PEOPLE’S DEMOCRACY REPUBLIC OF ALGERIA

MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

UNIVERSITY OF BATNA2 MOSTAFA BENBOULAID

FACULITY OF ARTS AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES

DEPARTEMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

MASTER 1 LLA

HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS

CHAPTER 3: GENETIC CLASSIFICATION “How can languages

be shown to be related?”

PRESENTED BY : GROUP 3 December 08th ,2019

STUDENTS MARKS /15 STUDENTS MARKS /15

1- Boutaida Lilia 6- Bouhidel Yasmin

2- Bensekhria Hanine 7 - Boukhenoune Ibtissame

3- Benremdane Sara 8 - Chetabi Zineb

4- Boughaba Rahma 9- Charef Marwa

5- Benalia Sara 10- Brahimi Khalil

MARK /15 Teacher’s Notes

Supervised by: DR GHODBANE

 List of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………… ….3

1. Definitions of the Concept………………………………………………………..4

2. The Rise of Comparative Method………………………………………………...6

3. Sir William Jones’s Contributions………………………………………………..7

4. Language Families………………………………………………………………..9

5. Family Tree…………………………………………………………………........12

6. Language Isolates…………………………………………………………….......17

7. Family Connections………………………………………………………………17

8. Cognates………………………………………………………………………….21

a. Types of Cognates………………………………………………………..22

9. Pidgins and Creoles………………………………………………………………23

10. Special Cases……………………………………………………………………..26

a. Language Isolates………………………………………………………...25

b. Language Phyla…………………………………………………………...26

c. Language Death…………………………………………………………..27

d. Language Revival…………………………………………………………28

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………..29

References ……………………………………………………………………………….30
Running head: GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 3

Introduction

How are languages shown to be related to one another? How are language families

established? Judging from media attention, it is one of the hottest questions in contemporary

linguistics. The issue of language classification comes up when we are dealing with more than

one language, as soon as we are faced with two languages or more the question is whether

that they are similar, or dissimilar rises. The broader and more central aim here is to

understand linguistic kinship. And furthermore to identify precisely what is genetic

classification? What criteria can be used for identifying whether two or more languages could

be grouped in one set, or one family concept. However, debate, and considerable confusion

about the methods for demonstrating family relationships among languages as yet not known ,

also the ways those language families have come to be established so to clear the vision we

need to Dive into the deep, in other words, we must take a look not only on the linguistic

kinship but also revealing which methods, techniques, strategies and rules were utilized and

proved successful in genetic classification and sir William Jones contribution after that of

course will discuss The aim by the end of this paper is to tackle all ten elements, starting

from definitions of the concepts till the special cases.

To simplify the above the starting point would be to ask the most obvious question:

what is genetic classification and how are languages shown to be related to one another?

Among the large number of criteria according to which languages might be classified, three

have been found fruitful 1) type, 2) proximity, and 3) common descent.

The first one provides typological, classification the second one provides for areal

classification, and the last one is called genetic/genealogical classification.

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 4

1. What is Genetic Classification?

1.1- Definitions of the Concepts

a) Classification (Cambridge dictionary definition): It is a division or category in a

system which divides things into Groups or types.
b) Explanation of concept Genetic: languages of the world are classified based on the
hypothesis of common origin.
The term ‘genetic’ is not associated with genes or genealogy (which

would mean that a language has Properties of at least two languages)

the term ‘genetic’ is associated rather with ‘geneses or ‘origin’ in

linguistics, “genetic relationship” among languages means a

phylogenetic, genealogical relationship, that is, descent from a common

ancestor. In contexts where potential confusio n May arise, we speak of

“human genetic” to distinguish it from the use of “genetic” for

linguistic kinship. Also, in general, we speak of languages being

“related,” Of “related languages”.

So what do we mean by Genetic classification, how can languages be shown to be

related?

The idea of relationships between languages is quite old and can be traced to Sir William

Jones‘s proclamation, in the latter part of the 18th century, Ubiquitous mistaken belief is that

genetic classification starts with Sir William Jones’ famous declaration of 1786,but There are

those who preceded him . Jones felt that the type of relationship he found between languages

like Sanskrit, Latin, Greek, etc. was such that it could not be accounted as due to chance, nor

due to borrowing, rather should be explained as due only to genetic inheritance.

