Lexical Influence from South Asia

Tom G. Hoogervorst

Jump to Content

Chapter 2 Lexical Influence from South Asia

于Traces of Contact in the Lexicon

著者：

Tom G. Hoogervorst

Tom G. Hoogervorst
Search for other papers by Tom G. Hoogervorst in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed

类型:: 章节

Page Range:: 25–56

DOI:: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004529458_003

您获得访问的方式：

Dar Hadith al Hassania

下载PDF

Abstract

This chapter traces South Asian loanwords in the Austronesian and Papuan languages of Maritime Southeast Asia. The relevant donor languages encompass two language families: Indo-European (specifically Indo-Aryan) and Dravidian (specifically South Dravidian). Among the former, Sanskrit has had the greatest impact in Maritime Southeast Asia. From the South Dravidian side, a significant layer of loanwords came from Tamil, whereas Malayalam donated a comparatively smaller amount of vocabulary. The vast majority of South Asian loanwords spread eastwards through Malay and to a lesser degree through Javanese, although direct contact can be seen in the local languages of North Sumatra. Especially the oldest forms of Javanese, in which many written texts have been preserved, are informative about the phonological and semantic developments of borrowed (and inherited) vocabulary in Maritime Southeast Asia. South Asian loanwords in this region (and beyond) encompass introduced items but also borrowed words for existing concepts. For the languages of Sumatra, Java, and elsewhere within the sphere of direct Indian influence, the lexical record reflects a profound impact from South Asian languages. Further to the east, only the most practical borrowings remain, all transmitted through intermediate languages. In the Papuan languages, specifically the Timor-Alor-Pantar and North Halmahera families, lexical influence from Indo-Aryan and South Dravidian languages is minimal and chiefly of recent date.

Introduction

South and Southeast Asia have been in contact for millennia. It is therefore no surprise to find traces of lexical borrowing across its languages and language families. In South Asia, the most widespread and expansive language families are Indo-European (specifically Indo-Aryan) and Dravidian (specifically South Dravidian). The former includes classical languages such as Sanskrit (Sk.) and Pali (Pa.), next to present-day mother tongues such as Hindustani (Hi.), Bengali (Be.), Gujarati, Sinhala, and Odia. Sanskrit represents the Old Indo-Aryan (OIA) stage of historical development, whereas Pali and several extinct vernaculars known collectively as “Prakrit” are classified as Middle Indo-Aryan (MIA), and the modern languages as New Indo-Aryan (NIA). The South Dravidian branch includes Tamil (Ta.), Malayalam (Ma.), Kannada, and Tulu. Tamil and Malayalam have been most prominent in language contact with Southeast Asia. While they are now considered separate languages, Tamil and Malayalam formed an undivided dialect continuum during the earliest stage of language contact with Southeast Asia. I will nevertheless treat them as separate entities in this chapter, as a number of phonological differences allow us to determine whether certain words were borrowed from the eastern or western part of this historical continuum.

In Maritime Southeast Asia, Javanese and especially Malay have historically been crucial for the transmission of loanwords from external sources (Sanskrit, Tamil, Arabic, Portuguese, Dutch, English, etc.) to the region’s smaller languages. Javanese is furthermore important on account of its extensive record of inscriptions and other texts, starting from the ninth century CE, which provide valuable insights into language development.¹ What are commonly referred to as “Papuan” languages consist of a number of separate families spoken in the eastern parts of Maritime Southeast Asia and the western parts of Oceania. There is no irrefutable evidence for direct contact between any “Papuan” language and any “Indian” language. With Malay as the chief vector of secondary borrowing, loanwords from Sanskrit and other South Asian languages are chiefly attested in Papuan languages families of the Wallacea region, such as the Timor-Alor-Pantar languages and North Halmahera languages. Further to the east, the presence of South Asian vocabulary is either minimal or very recent, and has always passed through Indonesian.²

This chapter investigates lexical traces from Indo-Aryan and South Dravidian languages in Austronesian and, to a lesser extent, Papuan languages. It does not attempt to be complete.³ Examples have been selected on account of their ability to illustrate the main tendencies underlying early lexical borrowing from South to Southeast Asia.⁴ As far as Austronesian languages are concerned, the geographical distribution of these loanwords is limited to Maritime Southeast Asia (including East Timor and the Philippines), Madagascar, small pockets of Mainland Southeast Asia (in particular the Chamic and Moklenic languages), and—to a minimal degree—Taiwan. There is no evidence of early language contact between South Asia and the Pacific. The role of Austroasiatic languages, which are spoken in South Asia as well as Southeast Asia, is too extensive a topic to be discussed here. I will also not look at Arabic and Persian words that entered Southeast Asia through the springboard of South Asia, nor at “Indian” loanwords recently introduced through European languages.

One of the most underestimated tasks of a historical linguist is to reconstruct regular sound correspondences, both in inherited and borrowed vocabulary. Borrowings between languages with vastly different phonological inventories are often unrecognizable as such. Consider, for example, the Hawaiian words kalikimaka, kanauika, and manakuke, which regularly go back to English ‘Christmas’, ‘sandwich’, and ‘mongoose’. Conversely, words that look similar may prove to be unrelated after the historical phonology of both languages is taken into account.⁵ Table 2.1 lists some widespread faulty etymologies—displaying different levels of credibility—in Malay.

Table 2.1

Rejected South Asian borrowings in Malay

Malay	South Asian faux-etymon	Genuine etymology
barat ‘west’	bhārata (Sk.) ‘India’	PMP *habaRat ‘southwest monsoon’
bəli ‘to purchase’	vil- (Ta.) ‘to sell’	PAN *beli ‘to buy’
dara ‘girl’	dāra (Sk.) ‘wife’	PMP *daRa ‘maiden, virgin, unmarried girl’
dua ‘two’	dva (Sk.)	PAN *duSa
hari ‘day’	hari (Sk.) ‘the sun’	PAN *waRi ‘day; sun; dry in the sun’
kəlam ‘dark, obscure’	kāḷam (Ta.) ‘blackness, darkness’	PAN *kelem ‘night, darkness’
mabuk ‘drunk’	mappu (Ta.) ‘beclouded state of the intellect, as by intoxication’	PAN *ma-buSuk ‘drunk, intoxicated’
patah ‘broken’	phaṭā (NIA) ‘torn, split, broken’	PMP *pataq ‘break, broken, cut through’
saruŋ ‘sarong (hip-wrapper)’	sāraṅga (Sk.) ‘of a variegated colour’	PAN *duŋ ‘shelter’⁶

This chapter examines South Asian lexical influence along three lines of inquiry: the integration of loanwords, the timeframe of borrowing, and the trajectories of borrowing. Lexical borrowing from South to Southeast Asia is complicated by vastly different phonological systems, especially in scenarios of secondary and tertiary transmission. Most lexical borrowing furthermore features semantic shift. The timeframe of acquisition is difficult to determine precisely. Textual attestations only provide a “not-after date” of transmission, whereas historical phonology allows for relative dating. Loanwords that exhibit the same phonological innovations as inherited vocabulary, for example, tend to be relatively early introductions. Loanwords for which high-level Austronesian protoforms can be reconstructed tend to be relatively ancient as well. The geographical distribution of South Asian loans is another tool to gauge their antiquity. Loanwords only found in the western parts of Maritime Southeast Asia, which had more intensive contact with South Asia, were arguably less prominent than loanwords that spread further eastwards.

1 Integration

As most South Asian loanwords spread across Maritime Southeast Asia through Malay and—to a lesser extent—Javanese, the phonological systems of both languages merit some further comment. Unlike some other Austronesian languages, modern Malay and Javanese normally lack long vowels and gemination. The three-way distinction of sibilants found in Sanskrit (⟨s⟩ /s/; ⟨ś⟩ /ʃ/; ⟨ṣ⟩ /ʂ/) is alien to Austronesian languages. Javanese has contrastive dental and retroflex stops—/t̪/ and /d̪/ versus /ʈ/ and /ɖ/—while Malay only has /t̪/ and /d/. As a result, direct South Asian borrowings into Javanese often retain their retroflex /ʈ/ (e.g. cəməʈi ‘whip’ < MIA *cammaṭṭhi, kaʈil ‘bedstead’ < Ta. kaṭṭil, pəʈi ‘box’ < NIA *peṭī), whereas borrowings acquired through Malay tend to display their dental counterparts (e.g. kati ‘a weight unit’⁷ < Ta. kaṭṭi, roti ‘bread’ < NIA *roṭī, topi ‘hat’ < NIA *ṭopī). Malay historically substituted /w/ by /b/ and /y/ by /j/, except in Arabic loanwords (Hoogervorst 2017b: 295). It furthermore exhibits a tendency to voice the historically voiceless /k/ and /c/ to respectively /g/ and /j/ (Hoogervorst 2015:84–86, 2017b: 296–297). The first syllable of loanwords originally consisting of three or four syllables is often clipped in Malayo-Polynesian languages, e.g. Malay biasa ‘usual’ and puasa ‘to fast’ respectively from Sanskrit abhyāsa ‘repetition; habit’ and upavāsa. Modern Malay and Javanese lack aspirated consonants, yet secondary borrowings in Tagalog reveal that aspirate consonants were historically retained by at least some speakers (Adelaar 1994:63). In Malagasy, the aspirated velar stops /kh/ and /gh/ both became /k/, whereas their non-aspirated counterparts /k/ and /g/ became /h/ (Adelaar 1994:64). In Malay, such Sanskrit loans as bahagia ‘fortunate’ (< bhāgya), bahasa ‘language’ (< bhāṣā), and pahala ‘reward’ (< phala) also reflect historical aspiration. In Toba Batak, the historical presence of aspirated consonants is revealed by an epenthetic /a/ (historically preceding a /h/) in words like baima ‘a name’ (< Sk. bhīma), bauta ‘a kind of spirit’ (< Sk. bhūta), and daupa ‘incense’ (< Sk. dhūpa) (van der Tuuk 1971:69).

