Loloish languages

Loloish
Loloish
Yi, Ngwi, Nisoic
Ethnicity	Yi people
Geographic; distribution	Southern China and Southeast Asia
Linguistic classification	Sino-Tibetan Lolo-Burmese Loloish; ;
Proto-language	Proto-Loloish
Subdivisions	Hanoish (Southern); Lahoish; ?Naxish ; Nusoish; Kazhuoish ; Lisoish (Central); Nisoish (Northern and Southeastern); ? ’Ugong ; (?) Lawoish ; (?) Jino ;
Glottolog	lolo1267

Last updated June 22, 2024

The Loloish languages, also known as Yi and occasionally Ngwi^[1] or Nisoic,^[2] are a family of fifty to a hundred Sino-Tibetan languages spoken primarily in Yunnan province of China. They are most closely related to Burmese and its relatives. Both the Loloish and Burmish branches are well defined, as is their superior node, Lolo-Burmese. However, subclassification is more contentious.

Names

Loloish is the traditional name for the family in English. Some publications avoid the term under the misapprehension that Lolo is pejorative, but it is the Chinese rendition of the autonym of the Yi people and is pejorative only in writing when it is written with a particular Chinese character (one that uses a beast, rather than a human, radical), a practice that was prohibited by the Chinese government in the 1950s.^[3]

David Bradley uses the term Ngwi, and Lama (2012) uses Nisoic. Ethnologue has adopted 'Ngwi', but Glottolog retains 'Loloish'. Paul K. Benedict coined the term Yipho, from Chinese Yi and a common autonymic element (-po or -pho), but it never gained wide usage.

Internal classification

Bradley (2007)

Loloish was traditionally divided into a northern branch, with Lisu and the numerous Yi languages and a southern branch, with everything else. However, per Bradley^[1] and Thurgood^[4] there is also a central branch, with languages from both northern and southern. Bradley^[5]^[6] adds a fourth, southeastern branch.

Northern Loloish : Nuosu (2 million), Nasu (1.0 million), etc.
Central Loloish : Lisu (940,000)–Lipho (250,000) (incl. Lolopo (570,000), Lalo (320,000)), Micha (50,000), Lahu (600,000), Jinuo (21,000), etc.
Southern Loloish : Akha–Hani, Phunoi–Bisu, Pholo and ’Ugong (aberrant; removed in Bradley 1997)
Southeastern Loloish : Nisu, Phula, Sani, Azha, Khlula, Muji, Phowa, etc.

Ugong is divergent; Bradley (1997) places it with the Burmish languages. The Tujia language is difficult to classify due to divergent vocabulary. Other unclassified Loloish languages are Gokhy (Gɔkhý), Lopi and Ache.

Lama (2012)

Lama (2012) classified 36 Lolo–Burmese languages based on a computational analysis of shared phonological and lexical innovations. He finds the Mondzish languages to be a separate branch of Lolo-Burmese, which Lama considers to have split off before Burmish did. The rest of the Loloish languages are as follows:

Loloish

Hanoish : Jino, Akha–Hani languages, Bisoid languages, etc. (See)

Lahoish: Lahu, Kucong

Naxish : Naxi, Namuyi

Nusoish: Nusu, Zauzou (Rouruo)

Ni ‑ Li ‑ Ka

Kazhuoish : Katso (Kazhuo), Samu (Samatao), Sanie, Sadu,^[7] Meuma ^[8]

	Lisoish : Lisu, Lolopo, etc. (See)

	Nisoish : Nisoid languages, Axi-Puoid languages

The Nisoish, Lisoish, and Kazhuoish clusters are closely related, forming a clade ("Ni-Li-Ka") at about the same level as the other five branches of Loloish. Lama's Naxish clade has been classified as Qiangic rather than Loloish by Guillaume Jacques and Alexis Michaud^[9] (see Qiangic languages ).

A Lawoish (Lawu) branch has also been recently proposed.^[10]

Satterthwaite-Phillips' (2011) computational phylogenetic analysis of the Lolo-Burmese languages does support the inclusion of Naxish (Naic) within Lolo-Burmese, but recognizes Lahoish and Nusoish as coherent language groups that form independent branches of Loloish.^[11]

