Mutual intelligibility

Types

Asymmetric intelligibility

Asymmetric intelligibility refers to a relationship between two partially mutually intelligible languages in which one group of speakers has greater difficulty understanding the other language than vice versa, due to various linguistic or sociocultural factors. For example, if one language is related to another but has simplified its grammar, the speakers of the original language may understand the simplified language, but not vice versa. To illustrate, Dutch speakers tend to find it easier to understand Afrikaans as a result of Afrikaans's simplified grammar.

Among sign languages

Sign languages are not universal and usually not mutually intelligible, although there are also similarities among different sign languages. Sign languages are independent of spoken languages and follow their own linguistic development. For example, British Sign Language and American Sign Language (ASL) are quite different linguistically and mutually unintelligible. The grammar of sign languages does not usually resemble that of the spoken languages used in the same geographical area. To illustrate, in terms of syntax, ASL shares more in common with spoken Japanese than with English.

As a criterion for distinguishing languages

Some linguists use mutual intelligibility as the primary linguistic criterion for determining whether two speech varieties represent the same or different languages.

A primary challenge to this view is that speakers of closely related languages can often communicate effectively when they choose to. For example, in the case of transparently cognate languages recognized as distinct such as Spanish and Italian mutual intelligibility is neither binary nor absolute, but exists along a spectrum, influenced by numerous speaker-specific and contextual variables.

Classifications may also shift for reasons external to the languages themselves. As an example, in the case of a linear dialect continuum, the central varieties may become extinct, leaving only the varieties at both ends. Consequently, these end varieties may be reclassified as two languages, even though no significant linguistic change has occurred within the two extremes during the extinction of the central varieties.

Furthermore, political and social conventions often override considerations of mutual intelligibility. For example, the varieties of Chinese are often considered a single language, even though there is usually no mutual intelligibility between geographically separated varieties. This is similarly the case among the varieties of Arabic, which also share a single prestige variety in Modern Standard Arabic. In contrast, there is often significant intelligibility between different North Germanic languages. However, because there are various standard forms of the North Germanic languages, they are classified as separate languages.

It is often claimed by linguists that mutual intelligibility is completely gradual (successively decreasing more and more, especially in a dialect continuum) and thus not very useful as a criterion for demarcating boundaries between languages (unless they are separated by a clear language border), but a 2021 study suggests that it can allow for meaningful segmentation.

Within dialect continua

North Germanic

Main article: North Germanic languages#Mutual intelligibility

Northern Germanic languages spoken in Scandinavia form a dialect continuum where the two furthermost dialects have almost no mutual intelligibility. As such, spoken Danish and Swedish normally have low mutual intelligibility, but Swedes in the Öresund region (including Malmö and Helsingborg), across the strait from the Danish capital Copenhagen, understand Danish somewhat better, largely due to the proximity of the region to Danish-speaking areas. While Norway was under Danish rule, the Bokmål written standard of Norwegian developed from Dano-Norwegian, a koiné language that evolved among the urban elite in Norwegian cities during the later years of the union. Additionally, Norwegian assimilated a considerable amount of Danish vocabulary as well as traditional Danish expressions. As a consequence, spoken mutual intelligibility is not reciprocal.

Romance

Main article: Classification of Romance languages

Because of the difficulty of imposing boundaries on a continuum, various counts of the Romance languages are given. For example, in The Linguasphere register of the world's languages and speech communities, David Dalby lists 23 languages based on mutual intelligibility:

• Iberian Romance: Portuguese, Galician, Mirandese, Astur-Leonese, Castilian (Spanish), Aragonese;
• Occitano-Romance: Catalan, Occitan;
• Southern Romance: Sardinian;
• Gallo-Romance: Langues d'oïl (including French), Piedmontese, Franco-Provençal;
• Rhaeto-Romance: Romansh, Ladin, Friulian;
• Gallo-Italic: Piedmontese, Ligurian, Lombard, Emilian-Romagnol, Venetian;
• Italo-Dalmatian (including Italian): Corsican, Neapolitan, Sicilian, Istriot, Dalmatian (extinct);
• Eastern Romance: Daco-Romanian, Istro-Romanian, Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian.

South Slavic

Main article: South Slavic languages

The non-standard vernacular dialects of Serbo-Croatian (Kajkavian, Chakavian and Torlakian) diverge more significantly from all four normative varieties of Serbo-Croatian. Their mutual intelligibility varies greatly between the dialects themselves, with the standard Shtokavian dialect, and with other languages. For example, Torlakian, which is considered a subdialect of Serbian Old Shtokavian, has significant mutual intelligibility with Macedonian and Bulgarian.

