North Caucasian languages

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  North Caucasian languages sit at one of the most contested frontiers in the study of human speech. Somewhere between 34 and 38 distinct languages, spoken across the Caucasus and predominantly in its northern reaches, may or may not share a single ancient ancestor. That question has occupied linguists for generations, and it still has no settled answer.

  The grouping brings together two well-established families: the Northwest Caucasian languages, known by a tangle of alternative names including Abkhazo-Adyghean, Abkhazo-Circassian, Pontic, and simply Circassian; and the Northeast Caucasian languages, also called East Caucasian, Nakh-Dagestani, or Caspian. Whether these two families genuinely descend from a shared root, or whether their similarities are a product of borrowing and coincidence, is the central dispute. What awaits closer examination is how strikingly different these languages are from each other, how extraordinarily complex their sound systems and grammars have become, and what the evidence for and against their kinship actually looks like.

• 2. A Question of Ancestry

  ›

  Sergei Starostin and Sergei Nikolaev are the linguists most closely associated with the hypothesis that the two Caucasian families share a common ancestor. Their proposal places that hypothetical ancestor roughly five thousand years before the common era. That is a very deep time horizon, and it is one reason the claim is so hard to evaluate.

  An automated computational analysis, known as ASJP 4 and conducted by Müller and colleagues in 2013, also grouped the North Caucasian languages together. The researchers who ran that analysis were careful to note its limits. Because the grouping emerged from an automated process, they explicitly declined to conclude whether it reflected genuine shared descent or simply a long history of words borrowed across the region. That caution points to a genuine difficulty: when languages have been in close contact for millennia, loanwords can mimic the patterns of inheritance, and short morphemes are especially hard to classify. Most of the morphemes in both North Caucasian families are quite short, often consisting of a single consonant, which makes them easier to borrow and easier to mistake for coincidences. Even among scholars who accept the North Caucasian hypothesis, the internal structure of the Northeast Caucasian branch remains a matter of open debate with no general agreement reached.

• 3. Sound Systems

  ›

  Ubykh, a Northwest Caucasian language, has 84 consonants. Archi, from the Northeast branch, is thought to carry 76. Those numbers place both languages among the most phonetically dense in the world, and they point to the most striking similarity between the two families.

  Both branches share a high level of phonetic complexity, including the widespread use of secondary articulation, meaning that consonants are produced with a simultaneous additional movement of the tongue or lips. This shared tendency toward elaborate sound inventories is the main perceived similarity that leads some linguists to group the families together. The shared complexity does not, by itself, prove common origin. Languages in close geographic contact can develop parallel phonological elaborations independently. But the scale of what these languages have built in their consonant systems is hard to ignore, and it is the foundation on which the North Caucasian hypothesis rests. The researchers who assembled possible cognate lists found that the morpheme shortness in both families makes those comparisons difficult to trust, since most proposed matches could equally be loanwords or chance resemblances.

• 4. Grammar Worlds Apart

  ›

  Tsez, a Northeast Caucasian language, inflects its nouns for location in a way that produces 126 locative suffixes. That number comes from the intersection of a series of locative cases with a further series of suffixes marking how motion relates to that location, and depending on the analysis, those suffixes are sometimes counted as noun cases in their own right.

  That degree of nominal complexity is characteristic of the Northeast branch. The Northwest branch moves in the opposite direction. Northwest Caucasian nouns typically distinguish only two or three cases, a spare system by comparison. What the Northwest languages do instead is pack enormous complexity into their verbs. The subject, the direct object, the indirect object, benefactive objects, and most spatial functions are all expressed within the verb itself. Two language families can share a taste for extreme grammatical elaboration while building that elaboration in entirely different architectural directions. The grammars of the two branches are, as linguists who study them note, quite different from each other, which is part of why the unity proposal remains controversial even among researchers who find it plausible.

• 5. The Kartvelian Separation

  ›

  Georgian belongs to the Kartvelian family, which also includes Zan and Svan. These languages were once grouped under the label South Caucasian and placed in the same broader conversation as their northern neighbors.

  That grouping has since been abandoned. Kartvelian is now classified as a fully independent language family, with no accepted relationship to the North Caucasian languages. The earlier label of South Caucasian has been set aside along with the implied connection. The separation matters for understanding what the North Caucasian debate is actually about: it is not a claim that all languages of the Caucasus region are related, but a narrower argument about whether the two northern families specifically share descent. Not all scholars accept even that narrower claim, and some who do find it plausible nonetheless reject the methodology Nikolayev and Starostin used in their 1994 classification to argue for it.