Talk:Northwest Caucasian languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Proto-Northwest Caucasian research[edit]

has anyone on here done any research on proto-northwest caucasian? Gringo300 09:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I've left a note on your user talk page. I've done a little bit of etymological work during the course of my compiling a dictionary of Ubykh; not a whole lot, mind you, but enough to come to the conclusion that Sergei Starostin's Proto-World Dene-Caucasian work perhaps shouldn't be taken at face value. If you want to ask me anything, leave a note on my user talk page, or you can email me at the address I've left on your user talk page. Best, Thefamouseccles 13:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Ibero-Caucasian not appropriate here[edit]

The stuff on (Ibero)-Caucasian repeats texts on the "Languages of the Caucasus" page. It should be merged into that page, leaving here a link "Various higher-level connections have been proposed between the North Caucasian languages and other families."
The Hattic parag too is duplicated, although the proper place for that is a tougher question.
Jorge Stolfi 06:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead and move the Ibero-Caucasian stuff. Hattic belongs here. I think some proposals are that Hattic was a NWC language, not that they were related at a higher level. kwami 07:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

2-vowel systems[edit]

If I remember correctly, the 2-vowel systems are analysed as /a/ and /ə/, with /ɨ/ being epenthetic. But I might be confusing them with Ndu in PNG. If s.o. knows or has a ref, could you verify? Thanks. kwami 07:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at: Hewitt, B. G. 2005. North-West Caucasian, in Lingua vol. 115. He sums up the current position: questions of vowels need to be treated separately for each different language, and the question appears to have been satisfactorily solved only for Abkhaz and Abaza (2 vowels (a vs ə/ɨ) + length for a only) and Kabardian (3 vowels (a vs ə vs ɨ); see Catford, J. C. 1997 Some Questions of NWC Phonetics and Phonology. In: Ozsoy, A. S. Proceedings of the Conference on Northwest Caucasian Linguistics. Novus Forlag: Oslo), and one would imagine that Adyghe's vocalic system would parallel that of Kabardian. The Ubykh situation has not yet been resolved, but my personal opinion is that Ubykh's vocalic system is the same as that of Adyghe and Kabardian, although most modern transcriptions (including my own, I admit) treat it as a long version of a. thefamouseccles 12:51, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Kh or x?[edit]

Kwami, I see that you have replaced Abkhaz/Ubykh by Abxaz/Ubyx. However, the name of the country is still spelled Abkhazia in most English sources, and that seems to be the case for the language as well. So, even though the "x" spelling smay be more accurate technically speaking, perhaps the "kh" spellings should be retained as the main names, with the "x" spellings in paretheses?
Jorge Stolfi 16:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe. A lot of these names are difficult for English speakers to read, and the fewer digraphs the better from that perspective. kwami 19:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
The average English speaker, never having heard of Ubykh, would probably pronounce it as "ubiks" if it were written as Ubyx. English speakers are used to seeing digraphs anyway; Kazakh, lakh and Sikh don't seem to provide any problem. Aside from which, the Googlefight results are about as conclusive as one can get with such a simplistic (puerile?) tool:
Ubykh vs Ubyx: 94,300 vs 764 (ratio of 123 to 1)
Abkhaz vs Abxaz: 415,000 vs 1,370 (ratio of 303 to 1)
thefamouseccles 12:58, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Circassian vs. Northwest Caucasian[edit]

Circassian is only a branch of NWC. NWC is never called Circassian.--Pet'usek [petrdothrubisatgmaildotcom] 07:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Circassian is the name givven to Northwest Caucasians by foreigners for a very long time, Thanks to Zirgs. None of the tribes used that name for themselves or other tribes,so it is not a branch, just an umbrella term for a aggregate culture of NW Caucasians. Russian use of "Cherkess" is only political. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.214.101.159 (talk) 13:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent deletions[edit]

To the recent user at IP address 69.251.74.46, if you're going to delete content, especially content that is referenced, please cite reasons for the deletion. Thefamouseccles (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Refutations of recent claims[edit]

Hello everyone,

I object to some edits that User:Listofpeople made recently to several articles concerning Northwest Caucasian languages, so I'll be reverting these edits in a couple of minutes based on my arguments below. The edits concern multiple pages, so I thought it would be healthier to keep the discussion central. I'll be making a note of the issue in all relevant talk pages, and invite people to this discussion. Please do not revert my edits until the discussion is over. Now is the time to discuss!

I wish to keep everything based on science, so I'll be citing works from the field of linguistics. However, I don't intend to bombard this discussion with references, so for the purposes of keeping it concise, I'll only list the 5 most cited works about the respective topic. But, of course, I can provide further refs if requested.

Claim #1: Kabardian is a dialect of the Adyghe language.

Response #1: No. Kabardian is a distinct language, which is mutually intelligible with Adyghe.

If one considers these authors too "local" or too "involved", here are is a paper from "mainstream" linguists:

Result #1: I'll be reverting Special:Diff/769188092, and the relevant edits to the articles such as Shapsug Adyghe dialect (which refer to the respective topics as sub-dialects). There are many more edits, such as this, and it is not possible to list all of them. But I'll certainly cite this discussion when I revert the edits. I'll not be intervening with the inappropriate redirects such as Shapsug Adyghe sub-dialect, since marking them for deletion would be disrespectful until the discussion is over.

Claim #2: There is a Circassian language, which has two dialects: Kabardian Adyghe and Lowland Adyghe.