Equal attention should be given to phonological innovations that took place in South Asia. Sanskrit was no longer a spoken language during the first centuries CE, when it exerted lexical influence on parts of Southeast Asia. The vernacular languages of North India around that period presumably constituted an intermediate stage between Middle- and New Indo-Aryan. MIA phonology displays lenition of intervocalic consonants and various assimilation processes of consonant clusters. Loanwords in Austronesian languages that also display these features, hence must have been acquired from MIA rather than Sanskrit. Most (but not all) NIA languages exhibit a further development: the elision of unstressed word-final vowels. Such forms are already attested in Old Javanese literature (Hoogervorst 2017a: 423–431). Other Indo-Aryan loanwords in Austronesian languages retain the unstressed word-final /a/, suggesting an even earlier transmission. Table 2.2 on the next page gives some examples, in which the likeliest stage of transmission is marked grey. Etyma marked with an asterisk (*) are my own reconstructions.

Sanskrit and other Indo-Aryan languages have lexical gender, in which female forms, derived adjectives, and other derivations are marked with a word-final /ī/. One noteworthy phenomenon in a number of West-Malayo-Polynesian languages is a preference for the i-forms of Sanskrit loanwords, even when these are rare or unattested in South Asia (Hoogervorst 2017b: 302–313).⁸ A number of common examples are given in Table 2.3.

The same process was active for MIA loanwords, whose reconstructions are chiefly based on historical phonology rather than textual attestation. Table 2.4 lists some of my postulations. This observation has some far-reaching implications for Austronesian historical linguistics. If a borrowed form *jadi in the meaning of ‘to be born; to become; to come about’ has indeed made its way into Southeast Asia through a MIA source, and we are not dealing with a case of chance resemblance, this transmission must have taken place at a remarkably early stage. Tentative reflexes such as Javanese dadi, Malagasy zary and Makassar jari all display the expected sound changes of inherited vocabulary (but Tagalog yari does not). This would imply that language contact took place when the innovation *j > d in Javanese was still ongoing. Reflexes of a hypothetical *kosali ‘village hall’ display an equally vast distribution, from Sumatra and the Philippines to Maluku (Lafeber 1922:135–136). The protoform *suligiq ‘kind of lance’, with attestations in the Philippines and western Indonesia and earlier reconstructed for the somewhat controversial entity of “proto Western-Malayo-Polynesian”, represents a similar instance of early borrowing from South Asia (Hoogervorst 2016:567–568).

Table 2.2

MIA and NIA loans in Malay and Javanese

OIA	MIA	NIA	Malay	Javanese
caurikā ‘theft’	cōriā	corī	curi	–
cukra ‘vinegar’	*cukka	cūk	cuka	cokaʔ
dāḍima ‘pomegranate’	dālima	dāṛim	dəlima	dlima
gōpāla ‘cowherd’	gōvāla	goāl	gəmbala	–
guḍa ‘sugar’	gula	guṛ	gula	gula
jāgrat ‘to be awake’	jagga	jāg	jaga	jaga
karpāsa ‘cotton’	kappāsa	kapās	kapas	kapas
kuñcikā ‘a key’	kuñciyā	kuñci	kunci	kunci
kustumbarī ‘coriander’	kutthumbharī	*kuthumbār	kətumbar	kətumbar
*mukhadvāra ‘a river mouth’	*muhavāra	–	muara	muwara
*pragaḍḍa ‘enclosure; fence’	*pagaḍḍa	pagār	pagar	pagər
rājñī ‘queen’	raṇṇī	rāṇī	rani	–
sakala ‘entire, all’	sagala	–	səgala	–
śmaśāna ‘cemetery’	masāṇa	masān	mesan⁹	maesan
śṛṅkhala ‘chain’	saṅkala	sã̄kal	səŋkəla	–
*sukaṁsa ‘pinchbeck’	*suhaṁsa	suã̄sā	suasa	suwasa
taḍāga ‘a pond’	talāga	talāu	təlaga	tlaga
tāmraka ‘copper’	tambaga	–	təmbaga	təmbaga
uṣṭra ‘a camel’	uṭṭa	ūṇṭ	unta	unta
vajra ‘steel’	vajja	bāj	baja	waja

Table 2.3

The preference for i-forms in Sanskrit loanwords

Sanskrit	Malay	Javanese	Toba Batak	Tagalog
artha ‘meaning’	arti	ərti	arti	–
bhāga ‘part’	bahagi, bagi	bage	bagi	bahagi
bīja ‘seed’	biji¹⁰	wiji	–	–
kacchapa ‘a lute’	kəcapi	kəcapi	hasapi	kudyaˈpiʔ
krakaca ‘a saw’	gərgaji	graji	garagaji	lagariʔ
kuṇḍa ‘a vessel’	kəndi	kəɳɖi	hondi	–
pārāpata ‘pigeon’	mərpati	–	darapati	kalapati
roga ‘infirmity; disease’	rugi ‘to suffer financial loss’	rugi	rugi	lugi

Table 2.4

Possible i-forms of MIA loanwords

Sanskrit	MIA	Postulated i-protoform	Old Javanese	Malay
dyūta ‘to gamble’	*jūda	*judi	judi, juɖi¹¹	judi
jāta ‘born; to come into existence’ (or: jāti ‘birth’)¹²	jāda (or jādi)	*jadi	dadi ‘coming into existence; being done’	jadi
kauśalya ‘a kind of pavilion’	*kosalla	*kosali	gusali, gosali ‘smithy’¹³	–
saraka ‘a drinking vessel’	*saraga	*saragi	saragi ‘a copper kettle or pot’	–
śūlikā ‘a sharp instrument’	*sūligā	*suligi	suligi ‘a kind of spear, javelin’	səligi

Some loanwords already exhibited i-forms in South Asia. In Hindustani and other NIA languages, ī-suffixation became a productive process to form diminutives and derive abstract nouns (Hoogervorst 2017b: 313–316). Table 2.5 lists a number of common examples.

In addition to direct contact with Indo-Aryan languages, a number of loanwords were evidently transmitted through Tamil or a closely related South Dravidian language. Sanskrit loans ending in a short /a/ occasionally obtain the Tamil ending /am/, while those ending in a long /ā/ obtain /ai/. In addition, postnasal or intervocalic stops in Tamil tend to be voiced, whereas word-initial stops tend to be devoiced.¹⁴ Table 2.6 lists some common Indo-Aryan loanwords in Malay that were presumably introduced by speakers of Tamil.

Table 2.5

NIA loanwords displaying the suffix -ī

OIA	NIA	Malay	Javanese
bhēḍra ‘ram’	bheṛī ‘sheep’	biri-biri¹⁵	–
pēṭṭa ‘lower belly’	peṭī ‘box’	pəti	pəʈi
rōṭṭa ‘bread’	roṭī	roti	roti
sthāna ‘place’	thānī ‘a permanent cultivator’	tani	tani
ṭōppa ‘hat’	ṭopī	topi	topi

Table 2.6

Indo-Aryan loanwords introduced by speakers of Tamil

Indo-Aryan etymon	Tamil pronunciation	Malay
ghoṭa (Sk.), ghoḍa (MIA) ‘horse’	*koːɖa	kuda
*joṛo (NIA) ‘couple’	*joːɖu ⟨cōṭu⟩	jodoh
loha (Sk., MIA) ‘metal’	*loːɦəm, loːgəm ⟨lōkam⟩	logam
parikhā (Sk.), parihā (MIA) ‘moat, ditch’	*pərige ⟨parikai⟩	pərigi
rāga (Sk.) ‘melody’	*raːgəm ⟨rākam⟩	ragam

In some instances, the precise trajectories of borrowing are uncertain. For example, MIA *cammaṭṭhi ‘whip’ and its Tamil equivalent cammaṭṭi would yield the exact same form in Austronesian languages, as would NIA peṭī ‘box’ and Ta. peṭṭi. Old Javanese calana and Malay cəlana ‘trousers’ resemble Hindustani colnā ‘short breeches’, yet both may ultimately reflect a South Dravidian form.¹⁶ Old Javanese joli and Malay juli ‘palanquin’ resemble NIA ḍolī or Tamil ṭōli, yet the word-initial consonant remains unexplained. The Malay word bəlanja ‘expenditure’ is another etymological puzzle. It has been identified as an isolated instance of Sinhala influence, going back to valan̆da-navā ‘to consume (of important people)’ through the locally created Pali form valañja (Gonda 1973:80–81). In other instances, the intervocalic /c/ was voiced in Austronesian languages under unclear circumstances, e.g. Old Javanese and Malay ajar ‘teaching’ and ujar ‘speech’, ultimately from Sk. ācārya ‘teacher’ and uccāra ‘pronunciation’.

The semantic integration of South Asian vocabulary languages forms an equally important point of attention. For literary languages, we can spot changes in meaning over time. In Malay, for example, the word desa (< Sk. deśa ‘province; country’) historically referred to any land and later to a rural settlement, while sastra (< Sk. śāstra ‘teaching; book or treatise’) initially denoted sacred books and astrological tables and later literature in general. The Old Javanese literature is of even greater value in the semantic domain, as it tends to reveal intermediate stages between original etyma and their contemporary derivations. As shown in Table 2.7, Sanskrit loanwords in Old Javanese can often be regarded as a missing link. Note that the Old Javanese examples on the next page are represented in their (reconstructed) phonological rather than orthographic forms.¹⁷

With Malay being the chief vector of transmission, we often see multiple semantic shifts; one upon acquisition into Malay and another into the second recipient language. Table 2.8 lists multiple semantic shifts seen in loanwords adopted into Malay and subsequently into Yakan, a language of the southern Philippines.

