Armenian language

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Armenian, known to its speakers as hayeren, stands alone. Among the dozens of branches that make up the Indo-European language family, it occupies its own branch entirely, with no surviving sibling. Between five and seven million people speak it worldwide today, and they do so across an enormous geographic spread, from the Republic of Armenia to diaspora communities scattered across continents. Written in an alphabet created in 405 AD by a single scholar named Mesrop Mashtots, Armenian carries more than fifteen centuries of continuous literary history. Its oldest surviving written text is a translation of the Bible. Yet for much of its early recorded life, scholars could not even agree on what kind of language it was. Some believed it was simply a form of Iranian. The story of how that misunderstanding was corrected, and what Armenian's true place in the language family turned out to be, opens a window onto one of the most contested questions in linguistics.

• 2. Misread as Iranian

  ›

  Paul de Lagarde and F. Müller, two prominent 19th-century scholars, looked at Armenian and saw an Iranian language. The resemblance was not superficial. Armenian had absorbed enormous numbers of loanwords from Western Middle Iranian languages, particularly Parthian, and the influence ran deep into the language's derivational morphology and syntax. Contact with Greek, Persian, and Syriac added further layers of borrowed vocabulary, making it genuinely difficult to locate the underlying native structure. The confusion began to lift in 1875, when philologist Heinrich Hübschmann applied the comparative method to separate two layers of Iranian vocabulary from the older Armenian core. He found that Armenian frequently carried two distinct morphemes for a single concept. The non-Iranian component, once isolated, revealed a consistent Proto-Indo-European pattern entirely different from Iranian, and the inflectional morphology confirmed it. Armenian was its own thing, not a dialect of any neighbor.

• 3. Greek, the Closest Living Relative

  ›

  Holger Pedersen, writing in 1924, was the first to formally propose that Greek is Armenian's closest surviving relative. His observation was straightforward: the number of shared vocabulary cognates between Greek and Armenian exceeded the agreements between Armenian and any other Indo-European language. Antoine Meillet followed in 1925 and 1927, building a case from morphological and phonological agreement, and concluding that the ancestor languages of Greek and Armenian had once been dialects spoken in immediate geographical proximity during the Proto-Indo-European period. Meillet's hypothesis gained broad circulation after his 1936 book. Georg Renatus Solta, examining the question in 1960, stopped short of positing a single Proto-Graeco-Armenian stage but still concluded, on both lexical and morphological grounds, that Greek was the dialect most closely related to Armenian. Eric P. Hamp, writing in 1976, went further and anticipated a time, in his own words, "when we should speak of Helleno-Armenian," envisioning the eventual recognition of a shared proto-language. Armenian and Greek share the augment, a negator derived from the Proto-Indo-European phrase ne h₂oyu kʷid, and specific phonological features including the representation of word-initial laryngeals by prothetic vowels. Fortson, writing in 2004, offered a cautionary note: by the time Armenian first appears in written records in the 5th century AD, the evidence of early kinship with Greek had already been worn down to a few suggestive traces.

• 4. Layers of Ancient Borrowing

  ›

  In 1985, Soviet linguist Igor M. Diakonoff identified what earlier scholars had called a Caucasian substratum in Classical Armenian, tracing loans from Kartvelian and Northeast Caucasian languages. He also identified a Hurro-Urartian layer, pointing to social and cultural vocabulary borrowed from the peoples who inhabited the Armenian homeland in the second millennium BC. His examples included ałaxin, meaning slave girl, from Hurrian; cov, meaning sea, from Urartian; ułt, meaning camel, from Hurrian; and xnjor, meaning apple tree, also from Hurrian. More recently, scholars such as Hrach Martirosyan have challenged many of these proposed borrowings, arguing instead for native Armenian etymologies and suggesting the traffic may have run in the opposite direction. One striking example is arciv, meaning eagle, which Martirosyan traces to Proto-Indo-European *h₂r̥ǵipyós, with cognates in Sanskrit, Avestan, and Greek; the word may have been loaned from Armenian into Urartian, not the reverse. Current scholarship is skeptical enough that fewer than ten Armenian words are considered of certain Hurro-Urartian origin, and no secure loans from Armenian into Hurro-Urartian can be established with confidence. Earlier contact with Anatolian languages is attested by the loanword xalam, meaning skull, which is cognate with Hittite ḫalanta, meaning head.