His famous passage is quote worthy:

“The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect

than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 5

bearing to both of them a stronger affinity, both in the roots of verbs and the forms of

grammar, than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no

philologer could examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some

common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists; there is a similar reason, though not quite

so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the Celtic, though blended with a very

different idiom, had the same origin with the Sanskrit; and the old Persian might be added to

the same family”. (Jones, 1786/1789)

Under comparison Of course, languages can be “related” through borrowing and other

means such as. Accident or chance. Language contact. Onomatopoeia, sound symbolism, and

unfortunately Universals and typologically co scholars’ methods stop at the identification of

similarities among compared languages, where they assume this is sufficient to demonstrate

that the languages are related however, assembling similarities among languages is just the

beginning

So Linguists throughout history have relied on three sources of evidence for genetic

relationship: 1 similarities in basic vocabulary, 2 shared structural/ 3 grammatical properties

(especially morphological), and 4 sound correspondences. (Hoenigswald 1990a:119–20)

. Genetic relationship – inheritance from a common ancestor in order to establish a plausible

hypothesis of genetic relationship it is necessary to eliminate other possible explanations (1–

4), leaving a genetic relationship (5) the most likely. The core of the generally accepted

methodology for investigating possible relationships

Genetic Classification of Languages (important points)

 When languages are known to have developed out of a common ancestral language
they are said to be genetically related.
 Genetic relationships therefore have to do with the linguistic characteristics that are
inherited by one generation of speakers from another (as opposed to those which are
acquired from other sources).
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 6

 That is, “all languages of the world are classified into families. All languages
belonging to a particular family are believed to have the same origin, that is, they
originated from the same ancestor language” (Dakubu 1988)
 Languages are related if they are divergent continuations of a single language spoken
at an earlier time; this implies that if we were to trace each language back in time, we
would find increasing similarities until finally we would be dealing with a single
language.
 Languages which are genetically related have a common ancestor. (Dzameshie, LNGS
224)
 The ancestral language is usually referred to as the proto-language (by some, Ur- is
used instead of proto).
 The languages derived from this are said to be its daughter languages, and the degrees
of interrelatedness are often described by using the metaphor of a family
 Technically, a lower level grouping is usually called a language family. The highest
level grouping is called a phylum, super stock, or even family.

2- The Comparative Method

Definition of comparison: it is a fundamental tool of analysis .it sharpens our power

of description and plays a central role in concept-formation, by bringing into focus suggestive

similarities and contrasts among cases.

Comparative is routinely used in testing hypothesis. it can contribute to the inductive

discovery of new hypothesis and to theory building.

Definition of the comparative method: in linguistics it is a technique for studying the

development of languages, by performing a feature-by-feature comparison of two or more

languages.

Also, it is the most important of the various techniques used to recover linguistic

history. It is a method (or a set of procedures) which compares related languages, descendants

from a common ancestral language, in order to postulate to ‘reconstruct’. The ancestral

language is commonly considered a major event in the history of ideas inspired by the success

of the comparative method in linguistics.

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 7

2.1- The Rise of the Comparative Method

From the 16th C onward, Europe became furnished with a wide variety of languages

due to voyages, trading, colonization and also because information on languages from other

continents became available in a form of word lists, grammar, and dictionaries.... Historical

linguistic had a background in the Greek tradition’s debate about language origins, and its

interest in etymology (the study of the historical development of languages particularly as

manifested in individual words «origins ". Dictionary meaning). also with the biblically based

notion of Hebrew placed as the original language (lingua Adamica, lingua Paradisiaca), and

all others were assumed to descend after the confounding of the tongues at babel. The

catalogue of languages and peoples in genesis shows the tradition of sparchlisten placing

Hebrew at the head between the 3rd and the seventeenth centuries.( Robind 1990: 86, Borst

1959).

After the renaissance period emerged a long scale word collections for language

comparisons, which are a remarkable feature through the centuries. And some of the land

markers whom played an important role in the development of the comparative linguistics are

: Konrad 1555, Gottfried Wilhem Leibniz 1717, Johan Christopher Adelung 1782, 1806,

lorenzo Hervás y Panduro 1784, 1800, peter Simon Pallas 1786...

The comparative grammar and its development explains clearly why each of the

following at one time has been considred as the " father " of comparative linguistics : Giraldus

Cambrensis 1194, Dante 1305, J.J Scaliger 1610 [1599], George Stirenhielm 1671, Anreas

Jäger 1686, Ludolf 1702 . Samual Ryrmathi 1799. Jacob Grimm 1818 …

3- Sir William Jones’s Contributions

During the 19th Century linguistic scholarship had the outstanding achievement

which was the comparative method. Sir William Jones (1746-1794) considered as the founder
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 8

of the comparative method. He was an English oriental’s, philosopher and student of ancient

India .Jones was a judge on supreme court in Bengal .sir William Jones founded the Asiatic

society in 1784 under the patronage of warren Hastings. While Jones was studying the

Sanskrit language, he observed that Sanskrit, Latin and Greek languages are similar , for

example the word ‘Pitar ‘ in Sanskrit it is similar to the word ‘Patar’ in Greek language , as

well as to in Latin language 'petar’ .sir William Jones in his third anniversary discourse to the

Asiatic society in 1786 , he declared that “ Sanskrit ,Latin and Greek languges are related to

each other and had a common root « in his famous philologer passage ,these Indo-European

languages are related to Gothic and Celtic languages , as well as to Persian language .this

declaration made the beginning of the Indo-European languages and the comparative

historical linguistics , according to Bengston and Rulen's (1997:3) that sir William Jones “

discovered the method of comparative linguistics –and with it the Indo-European family “.

