3623130

Proto-Austronesian and Old Chinese Evidence for Sino-Austronesian Author(s): Laurent Sagart Source: Oceanic Linguistics, Vol.
33, No. 2 (Dec., 1994), pp. 271-308 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3623130 . Accessed: 03/06/2013 02:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oceanic Linguistics.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Mon, 3 Jun 2013 02:59:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
PROTO-AUSTRONESIANAND OLD CHINESE EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN1

LAURENTSAGART
SOCIAL SCIENCERESEARCHINSTITUTE,UNIVERSITYOF HAWAI'I AND CENTRE DE RECHERCHES LINGUISTIQUESSUR L'ASIE ORIENTALE,PARIS
The proposalthata geneticrelationship exists betweenthe ChineseandAustronesian(An) languageswas firstmadeby A. Conrady (1916, 1923)andK. Wulff (1942) on the basis of lexical evidence andtypologicalobservationsof a fragmentarynature.Sagart(1990, 1993a),which arebasedon modernreconstructions of Old Chinese (OC) and Proto-Austronesian (PAn), expand the number of lexical comparisons(without attemptingto reconstructtheir common for (thataccountin particular ancestor),establishnew soundcorrespondences the origin of Chinese tones), and presentevidence of morphologicalcongruence. Criticismof this work (Matisoff 1992) has concentratedon the quality of the lexical comparisons.In the presentstudy I adopt a highly constrained methodology of lexical comparison(Section 3), allowing only semantically close, non-onomatopoeticcomparisonsbased on Chinese wordsattesteddurat the highest level (PAn). ing the OC period and An words reconstructible Despite these constraints-which go far beyond most of the comparative work currently done in Sino-Tibetan research-56 comparisons are presented.They relatefor the most partto noncultural notions andexhibitgenerally the same system of sound correspondencesas in my earlier work, thus tending to confirm it. An updated account of the morphological processes sharedby OC and PAn is given in Section 2, includingnew evidence for an intransitive or stative nasal prefix N- in OC, correspondingto PAn stative ma-. Supportingevidence from physicalanthropologyis describedin Section vis-a-vis Austricandthe 6, and Section 7 brieflydiscusses Sino-Austronesian Tibeto-Burmanlanguages.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 PROTO-AUSTRONESIAN. Proto-Austronesian, the ancestor language of all living An languages, is believed by a majority of Austronesianists to have been spoken on Formosa or neighboring areas of the China coast (see Blust 1988b for evidence from linguistic paleontology). Even though Formosa
Oceanic Linguistics,Volume 33, no. 2 (December 1994)
? by University All rights of Hawaii Press. reserved.
272
OCEANIC LINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2
is probablythe location from which the An languagefamily began its outward spread,it is generallyassumedthatthe earliestAn speakersin Formosamigrated there by boat from the Chinese coast: Chang (1989) equates the speakers of PAn with the neolithic culturesof Ta-Pen-K'engin northernTaiwan and FuKuo-Tunon Quemoy island (a few miles off the coast of Fujian),both C14datedto the late5thmillennium Bellwood(1991) cites Hemudu in Hangzhou B.C.; 1000 kms. north of the about northern of as of Taiwan, Bay, tip representative the type of neolithic society of the Chinacoast which could have sent settlers to Taiwan.The earliestC14 dates for Hemuduareslightly anteriorto 5000 B.C. Since outside Taiwan the earliest dates that may be associated with Anspeakingculturesareposteriorto 3000 B.C.,the firstmigrationoutside Taiwan, and the subsequentbreak-upof PAn into its daughterlanguages,may be dated 3000 B.C.(Bellwood 1991). Because the comparative method to approximately reconstructs protolanguages as they appearedimmediately before the time of they began to diverge, the date of 3000 B.C.is thus taken as representative PAn. reconstructed A properunderstanding of subgrouping is essential in deciding which words can be assigned to the protolanguage.I will assume the view of higher-order Austronesiansubgroupingarguedfor in Blust (1988a:16-17). In Blust's work, reconstructionsare made at differentlevels: Proto-WMP(level 3), Proto-MP (level 2), andPAn (level 1). We will be concernedmostly with those items that at the highest level (PAn). AlthoughBlust is not committed arereconstructible as to whetherthe Formosanlanguagesform one or threeprimarybranchesof Formosan as a singlewitness in practice he treats An (Tsouic,Atayalic,Paiwanic), AFTER SUBGROUPING OF An LANGUAGES, FIGURE1. HIGHER-ORDER BLUST(1988a:17), SIMPLIFIED
AN
MP
WMP
CEMP
F = Formosan: one or more primary subgroups in Taiwan; MP = Malayo-Polynesian: all extraFormosan An languages; WMP = Western Malayo-Polynesian: the MP languages of Botel Tobago, the Philippines, the Marianas, Palau, Sulawesi and satellites, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Lombok and Western Sumbawa, Malaya, Indochina and Madagascar; CEMP = Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian: all other MP languages.
FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN EVIDENCE
273
of reconstructed in determining the level of assignment items,dueto thepresumed of mutual and of contact borrowingsbetween Formosan importance antiquity items attested As a result, simultaneously in and outside of only languages. Formosa qualify for the PAn level. I follow thatprocedure. Roots aredefined(Blust An items areeitherwordsor "roots." Reconstructed of as 1988a) meaning-associated strings, CV(C) shape-mostly submorphemic or isolated CVC-occurring as the final syllable of at least four reconstructed words in An languages. Blust (1988a) lists 231 such roots. While comparison words,use of roots is less well established. routinelymakesuse of reconstructed An roots from externalcomparison.On reason to exclude Yet there seems no andcan be shown to the contrary, roots (at leastthose thatarenot onomatopoetic sound-meansome of the most characteristic belong to the PAn level) represent to ing associations in the language.Blust (1988a:54) suggested that "attention the root could open up new possibilities in exploringthe externalrelationships of the Austronesianlanguages."I follow his suggestion. words are assigned Although in Blust's publishedwork only reconstructed withroots.I to different reconstruction levels, the samecanbe done meaningfully regarda root as PAn if it includes both Formosanand non-Formosanitems. I take it thata PAn root occurredas the final syllable of at least one PAn word of in Chinese, the samemeaning.Sinceonly thelastsyllableof An wordsis reflected PAn with a word a root Chinese is not different from a very comparing comparing PAn word with a Chinese word. Only reconstructionsassignableto the earliest protolanguage,PAn, will be in thispaper.Thecognatesets andreconstructions aremainly used as comparanda in particular drawnfrom the literature, the lists in Blust (1980, 1983-84, 1985, items assignable 1989) and Tsuchida(1976). In a few instances,reconstructed to lower-level languages (such as Proto-Malayo-Polynesian,Proto-Western or Proto-Philippines) becausethey seemedto lackFormosan Malayo-Polynesian, I PAn level afterone or more Formosancognates cognates, have raised to the were identified.(See in Section 3 the cognate sets under*siraQ1'salt', *SulaR 'snake', *tuDuR 'sleep', *liqeR 'neck'; *kupit 'shut, close', *puluir'gather'.) A 'candidateroot', *-bair'broad,wide', has likewise been elevated to the status of PAn root. A new PAn root (as far as I know) has been identified:*-qem 'cloud, cloudy'. 1.2 OLD CHINESE. The oldest known texts writtenin a form of Chinese are the oracularinscriptionsof the late Shangdynasty(ca. 1300-1100 B.C.).It was formerly believed that the Shang civilization, and the Chinese civilization in stemmedfroma morewesterlyneolithicculture, theYangshao general,ultimately whose bearers hadgradually in earlyneolithictimes tradition, expandedeastward (Chang 1968). However, as a series of neolithic sites as ancient as Yangshao were discovered on the Pacific seaboard,notablyat Dawenkou, Qingliangang and other sites in south Shandongand northJiangsu,it became clear (in agree-
274
OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,
ment with the Shang traditionof their easternorigins) that a continuityexists betweenthese sites, in particular Dawenkou,andthe Shangcivilization (Chang 1980:347, 354). Chang (1980:345) listed continuities in materialculture between Shang and the Lungshanoidcultureson the coast of Shandong,and suggested thatthe rulersof the Shangdynastycould have been a conqueringgroup from the east. In line with Chang's argument, potterysigns at Dawenkou have been identifiedas early Chinese characters(Qiu Xigui 1978). Although identificationof the Shang oracularlanguage as an early form of Chinese is certain,the phoneticinformationcarriedby the oracularscriptis too scanty for reconstruction.OC as a reconstructedlanguage representsthe language of the early and middle Zhou dynasties,ca. 1100-600 B.C. Two OC reconstructionsare given for each Chinese word: Li Fang-kuei's (1971, 1976) and, following Li's between roundbrackets,a slightly modified version of Baxter's system (Baxter 1992, with emendations as outlined in Sagart 1993b). Baxter's system includes much of the progress made in Old Chinese since Karlgren: the distinctionbetween an 1- series and a t- series, the Division 2 -r- paradigm,andthe eliminationof final voiced stops are amongthe most conspicuous. The same featureshave been selected in several recent reconstructionsystems independentlyelaboratedby scholars in China (Zhengzhang), the formerSoviet Union (Starostin)andthe USA (Schiissler).Baxter's system also incorporateshis own statisticallybased reanalysisof the rhyming of OC pronunciation currently system.It is in my opinionthe best approximation betweenOC andPAn will available.In whatfollows, the soundcorrespondences in termsof Baxter'ssystem,withmy modifications. be formulated Li's transcriptions areprovidedfor comparison. 1.3 GENETIC RELATEDNESS. It is generallyconsideredthatmorphology is highly stable and not borrowable(except when affixed words areborrowed), becauseit is internallystronglystructured and resistantto change,both internal and external.For thatreasonthe diagnosticvalue of morphologicalcongruence in determining is particularly geneticrelationships high. Soundcorrespondences not themselves do a indicate by necessarily genetic relationship,since short,intense episodes of languagecontact (say, duringa colonial episode) may result in one languageborrowinga set of wordsfrom the other,yielding soundcorrespondences.The words borrowedin such contexts are, however, usually of a nonbasic, culturalkind. Conversely, the sharingof elements of basic vocabulary without sound correspondencesmay indicate borrowingin situations of constitutestrongproof prolongedandintimatecontact.Soundcorrespondences of a genetic relationshipif they can be shown to exist between elements of the basic vocabulary.The presenceof sound correspondencesthen argues against a prolongedcontactsituation, while shared basic vocabulary argues against a short contact situation. Only genetic inheritance remains as a possible explanation for the simultaneous presenceof both.
FORSINO-AUSTRONESIAN EVIDENCE
275
It might be argued that to rely exclusively on semantic proximity and the regularityof sound correspondencesin makingcognate decisions is an overly in the lexicon:etymologito soundchangeas implemented mechanisticapproach of languageswith well-documented historiesteem with sporadic cal dictionaries contaminations, blends,onomatopoetic changes-analogies, hypercorrections, soundchangein determinandso forth-which competewithregular retentions, ing the shapeof certainwords.While this is truein principle,I cannotsee how, especially in the case of languageswithouta writtenhistory,such sporadicdevelopments can be detected, if not against the backdropof a well-understood history of phonetic changes. There is no sound methodological alternativeto requiringregularsound correspondencesin comparativework. I shall then present these two kinds of linguistic evidence: morphological congruence (Section 2) and sound correspondencesin the basic vocabulary (Section 4).
2. MORPHOLOGICAL CONGRUENCE BETWEEN OC AND PAn. In general, OC and PAn agree in possessing a mostly derivationalmorphology makinguse of prefixes, infixes, and suffixes. Unlike Dakota,whose infixes are inserted after the first vowel of a stem (Moravcsik 1977:113-114), or Protowhose "nasalinfix" was insertedbefore the last segment of a Indo-European, root (Meillet 1937: 215-216), both PAn and OC inserttheir infixes before the firstvowel of a word stem. Evidence is presentedbelow thatat least one prefix and two infixes are sharedby OC and PAn. 2.1 PAn *-ar- : OC -r-. PAn and OC share a derivationalinfix (PAn *-ar-, OC -r-) whose core functionwas to deriveverbsof distributed actionandnouns of distributedobjects (a notion I owe to Stan Starosta).Distributedactions are actions that are temporallyor spatiallydistributed: the action either occurs rein or several locations or is simultaneously, peatedly performedby several actors. Onomatopoeiadescribingrepetitiveacoustic patterns,or sounds coming from several sources at once fit naturally here.Distributedobjects occur in sets or series. Names of distributed are count nouns:mass nouns cannot be objects distributedobjects. Typical nouns of distributedobjects are: names of paired or multiplebodyparts; namesof pairedobjects(tongs,pincers,chopsticks,shoes, and so forth)or objects having a repetitivepattern,for instancetoothedobjects (rakes, combs, harrows and the like); and names of animal or plant species (generics or collectives). 2.1.1 PAn *-ar-. I would like to propose that an infix of the form *-ar- and for PAn. It is reprehaving the functionjust describedmust be reconstructed sented in Formosa,in the Philippines,and in Malay.