List of mutually intelligible languages

Any information that does not have a source cited will be deleted. --

Afroasiatic

Main article: Afroasiatic languages

• Tunisian Arabic and Libyan Arabic (68–70% of sentences)
• Tunisian Arabic and Maltese (32–33% of sentences; Maltese is written with the Latin script, while Tunisian Arabic is written with the Arabic script)

Atlantic–Congo

Main article: Atlantic–Congo languages

• Kinyarwanda and Kirundi
• Luganda and Lusoga (partially)
• Nkore and Kiga
• Zulu, Northern Ndebele (significantly), Xhosa (significantly), Swazi (significantly), Southern Ndebele (partially),

Austronesian

Main article: Austronesian languages

• Banjarese, Berau Malay, and Brunei Malay
• Iban and Malay, especially with Sarawakian Malay (partially)
• Tokelauan and Tuvaluan
• Tagalog and Kasiguranin (partially)
• Maranao and Iranun

Indo-European

Main article: Indo-European languages

Germanic

Main article: Germanic languages

• Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish (significantly and asymmetrically)
• Dutch and Afrikaans (significantly and asymmetrically)
• Dutch and West Frisian (partially)
• German and Luxembourgish (partially)
• German and Yiddish (partially)
• English and Scots (significantly)
• English, Manglish, and Singlish (the latter two being English-based creoles)

Romance

Main article: Romance languages

• Portuguese and Galician (very significantly)
• Occitan and Catalan (significantly)
• Romanian, Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian (significantly)
• Spanish and Italian (partially)
• Spanish and Judaeo-Spanish (spoken or written in the Latin alphabet; Judaeo-Spanish may also be written in the Hebrew alphabet). Depending on dialect and the number of non-Spanish loanwords used.
• Spanish and Portuguese (significantly and asymmetrically)

East Slavic

Main article: East Slavic languages

• Belarusian, Ukrainian and Russian (moderately)

South Slavic

Main article: South Slavic languages

• Macedonian and Bulgarian (significantly)
• Macedonian and Serbo-Croatian (moderately to significantly)
• Slovene and Serbo-Croatian (partially)

West Slavic

Main article: West Slavic languages

• Czech and Slovak (significantly)
• Polish and Czech (partially and asymmetrically)
• Polish and Slovak (reasonably to partially)

Other subdivisions

• Irish and Scottish Gaelic (partially)
• Marathi and certain dialects of Konkani (significantly)

Kra-Dai

Main article: Kra-Dai languages

• Central Thai, Lao/Isan, Northern Thai, Shan and Tai Lue

Sino-Tibetan

Main article: Sino-Tibetan languages

• Akha, Honi and Hani (variety of different written scripts)
• Dungan and Mandarin, especially with Central Plains Mandarin

Turkic

Main article: Turkic languages

• Azerbaijani, Crimean Tatar, Gagauz, Turkish and Urum (partially)
• Uzbek and Uyghur

Uralic

Main article: Uralic languages

• Finnish and Estonian (partially)
• Finnish and Karelian (significantly)

Tungusic

Main article: Tungusic languages

• Manchu and Xibe

List of dialects or varieties sometimes considered separate languages

• Catalan: Valencianthe standard forms are structurally the same language and share the vast majority of their vocabulary, and hence highly mutually intelligible. They are not considered separate languages and both names -Valencian and Catalan- are officially recognized.
• Hindustani: Hindi and Urdu. Hindi is written in Devanagari while Urdu is written in Perso-Arabic script.
• Malay: Indonesian (the standard regulated by Indonesia), Brunei and Malaysian (the standard used in Malaysia and Singapore). Both varieties are based on the same material basis and hence are generally mutually intelligible, despite the numerous lexical differences. Certain linguistic sources also treat the two standards on equal standing as varieties of the same Malay language. However, vernacular or less formal varieties spoken between these two countries share limited intelligibility, evidenced by Malaysians having difficulties understanding Indonesian sinetron (soap opera) aired on their TV stations (which actually uses a colloquial offshoot heavily influenced by Betawi vernacular of Jakarta rather than the formal standard acquired in academical contexts) and vice versa.
• Northeastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA): NENA is a dialect continuum, with some dialects being mutually intelligible and others not. While Zakho Jewish Neo-Aramaic and Zakho Christian Neo-Aramaic are mutually intelligible, especially on the eastern edge of the continuum (in Iran), Jewish and Christian NENA varieties spoken in the same town are not mutually intelligible.
• Persian: Iranian Persian (natively simply known as Persian), Dari and TajikPersian and Dari are written in Perso-Arabic script, while Tajik is written in Cyrillic script.
• Serbo-Croatian: Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbianthe national varieties are structurally the same language, all constituting normative varieties of the Shtokavian dialect, and hence mutually intelligible, spoken and written (if the Latin alphabet is used). For political reasons, they are sometimes considered distinct languages.
• Sukhothai: Central Thai, Southern Thaistructurally similar in written forms and share most of their vocabulary; phonetically, phonemes with different allophones limit their mutual intelligibility. While Central Thai is fully tonal, similar to like other Thais, Southern Thai is pitch-accent.
• Chittagonian: RohingyaChittagonian and Rohingya are two closely related Indo-Aryan languages with similar structures but distinct differences, mainly in their vocabulary due to different historical and cultural influences. Chittagonian borrows words from Sanskrit, while Rohingya incorporates loanwords from Burmese, Arabic and Persian.https://www.thedailystar.net/star-weekend/news/chatgaya-vs-rohingya-1630219 Report from The Daily Star about how Chittagonian language helps to communicate with the Rohingyas at the Rohingya camps in Cox's Bazar.