Cannon (1990:246), declared that Jones « was the first known printed statement of the

fundamental postulate of Indo-European comparative Grammar ;more than that of

comparative linguistics as whole “ . Although Jones name was associated with comparative

method, he was not only the one who talked about this observation. In the 16th century there

were many visitors to India observed the similarities between the Indian and European

languages, among the observers was Van Boxhon in early 1653 he published a proposal for

proto- language (Scythian (. Sir William Jones his grand plan to write a history of human

races in Asia rather than the historical linguistics matters; according to him study language

was a help to him to study the origins of the human in Asia.

3.1- The Philologer Passage

Sir William Jones wrote eleven discourses, among these discourses the third and the

ninth discourses were written to solve the common origin of the five principle Asiatic nations

which are: china, Arabia, Tatars, India and Persia.

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 9

Sir William Jones delivered his third discourse at the Asiatic society in 1784 ; he

suggested that “ Sanskrit language , whatever be its antiquity ,is of a wonderful structure ;

more perfect than the Greek , more copious than the Latin ,and more exquisitely refined than

either , yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity , both in the roots of verbs and the

forms of grammar , than could possibly have been produced by accident ;so strong indeed ,

that no philologer could examine them all three , without believing them to have spring from

some common source ,which, perhaps , no longer exists : there is a similar reason , though not

quite so forcible , for supposing that both the Sanskrit and the Celtic , though blended with a

very different idiom , had the same origin with the Sanskrit , and old Persian might be added

to this family , if this were the place for discussing any question concerning the antiquities of

Persia

from the third anniversary discourse , on the Hindus delivered to the Asiatic society ,2

February 1786 .cited from sir William Jones :selected poetical and prose works , ed . By

Michael j. Franklin:(university of Wales press, 1995.pp. 355-370). Jones used in this passage

the comparative method to compare between the Sanskrit, Greek and Latin languages, he

concluded that these languages had a common ancestor known as the proto Indo-European.

3.2- The Asiatic Society

The Asiatic society of Bengal was founded by sir William Jones in 1784 latter on

changed to “the royal society of Bengal “ . He founded the royal society to encourage the

oriental studies. Jones delivered his famous discourses in it.

4-Language Family

4.1- What is a Language Family?

A language family is a grouping of linguistically linked languages, stemming from a

common ancestral mother-language called Protolanguage.

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 10

Languages with a significant number of common features in phonology, morphology,

and syntax are said to belong to the same language family. Subdivisions of a language family

are called "branches."

Most languages in the world belong to a specific family. Languages that have no

demonstrable relation with others, and cannot be classified within a specific family, are

generally known as language isolates.

Creole languages are the only ones to be neither isolates, nor members of a linguistic

family. They form their own different type of languages.(Richard Nordquist)

4.2- The Number of Language Families Worldwide

It is estimated that there are more than 250 established language Families in the

world, and over 6,800 distinct languages, many of which are threatened or endangered.
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 11

4.3- Major Language Families

Here some of the main language families :

1. Niger–Congo (1,542 languages) (21.7%): are the world's largest language

family and Africa's largest in terms of geographical area, number of speakers and
number of distinct languages.
2. Austronesian (1,257 languages) (17.7%): are a language family widely spoken
throughout Maritime Southeast Asia, Madagascar and the islands of the Pacific
Ocean. There are also a few speakers in continental Asia.

3. Trans–New Guinea (482 languages) (6.8%): is an extensive family of Papuan

languages spoken in New Guinea and neighboring islands, perhaps the third-
largest language family in the world by number of languages.

4. Sino-Tibetan (455 languages) (6.4%) : in a few sources also known as Trans-

Himalayan, is a family of more than 400 languages, second only to Indo-
European in number of native speakers.

5. Indo-European (448 languages) (6.3%) : are a language family of several hundred

related languages and dialects.
There are about 445 living Indo-European languages, according to the estimate
by Ethnologue, with over two thirds (313) of them belonging to the Indo-Iranian
branch.[3] The Indo-European languages with the greatest numbers of native
speakers
are Spanish, English, Hindustani (Hindi/Urdu), Portuguese, Bengali, Punjabi,
and Russian, each with over 100 million speakers,
with German, French, Marathi, Italian, and Persian also having more than 50
million. Today, 46% of the world's population (3.2 billion) speaks an Indo-
European language as a first language, by far the highest of any language family.

6. Australian [dubious] (381 languages) (5.4%) : consist of around 290–

363[1] languages belonging to an estimated 28 language families and isolates
7. Afro-Asiatic (377 languages) (5.3%) : is a large language family of about 300
languages that are spoken predominantly in West Asia, North Africa, the Horn of
Africa and parts of the Sahel
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 12

8. Nilo-Saharan [dubious] (206 languages) (2.9%) : The languages extend through

17 nations in the northern half of Africa: from Algeria to Benin in the west;
from Libya to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the centre; and
from Egypt to Tanzania in the east.

