Glottolog 5.1 -

<!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <title> Glottolog 5.1 - </title> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"> <meta name="description" content=""> <meta name="author" content=""> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="https://glottolog.org/static/favicon.ico?v=9f3f8cd893876bfacc0f4dc9f16a9c19" type="image/x-icon" /> <link href="https://glottolog.org/clld-static/css/packed.2bdb87f7.css" rel="stylesheet"> <script src="https://glottolog.org/clld-static/js/packed.0e48ef76.js"></script> <link rel="unapi-server" type="application/xml" title="unAPI" href="https://glottolog.org/unapi"> <script src="https://glottolog.org/_js"></script> </head> <body id="r-glottolog.meta"> <div id="top" class="navbar navbar-static-top navbar-inverse"> <div class="navbar-inner"> <div class="container-fluid"> <a class="btn btn-navbar" data-toggle="collapse" data-target=".nav-collapse"> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> </a> <a class="brand" href="https://glottolog.org/" title="Glottolog 5.1"> <img src="https://glottolog.org/static/glottolog_logo.png" width="28"/> Glottolog </a> <div class="nav-collapse collapse"> <ul class="nav"> <li id="menuitem_languages" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/glottolog/language" title="Languages">Languages</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_families" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/glottolog/family" title="Families">Families</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_search" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/glottolog" title="Language Search">Language Search</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_sources" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/langdoc" title="References">References</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_query" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/langdoc/complexquery" title="Reference Search">Reference Search</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_glottoscope" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/langdoc/status" title="GlottoScope">GlottoScope</a> </li> <li id="menuitem_about" class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/about" title="About">About</a> </li> </ul> <div class="pull-right"> <form class="navbar-form form-search" role="search" action="https://glottolog.org/glottolog"> <div class="input-append"> <input tabindex="1" type="text" class="search-query input-medium" placeholder="pr. Name / glcode / iso" name="search" id="site-search-input"> <button tabindex="2" id="site-search-button" class="btn" type="submit"><i class="icon-search"></i></button> </div> </form> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div id="contextnavbar" class="navbar navbar-static-top navbar-inverse"> <div class="navbar-inner"> <div class="container-fluid"> <a class="btn btn-navbar" data-toggle="collapse" data-target="#second"> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> <span class="icon-bar"></span> </a> <div id="second" class="nav-collapse collapse"> <ul class="nav pull-right"> <li class="active"> <a href="https://glottolog.org/glottolog/glottologinformation">About Languoids</a> </li> <li class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/langdoc/langdocinformation">About References</a> </li> <li class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/meta/glossary">Glossary</a> </li> <li class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/legal">Legal</a> </li> <li class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/meta/downloads">Download</a> </li> <li class=""> <a href="https://glottolog.org/meta/contact">Contact</a> </li> </ul> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="container-fluid"> <div class="row-fluid"> <div class="span10 offset1"> <div class="section" id="aboutlanguoids"> <h3> About Languoids <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#aboutlanguoids" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> </div> </div> </div> <div class="row-fluid"> <div class="span3 offset1"> <div class="well well-small"> <img src="https://glottolog.org/static/stammbaum.png"/> </div> </div> <div class="span7"> <p> Glottolog aims to provide a comprehensive list of languoids (families, languages, dialects) that linguists need to be able to identify. Each languoid has a unique and persistent identifier called <strong>Glottocode</strong> (<a href="https://content.iospress.com/articles/semantic-web/sw212843">Hammarström and Forkel (2022)</a>), consisting of four alphanumeric characters (i.e. lowercase letters or decimal digits) and four decimal digits (<span style="font-family: monospace">abcd1234</span> follows this patters, but so does <a href="/resource/languoid/id/b10b1234"><span style="font-family: monospace">b10b1234</span></a>). </p> <p> Currently 2024-10-29 there are <strong>7667 spoken L1 languages</strong> (i.e. spoken languages traditionally used by a community of speakers as their first language). </p> <p> Languages are classified (see below) into <strong>247 families</strong> and <strong>183 isolates</strong>, i.e., one-member families. This classification is the best guess by the Glottolog editors and the classification principles are described in <a href="#x1-10011">Figure 1</a> below and the accompanying text. Users should be aware that for many groups of languages, there is little available historical-comparative research, so the classifications are subject to change as scholarship and interest in those languages increase. Please contact the editors if you have corrections to the language classification. </p> <p> In addition to the genealogical trees (families and isolates), the Families page also includes the following <strong>non-genealogical trees</strong>: </p> <ul> <li>Sign Language</li> <li>Unclassifiable</li> <li>Pidgin</li> <li>Unattested</li> <li>Artificial Language</li> <li>Speech Register</li> <li>Mixed Language</li> </ul> <p> (Glottolog also