Language Atlas
Claims this atlas currently marks as unsettled or as tested and found false. A debated fact is one scholars hold competing positions on; a debunked one has been checked against the record and found not to hold. Both are kept in view rather than quietly smoothed over, with the reasoning that put each one where it stands.
124 statements.
Dene-Caucasian, Proto-Language StatusDiscredited
Dene-Caucasian, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Discredited
Source Dene-Caucasian languages, Wikipedia
Melanesian languages, Proto-Language StatusNot a genealogical group; at best paraphyletic, likely polyphyletic
Melanesian languages, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Not a genealogical group; at best paraphyletic, likely polyphyletic
Sources describe the classification as contested
Source Melanesian languages - Wikipedia
Remote Oceanic languages, Proto-Language Statusproposal abandoned; no proto-language established
Remote Oceanic languages, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States proposal abandoned; no proto-language established
Source Remote Oceanic languages - Wikipedia
Ural-Altaic, Proto-Language StatusRejected as a genealogical family; mainstream linguistics now holds that even the Altaic languages proposed within it do not share a common descent, so no valid Ural-Altaic proto-language is reconstructed.
Ural-Altaic, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Rejected as a genealogical family; mainstream linguistics now holds that even the Altaic languages proposed within it do not share a common descent, so no valid Ural-Altaic proto-language is reconstructed.
Source Ural-Altaic languages, Wikipedia
Adamawa languages, Proto-Language StatusGenetic unity is itself disputed, not merely the proto-language: Roger Blench (2012) treats Adamawa as a geographic grouping rather than a valid family and redistributes its branches into his proposed Savannas family, so no family-wide proto-language is reconstructed or claimed.
Adamawa languages, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Genetic unity is itself disputed, not merely the proto-language: Roger Blench (2012) treats Adamawa as a geographic grouping rather than a valid family and redistributes its branches into his proposed Savannas family, so no family-wide proto-language is reconstructed or claimed.
Source Wikipedia: Adamawa Languages
Afro-Asiatic, Proto-Language StatusProto-Afroasiatic is reconstructed only in broad outline. The time depth of the family, plausibly ten thousand years or more, is substantially greater than Indo-European or Bantu, which limits how confidently the common ancestor can be reconstructed.
Afro-Asiatic, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Proto-Afroasiatic is reconstructed only in broad outline. The time depth of the family, plausibly ten thousand years or more, is substantially greater than Indo-European or Bantu, which limits how confidently the common ancestor can be reconstructed.
Each of the six branches is individually well established; the deep time depth of the family as a whole is what limits secure reconstruction of the common ancestor.
Source Glottolog
Akkadian, Attested To (Year)75
Akkadian, Languages
Standing
Concerns Attested To (Year)
Currently States 75
The latest securely dated cuneiform text in Akkadian is an astronomical almanac from 74/75 CE, but this marks only the end of scribal/scholarly use, not of spoken use, which had given way to Aramaic many centuries earlier; the two dates should not be conflated.
Source Encyclopaedia Britannica
Altaic, Proto-Language StatusRejected by most historical linguists as a genuine reconstruction; treated instead as an inventory of borrowed and convergent forms accumulated through prolonged contact among Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic speakers.
Altaic, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Rejected by most historical linguists as a genuine reconstruction; treated instead as an inventory of borrowed and convergent forms accumulated through prolonged contact among Turkic, Mongolic and Tungusic speakers.
A reconstructed "Proto-Altaic" has been proposed, notably in Sergei Starostin's etymological dictionary citing shared basic vocabulary such as the words for eye, ear, neck and bone, but most specialists attribute this shared material to borrowing and long-term areal convergence rather than common ancestry. A minority of scholars continues to defend the genetic relationship.
Source Wikipedia: Altaic Languages
Amto-Musan, Proto-Language StatusWurm (1975) and Foley (2018) treat Amto-Musan as an independent Papuan language family; Ross (2005) left it unclassified for lack of data. Timothy Usher proposes linking it with the neighboring Arai languages and Pyu in an Arai-Samaia stock, a grouping Glottolog does not adopt.
Amto-Musan, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Wurm (1975) and Foley (2018) treat Amto-Musan as an independent Papuan language family; Ross (2005) left it unclassified for lack of data. Timothy Usher proposes linking it with the neighboring Arai languages and Pyu in an Arai-Samaia stock, a grouping Glottolog does not adopt.
Usher (2020) proposes an alternative Arai-Samaia stock grouping Amto-Musan with the Arai languages and Pyu; Glottolog does not adopt this link.
Source Wikipedia: Amto-Musan languages
Ancient Macedonian, Proto-Language StatusNo independently reconstructed proto-language: classification is debated between a Northwest Doric Greek dialect, the view with recent cautious scholarly agreement, and a separate but closely related Hellenic sister language of Greek.
