# Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger (Third Edition)/Europe and the Caucasus

​Europe and the Caucasus
Tapani Salminen
The territory of Europe together with the Caucasus and Anatolia is the home of a wide range of languages, diverse with respect not only to their genetic affiliations, but also to their endangerment status. One of the area’s special features is the relatively large number of non-endangered languages, most of which function as the dominant languages of nation-states, which happen to be quite numerous there. At the same time, among the many minority languages spoken in those nation-states only very few are safe in the strict sense of the word, in that they would not face heavy competition or even replacement by a dominant language within their own community.
Another specificity of the European language scene is the number of endangered languages closely related to the national languages and the literary standards based on them, to the extent that they appear in a diglossic relationship and are therefore often relegated to dialect status from a sociolinguistic perspective. The current Atlas, however, is concerned with spoken languages, and the bulk of this chapter is devoted to identifying and recognizing distinct vernaculars on the basis of linguistic criteria as opposed to the effects of administrative divisions or literary traditions.
The coverage of the languages of Europe and adjacent regions in the current Atlas is similar to their treatment in the relevant sections of the Encyclopedia of the World’s Endangered Languages (Moseley, 2007). A major departure is that a large number of prominent minority languages regarded as ‘safe’ in the Encyclopedia are here labelled ‘vulnerable’. The apparent paradox is entirely terminological, as vulnerable languages are those languages that are not immediately endangered but do not have a status equal to the dominant and majority languages. Examples of such languages include Basque, West Frisian, Moselle Franconian, Faroese, and many of the languages of ​the Caucasus, as well as a number of the so-called regional languages, as defined later. Indeed, of the minority languages in the area under review, only Catalan, Galician (with further qualifications described below), Tatar and Kurmanji are not regarded as endangered at all.
To be considered endangered, a language must notably have first-language speakers, which excludes pidgins such as Russenorsk, mixed or secret languages used as second languages such as Angloromani, classical languages such as Latin, artificial languages such as Esperanto and, arguably, revived languages that do not directly continue a former language tradition (see the discussion on Cornish below). Most crucially, however, dialects are not included, not because they would not represent an equally important facet of language diversity but for the simple fact that the list would be inexhaustible. There is a well-defined exception to the exclusion of dialects, discussed below, but the general guidelines for defining languages vs dialects need to be addressed first.
Languages, dialects and languages boundaries
The concept of mutual intelligibility is often cited as the main, or perhaps the only, linguistic criterion for distinguishing between languages and dialects. It is, indeed, useful in the clear-cut cases of either full mutual intelligibility, which implies a single spoken language, or at best limited comprehension, in which case separate languages are involved. In Europe in particular, the intelligibility levels between closely related varieties are often exaggerated, and there are several cases of undisputed groups of languages, for example Frisian, Mordvin and Saami, that are still sometimes referred to as single languages by ill-informed authorities or some conservative linguists. Similar instances of clearly independent minority languages nevertheless being called dialects include Gascon, Kashubian, Low Saxon and Tsakonian, to name just a few of the many examples discussed in the systematic survey below. Contrary cases, i.e. varieties with clearly sufficient mutual intelligibility to be subsumed under a single language, but described as languages on the basis of non-linguistic considerations, will also be highlighted.
The immediate problem with mutual intelligibility is that it is fully gradual, and varieties showing a moderate level of intelligibility are commonplace. Supplementary criteria are therefore required to determine the distinctiveness of the varieties under scrutiny. In the great majority of perceived borderline cases the solution is reasonably straightforward, however, and it generally amounts to the difference in the nature of language boundaries vs dialect boundaries, in other words the absence or presence of a dialect continuum.
Language boundaries (as opposed to dialect divisions) tend to have several characteristics, such as isoglosses defining the adjacent language areas through the entire length of the language boundary; innovations stopped from spreading to the other side of the language boundary; influences across the language boundary being recognizable as the result of areal contacts, for example loanwords; and speakers generally required to become bilingual to communicate on the other side of the language boundary.