Response #2: You are right about Adyghe being commonly referred to as Circassian, however from a linguistic point of view, here is the hierarchical structure that is agreed upon:

  • Northwest Caucasian languages -> This is a language family
    • Circassian languages -> This is a branch/subdivision of the language family
      • Adyghe language -> This is a language
        • Shapsug -> This is a dialect
        • Xakuchi
        • Bezhedukh
        • Abadzex
        • Natujaz
      • Kabardian language -> Again, language
        • Please see below for the dialects of Kabardian
    • Abkhaz-Abaza languages -> Again, this is a branch/subdivision
      • Abkhaz language
      • Abaza language
    • Ubykh -> This is the third branch with a single language
      • Ubykh language -> Again, language

About the dialects of Kabardian, Smeets (1984, p. 41) groups Kabardian dialects into three categories: West Kabardian, including Kuban and Kuban-Zelenchuk, Central Kabardian, which includes Baksan and Malka, and East Kabardian, comprising the Terek and Mozdok varieties. On the other hand, there are of course contradicting claims, but this is not the focus of our discussion at the moment. But please note that I will not be reverting Special:Diff/769193729 until our discussion here matures.

If I have to return to the claim and respond: No, "Circassian languages" is a subdivision of the Northwest Caucasian language family. Here are the five most cited sources:

Also, the term "Lowland Adyghe" is not established in the literature. A Google Scholar search results in "lowland+adyghe" 0 results. Our naming conventions are clear about this, as we all know.

Result #2: I will be reverting Special:Diff/769162832 and anything relevant.

Claim #3: Ubkyh is an oral variety / sub-dialect of the Circassian language.

Response #2: No no no no... While it is true that Ubkyh does not have a writing system, and is dead as of 1992, it certainly a distinct language that is not even grouped under the Circassian languages subdivision. Ubkyh is one of the prominent examples of dead languages that is commonly referred to. I believe it would not be easy to find a source that claims the opposite. I'll not make a five-item list for this one (here is a random, open-access article in English language), just see the works of Dumézil, who worked closely with Esenç, the last native speaker, or Özsoy, who has works published in Turkish (also worked with Esenç), which I think you'd understand, Listofpeople, since you seem to be a fellow native Turkish speaker (forgive me if I'm mistaken).

Result #3: I'll be reverting Special:Diff/769286016, Special:Diff/771617534, etc.

Even though the burden of proof is on User:Listofpeople, I've tried to make it crystal clear that these edits do not reflect the consensus of the linguistic community, so should not be repeated. I am willins to have a fruitful discussion about this and respond to any counter-arguments that anyone may have, but I urge Listofpeople or anyone else to refrain from repeating these edits until are discussion here is over. Thank you.