In some cases, loanwords are difficult to recognize as such due to their phonological integration in the recipient language. The examples in Table 2.9 are from Leti and Rote, two languages spoken, respectively, on the islands east and west of Timor. The relative time depth of borrowing can occasionally be deduced from phonological evidence. Rote kapa ‘ship’, for example, is more recently acquired than aba ‘cotton’, as the latter exhibits the innovation *k > ∅/#_ also attested in inherited vocabulary. Also note that Leti exhibits a specific type of metathesis yielding vowel-final stems.

Table 2.7

Diachronic shifts in meaning

Sanskrit	Old Javanese	Malay
āgama ‘approaching; acquisition of knowledge; a traditional doctrine’	agama ‘sacred traditional doctrine or precepts’	agama ‘religion’
bhaṅga ‘breaking; disturbance; rejection’	bhaŋga ‘breaking or destroying the laws of dharma’	baŋga ‘proud’
bheda ‘breaking; disuniting’	bheda ‘separation; disuniting; different’	beda ‘different’
cāmara ‘a fly-whisk; a plume on the heads of horses’	camara ‘a fly-whisk; plume, tuft (on shields)’	cəmara ‘ornamental tuft’
carita ‘gone; moving; deeds’	carita ‘events; story’	cərita ‘story’
kapāla ‘skull’	kapala ‘skull, upper part of the head’	kəpala ‘head’
padāti ‘going or being on foot; a pedestrian’	padati ‘pedestrian; cart’	pədati ‘cart’
pakṣa ‘wing; position; a point or matter under discussion’	paksa ‘fixed intention; firmly decided to’	paksa ‘compulsion; favourable opportunity’
parihāra ‘avoiding; seizing; concealment’	parihara ‘to refute; to restrain’	pəlihara ‘to domesticate (animals); to look after’
saṁyatta ‘come into conflict; being on one’s guard’	sanjata ‘weapon; armed forces’	sənjata ‘weapon’
vaca ‘speaking; talking’	waca ‘to read, sing (a text)’	baca ‘to read’
vaṁśa ‘a cane; the line of a pedigree’	waŋsa ‘lineage, dynasty, posterity’	baŋsa ‘race; descent’
viṣa ‘a servant; anything active; poison’	bisa ‘venomous; highly effective; skilled’	bisa ‘venom; ability’

Table 2.8

Semantic shifts in loanwords transmitted through Malay

South Asian etymon	Malay	Yakan
ḍāhaga (MIA) ‘a burning sensation’	dahaga ‘thirst’	dahagaʔ ‘to be greedy (for food only)’
*drohaka (Sk.) ‘mischief; treachery’	dərhaka ‘insurgent; rebellious’	dahulakaʔ ‘destructive’
guliga (MIA) ‘kernel’	guliga ‘a bezoar-stone’	buligaʔ ‘charm (consisting of stones of beautiful colours or petrified item)’
tengara (Ma.) ‘southeast’	təŋgara ‘southeast; south-eastern wind’	tuŋgaraʔ ‘a dry spell’
uttara (Sk.) ‘upper; northern’	utara ‘north; northerly’	uttalaʔ ‘dry season’
vañcana (Sk.) ‘deception’	bəncana ‘affliction’	binsanaʔ ‘to be in a state of suffering’
vicāra (Sk.) ‘deliberation; discussion’	bicara ‘discussion; to speak’	bissaː ‘word, language’
vidyādharī (Sk.) ‘a female supernatural being’	bidadari ‘nymph’	birarali ‘rainbow (sky maiden)’
vināśa (Sk.) ‘destruction’	binasa ‘destruction, ruin’	binasa ‘to kill; having intention to kill, to inflict pain’

Table 2.9

Phonological integration in Leti and Rote

South Asian etymon	Malay	Rote	Leti
chalaka (Sk.) ‘fraud, deceit’	cəlaka ‘misfortune’	silaka	slaka
jāla (Sk.) ‘casting net’	jala	dala	diala
kapās (NIA) ‘cotton’	kapas	aba	kawsa
kappal (Ta.) ‘ship’	kapal	kapa	kapla
laśuna (Sk.) ‘onion’	–¹⁸	laisona	lasoa
vajja (MIA) ‘steel’	baja	bai	wai

2 Timeframe

As mentioned previously, literary and epigraphic attestations can provide some information on the approximate time depth of borrowing. The writing traditions of Cham, Malay, and Javanese can be traced back to respectively the fifth, seventh, and ninth century CE. These classical languages constitute high-prestige registers, in which the amount of Sanskrit loans was presumably higher than in the spoken language. Yet the quantity of Sanskrit vocabulary is still vast in many vernaculars. In terms of tangible items, many names for precious minerals, jewels, and metals in the Malayo-Polynesian languages of Maritime Southeast Asia have Indo-Aryan and/or South Dravidian etymologies (Hoogervorst 2013:116–121, 2016:562–568). South Asian loanwords also occur in several other domains. Table 2.10 above lists some widespread Sanskrit loans in the languages of western Indonesia and, to a lesser extent, the Philippines.

Table 2.10

Sanskrit words often found as loanwords in Maritime Southeast Asia

Category	Examples
geography	bhūmi ‘earth’, guha ‘cave’, koṭa ‘fort’
law	doṣa ‘transgression’, pañjara ‘prison’, sākṣī ‘witness’
materials	kāca ‘glass’, saindhava ‘saltpetre’
numerals	ayuta ‘ten thousand’, koṭi ‘ten million’, lakṣa ‘hundred thousand’¹⁹
plants	jambu ‘rose apple’, kusumbha ‘safflower’, paṭola ‘pointed gourd’, tulasī ‘holy basil’
products	ghaṇṭā ‘bell’, jāla ‘casting net’, madhu ‘honey’
religion	dhūpa ‘incense’, jīva ‘life’, naraka ‘hell’, svarga ‘heaven’
scholarship	akṣara ‘letter’, bhāṣā ‘language’, guru ‘teacher’, kathā ‘speech’, paṇḍita ‘scholar’
social life	duḥkha ‘sorrow’, manuṣya ‘human’, sahodara ‘uterine brother’, sukha ‘happy’
time	kāla ‘time’, māsa ‘month’²⁰

The lexical influence of Pali, the liturgical and intellectual language of Theravāda Buddhism, has been considerable in Mainland Southeast Asia. By contrast, very few loanwords in Austronesian languages can be identified as originating from Pali, and those that look phonologically similar are better explained as MIA borrowings (Hoogervorst 2017a). Whenever we do find Pali influence, it is invariably transmitted through a non-Austronesian language. In the case of Moklenic languages, a low-order branch found around the Mergui Archipelago, such vectors include Old Mon and Thai, as will be discussed below (see Table 2.13). For Cham, the situation is more complex. Old Cham borrowed directly from Sanskrit but in modern Cham, spoken in different varieties on the Southeast Asian mainland, we find a number of South Asian (re)borrowings that appear to have entered the language through Khmer on account of their phonological shape. Among other things, this can be seen from the elision of the word-final short /a/ (Table 2.11).

Table 2.11

South Asian loans in Cham borrowed through Khmer

South Asian etymon	Old Khmer	Cham	Malay
āditya (Sk.) ‘the sun’	ādity	adit	–
anyāya (Sk., Pa.) ‘injustice’	anyāy	iniai ‘to be bewitched’	aniaya
āyus (Sk.), āyu (Pa.) ‘life’	āyuḥ	āyuḥ	–
bala (Sk, Pa.) ‘forces’	bal	bal	bala
budha (Sk.) ‘Mercury, Wednesday’	budh	but	–
campaka (Sk., Pa.) ‘champak flower’	cāṃp̋ā	caṃpā	cəmpaka
guru (Sk., Pa.) ‘teacher (spiritual)’	grū	grū, gru	guru
kāla (Sk., Pa.) ‘time’	kāl	kal ‘when; time’	kala
lābha (Sk, Pa.) ‘receiving; gain’	lābh	lap	laba
pāpa (Sk, Pa.) ‘sin’	pāp	pap	–
puṇya (Sk.) ‘merit’	puṇ²¹	ḅon	–
rūpa (Sk., Pa.) ‘form’	rūp	rūp	rupa
sukha (Sk, Pa.) ‘happiness’	sukh	thuk /θuk/	suka
varṇa (Sk.) ‘colour’	bār	bar	warna
yakkha (Pa.) ‘ogre’	yakkh	yak	–

The cultural domains of lexical borrowing speak volumes about the nature of historical contact. In addition to the practical items and concepts mentioned previously, Sanskrit words prevail in the domains of religion, mythology, governance, toponyms, and royal titles (Gonda 1973: 216–353). In addition, a number of common words in the languages of Java and Sumatra consist of Sanskrit elements yet appear to have been formed locally.²² These include numerous plant names and words like Old Javanese gajamina ‘a mythological whale’ (Sk. gaja ‘elephant’ + mīna ‘fish’) and mutyahara ‘pearl’ (Sk. mutya ‘pearl’ + hāra ‘garland’), corresponding to gajah mina and mutiara in Malay.²³ Many South Asian borrowings pertain to concepts already available in the recipient language. A well-known example in Malay is the substitution of *təlu ‘three’ for tiga, presumably borrowed from MIA *tiga ‘triple’ (Dyen 1946; Hoogervorst 2017a: 414–415). Equally illustrative is the co-existence in Malay and several other Austronesian languages of maŋga (< Ta. māṅkāy), məmpəlam (< Ta. māmpaḻam), and pauh (< PMP *pahuq) for ‘mango’ (Mahdi 2007:46–47). Conceivably, these forms originally denoted different cultivars or ripening stages of the same fruit. Additional examples of Sanskrit “luxury loans” in Malay are given in Table 2.12.