9. Oto-Manguean (178 languages) (2.5%) : are a large family comprising several

subfamilies of indigenous languages of the Americas

10. Austroasiatic (167 languages) (2.3%) : are a large language family of Mainland
Southeast Asia, also scattered throughout parts of India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and
southern China.

11. Tai–Kadai (91 languages) (1.3%) : are a language family of tonal languages found
in Mainland Southeast Asia, southern China, and Northeast India.

12. Dravidian (86 languages) (1.2%) : are a language family spoken by more than 215
million people, mainly in Southern India and northern Sri Lanka, with pockets
elsewhere in South Asia

13. Tupian (76 languages) (1.1%) : The Tupi or Tupian language family comprises
some 70 languages spoken in South America, of which the best known are Tupi
proper and Guarani.

5- Family Tree

5.1- What Is a Family Tree in Linguistics?

When discussing the historical relationship between languages ,linguists have often

used trees and branches as metaphors just as in biological relationships between humans in

order to explain and map the connections between language groups (families).
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 13

Each language family contains a group of languages related to each other and

descendant from a common ancestor which is called the "proto-language" of that family

.According to Ethnologue the 7,111 living human languages are distributed in 141 different

language families. A "living language" is simply one that is currently used as the primary

form of communication of a group of people. There are also many dead languages, or

languages which have no native speakers living, and extinct languages, which have no native

speakers and no descendant languages. Finally, there are some languages that are

insufficiently studied to be classified, and probably some which are not even known to exist

out side their respective speech communities.

Membership of languages in a language family is established by research in

comparative linguistics. Sister languages are said to have a "genetic" or "genealogical"

relationship. The latter term is older.Speakers of a language family belong to a common

speech community. The divergence of a proto-language into daughter languages typically

occurs through geographical separation, with the original speech community gradually

evolving into distinct linguistic units. Individuals belonging to other speech communities

may also adopt languages from a different language family through the language shift

process.

Genealogically related languages present shared retentions; that is, features of the

proto-language (or reflexes of such features) that cannot be explained by chance or borrowing

(convergence). Membership in a branch or group within a language family is established by

shared innovations; that is, common features of those languages that are not found in the

common ancestor of the entire family. For example, Germanic languages are "Germanic" in

that they share vocabulary and grammatical features that are not believed to have been present

in the Proto-Indo-European language. These features are believed to be innovations that took
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 14

place in Proto-Germanic, a descendant of Proto-Indo-European that was the source of all

Germanic languages.

5.2- The Indo-European Family Tree

The Indo-European language is the earliest known ancestor of modern English it is

also regarded as the most modern Western languages it first spread throughout Europe and

many parts of South Asia, and later to every corner of the globe as a result of colonization.

The term Indo-European is essentially geographical since it refers to the easternmost

extension of the family from the Indian subcontinent to its westernmost reach in Europe. The

family includes most of the languages of Europe, as well as many languages of Southwest,

Central and South Asia. With over 2.6 billion speakers (or 45% of the world’s population),

the Indo-European language family has the largest number of speakers of all language

families as well as the widest dispersion around the world. And since PIE left no written
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 15

records, historical linguists construct family trees, an idea pioneered by August Schleicher, on

the basis of the comparative method. The comparative method takes shared features among

languages and uses procedures to establish their common ancestry. It is not the only method

available but is one that has been most widely used.

The examples below show how this method actually works with some Indo-European

languages.

Proto-Germanic *texun> Old English teon>

Modern English ten
Proto-Italic *dekem> Latin decem> Modern
PIE*dekm> Italian dieci
Old Church Slavonic desenti> Modern
Bulgarian deset
Sanskrit dáça> Hindi/Urdu das
Greekdeka

● proto means ‘old’ in Greek

● means the form was reconstructed, not attested.

● means ‘became’

Sundberg takes this tree metaphor to a delightfully lavish extreme, tracing, say, how

Indo-European linguistic roots sprouted a variety of modern-day living languages including

Hindi, Portuguese, Russian, Italian — and, of course, our Language of the Future. The size of

the branches and bunches of leaves represent the number of speakers of each language at

different times: the likes of English and Spanish have sprouted into mighty vegetative

clusters, while others, like, Swedish, Dutch, and Punjabi, assert a more local dominance over

their own, separately grown regional branches.

 GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 16

Note: Retrieved from Minna Sundberg .(n.d). Illustration of the Indo-European and Uralic language

families, Stand StillStay Silent . http://www.opencult ure.com/2015/06/the-tree-of-languages-

illustrated-in-a-big-beautiful-infographic.html
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 17

6- Language Isolates

Language Isolates are languages that have no known historical or linguistic

relationship to any other languages. Language Isolates can found in all parts of the world. In

some cases, languages are classified as isolates because we know so little about them that we

are unable to establish a family relationship as in the case of some languages of Papua New

Guina.

In other cases, languages are well known and well described, but a family relationship

cannot be determined because all their relatives went extinct and have left no record

Such is probably the case of Basque; On the other hand, a language thought to be an isolate

may turn out to be related to other languages once scholars agree on the classification scheme.