Lesser-known languages

Notes

↑ [hle] 15,000; [jiy] 1,000; [jiu] 10,000; [lkc] 46,870; [lhu] 530,350; [lhi] 196,200; [ywt] 213,000; [yik] 30,000; [yit] 38,000; [ywl] 38,000; [llh] 120; [yne] 2,000; [lwu] 50; [ylm] 29,000; [lpo] 250,000; [lis] 942,700; [ycl] 380,000; [ysp] 190,000; [ymh] 23,000; [yiq] 30,000; [nuf] 12,670; [ysn] 100,000; [yta] 13,600; [ytl] 950; [zal] 2,100; [yna] 25,000; [yiu] 20,000; [yyz] 50; [ych] 3,300; [ygp] 100,000; [kaf] 4,000; [ylo] 15,000; [ywu] 150,000; [yig] 500,000; [iii] 2,000,000; [ysd] 400; [smh] 20,000; [ysy] 8,000; [ywq] 250,000; [yif] 35,000; [aub] 3,500; [yix] 100,000; [aza] 53,000; [yiz] 54,000; [ybk] 10,000; [ykt] 5,000; [ykl] 21,000; [ykn] 5,000; [yku] 1,000; [lgh] 300; [nty] 1,100; [ymi] 2,000; [ymx] 9,000; [ymq] 1,500; [ymc] 26,000; [ymz] 10,000; [yso] 36,000; [nos] 75,000; [yiv] 160,000; [nsf] 24,000; [nsd] 210,000; [nsv] 15,000; [ypa] 12,000; [ypg] 13,000; [ypo] 500; [yip] 30,000; [ypn] 10,000; [yhl] 36,000; [ypb] 17,000; [phh] 10,000; [ypm] 8,000; [ypp] 3,000; [yph] 1,300; [ypz] 6,000; [ysg] 2,000; [ytp] 200; [yzk] 13,000; [qeu] 12,400; [ahk] 563,960; [bzi] 240; [byo] 120,000; [ycp] 2,000; [cnc] 2,030; [enu] 30,000; [hni] 758,620; [how] 140,000; [ktp] 185,000; [lwm] 1,600; [lov] ? (not included); [mpz] 900; [ymd] 2,000; [phq] 350; [pho] 35,600; [pyy] 700; [sgk] 1,500; [slt] 2,480; [lbg] 9,550; [ugo] 80; Total: 9,078,770

Related Research Articles

Qiangic is a group of related languages within the Sino-Tibetan language family. They are spoken mainly in Southwest China, including Sichuan and northern Yunnan. Most Qiangic languages are distributed in the prefectures of Ngawa, Garzê, Ya'an and Liangshan in Sichuan with some in Northern Yunnan as well.

Naxi, also known as Nakhi, Nasi, Lomi, Moso, Mo-su, is a Sino-Tibetan language or group of languages spoken by some 310,000 people, most of whom live in or around Lijiang City Yulong Naxi Autonomous County of the province of Yunnan, China. Nakhi is also the ethnic group that speaks it, although in detail, officially defined ethnicity and linguistic reality do not coincide neatly: there are speakers of Naxi who are not registered as "Naxi" and citizens who are officially "Naxi" but do not speak it.

The Tibeto-Kanauri languages, also called Bodic, Bodish–Himalayish, and Western Tibeto-Burman, are a proposed intermediate level of classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages, centered on the Tibetic languages and the Kinnauri dialect cluster. The conception of the relationship, or if it is even a valid group, varies between researchers.

The Nung or Nungish languages are a poorly described family of uncertain affiliation within the Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Yunnan, China and Burma. They include:

The Lolo-Burmese languages of Burma and Southern China form a coherent branch of the Sino-Tibetan family.

The Tibeto-Burman languages are the non-Sinitic members of the Sino-Tibetan language family, over 400 of which are spoken throughout the Southeast Asian Massif ("Zomia") as well as parts of East Asia and South Asia. Around 60 million people speak Tibeto-Burman languages. The name derives from the most widely spoken of these languages, Burmese and the Tibetic languages, which also have extensive literary traditions, dating from the 12th and 7th centuries respectively. Most of the other languages are spoken by much smaller communities, and many of them have not been described in detail.

The Jino language constitutes a pair of Loloish language varieties spoken by the Jino people of Yunnan, China.

The Northern Loloish languages, also known as Northern Ngwi, are a branch of the Loloish languages that includes the literary standard of the Yi people. In Lama's (2012) classification, it is called Nisoid (Nisu–Lope), which forms the Nisoish branch together with the Axi-Puoid languages.

The Southern Loloish or Southern Ngwi languages, also known as the Hanoish or Hanish languages, constitute a branch of the Loloish languages that includes Akha and Hani.

The Lisoish languages are a branch of the Loloish languages proposed by Ziwo Lama (2012) that includes Lisu and several of the Yi languages. David Bradley (1997) considers Lisoish languages to be part of the Central Loloish branch.