contains lists of putative languages that are not regarded as real languoids by the editors but that are given a Glottocode for bookkeeping purposes; these are called <strong>bookkeeping languoids</strong> and they are described further below.) </p> </div> </div> <div class="row-fluid"> <div class="span5 offset1"> <table class="table table-striped" style="float: inline;"> <tbody> <tr> <th>Spoken L1 Language</th> <td class="right">7,667</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Sign Language</th> <td class="right">227</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Unclassifiable</th> <td class="right">120</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Pidgin</th> <td class="right">87</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Unattested</th> <td class="right">68</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Artificial Language</th> <td class="right">31</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Speech Register</th> <td class="right">15</td> </tr> <tr> <th>Mixed Language</th> <td class="right">8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>All</td> <td class="right">8,223</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </div> <div class="span5"> <div style="float: right;" class="span9 well well-small"> <img src="https://glottolog.org/static/World_Map.jpg"/> </div> </div> </div> <div class="row-fluid"> <div class="span10 offset1"> <div class="section" id="principles"> <h3> Principles <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#principles" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> Every putative language is considered according to the decision procedure in <a href="#x1-10011">Figure 1</a>. All spoken languages for which a sufficient amount of linguistic data exists—the leaves of the decision tree with double boxes around them—are deemed classifiable, and are classified into genealogical families (and isolates). The other kinds of languages are filed into the other categories that were listed above. Glottolog is complete only for classifiable languages. Regarding unattested and unclassifiable languages, see <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/476024">Harald Hammarström (2015)</a>. A comprehensive listing of pidgins is <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/129370">Peter Bakker and Mikael Parkvall (2010)</a>. This listing differentiates different levels of evidence for the existence of a pidgin, rather than a strict yes/no existence-decision. Elsewhere there are extensive lists of whistled languages ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/550751" title="Julien Meyer 2015">Julien Meyer 2015</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/84734" title="Réné-Guy Busnel and André Classe 1976">Réné-Guy Busnel and André Classe 1976</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/476058" title="Tom Harrisson 1965">Tom Harrisson 1965</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/478297" title="É. Thierry 2002">É. Thierry 2002</a> ), initiation languages ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/322233" title="Ngonga-ke-Mbembe, E.H.O 2009">Ngonga-ke-Mbembe, E.H.O 2009</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/625022" title="Lucas James 2021">Lucas James 2021</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/158886" title="Moñino, Yves 1977">Moñino, Yves 1977</a> , ritual languages <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/474913" title="Jonathan Brindle and Mary Esther Kropp Dakubu and Ọbádélé Kambon 2015">Jonathan Brindle and Mary Esther Kropp Dakubu and Ọbádélé Kambon 2015</a> ), secret languages ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/160707" title="Dugast, Idelette 1950">Dugast, Idelette 1950</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/18476" title="Ittman, Johannes 1959">Ittman, Johannes 1959</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/474652" title="Beaujard, Philippe 1998">Beaujard, Philippe 1998</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/547405" title="Berjaoui, Nasser 2016">Berjaoui, Nasser 2016</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/160841" title="Berjaoui, Nasser 2009">Berjaoui, Nasser 2009</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/67483" title="Leiris, Michel 1948">Leiris, Michel 1948</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/33403" title="Leslau, Wolf 1964">Leslau, Wolf 1964</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/548353" title="Hans W. Debrunner 1962">Hans W. Debrunner 1962</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/150176" title="Thomas, Northcote Whitridge 1914">Thomas, Northcote Whitridge 1914</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/625022" title="Lucas James 2021">Lucas James 2021</a> ) and drummed languages ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/99532" title="Rudolf Betz 1891">Rudolf Betz 1891</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/94221" title="Carrington, John F. 1949">Carrington, John F. 1949</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/547075" title="Arom, Simha and Cloarec-Heiss, France 1976">Arom, Simha and Cloarec-Heiss, France 1976</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/552075" title="Frank Seifart 2015">Frank Seifart 2015</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/66540" title="Theodore Stern 1957">Theodore Stern 1957</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/8617" title="Thomas C. Aitken 1990">Thomas C. Aitken 1990</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/625022" title="Lucas James 2021">Lucas James 2021</a> ). </p> </div> <div class="well well-small"> <a id="x1-10011"></a> <a href="https://glottolog.org/static/lfintro.png"> <img src="https://glottolog.org/static/lfintro.png" alt=""/> </a> <caption> <span class="id">Figure 1: </span> <span class="content">Decision procedure for inclusion in the present language listing.