Language
Country/Area
No result found
The Lost World of Language: Why is the Dené–Caucasian Hypothesis Stirring Academic Controversy?
The Dené–Caucasian hypothesis is a language family theory that has been proposed for a long time. For many linguistic scholars, this hypothesis is very controversial. This hypothesis attempts to connect several language groups in the northern hemisphere, including the Yeniseian languages of Siberia, the Na-Dené languages of North America, and the Vasconic languages (including Basque) and North Carpathian languages from Europe. However, almost all historical linguists doubt the validity of this hypothesis and even reject its existence.
A more narrow connection, specifically referring to the relationship between the Na-Dené language in North America and the Yeniseian language in Siberia (Dené–Yeniseian language hypothesis), was proposed by Edward Vajda in 2008 and gained popularity in the professional linguistics community. A certain degree of acceptance.
In the 20th century, scholars such as Alfredo Trombetti, Edward Sapir, and other scholars proposed similar classifications. However, these early linguistic explorations often lacked a solid empirical foundation. For example, Morris Swadesh included Dené–Caucasian members in a family called "Basque-Dennean" in his work, demonstrating his extensive connection with different languages. The languages mentioned by Swadesh, such as Uralic, Altaic and Dravidian languages, have vague connections with Dené–Caucasian, making subsequent research challenging.
With the passage of time, scholars like Sergei Starostin used more rigorous linguistic methods to analyze the correlation between Caucasian languages, Yeniseian languages and Sino-Tibetan languages. Their work provides more solid theoretical support for this hypothesis to a certain extent. However, these studies still face a lot of controversy, especially the uncertainty in reconstructing the original language, and it is difficult to track the complexity of the phonology and the phonological correspondence.
Academic concerns with Dené–Caucasian include heavy reliance on the complex reconstruction of Proto-(North-)Caucasian, which has drawn criticism due to its inherent uncertainties.
Among the supporters of the Dené–Caucasian hypothesis, Bengtson's theory is also noteworthy, in which he divided the Basque, North Caucasian, and Burushaski languages into a branch called the MacroCaucasian language family. He believes that it is not appropriate to rush to propose classifications of other nodes or subgroups, because synchronic research at this stage will continue to develop.
On the other hand, George van Driem proposed the Karasuk theory, which believed that there is a close relationship between Yeniseian language and Burushaski language, based on a small amount of grammatical and lexical similarities. Nonetheless, these links have so far failed to resolve the plug-in compatibility of the macrocaucasian hypothesis.
Research in this field is undoubtedly full of challenges, and the mixing and interaction between languages have put many hypotheses into question. For scholars, how to advance the study of these ancient languages through more rigorous methodologies will become an important issue in the future.
As the debate over the Dené–Caucasian hypothesis continues, it raises questions about the methods we use to reconstruct language histories and their socio-cultural implications.
Behind this language exploration and controversy, can we find a logical conclusion? Or will he be forever trapped in silence in this lost world of language?