Table 2.12

Sanskrit loans substituting inherited vocabulary in Malay

Sanskrit	Malay
	Sanskrit loan	Inherited equivalent
bāhu ‘upper arm’	bahu ‘shoulder’	(PAN *qabaRa)
gaja ‘elephant’	gajah	liman
kapāla ‘skull’	kəpala ‘head’	hulu
mālatī ‘jasmine’	məlati	məlur
mukha ‘mouth, face’	muka ‘face’	(PAN *daqiS ‘forehead; face’)
nīra ‘water, juice’	nira ‘palm juice’	lahaŋ
phala ‘nutmeg’	pala	?
samudra ‘ocean’	samudra	lautan
sūrya ‘sun’	surya	matahari

As mentioned previously, the antiquity of South Asian loanwords can at times be gauged from the phonological regularity of their tentative reconstructions. A number of Indo-Aryan and South Dravidian loans regularly reconstruct back to a proto Malayo-Polynesian level, while others have previously been assigned a “proto Western-Malayo-Polynesian” pedigree (Hoogervorst 2016). This number increases for low-order branches of the Austronesian language family. Table 2.13 lists some regular proto Moklenic reconstructions, which I postulate go back to Indo-Aryan etyma through intermediate languages such as Malay, Old Mon, and Thai.

As mentioned previously, the Old Javanese literature provides rough insights into the timeframe of lexical borrowing. Accordingly, the influence of Tamil turns out to be of considerable antiquity. A number of Tamil loanwords are found in Old Javanese inscriptions and literary texts predating the thirteenth century (Hoogervorst 2015). Some examples are listed in Table 2.14.

Absences have analytical value as well. The non-attestation in the vast Old Javanese textual record of some widespread Tamil loans in Malay, modern Javanese, and other Austronesian languages presumably indicates a more recent transmission. Examples in this category are given in Table 2.15, which juxtaposes Tamil loans in Malay, modern Javanese, and Tausug, a language of the southern Philippines.

Table 2.13

Proto Moklenic reconstructions borrowed from Indo-Aryan languages

Indo-Aryan etymon	Intermediate source	Proto Moklenic
gaja (Sk., Pa., MIA) ‘elephant’	gajah (Malay)	*gajah
hattha (Pa., MIA) ‘cubit’	hat (Old Mon, Thai)	*hat
jāla (Sk., Pa., MIA) ‘casting net’	jan (Thai)	*pə-jaːn
kācaka (Sk.) ‘glass’	krajok (Thai)	*kɛcɔk
manuṣya (Sk.), manussa (Pa.) ‘human being’	manut (Thai)	*manut
marīca (Sk.), marica (Pa.) ‘pepper’	mrek (Old Mon)	*mɛlɛk
panasa (Sk., Pa.) ‘jackfruit’	panah (Old Mon) or panaih (Acehnese)	*panɛh

Table 2.14

Tamil loanwords in Old Javanese

Tamil	Old Javanese
ceppu ‘small box’	cupu
kaṭai ‘shop’	gaɖay, gaɖe ‘pawning’
kaṭṭi ‘a weight unit’	kaʈi, kati
kayappū ‘an aquatic flower’	kayapu
koṇṭi ‘prostitute; concubine’	guɳɖik ‘female attendant’
pāṉai ‘earthen pot’	panay, pane
paricai ‘shield’	parisya, parise, paresi
uṅkal ‘limestone’	wuŋkal ‘boulder’
uṇṭai ‘ball’	uɳɖi
viricu ‘a kind of rocket’	mərəcu, mərcu ‘fireball (from the sky)’

In a relatively small number of cases, loanwords in the above category reveal clear South Dravidian origins but cannot be derived from a Tamil etymon. Table 2.16 lists some examples of borrowings that presumably spread eastwards through Malayalam.

Table 2.15

Tamil loanwords in Austronesian languages

Tamil	Malay	Javanese	Tausug
appam ‘a round rice flour cake’	apam	apəm	apam
cauttu ‘pattern, sample, model’	contoh	conto	suntu-an
cukkai ‘passage money’	cukai	–	sukay
kaḻutai ‘donkey’	kələdai	kuldi	–
kappal ‘ship’	kapal	kapal	kappal
kaṭṭil ‘cot; bedstead’	katil	kaʈil, kaɳʈil	kantil
kāval ‘guard’	kawal	kawal
māḷikai ‘palace’²⁴	maligai	malige	maːligay
mīcai ‘moustache’	misai	–	misay
mutal ‘capital’	modal	moɖal	muddal
pāvāṭai ‘a cloth used as a seat for important people’	puadai	puwaɖe	–
puṭṭu ‘a steamed snack of rice flour’	putu	puʈu	putu
taṇṭu ‘palanquin’	tandu	taɳɖu	–
veṭil ‘explosion’	bədil ‘rifle’	bəɖil	–
vilāṅku ‘fetters’	bələŋgu	bləŋgu	bilaŋguʔ

Table 2.16

Malayalam loanwords in Austronesian languages

Malayalam	Malay	Javanese	Tausug
kiḷikkatti ‘areca nut slicer’	kələkati	–²⁵	kakati
paṇikkar ‘martial arts expert’	pəndekar	paɳɖekar	pandikal ‘wise’
paravadāni ‘a carpet’	pərmadani	praŋwədani	palmaddaniʔ
saṟāmbi ‘a structure near the outside of a building’	sərambi	srambi	–
tenkara ‘southeast’	təŋgara	tuŋgara	tuŋgaraʔ

3 Trajectories

As mentioned in the previous two sections, Javanese and especially Malay were the chief vectors of lexical transmission into Maritime Southeast Asia and beyond. On limited occasions, European languages played a comparable role in later stages of history. We may think of Portuguese in the case of Timorese languages, as shown below, or English in British Malaya. These recent borrowings lack the wide geographical distribution of earlier loans acquired through Malay and Javanese. A common shibboleth of European intermediacy is the addition of a “plural” /s/ to certain product names. We may, for example, assume that such words as Malay durias ‘course muslin’ (< Hi. ḍoriyā), gauris ‘cowry shell’ (< Hi. kauṛī), and giras ‘a coarse cloth’ (< Hi. gāṛhā) entered Southeast Asia through Dutch, English, or Portuguese. The early-modern period also saw European loanwords transmitted by South Asians, especially in British Malaya. Some Malay words, in turn, spread to South Asia in this period (Hoogervorst 2013:32, 33, 35).

In some cases, lexical borrowing from Indo-Aryan and/or South Dravidian languages took place directly, rather than through Malay or Javanese. This was particularly the case in Sumatra, the Indonesian island closest to the Indian Subcontinent. In Acehnese, spoken on Sumatra’s westernmost tip, we find several loanwords not attested in other Austronesian languages (Table 2.17). The fact that these loanwords can be traced to relatively modern languages and did not find their way into Malay indicates that their transmission is of no great antiquity.

Another Sumatran speech community that has been in direct contact with South Asia are the Karo Batak. The presence in North Sumatra of medieval trading guilds from South India is well documented archaeologically and epigraphically. A small number of Karo Batak family names (marga) have been identified as South Dravidian in origin (Kern 1903; van Ronkel 1918), whereas lexical influence has been observed in the medieval Tamil word ūrōm ‘village assembly’, which reportedly gave rise to uruŋ ‘alliance; federation of different villages’ in Karo Batak and some closely related languages (Edwards McKinnon 1996:93).²⁶ Additional Tamil loans in Karo Batak are listed in Table 2.18.

North Sumatra’s Batak languages have also undergone lexical influence from Sanskrit, including in the names of the wind directions, months, days of the week, and zodiac (Voorhoeve 1972; Gonda 1973:119–130; Parkin 1974). Interestingly, many of these borrowings are unattested in Malay but do occur in Old Javanese. Toba Batak furthermore has a number of seemingly unique Sanskrit loanwords, as listed in Table 2.19.

Table 2.17

South Asian loanwords found in Acehnese but not in other Austronesian languages

South Asian etymon	Acehnese
bel (Hi., Be.) ‘wood-apple tree’	bi
bhaṅgī (Hi.) ‘person addicted to drinking bhaṅg’	baŋgi ‘opium addict’
cansur (Hi.) ‘cress (plant)’	camcuruih
daśi (Be.) ‘wick of a lamp’	daih
kuṟaṭu (Ta.) ‘pincers’	gɯrudu
pacīsī (Hi.) ‘a kind of game’	pacih
panas (Hi., Be.) ‘jackfruit’	panaih
pīr (Ta.) ‘luffa’	piʔ
pukaiyilai (Ta.) ‘tobacco’	paʔelɛʔ
uḷi (Ta.) ‘chisel; engraver’s tool’	uli ‘spanner’

Table 2.18

Tamil loanwords in Karo Batak

Tamil	Karo Batak
ciṟutāli ‘a kind of small tāli given by a paramour to his concubine’	sərtali ‘big, golden necklace worn during ceremonies’²⁷
curai ‘head of an arrow’	sore ‘an old fashioned arrow’
kaṇam ‘trifle, triviality’	kanam ‘fond of jokes, witty, fanciful’
keṭṭam ‘beard’	guram
māttu ‘checkmate’	mətu
oppam ‘ornamentation’	umpam ‘array, finery’
paṭṭam ‘an ornament worn on the forehead by women’	patam ‘a mark on the forehead made with betel saliva’
tukkam ‘sorrow, distress, affliction’	tukam ‘to pay respect during the ngombak ritual’

In some cases, a language other than Malay served as the vector of lexical borrowing. In the language of Nias, an island off Sumatra’s west coast, the Minangkabau language appears to have been of greater significance. Table 2.20 lists some South Asian loanwords in Nias and their presumed Minangkabau precursors.