276
Formosa:Paiwan-ar- 'distributed action/object' (examplesfromFerrell1982): k-ar-akim'to search everywhere' (kim 'search'; Egli lists k-ar-im 'look everywhere') dj-ar-adjulat'move feet constantly'(djulat 'a pace') dj-ar-adjiqes'splash wateron all sides' (djiqes 'splash') t-ar-atekel'drinkeverythingin sight' (tekel'to drink') dj-ar-akadjak'stompone's feet' (djakadjak'leg with which one kicks') k-ar-ulku(c'to have sound of hoeing' (kuckuq'hoe') q[-ar-ep[ep'medium-smallyellow glass beads' Cinnamomum randaiense' t-ar-ivtiv 'Beilschmiedia erythrophloia; 'small lobsteror shrimp' tj-ar-unguL Formosa:Amis -ar- 'distributed action/object'(examples from Fey 1986): p-ar-okpok'to gallop' p-ar-ekpek'to march' t-ar-iktik'to walk lightly' vehicles or planes' h-ar-egheg'sound of waves or approaching g-ar-awgaw 'noise of many voices' t-ar-odo' 'fingers,toes' k-ar-ot 'harrow' k-ar-iwkiway'hermitcrab' Tagalog -al- 'distributedaction/object' (examples from Panganiban 1973; Tagalog -I- regularlyreflectsPAn -r-) d-al-akdak 'sowing of rice seeds or seedlings for transplanting'(dakdak 'drivingin of sharpend of stakes into soil') g-al-ukgok 1. 'tremblingfrom angeror cold' 2. 'noise of stomach movement when beginningto be hungry' g-al-uygoy 1. 'tremblingdue to coldness' 2. 'vibrationof fat flesh when an obese person moves; bobbingup and down of female breastswhen a woman runs or jumps' d-al-ugdog 'beatingof drums,sound of drumbeats' b-al-ugbog'dorsalvertebrae' k-al-iskis 'scales of fish' b-al-atbat'horizontalbamboosalong roof frame,across rafters' k-al-aykay'rake' d-al-andan 'Citrusaurantiaca'(orangetree) action' (examples from AbdullahHassan 1974:83) Malay -er- 'distributed ketap 'to bite teeth' : k-er-etap'to bite teeth repeatedly' cancang 'to implant' : c-er-ancang 'to be pointed upwards(of numerous implantedstakes)' in many rows' catuk 'to arrange': c-er-atuk'to be arranged
277
gutup 'to crack' : g-er-utup'to crackrepeatedly(rattle)' kelip 'to flash': k-er-elip'to flash repeatedly(twinkle)' in infixedformin PAn:(B 1) k-ar-uSkuS At least one verbhas been reconstructed 3.35 for a Chinese 'to scrape'. (See cognate, also r-infixed.) WMP In a numberof languagesof the Philippines(Bikol, Ibanag,Cuyunon) andJava(Sundanese,Javanese),the -ar- infix has changedinto a pluralmarker on nouns and verbs. 2.1.2 Old Chinese -r- 'distributed action/object'. In a recent paper (Sagart 1993c) I have shown the medial -r- of OC to have been an infix formingplural or collective nouns, iterativeand durativeverbs of action (also at times introducing a nuanceof effort in verbs), as well as intensivestativeverbs and adjectives. A prominentcomponentin this package of functionscorrespondsto the notion of distributedobject or action, as defined above. Notions representedby more than several r-infixed synonyms are typical distributedobjects or actions:to scratch,scrape(four examples), to sew (three stockup (five examples),to hesitate,walk hesitatingly examples),to accumulate, (five examples),chopsticks(threeexamples),street/alley (threeexamples),young shoot (threeexamples), pig (four examples). The following pairs can be cited. A sidx (sij?) 'wash': ?I sridx (s-r-ij?) 'sprinkle,cleanse' gap (gop) 'join' (two things together): F grap (g-r-op) 'unite' (more than 2 things) f[lgap (gap) 'talkative': E grap (g-r-ap) 'sound of many people talking at the same time' ? khijh (kheg+s) 'musical stones' : khriV (kh-r-ej) 'sound of metallic instruments(bells etc.)' dzid (dzij) 'equal, uniform' : dzrid (dz-r-ij) 'class, groupof equals' gap (gop) 'join, unite' : jtgap (g-r-op) 'nameof a sacrificeto ancestors taken collectively' : r . dafnx (gin?) 'to protuberate' granx(g-r-in?) 'the eyeballs' A statistic(Sagart 1993c) bearingon namesof humanand animalbodypartsin SericaRecensa-where the overall ratio OC, as listed in Karlgren'sGrammata of namesof pluralbodyparts (eyes, teeth,fingers,horns,etc.) to namesof unique bodyparts(head, mouth, heart,tail, etc.) is roughly 2 : 1-gives the following result:out of 30 bodypartnamescarrying-r-, 26 arenamesof pluralbodyparts, and of the remainingfour, threeare derivedfrom r-infixedverbs. Morphology had died out in the standardlanguage by the time of Middle Chinese (ca. A.D. 500), but r-infixationsurvivedin varietiesof northernMandarinspoken in Shanxi, Shaanxi,and InnerMongolia: Modern CentralNorthernMandarin:Ih Ju League (Inner Mongolia) -l(regularreflex of OC -r-) 'distributed action/object':
278
pai3 'to shake': pa?lai3 'to oscillate, swing' pan4 'to mix': pa?lan4 'to stir' panl 'to run' :pa? anl 'to runon all sides' kug3 'to roll': kua? lur3 'to do somersaults' xua4 'to draw, paint' : xua?la4 'to scribble' taul 'hood, hanging pocket': ta?laul 'heavy clusters of fruits hanging from tree branches' thug2 'buttocks': thu? lug2 'buttocks' lag3 'lungs' tchiag3 (earlierkh-) 'lungs' : kha? thau4 'set, series': tha?lau4 'tirade,long stringof words' xag4 'alley, small street':xa?lag4 'idem' khu3 'nave of a wheel' : khua? lu3 'wheel(s) of a car' In the notation [a?], the glottal stop is not phonetic, but serves to indiNOTE: cate the shortnessof the precedingneutralvowel. 2.2 PAn *-in- 'patient nominalizing infix': OC -j- 'non-agent nominalizing infix'. PAn possessed an infix *-in- (with prefix variant*ni-) whose function is glossed by Starosta,Pawley, and Reid (1982) as "theN affected by V-ing." The following are examples from variousAn languages: hau 'to fine' : h-n-au 'personwho is fined' (Atayal) karat 'to write' : k-in-arat'book, paper'(Saisiyat) pa-'orip 'cause to be alive' : p-in-a'orip 'domestic animals' (Amis) batak 'to stretch,pull' : b-in-atak'sugarcandy stick' (Tagalog) tapa 'smoking;to dry' : t-i-apa 'smoked food' (Maranao) faisen 'to ask' : if-in-aisen 'the question' (Chamorro) Note the reductionof the infix to -i- in Maranao. In Old Chinese, medial -j- (yod), a very common morphologicalformative, had a numberof functionsincludingthatof deriving nouns from verbs. Some of these werepatientnominalizations, otherswere not, butagentnominalizations by means of -j- are entirelylacking. The following are some minimalpairs. kat (kat) 'to cut, castrate': ? kjat(k-j-at) 'gelded sheep' UL 0 duat (lot) 'to peel off' : ruat(1-j-ot)'insect exuviae' J mig (men) 'inscribe,engrave, inscription': , m-j-ig (m-j-ey) 'written word, name' ft. dug (do) 'to throw' : _ d-j-ug(djo) 'k.o. lance or spear'. : djuanx,tjuanx(dj-on?, pf duanx, tuanx(don?,ton?)'to cut, cut off' ,i t-j-on?)'cut meat, slice' bien(bin) 'to associate,join together' : 41 bjien(b-j-in) 'mate, wife' ,%4 i gwag (way) 'august' : TE gwjag (w-j-ag) 'king' '1J kug (ko) 'curved': f kjug(k-j-o) 'crooked spine' t. lag (rig) 'angular,lozenge-shaped' : ~ Ijag(r-j-ij) 'water-chestnut (Trapabicornis)' B- tan (tan) 'red' : Jfj tjan (t-j-an) 'bannerof red silk'
EVIDENCEFORSINO-AUSTRONESIAN
279
1t gjar(aaj) 'solemn': f{ gjar (y-j-aj) 'decorum,properdemeanor,ceremony, rule' bag (bag) 'side' : , bjag (b-j-ag) 'side-room' Wbig (beg) 'screen':-l; bjig (b-j-ej) '[screenedplace:] latrine' k hmarx(hmoj?)'fire' : X hmjarx(hm-j-oj?)'land clearedby fire'
2.3 PAn *ma- 'stative/intransitive verb prefix': OC N- 'stative/intransitive verb prefix'. It is generally recognized that PAn had a prefix *ma- for stative and intransitiveverbs, reflectedin numerousmodernAn languages. Atayal (Egerod 1980): m-buloq'to be blind' m-busuk'to be drunk' m-takui'to fall' m-?uyay'to be hungry' m-gugu'to be afraid' m-sayux'to be ashamed' Paiwan (Ferrell 1982): ma-kan 'to be(come) eaten' (kan 'eat') ma-tjani 'to fall down' ma-sadaw 'to receive a gash wound' ma-qudjaL'to be rainedupon (qudjaL'rain') ma-qadaw 'to be botheredby the heat of the sun (qadaw 'sun') ma-lum'to be(come) ripened' know about' : ma-keLag'be(come) known about' keLang'understand, 'hear' : langeda ma-langeda'be(come) heard;be audible' 'leave behind' : ma-adjuq'be(come) left behind' adjuq gutsguts 'scratch' : ma-gutsguts'be(come) scratched' Tagalog: ma- 'stativeprefix' ma-kita 'be seen' ma-tapus 'be finished'
ma-init 'be(come) hot' ma-lutoq 'get cooked'
Old Chinese also had a morphologicalprocess derivingstative and intransitive verbs. Following are some pairs. Q, kianh(kens) 'to see' : _, gianh (N-kens) 'to appear' phjakw(phjuk)'turnover' : I bjakw (N-phjuk)'to return' Sil pjat (pjat) 'to separate': SJ bjat(N-pjat) 'to take leave' * kwadh(kots) 'to assemble (trans.)': ' gwadh (N-kots) 'to assemble (intr.)' 3 kap(kop) 'to put together' : gap (N-kop) 'to agree' fi tjat (tjat) 'to break,to bend (trans.)' : ji djat (N-tjat) 'to bend (intr.)'
a
280 .
pradh (prats) 'to defeat': jI:. bradh(N-prats) 'to be defeated' - kwradh (krujs)'to destroy,ruin': t gwradh(N-krujs)'to be ruined' F4 trjaJwh(trjugs) 'hit the centre': f4j drjaiwh (N-trjugs) 'to be in the middle; middle brother,2nd of 3' tuanh(tons) 'to cut, sever' : a duanh(N-tons)'to be brokenoff, cut off fW from; to cease' J) tjuk(tjok) 'to assemble': J djuk(N-tjok)'to be connected with' trjak(trjak) 'to place, put something in a certainplace': X drjak(Ntrjak)'to occupy a fixed position' pj krigx (kre?)'separate,untie' : grigx (N-kre?)'loosened' e1 phjamh(phj[a,o]ms)'to overflow,inundate': i2 bjamh(N-phj[a,o]ms) 'to be thrownabout,floatabout' 'to go down, send down': [ gradwh(N-kruls) 'to lie [ kraiwh (kruQs) down, submitto' . kigh (keks) 'to attach': S gigh (N-keks)'be attachedto' 'to restrain' : { gjiamx t kjiamx(krjam?) (N-krjam?) 'poor,in direstraits' ' griap (N-krep)'narrow,pressedon 5 kriap(krep) 'to press between': both sides' fI krid (krij) 'to accompany': i3 grid (N-krij)'to harmonizewith' As commonlyunderstood, the intransitive or stativeverbswere derivedby turning the voiceless initial of the base form into a voiced initial, or at least into an initial thatemerges as voiced in the Middle Chinese lexical sources. Li Fangkuei reconstructedthese initials as voiced in Old Chinese also. Pulleyblank (1973), followed by Baxter(1992), took the view thatthe MC voiced initialsin these pairs were secondary, being originally OC voiceless initials becoming voiced in MC underthe influenceof an intransitive OC prefix i-. Thereis clear evidence, however, from Chinese loans into Miao-Yao,thatthe prefix responsible for intransitiveand stative voicing was a nasal of undetermined place of which I write as N-. In a of Chinese in loanwords the Mien articulation, study dialect of Yao, Downer (1973:14-16) cited the following Mien forms. tshe?7[from PY *tsh-] 'to pull down, pull apart' dze?7[from PY *nts(h)-] 'to be cracked,as earth' khoil [from PY *kh-] 'to open' (transitive:as in 'open the door') goil [from PY *rjkh-]'to open' (intransitive:as in 'the heart opens: be happy' and 'to blossom') gaat7 [from PY *rkh-] 'thirsty' As Downer saw, these are Chinese loanwords:comparet:f thrak(th-r-ak) 'to split, be rent;fissure', rI khdd(khoj) 'to open', j khat (khat) 'thirsty'. They areregardedby Downer as formingpartof the earlieststratum of Chineseloans into Mien. The last item has a White Miao cognate, cited by Downer as nqhe7 'thirsty'.At least in this case, it would seem thatthe borrowingwas into PMY. In orderto accountfor the alternation in the two Mien pairs,Downer supposed
281
a PY prefix (prenasalization)capable of turningactive verbs into intransitive ones. He noted that his best examples were Chinese loanwords,but could not explain why. of theMiao-Yao Similarfactsareobservedin theMiaobranch family.Consider the following pair,fromWhiteHmong(Martha Ratliff,pers.comm., 1993). tfhial [from PM *tsh-] 'new, fresh, bright' ntfhial [from PM *ntsh-] 'clear, fresh' Here again, we are dealing with Chinese loanwords,but this time, Chinese has a pair correspondingto the Hmong pair:
i tshjig (tshjei) 'clear,pure,bright' (Shi Jing) _ dzjij (N-tshjee) 'to clear duringthe night, of the weather' (Shi Jing); laterwrittenas Hg dzjir (N-tshjey)'clear, of the weather'
The Chinese pair is phonologically of the same type as those presentedin the list of active: stative andtransitive:intransitive pairsabove. Its firstmemberis neitheractive nortransitive(thoughtransitiveuses of i in the sense 'liquidate, butthe secondmemberis stative/intransitive. clearoff (an account)'areattested), The contributionof the N- prefix to that form is to markit overtly as stative/ intransitive. Comparethe pairformedby Tagaloginit 'hot', with implicitstative vs. meaning, the overtly markedma-init 'be hot'. had voiced stop initials,andthey could easily have andProto-Yao Proto-Miao used them to renderthe voiced stop initialsof Chineseloanwords. Why did they use voiceless prenasalizedstops instead?The simplestexplanationis thatwhat Miao and Yao interpreted as prenasalization in those Chinese loans was or better,a nasal prefix. prenasalization, 3. EVIDENCE FROM THE LEXICON. Evidence is presentedin this section thatOC andPAn sharesome lexical items, andthatthe set of sharedwords is not of a kind usually indicativeof borrowing. The following methodological controls have been applied to the lexical have been appliedto the circumstances comparisons.First, strictrequirements as a partial undercomparison, of attestation of the lexical material hedge against late innovations.Specifically, on the Chinese side, only words attestedin Han works(in otherwords,words or lexicographical or pre-Hanepigraphy, literature, that were demonstrablypartof the languagein the period 1400 B.C.-A.D. 200) are consideredfor comparison.This is a highly restrictivemove, thatexcludes all words attestedonly in such widely used lexicographicalsources as Guang sourcein my earlier Ya, GuangYun, Yu Pian,andJi Yun, the lattera prominent are based on the MC readings work (though naturally,all OC reconstructions in these works).Carehas also been takento excluderarewords.On the An side,
282
(words and roots, in the sense of Blust 1988a) assignable only reconstructions to the earliest (PAn) level on the subgroupingassumptionsof Blust (see 1.1) are included. This is also a highly restrictivemove, one that in effect narrows the list of eligible items to those attestedboth inside and outside of Formosa, altogetherno more than a few hundreditems in currentlyavailablelists. I shouldstressthatthe restriction on lower-levelAn reconstructions is adopted here not permanently, but as a temporary measureaimingat demonstrating that items belonging to levels lower than PAn are not crucial to establishing the relationship. Many valid lexical comparisonslinking Malayo-Polynesian,or wordswith Old Chinese wordsmay be found in my preeven Proto-Philippine vious work, notably Sagart(1993). Second, comparisonsinvolving onomatopesand words of expressive origin have not been consideredfor comparison.This excludes 62 of the 231 roots in Blust (1988a), plus some words that do not contain any root, as for instance (B 1) *tuRtuR'dove, coo of the dove', OC W' t-j-uj'kindof dove', Latinturtur 'dove'. Third,close semanticmatchingshave been required.Where semanticshifts are needed, evidence that the shift occurred in other languages (often IndoEuropeanlanguages,based on C. D. Buck's [1949] dictionary) is presented. In continuationof my earlierpractice,unless otherwisespecified, the sound materialon both sides is entirely accountedfor by the sound correspondences presentedin Section 4. As a result of applyingthese controls, only a small numberof comparisons (56 altogether)can be presentedhere.They relatefor the most partto universal semanticnotions:bodypartsandbodily functions(1-7), the physical world (811), animals and plants (12-17), deictics (18-19), qualities (20-26), and actions (27-52). A few comparisonsinvolving culturalnotions of great antiquity (53-56) are also cited. In the citations below, capitalizedvowels are stressed. OC prefixes NOTE: and suffixes are separatedfrom the word stems by means of '+', and infixes by areprecededby the indicationof theirsource and hyphens.An reconstructions level of reconstruction. Abbreviations for sourcesare: 'B' = Blust (1970, 1980, 1983-84, 1985, 1989); 'Br' = Blust (1988a); 'D' = Dempwolff (1938); 'S' = Sagart,this paper;'T' = Tsuchida(1976). Roots are signaledby the symbol 'r' levels are: '1' following the sourceabbreviation, e.g. 'Br', 'Sr'. Reconstruction = PAn; '2' = PMP; '3' = PWMP; '1+' indicates a level 2 or 3 reconstruction raised to level 1 in the presentpaperon the strengthof one or more Formosan cognates. Abbreviations for specific articles and monographs are: 'AEI' = Blust (1980); 'AE2' = Blust (1983-84); 'AE3' = Blust (1985); 'AE4' = Blust (1989); 'ART' = (Blust 1988a); 'JWGL'= Chou Fa-Kao (1974); 'LWFL' = Tsuchida(1971); 'RPTP' = Tsuchida(1976). Chinese charactersare followed by GrammataSerica Recensanumber(GSR, Karlgren1964) between square brackets.
EVIDENCEFOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN
283
3.1 HEAD. (D1+) *quluH1, consistingof(D2) *qulu 'head',Dahl (PAn= level 'head'(Wolff, pers.comm.);evidence 2) *quluH1'head',plus Puyumaqhuru-yu for final -Hl is provided by final -h in Aklanon and Cebuano reflexes (Dahl for this item (Aus1981:46-47). This is identical with Blust's reconstruction tronesian ComparativeDictionary on computer,June 7, 1993): (B1) *quluh 'head'. 'head' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing, Zhou bronze, cf. 1' [1102a] hrjagwx ' (?) (hl-j-u?) is phonetic in GSR 1048: e.g. 1048a: X dagwx (lu?) JWGL 1194). Note: was first com'way, road', though this is not recognized by Karlgren.OC paredto Dempwolff's *qulu by Peyros and Starostin(1984). 3.2 BRAIN. (T1, RPTP:172) *punuq'brain,head;forehead':Sarpunu?u, Tso RukTn RukBd RukMn 'brain', punu, RukMg t-punu-a, punu', ta-punu-a pnuu 'forehead', Pai punuq, Amis punuq,Bunun punuh 'brain', Paz punu? 'head', evidenceforthiswordis in Dyen (1992:188),who Tag pu:no?'leader'.Additional cited morePhilippinecognatesin the meanings'chief,headof a group',and 'beginning,source, origin'. Blust (1992:15) criticizedthis reconstruction, arguing that "none of the Philippineforms cited here can be said to be associatedwith andclaimingthat"thewhole extra-Formosan set almostcertainlyrebody parts" flects *puqun'beginning,source, origin;base of a tree'."Blust's principalreason for supposing thatsuch forms as Tag, Hlg pu:no?'leader,head of a group' are unrelatedto the Formosanset but are instead a metathesizedform of (D2) *puqun 'beginning, source, origin;base of a tree' is that they are also used in the meaning 'trunkof a tree'. He did not consider the possibility that *puqun formof *punuq. two Philippine wordsreflecting Further, mightbe a metathesized *punuqdefinitely show semantic association with 'head' as a bodypart:Ceb pu:no?,Bkl po:no? 'sores on the head'. Under Blust's interpretation,then, three homophonous but unrelated cognate sets must be recognized in the Formosa-Philippines area:(a) punuq 'brain,head (bodypart)'in Formosa;(b) of a tree',etc. in the Philippunuq(from*puqun)'head(of a group),origin,trunk in not Cebuano and and Bikol); (c) *punuq 'sores on the head', in pines (but Bikol and Cebuano.That all three cognate sets relate to the notion of 'head', and thattheirgeographical areasare non-overlapping, appearto be coincidental in Blust's interpretation. I will reconstruct PAn *punuq'brain,cranium(braincase, partof the skullthatenclosesthe brain), topof the head',shiftingin Formosa to Rukai 'forehead', Pazeh 'head'. The meanings 'brain' and 'cranium'were transferred in PMP to new forms: *u(n)t[e]k 'brain',*baTuk'skull, cranium', with narrowing of *punuq to 'top of the head' (whence Bikol, Cebuano 'sores on the head', perhaps through 'scalp'), and semantic extensions to 'leader,head of a group', 'beginning,source,origin', and 'base of a tree'. (D2) *puqun 'base of a tree; beginning, source, origin' is treatedas a metathesized form of PMP *punuq.It eventuallyreplaced*punuqoutsideof the Philippines.
284
Underthis interpretation, the fact that*puqun'base of a tree' is not reflectedin Formosais meaningful;in Blust's, it is coincidental. Wap [1244f] nagwx(nu?)'brain'(Zuo Zhuan:Xi 28; ZhanGuo Ce; Li Ji; Shuo Wen, writtenwith key 21 -t insteadof 130 n[); 'head, skull' (Huai Nan Zi). 3.3 NECK/GULLET. (D1+) *l[i]qeR 'neck': Fav ri (Happart1650; Marsh RukBd la:?,RukMgara:,RukTna?a,RukMnla?a(data from 1977), Kan ad?re, Tsuchida's LWFL), Amis li?el (Fey 1986), Tag li?ig, Mal leher, all 'neck'. [370h] ?in(?in) 'gullet' (ZhanGuo Ce). PE1 3.4 BREASTS/MILK. (T1, RPTP:229)*nunuH 'breasts,milk': Sarnuunu?'to suck milk', a, Tso nun?u'breastsof a woman;to milk, milk'; Paz mu-nunuh of woman'. 'breasts nunu Mlg TL[135a] njugx(n-j-o?)'milk, suckle' (Zuo Zhuan);'nipple' (Zhou Li); the Zuo Zhuan(Xuan:4) cites a non-infixedequivalentin the Chu dialect, read as though from OC nugx (no?)(Jing Dian Shi Wen 15). 3.5 TO VOMIT/SPIT OUT. (D1+) *u(n)taq'to vomit', consistingof the PMP forms under (D2) *[]u(n)taq 'to vomit', plus the Formosanset assembled by Tsuchida (RPTP:169), including: Atayal m-utaq,Tsou tra-vto,Rukai ut-taa, Paiwan m-utaq,Puyumautaqh+an 'vomit' and otherforms. Pi [62d] thagx (tha?) 'to eject from the mouth' (Shi Jing); thagh (tha?+s) of the initial of this word as OC 'vomit' (Guang Yun). On the reconstruction hl- by Baxter (1992), see my commentsunder3.8 'earth'below. 3.6 TO SLEEP. (D1+) *tuDuR 'to sleep', consistingofBunun (Nihira 1983) tudul 'sleep', ma-tudul 'sleepy, drowsy'; Fav atorro (Happart 1650; Marsh 1977); plus (D2) *tuDuR 'to sleep' (Tag tulog, Jav turu,Ho turi, Sa'a me-uru 'to sleep'); and PPh (Zorc) *tu:DuR'sleep'. HE [31d] djuarh (d-j-oj+s) 'to sleep' (Guo Ce); 'to sleep while sitting' (Shuo Wen). 3.7 TO THINK. (B 1, AE2) *nemnem'think':Pai ki-nemnem 'think,cogitate, pay close attention to'; Kan nemnem 'mental faculties'; Ilk pa-nemnem-en 'consider,fix the mind on, thinkon', Ilongot nimnim,Mota nonom'to think'. t [670a] niamh(nim+s) 'think of' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing, Zhou bronze, cf. JWGL 1378). With unexplainedtone correspondence:i [667q] njamx(n-jim?) 'think' (late Zhou inscriptions;Hou Han Shu). 3.8 EARTH. (Br) *-taq'mud;earth,ground',incl. Puy litaH 'dirt',Amispota? 'soil, soft mushy dirt', sota? 'earth, dirt; mud; land'; also (B2, AE4) buRtaq land or dwelling-place,the common road 'mud, earth'. Add Fav ta 'territory, or street,the ground'.
285
? [62a] thagx (tha?) 'soil, earth,land' (Shi Jing). Used in graphsas general Bodman signific for 'earth'.Basedon an isolatedTibeto-Burman comparandum, (1980:102) reconstructedthis word as OC hla:. Baxter (1992:793) followed, reconstructinghla?, and extending the same treatmentto anotherword in the same series: ?L[62d] thagx,h(tha?(+s)) 'eject from the mouth;vomit', Baxter hla?(s). The treatmentof the initial of these two words as OC hl- by Bodman and Baxter is absolutely contraindicated by the internal Chinese evidence: other words in the same phonetic series have MC initials that can only reflect OC dental stops, showing the series cannot be a lateral one: ft [M29270] 'belly', MC tuoB,unambiguouslyreflectingOC t-; and ti: [62j] MC zjaB, unambiguouslyreflectingOC d-.
3.9 TO FLOW/WATER(S). (Brl+) *-luR 'to flow', consistingof (Br3) -luR, 'to flow' (incl. (D3) aluR 'pond,stream',Bkl sulog 'flow of water'), plus Amis ?alol 'to be carriedaway by water;to drift,of a boat;to move from one place to another, usually with reference to the water' (Fey 1986; part of the gloss is found under the entry for sonol). Blust (1988b:52) observed that no word for at the PAn level. He suggestedthata word for 'water', 'river' is reconstructible or 'flowing water' may have been used instead. 7J, [576a] hwrjidx(hl-j-uj?)'river'(Shi Jing, Shu Jing); 'body of water' (Shu Jing); 'water' (as substance)(Yi Jing: ]itkLT7J,). The graphis a drawing of runningwater.This word is placed in the OC Zhi ,[] category by Tung (1967) and Chou (1970) with ambiguous supportfrom Ode 92. Based on Odes 104 and 183, Tang (1982) andBaxter(1992) place it in the Wei tf category.I follow Tang and Baxter. Both meaningsof 'water' (as substance)and 'river;body of water' are derivablefrom an originalmeaning 'to flow': cf. IE *wedor 'water', from a root *-wed 'wet; to flow'. Most of the words for 'river' in IE languages are derived from roots meaning 'flow, run' (Buck 1949:34,41). 3.10 SALT. (D1+) *siraQ1 'salt', consisting of (D3) *sira[q] 'condiment, salt' (Tag sila? 'culinarypreparation', ToBa, Ho sira 'salt'); plus Amis tsirah and Asai Note also Bunun ?as(la?(Ferrell 1969:98), Thao 1935). (Ogawa as cited qt':La?(Li Fang-kuei, by Ferrell 1969:98). TsoDt siru 'salt' (LWFL) may also belong here, but if so final -u is unexplained(-o expected). In contrast to PAn *qasiN, *siraQ1seems to refer to salt as substanceratherthan taste. A [71a] lagx (ra?) 'salt' (Zhou bronze, cf. JWGL 1488); 'salty' (Yi Jing); 'saltlands' (Zuo Zhuan, Rang 25); 'salt' (natural, as opposed to processed) ). Used in graphsas generalsignific A,ElE (Shuo Wen: r _, ;ff, iA, for 'salt'. 3.11 CLOUD/CLOUDY. (Srl) *-qem 'cloud, cloudy': Amis to?am'clouds' (Fey 1986); RukBd ame:md 'cloud' (LWFL);Bunun lohom(Ogawa and Asai 1935), luhum (Nihira 1983) 'cloud'. This root also includes a PWMP word,
286
VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANIC LINGUISTICS,
reconstructed here on the basis of a cognate set first assembled by K. Wulff (1942, no. 53): (3) *q-al-emqem'overcast' (Sundanesehalomhom'overcast', 'for the sky to be overcast'). NOTE: Ceb ?alum?um Saisiyat imim (Ogawa and but absence of initial Li is 'cloud' Asai 1935), amam related, (P. 1978) possibly ?- is irregular. Note also PPh *DaGqum'cloudy' (ZorcandCharles1971), with discrepantvowel. P [65 ly] jam (?-(r)j-um)'cloudy; dark, shade; northernslope of a height (not receiving sunlight)'(Shi Jing); 'the Yin or darkcosmogonic principle'(Yi (?-(r)jJing); [651a'] ?jam(?-(r)j-um) 'cloudy' (Da Dai Li Ji); [651x] ?jam um) 'cloudy' (Shuo Wen: the signific is 7 'cloud'). 3.12 SNAKE. (D1+) *SulaR'snake',consistingof(D3) *ulaR'snake'(Javula, Mal ular, Ho ulatra 'snake'); plus RukBd soldo, RukMg surd:, RukTnsod?a, RukMn?ola?a'snake' (formsfromTsuchida'sLWFL).Note: Tsuchida(RPTP: PHn *bul[aa]y'snake'on the basis of Kan vundy,Sar vuli?i, 143) reconstructed Tso fkoi and Itb volay 'snake'. Since outside of Formosa this etymon is only Philippinelanguage,it cannotbe assigned representedin Itbayaten,a northern to Level 1 because of the risk of borrowingfrom or into Formosan. tE [41]djar(l-j-aj) 'snake'(Shi Jing);'t [4a] thar(hlaj) 'snake'(ShuoWen). 3.13 WORM. (D1+) *[]ulej 'worm', consisting of (D2) *ulej 'worm, larva' and Puy qhured'worm, insect' (JohnWolff, pers. comm., 1992). [371c] rinx (I-j-in?), M [450j] rinx (l-j-in?) 'earth-worm'(Xun Zi); dbl. I1J same meaning (Meng Zi). Pai qacilu,Tag ?itlog, 3.14 EGG. (T1, RPTP: 172) *qiCeluR'egg': Kan?icuuru, Sa sa-olu 'egg'; see also (D2) *teluR 'egg'. [P[ [179a] luanx(1+lon?) 'egg' (Zuo Zhuan);ff [ lc] thuarx(hloj?) 'oval' (Chu Ci). 3.15 BEAK/PECK. (B , AE1) *tuktuk'beak of a bird;to peck': Pai tjuktjuk 'to peck;to strike(as a snake)';Kpp 'bill, beak (of a 'beak(of bird)',tj-m-uktjuk a bird;(...); to peck', etc. Note also Proto-Atayalic 'beak of WBM tuktuk bird)'; 'topeck' (Javpatuk Li 'to 'beak'). *g-um-atuk peck' (P. 1981),and(D3) *pa(n)tuk P1 [1218b] tuk(tok)or truk(t-r-ok) 'to peck up' (Shi Jing); l1g [1224n] truk (t-rj-ok+s)'beak'(onlyHantimetextexample). (t-r-ok)'topeck' (GuoCe);trjugh 3.16 EDIBLE FERN. (B1, AE1) *lukuC 'parasitic plant sp.': Puy rukuT nidus', Pai lukuts'parasiticlong-leafed plant with edible fruit 'Asplenium nidus', Chm lu-luhot'a vine: Maytenus thompsonii', grows on trees:Asplenium BatuBelah lukot'moss', Ibanlukut'moss, lichen, some algae', Narumge-lukut, Mal lukut'long moss, in contrastto mere lichen' (in Brunei, Sarawak:'large
