Afroasiatic languages
"Afro-Asiatic" redirects here. For other uses, see Afro-Asiatic (disambiguation).
Afroasiatic (Afro-Asiatic), also known as Afrasian or Hamito-Semitic[2] or Semito-Hamitic,[3] is a large language family of about 300 languages that are spoken predominantly in the Middle East, North Africa, the Horn of Africa and parts of the Sahel.[4] With the exception of Semitic, which is also spoken in the Middle-East and in Malta, all branches of the Afrosiatic family are spoken exclusively on the African continent.
Malta, Horn of Africa, North Africa, Sahel, and the Middle East
Linguistic classificationOne of the world's primary language families
ISO 639-2 / 5afa

Distribution of the Afro-Asiatic languages
Afroasiatic languages have over 500 million native speakers, the fourth largest number of any language family (after Indo-European, Sino-Tibetan and Niger–Congo).[5] The phylum has six branches: Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Egyptian, Omotic and Semitic. By far the most widely spoken Afroasiatic language or dialect continuum is Arabic. A de facto group of distinct language varieties within the Semitic branch, the languages that evolved from Proto-Arabic have around 313 million native speakers, concentrated primarily in the Middle East and North Africa.[6]
In addition to languages spoken today, Afroasiatic includes several important ancient languages, such as Ancient Egyptian, which forms a distinct branch of the family, and Akkadian, Biblical Hebrew and Old Aramaic, all of which are from the Semitic branch. The original homeland of the Afroasiatic family, and when the parent language (i.e. Proto-Afroasiatic) was spoken, are yet to be agreed upon by historical linguists. Proposed locations include the Horn of Africa, North Africa, the Eastern Sahara and the Levant.
In the early 19th century, linguists grouped the Berber, Cushitic and Egyptian languages within a "Hamitic" phylum, in acknowledgement of these languages' genetic relation with each other and with those in the Semitic phylum.[failed verification][7] The terms "Hamitic" and "Semitic" were etymologically derived from the Book of Genesis, which describes various Biblical tribes descended from Ham and Shem, two sons of Noah.[8] By the 1860s, the main constituent elements within the broader Afroasiatic family had been worked out.[7]
Friedrich Müller introduced the name "Hamito-Semitic" for the entire language family in his Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft (1876).[9]Maurice Delafosse (1914) later coined the term "Afroasiatic" (often now spelled "Afro-Asiatic"). However, it did not come into general use until Joseph Greenberg (1950) formally proposed its adoption. In doing so, Greenberg sought to emphasize the fact that 'Hamitic' was not a valid group and that language cladistics did not reflect race.[10][page needed]
Individual scholars have also called the family "Erythraean" (Tucker 1966) and "Lisramic" (Hodge 1972). In lieu of "Hamito-Semitic", the Russian linguist Igor Diakonoff later suggested the term "Afrasian", meaning "half African, half Asiatic", in reference to the geographic distribution of the family's constituent languages.[11]
The term "Hamito-Semitic" remains in use in the academic traditions of some European countries, as well as in the official census of the government of India.
Distribution and branches
Interrelations between branches of Afroasiatic (Lipiński 2001)
Some linguists' proposals for grouping within Afroasiatic
Scholars generally treat the Afroasiatic language family as including the following five branches, whereas Omotic is disputed:
Although there is general agreement on these six families, linguists who study Afroasiatic raise some points of disagreement, in particular:
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Afroasiatic languages" – news ·newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (April 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
In descending order of the number of speakers, widely-spoken Afroasiatic languages include:
Classification history
In the 9th century, the Hebrew grammarian Judah ibn Quraysh of Tiaret in Algeria was the first to link two branches of Afroasiatic together; he perceived a relationship between Berber and Semitic. He knew of Semitic through his study of Arabic, Hebrew, and Aramaic.[9] In the course of the 19th century, Europeans also began suggesting such relationships. In 1844, Theodor Benfey suggested a language family consisting of Semitic, Berber, and Cushitic (calling the latter "Ethiopic").[32] In the same year, T.N. Newman suggested a relationship between Semitic and Hausa, but this would long remain a topic of dispute and uncertainty.[citation needed]
