Misplaced Pages

#862137

68-579: Linguistically, the word Aladagh comes from the Turkic branch of the Altaic language family (- and, more specifically, from the Khorasani Turkic language ) and consists of two parts, ala and dagh / dag . Ala means "variegated", "patchwork", "particoloured " or "speckled" and dagh means "mountain", and therefore the word Aladagh means "(the) variegated or speckled mountain (range)". Geologically,

136-546: A dialect continuum . Turkic languages are spoken by some 200 million people. The Turkic language with the greatest number of speakers is Turkish , spoken mainly in Anatolia and the Balkans ; its native speakers account for about 38% of all Turkic speakers, followed by Uzbek . Characteristic features such as vowel harmony , agglutination , subject-object-verb order, and lack of grammatical gender , are almost universal within

204-665: A Finno-Permic grouping. Extending this approach to cover the Samoyedic languages suggests affinity with Ugric, resulting in the aforementioned East Uralic grouping, as it also shares the same sibilant developments. A further non-trivial Ugric-Samoyedic isogloss is the reduction *k, *x, *w > ɣ when before *i, and after a vowel (cf. *k > ɣ above), or adjacent to *t, *s, *š, or *ś. Finno-Ugric consonant developments after Viitso (2000); Samoyedic changes after Sammallahti (1988) The inverse relationship between consonant gradation and medial lenition of stops (the pattern also continuing within

272-502: A century's worth of editing work for later generations of Finnish Uralicists. The Uralic family comprises nine undisputed groups with no consensus classification between them. (Some of the proposals are listed in the next section.) An agnostic approach treats them as separate branches. Obsolete or native names are displayed in italics. There is also historical evidence of a number of extinct languages of uncertain affiliation: Traces of Finno-Ugric substrata, especially in toponymy, in

340-458: A competing hypothesis to Ob-Ugric. Lexicostatistics has been used in defense of the traditional family tree. A recent re-evaluation of the evidence however fails to find support for Finno-Ugric and Ugric, suggesting four lexically distinct branches (Finno-Permic, Hungarian, Ob-Ugric and Samoyedic). One alternative proposal for a family tree, with emphasis on the development of numerals, is as follows: Another proposed tree, more divergent from

408-472: A connection between Uralic and other Paleo-Siberian languages. Theories proposing a close relationship with the Altaic languages were formerly popular, based on similarities in vocabulary as well as in grammatical and phonological features, in particular the similarities in the Uralic and Altaic pronouns and the presence of agglutination in both sets of languages, as well as vowel harmony in some. For example,

476-448: A result, there exist several systems to classify the Turkic languages. The modern genetic classification schemes for Turkic are still largely indebted to Samoilovich (1922). The Turkic languages may be divided into six branches: In this classification, Oghur Turkic is also referred to as Lir-Turkic, and the other branches are subsumed under the title of Shaz-Turkic or Common Turkic . It

544-473: Is porsas ("pig"), loaned from Proto-Indo-European *porḱos or pre- Proto-Indo-Iranian *porśos , unchanged since loaning save for loss of palatalization , *ś > s.) The Estonian philologist Mall Hellam proposed cognate sentences that she asserted to be mutually intelligible among the three most widely spoken Uralic languages: Finnish, Estonian, and Hungarian: However, linguist Geoffrey Pullum reports that neither Finns nor Hungarians could understand

612-456: Is a common characteristic of major language families spoken in Inner Eurasia ( Mongolic , Tungusic , Uralic and Turkic), the type of harmony found in them differs from each other, specifically, Uralic and Turkic have a shared type of vowel harmony (called palatal vowel harmony ) whereas Mongolic and Tungusic represent a different type. The homeland of the Turkic peoples and their language

680-441: Is apparent from the list, Finnish is the most conservative of the Uralic languages presented here, with nearly half the words on the list above identical to their Proto-Uralic reconstructions and most of the remainder only having minor changes, such as the conflation of *ś into /s/, or widespread changes such as the loss of *x and alteration of *ï. Finnish has also preserved old Indo-European borrowings relatively unchanged. (An example

