Etruscan shows some similarities to Indo-European, such as a genitive in -s. There is no consensus on whether these are due to a genetic relationship, borrowing, chance and sound symbolism, or some combination of these.
Pêwendiya erdnîgarî
The existence of certain PIE typological features in Northwest Caucasian languages may hint at an early Sprachbund[8] or substratum that reached geographically to the PIE homelands.[9] This same type of languages, featuring complex verbs of which the current Northwest Caucasian languages might have been the sole survivors, was cited by Peter Schrijver to indicate a local lexical and typological reminiscence in western Europe pointing to a possible Neolithic substratum.[10]
Dengnasî
The phonology of Proto-Indo-European has been reconstructed to a large extent. Some uncertainties still remain, such as the exact nature of the three series of stops, and the exact number and distribution of the vowels.
Dengdar
The notation used here for the phonemes is traditional in Indo-European studies, but should not necessarily be interpreted as the corresponding IPA values. Most saliently, *y is traditionally used to represent IPA /j/, not any sort of front-rounded vowel. In addition, the traditional names and symbols for the dorsals and laryngeals should not be taken as more than a vague suggestion of their actual values.
Birrên dengdarên PHE Lêvî Coronal Paşî Laryngeal palatal plain labial Bêvilî *m *n Teqîner Bêlerz *p *t *ḱ *k *kʷ Bilerz (*b) *d *ǵ *g *gʷ sekinî *bʰ *dʰ *ǵʰ *gʰ *gʷʰ Xişok *s *h₁, *h₂, *h₃ Jenok *r, *l Nivdengî *y [j] *w
Proto-Indo-European (PIE) is the linguistic reconstruction of the common ancestor of the Indo-European languages.
Proto-hind-ewrop (PHE) vesazkirineke zimannasî ji zimanên hind û ewropî ya hevbeş ya dêrîn re ye.
PIE was the first proposed proto-language to be widely accepted by linguists.
PHE zimanê pêşî ye yê ku ji aliyê zimannasan ve wek pro-zimanekî hatiye pêşniyazkirin û pejirandin.
Far more work has gone into reconstructing it than any other proto-language, and it is by far the best understood of all proto-languages of its age.
Ji bo vezaskirina vî zimanî gelek xebat hatine kirin ku ji bo ti zimanekî din nehatine kirin û heta niha zimanekî wisa ye ku ji hemû proto-zimanên din yên di heman temenî de zêdetir tê fêmkirin.
During the 19th century, the vast majority of linguistic work was devoted to reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European or its daughter proto-languages such as Proto-Germanic, and most of the current techniques of linguistic reconstruction in historical linguistics (e.g. the comparative method and the method of internal reconstruction) were developed as a result.
Di sedsala 19an de piraniya xebatên zimannasiyê bi dil û can xebitîne ta ku PHE yan jî zimanên jê hatine yên wek Proto-cermanî vesaz bikin û piraniya teknîkên niha hene ku di zimannasiya dîrokî ji vezaskirina zimannasî tên bikaranîn( çend mînak: Metoda berawirdî û metoda vesazkirina hundirîn) wek encama wan xebatan derketin.
These methods supply all of our knowledge concerning PIE, since there is no written record of the language.
Ev metod jî hemû zanyar û agahiyan derbarê PHEyê didin me ji ber ku heta niha ti çavkaniyên nivîskî tune ne.
Indo-European vocabulary
2012. ↑ Gray, Russell D; Atkinson, Quentin D (27 November 2003), "Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin" (PDF), Nature (NZ: Auckland) (426): 435–39, doi:10.1038/nature02029, PMID 14647380 ↑ Bouckaert et al. 2012, p. 957. ↑ Kortlandt, Frederik (1993), General linguistics and Indo-European reconstruction (PDF), NL ↑ Kortlandt, Frederik (1989), The spread of the Indo-Europeans (PDF), NL ↑ Keltisch en de buren: 9000 jaar taalcontact (PDF) (in Dutch), NL: University of Utrecht, March 2007 |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help) ↑ Huld, Martin E (1997), "Satəm, Centum, and Hokum", in Adams, Douglas Q, Festschrift for Eric P. Hamp, pp. 115–38 ↑ Clackson 2007, p. 52. 1 2 Ringe 2006. ↑ Mayrhofer 1986, pp. 170 ff. ↑ Fortson 2004, p. 102. ↑ Beekes 1995. ↑ Sihler 1995. ↑ Beekes 1995, pp. 233,243. ↑ Sihler 1995, pp. 402–24. ↑ Beekes 1995, pp. 212-17. ↑ Lehmann, Winfried P (1993), Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics, London: Routledge, pp. 252–55, ISBN 0-415-08201-3 ↑ Kulikov, Leonid; Lavidas, Nikolaos, eds.