From a historical point of view, language boundaries emerge through the extremely frequent and recurrent process of extinction of transitional dialects. In the context of language endangerment, a language loses ground through language shift, i.e. whole-scale replacement, even when the dominant language is closely related, while a dialect is assimilated through levelling and adaptation feature ​by feature. In many instances, there is a small dialect area between two language areas which shares features with both and could at least from the outset be attached to either of the larger areas; as long as the dialect area itself is geographically well-defined, however, its classification on the basis of diachronic or other criteria does not undermine the concept of unique language boundary.
There are pairs and groups of languages as defined and discussed below that are often claimed to be very close to each other, suggesting that their correct classification would be as dialects of a single language. Notable examples are Adyge and Kabard-Cherkes, Chechen and Ingush, Komi and Permyak, the Oil languages (French), the Oc languages (except Gascon, whose classification as a dialect is simply an error) as well as Logudorese and Campidanese (Sardinian). It seems that their closeness, although real, is also often exaggerated, and many extra-linguistic considerations may influence judgements. Similar examples among non-endangered languages are the continental Scandinavian languages, Czech and Slovak or East Slavonic languages. It seems clear that inherent intelligibility is lower than the actual comprehension between speakers who have had substantial exposure to the closely related languages.
By contrast, national borders almost never match the boundaries of spoken languages, though they have an impact on perceptions, identities, literary traditions, official recognition and so on (in cases of Torne Valley Finnish, Valencian vs Catalan and Moldavian vs Romanian, to name just a few examples). Similarly, other geographical or cultural and religious divisions do not necessarily correspond to vernaculars, as is evident from Silesian or Sorbian, for example. The exclusion of cross-border communities speaking non-endangered languages is obviously an oversight with regard to the general assessment of language endangerment, but if they were included, the current maps would be much fuller and show a large number of points referring to languages endangered on one side of a border but not at all endangered on the other. It must be stated forcefully in this context that the recognition of cross-border language communities and the cultivation of local varieties, for instance to create new literary traditions, are extremely positive factors insofar as they preserve language diversity and contribute to the survival of the community in question as well as the maintenance of minority languages in general.
Minority languages closely related to the dominant languages and the literary standards based on them are technically referred to as regional languages in what follows, and their status is often intricate. They typically lack autochthonous literary standards, so that their literate speakers generally live in a situation of diglossia. From a sociolinguistic perspective, it is therefore not surprising that regional languages are referred to as dialects, but it must be emphasized that as a rule the regional languages presented below are defined as strictly on the basis of intelligibility and language boundaries as any other languages.
To give an example of a prototypical regional language, West Flemish, spoken in France, Belgium and the Netherlands, and known by a different name in each country, as well as having the bulk of the speaker community diglossic in Dutch, nevertheless possesses all the characteristics of an independent spoken language in that it appears highly unified across its language area and remains quite distinct from Dutch; many other examples follow in the systematic survey.
It must be noted, however, that in the case of a number of regional languages, an element of uncertainty remains as to their status, and Latgalian as well as South Jutish are such borderline instances. Varieties spoken in relative isolation from the main body of the language for a considerable time and showing major interference features from contact ​languages, technically referred to as outlying dialects, are treated on the same level as the varieties recognized as languages.
An important group with regard to the language vs dialect issue is that of the so-called Jewish languages. Taking into account various complexities, I have followed the guideline that varieties specific to Jewish communities must be distinct and independent as spoken languages, exactly like any other language, in order to be included—this only qualifies Judezmo, Yiddish and Juhur plus Corfiot Italkian as an outlying dialect of Venetan. From the cartographic point of view, non-territorial languages as well as languages with large diaspora communities pose a major and indeed an insurmountable problem. Judezmo and Yiddish as well as, even more extensively, Romani represent non-territorial languages. Of these, the Jewish languages have two map points, one of them in Israel, while Romani has been given a single point, and the locations of the points in Europe are essentially random.
Plautdietsch, Gottscheerish and several of the Aramaic languages have their map points in the original language areas despite the fact that all speakers have been displaced to distant destinations. In the case of Ubykh, since the entire nation has moved from one place to another, there are two map points, but the other Abkhaz-Adyge languages are only mapped for their home areas, despite the fact that only a minority of speakers were present there at one stage.
