scholarly journals On the genetic position of Chakpa within Luish languages

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keisuke Huziwara
Keyword(s):  
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katia Chirkova

Duoxu is a terminally endangered and virtually undescribed Tibeto-Burman language, spoken in the historically multi-ethnic and multi-lingual Miǎnníng county of Sìchuān province in the People’s Republic of China. Until recently, Duoxu was known only through a 740-word vocabulary list in the Sino-Tibetan vocabularies Xīfān Yìyǔ [Tibetan-Chinese bilingual glossary], recorded in Chinese and Tibetan transcriptions in the 18th century, and a grammatical sketch (Huáng & Yǐn 2012). Researchers who have worked on the language (Nishida 1973, Sūn 1982, Huáng & Yǐn 2012) have expressed different views about the features and the genetic position of Duoxu, variously viewing it as (1) closely related to Lolo-Burmese languages (Nishida 1973), (2) closely related to Ersu and Lizu, two neighboring languages that are currently classified as members of the Qiangic subgroup of the Tibeto-Burman language family (Sūn 1982), or (3) distantly related to those two languages and to Qiangic languages at large (Huáng & Yǐn 2012). The Duoxu language is critically endangered and urgently requires documentation. It is of great value for our understanding of the linguistic diversity of the region, and of its linguistic history. It is also of great value as a modern reflection of a language that was recorded in the 18th century. This paper makes a significant contribution in all these areas. Based on new fieldwork with all remaining elderly Duoxu speakers, this study provides newly collected data and a new analysis. It compares the newly collected data with the 18th-century attestations of Duoxu as well as with its two putative sister languages Ersu and Lizu. The conclusion of the study is that Duoxu is closely related to Ersu and Lizu, with superficial differences attributed to long-standing and on-going contact influence from Southwestern Mandarin.


Author(s):  
Marie-Elaine van Egmond ◽  
Brett Baker
Keyword(s):  

2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (9) ◽  
pp. 1117-1123
Author(s):  
V. A. Spitsyn ◽  
V. A. Batsevich ◽  
G. I. El’chinova ◽  
E. D. Kobyliansky
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Wang (汪鋒) ◽  
Wen Liu (劉文)

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. 嚴格的語音對應是歷史比較的基礎,也是判定語源關係的必要條件。在苗瑤語的語源問題研究中,李方桂(1937)提出漢藏語系四語族學說,即漢語、藏緬語、侗台語和苗瑤語。Benedict(1942、1975)則將苗瑤語從漢藏語系中劃分出去,理由是苗瑤語和漢語有對應關係的語素是由接觸造成的。苗瑤語系屬問題的爭議焦點在於苗瑤語和漢語音近義同的一批關係語素是否有嚴格的語音對應支持,然而這一問題一直以來不被重視。本文基於完全對應得到苗瑤語族內部11個語言的關係語素,隨後應用詞階法分析,結果如願所示,這11個語言之間具有發生學關係。同樣的程序應用于漢-苗瑤語關係語素,結果與上述呈現的模式相同,即這些關係語素是來自漢語和苗瑤語共同的祖語,而非語言接觸的產物。結合普遍對應的研究(Wang 2015),漢語和苗瑤語的發生學關係可以得到支持。不可釋原則也顯示漢-苗瑤語關係語素是由苗瑤語從漢語借用的可能性較小,因為二者間的部分語音對應不可能通過自然音變來解釋。此外,從上古漢語的角度對漢-苗瑤語關係語素的校驗也支持二者的同源關係。


2000 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Joseph

Mental health textbooks sometimes provide inaccurate information, typically supporting common beliefs in the field. Psychiatry and psychology textbooks' discussion of the schizophrenia adoption studies is examined. Particular attention is paid to the earlier studies, which helped pave the way for the current widespread acceptance of the importance of genetic factors influencing psychological trait differences. This article compares the accounts of 30 textbooks to the original studies they reviewed. Generally, problems with these textbooks' accounts include (1) the failure to critically assess the original researchers' methods and conclusions, (2) some textbooks' reliance on secondary sources, (3) the failure to discuss published critiques of the schizophrenia adoption studies, (4) inaccuracy in reporting the original findings, (5) the claim that studies finding nonsignificant results support the genetic position, and (6) a failure to discuss the potentially invalidating environmental confounds in the schizophrenia adoption studies (through the selective placement of adoptees). It is concluded that, in general, these textbooks have served to rubber-stamp mainstream psychiatry's questionable claims about the schizophrenia adoption studies at the expense of a thorough critical analysis.


2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Al-Jallad

The present contribution proposes the existence of two ‘micro linguistic areas’ in Arabia in which features from Arabic and other Semitic languages diffused multilaterally. Some of the output varieties pose a significant challenge to phylogeny as they exhibit conflicting isoglosses connecting them equally with different lineages of Semitic. We introduce to the term ‘areal hybridity’ to explain the genetic position of languages emerging from contact situations such as these. We argue that several older varieties, such as the dialect of Ṭayyiʾ and the medieval Ḥimyaritic language described by the Arab grammarians, as well some modern varieties of southwest Arabia, such as Rāziḥī and Riǧāl Almaʿ, fall into this category.


2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. García-Obregón ◽  
M.A. Alfonso-Sánchez ◽  
A.M. Pérez-Miranda ◽  
C. Vidales ◽  
D. Arroyo ◽  
...  

Genomics ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 286-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Schleutker ◽  
Antti-Pekka Laine ◽  
Leena Haataja ◽  
Martin Renlund ◽  
Jean Weissenbach ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document