Rigorous sound correspondence is fundamental to historical linguistics. It serves as a solid start in studying genetic relationship. Regarding the genetic position of Miao-Yao languages, Li (1937) proposed a hypothesis that the Sino-Tibetan language family consists of Chinese, Tibeto-Burman, Kam-Tai, and Miao-Yao. Benedict (1942; 1975) excluded Miao-Yao from the Sino-Tibetan language family since sound correspondences between Miao-Yao and Chinese were considered to be caused by language contact. The key point in this debate has been ignored for a long time: are the related morphemes proposed in this debate supported by rigorous sound correspondence? In this paper, related morphemes across 11 Miao-Yao languages have been first identified under the requirement of complete sound correspondence, and then analyzed by the Rank Method. The result of the genetic relationship between the 11 Miao-Yao languages has been confirmed. The same procedure has been applied to Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes, and similar pattern has been found. The Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes were recognized to be inherited from the common ancestor of Chinese and Miao-Yao. Combined with the result from the perspective of pervasive sound correspondence (Wang 2015), the proposal of a genetic relationship between Chinese and Miao-Yao has been supported. The Inexplicability Principle has been used to weaken the possibility of Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes being induced by borrowing from Chinese to Miao-Yao, since some sound correspondences are unlikely to be explained by natural phonetic mechanisms. Moreover, related morphemes in Chinese and Miao-Yao have been examined from the perspective of Old Chinese, and such an examination also supports the hypothesis of a genetic relationship between Chinese and Miao-Yao languages.
å´æ ¼çèªé³å°ææ¯æ·å²æ¯è¼çåºç¤ï¼ä¹æ¯å¤å®èªæºéä¿çå¿ è¦æ¢ä»¶ãå¨èç¤èªçèªæºåé¡ç ç©¶ä¸ï¼ææ¹æ¡ï¼1937ï¼æåºæ¼¢èèªç³»åèªæå¸èªªï¼å³æ¼¢èªãèç·¬èªãä¾å°èªåèç¤èªãBenedictï¼1942ã1975ï¼åå°èç¤èªå¾æ¼¢èèªç³»ä¸åååºå»ï¼çç±æ¯èç¤èªåæ¼¢èªæå°æéä¿çèªç´ æ¯ç±æ¥è§¸é æçãèç¤èªç³»å±¬åé¡ççè°ç¦é»å¨æ¼èç¤èªåæ¼¢èªé³è¿ç¾©åç䏿¹éä¿èªç´ æ¯å¦æå´æ ¼çèªé³å°ææ¯æï¼ç¶èéä¸åé¡ä¸ç´ä»¥ä¾ä¸è¢«éè¦ãæ¬æåºæ¼å®å ¨å°æå¾å°èç¤èªæå §é¨11åèªè¨çéä¿èªç´ ï¼é¨å¾æç¨è©éæ³åæï¼çµæå¦é¡æç¤ºï¼é11åèªè¨ä¹éå ·æç¼çå¸éä¿ã忍£çç¨åºæç¨äºæ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ ï¼çµæèä¸è¿°åç¾ç模å¼ç¸åï¼å³éäºéä¿èªç´ æ¯ä¾èªæ¼¢èªåèç¤èªå ±åçç¥èªï¼èéèªè¨æ¥è§¸çç¢ç©ãçµåæ®éå°æçç ç©¶ï¼Wang 2015ï¼ï¼æ¼¢èªåèç¤èªçç¼çå¸éä¿å¯ä»¥å¾å°æ¯æãä¸å¯éååä¹é¡¯ç¤ºæ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ æ¯ç±èç¤èªå¾æ¼¢èªåç¨çå¯è½æ§è¼å°ï¼å çºäºè éçé¨åèªé³å°æä¸å¯è½ééèªç¶é³è®ä¾è§£éãæ¤å¤ï¼å¾ä¸å¤æ¼¢èªçè§åº¦å°æ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ çæ ¡é©ä¹æ¯æäºè çåæºéä¿ã
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Baxter William H. 1992. A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Benedict Paul K. 1942. Thai, Kadai, and Indonesian: a new alignment in Southeastern Asia. American Anthropologist 44.4: 576â601.
Benedict Paul K. 1975. Austro-Tai Language and Culture with a Glossary of Roots. New Haven: Human Relations Area Files Press.
Chen Baoya é³ä¿äº . 1996. Lun yuyanjiechu yu yuyanlianmeng è«èªè¨æ¥è§¸èèªè¨è¯ç [Language contact and language union]. Beijing: Language and Culture Press.