Table 2.19

Sanskrit loanwords found in Toba Batak but not in other Austronesian languages

Sanskrit	Toba Batak
aṅgāra ‘the planet Mars’	aŋgara ‘third day of the month’
jñapita ‘made known; taught’	jamita ‘sermon’
pad ‘foot’	pat
pāśa ‘a snare; cord’	pasa ‘rope’
phaṇi ‘serpent’	pane ‘the god of the underworld Pane na Bolon’
vāda ‘speaking about; discussion; quarrel’	bada ‘quarrel or dispute’

Parts of the Philippines have been in precolonial contact with Borneo, Java, and Sumatra. The presence of Sanskrit words in Tagalog, a language from Luzon, is well known (Kern 1880; Wolff 1976). Many of these words did not make their way into (modern) Malay but can be found in Old Javanese. It is not impossible, however, that they were also once part of the Old Malay vocabulary and simply happen not to occur in the very small corpus of Old Malay texts preserved to us (Adelaar 2009:725). Some examples are listed in Table 2.21.

In Taiwan, the northernmost home of Austronesian languages, early South Asian loanwords are rare. For example, we find one isolated borrowing in Siraya, a now extinct language of Taiwan’s southwestern coast. The word in question is tabe ‘a greeting’, presumably from the now obsolete Malay or Javanese tabik (Adelaar 1994:57). This word reflects Old Javanese santabya, santawya ‘may (I) be pardoned, pardon (me)’, Toba Batak santabi, Makassar tabea, and ultimately Sanskrit kṣantavya. It presumably entered Siraya in the seventeenth century, given that many people in service of the Dutch East India Company came from the Indonesian Archipelago. Puyuma dawa ‘foxtail millet’ appears to be a borrowing from Maritime Southeast Asia, where the word may have originally denoted ‘sorghum’ (Mahdi 1994: 431–441). It ultimately reflects Sanskrit yava ‘barley’.

In Malagasy, a South East Barito language spoken on the island Madagascar, several Sanskrit loanwords have been identified (Dahl 1951:96–119; Adelaar 1994:55–56). Here, the transmission was certainly precolonial. Archaeological evidence points to roughly the seventh to eighth centuries CE as a likely timeframe for the settlement of the Malagasy speech community from southern Borneo to Madagascar. This is a period in which Malay was already heavily Sanskritized, substantiating the theory that South Asian influence on Malagasy was not direct (Adelaar 1989:32–33). As in the case of Tagalog (Table 2.21), some Sanskrit loanwords in Malagasy are not attested in (modern) Malay but we do find them in Old Javanese. Some examples of these indirect Sanskrit loans in Malagasy are listed in Table 2.22.

On Borneo itself, little evidence has been provided so far of direct contact between South Asian and local languages other than Malay. On the surface, it appears that few of the loanwords found in the languages of Borneo display a great time depth and most are found in Malay as well. However, this may simply reveal a lack of scholarly attention. Table 2.23 lists some examples taken from Smith (2017).

Table 2.20

South Asian loanwords in Nias

South Asian etymon	Minangkabau	Nias
āgama (Sk.) ‘a traditional doctrine’	ugamo ‘religion’	ugamo
gōvāla (MIA) ‘cowherd’	gumbalo	kubalo
gula (MIA) ‘sugar’	gulo	gulo
jagga (MIA) ‘to be awake’	jago ‘to guard’	zago
kuñci (NIA) ‘key’	kunci ‘key; to lock’	kusi
kusumbha (Sk.) ‘safflower’	kasumbo ‘red’	kasumbo ‘a citrus fruit’
lasun (Hi.), rasun (Be.) ‘garlic’	dasun	dasu
māmpaḻam (Ta.) ‘mango’	marapalam	marafala
parīkṣā (Sk.) ‘examination’	pareso ‘to examine’	fareso
phala (Sk.) ‘nutmeg’	palo	falo
rāja (Sk.) ‘king’	rajo	razo
rasa (Sk.) ‘essence; taste; love’	raso ‘to feel’	raso
sūtra (Sk.) ‘thread’²⁸	suto ‘silk’	suto
siṁha (Sk.) ‘lion’	siŋo	siŋo
upavāsa (Sk.) ‘to fast’	puaso	fuaso

Further to the east, the transmission of South Asian loanwords was primarily the result of language contact with Malay, both for Austronesian and non-Austronesian languages. The North Maluku archipelago—a historical centre of the lucrative spice trade—is home to several “Papuan” languages belonging to the North Halmahera branch. We find several South Asian words in the local languages, all of which appear to have been transmitted via Malay. By way of illustration, Table 2.24 lists several examples in Ternate and Galela.

Table 2.21

Sanskrit loanwords in Tagalog

Sanskrit	Old Javanese	Tagalog
cheda ‘cutting off’	cheda ‘injured, hurt, with a defect’	siˈra ‘a break; damage’
maṇḍala ‘a circle; anything round’	maɳɖala ‘circle; abode of a religious community’	madˈlaʔ ‘the people; the public’
mokṣa ‘liberation; death’	muksa ‘to vanish, disappear’	puksa ‘exterminated; annihilated’²⁹
paribhoga ‘enjoyments’	paribhoga	alibuˈghaʔ ‘irresponsible’
pramāda ‘intoxicated, negligent, careless’	pramada	palamara ‘traitor’
rekhā ‘a line’	rekha ‘line; outward appearance; to give shape to’	liˈkhaʔ ‘creation’
rūksa ‘rough; unpleasant’	ruksa ‘dreary, dismal’	luksa ‘in mourning’

Table 2.22

Sanskrit loanwords in Malagasy

Sanskrit	Old Javanese	Malagasy
āṣādha ‘a month (June–July)’	asadha	asara ‘the rainy season’
bhādrapada ‘a month (August–September)’	bhadrawada	vatravatra ‘one of the months’
kārttika ‘a month (October–November)’	kartika	hatsiha ‘the name of a month’
kṣetra ‘field’	setra	hetra ‘feudal land; tax’
māgha ‘a month (January–February)’	magha	maka ‘one of the months’
maṇḍapa ‘open hall’	maɳɖapa	lapa ‘a place of assembly’
mṛgaśīrṣa ‘a month (November–December)’	margasira	valasira ‘the harvest season’
tantra ‘the leading or principal or essential part’	tantra ‘illustrative stories (of the nītiśāstra)’	tantara ‘a history; a tale’
yaśa ‘worth; honour’	yasa ‘a meritorious deed’	asa ‘labour, work’

Table 2.23

South Asian loanwords in languages of Borneo

South Asian etymon	Malay	Attestation in Borneo
guha (Sk.) ‘cave’	goa	goa (Benyadu, Golik, Jangkang, Kendayan, Paser), gohaʔ (Bakumpai, Dusun Witu, Kapuas), gua (Bekati, Dalat, Hliboi Bidayuh, Kanowit, Keninjal, Kereho, Sanggau), guá (Mualang, Ribun), guaː (Iban), guaŋ (Gaai), guhaʔ (Maanyan), guho (Ketapang)
jāda~jādi (MIA) ‘born; to come into existence’	jadi	jadəy (Kejaman, Seberuang, Sekapan), jadi (Lahanan), jadiʔ (Kadorih, Ngaju), jadih (Busang, Data Dian), jadin̑a (Kendayan), jariʔ (Dusun Witu, Maanyan), mənjadi (Ketapang), mənjadí (Mualang), mənjadiʔ (Benuaq, Tunjung), n̑adi (Keninjal, Iban), ñadin (Dalat) ‘to become’
kāraṇa (Sk.) ‘cause’	karəna	kaŋɣná (Mualang), karena (Kadorih), karənaʔ (Gaai), karnaʔ (Kendayan), kaɣəna (Keninjal), kɣəna (Seberuang) ‘because’
paricai (Ta.) ‘shield’	pərisai	pərisay (Sungkung, Ribun, Paser), pəʀisay (Golik), pəɣisay (Sanggau, Keninjal, Seberuang, Mualang)

The easternmost point of lexical influence from South Asia can be identified as northwest New Guinea. Here, too, Malay played a key role in the transmission of these words. Table 2.25 lists several examples of South Asian loans in the Numfor-Dore dialect of Biak, a language from the Cenderawasih Bay north of New Guinea. A phonological analysis of the Biak data reveals different layers of borrowing. The word sarak ‘silver’, for example, displays both the innovation *l>r and the elision of the historical word-final /a/, precisely as in inherited vocabulary.³⁰ The words exhibiting a word-final /a/ are more recent acquisitions. Along similar lines, we may assume that cap ‘to sign’ is a relatively new loan on account of its /c/, ʃonto ‘similarity’ represents an earlier stage of phonological integration, whereas samara ‘a kind of large machete’ is even older, yet still not as old as sarak.