Notes
Nîşe
Scholars estimate that PIE may have been spoken as a single language (before divergence began) around 3500 BC, though estimates by different authorities can vary by more than a millennium.
Zanistvan wisa texmîn dikin ku 3500 salî BZ PHE wek zimanekî hebû (berî ku ji hev cuda bibe) , herwiha dîsa jî texmîn û nirxandinên zanistvanan bi dora 1000 salî tê guhertin.
A number of hypotheses have been proposed for the origin and spread of the language, the most popular among linguists being the Kurgan hypothesis, which postulates an origin in the Pontic–Caspian steppe of Eastern Europe.
Çend hîpotez hene lê ya herî navdar û belav di nav zimannasan de Hîpoteza Kurganî ye ku dibêje ku dibêje ku jêdera wan deşta deryayên reş û qezwînê yê rojhilatê Ewropayê ye.
Features of the culture of the speakers of PIE, known as Proto-Indo-Europeans, have also been reconstructed based on the shared vocabulary of the early attested Indo-European languages.
Taybetmendiyên çanda axiverên PHE wek proto-hind-ewropayî tê binavkirin, ev ziman li ser peyvên zimanên pesendkirî yên Hindo-ewropayî hatiye veavakirin.
The existence of PIE was first postulated in the 18th century by Sir William Jones, who observed the similarities between Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, and Latin.
Di sedsala 18an de William Jones cara pêşî amaje kir ku zimanê PHE heye, ew jî piştî, wî wekhevî di navbera Zimanê sanskrîtî, Yewnaniya kevn û latînî de dîtin.
By the early 20th century, well-defined descriptions of PIE had been developed that are still accepted today (with some refinements).
Di destpêka sedsala 20an de (li gel hinek serrastkirinan) pênasîneke baş ji PHEî re hat danîn û heta niha jî tê qebûlkirin.
The largest developments of the 20th century were the discovery of the Anatolian and Tocharian languages and the acceptance of the laryngeal theory. The Anatolian languages have also spurred a major re-evaluation of theories concerning the development of various shared Indo-European language features and the extent to which these features were present in PIE itself.
Pêşketina herî mezin a di sedsala 20an de çêbû, kişfkirina zimanên anatolyayê û zimanên Toçarî bû û pejirandina teoriya zengelorkî bû. Zimanên Anatolî bûn sedem ku gelek ve-nirxandin jî li ser wan teoriyên pêşketina taybetmendiyên zimanê Hindo-ewropayî jî bên kirin.
Relationships to other language families, including the Uralic languages, have been proposed but remain controversial.
Têkiliya wê bi malbata zimanên Uralî hat gotin û pêşniyazkirin lê hîn li ser wê mijarê li hev nebûye.
PIE is thought to have had a complex system of morphology that included inflectional suffixes as well as ablaut (vowel alterations, as preserved in English sing, sang, sung).
Ji ber ku pergala morfolojiya zimanê PHEyî gelekî aloz e ku ji qertafên çemandinê û abawlê (guherîna dengdêran, wek di ingilîzî de sing, sang, sung).
Nouns and verbs had complex systems of declension and conjugation respectively.
Tewanga navdêra û kişandina lêkeran jî gelekî kompleks bû.
Discovery and reconstruction
Vedîtin û veavakirin
Classification of Indo-European languages.
↑ Mallory 1989, p. 185: ‘The Kurgan solution is attractive and has been accepted by many archaeologists and linguists, in part or total. It is the solution one encounters in the Encyclopaedia Britannica and the Grand Dictionnaire Encyclopédique Larousse.’ ↑ Strazny 2000, p. 163: "The single most popular proposal is the Pontic steppes (see the Kurgan hypothesis)..." ↑ Anthony, David W (2007), The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-05887-3 ↑ Balter, Michael (13 February 2015). "Mysterious Indo-European homeland may have been in the steppes of Ukraine and Russia". © 2015 American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Red: Extinct languages.
