Proto-Athabaskan language facts for kids
Quick facts for kids Proto-Athabaskan |
|
|---|---|
| Proto-Athapaskan | |
| Reconstruction of | Athabaskan languages |
Proto-Athabaskan is like the "grandparent language" of all the Athabaskan languages spoken today. Think of it as the original language that existed a very long time ago, from which all the Athabaskan languages we know now developed.
Linguists (people who study languages) try to figure out what Proto-Athabaskan sounded like and how its grammar worked. They do this by looking at similarities in the Athabaskan languages spoken today, much like detectives piece together clues.
Sounds of Proto-Athabaskan
Figuring out the exact sounds of Proto-Athabaskan is still a big puzzle for linguists. However, they have made good progress on many parts of its sound system.
Special Symbols for Sounds
When linguists study Native American languages, they often use a special set of symbols called Americanist phonetic notation. This is different from the more common IPA symbols. Even though some linguists now prefer IPA, the traditional Americanist symbols are still widely used for Proto-Athabaskan.
In the tables below, you'll see the Proto-Athabaskan sounds first in their traditional symbols. Then, in square brackets, you'll see their IPA equivalents, which are more widely known.
It's important to know that some symbols used for sounds that seem "voiced" (like 'd' or 'z') actually mean "unaspirated" in Athabaskan studies. Unaspirated means there's no puff of air when you say the sound. True voiced sounds are very rare in Athabaskan languages, even in the ancient proto-language.
Reconstructing Consonants
Based on older studies, Proto-Athabaskan is thought to have had about 45 consonant sounds. That's a lot of different sounds!
| Obstruents (Sounds made with blocked airflow) | ||||||||||
| Bilabial (Lips) | Alveolar (Tongue to ridge behind teeth) | Postalveolar (Tongue behind ridge) | Velar (Back of tongue to soft palate) | Uvular (Back of tongue to uvula) | Glottal (Throat) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| central | lateral | plain | with rounded lips | plain | with rounded lips | |||||
| Stop (Air blocked then released) | unaspirated (no puff of air) | *d [t] | *g [k] | *ɢ [q] | *ɢʷ [qʷ] | |||||
| aspirated (with a puff of air) | *t [tʰ] | *k [kʰ] | *q [qʰ] | *qʷ [qʷʰ] | ||||||
| glottalized (with a pop) | *tʼ [tʼ] | *kʼ [kʼ] | *qʼ [qʼ] | *qʼʷ [qʷʼ] | *ʼ ~ *ˀ ~ *ʔ [ʔ] | |||||
| Affricate (Stop then fricative) | unaspirated | *ʒ ~ *dz [ts] | *λ ~ *dl [tɬ] | *ǯ ~ *dž [tʃ] | *ǯʷ ~ *džʷ [tʃʷ] | |||||
| aspirated | *c ~ *ts [tsʰ] | *ƛ ~ *tł ~ *tɬ [tɬʰ] | *č ~ *tš [tʃʰ] | *čʷ ~ *tšʷ [tʃʷʰ] | ||||||
| glottalized | *cʼ ~ *tsʼ [tsʼ] | *ƛʼ ~ *tłʼ ~ *tɬʼ [tɬʼ] | *čʼ ~ *tšʼ [tʃʼ] | *čʼʷ ~ *tšʼʷ [tʃʷʼ] | ||||||
| Fricative (Air flows with friction) | voiceless | *s [s] | *ł ~ *ɬ [ɬ] | *š [ʃ] | *šʷ [ʃʷ] | *x [x] | *x̣ ~ *χ [χ] | *x̣ʷ ~ *χʷ [χʷ] | *h [h] | |
| voiced | *z [z] | *l [ɮ]~[l] | *ž [ʒ] | *žʷ [ʒʷ] | *γ ~ *ɣ [ɣ] | *γ̇ ~ *ɣ̇ [ʁ] | *γ̇ʷ ~ *ɣ̇ʷ [ʁʷ] | |||
| Sonorants (Sounds made with open airflow) | ||||||||||
| Nasal (Air through nose) | *m [m] | *n [n] | *ŋ̪ ~ *ỹ ~ *ŋʸ ~ *nʸ [ɲ] | |||||||
| Approximant (Vowel-like consonants) | *y [j] | *ŋʷ ~ *w̃ ~ *w [w~w̃] | ||||||||
A Special "First Person" Sound
There's a unique sound in Proto-Athabaskan that linguists call *$. It's found in the word for "I" or "me" (the first person singular pronoun). In most Athabaskan languages, this sound became like "sh" (/š/). But in other related languages, it became different sounds. This makes it a very special and unique sound in the proto-language.
