Sino-Austronesian languages

Last updated
Sino-Austronesian
(hypothetical)
Geographic
distribution		 East, South and Southeast Asia
Linguistic classification proposed language family
Subdivisions
Glottolog None

Sino-Austronesian or Sino-Tibetan-Austronesian is a proposed language family suggested by Laurent Sagart in 1990. [1] Using reconstructions of Old Chinese, Sagart argued that the Austronesian languages are related to the Sinitic languages phonologically, lexically and morphologically. Sagart later accepted the Sino-Tibetan languages as a valid group and extended his proposal to include the rest of Sino-Tibetan. [2] He also placed the Tai–Kadai languages within the Austronesian family as a sister branch of Malayo-Polynesian. [3] The proposal has been largely rejected by other linguists who argue that the similarities between Austronesian and Sino-Tibetan more likely arose from contact rather than being genetic. [4] [5] [6]

Contents

Classification

Sagart (2004)

The classification below follows Sagart (2004).

Sagart suggests that monosyllabic Old Chinese words correspond to the second syllables of disyllabic Proto-Austronesian roots. However, the type A/B distinction in OC, corresponding to non-palatalized or palatalized syllables in Middle Chinese, is considered to correspond to a voiceless/voiced initial in PAN.

GlossProto-AustronesianChinese
brain*punuq 腦 *anuʔ > nǎo
salt*siRaH1 鹵 *araʔ > lǔ
foxtail millet *beCeng 稷 *btsək > jì

Starosta (2005)

Stanley Starosta (2005) expands Sagart's Sino-Austronesian tree with a "Yangzian" branch, consisting of Austroasiatic and Hmong–Mien, to form an East Asian superphylum. [7]

Criticism

Weera Ostapirat (2005) supports the link between Austronesian and Kra–Dai (Sagart built upon Ostapirat's findings), though as sister groups. However, he rejects a link to Sino-Tibetan, noting that the apparent cognates are rarely found in all branches of Kra–Dai, and almost none are in core vocabulary. [8]

Austronesian linguists Paul Jen-kuei Li and Robert Blust have criticized Sagart's comparisons, on the grounds of loose semantic matches, inconsistent correspondences, and that basic vocabulary is hardly represented. They also note that comparing with the second syllable of disyllabic Austronesian roots vastly increases the odds of chance resemblance. [4] [5] Blust has been particularly critical of Sagart's use of the comparative method. [9] Laurent Sagart (2016) responds to some of the criticisms by Blust (2009). [10]

Alexander Vovin (1997) does not accept Sino-Austronesian as a valid grouping, but instead suggests that some of the Sino-Austronesian parallels proposed by Sagart may in fact be due to an Austronesian substratum in Old Chinese. [6] This view is also espoused by George van Driem, who suggests that Austronesian and Sinitic had come into contact with each other during the fourth and third millennia BC in the Longshan interaction sphere. [11] [12] [13]

Distributions

See also

Related Research Articles

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

Sino-Tibetan, also cited as Trans-Himalayan in a few sources, 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. 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">Kra–Dai languages</span> Language family of mainland Southeast Asia

The Kra–Dai languages, are a language family in mainland Southeast Asia, southern China, and northeastern India. All languages in the family are tonal, including Thai and Lao, the national languages of Thailand and Laos, respectively. Around 93 million people speak Kra–Dai languages; 60% of those speak Thai. Ethnologue lists 95 languages in the family, with 62 of these being in the Tai branch.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Austronesian languages</span> Large language family mostly of Southeast Asia and the Pacific

The Austronesian languages are a language family widely spoken throughout Maritime Southeast Asia, parts of Mainland Southeast Asia, Madagascar, the islands of the Pacific Ocean and Taiwan. They are spoken by about 386 million people. This makes it the fifth-largest language family by number of speakers. Major Austronesian languages include Malay, Javanese, Sundanese, Tagalog (Filipino), Malagasy and Cebuano. According to some estimates, the family contains 1,257 languages, which is the second most of any language family.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hmong–Mien languages</span> Language family of south China and Southeast Asia

The Hmong–Mien languages are a highly tonal language family of southern China and northern Southeast Asia. They are spoken in mountainous areas of southern China, including Guizhou, Hunan, Yunnan, Sichuan, Guangxi, and Hubei provinces; the speakers of these languages are predominantly "hill people", in contrast to the neighboring Han Chinese, who have settled the more fertile river valleys.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Austric languages</span> Hypothetical parent family of the Austroasiatic and Austronesian languages

The Austric languages are a proposed language family that includes the Austronesian languages spoken in Taiwan, Maritime Southeast Asia, the Pacific Islands, and Madagascar, as well as Kra–Dai and Austroasiatic languages spoken in Mainland Southeast Asia and South Asia. A genetic relationship between these language families is seen as plausible by some scholars, but remains unproven.

The Kam–Tai languages, also called Dong–Tai or Zhuang–Dong in China, are a proposed primary branch of the Kra–Dai language family. However, since the 2000s in China, the names Dong–Tai and Zhuang–Dong have been used to refer to the entire Kra–Dai language family, including the Kra languages, due to the extensive documentation and comparative work done on Kra languages in China starting from the 2000s.

The Austro-Tai languages, sometimes also Austro-Thai languages, are a proposed language family that comprises the Austronesian languages and the Kra–Dai languages.

The Kra languages are a branch of the Kra–Dai language family spoken in southern China and in northern Vietnam.

<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.

Laurent Sagart is a senior researcher at the Centre de recherches linguistiques sur l'Asie orientale unit of the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS).

