Studies in Asian Geolinguistics, Monograph Series No. 1

Papers from the Third International
Conference on Asian Geolinguistics


ILCAA Joint Research Project 2015 - 2017 “Studies in Asian Geolinguistics”
Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies

Studies in Asian Geolinguistics, Monograph Series No. 1

Papers from the ird International
Conference on Asian Geolinguistics
23–24 May 2016,
Royal University of Phnom Penh
(Organized by ILCAA J R P 2015–2017“S  A G”)First published 2016
Edited by Mitsuaki E
Copyright © 2016 Individual Contributors
ISBN 978-4-86337-238-2(This is an electronic publication in PDF format)
Published by
Research Institute for
Languages and Cultures ofAsia and Africa (ILCAA)
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
3-11-1, Asahi-cho, Fuchu-shi,
183-8534, Tokyo, JAPANProgramDate:

23 - 24 May 2016

Venue: Royal University of Phnom Penh
Russian Federation Boulevard, Toul Kork, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
23rd May, 2016, Monday
9:00 - 9:10

Opening Ceremony

9:10 - 10:20

Session 1, Chair: Jean-Michel Filippi

Multamia R.M.T. Lauder & Allan F. Lauder, A longitudinal geolinguistic study oflanguage change in West Java, Indonesia ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 1
Atsuko Utsumi, Areal features on directionals and relative height terms in East

 Indonesia
10:35 - 12:20 Session 2, Chair: Multamia R.M.T. Lauder
Trí Dõi Trần, Correspondence between initial sounds in ancient Sino-Vietnamese words
in Viet and Muong languages ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 19
Masaaki Shimizu, A phonological basis for rethinking the Vietnamese isoglosses ͐͐͐ 28
Shiho Ebihara, Pastoral and non-pastoral areas, from the view point of geolinguistics
Lunch
14:00 - 15:40

Session 3, Chair: Trần Trí Dõi and Trần Thị Hồng HạnhNoboru Yoshioka, Domaaki as a language of northern Pakistan: from a geolinguistic
point of view ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 38
Mitsuaki Endo, Geographical Distribution of the /r/ type sounds in Zhuang ͐͐͐͐͐͐ 46
16:00 - 17:45

Session 4, Chair: Chitsuko Fukushima

Hiroyuki Suzuki & Sonam Wangmo, Cultural contexts of the expansion of a Tibetan
word ’bras ‘rice’ in the easternmost Tibetosphere ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 72
Keita Kurabe, A preliminary report on the distribution of 'eclipse' in languages ofmainland Southeast Asia ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 80
Kenji Yagi, Some notes on "sun" in Sinitic ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 90i

19:00 -Dinner

24th May, 2016 Tuesday
9:00 - 10:45

Session 5, Chair: Masaaki Shimizu

Takashi Ueya, Kinship Terms in China Guangxi Liujia Dialect ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐

98

Mika Fukazawa, Basic color terms in Ainu ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 102
Rei Fukui, Phonetic observations on Korean dialects made by Ogura Shinpei ͐͐͐͐͐ 112
11:00 - 12:10

Session 6, Chair: Rei Fukui

Chitsuko Fukushima, Geographical Distribution of Quasi-Nominal Particles inJapanese Dialects ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 127
Jean-Michel Filippi and Chem Vatho, The Linguistic Atlas of Cambodia and Standard
Khmer Language ͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐͐ 139ii

A longitudinal Geolinguistic Studyof Language Change in West Java, Indonesia
Multamia R.M.T. Lauder, Allan F. Lauder
Department of Linguistics, Humanities Faculty, Universitas Indonesia

Abstract
This paper questions a number of fundamental hypotheses in historical linguistics and geolinguistics,
namely that language change is constant, that it is gradual, occurring over very long time periods, andthat the basic vocabulary of languages is especially impervious to change.
The position taken in traditional lexicostatistics and glottochronology is that the rate of change of
meanings over time is relatively constant and can be represented with a simple formula where thevariables are time, percentage of shared cognates and the retention rate per thousand years. A roughly
constant retention rate of around 81% per thousand years for the Swadesh 200 basic word list has been
assumed (Atkinson and Gray, 2005). However, work using computer simulation has suggested that
language change may be faster in small communities (Nettle, 1999). Indonesia’s many regional
languages provide an opportunity to examine existing assumptions about the rate of change.
This paper reports on a longitudinal geolinguistic research study of the Bekasi region in West Java
where three main languages are found: Javanese, Sundanese and Betawi Malay.
Data was gathered on two occasions separated by two decades. The first study was done in 1978,
and the second in 1998. Both studies used exactly the same locations, informants, questionnaire, data
gathering and analysis method. A questionnaire was used to elicit 200 basic words from the Swadesh
list plus 50 phonological items. Data was gathered in 34 villages spread evenly across the area.
Isogloss and dialectometry maps were produced. Comparison of the maps for the same lexical item,
sampled across time, showed marked differences in distribution of language variation. There are
obvious examples of disappearing lexical items and the appearance of new ones.
Taken together, the results provide new evidence on language change. The results show that
language change occurs in periods as short as twenty years, and that the rate of change is not constant,with even basic words undergoing change. The implications of the findings are discussed from anumber of perspectives.

Keywords
geolinguistics, comparative linguistics, rate of language change, language mapping, isoglosses,
dialectometry, longitudinal research, Swadesh basic word list

1. Introduction
Languages are in a constant state of change (Aitchison, 2012). Various theories and concepts about
language change have developed including the idea that contemporary languages have evolved fromancestral languages and that languages may be related into families (Hock and Joseph, 1996)(Campbell, 2013). The earliest work into this was the comparative-historical work into the IndoEuropean languages (Beekes and Vaan, 2011). This paper seeks to explain changes in language fromthe standpoint of dialectology based on data from regional languages in the province of Bekasi in Java,a linguistically heterogeneous region with three languages, Betawi, Javanese, and Sundanese.

2. Linguistic Situation
Throughout Indonesia, the presently best estimate for the number of languages is 719. This makes
Indonesia the second most linguistically diverse nation in the world, after Papua New Guinea which
has 851 languages (Lewis et al., 2015, Martí et al., 2005: 48).
The linguistic situation in Indonesia is by any standard complicated. However, at a policy level,
three main categories of language are recognized, namely (1) Indonesian the national language, (2)local languages (bahasa daerah), and (3) foreign languages (Alwi and Sugono, 2000, Renandya, 2000:
115).
Indonesian is the national language, but census data reveals that it is not spoken as a first language
by all Indonesian citizens. Although its use is spreading, there are still many people who communicate
only in their local language. The number of people whose first language is a local language and forwhom Indonesian is a second language is 140 million people, about 55.51% of the population.
However, Indonesian has been gaining ground over the last three decades and the number of first
language speakers growing. This trend is being driven by three possible conditions:
1. The children of families whose parents are speakers of different regional languages tend to choose
Indonesian as the language used in the home seeing it as a practical solution to not having tochoose between one or both of the parents’ languages;
2. The children in families living in large cities will choose Indonesian to communicate withneighbours and at school even when their parents speak the same regional language; and3. The children in families living in large cities whose parents speak different regional languages
will see the daily use of Indonesian at home as a rational choice.
Presently, the number of native speakers of Indonesian has reached 22.8 million people, or 9.04% of
the entire population. The total number of speakers of Indonesian, both first and second language
speakers, is therefore 162.8 million people (Lewis et al., 2015).
The regional languages can be described first in terms of their numbers of speakers. Of Indonesia’s
719 languages, only fourteen have more than one million speakers. However, taken together, the total
number of speakers of these large languages is 174,579,000 people which accounts for 69.22% ofIndonesia’s 252.2 million total population (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2015). The names and speakernumbers for these large languages is:Javanese (84.3 million speakers), Sundanese (34 million speakers), Malay (13,040,000 speakers),
Batak (7.045 million speakers), Madura (6.77 million speakers), Minangkabau (5.53 million speakers),
Betawi (5 million speakers), Bugis (5 million speakers), Aceh (3.5 million speakers), Bali (3.33
million speakers), Makassar (2.13 million speakers), Sasak (2.1 million speakers), Lampung (1.834
million speakers), and Gorontalo (1 million speakers) (Lewis et al., 2015).
These fourteen large languages are all found either in the western part of Indonesia, in Java,
Sumatra, and Madura, or in central Indonesia, in Bali, West Nusa Tenggara and Sulawesi. In theeastern part of Indonesia, there are no languages with speaker numbers above a million but the numberof languages there is large.
There are also people who are monolingual and only speak their native regional language,
numbering recorded 89.4 million people which is 35.44% of the population.
Of the 719 languages recorded in Indonesia, 13 have become extinct. The number of living
languages is 706.
If we exclude the fourteen largest languages, this means that there are 692 other living languages
with populations of sizes that vary from several hundred thousand down to just a handful of speakers.
There are numerous very small languages: 386 languages with up to 5,000 speakers; 233 languages
with at least 1,000 speakers; 169 languages with at least 500 speakers; and 52 languages with 100
speakers or less (Gordon, 2005). These very small languages are found primarily in the eastern part ofIndonesia. Languages with such small populations are known to be very vulnerable to factors thatthreaten the existence of those languages.
The languages which have been classified as threatened with extinction has begun to attract theattention of linguists and others (Lauder, 2007a, Lauder, 2011a, Lauder, 2007b, 2011b, Lauder and

Sugono, 2011, Lauder and Lauder, 2012b, c) but we are still some way from widespread, coordinatedefforts to revitalize these languages to the point of sustainability. Efforts are under way to provide apolicy framework that is geared to provide legal certainty in attempts to ensure that the function androle of these languages is not marginalized (Lauder and Lauder, 2012a). Apart from the importance of
these regional languages to the communities themselves, Indonesia is of great interest to scholars
because it is home to hundreds of languages. These languages belong to two large language families
and the processes of language change and language loss are problems that are now seen everywhere in
the world.
There are currently around 6,000 languages in the world which belong to seventeen major
language families (Comrie et al., 2003, Crystal, 1997). These language families are: Indo-European,
Uralic, Altaic, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, Caucasian, Afro-Asiatic, Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Congo, Khoisan,
Eskimo-Aleut, Na-Dene, Amerind, Dravidian, Sino-Tibetan, Austric (Austronesian), Papuan (NonAustronesian), and Australian Aboriginal. The indigenous regional languages in Indonesia belong toeither the non-Austronesian or the Austronesian language families (Lewis et al., 2015).
Of the 719 listed languages in Indonesia, 255 can be classified as non-Austronesian languages(Lewis et al., 2015). This is approximately one third of all the languages in Indonesia. They are foundspread in the eastern part of Indonesia, in Maluku, East Nusa Tenggara, and Papua.
Comrie, et al. (2003) note that based on the latest research, the languages in Papua are notnecessarily fully derived from Proto non-Austronesian. There is still the possibility that the languages
actually are Austronesian, but come from different stock or phyla. The research methods forclassification of languages in language families is still developing in detail and scope achievable. The
placement of Papuan languages as belonging to the non-Austronesian family is still being discussed
and debated. There is even the possibility that future research will show that the languages in Papua
might belong to not one, but several language families (Comrie et al., 2003).
This brief sketch has provided an introduction to the overall language situation in Indonesia. We
focus now on a study of language change in done in a linguistic area in the Bekasi Regency, in WestJava province on Java island.
BekasiLaut Jawa

1

2
3
34
5
25
28

4
DKI Jaya

26

6
33
7
29

23

27

24

8
9

22

32

10
21

31

12

30
13

20

15

Kab.
16

Karawang

19

11
14

17
Kab. Bogor

18

17,85 km

3. Language Change
Language tends to be in a state of constant change or fluctuation (Aitchison, 2012). Changes can beobserved at all levels in a language. Many existing studies show such change occurring at the level ofphonology or the lexicon (Chambers and Schilling-Estes, 2013). The present study focuses on changes
in the lexicon as sampled in a geospatial context.
The total set of words in any language, its lexicon, can be seen as consisting of a small core of‘basic’ words which are relatively resistant to language change, and the remainder of the lexicon
which may shows words changing, while others may go out of use and new words appear. The field ofcomparative historical linguistics, based on over a century of scholarship on Indo-European and otherlanguages, has asserted with some certainty that the rate of change in the general lexicon is relatively
slow, with a significant change to the lexicon being seen in about a hundred years. But the rate ofchange for the basic lexicon is thought to be much slower, with such a change taking a millennium.
The present study presents data that shows the pace of change may be much quicker than previously
assumed.

Other than linguistic processes, extra-linguistic factors also determine the rate at which languagechanges. Geographical and topographical features such as mountain chains, rivers or stable flat ground,can enhance or impede the ease with which people can travel to get in contact with others insurrounding villages. The topography of Bekasi, the subject of this study, is a relatively small area,
relatively flat and open, and as as such there is no impediment to speakers from the three language
communities, Betawi, Sundanese, Javanese, being in contact with one another.

4. Data
Data was gathered in the Bekasi Regency which is located to the east of Jakarta. The first study was
conducted by Tawangsih1 (1978) and reported in Tawangsih (1987). Twenty years later the study was
repeated by Adriani (1998). Adriani used exactly the same methodology as the earlier research,
visiting the same villages, interviewing the same informants if still alive. If the informant had died,then a member of the family living in the same house was found as a replacement. Further, theresearch used the same questionnaire, the same interview techniques, and the same techniques formaking the maps.

5.

Discussion

Because every aspect of the research method was the same for both studies except for the time, any
difference found by comparing maps shows a change in the linguistic feature shown. The use of themethods of dialectology provide convincing evidence of the details of language change. First, it canshow changes in individual lexical items, both the basic vocabulary and cultural words, portrayedspatially in the map. Second, it can show the results for the entire set of words studied, amalgamatedeither as a whole or grouped into sets of words by semantic field. Third, it can express the extent or
degree of change for pairs of words from the two time points quantitatively through the calculation of
dialectometry and this can be used as empirical evidence for whether the distance between languages
in contact is at the level of a dialect or of a language.
The presentation of the maps produced using dialectology consistently has the earlier study(Tawangsih, 1978) on the left and the later study (Andriani, 1998) on the right. The maps for lexical
items shows the villages where data was collected, and a system of symbols to represent different
phonological realizations of a lexical item. The pronunciations for lexical items are given in a table ineach map. The number and types of pronunciations can be compared for each pair of maps in order todetermine the extent of the change as well as its spatial distribution. In the case of the isogloss maps,
the thicker the bundle of isoglosses, the greater the difference between one variety of language and its
neighbour. For the dialectometry maps, the thickness of the lines separating areas indicates the degreeof difference between the varieties spoken in two neighbouring areas.
5.1

Vocabulary Data

The idea of the basic vocabulary of a language is commonly based on high frequency lexical words. In
the field of comparative historical linguistics, a basic vocabulary is that set of words, both grammaticaland lexical, which is found in all the languages of the world. The basic vocabulary of any language isthought to have the following properties in relation to the question of language change: (1) the basic
vocabulary is more resistant to change than the rest of the lexicon, (2) the retention of the basic
vocabulary is constant over time, and (3) changes in the basic vocabulary in all languages will be thesame.
The basic vocabulary list used by Tawangsih and Andriani in Bekasi consisted of 37 words,
namely: child, dog, cloud, father, walk, star, moon, bird, blood, two, sit, four. teeth, nose, rain, mother,fish, this, wife, foot/leg, we, you, chief, we, sea, five, sun, they, mouth, hair, one, me, laugh, sleep,
three, and bone.

1

Tawangsih is the maiden name of the first author of this paper, Multamia RMT Lauder.

A comparison of the 37 basic words in the two studies shows that change occurred in all but three
in the brief space of twenty years. This is striking result that contradicts a century of the assumptionthat the basic words have a high retention rate measured in millennia.
A number of words which are part of the basic vocabulary were found to have continued in use,
but they showed a change in their geographic distribution. These words were dog, start, moon, bird,
blood, two, four, rain, fish, foot/leg, one, three and bone. However, as many as 21 of the basic words
did show a change of some kind, whether phonetic, the appearance of a new word, replacement by a
new word, or even the disappearance from use of the word without a new one coined to replace it.
A total of 218 language maps were produced, one for each lexical item, with data collected first in
1978 and then in 1998. A comparison of the maps for any one item, between the 1978 and the 1998
study shows if any variation occurred.
All the lexical variations, shown on 218 language maps, both from the 1978 and the 1998 studies,can be grouped as demonstrating six kinds of change. The type of change for each group, labelled A to
F, is described below along with the percentage of lexical items for each group.
x Group A (4.59%): no change occurred;x Group B (27.98%): no change was seen but some items were found to have moved to a newlocation (observation point);
x Group C (10.55%): a change in the sound of the word was found and some words were lost
without the coining (addition) of a new word;
x Group D (17.89%): the variant of the word used remains the same, but there is the introduction ofa new word;
x Group E (0.46%): all variants of the lexical item in use are changed with new word;
x Group F (38,53%): some of the variants of a word demonstrate no change, but some of thevariants disappear while there is also the addition of new variants.
5.1.1

Vocabulary Group A Data

The vocabulary in group A represents 4.59% of all vocabulary and is the fifth largest group out of six.
Group A consists of vocabulary where there was no change in the twenty years between 1978 and1998. This is shown in the maps for KAPAK (axe) which are shown below.
100/78 Kapak

100/98 KapakAs can be seen in the maps above, there is only one variant for the word KAPAK (axe). The word ispart of the lexicons in both the Betawi and Sundanese languages and it is also used by the communityof Javanese speakers in Bekasi. No change, either in pronunciation or geographical distribution has
occurred in the twenty years between the two studies.
5.1.2

Vocabulary Group B Data

042/78 Bantal

042/98 Bantal

The words in group B make up 27.98% of all words and it is the second largest group. Group B
includes words which have not changed but whose geographical distribution has changed. An exampleof this is shown in the two maps above for the word (042) BANTAL (pillow).
The maps above show that for the word bantal (pillow), there are three variants: bantal (1-10, 1213, 22-23, 25-33), kangulu (25, 27, 34), and anggel (11, 24-25). The numbers refer to the village
numbers. The maps show that all three variants have persisted and there has been no change, either
phonetic or lexical. However, there have been changes in the geographical distribution for all of them:bantal (1-10, 12-13, 22-34), kangulu (25, 27), and anggel (11, 14-21).
5.1.3

Vocabulary Group C Data

The words in group C represent 10.55% of all words making it the fourth largest group. Group B
contains words where there have been changes in pronunciation and some variants have been lost
without being replaced by new words. The maps below for word (181) SELENDANG (shawl/scarf)
exemplify this.

