Proto-Altaic language


The Proto-Altaic language is a hypothetical extinct language that has been proposed as the common ancestor of the Altaic languages.
In the 18th century, some similarities between the Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic languages led to the conjecture that they would be a single language family with a common ancestral language. Starting in the 19th century, some linguists proposed to include also the Japonic and/or Koreanic languages as well as the Ainu language, forming what would later be called the "Macro-Altaic family". Around the same time others proposed to include the Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic languages in a Ural-Altaic family.
Versions of the Altaic family hypothesis were widely accepted until the 1960s, and is still listed in many encyclopedias and handbooks. However, in recent decades the proposal has received substantial criticisms, and has been rejected by many comparative linguists.
Nevertheless, "Altaicists" such as Václav Blažek and Sergei Starostin have endeavored to reconstruct "Proto-Altaic", the hypothetical common ancestral language of the family.
Some Altaicists have proposed that the original area where Proto-Altaic would have been spoken was a relatively small area comprising present-day North Korea, Southern Manchuria, and Southeastern Mongolia. The date for its split into the major recognized families was estimated at 5000 BC or 6000 BC. This would make Altaic a language family about as old as Indo-European but considerably younger than Afroasiatic.

Reconstruction

, the most comprehensive attempt at reconstructing a Proto--Altaic language is the 2003 Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages by Starostin, Dybo and Mudrak, which was summarized in 2006 by Blažek.

Reconstructed phonology

Based on the proposed correspondences listed below, the following phoneme inventory has been reconstructed for the hypothetical Proto-Altaic language.

Consonants

1 This phoneme only occurred at the beginnings of words.
2 These phonemes only occurred in the interior of words.

Vowels

It is not clear whether,, were monophthongs as shown here or diphthongs ; the evidence is equivocal. In any case, however, they only occurred in the first syllable of any word.
Every vowel occurred in long and short versions which were different phonemes in the first syllable. Starostin et al. treat length together with pitch as a prosodic feature.

Prosody

As reconstructed by Starostin et al., Proto-Altaic was a pitch accent or tone language; at least the first and probably every syllable could have a high or a low pitch.

Sound correspondences

If a Proto-Altaic language really existed, it should be possible to reconstruct regular sound correspondences between that protolanguage and its descendants; such correspondences would make it possible to distinguish cognates from loanwords. Such attempts have repeatedly been made. The latest version is reproduced here, taken from Blažek's summary of the newest Altaic etymological dictionary and transcribed into the.
When a Proto-Altaic phoneme developed differently depending on its position in a word, the special case is marked with a hyphen; for example, Proto-Altaic disappears or becomes at the beginning of a Turkic word and becomes elsewhere in a Turkic word.