748-600: Is at the base of today's wide acceptance of the inclusion of Samoyedic as a part of the Uralic family. Meanwhile, in the autonomous Grand Duchy of Finland , a chair for Finnish language and linguistics at the University of Helsinki was created in 1850, first held by Castrén. In 1883, the Finno-Ugrian Society was founded in Helsinki on the proposal of Otto Donner , which would lead to Helsinki overtaking St. Petersburg as

SECTION 10

#1732858224863

816-443: Is currently regarded as one of the world's primary language families . Turkic is one of the main members of the controversial Altaic language family , but Altaic currently lacks support from a majority of linguists. None of the theories linking Turkic languages to other families have a wide degree of acceptance at present. Shared features with languages grouped together as Altaic have been interpreted by most mainstream linguists to be

884-564: Is not clear when these two major types of Turkic can be assumed to have diverged. With less certainty, the Southwestern, Northwestern, Southeastern and Oghur groups may further be summarized as West Turkic , the Northeastern, Kyrgyz-Kipchak, and Arghu (Khalaj) groups as East Turkic . Geographically and linguistically, the languages of the Northwestern and Southeastern subgroups belong to

952-593: Is now European Russia, and the Budini , described by Herodotus as notably red-haired (a characteristic feature of the Udmurts ) and living in northeast Ukraine and/or adjacent parts of Russia. In the late 15th century, European scholars noted the resemblance of the names Hungaria and Yugria , the names of settlements east of the Ural. They assumed a connection but did not seek linguistic evidence. The affinity of Hungarian and Finnish

1020-511: Is suggested to be somewhere between the Transcaspian steppe and Northeastern Asia ( Manchuria ), with genetic evidence pointing to the region near South Siberia and Mongolia as the "Inner Asian Homeland" of the Turkic ethnicity. Similarly several linguists, including Juha Janhunen , Roger Blench and Matthew Spriggs, suggest that modern-day Mongolia is the homeland of the early Turkic language. Relying on Proto-Turkic lexical items about

1088-411: Is the least harmonic or not harmonic at all. Taking into account the documented historico-linguistic development of Turkic languages overall, both inscriptional and textual, the family provides over one millennium of documented stages as well as scenarios in the linguistic evolution of vowel harmony which, in turn, demonstrates harmony evolution along a confidently definable trajectory Though vowel harmony

1156-639: Is to any other language family. The hypothesis that the Dravidian languages display similarities with the Uralic language group, suggesting a prolonged period of contact in the past, is popular amongst Dravidian linguists and has been supported by a number of scholars, including Robert Caldwell , Thomas Burrow , Kamil Zvelebil , and Mikhail Andronov. This hypothesis has, however, been rejected by some specialists in Uralic languages, and has in recent times also been criticised by other Dravidian linguists, such as Bhadriraju Krishnamurti . Stefan Georg describes

1224-594: Is widely rejected by historical linguists. Similarities with the Uralic languages even caused these families to be regarded as one for a long time under the Ural-Altaic hypothesis. However, there has not been sufficient evidence to conclude the existence of either of these macrofamilies. The shared characteristics between the languages are attributed presently to extensive prehistoric language contact . Turkic languages are null-subject languages , have vowel harmony (with

1292-415: The ğ in dağ and dağlı is not realized as a consonant, but as a slight lengthening of the preceding vowel. The following table is based mainly upon the classification scheme presented by Lars Johanson . [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] The following is a brief comparison of cognates among the basic vocabulary across

1360-586: The Catholic missionaries sent to the Western Cumans inhabiting a region corresponding to present-day Hungary and Romania . The earliest records of the language spoken by Volga Bulgars , debatably the parent or a distant relative of Chuvash language , are dated to the 13th–14th centuries AD. With the Turkic expansion during the Early Middle Ages (c. 6th–11th centuries AD), Turkic languages, in

1428-549: The Chuvash language from other Turkic languages. According to him, the Chuvash language does not share certain common characteristics with Turkic languages to such a degree that some scholars consider it an independent Chuvash family similar to Uralic and Turkic languages. Turkic classification of Chuvash was seen as a compromise solution for the classification purposes. Some lexical and extensive typological similarities between Turkic and