References

References

1. "What is Sign Language?". Linguistic society.
2. [[Karen Nakamura. Nakamura, Karen]]. (1995). "About American Sign Language." Deaf Resource Library, Yale University. [http://www.deaflibrary.org/asl.html]
3. Gröschel, Bernhard. (2009). "Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik: mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit". Lincom Europa.
4. See e.g. P.H. Matthews, ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics'', OUP 2007, p. 103.; W. Abraham (ed.), ''Terminologie zur neueren Linguistik'', Tübingen 1974, p. 411; T. Lewandowski, ''Linguistisches Wörterbuch'', Heidelberg/Wiesbaden (5th ed.) 1990, pp. 994–995; L. Campbell, ''Historical linguistics. An introduction'', Edinburgh 1998, p. 165; G. Mounin, ''Schlüssel zur Linguistik'', Hamburg, 1978, p. 55; U. Ammon, "Language – Variety/Standard Variety – Dialect", U. Ammon et al (ed.), ''Sociolinguistics / Soziolinguistik. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society / Ein internationales Handbuch zur Wissenschaft von Sprache und Gesellschaft'', Berlin/New York 1987, p. 324; D. Crystal, ''A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics'', Oxford (4th ed) 1997, 2003, p. 286.
5. (1998). "Dialectology". Cambridge University Press.
6. (June 2021). "Taking taxonomy seriously in Linguistics: intelligibility as a criterion of demarcation between languages and dialects.". Lingua.
7. Gooskens, Charlotte. (2007). "The Contribution of Linguistic Factors to the Intelligibility of Closely Related Languages". Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.
8. David Dalby, 1999/2000, ''The Linguasphere register of the world's languages and speech communities.'' Observatoire Linguistique, Linguasphere Press. Volume 2, p. 390-410 (zone 51). Oxford.[http://www.linguasphere.info/lcontao/tl_files/pdf/master/OL-SITE%201999-2000%20MASTER%20ONE%20Sectors%205-Zones%2050-54.pdf] {{Webarchive. link. (2014-08-27)
9. Радева, Василка. (15 July 2018). "Българският език през ХХ век". Pensoft Publishers.
10. (2016-01-01). "Mutual intelligibility of spoken Maltese, Libyan Arabic, and Tunisian Arabic functionally tested: A pilot study". Folia Linguistica.
11. {{Ethnologue22. kin. Kinyarwanda
12. Hyman, Larry. (2020-09-15). "Syntactic architecture and its consequences I: Syntax inside the grammar". Language Science Press.
13. Poletto, Robert E.. (1998). "Topics in RuNyankore Phonology". Ohio State University.
14. Angogo, Rachel. "LANGUAGE AND POLITICS IN SOUTH AFRICA". elanguage.net.
15. Collins, James T.. (2006). "Insular Southeast Asia: Linguistic and cultural studies in Honour of Bernd Nothofer". Harrassowitz.
16. (2006). "The Austronesians: Historical and Comparative Perspectives". ANU Press.
17. {{Ethnologue22. tkl. Tokelauan
18. {{Ethnologue22. tvl. Tuvaluan
19. Bø, I. (1976). "Ungdom og naboland : en undersøkelse av skolens og fjernsynets betydning for nabospråkforståelsen". Rogalandsforskning.
20. (2006). "Mutual Comprehensibility of Written Afrikaans and Dutch: Symmetrical or Asymmetrical?". Literary and Linguistic Computing.
21. [https://www.sprachreisen.de/news/artikel/welche-sprache-spricht-man-in-luxemburg/ sprachreisen.de - Welche Sprache spricht man in Luxemburg?]
22. Avrum Ehrlich, Mark. (2009). "Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora: origins, experience and culture, Volume 1". ABC-CLIO.
23. Beswick, Jaine. (2005). "Linguistic homogeneity in Galician and Portuguese borderland communities". Estudios de Sociolingüística.
24. [https://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9083828/Romanian-language Romanian language – Britannica Online Encyclopedia]
25. Voigt, Stefanie. (2014). "Mutual Intelligibility of Closely Related Languages within the Romance language family".
26. (2004). "Balkan Syntax and Semantics". John Benjamins Publishing.
27. (1996). "Child Language, Creolization, and Historical Change: Spanish in Contact with Portuguese". Gunter Narr Verlag.
28. (1997). "Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle of the University of Victoria: WPLC.". WPLC, Department of Linguistics, University of Victoria.
29. (2001). "A Ladino Legacy: The Judeo-Spanish Collection of Louis N. Levy". Alexander Books.