181/78 Selendang

181/98 Selendang

In the 1978 map, it can be seen that there were four etymons for selendang (shawl/scarf): slendang (24, 6-10, 12-13, 22, 25, 27-34), solendang (11, 15-20), kudungan (1, 2, 5, 23, 26, 28), karembong (21),and tiyung (14, 24). In the 1998 map, we see a number of changes. The etymon karembong has
disappeared or is no longer used by the local population and has been replaced by the word tiyung. In
addition there have been a number of changes in the distribution of words. Slendang is now found in(3-4, 20, 22-23, 30-32, 34), solendang (14-15), and tiyung (15-19, 21, 24). Meanwhile, the use of
kudungan has become more widespread (1-2, 5-7, 9-13, 22, 25-27, 29, 31) while also experiencing asound change becoming kudung (8) and krudung (33).
5.1.4

Vocabulary Group D Data

Group D contains 17.89% of all words, making it the third largest group. Group D consists of lexical
items which have retained their earlier phonetic forms, but exhibit changes in geographical distribution
and also the emergence of new word variants. Map (039) PAGAR (fence) provides an example of this.
On the 1978 map, the variants of pagar (fence) were: pager (2-4, 6, 11, 13-23, 27, 30, 31, 33);
pageran (25, 34); jaro (1, 5, 7-10, 12, 26, 28-29, 32); and kikis (24). On the 1998 map, all four of thesevariants are still in use, but their distribution has changed: pager (14, 16-22, 28, 34); pageran (1); jaro
(2-9, 12, 13, 26-27, 29-33); and kikis (15, 25). Also, two new word variants have appeared, namely
pager jaro (10-11, 23, 27) and sari'sik (24).
The data clearly show that there has been contact between the three language areas – Betawi,
Sundanese and Javanese. Language contact has most likely been a cause leading to changes in thegeographical distribution of language variants. The existence of pager and pageran in 1998 has been
put under pressure by the introduction of jaro which extends towards the east. In addition, theappearance of the new variant sari’sik which in Sundanese appears as sarigsig (barrier, divider, bars).

039/78 Pagar

5.1.5

039/98 Pagar

Vocabulary Group E Data

The words in group E make up only (0.46%) of all words making the group the smallest. This groupconsists of word variants which have all been replaced with new word variants. An example of this isshown in map (128) GELAP (dark).
128/78 Gelap

128/98 Gelap

Both the 1978 and the 1998 map contain four etymons. The 1978 map has the word variants teduh (13, 5-9, 12-15, 22-23- 26, 28, 30-33), ceudeum (16, 19-20, 24, 27), haleungheum (17, 21, 24), andmendung (4, 10-11, 25, 29, 34). None of these are found in the 1998 map having all been lost or fallenout of use by the local population. Four completely new word variants appear to replace them gelap(1-8, 12-13, 23, 26, 28-33), peteng (4, 9-10, 22, 25, 27, 34), powek (11, 14-21, 24), and jumbleng (27).
5.1.6

Vocabulary Group F Data

The vocabulary in group F make up 38.53% of all words, making this the largest of the groups. This
makes it the dominant type of change occurring in Bekasi. The vocabulary variants in group F survive
or persist with sound changes, but a number of variants also disappear, and there are also cases of newwords coming into use. We also see a significant change in geographical variation. These processes
are exemplified in the map (1038) LUMBUNG (barn, shed).
038/78 Lumbung

038/98 Lumbung

Four word forms are found in the 1978 map, namely gudang (8-10, 25-27, 34), lumbung (1-7, 10, 1213, 22-23, 25, 28-31, 33), leuit (11, 14-21, 24), and pangkeng (32). Twenty years later, we see quite
sweeping changes. Three of these forms have survived but they have undergone both sound changes
and also changes in their distribution, as follows gudang (2, 6, 8, 28-29), lumbung (1-10, 12-13, 22-23,
26-33), and pangkeng (31). The variant leuit meanwhile is still in use by the local population but has
undergone sound change and distributional change leuyit (11, 14-21). Apart from this, four new word
variants have emerged, namely pangkeng padi (27), gowah (24), kekondong (34), and krombong (25).
5.2
5.2.1

Isogloss Data
Combined Isogloss Data

An isogloss map is made for each of the 218 lexical items. These 218 individual maps can be
combined by layering them on a single map. The maps below show this combined isogloss data, where
the thicker the bundling of isoglosses, the more marked the difference between two language areas.
The isoglosses on the 218 language maps, taken together, show that the boundaries separating the
Betawi, Sundanese and Javanese language areas still pass between the same data observation points.
However, in the space of twenty years, the number of isoglosses demarking the limits of the Javanese
language area, has reduced, showing on the maps as thinning of the bundle of isoglosses. This thinninghas occurred because, during those twenty years, a process of linguistic accommodation has occurredin the Javanese ‘enclave’ toward the Betawi and Sundanese speaking communities that surround them.
An opposing trend has also occurred with the thickening of the bundle of isoglosses delimiting theborder between the Sundanese and Javanese language areas.
When interpreting this data, it should be borne in mind that any change shown in an isogloss map
is the change in the language of individuals based on the lexical, phonological and geographicalfeatures. It does not convey or imply anything about the attitudes of individuals or communities about
these languages or their boundaries, and in particular should not be seen as a socio-politicalphenomenon wherein communities appeal to this data to insist on formally recognized shifts in theboundaries of their languages.
Berkas Isoglos 78

5.2.2

Berkas Isoglos 98

Isogloss Data by Semantic Field

Apart from broad generalizations about the isogloss data as a whole, it is also possible to distinguishmore detailed patterns of distribution through looking at the sets of isoglosses by semantic field. An
example of a specific pattern of isoglosses can be seen for example in the isogloss map for thesemantic fields for parts of the body, kinship and nature. The isoglosses for the semantic field of partsof the body shows a situation where the patterns in the earlier and later studies are similar; in that for
kinship, we see the patterns have somewhat changed; while for the semantic field of natural features
we see the isoglosses have changed. These three semantic fields, by their nature, also contain a lot ofbasic words, so any change in these also has implications for the theory of slow and gradual change inthe basic lexicon of languages.
The semantic field for PARTS OF THE BODY
The semantic field of parts of the body consists of the words: head, forehead, nose, mouth, lips, teeth,
tongue, ear, neck, finger, thumb, index finger, little finger, leg, thigh, bone, hair, eyebrows, and blood.

Berkas Isoglos Anggota Tubuh 78

Berkas Isoglos Anggota Tubuh 98

The bundles of isoglosses in the 1978 and 1998 maps resemble each other to a high degree with theisoglosses following the same path. A closer inspection also reveals that there are single isolated
isoglosses that have shifted to a different path in the 1998 map. The groups of isoglosses (semantic
fields) which exhibit very little change in this way make up 40% of all the groups.
The semantic field of KINSHIP
The vocabulary in the semantic field of kinship includes the following words: grandfather,
grandmother, father, mother, older uncle, younger uncle, older aunt, younger aunt, older brother, older
sister, younger brother, younger sister, child, older niece/nephew, younger niece/nephew, grandchild,husband, wife, in-laws, daughter/son in-law, and brother/sister-in-law.

Berkas Isoglos Kekerabatan 78

Berkas Isoglos Kekerabatan 98

The isogloss maps for the semantic field of kinship bear little resemblance to each other, althoughsome faint similarities still can be seen. For example, traces of the bundle of isoglosses in the southcenter and the vertical bundle in the north of the 1978 map can still be seen in the 1998 map. But therelationship is not distinct. Thus, we find evidence that even though this semantic field contains a large
number of basic words, the distribution of vocabulary variants is clearly in the process of change.
The semantic field of NATURAL FEATURES
The semantic field of natural features contains the following words: sun, solar eclipse, moon, star,
cloud, rain, lightning, lake, river, and sea.

Berkas Isoglos Bagian Alam 78

Berkas Isoglos Bagian Alam 98

Basic words in the semantic field of natural features are: cloud, star, rain, sea and sun. A comparisonof the pattern of isoglosses in the 1978 and 1998 maps immediately shows sweeping change. Change
has not led to variations in words at the same observation point, but also led to significant changes in
the geographical distribution of vocabulary.
On the basis of the bundles of isoglosses in the aggregated set of 218 isogloss maps and also theindividual maps for different semantic fields, we can see that the “boundaries” between the Betawi,
Sundanese and Javanese languages are largely located in the same places, although some of thebundles are thinner in the 1998 maps. However, if we focus on the isogloss maps for some of thesemantic fields, we can see a tendency for notable degrees of change is also found.
Most importantly, we see that the space of 20 years, although the basic vocabulary has had quite ahigh retention rate, a significant number are undergoing sound changes, and not a few are being
replaced with new words. These findings on what is happening in Bekasi with regard to languagechange suggest that all three assumptions in comparative historical linguistics about the rate oflanguage change, in particular to changes in the basic vocabulary, are not being supported here.
5.3 Dialectometry Data
While isogloss maps show us the geographical distribution of language variants, dialectometry gives
us quantitative information about the degree of difference that has occurred between neighbouringobservation points. The results of the dialectometry analysis are a way of quantifying the extent of the
impact that the process of linguistic accommodation between speakers of Javanese in isolated areas
and the speakers of Betawi and Sundanese in the areas surrounding them.
The degree of difference between contiguous language areas which is derived from dialectometryis expresses as a percentage. Séguy has related the degree of difference by dividing the scale into
bands (Séguy, 1973). Séguy’s band scale goes from no difference to different language: ≤ 20% nodifference, different speech 21-30%, 31-50% different sub-dialect, 51-80% different dialect, and ≥81% different languages. The dialectometry analysis for the data from 1978 show that observations
points 25, 27, and 34 showed differences in linguistic variation which was above 81% - a difference of
language. This data, cross-checked with on the ground observation, showed clearly that Javanese wasin use at these points. However, by 1998, between observation point 34 and the points around it whereBetawi was spoken, the degree of difference had dropped substantially to 31-50% a difference only of
sub-dialect. Meanwhile, the difference at observation point 27, had dropped by 1998 to below 20% no difference.
Dialektometri Leksikal 78

0--20%
21--30%31--50%51--80%80%

Tak Beda
Beda Wicara
Beda Subdialek
Beda Dialek
Beda Bahasa

Dialektometri Leksikal 98

0--20%
21--30%31--50%51--80%80%

Tak Beda
Beda Wicara
Beda Subdialek
Beda Dialek
Beda Bahasa

Based on the calculation of dialectometry, it can be proposed that the Javanese vocabulary used twenty
years ago at observation points 27 and 34 have tended to change. These changes have occurred
primarily as a result of adapting words from the Betawi vocabulary into the Bekasi variant of Javanese.
In addition, the area along the border between the observation points for Betawi and Sundanese(10/11; 12/11; 13/14; 31/15; 30/16; 30/20; 22/21; 23/24; and 26/25) has showed a decrease in thepercentage difference.
This change is facilitated in Bekasi by the absence of physical or social impediments to crosscultural communication. The process of borrowing and assimilation in language contact which is
known to occur in situations such as this is described by Dixon (1997: 15):
If two languages are in contact - some of the speakers of each having a degree of competence inthe other - they are likely to borrow lexemes, grammatical categories and techniques, and somegrammatical forms (in at least one direction, often both directions) and gradually become moresimilar.

6.

Historical Background

Language contact in Bekasi is not a new phenomenon but has been underway for a long time. Several
centuries after the Tarumanagara Empire collapsed before the 7th century AD, the famous Pajajaran
Kingdom was established under the leadership of King Siliwangi. There is archaeological evidence
that prove that present day Bekasi was part of the Pajajaran kingdom. Importantly, there was a mainroad from the capital city to Karangsambung passing through Cileungsi and Cibarusa. Secondly, theremains of a ship have been found in the Rawa Tembaga area and the remains of a ships chains in the
Kobak Rante area which prove that in the past Bekasi was one of the important port towns in the
Pajajaran kingdom.
After the collapse of the Pajajaran kingdom due primarily to the spread of Islam, order began tobreak down in Bekasi. By the end of the 17th century, Bekasi had become part of the kingdom ofMataram. Banten was strategic for Mataram because of its location. It had immediate borders to thesouth of the centres of power and also was next to the V.O.C. in the west. ??? At that time, Bekasi wasa location where Mataram soldiers were trained for combat and was also important as a rice granaryduring the war against the V.O.C. in 1626.
Based on reports in Raffles’ History of Java (Raffles, 1817, 1830), and the Encyclopaedia van
Nederlandsch Indie (1895) (Lith et al., 1917), it is possible to trace and reconstruct the growth of the
population in Bekasi.
When Mataram forces attacked the town of Batavia, (but suffered a crushing loss?) many Mataram
soldiers did not return to the capital of Mataram. They chose to remain in the vicinity of Batavia, andsome of them found refuge in Bekasi. In Bekasi, they lived in groups around the districts of Sutani,
Cabangbungin, and Pabayuran. This was the origin of the enclave of a small Javanese community in
Bekasi. They chose to settle on a small island in a lake, as it afforded a natural defensive position
against any V.O.C. soldiers who might be sent after them. Taking these things into account, it is not
surprising that the speech community was able to maintain its cohesiveness and identity over a longtime.
The Betawi community in Bekasi forged a strong identity, and it has been supposed that their
vocabulary would also tend toward homogeneity. One study investigated the composition of 200 basic
words from the Betawi vocabulary. The study showed that 93% of these words were similar to words
in Riau Malay and the remaining 7% were cognates of Javanese, Sundanese, and Balinese words.
However, another broader study by Muhadjir contradicted this and suggested that the Betawi lexicon
was much more heterogeneous. Muhadjir studied both the basic vocabulary and the cultural
vocabulary. He found that words that originated in Malay accounted for only 35.21%. The rest were
cognates of various other languages. 18.37% were cognates originating in borrowings from Javaneseand 22.05% were cognates originating from Javanese and Sundanese.

7. Conclusion
The findings from the two Bekasi studies can throw new light on our understanding of languagechange most notably by challenging the long held assumption of slow and constant rate of change forthe basic words of a language. Other researchers have questioned these too. Based on studies ofaboriginal languages in Australia, Dixon (1997: 9) concluded that "The rate at the which a languagechanges is not constant and is not predictable." The present work provides evidence that that best
describes what is happening in the recent past and the present.
The phenomenon of more rapid and irregularly paced change in language needs an explanation. In
Bekasi, a number of extra-linguistic factors are likely to be involved. Bekasi is a socio-culturally
heterogeneous area. It is located adjacent to the capital city Jakarta and it has experienced rapid
economic growth. A number of government programs designed to stimulate development have been
implemented there. These include drives to provide a number of services to all villages including
electricity, news media, radio, television, telephones, and internet services. It is feasible to think thatany of these could have contributed to the processes of language contact that underlie the rapidchanges seen in the languages used there. Bekasi is multilingual and this forces the different speaker
communities to become bilingual or multilingual. In the process, we see the features ofaccommodation as speakers in this multilingual situation are forced to make choices about what
language or vocabulary to use. This is highly likely to continue with further diffusion due togeography and demographics.

References
Aitchison, Jean. 2012. Language Change: Progress or Decay? 4th edition. Cambridge Approaches to
Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alwi, Hasan, and Sugono, Dendy. 2000. Dari Politik Bahasa Nasional ke Kebijakan Bahasa Nasional(From National Language Politics to National Language Policy). In Politik Bahasa : RisalahSeminar Politik Bahasa (Language Politics : Procedings of the Seminar on Language Politics). eds.
Hasan Alwi and Dendy Sugono, v-xiv. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa dan Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Andriani, Linda. 1998. Evaluasi Perubahan Leksikal: Studi Kasus Kabupaten Bekasi [An Evaluationof Lexical Change: A Case Study in the Bekasi Regency, Java], Thesis for Bachelors Degree.
Department of Language and Literature, Universitas Indonesia.
Atkinson, Quentin D., and Gray, Russell D. 2005. Curious Parallels and Curious ConnectionsPhylogenetic Thinking in Biology and Historical Linguistics. Systematic Biology, 54(4), 513-526.
Badan Pusat Statistik. 2015. Perkiraan Penduduk Beberapa Negara, 2000-2014. Jakarta: Badan Pusat
Statistik. Online Address: http://www.bps.go.id/linkTableDinamis/view/id/960. Accessed: 3
November 2015.
Beekes, R. S. P., and Vaan, Michiel Arnoud Cor de. 2011. Comparative Indo-European Linguistics:
An Introduction. Second edition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Campbell, Lyle. 2013. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Third edition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Chambers, J. K., and Schilling-Estes, Natalie eds. 2013. The Handbook of Language Variation andChange. Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics. Second Edition. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Comrie, Bernard, Matthews, Stephen, and Polinsky, Maria eds. 2003. The Atlas of Languages: The
Origin and Development of Languages throughout the World. Facts on File Library of Language
and Literature. 2nd edition. New York: Facts On File.
Crystal, David. 1997. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1997. The Rise and Fall of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. ed. 2005. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Fifteenth edition. Dallas,
Tex.: SIL International.
Hock, Hans H., and Joseph, Brian D. 1996. Language History, Language Change, and Language
Relationship: An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics. Vol. 93. Trends inlinguistics: Studies and monographs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lauder, Allan F. 2007a. Indigenous Languages in Indonesia: Diversity and Endangerment. In
Procedings of Kongres Linguistik Nasional XII. Surakarta, 3-6 September. Masyarakat Linguistik
Indonesia & Universitas Sebelas Maret.
Lauder, Allan F., and Lauder, Multamia R.M.T. 2012a. A Review of Indonesian National Language
Legislation. Paper read at Ninth International Conference: Language, Development and Identity.
Bandung. 16-18 June, 2012. Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), British Council and University ofLeeds.
Lauder, Multamia R.M.T. 2011a. Kepedulian terhadap Keberagaman melalui Revitalisasi Bahasa
Minoritas. In Ilmu Pengetahuan Budaya dan Tanggung Jawabnya: Analekta Pemikiran Guru Besar
FIB UI. ed. Riris K. Toha-Sarumpaet, 315-330. Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia (UI Press).
Lauder, Multamia R.M.T. 2007b. Pemenuhan Hak Akses Informasi sebagai Salah Satu Upaya
Memperlambat Laju Kepunahan Bahasa. In Procedings of Kongres Linguistik Nasional XII.
Surakarta, 3-6 September. Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia & Universitas Sebelas Maret.
Lauder, Multamia R.M.T. 2011b. Pengelolaan dan Pemberdayaan Bahasa-Bahasa yang Berpotensi
Terancam Punah. Paper read at Pengembangan dan Perlindungan Bahasa-Kebudayaan Etnik
Minoritas untuk Penguatan Bangsa. Jakarta. 15 Desember 2011. Puslit. Kemasyarakatan dan
Kebudayaan (PMB), Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia (LIPI).
Lauder, Multamia R.M.T., and Sugono, Dendy. 2011. Strategies for Language Policy and Planning in
Asia and Europe. Paper read at Steering Committee Meeting of the ASEM Language Diversity
Forum. Hotel Nusa Dua, Bali. 28-29 November 2011. Direktorat Kerjasama Intra Kawasan Amerika
dan Eropa, Kementrian Luar Negeri (Indonesia).