SECTION 20

#1732858224863

1496-533: The Eskimo–Aleut languages . This is an old thesis whose antecedents go back to the 18th century. An important restatement of it was made by Bergsland (1959). Uralo-Siberian is an expanded form of the Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis. It associates Uralic with Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan , and Eskimo–Aleut. It was propounded by Michael Fortescue in 1998. Michael Fortescue (2017) presented new evidence in favor for

1564-662: The Indo-European family. In 1717, the Swedish professor Olof Rudbeck proposed about 100 etymologies connecting Finnish and Hungarian, of which about 40 are still considered valid. Several early reports comparing Finnish or Hungarian with Mordvin, Mari or Khanty were additionally collected by Gottfried Leibniz and edited by his assistant Johann Georg von Eckhart . In 1730, Philip Johan von Strahlenberg published his book Das Nord- und Ostliche Theil von Europa und Asia ( The Northern and Eastern Parts of Europe and Asia ), surveying

1632-694: The Proto-Uralic language include: The first plausible mention of a people speaking a Uralic language is in Tacitus 's Germania ( c.  98 AD ), mentioning the Fenni (usually interpreted as referring to the Sámi ) and two other possibly Uralic tribes living in the farthest reaches of Scandinavia. There are many possible earlier mentions, including the Iyrcae (perhaps related to Yugra) described by Herodotus living in what

1700-426: The Turkic peoples of Eurasia from Eastern Europe and Southern Europe to Central Asia , East Asia , North Asia ( Siberia ), and West Asia . The Turkic languages originated in a region of East Asia spanning from Mongolia to Northwest China , where Proto-Turkic is thought to have been spoken, from where they expanded to Central Asia and farther west during the first millennium. They are characterized as

1768-567: The Uralian languages ( / j ʊəˈr eɪ l i ə n / yoor- AY -lee-ən ), are spoken predominantly in Europe and North Asia . The Uralic languages with the most native speakers are Hungarian (which alone accounts for approximately 60% of speakers), Finnish , and Estonian . Other languages with speakers above 100,000 are Erzya , Moksha , Mari , Udmurt and Komi spoken in the European parts of

1836-642: The Vepsians to general knowledge and elucidated in detail the relatedness of Finnish and Komi. Still more extensive were the field research expeditions made in the 1840s by Matthias Castrén (1813–1852) and Antal Reguly (1819–1858), who focused especially on the Samoyedic and the Ob-Ugric languages , respectively. Reguly's materials were worked on by the Hungarian linguist Pál Hunfalvy  [ hu ] (1810–1891) and German Josef Budenz (1836–1892), who both supported

1904-466: The " Turco-Mongol " tradition. The two groups shared a similar religion system, Tengrism , and there exists a multitude of evident loanwords between Turkic languages and Mongolic languages . Although the loans were bidirectional, today Turkic loanwords constitute the largest foreign component in Mongolian vocabulary. Italian historian and philologist Igor de Rachewiltz noted a significant distinction of

1972-529: The 1960s. Eurasiatic resembles Nostratic in including Uralic, Indo-European, and Altaic, but differs from it in excluding the South Caucasian languages, Dravidian, and Afroasiatic and including Chukotko-Kamchatkan, Nivkh , Ainu , and Eskimo–Aleut. It was propounded by Joseph Greenberg in 2000–2002. Similar ideas had earlier been expressed by Heinrich Koppelmann in 1933 and by Björn Collinder in 1965. The linguist Angela Marcantonio has argued against

2040-665: The Russian Federation. Still smaller minority languages are Sámi languages of the northern Fennoscandia ; other members of the Finnic languages , ranging from Livonian in northern Latvia to Karelian in northwesternmost Russia; and the Samoyedic languages , Mansi and Khanty spoken in Western Siberia . The name Uralic derives from the family's purported "original homeland" ( Urheimat ) hypothesized to have been somewhere in