Consonants

Only single consonants are considered here. In the middle of words, clusters of two consonants were allowed in Proto-Altaic as reconstructed by Starostin et al. ; the correspondence table of these clusters spans almost seven pages in their book, and most clusters are only found in one or a few of the reconstructed roots.
Proto-AltaicProto-TurkicProto-MongolicProto-TungusicProto-KoreanProto-Japonic
/pʰ/0-1, /j/-, /p//h/-2, /j/-, -/b/-, -/h/-2, -/b//p//p//p/
/p//b//b/-6, /h/-2, /b//p/-, /b//p//p/
/b//b//b/-, -/h/-, -/b/-9, -/b//b//p/, -/b/-/p/-, /w/, /b/10, /p/11
/tʰ//t/-, /d/-3, /t//t/, /tʃ/4, -/d//t//t//t/
/t//d/-, /t//t/, /tʃ/4/d/-, /dʒ/-7, /t//t/, -/r/-/t/-, /d/-, /t/
/d//j/-, /d//d/, /dʒ/4/d//t/, -/r/-/d/-, /t/-, /t/, /j/
/tʃʰ//tʃ//tʃ//tʃ//tʃ//t/
/tʃ//d/-, /tʃ//d/-, /dʒ/-4, /tʃ//s/-, -/dʒ/-, -/s/-/tʃ//t/-, -/s/-
/dʒ//j//dʒ//dʒ//tʃ//d/-, /j/
/kʰ//k//k/-, -/k/-, -/ɡ/-5, -/ɡ//x/-, /k/, /x//k/, /h//k/
/k//k/-, /k/, /ɡ/8/k/-, /ɡ//k/-, /ɡ/-, /ɡ//k/-, -/h/-, -0-, -/k//k/
/ɡ//ɡ//ɡ/-, -/h/-, -/ɡ/-5, -/ɡ//ɡ//k/, -/h/-, -0-/k/-, /k/, 012
/s//s//s//s//s/-, /h/-, /s//s/
/z//j//s//s//s//s/
/ʃ//s/-, /tʃ/-13, /s//s/-, /tʃ/-13, /s//ʃ//s//s/
/m//b/-, -/m/-/m//m//m//m/
/n//j/-, -/n/-/n//n//n//n/
/nʲ//j/-, /nʲ//dʒ/-, /j/, /n//nʲ//n/-, /nʲ/14/m/-, /n/, /m/
/ŋ/0-, /j/-, /ŋ/0-, /j/-, /ɡ/-15, /n/-16, /ŋ/, /n/, /m/, /h//ŋ//n/-, /ŋ/, 00-, /n/-, /m/-7, /m/, /n/
/r//r//r//r//r//r/, /t/4, 15
/rʲ//rʲ//r//r//r//r/, /t/
/l//j/-, /l//n/-, /l/-, /l//l//n/-, /r//n/-, /r/
/lʲ//j/-, /lʲ//d/-, /dʒ/-4, /l//l//n/-, /r//n/-, /s/
/j//j//j/, /h//j//j/, 0/j/, 0

1 The Khalaj language has instead. However, it has also added in front of words for which no initial consonant can be reconstructed for Proto-Altaic; therefore, and because it would make them dependent on whether Khalaj happens to have preserved any given root, Starostin et al. have not used Khalaj to decide whether to reconstruct an initial in any given word and have not reconstructed a for Proto-Turkic even though it was probably there.
2 The Monguor language has here instead ; it is therefore possible that Proto-Mongolian also had which then became in all descendants except Monguor. Tabgač and Kitan, two extinct Mongolic languages not considered by Starostin et al., even preserve in these places.
3 This happened when the next consonant in the word was,, or.
4 Before.
5 When the next consonant in the word was.
6 This happened "in syllables with original high pitch".
7 Before, or.
8 When the next consonant in the word was.
9 When the preceding consonant was,,, or, or when the next consonant was.
10 Before,, or any vowel followed by.
11 Before, or and then another vowel.
12 When preceded by a vowel preceded by.
13 Before.
14 Starostin et al. follow a minority opinion in interpreting the sound of the Middle Korean letter ᅀ as or rather than.
15 Before.
16 Before,, or.

Vowels

is pervasive in the languages attributed to Altaic: most Turkic and Mongolic as well as some Tungusic languages have it, Korean is arguably in the process of losing its traces, and it is controversially hypothesized for Old Japanese. Nevertheless, Starostin et al. reconstruct Proto-Altaic as lacking vowel harmony. Instead, according to them, vowel harmony originated in each daughter branch as assimilation of the vowel in the first syllable to the vowel in the second syllable. "The situation therefore is very close, e.g. to Germanic or to the Nakh languages in the Eastern Caucasus, where the quality of non-initial vowels can now only be recovered on the basis of umlaut processes in the first syllable." The table below is taken from Starostin et al. :
1 When preceded by a bilabial consonant.
2 When followed by a trill,, or.
3 When preceded or followed by a bilabial consonant.
4 When preceded by a fricative.

Prosody

Length and pitch in the first syllable evolved as follows according to Starostin et al., with the caveat that it is not clear which pitch was high and which was low in Proto-Altaic. For simplicity of input and display every syllable is symbolized as "a" here:
Proto-AltaicProto-TurkicProto-MongolicProto-TungusicProto-KoreanProto-Japonic
12
12

¹ "Proto-Mongolian has lost all traces of the original prosody except for voicing *p > *b in syllables with original high pitch".
² " several secondary metatonic processes happened in Korean, basically in the verb subsystem: all verbs have a strong tendency towards low pitch on the first syllable."