Kathu is a Lolo-Burmese language of Balong (坝聋), Nanping Township (南屏镇), Guangnan County, Yunnan, China. The Kathu are locally known as the White Yi (白彝). Wu Zili (2004) estimates that Kathu has a total of more than 7,000 speakers in Guangnan County, as well as in Jinping County, Yunnan. Ethnologue mentions a possible presence in Guangxi Province.

Mondzish (Mangish) is a small group of languages that constitute the most divergent branch of the Lolo–Burmese languages in the classification of Lama (2012). The Mondzish languages are spoken in Funing, Guangnan, Malipo, and Napo counties of China and Hà Giang and Cao Bang provinces of northern Vietnam. The autonyms of Mondzish-speaking peoples often begins with *man-. Lama (2012) considers *man- to be cognate with Mán (蛮), which is an ancient Chinese exonym for non-Chinese peoples to the south.

Tagu 塔古 is a Loloish language spoken in parts of Dongshan and Sina townships in southeastern Yongsheng County by at least 2,000 people.

The Central Loloish languages, also known as Central Ngwi, is a branch of Loloish languages in Bradley (1997). It is not used in Lama's (2012) classification. Central Loloish is also not supported in Satterthwaite-Phillips' (2011) computational phylogenetic analysis of the Lolo-Burmese languages.

Lang’e 崀峨 is a Loloish language spoken in 12 villages of Lang’e village cluster in Changhai Township, southwestern Yongsheng County by about 2,500 people.

The Naic or Naxish languages are a group of Sino-Tibetan languages that include Naxi, Na (Mosuo), Shixing (Xumi), and Namuyi (Namuzi). They have been variously classified as part of the Loloish or the Qiangic branch of Sino-Tibetan.

The Burmo-Qiangic or Eastern Tibeto-Burman languages are a proposed family of Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Southwest China and Myanmar. It consists of the Lolo-Burmese and Qiangic branches, including the extinct Tangut language.

Proto-Loloish is the reconstructed ancestor of the Loloish languages. Reconstructions include those of David Bradley (1979), James Matisoff (2003), and Ziwo Lama (2012).

The Lawu languages or Lawoish languages are a proposed branch of Loloish languages. Internal classification within Loloish is uncertain. It may form a branch of Central Loloish, or it may be an independent branch of Loloish. The Lawu languages are:

The Siloid languages belong to the Southern Loloish (Hanoish) branch of the Sino-Tibetan language family. The Siloid branch was first proposed by Hsiu (2016).

References

1 2 Bradley 1997.
↑ Lama 2012.
↑ Benedict, Paul K. (1987). "Autonyms: ought or ought not" (PDF). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. 10: 188..
↑ Thurgood 2003, p. 8.
↑ Bradley 2002.
↑ Bradley 2007.
↑ Fang Lifen [方利芬]. 2013. A genetic study on the Sadu language of Bai people in Yuxi [玉溪白族撒都话系属研究]. M.A. dissertation. Beijing: Minzu University.
↑ Hsiu, Andrew (August 7–10, 2013). New Endangered Tibeto-Burman Languages of Southwestern China: Mondzish, Longjia, Pherbu, and Others. 46th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (ICSTLL 46). Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, US. doi:10.5281/zenodo.1127796. S2CID 135404293.
↑ Jacques, Guillaume & Michaud, Alexis (2011). "Approaching the historical phonology of three highly eroded Sino-Tibetan languages" (PDF). Diachronica. 28 (4): 468–498. doi:10.1075/dia.28.4.02jac. S2CID 54013956.
↑ Hsiu, Andrew (2017), The Lawu languages: footprints along the Red River valley corridor
↑ Satterthwaite-Phillips 2011.