Vito Genovese 13:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear Vito Genovese, please do not revert those edits. I am afraid you misunderstood it. I will explain you in a few minutes. Then you decide. Listofpeople (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Listofpeople: I have reverted them before seeing your post, but I would gladly revert myself if you could prove your point. Best,--Vito Genovese 13:39, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Dear Vito Genovese, I am glad that you are interested in NWC, but I am very disappointed that I have to tell you that you are confusing the English translations of the Russian-specific terms "Адыгский" and "Адыгейский". This is the whole point. It was already mentioned in the edit summaries.
Адыгский Adygskij = Russian ethnolinguistic term for (1) an Adyghe person and (2) the Adyghe language.
Адыгейский Adygejskij = Russian administrative term for (1) an Adyghe who only resides in Республика Адыгея (Respublika Adygeya) and (2) a particular Adyghe dialect that serves as an official language in that federal subject where the literary form is based on the way that the Temirgoy tribe speaks Adyghe. [The Republic of] Adygean is not the same thing as the Adyghe language or the Adyghe people which is a broader term that the Republic was named after, not the other way around.
First and foremost, the word "Adyghe" is the Anglicised form of the endonym (native name) of the ethnic group –Kabardians being the most crowded one of that group's 12 main tribes– who call themselves "Адыгэ" (Transliteration from Cyrillic: Adygè; Transliteration to Turkish: Adıge; Russian: (plural) ru:Адыги/черкесы Adygi/cherkesy). This ethnic group is more commonly known as the Circassians in English and tr:Çerkesler/Adıgeler in Turkish. The word "Adyghe" is not only used to refer to the people, but also to the language.
As I said, ru:Черкесы cherkesy (English: Circassians) is synonymous to ru:Адыги adygi (English: Adyghe). Again, the latter comes from the Circassian endonym Адыгэ Adygè. Besides, there is another article called ru:Черкесы (народ, Карачаево-Черкесия) on Russian Wikipedia. It is about the Adyghe people in modern-day Karachayevo-Cherkesskaya Respublika (KChR) (mainly from the Besleney tribe) in particular. The word "Cherkess" refers to the Circassians in general, but, only because of that federal subject's title, some non-Russian speakers who are also not familiar with the Circassians still think that a Circassian might be a person who live in KChR only. This is incredible, but one can easily correct them. What is more incredible is that some foreigners also think that an Adyghe is a person who live in today's Respublika Adygeya. Even the majority of the remaining Adyghe in Russia do not live there. The Adyghe in that republic are known as ru:адыгейцы adygejtsy, meaning those of the [Republic of] Adygea in Russian, whereas the Adyghe in general are, once again, called ru:Адыги (this is the etnolinguistic term that is not related to administrative divisions).
In your first response, I am sure you are trying to say Адыгейский язык (the Temirgoy dialect which serves as an official language in the republic of the same name), but, instead, you are saying that it is mutually intelligible with Adyghe, i.e. Адыгский язык, contradicting with the very fact that the Kabardian dialect itself, which serves as an official language in Кабардино-Балкарская Республика (Kabardino-Balkarskaya Respublika) and Карачаево-Черкесская Республика (Karachayevo-Cherkesskaya Respublika), is called Адыгэбзэ Adygèbzè in Kabardian. Please keep in mind that there are also two Adyghe Wikipedias: Адыгабзэ Adygabzè and Адыгэбзэ Adygèbzè. The suffix "-бзэ" is like "-ish" in English when it comes to languages. By the way, the common name for both dialects is Адыгэ псалъэ (Adyghe language/tongue). Let me put it this way:
Адыгабзэ (Literally Adyghe) (Circassian language) and its two literary dialects serving as official federal-subject languages in Russia:
Кӏах Адыгабзэ (literally Lowland Adyghe) = official in the Russian federal subject of ADY. Speaking of that, Shapsug belongs to this Adyghe dialect. Before the creation of a standardised Lowland Adyghe, you could call each tribe's spoken form a dialect. Still you can. For instance, Temirgoy itself is a dialect as the written basis of Lowland Adyghe today, but you can also call it a subdialect of Lowland Adyghe in other sense. The only difference is that this subdialect, unlike that of others, later became a literary dialect since its speakers constituted the majority in the lowland region at that time.
Къэбэрдей Адыгэбзэ (literally Kabardian Adyghe) = official in the Russian federal subjects of KBR and KChR, where the literary form is based on the way that Kabardian tribe speaks Adyghe.
Fair enough, I wanted to clarify this very important distinction. You can verify everything I said. We are talking about a language and an ethnic group who live in a civilised world. This topic does not require an original research or other. It is not open to one's interpretation either. Of course, I do not expect everyone to be very well-informed about this topic, but the misnomer I mentioned is very critical at this point that one should take an action immediately. Please do check each of those articles and the references there. I hope you read this message as soon as possible. All the best, Listofpeople (talk) 21:13, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@Listofpeople: Thank you for this comprehensive message. Being an Adyghe who was born to a Shapsug mother and Abzakh father, I am well aware of the basic information you have provided. Some of them may of course be useful who'd be willing to join the discussion, so thank you.
I understand your premise, but I am afraid it is a false one. The information you have provided does not support your claims outlined in my initial message. Let me go slightly off-topic here and throw in an example that I am sure you too would find familiar: Azerbaijani people consider themselves Turks, and Turks agree. Many Turkish scholars working in the field of Turkish philology (they call it "Turcology", which is actually a misnomer of some sort) call the Azerbaijani language "Azeri Turkish" and the Turkish language "Turkey Turkish". They call the Turkic languages "Turkish languages", so according to them, all languages under the Turkic language subdivision constitute one single Turkish language, and these "dialects" form some kind of Sprachbund. But, of course, it is well-established that they are wrong, and these are actually distinct languages that are grouped together (typologically, that is). What's more, when Turkish people call the language in question "Azerice", Azerbaijani people get offended and plea that it is a misnomer, that we should call it "Azerbaycanca" or "Azerbaycan Türkçesi". I am telling all this just to make a simple point: The facts matter, not the unjustified claims.
I have provided multiple sources to prove my points, and I am willing to provide many more if needed. We are talking about linguistics here, and I have provided pure linguistics arguments and sources to support everything I have written. You, however, have not provided any sources to substantiate your claims. On top of that, my sources do disprove your claims. I appreciate your civil attitude, you are obviously a very nice person, but I am afraid your claims reflect a certain POV, and, obviously, we have to have a neutral point of view. I'll agree to your proposed edits the minute you provide sound evidence to support them.