• 5. The Alphabet and Its Maker

  ›

  Mesrop Mashtots introduced the Armenian alphabet in 405 AD, and the system he created was graphically unique from the start. It originally contained 36 letters. Mashtots is also credited by some with the creation of the Georgian alphabet and the Caucasian Albanian alphabet, making him one of the most consequential figures in Caucasian literacy. Two more letters, the sounds rendered as o and f in transliteration, were added during the Middle Ages, bringing the total to 38. In the 1920s, Soviet Armenia carried out an orthography reform that added one more character, a ligature that had previously been written as a combination of two letters, while another letter was discarded and reassimilated into a new digraph. The reformed alphabet and spelling system is used by Armenians in Armenia and the former Soviet states. Diaspora Armenians, including Eastern Armenian speakers in Iran and all Western Armenian speakers everywhere, have not adopted the reform and continue using the traditional alphabet and spelling.

• 6. Two Languages from One

  ›

  In the 19th century, Eastern Armenia was conquered from Qajar Iran by the Russian Empire, while Western Armenia, comprising roughly two thirds of historical Armenia, remained under Ottoman control. Armenian intellectual and cultural life concentrated in two cities: Istanbul, for Armenians living under Ottoman rule, and Tbilisi, for those under Russian administration. From these two centers emerged two standardized modern literary forms. Western Armenian crystallized around the dialect that had formed in Istanbul, shaped by waves of immigrants from across the Ottoman territories. Eastern Armenian took its foundation from the dialect of the Yerevan region and Mount Ararat, centered in Tbilisi. Both centers promoted what was called Ashkharhabar, the spoken vernacular, as a modern literary language, displacing the ancient written standard known as Grabar. Schools teaching modern Armenian and a proliferation of newspapers in both varieties drove literacy rates up even in remote rural areas. After World War I, the Soviet Armenian republic made Eastern Armenian its official language, while the diaspora created by the Armenian genocide preserved Western Armenian. The differences between the two standards are considerable, but they remain mutually intelligible after significant exposure, though some subdialects, such as Homshetsi, are not mutually intelligible with other varieties at all.

• 7. Literary Life of Grabar

  ›

  Classical Armenian, called Grabar, was the language's written standard from the 5th century all the way to the 18th century, and a spoken language as well until the 11th. Its oldest surviving literary monument is the 5th-century Bible translation; another early translation from that same century was the Armenian Alexander Romance. Gregory of Narek, who lived from 951 to 1003, produced the Book of Lamentations, a work that exemplifies the literary development of Old Armenian by the 10th century. Gregory contributed well above a thousand new words to the literary vocabulary through his hymns and poems, and opened the door for his successors to write about secular themes and in the vernacular. A poem by Hovhannes Sargavak, devoted to a starling, made it legitimate to write Armenian poetry about nature, love, and female beauty. Konsdantin Yerzinkatsi went further, criticizing the ecclesiastic establishment and addressing social issues directly. Grabar borrowed extensively from Middle Iranian languages, primarily Parthian, and accumulated loanwords from Greek, Syriac, Aramaic, Arabic, Mongol, Persian, and indigenous languages including Urartian. The first Armenian periodical, Azdarar, was still published in Grabar as late as 1794, more than a century after the vernacular revival had gathered momentum.

• 8. A Language and Its Diaspora

  ›

  Western Armenian today is the primary language of the Armenian diaspora, and the medium of instruction in the majority of Armenian-language schools outside Armenia. In the Samtskhe-Javakheti region of Georgia, Armenian was the main language of instruction in 144 state-funded schools as of 2010, despite having no legal status in that country. In California, agencies including the Department of Social Services, the Department of Motor Vehicles, and state superior courts provide Armenian translations of their documents. The city of Glendale displays some street signs in Armenian. In Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, Armenians historically received greater linguistic autonomy than other minority communities; in Iran, they have been de facto the only non-Persian ethnic group permitted to operate private schools with Armenian as the medium of instruction, a right rooted in Article 15 of the Iranian constitution. Western Armenian dialects spoken in northern Armenia, particularly in Gyumri and around 130 villages in Shirak Province, descend from the Karin dialect and reflect a strand of the language that survived the disruptions of the 20th century. The dialect spoken by Nakhichevan-on-Don Armenians traces back to Crimean origins, carried when that community established its town in 1779.