287
fern, Platycerium spp., found on trees'), Snd lukut'duckweed,moss', BM lukut or 'parasite creeperthat grows on duriantrees, etc., and which is used medicinally', Uma luku?'epiphyte',Li'o luku'tree with edible fruit'. Add Amis lokot 'edible fern growing on trees' (Fey 1986). Ji [301d] kwjat(k-j-ot) 'an edible fern, Pteridium aquilinum'(Shi Jing). 3.17 HUSK, CHAFF. Dyen (PHn= level 1?, 1992:189)*epa('husk,chaff' ?): Atayal (Sq) pa-qi?, Pangasinanqepa, Toba Batakhopa-h-opa'rice husk', Buli (Halmahera) afa 'chaff. Also (D3) qempa'husks,chaff' (consistingof Mal empa, NgD hampa,both 'husks,chaff'). JP [102*] phjag (ph-j-a) 'husks,chaff of wheat' (Shuo Wen). 3.18 THIS. (T1, RPTP:135) *iniH2 'this', incl. Sar ka-ni?i 'this', na-ani 'here', Tso eni 'this', RukBd ku-ini, RukMg k-inii, RukTnak-ini 'that (near hearer)',Puy ini?,Ami ini, Sai h-ini, Paz ini?,Ata qa-ni, Sed ?ini?'this', Ulawa ini 'that'.For moreextra-Formosan cognatessee (D2) *ini 'this (demonstrative pronoun)'. ?I [359a] njidx(nj-ij?) deictic adjective 'this' (Shi Jing:Da Ya, Sang Rou); deictic pronoun'this' (Gong Yang Zhuan);'thus'(MengZi); 'you' (Zuo Zhuan, Lun Yu, Meng Zi). On these and otherreferences,see Yang Shuda's Ci Quan. Note also Cantoneseni (high level tone) 'this'. 3.19 OPPOSITE/THAT (FAR). (T1, RPTP:160) *S6i(m)pa[rR]'opposite shore': Kan m-u-a-sipard,Sar m-u-u-sipara'walk across the river', i-isipara 'the otherside of the river'; add Bununsipal 'opposite' (Nihira 1983); plus the items under (D3) i(m)pa[r] 'other side' and Zorc and Charles (PPh, 1971) *iNpa(rR). I [25g] pjarx (p-j-aj?)'fardemonstrative'(as opp. to 9iL,close demonstrative): 'he, him, that, these, they, etc.' (Shi Jing, Yi Jing). 3.20 HIGH. (Brl) -kaw 'high, tall', including(B2, AE1) lagkaw 'high, tall', raisedto level 1 in ART(p. 105)on the strength of unspecified Formosan material. r [1129a] kagw (kaw) 'high' (Shi Jing);'f [1 138i] k-j-agw(k-j-aw) 'high, lift the head' (ZhuangZi). 3.21 BROAD. (Srl) *-bar 'broad',consistingof candidateroot *-bari'broad' (ART:73), based on 3 WMP items (probablyincluding (D3) *baribai 'broad, wide' and (B3) *lak(e)baj 'broad,wide'), supplementedwith Atayal (Egerod 1980) laba) 'broad',Sediq llabag 'wide' (Li 1981). 5 [740f'] bag (bag) 'broad,wide' (Shu Jing); 'wide' (Xun Zi); 'extensive, vast' (Shuo Wen); also 'side' (Shu Jing, Zuo Zhuan),and in derivatives:R bj-ag 'side-room', {f baV+s'at side of'. The primarymeaningis 'broad,wide',
288
with semanticextension to 'side' through'width', as in Latinlatus 'side', orig. 'spreadout, wide', and English 'side', from OE sid 'wide, broad,long'. 3.22 SALTY. (Ti, RPTP:128) *q2asiN 'salt': Kan ma-?aini, Sar m-?aiLi 'salt', Tso m-aski,Puy hasil 'salty', Mig h-asina 'salt, savor', To m-ahi 'sour, astringent'.OtherMP items under(D2) *asin 'salt', in particular Fij m-asi-mSam masi 'fermented The semantics in breadfruit'. asi-a, Fu, Tso, Puy, Mlg, Fij, Fu, Sam point to the taste, ratherthanto the substance,of salt. : sjin (s-j-in) 'hot-tasting,pungent,bitter' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing); describes the taste of onions, garlic,etc. Semanticparallels: Lithuanian suurus'salt', from an IE word meaning 'sour' (Buck 1949:15.38); Atayal tqmtux, qpmtux'bitter, salty' (Egerod 1980). 3.23 OVERCAST. (Brl) *-Dem 'dark,overcast': incl. (B , AE3) *quDem 'dim, obscure, dark' (Pai quzem'dim, dull-colored', Puy Huz-Huzem 'black', Bal urem 'unclear, misty, half-dark, twilight'); as well as other PMP and PWMP reconstructionsand isolated words. To these add the cognate set assembled by Tsuchida (TI, RPTP:228) under *D2amD2om'dark', incl. Sar Bun masaasam-a'dark', Tso cmacma'rainclouds',RukTnma-D-a-maDemn, dumdum'dark', Tonga lo:lo: 'absolutely dark'. Or (Brl) *-lem 'dark', incl. (B I, ART) *qiS(e)lem 'darkcolor', (D3) *kelem 'dark', raised to level 1 in ART on the strengthof unspecifiedFormosanevidence, and various otherreconstructionsand isolated words, notablyfrom Paiwanand Puyuma. H [656*] drjam([d,l]-rj-[i,u]m) 'long spell of overcast weather' (Shuo Wen); H ddm([d,l][i,u]m) 'clouds covering the sky' (Shuo Wen Xin Fu; Yu Pian). 'to huddle, 3.24 BENT I. (Brl) *-kuk 'bent, crooked'. IncludesAmis ?otkok as when cold'; (B2, AE3) *durjkuk 'hunchedover' andnumerousotherPWMP and PMP reconstructions as well as isolated words. EFl[1213a] khjuk(kh-(r)j-ok)'bend, bent' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing), 'crooked, object' -r-: A [1225a] k-r-uk(k-r-ok) unjust' (Zuo Zhuan);with 'distributed 'horn,the horns' (Shi Jing); with voiced initial (stative N- prefix):, [1214a] g-j-uk(N+k-(r)j-ok)'compressed,bent, curved, of the body' (Shi Jing); 'curl, twist, of hair' (Shi Jing). 3.25 BENT II. (Brl) *-kul 'curl,bend', incl. Amisfitokol'driedandbent over, though still alive (trees)', (B2, AE2) *sirjkul'bent, of the arm', (D3) *Derikul and isolated bend a limb', plus variousWMP reconstructions 'curvedbodypart, words.Add Favorlang(Happart1650) bokkol'deformityof going bent', Pazeh 'crooked,bent'. (Ferrell 1968) ti-bukuL ; [226a] gwjian (N+k-rj-on?)'bend,curved' (Shi Jing); '(rolledhand:)fist' (Li Ji; also written as ~ [226g] id.); t' [226d] kwhjian(kh-rj-on) 'crooked
289
wood' (Guo Ce); 'bowl made of curvingwood' (Meng Zi); I [226e] khwjian (kh-rj-on) or gwjian (N+kh-rj-on) 'curly hair of foreigners' (Guang Yun); ' [226*] gwjian (N+k-rj-on) 'sickness of crooked hands' (GuangYun). 3.26 BENT III. (Brl) *-kut 'hunched,bent over':Amis 'okot'huddle,as when cold'; (B2, AE2) *sikut 'bent, of the arm';and so forth. J1 [496k] khwjat(kh-j-ut)'bend' (Zuo); 'subdue' (Shi). 3.27 TO ASCEND. (T1, RPTP: 155) *a(n)Dak 'ascend': Sar m-a-asaka,Tso oc?o'to ascendthe hill', Kppalak 'to raisethe price',Mlg andra 'look upwards', Fij z-andra 'rise (of the sun or moon)'. _ [916ac] trjak (t-rj-ik)'ascend'(Shi Jing,Shu Jing,Zhou bronze,cf. JWGL With 1816). irregularvoicing correspondence. 3.28 TO STRIKE. (B1, AE4) *basbas 'hit, strike', incl. Amisfacfac 'to hit, strike, as a child or a waterbuffalo', and Bkl basbas 'to whip (beat, hit)'. f{ [307a] bjat(b-j-at) 'to strike;hew, cut; attack'(Shi Jing). 3.29 TO PULL OUT, UPROOT. (Brl) *-buC 'weed, pluck, pull out', including threePAn items: (D2) *butbut'pull out', (D2) *Rabut'pull out', both raised to PAn level and listed as *buCbuC 'pluck, pull out', *Ra(m)buC 'to of unspecifiedFormosan weed, pull out' by Blust (1988a:86-87) on the strength evidence; and (B1) *u(m)buC 'pluck, pull out'. The supportingevidence for thatword is also unspecified.The root includesseveralPMPandPWMPreconstructionsas well as isolated items. t [276h] briadh(b-r-ot+s,compareBaxter 1992:396) 'pull up, uproot'(Shi out (as a forest,some treeshaving Jing, Shu Jing,Yi Jing);badh(bot+s) 'thinned been pulled up)' (Shi Jing). 3.30 TO GRASP/TO CATCH. (Brl) *-gem 'graspin the fist':incl. (B2, AE1) *gem 'holdin the fist', and(D2) *gemgem 'makea fist', raisedto level 1 in ART on unspecifiedevidence. Add Rukaiwagam'gam'to squeeze' (Ferrell 1969). M [65 In] gjam (g-j-[i,u]m) 'catch' (Guo Yu); same word, written as , [652*] id. 'catch in the hand' (Yi Qie Jing Yin Yi); T [6511m]id. 'catch,capture;bird' (Zhou bronze, cf. JWGL 1838; Zuo Zhuan);'animal' (Yi Jing). For the semanticdevelopmentfrom 'catch' to 'game' to 'animal,bird', see Wang Li (1982:605). 3.31 TO ENCLOSE/TO CONTAIN. (Brl+) *-kem 'enclose, cover, grasp', consisting of (Br3) *-kem 'enclose, cover; grasp' (add (D3) *kemkem 'hold closed, contain'), supplementedwith Pazeh mu-hakem 'carryin arms' (Ferrell 1968). A [651h] khjam(kh-(r)j-im) 'coverlet' (Shi Jing); : [615a] kam 'cover' (Mu Tian Zi Zhuan); A kham 'to contain' (t Yang and S- Yue dialects
290
according to Fangyan);'niche for the effigy of a god' (only Tang-eratext exjMj [643a] gam 'to enample);also, with unexplainedvoicing correspondence: ' 'cuirass' contain' (Shi [6511'] Zi); Jing); gam (gim) 'to convelop, (Meng tain' (Shu Jing, Yi Jing);ri [651h] gjamh(g-(r)j-im+s) 'single shroud'(Yi Li). 3.32 TO EMBRACE, GRASP, CLASP. (Brl) *-kep 'seize, grasp, embrace', incl. (B 1) *dekep 'embrace'(the supportingmaterialfor this word has not been published), (D3) *kepkep 'grasp,hold', Fij moko'embrace,clasp in the arms', and so forth. 3I [6301]giap (gep, with unexplainedinitial voicing) and tsiap (tsep, probably fr. s+kep) 'grasp,hold' (Shi Jing); 'clasp underarm' (Meng Zi); read as tsiap (tsep, from s+kep) 'encompass,embrace' (Shi Jing); k [630a] kriap (kr-ep) 'be on both sides of' (Shi Jing); 'pressbetween' (Zuo Zhuan). 3.33 TO ENCIRCLE, WRAP AROUND. (Brl) *-kes 'encircle,wrapfirmly around',incl. (B3) *bakes 'belt', restatedas (B1, ART) *ba(R)kes 'k. o. belt' andisolated on unspecified evidence;andotherPMPandPWMPreconstructions items, such as Kny balikes 'k. o. woven belt'; Hlg wagkus 'belt, sash, waistband', and so forth. I [279d] kiat(ket),giat (? N-ket)'to wrapa cord aroundan object andmeasure it' (Chu Ci); ]J [279k] khiat(khet),giat (? N-khet)'girdle' (ZhuangZi). 3.34 TO SCRAPE I. (B 1, AE4) *kiSkiS 'scrapeoff', incl. Kavalankiskis 'to shave', Amis kiskis 'scrapeoff a surface, strip', Yamdena(CMP) kiki 'scour, scrub off'. Or: (Ti, RPTP:130) *ki0kiO 'shave, scrape', incl. Kan k-um'to shave fur', Bun kiskis-un'to shave Tso m-ru-?si?si akisikisi,Sark-um-isikisi, beard', Ata ka-kiskis 'a file' Mlg kikis-ana 'to be grawed [sic; gnawed ?], scraped'.Add Amis (Fey 1986) kickic 'to cut flesh off the bones'. - [313*] khriat(kh-r-[i,e]t) 'scratch,scrape' (Shuo Wen, Guang Yun, Yu Yu Pian and GuangYun give a second readingkriat(k-r-[i,e]t). Pian). NOTE: 3.35 TO SCRAPE H. (B 1, AE4) *kuSkus(sic; apparently a typo for *kuSkuS) 'scrape': Ami koskos 'scratchone's body', Pai kuskus'a scraper', Ceb kukhu 'scrape,scatch off somethingthat sticks to a surfacewith a thrustingmotion'. An infixedform(B 1, AE4) *k-ar-uSkuS theChineseform,is 'scrape',paralleling at the PAn level. independentlyreconstructible fil [302n] kwrat(k-r-ot) 'scrape'(Zhou Li). 3.36 TO CLOSE, SHUT. (B 1+) *kupit'close, shut', consistingof (B3, AE2) *kupit 'close, shut', plus Amis *kopit 'close the eyes' (Fey 1986). Br [412ab]pit (pit) 'shut,close' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing, Zuo Zhuan);rj, [405n] pjidh (p-j-it+s) 'shut,close' (Shi Jing).