Vito Genovese 21:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Dear Vito Genovese, let me understand, are you really saying that you are from the diaspora, but are not aware of the very fact that the Kabardians are one of the Adyghe tribes, who always call themselves Адыгэ Adygè, and that they speak what they call Адыгэбзэ Adygèbzè, more specifically kbd:Къэбэрдей Адыгэбзэ? It is written everywhere. Kabardian Wikipedia's native name is also Адыгэбзэ. I am sorry that you think that saying what they are reflects a POV. See Russian Wikipedia: ru:Адыгейский язык (ady:Кӏах Адыгабзэ, meaning Lowland Adyghe) and ru:Адыгский язык (ady:Адыгабзэ, meaning the Adyghe language). The former, also known as West Adyghe or [Republic of] Adygean, etc., is a dialect of the latter which refers to the Adyghe (Circassian) language in general. Adyghe is the endonym for Circassian. Adyghe is not a dialect of Circassian. Adyghe (Adygskij yazyk) is Circassian itself. Adyg[h]ean (of Adygea) (Adygejskij yazyk) is a dialect (one of the two literary Adyghe dialects). Please see the following:
(1) "The Kabards, also known as Kabardins, Kabardians, or Kabardinians, are a subethnic group of the Circassians, who represent the Adyga branch of the Adygo-Abkhaz linguistic group....The Kabards speak Kabardian, a dialect of Circassian (also known as Adyghe or Adyga). Besides Abkhaz and Abaza, the Circassian language has no modern relatives....All Kabards consider themselves Circassians." p. 213, Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia edited by Jeffrey E. Cole
(2) "All of the languages mentioned in this table have been discussed earlier in this chapter except for the Kabardian dialect of Adyghe." p. 124, UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics
(3) "The Kabardian language constitutes the Eastern branch of the Circassian or Adyghe language-group, the Western subdivision of which is known as Kyakh. These two languages are closely related; their respective speakers soon learn to communicate with each other without much difficulty. All Circassians call themselves ād'əγ'a and their language ādəγiabza; the name 'Circassian' or 'Cherkes' is applied to them only by foreigners." Introduction, Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian (Eastern Adyghe) by Aert H. Kuipers, Columbia University
(4) Memoirs of the Circassian historian Kadir I. Natho, p. 461: "Teaching the Kabardian dialect to the children was better than none, because Kabardian was one of the dialects of our mother tongue—Adyghebze instead of Adigabze. The first thing I taught to our Circassian students in that dialect was this:
Se,
Woe,
Seri sy Adig,
Wori ou Adigesh,
Se si ani Adigesh,
Woe oui ani Adigesh,
Se si adi Adigesh,
Woe ou adi Adigesh,"
(5) Sara D. Knapp's The Contemporary Thesaurus of Search Terms and Synonyms: A Guide for Natural Language Computer Searching (2010), p.87: "Lower Adyghe, Kiakh (Circassian), Kabardian (Upper Circassian)"
(6) "Uzaklığa büyük doğal engelleri de ekleyebileceğimiz Kafkasya’da Adığece için bu durum şöyle gelişmiştir: 13.-14. yüzyıllarda, tarihi olaylara bağlı olarak Adığelerin bir kısmı batıdan doğuya doğru ilerleyerek merkezi Kafkasya’ya yerleşmiş ve bugün Kabardey ve Besleney olarak bilinen topluluklar ortaya çıkmıştır. Dolayısıyla Adığeler, Doğu veya Yukarı Adığe (Şhağ) ve Batı veya Aşağı Adığe (Ç’ahe) olarak ikiye ayrılmıştır. Adığece de buna bağlı olarak iki lehçeden oluşmaktadır: Abzeh, Bjeduğ, Çemguy ve Şapsığ ağızlarından oluşan Batı Adığe lehçesi; Baksan, Terek (Cılahsteney), Kuban, Kuban-Zelençuk, Malka (Balk) ve Besleney ağızlarından oluşan Doğu Adığe veya Kabardey lehçesi (Besleneyler Kabardeylerden ayrı bir boy sayılmalarına rağmen dilleri Kabardey lehçesinin bir ağzı kabul edilmektedir).
1922 yılında Batı Adığe topraklarının küçük bir kısmında, Şapsığları dışarıda bırakan “Çerkes (Adıgey) Özerk Bölgesi” (bugünkü Adıgey Cumhuriyeti), Kabardey ve Besleneylerin yaşadığı bölgelerde de Karaçay-Çerkes ve Kabardey-Balkar özerk bölgeleri (bugün ikisi de cumhuriyet) kuruldu. Adığeceyle ilgili terminolojik karışıklık da bundan sonra başladı. Bu üç idari birimde yaşayan Adığeler üç ayrı milliyetmiş gibi (Adıgeyler, Çerkesler ve Kabardeyler) kabul edilmeye başlandı. Adığecenin iki lehçesi de ‘Adıgey dili’ ve ‘Kabardey-Çerkes dili’ olarak iki ayrı dil kabul edildi; alfabe ve edebiyat ikisi için ayrı ayrı oluşturuldu. Rusya’da bugün hala geçerli olan bu sınıflandırmaya göre Kuzeybatı (Abhaz-Adığe) dil grubu beş dilden oluşmaktadır: Adıgeyce, Kabardey-Çerkesçe (veya sadece Kabardeyce), Abhazca, Abazince ve Ubıhça. Ubıhça, 1860’lardan itibaren Kafkasya’da konuşanı kalmadığı ve bugün artık ölü dil olduğu için çoğu Sovyet/Rus dilbilimci tarafından bu listeye dahil edilmez. Abazaca da Adığeceyle aynı kaderi paylaşarak Abhazca ve Abazince diye ayrılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, yaşanan bu tarihi süreç sonucunda Adığece küçük farklılıkları olan iki alfabeye sahip olmuştur.
İlgili kaynakların, özellikle dille ilgili olanların çoğu Rusça olduğu için bu terminoloji Türkçeye de aktarıldı. Bu yapılırken bir de Adıgey’de konuşulan Batı lehçesi (‘Adıgey dili’) ‘Adığece’ olarak tercüme edildi ve ortaya “Adığece ve Kabardeyce” gibi gariplikler çıktı." "Çerkes-Adığe Yazısının Tarihçesi" by Murat Papşu
(7) "A specific goal in the cultural realm which has encountered numerous difficulties, is the aspiration toward the creation of a unified written Circassian/ Adyghe language. At the moment two close written languages exist – Western Adyghe and Eastern Adyghe (Kabarda). The differences between them are brought into sharper relief by dissimilar spelling systems. There are also voices advocating latinisation of the language." The Caucasus edited by Moshe Gammer
(8) "The Adyghe do not only inhabit Adygeya (a constituent republic of the Russian Federation since 1991), but also Karachay-Cherkessia where they are known as 'Cherkes.' There are also the Kabardin of Kabardino-Balkaria, along with the Besleney tribe, who are often conceived as the eastern branch of the Adyghe. While Adyghe is the name this people apply to themselves, in the West they are often known as the Circassians. Their language is referred to as Adyghe or Adygeyan." p. 57, Shamanic Journeys, Michael Berman
(9) The New Encyclopaedia Britannica 1983, p. 1012: "Adyghians (100,000), in the Adyghe Autonomous Oblast; Kabardians or Kabardino-Circassians (about 320,000) dwell mainly in the Kabardino-Balkar A.S.S.R. Both Adyghians and Kabardians call themselves adige." This is what I am saying: "Adyghian" (Adygean, of the federal subject of Adygea) versus "Adige" (Adyghe, the broader, ethnolinguistic term). "Kabardian dialect of the Adige language at a fairly early stage...." Anthony Gorman
(10) Russian Wikipedia: "Сами адыгейцы, кабардинцы и черкесы называют свой язык адыгэбзэ, что означает «адыгский язык». Несмотря на существование общего названия, в русском языке бытуют также раздельные названия — адыгейский язык, кабардинский язык и черкесский язык." ([Republic of] Adygeans, Kabardians, and Cherkessians [of Karachay-Cherkessia] all themselves call their language адыгэбзэ, meaning the Adyghe language. Despite the existence of a common name, there are also different names in Russian: Adygean language, Kabardian language, and Cherkessian language.)
(11) "Kabardian is the name given to Eastern Adyghe (or Circassian, as Adyghe is also known). Eastern and Western Adyghe are extremely closely related and may be considered dialects of one language." p. 108, Restrictiveness in Case Theory, by Henry Smith, Cambridge Studies of Linguistics
All the best, Listofpeople (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Listofpeople: There is nothing in what I've written that justifies your first sentence. I have never denied any of these.