2012. ↑ Gray, Russell D; Atkinson, Quentin D (27 November 2003), "Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin" (PDF), Nature (NZ: Auckland) (426): 435–39, doi:10.1038/nature02029, PMID 14647380 ↑ Bouckaert et al. 2012, p. 957. ↑ Kortlandt, Frederik (1993), General linguistics and Indo-European reconstruction (PDF), NL ↑ Kortlandt, Frederik (1989), The spread of the Indo-Europeans (PDF), NL ↑ Keltisch en de buren: 9000 jaar taalcontact (PDF) (in Dutch), NL: University of Utrecht, March 2007 |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help) ↑ Huld, Martin E (1997), "Satəm, Centum, and Hokum", in Adams, Douglas Q, Festschrift for Eric P. Hamp, pp. 115–38 ↑ Clackson 2007, p. 52. 1 2 Ringe 2006. ↑ Mayrhofer 1986, pp. 170 ff. ↑ Fortson 2004, p. 102. ↑ Beekes 1995. ↑ Sihler 1995. ↑ Beekes 1995, pp. 233,243. ↑ Sihler 1995, pp. 402–24. ↑ Beekes 1995, pp. 212-17. ↑ Lehmann, Winfried P (1993), Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics, London: Routledge, pp. 252–55, ISBN 0-415-08201-3 ↑ Kulikov, Leonid; Lavidas, Nikolaos, eds.
White: categories or unattested proto-languages.
Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Taylor & Francis. p. 463. ↑ Hock, Hans Henrich (2015). "Proto-Indo-European verb-finality: Reconstruction, typology, validation".
Left half: centum languages; right half: satem languages
1 2 Lehmann, Winfred P. (1974). Proto-Indo-European Syntax. University of Texas Press. p. 250. ↑ Language Log » Proto-Indo-European in Prometheus?, Languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu, 2012-06-08, retrieved 2013-03-12 Senifandina zimanê Hindo-Ewropayî.
Historical and geographical setting
Çarçoveya dîrokî û erdnîgarî
There are several competing hypotheses about when and where PIE was spoken.
Gelek hîpotezên cuda û dijber hene ku behsa cih û tarîxa ku PHE dihat axaftin dike.
The Kurgan hypothesis is "the single most popular" model,[1][2] wherein the bearers of the Kurgan culture of the Pontic steppe are the hypothesized speakers of the reconstructed Proto-Indo-European language.[3][4] Alternative theories include an Anatolian urheimat[5][page needed] and Armenian urheimat.
Hîpoteza Kurgan ya tekane ye ya ku gelekî tê pejirandin,[1][2] ku xwediyên çanda Kurganê yên li deşta deryayên reş û qezwwînê, ew kes in yên ku bi zimanê PHE yê veavakirî diaxivîn.[3][4] Hinek teoriyên din hene ku hîpoteza Anatoliyan û hîpoteza ermeniyan jî di nav wan de ne[page needed] .[5]
Mainstream linguistic estimates of the time between PIE and the earliest attested texts (ca. nineteenth century BC; see Kültepe texts) range around 1,500 to 2,500 years, with extreme proposals diverging up to another 100% on either side.
Çavkaniyên zimannasî yên sereke diyar dikin ku dema di navbera PHE û nivîsên pesendkirî yên dawî de( Sedsala 19an BZ; binere Nivîsên Kültepe) ji 1500 heta 2500 salî ye.
Historically, some proposed models postulate the major dispersion of branches in:
Ji aliyê dîrokî ve hinek model dibêjin ku şaxên sereke wisa ne:
the 4th millennium BC (excluding the Anatolian branch) in Armenia, according to the Armenian hypothesis (proposed in the context of Glottalic theory); the 4th or 5th millennium BC in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, according to Marija Gimbutas's Kurgan hypothesis; the 6th millennium BC or later in Northern Europe according to Lothar Kilian's and, especially, Marek Zvelebil's models of a broader homeland; the 6th millennium BC in India, according to Koenraad Elst's Out of India model; the 7th millennium BC in Anatolia (the 5th, in the Balkans, excluding the Anatolian branch), according to Colin Renfrew's Anatolian hypothesis; the 7th millennium BC in Anatolia (6th excluding the Anatolian branch), according to glottochronological studies;[6][7][page needed] before the 10th millennium BC in the Paleolithic Continuity Theory.