This in the case of Japanese which was considered to be a language isolate until its

relationship to Rynkyuan languages was established.

As a result, Japanese is now considered to be a member of the Japanese (Japonic)

Language Family.

Finally, some languages have become isolated in recent times and this happened

because all their known relatives have become extinct.

7- Family Connections

Are all languages related to each other ? How can they be related?

Do they all come from a common ancestor ?

Can two distant languages be related ?

Why words look similar?

Language change and develop through time, so that all Indo-European languages are

now very different from each , and through comparative study we can see that they share

words in common as well as some linguistics characteristics.

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 18

We must look for languages that seem to share enough similarities to suggest

that there may be a genetic relationship.

Table 1

A word correspondences in some Indo-European languages

Three
Latin Tres
Greek Treis
Sanskrit Treeni
Spanish Tres
Dutch Tre
Italian Tre
Swedish Tre
French Trois
German Drei
Danish Drie
Russian Tri

Note :They all come from the Indo-European word “ Tréyes’’ Proto-Indo-European words

are theoretical reconstruction, based on the similarities and differences among current and extinct

Indo-European languages.

7.1- Chance Similarity

Some resemblances are accidental, see (A1) ; chance similarity of sound and meaning

of a word in two different languages. Any given pair of languages will offer at least some

phonetically and semantically similar linguistic items whose similarity are simply due to

chance.
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 19

(A1)

French “ Feu ” English “much”

= Fire Spanish “ mucho”

German “ Feuer”

Malay “ mata ”

= Eye

Modern Greek “ mati”

7.2- Similarity due to Linguistic Contact

When a language comes into contact with another, either of them may influence the

other language. Here it appears; see (B1) , as if English is a fusion of two distinct languages,

French and German, with no evidence for genetic relationship between these languages.

Such a relationship is attributed to borrowing, and in fact the correspondences between

English and French result from the Norman Conquest of England. (Hock & Joseph,2009)

(B1)

English French German

Calf Kalb

Veal veau

Cow Kuh

Beef boeuf

Note: Copied from “ Language History, Language Change, Language Relationship”

(p.434),by Hans, H. HOCK., & Brian D. Joseph. (2009).

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 20

By looking at other items, such as the ones in (B2)

(B2)

English French German

Father père Vater (-f )

Mother mère Mutter

Brother frère Bruder

B2 shows that English and French similarities are restricted to certain, limited spheres

of vocabulary, while German and English similarities pervade the whole lexicon. It is easy to

see that French does not exhibit any closer affinities with English .On the other hand, the

similarities between English and German are much more striking.

7.3- Common Origin

The early Indo-European languages and even some modern one exhibit striking

similarities in the third person singular and plural forms of the verb ‘To be’ ( Hock & Joseph,

2009, p.437)

Sanskrit Latin Modern German Old Church Slavic

as-ti ‘is’ es-ti ‘is’ is-t ‘is’ es-tu ‘is’

s-anti ‘are’ s-unt ‘are’ s-ind ‘are’ s-out ‘are’

The example above contributed greatly to William Jone’s proposal that “Sanskrit” ,

Greek Latin and perhaps “Gothick” and “Celtic” are descended from a common ancestor.
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 21

8- Cognates

Identification of cognates is a component of two principle tasks of historical linguistics

demonstrating the relatedness of languages and reconstructing the histories of families.

Genetically related languages originate from a common proto-language. In the absence of

historical records proto-languages have to be reconstructed from cognates ; reflexes of proto-

words that survive in some form in the daughter languages.

8.1- Definition of Cognates

In the narrow sense used in historical linguistics, a cognate of a word in one language (e.g

English) is a word in another language (e.g German) that has a similar form and is or was

used with a similar meaning in which they have gradually developed from the same ancestor

word (inherited from a shared parent language). The English words mother, father and friend

are cognates of the German words Mutter, Vater and Freund. On the basis of these cognates,

we would imagine that modern English and modern German probably have a common

ancestor in what has been labeled the Germanic branch of Indo-European. By the same

process, we can look at similar sets in Spanish (madre, padre, amigo) and Italian (madre,

padre, amico) and conclude that these cognates are good evidence of a common ancestor in

the Italic branch of Indo-European. The word cognate derives from the Latin noun« cognatus

» which means « blood relative ».

Lets take a minute to look at a few cognates from other languages ; French-English for

example. There are many of them and the following are just a few :

English French

Blond blond
cruel cruel
modern moderne
question question
criminal criminel
accident accident
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 22

Now take a look at a few German-English cognates

English German

alarm Alarm
oval Oval
alphabet Alphabet
auto Auto
garden Garten
milk Milch

Note: all nouns in German are capitalized.

8.2- Types of Cognates

Cognates may have evolved similar, different or even opposite meanings, but in most

cases there are some similar sounds or letters in the words, in some cases appearing to be

dissimilar. Some words sound similar, but do not have the same meaning ; these are called

False Cognates.