Unlike Plautdietsch (which, although largely spoken in the Americas, originated in Europe), the languages – or perhaps, rather, outlying dialects in the current sense – that developed from European languages in other continents are not mentioned further in this chapter. The list would include Afrikaans, Pennsylvania German, Colonia Tovar German, Hutterite German, Loreto-Ucayali Spanish and Cajun French, to name those having Intemational Standards Organization (ISO) codes of their own.
Languages in Europe and the Caucasus
The following survey is arranged in terms of language classification, with a discussion of the endangerment problems pertinent to each.
■ ■Basque
The Basque language is probably the best-known language isolate, or single-language family, as well as one of the most widely recognized minority languages in the world. It is one of the languages that are labelled 'vulnerable' in the current Atlas.
■ ■The Uralic family
The Uralic language family consists of nine groups of closely related languages, of which Saami, Finnic, Mordvin, Mari, Permian and Hungarian are represented in Europe. The languages of the other three branches Mansi, Khanty and Samoyed—are or were spoken in Siberia, but the area of Tundra Nenets in the Samoyed branch extends to the west of the Ural mountains, and the area of Southern Mansi also originally covered parts of Europe.
Of the eleven Saami languages, North Saami is the least endangered, and could perhaps be regarded as vulnerable in its core area in Finnmark in Norway, but across its large range its position is much weaker, so that keeping it among definitely endangered languages can also be justified. By contrast, South Saami, Lule Saami, Inari Saami, Skolt Saami and Kildin Saami are definitely if not severely endangered, although in all communities there are notable efforts to maintain the native language, so far perhaps most successfully among the Inari Saami. Ume Saami, Pite Saami and Ter Saami, on the other hand, have only a very few elderly speakers, and the last speaker of Akkala Saami, also known as Babino Saami, died in 2002, which constitutes the second most recent extinction in Europe. Language ​boundaries between the Saami languages are generally clear-cut and often deep, for instance the three languages spoken in Finland (North Saami, Inari Saami and Skolt Saami) differ notably from one another.
Of the ten Finnic languages, Estonian and Finnish are not endangered. Võro-Seto, Karelian and Olonetsian have speakers in the range of tens of thousands, but assimilation is proceeding quite rapidly. The remaining languages appear on the scale from severely to critically endangered in the order Veps, Lude, Ingrian and Vote. The last first- language speaker of Livonian died in 2009, but Livonan is further cultivated as a second language. Furthermore, Krevin, an outlying dialect of Vote in Latvia, became extinct in the nineteenth century. There exists a northern Finnic language chain from Finnish via Karelian, Olonetsian and Lude to Veps, in which language boundaries are, however, clear-cut, and all languages are equally distant from their neighbours. This invalidates both the Russian administrative grouping of Karelian, Olonetsian and Lude together as a 'Karelian' language as well as the various combinations of these three languages plus Ingrian by linguists following traditional views not based on linguistic considerations. The separation of Võro-Seto from Estonian is recent in terms of an established language boundary, but the actual linguistic differences are notable. Torne Valley Finnish, by contrast, is an exemple of a variety not separated by a language boundary and therefore a dialect on linguistic grounds. It has however an official status and an emerging literary tradition in part of its range, and it may therefore also prove to be an example of how the recognition of cross-border language communities and the cultivation of local varieties clearly contribute to the preservation of language diversity.
The Mordvin branch of the Uralic family consists of two languages, Erzya and Moksha. There exists a tradition of lumping together Erzya and Moksha as a single 'Mordvin' language, and although the Soviet authorities recognized both languages (somewhat inconsistently in view of other similar cases in Karelia and many places in Siberia), they nevertheless only collected combined census data. Both languages still have a large number of speakers, but the assimilation rate is high, and younger speakers typically use the native language only with elderly relatives. A very high percentage of Erzya- and Moksha-speakers live in small diaspora-based settlements.