291
3.37 TO SLIP OFF, LOOSE. (Brl+) *-lus 'to slip off' consisting of (Br3) *-lus 'slip off' (includes such meanings as 'loose', 'fit loosely', 'slip off, free from grip', 'slipping freely off and on', etc.), and Bunun (Nihira 1983) luslus 'slip, slide', Ami (Fey 1986) ploc 'to pull off, disengage, as to take off a ring', pololoc 'slide down out of position, as for a baby to slide down too low on its mother's back'. #Q [324m] duat (lot), thuat(hlot) 'peel off' (Lie Zi); 'take off (as clothes)' (Guo Yu); ('slip off', thus) 'escape, disappear' (Lao Zi); e# [324e] thuadh (hlot+s), sthjuadh (hl-j-ot+s), ruat (l-j-ot) 'exuviae of insects or reptiles' (Zhuang Zi); 1# [324q] sthjuadh(hl-j-ot+s) 'let loose' (Shi Jing); , [324d] thuadh(hlot+s), duadh(lot+s) 'withdraw,flee' (Shi Jing);and a series of items with semanticssuch as 'careless,easy, leisurely,pleased,glad', all derivingfrom 'loose, comfortable'.See 324a,m,o. 3.38 TO GNAW. (B 1, AE4) *JitIit 'gnaw',incl. Amis gitgit 'gnawon bonesor wood', ToBa gitgit 'moth'.Note also root (Brl) *-reC 'angry,gnashthe teeth'. X [279e] giat (get) 'gnaw, crunchin the teeth' (GuanZi, Li Ji). 3.39 TO SHOOT. (T1, RPTP:168)*panaq2'shoot': Kan mu-pand?-a, Sar ua-pana, Tso pono (pna-a), RukBd[L]pdna, RukMg u-pnda,RukTnua-pand, RukMn u-pana 'to shoot with a bow', Pai panaq, Ami panaq 'arrow', Puy p'to an-anah,Bunpanah-un,Sai p-um-ana?'to shoot with a bow', Paz mu-pana? throw at, to hit', Tofana, shoot with bow'; Malayo-Polynesiancognates were assembled by Dempwolff underthe reconstruction(D2) panaq 'shoot, shooting weapon': Tag pana?, Jav panah 'arrow', Mal, NgD panah 'shooting weapon', Fij vana, Sa'a hana 'to shoot', Fufana 'bow', Samfana 'to shoot'. s [94z] nagx (na?) 'crossbow' (Zhou Li, Mo Zi, ZhuangZi); X [94d'] id. 'flint arrow-head' (Shu Jing). A hapax legomenon character: -, whose meaningis certainlyrelatedto the shootingof arrowsand whose pronunciation clearly involves the stem na(?),appearson a WesternZhou bronze.It has been by Xu Zhongshu(Xu 1934:427) as an early form of S 'crossbow' interpreted above. The similarityin sound with words for 'crossbow' in some Southeast Asian languages (NorthernTai naaBI, Vietnamesena [Sac tone], etc.) has led some scholars(Benedict 1975:109;NormanandMei 1976:293) to supposethat the name of the crossbow, and the crossbow itself, were borrowedby the Chinese from their southernneighbors.This is unnecessaryand unsupported. Use of crossbows by southernpeoples is not recordedin Chinese historicalworks until the Han dynasty, while Chinese crossbows are known to have existed at least since the WarringStates period. A passage in Shu Jing : r ~/Star , ?t !L), where the wordt is understoodby most _E'- ,I, WlIJ d (- o commentatorsas designating a partof the crossbow mechanism, implies that the crossbow existed in the early archaic period, supporting Xu Zongshu's identificationof an early form of the characterU. From the point of view of
292
the history of techniques,Needham (Scienceand Civilizationin China, vol. 4, pt. 2, sect. 27, p. 224) regardsthe crossbow as "a characteristicallyChinese invention."Indigenousdevelopmentof Chinese crossbows from simple bows (definitelypartof the toolkitof the NeolithicChinese,judging from widespread finds of arrowheadsin sites all across China; cf. Chang 1986), or from bow snares(such as those used by the Amis; see Fey 1986:217) is the most plausible explanation.An indigenous origin for the Chinese crossbow is supportedby the continued use, throughthe entire archaicperiod, of a word-stemna? (all with phonetic4V, a subset of GSR 94) for wordsrelatingto the shooting of arrows. The semanticscatterin this set of words(flintarrowhead; crossbow) suggests 'shoot' as originalmeaning. 3.40 TO CHEW. (B 1, AE4) *paqpaq'chew': Amis pa?pa?'chew', Marpapa? 'bite, chew'; note also (D3) *se(m)paq 'to chew, chew up'. [I [102i'] bagh (N+pa?+s : Mandarin[pu3] reflectsthe bare stem: OC pa?) 'to chew, have food in the mouth' (ZhuangZi, Shuo Wen). An infixed variant [M3361] 'to chew' reflecting OC pjagx (p-j-a?) is listed in MC dictionaries: GuangYun, Ji Yun (Ji Yun also ph-j-a?). 3.41 TO BRAID. (Brl) *-pid 'braid,wind together', incl. Puy Hupiz 'to plait rattanor bamboo', Amis ?opir'braidof hair or rope', (B3, AE3) *apid 'braid' plus several isolated WMP words. ,tV [221*] pianx (p[e,i]n?) 'braidsof hemp or wheat stalks' (Shuo Wen); ,i [246e] pianx (p[e,i]n?) 'plait (the hair)' (Shi Ji, readingafter Ci Yuan); also, with intransitivelyvoiced initial: ;- [219*] bianx(b[e,i]n?) 'plait the hair into braids' (Liang Shu). 3.42 TO GATHER, BE TOGETHER, ALL. (D1+) *pulur 'gather,together', consisting of (D3) pulur 'gather'(Tagpulog,ToBapulug 'gathered',Javpulug 'to harvest', NgD pulug 'assembled'), plus Amis polog 'all, all together' (Fey 1986; the examples include verbaluses as 'to gather,get together'). M[J [I 176a] dug (log) 'to be the same, join, unite' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing, Zhou bronze,cf. JWGL1035); also [1176i] ] dug(log) 'all' (Shu Jing); J [1176d] dug (log) ('alloy', thus) 'bronze' (Zuo Zhuan). 3.43 TO RISE. (B1, AE4) *sakat 'rise, climb up': Amis cakat 'arise, go up', Bkl sakdt 'go upstairs';climb, scale, mount, ascend', Mar sakat 'step up, rise up'; Ngadha (CMP) saka 'ascend, mount (as a horse)'; 'rise (as water in a stream)'; Buru (CMP) saka-h 'ascend to'; saka-t 'up'. Note also (D2) *arjkat 'to lift, lift up'. f- [313n] kjat(k-j-at) 'to rise, raise, lift' (Shi Jing). Also read as gjiat (g-rjat), kjiat(k-rj-at),kh-j-iat(kh-rj-at).
EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN
293
3.44 TO CHOP. (B 1, AE4) *saksak'hack,chop into pieces', incl. Amis cakcak 'cut into pieces with a machete, as sweet potatoes', Ceb saksak 'chop something into pieces (...)', Mig sasaka 'the half', roa sasaka 'divided into halves, cut into two equal parts'. aF [798o] tsrjak(ts-rj-ak) 'to cut off' (Gong Yang Zhuan), 'cut in twain' (Mathews).Note: the signific is fi 'axe', not 73 'knife', implying cuttingdone with an axe. 3.45 TO STICK INTO/TO PIERCE. (Brl) *-sek 'insert,stick into a soft surface': (B 1, ART) *pasek 'wooden pin, wedge; drive in a stake' (based on (D3) with unspecifiedFormosan cognates,which may *pasek 'Pflock',supplemented and includeAmis pacek 'nail'); (B1, ART) *Cesek 'insert,force into a soft surbased on unspecifiedevidence. face', a reconstruction *J [868d] tshjik(tsh-j-ek),tshjigh(tsh-j-ek+s) 'pierce,prod, stab' (Shi Jing; Zhou bronze, cf. JWGL927; Meng Zi); :tq [868a] tshjigh (tsh-j-ek+s) 'thorn' (Shang inscription;Shuo Wen, no text example);i [868e] tshjigh(tsh-j-ek+s) 'to prick' (He Guan). 3.46 TO CRAM/TO STOP UP. (Brl) *-sek 'cram,crowd'. This root includes one PAn item, (D2) *seksek 'to stuff (Tag siksik'sausage',Ho sesika 'stuffed', Fij soso 'to stuff'), for which a Formosancognate may be cited: Amis cekcek 'to press, crowd together' (Fey 1986). Otherreconstructions having root *-sek are(B2, AE3) *be(n)sek'overcrowded', *dasek (B3, ART) 'presstogether,comforth. words this come and so Isolated under root mostly from WMP press', oso 'narrow,crowded;strait'). languages (but Fij X [908a] sak(sik) 'stop up, block' (Shi Jing); 'fill' (Meng Zi); ModernChinese 'to stop up, to block. To cork. A cork or stopper'(Mathews). 3.47 TO INSERT. (B 1, AE4) *selsel 'insert,cramin': Amis celcel 'slipthrougha crowded place'; Jav sesel 'thatwhich is pushed/inserted into something;push in'; Bal sesel 'be crowded into any place (clothes etc.)'. [378a] tsjinh (ts-j-in+s) 'insert' (Zhou Li); }t [378f] tsjinh (ts-j-in+s) 'insert' (Li Ji); and X [379a] tsjinh(ts-j-in+s) 'introduce'(Shu Jing). 3.48 TO SUCK. (Brl) *-sep 'sip, suck', incl. (B1, AE2) *qesep, *q-um-esep 'suck' (Pai qetep 'swallow liquid when masticatingsomethingsolid, as sugarcane', q-m-etep'to "eat"the liquidportionof something,as sugarcane',Tir esef 'suck, sip', etc.); and (D2) *sepsep 'to suck' (Tag sipsip,ToBa sopsop,Javsesep, Sa'a toto 'to suck'), the latter in fact a PAn item. Compare the cognate set assembled by Tsuchida(T1, RPTP:129):*0apoap'to suck': RukBd OapIOapa, RukTn ua-Oap4Oapa, Pai t-m-aptdp, RukMn sapasapa, Amis RukMg u-Op~Opa, Bun supsup-un, Sa toto'to suck'. A doubletformwith roundedvowel mi-cepcep, is also reconstructible from Amis and Philippinereflexes: (B 1, AE4) *supsup
294
'sip, suck' (Amis copcop 'to suck, as a mosquito sucking blood', Bkl supsup 'sip, suck', Mar sosop 'suck'). [6600] tsap(ts[,u]p) 'to sting and suck, as mosquitoes' (Lie Zi); 1IE [679*] tsap (ts[i,u]p) 'to suck, lick' (Han time text example); 'to suck' (modern Mandarin:Mathews). NOTE: This comparisonmay involve an onomatopoeticelement, although Blust (ART) does not treatroot *-sep as onomatopoetic. 3.49 TO WASH. (B1, AE4) *SawSaw 'wash, rinse': Amis sa(w)saw 'generic word for wash', Tag hawhaw 'rinsing(said of clothes)'. A [1134g] tsagwx (tsaw?) 'to wash' (Li Ji); & [1134i] tsagwx (tsaw?) 'to bleach' (sc. silk)' (Li Ji). 3.50 TO TIE. (B1, AE4) *SikeC 'tie, attachto', incl. Amis siket 'be attached This is identicalwith (D2) *iket 'to tie, to, joined to', Mar iket 'to tie'. NOTE: make a knot'. i` [393p] kit (kit) 'to tie, knot' (Shi Jing, Yi Jing, Zuo Zhuan). 3.51 TO TREMBLE/TO SHAKE. (Brl) *-ter 'shiver, tremble'; also (D3) The meaning 'shiver' (from cold) is *ke(n)Te[r] 'tremble, vibrate'. NOTE: It in in this root. occurs only one item: (B1, AE1) *terter'shiver, peripheral in there a Maranao and tremble', reflex, Sai man-tete only beingjust 'tremble'. reflex be also without 'shiver' semantics:Amis AnotherFormosan may added, terter'to be shakenor jolted' (Fey 1986). JR [455p] tjian,h (t-j-in(+s)) (t-j-in(+s)) 'to shake'(Shi Jing);H [455s] tjian,h 'to shake' (Shi Jing, Shu Jing). Both verbs are used transitivelyand intransitively. 3.52 TO HAMMER, POUND. (B 1, AE3) *tuqtuq'to hammer,pound,crush', 'to hammer',Ilk toto 'to incl. Pai tjuqtjuq'blacksmith'shammer',tj-m-uqtjuq crush,pound, hammer,beat (barkof trees), Mlg toto 'the act of poundingwith a pestle', Leti (CMP) tutu 'knock, pound, stamp';or (T1, RPTP:133) *tutuHl 'to beat', incl. Kanm-aka-tutu 'to hit with the fist', Tso m-uutu (tutv-a)'to strike or hit (in general)', Paz kalu-batu m-tutuh'to strikewith a stone', and so forth. See (D3) *tutu 'Stampfen'(ToBa, Jav, Ho tutu'Stampfen')for WMP cognates of *tutuHland/or*tuqtuq. M [1090r] tagwx(tu?) 'to hammer,beat, pound' (Shi Jing: Xiao Ya 197.2: readingafterJing Dian Shi Wen; also Li Ji, Shuo Wen). This comparisonmay involve an onomatopoeticelement. NOTE: 3.53 RICE GRUEL/COOKED RICE. (Brl) *-buR 'rice gruel;to mix'. This root includes (D2) *buDbuD 'pulverize,gruel' (Mal, ToBa bubur'rice gruel'),
295
modified to (D1) *buRbuR'porridge'in ART (see also AE2:49) on unspecified evidence; also PPh (Zorc) *buRbuR'cook wet rice'. Root *-buR also includes such items as Han ldbug 'rice gruel', Kel menebhur 'rice gruel', Tbl libol 'rice soup'. Add Bunun (Nihira 1983) hibul 'to mix'. The Yu &i [262i] bjanx,h(b-j-[a,o]n?)'cooked rice or millet' (Li Ji). NOTE: Pian says this word was writtenwith phonetic #- (indicatingroundedvowel, b-j-on?ratherthanb-j-an?)in the Zhou Shu, a section of the Shu Jing. 3.54 RICE AS FOOD. (D3) *imay 'rice' (Mal imai 'cooked rice', ToBa eme 'unhuskedrice'). Wolff (pers.comm., 1992) cited Amis hemay,Kuv qmay,Puy sumay 'cooked rice', Ibg ammay,Ceb humdy,SimalungunBatak ome, ToBa PAn (= level 1) *semay (in standard eme 'Oryzasativa', reconstructing orthog'rice as food' irregularities. despite phonological *Semay) raphy: X: [598a] midx(mij?)'peeled grain,rice' (Shang inscriptions,Shu Jing, Zuo Zhuan, Shuo Wen, etc.). 3.55 HOUSE. (Ti, RPTP:232) *Rumaql 'house': Sar ruma?-a'lair or den of beasts', Tso rmoo 'house', Pai umaq 'house', Puy rumaH,Amis lumaq, Bun Sa'a lume'house'.For otherextra-Formosan lumah,Paz xuma?, cognates(ToBa, see Mal, NgD, Ho) (D2) *Rumaq'house'. J,,/ [103i] mjagx(m-j-a?)'largehouse' (GuanZi, Shi Ming); 'side buildings or covered hallways arounda yard' (Chu Ci, Shuo Wen). 'torch':Paiwanzama-n'torch', 3.56 TORCH/FIRE. (T1, RPTP: 154) *D2amaR Amis lamal 'fire', Tonga ama 'to fish by torch-light', Samoan lama 'torch', and otherMP items under(D2) *damaR'resin, torch,light', which see. Other Formosan forms show irregularcorrespondences,suggesting borrowing: in firstvowel, damalexpected); LWFLarefoundBunlsbdimal'lightning'(irregular RukBd Ddmara,RukMg Dmdro,RukTn DamdaRukMn damar9'moon' (-rirregular);also Sar Lamar 'to burn' (cited by Tsuchida 1976:77; s- expected). Other possibly related forms are: Kav zamaR 'fire', Ketagalan(Basay dial.) namaD, (Trobiawandial.) zamal 'fire' (cited by P. Li 1992:282), Favorlang ramal 'a burntfield' (Happart1650); Sirayalamag 'burning'(cited by Ferrell 1969:88; but I could not find it in Van der Vlis's vocabulary). k [353a] hmarx(hmij?)'fire' (Shang insc., Shi Jing, Shu Jing); M [356b] hmjorx(hm-j-ij?) 'blazing fire' (Shi Jing); 'f [164s] hmjarx(hm-j-ij?) 'fire' (Zhou Li).