2108-453: The Turkic family. There is a high degree of mutual intelligibility , upon moderate exposure, among the various Oghuz languages , which include Turkish , Azerbaijani , Turkmen , Qashqai , Chaharmahali Turkic , Gagauz , and Balkan Gagauz Turkish , as well as Oghuz-influenced Crimean Tatar . Other Turkic languages demonstrate varying amounts of mutual intelligibility within their subgroups as well. Although methods of classification vary,

Aladagh Mountains - Misplaced Pages Continue

2176-442: The Turkic language family (about 60 words). Despite being cognates, some of the words may denote a different meaning. Empty cells do not necessarily imply that a particular language is lacking a word to describe the concept, but rather that the word for the concept in that language may be formed from another stem and is not cognate with the other words in the row or that a loanword is used in its place. Also, there may be shifts in

2244-491: The Turkic languages are usually considered to be divided into two branches: Oghur , of which the only surviving member is Chuvash , and Common Turkic , which includes all other Turkic languages. Turkic languages show many similarities with the Mongolic , Tungusic , Koreanic , and Japonic languages. These similarities have led some linguists (including Talât Tekin ) to propose an Altaic language family , though this proposal

2312-527: The Uralic affinity of Hungarian. Budenz was the first scholar to bring this result to popular consciousness in Hungary and to attempt a reconstruction of the Proto-Finno-Ugric grammar and lexicon. Another late-19th-century Hungarian contribution is that of Ignácz Halász  [ hu ] (1855–1901), who published extensive comparative material of Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic in the 1890s, and whose work

2380-577: The West. (See picture in the box on the right above.) For centuries, the Turkic-speaking peoples have migrated extensively and intermingled continuously, and their languages have been influenced mutually and through contact with the surrounding languages, especially the Iranian , Slavic , and Mongolic languages . This has obscured the historical developments within each language and/or language group, and as

2448-409: The acute denotes a secondary palatal articulation ( ⟨ś⟩ [sʲ ~ ɕ] , ⟨ć⟩ [tsʲ ~ tɕ] , ⟨l⟩ [lʲ] ) or, in Hungarian, vowel length. The Finnish letter ⟨y⟩ and the letter ⟨ü⟩ in other languages represent the high rounded vowel [y] ; the letters ⟨ä⟩ and ⟨ö⟩ are the front vowels [æ] and [ø] . As

2516-521: The arrangement of its subgroups is a matter of some dispute. Mordvinic is commonly seen as particularly closely related to or part of Finno-Samic. The term Volgaic (or Volga-Finnic ) was used to denote a branch previously believed to include Mari, Mordvinic and a number of the extinct languages, but it is now obsolete and considered a geographic classification rather than a linguistic one. Within Ugric, uniting Mansi with Hungarian rather than Khanty has been

2584-433: The central Turkic languages, while the Northeastern and Khalaj languages are the so-called peripheral languages. Hruschka, et al. (2014) use computational phylogenetic methods to calculate a tree of Turkic based on phonological sound changes . The following isoglosses are traditionally used in the classification of the Turkic languages: Additional isoglosses include: *In the standard Istanbul dialect of Turkish,

2652-801: The chief northern center of research of the Uralic languages. During the late 19th and early 20th century (until the separation of Finland from Russia following the Russian Revolution ), the Society hired many scholars to survey the still less-known Uralic languages. Major researchers of this period included Heikki Paasonen (studying especially the Mordvinic languages ), Yrjö Wichmann (studying Permic ), Artturi Kannisto  [ fi ] ( Mansi ), Kustaa Fredrik Karjalainen ( Khanty ), Toivo Lehtisalo ( Nenets ), and Kai Donner ( Kamass ). The vast amounts of data collected on these expeditions would provide over

2720-567: The climate, topography, flora, fauna, people's modes of subsistence, Turkologist Peter Benjamin Golden locates the Proto-Turkic Urheimat in the southern, taiga-steppe zone of the Sayan - Altay region. Extensive contact took place between Proto-Turks and Proto-Mongols approximately during the first millennium BC; the shared cultural tradition between the two Eurasian nomadic groups is called