The Mari branch also consists of two languages that are known either as Western Mari and Eastern Mari, or Hill Mari and Meadow Mari, respectively. Both name choices are slightly problematic: Hill Mari in the narrow sense constitutes only one of the two dialect areas of Western Mari, the other being North-Western Mari, while Meadow Mari often excludes the more easterly diaspora dialects which may collectively, and confusingly, also be called 'Eastern Mari'.
The Permian languages show a clear division into two sub-branches, Udmurt vs Komi, of which the former is a single language while the latter is divided into two languages, Permyak and Komi proper (the old name Zyryan may also be included to avoid ambiguity, and for maximum clarity 'Permyak Komi' and 'Zyryan Komi' can also be used), plus an outlying dialect, Yazva Komi (also known as Eastern Permyak).
■ ■The Indo-European family
The Indo-European language family consists of nine extant groups of closely related languages, of which Slavonic, Baltic, Germanic, Celtic, Romance, Albanian, Hellenic and Armenian were originally confined to the area covered by this chapter, while the Indo-Iranian languages are mainly spoken further east in Asia, with the exceptions listed below.
The Slavonic branch consists of three sub-branches, South, West and East Slavonic. There are four non-endangered South Slavonic languages, Bulgarian, Macedonian, Serbo-Croat (the traditional name ​in linguistic usage of the spoken language on which modern Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian etc. literary standards are based) and Slovene. Serbo- Croat is indeed a model example of the unnecessary confusion that follows when the relationships between spoken language and literary tradition are not considered analytically. It is increasingly clear that Torlak, spoken in south-eastern Serbia and extending to both Bulgaria and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, needs to be recognized as a vulnerable regional language most closely related to Bulgarian- Macedonian rather than enclosed within Serbo-Croat.
Besides the three non-endangered West Slavonic languages, Polish, Czech and Slovak, only Sorbian is widely known as an endangered minority language. In fact, it is often referred to as two languages, Lower Sorbian and Upper Sorbian, but in our current framework they represent, rather, two literary traditions based on spoken varieties that show high mutual intelligibility and are connected through transitional dialects, thus constituting a genuine dialect continuum. Kashubian is another clearly distinct and endangered language, although often popularly regarded as a dialect of Polish and with varying estimates as to its degree of endangerment.
Only two of the East Slavonic languages, Russian and Ukrainian, are classified as non-endangered here, meaning that Belarusian, while an official language of an independent country, is regarded as vulnerable, based on the widespread use of Russian in its stead. Two regional languages are recognized within this group: one is well established, i.e. Rusyn, also known as Carpatho-Rusyn (and not to be confused with Vojvodina Rusyn); the other is somewhat unknown, namely Polesian in the border region of Belarus, Poland and Ukraine, still subsumed under Belarusian by SIL and in the Encyclopedia (Moseley, 2007).
Of the Baltic group, Latgalian has been treated as a regional language distinct from Latvian, although it is close to Latvian proper.
The Germanic branch consists of three sub-branches, West, North and East Germanic. There are three non-endangered West Germanic languages, English, Dutch and German, all of which are here defined more narrowly than in non-specialist usage. First, English excludes Scots, which extends as far south as Northumbria. Second, Dutch covers Hollandish, Brabantish and East Flemish, while West Flemish is a clear example of a regional language. Third, German consists of Thuringian, Upper Saxon and Silesian, so that not only Low Saxon but also Limburgian-Ripuarian, Moselle Franconian (which covers Luxembourgish), Rhenish Franconian and East Franconian as well as Alemannic and Bavarian are recognized as regional languages. None of the regional languages are particularly endangered but they all continue to be spoken in a diglossic situation with the national languages. Moselle Franconian in Luxembourg and Alemannic in Switzerland do not easily qualify even as vulnerable, given their extremely strong position as spoken languages, but they are to some extent in competition with German, and Moselle Franconian also with French. More to the point, Moselle Franconian and Alemannic are both spoken in several countries and their status is much weaker elsewhere. Notably, Alsatian in France, while part of the Alemannic dialect continuum and therefore not listed separately, is nevertheless included in the current Atlas.