* * *
Although the scarcity of cultural items in the above list is not necessarily meaningful (perhapsnonculturalitems tend to predominatein the lexicon of reconstructedlanguages such as PAn), it is noteworthyand significantthat a majorityof items in the list are not of a kind thatwould normallylend itself to
296
borrowing in a limited contact situation. Note also that the list contains not only basic vocabularyitems, but also over 50 percentof verbs,a word class believed to resist borrowingwell. Also noteworthy,thoughsomewhatenigmatic at this point, is the frequentassociationof verbs and PAn roots. Missing from the list are personalpronounsand numerals,two very stable word classes in IE languages.This is not abnormalin the East Asian context. in East Avoidance of personalpronounsis a widespreadculturalcharacteristic innovation,andborrowingfor this Asia, resultingin a high rateof replacement, word class. Numerals also are less stable in East Asia than they are in the IE languages: numeralsfrom 2 to 10 were borrowedby Thai from Chinese and from Yi by Gelao (EdmondsonandThurgood1992); Chinese numeralsfrom 1 to 10 were borrowedby Miao-Yao. Hashimoto (1976:7) reportsa statement, made in private conversation by G. Diffloth, to the effect that the principal is tradenegotiation occasion primitivepeoples of SoutheastAsia need numerals with merchantsof otherethnic or linguistic groups.
4. SOUND CORRESPONDENCES. The comparisons of Section 3 illustrate the correspondenceof OC monosyllabic word stems with the final syllable of PAn words, both C1V(C2)in structure: affixes, whetherOC or PAn, have been The ancestor or PSAn) is language ("Proto-Sino-Austronesian," disregarded. like PAn. The shift to assumed to have been polysyllabic Chinese monosyllabism occurredthroughthe loss of nonfinal syllables, a typological shift 1984) recently at work in Huihui,a Chamic languageon Hainan(Haudricourt in progressin variousAustroasiatic and currently (AA) languages(Ferlus1979, Diffloth 1980). Correspondencesbetween PAn and my OC reconstructions, slightly modified from Baxter (1992), are given for each position in Table 1. The numbers given for each comparison are from their respective subsections in Section 3 (the digits following the point in each number).Numbers Chinese vowels in parenthesesin the table involve ambiguouslyreconstructed or consonants. With adjustments due to the changein the OC transcription system, as well as a few modifications and innovations, which will be fully justified elsewhere, these correspondencesare by and large a subset of those proposed in my earis referred to my recentpublication lier work.The interested reader (Sagart1993) for a discussionof thesoundchangesinvolved.A shortoutlinewill be given here. for the C, position show a basic agreementin consonantal Correspondences is assumedto be secondary, voicing. VoicelessnessamongOC sonorants perhaps the traceof a lost voiceless prefix.The OC aspiration contrastamong voiceless of singletonvs. clusteramongvoiceless stopsis thoughtto reflecta PSAncontrast consonantsin word-internal That PSAn contrast,lost in Formosan,is position. continuedin PMP by nasal accretion.Only in a small numberof cases can MP
FORSINO-AUSTRONESIAN29 EVIDENCE
297
TABLE 1. SOUND CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN PAn AND OC

POSITION C1
PAN
-p-
OC
NO. COMPARISON
p(h)-
17, 19, 36, 40, 41

5, 8, 15, 51, 52 16, 20, 24, 25, 26, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 43, 50 11 ~~~3, 21,28,29,53 6, (23) 27 !(irregular) 30 54, 55, 56 ~2,4, 7,18, 39 38 1, 9, 12, 13, 14, (23), 37, 42 I ~~0 46 ~~22, 44, 45, 47, 48 49 5, 8, 10, 12, 17, 19, 20, 21, 28, 39, 40, 43, 44, 49, 54, 55 27, 56 18, 22, (34), 36, (41) (34), 38, (41) 1, 2, 9,26, 52, 6, 14, 15, 16, 24, 25, 29, 35, 37, 42, 53 ~~4, (23), (30), 31, 46, (48), 51 ~~~(7), 33, (34), 45 ~~32, 3, (7), 13, 47, 50 (precedingdentals, except no. 7) 11, (23), (30), (48) (precedinglabials)
t(h)-kk(h)7-qb-bd-Dt-D3g9 (h)mn-nrj- -I(h)1r-rs-ststs-a-a-o-a-1-11i-
-u-e-eeC2 -e-p -t -C -s -S -k -q -H -Q,

-
-eu-0-0-e-1-
-u-
-p
-t -t -t -t -k -7
32,48
26, 36, 38, 43 16, 29, 50 28, 33, 37 34, 35 15, 24, 27, 44, 45, 46 2, 5, 8, 40, 52, 55, 39 (incl. -q, and -q2) I ~~~0 1, 4, 52, 18 (incl. -H1and -H2) 8, 11, 23, 30, 31 25, 47 22
1 -N -r -R
m n -n -n -n(?)
~~~51
3, 14, 533
-R
-d
-j(?)
6, 9, 12, 19,56
41
-j
-y
-n? -n?
-9
13
21, 42
-j?7
54
-w 20, 49 -w(?) 17 -0 -0 Comparisonnumbersare digits following the point of subsection numbersin Section 3.
298
VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANICLINGUISTICS,
nasal accretion be explained as an innovationon the basis of reconstructible PAn forms. in Chinese, one open, Each of the four PAn vowels has two correspondents one close. It is noteworthythatat least threeof these fourpairsof Chinese vowels (i-e, u-o, i-a) are recognized ablautsets in OC: both membersof the same pair frequentlyalternatein word families. With the fourthpair (i-e), the lower vowel is often replacedby i precedinga frontending, and by u when preceding a labial ending. betweenOC and Withfinalconsonants,nasalsandvoiceless stopscorrespond from are inherited voiced PAn. The PAn PSAn, andevolved to stops presumed sounds symbolized The in + Chinese. clustersof homorganicnasal glottal stop as PAn *-q, *-Q, and *-H merged as -? in OC, aligning with *-? from PSAn voiced stops to form the Tone B category.Supportfor my earlierproposalthat PSAn final *-s changed to -h in OC, later to become the tone C category, is missing from the presentlist of comparisons.The presentlist of comparisons of PAn *-s to OC -t. does however provide supportfor a correspondence accountsfor Thata coherent,nonstratified system of soundcorrespondences the phonetics of the above comparisonsis an indicationthat the common vocabularyis not sharedby OC and PAn as a result of a long period of intimate contact between them.
5. SOUND CORRESPONDENCES IN THE BASIC VOCABULARY. A minimal argumentfor sound correspondencesin the basic vocabulary,based on six basic vocabularyitems listed in Table 2, is presentedhere. Ten sound correspondencesinterlockto accountfor the segments in the final syllables of and in the OC word bases. Apartfrom the corresponthe PAn reconstructions dences of PAn *-t- to OC th-, andPAn *-D- to OCd-, which must be stipulated if only the comparisonsin Table 2 areconsidered(supportfor these has, however, been provided in Section 4), each sound correspondenceis exemplified twice. The correspondencesare listed in Table 3. 6. EXTRALINGUISTIC EVIDENCE. As outlined in Section 1, independent work by specialists of Chinese and Austronesian cultural history pointsto the east Chinacoast as a key areain the emergenceof both the Chinese and An cultures. Looking back in time from the early dynastic period, a continuouscultural lordsin the Shangqiu sequenceconnects the Shangcivilization,the predynastic millennium late 3rd of the culture the B.C.,and the area, ShandongLongshan neolithicculturesof DawenkouandQingliangangin south Shandongandnorth Jiangsu,whose earliest sites have been dated around5000 B.C.
299
COMPARISONS BETWEEN PAn AND OC TABLE2. SOMELEXICAL

PAN
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. quluH1 nunuH1 punuq -taq SulaR tuDuR 'head' 'breasts,milk' 'brain' 'mud, earth,ground' 'snake' 'to sleep'
OC
IL 0i h-j-u? n-j-o? nu? ? tha? K 1-j-aj HB d-j-oj+s 'head' 'milk, suckle, nipple' 'brain' 'earth,' 'snake' 'to sleep'
Furtherto the south, anothercontinuoussequence leads from the historical An-speaking societies of Taiwanback to the late 5th millenniumB.C.ceramic Taiwanand acrossthe Taiwanstraits,at Fusites at Ta-P'en-K'eng in northern Kuo-Tun on Quemoy island (Chang 1989), and beyond, to neolithic sites in southeasterncoastal China where, as in Hemudu of north Zhejiang, rice was grown, pile dwellings built, and domestic pigs, dogs, and waterbuffaloes kept
around 5000 B.C.
Convergencesof many kinds exist between these two coastal sequences, the to the An culture,and southernHemudu-Fuguodun-Formosa sequenceancestral the northernDawenkou-Shandong-Longshan-Shang sequence which is one of the main strandsin the developmentof the Chinese culture. Based on evidence of archaeologicalcontinuitybetween them, the Nanjing Museum group (1978) and Pearson(1983:137) have arguedthat the neolithic cultures of coastal south Shandong,Jiangsu, and northZhejiang are regional variantsof the same culture,called by them the Qingliangangculture.Pearson (1983:124) regards Hemudu as "the forerunnerof the Ch'ing-lien-kang [= Qingliangang] culture in terms of general adaptation and pottery styles." With respect to the division between southern and northernvariants of the Qingliangang culture,Pearsonalso notes that "cultivationequipmentappears to have developedearlierin the southandthen spreadto the north"(1983:138). Another trait shared by the two traditions is tooth extraction. Skulls unearthed at the neolithic site of Dawenkou in south Shandong had had their upper lateralincisors extractedbetween 12-13 and 18-21 years of age in both males and females (Yan 1972). Extractionof upperlateralincisors as a puberty rite is widespreadamong the modernAn populationsof Formosa,for instance Bunun (Nihira 1983, under"bintus"), Atayal (TurnerandLien 1984), Saisiyat, and Tsou (Ferrell 1966). It is also attestedarchaeologically(Chang 1957). TABLE3. SOMESOUNDCORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN PAn ANDOC
C1 V C2
-1- : -n-: -t- : -D-:
(h)lnthd-
1,5 2,3 4 6
-u- : -u-a-
-u- 1,3 -o- 2,6 -a- 4,5
-H1 : -q : -R
-? -j
1,2 3,4 5,6
300
OCEANICLINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2
Last but not least, physicalanthropology providesevidence of close physical associatedwiththesetwo traditions. Of particular proximitybetweenpopulations interestis M. Pietrusewsky'smultivariate of 53 of human series investigation skulls from Asia and the Pacific (Pietrusewsky 1992). The study showed Formosanaboriginals,represented by 36 Atayal skulls, to be closest in a cluster analysis of distances to Chinese of Taiwan and HainanIsland, and Shang dynastyChinese from Anyangin northernChina.Based on these results alone, Pietrusewsky(1992:326) suggested"anolder andpossibly separateancestryof these groups [i.e., Formosanrepresented by Atayal, modernChinese from the southeastcoast, and ShangdynastyChinese-LS], one which was distinctfrom the morenortherly Asiaticmainland Korean mongoloidgroupssuchas Japanese, and Chinese."("Chinese"at the end of the citationrefersto a series of skulls of soldiers of the Manchuarmy,who were quite likely Manchuthemselves.)