Lauder, Multamia R.M.T., and Lauder, Allan F. 2012b. Penelisikan Variasi Bahasa dan Pengelolaan
Bahasa di Indonesia [Investigating Language Variation and Language Management in Indonesia].
Paper read at Seminar Sehari bersama Prof. Dr. Bernd Nothofer Mantan Guru Besar Tamu Program
Studi Linguistik Program Pascasarjana UGM dan Kenangan Purnabakti Dr. Inyo Yos Fernandez.
Yogyakarta, 10 September 2012. Universitas Gajah Mada.
Lauder, Multamia R.M.T., and Lauder, Allan F. 2012c. The Importance of Maintaining Linguistic andCultural Diversity in SEA. Paper read at National Workshop on Traditional Knowledge and Cultural
Diversity. Dili, Timor Leste, 10th May 2012. UNESCO.
Lewis, M. Paul, Simons, Gary F., and Fennig, Charles D. eds. 2015. Ethnologue: Languages of theWorld. Eighteenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International.
Lith, Pieter Antonie van der, Spaan, A. J., Fokkens, F., and Snelleman, Johannes François eds. 1917.
Encyclopædie van Nederlandsch-Indië. Second edition. The Hague & Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff &E.J. Brill.
Martí, Fèlix, Ortega, Paul, Idiazabal, Itziar, Barreña, Andoni, Juaristi, Patxi, Junyent, Carme, Uranga,
Belen, and Amorrortu, Estibaliz eds. 2005. Words and Worlds : World Languages Review. vol. 52.
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon [England] ; Buffalo [N.Y.]: Multilingual Matters.
Nettle, Daniel. 1999. Using social impact theory to simulate language change. Lingua, 108(2-3), 95117.
Raffles, Thomas Stamford. 1817. The History of Java. London: Black, Parbury, and Allen.
Raffles, Thomas Stamford. 1830. The History of Java. Second edition. London,: J. Murray.
Renandya, Willy A. 2000. Indonesia. In Language Policies and Language Education: The Impact inEast Asian Countries in the Next Decade. eds. Wah Kam Ho and Ruth Y. L. Wong, 113-137.
Singapore: Times Academic Press.
Séguy, Jean. 1973. La Dialectométrie dans l'Atlas Linguistique de la Gascogne. In Revue deLinguistique Romane, 37, 1-24. Paris: Société Linguistique Romane.
Tawangsih, Multamia R.M. 1987. Bahasa-bahasa di Bekasi. Jakarta: Panca Mitra.
Tawangsih, Multamia R.M. 1978. Bahasa di Daerah Bekasi: Sebuah Kajian Lokabasa [Languages in
Bekasi: A Geolinguistic Study], Thesis for Bachelors Degree. Department of Language andLiterature, Universitas Indonesia.

Correspondence between initial sounds in ancient Sino-Vietnamese words
in Viet and Muong languages
Trần Trí Dõi(Prof.Dr., Faculty of Linguistics, USSH, Vietnam National University).
Abstract: In their development history, the Viet and the Muong evolved into
individual but relative languages by the 13th – 14th centuries after the period of VietMuong Common. Both had the same borrowings from Sino when they were still one as
Ancient/Archaic Viet-Muong. For this reason, their phonetics as well as geographicaldifferences among Muong dialects and Vietnamese provide good evidence for identifying
ancient Sino-Vietnamese and Vietnamized Sino-Vietnamese word classes borrowed from
Sino. This will be demonstrated through the correspondence between initial sounds inancient Sino-Vietnamese words in Viet and Muong languages in this paper.
Key words: ancient Sino-Vietnamese, Vietnamized Sino-Vietnamese, Vietnamese
language, Muong language, geographical dialect
1.Ancient Sino-Vietnamese Words in Vietnamese and Muong Languages
1.1. Separation of Vietnamese and Muong Languages in the Viet-Muong Group
Vietnamese (or Viet) and Muong are monosyllabic languages in the Viet-Muonggroup (Vietic) which belongs to the Mon-Khmer branch in the Austroasiatic family
which is considered native to the cultural area of Southeast Asia. Throughout theirdevelopment history, Viet and Muong had been identified as different parts (or dialects)
of proto Viet-Muong/proto Vietic, or PVM for short), ancient/archaic Viet-Muong(AVM) and Viet-Muong Common (VMC). Only after the period of VMC did Viet andMuong start to separate and evolve in their own manner into independent individuals in
the group (Trần Trí Dõi, 2011:98-174). This separation is believed to have occurred
around the 13th-14th centuries.
The difference in the lexicons of Viet and Muong is most probably due to thedifferences in Sino loans. Phonetically, unlike Muong, all pre-nasal or glottalized initials
in PVM became nasal sounds in Viet under the nasalization rule (Trần Trí Dõi, 2011:
186-197). Also, as the two initials in VMC voiceless plosive series became implosives(which are referred to as voiced sounds represented by b and đ at present), the alveolardental fricative *s turned to t as a result of stopization (Trần Trí Dõi, 2015). On the other
hand, in some cases, open syllables with two narrow vowels [*i] and [*u/*o] changed tohalf-open ones with a short middle, more open vowel (*i > ây, ay; *u > âu, au/ao)
followed by a semi-vowel as the ending sound (Trần Trí Dõi, 2015a:85-90).
Thus, in the Viet-Muong group, Viet and Muong shared the same history ofdevelopment from PVM (around 1000 B.C.E) until the 13th-14th centuries C.E., andhistorical changes in the two languages in this period should, in principle, be treated in
the same way. Only when they had evolved into individuals (around the 13th-14th
centuries) did they experience different historical changes. Therefore, we posit that

historical phonetics of Muong can provide good evidence for investigating Sino loans in
the Viet-Muong group.
1.2. Ancient Sino-Vietnamese words in Viet and Muong
Throughout history, Vietnamese in particular and the whole Viet-Muong group in
general did borrow words from Sino. However, researchers are short of convincing
evidence to prove borrowings between the two languages in the PVM period, so
borrowings that have been addressed are those of the AVM period. In his 1948 analysis
of Sino loans in Vietnamese, Vương Lực divided them into three word classes of Sino
origin, namely Hán Việt ngữ, Hán Việt ngữ cổ and Hán Ngữ Việt hóa (lit. SinoVietnamese, Ancient Sino-Vietnamese and Vietnamized Sino, respectively) (Vương Lực,1982). Vương Lực’s view to such identification was subsequently shared by various
scholars in Vietnam and beyond, with slight changes in naming, e.g. Hán Việt ngữ cổ(Ancient Sino-Vietnamese) was called Hán-Việt cổ (Archaic/Ancient Sino-Vietnamese)(ASV), Hán Việt ngữ was called Hán-Việt (Sino-Vietnamese, SV) and Hán ngữ Việt hóa
was called Hán-Việt Việt hóa (Vietnamized Sino-Vietnamese VSV).
Vietnamese words of Sino origin identified as ASV are those borrowed in the
AVM period, e.g. đầu (柕 - head), buồng (ᡣ - room), muôn (ⴙ – ten thousand/many),mùa (ົ - season), mùi (࿡ - smell), etc., and they are currently used as pure Vietnamesewords. In this historical period, as Viet and Muong were still one language, thoseborrowed into Viet probably entered Muong as well. However, the distinction between
ASV and VSV words remains controversial. At present, the lists of these loans (firstdeveloped by Vương Lực) are cited by both Chinese and Vietnamese scholars, with great
differences in numbers. For instance, Nguyễn Văn Khang presented a list of 108 ASV
words, but only 96 of them were noted as cited from Vương Lực (Nguyễn Văn Khang,2007:245-256). Meanwhile, Vũ Đức Nghiệu referred to Nguyễn Văn Khang’s list of 108
words. He also made a new list of 288 instances 1 based on Lý Lạc Nghị, and mentioned
Hà Tuệ Thành’s 196 instances (Vũ Đức Nghiệu, 2011:154-159).
For the sake of this paper, we only limit ourselves to investigating thecorrespondence of initials in ASV using Nguyễn Văn Khang’s list cited from Vương Lực,which is currently most widely accepted. Other lists are still under much debate, as anumber of words are variably regarded as ASV by some but as VSV by others, or viceversa. That again explains why we rely on Nguyễn Văn Khang’s list of ASV cited fromVương Lực.
2.Data and Geography concerning Correspondence of Initials
2.1.Geography of Viet and Muong
When providing explanation for the development history of the Viet-Muonggroup in general, and of Viet and Muong in particular, we pointed out that the differencein their geographical residence is one of the causes to their historical difference. We
stated, “the reason why Viet entered a new period of development was that speakers of
1

When enumerating Ancient Sino-Vietnamese words from Lý Lạc Nghị’s list, Vũ Đức Nghiệu stated thatLý Lạc Nghị “did not make a separate list of ancient Sino-Vietnamese words”. The list presented in VũĐức Nghiệu’s book was based on “his notation and explanations” in the Vietnamese translation of “Tracing
the origin of Sino” (Vũ Đức Nghiệu, 2011: 156).



VMC in the delta and in the mountains experienced various degrees of social impacts”(Trần Trí Dõi, 2011: 155). Such impacts were linguistically attributed to the “Sinicization”
process at differing extents. Observing current settlements of Muong and Viet speakers,
we can see the difference in the geographical distribution of the two communities (seeAnnex: Map 1), which resulted in this historical impact. While Viet speakers mostly
dwelled along the coastal delta, Muong speakers took the geographical intersections
between the plain and the high mountains in the west as their home. Thanks to moreconvenient transport links in the coastal delta, the indigenous Viet people enjoyed morecontact with the Chinese. Meanwhile, the Muong definitely suffered from transportdifficulties, and consequently much less contact with the Chinese than the Viet. We positthat such geographical differences concerning their residence served as key drives to thedivergence of VMC into independent individuals around 700 years ago, resulting inlinguistic differences described earlier in section 1.1.
Geographical differences not only existed between Viet and Muong, but among
various dialects of Muong as well. In a recent study, J.D. Phan once again2 pointed outthat even dialects of Muong did differ greatly in a variety of ways across geographicalareas (John D. Phan, 2012:1-18). In his account, the southern dialects of Muong extended
northward as far as the Muot village in Cam Thuy, Thanh Hoa while the central dialectsof Muong were represented by Na Bai (Cao Phong, Hoa Binh), and the northern dialectsof Muong by Choi hamlet (Tan Son, Phu Tho). Nguyễn Văn Tài’s phonetic analysis ofMuong dialects also showed the same differences among those three regions of Muong
dialects (Nguyễn Văn Tài, 2005). Given the current research situation, when dealing withgeographical differences among Muong dialects, we can make temporary use of the same
southern, central and northern distinction across the three provinces of Thanh Hoa, Hoa
Binh and Phu Tho as those used by John D. Phan.
2.2.Correspondence of initials in Viet and Muong among Ancient SinoVietnamese words
According to Nguyễn Văn Khang, the list of Ancient Sino-Vietnamese words in
Vietnamese enumerated by Vương Lực contains 96 instances. Among these, considering
the place and manner of articulation of initials in syllables, we find rich correspondence
between Viet3 and Muong. In terms of the place of articulation, initials in ASV include
bilabial, dental, alveolar, palatal, velar and glottal consonants; in terms of the manner ofarticulation, they include plosive, fricative and nasal consonants.
However, for the sake of investigation in this paper, we only pay attention to thecorrespondence between nasal and lateral [m, n, ɲ, ŋ, l] among ASV in Viet and Muong
as some examples. We choose nasals and laterals because in Vietnamese phonetic history,these initials are proved to have been the best preserved since PVM4. This means that inprinciple, in their development history, these initials remain almost unchanged. Therefore,
given geographical differences between Viet and Muong speakers, correspondence of2

In his classification of Muong dialects to find data for his study of the Vietnamese language, H. Masperoused geographical distribution as one of the criteria (H. Maspero, 1912: 5).
3
We hereby make temporary use of Sino-Vietnamese pronunciation and Ancient Sino-Vietnamese astranscribed by Nguyễn Văn Khang. In fact, some pronunciation of these words of Sino origin may needreconsidering.
4
See Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1995), Trần Trí Dõi (2009, 2011, 2011a)initials among ASV and Muong dialects may reveal interesting facts concerning ASV in
language history. At present, the way the Muong people use these words of Sino origin ishardly different from that of the Viet. Although not all ASV words in current use in
Vietnamese may find their corresponding forms in Muong, the words identified may
generate some observations of possible borrowings.
More specifically, of the 1,000 words in 30 dialects classified by Nguyễn Văn
Tài5 (NVT), among the nasal and lateral initials, only 3 out of 23 are bilabial and velar,
namely mả, múa, ngẩng (tomb, dance, raise (one’s head), respectively). Muong data
analyzed by Nguyễn Văn Tài are given in the first column of the following table.
Meanwhile, in Muong “Dictionary” by Nguyễn Văn Khang 6 (NVK, chief editor), thenumber of correspondence, though larger, stands at 15 instances, namely 4 instances of[l] out of 6 (lầu, lìa, liềm, lồng – floor, separate, sickle, cage), 7/7 instances of [m] (mèo,mạng, lông mày, mả, mùi, múa, sương mù – cat, web, eyebrow, tomb, smell, dance, fog),
one instance of [n] out of 2 (nộp – pay), 3/7 instances of [ŋ] (ngửa, ngà voi, ngan –supine, ivory, white duck). In “Muong Corpus”7 published in 1987 with 1909 entries, wefind only 6 out of 23 instances of correspondence, including 1 out of 6 of [l] (lừa donkey), 3 out of 7 of [m] (mèo, lông mày, múa – cat, eyebrow, dance), and 2 out of 7 of[ŋ] (ngửa, ngăn – supine, prevent/resist). As both of the “Dictionary” and “Muong
Corpus” are based on the Muong dialect in Tan Lac (Muong Bi) and Lac Son (MuongVang) in Hoa Binh province, they represent the central Muong. Putting them all together,
we get the following correspondence.
Material of Muong language (IPA)
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

SV
ᶂ
㞳
㚣
㐃
⡲
㦯
⊧
࿨
┱
࿡
⯙
㟝
቎
༡
⣡
㎯
␲
㏫
⎰

lâu
li
liêm
liên
lung
lư
miêu
mệnh
mi
vị
vũ
vụ
mộ
nam
nạp
nhục
nghi
nghịchngõaASVlầu (floor)lìa (depart)liềm (sickle)
liền* (immediately, at once)lồng (cage)lừa (donkey)
mèo (cat)mạng (lives/fate)(lông) mày (eye brow)mùi * (smell)múa (dance)(sương) mù (fog/mist)mả (grave)nômnộp (to hand in)nhuốc (sullying)
ngờ/ngỡ * (doubt/think)ngược (against, opposite)
Ngói (tile roof)5

NVT[muǝ3][ma4]-

See Nguyễn Văn Tài (2005: 233-257)
See Nguyễn Văn Khang (2002). We use IPA to transcribe these initials.
7
Published by the Soviet Union’s Academy of Science (AN.SSSP, 1987).
6



-

NVK
[lɤ̆w2][lie2][liem2][loŋ2][mɛ̀w4][maŋ4][măj2][muj4][muǝ5][mu2][ma3][nop1]-

VX-[lɯǝ1][mɛw1][muj1][muǝ3]
-

20
21
22
23

ᚚ
௮
∳
㞜

ngự
ngưỡngnhanhạnngựa (ngăn) horse (to prevent)ngửa/ngẩng (turn upward)ngà (ivory)ngan (musk duck)[ŋɔk3]-[ŋăn1]
[ŋa4]
[ŋa2]
-

[ŋan2][ŋak3]-Note:- NVT is material of Muong language collected in Huy Thuong – a commune in Phu Yen district, Son La
province, Vietnam. (21o16’41’’B, 104o41’34’’Đ)- NVK is material of Muong language collected in Phong Phu commune which is in Muong Bi area of Tan Lac
district, Hoa Binh Province, Vietnam. (20o37’51’’B, 105o12’43’’Đ)- VX is material of Muong language collected in An Nghia commune which is in Muong Vang area of Lac Son
district, Hoa Binh province, Vietnam (20o24’4’’B, 105o30’18’’Đ)

1. Discussion
With the data at hand, we can see initials in ASV in Viet and Muong are treatedalmost the same. Such similarity is found not only between Viet and Muong, but among
various Muong dialects as well. This means Sino loans which are referred to as ASV
have been preserved in Muong in the same way as in Viet. This also means those wordsof Sino origin were borrowed into Viet in AVM period.
Another issue may arise through the investigation of ASV in Viet and Muong. That is,most probably, thanks to the identification of correspondence of Sino words classified as
ASV and VSV in Viet and Muong, we may acquire more clues to re-assert the two wordclasses in Vietnamese, i.e. thanks to Muong data, we can deal with the controversy oversome words of Sino origin which are either believed to be ASV or VSV in different
views.
REFERENCES- Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1995), Giáo trình lịch sử ngữ âm tiếng Việt (Sơ thảo), Nxb
Giáo dục.
- Trần Trí Dõi (2009), Về nguồn gốc lịch sử của dãy âm đầu mũi [m, n, ɲ, ŋ] hiệnnay trong tiếng Việt, Ngôn ngữ, No 11(246)/11-2009, tr 1 - 11.
- Trần Trí Dõi (2011), Giáo trình lịch sử tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo dục Việt Nam.
- Trần Trí Dõi (2011a), Một vài vấn đề nghiên cứu so sánh lịch sử nhóm ngôn
ngữ Việt - Mường, Nxb Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội.
- Trần Trí Dõi (2015), Hiện tượng tắc hóa (stopization) âm đầu trong lịch sửtiếng Việt, Hội thảo Quốc tế“Ngôn ngữ học Việt Nam 30 năm đổi mới và phát triển”,Viện Ngôn ngữ học, Hà Nội ngày 23 tháng 08 năm 2015, 09 tr A4- Trần Trí Dõi (2015a), Góp thêm ý kiến về sự tương ứng giữa vần *[U], *[O] với[ÂW/ĂW] và [AW] trong ngữ âm lịch sử tiếng Việt, Tạp chí Khoa học Xã hội và Nhânvăn (Vietnam Social Sciences and Humanities), số 1 (10/2015), tr 85-90.
- H. Maspéro (1912), Etude sur la phonétique historique de la langue annamite:
Les initiales, BEFEO, XII, no1, pp 1-127.



- Nguyễn Văn Khang chủ biên (2002), Từ điển Mường - Việt, Nxb Văn hoá dântộc.
- Nguyễn Văn Khang (2007), Từ ngoại lai trong tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo dục.
- Vương Lực (1982), Long trùng tịnh điêu trai văn tập. Trung Hoa thư cục, 1982(tiếng Trung)- Vũ Đức Nghiệu (2011), Lược khảo lịch sử từ vựng tiếng Việt, Nxb Giáo dụcViệt Nam.
- John D. Phan (2012), Mường is not a subgroup: Phonological evidence foraparaphyletic taxon in the Viet-Muong sub-family, Mon – Khmer Studies 40: 1-18
-A.N.SSSP, (1987), Jazưk Mương, “Nauka”, Moskva.
- Nguyễn Văn Tài (2005), Ngữ âm tiếng Mường qua các phương ngôn, Nxb Từđiển bách khoa.
Annex I (Map I): Geographical differences between Viet and Muong at present

Annex II (Map II): Geographical distribution of southern, central and northerndialects of Muong

Annex III: List of Ancient Sino-Vietnamese ASV in Muong language- NVT is material of Muong language collected in Huy Thuong – a commune in Phu Yen district, Son La
province, Vietnam. (21o16’41’’B, 104o41’34’’Đ)- NVK is material of Muong language collected in Phong Phu commune which is in Muong Bi area of Tan Lac
district, Hoa Binh Province, Vietnam. (20o37’51’’B, 105o12’43’’Đ)- VX is material of Muong language collected in An Nghia commune which is in Muong Vang area of Lac Son
district, Hoa Binh province, Vietnam (20o24’4’’B, 105o30’18’’Đ)“ᶂ, 㞳, 㚣, ⡲” ( : l)“㦯” ( : l)“⊧” ( : m)“࿨, ┱” ( : m)“࿡” ( : m, : m>v)“⯙” ( : m, : m>v)

“㟝” ( : m, : m>v)

“቎” ( : m)“⣡” ( : n)“ᚚ” ( : ŋ)“௮” ( : ŋ)“∳” ( : ŋ, : ŋ>ɲ)Trần Trí Dõi
Faculty of Linguistics, USSH, Vietnam National University
336, Nguyễn Trãi, Thanh Xuân, Hà Nội Việt Nam
Email: ttdoihanh@gmail.com.

