1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Diachronica
  4. Volume 39, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 39, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The Tungusic language family is comprised of languages spoken in Siberia, the Russian Far East, Northeast China and Xinjiang. There is a general consensus that these languages are genealogically related and descend from a common ancestral language. Nevertheless, there is considerable disagreement with regard to the internal structure of the Tungusic family and the time depth of its separation into daughter languages. Here we use computational Bayesian phylogenetic methods to generate a phylogeny of Tungusic languages and estimate the time-depth of the family. Our analysis is based on the recently introduced Leipzig-Jakarta-Jena list, a dataset of 254 basic vocabulary items collected for 21 Tungusic doculects. Our results are consistent with two basic classifications previously proposed in the literature, notably a Manchu-Tungusic classification, in which the break-up of Jurchenic constitutes the first split in the tree, as well as a North-South classification, which includes a Jurchenic-Nanaic and an Orochic-Ewenic branch. In addition, we obtain a time-depth for the age of Proto-Tungusic between the 8th century BC and the 12th century AD (95% highest posterior density interval). Previous classifications of Tungusic were based on both classical historical comparative linguistic and lexicostatistic approaches, but the application of Bayesian phylogenetic methods to the Tungusic languages has not so far been attempted. In contrast to previous approaches, our Bayesian analysis adds an understanding of the statistical robustness of the proposed branches and infers absolute divergence dates, allowing variation of rates of change across branches and cognate sets. In this way, our research provides a reliable quantitative basis for previous estimates based on classical historical linguistic and lexicostatistic approaches.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
2021-05-25
2024-09-15

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Avrorin, Valentin A.
    1959 Grammatika nanajskogo jazyka [The grammar of Nanai]. Vol.1. Moscow – Leningrad: Publishing House of Academy of Sciences of USSR.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Benzing, Johannes
    1955 Die tungusischen Sprachen: Versuch einer vergleichenden Grammatik. Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse11. 949–1099. Wiesbaden: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bouckaert, Remco R., Philippe Lemey, Michael Dunn, Simon J. Greenhill, Alexander V. Alekseyenko, Alexei J. Drummond, Russell D. Gray, Marc A. Suchard, & Quentin D. Atkinson
    2012 Mapping the origins and expansion of the Indo-European language family. Science337(6097). 957–960. 10.1126/science.1219669
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1219669 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bouckaert, Remco, Joseph Heled, Denise Kühnert, Tim Vaughan, Chieh-Hsi Wu, Dong Xie, Marc A. Suchard, Andrew Rambaut, & Alexei J. Drummond
    2014 BEAST 2: A software platform for Bayesian Evolutionary Analysis. PLoS Computational Biology10(4). e1003537. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003537
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003537 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bouckaert, Remco & Martine Robbeets
    2017 Pseudo Dollo models for the evolution of binary characters along a Tree. BioRxiv. doi:  10.1101/207571
     https://doi.org/10.1101/207571 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bouckaert, Remco R., Claire Bowern, & Quentin D. Atkinson
    2018 The origin and expansion of Pama-Nyungan languages across Australia. Nature Ecology & Evolution2. 741–749. 10.1038/s41559‑018‑0489‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0489-3 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bowern, Claire
    2018 Computational phylogenetics. Annual Review of Linguistics4. 281–296. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑011516‑034142
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011516-034142 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowern, Claire & Quentin Atkinson
    2012 Computational phylogenetics and the internal structure of Pama-Nyungan. Language, 817–845. 10.1353/lan.2012.0081
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0081 [Google Scholar]
  9. Castrén, M. Alexander
    1856 Grundzüge einer Tungusischen Sprachlehre nebst kurzem Wörterverzeichniss. St. Petersburg: Buchdruckerei der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Chang, Will, David Hall, Chundra Cathcart, & Andrew Garrett
    2015 Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European Steppe Hypothesis. Language91 (1): 194–244. 10.1353/lan.2015.0005
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0005 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cincius, Vera I.
    1949 Sravnitel’naja fonetika tunguso-man’chzhurskich jazykov [Comparative phonetics of Manchu-Tungus languages]. Leningrad: Uchpedgiz.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. (ed.) 1975, 1977 Sravnitel’nyj slovar’ tunguso-man’chzhurskix jazykov [Comparative dictionary of the Tungus-Manchu languages]. Vols.1, 2. Leningrad: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Doerfer, Gerhard
    1978 Classification problems of Tungus. InGerhard Doerfer & Michael Weiers (eds.), Beiträge zur nordasiatischen Kulturgeschichte: Tungusica, 1–26. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Drummond, Alexei J. & Remco R. Bouckaert
    2015 Bayesian evolutionary analysis with BEAST. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139095112
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139095112 [Google Scholar]
  15. Drummond, Alexei J., Simon Y. W. Ho, Matthew J. Phillips, & Andrew Rambaut
    2006 Relaxed phylogenetics and dating with confidence. PLOS Biology4(5), e88. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040088
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040088 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dunn, Michael
    2015 Language phylogenies. InClaire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 190–211. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Dybo, Anna V.