Newer Ideas for Consonants
More recently, a linguist named Leer suggested a different way to understand the Proto-Athabaskan sound system. He thought some sounds were actually made in different parts of the mouth. For example, he reinterpreted some "velar" sounds (made at the back of the mouth) as "palatal" (made at the roof of the mouth). His new system has 8 fewer sounds, making it a bit simpler.
| Obstruents (Sounds made with blocked airflow) | |||||||||||
| Bilabial | Apical (Tongue tip) | Lateral (Air over sides of tongue) | Laminal (Tongue blade) | Postalveolar | Retroflex (Tongue curled back) | Palatal | Uvular | Glottal | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stop/Affricate | unaspirated | *d [t] | *dl [tɬ] | *dz [ts] | *ǯ ~ *dž [tʃ] | *ǯʳ ~ *džʳ [ʈʂ] | *gʸ [c] | *ɢ [q] | |||
| aspirated | *t [tʰ] | *tɬ [tɬʰ] | *ts [tsʰ] | *č ~ *tš [tʃʰ] | *čʳ ~ *tšʳ [ʈʂʰ] | *kʸ [cʰ] | *q [qʰ] | ||||
| glottalized | *tʼ [tʼ] | *tɬʼ [tɬʼ] | *tsʼ [tsʼ] | *čʼ ~ *tšʼ [tʃʼ] | *čʼʳ ~ *tšʼʳ [ʈʂʼ] | *kʼʸ [cʼ] | *qʼ [qʼ] | *ʼ ~ *ʔ [ʔ] | |||
| Fricative | voiceless | *ɬ [ɬ] | *s [s] | *š [ʃ] | *xʸ [ç] | *x̣ ~ *χ [χ] | *h [h] | ||||
| voiced | *l [l] | *z [z] | *ž [ʒ] | (*y [j]) | *ɣ̇ ~ *ɣ [ʁ] | ||||||
| Sonorants (Sounds made with open airflow) | |||||||||||
| Nasal | *m [m] | *n [n] | *nʸ ~ *ñ [ɲ] | ||||||||
| Approximant | *w [w] | *y [j] | |||||||||
Reconstructing Vowels
Linguists also believe Proto-Athabaskan had a system of four "long" or "full" vowels and three "short" or "reduced" vowels. Reduced vowels are often pronounced more in the middle of the mouth.
| Front | Back | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full | Reduced | Reduced | Full | |
| High | *iˑ [iː] | *uˑ [uː] | ||
| Mid | *ə [ə] | *υ ~ *ʊ [ʊ] | ||
| Low | *eˑ [eː] | *α [ɑ] | *aˑ [ɑː] | |
The table below shows how these Proto-Athabaskan vowels changed into the vowels found in different Athabaskan languages today. You can see how one sound in the old language can become different sounds in its "daughter" languages.