2788-578: The common morphological elements between Korean and Turkic are not less numerous than between Turkic and other Altaic languages, strengthens the possibility that there is a close genetic affinity between Korean and Turkic. Many historians also point out a close non-linguistic relationship between Turkic peoples and Koreans . Especially close were the relations between the Göktürks and Goguryeo . Uralic languages The Uralic languages ( / j ʊəˈr æ l ɪ k / yoor- AL -ik ), sometimes called

Aladagh Mountains - Misplaced Pages Continue

2856-594: The course of just a few centuries, spread across Central Asia , from Siberia to the Mediterranean . Various terminologies from the Turkic languages have passed into Persian , Urdu , Ukrainian , Russian , Chinese , Mongolian , Hungarian and to a lesser extent, Arabic . The geographical distribution of Turkic-speaking peoples across Eurasia since the Ottoman era ranges from the North-East of Siberia to Turkey in

2924-499: The early 20th century, they were found to be quite divergent, and they were assumed to have separated already early on. The terminology adopted for this was "Uralic" for the entire family, " Finno-Ugric " for the non-Samoyedic languages (though "Finno-Ugric" has, to this day, remained in use also as a synonym for the whole family). Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic are listed in ISO 639-5 as primary branches of Uralic. The following table lists nodes of

2992-403: The early Turkic language. According to him, words related to nature, earth and ruling but especially to the sky and stars seem to be cognates. The linguist Choi suggested already in 1996 a close relationship between Turkic and Korean regardless of any Altaic connections: In addition, the fact that the morphological elements are not easily borrowed between languages, added to the fact that

3060-564: The epoch". Still, in spite of this hostile climate, the Hungarian Jesuit János Sajnovics traveled with Maximilian Hell to survey the alleged relationship between Hungarian and Sámi, while they were also on a mission to observe the 1769 Venus transit . Sajnovics published his results in 1770, arguing for a relationship based on several grammatical features. In 1799, the Hungarian Sámuel Gyarmathi published

3128-574: The family. The Compendium is the first comprehensive dictionary of the Turkic languages and also includes the first known map of the Turkic speakers' geographical distribution. It mainly pertains to the Southwestern branch of the family. The Codex Cumanicus (12th–13th centuries AD) concerning the Northwestern branch is another early linguistic manual, between the Kipchak language and Latin , used by

3196-402: The geography, peoples and languages of Russia. All the main groups of the Uralic languages were already identified here. Nonetheless, these relationships were not widely accepted. Hungarian intellectuals especially were not interested in the theory and preferred to assume connections with Turkic tribes, an attitude characterized by Merritt Ruhlen as due to "the wild unfettered Romanticism of

3264-963: The meaning from one language to another, and so the "Common meaning" given is only approximate. In some cases, the form given is found only in some dialects of the language, or a loanword is much more common (e.g. in Turkish, the preferred word for "fire" is the Persian-derived ateş , whereas the native od is dead). Forms are given in native Latin orthographies unless otherwise noted. (to press with one's knees) Azerbaijani "ǝ" and "ä": IPA /æ/ Azerbaijani "q": IPA /g/, word-final "q": IPA /x/ Turkish and Azerbaijani "ı", Karakhanid "ɨ", Turkmen "y", and Sakha "ï": IPA /ɯ/ Turkmen "ň", Karakhanid "ŋ": IPA /ŋ/ Turkish and Azerbaijani "y",Turkmen "ý" and "j" in other languages: IPA /j/ All "ş" and "š" letters: IPA /ʃ/ All "ç" and "č" letters: IPA /t͡ʃ/ Kyrgyz "c": IPA /d͡ʒ/ Kazakh "j": IPA /ʒ/ The Turkic language family

3332-516: The most complete work on Finno-Ugric to that date. Up to the beginning of the 19th century, knowledge of the Uralic languages spoken in Russia had remained restricted to scanty observations by travelers. Already the Finnish historian Henrik Gabriel Porthan had stressed that further progress would require dedicated field missions. One of the first of these was undertaken by Anders Johan Sjögren , who brought

3400-670: The mountains were mainly uplifted in the Alpine orogeny during the Neogene and especially in the Miocene , although the orogenic phase continued in the Pliocene . The range is made chiefly of Jurassic rocks in the western, south-central, eastern and southeastern parts, with a smaller portion of Paleozoic rocks in the north-central section. The Aladagh Mountain Range consists of high mountains situated far from