Bradley, David (1997). "Tibeto-Burman languages and classification". Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, Papers in South East Asian linguistics (PDF). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-10-11.
Bradley, David (2002). "The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman". In Beckwith, Christopher & Blezer, Henk (eds.). Medieval Tibeto-Burman languages. International Association for Tibetan Studies Proceedings 9 (2000) and Brill Tibetan Studies Library 2. Leiden: Brill. pp. 73–112.
Bradley, David (2007). "East and Southeast Asia". In Moseley, Christopher (ed.). Encyclopedia of the World's Endangered Languages. London & New York: Routledge. pp. 349–424.
Lama, Ziwo Qiu-Fuyuan (2012). Subgrouping of Nisoic (Yi) Languages (PDF) (Ph.D). University of Texas at Arlington.
Satterthwaite-Phillips, Damian (2011). Phylogenetic inference of the Tibeto-Burman languages or On the usefulness of lexicostatistics (and "Megalo"-comparison) for the subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman (Ph.D. dissertation). Stanford University.
Thurgood, Graham (2003), "A subgrouping of the Sino-Tibetan languages", in Thurgood, Graham; LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), Sino-Tibetan Languages, London: Routledge, pp. 3–21, ISBN 978-0-7007-1129-1.
Driem, George van (2001). Languages of the Himalayas: An Ethnolinguistic Handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region. Leiden: Brill.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[3] [hle] 15,000; [jiy] 1,000; [jiu] 10,000; [lkc] 46,870; [lhu] 530,350; [lhi] 196,200; [ywt] 213,000; [yik] 30,000; [yit] 38,000; [ywl] 38,000; [llh] 120; [yne] 2,000; [lwu] 50; [ylm] 29,000; [lpo] 250,000; [lis] 942,700; [ycl] 380,000; [ysp] 190,000; [ymh] 23,000; [yiq] 30,000; [nuf] 12,670; [ysn] 100,000; [yta] 13,600; [ytl] 950; [zal] 2,100; [yna] 25,000; [yiu] 20,000; [yyz] 50; [ych] 3,300; [ygp] 100,000; [kaf] 4,000; [ylo] 15,000; [ywu] 150,000; [yig] 500,000; [iii] 2,000,000; [ysd] 400; [smh] 20,000; [ysy] 8,000; [ywq] 250,000; [yif] 35,000; [aub] 3,500; [yix] 100,000; [aza] 53,000; [yiz] 54,000; [ybk] 10,000; [ykt] 5,000; [ykl] 21,000; [ykn] 5,000; [yku] 1,000; [lgh] 300; [nty] 1,100; [ymi] 2,000; [ymx] 9,000; [ymq] 1,500; [ymc] 26,000; [ymz] 10,000; [yso] 36,000; [nos] 75,000; [yiv] 160,000; [nsf] 24,000; [nsd] 210,000; [nsv] 15,000; [ypa] 12,000; [ypg] 13,000; [ypo] 500; [yip] 30,000; [ypn] 10,000; [yhl] 36,000; [ypb] 17,000; [phh] 10,000; [ypm] 8,000; [ypp] 3,000; [yph] 1,300; [ypz] 6,000; [ysg] 2,000; [ytp] 200; [yzk] 13,000; [qeu] 12,400; [ahk] 563,960; [bzi] 240; [byo] 120,000; [ycp] 2,000; [cnc] 2,030; [enu] 30,000; [hni] 758,620; [how] 140,000; [ktp] 185,000; [lwm] 1,600; [lov] ? (not included); [mpz] 900; [ymd] 2,000; [phq] 350; [pho] 35,600; [pyy] 700; [sgk] 1,500; [slt] 2,480; [lbg] 9,550; [ugo] 80; Total: 9,078,770

[FOOTNOTEBradley1997-1] 1 2 Bradley 1997.

[FOOTNOTELama2012-2] Lama 2012.

[4] Benedict, Paul K. (1987). "Autonyms: ought or ought not" (PDF). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. 10: 188..

[FOOTNOTEThurgood20038-5] Thurgood 2003, p. 8.

[FOOTNOTEBradley2002-6] Bradley 2002.

[FOOTNOTEBradley2007-7] Bradley 2007.

[8] Fang Lifen [方利芬]. 2013. A genetic study on the Sadu language of Bai people in Yuxi [玉溪白族撒都话系属研究]. M.A. dissertation. Beijing: Minzu University.

[Hsiu2013-9] Hsiu, Andrew (August 7–10, 2013). New Endangered Tibeto-Burman Languages of Southwestern China: Mondzish, Longjia, Pherbu, and Others. 46th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (ICSTLL 46). Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, US. doi:10.5281/zenodo.1127796. S2CID 135404293.

[Jacques-10] Jacques, Guillaume & Michaud, Alexis (2011). "Approaching the historical phonology of three highly eroded Sino-Tibetan languages" (PDF). Diachronica. 28 (4): 468–498. doi:10.1075/dia.28.4.02jac. S2CID 54013956.

[Hsiu2017-11] Hsiu, Andrew (2017), The Lawu languages: footprints along the Red River valley corridor

[FOOTNOTESatterthwaite-Phillips2011-12] Satterthwaite-Phillips 2011.

[1]

[2]

[lower-alpha 1]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]