A Phonological Basis for Rethinking Vietnamese Isoglosses
Shimizu Masaaki
Graduate School of Language and Culture, Osaka University

Abstract
This study aims to rethink Vietnamese isoglosses through analysis of the dialectal data collected
in September 2011 and September 2012. The only comprehensive work on Vietnamesedialectology so far is Hoàng (1989). However, in the nearly 20 years since its publication, many
obvious changes occurred in the language's phonological and lexical distribution. We will clarify
which features were subject to change and which were not. The main objective of this study isthe distribution of the initial consonants that show dialectal variations.

1

Introduction

Vietnamese dialectal variation has been an object of many scholars’ interests (Cadier 1902, Maspero
1912, Jones&Huỳnh 1957, Thompson 1959, Hoàng 1989, etc.), and it reflects the geographical spreadof the Việt (Kinh) tribe through its long history of migration (Đặng 1994). From the first description ofeach dialect—especially those of the Christian missionaries—until now, each dialect had undergone
several kinds of changes, among which the phonological changes are quite important when considering
isoglosses.

2

Previous literature

The only comprehensive work on Vietnamese dialectology is Tiếng Việt trên các miền đất nước(Vietnamese of each region) by Hoàng Thị Châu, published in 1989. An important contribution of thiswork is the fact that it showed clear phonological evidence of dialect division. The isoglosses shown
there are still meaningful and remain the basis for dialectal division today. Using the same data as ours,
Kondo (2012) proposed new evidence for Vietnamese isoglosses based on the lexical distribution toensure that the Hoàng's (1989) dialect-division proposal was still significant.

3

Data

The data used in this paper were collected in September 2011 and September 2012 in Vietnam. Most of
the contributors were the university students. The data consist of two portions: reading sounds from thesyllable list and the lexical questionnaire. This study is based on the sound data. Sixty-one consultantsfrom 60 different birth places were required to read the syllable list aloud as written in the modern
Vietnamese orthography, Quốc Ngữ, three times for each syllable. The syllable list consists of three sets:initial consonants with simple rhymes (e.g., /-a1/ and a few /-ɔ1/ cases), rhymes with simple initials (e.g.,/t-/, /k-/, etc.), and the 6 tones in an open syllable, /ta/, and in a sentence (Anh Hà có thể đã hẹn. [ʔaŋ̟1 ha2kɔ5 tʰe3 ᶑa4 hɛn6] “Mr. Ha could have made an appointment”).

4

Methods and Results

All sound data compiled for reading the syllable set were transcribed with IPA and compared among thedialects. In this study, we concentrate on the initial consonants, among which the letters that show
dialectal variation are: ch, d, g, gi, kh, r, s, tr, v, and x (see Table.1). The Northern phonemes for all ofthese letters are fricatives or affricates. The phonetic realization of each letter is as follows:



(1)

Orth.

Sound variation among dialects Maps

r
tr
s
ch
d
gi
v
x
g
kh

[z],
[tʃ],
[s],
[tʃ],
[z],
[z],
[v],
[s],
[ɣ],
[x],

[ʐ],
[ʈʂ],
[ʂ],
[c]
[ɗ],
[ʐ],
[w],
[ʃ]
[ɡ]
[kʰ]

[r~ɽ],
[ʈ]
[ʃ]

[ɣ]

[j]
[j]
[j]

(Fig.1)(Fig.2)(Fig.3)(Fig.4)(Fig.5)(Fig.6)(Fig.7)(Fig.8)(Fig.9)(Fig.10)The distribution of each realized form is plotted in the maps in Figs. 1-10. For some letters, such as d andch, the distribution is quite clear-cut, while for the others, it is not. When we compare our results with
Hoàng’s (1989), shown by the red dashed lines in the maps, the distribution of some letters, such as r, dand gi, coincide with Hoàng's (1989), while others do not. Hereafter, we will attempt to interpret them toconsider the isoglosses of present Vietnamese.

5

Discussion

According to Hoàng (1989), the Vietnamese dialects are divided into three groups: Northern (NOR),
Central (CEN) and Southern (SOU) dialects. Concerning the initial consonants, the isogloss that divides
the NOR and CEN dialects is shown in Maps 1, 2, and 3, while the one that divides the CEN and the
SOU dialects is shown in Map 7. The former is located at the border of the Thanh Hoá and Nghệ An
provinces, and the latter is at the border of the Thừa Thiên-Huế and Quảng Nam-Đà Nẵng provinces,which coincides with the Hải Vân Pass. First, based on these borders, we will allot the sound variants tothree dialects. Their distribution with the Proto Vietmuong (PVM) and 17C phonemes corresponding toeach of them (Shimizu 2015) are as follows:
(2)

PVM
*p *b
*t *d
*c *ɟ
*c *ɟ
*s
*tʃ
*k *g
*kʰ
*Cl*Cr-

5.1

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

17C

SOU

CEN

NOR

Orth.

*β~βj
*ð~ðj
*c
*ȷ
*ɽ
*ʃ
*ɣ
*kʰ
*tl~bl
*ʂ

j/w/v
j
c
j
ɽ~r/ʐ/ɣ
s

v
j/ɗ/z
c
j/ʐ/z
ʐ
s/ʃ

v
z
tʃ
z
z
s
ɣ
x
tʃ
s

(v)
(d)
(ch)
(gi)
(r)
(x)
(g)
(kh)
(tr)
(s)

ɡ~ɣ
kʰ~x
ʈ~ʈʂ
ʂ~ʃ

Geographical Interpretation

Four isoglosses can be settled through Hoàng’s (1989) study and our own, and their phonologicalevidence is summarized as follows:



(3)
Isoglosses
ձThanh Hoa-Nghệ An
ղNgang PassճHải Vân PassմBình Thuận-Ninh Thuận

Hoàng (1989)
r [z-ʐ], tr [tʃ-ʈ], s [s-ʂ]
d [z-j], gi [z-j]v [v-j]Data in 2011, 2012
r [~z], tr [~tʃ], ch [c~] *ch [~tʃ], d [z-j], gi [j~]v [w/j~]* [~A] denotes that the sound A distributes from the origin northward, while [A~] from the origin southward.

Two isoglosses ձ and ղ still are meaningful for the present situation, while as far as the initialconsonants are concerned, a very important line (ճ), which is regarded as the border between the CEN
and the SOU dialects, does not suit the present situation. The point here is the reading of the letter v.
According to Hoàng (1989), in the SOU dialect, the letter v is usually read as [v] only in the cultural
lexicon (i.e., Sino-Vietnamese), while it is read in others as [j]. However, at present, the NOR and CEN[v] have spead to the SOU region.
5.2

Historical Interpretation

The chronological order of each phoneme in (2) and its dialectal distribution can be estimated asfollows:
(4)

Orth.

17C

Present

v

*βj

j
β

>
>

j
v

SOU
CEN/NOR

d

*ðj

j
ð

>
>

j
z

SOU/CEN
CEN/NOR

ch

*c

c

>

tʃ

SOU/CEN > NOR

gi

*ȷ

j

> ʐ >

z

SOU > CEN > NOR

r

*ɽ

ɽ

> ʐ >

z
ɣ

SOU > CEN > NOR
SOU (Mekong Delta region)

x

*ʃ

ʃ

>

s

CEN > SOU/NOR

g

*ɣ

ɡ

>

ɣ

SOU/CEN > NOR

kh

*kʰ

kʰ

>

x

SOU/CEN > NOR

tr*tl~blʈ> ʈʂ > tʃ

SOU/CEN > NOR

s

*ʂ

ʂ

> ʃ

SOU/CEN > NOR> s

Dialectal distribution

As for the initial consonants, it is quite obvious that the NOR phonemes always show the mostinnovative forms. Meanwhile, in some cases, such as gi and r, the SOU dialect preserves the oldest form,
and the CEN dialect shows the intermediate forms. In other cases, the CEN dialect preserves the older
form (e.g., for x) or the SOU and CEN dialects preserve the older ones (e.g., for ch, g, kh, tr, and s).

6

Conclusion

Through the discussion above, as for the initial consonants, the border between the CEN and SOU
dialects are becoming unclear, compared to the situation 20 years ago. However, the border between the
NOR and CEN dialects is still quite obvious, which makes the status of NOR speech outstanding, andcan give way to the spread of NOR speech to other regions.

Acknowledgements
Our thanks go to Prof. Trần Trí Dõi with the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Hanoi, for
his great help in our research.
References
Cadière, Léopold E. 1902. Phonétique annamite (dialecte du Haut-Annam), E. Leroux, Paris, France.
Đặng Thu. 1994. Di dân của người Việt từ thế kỷ X đến giữa thế kỷ XIX [Migration of the Viet from the Xth century
to the middle of the XIXth century], Trung tâm Nghiên cứu Dân số và Phát triển, Hà Nội, Việt Nam.
Hoàng Thị Châu. 1989. Tiếng Việt trên các miền đết nước: Phương ngữ học [Vietnamese of each region:
Dialectology]. Nhà xuất bản Khoa học Xã hội, Hà Nội, Việt Nam.
Jones, Robert B., Huỳnh Sanh Thông. 1957. Introduction to Spoken Vietnamese, American Council of Learned
Societies, Washington, USA.
Kondo Mika. 2012. A preliminary survey of the isoglosses in Vietnam, Papers from the First International
Conference on Asian Geolinguistics, December 14-15, 2012, Aoyama Gakuin University, Tokyo, Japan:
45-64.
Maspero, Henri. 1912. Études sur la phonétique historique de la langue annamite: les initiales, BEFEO, 12: 1-126.
Shimizu Masaaki. 2015. A Reconstruction of Ancient Vietnamese Initials Using Chữ Nôm Materials, NINJAL
Research Papers, 9: 135-158.
Thompson, Laurence C. 1959. Saigon Phonemics, Language, 35(3): 454-476.



ձ


z
ʐ

* Dashed lines (͐):
Isoglosses in
Hoàng (1989)

Fig.1 r (z: ●, ʐ: ●, r~ɽ: ●, ɣ: ●)

ձ


tʃ
ʈ

Fig.2 tr (tʃ: ●, ʈʂ: ●, ʈ: ●)* Isogloss in
Hoàng (1989)

ձ


s
ʂ

Fig.3 s (s: ●, ʂ: ●, ʃ: ●)

ձ


ղ


Fig.4 ch (tʃ: ●, c: ●)* Isogloss in
Hoàng (1989)

ղ


z
j

* Isogloss in
Hoàng (1989)zj* Isogloss in
Hoàng (1989)

Fig.5 d (z: ●, ɗ: ●, j: ●)ղ

Fig.6 gi (z: ●, ʐ: ●, j: ●)



v
ճ


մ


Fig.7 v (v: ●, w: ●, j: ●)Fig.8 x (s: ●, ʃ: ●)j* Isogloss in
Hoàng (1989)

Fig.9 g (ɣ: ●, ɡ: ●)Fig.10 kh (x: ●, kʰ:●)Table.1
No.

province, etc.

Birth place

ra

trà

so

và

xa

1

Thái Nguyên

ucky

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

cho

zaː1

da

zaː5

giá

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

gà

xɔː5

khó

9

Vĩnh Phúc

ducbac

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

15

Bắc Giang

quenham

zaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

6

Bắc Ninhbacninh

ɽaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

8

Hải Dương

namsachɽaː1ңʐaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔːɑ1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔːɑ5

19

Hải Dương

ngocchauraː1ңzaː1ʈʂaː2sɔː1ңʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

ʐaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

5

Hưng Yên

vinhkhuc

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

20

Hải Dương

trungkhanh

raː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

13

Hưng Yên

thuanhung

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

3

Hà Tây

hatay

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2ңɡaː2

xɔː5ңkʰɔː5

11

Hải Phòng

dongphuong

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

18

Hải Dương

tucuong

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

17

Hải Dương

hungthairaː1>zaː1ʈʂaː2>tʃaː2

ʂɔː1>sɔː1tʃɔːɑ1zaː1ʐaː5>zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔːɑ5

10

Hà Tâyunghoa

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

2

Hưng Yên

antao

raː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5ңkʰɔː5

7

Hà Namlynhan

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

4

Hà Namthanhliem

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

16

Nam Định

daithangraː1ңzaː1ңʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

ʃɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2ңɡaː2

xɔː5

70

Thanh Hoáthanhtho

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

14

Nam Định

nghiahungʐaː1ңraː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

68

Thanh Hoá

hunglocth

zaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

67

Thanh Hoáhoangkhanhɽaː1ңʐaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

kʰɔː5ңxɔː5

64Thanh Hoá

hauloc

zaː1

tʃaː2

ʃɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

73

Nghệ Anquyhop

ɽaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

69

Nghệ Andienthap

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

72

Nghệ An

phuthanh

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

62

Nghệ An

vandien

ɽaː1

tʃaː2

ʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

65

Nghệ Anhungloc

ɽaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

71

Nghệ An

vinh

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

tʃɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

12

Hà Tĩnh

buixa

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

40

Quảng Bìnhlytrach

ɾaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

ɗaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

61

Quảng Bìnhhaidinh

ɽaː1

ʈaː2

ʃɔː1

cɔː1

zaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2ңɣaː2

kʰɔː5

38

Quảng Trịvinhkim

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

vaː2

ʃaː1>saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

39

Huế

quangdien

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

kʰɔː5

44

Đà Nẵngthoquang

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

tʃɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

kʰɔː5

54

Đà Nẵngdanang1

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

xɔː5

50

Đà Nẵng

camle1

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

49

Hội An

cudai

ɽaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

53

Hội An

hoian

ʐaː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

46

Quảng Namdaihoaʐɔ̆ɑː1

ʈʂɑː2

ʃɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vwɑː2

sɔ̆ɑː1

ɣɑː2

xɔː5

43

Quảng Namduyhoarɔ̆aː1ʈɔ̆aː2sɔː1cɔː1jɔ̆aː1jɔ̆aː5vɔ̆aː2ʃɔ̆aː1ɡɔ̆aː2xɔː552Quảng Namtamgiang

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

zaː1ңjaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

xɔː5

48

Quảng Namtammydongʐɔ̆aː1ʈɔ̆aː2ʂɔː1cɔː1jɔ̆aː1jɔ̆aː5vɔ̆aː2sɔ̆aː1ɣɔ̆aː2xɔː542Quảng Ngãitunghia

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɑɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɑɔː5

56

Bình Định

quynhon

ʐaː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

ᶁaː1ңjaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

kʰɔː5>xɔː5

57

Phú Yên

tuyhoa

raː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

kʰɔː5

41

Khánh Hoàdienkhanh

raː1

ʈʂaː2

ʃɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

58

Ninh Thuận

phuocson

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

31

Long Anmyhanhbac

raː1ңɽaː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

ʋaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

24

Bình Thuận

thuanquy

raː1

tʃaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

waː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

26

tp HCMbinhthanh1

ɽaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

27

Long Antphcm2

ʐaː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

ʝaː1

dʒaː5>ʝaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

25

Tiền Giang

tphcm1

raː1

ʈʂaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

jaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5>kʰɔː523

tp HCMbinhchanh

raː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

30

BR-VT

xuyenmoc

raː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

32

An Giangkienan

ɣaː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

jaː2

saː1

ɣaː2ңɡaː2

xɔː5

21

Bến Trep3bentre

raː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

jaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

35

Bến Treluongquoi

ɣaː1

ʈaː2

ʂɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

zaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

22

Bến Trephuochiep

raː1

ʈaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

jaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5

36

Vĩnh Phúc

tambinhɣaː1ңɡaː1

ʈaː2

ʃɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

vaː2

saː1

ɡaː2

kʰɔː5

28

Sóc Trăng

tanlong

ɣaː1

ʈʂaː2

sɔː1

cɔː1

jaː1

jaː5

jaː2

saː1

ɣaː2

xɔː5



Domaaki as a language of northern Pakistan:from a geolinguistic point of view
YOSHIOKA Noboru
National Museum of Ethnology, Japan

Abstract
This is a pilot study to draw the linguistic similarity and dissimilarity among languages
graphically as treating Domaaki, spoken in northern Pakistan, being a geneologically once or
still conrtoversial language as the main subject of discussion. By means of geolinguistics I plot
maps of languages/dialects with differently coloured symbols which reflect the ratio of
idiosyncretic items and the deviation of similarity to any ideal language(s). As a result Domaaki
appears to be a geneologically Central Indic language being more affected by Dardic languages
than Burushaski, indeed.

1

Introduction

The Domaaki language, an Indo-Aryan language spoken in northern Pakistan, has been consideredeither as a Dardic language or as a Central Aryan language. Even though there were actually (but few)
description on the language, its geneological position was, or is still, controversial among scholars. I
think it is caused by that the characteristics of Domaaki include the ones of both language groups. While
the strict position is unknown within the Indo-Aryan group, Domaaki shows much similarity to anothersurrounding language, Burushaski, too.
Here, I try to illustrate how the Domaaki language is close to Dardic languages, Central Aryan
languages, and Burushaski graphically by taking a hint from geolinguistic ways to show data.

2

Domaaki and the surrounding languages

Domaaki is the ethnic language of Doma /ɖóma/ people. But actually many Doma in northern Pakistan
do not speak Domaaki, and they have selected to use other languages most of which are the languages ofother ethnic groups, such as Burushaski, Shina, Khowar, Wakhi, Balti.
In northern Pakistan, there are many languages from different language families / branches (see Map
1 on the next page). Domaaki itself is a Central Indic language as an outland far from the area of theCentral languages including Hindi-Urdu. This language is completely enclaved by Burushaski which isa language isolate (purple in the map). And around Burushaski there are some Dardic languages,
including Shina, Khowar, Kalasha, and Kashmiri, which are classified as Northwestern Indic languages(Indic is yellow in the map). While, north to Burushaski, an Eastern Iranian language Wakhi is spoken(Iranian is red). In the west side of northern Pakistan, there is also a Nuristani language (orange
coloured) Kati spoken by a few people. The Nuristani branch belongs to Indo-Iranian group, but it is on
the same level as Indic (Aryan) and Iranian. At the southeast to Shina area, they speak Balti being a
Tibetan language (light green in the map).
Now, based on my research, the Domaaki language is spoken only in two communities. The first is
Mominabad village of Hunza valley, in Hunza-Nager district in Gilgit-Baltistan administrative territory,
and the second is Bedishal hamlet at Uyum Nager village of Nager valley, in the same district. Domapeople living in the other places, they can no longer speak the language. The speakers of Domaaki are in
total less than 500 people at most. They use Burushaski for daily life in their community nowadays, too.
Historically Domaaki has sometimes been considered as a Dardic language like to the otherIndo-European languages in this area. Or some scholars may be still thinking so, while many evidencesMap 1. Languages and Language families / branches in northern Pakistan

say “no”. Because Domaaki shows much similarity with Dardic languages I think. And that is why I
want to show the characteristics of Domaaki now.
In this pilot study, I treat Urdu and the following languages and dialects which I have surveyed on by
myself: Mominabad Domaaki (2 consultants’ data), Bedishal Domaaki, Karimabad Burushaski, Ganish
Burushaski, Nager Burushaski, Yasin Burushaski, Gilgit Shina, Ishkoman Khowar, Yasin Khowar, andRumbur Kalasha.