</span> </caption> </div> <div class="section" id="inclusionexclusionoflanguages"> <h4> Inclusion/exclusion of languages <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#inclusionexclusionoflanguages" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h4> <h5><a id="x1-3000"></a>1. Is the putative language assertably distinct from all other known languages?</h5> <p> For any alleged language to be considered in the classification we must first determine whether it was distinct from all other languages. By distinct, we mean <em>not mutually intelligible</em> with any other language. In principle, any convincing evidence to this effect is sufficient. For example, direct comparison of language data or testimonies of non-intelligibility to all neighbouring languages is the most straightforward kind of evidence. But also, various types of evidence for isolation from all other humans for a long time could make a convincing case that a language is indeed distinct from all others. </p> <p> For example, Flecheiros is the name given to an uncontacted group in the Javari valley in Western Brazil (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/85197">Carlos Alberto Ricardo 1986</a>). Ethnographic evidence suggests that they, if akin to anyone in the vicinity, are Kanamari (a known Katukinan language, see, e.g., <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/9415">Zoraide dos Anjos 2011</a>). However, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/311488">Scott Wallace (2011)</a> recounts one meeting between a Kanamari and the Flecheiros revealing that they do not speak intelligible languages (though one Kanamari woman captured at an early age was living among the Flecheiros). Even if not totally foolproof, this appears to be convincing evidence that the Flecheiros speak a language distinct from all others. </p> <p> However, all the pieces of evidence must be present. There are plenty of other cases where a speech form (often extinct) is known not to have been unintelligible to some or most languages around it (e.g., Yalakalore in <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/37160">David M. Eberhard 2009</a>), but this is not sufficient if it cannot be asserted for <em>every</em> plausible candidate. A further caveat is that testimonies must themselves be convincing to count as testimonies. There are cases where unintelligibility information comes from individuals who were in no position to judge it, e.g., they might be passing on hearsay, or pass on some kind of general impression not based solely on language. </p> <p> If a putative language is or was not considered as a distinct language by these criteria, it is either a dialect of a language, or it is classified as “based on misunderstanding”. In the latter case, it is listed as a type of bookkeping languoid (see below). </p> <h5><a id="x1-4000"></a>2. Are there form-meaning pairs?</h5> <p> For a linguistic classification, we naturally require that actual linguistic data, i.e., form-meaning pairs (as opposed to purely sociolinguistic data), form the basis for the classification. That means that some linguistic data has been collected which provides the basis for classification, but does not necessarily mean that the data in question has been published. We also require that the data is not known to have vanished, meaning that once attested languages whose attestation now appears to be lost count as unattested. For example, grammar sketches of three extinct South American language Taimviae, Teutae and Agoiae that once did exist (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/45004">Daniel G. Brinton 1898</a>:203, 208) now seem to have vanished completely. Thus, the three count as unattested because it is known that the attestation is gone. </p> <h5><a id="x1-5000"></a>3. Has it served as the main means of communication for a human society?</h5> <p> There are two reasons for restricting the scope to communication systems that serve(d) as the main means of communication for a human society. </p> <p> First, language classification (see below) by the comparative method explicitly or implicitly assumes that language change is governed by certain (vaguely formulated) probabilistic laws. These laws have a plausible theoretical foundation if the communication system serve(d) as the main means of communication for a human society, but do not necessarily apply to all forms of normed human communication systems. For example, radical vocabulary replacement within one generation of speakers would be highly unlikely for a main means of communication of a society (communication would break down!), but might be possible in an auxiliary communication system taught to adults. Similarly, sound change is though to come about as humans hear and (mis)interpret spoken analog communication (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/314555">John J. Ohala 1993</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/314558">Brown, Cecil H. and Eric W. Holman and Søren Wichmann 2013</a>) and would, for that reason, not be expected in, e.g., computer programming languages. </p> <p> Second, one of the purposes for doing language classification in the first place is to obtain insights into the history of its speakers. All human societies have a main means of communication, so such a communication system reflects the history of a human society. It is not necessarily the case that all forms of normed human communication systems reflect the history of its speakers. For example, a whistled language may come and go in the course of history of a people, whereas a people cannot be without a main speech form for any period of history. </p> <p> If a putative language is not the main means of communication for a society, it is classified as a pidgin or as a speech register. (Neither whistled or drummed languages nor jargons are currently included in Glottolog.) </p> <h5><a id="x1-6000"></a>4. Is the modality speech?