| Hokan | |
|---|---|
| (controversial) | |
| Geographic distribution | North America |
| Linguistic classification | Proposedlanguage family |
| Subdivisions | |
| Language codes | |
| ISO 639-5 | hok |
| Glottolog | None |
 Hokan families of California, Arizona and Baja California | |
TheHokan/ˈhoʊkæn/ language family is a hypothetical grouping of a dozen small language families spoken mainly inCalifornia,Arizona, andBaja California.
The nameHokan is loosely based on the word for "two" in the various Hokan languages:*xwak in Proto-Yuman,c-oocj (pronounced[koːkx]) inSeri,ha'k inAchumawi, etc. Compare similar construction of the term "Penutian".
The "Hokan hypothesis" was first proposed in 1913 byRoland B. Dixon andAlfred L. Kroeber,[1][2] and further elaborated byEdward Sapir. Initial follow-up research found little additional evidence that these language families wererelated to each other. But since about 1950, increased efforts to document Hokan languages and to establish sound correspondences in proposed lexical resemblance sets have added weight to the Hokan hypothesis, leading to its acceptance by many specialists in the languages of California, Oregon, andMesoamerica. However, some skepticism remains among scholars.[3]
Linguist Paul Rivet claimed theYurumanguí language ofColombia was part of the Hokan family.[4] This claim has not been accepted by historical linguists. Terrence Kaufman wondered if Hokan might be related toOto-Mangean of Central America.[5]
An automated computational analysis (ASJP 4) by Müller et al. (2013)[6] found lexical similarities amongSeri,Yuman andTequistlatecan. However, since the analysis was automatically generated, the grouping could be either due to mutual lexical borrowing or genetic inheritance.
The geographic distribution of the Hokan languages suggests that they became separated around theCentral Valley of California by the influx of later-arrivingPenutian and other peoples; archaeological evidence for this is summarized in Chase-Dunn & Mann (1998). These languages are spoken by Native American communities around and east ofMount Shasta, others nearLake Tahoe, thePomo on the California coast, and theYuman peoples along the lowerColorado River. Some linguists also includeChumash, between San Luis Obispo and Los Angeles, and other families, but the evidence is insubstantial, and most now restrict Hokan to some or all of the languages listed below.
Linguists have suggested thatCoahuilteco andComecrudan spoken in southern Texas and northern Mexico belong to theHokan language family. These languages are extinct and confirmation of the relationship is lacking.[7]
The Hokan languages retained by Kaufman (1988) due to regular sound correspondences and common core vocabulary are as follows. (The data on which these conclusions were drawn have not been published or evaluated by anyone else.) Apart from Shasta–Palaihnihan and Yuman, all branches are single languages or shallow families.[8]
Marlett (2008) reevaluated the evidence and concluded that the evidence for Seri and Salinan has not been systematically or convincingly presented. The inclusion of the Tequistlatecan languages has also not received much support.[citation needed] TheChumash languages were once included, but that position has been almost universally abandoned.
A lexicostatistical classification of the Hokan languages by Zhivlov (2013) is roughly presented as follows.[9]
Zhivlov (2013) does not considerJicaquean (Tol) andWasho to be Hokan languages.
Some Hokan lexical correspondences fromMary R. Haas (1963) are provided below.[10]
| GLOSS | PROTO- SHASTA | PROTO- PALAIHNIHAN | PROTO- POMO | Yana | Karok | Chimariko | PROTO- YUMA | PROTO- HOKAN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 'ear' | *ísamakʼ | *ísamaK | *išamál | malʔgu | -sam | *išamárika *išamákari | *išamarukʼa *išamákʼaru | |
| 'liver' | *č-ímapasi | *iwapasi | ima | váfiš | -ši | *imačipasí | *č-imapasi *imačipasi | |
| 'navel' | *ímaraw | alu(Achomawi) | lakʼi | ʔárup | -napu | *imalikwí *imakwáli | *imarakʼwi *imakʼwari | |
| 'neck (nape)' | *ímapka | *iwapaKi | vúˑp | -kki | *amipúki | *imapaki *amipaki | ||
| 'nose' | *č-imari | *yaw̃ari *iw̃ari | *ilaw̃a | *yamari *imari *irama | ||||
| 'tongue' | ipwá(Okwanuchu) | *ipali __ | *ipál __ | bawal- | ápri- | -pen | *ipáli | *ipari *ipawari *ipariwa |
Similar forms for 'tongue' include:
Shaul (2019) notes the following similarities between Proto-Hokan (based on Kaufman 2015[11]) andProto-Uto-Aztecan.[12]
| Gloss (for Proto-Hokan) | Proto-Hokan | Proto-Uto-Aztecan |
|---|---|---|
| louse/flea | #ači | *atë(N) ‘louse/nit’ |
| paternal grandfather | #apu | *apu ‘father/parent/mother’ |
| objective case | #-i | *i ‘objective case’ |
| come | #iyu, #iya | *ya- ‘come’ |
| wife | #luwa, #lowa | *lowa ‘vagina’ |
| hand | #man, #ma | *man ~ *ma ‘hand’ |
| give | #ma ~ #mo | *maka ‘give’ |
| woman | #mari | maːla ‘mother’ (Yoemian) |
| know (through magic) | #mata ~ #matu ~ #mati | *mata ~ *mati ‘know’ |
| be a woman | #momo- | momo- ‘woman’ (Hopi) |
| (not quite) dead | #mu- | *mukːV ‘die (singular)’ |
| young woman | #mus- | *muts [~ *mos] ‘vagina’ |
| child | #ŋam | -ŋyam ‘clan’ (Hopi) |
| pitch/sap | #sala | *saLa ‘pitch’ |