Hezarsala 4em BZ (ji bilî beşê anatolyayê) in li gorî hîpoteza ermenî li Ermenistanê ye (di hundirê teoriya zimanokî de tê pêşniyazkirin); Hezarsala 14em yan hezarsala 5em BZ li deşta deryayên reş û qezewînê li gorî teoriya Kurgan ya Marija Gimbutasî; the 6th millennium BC or later in Northern Europe according to Lothar Kilian's and, especially, Marek Zvelebil's models of a broader homeland; hezarsala 6em BZ li Hindistanê, li gorî Koenraad Elstî; hezarsala 7em BZ li Anatolyayê (ya 5em li Balkanê ji bilî şaxê Anatolyayê), ew jî li gorî hîpoteza anatolyayê ya Colin Renfrewî; hezarsala 7em BZ li anatolyayê (hezarsala 6em anatolya jî di nav de) li gorî dîrokandina zimanî ;[6][7][page needed] berî hezarsala 10em BZ di teoriya berdewamiya paleolîtîk.
Most linguists accept Gimbutas's Kurgan hypothesis[citation needed]. Renfrew's archaeological hypothesis assumes the Proto-Indo-Europeans brought agriculture to Europe long before the domestication of the horse, and is not accepted by most linguists[citation needed]. The Out-of-India and Northern-European hypotheses are fringe theories past their vogue.
Piraniya zimannasan hîpoteza Kurganî dipejirînin. hîpoteza arkeolojîk ya Renfrewî dibêje û ferz dike ku Proto-Hindî-ewropayiyan, hîn berî hesp bên kedîkirin, çandinî anîe Ewrupayê lê gelek zimannas napejirînin hîpotezên derveyî Hindistanê û bakurê ewrupayê hîpotez in kevin in û zêde nayên qebûlkirin.
History
Dîrok
Indo-European studies began with Sir William Jones making and propagating the observation that Sanskrit bore a certain resemblance to classical Greek and Latin.
Vekolînên Hindo-Ewropayî bi William Jonesî re dest pê kir piştî ku hewl da hevşibiya di navbera zimanê sanskrîtî û klasîkên Latînî û yewnanî de çêke û derxîne.
In The Sanscrit Language (1786) he suggested that all three languages had a common root, and that indeed they might further all be related, in turn, to Gothic and to the Celtic languages, as well as to Persian.
Wî di pirtûka Zimanê Sansikrîtî de (1786) wisa got ku rehên her sê zimanan yek in û herwiha zimanên kotî û Keltî û yên farisî jî nêzîkî wan in.
Jones' third annual discourse before the Asiatic Society on the "history and culture of the Hindus" (delivered on 2 February 1786 and published in 1788) with the famed "philologer" passage is often cited as the beginning of comparative linguistics and Indo-European studies.
Jones di guftgoya xwe ya salane ya sêyem de pêşiya Civala Asyayî, " dîrok û çanda Hindûyan"(di 2 sibata 1786an de gihişt û 1788an de hat wşandin) li gel destpêka "fîlologer" wel destpêka zimannasî ya berawird û lêkolînên Hindo-Ewrupayî dihesibe.
This is Jones' most quoted passage, establishing his tremendous find in the history of linguistics:
Ev gotina wî nîşana kişfa wî ya mezin di zimannasiyê de ye:
This common source came to be known as Proto-Indo-European.
Ev çavkaniyên hevbeş wek Proto-HindoEwropayî hatin nasîn.
The classical phase of Indo-European comparative linguistics leads from Franz Bopp's Comparative Grammar (1833) to August Schleicher's 1861 Compendium and up to Karl Brugmann's Grundriss published from the 1880s. Brugmann's junggrammatic re-evaluation of the field and Ferdinand de Saussure's development of the laryngeal theory may be considered[by whom?] the beginning of "contemporary" Indo-European studies.
