Central Eurasian Language Grammars project/organising

<accesscontrol>CELG</accesscontrol> This page is here for organising thoughts for the Central Eurasian Language Grammars project.

This includes at to-do list and ideas on the name(s) of the volume(s).

The bulk of it, though, is ideas for organising the languages by volume (currently #Medium-density, #Low-density, #Critical, and #Extinct / Historic). Along with the languages in each section are UNESCO declarations about the relative endangerment of the language (including estimates of the number of speakers), and also ideas for who could write a chapter on the language.

There's also a few notes on #Size concerns.

To-do

Organisational stuff

• Determine general criteria for inclusion of a language.
  • Decide on whether to include large numbers of Uralic and Iranic languages.
• Figure out criteria for what constitutes what kind of language for #Language Organisation. A rough explanation of current criteria appears on this wiki at Medium density languages.

Getting things moving

• Decide on people to contact,

Criteria

What makes a language worthy of being included?

Ideas:

• Perhaps some combination of consideration of number of speakers, lack of good materials, relevance to Central Eurasian cultural/linguistic complex?

Name

Ideas for what to name the various volumes go here:

• A linguist's {guide/guidebook/handbook/(desk) reference} {to/of/for/on} (the?) {Medium Density/Low Density/Critical/Extinct~Historical} languages of the Central Eurasian Sprachbund.
• A {guide/guidebook/handbook/(desk) reference} {to/of/for/on} (the?) {Medium Density/Low Density/Critical/Extinct~Historical} languages of the Central Eurasian Sprachbund for linguists!

Language Organisation

Languages are broken down by what volume they should occur in, and then genetic affiliation. Ideas for contributors are included with each language, as well as some info from UNESCO's Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger.

High-density These languages probably don't deserve a volume of their own: good stuff already exists on them! Russian UNESCO status: none 278M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Japanese UNESCO status: none 130M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Korean UNESCO status: none 78M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Turkish?? UNESCO status: none 63M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Fārsi UNESCO status: none 56M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Finnish?? UNESCO status: none 6M speakers (estimate, wikipedia)

Medium-density Turkic Turkish UNESCO status: none 63M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Who (idea): Kornfilt? Azeri UNESCO status: none 31M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Uzbek UNESCO status: none 23.5M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Kazakh UNESCO status: none 12M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Who (last resort): Jonathan Uyghur UNESCO status: none 10M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Who (idea): Arienne Dwyer (recommended by Mahire Yakup (recommended by Eric Schluessel)) Who (other recommendations by Eric): "Reyhangul Abliz (Professor at Xinjiang Agricultural University, co-author of Uyghur: A manual for conversation and De Jong's grammar) rayhan10@hotmail.com, tell her I sent you; Abdurishit Yakup (in Germany, wrote an excellent grammar of Turpan Uyghur); Mahire Yakup (at University of Kansas, teaches Uyghur at SWSEEL, PhD student); Frederick de Jong (very, very senior professor at Utrecht, produced the above-mentioned learner's grammar of Uyghur with Reyhangul and others), frederick.dejong@let.uu.nl, again, tell him I sent you..." Turkmen UNESCO status: none 9M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Tatar UNESCO status: none 8M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Kyrgyz UNESCO status: none 3.5M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Who (current gramar draft): Jonathan Qaraqalpaq UNESCO status: none 0.5M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Bashqort UNESCO status: unsafe, 1,379,727 speakers (2002 census) Chuvash UNESCO status: unsafe, 1,325,382 speakers (2002 census) Mongolic Khalkha UNESCO status: none 2.6M speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Who (current grammar draft): Andrew IE Tajik UNESCO status: none 4.5M speakers (estimate, wikipedia)