As I've stressed earlier, this is purely a linguistic discussion focused on the classification of a couple of linguistic varieties. The field of linguistic typology handles such classifications, and these analyses do not depend on factors such as race and ethnicity, they only depend on linguistic criteria used for these purposes. So your arguments should be based on linguistics, and the authors of your sources must have a formal education in linguistics or at least in something close in order to be considered reliable.

Let me go through your sources one by one:

  1. Jeffrey Cole has a PhD in anthropology, with no publications remotely related to linguistics. I am afraid this source is not reliable for the purposes of our discussion.
  2. Here is a better link to identify all occurrences of the word Kabardian in this work. I see two references to the word, and one is the one that you've mentioned, and one that clearly identifies Kabardian as a language. I haven't been able to find a table of contents for the work. These two references probably belong to different articles and authors, and they are most definitely linguists, obviously. But, we have a tie. :)
  3. This is Kuipers (1960), the very source I have cited in my initial post. I am afraid Kuipers supports what I am saying.
  4. Kadir Natho is, as you yourself mention, a historian. The family name implies he is an Adyghe, even a Shapsug, since I know a lot of Nathos. :) This author can not be considered a reliable expert in terms of linguistic typology, and I am afraid he is another example of the tendency to demonstrate political bias, which I have referred to as POV in my previous message. I'll elaborate on this later.
  5. Sarah D. Knapp is a librarian, who is now retired. Not even an advanced degree, so not reliable. However, I am guessing she was a good librarian, since she managed to capture your premise perfectly.
  6. Murat Papşu... I like Papşu, I have learned a lot from him, and I have read him extensively. Nonetheless, the problem is the same: Papşu has a bachelor's degree in Russian philology, and he pens books on the peoples of Caucasia. I admire this person very much, but I wouldn't rely on him for a typological classification based on the universal principles of linguistics.
  7. I am not sure this one supports you, since he refers to Adyghe and Kabardian as languages. I will get into the closeness below.
  8. Michael Berman has a PhD in alternative medicines. Please...
  9. Anthony Gorman has a PhD in Egyptian historiography, so, no.
  10. Please don't cite a WMF project.
  11. Another linguistic source, I am glad to see this. Again, here is a better link that highlights the occurrences of Kabardian. I count 7 occurrences that refer to Kabardian as a language, and only 1 occurrence, which is the one you have cited, that refers to it as a dialect. I am afraid this constitutes selective citing.

In summary, there is only one reliable, convinving and consistent source (among those you have cited) that supports your claims, and it is the one in the UCLA WPP, the paper whose author remains anonymous right now. But I consider it reliable nonetheless.

Listofpeople: Wikipedia runs on consensus, and I believe I have managed to demonstrate the consensus of an entire scientific field that is devoted to studying languages. What I was referring to when I mentioned the word "POV" before was merely political bias. Even though I am an Adyghe, I do not have this bias, and I am able to look at the matter objectively. This is the very same thing as the situation I have described in my example about the Azerbaijani people. Since the concept of language is closely related to the culture, it is sometimes hard to differentiate the two. Azerbaijani people are considered Turks by some (whether this is true or false is not our concern, obviously), so this reflects on the language, even though the distinction between these languages is enough to consider them two different languages. The same is true for Adyghe and Kabardian. Kabardians identify themselves as Adyghes, I wouldn't dream about opposing this, but what I am emphasizing on is merely a linguistic distinction. Languages are living organisms, languages evolve, languages go their separate ways. As you know, Latin language has evolved into multiple popular languages that we hear all around the globe. What is the difference between Urdu and Hindi (other than the writing system) that makes them two different languages? Of course Adyghe and Kabardian were once the same language, they were even the same as Abkhaz and Abaza in a certain point in time. It's a strong possibility that all Indo-European languages were at some point a single language. I have seen you editing "Proto-x language" articles, so I know that you are familiar with the concept. Adyghe and Kabardian were once the same language, people may still refer to them as the same language, but they are now typologically distinct enough to be considered separate languages. This is all I am saying.