Chen Baoya é³ä¿äº. 1999. Hantai guanxici shengmu youxu guize duiyingbiao æ¼¢å°éä¿è©è²æ¯æåºè¦åå°æè¡¨ [Table of initial correspondence of Chinese-Tai related words]. Yuyanxu eluncong èªè¨å¸è«å¢ [Essays on Linguistics] 22: 186â225.
Chen Baoya é³ä¿äº and Wang Feng 汪é . 2006. Lun queding hexinyusubiao de jibenyuanze: yi Shanggu Hanyu weili. è«ç¢ºå®æ ¸å¿èªç´ çåºæ¬ååâ以ä¸å¤æ¼¢èªçºä¾ [The definition of kernel morphonemes: the case of Old Chinese]. Yuyanxue luncong èªè¨å¸è«å¢ [Essays on Linguistics] 33: 183â222.
Chen Baoya and Wang Feng . 2011. On several principles in reconstructing a proto-languageâwith the reconstruction of tone and pre-initial *h- and *Ê- of Proto-Yi. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 39.2: 370â402.
Gong Hwang-cherng . 2002. Collected Papers on Sino-Tibetan Linguistics. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics (Preparatory Office), Academia Sinica.
Gong Huang-cheng é¾ç å . 2006. Hanyu yu miaoyaoyu tongyuan guanxi de jiantao æ¼¢èªèèç¤èªåæºéä¿çæª¢è¨ [Reexamination of the genetic relationship between Chinese and Miao-Yao]. Zhongguo yuyanxue jikan ä¸åèªè¨å¸éå [Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics] 1.1: 255â270.
Haugen Einar. 1950. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language 26: 210â231.
Li Fang-Kuei . 1937/1973. Languages and dialects of China. In The Chinese Year Book. Shanghai: The Commercial Press. Also in Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 1973.1: 1â13.
Li Fang-kuei ææ¹æ¡ . 1971 [1980]. Shangguyin yanjiu ä¸å¤é³ç ç©¶ [Studies on Old Chinese phonology]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Ostapirat Weera . 2016. Issues in reconstruction and affiliation of Proto-Miao-Yao. Language and linguistics 17.1: 133â145.
Ratliff Martha . 2010. Hmong-Mien Language History. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Schuessler Axel . 2003. Multiple origins of the old Chinese lexicon. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 31.1: 1â71.
Swadesh Morris. 1952. Lexico-statistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts: With special reference to North American Indians and Eskimos. In Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 96.4: 452â463.
Swadesh Morris. 1955. Time depths of American linguistic groupings. American Anthropologist 56.3: 361â377.
Wang Feng. 2004. Language Contact and Language Comparison â The Case of Bai. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong PhD dissertation.
Wang Feng . 2006. Comparison of Languages in Contact: the Distillation Method and the Case of Bai. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Wang Feng 汪é . 2011. Yuyin diying de liangzhong fangkuanmoshi jiqi houguoâyi Yibai bijiao weili èªè¨å°æçå ©ç¨®æ¾å¯¬æ¨¡å¼åå ¶å¾æâ以å½ç½æ¯è¼çºä¾ [Two models to loosen the requirement of sound correspondence and their consequencesâwith a comparison of the Bai language and the Yi language]. Yuyanxue luncong èªè¨å¸è«å¢ [Essays on Linguistics] 44: 1â39.
Wang Feng 汪é . 2012. Yuyan jiechu yu yuyan bijiaoâyi Baiyu weili èªè¨æ¥è§¸èèªè¨æ¯è¼â以ç½èªçºä¾ [Language contact and language comparisonâThe case of Bai]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Wang Feng 汪é . 2013. Hanzang yuyan bijiao de fangfa yu shijianâHan, Bai, Yiyu bijiao yanjiu æ¼¢èèªè¨æ¯è¼çæ¹æ³è實è¸âæ¼¢ãç½ãå½èªæ¯è¼ç ç©¶ [Methodologies and implementations of Sino-Tibetan comparisons: The comparative studies of Chinese, Bai and Yi languages]. Beijing: Peking University Press.
Wang, Feng . 2015. Sound correspondence and the comparative study of Miao-Yao languagesâfrom the perspective of pervasiveness of sound correspondence. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 8.1: 157â176.
Wang Feng . 2017. The inexplicability Principle and recognition of genetic relationship: to solve the controversy of Sino-Tai âfiveâ and âsixâ. In New Horizons in Evolutionary Linguistics, Journal of Chinese Linguistics. Monograph Series No. 27: 254â260.
