5,486
edits
Minhast: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Added narrative to the description of the language family grouping, with Dr Tashunka's dialectal analysis
(Added narrative to the description of the language family grouping, with Dr Tashunka's dialectal analysis) |
|||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
Located just 1,232 km from northeast Japan, this Northeast Asian language bears few if any similarities with its nearest neighbors, the former Yamato Empire (Japan), the Kingdom of Koguryeo (Korea) and Moshir Ainu(the Ainu Democratic Federation). Two other languages in the island nation, [[Peshpeg]] and [[Ín Duári]] (Golahát), both of which are moribund, are also unrelated; any similarities existing between the two languages and Minhast are due to areal features, with Minhast as the dominant influence. Linguists investigated possible relationships with the Altaic and Native North American languages, but failed to find any conclusive evidence. Words from Paleosiberian languages, principally Ainu, Nivkh and Chutchki, appear in the lexicon, however these have been identified as loanwords, albeit some of the loans appear to be very old, e.g. Minhast ''siħ'' ("trace") vs Nivkh ''zif'' ("tracks"). | Located just 1,232 km from northeast Japan, this Northeast Asian language bears few if any similarities with its nearest neighbors, the former Yamato Empire (Japan), the Kingdom of Koguryeo (Korea) and Moshir Ainu(the Ainu Democratic Federation). Two other languages in the island nation, [[Peshpeg]] and [[Ín Duári]] (Golahát), both of which are moribund, are also unrelated; any similarities existing between the two languages and Minhast are due to areal features, with Minhast as the dominant influence. Linguists investigated possible relationships with the Altaic and Native North American languages, but failed to find any conclusive evidence. Words from Paleosiberian languages, principally Ainu, Nivkh and Chutchki, appear in the lexicon, however these have been identified as loanwords, albeit some of the loans appear to be very old, e.g. Minhast ''siħ'' ("trace") vs Nivkh ''zif'' ("tracks"). | ||
For these reasons, Minhast had long been classified as a language isolate. However, in a breakthrough study by Ming Wei and Jaeng Tae-Moon at the Department of Linguistics in Beijing Imperial University discovered shared features between Minhast, the Northwest Pacific language [[Nankôre]], and the Native American language [[Nahónda]], the latter two languages also having been classified as language isolates. Fossilized verbalizer morphemes | For these reasons, Minhast had long been classified as a language isolate. However, in a breakthrough study by Ming Wei and Jaeng Tae-Moon at the Department of Linguistics in Beijing Imperial University discovered shared features between Minhast, the Northwest Pacific language [[Nankôre]], and the Native American language [[Nahónda]], the latter two languages also having been classified as language isolates. These languages have thus been grouped together into a language family called Nahenic, from the reconstructed form ''*nāhen'', meaning "people". Fossilized verbalizer morphemes affixed to body parts, the relatively intact preservation of the form of the Causative affix and its relative position in each language's verbal template, and cognate sets and sound change correspondences demonstrated these far-flung languages as having a common ancestry. A major impediment to discovering Minhast's relationship to other languages was hampered by the paucity of literature on Nankôre; it was through the extensive documentation of this language by Brian Mills, from the Department of Indian Anthropology and Linguistics at the University of North Carolina that provided the material needed to link Minhast with Nankôre and Nahónda. Dialectal analysis conducted by Napayshni Tashunka of the University of the Lakota Nation has further contributed to the reconstruction of the Nahenic language family, particularly with data gathered from the Stone Speaker dialect, a divergent dialect which he argues should be classified as a separate language under a larger grouping, the Minhastic branch. | ||
Typologically, Minhast is an ergative, polysynthetic language. Verbal morphology is highly aggluginative and performs noun incorporation and other complex valence operations. Unmarked word order is SOV. Ergativity surfaces both at the morphologic and syntactic levels. Both its ergative<sup>1</sup> and polysynthetic characteristics have generated much academic research in comparative and theoretical linguistics. | Typologically, Minhast is an ergative, polysynthetic language. Verbal morphology is highly aggluginative and performs noun incorporation and other complex valence operations. Unmarked word order is SOV. Ergativity surfaces both at the morphologic and syntactic levels. Both its ergative<sup>1</sup> and polysynthetic characteristics have generated much academic research in comparative and theoretical linguistics. | ||