← Back to Volume 16

Lexical Stratigraphy and Turkicization in the Xiongnu: An Iranian Prestige Layer in Chinese Transcriptions

Shubin Gong
pp.59-64 DOI: 10.62051/9xax3g83 July 2, 2026
Download PDF
Abstract: The Chinese historiographic record preserves ethnonyms, titles, personal names, and a modest set of glosses that later scholarship has treated as the principal basis for assigning a “Xiongnu language.” This paper reexamines this long-standing Xiongnu language problem by treating the Chinese-recorded information as a stratified lexical record rather than as evidence for a single stable vernacular. Instead of assigning the material to one language family, the analysis focuses on the internal distribution of proposed etymological layers and their sociolinguistic implications. A clear asymmetry emerges: Iranian-associated items cluster in early sources and are largely confined to institutional and pastoral vocabulary, whereas Turkic-associated items appear across both early and later layers and span a broader range of semantic domains. This pattern is most consistent with an early Iranian prestige or contact layer progressively assimilated within a Turkic-dominant communicative environment during the Xiongnu imperial period. The findings suggest that apparent support for competing single-family hypotheses reflects stratification within a small, transmitted corpus rather than mutually exclusive identifications.
Keywords: Xiongnu; language contact; linguistic stratum; language shift.
APA Citation: Shubin Gong (2026). Lexical Stratigraphy and Turkicization in the Xiongnu: An Iranian Prestige Layer in Chinese Transcriptions. Transactions on Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 16(1), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.62051/9xax3g83

References

  1. Di Cosmo N. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
  2. Baxter W H, Sagart L. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
  3. Savelyev A, Jeong C. Early nomads of the Eastern Steppe and their tentative connections in the West. Evolutionary Human Sciences, 2020, 2: e20. DOI: 10.1017/ehs.2020.18.
  4. Jeong C, Wang K, Wilkin S, et al. A dynamic 6,000-year genetic history of Eurasia’s Eastern Steppe. Cell, 2020, 183(4): 890-904.e29. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.10.015.
  5. Lee J, Miller B K, Bayarsaikhan J, et al. Genetic population structure of the Xiongnu Empire at imperial and local scales. Science Advances, 2023, 9(15): eadf3904. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adf3904.
  6. Rogers L L, Kaestle F A. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA haplogroup frequencies in the population of the slab burial mortuary culture of Mongolia (ca. 1100–300 BCE). American Journal of Biological Anthropology, 2022, 177(4): 644-657. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.24478.
  7. Dybo A V. Lingvističeskije kontakty rannix tjurkov. Leksičeskij fond. Pratjurkskij period [Linguistic contacts of the early Turks. Lexical stock. The Proto-Turkic period]. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, 2007.
  8. Fan Ye. Hou Hanshu. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1965.
  9. Sima Qian. Shiji (Annotated with traditional commentaries). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1959.
  10. Wei L, Li H. About the names of the Chanyu family and the branch tribes of the Xiongnu. In: Xu D, Fu J (Eds.), Language Contact and Language Variation, pp. 69-96. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2019.