This subfamily of around 30 languages is divided into three groups according to geography:Plains,Central, andEastern Algonquian. Of the three, only Eastern Algonquian constitutes a truegenetic subgroup.[5]
The languages are listed following the classifications of Goddard (1996) and Mithun (1999).Extinct languages are marked with †, and endangered languages are noted as such. For dialects and subdialects, consult the separate main articles for each of the three divisions.
Eastern Algonquian is a true genetic subgrouping. ThePlains Algonquian and theCentral Algonquian groups are not genetic groupings but ratherareal groupings. Although these areal groups often do share linguistic features, these commonalities are usually attributed tolanguage contact.[6] Paul Proulx has argued that this traditional view is incorrect,[7] and thatCentral Algonquian (in which he includes the Plains Algonquian languages) is a genetic subgroup, with Eastern Algonquian consisting of several different subgroups. However, this classification scheme has failed to gain acceptance from other specialists in the Algonquian languages.[8]
Instead, the commonly accepted subgrouping scheme is that proposed byIves Goddard (1994). The essence of this proposal is thatProto-Algonquian originated with people to the west who then moved east, although Goddard did not attempt to identify a specific westernurheimat for Proto-Algonquian in his 1994 paper. By this scenario, Blackfoot was the first language to branch off, which coincides well with its being the most divergent language of Algonquian. In west-to-east order, the subsequent branchings were:
Arapaho-Gros Ventre, Cree-Montagnais, Menominee, and Cheyenne;
Then the core Great Lakes languages: (Ojibwe–Potawatomi, Shawnee, Sauk–Fox–Kickapoo, and Miami–Illinois); and
Finally, Proto-Eastern Algonquian.
This historical reconstruction accords best with the observed levels of divergence within the family, whereby the most divergent languages are found furthest west (since they constitute the earliest branches during eastern migration), and the shallowest subgroupings are found furthest to the east (Eastern Algonquian, and arguably Core Central). This general west-to-east order is compatible with the proposal from J.P. Denny (1991) that Proto-Algonquian people may have moved east from thePlateau region ofIdaho andOregon or theRocky Mountain-Great Plains boundary ofMontana, dropping off subgroups as people migrated.[9] Goddard also points out that there is clear evidence for pre-historical contact between Eastern Algonquian and Cree-Montagnais, as well as between Cheyenne and Arapaho–Gros Ventre. There has long been especially extensive back-and-forth influence between Cree and Ojibwe.[10]
It has been suggested that the "Eastern Great Lakes" languages – what Goddard has called "Core Central", e.g., Ojibwe–Potawatomi, Shawnee, Sauk–Fox–Kickapoo, and Miami-Illinois (but not Cree–Montagnais or Menominee) – may also constitute their own genetic grouping within Algonquian. They share certain intriguing lexical and phonological innovations. However, this theory has not yet been fully fleshed out and is still considered conjectural.
Algonquian is sometimes said to have included the extinctBeothuk language ofNewfoundland, whose speakers were both in geographic proximity to Algonquian speakers and who share DNA in common with the Algonquian-speakingMiꞌkmaq.[11][12] However, linguistic evidence is scarce and poorly recorded, and it is unlikely that reliable evidence of a connection can be found.[13]
The Algonquian language family is known for its complexpolysyntheticmorphology and sophisticatedverb system.[14] Statements that take many words to say inEnglish can be expressed with a single word. Ex: (Menominee)paehtāwāēwesew "He is heard by higher powers" (paeht- 'hear', -āwāē- 'spirit', -wese- passivizer, -w third-person subject) or (Plains Cree)kāstāhikoyahk "it frightens us". These languages have been extensively studied byLeonard Bloomfield,Ives Goddard, and others.
Algonquian nouns have ananimate/inanimate contrast: some nouns are classed asanimate, while all other nouns areinanimate.[14] There is ongoing debate over whether there is a semantic significance to the categorization of nouns as animate or inanimate, with scholars arguing for it as either a clearlysemantic issue, or a purelysyntactic issue, along with a variety of arguments in between. More structurally inclined linguistic scholars have argued that since there is no consistent semantic system for determining theanimacy of a noun, that it must be a purely linguistic characterization. Anthropological linguists have conversely argued the strong connection between animacy and items viewed as having spiritual importance.
Another important distinction involves the contrast between nouns marked asproximate and those marked asobviative. Proximate nouns are those deemed most central or important to the discourse, while obviative nouns are those less important to the discourse.[15]
There are personal pronouns which distinguish three persons, two numbers (singular and plural),inclusive and exclusive first person plural, and proximate and obviative third persons. Verbs are divided into four classes:transitive verbs with an animate object (abbreviated "TA"), transitive verbs with an inanimate object ("TI"),intransitive verbs with an animate subject ("AI"), and intransitive verbs with an inanimate subject ("II").[15]
A very notable feature of the Algonquian languages is theirdirect-inverse (also known ashierarchical)morphosyntactic alignment, distinguishing between an unmarked voice where the subject outranks the object in a person hierarchy and a marked voice where the opposite relation obtains.[16]
Bloomfield, Leonard (1946). "Algonquian".Linguistic Structures of Native America. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology. Vol. 6. New York.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
Goddard, Ives (1978). "Central Algonquian Languages". In Trigger, Bruce G. (ed.).Northeast.Handbook of North American Indians, ed. William C. Sturtevant. Vol. 15. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. pp. 583–87.ISBN978-0-16-004575-2.
Goddard, Ives (1979). "Comparative Algonquian". In Campbell, Lyle; Mithun, Marianne (eds.).The Languages of Native North America: Historical and Comparative Assessment. Austin: University of Texas Press. pp. 70–132.
Mithun, Marianne (1999).The languages of Native North America. Cambridge University Press.ISBN0-521-23228-7.
Moondancer; Woman, Strong (2007).A Cultural History of the Native Peoples of Southern New England: Voices from Past and Present. Boulder, Colorado: Bauu Press.ISBN978-0-9721349-3-4.
O'Brien, Frank Waabu (2010).Understanding Indian Place Names in Southern New England. Colorado: Bauu Press.ISBN978-0-9820467-6-0.
Pentland, David H. (2006). "Algonquian and Ritwan Languages". In Brown, Keith (ed.).Encyclopedia of Languages and Linguistics (2nd ed.). Elsevier. pp. 161–6.
Proulx, Paul (2003). "The Evidence on Algonquian Genetic Grouping: A Matter of Relative Chronology".Anthropological Linguistics.45:201–25.
