Editing Etruscan language (section)

=== Superseded theories and fringe scholarship ===
For many hundreds of years the classification of Etruscan remained problematic for historical linguists, though it was almost universally agreed upon that Etruscan was a language unlike any other in Europe. Before it gained currency as one of the Tyrrhenian languages, Etruscan was commonly treated as a [[language isolate]]. Over the centuries many hypotheses on the Etruscan language have been developed, most of which have not been accepted or have been considered highly speculative since they were published. The major consensus among scholars is that Etruscan, and therefore all the languages of the Tyrrhenian family, is neither Indo-European nor Semitic,<ref name=Benelli2018>{{cite book|last1=Bellelli |first1=Vincenzo |last2=Benelli |first2=Enrico |date=2018 |chapter=Aspetti generali. 1.2 Lingua e origini |title=Gli Etruschi - La scrittura, la lingua, la società |language=it |publication-place=Rome |publisher=Carocci editore |pages=18–20 |isbn=978-88-430-9309-0}}</ref> and may be a Pre–Indo-European and Paleo-European language.<ref name=Haarmann2014/><ref name=Harding2014/> At present the major consensus is that Etruscan's only kinship is with the Raetic and Lemnian languages.<ref name=Benelli2018/><ref name=Belfiore2020>{{cite journal|last1=Belfiore |first1=Valentina |date=May 2020 |title=Etrusco |journal=Palaeohispanica. Revista sobre lenguas y culturas de la Hispania Antigua |language=it |issue=20 |pages=199–262 |doi=10.36707/palaeohispanica.v0i20.382 |doi-access=free |s2cid=243365116 |issn=1578-5386}}</ref>

==== Pre-Greek substrate hypothesis ====
The idea of a relation between the language of the [[Minoan civilization|Minoan]] [[Linear A]] scripts was taken into consideration as the main hypothesis by [[Michael Ventris]] before he discovered that, in fact, the language behind the later [[Linear B]] script was [[Mycenean Greek|Mycenean]], a [[Ancient Greek dialects|Greek dialect]]. It has been proposed to possibly be part of a wider Paleo-European "Aegean" language family, which would also include [[Minoan language|Minoan]], [[Eteocretan language|Eteocretan]] (possibly descended from Minoan) and [[Eteocypriot language|Eteocypriot]]. This has been proposed by Giulio Mauro Facchetti, a researcher who has dealt with both Etruscan and Minoan, and supported by S. Yatsemirsky, referring to some similarities between Etruscan and Lemnian on one hand, and [[Linear A|Minoan]] and Eteocretan on the other.{{sfn|Facchetti|2000}}{{sfn|Facchetti|2002|p=136}}
It has also been proposed that this language family is related to the pre-Indo-European languages of Anatolia, based upon place name analysis.<ref name="auto" /> The relationship between Etruscan and Minoan, and hypothetical unattested pre-Indo-European languages of Anatolia, is considered unfounded.<ref name=Benelli2018/><ref name=Belfiore2020/>

==== Anatolian Indo-European family hypothesis ====
Some have suggested that Tyrsenian languages may yet be distantly related to early [[Indo-European languages]], such as those of the [[Anatolian languages|Anatolian branch]].<ref>For example, Steinbauer (1999), Rodríguez Adrados (2005).</ref> More recently, [[Robert S. P. Beekes]] argued in 2002 that the people later known as the Lydians and Etruscans had originally lived in northwest [[Anatolia]], with a coastline to the [[Sea of Marmara]], whence they were driven by the [[Phrygians]] ''circa'' 1200 BC, leaving a remnant known in antiquity as the [[Tiras|Tyrsenoi]]. A segment of this people moved south-west to [[Lydia]], becoming known as the [[Lydian language|Lydians]], while others sailed away to take refuge in Italy, where they became known as Etruscans.<ref>Beekes, Robert S. P.[http://www.knaw.nl/Content/Internet_KNAW/publicaties/pdf/20021051.pdf "The Origin of the Etruscans"]{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120117190941/http://www.knaw.nl/Content/Internet_KNAW/publicaties/pdf/20021051.pdf|date=2012-01-17}}. In: ''Biblioteca Orientalis'' '''59''' (2002), 206–242.