There have been various classification schemes for Southeast Asian languages.

Proto-Tibeto-Burman is the reconstructed ancestor of the Tibeto-Burman languages, that is, the Sino-Tibetan languages, except for Chinese. An initial reconstruction was produced by Paul K. Benedict and since refined by James Matisoff. Several other researchers argue that the Tibeto-Burman languages sans Chinese do not constitute a monophyletic group within Sino-Tibetan, and therefore that Proto-Tibeto-Burman was the same language as Proto-Sino-Tibetan.

Proto-Hmong–Mien (PHM), also known as Proto-Miao–Yao, is the reconstructed ancestor of the Hmong–Mien languages. Lower-level reconstructions include Proto-Hmongic and Proto-Mienic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tai peoples</span> Descendants of speakers of a common Tai language

Tai peoples are the populations who speak the Tai languages. There are a total of about 93 million people of Tai ancestry worldwide, with the largest ethnic groups being Dai, Thais, Isan, Tai Yai (Shan),Tai Lai(Shanni), Lao, Tai Ahom, Tai Meitei and Northern Thai peoples.

Scott DeLancey is an American linguist from the University of Oregon. His work focuses on typology and historical linguistics of Tibeto-Burman languages as well as North American indigenous languages such as the Penutian family, particularly the Klamath. His research is known for its diversity of its thematic and theoretical reach.

Proto-Sino-Tibetan (PST) is the hypothetical linguistic reconstruction of the Sino-Tibetan proto-language and the common ancestor of all languages in it, including the Sinitic languages, the Tibetic languages, Yi, Bai, Burmese, Karen, Tangut, and Naga. Paul K. Benedict (1972) placed a particular emphasis on Old Chinese, Classical Tibetan, Jingpho, Written Burmese, Garo, and Mizo in his discussion of Proto-Sino-Tibetan.

The East Asian languages are a language family proposed by Stanley Starosta in 2001. The proposal has since been adopted by George van Driem and others.

Proto-Kra–Dai is the proposed reconstructed ancestor of the Kra–Dai languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Old Yue language</span> Ancient language of China

The Old Yue language is an unknown unclassified language, or groups of various languages, spoken in ancient southern China, and northern Vietnam circa 700s BCE or later. It can refer to Yue, which was spoken in the realm of Yue during the Spring and Autumn period. It can also refer to the different languages spoken by the Baiyue. Possible languages spoken by them may have been of Kra–Dai, Hmong–Mien, Austronesian, Austroasiatic and other origins.

References

  1. ↑ Sagart, L. (1990) "Chinese and Austronesian are genetically related". Paper presented at the 23rd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, October 1990, Arlington, Texas.
  2. ↑ Sagart, Laurent (2005). "Sino-Tibetan–Austronesian: an updated and improved argument". In Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics . London: Routledge Curzon. pp.  161–176. ISBN   978-0-415-32242-3.
  3. ↑ Sagart, Laurent (2004). "The higher phylogeny of Austronesian and the position of Tai-Kadai". Oceanic Linguistics. 43 (2): 411–444. doi:10.1353/ol.2005.0012. JSTOR   3623364. S2CID   49547647.
  4. 1 2 Li, Paul Jenkuei (1995). "Is Chinese genetically related to Austronesian?". In Wang, William S-Y. (ed.). The Ancestry of the Chinese Language. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series. Vol. 8. Chinese University Press. pp. 92–112. JSTOR   23826144.
  5. 1 2 Blust, Robert (1995). "An Austronesianist looks at Sino-Austronesian". In Wang, William S-Y. (ed.). The Ancestry of the Chinese Language. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series. Vol. 8. Chinese University Press. pp. 283–298. JSTOR   23826144.
  6. 1 2 Vovin, Alexander (1997). "The comparative method and ventures beyond Sino-Tibetan". Journal of Chinese Linguistics. 25 (2): 308–336. JSTOR   23756693.
  7. ↑ Starosta, Stanley (2005). "Proto-East Asian and the origin and dispersal of languages of east and southeast Asia and the Pacific". In Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics . London: Routledge Curzon. pp.  182–197. ISBN   978-0-415-32242-3.
  8. ↑ Ostapirat, Weera (2005). "Kra–Dai and Austronesian: Notes on phonological correspondences and vocabulary distribution". In Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics . London: Routledge Curzon. pp.  107–131. ISBN   978-0-415-32242-3.
  9. ↑ Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages". Oceanic Linguistics. 53 (2): 300–391. doi:10.1353/ol.2014.0025. JSTOR   43286532. S2CID   144931249.
  10. ↑ Sagart, Laurent (2016). "The wider connections of Austronesian: A response to Blust (2009)". Diachronica. 33 (2): 255–281. doi:10.1075/dia.33.2.04sag.
  11. ↑ van Driem, G. 1998. ‘Neolithic correlates of ancient Tibeto-Burman migrations’, pp. 67–102 in Roger Blench and Matthew Spriggs, eds., Archaeology and Language II. London: Routledge.
  12. ↑ van Driem, G. 2005. ‘Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory’, pp. 285–338 in Yogendra Prasada Yadava, Govinda Bhattarai, Ram Raj Lohani, Balaram Prasain and Krishna Parajuli, eds., Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.
  13. ↑ van Driem, George. 2016. ‘The Eastern Himalayan corridor in prehistory’, pp. 467-524, Vol. II in Elena Nikolaevna Kolpačkova, ed., Проблемы китайского и общего языкознания — Problems in Chinese and General Linguistics. St. Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Studija « NP-Print ».

Further reading

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.