To complete the list of West Germanic languages, the Frisian languages, West Frisian, Saterlandic and North Frisian, pose no problems as to classification, West Frisian being one of the larger minority languages in Europe, listed as vulnerable in the current Atlas. Yiddish in the narrow sense would only correspond to Eastern Yiddish in the SIL classification, while Western Yiddish (including so-called Judeo-Alsatian) perhaps never became fully independent from Alemannic. Eight outlying dialects of West Germanic languages are recognized in the Atlas. There ​are many other West Germanic language enclaves, but the above list covers the ones representing both long-term isolation and contact-based development. Plautdietsch is one of the cases where the current location of speakers cannot really be presented in the Atlas because they live in worldwide diaspora; its map point is shown as its birthplace in Ukraine, from where the remaining speakers were deported in the 1940s.
Of the North Germanic sub-branch, Faroese is listed as vulnerable in the Atlas because of the small size of the language community and the competition from Danish. Dalecarlian, Scanian (including Bornholmian) and Gutnish) are endangered regional languages clearly distinct from Swedish, while South Jutish in the Danish-German border region is only tentatively recognized as a regional language separate from Danish.
The Celtic branch of the Indo-European family consists of two sub-branches, Gaelic (Goidelic) and Brythonic (Brittonic), each of which is a group of three well-known languages, i.e. Irish, Manx and Scottish Gaelic constitute Gaelic; and Welsh, Cornish and Breton make up Brythonic. While the genetic classification of the languages is not contentious, there are many issues concerning their endangerment status. Welsh, with a strong speaker base and much institutional support nowadays, is nevertheless regarded as vulnerable, similar to almost all other minority languages, which can indeed be justified on the basis of continuing English domination in practically all fields of life. Irish, despite its official status, as well as Scottish Gaelic show gradual erosion of first-language speaker communities, and Breton, with an impressive number of speakers until recently, is losing ground much more rapidly. Manx and Cornish are uncontested representatives of the category of revived languages in Europe. Manx ceased to be a spoken community language in the nineteenth century, and the last first-language speaker, Ned Maddrell, died in 1974. A number of people who learnt from him and his contemporaries have, however, kept up the use of Manx as a second language, and the knowledge of the language has since then spread further through the school network and other channels on the Isle of Man. Cornish became extinct as a first language much earlier, most likely by the end of the eighteenth century, but there have nevertheless been several proposals for revived Cornish which have led to largely successful attempts to reestablish a variety of indigenous language traditions in Cornwall.
The Romance languages – one of the few major groups of languages whose proto-language, i.e. Latin, is known in great historical detail – consist of nine sub-branches, namely Ibero-Romance, Occitano-Romance, Gallo-Romance, Raeto-Romance, Sardinian, Italo-Romance, Istriot, the extinct Dalmatian, and Romanian in the broad sense. It is often taken for granted that the classification of the Romance languages must be highly complicated, but in most cases the language divisions within sub-branches appear rather definite and conclusive. To start with Ibero-Romance, it is represented by four extant spoken languages in the Iberian peninsula, namely Galician-Portuguese, Asturian-Leonese, Spanish (also referred to as Castilian) and Aragonese, as well as Judezmo (Judeo-Spanish, also known as Ladino) and the long-extinct Mozarabic. Galician and Portuguese are, of course, generally known through differentiated literary traditions and separated by a national border, but the spoken varieties can at best be divided along a very shallow boundary south of the Galician-Portuguese border, and Galician, even if treated as an independent minority language within Spain, would not immediately qualify as endangered because of its inherently strong position and its close proximity to Portuguese. Both Asturian-Leonese and Aragonese, however, are increasingly endangered.