3468-951: The nearby Tungusic and Mongolic families, as well as the Korean and Japonic families has in more recent years been instead attributed to prehistoric contact amongst the group, sometimes referred to as the Northeast Asian sprachbund . A more recent (circa first millennium BC) contact between "core Altaic" (Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic) is distinguished from this, due to the existence of definitive common words that appear to have been mostly borrowed from Turkic into Mongolic, and later from Mongolic into Tungusic, as Turkic borrowings into Mongolic significantly outnumber Mongolic borrowings into Turkic, and Turkic and Tungusic do not share any words that do not also exist in Mongolic. Turkic languages also show some Chinese loanwords that point to early contact during

SECTION 50

#1732858224863

3536-469: The nine undisputed families) are becoming more common. A traditional classification of the Uralic languages has existed since the late 19th century. It has enjoyed frequent adaptation in whole or in part in encyclopedias, handbooks, and overviews of the Uralic family. Otto Donner's model from 1879 is as follows: At Donner's time, the Samoyedic languages were still poorly known, and he was not able to address their position. As they became better known in

3604-444: The northern part of European Russia have been proposed as evidence for even more extinct Uralic languages. [REDACTED] All Uralic languages are thought to have descended, through independent processes of language change , from Proto-Uralic . The internal structure of the Uralic family has been debated since the family was first proposed. Doubts about the validity of most or all of the proposed higher-order branchings (grouping

3672-434: The notable exception of Uzbek due to strong Persian-Tajik influence), converbs , extensive agglutination by means of suffixes and postpositions , and lack of grammatical articles , noun classes , and grammatical gender . Subject–object–verb word order is universal within the family. In terms of the level of vowel harmony in the Turkic language family, Tuvan is characterized as almost fully harmonic whereas Uzbek

3740-535: The number of common words. The following is a very brief selection of cognates in basic vocabulary across the Uralic family, which may serve to give an idea of the sound changes involved. This is not a list of translations: cognates have a common origin, but their meaning may be shifted and loanwords may have replaced them. Orthographical notes: The hacek denotes postalveolar articulation ( ⟨ž⟩ [ʒ] , ⟨š⟩ [ʃ] , ⟨č⟩ [t͡ʃ] ) (In Northern Sámi, ( ⟨ž⟩ [dʒ] ), while

3808-443: The other language's version of the sentence. No Uralic language has exactly the idealized typological profile of the family. Typological features with varying presence among the modern Uralic language groups include: Notes: Many relationships between Uralic and other language families have been suggested, but none of these is generally accepted by linguists at the present time: All of the following hypotheses are minority views at

3876-446: The present time in Uralic studies. The Uralic–Yukaghir hypothesis identifies Uralic and Yukaghir as independent members of a single language family. It is currently widely accepted that the similarities between Uralic and Yukaghir languages are due to ancient contacts. Regardless, the hypothesis is accepted by a few linguists and viewed as attractive by a somewhat larger number. The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis associates Uralic with

3944-464: The result of a sprachbund . The possibility of a genetic relation between Turkic and Korean , independently from Altaic, is suggested by some linguists. The linguist Kabak (2004) of the University of Würzburg states that Turkic and Korean share similar phonology as well as morphology . Li Yong-Sŏng (2014) suggest that there are several cognates between Turkic and Old Korean . He states that these supposed cognates can be useful to reconstruct

4012-516: The similarities of Sámi, Estonian, and Finnish, and also on a few similar words between Finnish and Hungarian. These authors were the first to outline what was to become the classification of the Finno-Ugric, and later Uralic family. This proposal received some of its initial impetus from the fact that these languages, unlike most of the other languages spoken in Europe, are not part of what is now known as