Friedrich Müller named the traditional Hamito-Semitic family in 1876 in his Grundriss der Sprachwissenschaft ("Outline of Linguistics"), and defined it as consisting of a Semitic group plus a "Hamitic" group containing Egyptian, Berber, and Cushitic; he excluded the Chadic group.[citation needed] It was the Egyptologist Karl Richard Lepsius (1810–1884) who restricted Hamitic to the non-Semitic languages in Africa, which are characterized by a grammatical gender system. This "Hamitic language group" was proposed to unite various, mainly North-African, languages, including the Ancient Egyptian language, the Berber languages, the Cushitic languages, the Beja language, and the Chadic languages. Unlike Müller, Lepsius considered that Hausa and Nama were part of the Hamitic group. These classifications relied in part on non-linguistic anthropological and racial arguments. Both authors used the skin-color, mode of subsistence, and other characteristics of native speakers as part of their arguments that particular languages should be grouped together.[33]
Distribution of the Afroasiatic/Hamito-Semitic languages in Africa
In 1912, Carl Meinhof published Die Sprachen der Hamiten ("The Languages of the Hamites"), in which he expanded Lepsius's model, adding the Fula, Maasai, Bari, Nandi, Sandawe and Hadza languages to the Hamitic group. Meinhof's model was widely supported in the 1940s.[33] Meinhof's system of classification of the Hamitic languages was based on a belief that "speakers of Hamitic became largely coterminous with cattle herding peoples with essentially Caucasian origins, intrinsically different from and superior to the 'Negroes of Africa'."[34] However, in the case of the so-called Nilo-Hamitic languages (a concept he introduced), it was based on the typological feature of gender and a "fallacious theory of language mixture." Meinhof did this although earlier work by scholars such as Lepsius and Johnston had substantiated that the languages which he would later dub "Nilo-Hamitic" were in fact Nilotic languages, with numerous similarities in vocabulary to other Nilotic languages.[35]
Leo Reinisch (1909) had already proposed linking Cushitic and Chadic while urging their more distant affinity with Egyptian and Semitic. However, his suggestion found little acceptance. Marcel Cohen (1924) rejected the idea of a distinct "Hamitic" subgroup and included Hausa (a Chadic language) in his comparative Hamito-Semitic vocabulary. Finally, Joseph Greenberg's 1950 work led to the widespread rejection of "Hamitic" as a language category by linguists. Greenberg refuted Meinhof's linguistic theories and rejected the use of racial and social evidence. In dismissing the notion of a separate "Nilo-Hamitic" language category, in particular, Greenberg was "returning to a view widely held a half-century earlier." He consequently rejoined Meinhof's so-called Nilo-Hamitic languages with their appropriate Nilotic siblings.[7] He also added (and sub-classified) the Chadic languages, and proposed the new name Afroasiatic for the family. Almost all scholars have accepted this classification as the new and continued consensus.
Greenberg's model was fully developed in his book The Languages of Africa (1963), in which he reassigned most of Meinhof's additions to Hamitic to other language families, notably Nilo-Saharan. Following Isaac Schapera and rejecting Meinhof, he classified the Khoekhoe language as a member of the Khoisan languages, a grouping that has since proven inaccurate and excessively motivated on the presence of click sounds.[1] To Khoisan he also added the Tanzanian Hadza and Sandawe, though this view has been discredited as linguists working on these languages consider them to be linguistic isolates.[36][37] Despite this, Greenberg's classification remains a starting point for modern work of many languages spoken in Africa, and the Hamitic category (and its extension to Nilo-Hamitic) has no part in this.[37]
Since the three traditional branches of the Hamitic languages (Berber, Cushitic and Egyptian) have not been shown to form an exclusive (monophyletic) phylogenetic unit of their own, separate from other Afroasiatic languages, linguists no longer use the term in this sense. Each of these branches is instead now regarded as an independent subgroup of the larger Afroasiatic family.[38]
In 1969, Harold Fleming proposed that what had previously been known as Western Cushitic is an independent branch of Afroasiatic, suggesting for it the new name Omotic. This proposal and name have met with widespread acceptance.
Based on typological differences with the other Cushitic languages, Robert Hetzron proposed that Beja has to be removed from Cushitic, thus forming an independent branch of Afroasiatic.[39] Most scholars, however, reject this proposal, and continue to group Beja as the sole member of a Northern branch within Cushitic.[40][41][page needed]
Glottolog does not accept that the inclusion or even unity of Omotic has been established, nor that of Ongota or the unclassified Kujarge. It therefore splits off the following groups as small families: South Omotic, Mao, Dizoid, Gonga–Gimojan (North Omotic apart from the preceding), Ongota, Kujarge.