</ref> This account draws on the well-known story by [[Herodotus]] (I, 94) of the Lydian origin of the Etruscans or Tyrrhenians, famously rejected by [[Dionysius of Halicarnassus]] (book I), partly on the authority of Xanthus, a Lydian historian, who had no knowledge of the story, and partly on what he judged to be the different languages, laws, and religions of the two peoples. In 2006, Frederik Woudhuizen went further on Herodotus' traces, suggesting that Etruscan belongs to the [[Anatolian languages|Anatolian]] branch of the Indo-European family, specifically to [[Luwian]].<ref name="luwianseapeoples">{{cite book |last=Woudhuizen |first=Frederik Christiaan |url=http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/7686/Woudhuizen%20bw.pdf |title=The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples |publisher=Erasmus Universiteit |year=2006 |location=Rotterdam |page=139}}</ref> Woudhuizen revived a [[Etruscan origins#Historical claims of allochthonous (outside) origin|conjecture]] to the effect that the Tyrsenians came from [[Anatolia]], including [[Lydia]], whence they were driven by the [[Cimmerians]] in the early Iron Age, 750–675 BC, leaving some colonists on [[Lemnos]]. He makes a number of comparisons of Etruscan to [[Luwian]] and asserts that Etruscan is modified Luwian. He accounts for the non-Luwian features as a [[Mysia]]n influence: "deviations from Luwian [...] may plausibly be ascribed to the dialect of the indigenous population of Mysia."<ref>Woudhuizen 2006 p. 86</ref> According to Woudhuizen, the Etruscans were initially colonizing the Latins, bringing the alphabet from Anatolia. For historical, archaeological, genetic, and linguistic reasons, a relationship between Etruscan and the Indo-European Anatolian languages (Lydian or Luwian) and the idea that the Etruscans initially colonized the Latins, bringing the alphabet from Anatolia, have not been accepted, since the account by Herodotus is no longer considered reliable.<ref name="Wallace2010" /><ref name=Posth2021/><ref name=Barker>{{cite book |last1=Barker |first1=Graeme |author-link1= Graeme Barker|last2=Rasmussen |first2=Tom |author-link2=Tom Rasmussen |author-mask1= |author-mask2= |author-mask3= |author-mask4= |author-mask5= |name-list-style= |translator-last1= |translator-first1= |translator-link1= |translator-last2= |translator-first2= |translator-link2= |display-translators= |translator-mask1= |translator-mask2= |year=2000 |orig-year= |script-chapter= |trans-chapter= |chapter-format= |display-editors= |title=The Etruscans |script-title= |trans-title= |url-status= |url-access= |series= The Peoples of Europe|location=Oxford |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |page=44 |no-pp= |isbn=978-0-631-22038-1 }}</ref><ref name=Turfa2017>{{cite book |last1=Turfa|first1= Jean MacIntosh |author-link1=Jean MacIntosh Turfa|year= 2017|chapter= The Etruscans|editor1-last= Farney|editor1-first=Gary D. |editor2-last=Bradley |editor2-first=Gary |title=The Peoples of Ancient Italy |location=Berlin |publisher= De Gruyter|pages=637–672 |doi=10.1515/9781614513001 |isbn=978-1-61451-520-3 }}</ref><ref name=DeGrummond2014>{{cite book |last1= De Grummond |first1=Nancy T.|author-link1= Nancy Thomson de Grummond|year=2014 |chapter=Ethnicity and the Etruscans|editor1-last=McInerney |editor1-first=Jeremy |title=A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean |location=Chichester, UK |publisher= John Wiley & Sons, Inc |pages=405–422 |doi=10.1002/9781118834312 |isbn=978-1-4443-3734-1 }}</ref><ref name=Shipley2017>{{cite book |last1=Shipley |first1=Lucy |year= 2017|chapter=Where is home? |title= The Etruscans: Lost Civilizations|location=London |publisher=Reaktion Books |pages=28–46 |isbn=978-1-78023-862-3 }}</ref>

==== Other theories ====
The interest in Etruscan antiquities and the Etruscan language found its modern origin in a book by a Renaissance Dominican friar, [[Annio da Viterbo]], a [[Christian Kabbalah|cabalist]] and [[oriental studies|orientalist]] now remembered mainly for literary forgeries. In 1498, Annio published his antiquarian miscellany titled {{Lang|la|Antiquitatum variarum}} (in 17 volumes) where he put together a theory in which both the [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] and Etruscan languages were said to originate from a single source, the "Aramaic" spoken by [[Noah]] and his descendants, founders of the Etruscan city [[Viterbo]].