4080-588: The standard, focusing on consonant isoglosses (which does not consider the position of the Samoyedic languages) is presented by Viitso (1997), and refined in Viitso (2000): The grouping of the four bottom-level branches remains to some degree open to interpretation, with competing models of Finno-Saamic vs. Eastern Finno-Ugric (Mari, Mordvinic, Permic-Ugric; *k > ɣ between vowels, degemination of stops) and Finno-Volgaic (Finno-Saamic, Mari, Mordvinic; *δʲ > *ð between vowels) vs. Permic-Ugric. Viitso finds no evidence for

4148-482: The temperate mediterranean climate of the northwestern and western mountains of Iran. Aside from the highest section of the central Elburz that has a cold mountain climate, even the Elburz Mountain Range has a generally Mediterranean climate in the eastern, central, and Western parts. Turkic languages The Turkic languages are a language family of more than 35 documented languages, spoken by

SECTION 60

#1732858224863

4216-413: The theory as "outlandish" and "not meriting a second look" even in contrast to hypotheses such as Uralo-Yukaghir or Indo-Uralic. Nostratic associates Uralic, Indo-European, Altaic, Dravidian, Afroasiatic, and various other language families of Asia. The Nostratic hypothesis was first propounded by Holger Pedersen in 1903 and subsequently revived by Vladislav Illich-Svitych and Aharon Dolgopolsky in

4284-917: The three families where gradation is found) is noted by Helimski (1995): an original allophonic gradation system between voiceless and voiced stops would have been easily disrupted by a spreading of voicing to previously unvoiced stops as well. A computational phylogenetic study by Honkola, et al. (2013) classifies the Uralic languages as follows. Estimated divergence dates from Honkola, et al. (2013) are also given. Structural characteristics generally said to be typical of Uralic languages include: Basic vocabulary of about 200 words, including body parts (e.g. eye, heart, head, foot, mouth), family members (e.g. father, mother-in-law), animals (e.g. viper, partridge, fish), nature objects (e.g. tree, stone, nest, water), basic verbs (e.g. live, fall, run, make, see, suck, go, die, swim, know), basic pronouns (e.g. who, what, we, you, I), numerals (e.g. two, five); derivatives increase

4352-730: The time of Proto-Turkic . The first established records of the Turkic languages are the eighth century AD Orkhon inscriptions by the Göktürks , recording the Old Turkic language, which were discovered in 1889 in the Orkhon Valley in Mongolia. The Compendium of the Turkic Dialects ( Divânü Lügati't-Türk ), written during the 11th century AD by Kaşgarlı Mahmud of the Kara-Khanid Khanate , constitutes an early linguistic treatment of

4420-592: The traditional family tree that are recognized in some overview sources. Little explicit evidence has however been presented in favour of Donner's model since his original proposal, and numerous alternate schemes have been proposed. Especially in Finland, there has been a growing tendency to reject the Finno-Ugric intermediate protolanguage. A recent competing proposal instead unites Ugric and Samoyedic in an "East Uralic" group for which shared innovations can be noted. The Finno-Permic grouping still holds some support, though

4488-623: The vicinity of the Ural Mountains , and was first proposed by Julius Klaproth in Asia Polyglotta (1823). Finno-Ugric is sometimes used as a synonym for Uralic, though Finno-Ugric is widely understood to exclude the Samoyedic languages. Scholars who do not accept the traditional notion that Samoyedic split first from the rest of the Uralic family may treat the terms as synonymous. Uralic languages are known for their often complex case systems and vowel harmony . Proposed homelands of

4556-464: The word for "language" is similar in Estonian ( keel ) and Mongolian ( хэл ( hel )). These theories are now generally rejected and most such similarities are attributed to language contact or coincidence. The Indo-Uralic (or "Indo-Euralic") hypothesis suggests that Uralic and Indo-European are related at a fairly close level or, in its stronger form, that they are more closely related than either

4624-591: Was first proposed in the late 17th century. Three candidates can be credited for the discovery: the German scholar Martin Fogel  [ de ] , the Swedish scholar Georg Stiernhielm , and the Swedish courtier Bengt Skytte . Fogel's unpublished study of the relationship, commissioned by Cosimo III of Tuscany, was clearly the most modern of these: he established several grammatical and lexical parallels between Finnish and Hungarian as well as Sámi. Stiernhielm commented on

#862137