3

How to draw the similarity and dissimilarity among languages

Taking a hint from geolinguistic way to visualise, I illustrate the distance among the characteristics oflanguages in northern Pakistan here. On Map 1 above the language groups are distinguished by colours,
but the distinction is based on the geneological classes and the colouring does not reflect actual
similarity and dissimilarity among languages, indeed.
Meanwhile in geolinguistics, I felt that the results of study usually show dis/similarity among
languages despite of language families. Some of them show the cases that geographic closeness reflects
linguistic similarity, and something else show that geographic closeness sometimes cannot surpass the
geneological bonds. Anyway it seems the geolinguistic ways are valid to know linguistic dis/similarity
among neighbouring languages. The ways can be useful to illustrate the characteristics of a once
controversial language, Domaaki.
In the following procedure I try to draw out the character of Domaaki:



1.

Fixing three primary colours, red, green, and blue, on the three ideal (typical) languages
concerning to Domaaki, that is, Urdu as a Central Indic language, Shina as a Dardic language,and Burushaski as a circumjacent language, respectively.
2. Comparing the linguistic items of 11 sample languages (see §2 above) to the ones of three ideal
languages.
i.
When an item is (apparently) cognate with any ideal language, then the said language will
be coloured with the colour of the ideal language.
ii.
When an item is not cognate with any ideal language, then it will not get any colour.
iii.
When an item is cognate with two or three ideal languages, then it gets all colours of theideal langauges concerned. (For example, an item cognate both with Urdu and Shina, thenthe item will be cloloured yellow, which is made with red and green.)

At this stage, a map is drawn for an item. The following three maps are examples of basic vocaburaly
items “stone”, “water”, and “write”. In this scale, the dialects of Burushaski and Domaaki in Hunza andNager valleys are overlapping, but to explain the making method of maps and to inform how languages
are similar or dissimilar in this wider ranged area. Notice that Urdu position in these maps are not strict,and the actual position of Urdu is more southward. Ideal languages are plotted with larger circles.
Ishkoman Khowar
ideal Burushaski

Yasin Khowar
ideal Shina

Yasin
Burushaski

Burushaskis &Domaakis
Shina

KalashaUrdu
ideal Urdu
Map 2. The map of “stone”

Map 3. The map of “water”

Map 4. The map of “write”

In Map 4, Shina and Urdu show the same origin and then they are shown in yellow colour, while otherDardic languages, i.e. Khowar and Kalasha, have other type of forms and then they are black (no colour)
here.
3.

Piling up given maps for each item. At the time, RGB colour scores (8-bit) of each point arecalculated into the average marks.

Ћ Nager Domaaki

Map 5. The piled map of “stone”, “water”, and “write”

For example, Nager Domaaki in Map 5 is coloured with gray [85.85.85: RGB], as a result of three scores,
green [0.255.0] in Map 2, red [255.0.0] in Map 3, and blue [0.0.255] in Map 4.
In this way, we can see the likelihood of each language comparing to ideal languages.
Luminousity reflects the degree how many items which are (not) cognate with the ones of some ideal
language a said language has. The darker a language symbol is, the more idiosyncratic items thelanguage has.
Saturation indicates the degree how much a language inclines toward some ideal languages. If alanguage is symbolised more colourfully, it means the language is more specifically similar to less than
three ideal languages.

Of course, hue shows to which ideal language a given language is similar on asked items.
But less luminous colours are surely difficult to distinguish by human eyes, so that I make one morekinds of maps which is inflated luminousity.
4.

Inflating luminousity of maps made in the #3 process for the sake of perceptibility, as adding
same scores on each of RGB to make the largest score up to 255.

Map 6. The inflated map of “stone”, “water”, and “write”

Now the luminousity is amplified and symbols remain only saturation and hue values. For example,
Nager Domaaki in Map 6 is symbolised with completely white colour, because the data of the idiolect istrichotomic and its [85.85.85] score has become [255.255.255]. It is not similar to any ideal language
specifically here.

4

Vocaburaly

At first I illustrated the languages of northern Pakistan on 480 basic vocabulary. In my fieldwork I
almost always start survey with 500 basic vocabulary based on Tokunaga et al. (1967). Some words inthe questionnaire are not suite for northern Pakistan, and then I treat only 480 words’ data for this study.
The result is as follows:Map 7. The piled map of 480 vocabulary

Except Burushaski, Shina, and Urdu, all languages have got very dark. They are not quite similar to anyof ideal languages.

Map 8. The luminousity inflated map of 480 vocabulary

The luminousity inflated map shows the points: Khowar and Kalasha being yellow coloured have bothcharacteristics of Dardic (Shinaish) and Central (Urduish). This fact can be said that Shina may not be atypical Dardic language.
To see the Domaaki situation, I enlarge the enclosed part in Map 8 below.

Karimabad Burushaski
Hunza Domaaki 1
Hunza Domaaki 2
Ganish Burushaski

Nager Domaaki
Map 9. The luminousity inflated map of 480 vocabulary in Hunza-Nager

We can see that three Domaaki symbols get different colours. Nager Domaaki, of a 50’s man, shows themost Shinaish characteristics and Hunza Domaaki 2, of a 20’s man, is sufficiently Urduish. Hunza
Domaaki 1, of a 30’s woman, takes a middle position between the two idiolects.

5

Grammatical topics

I illustrate similarity maps not only on 480 vocabulary, but also on 15 grammatical items in the sameway.
KhowarYasin Burushaski

Hunza-Nager Ѝ
BurushaskiЋ Domaaki

Shina
KalashaUrdu

Map 10. The piled map of 15 grammatical items

The 15 items are as follows:
Numeral base (decimal / Indefinite singular affix (y/n)
vigesimal)
Fixed-segmentofecho Causative derivational affix(y/n)
formation (/w/, /ţ/, /m/)Retroflex affricates (y/n)
Voiced aspirate consonants(y/n)
Complex predicates (y/n)
Passive construction (y/n)
Use of prefixes (y/n)

Gender system (2-way / 4-way)Indefinite plural affix (y/n)
Anticausative derivational affix(y/n)
Nasal vowels (y/n)
Impersonal causal expressions(y/n)
Neutralisation of negative
copulae (none / all / partial)

Map 10 is not inflated on the luminousity. There are several areal features on the grammars in thisarea, northern Pakistan, that is a reason we would misunderstand what are inherent characteristics andwhat are a posteriori auquired characters under language contacts for a long period. Actually, Domaaki
shows bluish green colour here, which is more bluish than other Dardic languages but rather greenish
than bluish at the score [R:44 G:121 B:99].
Of course, it is very problematic, I am feeling, about that here I treat every grammatical features as if
they have the same value each other.

6

Conclusions and further issues

This is a pilot study to illustrate linguistic similarity and dissimilarity by means of geolinguistic
graphical display.
There still remain many points to be improved, actually. However I could aware some charactersanew with this study, such as that the personal vocabularies of three Domaaki consultants vie with eachother whether they have more Dardic or Central Indic cognate words than the other branch’s andBurushaski words. I was always feeling in fieldworks that Domaaki has so many Burushaski
characteristics that it might be a creole between Indic and Burushaski, but now my suchmisunderstandings are completely wiped out by the results. Domaaki is never a kind of Burushaski
creole. Illustrated maps in this study tell us that Domaaki is possibly a language of Central Indic group
geneologically, whereas it is well affected by Dardic, or specially Shina, as well as Burushaski. The
reason why Dardic influence is stronger than Burushaski effect may be at the primitive commonality of
the genes of Domaaki, Shina, and Burushaski or at the original similarity of lingustic parts among thelanguages concerned.
It is interesting that western Dardic languages, i.e. Khowar and Kalasha in this study are
considerably different from Shina as an eastern Dardic language both on the vocabulary and thegrammar. There are more western and eastern Dardic languages in a wide area from northwestern
Pakistan to northwestern India. As a farther issue, it should be discussed on where, or which language,is the centre of Dardic languages. Shina does not seem so.

Acknowledgements
I am deeply grateful to my field consultants: Qhushan (Mominabad Domaaki), Ali Ahmad Jan(Mominabad Domaaki), Gohar Ali (Bedishal Domaaki), Amir Qhan (Karimabad Burushaski), Musa
Baig (Ganish Burushaski), Ainur Qhayat (Nager Burushaski), Arshad Ali (Yasin Burushaski), Masood
Rehman (Gilgit Shina), Said Ghulam Nabi Wafa (Ishkoman Khowar), Sharif Ullah (Yasin Khowar), andYasir Arafat (Rumbur Kalasha). For the remaining flaws I can blame only myself. This work was
supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15H05380.
Reference
Tokunaga, Yasumoto et al. (eds.) 1967. Linguistic Questionnaire for Asia and Africa 2. Tokyo: Research Institutefor Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

Geographical Distribution of the /r/ type sounds in Zhuang
Mitsuaki Endo
Aoyama Gakuin University

Abstract
A chronological order concerning / r / type sounds in Zhuang is given based on processes ofmerger as well as geographical distribution. Complicated types are found in the Southern group;
however, it is easier to reconstruct the changing process step by step in such an area.
Directionalities of sound changes were extracted from these concrete changes.

1

Introduction

This paper discusses the geographical distribution of the / r / type sounds in Zhuang, a Tai-Kadai
language located mainly in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China. Yuan (1963) 1 first gave
11 corresponding rules with full data for 98 words/morphemes among the 51 Zhuang dialects, as
follows:
Reconstructed
LexicalForms
Sound Correspondences among Dialects
Items Frequency----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------*ʔrhj : ɣ : r : ð : z : h : j : l : hl
1-9
9
*ʔru̯
hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : j : l : hl : jw : zw : lw : w(v)10-156*thr (*tr)

hj : h: ɣ : r : ð : z : j : l : th (t)

16-26

11

*thru̯ (*tru̯)

hjw : hw : hj : h : ɣ : r : ð : z : j : jw : l : lw : th (t)

27-28

2

*khr (*kr)

hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : j : l : hl : khj : h

29-36

7

*khru̯

hjw : hw : hj : h : ɣ : rjw : rw : r : ð : zw : z : jw : j : lw : l : w : hl : khj : kh

37-41

4

*r (*ru̯)hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : θ : j : l

42-67

26

*nr (*nru̯)hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : θ : j : l : n

68-75

8

*ɣ

hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : θ : j : l : hl : ɬ

76-91

16

*ɣu̯

hjw : hj : hw : rw : ɣ : r : ð : z : θw : jw : lw : hl : ɬ : h

92-95

4

*ŋr

hj : ɣ : r : ð : z : θ : j : l : n : ŋ : h

96-98

3

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------Table 1. Sound Correspondences concerning / r / in Zhuang

These rules were extracted with an orthodox comparative linguistic method, and they serve as soundchange chains among cognate words/morphemes. Here, we can ask further questions, such as what are
their geographical distibutions, and how did these differences come about. As a matter of fact, Yuan
(1963: 191) declared that this detailed dialectal information was given for drawing dialect maps. Now,
we are going to put his plan to practice.

1 This paper was included in Yuan (2010) as well, but 4 lines were lacking from line 15 of page 173, due tomisprinting.

2

Places and subdivisions of the Zhuang dialects

The places which Yuan (1963) reported are as follows: 1. Liujiang, ḣ⊏; 2. Northern Laibin, ᶕᇮ(㓒≤⋣े); 3. Yishan, ᇌኡ; 4. Liucheng, ḣ෾; 5. Xincheng, ᘫ෾; 6. Luocheng, 㖇෾; 7. Huanjiang, ⧟⊏; 8. Damiaoshan, བྷ㤇ኡ˄བྷᓉኡ˅; 9. Rong'an, 㶽ᆹ; 10. Sanjiang, й⊏; 11. Yongfu, ≨⾿; 12.
Longsheng, 嗉㜌; 13. Hechi, ⋣⊐; 14. Nandan, ইѩ; 15. Donglan, ь‫ ;ޠ‬16. Du'an, 䜭ᆹ; 17. Mashan,傜ኡ; 18. Shanglin, к᷇; 19. Southern Laibin, ᶕᇮ(㓒≤⋣ই); 20. Wuyi, ↖ᇌ; 21. Xiangxian, 䊑৯;
22. Luzhai, 咯መ; 23. Guixian, 䍥৯˄䍥⑟˅; 24. Lipu, 㦄⎖; 25. Yangshuo, 䱣ᵄ; 26. Binyang, ᇮ䱣;
27. Northern Hengxian, ⁚৯े; 28. Southern Hengxian, ⁚৯ই; 29. Northern Yongniang, 䛅ᆱ(䛅⊏े ); 30. Wuming, ↖ 呓 ; 31. Pingguo, ᒣ ᷌ ; 32.
Tiandong, ⭠ь; 33. Tianyang, ⭠䱣; 34. Baise, Ⲯ㢢;
35. Tianlin, ⭠᷇; 36. Longlin, 嗉᷇; 37. Lingle, ߼Ҁ;
38. Fengshan, ࠔኡ; 39. Qinxian, 䫖৯; 40. Southern
Yongning, 䛅ᆱ(䛅⊏ই); 41. Long'an 䲶 ᆹ ; 42.
Northern Fusui, ᢦ㔕(े); 43. Southern Fusui, ᢦ㔕( ই); 44. Shangsi, кᙍ; 45. Chongzuo, ጷᐖ; 46.
Ningming, ᆱ᰾; 47. Longzhou, 嗉ᐎ; 48. Daxin, བྷᯠ;
49. Tiandeng, ཙㅹ; 50. Debao, ᗧ‫ ;؍‬51. Jingxi, 䶆㾯.
The Zhuang language is divided into two dialectgroups: The Northern dialects consist of places No. 1 toNo. 38, and Southern dialects consist of No. 39 to No.
51 as seen in map 1. The Northern and Southern groups,
belong to the Northern Tai and Central Tai, respectively
according to the standard classification of Tai
languages as given in Li (1977).
Map 1.
Hereafter, all maps are drawn with Arc GIS Online. Northern and Southern groups of Zhuang

3

Specimens of individual maps: lexical items No. 1 and No. 12

The 98 lexical items are drawn in linguistic maps as seen in the Appendix. Here are two specimens for
lexical items No. 1 and No. 12.

Map 2. Lexical item No. 1 Stem morpheme of Amaranthus tricolor

Map 3. Lexical item No. 12 mushroom
For each lexical item, only data for a cognate form with / r / type sound is found in Yuan (1963).
Therefore, places having such a form differ from word to word; in some items, almost all dialects
occupy the same form, while in others, only few places occupy such a form.
It is observed that rivers and roads play a role in the dispersion of a linguistic feature. For example,
form [ l ] is found along the Youjiang River and Yujiang River in map 2, as well as along the ZuojiangRiver in map 3, and so on. Wei (2015) pointed out a similar observation drawing a linguistic map of"house" with / r / type initial consonant in Zhuang. Furthermore, he postulated the following changing
process using a diagram as seen in Pan (2010):             В ɣ*r Ѝ r Ѝ l / hl Ѝ j / hj Ѝ z Ѝ ð          Г ɬ     Г θThis is an interesting and meaningful attempt, butsince this directionality was given merely by theory ofsound change, it is necessary to find evidence to prove
the hypothesis,
Unfortunately, geographical distributions give little
help to decide the chronological order of a phonologicalphenomenon. Since the norm of ABA distribution or
peripheral distribution depends on the First Principle ofLinguistics by Saussure, e.g. arbitrariness of language
sign, it is applicable to a lexical item which is acombination of sound and meaning. However, cognate
forms are used to examine a phonological phenomenon.
They have a common origin by definition. And a soundcan change into another sound in separated areas
independently. A well-known example among Japanesedialectologists is that the proto *ai rests intact in thecentral area of the main island of Japan, while it changed
into [ e:, ɛ:, æ: ] etc. in peripheral areas as seen in map 4cited from Sato (2002: 314).
Map 4. Reflections of *ai in Japanese dialects4

Merging Types of Proto-Phonemes

However, according to comparative linguistics, there is a principle concerning sound categories: giventhat two (or more) sound categories in a dialect correspond only to one caterory in another dialect, if
there is no conditioning factor (e.g. complementary distribution) between these categories, then amerger occurred in the later dialect. Endo (2015) displayed geographical distributions and relative
chronology of tone category types in Tai-Kadai using this method, and extracted directionalities of tone
value change. Here, we apply this point of view to the / r / type initial consonants in Zhuang. Table 2
shows the various reflection types regarding merging patterns of proto categories. Types A to G belong
to the Southern Group, while types H to R belong to the Northern Group. Proto categories *hr, *thr,*khr occur in upper tone categories which derived from voiceless initials, the others occur in lower tone
categories which derived from voiced initials.
Types

A

B

*hr

h

h

*thr

th

*khr

khj

khj

*r

l

l

l

l

*nr

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

*ɣ

r

ɬ

ɬ

l

l

hl

l

*ŋr

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

n

50

47

48

46

43

41

44

42

51
Places

C

D

E

F

G

h

h

hl

l

th

th

th

l

hl

l

h
khj

H

I

J

j

j

j

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

ɣ,
hj

l
l

r

θ

39

10

6-8

9

40

15

45
49

ɣ

r

ð

z

l

j

h,
hj

1

19-

4

5

36

28

11-

3

22

16

26

29

14

18

24

17

27

32-

25

23

35

30

31

37

2

21

38

Table 2. Reflecting types of proto-phonemes among Zhuang dialects
Essentially the same table is already given in Yuan (1963: 190), in which the proto categories withrounded medial u̯ are omitted as well. There are some amendments: 1) *ʔr by Yuan (1963) is replacedby *hr, following the reconstruction by Li (1977: 148-151) and Liang & Zhang (1996: 101). The reason
for the reconstruction of *ʔr opposing to *r is the fact that these morphemes are read in upper toneclasses, denoting the voiceless origin of the initial consonants. Although a three-fold distinction
consisting of glottalized, voiceless and voiced sonorants exists in the Kadai branch, voiceless sonorants
commonly exist in the Tai branch as indicated in traditional orthographies in Siamese, Laos, and so on.
Moreover, *hr or *r̥ is far more easier to explain the changing process to the modern descendants like[ h ], [ hl ], and [ hj ]. 2) Types A to R are distinguished and given names by this paper. 3) Correctionof misprinting and errors in writing: Type H was written as seen in place 5, but actually it should be 15,
and 10 should be also added; Type I was written as seen in places 8 and 13, but actually places 6, 7, 11,
12, 14 should belong to this type instead of the original Type M. 4) Type R is separated from originalType L, since there are many cases of other reflections as [h] and [hj] in this place.
The geographical distributions of these types are displayed in map 5 below.

Map 5. Geographical distribution of merging types concerning / r / type sounds in Zhuang

5

Chronological Order of Each Type based on Merging Process

Now we trace the merging process from the proto system to each type step by step. This process is
displayed on the map comparing geographical distribution. Finally, directionalities of sound valuechanges will be extracted from this process.
5.1

Changing Process in the Southern Group

Type A distinguishes all 7 categories in the proto system; therefore it should be the oldest. As for thechanges of sound values, *hr > h and *thr > th are a simple drop of medial *r. In *khr > khj, medial *rchanged into j. This is a frequently observed pattern of sound change. *r > l is also a well-known typeof change, for example, Bangkok or Southern district Siamese r- initial is pronounced as l in Isan
Siamese or Lao. As a result of this change, the distinction between *r and *l in Proto-Zhuang coalesced
into single l-, while this distinction was kept in the Northern Group. By and large, the Southern Group isconservative in terms of protection of proto distinctions regarding / r / type sounds, while in this regard
the Northern Group kept the older distinction of categories. *nr > n and *ŋr > ŋ are again a simple dropof medial *r. Regarding *ɣ > r, the exact phonetic nature of *ɣ is also a problem, and no further
comment is given here.