​Occitano-Romance is divided into three sub-units, conventionally labelled as Catalan, Gascon and Occitan. Catalan and Gascon represent single spoken languages, although both cases merit further discussion. Valencian possesses a literary tradition differing slightly from Catalan proper, but with regard to the vernacular no language boundary as defined above is involved. Algherese Catalan is listed as an outlying dialect here because of its isolated position subject to intensive language contacts. Gascon, called Aranese south of the French-Spanish border, is a clearly distinct language within Occitano-Romance. Of the other Oc languages, Languedocian, Provençal, Limousin and Auvergnat were also previously given language status in the Ethnologue, and while they, as well as Alpine Provençal included in the current Atlas, are admittedly close to each other, they have nevertheless shown markedly distinct traits for centuries and the differences among them are much greater than those within Catalan. Even if there were grounds for regarding Languedocian, Provençal, Limousin, Auvergnat and Alpine Provençal as dialects of a single spoken language, the arguments could not rely on an ideology supporting a particular cultural tradition, in this case the archaizing but largely Languedocian- based Occitan literary language. Finally, there is an outlying dialect of Alpine Provençal known as Gardiol in southern Italy. With the exception of Catalan, which is arguably the safest minority language in Europe, all varieties of Occitano-Romance are endangered, and it remains to be seen whether the lack of official encouragement of internal diversity has the effect of further escalating their disappearance.
It is true that the entire Oïl language area within French consists of closely related varieties, namely, besides French, Poitevin-Saintongeais, Gallo, Norman, Picard, Walloon, Champenois, Lorrain, Burgundian and Franc-Comtois, but lumping them together nevertheless disregards a considerable amount of variety and diversity. In general, the arguments presented by Bernard Cerquiglini in his report Les langues de la France (Cerquiglini et al., 2003) seem solidly based and internally consistent, and the current Atlas follows his stand. There are three outlying dialects of Norman on the Channel Islands, those of Guernsey and Jersey, and the recently extinct one of Alderney. Outside the Oïl area, Gallo-Romance consists of Francoprovençal, Piedmontese, Ligurian, Lombard, Emilian-Romagnol and Venetan. It may be argued that within Francoprovençal there is so much diversity and fragmentation that it too, like the Oc and the Oïl languages, should be seen as a group of languages rather than a single language, but it nonetheless seems a true case of a dialect continuum, as well as exhibiting sufficient intelligibility to allow us to defend the current treatment.
Raeto-Romance is a group of three well-known minority languages, Romansh, Ladin and Friulian. Raeto-Romance is often classified inside Gallo-Romance, but there seem to be enough distinguishing features for it to be treated as an independent sub-branch.
Sardinian is here understood as a unit consisting of two closely related languages, Logudorese and Campidanese, while Gallurese and Sassarese are dealt with in the Italo-Romance section below. It may be argued that Logudorese and Campidanese are close enough to be treated as dialects of a single Sardinian language, but as in the cases of the Oc and Oïl languages discussed above, they appear reasonably distinctive. There is no doubt of their being endangered, as Italian is gaining ground fast, even in Sardinian's heartland.
Italo-Romance consists of Corsican, as well as Gallurese and Sassarese (treated technically as outlying dialects of Corsican here), Italian (comprising Tuscan and Central Italian dialect groups), South Italian (including Campanian and Calabrese) and Sicilian. Until now, Italian authorities have not granted recognition to the regional languages belonging to the Italo-Romance or the ​Gallo-Romance sub-branches, although Ladin and Friulian are recognized. South Italian and Sicilian, and to a lesser extent Corsican, nevertheless enjoy a relatively stable position as the vernaculars of their communities.
The Istriot language is a little-known although relatively well-studied language of the Istrian peninsula that constitutes an independent branch of Romance and is also severely endangered.
The Romanian sub-branch of Romance consists not only of Romanian in the narrow sense of the term (also called Daco-Romanian), but also of the widely dispersed Aromanian (Macedo-Romanian), Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian languages, all of which are highly endangered, especially Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian in Greece. Linguists in Romania traditionally treat all members of this sub-branch as dialects of Romanian, but given the notable differences and clear boundaries between them, such a stance only reflects out-of-date terminology.
Albanian is a primary branch of the Indo-European family, and its two main varieties, Gheg and Tosk, can be seen as dialect groups of a single, bipolar language joined by a belt of transitional dialects. Neither of them is endangered, but there are three endangered outlying dialects, two of Tosk and one of Gheg.