Qonaxa klasîk ya zimannasiya berwirdî bi Franz Boppî di Comparative Grammar (1833) dest pê kir û bi 1861 Compendiuma August Schleicherî û Grundrissa Karl Brugmann dewam kir.
PIE as described in the early 20th century is still generally accepted today; subsequent work has largely refined and systematized the field, as well as incorporating new information, such as the Anatolian and Tocharian branches unknown in the 19th century.
.
Julius Pokorny's magisterial Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch ("Indo-European Etymological Dictionary", 1959) gave a detailed overview of the lexical knowledge accumulated up until that time, but neglected contemporary trends of morphology and phonology (including the laryngeal theory), and largely ignored Anatolian.
Nifşê vekolînerên Hindo-Ewropayîtiyê di salên heftêyî de (wek Calvert Watkins, Jochem Schindler û Helmut Rix) nerîneke baştir ji bo fêmkirina morfolojiyê derxist û li dû 1956 Apophonie ya Kuryłowicz's têgihiştina ablautê jî çêtir bû. Ji salên şêstî û vir ve, zanîna zimanên anatolî jî têra xwe zêde bû û wisa têkiliya wê bi PHEî ve başitr hat fêmkirin; binere Hindo-Hîtîtî.
Turkish genocide may refer the following genocides perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire's Turkish-speaking population in the early 20th century against minorities:
Komkujiyên tirkan ew komkujî ne yên ku bi destên împeratoriya Osmanî ya ya tirkîaxiv di sedsala 20an de pêk hat û li dijî van kêmneteweyan bû:
Armenian Genocide Assyrian Genocide Greek genocide
Nîjadkujiya ermeniyan Komkujiya asûriyan Komkujiya yewnaniyan
Any language is determined to be an extinct language when the last native or fluent speaker of that language dies.
Her ziman gava axiverê wê yê dawî yê ku baş dikare biaxive dimire, dihesibe zimanekî mirî.
Language death Extinct language Lists of endangered languages List of languages by time of extinction
Mirina zimanî Zimanê mirî Lîsteya zimanê di bin xeterê de Lîsteya zimanên mirî li gorî tarîxa mirinê
Out of the nearly 7,000 living languages, there are some 500 classified as nearly extinct because "only a few elderly speakers are still living".[1]
Ji nêzîkî 7000 zimanên zindî, nêzîkî 500 hebî hene ku hatine senifandin wek zimanên li ber mirinê"tenê çend qisekerên temenmezin mane ku pê diaxivin".[1]
Last known speakers of languages
Axiverên dawî yên zimanan
Last known speakers of languages Name Born Died Language Taxonomy Notes Marchant, ChestenChesten Marchant unknown 1676 Cornish1 !Cornish (last monoglot speaker) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 1] McMurray, MargaretMargaret McMurray unknown 1760 Galwegian dialect, Scottish Gaelic Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Goidelic – Scottish Gaelic Pentreath, DollyDolly Pentreath unknown 1777 Cornish2 !Cornish (traditionally known as the last fluent native speaker; disputed)[2] Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 2] Shanawdithit 1801c. 1801 1829 Beothuk unclassified Sutherland, WalterWalter Sutherland unknown 1850c. 1850 Norn Indo-European – Germanic – North Germanic – West Scandinavian Juana Maria unknown 1853 Nicoleño Uto-Aztecan – Northern – Takic (unclassified beyond the Takic