    2013 Etimologičeskij slovar’ bazisnoj leksiki tjurkskix jazykov [An etymological dictionary of Turkic basic vocabularies]. (Etimologičeskij slovar’ tjurkskix jazykov 9.) Astana: TOO “Prosper Print”.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Fortescue, Michael
    2016 Comparative Nivkh dictionary. (Languages of the world/dictionaries, 62.) München: LINCOM.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gavryushkina, Alexandra, David Welch, Tanja Stadler, & Alexei J. Drummond
    2014 Bayesian inference of sampled ancestor trees for epidemiology and fossil calibration. PLoS Computational Biology10(12): e1003919. doi:  10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003919
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003919 [Google Scholar]
  20. Georg, Stefan
    2004 Unreclassifying Tungusic. InCarsten Naeher (ed.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Manchu-Tungus Studies (Bonn, August 28 – September 1, 2000), Volume 2: Trends in Tungusic and Siberian Linguistics, 45–57. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gorelova, Liliya M.
    2002 Manchu grammar. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047401148
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047401148 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gray, Russell D. & Quentin D. Atkinson
    2003 Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature426. 435–439. 10.1038/nature02029
     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02029 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gray, Russell D., Alexei J. Drummond, & Simon J. Greenhill
    2009 Language phylogenies reveal expansion pulses and pauses in Pacific settlement. Science323(5913). 479–483. 10.1126/science.1166858
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1166858 [Google Scholar]
  24. Greenhill, Simon J., Thomas E. Currie, & Russell D. Gray
    2009 Does horizontal transmission invalidate cultural phylogenies?Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences276(1665). 2299–2306. 10.1098/rspb.2008.1944
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.1944 [Google Scholar]
  25. Grollemund, R., B. Branford, K. Bostoen, A. Meade, C. Venditti & M. Pagel
    2015 Bantu expansion shows habitat alters the route and pace of human dispersals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 112(43). 13296–13301. 10.1073/pnas.1503793112
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503793112 [Google Scholar]
  26. Haspelmath, Martin and Uri Tadmor
    (eds.) 2009 Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110218442
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110218442 [Google Scholar]
  27. Heath, Tracy A., John P. Huelsenbeck, & Tanja Stadler
    2014 The fossilized birth-death process for coherent calibration of divergence-time estimates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 111(29). E2957–E2966. 10.1073/pnas.1319091111
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319091111 [Google Scholar]
  28. Heggarty, Paul, Cormac Anderson, & Matthew Scarborough
    (eds.) 2017 Cognacy in basic lexicon for the Indo-European language family. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. cobl.clld.org
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Holman, Eric W., Cecil H. Brown, Søren Wichmann, André Müller, Viveka Velupillai, Harald Hammarström, Sebastian Sauppe, Hagen Jung, Dik Bakker, Pamela Brown, Oleg Belyaev, Matthias Urban, Robert Mailhammer, Johann-Mattis List, & Dmitry Egorov
    2011 Automated dating of the world’s language families based on lexical similarity. Current Anthropology52(6). 841–875. 10.1086/662127
     https://doi.org/10.1086/662127 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hölzl, Andreas
    2017 Kilen: Synchronic and diachronic profile of a mixed language. Paper presented atLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 24th LIPP Symposium, Munich, June 21–23, 2017, Language in Contact: Yesterday – Today – Tomorrow.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Ikegami, Jiro
    1974 Versuch einer Klassifikation der Tungussischen Sprachen. InGyorgy Hazai and Peter Zieme (eds.), Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur der Altaischen Völker, 271–271. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Jakhontov, Sergej J.
    1971 Leksika kak priznak rodstva jazykov [Vocabulary as a feature of language genetic relationship]. InO. P. Sunik (ed.), Problema obshchnosti altajskix jazykov. Leningrad: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Janhunen, Juha
    1991 Material on Manchurian Khamnigan Evenki. (Castrenianumin Toimitteita, 40.) Helsinki: Castrenianum.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. 2005 Tungusic: An endangered language family in Northeast Asia. InInternational Journal of the Sociology of Language173. 37–54. 10.1515/ijsl.2005.2005.173.37
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2005.2005.173.37 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2012 The expansion of Tungusic as an ethnic and linguistic process. InAndrej L. Malchukov and Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics (Turcologica 89), 5–16. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kassian, Alexei, George Starostin, Anna Dybo, & Vasiliy Chernov
    2010 The Swadesh wordlist. An attempt at semantic specification. Journal of Language Relationship4. 46–89.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Kazama, Shinjiro
    2003 Basic vocabulary (A) of Tungusic languages. Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim A2–037. Kyoto, Japan.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kitchen, Andrew, Christopher Ehret, Shiferaw Assefa, & Connie J. Mulligan
    2009 Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an Early Bronze Age origin of Semitic in the Near East. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences276(1668). 2703–2710. 10.1098/rspb.2009.0408
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.0408 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kolipakam, Vishnupriya, Fiona M. Jordan, Michael Dunn, Simon J. Greenhill, Remco Bouckaert, Russell D. Gray, & Annemarie Verkerk
    2018 A Bayesian phylogenetic study of the Dravidian language family. Royal Society Open Science5, 3. 171504. 10.1098/rsos.171504
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.171504 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kormushin, Igor V.