| Language | Full vowels | Reduced vowels | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proto-Athabaskan | *i(ˑ) | *e(ˑ) | *a(ˑ) | *u(ˑ) | *əprefix | *əstem | *α | *ʊ |
| Denaʼina | i | a | u | i | ə ~ ∅ | ə | ə | ə |
| Deg Hitʼan | e | a | o | e | ə | ə | ə | ʊ |
| Koyukon | i | a | o | u | ə ~ [∅] | ə | α ~ ʊ | ʊ ~ α |
| Upper Kuskokwim | i | a | o | u | ə ~ [∅] | ə | ʊ | ʊ |
| Lower Tanana | i | a | o | u | ə ~ [∅] | ə | ʊ | ʊ |
| Ahtna | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | u(ˑ) | e ~ ∅ | e | a | o |
| Tanacross | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | u(ˑ) | e ~ ∅ | e | a | o |
| Upper Tanana | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | u(ˑ) | i ~ ∅ | ɵ ~ a | a | o |
| Hän | i | e | æ | u | ə ~ ∅ | ɵ ~ ə | a | o |
| Gwichʼin | i[pal] | i[pal] | e ~ i | i(o)[pal] | ə | a | a | o |
| Northern Tutchone | i | i | e | u | e | ʌ | ʌ | o ~ ʌ |
| Southern Tutchone | i | e | a | u | e | ʌ | ʌ | o ~ ʌ |
| Tagish-Tahltan | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | u(ˑ) | e | e ~ i | a | o |
| Tsekʼehne/Sekani | i | e | a | u | ə ~ ɪ | ə ~ i | a | o ~ ʊ |
| Witsuwitʼen | i ~ e | i ~ e ~ ɛ | a ~ e | u ~ o | ə ~ ∅ | ə | ə | o ~ ə[rnd] |
| Dakelh/Carrier | i | e ~ i | a | u ~ o | ə (~ ∅) | ə | ə | ə[rnd] |
| Slave | i | e | a | u | ɛ | ɛ | a | o |
| Dëne Sųłiné/Chipewyan (Li) | i | e ~ ə ~ ɛ | a | u | ɛ ~ ə | ɛ ~ ə | a | o |
| Tsuutʼina | i | a | o | u | i | i | o | u |
| Navajo | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | o(ˑ) | i ~ a | i ~ a | a | o |
| Apache (Hoijer) | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | o(ˑ) | i | i ~ a | a | o |
| Hupa (morph.) | e | e | a | o | ə | ə | α | ʊ |
| Hupa (phonemic) | e(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | o(ˑ) | i | i | a | o |
| Mattole (Li) | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | o(ˑ) | i | i | a ~ i | o |
| Galice (Hoijer) | i(ˑ) | e(ˑ) | a(ˑ) | o(ˑ) | a | a | a | a[rnd] |
| Tututni (Golla) | i | e | a | u | ə | ə | ə | ə[rnd] |
Understanding Tone
Tone is when the pitch of your voice changes the meaning of a word. For example, in Mandarin Chinese, "ma" can mean "mother," "hemp," "horse," or "scold" depending on the tone.
Early studies of Athabaskan languages didn't notice tone. But in 1891, a linguist named Father Adrien-Gabriel Morice described tone in the Carrier language. Later, Edward Sapir, a famous linguist, started to believe that Proto-Athabaskan must have had tones, even though it was confusing because different Athabaskan languages seemed to have opposite tones for the same words.
Look at this table. It shows how the word for "head" or "fish" might have had different tones in different languages:
| Gwich'in | Tsuut'ina | Navajo | Slavey | Kaska | Hare | Mattole | Galice | Dena'ina | PA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| "head" | –kìʔ | –tsìʔ | –tsìːʔ | –tᶿíʔ | –tsíʔ | –f(ʷ)íʔ | –tsiʔ | –siʔ | –tsi | *–tsiʔ |
| "fish" | ɬúg | ɬúkʼά | ɬóˑʔ ~ -lóˑʔ | ɬùè ~ -lùéʔ | ɬùgə̀ | lùgè ~ -lúgéʔ | ɬoˑkʼe | ɬoˑkʼe | ɬiqʼa | *ɬuˑqʼə ~ *ɬuˑqʼeˑ |
Notice how the first three languages have a low tone for "head" but a high tone for "fish," while the next three have the opposite! The last three languages don't have tone at all. This was a big mystery.
In 1964, Michael Krauss suggested that Proto-Athabaskan didn't have tones, but instead had "glottalization" (a quick closing of the vocal cords) on vowels. This glottalization then developed into tones in some languages, or disappeared in others. This idea was supported by studying the Eyak language and a dialect of Tlingit language, which had similar glottal features.