Types

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

*hr

h

h

h

h

hl

l

*thr

th

th

th

th

*khr

khj

khj

l

hl

l

*r

l

l

l

l

*nr

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

*ɣ

r

ɬ

ɬ

l

l

hl

l

*ŋr

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

ŋ

n

h
khj

l

Table 3. and Map 6. Changing process in the Southern GroupThe change from type A to type B is accomplished only by one step: th > h, and in type C, the further
change khj > h also occurred. These changes are the loss of closure between tongue and palate. The
nature of change between [ r ] in type A and [ ɬ ] in types B & C for *ɣ is uncertain.
Type D still keeps [ khj ], so it is relatively older than type C. At the same time, it has a sharedinnovation from proto *hr and *thr to [ h ] with type B. Therefore, type D came from type B, and thedistinction between *r and *ɣ merged into [ l ].
Type E has kept *th, so it is older than types B, C, and D, and it should be derived directly from type
A in this regard. However, type E has a common innovation with type D regarding the merger of *r and*ɣ. Besides, type E further experienced the merger of *khr into *r and *ɣ.
Type F has a shared innovation with type E regarding the merger of *khr and *ɣ. However, it keeps
the distinction between *khr and *r; hence it couldn't be derived from type E. Also, type F keeps proto*thr category; therefore it couldn't be derived from type B, C, or D, but from type A or the proto type.
An innovation from *hr to [ hl ] occurred and coalesced with *khr and *ɣ. The sound value [ hl ] for *hr
and *khr is also noteworthy. The first element [ h ] may be regarded as the retention of the first elementof proto initials *hr and *khr.
Type G is similar to type F regarding the merger of *hr, *khr, and *ɣ, but the actual sound is [ l ], not[ hl ] of type F. In this regard, type G is the same as type E, as well as the merger of *r to [ l ]. Moreover,proto *ŋr merged to the descendant of *nr, and became [ n ].
The whole changing process can be diagrammed as in table 4 below: В CA ЍBЍD ГЎ̿̿̿̿Ѝ E Г
F ̿̿̿̿̿̿Ѝ G

Table 4.
Chronological order of merger types in the Southern group

Map 7.
Shared innovationsin the Southern groupShared innovations in the Southern group are shown in map 7. Here, the district where *kr > h isincluded with that of *hr, *thr > h; while *khr > l in *r, *ɣ > l, respectively. This relationship iscomparable to a subset in a Venn diagram. In such a situation, the change with a bigger area occurredearlier than that with a smaller area, given that these changes have close relationships, especially incases of a push chain or drag chain.
5.2

Changing Process in the Northern GroupIn the Northern group, there are two subgroups: types H, I, and J show bipartition in which the upper
series consonants merged to [ j ] and the lower series consonants merged together to become [ l, r, or θ ]respectively; types K to R display a consistent reflection regarding phonetic diversity [ hj, ɣ, r, ð, z, l,and j ] as seen in table 5.
Types

C

*hr
*thr

G

H

I

J

j

j

j

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

R

l
h

*khr

th

ɣ,

l
hj

*r

l

*nr

n

n

*ɣ

ɬ

l

*ŋr

ŋ

n

l

r

ɣ

r

ð

z

l

j

h,
hj

θ

Table 5. Types in the Northern group and type C & G in the Southern group
The former subgroup is mainly located in the Northern Guangxi area. This subgroup has a similarity
with type C of the Southern group, with respect to the merger of upper consonants. Based on the extent
of the merger, the former subgroup may be relatively earlier than the later subgroup.
Type P has a similarity with type G of Southern group, since the former type can emerge if [ th ] and[ n ] of the later changed to [ l ]. Geographically speaking, Type P is located next to type G, especially in
Nanning. Type P possibly dispersed from Nanning along the Youjiang river.
Type M and type I are similar in thatthey have [ r ] in common. They are
geographically adjacent and type M
seems to be distributed in the peripheralarea in the Northern group. Maybe type
M is the oldest among the later subgroup.
Type K with [ hj ] is located at the
inner side of type M, so it derived fromtype M, that is to say, a change [ r ] >[ hj ] occurred.
Type L with [ ɣ ] seems to be thenewest form in the Zhuang language,
since it occupies the central area
including Wuming, which is the standard
variety of Zhuang.
Other than these, types N, O, Q arescattered, and experienced minor change.
Type R is a mixed type.
Map 8. Types in the Main Part of Northern group6Conclusion

The entire picture of merging types in Zhuang is seen in Map 9.

Map 9. The Whole Process of Change of / r / type sounds in Zhuang
Thanks to the preservation of older systems in the Southern group, a relatively solid changing
process was traced in this region. Also, we can extract the directionalities of sound change from these
concrete changes as follows:
1) *hr > hin types A, B, C, D, E
2) *hr > hl
in type F3) *hr > lin type G4) *thr > th in types A, E, F, G
5) th > hin types B, C, D
6) *khr > khj in types A, B, D
7) khj > hin type C8) khj > hl
in type F9) hl > lin types E, G
10) *r > lin types A, B, C, D, E, F, G
11) *nr > n
in types A, B, C, D, E, F, G12) *ɣ > r
in type A13) *ɣ > lin types B, C, D, E, G
14) *ɣ > hl
in type F15) *ŋr > ŋin types A, B, C, D, E, F16) ŋ > nin type G17) *hr, *thr, *khr > j
in type H, I, J18) th > lin type P19) n > lin type P20) r > hj
in type K21) r > ɣin type L22) r > zin type O23) r > ðin type N24) r > jin type Q
The changes from proto form to the modern forms are provisional, especially for *ɣ. Directionalities
18 to 24 in the Northern groups have less reliability.
In sum, a relatively safer interpretation of geographical distribution based on merging types ofseveral categories can be given, although complicated situations are observed in individual maps.

Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research KAKENHI (C) from JSPS,
15K02525, 2015-2017. I appreciate Dr. Donna Erickson for correcting grammatical mistakes of myEnglish.
References
Endo, M. 2015. Geographical Distribution of Tone in Tai-Kadai. Keizai Kenkyu, Aoyama Gakuin University,
7:1-35.
Li, F. 1977. A Handbook of Comparative Tai. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.
Liang, M. & Zhang, J. 1996. Dongtai Yuzu Gailun [Introduction to Tai-Kadai]. Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexue
Press. [in Chinese]
Pan, W. 2010. Cong Dili Shishi Huanyuan Lishi Zhenshi [Historical Real Time Sound Shifts as Reconstructedfrom Geographical Apparent Time]. Minzu Yuwen, 2010(1):3-12. [in Chinese]
Sato, R. 2002. Hogen no Chizucho [Dialect Atlas]. Tokyo: Shogakukan. [in Japanese]Wei, J. 2015. Yuyan Jiechu Shiyu xia Zhuangyu Liuyin *r de Tezheng Fenbu [Feature Distribution of Glide [r] in
Zhuang Language in Perspective of Language Contact]. Zhongyang Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui
Kexue Ban), 42(4):136-141. [in Chinese]
Yuan, J. 1963. Zhuangyu / r / de Fangyin Duiying [Sound Correspondences of / r / among the Zhuang Dialects].
Yuyanxue Luncong, 5:187-218; also In: Wang, F. & Sun H. eds.2010. Yuan Jiahua Wenxuan [Selected Worksof Yuan Jiahua]. 155-178. Beijing: Beijing University Press. [in Chinese]
Zhang, J. et al. 1999. Zhuangyu Fangyan Yanjiu [Studies in Zhuang Dialectology], Chengdu: Sichuan Minzu Press.
[in Chinese]Appendix

No. 1 “㣻”㨌No. 2 э⬌

No. 3

⢋“ⱏ”

No. 4 㠬

No. 5

“࠷”㚹

No. 6 㲺ᑀ

No. 7 呑“ߐ”No. 8 ᝸㧷

No. 9 ⛂㨌“䬵”

No. 10 Ⱃ

No.11

“ợ”ཤ

No. 12 㧼ᆀNo. 13

ᢃથ⅐

No.14 ⤇“ਛ”

No. 15“㙉”⭠

No. 16 ⸣ཤ

No. 17

ቮᐤ

No. 18 ཤ㲡No. 19

No. 20 ⴻ㿱᳆઼ǃ⑙᳆

No.21 㵌㴲No. 22 “᥁”≤No.23 “ᮢ”䰘No. 24 ᯇㅐNo. 25 ≤“┑”Ҷ

No. 26 “⸽”ṁNo. 27

ᣜ

No. 28 ቱ

No. 29㬍䶋˄Ἵ⢙˅

No. 30 ‫ޝ‬No. 31 ⻇“Ḍ”

No. 32 ራ᢮

No.33 ㆋᆀNo. 34 “ᷛ”ṁǃ

No. 35

No. 36 ਟԕᩪᑖⲴ呑“ㅬ”ᯁ呐No. 37“䟿”ᐳ

No. 38 ㅁ

No. 39 ⓚ˄ኡ⏗˅

No.41

䚃䐟

No. 40 а“ത”а“ᣡ”No. 42 “哫”㝨No. 43

䟾⥚

No. 44 ࠰“࡙”No. 45

བྷਦ῅ṁ

No. 46 䐟“━”No. 47“࢚”ᐳ

No. 48 “᣹”䖖No. 49“ॸ”依No. 50 ⡚ᆀ

No. 51

㩔⚛㲛

No. 52 ཙ“ᰡ”No. 53

咠

No. 54 ᰙNo.55 仾

No. 56 婺˄⍎൪˅

No. 57“䍾”എᶕ

No. 58 “䐏”ᡁᶕ

No. 59⢋“ḿ”

No. 60 “⍷”≤

No. 61 㡩

No. 62

No. 63 㠝㲛

No. 64 ṁ“ṩ”

No. 65

No. 66 ⸣ཤӾኡк“┊”лᶕ

㵼㳚



“ਾ”ᰕ

No. 67 ≤“ⓒ”

No. 68 ≤No. 69

呏

No. 70 “䵢”≤

No. 71“ཆ”䗩

No. 72 “⍚”≤

No. 73“л”ሿ⢋ˈ“л”ኡ

No. 74 “ᢃ”䴧ǃ䴧“૽”No. 75 ㄻ

No. 77

㓶㌐

No. 76 ሿਦ῅ṁ

No. 78 “䮯”⸝No. 79≄࣋ˈࠪ“࣋”No. 80 ᵘỹ

No. 81㤖ᾍṁ

No. 82 ⸕䚃ˈᲃᗇ

No. 83“┿”䴘

No. 84 呏“ネ”

No. 85

㱾“ਛ”ˈ“੬”No. 86 ཙ“Ӟ”Ҷ

No. 87⢋“⎨”≤

No. 88 અੀ

No. 89㺓㜎ˈ㛾㺓

No. 90 сNo. 91 ⮢ൠ

No. 92 呑“㲡”

No. 93 ㌐ˈに༣

No. 94 “㙣”ᵥ

No. 95

No. 96 ᖡᆀн‫ׯ‬Ҿᩜ〫Ⲵ呑“ㅬ”

No. 97

㣍哫

No. 98 ᒢᷟCultural Contexts of the Expansion of a Tibetan Word ’bras ‘Rice’in the Easternmost TibetosphereaHiroyuki Suzuki and Sonam Wangmoaa

IKOS, University of Oslo

Abstract
This article attemps to provide linguistic maps regarding the word form ‘rice’ used in thelanguages spoken in the easternmost Tibetosphere, focusing on Tibetic and Qiangic languages
spoken in Sichuan and Yunnan, China, and to examine how the Tibetan word form ’bras has
widely expanded, not only in Tibetic languages but also in non-Tibetic languages and varieties.
Our principal hypothesis is: Tibetan ’bras has been used as a religious material and it is thus
regarded as a cultural word, therefore many languages and varieties spoken in the Tibetosphere
employ the same cognate.

1

Introduction

Suzuki et al. (2016ab) have drawn linguistic maps of ‘rice plant’ and ‘rice’ in general in Tibeto-Burman
languages, with which we can see that word forms for ‘rice’ employed in most Tibetic languages as wellas languages spoken in the eastern Tibetosphere are common to each other, i.e., a form corresponding to
Written Tibetan (henceforth WrT) ’bras.1 However, as we can imagine, most parts of the Tibetosphere
are not suitable to cultivate rice and this word must not be a basic word in these languages. Indeed, it is
known that more than 70 per cent of word forms are shared with varieties of the Tibetic languages (Jined. 1983:144), and more than 90 per cent of word forms correspond to a WrT form. Hence, it is not quite
peculiar that the word for ‘rice’ is also shared with many varieties within the Tibetic languages.
However, if the word ‘rice’ is acquired through a cultural contact, how can this word form be widely
shared within the Tibetic languages distributed in the widest area among the Tibeto-Burman languages?
For this question, the present authors will raise a hypothesis that the word ‘rice’ spreaded as a religious
word all over the Tibetosphere, and because of this reason, this word can be borrowed by other
non-Tibetic languages spoken in the eastern Tibetosphere, such as rGyalrongic and Qiangic languages,some of which have originally had their own word forms of ‘rice’ (and a semantic division of ‘rice’ if
applicable).
This article provides a detailed description of the geolinguistic analysis of the word forms for ‘rice’
derived from WrT ’bras in the languages spoken in the easternmost Tibetosphere. The geographicalscope of the eastern Tibetosphere follows the definition of Suzuki (2015), and the easternmost
Tibetosphere corresponds the places confronting to other cultural areas. The article focuses on Tibetic
and Qiangic languages spoken in Sichuan and Yunnan. The linguistic maps reflect so-called ‘regiolects’,i.e., dialects with regional differences. Sociolects, which certainly exist in the given area, are not dealt
with in this article.

2

WrT ’bras and its phonetic variation

There are many phonetic realisations of the word form derived from WrT ’bras, some of which are:[݅‫ܭܩ‬:], [m‫ܩ‬i:], [݄ܱi:], [ଔd‫ݣ‬e:], [mb‫ޥܭ‬:], [mb‫]ޝݧܭ‬, [mbr‫ܭ‬:], [݅‫]ܸ݁ ݁ܩ‬, [ƾg݁:], and [ƾgi:]. Paying attention to the
1 Note that WrT ’bras corresponds to Proto-Tibeto-Burman (PTB) *b-ras ‘RICE / FRUIT / BEAR FRUIT /ROUND OBJECT’. Tibetic languages principally employ this PTB etymon for ‘rice’ among the Tibeto-Burman
languages. See STEDT: http://stedt.berkeley.edu/~stedt-cgi/rootcanal.pl/etymon/2071, accessed 16th March 2016.

initial sound of this word form, the distribution of various phonetic realisations attested in the Tibetic
languages are displayed as Map 1 (from Suzuki 2016):

Map 1: Distribution of the main initial (with a glide) sound corresponding to WrT ’bras.2
Other than them, phonetic forms attested in non-Tibetic languages are following:
Table 1: WrT ’bras in non-Tibetic languages3
Language
Dialect
Chuchen rGyalrong
MunashanbTsanlha rGyalrong
SenggesTau
Mazur
Geshitsa
brGyargyud
Lhagang Choyu
ThamkhasnDrapaNgwirdeiDarmdo Minyag
Lhatseshis
Nyagrong Minyag
Shoring

Word form for WrT ’bras
bras
m
bras
m
br‫ܭ‬
m
br‫ܭ‬
m
‫ܩ‬wa
m
‫ܭܩ‬
݅
‫ݢܩ‬e
݅
‫ܩ‬ri
m

2 This map is designed with ArcGIS online. The legend does not reflect the preinitial feature (prenasalisation inmost cases); ‘‫ ’ܩ‬includes both a plosive /‫ܩ‬/ and an affricate /‫ݢܩ‬/; ‘#’ means lack of the form corresponding to
WrT ’bras.
3 The data has been collected by the first author. The suprasegmental description of word forms is uniformly
omitted.

Even though the phonetic variation is wide, it is easy to understand that they are derived from thesingle WrT form ’bras. Phonetic variation is generally not a criterion to classify word forms. However,an irregular sound correspondence should be noted, because it might show a spreading process of theirregular form.4
An overall distribution of the word form ‘rice’ derived from WrT ’bras over the languages spoken in
the eastern Tibetosphere is displayed in Map 2.

Map 2: Distribution of the word form ‘rice’ in the languages in the eastern Tibetosphere.5

4 A partial discussion for the irregular phonetic form of WrT ’bras ‘rice’ was provided in Suzuki (2012).
5 Legend: TT: Tibetic languages using WrT ’bras; TQ: : non-Tibetic (especially Qiangic) languages using

WrT ’bras; NonT: non-Tibetic languages not using WrT ’bras; T drus ma: Tibetic languages using WrT drus ma.

As shown in Map 2, the issue regarding this article is mainly limited to the Minyag-rGyalrong area
and the north-western part of Yunnan because these areas display a complicated situation. The authors
are going to analyse these two cases in detail. First, we describe the usage of rice in the religious life
under the Tibetan cultural area, taking Lhagang, the sacred place worshipped by Tibetans inhabiting thesurrounding areas, as an example, and show the importance of the rice in their belief. Second, weanalyse the way of spreading word (phonetic) forms for ‘rice’ by drawing specific linguistic maps. The
basic data is common to Suzuki et al. (2016ab), the project of Studies in Asian Geolinguistics.

3

Use of ‘rice’ in everyday life and rituals: example from Lhagang Village

Lhagang Village is located on the Minyag Rabgang region,6 a part of the easternmost Tibetosphere,
where a monastery with a locally well-known Bodhisattva statue lays7 and attracts many pilgrims not
only from Minyag but also from its surrounding areas including rGyalrong. Under this perspective,
Lhagang Village functions as a ‘crossroad’ of various local cultures within the easternmost
Tibetosphere.
At present, rice is widely eaten as a part of staple food by Tibetans in Minyag and rGyalrong. Since
rice does not grow on the plateau of Minyag Rabgang, it is certainly ‘imported’, at least in Lhagang
Village, from Dartsendo Town (known as Lucheng Town), the administrative centre of this region.
However, there are no rice fields in the town. Hence, rice should be transported from other places,
perhaps from the Han territory such as Yaan. In the rGyalrong valley, rice can be cultivated, however,
we rarely see rice field there. Rice in the rGyalrong area should also be imported from the contacting
Sinosphere.
Rice is also employed when people practise rituals. Lhagang Monastery belongs to the Sakyapa sectof Tibetan Buddhism; however, the use of rice in rituals is quite common to any sects. In Lhagang
Village, we can principally see two rituals using rice: bdun mtshon chus skyes and ’bras bsres ma sku.
bdun mtshon chus skyes is to consecrate rice to water by soaking it in water or alcohol; ’bras bsres ma
sku is to prepare boiled rice cooled and hardened with butter in a small bowl, used when a monk comesto a laypeople’s house to recite a sutra for eliminating misfortunes and driving bad luck out from thehouse. In addition, Tibetans put crops including rice in a ma۬‫ڲ‬a, a circle-shaped religious box
symbolising a mandala in order to make offerings. According to the abbot of Lhagang Monastery, there
are three monastic rituals utilising rice: ma۬‫ڲ‬a bzhi mchod, rab gnas, and sbyin bsreg cho ga. Other thanthem, rice is also used in any rituals as a replacement of white stones and/or white ritual objects justwhen they lack. This situation indicates that rice plays an important role in religious ceremonies eventhough its use is limited.
Ritual use of rice is widespread in the Tibetosphere. Since it is not recent expansion, the supply ofrice to the Tibetosphere in the past and present is a question, which has not been well investigated so far.
The present description is not enough to figure out a complete way from the provenance to thedestination of rice. However, we can understand how rice is treated in the Tibetosphere and functions in
the Tibetan culture. Therefore, the languages spoken under the strong influence of the Tibetan culture
must have received the word ’bras ‘rice’ as one of the cultural objects.