</h5> <p> The present classification of spoken languages follows the existing well-established methodology for inferring genealogical relationships (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/94097">Campbell, Lyle and Poser, William J. 2008</a>). The relevant principles and their application are explained below in the Classification section. </p> <p> Since a similar methodology for the classification of sign languages remains to be formulated, sign languages are classified on a weaker theoretical basis. The relevant principles and their application are explained below in the Classification section. </p> <h5><a id="x1-7000"></a>5. Are the form-meaning pairs enough to distinguish between different classification proposals?</h5> <p> We also require that the amount of form-meaning pairs is sufficient for a classification. There is no universal fixed threshold for how much is sufficient as this depends on how closely related the language is to other known languages. An approximate minimal requirement is 50 items or so of basic vocabulary, i.e., not personal names or special domain vocabulary. For example, the extinct language Gamela of northeastern Brazil is known from 19 words only (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/47776">Curt Nimuendajú 1937</a>:68)—hardly enough for a classification. It is arguable that the sound-values encoded in the Linear A script can be gauged, but little, if any, meaning can be inferred (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/18847">Yves Duhoux 1998</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/145800">Best, Jan 1989</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/10744">K. Aartun 1997</a>), rendering the data insufficient for classification. </p> <p> If not enough form-meaning pairs are attested to allow classification, the language is filed under Unclassifiable. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="classification"> <h4> Classification <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#classification" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h4> <h5> <a id="x1-9000"></a> 6. Are the form-meaning similarities to at least one other language best explained by inheritance from a common ancestor? </h5> <p> Given a language with sufficient attestation, one can compare it with the remaining languages. If there are similarities to other language(s) that can be shown exceed chance, there are three possible kinds of explanations: universals, contact or inheritance from a common ancestor (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/94097">Campbell, Lyle and Poser, William J. 2008</a>). If the best explanation for the similarities are inheritance from common ancestor, languages are classified as belonging to the same family. A language which, by this principle, does not belong to the same family as any other language is also called an isolate. What constitutes the “best” explanation is not a static judgment, but subject to change as new considerations and new data appear. For example, some lexical parallels between Nadahup, Kakua-Nukak and Puinave (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/158063">Rivet, Paul and Constant Tastevin 1920</a>) were for a long time considered by many to be “best” explained by a genealogical relationship. However, thanks to increased documentation and interest in the languages, the explanation of the similarities as loans, chance resemblances and even data errors, is now favoured (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/60268">Patience Epps 2008</a>:5-9, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/153689">Katherine Bolaños and Patience Epps 2009</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/21440">Katherine Bolaños 2011</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/138662">Girón, Jesús Mario 2008</a>:419-439). Not only the state of documentation and investigation of specific groups may alter the perceived “best” explanation, but also new arguments regarding the probative value of various kinds of evidence. For example, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/21928">Malcolm Ross (1995)</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/148196">Malcolm Ross (2001)</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/10496">Ross, Malcolm (2005)</a> argues that similarities in pronoun signatures can be used to create preliminary groupings of Papuan languages, whereas <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/314563">Harald Hammarström (2012)</a>, using data from all over the world, argues that such usage of the evidence is not probative for genealogical groupings. </p> <p> There is the theoretical possibility that a language with sufficient attestation has simply not (yet) been compared to other relevant languages to determine if there are any non-random similarities. In practice, we know of no such language, and therefore have no separate category for languages inhabiting this logical possibility. </p> <p></p> <h5><a id="x1-10000"></a>7. Has there been sufficient comparison to determine its closest relative(s)?</h5> <p> Given a language and the other languages that belong to the same family, if insufficient data is available or insufficient comparative work has been done to determine the closest relative(s) of the language at hand, it is left unclassified within the finest-level (sub)family that can be discerned. </p> <p> For example, the subgrouping study of the Greater Awyu subfamily by <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/304684">Lourens de Vries and Ruth Wester and Wilco van den Heuvel (2012)</a> uses shared innovations in verb morphology as the most reliable indicator of linguistic ancestry because, in a landscape of dialect chains and clan loyalty shifts (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/305807">de Vries, Lourens J. 2012</a>), lexicon and phonology is thought to be particularly vulnerable to diffusion. Within the Greater Awyu languages, there is a binary split between the Becking-Dawi group and the Awyu-Dumut groups. Awyu-Dumut, in turn, divides into three large dialect chains Awyu, Dumut and Ndeiram. For one language (clearly belonging to the Greater Awyu family on lexical and pronominal grounds), Sawi, no morphological data is available, so, for lack of data on verb morphology, its position within the subfamily cannot be determined and it is consequently left unclassified within it. </p> <p> In other cases, data availability is not the bottleneck, but the work required to ascertain the subgrouping. Plenty of data exists for Adamawa Fali and other Volta-Congo languages (although patchily distributed), but subgrouping in the Volta-Congo languages is a large and complicated issue, leaving the subgrouping of Adamawa Fali unresolved (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/114627">Boyd, Raymond 1989</a>:180). </p> <h5><a id="x1-11000"></a>8. Is there a subgrouping based on shared innovations?