How Words Are Built (Morphology)
All Athabaskan languages have very complex word structures, especially their verbs. They are often called polysynthetic languages, meaning words can be made up of many different parts (prefixes, suffixes, etc.). Because of this, linguists believe Proto-Athabaskan also had a very complex way of building words.
The Verb Template
Imagine a blueprint for building a verb. That's what a "verb template" is. It shows the order in which different parts (like prefixes that tell you who is doing the action, or when it happened) attach to the main verb root.
Keren Rice, a linguist, created a "Pan-Athabaskan" verb template. This template shows how complex verbs are in these languages, and it's a good guess at what the Proto-Athabaskan verb structure might have looked like.
| disjunct domain (outer parts) | # | conjunct domain (inner parts) | [ | stem (verb core) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| preverb (before the verb) | how many or how often | incorporated words | object (who or what is affected) | 3rd person subject (he/she/it/they) | % | qualities | how the action starts | how the action happens | how the action is viewed | 1st & 2nd person subject (I/you/we) | classifier (special verb prefix) | root (main meaning) | aspect suffixes (verb endings) | |||||||||||||||
| areal | multiple | iterative (repeated) | distributive (spread out) | d- | n- | gh- | inceptive (starting) | egressive (finishing) | conative (trying) | achievement n- | accomplishment s- | semel-factive i- (once) | activity gh- | imperfect (ongoing) | perfect (completed) | optative (wish) | future | |||||||||||
Other linguists, like Kibrik and Hoijer, also proposed verb templates. While they use slightly different terms, they generally agree on the complex structure of Athabaskan verbs.
The Classifier
The "classifier" is a very important part of Athabaskan verbs. It's a special prefix that appears in all Athabaskan languages, as well as in the related Tlingit and Eyak languages. It's so unique that some linguists call it the "hallmark" of the Na-Dene languages family (which includes Athabaskan, Eyak, and Tlingit).
Every Athabaskan verb must have a classifier. Its main job is to show how the action of the verb relates to the subject and object. It tells you things like whether the verb is active, passive, or if the action affects itself.
Why it's called "Classifier"
The name "classifier" can be a bit confusing because it doesn't always "classify" things in an obvious way in Athabaskan languages. When Franz Boas first described it for Tlingit, he thought it had a classifying function. Later, Edward Sapir noticed it in Athabaskan languages and described it as showing if a verb was transitive (needs an object), intransitive (doesn't need an object), or passive.
Even though the name isn't perfect for Athabaskan languages, linguists still use "classifier" because it's a well-known term in the field.
Reconstructing the Classifier
Linguists have tried to reconstruct what the Proto-Athabaskan classifier looked like. Jeff Leer suggested it was a combination of two things:
- A "series" (whether a lateral fricative sound was present or not).
- A "D-effect" (whether a 'd' sound or a vowel was present).
Here's a simpler version of his early idea:
| −D (no D-effect) | +D (with D-effect) | |
|---|---|---|
| ∅ (no lateral sound) | *∅- (just nothing) | *də- (with a 'd' sound) |
| ɬ (with a lateral sound) | *ɬ- (with a 'ɬ' sound) | *ɬə- > *l(ə)- (with 'ɬ' and a 'd' sound, which became 'l') |
Later, Leer offered a more complex reconstruction, taking into account some rare connections with the Eyak language. This newer idea includes a sound *nʸə- that was mostly lost in Athabaskan languages.
| −D | +D | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| —I (no special sound) | +I (with a special sound) | ||
| ∅ (no lateral sound) | *∅- | *nʸə- | *də- |
| ɬ (with a lateral sound) | *ɬ- | *nʸə-ɬ- | *ɬə- > *lə- |
See also
- Proto-Dené–Caucasian language
- Dené–Yeniseian languages
 | Georgia Louise Harris Brown |
 | Julian Abele |
 | Norma Merrick Sklarek |
 | William Sidney Pittman |