Vito Genovese 14:13, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear Vito Genovese, the same mistake again, please...
Once again, please read this sentence carefully: You are still confusing the broader term "Adyghe (адыгский) language" for the Adygean (адыгейский) language, i.e. an Adyghe dialect spoken in the Republic of Adygea where it has an official language status. Without acknowledging this difference, it is totally pointless to say a word about them. If you try to equate those two, you would make a serious translation error. Kabardians speak what they call Адыгэбзэ (Adygèbzè). In your second-to-last sentence, instead of saying "[Republic of] Adygean and Kabardian" (yes, these two is different), you are saying "Adyghe and Kabardian" (Very serious mistake! Because Kabardians speak Adyghe / Kabardian Adyghe (kbd:Къэбэрдей Адыгэбзэ) / Eastern Adyghe, etc., Adyghe being the endonym for Circassian.)
I would love to talk about this ethnolinguistic group (which is my expertise) for days, but the issue at stake on all those Wikipedia articles you reverted is highly critical that we cannot spend much time discussing the most basic thing about this language. I repeat, you confused the broader the broader term "Adyghe (адыгский) language" for the Adygean (адыгейский) language.
Yes, we are talking about the linguistic terminology. NWC is also known as Abz–Adg family, amongst others. Besides, the native name of the Circassian language is Адыгэ псалъэ. Адыгэ = Adyghe! You are now saying that you already know Kabardians are Adyghe, only and only Adyghe, but I am very surprised by the analogies you brought up. Anyway, Kabardians are merely a tribe. Please refrain from using the word "Adyghe" (Adygskij, ethnolinguistic term) to refer to the language of the Republic of Adygea (Adygejskij, administrative term) only. Adygskij includes Adygejskij, but it also includes others. One cannot equate Adygskij with Adygejskij. It is more than that. Every single person on Wikipedia can verify that. I have managed to demonstrate the evidence although the title is self-evident. I have proven why one cannot redirect the Wikipedia article "Adyghe language" to the dialect (also a Russian federal subject language) called Kyakh aka Lowland Adyghe aka Lower Adyghe aka Low Adyghe aka Lowland Circassian aka Lower Circassian aka Low Circassian aka West Circassian aka Western Circassian aka West Adyghe aka Western Adyghe aka адыгейский ([Republic of] Adygean-Adyghian-Adyghean-Adygeyan). I should also remind you that on Russian Wikipedia "адыгский" does not redirect to "адыгейский".
Two literary Adyghe = Adyghe+a+n (named after the recent republic Adygea, administrative name, not linguistic, but even the administrative name of that does not equate it with Adyghe) + Kabardino-Cherkess (named after the recent republics Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachayevo-Cherkessia, administrative name)
Two literary Adyghe = Кӏах Адыгабзэ (named after the people, ethnolinguistic name) + Къэбэрдей Адыгэбзэ (named after the people, ethnolinguistic name)
Any objections to this? Do you now see the difference between the Adyghe+a+n (Adygejskij) language and the Adyghe (Adygskij) language?
POV? No sentence in that historian's quote reflects a POV. None of the others does. I also quoted from the article on Russian Wikipedia just to give you an idea. How does Aert H. Kuipers support what you are saying? Even the title of his book that you cited is Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian (Eastern Adyghe). Eastern Adyghe! You totally ignored the fact there are two literary Adyghe dialects (standardised during the Soviet Union). Those two dialects serve as official language in the republics of the remaining Adyghe people in Russia, but our topic is not their status. The title "Kabardian language" is fine as long as you do not claim that it is not an Adyghe language. Do you see what I mean? The main problem here is that you falsely associate the term "Adyghe" with the one in the Republic of Adygea only, ignoring the existence of the other literary one (Kabardian). After your response, I will revert them accordingly. The broader term "Adyghe (адыгский) language is not the same thing as the Adygean (адыгейский) language. Adygean is the ady:Кӏах Адыгабзэ (literally Lowland Adyghe but also known as West Adyghe, for instance). Adyghe is not confined to Кӏах Адыгабзэ only. I think I have already been quite clear. Sincerely, Listofpeople (talk) 17:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
@Listofpeople: I am very disappointed in your most recent message, since I am becoming convinced that you are not reading anything I am posting, and that you are reiterating the things you have already said. First off, I can safely say that it is against our rules to push your POV and revert any edits until the discussion is over. DO NOT do that please, as I'll have to notify an administrator, since edit warring is not my thing.
I will make it perfectly easy and clear for you:
  1. What these languages are called in Adyghe, in Kabardian, or in Russian is irrelevant. We are holding a discussion to make a decision in ENGLISH language.
  2. What the peoples of the Caucausus have been traditionally calling these languages is irrelevant. These classifications are based on modern linguistic methods. Two varieties that are considered dialects today may be considered separate languages in a hundred years for now. Adyghe and Kabardian are considered two DISTINCT languages by the linguistic community. There is an overwhelming consensus that you simply can not disprove.
  3. I have told you this before. I am well aware of the fact that the term Circassian is often used as a synonym (just like the peoples) for the Adyghe language (for the purposes of clarification, I am referring to ady), but it is also the name of the subdivision of the Northwest Caucasian languages. So what you call the Adyghe language is in fact the subdivision called Circassian languages, which actually contain two typologically distinct languages, namely Adyghe and Kabardian. We've been over this.
I have provided more than enough sources to prove all this. If you revert, I will consider this vandalism, and notify an administrator.
Vito Genovese 18:14, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Dear Vito Genovese, I also think that you ignored what I am writing on this page. I am reiterating because you keep making the same mistake. You misuse the word "Adyghe" for Adygean. Listen, Adygean (West Adyghe, Kyakh, Lowland Adyghe, Adyghe of the Republic of Adygea, Адыгейский, Ady) language is the subdivision of the Circassian (Adyghe; Адыгский)) language, whereas Adyghe is the subdivision of Abazgi–Adyghe, hence the name.