Proposed Afroasiatic sub-divisions
Greenberg (1963)Newman (1980)Fleming (post-1981)Ehret (1995)
  • Semitic
  • Egyptian
  • Berber
  • Cushitic
    • Northern Cushitic
      (equals Beja)
    • Central Cushitic
    • Eastern Cushitic
    • Western Cushitic
      (equals Omotic)
    • Southern Cushitic
  • Chadic
  • Berber–Chadic
  • Egypto-Semitic
  • Cushitic
(excludes Omotic)
  • Omotic
  • Erythraean
    • Cushitic
    • Ongota
    • Non-Ethiopian
      • Chadic
      • Berber
      • Egyptian
      • Semitic
      • Beja
  • Omotic
    • North Omotic
    • South Omotic
  • Erythrean
    • Cushitic
      • Beja
      • Agaw
      • East–South Cushitic
        • Eastern Cushitic
        • Southern Cushitic
    • North Erythrean
      • Chadic
      • Boreafrasian
        • Egyptian
        • Berber
        • Semitic
Orel & Stobova (1995)Diakonoff (1996)Bender (1997)Militarev (2000)
  • Berber–Semitic
  • Chadic–Egyptian
  • Omotic
  • Beja
  • Agaw
  • Sidamic
  • East Lowlands
  • Rift
  • East–West Afrasian
    • Berber
    • Cushitic
    • Semitic
  • North–South Afrasian
    • Chadic
    • Egyptian
(excludes Omotic)
  • Omotic
  • Chadic
  • Macro-Cushitic
    • Berber
    • Cushitic
    • Semitic
  • North Afrasian
    • African North Afrasian
      • Chado-Berber
      • Egyptian
    • Semitic
  • South Afrasian
    • Omotic
    • Cushitic
Little agreement exists on the subgrouping of the five or six branches of Afroasiatic: Semitic, Egyptian, Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, and Omotic. However, Christopher Ehret (1979), Harold Fleming (1981), and Joseph Greenberg (1981) all agree that the Omotic branch split from the rest first.
Position among the world's languages
Afroasiatic is one of the four major language families spoken in Africa identified by Joseph Greenberg in his book The Languages of Africa (1963). It is one of the few whose speech area is transcontinental, with languages from Afroasiatic's Semitic branch also spoken in the Middle East and Europe.
There are no generally accepted relations between Afroasiatic and any other language family. However, several proposals grouping Afroasiatic with one or more other language families have been made. The best-known of these are the following:
Date of Afroasiatic

Speech sample in the Semitic Neo-Aramaic language, a descendant of Old Aramaic
The earliest written evidence of an Afroasiatic language is an Ancient Egyptian inscription dated to c. 3400 BC (5,400 years ago).[43] Symbols on Gerzean (Naqada II) pottery resembling Egyptian hieroglyphs date back to c. 4000 BC, suggesting an earlier possible dating. This gives us a minimum date for the age of Afroasiatic. However, Ancient Egyptian is highly divergent from Proto-Afroasiatic,[44] and considerable time must have elapsed in between them. Estimates of the date at which the Proto-Afroasiatic language was spoken vary widely. They fall within a range between approximately 7,500 BC (9,500 years ago), and approximately 16,000 BC (18,000 years ago). According to Igor M. Diakonoff (1988: 33n), Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 10,000 BC. Christopher Ehret (2002: 35–36) asserts that Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 11,000 BC at the latest, and possibly as early as c. 16,000 BC. These dates are older than those associated with other proto-languages.
Afroasiatic Urheimat
Main article: Afroasiatic Urheimat
Map showing one of the proposed Afroasiatic Urheimat (Eastern Sahara theory.)
The Afroasiatic urheimat, the hypothetical place where Proto-Afroasiatic language speakers lived in a single linguistic community, or complex of communities, before this original language dispersed geographically and divided into distinct languages, is unknown. Afroasiatic languages are today primarily spoken in West Asia, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and parts of the Sahel. Their distribution seems to have been influenced by the Sahara pump operating over the last 10,000 years.