family) Nikonha 1765c. 1765 1871 Tutelo Siouan – Western Siouan – Ohio Valley Siouan – Virginia Siouan [notes 3] Trugernanner 1812c. 1812 1876 Tasmanian !an unidentified Tasmanian language unknown; there were multiple language families in Tasmania [notes 4] Davey, JohnJohn Davey 1812 1891 Cornish3 !Cornish (some knowledge) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 5] Udaina, TuoneTuone Udaina 1823 1898 Dalmatian Indo-European – Italic – Romance – Italo-Dalmatian Smith, Fanny CochraneFanny Cochrane Smith 1834 1905 Tasmanian !an unidentified Tasmanian language unknown; there were multiple language families in Tasmania [notes 6] Fielding, FideliaFidelia Fielding 1827 1908 Mohegan-Pequot Algic – Algonquian – Eastern Algonquian Toney, SantuSantu Toney 1835 1910c. 1910 Beothuk (some knowledge) unclassified [notes 7] Mann, JohnJohn Mann 1834 1914c. 1914 Cornish4 !Cornish (extent of proficiency unclear) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 8] Ishi 1860c. 1860 1916 Yana language isolate [notes 9] Noble, SallySally Noble unknown 1922 Chimariko language isolate Solorsano, AscencionAscencion Solorsano unknown 1930 Mutsun Yok-Utian – Utian – Ohlone/Costanoan – Southern [5] Johnson, FrancesFrances Johnson unknown 1934 Takelma language isolate Trruúlmani unknown 1934 Puelche Chon Sam !Watt Sam and Nancy Raven unknown 1939 !late 1930s Natchez language isolate Meadows, IsabelIsabel Meadows 1846 1939 Rumsen Yok-Utian – Utian – Ohlone/Costanoan – Southern Decloux, DelphineDelphine Decloux 1871 1940 Chitimacha language isolate Youchigant, SesostrieSesostrie Youchigant unknown 1940s Tunica language isolate Nalig, JamesJames Nalig 1870sc. 1870s 1954 Utaha Austronesian – Malayo-Polynesian – Southern Oceanic – Oceanic [6] Yee, MaryMary Yee 1897 1965 Barbareño Chumashan – Southern – Central [notes 10] Maddrell, NedNed Maddrell 1877 1974 Manx Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Goidelic [notes 11] Loij, ÁngelaÁngela Loij 1900c. 1900 1974 Selk’nam[notes 12] Chon Lunel, ArmandArmand Lunel 1892 1977 Shuadit (Jewish dialect of Occitan) Indo-European – Italic – Romance – Western – Ibero-Romance – Occitan Palmer, AlfAlf Palmer 1891c. 1891 1981 Warrungu Pama-Nyungan – Maric Butler, JackJack Butler 1901 1986 Jiwarli dialect, Mantharta Pama-Nyungan – Kanyara–Mantharta – Mantharta Nolasquez, RoscindaRoscinda Nolasquez 1892 1987 Cupeño Uto-Aztecan – Northern – Takic – Cupan – Cahuilla-Cupeño Plotnikova, KlavdiyaKlavdiya Plotnikova 1895c. 1895 1989 Kamassian Uralic – Samoyedic – Core Samoyedic – Kamas–Selkup Munro, MorndiMorndi Munro unknown 1990s Unggumi dialect, Worrorra Worrorran – Western – Worrorra Bernat, FidelaFidela Bernat 1898 1991 Roncalese (Erronkarriko) dialect, Basque language isolate !Basque is a language isolate Esenç, TevfikTevfik Esenç 1904 1992 Ubykh Northwest Caucasian Asai, TakeTake Asai 1901c. 1901 1994 Sakhalin Ainu Ainu Paterson, AlgyAlgy Paterson unknown 1995 Martuthunira Pama-Nyungan – Ngayarta Dailey, Truman WashingtonTruman Washington Dailey 1898 1996 Otoe-Missouria dialect, Chiwere Siouan – Western Siouan – Mississippi Valley – Chiwere–Winnebago – Chiwere Vyie unknown 1997 Sirenik Eskimo Eskimo-Aleut – Eskimo – Yupik?
