Jump to content

Talk:Äynu language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

From what I understand of Aini, it's more of a mixed language than a true Turkic language. The vocabulary is almost all Persian, but the grammar is Turkic. Should we change the classification to Mixed Language? Straughn 16:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a section that says Aini is a secret language. I doubt this is true. Can someone verify this?

Not a mixed language

[edit]

According to Lars Johansson (pg 21-22, ref in article), Aynu is not a mixed language. (Taivo (talk) 20:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Per Hayasi et al., who actually did field work among the Aynu, it is a mixed language. Also, Bakker, who does typological work on mixed languages, considers it a mixed language. Johansson appears to be taking the stance that the classification of a language should be based entirely on its grammar, and would therefore consider CIA or Michif mixed languages, but not, for example Media Lengua. I'll include a citation of Bakker in the article. Straughn (talk) 16:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Most linguists are wary of "mixed language" claims and feel that they are too freely thrown about (English has been called a "mixed language"). I think that Johansson is just taking the conservative point-of-view (which I happen to share) that the technical definition of "mixed language" is not completely met by Aynu. If I read him correctly, then Aynu still has a base vocabulary that is Turkic in origin. If this is the case, then Aynu is not a mixed language according to definition. Michif is a true mixed language--Cree verbs and verb morphology, French nouns and noun morphology. What I read about Aynu is Turkic grammar, Turkic base vocabulary, a lot of Persian loanwords. That's not a mixed language. But the only sources I have access to here in Ukraine are the online Johansson article ("Map...") and The Turkic Languages (which doesn't seem to mention Aynu). (Taivo (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Just read your user page, at least you're a real linguist so I can trust you know the way linguists work. Sometimes here on Wikipedia.... I'm still not completely convinced that Aynu is a mixed language, but tom[e]to/tom[a]to. You might want to note in the article that not all linguists agree with the mixed language assessment and ref Johansson's "map" article. Cheers (Taivo (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
From what I understand, all lexical content is Persian and all grammatical content is Uyghur. I'll have to find some more references on how it all works, especially verbs, which would be the most problematic in the context of Persian-Turkic mixture. I'll check out what Hayasi says and adjust everything accordingly. Straughn (talk) 21:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Numerals

[edit]

The article says, "Äynu numerals are borrowed from Persian". Does this mean they actually use the Persian variant of the Eastern Arabic numerals (۰۱۲۳۴۵۶۷۸۹)? Or is it just that the names of the numbers were adapted from the Persian words? - dcljr (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For most people, "numerals" means those 10 glyphs used for writing numbers. But for linguists, numerals means the number words of a given language. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Karluk or Siberian?

[edit]

The article says, "Some linguists call it a mixed language, having a mostly Turkic grammar, essentially Uyghur, but a mainly Iranian vocabulary.", meaning that Äynu is a Karluk language, instead of Siberian as Glottolog states.

Furthermore, the Uyghur language article states: "It is closely related to Äynu, Lop, Ili Turki, the extinct language Chagatay (the East Karluk languages), and more distantly to Uzbek (which is West Karluk)." Sakaiberian (talk) 21:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-European?

[edit]

@Vofa has changed the article to call Änyu Indo-Iranian a few times, but all I can find source wise is that it's Turkic. Vofa, do you have a source for your edit? Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:28, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is: https://www.omniglot.com/writing/aynu.htm
It says here that, Äynu has a largely Iranic vocabulary, while having a Turkic grammar. Vofa (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but there's nothing I've been able to find anywhere saying it's Indo-Iranian. English has a predominantly Romance vocabulary, it's still Germanic and not a Romance language. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:38, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nowhere does it say that it is Indo-Iranian. Sources state that the cryptolect has an Iranic vocabulary. Vofa (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That still makes it Turkic, though. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 10:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
„That still makes it Turkic, though“
what is? What makes Äynu Turkic?
I tried to make a neutral edit, yet it seems to have been removed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1272574621&oldid=1272573969&title=Äynu_language Vofa (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's factually incorrect. It's a Turkic language per literally every RS I've been able to find. From the Swedish source for the cryptolect part:

Eynu is certainly an idiom formed under unusual socio-communicative conditions. Some scholars have taken it to be a hybrid language, produced from two different languages, but it is obviously just an Uyghur variety with a special vocabulary of non Turkic origin.

Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 17:01, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Vofa (talk) 08:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You’re free to do so privately, but Wikipedia needs verifiability for content added here and your perspective appears to have no academic support, so unless you have some strong sources that run counter to the consensus we can find I suggest not editing the article in that way. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 09:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Secret language?

[edit]

Is this for real? Does anybody have a source for this claim? 2seal (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source is mentioned in the article in plain sight: Johanson (2001), p. 22. –Austronesier (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]