This feature allows to generate a graphic representation of the supposed genetic relationships between the language set included in the database, in the form of a genealogical tree (it is also implemented in the StarLing software). The tree picture also includes separation dates for various languages, calculated through standardized glottochronological techniques; additionally, a lexicostatistical matrix of cognate percentages can be produced if asked for.
The tree can be generated by a variety of methods, and you can modify some of the parameters to test various strategies of language classification. The pictures can be saved in different graphic formats and used for presentation or any other purposes.
This option displays the full description for the selected database, including: (a) the complete list of primary and secondary bibliographical sources for the included languages, including brief descriptions of all titles; (b) general notes on said languages, e. g. sociolinguistic information, degree of reliability of sources, notes on grammatical and lexical peculiarities of the languages that may be relevant for the compilation of the lists, etc.; (c) details on the transcription system that was used in the original data sources and its differences from the UTS (Unified Transcription System) transliteration.
This option, when checked, uses a set of different color markers to highlight groups of phonetically similar words in different languages with the same Swadesh meaning.
Phonetic similarity between two different forms is defined in the GLD as a situation in which the aligned consonants of the compared forms (usually the first two) are deemed «similar» to each other. In order for two consonants to be «similar», they have to belong to the same «consonantal class», i.e. a group of sounds that share the same place and a similar manner of articulation. The current grouping of sounds into sound classes can be found here.
Accordingly, the aligned forms undergo a process of «vowel extraction» (all vowels are formally assumed to belong to «class H», together with «weak» laryngeal phonemes), and the individual consonants are then converted to classes, e. g. dog → TK, drink → TRNK (in comparisons, only the first two consonants will be used, so, actually TR), eat → HT (word-initial vowel is equated with lack of consonant or «weak» consonant), fly → PR (l and r belong to the same class) and so on.
If both of the first two consonants of the compared forms are found to correlate, i.e. belong to the same class, the words are deemed similar (e. g. English fly and German fliegen both have the consonantal skeleton PR). If at least one differs, the words are not deemed similar (e. g. English tooth → TT and Old Norse tɔnn → TN, although they are etymological cognates, will not pass the similarity tense because of the second position).
In most cases, checking this option will highlight phonetically similar forms that are also etymological cognates and share the same numeric cognation indexes. Occasionally, however, the checking will also yield «false positives» (accidentally phonetically similar forms that do not share a common origin) and «false negatives» (phonetically dissimilar forms, not highlighted, but actually cognate). It should be noted that one should never expect this method to yield a 100% accurate picture of etymological cognacy. Rather, the method is useful for the following goals: (a) assess the amount of phonetic change that took place between related languages; (b) give a general idea of the degree of closeness of relationship for those languages where phonetic correspondences have not yet been properly established; (c) assess the average number of «chance similarities» that may arise between different languages.
The last task is particularly instructive if the «Highlight...» option is used between two different languages from different databases, i.e. not related to each other or distantly related: in most cases, it will yield around 2-3 accidental color highlights, but occasionally, the count may go as high up as 5 or 6.
This option unfolds all of the notes that accompany the individual forms in the database. Sometimes these notes only consist of a basic reference to the bibliographical source, but at other times, they can be quite expansive, which makes browsing through the wordlist quite cumbersome. By default, the notes stay hidden (each note can also be opened separately by clicking on the sign next to the word).
Tugov 1967: 226; Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 52; Genko 1955: 112. Compound form, literally 'one way' (zǝ 'one' q.v. + mʕʷa 'way, road' q.v.). Other equivalents listed in [Zhirov & Ekba 1965] correspond to 'all' as 'whole, complete' rather than the required 'each one' (in a number of objects).
Tugov 1967: 403; Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 159. Meaning is glossed as Russian зола '(hot) ashes (in the stove), lye' rather than пепел, for which a different equivalent is found: satħʷa [Tugov 1967: 333], but qʷa seems to be the more "basic" term in the language (morphologically more simple, found in multiple compound formations, etc.).
Bgazhba 1964: 292; Genko 1998: 303; Kaslandzia 2005: I, 427. Same word as 'skin' q.v.; for additional semantic precision, the complex form a=cʼla a=ɕʷa (literally 'tree-skin') may be used.
Bgazhba 2006: 309 (erroneously rendered orthographically as a=psˈaː-tʼʷ {аҧсаатǝ}, although most sources indicate palatal articulation of the fricative); Genko 1998: 197. The simple variant a=pʆˈaː is also attested.
Tugov 1967: 244; Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 558. A compound form, not segmentable on the synchronic Abaza level, but clearly segmentable into distinct morphemes based on external comparison.
Bgazhba 2006: 138; Genko 1998: 50. The first variant is from [Bgazhba 2006]; the second is from Genko's dictionary. Both seem to represent subdialectal varieties.