</h5> <p> The preferred subgrouping criterion is a subgrouping based on shared innovations (<a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/98107">Malcolm Ross 1988</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/302679">Malcolm Ross 1997</a>). For each language where such is available, that subgrouping is followed. </p> <h5><a id="x1-12000"></a>9. Are there other, weaker, arguments for subgrouping?</h5> <p> If no subgrouping based on shared innovations is available, whatever other (weaker) arguments are considered. Weaker arguments would be shared similarities in general, e.g., lexicostatistics, which may reflect borrowings and/or retentions. The subgrouping of the least bad such evidence is followed. For example, two independent published opinions exist on the internal subgrouping of the Mek languages, namely that of <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/37015">Volker Heeschen (1978)</a>, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/34449">Volker Heeschen (1992)</a> and that which appears in <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/38805">Peter J. Silzer and Heljä Heikkinen-Clouse (1991)</a>. The former gives a lexicostatistical argument for a subgrouping while the latter lists a subgrouping without pointing to any evidence at all. The lexicostatistical evidence is preferrable to no evidence at all, and is therefore followed. </p> <h5><a id="signlanguages"></a>On the classification of sign languages</h5> <p> The category of Sign Language languages in Glottolog is first divided into L1 Sign Languages, Auxiliary Sign Systems and Pidgin Sign Languages. L1 Sign Languages are full-fledged languages (in the sense of <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/622622" title="Charles F. Hockett 1960">Charles F. Hockett 1960</a> 's Design Features) that are or were someone's mother tongue. Homesign systems, developed for basic communication by isolated deaf children and their immediate family, are not full-fledged languages ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/678839" title="Hill, Joseph C. and Lillo-Martin, Diane C. and Wood, Sandra K. 2019">Hill, Joseph C. and Lillo-Martin, Diane C. and Wood, Sandra K. 2019</a> ). Homesign systems are not catalogued in Glottolog. A ``critical mass'' of interacting deaf individuals can transform (a/some) homesign system into an L1 language but precisely when this happens is a matter of uncertainty. Perhaps a half a dozen to a dozen individuals are sufficient and Glottolog is relatively liberal in the judgment of particular cases. (This is visible not least in labels such as ``emergent'', ``nascent'' or ``family sign'' used in the titles of publications about the same cases). The list of L1 sign languages in Glottolog aims to be complete but, as with spoken languages, there has to be a published convincing argument as to its existence and distinctness to other languages in order to merit inclusion. Pidgin Sign Languages, like spoken Pidgin languages, are by definition not full-fledged languages. Although some are included, Glottolog does not aim to be complete with respect to Pidgin Sign Languages. Auxiliary Sign Systems are similarly, by definition, not anyone's mother tongue ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/2405" title="Kendon, Adam 1988">Kendon, Adam 1988</a> ):2-6, 404-441 and Glottolog does not aim to be complete with respect to auxiliary sign systems. Deaf individuals, like anyone else, may use an existing auxiliary sign system and if there is ``critical mass'' of such users that may turn the auxiliary sign system into an L1 Sign Language, e.g., Yolngu Sign Language ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/436923" title="Adone, Marie Carla and Elaine L. Maypilama 2014">Adone, Marie Carla and Elaine L. Maypilama 2014</a> ). </p> <p> The L1 Sign Languages are further classified into families, resembling genealogical families for spoken languages. For spoken languages, a relatively well-developed methodology, i.e., the Comparative Method (see, e.g., <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/431133" title="Michael Weiss 2014">Michael Weiss 2014</a> ), exists for establishing relationships and subclassification. For signed languages, such a methodology remains to be articulated (see <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/666635" title="Justin M. Power 2022">Justin M. Power 2022</a>: 4 , 9-13, <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/670039" title="Abner, Natasha and Geraci, Carlo and Yu, Shi and Lettieri, Jessica and Mertz, Justine and Salgat, Anah 2020">Abner, Natasha and Geraci, Carlo and Yu, Shi and Lettieri, Jessica and Mertz, Justine and Salgat, Anah 2020</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/578660" title="Wilson, Brittany 2014">Wilson, Brittany 2014</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/551379" title="Parks, Jason 2011">Parks, Jason 2011</a> , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/666837" title="Timothy Reagan 2021">Timothy Reagan 2021</a> etc.). In lieu of a well-developed methodology, Glottolog