Mahakiranti languages

Last updated
Mahakiranti
Bahing–Vahu
(proposed)
Geographic
distribution
Nepal and India (Sikkim, Darjeeling and Kalimpong)
Linguistic classification Sino-Tibetan
Subdivisions
Language codes
Glottolog maha1306

The Mahakiranti or Maha-Kiranti ('Greater Kiranti') languages are a proposed intermediate level of classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages, consisting of the Kiranti languages and neighbouring languages thought to be closely related to them. Researchers disagree on which languages belong in Mahakiranti, or even whether Mahakiranti is a valid group. The group was originally proposed by George van Driem, who retracted his proposal in 2004 after a field study in Bhutan.

Contents

Conceptions of Mahakiranti

van Driem (2001) posits that the Mahakiranti languages besides Kiranti proper are Newar, Baram, and Thangmi. Baram and Thangmi are clearly related, but it is not yet clear if the similarities they share with Newar demonstrate a 'Para-Kiranti' family, as van Driem suggests, or if they are borrowings. He sees Lepcha, Lhokpu, and the Magaric languages (in the narrow sense, whether or not Chepangic proves to be Magar) as the Bodic languages closest to Mahakiranti.

van Driem's conception of Mahakiranti

Matisoff's Mahakiranti includes the Newar and the Magaric languages along with Kiranti. He groups Mahakiranti with the Tibeto-Kanauri languages (in which he includes Lepcha) as Himalayish.

Bradley (1997) adds Magar and Chepang to van Driem's Mahakiranti and calls the result Himalayan. This, along with his "Bodish" (equivalent to Tibeto-Kanauri), constitutes his Bodic family.

Ethnologue (15th ed.) posits Magaric, Chepang, and Newar alongside Kiranti; Mahakiranti is in turn posited to be related to Tibeto-Kanauri in a Himalayish branch, largely equivalent to other scholars' Bodic.

Benedict (1972) included Newar and Chepangic, but not Magaric. He mistakenly classified Vayu as Chepangic and thus named the family Bahing–Vayu.

Retraction of the hypothesis by van Driem

After a field visit to Bhutan, van Driem, the original proponent of this hypothesis, collected data on the Gongduk language which made him realize morphological traits common between Kiranti and Newar are not unique to either Kiranti or Newar but a shared retention of a far older trait. He retracted his proposal in 2004. [1]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sino-Tibetan languages</span> Language family native to Asia

Sino-Tibetan is a family of more than 400 languages, second only to Indo-European in number of native speakers. Around 1.4 billion people speak a Sino-Tibetan language. The vast majority of these are the 1.3 billion native speakers of Sinitic languages. Other Sino-Tibetan languages with large numbers of speakers include Burmese and the Tibetic languages. Four United Nations member states have a Sino-Tibetan language as their main native language. Other languages of the family are spoken in the Himalayas, the Southeast Asian Massif, and the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau. Most of these have small speech communities in remote mountain areas, and as such are poorly documented.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thami</span> Indigenous tribe of Nepal

The Thangmi are an indigenous ethnic tribe of Eastern Himalayas. In Nepal, they reside mainly in Suspa, Kshamawati, Khopachagu, Alampu, Bigu, Kalinchok, Lapilang and Lakuri Danda villages of Dolakha district in East-Central Nepal. In India, they reside in Darjeeling, Kalimpong, Kerseong and Sikkim. Many members of Thami clan are also living in Bhutan. They are locally known as Thangmi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George van Driem</span> Dutch linguist

George "Sjors" van Driem is a Dutch professor emeritus of linguistics at the University of Bern. He studied East Asian languages and is known for the father tongue hypothesis.

The Himalayan Languages Project, launched in 1993, is a research collective based at Leiden University and comprising much of the world's authoritative research on the lesser-known and endangered languages of the Himalayas, in Nepal, China, Bhutan, and India. Its members regularly spend months or years at a time doing field research with native speakers. The Director of the Himalayan Languages Project is George van Driem. Project members include Mark Turin and Jeroen Wiedenhof. The project recruits graduate students to collect field data on little-known languages for their Ph.D. dissertations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lepcha language</span> Tibeto-Burman language of Sikkim, Nepal and Bhutan

Lepcha language, or Róng language, is a Himalayish language spoken by the Lepcha people in Sikkim, India and parts of West Bengal, Nepal, and Bhutan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Languages of Bhutan</span>

There are two dozen languages of Bhutan, all members of the Tibeto-Burman language family except for Nepali, which is an Indo-Aryan language, and the Bhutanese Sign Language. Dzongkha, the national language, is the only native language of Bhutan with a literary tradition, though Lepcha and Nepali are literary languages in other countries. Other non-Bhutanese minority languages are also spoken along Bhutan's borders and among the primarily Nepali-speaking Lhotshampa community in South and East Bhutan. Chöke is the language of the traditional literature and learning of the Buddhist monastics.