4

Word spreading process of WrT ’bras: cases of two areas

4.1

Minyag-rGyalrong area

A linguistic map regarding the word form for ‘rice’ in the languages spoken in the Minyag-rGyalrong
area is following:

6 Administratively, Lhagang Village is in Tagong Town, Kangding Municipality, Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous

Prefecture, Sichuan Province.
7 See Sonam Wangmo (2013) and Suzuki & Sonam Wangmo (2015) for details.

Map 3: Word form for ‘rice’ in the Minyag-rGyalrong area.
In this region, many non-Tibetic languages and varieties employ the form corresponding to
WrT ’bras, so do all the Tibetic languages reflected on Map 3. The majority of non-Tibetic languages
spoken there belong to the Tibetosphere, which means that the influence of the Tibetan culture andcustom is extremely strong. Hence, this distribution is not extraordinary.
First of all, we should note that the border area of the varieties using this word form and those using
their own word form. There are two places to be described: Situ-rGyalrong varieties in MaerkangCounty and nGochang (generally known as Guiqiong) in Kangding Municipality. Situ-rGyalrong
varieties generally have one form for the whole ‘rice’ category, whereas nGochang, at least three forms(Suzuki et al. 2016b). This situation implies that nGochang has once been spoken in a rice cultivationarea, or been a desceendent of a language spoken in a rice cultivation area. Another view can be pointed
out: the contact of nGochang with Sinitic varieties, which have at least four words for the ‘rice’ category.
In fact, the form for ‘rice plant’ of Qianxi nGochang is a Sinitic loan (guzi). In Situ-rGyalrong, there isan inherent word for ‘rice’, /khre/, which is, in fact, problematic; it might be an earlier Tibetan loancorresponding to WrT khre ‘millet’. Situ-rGyalrong is mainly spoken inside steap valleys, wherecultivation of crops except for barley is difficult, hence the rice has not occupied an important place inthe language landscape. However, varieties spoken in the region which is much closer to the
Tibetic-spoken area have accepted a form corresponding to WrT ’bras ‘rice’ as shown in Map 3, see the
distribution of TQ. Moreover, various phonetic forms of ‘rice’ related to WrT ’bras in rGyalrongic
languages (see Table 1) reflect the origin and period of borrowing from Tibetic varieties. For example,
the pronunciation /mbras/ attested in Situ, Chuchen, and bTsanlha rGyalrong has already disappeared inthe majority of Tibetic varieties surrounding the rGyalrongic languages. 8 It means that this word form is
an archaic loan.
Next, we will consider several factors that non-Tibetic languages accepted the Tibetan loan
regarding ‘rice’. The primary purpose of use of ‘rice’, especially ‘rice grain’, within the Tibetospheremight be religious ceremonies mentioned in Section 3. Since the Tibetic-spoken area is normally locatedhigher than 3,000m altitude, rice cannot grow; however, Tibetan inhabitants employ rice for several
special religious ceremonies, whether they practise Buddhism or Bon. If their use of rice is highly
associated to the religious purpose, the word for ‘rice’ itself can be counted as a cultural word.
To sum up, the distribution of the word form is basically related to WrT ’bras in non-Tibetic
varieties in Map 3 is connected to Tibetic varieties. In addition, this word form is not a recent loan but anarchaic one judging from the phonetic variation attested in rGyalrongic languages. A detailed process ofborrowing should be investigated by referring to the historical sound development of Tibetic varieties.
4.2

Yunnan area

A linguistic map regarding the word form for ‘rice’ in the languages spoken in the Tibetosphere in
Yunnan is following:

Map 4: Word form for ‘rice’ in the Tibetosphere in Yunnan.
8 In fact, it is extremely difficult to find a variety of any Tibetic languages which has a phonetic form as /mbras/. For

example, an initial /mbr/ is attested near the rGyalrongic-spoken area (see Map 1), but its rhyme is not /as/. On theother hand, Ladak (Tibetic language spoken in North India) has an /as/ rhyme but its initial is /br/, lacking
prenasalisation.

An interesting point in the Tibetosphere of Yunnan which is different from the case in
Minyag-rGyalrong region is that there are no non-Tibetic languages and varieties employing the form
corresponding to WrT ’bras. Moreover, some Tibetic varieties do not use WrT ’bras-form for ‘rice’ (Tdrus ma-type in Map 4). In Yunnan, we should pay more attention to exceptional phonetic realisations,especially a velar sound, attested in Tibetic varieties mainly distributed in Shangri-La Municipality (seeMap 1) which are not reflected on Map 4, as well as varieties with a semantic division between ‘rice
plant’ and ‘rice grain’.
The idea ‘every word has its history’ is the most fundamental for geolinguistc research. If a given
sound change cannot be explained in a straight way of the regular process, we should seek other factor(s)which caused the exception. The phenomenon observed in many varieties spoken in the central area of
Shangri-La Municipality is that the velar sound /ƾg/ appears on the position where the apparition of /ଔd‫ݣ‬/or /݄ܱ/ is expected. It is certain that some varieties has a regular sound correspondence between WrT ’br
and /ƾg/, however, the distribution of such varieties is limited, and it is also complicated that they givesome influence to varieties spoken in a wider region. Returning to Map 1, we notice that the distributionof /ƾg/ forms a ‘line’ from the central area of Shangri-La Municipality to Lijiang Municipality. What
does this shape of distribution mean? Thinking of this issue with other background information of theregion and history, we can raise a hypothesis that there has been influence from Naxi, previous prestige
language functioned while the Mu-chieftain period from Ming to Qing dynasties. In Lijiangba Naxi,
phonetic realisations among prepalatal, palatal, and velar are not well distinct. In Shangri-La, rice is notcultivated but used as religious purposes as well as frequently eaten by inhabitants at present. In addition,
the provenance of rice as a commercial item is Dali and Lijiang. In other words, the word for ‘rice’ wassomewhat influenced from the pronunciation of Naxi-speakers and the oral form might have transmitted
from south to north.9
Since the climate condition is appropriate for rice cultivation, Tibetans practise to plant rice in a partof the Tibetosphere of Yunnan, especially along lower Jinshajiang within Shangri-La and Weixi. In thisarea, Tibetans’ language also have a semantic division within the ‘rice’ category, i.e., ‘rice plant’ and‘rice grain’ (Suzuki 2016). Of them, the form of ‘rice plant’ generally corresponds to WrT ’bras, as
reflected on Map 4, while that of ‘rice grain’, to WrT drus ma (see also Suzuki 2012). The class ‘T drus
ma’ of Map 4 could have been generated by replacing WrT ’bras for WrT drus ma over the wholesemantic division of ‘rice’ because ‘rice’ as a food is more important than that as a plant in the non ricecultivating area.

5

Conclusion

The word form of ‘rice’ in the Tibetic languages in the eastern Tibetosphere mainly corresponds to
WrT ’bras, and its geographical distribution is nearly pervasive. Most regions do not belong to the ricecultivation area, however, varieties have the same stem for rice. It is probably because the rice is used forreligious rituals, whether they are of Bon or Buddhism. The rice is generally a kind of staple food, but inthe case of Tibet, it can be used for a religious purpose.
In the Minyag-rGyalrong area, the loan of the word form WrT ’bras is certainly related to the
distribution of non-Tibetic languages. Most varieties spoken in the vicinity of Tibetic-spoken area
employ a WrT ’bras form for ‘rice’. Its expansion is highly connected with the strength of Tibetan
cultural influence.
In the Tibetosphere in Yunnan, however, a complicated system is attested. Several dialects spoken
under the rice cultivation culture distinguish ‘rice grain’ from ‘rice plant’ by using different stems. The
irregular sound correspondence of WrT ’bras is also seen in Yunnan, which might have spreaded fromthe Naxi area to its north following the cultural influence of Lijiang.

9 See Suzuki (2016) for a detail.

Acknowledgements
We should like to express my gratitude to my Tibetan friends who helped us and taught us their mothertongue. Field research was funded by four Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society
for the Promotion of Science [JSPS]: “Linguistic Substratum in Tibet” (headed by Yasuhiko Nagano,No. 16102001), “Dialectological Study of the Tibetan Minority Languages in the Tibetan Cultural Areain West Sichuan” (headed by the present author), “International Field Survey of the rGyalrongic
Languages” (headed by Yasuhiko Nagano, No. 21251007), and “Study on the Dialectal Development ofTibetan Spoken in Yunnan, China, through a Description of the Linguistic Diversity” (headed by thepresent author, No. 25770167), as well as and a private financial support of Tibetan Studies Committeeof Yunnan Ethnology Association headed by Xu Jianhua.
References
Jin, P. ed. 1983. Zangyu Jianzhi. Minzu Chubanshe.
Sonam Wangmo. 2013. Lhagang Monastery in Myth, History and Contemporary Society. Universitetet i Oslo
M.Phil. Thesis.
Suzuki, H. 2012. À propos du terme ‘riz’ et de l’hypothèse du groupe dialectal Sems-kyi-nyila en tibétain duKhams. Revue d’études tibétaines 23:107-115.
Suzuki, H. 2015. A geolinguistic description of terms for ‘sun’ in Tibetic languages in the eastern Tibetosphere.
Studies in Asian Geolinguistics 1:79-85.
Suzuki, H. 2016. A geolinguistic description of terms for ‘rice’ in Tibetic languages of the eastern Tibetosphere.
Studies in Asian Geolinguistics 2 (in press).
Suzuki, H. and Sonam Wangmo. 2015. Quelques remarques linguistiques sur le tibétain de Lhagang, «l’endroit
préféré par le Bodhisattva». Revue d’études tibétaines 32:153-175.
Suzuki, H., S. Shirai, K. Kurabe, K. Iwasa, S. Ebihara, and I. Matsuse. 2016a. Rice plant: Tibeto-Burman. Studies
in Asian Geolinguistics 2 (in press).
Suzuki, H., K. Kurabe, K. Iwasa, S. Shirai, S. Ebihara, and I. Matsuse. 2016b. Geolinguistic analysis of ’rice’ inTibeto-Burman. Studies in Asian Geolinguistics 2 (in press).

A preliminary report on the distribution of ‘eclipse’in languages of Mainland Southeast Asia
Keita Kurabe
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science / ILCAA, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies

Abstract
The aim of this paper is to provide a preliminary overview of expressions for solar and lunar
eclipses in East and mainland Southeast Asian languages from the geolinguistic point of view.
Our findings, based on an investigation of about 100 languages and dialects, can be summarized
as follows. (a) At least 80 languages, irrespective of genetic affiliation of them, express solar andlunar eclipses employing ingestive verbs with morphemes for the sun or the moon and predator
nouns which consume it. (b) Ingestive verbs involved in the eclipse expression are almost always‘to eat’ or ‘to swallow’. (c) Predator nouns involved, in most cases, are some kinds of animals
such as a dog, frog, tiger, flying squirrel, spirit, dragon, snake, centipede, and fish. (d) Languages
sometimes exhibit some kinds of asymmetries between solar and lunar eclipses.

1

Introduction

Many languages of East and Southeast Asia express the eclipse of the sun and the moon employing
ingestive verbs such as ‘to eat’ and ‘to swallow’ in addition to morphemes referring to the sun and moon.
The aim of this paper is to explore expressions for solar and lunar eclipses in East and mainland
Southeast Asian languages and to provide a preliminary overview of them. Our primary finding, basedon an investigation of about 100 languages and dialects, is that at least 80 languages, irrespective ofgenetic affiliation of them, express solar and lunar eclipses employing ingestive verbs with morphemes
for the sun or the moon and predator nouns which consume it.

2

Solar and Lunar eclipses: A quick exemplification

Many languages of East and Southeast Asian languages, regardless of genetic affiliation of them,
express solar and lunar eclipses employing ingestive verbs, especially ‘to eat’ and ‘to swallow’. First
observe this in the following examples, which appear to be in a borrowing relationship, where Japaneseand Chinese express solar and lunar eclipses employing a verb ‘to eat’ in addition to morphemes for thesun and moon.
(1)

Mandarina. rì-shísun-eat‘solar eclipse’
b. yuè-shímoon-eat‘lunar eclipse’



(2)

Japanesea. nit-syoku
sun-eat‘solar eclipse’
b. get-syoku
moon-eat‘lunar eclipse’

Although the expressions in Mandarin and Japanese given above do not mention about what/who
eats the sun and moon, many languages in East and mainland Southeast Asia, including Mandarin, haveexpressions for the solar and lunar eclipse that explicitly express the agent of consumption. Consider:(3)

Mandarin [Sinitic]tiān gǒu chī yuèliang
sky dog eat moon
‘lunar eclipse’ (lit. ‘celestial dog eats the moon’)(4)

Lahu [Tibeto-Burman] (Matisoff 2006:77)
mû-ni
lâ
câ
ve
sun
tiger eat
PTCL
‘have an eclipse of the sun’ (lit. ‘tiger eats the sun’)(5)

Kadu [Tibeto-Burman] (Dr. Keisuke Huziwara, p.c., 2015)
pə1touŋ2nyon2
sə1miʔ2sunpythonswallow‘have an eclipse of the sun’ (lit. ‘python swallows the sun’)(6)

Shan [Tai-Kadai] (Sao Tern Moeng 1995)
kop4 kin1 lɤn1
frog eatmoon‘lunar eclipse’ (lit. ‘frog eats the moon’)(7)

Yay [Tai-Kadai] (Hudak ed. 1991:28)
kɯn1
dɯan1
baaŋ2
flying.squirrel eat
moon‘lunar eclipse’ (lit. ‘flying squirrel eats the moon’)(8)

Kaco’ [Austroasiatic] (Dr. Nathan Badenoch, p.c., 2016)kaːŋgɒ̤w ləːnkhɒjcatfishswallowmoon‘lunar eclipse’ (lit. ‘catfish swallows the moon’)



(9)

Sedang [Austroasiatic] (Smith 2012:424)
kơxế
ka
hài
centipede eatsun‘solar eclipse’ (lit. ‘centipede eats the sun’)(10) Mong Njua [Hmong-Mien] (Lyman 1974:199)
kláŋ
nâo
hli
spiriteat
moon‘lunar eclipse’ (lit. ‘spirit eats the moon’)3

Previous studies

There are seemingly no previous linguistic studies that investigate the expressions for solar and lunar
eclipses in East and mainland Southeast Asian languages. In folklore and mythological studies, on theother hand, it is known that Chinese and some indigenous peoples in East and Southeast Asia have
folklore or mythology that attributes eclipses to devouring of the sun and moon by animals or
mythological beings. Wallis (1918:369), for example, mentions a Chinese belief about eclipses,
remarking that “the sun or moon is being swallowed by a dog or other beast. They accordingly beatgongs to rescue it by frightening away the devourer.” This belief can be traced back to ancient China, as
the Huainanzi (before 139 BC) records a belief that attributes lunar eclipses to devouring of the moon bya frog in the moon. Also, Hinduism, as found in a narrative of Mahābhārata, attributes eclipses to Rāhu,
the severed head of an Asura, Svarbhānu, which swallows the sun.

4

Eclipses with ingestive verbs

Solar and lunar eclipses in East and Southeast Asian languages, as exemplified in Section 2, tend to be
expressed employing ingestive verbs, such as ‘to eat’ and ‘to swallow’. This section provides a close
look at these expressions, classifying them from three different perspectives. (a) What consumes the sunand moon? (b) In what manner? (c) What consumes the sun and moon in what manner? In what follows,these three perspectives will be discussed in order.
4.1

What consumes the sun or moon?

Eclipse expressions with ingestive verbs can be divided into two types in terms of the agent of ingestion:
one which does not overtly express the agent and one which does. Japanese belongs to the former type,as illustrated by (2) in Section 2. The same holds for Sgaw Karen (TB), Rawang (TB), Garo (TB),
Vietnamese (AA), and Buginese (AN), among others. Mandarin and most Sinitic languages have both
expressions as illustrated by the Mandarin examples given in (1) and (3). Eclipse expressions with overt
agents prevail in languages of East and mainland Southeast Asia. (11) lists languages that have this typeof expressions, being classified based on language families and branches.
(11) a. Sino-Tibetan[Sinitic] Gan, Hakka, Hui, Jin, Mandarin, Min Bei, Min Dong, Min Nan, Min Zhong, Wu,
Xiang, Yue; [Angami-Pochuri] Sema; [Jinghpaw-Luish] (Jinghpaw) Jinghpaw, Gauri,Duleng, (Luish) Kadu, Ganan; [Lepcha] Lepcha; [Naic] Naxi; [Ngwi-Burmese] (Burmish)
Zaiwa, Lhaovo, Lacid, Ngochang, (Ngwi) Azhe Yi, Lahu, Lisu, Nisu Yi, Nuosu Yi, Sani Yi;[Northern Naga] Chang; [Qiangic] Northern Qiang, Southern Qiang; [Tani] Apatani;[Tangkhul] Tangkhulb. Tai-Kadai[Kra] Gelao; [Kam-Sui] Dong, Maonan, Mulam, Sui, [Hlai] Hlai?; [Ong Be] Be; [Tai](Central) Western Nung; (Northern) Bouyei, Saek, Yongbei Zhuang; (Southwestern) Ahom,
Black Tai, Dehong, Lao, Lue, Shan, Thai; (others) Lungming, Yay
c. Austroasiatic[Bahnaric] (Central) Bahnar, (North) Kaco’, Rengao, Sedang, (South) Mnong; [Katuic] Kui;
[Khasian] Khasi; [Khmeric] Khmer; [Khmic] Bit, Khmu; [Palaungic] (Angkuic) Man Met,
(Waic) Wa; [Aslian] Senoi
d. Hmong-Mien[Hmongic] (Chuanqiandian) Chuanqiandian, Diandongbei, Luobohe, Mong Njua, White Meo,
(Xiangxi) Xiangxi, (Qiandong) Qiandong; [Mienic] (Biao-Jiao) Biao Min Yao, (Bunu) Bunu,(Mian-Jin) Mian

The map given below shows the geographical distribution of languages with the overt agent eclipse
expression. Observe in the map that this type of expressions is widely distributed in the region, being
observable in China (incl. Hainan), Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thai, Burma, NE India (incl. Nepal,
Bhutan), Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Figure 1: Geographical distribution of eclipse expressions with overt agents (produced with ArcGis)
The following list provides languages with the overt agent eclipse expression grouped in terms ofgenetic affiliation and of semantic types of the agent, i.e. what consumes the sun and moon. Observe inthe list that, although some languages make use of inanimate agents such as wood, the sun, and the moon,most languages employ some kinds of animals in order to express the solar and lunar eclipse. Recurrent
animal motifs distributing cross genetic affiliation are a dog and a frog.