sign languages are (sub-)grouped on lexical and/or historical evidence on transmission. A lexical comparison, even given caveats for cognacy establishment and transmission type, is usually stronger evidence than historical evidence since a historical connection may or may not be closely tied to the transmission of an entire signed language. We follow earlier work that estimates that 30% lexicostatistical similarity and above to be indicative of family relationship ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/154107" title="Bernadet Hendriks 2008">Bernadet Hendriks 2008</a>: 37 , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/682616" title="Palacios Guerra Currie, Anne-Marie and Richard P. Meier and Keith Walters 2002">Palacios Guerra Currie, Anne-Marie and Richard P. Meier and Keith Walters 2002</a>: 228-229 , <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/476525" title="David McKee and Graeme Kennedy 2000">David McKee and Graeme Kennedy 2000</a>: 57-58 etc.). If lexical evidence is not available, historical evidence, e.g., the signed language of relevant foundational deaf institutions and/or influential individuals therein is taken as as an indicator of the origin of a signed language. Also evidence or arguments as to the absense of any historical connection to other known signed language is taken as an indicator of independent origin, i.e., a separate family/isolate. This means that, unlike with spoken languages in Glottolog, signed languages can be classified into families/isolates without there being any recorded language data, i.e., form-meaning pairs. For example, nothing has been published on lexicon or structure of the (presumed) signed language of Dadhkai village in Jammu and Kashmir state (India). Its existence is arguable on the incidence of deafness ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/586813" title="Sushil Razdan and Sunil Kumar Raina and Kamal K. Pandita and Shiveta Razdan and Renu Nanda and Rajni Kaul and Sandeep Dogra 2012">Sushil Razdan and Sunil Kumar Raina and Kamal K. Pandita and Shiveta Razdan and Renu Nanda and Rajni Kaul and Sandeep Dogra 2012</a> ) and its classification as an isolate is inferred from the lack of historical connections of this village to any other known signed language. Also unlike spoken languages in Glottolog, there exist signed languages for which lexical data (but little historical information) is available, yet no systematic comparison to neighbouring signed languages has been carried out. Such language are listed as Unclassified L1 Sign Language is Glottolog. For example, there is a dictionary of Rwandan Sign Language ( <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/552984" title="Marion Grace Woolley 2009">Marion Grace Woolley 2009</a> ) which has not been used for lexical comparisons and the little historical information available is insufficient to confirm or deny any relationship with deaf schools/languages in neighbouring or far countries. </p> <p> It is expected that the quality of the classification of signed languages in Glottolog is far inferior to that of the spoken languages. Nevertheless, unlike earlier work such as that of Anderson (reproduced in <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/571027" title="Woll, Bencie and Sutton-Spence, R. and Elton, F. 2001">Woll, Bencie and Sutton-Spence, R. and Elton, F. 2001</a>: 27 ), <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/320241" title="Henri Wittmann 1991">Henri Wittmann 1991</a> or <a class="Source" href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/673430" title="Cantin, Yann 2016">Cantin, Yann 2016</a> , sources are given for each classificatory choice to enable scrutiny and facilitate future improvement. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="accountability"> <h4> Accountability <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#accountability" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h4> <p> The outcome classification is presented in the glottolog tree. Detailed evidence that the presented classification actually conforms to the principles above is provided in the form of references to work containing or subsuming the required evidence for the decisions reflected in the classification. </p> <p> On the leaf level, i.e., for languages, references to actual data for each language are given, justifying principles 1-5. </p> <p> For the classification, principles 6-9, references justifying nodes are displayed in the green box below the tree-fragment box. Wherever necessary, a comment accompanies the reference if the decision reflected in the tree does not follow straightforwardly from the argumentation in the references work(s). </p> <p> We do not always conform to the interpretation and conventions of the authors cited as justification. It may be, for example, that an author states that a certain group should be assumed on purely geographic grounds, in anticipation of future work, or some other reason not admissible as justification in the present classification. In such cases, the justificational value of the reference is on the (lack of) evidence and/or arguments found in the reference, not necessarily the interpretation of this state given in that reference. </p> <p> Even though the information given in the current version of Glottolog is fairly substantial, we cannot guarantee that we have included all the relevant information yet. We decided to release Glottolog early rather than wait for the completed version, which will be evolving continually anyway. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="namesoffamiliesandsubfamilies"> <h3> Names of families and subfamilies <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#namesoffamiliesandsubfamilies" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> Whenever possible, names of families and subfamilies are taken over from the current literature. This is considered possible when there is no name clash (with another language or (sub-)family in the world) and the name in the literature in principle refers to the intended set of languages. If the (sub-)family in the present classification differs in any significant way from that associated with a certain name, we have introduced a new unique name which is in often not found in the literature. The new names are all unique and unambiguous but otherwise, for the current edition of Glottolog, we spent little effort on finding the name optimal in describing its set of languages (e.g., with the name of a central river or by taking the word for “man”) or optimal in the system of names in the region or greater family (e.g., by using a name with a Spanish flavour if the surrounding (sub-)families have Spanish-flavoured names). A number of names may look somewhat artificial (e.g., Nuclear A, or, A-B-C) or out of place (e.g., a subfamily with an Anglophone name whose parent has a Francophone name), reflecting the fact that no particular value is attached to names beyond being unique and unambiguous. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="example"> <h3> Example <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#example" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> For example, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/tuca1253">Tucanoan</a> is a South American language family. <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/310719">Chacon, Thiago C. (2012)</a>, with later amendments in <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/576304">Ramirez, Henri. (2019:5-7)</a>, contains a subgrouping based on shared phonological innovations and defines the position in the tree for all the below nodes except Arapaso, Miriti, Macaguaje, Kueretu and Tama, which fall outside the scope of his study. Thus, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/310719">Chacon, Thiago C. (2012)</a> and <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/576304">Ramirez, Henri. (2019:5-7)</a> are given as the references justifying the top-level family as well as the reference justifying most intermediate nodes. For Western Tucanoan there's also the study by <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/557465">Skilton, Amalia. (2013)</a>, which is added to the two for that node. The remaining languages, Arapaso, Miriti, Macaguaje and Tama do exist (or did exist) and they are arguably Tucanoan. For Macaguaje and Tama, a small amount of data is attested and published, and this is enough for <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/56760">Sergio Elías Ortiz (1965:133)</a> to show that they are within the <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/sion1248">Siona-Secoya</a> group, and <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/576304">Ramirez, Henri. (2019:5-7)</a> later makes a closer assessment of their position. Thus, here <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/56760">Sergio Elías Ortiz (1965:133)</a> and <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/576304">Ramirez, Henri. (2019:5-7)</a> are cited as the references justifying the position of Macaguaje and Tama. For Miriti and Arapaso, <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/9035">Brüzzi Alves da Silva, Alcionilio (1972)</a> was able to obtain minuscule wordlists of them which appeared in <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/24652">Brüzzi Alves da Silva, Alcionilio (1962:96-97, 101-102)</a>, and concluded that they were Tucanoan but did not insist on a more specific placement himself. More recently, another wordlist of Arapaso collected a century earlier by Natterer has surfaced, and this allowed <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/576304">Ramirez, Henri. (2019:5-7)</a> to place this language more specifically to place this language more specifically in a subgroup with Kotiria and Wa'ikhana. Regarding Miriti, the remaining community members asserted <a href="https://glottolog.org/resource/reference/id/24652">Brüzzi Alves da Silva, Alcionilio (1962:101-102)</a> that the language was similar to Arapaso and this is consistent with the minuscule wordlist. The language is thus classified accordingly with this (admittedly meagre) motivation. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="dialects"> <h3> Dialects <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#dialects" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> For the current edition of Glottolog, we spent little effort on making dialect classifications consistent and on providing references for dialects. Most of the information on dialects in Glottolog is lifted from the Multitree project and contains numerous errors and inconsistencies which we are aware of, but have not yet had the resources to systematically correct. We hope to provide more information on dialects in the future. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="coordinates"> <h3> Coordinates <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#coordinates" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> Glottolog provides coordinates for nearly all language-level languoids. The coordinate often represents the geographical centre-point of the area where the speakers live, but may also indicate a historical location, the demographic centre-point or some other representative point. Like (variant) names and country locations (but unlike language division and classification), coordinates are attributes close to observation and are therefore not given with a specific source in Glottolog. However, it is expected that any source attributed to the language in Glottolog would indicate a location compatible with the coordinate given in Glottolog. The actual sources for the coordinates in Glottolog are varied and include both individual points submitted by various users and ourselves as well as databases such as WALS, ASJP and human reading of Ethnologue maps. As such the coordinates in Glottolog are not a substitute for a full and well-founded source in language locations (or variant names). For that, one needs to look at the individual sources attributed to the language in Glottolog. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="bookkeepinglanguoids"> <h3> Bookkeeping languoids <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#bookkeepinglanguoids" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> Glottolog contains a list of languages that the editors do not regard as real languages but instead as languages based on misunderstanding. </p> <p> Sometimes linguists claim the existence of a language that later turns out to be a misunderstanding. For instance, <a href="https://glottolog.org/glottolog?search=Yarsun">Yarsun</a> was once claimed by Ethnologue to be an Austronesian language of northern New Guinea, and there is still an ISO 639-3 code for it. However, recent research provided insufficient evidence that such a language ever existed in the sense of being distinct from every other language. In such cases, ISO 639-3 codes are often retired, because active ISO 639-3 codes must be about real languages. Glottolog never retires Glottocodes and keeps them also for bookkeeping purposes. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="agglomeratedendangermentstatusaes"> <h3> Agglomerated Endangerment Status (AES) <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#agglomeratedendangermentstatusaes" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p> The Agglomerated Endangerment Status (AES) is an endangerment scale, derived from the databases of <a href="https://www.endangeredlanguages.com" title="The Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat)"><i class="icon-share"></i> The Catalogue of Endangered Languages (ELCat)</a> , <a href="https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000187026" title="UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger"><i class="icon-share"></i> UNESCO Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger</a> and <a href="https://www.ethnologue.com/" title="Ethnologue"><i class="icon-share"></i> Ethnologue</a>. For more information see <a href="https://glottolog.org/langdoc/status">GlottoScope</a>, which also contains information on descriptive status. </p> </div> <div class="section" id="acknowledgements"> <h3> Acknowledgements <a href="#top" title="go to top of the page" style="vertical-align: bottom">⇫</a> <a class="headerlink" href="#acknowledgements" title="Permalink to this headline">¶</a> </h3> <p>Thanks </p> <ul class="itemize1"> <li class="itemize">To Hedvig Skirgård for miscellaneous corrections and issued raised</li> <li class="itemize">To Tim Usher for many points of dicussion re Papuan languages</li> <li class="itemize">To Mark Donohue for many points of dicussion re Papuan and Austronesian languages </li> <li class="itemize">To Hilário de Sousa and Andy Hsiu for many points of dicussion and clarification regarding languages in the Sinosphere </li> <li class="itemize">To Matthew Dryer for many points of dicussion re Papuan and other languages</li> <li class="itemize">To Roger Blench for all things Nigerian and beyond</li> <li class="itemize">To Tom Güldemann the 'bald eagle' of African language classification</li> <li class="itemize">To Bonny Sands for help with access to various valuable documents</li> <li class="itemize">To Mikael Parkvall for help with “Creole” language classification</li> <li class="itemize">To Willem Adelaar for many points of discussion re South American languages</li> <li class="itemize">To Raoul Zamponi for help with access to various valuable documents</li> <li class="itemize">To Guillaume Segerer for help with access to various valuable documents</li> <li class="itemize">To all authors of descriptive and comparative works on the languages of the world </li> <li class="itemize">To 25 libraries for access and services</li> <li class="itemize">To over 250 individuals who provided confirming and/or clarificatory information </li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="row-fluid"> <div class="span12"> <footer> <div class="row-fluid" style="padding-top: 15px; border-top: 1px solid black;"> <div class="span3"> <a href="https://www.eva.mpg.de" title="Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig"> <img width="80" src="https://glottolog.org/clldmpg-static/minerva.png" /> </a> </div> <div class="span6" style="text-align: center;"> <a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"> <img alt="License" style="border-width:0" src="https://glottolog.org/clld-static/images/cc-by.png" /> </a> <br /> <span class="Dataset" href="http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Dataset" property="dct:title" rel="dct:type" xmlns:dct="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">Glottolog 5.1</span> edited by <span xmlns:cc="https://creativecommons.org/ns#" property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL"> Hammarström, Harald & Forkel, Robert & Haspelmath, Martin & Bank, Sebastian </span> <br /> is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"> Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</a>. </div> <div class="span3" style="text-align: right;"> <a class="clld-privacy-policy" href="https://www.eva.mpg.de/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a><br/> <a class="clld-disclaimer" href="https://glottolog.org/legal">Disclaimer</a> <br/> <a href="https://github.com/clld/glottolog3"> <i class="icon-share"> </i> Application source (v4.6-25-g0cb6f48) on<br/> <img height="25" src="https://glottolog.org/clld-static/images/GitHub_Logo.png" /> </a> </div> </div> </footer> </div> </div> </div> <div id="Modal" class="modal hide fade" tabindex="-1" role="dialog" aria-labelledby="ModalLabel" aria-hidden="true"> <div class="modal-header"> <button type="button" class="close" data-dismiss="modal" aria-hidden="true">×</button> <h3 id="ModalLabel"></h3> </div> <div id="ModalBody" class="modal-body"> </div> </div> <script> </script> </body> </html>

CINXE.COM

Glottolog 5.1 -