7. SINO-AUSTRONESIAN, AUSTRIC, TIBETO-BURMAN. As I have repeatedlystated,a genetic unityof OC andPAn is not incompatiblewith other links proposedearlierbetween either language and otherEast Asian language groups (Austric,Sino-Tibetan,Austro-Tai).It implies, however, that any relationship thatis valid of either OC or PAn is valid of both. Schmidt's Austric (Schmidt 1906), once pronounced "extinct" by P. K. Benedict, whose lexicalist conception of genetic relationshipshad led him to disregardthe strikingmorphologicalcongruencebetween AA and An, has recently received strongsupportfromReid's comparisonof NicobareseandPAn morphology and syntax (Reid 1993). An additionalpiece of morphological evidence for Austric is this: I have shown in Section 2 that an infix *-ar- 'disin PAn; it turnsout that an affix tributedaction/object'must be reconstructed forPAA, basedon Semai of similarshapeandmeaningmustalso be reconstructed (Aslian, Malaysia) -ra- 'simultaneouspluralinfix' (Diffloth 1976), KhmerLr- and1-)'generalized (a prefixwithtwo allomorphs, frequentative prefix'(Jenner or intensifying 1980-81 :xlii), Jeh (Vietnam,northBahnaric)ra- 'frequentative prefix/infix(Watson prefix' (Gradin1976), Pacoh (Vietnam)tar-/-ar-reciprocal 1966), and Sora (Munda)ar- or al- 'reciprocalprefix' (Ramamurti1938; I am indebtedto Stan Starostafor bringingthe Soraprefixto my attention).In combinationwith otherprefixes,this affix always occupies the second position, as in Pacohpar- 'causativereciprocal',a combinationof causativepa- and reciprocal -r-, Khmerpra- 'reciprocal'(Jenner1980-81 :xxvi), andKhasimar- 'facing, matching', a combinationof a prefix ma- and -r- 'reciprocal'(Henderson 1976). Note thatKhasimar- is directlycomparableto Paiwanmarh-,a marker of reciprocalactions(Egli 1990). The distribution of this r-/-r- affix leaves little doubt as to its antiquitywithin AA. Lexical evidence for Austric is very limited, though not entirely absent (Diffloth 1993): it includesa few basic items ('eat', 'eye', etc.). As Reid (1993)
EVIDENCE FORSINO-AUSTRONESIAN
301
indicates,the very weaknessof the lexical evidence shows thatthe morphology fromone familyto the other sharedby An andAA couldnothavebeentransferred lexical loans. Another be to would regardAA as a mixed lanpossibility through of and the sense Thomason Kaufman (in 1988), one thatderivedits morguage from an An and its lexicon from another source(or vice versa: phology language, fromAA andits lexiconfrom An as a mixedlanguagethatderivedits morphology anothersource).Leavingaside,however,the difficultyof identifyingthat"other source," it must be noted that none of the cases describedby Thomason and Kaufmanseems to fit the AA/An situationwell. Ma'a of Tanzania,originallya Cushitic language, "whichconsists of mostly Cushiticbasic vocabulary,a few Cushitic grammaticalpatterns,and a ratherfull Bantu grammarthat includes muchinflectional morphologyandeven some allomorphy" (p. 20), has borrowed many nonbasic words from Bantu,and in this the Ma'a/Bantusituationdiffers from the AA/An case. In MednyjAleut (Thomasonand Kaufman1988:233ff.), andthe bulkof the grammar areclearlyAleut,but the enwhere"thevocabulary tirefiniteverbmorphologyis Russian" (p. 20), it is thefactthatAleutmorphology is maintained in Mednyjoutsideof finiteverbsthatseems to differfromthe AA/ An situation,where morphologicalcongruenceappearsto be more diffuse and pervasive.As Thomasonand Kaufman acknowledge(p. 20), cases of borrowing of morphologicalparadigmsare not common; furthermore, the social circumstanceswhichgave rise to the Ma'a andMednyjcases aresomewhatunusual,and one wouldhesitateto assumethemfor a protolanguage suchas PAA or PAn. The is that the An-AA is simplestexplanation relationship genetic,very ancient,and thatmorphologyis indeedvery stable,moreso thanthe basic vocabulary. If, as is likely, Austricis real, and if, as I have claimed,Chinese and PAn are As withAA andAn, little related,it mustfollow thatOC andAA arealso related. lexical evidence can be adducedin favor of a genetic link betweenChinese and AA, but morphological evidence, in particularrelating to infixial processes, of OC morphologyis still clearly exists (despitethe fact thatour understanding I have cited the affix *r-/-rof distributed actionthatmust be very incomplete): in PAA, PAn, andOC.PAA *-n- 'nonagent infix' and reconstructed nominalizing PAn *-in- 'patient nominalizing infix' both correspondto OC -j- 'non-agent nominalizinginfix'. ThatOC and PAn sharemore lexicon betweenthemselves, thaneitherdoes withAA, indicates withsoundcorrespondences, thatPAn andOC togetheragainstPAA withinan extendedAustricsuperfamily. subgroup Publishedevidence for a Chinese-Tibeto-Burman (TB) unity(Benedict1972, items and indicationsof sharedmor1976) consists of sharedbasic vocabulary However,this sharedmorphology phology (essentiallycausatives- prefixation). of some of the lexical items,thoughsuggestive,is is limited,andthe "basicness" in an intimate,long-termcontactsituno fool-proofguarantee againstborrowing for millennia. ationof the kindthatChineseandthe TB languageshave sustained The problem is compounded by poorly understood sound correspondences, which make it hazardous to distinguish between cognates, look-alikes, and
302
loanwords.We shouldkeep in mindthe late M. Hashimoto'swarningthat"itis still premature to talk about an establishedlanguagefamily for Sino-Tibetan, before solving the problemof cognate/loandistinction"(Hashimoto 1976:1). It is symptomatic,in this connection, that the Benedict-Matisoff paradigmof Sino-Tibetan(ST) researchhas not produceda Proto-Sino-Tibetan reconstrucin Benedict (1972) does not include Karen, tion. Even the PTB reconstruction which accordingto that authoris coordinatewith TB within the Tibeto-Karen branchof ST. For these reasons, the relationship,though not implausible, is less well demonstratedthan is usually assumed. A useful assessment of the degree of proximityof the TB-OC relationshipdemandsas a prerequisitethat the genetically inheritedmaterialbe sortedout from the loans, and this cannot of the sound correspondences. be achieved withouta clearerunderstanding the Austronesian has not movedChineseaway from Interestingly, perspective it has strengthened the case for a Chinese-TBunity.On the TB. On the contrary, the OC medials side, -j- and-r- as infixeshas simplifiedthe treating phonological need of the for the unnaturally medials, removing complex syscorrespondence tem of PST medialsposited by Coblin (1986). The An perspectivealso throws of the correspondence considered of the irregular, light on some aspects,hitherto of the relationOC toneB in TB, as shownbelow. The morphological component nasal ship has been reinforcedby the discovery of the OC stative-intransitive with PAn but inNwhich not *maalso with the aligns only prefix (Section2), transitiveand stative prefix of TB (WT m-, Kachin ma-, etc., see Wolfenden betweenChinese,TB, andtheAn 1929:26,111).In lexicon,theareaof agreement far 14 out in of 56 OC-PAncomparisons presented languagesis fromnegligible: Section3 havepotentialTB cognates,as in Table4. Note in thattablethe phonoTABLE 4. SOME POTENTIAL PAn-OC-TB COGNATES
PAn 1. 2. 4. 9. 14. 15. 24. 27. 35. 37. 48. 52. 54. 56. head I 1 brain I breasts I flow egg I Ipeck I bent,crooked I I to ascend I I to scrape to slip off, loose to suck to hammer,pound Irice torch/fire quluH punuq nunuH -luR qiCeluR tuktuk -kuk a(n)Dak kuSkuS -lus -sep tutuH imay D2amaR OC hl-j-u? nu? n-j-o? hl-j-uj? Prefix+lon? tok, t-r-ok kh-(r)j-ok t-rj-ik k-r-ot lot, hlot tsip tu? mij? hmij? PTB **lu nuk nuw = naw twiy = tway, 1, wi(y) twiy = tway tuk (cut, knocl k, pound) kuk 1-tak kut g-lwat (free, r elease) dzo:p tow/dow aro) moy (Bodo-Gmey
PTB forms from Benedict (1972) ** lu 'head' in Lushai, Lakher,Laizo, Komren,Khumi (Matisoff 1991)
303
TABLE5. SOMEDIRECTPAn-PTBCOMPARISONS
PAn mother palm leaf tongue ina Da(m)pa p-al-apaq dilaq PTB (Benedict 1972) m-na 'mother,older sister, daughter-in-law' pa = pwa (Chinese # p-j-a 'breadthof four fingers') pak = pwak m-lyak, s-lyak (Chinese 1f(?) l-j-e?'lick')
logical parallelin items9 'flow' and 14 'egg' betweenPAn *-luRandPTB *twiy = *twoy,wherePAn *-R: PTB *-y is supported by item 56 'torch,fire'. In some cases, directPAn-PTB comparisonsnot involving OC, or with better semanticagreementbetweenPAn andPTB, can be made, as in Table 5. The observantreaderwill have noticedthatPTB *-k standsfor PAn *-q in the comparisonsfor 'brain'(Table4) and 'leaf' and 'tongue' (Table 5), in this connection also 'pus', PAn nanaq,WT rnag (-g WT reflexof PTB *-k). In these words to a PAn sound otherthan OC has tone B (-?). Where OC has -? corresponding PTB has a PTB vowel Here seems to reflect a PAn (or semivowel) ending. -q, distinctionlost by OC. These facts renderless likely the possibility that the materialsharedby OC and TB reflects a contact situation.They suggest that the TB languages may standcloser to Chinese(andto PAn)thanI hadoriginallyassessed(Sagart1990), and that the Chinese-Austronesian componentof the expandedAustric superreferred to have to be augmentedof the Tibeto-Burman above, may family, languages. However, methodologically controlled studies, paying special attention to sound correspondences and morphological congruence, will be necessary in order to establish the position of the TB languages vis-a-vis Chinese and Austronesian,as well as the possible membershipof Miao-Yao and Tai-Kadaiin our expandedAustric.
NOTES
1. I wishto express totheSocial Institute Science Research anditsdirector, mygratitude Don Topping, for theirhospitality of Hawai'i, duringmy stay at the University waswritten. to myAustronesianist wherethispaper thanks My sincere colleagues of Hawai'i, in particular andLaurie Reidforsharing of theUniversity StanStarosta withme theirconsiderable andfor nuof theAustronesian knowledge languages, withthispaper; to merous valuable comments andsuggestions on issuesconnected for Martha forherhelpwithMiao-Yao to MikePietrusewsky, Ratliff, morphology; to issues withmetherelevance of evidence fromphysical anthropology discussing mine. All errors of linguistic classification in AsiaandthePacific. are,of course, name is citedin full 2. Incitinglanguage materials fromprimary thelanguage sources, andthereference 'Bunun forinstance of thesource indicated, 1983)'.Inciting (Nihira abbrefromsecondary sources 1976,or Blust1988a),language (suchas Tsuchida different viations followthesource text:forthatreason, in thispaper, abbreviations list contains all language abbreviaThefollowing mayreferto the samelanguage.
304
OCEANICLINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2
tions used in this paper;for furtherreference,the readeris invitedto referto the lists in the relevant of abbreviations Ami, Amis;AN, AA, Austroasiatic; secondarysources: Austronesian;Ata, Atayal; Bal, Balinese; Bkl, Bikol; BM, Bolaang Mongondow; Bun, Bunun; BunIsb, Bunun, Isbukun dialect; Ceb, Cebuano; CEMP, CentralEastern Malayo-Polynesian; Chm, Chamorro; CMP,CentralMalayo-Polynesian; F, Formosan;Fav,Favorlang; Fij, Fijian;Fu, Futuna;Han, Hanunoo;Hlg, Hiligaynon; Ho, Hova; Ibg, Ibanag; IE, Indo-European; Ilk, Ilokano; Itb, Itbayaten; Jav, Javanese; Kan, Kanakanavu;Kny, Kankanay;Kav, Kavalan;Kel, Kelabit; Kpp, Kuv, Kuvalan;Mal, Malay; Mar, Maranao;MC, Middle Chinese; Kapampangan; Mlg, Malagasy; MP, Malayo-Polynesian;NgD, Ngadju Dayak; OC, Old Chinese; OE, Old English;PAA, Proto-Austroasiatic; Pai, Paiwan;PAn,Proto-Austronesian; Paz, Pazeh; PHn, Proto-Hesperonesian; PIE, Proto-Indo-European;PM, ProtoMiao; PMP, Proto-Malayo-Polynesian; PMY, Proto-Miao-Yao;PPh, Proto-PhilipPTB, Proto-Tibeto-Burman; pine; PSAn, Proto-Sino-Austronesian; Puy, Puyuma; PWMP,Proto-WesternMalayo-Polynesian;PY, Proto-Yao;RukBd, Rukai, Budai dialect; RukMg, Rukai, Maga dialect; RukMn,Rukai, Mantauran dialect; RukTn, Rukai,Tonadialect; Sa, Sa'a; Sai, Saisiyat;Sam, Samoan;Sar, Saaroa;Sed, Sediq; Snd, Sundanese;Sq, Squliq; ST, Sino-Tibetan;Tag, Tagalog;TB, Tibeto-Burman; To, Tongan;ToBa,Toba Batak;Tso, Tsou; TsoDt, Tsou, Tbl, Tagabili;Tir,Tiruray; Duhtudialect;WBM, WestBukidnonManobo;WMP,WesternMalayo-Polynesian; WT, WrittenTibetan. 3. On the alternationof -j and -n in OC see Baxter (1992:295-297).
REFERENCES
AbdullahHassan. 1974. Themorphology of Malay.KualaLumpur:Dewan Bahasa Dan Pustaka. Baxter,William H. III. 1992. A handbook of Old Chinesephonology.Trendsin Linguistics Studies and Monographs64. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. Bellwood, Peter. 1991. The Austronesiandispersaland the origin of languages. ScientificAmerican,July 1991, pp. 88-93. A conspectus.Cambridge:University Printing Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: House. .1975. Austro-Thai: Languageand culture.HRAF Press. addenda.OceanicLinguistics9:104-162. Blust, Robert. 1970. Proto-Austronesian 1980. Austronesianetymologies. OceanicLinguistics 19:1-181. 1983-84. Austronesianetymologies II. OceanicLinguistics22-23:29-149. 1985. Austronesianetymologies III. OceanicLinguistics25:1-123. An essayon thelimitsof morphology. 1988a.Austronesian roottheory: Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins. . 1988b. The Austronesianhomeland:A linguistic perspective.Asian Perspectives 26:45-67. 1989. Austronesianetymologies IV. OceanicLinguistics28:111-180. 1992. The position of the Formosan languages: Method and theory in Austronesian comparativelinguistics. In Papersfor InternationalSymposiumon AustronesianStudies Relating to Taiwan,pp. 21-55. Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.