Table 2.24

South Asian loanwords in Ternate and Galela

South Asian etymon	Malay	Galela	Ternate
ācāra (Sk.) ‘conduct; custom’	cara ‘method’	cara	cara
bheda (Sk.) ‘breaking; disuniting’	beda ‘different’	beida ‘not on good terms’	beda ‘difference’
buddhi (Sk.) ‘intelligence; reason’	budi ‘kindness’	budi	budi
doṣa (Sk.) ‘transgression’	dosa	dosa	dosa
guru (Sk.) ‘teacher’	guru	guru	guru
hasta (Sk.) ‘cubit’	hasta	hɑːsita	hasta
jagga (MIA) ‘to be awake’	jaga ‘to guard’	jaga	jaga
kappal (Ta.) ‘ship’	kapal	kɑːpɑli	kapal
kaṭṭi (Ta.) ‘a weight unit’	kati	kɑti	kati
kuñci (NIA) ‘key’	kunci	kuci	kuci
kusumbha (Sk.) ‘safflower’	kəsumba ‘a red dye; safflower’	kasuba ‘red cotton’	kasuba ‘violet’
marīca (Sk.) ‘black pepper’	mərica	rica ‘Spanish pepper’	rica
tambaga (MIA) ‘copper’	təmbaga	tabaga	tambaga
vaṁśa (Sk.) ‘a cane; the line of a pedigree’	baŋsa ‘race’	baŋsa	baŋsa ‘a nobleman’
vicāra (Sk.) ‘deliberation; discussion’	bicara ‘to discuss’	bicara	bicara

Table 2.25

South Asian loanwords in Biak

South Asian etymon	Malay	Biak
cāmara (Sk., MIA) ‘a fly-whisk; a plume on the heads of horses’	cəmara ‘ornamental tuft’	samara ‘a kind of large machete’
cauttu (Ta.) ‘pattern, sample, model’	contoh	ʃonto ‘similarity’
chāp (NIA) ‘seal’	cap	cap ‘to sign’
gula (MIA) ‘sugar’	gula	gura
kaṁsa (Sk.) ‘copper’	kaŋsa	kansa
kappal (Ta.) ‘ship’	kapal	kapar
kuñci (NIA) ‘key’	kunci	kudsi
marīca (Sk.) ‘black pepper’	mərica	marisan ‘chili pepper’
śalākā (Sk.) ‘a kind of coin’	səlaka ‘silver’	sarak

In the south-eastern parts of Maritime Southeast Asia, we find a rather complex history of contact. South Asian loanwords, transmitted through Malay and/or Javanese, are relatively limited in number but can be found in Austronesian and Timor-Alor-Pantar languages alike. In East Timor, a former Portuguese colony, we also find a number of South Asian loanwords that found their way to the island through Portuguese. These loans are not found in Austronesian languages outside the island. Even within East Timor, many appear to be restricted to Tetun, which has received the greatest impact from Portuguese. Table 2.26 above lists a number of South Asian loanwords in Tetun, indicating on the basis of their phonological shape whether they were borrowed through Malay or Portuguese.

Table 2.26

South Asian loanwords in Tetun

South Asian etymon	Malay	Portuguese	Tetun
bhansāl (Hi.) ‘shed’	baŋsal	bangaçal	baŋgaˈsal
cakkara (Ma.) ‘palm sugar’	–	jagra	jarga
cāmara (Sk., MIA) ‘a fly-whisk; a plume on the heads of horses’	cəmara ‘ornamental tuft’	–	samara ‘plume of dyed animal hair’
kapās (NIA) ‘cotton’	kapas	–	kabas
kaṭṭi (Ta.) ‘a weight unit’	kati	cate, cates	kati, katis
kauṛī (NIA) ‘cowrie shell’	–	caurim	kauˈriŋ
kuḷam (Ta.) ‘pond’	kolam	–	kolaŋ ‘(saltwater) swamp; lagoon’
maināttu (Ma.) ‘laundry(wo)man’	mənatu	mainato	mainatu
mūṅg (NIA) ‘mung bean’	–	mungo	muŋgu
muruṅkai (Ta.) ‘horseradish tree’	məruŋgai	–	maruŋgi
nāma (Sk.) ‘name’	nama	–	nama ‘namesake’
nel (Ta.) ‘harvested rice’	–	néle	neli
paṭola (Sk.) ‘pointed gourd’	pətola ‘loofah; rag gourd’	–	patola
ṭanḍel (Hi.) ‘coxswain’	tandil	tandel	tanˈdel

A number of South Asian borrowings spread across Maritime Southeast Asia in a morphologically complex form. This seems to be the case, for example, with the Malay word malas ‘lazy’ and its reflexes, which consists of the stative/attributive prefix ma- and the base alas ‘laziness’ borrowed from some NIA source (Hoogervorst 2016:580). In other cases, the presence of the prefix sə- ‘one; the same’ reveals Malay as the immediate donor. Some examples are given in Table 2.27.

In other instances, morphology reveals a Javanese transmission. Reflexes of Old Javanese panjyut ‘lamp; torch’, reflecting Sanskrit jyut ‘to shine’ combined with the substantive prefix paN-, can be found from Sumatra to Maluku (Lafeber 1922:147–148; Mills 1981:69). The words Sk. vaśa ‘power’ and Ta. viricu ‘a kind of rocket’ yielded Old Javanese ka-wasa ‘overpowered; in the power of’ and modern Javanese mərco-n ‘fireworks’, which were in turn adopted by other Austronesian languages (e.g. Malay kuasa, mərcun and Makassar koasa, baraccuŋ). Old Javanese ajar-an ‘horse’ (Javanese jaran) is derived from the aforementioned base ajar ‘teaching’ and has been adopted in languages of Borneo, Sulawesi, and Nusa Tenggara, e.g. Ngaju Dayak hajaran, Banggai ajalan, Tae’ daraŋ, Makassar jaraŋ, Bimanese jara, Komodo jaraŋ, Manggarai jaraŋ, Ngadha dzara, and Kambera njara.³¹

Table 2.27

South Asian loanwords featuring Malay sə-

South Asian etymon	Malay	Example of secondary borrowing
jaitra (Sk.) ‘victorious’	sə-jahtəra ‘tranquility’³²	sajahitraʔ (Tausug)
kāla (Sk.) ‘time’	sə-kali ‘once’	sakayiʔ (Yakan) ‘when’
kūṭṭu (Ta.) ‘companionship’	sə-kutu ‘cooperative association’	səkuʈu (Javanese) ‘allied’
nityaśa (Sk.) ‘always’	sə-nəntiasa ‘everlasting’	sinittiyasa (Yakan) ‘to worship at all prescribed times’
prati (Sk.) ‘towards’	sə-pərti ‘like; resembling’	saparti (Maranao)

We find several more examples of South Asian loanwords unattested in Malay yet found in languages from Java, North Sumatra and South Sulawesi. They may have existed in an earlier stage of Malay but might also reflect direct contact with Indo-Aryan languages. Table 2.28 lists some examples.

Table 2.28

Indo-Aryan loanwords not found in Malay

Indo-Aryan etymon	Austronesian attestations
āyoga (Sk.) ‘a yoke for draft animals’	auga (Toba Batak), ioga (Karo Batak), ayoka (Makassar), ajoa (Bugis)
dravya (Sk.) ‘object of possession, wealth, goods, money’	drawya, drabya (Old Javanese) ‘property, what belongs to’, duwe (Javanese) ‘to own’, rubia (Karo Batak) ‘animal’, dorbia (Toba Batak) ‘domestic animals’, Gayo durubiɯ
laśuna (Sk.) ‘garlic’, lasun (Hi.), rasun (Be.)	lasuna (Makassar, Bugis, Toba Batak, Karo Batak), lasonaʔ (Maranao), jasun (Old Javanese), dasun (Minangkabau), lasun (Gayo)
nāyaka (Sk.) ‘chief, leader’	nayaka (Old Javanese, Javanese), layaka (Makassar, Bugis)
panasa (Sk.) ‘breadfruit’, panas (Hi., Be.)	panasa (Old Javanese, Bugis), panasaʔ (Makassar), pinasa (Toba Batak), panaih (Acehnese)

4 Concluding Remarks

The lexical data examined here afford a number of observations. Firstly, as the Old Javanese corpus reveals, Sanskrit, Tamil, MIA, and even NIA words show up in Maritime Southeast Asia at roughly the same time. This indicates that different parts of South Asia were in contact with different parts of Southeast Asia. Through Javanese, Malay, or both, some South Asian loanwords travelled north through the Philippines, east to Nusa Tenggara, and possibly west through Madagascar. The semantics observed in Old Javanese furthermore reveal how the meanings of ancient South Asian words changed over time, offering in many cases a missing link to contemporary reflexes.

An even greater role was played by people who spoke and/or wrote Malay. The amount of early texts in this language is much smaller compared to Javanese, leaving us relatively ignorant about the Old Malay lexicon. Its geographical influence appears to have surpassed that of Javanese. Lexical influence from Malay is found across Maritime Southeast Asia, Madagascar, the western parts of New Guinea, the Southeast Asian mainland, and Taiwan. This includes inherited vocabulary, South Asian loans, and Arabic loans, which in some areas seem to have travelled as a package. In certain languages, such as Biak and Rote, multiple layers of loanwords can be identified on the basis of historical phonology. As standard Indonesian continues to influence all languages from Sumatra to New Guinea, this process is arguably still ongoing. Such relatively modern borrowings tend not to undergo high levels of phonological alteration.

In a small number of cases, particularly in Sumatra, direct contact with the Indian Subcontinent—that is, without Malay or Javanese as intermediary languages—is in evidence. In the Batak speech communities, contact appears to have taken place from the eleventh to the fourteenth century. In Acehnese, this contact continued into colonial times. In both cases, we find Indo-Aryan as well as South Dravidian loanwords. Another contact scenario is presented by the Chamic and Moklenic languages of the Southeast Asian mainland. Here, Khmer (in the case of Chamic) and Old Mon and Thai (in the case of Moklenic) played a role in the transmission of South Asian vocabulary, although Old Cham also borrowed directly from Sanskrit. Only in these two subgroups do we find some plausible evidence of loanwords from Pali, as opposed to Sanskrit or MIA. In general, Austronesian languages show greater quantities of South Asian loanwords than “Papuan” languages.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Arlo Griffiths and to an anonymous peer-reviewer for their valuable suggestions to improve this chapter.