Low-density These are low density languages. UNESCO rates most of these languages as unsafe or definitely endangered. Turkic Kumyk UNESCO status: unsafe, 458,121 speakers (2002 census) Sakha UNESCO status: unsafe, 456,288 speakers (2002 census) Who (idea): Nyurguyana Petrova (petrova3@buffalo.edu, native speaker and linguistics student, friend of / recommended by Chris Straughn (U Chicago)) Karachay-Balkar UNESCO status: unsafe, 302,748 speakers (2002 census) Tuvan UNESCO status: unsafe, 242,754 speakers (2002 census of the Russian Federation; much smaller numbers of speakers in China and Mongolia) Who (idea): Greg Anderson and/or David Harrison Khorasani UNESCO status: unsafe, 200,000 speakers (approximate) Gagauz UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 180,000 (estimate for the Republic of Moldova and the Ukraine based on Schulze 2002) Salar UNESCO status: unsafe, 104,503 speakers (population figure from the 2000 census; the active speakers are much fewer, but no estimate is available; cf. Dwyer 2001) Who (idea): Arienne Dwyer (recommended by Mahire Yakup—see above for Uyghur) Crimean Tatar (Qrımtatar) UNESCO status: severely endangered, 100,000 (Comrie in the Atlas of the world’s languages (1994): “Maria S. Polinsky advises me that the number of solid first language speakers of Crimean Tatar may not exceed 100,000”; census figures are much higher, but may be inflated); numbers include Krymchak (Judaeo-Crimean Tatar) 400,000 speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Khakas (Kacha, Sagay, Kyzyl, Koibal, Beltir, Shor) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 52,217 speakers (2002 census) Southern Altay (Altay, Teleut (Telengut), Telengit) (Teleut on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 50,000 speakers (estimate based on the 2002 census of the Russian Federation; 65,534 speakers of Altay languages collectively, which may be a slightly inflated figure) Khalaj UNESCO status: unsafe, 42,100 speakers (2000 census) Dolgan UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 4,865 speakers (2002 census) Mongolic Buryat (Trans-Baikal) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 300,000 speakers (estimate for Trans-Baikal Buryat based on the 2002 census: 368,807 speakers of Buryat altogether, which includes a number of Mongolian speakers; cf. Buryat (Cis-Baikal) and Buryat (Manchuria)) Oyrat UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 280,000 speakers (estimate based on Birtalan 2003: approximately 150,000 speakers in Mongolia and less than 130,000 in northern Sinkiang, which represent the numerically most significant groups) Kalmyk UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 153,602 speakers (2002 census) Daur (Nonni) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 100,000 speakers (estimate based on Tsumagari 2003) Ordos UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 100,000 speakers (2003 Georg estimate) Buryat (Cis-Baikal) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 50,000 speakers (estimate based on various sources covering both China and Mongolia; according to Skribnik 2003: 102 there are at least 100,000 ethnic Buryat in the region, but “the general trend is that Buryat is being abandoned in favour of more dominant languages”) Tungusic Xibe (maybe should be in #Critical?) UNESCO status: severely endangered, 27,000 (population figure based on the 2000 census; not all are active speakers) IE Ossetic (maybe #Medium-density?) UNESCO status: unsafe, 550,000 speakers (estimate based on the 493,610 speakers reported in the 2002 census of the Russian Federation; also spoken in South Ossetia) Wakhi UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 75,000 speakers (The figure is relatively accurate and is based on approximate estimate of the speakers in the borders of four countries: Badakhshan region in Tajikistan, Badakhshan Province in Afghanistan, Northern Pakistan and Tashkurghan disctrict of Xinjiang Prov) Yaghnobi UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 20,000 speakers (The estimate is based on 2001 official census) Other Dungan UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 41,000 speakers (2001 census)