False cognates are two words in different languages that appear to be cognates but

actually are not ( for example, the English advertisement and the French avertissement, which

means « warning » or « caution »). Also embarrassed in English and the Spanish embarasada

which means « pregnant », Sensible in English which means « reasonable » but « sensitive »

in French and Spanish.

Perfect Cognates

For perfect cognates we have words that are spelled exactly the same for example in

both English and Spanish, and they mean exactly the same thing but their pronunciation is

different. For example : English ‘chocolate’, Spanish ‘chocolate’ , ‘ regular ; regular’ and

‘animal ;animal’ .

Near Perfect Cognates

The next group of words are near perfect cognates. These are words that mean the same

thing in both « English and Spanish » for example, but are not quite spelt the same but almost
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 23

the same. You will be able to see that there are certain patterns that form with near perfect

cognates that allow you to potentionally predict when a near cognate is likely to exist. The

main difference between two near perfect cognates is the pronunciation and this is where you

have to be careful.

Therefore, for example you have the English word « basic » which in Spanish is «

básico ». Also, you have the English word « information » which in Spanish is « información

», « anniversary » « anniversario », « arbitrary » « arbitrario ».

9- Pidgins and Creoles

The languages known as Pidgins and Creoles. These languages are widely used in

such areas as the Caribbean, Africa, and the South Pacific, and are coming to have more

and more importance in the life of these regions. It therefore behooves us to have an

accurate knowledge of their characteristics, function, and importance. To meet this need, I

have provided a general discussion of their nature, origins. (Robert A. Hall, 1967)

9.1- Origins

Although the recent study has collected a great deal of information on the subject and

origins of the Pidgins and Creoles; but the more we try to trace their history the more accurate

and speculative calculation. In the past, they were seen as auxiliary languages, so references

to them are random Nevertheless, old manuscripts, often indicate where and how these

languages were used ; We cannot build a theory on such evidence alone; but when supported

by historical documentation and compared with samples of modern West Indian creoles, it

can provide insights into the origins and development of such languages , while pidginization

may well be a natural consequence of languages in contact.

The origins of Pidgins were essentially when people speaking two different languages

have to work together, usually in some form of trade relation . In such situations the so-called
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 24

pidgins arise, more or less purposely made up of vocabulary items from each language.

Pidgins have been particularly associated with areas settled by European traders; examples

have been Chinook Jargon, a Lingua Franca based on an American Indian language and

English that was formerly used in Washington and Oregon. (Todd, Todd, & TODD, 1990).

Generally speaking, Pidgins form in the context of a multicultural population.

Historically, this has often happened in areas where multiple groups were trading with each

other, or when groups of slaves from various nations were assimilated into a single population

and developed a language. (STEP Hkoyfman, 2017).

9.2- Definitions of Pidgins and Creole Languages

Pidgins and creoles are both the result of what happens when you blend two or more

languages, but they’re not the same. Simply The Oxford English Dictionary definition of

Pidgin is: A language containing lexical and other features from two or more languages,

characteristically with simplified grammar and a smaller vocabulary than the languages from

which it is derived, used for communication between people not having a common language.

A Creole is a Pidgin with native speakers, or one that’s been passed down to a

second generation of speakers who will formalize it and fortify the bridge into a robust

structure with a fully developed grammar and syntax.

Pidgins: are languages which have come about in situations where people needed to

communicate perhaps for trade but where no common language existed. but no group learns

the native language of any other group . They cooperate with the other groups to create a

make-shift language to serve their needs. They draw their lexicon from one or more languages

where the lexicon is small and the number of grammatical categories and rules are few. It is in

principle nobody’s mother tongue. (Burchfield, 1992).

Creole: is a language that was originally a pidgin but has become nativized, i.e. a

community of speakers claims it as their first language. For example, from the seventeenth
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 25

to the nineteenth century, Africans of diverse ethno linguistic groups were brought by

Europeans to colonies in the New World to work together on sugar plantations.

9.3- The Process of Development from Pidgin to Creole

Originally, all Pidgins were restricted with regard to user and use. In the early stages

they would have had small vocabularies and few syntactic rules; they would have been

capable of dealing with only a limited range of subjects, yes/no questions, and with the

simplest of explanations. They would have utilized gesture to reinforce or clarify meanings

and they would have proved inadequate for sustained conversation. From these origins they

developed either as extended Pidgins or as Creoles and became capable of expressing the

views and beliefs of their users, became capable of permitting intergroup communication in

areas where it had not existed before . How did this happen? When communication is only

between two languages, one or both groups acquire the other language, but in a multilingual

area, a common language, accessible to all groups, is necessary. And its emergence even more

frequently used especially the primitive English language in West Africa such as sailors,

traders and African settlers. At first this would only have happened when Africans were

brought as slaves from different regions and kept at the ports while the ships were prepared

for the journey to the New World . Naturally, the slaves communicated with each other in the

ship. It is likely that the use of the Pidgin in domestic and slave situations was a vital factor in

its expansion because, in such conditions, the Pidgin was the only available Lingua Franca

and thus had to be developed to serve a wider range of communication needs than were

required for simple barter. When the contact between English and the related pidgin or Creole

was sustained and as education in standard English became more widespread, a process of

decreolization occurred. The Pidgin/ Creole became more and more influenced by the

standard in phonology, lexis and syntax. . (Todd, Todd, & TODD, 1990).
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 26

Differences between Pidgins and Creoles (Essays, UK, 2018).