30. Schenker, Alexander M.. (1993). "The Slavonic Languages". Routledge.
31. link. (2009-03-11 , UCLA International Institute)
32. link. (2009-03-11 on UCLA)
33. Kordić, Snježana. (2024). "Languages and Nationalism Instead of Empires". [[Routledge]].
34. Trudgill, Peter. (2004). "Speaking from the Margin: Global English from a European Perspective". Peter Lang.
35. (2006). "Encyclopedia of language & linguistics". Elsevier.
36. Kevin Hannan. (1996). "Borders of Language and Identity in Teschen Silesia". Peter Lang.
37. Christina Bratt Paulston. (1988). "International Handbook of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education". Bloomsbury Academic.
38. "How Konkani Won the Battle for 'Languagehood'".
39. "Ausbau and Abstand languages".
40. (1973). "Phonemes of the Alu Dialect of Akha". Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics No.3.
41. Rimsky-Korsakoff Dyer, Svetlana. (1977). "Soviet Dungan nationalism: a few comments on their origin and language". Monumenta Serica.
42. Kasapoğlu Çengel, Hülya (2004). [http://turkoloji.cu.edu.tr/HALKBILIM/hulya_kasapoglu_cengel_urum_turkleri_folklor.pdf Ukrayna'daki Urum Türkleri ve Folkloru]. Milli Folklor, 2004, Yıl. 16, S. 16, s. 59
43. Sinor, Denis. (1969). "Inner Asia. History-Civilization-Languages. A syllabus". Bloomington.
44. "Uzbek – the Center for East European and Russian/Eurasian Studies".
45. "Morpho-syntax of mutual intelligibility in the Turkic languages of Central Asia - Surrey Morphology Group".
46. Katzner, Kenneth. (2002). "The languages of the world". Routledge.
47. Taagepera, Rein. (1999). "The Finno-Ugric republics and the Russian state". Routledge.
48. {{Ethnologue22. sjo. Xibe
49. link. (2008-12-17 . Report from [[Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua]] about denomination and identity of Valencian.)
50. Gumperz, John J.. (February 1957). "Language Problems in the Rural Development of North India". The Journal of Asian Studies.
51. Swan, Michael. (2001). "Learner English: a teacher's guide to interference and other problems". Cambridge University Press.
52. (29 July 2022). "Majlis Bahasa Brunei Darussalam Indonesia Malaysia (MABBIM)".
53. (2013-03-07). "The Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar". Routledge.
54. An example of equal treatment of Malaysian and Indonesian: the ''Pusat Rujukan Persuratan Melayu'' database from the [[Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka]] has a "Istilah [[Majlis Bahasa Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia
55. "Towards an account of information structure in Colloquial Jakarta Indonesian". Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
56. Sugiharto, Setiono. (25 October 2008). "Indonesian-Malay mutual intelligibility?".
57. (2018). "Attributive constructions in North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic". Language Science Press.
58. (2020). "Eine hundertblättrige Tulpe - Bir ṣadbarg lāla: Festgabe für Claus Schönig". Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
59. (2002). "A Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dictionary: Dialects of Amidya, Dihok, Nerwa and Zakho, Northwestern Iraq : Based on Old and New Manuscripts, Oral and Written Bible Translations, Folkloric Texts, and Diverse Spoken Registers, with an Introduction to Grammar and Semantics, and an Index of Talmudic Words which Have Reflexes in Jewish Neo-Aramaic". Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.
60. "Dari/Persian/Tajik languages".
61. Kordić, Snježana. (2010). "Jezik i nacionalizam". Durieux.
62. Mader Skender, Mia. (2022). "Die kroatische Standardsprache auf dem Weg zur Ausbausprache". University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Slavonic Studies.
63. Šipka, Danko. (2019). "Lexical layers of identity: words, meaning, and culture in the Slavic languages". Cambridge University Press.
64. Kordić, Snježana. (2004). "Slavistische Linguistik 2002: Referate des XXVIII. Konstanzer Slavistischen Arbeitstreffens, Bochum 10.-12. September 2002". Otto Sagner.
65. Greenberg, Robert David. (2004). "Language and identity in the Balkans: Serbo-Croatian and its disintegration". Oxford University Press.