Language Sources

Acehnese	Djajadiningrat 1934
Bengali	Biswas 2000
Biak	van Hasselt 1876
Bugis	Matthes 1874
Cham	Aymonier & Cabaton 1906
Galela	van Baarda 1895
Gayo	Hazeu 1907
Hindustani	Platts 1884
Javanese	Robson & Wibisono 2002
Karo Batak	Prinst 2002
Makassar	Cense 1979
Malagasy	Richardson 1885
Malay	Wilkinson 1932
Malayalam	Gundert 1962
Maranao	McKaughan & Al-Macaraya 1996
MIA (Middle-Indo-Aryan)	Turner 1966
Minangkabau	Moussay 1995
NIA (New-Indo-Aryan)	Turner 1966
Nias	Laiya et al. 1985
OIA (Old-Indo-Aryan)	Turner 1966
Old Javanese	Zoetmulder 1982
Old Khmer	Jenner 2009
Old Mon	Shorto 1971
Pali	Rhys Davids & Stede 1966
Portuguese	Dalgado 1919
PAN (Proto Austronesian)	Blust & Trussell ongoing
PMP (Proto Malayo-Polynesian)	Blust & Trussell ongoing
Proto Moklenic	Larish 1999
Sanskrit	Monier-Williams 1899
Siraya	Adelaar 2011
Tagalog	Ferrer 2003
Tamil	Tamil 1924–1936
Tausug	Hassan et al. 1994
Ternate	de Clercq 1890
Tetun	Hull 1999
Toba Batak	Warneck 1977
Yakan	Behrens 2002

Old Javanese was written in an Indic syllabary and is transliterated according to the ISO 15919 standard by an increasing number of scholars, including elsewhere by the present author. For comparative purposes, I have chosen in this chapter to homogenize the transcription of Old Javanese with that of the other Austronesian languages. Concretely, this means I have not indicated orthographic details that are not based on (reconstructed) phonological realities.

Klamer (this volume) finds no South Asian loanwords in Timor-Alor-Pantar languages that display signs of early acquisition.

Extensive overviews of Sanskrit and other South Asian loanwords in the languages of Southeast Asia include Gonda (1973) and Jones (2007). Middle Indo Aryan influence is investigated in De Casparis (1986) and Hoogervorst (2017a, 2017b), whereas South Dravidian influence is investigated in Van Ronkel (1902, 1903) and Hoogervorst (2015).

Due to the higher sociolinguistic status of Sanskrit, lexical borrowing has predominantly taken place in the eastward direction. However, see Hoogervorst (2013:106–116) on Malayo-Polynesian loanwords in South Asian languages. There has also been a long tradition among Indologists of detecting purported “Austric” influence in Indo-Aryan languages, although this would-be language family is no longer supported by academic research.

Common reasons to reject superficially attractive borrowing hypotheses include fortuity, transmission in the opposite direction, and similarities of a universal nature, such as onomatopoeia and kinship terms.

“Attested mainly as doubled or with a petrified prefix” (Wolff 2010:825).

In Old Javanese inscriptions, we find ⟨kāṭi⟩ (Kurungan, 885 CE), ⟨kati⟩ (Salingsingan, 880/905 CE), or the abbreviation ⟨kā⟩, whereas later sources mostly feature kati or kāti (Clavé & Griffiths 2022:228, n.76).

Tetun displays a similar preference for feminine forms of Portuguese loanwords (Hajek & Williams-van Klinken 2019).

The first vowel in Malay and Javanese is irregular and presumably reflects confusion with the word nisan or nesan ‘gravestone’ (< Persian nišān ‘sign; mark’).

Also compare vijaiḥ in Old Cham (cf. Lepoutre 2013:234–235; Griffiths & Lepoutre 2016:216, 223–224, 264). The diphthong /ai/ corresponds to /i/ in Malay but the word-final /h/ remains unexplained.

While absent in Zoetmulder (1982), ⟨juḍi⟩ appears to be the more common spelling (Arlo Griffiths, pers. comm. 2020). Also compare modern Javanese juɖi ‘gambling’.

The possible connection between Sanskrit jāti and Old Malay jādi has been pointed out independently by Clavé & Griffiths (2022:224, n.46).

Presumably with a broader meaning historically, as reflexes of gosali denote a sort of social space in other Austronesian languages. The etymologically related form gohālī—found in the Prakit of North Bengal around the turn of the sixth century—has been interpreted as ‘hamlet’ (Griffiths 2018:40–42).

Phonemically there is no opposition between voiced and unvoiced consonants in Tamil, nor in the script.

I am uncertain how this word relates to Old Javanese wiwi ‘goat’ (attested from the ninth century CE) and Proto Rote-Meto *bibi.

While Tamil and Malayalam have callaṭam, Kannada and Tulu exhibit callaṇa (Burrow & Emeneau 1984:209).

I provisionally regard aspirated stops in Old Javanese as distinct phonemes on account of the realization of possible Old Javanese loans in Tagalog and Malagasy (see Table 2.21 and 2.22).

Cf. Makassar, Bugis lasuna.

Across Malayo-Polynesian languages, these numerical values have shifted to respectively ‘one million’, ‘hundred thousand’, and ‘ten thousand’.

Typically borrowed in the meaning of ‘season’ or ‘period’.

Pronounced as /ɓon/ in contemporary Khmer.

These also include numerous Indonesian neologisms, such as basantara ‘lingua franca’ (Sk. bhāṣā ‘language’ + antara ‘in the interior’) and mitra bəstari ‘peer reviewer’ (Sk. mitra ‘friend’ + Sk. vistārī ‘great’). See Gonda (1973:626–634) for several older examples.

The former appears to be a calque of Old Javanese iwak liman, whereas the latter corresponds to muktāhāra in Sanskrit. Both mutya and muktā are back-formations (cf. MIA muttā, mottā) ultimately reflecting a Dravidian precursor (Turner 1966:584).

The meaning has shifted in Javanese to ‘throne’ and in Tausug to ‘a (small) house-shaped receptacle containing confections and money (which is carried on the shoulders of two men in an Islamic Studies graduation procession or a wedding procession); miniature ceremonial palace’.

Compare Old Sundanese kalakatri, which should probably be read as kalakaṭi since ⟨tr⟩ and ⟨ṭ⟩ are spelled identically in the Indic writing system of this language (Balogh & Griffiths 2020:21).

If so, the innovation from *m > ŋ in word-final position needs further explanation.

I thank Edmund Edwards McKinnon (pers. comm. 2011) for pointing out this etymology.

But already denoting ‘silk’ in the forms paṭṭasūtra and rāgasūtra ‘a silk thread’. Hence Old Khmer sūtra and Old Javanese sutra ‘silk’.

In a number of Malayo-Polynesian languages of Maritime Southeast Asia, the substitution of /m/ for /p/ is common in loanwords that have been interpreted as prenasalised verbs (Hoogervorst 2015:48, 2017a:396).

For example Biak rim ‘five’ from PMP *lima.

Data taken from Blust & Trussel (ongoing).

This form has alternatively been explained as a reflex of Sanskrit sac-chattra ‘with an umbrella’ and hence ‘under government protection’ (Poerbatjaraka 1953:41; Hoogervorst 2015:85). With regard to the phonological shape, compare Malay bahtəra ‘ship’ from Sanskrit vahitra.