1. Pidgin is a linguistic communication that comprised of components of two or

more other languages and is used for communication among people. It is not a
first language. Whereas, Creole is a language that was at first a pidgin but has
“transformed” and become a first language.
2. Structural difference: Creole languages have the “Subject Verb Object” word
order whereas Pidgin can have any possible order.
3. One important difference between Pidgins and Creoles is that pidgins do not
have first language speakers while creoles do.

As with languages and dialects, the difference between Pidgins and Creoles is not exactly

airtight and It has not been finalized. Language is a vast continuum, and it’s ever in flux.

10- Special Cases

a. Language Isolates

It’s a linguistic phenomenon where we find languages isolated and represented as a

family. There are many isolated languages with no family whatsoever (no genetic relationship

with any other language) i.e. It does not descend from any ancestor as any other language that

we know (a one member family). For instance the Basque language which is considered as an

absolute isolate despite all attempts to relate it to an ancestral language.

Language isolate (also called isolated language): A language with no known relatives,

that is, a family with but a single member. Some well-known isolates are: Ainu, Basque,

Burushaski, Etruscan, Gilyak (Nivkh), Nahali, Sumerian, Tarascan and Zuni (Campbell &

Mixco, 2007).

Since presumably all isolates are relics of once larger families which simply can't be

reconstructed because of antiquity or loss of data. All language isolates are their own

protolanguages, because they are “unrelated” to any other languages (LASS, 1997).
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 27

b. Language Phyla

Considering that the classification structure of language families is divided to smaller

phylogenetic units as descendants of an ancestral mother language, many taxonomists

particularly refrained from calling more branched and large language families as “families”.

Instead they used the term Phyla, (plural of phylum) to refer to the larger groupings aiming to

link languages families to an ancestral language.

Therefore a language Phyla is a the taxonomic classification of languages that is larger

than families, and according to linguistics glossary (Campbell& Mixco, 2007) the definition

of the term Phylum is a proposed Genetic Relationship that groups together language families

in a larger-scale classification making a large division of languages that are possibly distantly

related.

Concerning these language groupings, many hypotheses were brought to light mainly

in the 20th century, for instance the proposed phyla, Nostratic, Déne-Caucasian, and Austric;

furthermore, a phylum that gathers all languages under what called a proto-world language

dated 60,000 to 70,000 years ago. (O'Grady, Dobrovolsky, Katamba, 2001).

c. Language Death

As it implies, it means the death of a language which is what happens when a language

perishes after the disappearance of all its native speakers even though they may continue to be

used in some way (Latin for example). Typically, language death involves language shift and

replacement where the obsolescent language becomes restricted to fewer and fewer

individuals who use it in ever fewer contexts, until it ultimately vanishes altogether. Language

endangerment is considered by many scholars to be the most serious problem in linguistics

today, and many languages have already become extinct, for example, Cornish, Coptic,

Dalmatian, Etruscan, Gothic, Hittite, Manx, Old Prussian, Sumerian, and many more.

(Campbell& Mixco, 2007)

GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 28

c.1. Kinds of Language Death

1. Gradual language death (the most common): loss of a language due to

gradual shift to the dominant language
2. Sudden language death: language death by genocide or sudden death. (E.g.
Tasmanian and Yana)
3. Radical language death: rapid language loss due either to severe political
repression under which speakers stop speaking the language for self-
defense, or, to rapid population collapse due to destruction of culture,
epidemics etc. (Campbell& Mixco, 2007)
4. Bottom-to-top language death: attrition of the repertoire of stylistic
registers from the bottom up with use continuing only in formal genres;
loss comes first in contexts of domestic intimacy and the language is
confined to use only in elevated contexts.

d. Language Revival

Occasionally referred to as language revitalization or reversing language shift as well.

Language revitalization is based on the concept of language vitality, that's a reference that

talks about the ability of native speaker communities maintaining their language even though

all around them there is another dominant language being spoken in wider society. Academics

such as Joshua Fishman and Bernard Spolsky said concerning this matter that with concerted

effort communities can reverse language shift; can reverse language loss and start sustaining

an endangered language again, being bilingual in localized language is achievable but it

comes down to a simple act, and difficult to maintain, it comes down to parents raising their

children in their native language. It’s about saving years of study later in life pain fees lost

wages government resources teaching adults to speak language when children can cope with

multiple languages efficiently and effectively from the time they start speaking which it's

totally achievable to bring life back to endangered languages. Language is important

but if we don't have communities to speak it and use it it's not a living language, so to bring a

language, culture, and identity back to life it must cross generations. (Fishman, 2006)
GENETIC CLASSIFICATION 29