And these terms are already established in the English terminology (which mainly comes from Russian). I have provided evidence for that as if there was really a need. I am not making up terms. You know that very well. If you rename Adygean (language of Адыгей/Adygej/Adygey/Adygei) as Adyghe (the term which existed before the establishment of the oblast, later republic of Adygea!), then you would suggest the non-Adygean Adyghe is not Adyghe. You are aware of the confusion that you caused. You chose that way as if there is technically no alternative.
Adyghe (Circassian) (Адыгский)) = Adygean (Adyghe in Adygea, Адыгейский) language + Kabardian (Adyghe in Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachayevo-Cherkessia, Кабардино-черкесский) language. Adygean is also known as West Adyghe or Lowland (Кӏах) Adyghe, etc. WEST ADYGHE IS A LANGUAGE. EAST ADYGHE IS ALSO A LANGUAGE. TWO CLOSELY RELATED LANGUAGES. On Turkish Wikipedia I see that you also made the same thing very recently and moved "Batı Adıgecesi" (West/Western Adyghe) to "Adıgece" (Adyghe), ignoring the presence of "Doğu Adıgece"/"Doğu Adıgecesi" (East/Eastern Adyghe). "Adıgece" and "Çerkesçe"/"Çerkezce" is the same thing. And there are two literary "Adıgece" languages. "Adıgece" can be redirected neither to "Batı Adıgece" nor to "Doğu Adıgece". "Adıgece" should be redirected to "Çerkesçe" which includes both West and East. If you like, you could redirect "Batı Adıgece"/"Batı Adıgecesi" to "Adıgeyce"/"Adıge Cumhuriyeti Adıgecesi"/"Adigey[a] Adigecesi" (I do not make up these terms, and you know it), but "Batı Adıgece/si" is much more clear because people who are not familiar with this topic might not know the drastic difference between "Adıgece" and "Adıgeyce" as one cannot expect all Turkish people to be familiar with the federal subject names of Russia, such as "Adıgeya". Those may think that "Oh, it says 'Adıgeyce', it might be the same thing with the word 'Adıgece' that I heard the other day," even though it is not the same thing. After seeing you wrote that "Batı Çerkesçesi" 709, "Adigece" ise 42.200 sonuç veriyor." to justify your move there, I am pretty sure that you actually know very well that "Adıgece" (Adigece, Adığece, Adiğece, etc.) is not confined to "Batı Çerkesçe" (aka "Batı Çerkezce", "Batı Çerkesçesi", or "Batı Çerkezcesi") only, but, for some reason, you were are up to something else. Of course, "Adıgece" would have more results than its Western branch "Batı Adıgece" alone because the former includes more than that branch. You know it either way. It is like comparing apples to oranges. Again:
The Kabards, also known as Kabardins, Kabardians, or Kabardinians, are a subethnic group of the Circassians, who represent the Adyga branch of the Adygo-Abkhaz linguistic group....The Kabards speak Kabardian, a dialect of Circassian (also known as Adyghe or Adyga). Besides Abkhaz and Abaza, the Circassian language has no modern relatives....All Kabards consider themselves Circassians." p. 213, Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia
"The Kabardian language constitutes the Eastern branch of the Circassian or Adyghe language-group, the Western subdivision of which is known as Kyakh. These two languages are closely related; their respective speakers soon learn to communicate with each other without much difficulty. All Circassians call themselves ād'əγ'a and their language ādəγiabza; the name 'Circassian' or 'Cherkes' is applied to them only by foreigners." Introduction, Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian (Eastern Adyghe)
The Contemporary Thesaurus of Search Terms and Synonyms: A Guide for Natural Language Computer Searching (2010), p.87: "Lower Adyghe, Kiakh (Circassian), Kabardian (Upper Circassian)"
"A specific goal in the cultural realm which has encountered numerous difficulties, is the aspiration toward the creation of a unified written Circassian/ Adyghe language. At the moment two close written languages exist – Western Adyghe and Eastern Adyghe (Kabarda). The differences between them are brought into sharper relief by dissimilar spelling systems. There are also voices advocating latinisation of the language." The Caucasus
"The Adyghe do not only inhabit Adygeya (a constituent republic of the Russian Federation since 1991), but also Karachay-Cherkessia where they are known as 'Cherkes.' There are also the Kabardin of Kabardino-Balkaria, along with the Besleney tribe, who are often conceived as the eastern branch of the Adyghe. While Adyghe is the name this people apply to themselves, in the West they are often known as the Circassians. Their language is referred to as Adyghe or Adygeyan." p. 57, Shamanic Journeys
"Kabardian is the name given to Eastern Adyghe (or Circassian, as Adyghe is also known). Eastern and Western Adyghe are extremely closely related and may be considered dialects of one language." p. 108, Restrictiveness in Case Theory: Cambridge Studies of Linguistics
In short, I will make it perfectly easy and clear for you:
ADYGEAN (АДЫГЕЙСКИЙ, ADYGHE OF ADYGEA, LOWLAND / WESTERN) AND KABARDIAN ARE WHAT ARE DISTINCT FROM, BUT CLOSELY RELATED TO, EACH OTHER
NOT "ADYGHE" (АДЫГСКИЙ) AND KABARDIAN BECAUSE ADYGHE MEANS CIRCASSIAN AND INCLUDES THE KABARDIAN (HIGLAND, UPPER, EASTERN ADYGHE) LANGUAGE, TOO. And I actually have provided more than enough sources to prove this even though it is the most basic thing about this language.
CIRCASSIAN = CHERKESS = ADYGHE = ADYG[H]E-[Y]A-N PLUS KABARDINO-CHERKESS[IAN]. This is the official name.
TR: ADIGEYCE (BATI ADIGECE, BATI ADIGECESI, ADIGE CUMHURIYETI ADIGECESI, OVA (PLAIN) OR AŞAĞI (KYAKH, LOWLAND) ADIGECE/SI, ADIGEY ADIGECESI, BATI ÇERKESÇE/SI-ÇERKEZCE/SI) AND KABARTAYCA/KABARDEYCE (DOĞU ADIGECE/Si, YUKARI, KABARTAY-BALKARYA/KARAÇAY-ÇERKESYA ADIGECESI) ARE WHAT ARE DISTINCT FROM, BUT CLOSELY RELATED TO, EACH OTHER.
ÇERKESÇE = ADIGECE = ADIGE CUMHURIYETI /ADIGEY[A] ADIGECESI PLUS KABARTAY-BALKARYA/KARAÇAY-ÇERKESYA ADIGECESI. As to the standardised NWC languages:
Literary languages of the Abazgi–Adyghe family (Native name: Абадзэ-адыгэ бзэхэр, Russian: Абхазо-адыгские языки)
  • Abazgi (Abkhaz–Abaza or simply Abkhaz) dialectic continuum (closely related)
    • Literary language: Abkhaz (official in Abkhazia) (Native name: Аҧсуа бызшәа)
    • Literary language: Abaza (official in Karachayevo-Cherkessia, Russia) (Native name: абаза бызшва, Russian short: абазинский)