Bgazhba 1964: 161 (rendered orthographically as {агушҧы}); Genko 1998: 75; Kaslandzia 2005: I, 318. The first component of this compound, when used individually, means either 'heart' q.v. or 'breast' in an abstract sense ('hold close to the breast / heart', etc.). The second component, a=špˈǝ, when used individually, may mean 'breast / thorax' all by itself ([Genko 1998: 350]; [Kaslandzia 2005: I, 613]); this looks like innovative semantic usage (see the meaning 'side' for this word in the closely related Abaza), but, since the original compound has not yet been replaced completely by the innovation, it makes sense to regard the morpheme =gʷǝ- as still the main carrier of the meaning 'breast' in Abkhaz. Cf. also a=gʷǝ-pħʷˈǝ {агǝыҧҳǝы} ~ a=gʷǝ-ħʷpˈǝ {агǝыҳǝҧы} 'female breast' [Kaslandzia 2005: I, 312], where the second component is the same as in a=pħʷˈǝ-s 'woman' q.v.
Bgazhba 1964: 199; Genko 1998: 55; Kaslandzia 2005: I, 255. Genko's dictionary also records such variants as ˈa=bǝl-ra (accent on the 1st syllable) and ˈa=blǝ-ra (with metrathesis); cf. a=blˈǝ-ra 'conflagration, place burnt out by the fire' in [Kaslandzia 2005: I, 249]. Distinct from a=cracʼa-ra 'to set fire (to smth.)' [Kaslandzia 2005: II, 414].
Bgazhba 2006: 46; Genko 1998: 84. Quoted as a=nap=xǝʆ {анаҧхыс ̀} in [Bgazhba 2006], which could be an orthographic error (Genko's dictionary, as well as external parallels, all confirm that the labial is glottalized). See notes on Abkhaz proper for the internal structure.
Tugov 1967: 288. The word is historically a compound, the first part of which is still identifiable as Abaza napʼǝ 'hand' q.v. The second part, =xǝ, goes back to the old root for 'nail' and is also seen in Abaza šʸapʼ=xǝ ~ šʸam=xǝ {щапIхы ~ щамхы} 'toenail / claw' [Tugov 1967: 451], where the first part = šʸapʼǝ 'foot' q.v. In [Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 267], the equivalent for 'nail' is given as napʼxǝ-šʸapʼxǝ {напIхы-щапIхы}, i.e. 'fingernail and toenail'.
Bgazhba 1964: 367; Genko 1998: 198, 200; Kaslandzia 2005: II, 69, 74. The two variants seem to be freely interchangeable; ˈa=pta is occasionally regarded as a simplified variant of the more archaic ˈa=pstħʷa.
Bgazhba 1964: 609; Genko 1998: 279; Kaslandzia 2005: II, 357. Cf. the first morpheme of this compound separately in ˈa=χʸ-ta 'cold (n.)' [Genko 1998: 278]. The second morpheme remains unclear.
Tugov 1967: 407; Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 549. Polysemy: 'cold / cool'. Phonetic structure of the stem (as well as external comparison) indicates a compound origin, but the etymology of the second part of the compound (-šʷašʷa) remains unclear.
Bgazhba 1964: 458; Genko 1998: 14, 181. The root morpheme is =y-, combined with different preverbs (=ne=y- 'to come thither', =a=y- 'to come hither'). Cf. also a different root in a=a-rˈa 'to come, arrive' ([Genko 1998: 16]; [Kaslandzia 2005: I, 28]), frequently used in abstract meanings ('to grow up', 'to come, arrive (of a time or season)', etc.).
Bgazhba 1964: 563 (quoted in the morphological variant i=b-ow {ибоу}); Kaslandzia 2005: I, 213. The word is absent in both [Genko 1998] and [Shakryl 1986]. However, it is still eligible over a=ʕʷˈa [Genko 1998: 366], glossed as 'dry, dessicated' (i. e. 'deprived of necessary moisture' instead of 'deprived of excessive moisture').
Tugov 1967: 114; Zhirov & Ekba 1956: 492. The latter source quotes two secondary synonyms: (a) yǝ=r=ʕʷu {йыргIву}, derived from the verbal stem ʕʷa- 'to (become) dry' [Tugov 1967: 196]; (b) waʕʷ {уагIв}, actually 'dry (of weather)', 'drought' [Tugov 1967: 373]. The majority of textual examples in both sources confirms that bax is the most convenient and frequently used equivalent for the required Swadesh meaning (cf.: kʼasǝžʷ bax 'dry cloth', etc.); ʕʷa- is generally used in the meaning 'deprived of necessary moisture' (i. e. 'stale', 'withered', etc.) than in the meaning 'deprived of excessive moisture'. The stem is a composite verbal one (cf. ba-x-ra 'to (become) dry'), with the productive auxiliary stem -x- joined to the original root.
Build treei