Morphological correspondences

Starostin et al. have reconstructed the following correspondences between the case and number suffixes of the Altaic languages :
/V/ symbolizes an uncertain vowel. Suffixes reconstructed for Proto-Turkic, Proto-Mongolic, Proto-Korean, or Proto-Japonic, but not attested in Old Turkic, Classical Mongolian, Middle Korean, or Old Japanese are marked with asterisks.
This correspondences, however, have been harshly criticized for several reasons: There are significant gaps resulting in the absence of etymologies for certain initial segments: an impossible situation in the case of a genetic relationship; lack of common paradigmatic morphology; in many cases, there are ghosts, invented or polished meanings; and word-list linguistics rules supreme, as there are few if any references to texts or philology.
There are also many reconstructions proved to be totally false. For instance, regarding Korean, Starostin et al. state that Middle Korean genitive is /nʲ/, while it actually was /s/ in its honorific form, and /ój/ or /uj/ as neutral forms.
In addition, some "cognates" are visibly forced, like the comparison between Turkish instrumental and Japanese locative /ni/. A locative postposition expresses an absolutely different meaning to that of an instrumental, so it is evident that both of them are not related whatsoever. The same applies for Japanese /ga/ and Proto Tungusic /ga/. The first of those particles expresses genitive case, while the second is the partitive case, which bear no resemblance of meaning at all either. A different kind of issue is that of the Old Turkish genitive /Xŋ/ and Old Japanese genitive /no/. Although they share the same consonant, the fact that the former is a vowel plus a consonant, and the second is a fixed set of the consonant /n/ plus vowel /o/ makes the fact that those two are cognates extremely unlikely.

Selected cognates

Personal pronouns

The table below is taken from Blažek and transcribed into IPA.
Proto-AltaicProto-TurkicProto-Mongolic, Classical MongolianProto-TungusicProto-Korean, Middle KoreanProto-Japonic
"I"
"me"
"I"Old Chinese:
, 1
"thou" and/or 1
"thee" ?
"thou"Proto-Tibeto-Burman
"we"
"us"
"ye" and/or
"you"

As above, forms not attested in Classical Mongolian or Middle Korean but reconstructed for their ancestors are marked with an asterisk, and /V/ represents an uncertain vowel.
There are, however, several problems with this proposed list. Aside from the huge amount of non-attested, free reconstructions, some mistakes on the research carried out by Altaicists must be pointed out. The first of them is that Old Japanese for the first person pronoun was neither /ba/ or /a/. It was /ware/, and sometimes it was abbreviated to /wa/. Also, it is not a Sino-Japanese word, but a native Japanese term. In addition, the second person pronoun was not /si/, but either /imasi/, or /namu/, which sometimes was shortened to /na/. Its plural was /namu tachi/.

Other basic vocabulary

The following table is a brief selection of further proposed cognates in basic vocabulary across the Altaic family. Their reconstructions and equivalences are not accepted by the mainstream linguists and therefore remain very controversial.
Proto-Altaic meaningProto-AltaicProto-TurkicProto-MongolicProto-TungusicProto-KoreanicProto-Japonic
that/di/- or /ti/-/te-re//ta//tjé//tso-re/
eye/ni-dy/5/nú-n//mà/-
neck/mje-k//nəmpV/
breast1/køkø-n/2/kuku-n/2/kokajŋi/ "pith; medulla; core"/kəkə-rə/1 "heart"
stone3
star/ho-dun//osi/4
oath, god, sky/taŋgarag//taŋgura/

1 Contains the Proto-Altaic dual suffix : "both breasts" – "chest" – "heart".
2 Contains the Proto-Altaic singulative suffix -/nV/: "one breast".
3 Compare Baekje */turak/ "stone".
4 This is in the Jurchen language. In modern Manchu it is usiha.
5 This is disputed by Georg, who states: "The traditional Tungusological reconstruction *yāsa cannot be replaced by the nasal-initial one espoused here, needed for the comparison." However, Starostin mentions evidence from several Tungusic languages cited by Starostin et al.. Georg does not accept this, referring to Georg and a then upcoming paper.