While there is no definitive agreement on when or where the original homeland of this language family existed, most scholarly work in linguistics favor an East African or Saharan origin.[45][46][47][page needed][48][49][page needed][50][51] A Levant/Fertile Crescent origin has also been proposed.[52]
Similarities in grammar and syntax
Verbal paradigms in several Afroasiatic languages:
NumberLanguage →ArabicKabyleSomaliBejaHausa
Verb →katabafegnaw
Meaning →writeflycomefaildrink
singular1ʼaktubuttafgeɣimaadaaanáwina shan
2ftaktubīnatettafgeḍtimaadaatináwikina shan
2mtaktubutináwakana shan
3ftettafegtináwtana shan
3myaktubuyettafegyimaadaaináwyana shan
plural1naktubunettafegnimaadnaanínawmuna shan
2mtaktubūnatettafgemtimaadaantínawnakuna shan
3myaktubūnattafgenyimaadaanínawnasuna shan
Widespread (though not universal) features of the Afroasiatic languages include:
One of the most remarkable shared features among the Afroasiatic languages is the prefixing verb conjugation (see the table at the start of this section), with a distinctive pattern of prefixes beginning with /ʔ t n y/, and in particular a pattern whereby third-singular masculine /y-/ is opposed to third-singular feminine and second-singular /t-/.
According to Ehret (1996), tonal languages appear in the Omotic and Chadic branches of Afroasiatic, as well as in certain Cushitic languages. The Semitic, Berber and Egyptian branches generally do not use tones phonemically.
The Berber and Semitic branches share certain grammatical features (e.g. alternative feminine endings *-ay/*-āy; corresponding vowel templates for verbal conjugations) which can be reconstructed for a higher-order proto-language (provisionally called "Proto-Berbero-Semitic" by Kossmann & Suchard (2018) and Putten (2018)). Whether this proto-language is ancestral to Berber and Semitic only, or also to other branches of Afroasiatic, still remains to be established.[54][55]
Shared vocabulary

Speech sample in Shilha (Berber branch)

Speech sample in Somali (Cushitic branch)

Speech sample in Literary Arabic (Semitic branch)
The following are some examples of Afroasiatic cognates, including ten pronouns, three nouns, and three verbs.
Source: Christopher Ehret, Reconstructing Proto-Afroasiatic (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995).
Note: Ehret does not make use of Berber in his etymologies, stating (1995: 12): "the kind of extensive reconstruction of proto-Berber lexicon that might help in sorting through alternative possible etymologies is not yet available." The Berber cognates here are taken from the previous version of the table in this article and need to be completed and referenced.
Abbreviations: NOm = 'North Omotic', SOm = 'South Omotic'. MSA = 'Modern South Arabian', PSC = 'Proto-Southern Cushitic', PSom-II = 'Proto-Somali, stage 2'. masc. = 'masculine', fem. = 'feminine', sing. = 'singular', pl. = 'plural'. 1s. = 'first person singular', 2s. = 'second person singular'.
Symbols: Following Ehret (1995: 70), a caron ˇ over a vowel indicates rising tone, and a circumflex ^ over a vowel indicates falling tone. V indicates a vowel of unknown quality. Ɂ indicates a glottal stop. * indicates reconstructed forms based on comparison of related languages.
*Ɂân- / *Ɂîn- or *ân- / *în- ‘I’ (independent pronoun)*in- ‘I’ (Maji (NOm))*Ɂâni ‘I’*nV ‘I’jzi 'I'*Ɂn ‘I’nek / nec ‘I, me’
*i or *yi ‘me, my’ (bound)i ‘I, me, my’ (Ari (SOm))*i or *yi ‘my’*i ‘me, my’ (bound).j (1s. suffix)*-i ‘me, my’inu / nnu / iw ‘my’
*Ɂǎnn- / *Ɂǐnn- or *ǎnn- / *ǐnn- ‘we’*nona / *nuna / *nina (NOm)*Ɂǎnn- / *Ɂǐnn- ‘we’jnn ‘we’*Ɂnn ‘we’nekni / necnin / neccin ‘we’
*Ɂânt- / *Ɂînt- or *ânt- / *înt- ‘you’ (sing.)*int- ‘you’ (sing.)*Ɂânt- ‘you’ (sing.)ntk, *ʲānt- ‘you’ (sing.)*Ɂnt ‘you’ (sing.)netta "he" (keyy / cek "you" (masc. sing.))
*ku, *ka ‘you’ (masc. sing., bound)*ku ‘your’ (masc. sing.) (PSC)*ka, *ku (masc. sing.).k, (2s. masc. suffix)-ka (2s. masc. suffix) (Arabic)inek / nnek / -k "your" (masc. sing.)
*ki ‘you’ (fem. sing., bound)*ki ‘your’ (fem. sing.)*ki ‘you’ (fem. sing.).ṯ, (fem. sing. suffix, < *ki)-ki (2s. fem. sing. suffix) (Arabic)-m / nnem / inem "your" (fem. sing.)