The 19th century saw numerous attempts to reclassify Etruscan. Ideas of [[Semitic languages|Semitic]] origins found supporters until this time. In 1858, the last attempt was made by [[Johann Gustav Stickel]], [[Jena University]] in his {{Lang|de|Das Etruskische durch Erklärung von Inschriften und Namen als semitische Sprache erwiesen}}.<ref>{{cite book|title=Das Etruskische durch Erklärung von Inschriften und Namen als semitische Sprache erwiesen|last=Stickel|first=Johann Gustav|publisher=Wilhelm Engelmann|place=Leipzig|year=1858}}</ref> A reviewer<ref>Gildemeister, Johannes. In: ''ZDMG'' '''13''' (1859), pp. 289–304.</ref> concluded that Stickel brought forward every possible argument which would speak for that hypothesis, but he proved the opposite of what he had attempted to do. In 1861, [[Robert Ellis (classicist)|Robert Ellis]] proposed that Etruscan was related to [[Armenian language|Armenian]].<ref>Ellis, Robert (1861). ''The Armenian origin of the Etruscans''. London: Parker, Son, & Bourn.</ref> Exactly 100 years later, a relationship with [[Albanian language|Albanian]] was to be advanced by [[Zecharia Mayani]],<ref>Mayani, Zacharie (1961). ''The Etruscans Begin to Speak''. Translation by Patrick Evans. London: Souvenir Press.</ref> a theory regarded today as disproven and discredited.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Shipley |first=Lucy |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q51NDwAAQBAJ |title=The Etruscans: Lost Civilizations |date=2023 |publisher=Reaktion Books |isbn=978-1-78023-862-3 |pages=183, 251|quote=Even into the 1960s, new language links were proposed and disproven: Albanian as Etruscan [...] This discredited idea was put forward in Z. Mayani, The Etruscans Begin to Speak (London, 1962).}}</ref>

Several theories from the late 19th and early 20th centuries connected Etruscan to [[Uralic languages|Uralic]] or even [[Altaic languages]]. In 1874, the British scholar [[Isaac Taylor (priest)|Isaac Taylor]] brought up the idea of a genetic relationship between Etruscan and [[Hungarian Language|Hungarian]], of which also [[Jules Martha]] would approve in his exhaustive study {{Lang|la|La langue étrusque}} (1913).<ref name="szabir.com" /> In 1911, the French orientalist Baron Carra de Vaux suggested a connection between Etruscan and the [[Altaic languages]].<ref name="szabir.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.szabir.com/blog/etruscans-huns-and-hungarians/ |title=Etruscans, Huns and Hungarians|last=Tóth |first=Alfréd |access-date=June 17, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100302115355/http://www.szabir.com/blog/etruscans-huns-and-hungarians/ |archive-date=March 2, 2010 }}</ref> The Hungarian connection was revived by [[Mario Alinei]], emeritus professor of Italian languages at the [[University of Utrecht]].<ref>Alinei, Mario (2003). [http://www.uu.nl/faculty/humanities/NL/Onderzoek/hoogleraren/Pages/emeritushoogleraren.aspx ''Etrusco: una forma arcaica di ungherese'']. Il Mulino: Bologna.</ref> Alinei's proposal has been rejected by Etruscan experts such as Giulio M. Facchetti,<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.uninsubria.eu/research/compscicomm/CV_CompSciComm/Facchetti.pdf |title=Giulio Mauro Facchetti |access-date=2010-10-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720173303/http://www.uninsubria.eu/research/compscicomm/CV_CompSciComm/Facchetti.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-20 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>Facchetti, Giulio M. [http://didattica.iulm.it/scritture_dimenticate/JIES.pdf "The Interpretation of Etruscan Texts and its Limits" (PDF)]{{Dead link|date=July 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}. In: ''Journal of Indo-European Studies'' '''33''', 3/4, 2005, 359–388. Quote from p.