305
Bodman, Nicholas C. 1980. Proto-Chineseand Sino-Tibetan:Data towardsestablishto historical linguistics, ed. by ing the natureof the relationship.In Contributions FransVan Coetsem and LindaWaugh,pp. 34-199. Leyden: E. J. Brill. Buck, Carl Darling. 1949. A dictionaryof selectedsynonymsin the principal European languages.Chicago: Chicago UniversityPress. Chang, Kwang-chih. 1957. Yuanshanchutu de yi ke ren chi. KaoguRenleiXuekan9, 10:146-147. . 1968. Thearcheologyof ancient China, 2d ed. New Haven and London:Yale UniversityPress. .1986. Thearcheologyof ancient China, 4th ed. New Haven and London:Yale UniversityPress. . 1980. Shang civilization.New Havenand London:Yale UniversityPress. . 1989. Xin Shiqi shidaide TaiwanHaixia [TheTaiwanstraitsin neolithictimes]. Kaogu 261:241-250. Chou, Fa-kao 1970. Lun Shang-kuIn ho Ts'ieh-Yun.Journalof the Instituteof Chinese Studiesof the Universityof Hongkong3:321-457. . 1974. Chin-Wen Ku-Lin[Etymological dictionaryof ancient Chinese bronze inscriptions], 16 vols. Hongkong:The Chinese University Press. Coblin, W. South. 1986. A Sinologist's handlist of Sino-Tibetanlexical comparisons. Monumenta Serica Monograph Series XVIII, ed. by Roman Malek. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag. zwischenden austrischenund den Conrady,August. 1916. Eine merkwiirdige Beziehung indochinesischenSprachen.Aufsaetze zur Kultur-und SprachgeschichteE. Kuhn gewidmet, pp. 475-504. Munchen. . 1923. Neue austrich-indochinesische Parallelen. Hirthanniversary volume(Asia volume), pp. 23-66. Majorintroductory Dahl, Otto Christian. 1981. Early phonetic and phonemic changes in Austronesian. Instituttetfor sammenlingnendekulturforskning, Serie B, Skrifter LXIII. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Lautlehre des Austronesischen vol. Wortschatzes, Dempwolff, Otto. 1938. Vergleichende Beihefte zurZeitschriftfir Eingeborenensprachen, 19. Berlin: 3, Wirterverzeichnis. DietrichReimer. Studies,pt.1, ed. by Philip Diffloth, Gerard.1976. Expressivesin Semai. InAustroasiatic N. Jenner,LaurenceC. Thompson, and Stanley Starosta,pp. 249-264. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. . 1980. The Wa languages.Linguisticsof the Tibeto-Burman Area 5(2):1-182. . 1993. The lexical evidencefor Austric,so far.Paperpresented at the Conference on Asia-Mainland/Austronesian Connections(CAMAC),Honolulu,May 10-13. Downer, G. B. 1973. Strataof Chinese loanwordsin the Mien dialect of Yao. Asia Major 13:1-33. Dyen, Isidore. 1992. The internalandexternalclassificationof the Formosanlanguages. In Papersfor International on Austronesian StudiesRelatingto Taiwan, Symposium pp. 162-196. Taipei:Instituteof History and Philology, Academia Sinica. and its place in Edmondson,Jerry,and GrahamThurgood. 1992. Gelao reconstruction Kadai. Paperpresentedat the 25th International Conferenceon Sino-TibetanLanguages and Linguistics,October 14-18, at the Universityof California,Berkeley. Egerod, S0ren. 1980. Atayal-English dictionary.ScandinavianInstituteof Asian Studies, monograph35. London and Malm0: CurzonPress. Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz. Egli, Hans. 1990. Paiwangrammatik. Orientale Ferlus,Michel. 1979. Lexique francais-thavung.Cahiersde LinguistiqueAsie 5:71-94.
306
OCEANIC LINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2
tribes:A preliminary and Ferrell,Raleigh. 1966. The Formosan linguistic,archaeological culturalsynthesis.Bulletinof theInstitute Academia Sinica 22:97-127. of Ethnology, .1968. The Pazeh-Kahabulanguage. Bulletinof the Dept. of Archaeologyand National TaiwanUniversity31-32:73-96. Anthropology, 1969. Taiwan in cultural and linguisticclassification. Aboriginal problems groups: of Ethnology, no. 17,Institute Academia Sinica.Nankang: Academia Sinica. Monograph 1982. Paiwan dictionary. Pacific Linguistics C-73. Canberra: Australian National University. Fey,Virginia.1986.Amisdictionary. Taipei:The Bible Society in the Republicof China. Gong, Hwang-cherng1977. Ku Tsang-wenti y chi ch'i hsiang-kuanwen-t'i [The classical Tibetany and its relatedproblems].Bulletinof the Institute of Historyand Philology,AcademiaSinica 48:205-228. Studies5:25-42. Gradin,Dwight. 1976. Wordaffixationin Jeh. Mon-Khmer Gilbertus1650 [1896]. Wordboek det Favorlangsche Taal.Publishedin 1896 in Happart, as "Happart's in Thearticlesof Christian English translation Favorlangvocabulary" instruction in Favorlang-Formosan Dutch and English, ed. by W. Campbell, pp. 122-199. London:KeganPaul, Trenchand Trtibner. and pastoraldiffusion of languages.Papers Hashimoto,MantaroJ. 1976. The agrarian Asian Linguistics, pp. for the First Japan-US Joint Seminaron East and Southeast 1-14. Tokyo:The JapanSociety for the Promotionof Science. Haudricourt, Andre-Georges.1984. La tonologie des langues de Hainan.MinzuYuwen 4:17-25. Henderson,Eugenie J. A. 1976. Vestiges of morphologyin modernstandardKhasi. In Austroasiaticstudies, pt. 1, ed. by Philip N. Jenner, LaurenceC. Thompson and Stanley Starosta,pp. 477-522. Honolulu:Universityof HawaiiPress. to A lexiconof Khmermorphology, Jenner,Philip N. 1980-81. Introduction by Philip N. Studies9-10:vii-lxii. UniversityPress of Hawaii. Jennerand S. Pou. Mon-Khmer serica recensa.G0teborg:ElandersBoktryckeri Karlgren,Bernhard.1964. Grammata Aktiebolag. Li Fang-kuei. 1971. Shang-kuIn Yen-chiu. TsinghuaJournalof ChineseStudies,n.s., 9(1,2):1-61. 1976. Chi-ke Shang-kuSheng-muWen-t'i. In Tsung-tung Chiang KungShihed. by Szu Ch'i-liang et al., pp. 1143-1150. shih Chou-nienChi-nienLun-wen-chi, Taipei:AcademiaSinica. Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1978. A comparativevocabularyof Saisiyat dialects. Bulletinof the Instituteof Historyand Philology,AcademiaSinica 49:133-199. 1981. Reconstructionof Proto-Atayalicphonology. Bulletinof the Instituteof Historyand Philology,AcademiaSinica 52:235-301. featuresin someAustronesianlanguagesin 1992. Formosanvs. non-Formosan on Austronesian Taiwan.In Papersfor International StudiesRelating to Symposium Taiwan,pp. 268-284. Taipei:Instituteof History and Philology,Academia Sinica. Li, Zhiguo. 1991. Yi Meng fangyande 'fenyinci'. Fangyan3: 206-210. A putativeFormosansubgroup.Ph.D. Marsh,Mikell A. 1977. Favorlang-Pazeh-Saisiat: dissertation,WashingtonState University. at the Matisoff,JamesA. 1991. New goals in S[ino-]T[ibetan] linguistics.Paperpresented 24th International Conferenceon Sino-Tibetan LanguagesandLinguistics,Bangkok, October7-11. 1992. Following the marrow: Two parallel Sino-Tibetan etymologies. Area 15(1):159-177. Linguisticsof the Tibeto-Burman des languesindo-europeennes. a I'etudecomparative Meillet, Antoine. 1937. Introduction Paris:Hachette.
EVIDENCE FORSINO-AUSTRONESIAN
307
infix system. Journalof the American Miller, Roy Andrew. 1958. The Tibeto-Burman OrientalSociety78:193-204. Moravcsik,EdithA. 1977. On rulesof infixing.Bloomington:IndianaLinguisticsClub. Nanjing Museum. 1978. Changjiangxiayou xinshiqi shidai wenhua ruogan wenti de tanxi [An investigation of some questions relating to the neolithic cultures of the lower Yangtse]. WenWu4:46-57. 2d ed. Privatelypublished. Nihira,Y. 1983. A Bununvocabulary, Norman,Jerry,andTsu-lin Mei. 1976. The Austroasiaticsin ancientsouthChina:Some lexical evidence. Monumenta Serica 32:274-301. native Ogawa, Naoyoshi, and ErinAsai. 1935. Themythsand traditionsof the Formosan tribes.Taipei. Panganiban,Jose Villa. 1973. DiksyunariotesauroPilipino-lngles. Lungsod Quezon: Manlapaz. Pearson, Richard. 1983. The Ch'ing-lien-kangCultureand the Chinese Neolithic. In The origins of Chinesecivilization, ed. by David N. Keightley, pp. 119-145. Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress. Peyros, Ilya I., and Sergey A. Starostin.1984. Sino-Tibetanand Austro-Tai.ComputationalAnalysesof Asian and AfricanLanguages22:123-127. Pietrusewsky,Michael. 1992. Taiwanaboriginals,Asians and Pacific Islanders:A mulon Austronetivariateinvestigationof skulls. In Papers for International Symposium sian StudiesRelatingto Taiwan,pp. 319-360. Taipei:Instituteof Historyand Philology, Academia Sinica. Pulleyblank,E. G. 1973. Some new hypotheses concerningword families in Chinese. Journalof ChineseLinguistics 1:111-125. 3:162-71. Qiu Xigui. 1978. Hanzi xingcheng wenti de chubutansuo.ZhongguoYuwen Rao SahibG. V. 1938. Sora-Englishdictionary. Madras: Government Press. Ramamurti, Reid, LawrenceA. 1993. Morphologicalevidence for Austric. Paper presentedat the Conference on Asia-Mainland/AustronesianConnections (CAMAC), Honolulu, May 10-13. Sagart, Laurent. 1990. Chinese and Austronesian are genetically related. Paper preConference on Sino-TibetanLanguages and Linsented at the 23rd International guistics, October,Arlington,Texas. . 1993a. Chinese andAustronesian: Evidence for a genetic relationship.Journal of ChineseLinguistics21:1-62. 1993b. New views on Old Chinese phonology.Diachronica 10:237-260. 1993c. L'infixe -r- en chinois archaique.Bulletinde la Societe de Linguistique de Paris 88:261-293. einbindeglied Zentralasiens zwischenVolkern Schmidt,P.W. 1906.DieMon-Khmer-Volker, undAustronesiens. Braunschweig:FriedrichVieweg und Sohn. Starosta,S., A. Pawley and L. Reid 1982. The evolution of Focus in Austronesian.In on Austronesian Linguistics, vol. 2, Papersfrom the ThirdInternational Conference and S. A. Wurm,pp. 145-170. Pacific Lined. by AmranHalim, Lois Carrington, AustralianNationalUniversity. guistics C-75. Canberra: Tang Zuofan. 1982. Shanggu YinShouce [Manual of Old Chinese pronunciation]. Jiangsu:Renmin. Thomason, SarahGrey,and TerrenceKaufman.1988. Languagecontact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress. Tsuchida, Shigeru. 1971. List of words of Formosanlanguages.Ms. . 1976. Reconstruction phonology.Study of Languagesand Culof Proto-Tsouic tures of Asia andAfrica, Monographno. 5. Tokyo:Institutefor Studyof Languages and Culturesof Asia andAfrica.
308
VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANICLINGUISTICS,
Piao Kao. MonographB-21. Taipei:Institute Tung, T'ung-ho. 1967. Shang-kuIn-Yun of History and Philology, Academia Sinica. Turner,Christy G. II, and Chao-Mei Lien. 1984. Diachronic differences in Taiwan dental morphology. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific PrehistoryAssociation 5:74-82. Canberra:Australian National University. Von Koerber,H. N. 1935. Morphologyof the Tibetanlanguage.Los Angeles and San Francisco:Suttonhouse. Zidian [Dictionaryof word families]. Beijing: Shangwu. Wang Li. 1982. Tongyuan Watson,SaundraK. 1966. Verbalaffixationin Pacoh. Mon-KhmerStudies II:15-30. Wolfenden,S. 1929. Outlinesof Tibeto-Burman linguisticmorphology.London:Royal Asiatic Society. Wulff, K. 1942. Ueber das Verhaeltnis des Malayo-Polynesischen zum IndochineSelskab.Historisk-filologiskeMeddelser sischen. Det Kgl. DanskeVidenskabernes XXVII, 2. K0benhavn:EjnarMunksgaard. Xu Zhongshu. 1934. Yishi yu nu zhi yuanyuan ji guanyuci lei ming wu zhi kaoshi.Bulletin of the Instituteof History and Philology, no. 4. Taipei:Academia Sinica. YanYan1972. Dawenkouxin shiqi shidairengude yanjiubaogao. KaoguXuebao1:92122. Zorc, R. David, and MatthewCharles. 1971. Proto-Philippinefinder list. Typescript, Cornell University.

3623130

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

3623130

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Proto-Austronesian and Old Chinese Evidence for Sino-Austronesian Author(s): Laurent Sagart Source: Oceanic Linguistics, Vol.

PROTO-AUSTRONESIANAND OLD CHINESE EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN1

? by University All rights of Hawaii Press. reserved.

OCEANIC LINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2

FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN EVIDENCE

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN EVIDENCE

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

ma-init 'be(come) hot' ma-lutoq 'get cooked'

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN EVIDENCE

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANIC LINGUISTICS,

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANIC LINGUISTICS,

EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANIC LINGUISTICS,

TABLE 1. SOUND CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN PAn AND OC

17, 19, 36, 40, 41

t(h)-kk(h)7-qb-bd-Dt-D3g9 (h)mn-nrj- -I(h)1r-rs-ststs-a-a-o-a-1-11i-

-u-e-eeC2 -e-p -t -C -s -S -k -q -H -Q,

VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANICLINGUISTICS,

EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN

COMPARISONS BETWEEN PAn AND OC TABLE2. SOMELEXICAL

-1- : -n-: -t- : -D-:

-u- 1,3 -o- 2,6 -a- 4,5

1,2 3,4 5,6

OCEANICLINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2

OCEANIC VOL. 33, NO. 2 LINGUISTICS,

OCEANICLINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2

EVIDENCE FOR SINO-AUSTRONESIAN

OCEANIC LINGUISTICS, VOL. 33, NO. 2

VOL. 33, NO. 2 OCEANICLINGUISTICS,

Você também pode gostar