The Hellenic branch consists of two languages, Greek and the severely endangered Tsakonian, which have been distinct since ancient times. The outlying dialects of Greek are very much endangered.
Besides the non-endangered (Eastern) Armenian, there are several isolated speaker communities, of which Western Armenian (which survives in Istanbul, the Middle East and elsewhere in the diaspora) as well as Homshetsma (spoken near the Black Sea coast) are tentatively recognized as outlying dialects in the Atlas.
The Indo-Iranian branch consists of three sub-branches, Indic, Iranian and Nuristani (also known as Kafiri). Romani is the only Indic language in the area covered by this chapter, while its extinct relative Lomavren in Armenia provided vocabulary to the local mixed language with an Armenian basis. Romani is incontestably the most widespread non-territorial language in the world. It is treated as seven languages by SIL under the names Carpathian Romani, Kalo Finnish Romani, Baltic Romani, Balkan Romani, Sinte Romani, Welsh Romani and Vlach ('Vlax') Romani, but despite their extensive distribution and many contact-induced innovations the Romani dialects preserve a remarkable degree of unity, which has led to the current treatment of Romani as a single language. The placing of the map point, in north-west Transylvania, is meant to give token representation to a very diffuse language.
There are several mixed languages with Romani vocabulary in Europe, the best known perhaps being Angloromani, but since they typically function as second languages in their communities, they have not been included in the Atlas, although a fuller description of language diversity should aim to take them into account.
There are also several languages belonging to the Iranian sub-branch of the Indo-Iranian branch spoken in the Caucasus and Anatolia. The only Eastern Iranian language in the area under review is Ossete, with two characteristic dialect groups, Digor and Iron, but apparently sufficiently cohesive to be regarded as a single language. Ossete has a broad speaker base and it belongs to the vulnerable category with other large minority languages of the Caucasus. Tat and Juhur (Judeo-Tat), comprising a sub-unit of South-Western Iranian languages, are also spoken in the Caucasus, under strong pressure from Azerbaijani and Russian respectively.
One North-Western Iranian language, Zazaki, is spoken exclusively in Turkey, and despite having a high number of speakers, it must be regarded as vulnerable at the minimum. Of the North-Western Iranian ​languages, two more are represented in the region: Kurmanji (Northern Kurdish), spoken mainly in Turkey but also in the neighbouring countries in the Caucasus and the Middle East, cannot be regarded as endangered; Talysh, spoken in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Azerbaijan is, by contrast, threatened by the majority languages. Furthermore, a poorly documented and recently extinct language called Kilit is known from the Nakhichevan region of Azerbaijan, but it may also have been an outlying dialect of a nearby North-Western Iranian language.
■ ■The Semitic family
The Semitic language family is represented in the area under review by two languages of the Arabic branch, the severely endangered Cypriot Arabic and the non-endangered Maltese, as well as a number of clearly endangered languages of the Aramaic branch in Turkey and the Caucasus. Both of the known Central Neo-Aramaic languages, the closely related Turoyo and Mlahso, were based in Turkey, from where the majority of speakers fled in the early twentieth century. Turoyo now survives marginally in Turkey as well as in the Syrian Arab Republic, but mainly through a major diaspora in several countries in western Europe and overseas. Mlahso is now extinct both in Turkey and in the expatriate community in the Syrian Arab Republic. Three North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic languages were traditionally spoken in Turkey and across the border further into the Middle East, namely Suret (divided by SIL on non-linguistic grounds into Assyrian Neo-Aramaic and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic), Hértevin (reportedly quite different from Suret) and Lishan Didan (a Jewish Aramaic language also linguistically separate), all of them now largely in diaspora. Furthermore, an outlying dialect of Suret was created in Georgia because of the migration of the entire Bohtan Neo-Aramaic community from Turkey.
■ ■The Kartvelian family
The Kartvelian language family is clearly structured into four languages, of which Georgian is non-endangered, while Svan and the closely related but distinct Mingrelian and Laz are increasingly endangered.