&nbsp;371: ‘[...] suffice it to say that Alinei clears away all the combinatory work done on Etruscan (for grammar specially) to try to make Uralic inflections fit without ripping the seams. He completely ignores the aforesaid recent findings in phonology (and phoneme/grapheme relationships), returning to the obsolete but convenient theory that the handwriting changed and orthography was not consolidated'.</ref> Finno-Ugric experts such as Angela Marcantonio,<ref>Marcantonio, Angela (2004). "Un caso di 'fantalinguistica'. A proposito di Mario Alinei: 'Etrusco: una forma arcaica di ungherese'." In: ''Studi e Saggi Linguistici'' '''XLII''', 173–200, where Marcantonio states that "La tesi dell’Alinei è da rigettare senza alcuna riserva" ("Alinei's thesis must be rejected without any reservation"), criticizes his methodology and the fact that he ignored the comparison with Latin and Greek words in pnomastic and institutional vocabulary. Large quotes can be read at Melinda Tamás-Tarr "[http://www.osservatorioletterario.net/enigmaetrusco3.pdf Sulla scrittura degli Etruschi: «Ma è veramente una scrittura etrusca»? Cosa sappiamo degli Etruschi III]". In: ''Osservatorio letterario. Ferrara e l’Altrove'' ''X/XI'', Nos. 53/54 (November–December/January–February 2006/2007), 67–73. Marcantonio is Associated Professor of Historical Linguistics and Finno-Ugric Studies at the University of Rome "La Sapienza" ([http://sites.google.com/site/angelamarcantonio/ personal website] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150214075612/https://sites.google.com/site/angelamarcantonio/ |date=2015-02-14 }}).</ref> and by Hungarian historical linguists such as Bela Brogyanyi.<ref>Brogyanyi, Bela. "[http://redaktion.gesus-info.de/S&S-online/S&S_38-2008.pdf Die ungarische alternative Sprachforschung und ihr ideologischer Hintergrund – Versuch einer Diagnose] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211123205704/http://redaktion.gesus-info.de/S%26S-online/S%26S_38-2008.pdf |date=2021-11-23 }}". In: ''Sprache & Sprachen'' '''38''' (2008), 3–15, who claims that Alinei shows a complete ignorance on Etruscan and Hungarian ["glänzt er aber durch völlige Unkenntnis des Ungarischen und Etruskischen (vgl. Alinei 2003)"] and that the thesis of a relation between Hungarian and Etruscan languages deserves no attention.</ref> Another proposal, pursued mainly by a few linguists from the former Soviet Union, suggested a relationship with [[Northeast Caucasian]] (or Nakh-Daghestanian) languages.<ref name="robertson">{{cite web |first=Ed |last=Robertson |title=Etruscan's genealogical linguistic relationship with Nakh–Daghestanian: a preliminary evaluation |year=2006 |url=http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(329)EGRWND.pdf |access-date=2009-07-13 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110810021157/http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(329)EGRWND.pdf |archive-date=10 August 2011 }}</ref><ref name="starostin">{{Cite book |last1=Starostin | first1=Sergei | author1-link=Sergei Starostin | last2=Orel | first2=Vladimir | year=1989 | contribution=Etruscan and North Caucasian| title=Explorations in Language Macrofamilies | editor-last =Shevoroshkin | editor-first=Vitaliy | series=Bochum Publications in Evolutionary Cultural Semiotics | issue=23 | publisher=Bochum }}</ref> None of these theories has been accepted nor enjoys consensus.<ref name=Benelli2018/><ref name=Belfiore2020/>