Wang Fushi çè¼ä¸ and Mao Zongwu æ¯å®æ¦ . 1995. Miaoyaoyu guyin gouni èç¤èªå¤é³æ§æ¬ [Reconstruction of the sound system of Proto-Miao-Yao]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Press.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 665 | 128 | 23 |
| Full Text Views | 513 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 162 | 4 | 0 |
Rigorous sound correspondence is fundamental to historical linguistics. It serves as a solid start in studying genetic relationship. Regarding the genetic position of Miao-Yao languages, Li (1937) proposed a hypothesis that the Sino-Tibetan language family consists of Chinese, Tibeto-Burman, Kam-Tai, and Miao-Yao. Benedict (1942; 1975) excluded Miao-Yao from the Sino-Tibetan language family since sound correspondences between Miao-Yao and Chinese were considered to be caused by language contact. The key point in this debate has been ignored for a long time: are the related morphemes proposed in this debate supported by rigorous sound correspondence? In this paper, related morphemes across 11 Miao-Yao languages have been first identified under the requirement of complete sound correspondence, and then analyzed by the Rank Method. The result of the genetic relationship between the 11 Miao-Yao languages has been confirmed. The same procedure has been applied to Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes, and similar pattern has been found. The Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes were recognized to be inherited from the common ancestor of Chinese and Miao-Yao. Combined with the result from the perspective of pervasive sound correspondence (Wang 2015), the proposal of a genetic relationship between Chinese and Miao-Yao has been supported. The Inexplicability Principle has been used to weaken the possibility of Sino-Miao-Yao related morphemes being induced by borrowing from Chinese to Miao-Yao, since some sound correspondences are unlikely to be explained by natural phonetic mechanisms. Moreover, related morphemes in Chinese and Miao-Yao have been examined from the perspective of Old Chinese, and such an examination also supports the hypothesis of a genetic relationship between Chinese and Miao-Yao languages.
å´æ ¼çèªé³å°ææ¯æ·å²æ¯è¼çåºç¤ï¼ä¹æ¯å¤å®èªæºéä¿çå¿ è¦æ¢ä»¶ãå¨èç¤èªçèªæºåé¡ç ç©¶ä¸ï¼ææ¹æ¡ï¼1937ï¼æåºæ¼¢èèªç³»åèªæå¸èªªï¼å³æ¼¢èªãèç·¬èªãä¾å°èªåèç¤èªãBenedictï¼1942ã1975ï¼åå°èç¤èªå¾æ¼¢èèªç³»ä¸åååºå»ï¼çç±æ¯èç¤èªåæ¼¢èªæå°æéä¿çèªç´ æ¯ç±æ¥è§¸é æçãèç¤èªç³»å±¬åé¡ççè°ç¦é»å¨æ¼èç¤èªåæ¼¢èªé³è¿ç¾©åç䏿¹éä¿èªç´ æ¯å¦æå´æ ¼çèªé³å°ææ¯æï¼ç¶èéä¸åé¡ä¸ç´ä»¥ä¾ä¸è¢«éè¦ãæ¬æåºæ¼å®å ¨å°æå¾å°èç¤èªæå §é¨11åèªè¨çéä¿èªç´ ï¼é¨å¾æç¨è©éæ³åæï¼çµæå¦é¡æç¤ºï¼é11åèªè¨ä¹éå ·æç¼çå¸éä¿ã忍£çç¨åºæç¨äºæ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ ï¼çµæèä¸è¿°åç¾ç模å¼ç¸åï¼å³éäºéä¿èªç´ æ¯ä¾èªæ¼¢èªåèç¤èªå ±åçç¥èªï¼èéèªè¨æ¥è§¸çç¢ç©ãçµåæ®éå°æçç ç©¶ï¼Wang 2015ï¼ï¼æ¼¢èªåèç¤èªçç¼çå¸éä¿å¯ä»¥å¾å°æ¯æãä¸å¯éååä¹é¡¯ç¤ºæ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ æ¯ç±èç¤èªå¾æ¼¢èªåç¨çå¯è½æ§è¼å°ï¼å çºäºè éçé¨åèªé³å°æä¸å¯è½ééèªç¶é³è®ä¾è§£éãæ¤å¤ï¼å¾ä¸å¤æ¼¢èªçè§åº¦å°æ¼¢-èç¤èªéä¿èªç´ çæ ¡é©ä¹æ¯æäºè çåæºéä¿ã
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 665 | 128 | 23 |
| Full Text Views | 513 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 162 | 4 | 0 |