These are the literary languages as defined during the Soviet Union in order to serve as official languages in the federal subjects where the remaining Abazgi–Adyghe people mainly live in the Union, but before that time these people could still write, but not in a standard way. By the way, the code Ady, which was created in the 2000s, is for Adygean (Kyakh, Lowland, West Adyghe; Adyghe of Adygea), not for Adyghe in general, but in English, it is easy for people to confuse because the federal subject was named after the Circassian endonym "Adyghe", and then the language of that federal subject was named after the federal subject. -> Adyghe + ya = Respublika Adygeya. Adygean (Адыгей+ский) -> Адыгей -> Adygey / Adygej / Adygei (and then sometimes non-Russian speakers drop "й" and confuse it for the translation of Адыгский for that of Адыгейский as in your case). Here is another reason why you should never confuse the translation of Адыгский for that of Адыгейский: When you download the table "Национальный состав населения по субъектам Российской Федерации" of Official 2010 Census, under "Краснодарский край" you will find the ethnic groups there, including:
  • Русские 4522962 (Russkie [Ethnic] Russians)
    • Казаки 5261 (Kazaki Cossacks)
  • ...
  • Украинцы 83746 (Ukraintsy Ukrainians)
  • ...
  • Адыгейцы 13834 (Adygejtsy' Adygeans)
  • ...
  • Молдаване 5170 (Moldovane Moldovans)
  • ...
  • Шапсуги 3839 (Shapsugi Shapsug)
Now, what do you understand from this table? Are you going to claim that the Shapsug are not Adyghe because they are not officially called Adyge+a+n in the official Census only because you could not differentiate Adyghe from Adygean? No, you cannot claim because living in a federal subject is not what determines the ethnic group. Being a resident of Adygea is not a criterion of being an Adyghe because less than 5% of Adyghe in the world live in Adygea. The Census does not say whether the Shapsug are Adyghe or not, it just says they are not Adygean (Adyghe of Adygea, sometimes people use the word "Adygei" (due to "Адыгей-" for that in English). They are one of the 12 main Adyghe (aka Circassian) tribes, but the main place of settlement for the remaining population of the Adyghe tribes of Besleney, Kabarday, Shapsug is not Adygea. On the other hand, in Russia, a Bzhedug family usually lives in the federal subject Adygea (named after the Circassian endonym "Adyghe") and is thus an Adygean, whereas a Besleney family usually lives in the federal subject "-Cherkessia" (named after the exonym "Cherkess" aka "Circassian") and is thus a Cherkess (plural Cherkesy: ru:Черкесы (народ, Карачаево-Черкесия) is not to be confused with ru:Черкесы which also includes the former besides others).
Do you see the point? Let me repeat, If you falsely rename Adygean (Adyghe of Adygea only) to Adyghe, and you did, that would mislead the reader that the non-Adygean Adyghe are not Adyghe. If you falsely rename Circassian of Cherkessia to Circassian, then that would mislead that the non-Cherkessian Adyghe is not a Circassian.
Literary languages of the Abazgi–Adyghe family (Native name: Абадзэ-адыгэ бзэхэр, Russian: Абхазо-адыгские языки)
  • Abazgi (Abkhaz–Abaza or simply Abkhaz) dialectic continuum (closely related)
    • Literary language: Abkhaz (official in Abkhazia) (Native name: Аҧсуа бызшәа)
    • Literary language: Abaza (official in Karachayevo-Cherkessia, Russia) (Native name: абаза бызшва, Russian short: абазинский)
I also highlighed the words that I want you not to confuse with each other in order not to give a wrong impression to the reader. This is not a personal request, and everything is justified by the evidence. I hope you revert those changes as soon as possible. In addition to those, you might also reconsider your recent major changes on the Circassian-related articles of Turkish Wikipedia as well. I see that there were very recent, major problematic redirects there, such as this one a few weeks ago. At that moment, you probably forgot that Batı Çerkes dili = Batı Adıge dili = Kiah, and that Adıgece is not Batı only. You can use thousands of reliable sources in Turkish to verify that, in case you do not want to quote from Circassian, Russian, English, etc. Adıgece is also offered as an optional course in Turkish schools. After that, you might start by reverting this IP's edit (likely a good faith one rather than vandalism) and many other problems there.
All the best, Listofpeople (talk) 11:49, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
@Listofpeople: I have already responded to and proven the unfoundedness of your claims which you repeat again and again, but can not back up with credible linguistic sources. If you have such sources, please provide them. If you don't, please stop pushing this bias. I will not make the same mistake and make the points I have already made. Please bother to read what I have written.
Vito Genovese 12:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
This conversation is getting quickly bloated, and so I (and likely others) am getting a tl;dr glaze in my eyes. Perhaps you two should step back for a minute and let others contribute. I will say for myself that it so far seems as though Vito is correct here. It may be, though, that there is some degree of dispute in the literature. Since Vito has offered sourcing to show as such, it's up to Listofpeople to counter this sourcing, rather than demonstrate a textbook example of using search terms to commit confirmation bias. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 21:17, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
As far as I can gather on a read-over, there are two distinct main issues in dispute here:
  1. Are the language varieties that we currently call "Adyghe language" and "Kabardian language" better called "Lowland Adyghe" and "Eastern/Highland Adyghe"?
    — This is not a matter of simply observing what the corresponding terms in Adyghe and Kabardian (or, for that matter, Russian) are. English can and does employ different terminology conventions of its own. English-language sources, such as Glottolog and Ethnologue, or everything currently cited in our article on Kabardian or Kabardian grammar, seem to prefer either the former terms, or the even wider "Circassian". Switching to the latter terminology seems so far unsubstantiated by any sources.
  2. Are these two entities distinct languages, or two dialects of the same language ("Adygean")?
    — This is a notoriously fuzzy question. Again, English-language sources seem to prefer considering them distinct languages; but if Russian or native sources take the opposite view, this is definitely going to be worth mentioning.
A further issue, completely irrelevant for the organization of linguistic articles however, is to what extent the same applies to the peoples we currently call "Adyghe people" and "Kabardians". It is completely possible for a single ethnic group to speak multiple related languages (e.g. the Sami people); or for a single language be spoken by multiple distinct ethnic groups (e.g. English by several modern-day Native American groups).
(Also, for future reference to User:Listofpeople, please note that changes in terminology of this kind are not meant to be marked as minor edits.)
--Trɔpʏliʊmblah 22:19, 15 April 2017 (UTC)