    1998 Udyhejskij (udegejskij) jazyk [The Udihe language]. Moscow: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Korovina, Evgeniya
    2011 Leksika prirodnogo i kul’turnogo okruzheniya v tunguso-man’chzhurskich jazykach (v istoriko-tipologicheskom osveshchčenii) [Tungus-Manchu vocabulary related to natural environment and cultural activities (in historical and typological perspective)]. Moscow: Russian State University of Humanities, BA dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. List, Johann-Mattis
    2017 A web-based interactive tool for creating, inspecting, editing, and publishing etymological datasets. Proceedings of the EACL 2017 Software Demonstrations, Valencia, Spain, April 3–7 2017: 9–12. 10.18653/v1/E17‑3003
     https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/E17-3003 [Google Scholar]
  43. Maturana Russel, Patricio, Brendon J. Brewer, Steffen Klaere, & Remco R. Bouckaert
    2019 Model selection and parameter inference in phylogenetics using nested sampling. Systematic Biology68(2). 219–233. 10.1093/sysbio/syy050
     https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syy050 [Google Scholar]
  44. Menges, Karl Heinrich
    1968 Die tungusischen Sprachen. Tungusologie. Handbuch der Orientalistik [I. Abteilung, 5. Band: Altaistik, 3. Abschnitt], 21–256. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Messerschmidt, Daniel Gottlieb
    . Forschungsreise durch Sibirien 1720–1727. T. 2: Tagebuchaufzeichnungen, Januar 1723 – Mai 1724 Berlin: Akademie Verlag 1964.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Mishchenkova, Karina O.
    2019 Refleksy praevenkijskogo *s v govorax evenkijskogo jazyka v kontse XVII v. i pervoj polovine XVIII v. [Reflections of the Proto-Evenki *s in the Evenki dialects in the late 17th century and the first half of the 18th century]. Uralo-altajskie issledovanija3(34). 72–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Nicholls, Geoff K., & Russel D. Gray
    2006 Quantifying uncertainty in a stochastic Dollo model of vocabulary evolution. InPeter Forster & Colin Renfrew (eds.), Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, 161–172. Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Nikolaeva, Irina
    2006 A historical dictionary of Yukaghir. Trends in Linguistics: Documentation, 25. Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110892840
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110892840 [Google Scholar]
  49. Novikova, Klavdija A.
    1980 Ocherki Dialektov Evenskogo Jazyka: Ol’skij Govor [Sketches of the Even dialects: Olsky dialect]. Leningrad: Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Penny, David, Bennet J. McCormish, Michael A. Charleston, & Michael D. Hendy
    2001 Mathematical elegance with biochemical realism: The covarion model of molecular evolution. Journal of Molecular Evolution53(6). 711–723. 10.1007/s002390010258
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s002390010258 [Google Scholar]