Ancient Macedonian, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States No independently reconstructed proto-language: classification is debated between a Northwest Doric Greek dialect, the view with recent cautious scholarly agreement, and a separate but closely related Hellenic sister language of Greek.
Source Wikipedia: Ancient Macedonian Language
Ancient South Arabian, Proto-Language StatusNo separate proto-language reconstructed: the four principal languages, Sabaic, Minaic, Qatabanic and Hadramitic, are directly attested in their own inscriptions rather than derived by reconstruction; their placement within Semitic is itself debated between an older South Semitic classification and a newer Central Semitic one for at least Sabaic.
Ancient South Arabian, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States No separate proto-language reconstructed: the four principal languages, Sabaic, Minaic, Qatabanic and Hadramitic, are directly attested in their own inscriptions rather than derived by reconstruction; their placement within Semitic is itself debated between an older South Semitic classification and a newer Central Semitic one for at least Sabaic.
Source Wikipedia: Ancient South Arabian
Aramaic Alphabet, In Use Since (Year)-800
Aramaic Alphabet, Scripts
Standing
Concerns In Use Since (Year)
Currently States -800
Omniglot dates the script's adaptation from Phoenician to around 800 BCE, with its oldest known inscription circa 850 BCE; Encyclopaedia Britannica's account places its emergence somewhat earlier, in the tenth to ninth centuries BCE, rising to prominence after Assyria's eighth century BCE conquests.
Source Omniglot: The Online Encyclopedia of Writing Systems and Languages
Arutani, Proto-Language StatusNo proto-language; classified as an isolate by most linguists, though grouped with Sape, and later Maku, in a proposed Arutani-Sape family
Arutani, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States No proto-language; classified as an isolate by most linguists, though grouped with Sape, and later Maku, in a proposed Arutani-Sape family
Swadesh and Greenberg proposed an Arutani-Sape family, later expanded by Kaufman to include Maku; not confirmed.
Source Arutani language, Wikipedia
Atlantic (Semitic) languages, RegionEuropean Atlantic coast (hypothesized by Theo Vennemann)
Atlantic-Congo, Proto-Language StatusThe family's own internal composition is still debated. Glottolog, following Güldemann (2018), limits demonstrated Atlantic-Congo to Volta-Congo and the former West Atlantic languages, leaving several languages (Pre, Mpre, Aproumu Aizi) provisionally placed but not conclusively classified within it.
Atlantic-Congo, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States The family's own internal composition is still debated. Glottolog, following Güldemann (2018), limits demonstrated Atlantic-Congo to Volta-Congo and the former West Atlantic languages, leaving several languages (Pre, Mpre, Aproumu Aizi) provisionally placed but not conclusively classified within it.
Source Wikipedia: Atlantic-Congo languages
Austric, Proto-Language StatusProposed, unproven; no established proto-language
Austric, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Proposed, unproven; no established proto-language
Source Austric languages (Wikipedia)
Austroasiatic, Proto-Language StatusProto-Mon-Khmer, the family's largest branch, is reconstructed in detail; a single Proto-Austroasiatic uniting all branches is less securely established.
Austroasiatic, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Proto-Mon-Khmer, the family's largest branch, is reconstructed in detail; a single Proto-Austroasiatic uniting all branches is less securely established.
The wider Austric hypothesis linking Austroasiatic to Austronesian, and possibly Kra-Dai and Hmong-Mien, remains a minority position most specialists do not accept.
Source Wikipedia: Austroasiatic Languages
Baltic, Proto-Language StatusDebated: commonly held to descend from a reconstructed Proto-Baltic stage that split into East and West Baltic branches, though some recent scholarship argues Proto-Balto-Slavic split directly into three groups with no unified Proto-Baltic stage
Baltic, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Debated: commonly held to descend from a reconstructed Proto-Baltic stage that split into East and West Baltic branches, though some recent scholarship argues Proto-Balto-Slavic split directly into three groups with no unified Proto-Baltic stage
Sources disagree on whether a unified Proto-Baltic stage existed before splitting into East and West Baltic, or whether Proto-Balto-Slavic split directly into three groups instead.
Source Wikipedia: Baltic languages
Barito, Proto-Language StatusValidity as a genetic group is debated
Barito, Language Families
Standing
Concerns Proto-Language Status
Currently States Validity as a genetic group is debated
Some scholars treat Barito as a Sprachbund rather than a genuine clade and Adelaar (2005) rejects it as a valid group.
Source Barito languages, Wikipedia
Bengali, Attested From (Year)782
Bengali, Languages
Standing
Concerns Attested From (Year)
Currently States 782
8th century CE; a Sanskrit-Chinese dictionary compiled in 782 CE contains 51 Bengali words, the earliest documented evidence, though whether this represents a fully differentiated language is not certain.
Source Wikipedia: Bengali Language