*kūna ‘you’ (plural, bound)*kuna ‘your’ (pl.) (PSC)*kun ‘you’ (pl.).ṯn, *-ṯin ‘you’ (pl.)*-kn ‘you, your’ (fem. pl.)-kent, kennint "you" (fem. pl.)
*si, *isi ‘he, she, it’*is- ‘he’*Ɂusu ‘he’, *Ɂisi ‘she’*sV ‘he’sw, *suw ‘he, him’, sj, *siʲ ‘she, her’*-šɁ ‘he’, *-sɁ ‘she’ (MSA)-s / nnes / ines "his/her/its"
*ma, *mi ‘what?’*ma- ‘what?’ (NOm)*ma, *mi (interr. root)*mi, *ma ‘what?’mj ‘what?’, ‘who?’ (Arabic, Hebrew) / mu? (Assyrian) ‘what?’ma? / mayen? / min? "what?"
*wa, *wi ‘what?’*w- ‘what?’*wä / *wɨ ‘what?’ (Agaw)*wa ‘who?’wj ‘how ...!’mamek? / mamec? / amek? "how?
*dîm- / *dâm- ‘blood’*dam- ‘blood’ (Gonga)*dîm- / *dâm- ‘red’*d-m- ‘blood’ (West Chadic)jdmj ‘red linen’*dm / dǝma (Assyrian) / dom (Hebrew) ‘blood’idammen "bloods"
*îts ‘brother’*itsim- ‘brother’*itsan or *isan ‘brother’*sin ‘brother’sn, *san ‘brother’aẖ (Hebrew) "brother"uma / gʷma "brother"
*sǔm / *sǐm- ‘name’*sum(ts)- ‘name’ (NOm)*sǔm / *sǐm- ‘name’*ṣǝm ‘name’smj ‘to report, announce’*ism (Arabic) / shǝma (Assyrian) ‘name’isen / isem "name"
*-lisʼ- ‘to lick’litsʼ- ‘to lick’ (Dime (SOm))*alǝsi ‘tongue’ns, *līs ‘tongue’*lsn ‘tongue’iles "tongue"
*-maaw- ‘to die’*-umaaw- / *-am-w(t)- ‘to die’ (PSom-II)*mǝtǝ ‘to die’mwt, ‘to die’*mwt / mawta (Assyrian) ‘to die’mmet "to die"
*-bǐn- ‘to build, to create; house’bin- ‘to build, create’ (Dime (SOm))*mǐn- / *mǎn- ‘house’; man- ‘to create’ (Beja)*bn ‘to build’; *bǝn- ‘house’*bnn / bani (Assyrian) / bana (Hebrew) ‘to build’*bn(?) (esk "to build")
There are two etymological dictionaries of Afroasiatic, one by Christopher Ehret, and one by Vladimir Orel and Olga Stolbova. The two dictionaries disagree on almost everything.[56] The following table contains the thirty roots or so (out of thousands) that represent a fragile consensus of present research:
NumberProto-Afroasiatic FormMeaningBerberChadicCushiticEgyptianOmoticSemitic
3(ʔa-)dVmred, blood
4*(ʔa-)dVmland, field, soil
6ʔigar/ *ḳʷar-house, enclosure
12*gamm-mane, beard
13*gVncheek, chin
18*ḳa(wa)l-/ *qʷar-to say, call
23*mawVt-to die
26*inn-I, we
30*šunto sleep, dream
Etymological bibliography
Some of the main sources for Afroasiatic etymologies include:
See also
This article has an unclear citation style. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation and footnoting. (August 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
  1. ^ a b c d Sands 2009, pp. 559–580.
  2. ^ Katzner 2002, p. 27.
  3. ^ Robert Hetzron, "Afroasiatic Languages" in Bernard Comrie, The World's Major Languages, 2009, ISBN 113426156X, p. 545
  4. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Browse by Language Family.
  5. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Summary by language family.
  6. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Arabic.
  7. ^ a b c Ruhlen 1991, pp. 76, 87.
  8. ^ Gregersen, Edgar A. (1977). Language in Africa: An Introductory Survey. Taylor & Francis. p. 116. ISBN 978-0677043807. Retrieved 1 September 2016.
  9. ^ a b Lipiński 2001, pp. 21–22.
  10. ^ Dimmendaal 2008.
  11. ^ The New Encyclopædia Britannica, Volume 8; Volume 22. Encyclopædia Britannica. 1998. pp. 722. ISBN 978-0-85229-633-2.