Bibliography

Adelaar, K. Alexander. 1989. ‘Malay Influence on Malagasy. Linguistic and Culture-Historical Implications.’ Oceanic Linguistics 28(1):1–46.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Adelaar, K. Alexander. 1994. ‘Malay and Javanese loanwords in Malagasy, Tagalog and Siraya (Formosa).’ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië 150(1):50–65.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Adelaar, K. Alexander. 2009. ‘Loanwords in Malagasy.’ In: Martin Haspelmath and Uri Tadmor (eds), Loanwords in the World’s Languages. A Comparative Handbook of Lexical Borrowing. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 717–746.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Adelaar, K. Alexander. 2011. Siraya. Retrieving the Phonology, Grammar and Lexicon of a Dormant Formosan Language. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Aymonier, Étienne and Antoine Cabaton. 1906. Dictionnaire Čam-Français. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Baarda, M.J. van. 1895. Woordenlijst Galèlareesch-Hollandsch. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Balogh, Dániel and Arlo Griffiths. 2020. ‘DHARMA Transliteration Guide.’ halshs-02272407v3.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Behrens, Dietlinde. 2002. Yakan-English Dictionary. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Biswas, Sailendra. 2000. Samsad Bengali-English dictionary. Calcutta: Sahitya Samsad. Third edition.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Blust & Trussell. Ongoing. The Austronesian Comparative Dictionary (www.trussel2.com/ACD).
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Burrow, T. and M.B. Emeneau. 1984. A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Second edition.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Casparis, J.G. de. 1986. ‘Some Notes on Words of “Middle-Indian” Origin in Indonesian Languages (Especially Old Javanese).’ In: Luigi Santa Maria, Faizah Soenoto Rivai and Antonio Sorrentino (eds), Papers from the III European Colloquium on Malay and Indonesian Studies (Naples, 2–4 June, 1981), pp. 51–69. Naples: Instituto Universitario Orientale.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Cense, A.A. 1979. Makassaars-Nederlands woordenboek. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Clavé, Elsa and Arlo Griffiths. 2022. ‘The Laguna Copperplate Inscription: Tenth-Century Luzon, Java, and the Malay World.’ Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints 70(2):167–242.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Clercq, F.S.A. de. 1890. Bijdragen tot de kennis der Residentie Ternate. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Dahl, Otto Christian. 1951. Malgache et Maanjan. Oslo: Egede-Instituttet.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Dalgado, Sebatião Rodolfo. 1919. Glossário Luso-Asiático. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Djajadiningrat, Hoesein. 1934. Atjèhsch-Nederlandsch woordenboek. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Dyen, Isidore. 1946. ‘Malay tiga “three”.’ Language 22(2):131–137.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Edwards McKinnon, E. 1996. ‘Mediaeval Tamil Involvement in Northern Sumatra, c11–c14 (The Gold and Resin Trade).’ Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 69(1):85–99.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Ferrer, Alicia S. 2003. Diksyunaryo Filipino—English. Manilla: MECS Publishing House.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Gonda, J. 1973. Sanskrit in Indonesia. New Dehli: International Academy of Indian Culture. Second edition.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Griffiths, Arlo. 2018. ‘Four More Gupta-period Copperplate Grants from Bengal.’ Pratna Samiksha 9:15–57.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Griffiths, Arlo and Amandine Lepoutre. 2016. ‘Études du corpus des inscriptions du Campā, VIII. Les inscriptions des piédroits des temples de Po Klaong Girai (C. 8–11), de Linh Thái (C. 109–110) et de Yang Prong (C. 116).’ Bulletin de l’Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient 102:195–296.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Gundert, H. 1962. A Malayalam and English dictionary. Kottayam: Sahitya Pravarthaka. Second edition.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hajek, John and Catherina Williams-van Klinken. 2019. ‘Language Contact and Gender in Tetun Dili. What Happens When Austronesian Meets Romance?’ Oceanic Linguistics 58(1):59–91.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hasselt, J.L. van. 1876. Hollandsch-Noemfoorsch en Noemfoorsch-Hollandsch Woordenboek. Utrecht: Kemink & Zoon.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hazeu, G.A.J. 1907. Gajōsch-Nederlandsch woordenboek met Nederlandsch-Gajōsch register. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hoogervorst. Tom G. 2013. Southeast Asia in the Ancient Indian Ocean World. Oxford: Archaeopress.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hoogervorst. Tom G. 2015. ‘Detecting Pre-Modem Lexical Influence from South India in Maritime Southeast Asia.’ Archipel 89:63–93.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hoogervorst. Tom G. 2016. ‘Problematic Protoforms. Some “Hidden” Indic Loans in Western Malayo-Polynesian Languages.’ Oceanic Linguistics 55(2):561–587.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hoogervorst. Tom G. 2017a. ‘The Role of “Prakrit” in Maritime Southeast Asia through 101 Etymologies.’ In: Andrea Acri, Roger Blench and Alexandra Landmann (eds), Spirits and Ships. Cultural Transfers in Early Monsoon Asia, pp. 375–440. Singapore. ISEAS.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hoogervorst. Tom G. 2017b. ‘Lexical Influence from North India to Maritime Southeast Asia. Some New Directions.’ Man in India 97(1):293–334.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Hull, Geoffrey. 1999. Standard Tetum-English Dictionary. Winston Hills, NWS: Sebastião Aparício da Silva Project.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Irene U., Nurhadan Halud, Seymour A. Ashley and Mary L. Ashley. 1994. Tausug-English Dictionary. Kabtangan Iban Maana. Manilla: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Jenner, Phillip. 2009. Dictionary of pre-Angkorian Khmer and Dictionary of Angkorian Khmer. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics Series 597. Accessed through http://sealang.net/ (2020)
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Kern, H. 1880. ‘Sanskritsche Woorden in het Tagala.’ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië 28(3):535–564.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Kern, H. 1903. ‘Drawidische Volksnamen op Sumatra.’ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië 55(3):358–362.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Lafeber, Abraham 1922. Vergelijkende klankleer van het Niassisch. The Hague: Hadi Poestaka.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Larish, Michael D. 1999. The Position of Moken and Moklen within the Austronesian Language Family. University of Hawai‘i, PhD dissertation.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Laiya, Sitasi Z., Siswanto Zagoto, Happy Laiya, Selamat Zagoto and Amita Zagoto. 1985. Kamus Nias-Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Lepoutre, Amandine. 2013. ‘Études du corpus des inscriptions du Campā IV. Les inscriptions du temple de Svayamutpanna. Contribution à l’histoire des relations entre les pouvoirs cam et khmer (de la fin du XIIe siècle au début du XIIIe siècle).’ Journal Asiatique 301(1):205–278.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Mahdi, Waruno. 1994. ‘Some Austronesian Maverick Protoforms with Culture-Historical Implications—II.’ Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):431–490.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Mahdi, Waruno. 2007. Malay Words and Malay Things. Lexical Souvenirs from an Exotic Archipelago in German Publications before 1700. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Matthes, B.F. 1874. Boegineesch-Hollandsch woordenboek met Hollandsch-Boegineesche woordenlijst en verklaring van een tot opheldering bijgevoegden ethnographischen atlas. The Hague: M. Nijhoff.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
McKaughan, Howard and Batua Al-Macaraya. 1996. A Maranao dictionary. Manilla: De La Salle University & the Summer Institute of Linguistics.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Mills, Roger F. 1981. ‘Additional Addenda.’ In: Robert Blust (ed.), Historical Linguistics in Indonesia I, pp. 59–82. Jakarta: NUSA.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Monier-Williams, Monier. 1899. A Sanskṛit-English Dictionary. Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Moussay, Gérard. 1995. Dictionnaire Minangabau—Indonesien—Français. Paris: l’Harmattan.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Parkin, H. 1978. Batak Fruit of Hindu Thought. Madras: Christian Literature Society.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Platts, John T. 1884. A dictionary of Urdu, classical Hindi, and English. London: W.H. Allen.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Poerbatjaraka. 1953. ‘Beberapa Kata.’ Bahasa dan Budaja 1(3):42–44.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Prinst, Darwin. 2002. Kamus Karo-Indonesia. Medan: Penerbit Bina Media.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Rhys Davids, T.W. and William Stede (eds). 1966. The Pali Text Society’s Pali–English dictionary. London: Luzac, 1966. Reprint.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Richardson, James. 1885. A New Malagasy-English Dictionary. Antananarivo: The London Missionary Society.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Robson, Stuart and Singgih Wibisono. 2002. Javanese English Dictionary. Singapore: Periplus.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Ronkel, Ph.S. van. 1902. ‘Het Tamil-element in het Maleisch.’ Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde 45:97–119.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Ronkel, Ph.S. van. 1903. ‘Tamilwoorden in Maleisch gewaad.’ Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde46:532–557.
Ronkel, Ph.S. van. 1918. ‘Drawidische Volksnamen op Sumatra.’ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 55(1):358–362.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Shorto, Harry L. 1971. A Dictionary of the Mon Inscriptions from the Sixth to the Sixteenth Centuries. London: Oxford University Press.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Smith, Alexander D. 2017. The Languages of Borneo. A Comprehensive Classification. University of Hawai‘i, PhD dissertation.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Tamil, 1924–1936. Tamil Lexicon. [Madras:] University of Madras. Six volumes.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Turner, Ralph Lilley. 1966. A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages. London: Oxford University Press.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Tuuk, H.N. van der. 1971. A Grammar of Toba Batak. The Hague: Martinus Hijhoff. Reprint [1864].
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Voorhoeve, P. 1972. ‘Sanskrit maandnamen in het Bataks.’ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 128(4):494–496.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Warneck, Joh. 1977. Toba-Batak—Deutsches Wörterbuch. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Wilkinson, R.J. 1932. A Malay-English Dictionary (Romanised). Mytilene: Salavopoulos and Kinderlis.
Wolff, John U. 1976. ‘Malay Borrowings in Tagalog.’ In: C.D. Coutan and O.W. Wolters (eds), Southeast Asian History and Historiography. Essays Presented to D.G.E. Hall, pp. 345–367. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Wolff, John U. 2010. Proto-Austronesian Phonology with Glossary. Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用
Zoetmulder, P.J. 1982. Old Javanese-English Dictionary. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
- 检索谷歌学术
- 导出引用

引用信息

Save
Cite
Email this content

Share Link

Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friend
Email this content
or copy the link directly:

https://brill.edhh.ma/display/book/9789004529458/BP000002.xml
The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.

Link copied successfully

折叠
展开
回到页面顶端

Traces of Contact in the Lexicon

Austronesian and Papuan Studies

丛编： Brill Studies in Language Contact and the Dynamics of Language, 卷： 4

ISBN:: 9789004529458

出版社:: Brill

印刷出版日期:: 13 Jan 2023

Subjects
- Asian Studies
  - Pacific
- Languages and Linguistics

Front Matter

Part 1 Ancient and Pre-Modern Contact

Part 2 Modern and Contemporary Contact

Back Matter

统计数据

	全部期间	过去一年	过去30天
摘要浏览次数	0	0	0
全文浏览次数	3298	1296	139
PDF下载次数	1415	649	61

African Studies	Education	Media Studies
American Studies	History	Middle East and Islamic Studies
Ancient Near East and Egypt	Human Rights and Humanitarian Law	Musicology
Art History	International Law	Philosophy
Asian Studies	International Relations	Religious Studies
Biblical Studies	Jewish Studies	Slavic and Eurasian Studies
Biology	Languages and Linguistics	Social Sciences
Book History and Cartography	Life Sciences	Theology and World Christianity
Classical Studies	Literature and Cultural Studies

Subjects

AppBar-Authors 2025

AppBar-Open Access 2025

AppBar-Product Information 2025

AppBar-Company 2025

AppBar-Contact 2025

Chapter 2 Lexical Influence from South Asia

Abstract

Introduction

Table 2.1

1 Integration

Table 2.2

Table 2.3

Table 2.4

Table 2.5

Table 2.6

Table 2.7

Table 2.8

Table 2.9

2 Timeframe

Table 2.10

Table 2.11

Table 2.12

Table 2.13

Table 2.14

Table 2.15

Table 2.16

3 Trajectories

Table 2.17

Table 2.18

Table 2.19

Table 2.20

Table 2.21

Table 2.22

Table 2.23

Table 2.24

Table 2.25

Table 2.26

Table 2.27

Table 2.28

4 Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgements

Language Sources

Bibliography

引用信息

Share Link

Traces of Contact in the Lexicon

Austronesian and Papuan Studies

目录

统计数据

统计数据