Critical These are moribund and maybe recently dead languages. Many are classified by UNESCO as severely endangered, critically endangered, or extinct. Turkic Sonkori UNESCO status: none, 35'000 speakers (at most, based on Pocelujevskij 1997) "Yurt Tatar" UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 12,000 speakers (2005 Арсланов) Trukhmen ("Caucasian Turkmen") UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 10,000 speakers (estimate based on the 2002 census) Baraba UNESCO status: none ~8000 speakers (estimate, Dmitrijeva 1997) Karagash (Astrakhan Nogay) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 7,000 speakers (current estimate; not listed separately in the census) Shor (Shor on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: severely endangered, 6,210 speakers (2002 census) Saryg/Western Yugur UNESCO status: severely endangered, 4,600 speakers (2000 census) Northern Altay (Tuba, Qumandı, Chalkan/Lebedin/Kuu) (Qumandı on lingsib.iea.ras.ru, Chalkan on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: severely endangered, speaker data unavailable (not know exactly, but in the range of a few thousand; the 2002 census figures for Tuba [436], Kumandy [1044] and Chalkan [539] are presumably too low, because some speakers may have registered as (Southern) Altay speakers) Karaim UNESCO status: severely endangered, 50 speakers (Trakai, Lithuania), 6 speakers (Western Ukraine), 0 speakers (Crimea) ~ 500 speakers (estimate, based on 1989 census, Musajev 1997) Krymchak UNESCO status: none < 500 speakers (estimate, based on 1989 census, Rebi et al. 1997) Alabugat Tatar ("outlying dialect of Nogay") UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 422 speakers (1987 figure in Арсланов 1988) Dukha (Tuha/Tsaatan) UNESCO status: severely endangered, 200 speakers (compromise figure based on various sources) Ili Turk UNESCO status: severely endangered, 120 speakers (1980 R. F. Hahn for the Ethnologue) Urum UNESCO status: definitely endangered, data unavailable 112 speakers (estimate, wikipedia) Tofa / Karagas (Tofalar/Karagas on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: critically endangered, 40 speakers (specialist estimate; the census figure 378 is inflated) Who (idea): David Harrison and/or Greg Anderson ?? Who (idea): Rassadin? Chulym (Middle Chulym?) (Chulym on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: critically endangered, 35 speakers (specialist estimate) Who (idea): David Harrison and/or Greg Anderson Fu-yü Ğırgıs ("Manchurian Kirgiz") UNESCO status: critically endangered, 5 speakers (estimate based on various sources reporting less than 10 speakers) Khotong UNESCO status: none Kamas Turk (an extinct outlying dialect of Khakas spoken by the last speakers of Kamas (Samoyed)) UNESCO status: extinct, 0 speakers (recently extinct) Soyot (Soyot on lingsib.iea.ras.ru) UNESCO status: extinct, 0 speakers (became extinct in the second half of the twentieth century) Who (idea): Rassadin? Crimean Turkish UNESCO status: severely endangered, data unavailable (subsumed under Crimean Tatar in the censuses) Mongolic Daur (Hailar) UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 5,000 speakers (estimate based on Tsumagari 2003) Eastern/Shira Yugur UNESCO status: severely endangered, 3,000 speakers (based on Junast 1981 estimate of one third of the (then) total population of 9,000 Yugur speaking Shira Yugur) Khamnigan Mongol UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 2,000 speakers of Manchurian dialect (2003 Janhunen estimate) less than 50 speakers of the Mongolian dialect (estimate, Shimunek estimate, based on preliminary fieldwork in summer 2006) Manchurian Ölöt UNESCO status: severely endangered, 1,000 speakers (rough estimate) Daur (Amur) UNESCO status: critically endangered, (overall vitality: definitely endangered) 400 speakers (2003 Tsumagari estimate) Khövsgöl Uryangkhay UNESCO status: critically endangered, 10 speakers (specialist estimate) Tungusic Solon UNESCO status: definitely endangered, 10,000 speakers (estimate based on the 2000 census and other sources) Evenki UNESCO status: severely endangered, 7,584 speakers (2002 census of the Russian Federation for Evenki; cf. Evenki (Northern Siberia) and Evenki (Sakhalin); possibly also a small number of speakers in Mongolia) Evenki (Manchuria) UNESCO status: severely endangered, 4,000 speakers (estimate based on Chinese census figures and other sources; includes all speakers in the official Oroqen nationality as well as under 1,000 speakers of the Manchurian Reindeer Tungus dialect and the approximately 1,000 Evenki-speaking Khamnigan) Manchu (Amur) UNESCO status: critically endangered, 10 speakers (compromise figure based on various sources) Ongkor Solon UNESCO status: extinct, 0 speakers (the last fluent speaker died in the 1990s; there may still be a few people who know some isolated phrases or words) Uralic Kamas/Koibal (Samoyedic) UNESCO status: extinct, 0 speakers (the last speaker, Klavdia Plotnikova, died in 1989) IE Yazgulami UNESCO status: severely endangered, 6,000 speakers (Official statistics, 2003) Ishkashimi UNESCO status: severely endangered, 1,000 speakers (Approximate estimate, 2006)

Extinct / Historic Most of these won't be able to have full grammars written on them, and many won't be able to have more than "present level of knowledge about the language" written. Maybe this volume should be of a slightly different nature. Turkic Orkhon/Yenisei Old Kirgiz? Old Uyghur Karakhanid Bolgar Khazar Cuman? Chaghatay Old Tatar Mamluk Kypchak X-XIth century Oghuz Pecheneg Polovec Old Anatolian Turki Khwarezmian Mongol-Xianbeic Classical Mongolian Kitan Tabgach Middle Mongol IE Scythian Sogdian Bactrian Tokharian A/B

Unsorted

• Bojnurdy (Iranian Turkic)
  • UNESCO status: none

Size concerns

A decent-quality bare-bones grammar of a medium-density language would be a minimum of about 20 pages, and a more full grammar might be as much as 50 pages. This allows for a maximum of 10-20 languages per volume before a volume starts to get too big. On the level of the volume, do we stress quantity of languages, or quality of grammars (probably the former, but we do want to fit everything)? On the level of the individual language/grammar, we probably stress quality over size? These are things which need to be discussed.