The most common living example of such cases is Hebrew which was mainly used as

a language of scripture, ritual, and to a lesser degree scholarship, it had died out as a spoken

language. Its revitalization began late 19thc and early 20thc, the revival of Hebrew as a

spoken language made complete switch from Yiddish and many other European languages to

Modern Hebrew. (Hock& Joseph, 2009)

Conclusion

In summary, our intention in this chapter is to place the methodology for investigating

possible cases for classifying languages genetically. We began our investigation by referring

to the way languages are categorized according to their descent. Languages that developed

historically from the same ancestor language are grouped together and are said to be

genetically related. This ancestor may be attested (that is, texts written in this language have

been discovered or preserved, as in the case of Latin), or it may be a reconstructed proto-

language for which no original texts exists (as is the case for Indo-European).

(O’Grady,2005). The purpose of genetic classification is to group languages into families

according to their degree of diachronic relatedness.

 30

References

About world languages: Language isolates (n.d) .Retrieved From

https://www.mustgo.com/worldlanguages/language- isolates/

Aik, Henvald, Alexandra Y .Dixon R.M.W (2001). "Introduction" areal diffusion and genetic

inheritance problems in comparative linguistics. Oxford linguistics.

Antonio, A.(December16,2016). Near-Perfect cognates: English to Spanish [Web blog

post].Retrieved from

https://es.verbling.com/articles/post/near-perfect-cognates-english-to-spanish-

5781d9e65c69247b005203ed

Chakrabarty ,R .(2008). The Asiatic society :1784_2008 .An overview in time past and time

present :two hundred and twenty .five years of the Asiatic society 'kolkata :the Asiatic

society pp. 2-24

Cognates (English// Reading). (n.d).Retrieved from

https://www.texasgateway.org/resource/cognates-english- i-reading

Collier, David and James E .Mahon (1993). Conceptual stretching revisited alternative views

of categories in comparative analysis.

Crystal, D. (2000). Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

 31

Eberhard, David M., Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.). 2019. Ethnologue:

Languages of the World. (22nd.ed). Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Retrieved from

https://www.ethnologue.com/guides/largest- families

Essays, UK. (November 2018). Differences between Pidgins and Creoles. Retrieved from

https://www.ukessays.com/essays/english-language/pidgins-and-creoles.php?vref=1

Fishman, J. (2006). Language Loyalty, Language Planning, and Language Revitalization.

Clevedon, UK: Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, cop.2006.

Fyfe, C. (1967). Pidgin and Creole Languages. By Robert A. HallJr, Ithaca: Cornell

University Press; London: Oxford University Press, 1966. Pp. xv 188. 60s. The

Journal of African History, 8(3), 574-574. doi:10.1017/S0021853700008197.

George, Y.(2005).The study of language. Cambridge University Press.

Grzegorz, K.(2009). Identification of cognates and Recurrent sound correspondences in word

lists,50(2),201-235.

Hans, H. HOCK., & Brian D. Joseph. (2009). Language History, Language Change and

Language Relationship: An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics

(2nd rev.ed). Mouton De Gruyter.

Historical Linguistics and Language Change.(1997). Cambridge University Press 1997.

John, Holm.(September 2009). Languages in Contact. Cambridge University Press.

Jones’ (1786,1789) famous philologer passage.

Loreto, Todd.(December14,1990). Pidgins and Creoles (2nd.ed). Routledge.

Lyle ,Campbell.(1997). Genetic classification, typology, areal linguistics.

 32

Lyle Campbell, & Mauricio, J. Mixo. (2007). A Glossary of Historical linguistics. Edinburgh

University of Press.

Lyle, Campbell, William J.Posser.(2008). Language Classification: History and Method.

Cambridge University Press.

Lyle, Campbell.(1977). Quichean Linguistic Prehistory. (University California Publications

in Linguistics, 81.) Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Lyle, Campbell.(2015).International encyclopedia of the social and behavioural

sciences.(2nd.ed).

Minna Sundberg .(n.d). Illustration of the Indo-European and Uralic language families, Stand

StillStay Silent .Retrieved from

http://www.opencult ure.com/2015/06/the-tree-of- languages- illustrated-in-a-big-

beautiful- infographic.html

NORTH Caucasian, Ethnologue, Archived from the original on July 2, 2016, Retrieved July

17, 2016

Payne, D. L. (2014). Amazonian Linguistics: Studies in Lowland South American Languages.

Texas: University of Texas Press.

Richard.(January14,2019). What are Cognates and how can they help you learn a language?

[Web blog post].Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/what- is-cognate-words-1689859

Willam O'Grady; Michael Dobrovolsky; Francis Katamba. (2001). Contemporary Linguistics.

Canada: Pearson ESL.

WITTMANN Henri, Classification linguistique des langues signées non vocalement, Revue

québécoise de linguistique théorique et appliquée (in French), 10 (1): 215–288, 1991.