ThePaleo-Siberian languages are a group of fourlanguage isolates and smalllanguage families spoken in parts ofSiberia. They are not known to have anygenetic relationship to each other; their only widely accepted link is that they are held to have antedated the more dominant languages, particularlyTungusic and latterlyTurkic languages, that have largely displaced them. Even more recently, Turkic (at least in Siberia) and especially Tungusic have been displaced in their turn byRussian.
TheChukotko-Kamchatkan family, sometimes known as Luoravetlan, includesChukchi and its close relatives,Koryak,Alutor andKerek.Itelmen, also known as Kamchadal, is also distantly related. Chukchi, Koryak and Alutor are spoken in easternmost Siberia by communities numbering in the thousands (Chukchi) or hundreds (Koryak and Alutor). Kerek is extinct, and Itelmen is now spoken by fewer than 5 people, mostly elderly, on the west coast of theKamchatka Peninsula.
Nivkh (Gilyak, Amuric) consists of two or three languages spoken in the lowerAmur basin and on the northern half ofSakhalin island. It has a recent modern literature.
TheYeniseian languages were a small family formerly spoken on the middleYenisei River and its tributaries, but are now represented only byKet, spoken in theTurukhansk district ofKrasnoyarsk Krai by no more than 200 people.
Yukaghir is spoken in two mutually unintelligible varieties in the lowerKolyma andIndigirka valleys. Other languages, includingChuvan, spoken further inland and further east, are now extinct. Yukaghir is held by some to berelated to theUralic languages.
On the basis of morphological, typological, and lexical evidence,Michael Fortescue suggests that Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Nivkh (Amuric) are related, forming a largerChukotko-Kamchatkan–Amuric language family. Fortescue does not consider Yeniseian and Yukaghir to be genetically related to Chukotko-Kamchatkan–Amuric.[2]
The purpose of the existence of Paleo-Siberian itself lies in its practicability and remains a grouping of convenience for a variety of unclassifiable language isolates located in Northeast Eurasia.
The largely-extinct Yeniseian language family, primarily through the Ket language, has been linked to the Na-Dené languages of North America.[3]Dené–Yeniseian has been called "the first demonstration of agenealogical link between Old World and New World language families that meets the standards of traditional comparative-historical linguistics".[4] Attempts to connect it toSino-Tibetan,North Caucasian andBurushaski have also been made, especially through the widely-discredited Dené-Caucasian hypothesis.
Kim Bang-han proposed thatplacename glosses in theSamguk sagi reflect the original language of the Korean peninsula and a component in the formation of both Korean and Japanese. It is suggested that this language was related to Nivkh in some form.[5][6][7]Juha Janhunen suggests the possibility that similar consonant stop systems in Koreanic and Nivkh may be due to ancient contact.[8]Martine Robbeets suggests that Proto-Korean had a Nivkh substrate influence. Further parallel developments in their sound inventory (Old to Middle Korean and Proto-Nivkh to Nivkh) as well as commonalities in the syntax between Koreanic and Nivkh specifically have been observed.[9] Alexander Vovin, in a criticism of the Altaic language grouping, has suggested that Korean shares similarities with other Paleo-Siberian languages in several important respects (i.e. phonotactics, verb incorporation v. compounding, adjectives as verbs and not nominals).[10]
TheOb-Ugric andSamoyedic languages predate the spread of Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic languages, but are part of the well established largerUralic family, thus not Paleo-Siberian. Yukaghir has often been suggested as a more distant relative of Uralic as part of theUralic-Yukaghir languages, as well as Eskimo-Aleut as part of theUralo-Siberian languages.[11] However, these hypotheses are controversial and not universally accepted.
Below are selected basic vocabulary items in proto-languages reconstructed for Paleo-Siberian languages and language families.Proto-Eskimo,Proto-Uralic, Proto-Ainu,Ainu,Proto-Korean andProto-Japanese are also given for comparison.
^Fortescue, Michael. 1998.Language Relations across Bering Strait: Reappraising the Archaeological and Linguistic Evidence. London and New York: Cassell.ISBN0-304-70330-3.
^Starostin, Sergei A.; Ruhlen, Merritt (1994)."Proto-Yeniseian Reconstructions, with Extra-Yeniseian Comparisons". In Ruhlen, M. (ed.).On the Origin of Languages: Studies in Linguistic Taxonomy. Stanford University Press. pp. 70–92. [Partial translation of Starostin 1982, with additional comparisons by Ruhlen.]
^Fortescue, Michael D.; Jacobson, Steven A.; Kaplan, Lawrence D. (1994).Comparative Eskimo Dictionary with Aleut Cognates. Fairbanks, Alaska: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska, Fairbanks.ISBN1-55500-051-7.
^Nikolaeva, Irina (2006).A Historical Dictionary of Yukaghir. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
^Fortescue, Michael (2005).Comparative Chukotko–Kamchatkan Dictionary. Trends in Linguistics. Vol. 23. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
^Fortescue, Michael (2016).Comparative Nivkh Dictionary. Munich: Lincom Europa.
^Tranter, Nicolas (2012).The Languages of Japan and Korea. New York: Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-46287-7.
^Vovin, Alexander (1993).A Reconstruction of Proto-Ainu. Leiden: Brill.
^Vovin, Alexander (1994). "Long-distance Relationships, Reconstruction Methodology, and the Origins of Japanese".Diachronica.11 (1):95–114.doi:10.1075/dia.11.1.08vov.