The Kiranti languages are a major family of Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Nepal and India by the Kirati people.

Raji–Raute is a branch of the Sino-Tibetan language family that includes the three closely related languages, namely Raji, Raute, and Rawat. They are spoken by small hunter-gatherer communities in the Terai region of Nepal and in neighboring Uttarakhand, India.

The Magar languages are a small proposed family of Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Nepal, notably including Magar and Kham. (Ethnologue considers each to be a cluster of languages.) They are often classified as part of the Mahakiranti family, and Van Driem (2001) proposes that they are close relatives of Mahakiranti.

The Chepangic languages, Chepang and Bhujel, are Sino-Tibetan languages of uncertain affiliation spoken in Nepal. They are often classified as part of the Mahakiranti or Magaric families.

Bodish, named for the Tibetan ethnonym Bod, is a proposed grouping consisting of the Tibetic languages and associated Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Tibet, North India, Nepal, Bhutan, and North Pakistan. It has not been demonstrated that all these languages form a clade, characterized by shared innovations, within Sino-Tibetan.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tamangic languages</span> Sino-Tibetan branch of central-eastern Nepal

The Tamangic languages, TGTM languages, or West Bodish languages or Kaike-Ghale-Tamangic languages (Glottolog), are a family of Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in the Himalayas of Nepal. They are called "West Bodish" by Bradley (1997), from Bod, the native term for Tibet. TGTM stands for Tamang-Gurung-Thakali-Manang.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tibeto-Burman languages</span> Group of the Sino-Tibetan language 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 Baram–Thangmi languages, Baram and Thangmi are Tibeto-Burman languages spoken in Nepal. They are classified as part of the Newaric branch by van Driem (2003) and Turin (2004), who view Newar as being most closely related to Baram–Thangmi.

Lhokpu, also Lhobikha or Taba-Damtoe-Bikha, is one of the autochthonous languages of Bhutan spoken by the Lhop people. It is spoken in southwestern Bhutan along the border of Samtse and Chukha Districts. Van Driem (2003) leaves it unclassified as a separate branch within the Sino-Tibetan language family.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ʼOle language</span> Sino-Tibetan language of western Bhutan

ʼOle, also called ʼOlekha or Black Mountain Monpa, is a possibly Sino-Tibetan language spoken by about 1,000 people in the Black Mountains of Wangdue Phodrang and Trongsa Districts in western Bhutan. The term ʼOle refers to a clan of speakers.

Thangmi, also called Thāmī, Thangmi Kham, Thangmi Wakhe, and Thani, is a Sino-Tibetan language spoken in central-eastern Nepal and northeastern India by the Thami people. The Thami refer to their language as Thangmi Kham or Thangmi Wakhe while the rest of Nepal refers to it as Thāmī. The majority of these speakers, however, live in Nepal in their traditional homeland of Dolakhā District. In India, the Thami population is concentrated mostly in Darjeeling. The Thangmi language is written using the Devanagari script. Thangmi has been extensively documented by Mark Turin.

The Rung languages are a proposed branch of Sino-Tibetan languages. The branch was proposed by Randy LaPolla on the basis of morphological evidence such as pronominal paradigms. However, Guillaume Jacques and Thomas Pellard (2021) argues that these languages do not constitute a monophyly based on recent phylogenetic studies and on a thorough investigation of shared lexical innovations.

The Newaric languages are a proposed group of Sino-Tibetan languages. George van Driem (2003) and Mark Turin (2004) argue that Newar and Baram–Thangmi share many features with each other, and thus group with each other.

References

  1. van Driem, George (2004). "Newaric and Mahakiranti". In Saxena, Anju (ed.). Himalayan Languages. De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 413–418. ISBN   978-3-11-017841-8.