  51. Pevnov, Alexander M.
    1984 Glottoxronologija i tunguso-manchzhurskaja problema [Glottochronology and the Tungus-Manchu issue]. InZhanna V. Andreeva, Irina S. Zhushchixovskaja, & Alexander M. Pevnov (eds.), Arxeologija i etnografija narodov Dal’nego Vostoka, 31–37. Vladivostok: DVNTS AN SSSR.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 2008 Lingvisticheskie puti reshenija tunguso-manchzhurskoj problemy [Linguistic ways of solving the Tungus-Manchu issue]. Voprosy jazykoznanija5. 63–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 2012 The problem of localization of the Manchu-Tungusic homeland. InAndrej L. Malchukov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics. (Turcologica 89.), 17–40. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 2013 O mongol’skom proisxozhdenii man’chzhurskogo pokazatelja datel’nogo padezha [On Mongolic origin of the Manchu dative case marker]. Pavel O. Rykin (ed.). Mongol’skie jazyki: istorija i sovremennost’: Materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferentsii, Sankt-Peterburg, 21–23 oktjabrja 2013, 79–83. St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istorija.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Poppe, Nicholas
    1965 Introduction to Altaic linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Rambaut, Andrew, Marc A. Suchard, Dong Xie, & Alexei J. Drummond
    2014 Tracer v1.6. beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/Tracer
  57. Robbeets, Martine
    2015 Diachrony of verb morphology. Japanese and the Transeurasian languages. (Trends in Linguistics 291.) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110399943
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110399943 [Google Scholar]
  58. Robbeets, Martine & Remco Bouckaert
    2018 Bayesian phylolinguistics reveals the internal structure of the Transeurasian Family. Journal of Linguistic Evolution3. 145–162. 10.1093/jole/lzy007
     https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzy007 [Google Scholar]
  59. Robbeets, Martine, Juha Janhunen, Alexander Savelyev, & Evgeniya Korovina
    2020 The homelands of the individual Transeurasian proto-languages: Where, when and what?InMartine Robbeets & Alexander Savelyev (eds.), The Oxford guide to the Transeurasian languages, 753–771. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198804628.003.0044
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198804628.003.0044 [Google Scholar]
  60. Sagart, Laurent, Guillaume Jacques, Yunfan Lai, Robin J. Ryder, Valentin Thouzeau, Simon J. Greenhill, & Johann-Mattis List
    2019 Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America116(21). 10317–10322. 10.1073/pnas.1817972116
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817972116 [Google Scholar]
  61. Savelyev, Alexander & Martine Robbeets
    2020 Bayesian phylolinguistics infers the internal structure and the time-depth of the Turkic language family. Journal of Language Evolution5(1). 39–53. 10.1093/jole/lzz010
     https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzz010 [Google Scholar]
  62. Schmidt, Peter
    1915 Etnografija Dal’nego Vostoka [Ethnography of the Far East]. Vivat Academia1. 30–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Schrenck, Leopold von
    1883 Ob inorodcax Amurskogo kraja [On inorodtsy in the Amur region]. TomI. St. Petersburg.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Sem, Lidia I.
    1976 Ocherki dialektov nanajskogo jazyka. Bikinskij (ussurijskij) dialect [Outlines of the Nanai dialects. The Bikin (Ussuri) dialect]. Leningrad: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Starostin, Georgij S.
    2013 Jazyki Afriki. Opyt postrojenija leksikostatisticheskoj klassifikacii. T. 1: Metodologija. Kojsanskije jazyki [The languages of Africa. An attempt at lexicostatistic classification. Vol. 1: Methodology. Khoisan languages]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Starostin, Sergej A., Anna V. Dybo, & Oleg A. Mudrak
    2003 Etymological dictionary of the Altaic languages. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Sternberg, Lev J.
    1933 Giljaki, orochi, gol’dy, negidal’tsy, ajny [The Giljak, the Oroche, the Gold, the Negidal, the Ainu peoples]. Khabarovsk: Dal’giz.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Sunik, Orest P.
    1959 Tunguso-man’chzhurskije jazyki [Manchu-Tungus languages]. Mladopi’mennyje jazyki narodov SSSR. Moscow: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Tadmor, Uri, Martin Haspelmath, & Bradley Taylor
    2010 Borrowability and the notion of basic vocabulary. Diachronica27(2). 226–246. 10.1075/dia.27.2.04tad
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.27.2.04tad [Google Scholar]
  70. Tavaré, Simon
    1986 Some probabilistic and statistical problems in the analysis of DNA sequences. Lectures on Mathematics in the Life Sciences17. 57–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Tsumagari, Toshiro
    1992 A basic vocabulary of Khamnigan and Oluguya Ewenki in Northern Inner Mongolia. Bulletin of the Institute for the Study of North Eurasian Cultures21. 83–103.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Vasilevich, Glafira M.
    1960 K voprosu o klassifikacii tunguso-man’chzhurskih jazykov [About the question of classification of Manchu-Tungus languages]. Voprosy jazykoznanija2. Moscow: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 1969 Znachenie dnevnikov Messerschmidta dl’a tungusovedenija [Value of Messerschmidt’s notes for Tungusic studies]. Izvestija Sibirskogo otdelenija Akademii Nauk SSSR, 6, 2. 116–122.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Vovin, Alexander
    1993 Towards a new classification of Tungusic languages. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher65. 99–113.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Yanushevich, Zoya V., Yuri Y. Vostretsov, & Sofiya V. Makarova
    1990 Paleoetnobotanicheskie nahodki v Primor’e [The palaeo-ethnobotanical finds in Primorye]. Vladivostok: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Zhang, Menghan, Shi Yan, Wuyun Pan, & Li Jin
    2019 Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the Late Neolithic. Nature569. 112–115. 10.1038/s41586‑019‑1153‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1153-z [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
Loading
A Bayesian approach to the classification of Tungusic languages
Diachronica 39, 128 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.20010.osk
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): basic vocabulary; Bayesian phylogenetics; family time depth; language classification; language phylogeny; Tungusic languages

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error