  12. ^ "Harrassowitz Verlag – The Harrassowitz Publishing House". harrassowitz-verlag.de. Archived from the original on 29 June 2017. Retrieved 14 April 2018.
  13. ^ Sands 2009.
  14. ^ Trigger, Bruce G., ‘Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship?’, Kush 12, 1964, 188–194.
  15. ^ Trigger, Bruce, G.,‘The Classification of Meroitic: Geographical Considerations’, Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients 13, 1977, 421–435.
  16. ^ Hintze, Fritz, ‘Some Problems of Meroitic Philology’, Abdel Gadir Mahmoud Abdalla (ed.), Studies of the Ancient Languages of the Sudan, Sudanese Studies 3, Khartoum University Press, Khartoum, 1974, 73–78.
  17. ^ Hintze 1979, pp. 1–214.
  18. ^ Blench 2008.
  19. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Hausa.
  20. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Amharic.
  21. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Somali.
  22. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Afar.
  23. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Tachelhit.
  24. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Tigrigna.
  25. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Kabyle.
  26. ^ Dekel, Nurit (2014). Colloquial Israeli Hebrew: A Corpus-based Survey. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-037725-5.
  27. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Tamazight, Central Atlas.
  28. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, https://www.ethnologue.com/language/rif Tarifit].
  29. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, one Gurage language.
  30. ^ Borg 1998.
  31. ^ Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2021, Assyrian Neo-Aramaic.
  32. ^ Pereltsvaig, Asya (9 February 2012). Languages of the World: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-00278-4.
  33. ^ a b Ruhlen 1991, pp. 80,81.
  34. ^ Shillington 2005, p. 797.
  35. ^ Ruhlen 1991, p. 109.
  36. ^ Sands 1998, p. 14.
  37. ^ a b Ruhlen 1991, p. 117.
  38. ^ Everett Welmers, William (1974). African Language Structures. University of California Press. p. 16. ISBN 978-0520022102.
  39. ^ Hetzron, Robert (1980). "The limits of Cushitic". Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika. 2: 7–126.
  40. ^ Appleyard 2012, pp. 199–295.
  41. ^ Güldemann 2018.
  42. ^ "Is Omotic Afroasiatic? (In Norwegian)" (PDF). uio.no. Retrieved 14 April 2018.
  43. ^ Mitchell, Larkin (March–April 1999). "Earliest Egyptian Glyphs". Archaeology Magazine. 52 (2). Retrieved 14 April 2018.
  44. ^ Trombetti 1905, pp. 1–2.
  45. ^ Wichmann & Grant 2012, p. 73.
  46. ^ Wolff, H. Ekkehard. "Afro-Asiatic languages". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2 September 2018.
  47. ^ Blench 2006.
  48. ^ Ehret, Christopher; Keita, S. O. Y.; Newman, Paul (2004). "The Origins of Afroasiatic". Science. 306 (5702): 1680.3–1680. doi​:​10.1126/science.306.5702.1680c​. PMID 15576591. S2CID 8057990.
  49. ^ Bernal 1987.
  50. ^ Bender 1997, pp. 19–34.
  51. ^ Militarev A (2005) Once more about glottochronology and comparative method: the Omotic-Afrasian case, Аспекты компаративистики – 1 (Aspects of comparative linguistics – 1). FS S. Starostin. Orientalia et Classica II (Moscow), p. 339-408.
  52. ^ Hall & Jarvie 2005, p. 27.
  53. ^ Carsten Peust, "On the subgrouping of Afroasiatic" Archived 9 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine, LingAeg 20 (2012), 221–251 (p. 243).
  54. ^ Kossmann & Suchard 2018, pp. 41–56.
  55. ^ Putten, Marijn van (2018). "The feminine endings *-ay and *-āy in Semitic and Berber". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. 81 (2): 205–225. doi​:​10.1017/S0041977X18000447​.
  56. ^ Ratcliffe, Robert R. (2012). "On calculating the reliability of the comparative method at long and medium distances: Afroasiatic comparative lexica as a test case". Journal of Historical Linguistics. 2 (2).
Works cited
General references
See also: § Etymological bibliography
This article includes a list of general references, but it remains largely unverified because it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (September 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
External links
Last edited on 4 May 2021, at 05:17
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted.
Privacy policy
Terms of Use
HomeRandomNearbyLog inSettingsDonateAbout WikipediaDisclaimers