Axiverêm dawî yên nasirî yên zimanaan Nav Jidayikbûn Mirin Ziman Taxonomy Notes Marchant, ChestenChesten Marchant unknown 1676 Cornish1 !Cornish (last monoglot speaker) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 1] McMurray, MargaretMargaret McMurray unknown 1760 Galwegian dialect, Scottish Gaelic Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Goidelic – Scottish Gaelic Pentreath, DollyDolly Pentreath unknown 1777 Cornish2 !Cornish (traditionally known as the last fluent native speaker; disputed)[2] Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 2] Shanawdithit 1801c. 1801 1829 Beothuk unclassified Sutherland, WalterWalter Sutherland unknown 1850c. 1850 Norn Indo-European – Germanic – North Germanic – West Scandinavian Juana Maria unknown 1853 Nicoleño Uto-Aztecan – Northern – Takic (unclassified beyond the Takic family) Nikonha 1765c. 1765 1871 Tutelo Siouan – Western Siouan – Ohio Valley Siouan – Virginia Siouan [notes 3] Trugernanner 1812c. 1812 1876 Tasmanian !an unidentified Tasmanian language unknown; there were multiple language families in Tasmania [notes 4] Davey, JohnJohn Davey 1812 1891 Cornish3 !Cornish (some knowledge) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 5] Udaina, TuoneTuone Udaina 1823 1898 Dalmatian Indo-European – Italic – Romance – Italo-Dalmatian Smith, Fanny CochraneFanny Cochrane Smith 1834 1905 Tasmanian !an unidentified Tasmanian language unknown; there were multiple language families in Tasmania [notes 6] Fielding, FideliaFidelia Fielding 1827 1908 Mohegan-Pequot Algic – Algonquian – Eastern Algonquian Toney, SantuSantu Toney 1835 1910c. 1910 Beothuk (some knowledge) unclassified [notes 7] Mann, JohnJohn Mann 1834 1914c. 1914 Cornish4 !Cornish (extent of proficiency unclear) Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Brittonic [notes 8] Ishi 1860c. 1860 1916 Yana language isolate [notes 9] Noble, SallySally Noble unknown 1922 Chimariko language isolate Solorsano, AscencionAscencion Solorsano unknown 1930 Mutsun Yok-Utian – Utian – Ohlone/Costanoan – Southern [5] Johnson, FrancesFrances Johnson unknown 1934 Takelma language isolate Trruúlmani unknown 1934 Puelche Chon Sam !Watt Sam and Nancy Raven unknown 1939 !late 1930s Natchez language isolate Meadows, IsabelIsabel Meadows 1846 1939 Rumsen Yok-Utian – Utian – Ohlone/Costanoan – Southern Decloux, DelphineDelphine Decloux 1871 1940 Chitimacha language isolate Youchigant, SesostrieSesostrie Youchigant unknown 1940s Tunica language isolate Nalig, JamesJames Nalig 1870sc. 1870s 1954 Utaha Austronesian – Malayo-Polynesian – Southern Oceanic – Oceanic [6] Yee, MaryMary Yee 1897 1965 Barbareño Chumashan – Southern – Central [notes 10] Maddrell, NedNed Maddrell 1877 1974 Manx Indo-European – Celtic – Insular Celtic – Goidelic [notes 11] Loij, ÁngelaÁngela Loij 1900c. 1900 1974 Selk’nam[notes 12] Chon Lunel, ArmandArmand Lunel 1892 1977 Shuadit (Jewish dialect of Occitan) Indo-European – Italic – Romance – Western – Ibero-Romance – Occitan Palmer, AlfAlf Palmer 1891c. 1891 1981 Warrungu Pama-Nyungan – Maric Butler, JackJack Butler 1901 1986 Jiwarli dialect, Mantharta Pama-Nyungan – Kanyara–Mantharta – Mantharta Nolasquez, RoscindaRoscinda Nolasquez 1892 1987 Cupeño Uto-Aztecan – Northern – Takic – Cupan – Cahuilla-Cupeño Plotnikova, KlavdiyaKlavdiya Plotnikova 1895c. 1895 1989 Kamassian Uralic – Samoyedic – Core Samoyedic – Kamas–Selkup Munro, MorndiMorndi Munro unknown 1990s Unggumi dialect, Worrorra Worrorran – Western – Worrorra Bernat, FidelaFidela Bernat 1898 1991 Roncalese (Erronkarriko) dialect, Basque language isolate !Basque is a language isolate Esenç, TevfikTevfik Esenç 1904 1992 Ubykh Northwest Caucasian Asai, TakeTake Asai 1901c. 1901 1994 Sakhalin Ainu Ainu Paterson, AlgyAlgy Paterson unknown 1995 Martuthunira Pama-Nyungan – Ngayarta Dailey, Truman WashingtonTruman Washington Dailey 1898 1996 Otoe-Missouria dialect, Chiwere Siouan – Western Siouan – Mississippi Valley – Chiwere–Winnebago – Chiwere Vyie unknown 1997 Sirenik Eskimo Eskimo-Aleut – Eskimo – Yupik?
List of last known speakers of languages
Lîsteya axiverên dawî yên naskirî zimanan
References
Referans