■ ■The Abkhaz-Adyge family
The Abkhaz-Adyge language family consists of three units, Abkhaz, Ubykh and Adyge. The speakers of Ubykh were forced to translocate from the Caucasus to Turkey, where the language is now extinct. Mass migrations from the other language communities to the Middle East and further afield also occurred in the nineteenth century, but their map points appear only in their current locations in the Caucasus. The Abkhaz branch is usually classified as consisting of two closely related languages, Abkhaz and Abaza. Since the Ashkharawa dialect is practically identical with Abkhaz, the solution adopted in the current Atlas is to regard the more distinct Tapanta dialect alone as representing Abaza, which would perhaps best be qualified as an outlying dialect of Abkhaz. The Adyge ('Adyghe') branch, also known as Circassian, also consists of two closely related varieties, but their status as separate languages, Adyge proper (Western Circassian) vs Kabard-Cherkes (Eastern Circassian, also Kabardian), is clearer. Despite the turbulent history, the endangerment status of the extant Abkhaz-Adyge languages is no worse than vulnerable.
■ ■The Nakh-Daghestanian family
The classification of the Nakh-Daghestanian language family is, despite the large number of languages, relatively uncomplicated. The Nakh branch consists of three languages, the severely endangered Bats and the vulnerable, closely related Chechen and Ingush. Altogether ​twenty-seven other languages in six groups are spoken in Daghestan and further south to Azerbaijan, of which Avar, comprising a group of its own, is the region's dominant indigenous language; it is vulnerable only due to its secondary position in comparison with Russian. The Andi and Tsez languages are spoken by small communities and appear at least in the category of definitely endangered. Lak and Dargwa, classified either as distinct branches or together, have larger numbers of speakers and are labelled vulnerable. The Lezgian group contains two major and thus only vulnerable indigenous languages, and eight small and endangered ones. There are a further two items in the list that may warrant a division into several languages, most notably Dargwa, which, it has been suggested, may contain anything from a couple to eighteen languages, but also Karata, from which the Tokita dialect may turn out to be distinct. All in all, the language boundaries in this region of exceptionally high language density are conspicuously clear and the few problematic issues derive from the lack of information rather than inconclusive criteria.
■ ■The Turkic family
The Turkic language family has only two primary branches, one consisting of the Chuvash language alone (historically known as Bulgar Turkic with the inclusion of long-extinct languages) and the other comprising all the remaining languages called Common Turkic. Chuvash itself is supported by a large minority community and belongs to the vulnerable category because of the dominant position of Russian.
The Common Turkic branch is further divided into nine genetic groups, of which only two, Oguz and Kipchak, are represented in the area covered by this chapter. The Oguz languages spoken within the area under review are Gagauz, Turkish and Azerbaijani as well as three outlying dialects, two of Turkish and one of Turkmen. Gagauz may be said to have originated as an outlying dialect, and the classification of the Gagauz dialects in the Balkans poses further problems because they have not been sufficiently studied.
Kipchak, the most diverse of the Turkic groups, has three recognizable subgroups. First, the subgroup consisting of Crimean Tatar, Karaim, Kumyk, Karachay-Balkar and the extinct Cuman is spoken entirely within the area under review. Kumyk and Karachay-Balkar are both vulnerable, while Crimean Tatar and Karaim are highly endangered, not least because of the mass deportation of the Crimean Tatar community to Central Asia in the Soviet era, so that today only a minority of speakers live in the Crimea, the location of the map point for Crimean Tatar. Second, Tatar and Bashkir (Bashkort), as well as two outlying dialects of Tatar in Siberia, compose a close-knit subgroup, with Tatar as one of the very few entirely safe minority languages in Europe and Bashkir also relatively stable but nonetheless vulnerable. Third, Nogay, a moderately endangered language with widely scattered communities in eastern Europe and the Caucasus, belongs to a subgroup together with Kazakh and Karakalpak. Nogay is also traditionally spoken in the Crimea as well as in Dobruja, but in those regions its speakers are administratively counted among Crimean Tatars.
■ ■The Mongolic family
Kalmyk is the only Mongolic language spoken in Europe, and it is definitely endangered despite its position as an official language of a constituent republic of the Russian Federation.