2011. The adrelative genitive in Udi: syntactic borrowing plus reanalysis (original) (raw)
Related papers
Individual languages can be that are subject e.g. to programs in language documentation can be defined in at least two ways: (a) In terms of linguistic criteria that usually refer to a canon of features derived from phonology, grammar, and the lexicon. (b) In terms of sociological parameters that refer to social features that underlying specific linguistic practices of a 'speech community'. In case such communities are marked for maximal monolingualism, this distinction may mainly be relevant when considering diastratic, diatopic, and diaphasic features present in the community. However, when documenting the linguistic practices of communities that are marked for strong patterns of 'functional bi-or multilingualism', we have to ask what is meant by the delimiting feature 'speech' at all. Referring to a definition of 'a language' in terms of (a) would mean that the linguistic practices of the community under survey are filtered accordingly, ignoring larger parts of actual practices carried out in the other language(s). This short essay illustrates this aspect with the help of observations that are related to the Udi 'speech community' of Nij, a small village in Northwestern Azerbaijan. It will be argued that albeit 'Udi' can be described as a distinct linguistic system according to (a) being related to the world of East Caucasian language, the actual linguistic practices of the Udis are grounded in strong patterns of functional bilingualism and biculturalism (Udi/Azeri). Accordingly, we may assume that 'Udi' (in terms of (a)) is just a specific aspect of 'Udi' as defined in terms of (b).
Eurasian Linguistic Foundations, Part II of II Parts (Update 02.10.2022)
Special Note: Out of 54 pages of the 560 page "Eurasian Linguistic Foundations" document, I have extracted data that is reaching 40 pages! I thought there might be pattern(s) that would clarify the movement of Indo-Europeans and their interaction with other linguistic groups. While the data all look like chaos, it is surprising how much of an affect the extinct Akkadian language (last spoken ~3,000 years ago!) has had in our European and Asian linguistic foundations. Hittite, a dead language since 1150 B.C., also plays a big part in the formation of our modern European and Asian languages. Akkadian is one of the oldest Semitic languages and Hittite is considered to be the oldest Indo-European language. It is clear that the patterns shown on Akkadain and Hittite will continue to dominate our search. Hoping to see patterns involving Georgian, Basque and Armenian, I broke them into separate linguistic "correspondences." As will be seen in Part I, "Eurasian Linguistic Foundations," Basque is highly influenced by Latin and corresponds with Slavic, English, et. al. Armenian is not as associated with Greek as linguists would have us believe and Georgian corresponds with Eurasian languages more than expected. However: This discussion, Part II of "Eurasian Linguistic Foundations," attempts to make sense out of the data base of linguistic patterns in Part I. Part II is a work in progress and will be updated and is expected to exceed 200 pages. Part I of this document consists of a data base showing correspondences among Indo-European, Akkadian, Basque, Georgian, Finnish-Uralic, Altaic, and Traditional Chinese, languages. We also include extinct languages, such as Etruscan, Lycian, Milyan (Mylian), Luvian, Tocharian and Hittite. The corresponding words in Part I did not emerge as I expected, and there are many anomalies that need to be addressed which will be presented in Part II of this work. The greatest anomaly involves Akkadian, an extinct and the oldest Semetic language. It is named after Akkad, a major center of the Mesopotamian civilization(s). It was spoken from the 3 rd millennium B.C. until its replacement by Old Aramic by the 8 th century B.C. The language was the lingua Franca of much of the Ancient Near East until the Bronze Age Collapse ~1180-1150 B.C., when major capitals were destroyed, such as Troy, and the Hittite capital, Hatussa. By the Hellenic period the Akkadian language was largely confined to scholars and priests working in temples in Assyria and Babylonia. The last known cuneiform text in Akkadian dates from the 1 st century B.C. (See Wikipedia.org). Because of its central position, such as during the Assyrian Empire (2025-1522 B.C.), traders were no doubt coming from afar to exchange goods with the civilizations of the Near East. Some of the curious affiliations that need to be explained include the Basques (who are located in Iberia (Spain) and southwestern France). They were known as the Vascones by Rome. While the Basque language generally corresponds with Latin-based languages, that we color "red" in Part I, there are many peculiar correspondences with Akkadian. Another language, Finnish-Uralic, displays similar anomalous features relating to Akkadian. Any connection that these or other languages may have to Akkadian would have to be well before the 8 th century B.C. I recommend that an informative application of this data base Eurasian Linguistic Foundations-Discussion on anomalous patterns of cultural exchange.
GRAMMATICALIZATION IN THE NORTH CAUCASIAN LANGUAGES
Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), Grammaticalization from a Typological Perspective. (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics) Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 116–145.
This is the prepublication version. For the published version, contact us by email.
Historical Linguistics of the Caucasus: Book of abstracts
Editorial board: Gilles Authier, Hélène Gérardin, Magomed I. Magomedov, Timur A. Maisak; Compiled by Timur A. Maisak. / Makhachkala: IYaLI DNC RAN, 2017. – 210 p., 2017
This book brings together the abstracts for the oral and poster presentations delivered at the international conference “Historical Linguistics of the Caucasus”, which took place at École Pratique des Hautes Études in Paris, April 12-14, 2017. The presentations deal mainly with historical aspects of the Caucasian language families – Nakh-Daghestanian, Abkhaz-Adyghe, and Kartvelian – as well as the Indo-European languages of the region. A special thematic workshop within the conference was devoted to imperfectivity and its relation to modality, as part of the international project IMMOCAL – Imperfective Modalities in Caucasian Languages (project coordinator Gilles Authier). For linguists, students of linguistics and philology and all those interested in the languages of the Caucasus.
Slavic-style aspect in the Caucasus
Suvremena lingvistika, 2010
Cross-lin guis ti cal ly, the expression of the as pec tual op po si tion 'Per fective-Imperfective' by means of pre verbs is a quite rare phenomenon; the la bel 'Sla vic-style as pect' proposed for this de rivational ca te go ry re flects the fact that the Slavic lan guage fa mily (Rus sian above all) has, un til recently, been the pri mary sour ce of assumptions and data about as pect. However, similar sys tems are to be found al so in other languages and lan guage fa mi lies, which can be compared and ar ranged along a scale according to their degree of gram ma ti ca li za tion. The present article is a first attempt to compare and describe typologically some aspectual or aspectual-like features of three lan gua ges spoken in the Caucasus, Russian, Georgian and Ossetic; it discusses their beha viour and illustrates some pa ra me ters of variation within this ca te go ry. Further, the possibility of con tact induced changes is briefly illustrated.