Documents
 
Main page
 

Classification: Message from István Bátori

Submitted by István Bátori (batori at uni-koblenz.de), 5 October 2005.

Riho Grünthal [posting on the e-mail list 3 October 2005, JL] has made an attempt to put TyDbUr in a broader framework. May I proceed along these lines.

1. Riho Grünthal observes that typological studies differ from tradional Uralic studies in orientation. Typological studies are concerned rather with descriptive linguistics while on the other hand traditional Uralists have a historical approach.

The point is that the project TyDbUr should not perpetuate this unfortunate division. On the contrary we should try to overcome the current barriers. I cannot imagine that it would be of serious scientific interests to (re)analyse for instance the Permian case system (or similar topics) from typological and then from comparativistic point of view as two separate rivalizing studies with unnoticed conflicts.

2. Typological studies may concern mostly syntax and morphology while historical studies deal primarily with phonology. In order to overcome the current division it would be more appropriate to to include all linguistic subdivisions in the TyDbUr-program. Otherwise someone may mean, that typological studies concern syntax and morphology and comparative studies phonology.

3. Conceiving a typological framework for the Uralic languages we need a uniform and comprehensive reference system. All languages, dialectal groups and individual dialect should be ordered and localized either geographically or according to sources and preferably both. The reference system should be set up according to the current consensus. The point is not to propose a new familiy tree, but to offer a working device, which can be refered unambiguously everywhere. Some years ago Wolfgang Veenker has proposed such a system.

It is to be expected that the actual investigation within TyDbur confirm the current classification in which case the classification scheme receives an additional support. If the result of a particular typological inquiry do not confirm the currently valid dialect partitions, it may turn out that the asignment of the dialect is wrong and should be revised.

To the languages and dialects in the UEDb I have set up a classification system, which illustrates the shape of the system (see attachment) without claiming to be errorfree.

István S. Bátori