Numerals and related words

In the Indo-European family, the numerals are remarkably stable. This is a rather exceptional case; especially words for higher numbers are often borrowed wholesale. Indeed, the Altaic numerals are less stable than the Indo-European ones, but nevertheless Starostin et al. reconstruct them as follows. They are not accepted by the mainstream linguists and are controversial. Other reconstructions show little to no similarities in numerals of the proto-languages.
Proto-Altaic meaningProto-AltaicProto-TurkicProto-MongolicProto-TungusicProto-KoreanProto-Japonic
1/byri//bir//byri/ "all, each" "at first"/pi-tə/
single/nøŋe//nige/ "1"/noŋ/~/non/ "be the first, begin"/nəmi/ "only"
front/emo//øm-gen/ "upper part of breast"/emy/-/emu/~/ume/ "1"/maen-/~/môn-chô/ "first of all"26/upe/ "upper"
/mape/ "front"
single, one of a pair "one of a pair"/son-du-/ "odd"1 "1"
or /hə̀t-/ 1		/sa/- "together, reciprocally"
2/tybu/2 "2 "34
pair, couple/eki/ "2", "twins"; ? "20"/ekire/ "twins"
different, other/gojV//gojar/ "2"/goj/~/gia//kía/
pair, half/puta/- "2"
3/ŋy/ "30"5/gu-rban/; "30"6/mi/-7
/ìlù//øløŋ/9/ila-n/ "3"/jərə/ "many"/ùrù-pu/ "bissextile "
object consisting of 3 parts/séjra/ "trident, pitchfork" "3"/sárápi/ "rake, pitchfork"
4/dø-rben/; "40"10/dy-gin//də/-
5/ta-bun/; /ta-bin/ "50"11/tà/-/i-tu-/12
6; "60"1314/mu/-
715/jeti/; /dala-n/ "70"15/nada-n//nìr-/16/nana/-
8/jè-t-/17/da/-
9/xegyn//kəkənə/
10 or /tøbe//təwə/18,/-so/"-0"/i-so/50
many, a big number "100"19/jér/ "10" /jə̀rə̀/ "many" "10,000"
/jə̀rə̀/ "many"
many, a big number "10"/ha-rban/ "10", /ha-na/ "all"20-/pə/, -/pua/ "-00"21
20 or "40"22/kori-n//xori-n//pata-ti/23
100?/jom/ "big number, all"24
1000/dymen/ or /tymen/ "10,000"25/ti/

1 Manchu /soni/ "single, odd".
2 Old Bulgarian /tvi-rem/ "second".
3 Kitan has "2".
4 is probably a contraction of -/ubu/-.
5 The /y/- of "3" "may also reflect the same root, although the suffixation is not clear."
6 Compare Silla /mir/ "3".
7 Compare Goguryeo /mir/ "3".
8 "third ", "consisting of three objects"
9 "song with three out of four verses rhyming "
10 Kitan has "4".
11 Kitan has "5".
12 "". – Blažek also considers Goguryeo "5" to be related.
13 Kitan has "6".
14 Middle Korean has "6", which may fit here, but the required loss of initial "is not quite regular".
15 The Mongolian forms "may suggest an original proto-form" or "with dissimilation or metathesis in" Proto-Mongolic. – Kitan has "7".
16 in Early Middle Korean.
17 "Problematic".
18 Compare Goguryeo "10".
19 Manchu "a very big number".
20 Orok "a bundle of 10 squirrels", Nanai "collection, gathering".
21 "Hundred" in names of hundreds.
22 Starostin et al. suspect this to be a reduplication: "20 + 20".
23 would be expected; Starostin et al. think that this irregular change from to is due to influence from "2".
24 From.
25 Also see Tümen.
26 Modern Korean – needs further investigations

Works cited