(12) a. Sino-Tibetan
DOG: Azhe Yi, Lacid, Lhaovo, Lisu, Naxi, Nisu Yi, Ngochang, Nuosu Yi, Qiang, Sani Yi,
Zaiwa; FROG: Apatani, Jinghpaw, Lahu; PYTHON: Kadu; CELESTIAL DOG: Gan, Hakka,
Hui, Jin, Mandarin, Min Bei, Min Dong, Min Nan, Min Zhong, Wu, Xiang, Yue; SNAKE:
Ganan; TIGER: Azhe Yi, Chang, Lahu, Lepcha, Sani Yi, Sema, Tangkhul;
b. Tai-Kadai
FROG: Ahom, Black Tai, Bouyei, Dehong, Lao, Lue, Maonan, Saek, Shan, Sui, Thai; DOG:
Gelao, Mulam; DOG [PSN]: Black Tai; FLYING SQUIRREL: Yay; WOOD: Be;
MYTHICAL CREATURE: West Nung; CELESTIAL DOG: Lungming; SUN: Be (i.e. ‘suneats the moon)c. Austroasiatic
CATFISH: Kaco’; CENTIPEDE: Sedang; FISH (kind of): Bahnar, Sedang; FROG: Bit, Khasi,
Khmu, Man Met; DOG: Paraok Wa; MOON: Mnong (i.e. ‘moon swallows the sun’); RAHU:
Khmer, Kui, Senoi
d. Hmong-Mien
CELESTIAL DOG: Luobohe Miao, Xiangxi Miao; SPIRIT: Mong, Chuanqiandian Miao,
Diandongbei Miao, Mong Njua, White Meo
The map given below shows the geographical distribution of animal motifs employed for the eclipse
expressions. Observe in the map that a dog and a frog prevail in East and mainland Southeast Asia.

Figure 2: Geographical distribution of animal motifs utilized for eclipses (produced with ArcGis)



4.2

In what manner?

Eclipse expressions with ingestive verbs can also be classified in terms of what verb is involved. The
following list provides languages classified in terms of genetic affiliations and of ingestive manners.
Observe that prevailing verbs across genetic affiliation are ‘to eat’ and ‘to swallow’. Note that languages
in the parentheses are of the agentless type that expresses the eclipse with no devourer, and languages
without parentheses are of the type that explicitly expresses the devourer.
(13) a. Sino-Tibetan
EAT: Azhe Yi, Gan, Hakka, Hui, Mandarin, Jiangwei Mandarin, Jin, Min Dong, Wu, Xiang,
Yue, Lahu, Qiang, Zaiwa, Lacid, Lisu, Lhaovo, Nisu Yi, Ngochang, Nuosu Yi, Sani, Yi,
Sema, Tangkhul, Chang; SWALLOW: Apatani, Jinghpaw, Jiangwei Mandarin, Kadu, Ganan,(Abor-Miri, Lushai, Sgaw Karen, Garo Rawang); BITE: Linwu Hunan, Lepcha, Naxi;
CRACK (as seeds between one’s teeth): Min Bei, Min Zhong
b. Tai-Kadai
EAT: Thai, Shan, Lao, Ahom, Black Tai, Dehong, Gelao, Lue, Bouyei, Yay, Saek, Sui,
Lungming, Maonan, Mulam, Be, West Nung, (Kam); SWALLOW: Yongbei Zhuang, Hlaic. Austroasiatic
EAT: Bit, Khasi, Kui, Man Met, Paraok Wa, Sedang, (Jeh); SWALLOW: Khmu, Senoi,
Bahnar, Mnong, Kaco’, Khmer, Plei Bong Bahnar, Rengao, (Vietnamese, Car)d. Hmong-Mien–EAT: Biao Min Yao, Chuanqiandian Miao, Diandongbei Miao, Luobohe Miao, Mong Njua,
White Meo, Xiangxi Miao, (Qiandong Miao); SWALLOW: Mian Yao

Figure 3: Geographical distribution of ingestive verbs employed for eclipses (produced with ArcGis)

Figure 3 shows the geographical distribution of ingestive verbs employed for the eclipse expression.
Observe that the verb ‘to eat’ is predominant in the region followed by the verb ‘to swallow’, whichappears to be distributed in more peripheral areas.
4.3

What consumes the sun and moon in what manner?

It is of interest to ask what eater is combined with what ingestive verb. The following is a summary of
combinations of animals and ingestive verbs involved in eclipse expressions. It should be noted that thislist is based on a limited data set and thus can be falsified when more data are taken into account.
(14) Combination of animal motifs plus verbs–CENTIPEDE: eat–FISH (kind of): eat–FLYING SQUIRREL: eat–MYTHICAL CREATURE: eat–SPIRIT: eat–SUN: eat
–WOOD: eat–CATFISH: swallow–MOON: swallow–RAHU: swallow–SNAKE/PYTHON: swallow–FROG: eat, swallow–CELESTIAL DOG: eat, bite, crack–DOG: eat, bite
–TIGER: eat, bite

5

Symmetry and asymmetry of solar and lunar eclipses

It is not always the case that both solar and lunar eclipses are encoded by a symmetrical expression.
Observe first in the following examples from Jinghpaw that eclipses of the sun and moon are expressedby symmetrical expressions that employ the same morphemes except the sun and moon.
(15) Jinghpaw [Tibeto-Burman] (my field notes)
a. jan
ɕùʔ
məyùʔ
sun
frog swallow‘solar eclipse’b. ɕəta ɕùʔməyùʔmoon frog swallow‘lunar eclipse’
There are also languages that encode the solar and lunar eclipse using asymmetrical expressions.
Lahu, Sani Yi, Sedang and Black Tai employ asymmetrical expressions for solar and lunar eclipses inthat two different animal motifs are utilized.

(16) Lahu [Tibeto-Burman] (Matisoff 2006:77)
a. mû-ni
lâ
câ ve
sun
tiger eat PTCL
‘have an eclipse of the sun’b. ha-pa
pā
câ ve
moon
frog eat PTCL
‘have an eclipse of the moon’(17) Sani Yi [Tibeto-Burman] (Wu and Ji eds. 2011:488, 687)
a. lo21tʂi33mɒ33 lɒ55 dzɒ21
suntiger eat‘solar eclipse’tʂ‘i21 lɪ33 dzɒ21b. ɬɒ33bɒ33mɒ33
moon
dog ?
eat
‘lunar eclipse’(18) Sedang [Austroasiatic] (Smith 2012:423–4)
a. ko’xế
kahài
centipedeeatsun‘solar eclipse’
b. kauka
khếfish(type.of) eat
moon‘lunar eclipse’(19) Black Tai [Tai-Kadai] (Baccam Don et al. 1989)
a. ma cuəŋ
ma
ŋɛɛŋ
kin
taavandog Chuang dog Ngaeng eatsun‘solar eclipse’
b. kopkin bɯənfrog eat moon
‘lunar eclipse’
Liangshan Yi also encodes solar and lunar eclipses with asymmetrical expressions, but this timewith different verbs. Compare:(20) Liangshan Yi [Tibeto-Burman] (Wu and Ji eds. 2011:488, 687)sɿ33
a. ho33bu33
sun
die‘solar eclipse’k‘ɯ dzɯb. ɬo21bo21
moon
dog eat‘lunar eclipse’6

Summary and prospects

This paper provided a first look at expressions for solar and lunar eclipses in East and mainland
Southeast Asian languages. Our findings, based on an investigation of about 100 languages and dialects,
can be summarized as follows. (a) At least 80 languages, regardless of genetic affiliation of them,
express solar and lunar eclipses employing ingestive verbs with morphemes for the sun or the moon andpredator nouns which consume it. (b) Ingestive verbs involved in the eclipse expression are almost
always ‘to eat’ or ‘to swallow’. (c) Predator nouns involved, in most cases, are some kinds of animals
such as a dog, frog, tiger, squirrel, spirit, dragon, snake, centipede, and fish. (d) Languages sometimes
exhibit some kinds of asymmetries between solar and lunar eclipses.
The future directions for this study may be summarized as follows. (1) More data are required. This
study is far from conclusive as it is based on limited data (about 100 languages). (2) The genesis of thewidespread eclipse expression is also an important issue. There are three possibilities: diffusion, chance,or polygenesis (universal). It is highly likely that the resembling expressions for eclipses in East andmainland Southeast Asian languages stem from a common world view that is caused by cultural andlinguistic diffusion. It should be noted, however, that similar expressions can be found in other parts of
the world as well. For example, Campbell, Kaufman and Smith-Stark (1986:553), which provide
semantic calques characteristic of the Meso-American linguistic area, list “eclipse: eat the sun/moon; thesun/moon dies; sun/moon to rot” as an areal calque. It is also pointed out by folklore and mythologicalstudies that folk beliefs that attribute eclipses to consumption of the sun and moon by animals andmythological beings are found around the world, whether they are in relationships of cultural diffusion,accidental similarity, or universal tendency. Thus, Norse mythology tells the story of wolves pursuing
the sun and moon to devour them, and a popular belief about eclipses among North American Indian“was that some mythological being, such as Coyote, a bird, a dog, Frog, Lizard, Rattlesnake, etc., waseating the sun or moon. In many tribes noise was made to frighten the aggressor and bring back the sunor moon to life” (Leach and Fried eds. 1972: 337-8). The Sandwich Islander says that “the moon is bitten,
pinched, or swallowed” during an eclipse (Wallis 1918: 369).
References
Baccam, Don, Faluang, Baccam, Hung Baccam, Dorothy Fippinger. 1989. Tai Dam-English, English-Tai Dam
vocabulary. Eastlake: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Campbell, Lyle, Terrence Kaufman and Thomas C. Smith-Stark. (1986) Meso-America as a linguistic area.
Language 62.3: 530-70.
Hudak, Thomas J. 1991. William J. Gedney’s the Yay language: glossary, texts, and translations. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan.
Izushi, Yoshihiko. 1927. Jōdaishina no hi to tsuki to no setsuwa ni tuite [On the sun and moon myths in ancient
China]. The Toyo Gakuho 16:3. pp.411-26.
Leach, Maria and Jerome Fried (eds.), 1972. Funk and Wagnalls standard dictionary of folklore, mythology andlegend. New York: Funk and Wagnalls.
Lyman, Thomas A. 1974. Dictionary of Mong Njua: a Miao (Meo) language of Southeast Asia. The Hague:
Mouton.
Matisoff, James A. 2006. English-Lahu lexicon. University of California Publications in Linguistics, Vol. 139.
Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.

Means, Nathalie and Paul B. Means. 1987. Senoi-English, English-Senoi dictionary. Petaling Jaya: Pelanduk
Publications.
Premsrirat, Suwilai. 2002. Thesaurus of Khmu dialects in Southeast Asia. Bangkok: Institute of Language andCulture for Rural Development, Mahidol University.
Sao Tern Moeng. 1995. Shan-English dictionary. Kensington, Maryland: Dunwoody Press.
Smith, Kenneth D. 2012. Sedang Dictionary with English, Vietnamese, and French glossaries. Salaya, Thailand:
Mahidol University and Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Wallis, Wilson D. 1918. Prodigies and portents. In James Hastings (ed.), Encyclopaedia of religion and ethics. Vol.
10. 362-76. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Wang, Xin. 2015. Tiangou shi ri (yue) kou [A consideration on the dog eats the sun (moon)]. In Kazuhiko Komatsu(ed.), The Tradition and Creation of Yōkai Culture: From the Viewpoint of Inside and Outside, 67-81. Kyoto:
International Research Center for Japanese Studies.
Wu, Zili and Jiafa Ji (eds.), 2011. Han-Yi jiangming cidian [Concise Chinese-Yi dictionary]. Sichuan minzu
chubanshe.

Some Notes on Sun in Sinitic
Kenji Yagi
Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies

Abstract
This article discusses three topics related to maps of “sun” in Sinitic and other neighbouring
languages. One is the possibility that the form yang㝧 existed before the appearance of the formtaiyangኴ㝧, the second is that forms including “eye” are also found in Sinitic, and the last is thatthe forms including labial onset show continuous distribution with some southern languages;some of these forms may have a common origin.

1

Introduction

Map 1: Sun in Sinitic overall map

The map of “sun” in Sinitic has already been drawn by Cao (2008) and Matsue (2009), and the main
distributions of the map are interpreted in Matsue (2009) and Ueya and Yagi (2015). For simplicity, firstI provide an outline of the distribution, and then discuss three topics related to other neighbouring
languages, especially in the southern region.
Legends and brief explanation
A: ri᪥type A1: Monosyllabic type of ri᪥ A2: rtou᪥㢌, retou⇕㢌, etc.
B: taiyangኴ㝧 type
C: b-/ p- type: Having a labial onset. C1:㝧፠,C2:ኴ㝧ໟ,C3:᪥㢌⳶, etc., see Section 4.
D: ye√ type
E: wo❐ type
F: yan║ type
G: k- type: Having a onset k- or khThe main categories of words representing “sun” in Sinitic are divided into ri᪥ type and taiyangኴ㝧 type (Map 1), which are distributed all over China (although taiyang are relatively seldom seen insouthern dialects), and many dialects contain both types. The monosyllabic forms of ri (Middle Chinese(MC) form reconstructed by Guo (2010) is *nʑĭĕt), already found in oracle bone script, are also
distributed in some southern dialects; however, many other dialects contain forms like ritou᪥㢌 orretou⇕㢌. The form taiyang is attested in the literature from the Han period onward.

2

About the origin of ye√√ and yangpo㝧፠

2.1 Continuous distribution of C1 (yangpo㝧፠), D (ye√), E (wo❐), and F (yan║)
C1(yangpo㝧፠) and D(ye√) types, which have rather concentrated distributions, are distributed
around Shanxi or Hebei, as are E (wo❐) and F (yan║) types, both quite minor. The distribution of C1
and D is approximately complementary, and E and F seem to be distributed in the peripheral area of the
distribution of C1 and D (Map 2).
2.2

The sound similarity of ye√ and yang㝧Sound weakening

春
MC:jĭaŋ 烍

Folk etymology

春iɐ˜炷Daixianẋ৯1㸧

Paronymic attractioniɐ˜ > ȵiɐr䛤

春yo炷Lanxianዊ৯1㸧

yo > uə ネ䇢ネiɛ uər炷Guantao侶㝡2㸧

春iɛ炷Xinxian⾣৯1㸧iɛ > ə䌳炷və?炸䌳⫸ə zəʔ炷Loufan⦬✖3炸春iã炷Jining普⬩4炸

iã > ia䇢

䇢䇢ia ia炷Wanrongᶯ匋1炸
春⧮
⣒春

㖍柕䛤ʐʅ tʰəu ȵiɐr炷Yongji㯠⍾1㸧

Table 1: Summary of the process of weakening of yang㝧and appearance of new forms
The sound difference between ye√(MC: *jĭa1) and yang㝧(MC: *jĭaŋ1) in Middle Chinese is thepresence of the nasal final “-ŋ”. Especially around Shanxi province, the nasal final is frequently weak or
1Hou 1993
2Hebeisheng 1999
3Guo 2005
4Chen 1996dropped; therefore, the √ and 㝧 sounds are often close to or corresponding to each other. For example,
in Xinᛙ prefecture, the sound of the “sun” is “iɛ pʰɛ (㝧፠)”; and “grandfather” is “iɛ iɛ (√√ ”(Hou
1993). Here, the 㝧 and √sounds completely correspond. Further, in some dialects like Fufengᢇ㢼 (inShaanxi), 㝧፠ is written as √፠.
From the continuous distribution and sound similarity of ye√ and yang㝧, we can presume thepossibility that ye√ is derived from yang㝧. First, the sound of yang㝧 weakened, and then throughparonymic attraction or folk etymology, ye√ appeared. The appearance of E (wo❐) or F (yan║) also
can be similarly interpreted. A summary of this process is shown in Table 1.

Map 2: The distribution of ye√ and yangpo㝧፠3

Distribution of yan║║, kongᏍ etc., and cross-linguistic similarity of word formation

Map3 shows the distribution of words related to “eye” or “hole” in Sinitic, Tai-Kadai, and Austroasiatic.
The Tai-Kadai map is made by Endo Mitsuaki, and the Austroasiatic map by Kondo Mika.
Legends of Map 3 (in Sinitic)
E: wo❐type烉√❐ඣ[iɛ uər] 㝧፠❐Ꮚ[iɑN pʰɤɯ vɤɯ ʦəʔ]F: yan║type烉᪥㢌║[i tə ŋaN] ኴ㝧║[tha ioN ŋɑN]G烉k-type烉
G1: gongබ炷koŋ炸type烉᪥㢌බ[zik t‘au koŋ] ኴ㝧බබ[tʰɑ ɦiAN koŋ koŋ]G2: kong✵Ꮝ (kʰoŋ)type烉᪥㢌Ꮝ[ȵiəʔ tiu kʰoŋ] ᪥㢌✵G3: gu≃(ku)type烉᪥㢌≃[ȵi tʰæ ku]
G4: ku❎(kʰu)type烉᪥㢌❎[ni diɤ kʰu]

Map 3: The distribution of “eye” types in Sinitic, Tai-Kadai, and Austroasiatic
3.1 About the “eye” type
In some Chinese dialects, the forms contain yan║“eye” (F type). As mentioned in Endo (2015), forms
like “eye” + “day or sky” are frequently observed in Tai-Kadai or Austroasiatic, etc.; therefore, there iscross-linguistic similarity of word formation. However, in Sinitic, the forms already include a word
representing “sun,” like ri᪥ or taiyangኴ㝧. In addition, the Chinese yan║ can also represent “hole,”
and forms like kongᏍ (G2) or wo❐ (E), which represent “hole,” are found in other dialects, therefore
the Chinese yan║ and Tai-Kadai or Austroasiatic “eye” might be etymologically different. The
possibility that yang㝧 changes into yan║ was discussed in section 2.
3.2 About the changing process in Sinitic
G (k-) includes elements with several unrelated meanings, such as gongබ “gentleman, grandfather,”kongᏍ/✵ ”hole,” ku5❎”nest,” gu≃”bull,” etc. These forms are taken as one type because of theirsound similarity. They all have a syllable with onset k- and a rounded back vowel like -u- or -o-, and are
divided into four subgroups based on two criteria: (1) whether aspirated (G2, G4) or not (G1, G3), (2)containing a nasal final (G1, G2) or not (G3, G4).
G1 (gongබ) has most the widespread distribution. gongබ is a kind of reverential form, and thebackground taking “sun” as an object of worship might relate to its formation.
G2 (kongᏍ/✵) is concentrated in ZhejiangύỤ, as is G1, therefore, G2 (considering the “sun” as a“hole in the sky”) may be derived from G1 type.
G3 and G4 are also scarcely distributed, and concentrated around JiangxiỤす or Hunan†༡. In theseareas, gu≃㻌is used as a suffix denoting males, therefore, it is possible to think that gongබ existed there
first, and when the sound and the meaning weakened, gongබ became gu≃. People later considered ku❎㻌(also a kind of “hole”) more suitable, and G4 was formed.

4

About the b-/ p- type

4.1 The distribution of b-/ p- typeThe b-/ p- type contains a labial onset syllable like baoໟ or pu⳶ in their forms, classified into fivesubtypes.
C1: yangpo㝧፠[iɑN pʰə] [iɛ pʰɛ],etc.
C2: taiyangbao ኴ㝧ໟ / ritoubao᪥㢌ᐆ[ziek tʰau pɔ] ,etc.
C3: retoufo⇕㢌ష[ȵieʔ də və] 㖍ⵦ㢌 [ȵiɪʔ bu dœʏ] □㖍[bi nʌʔ][bIŋ nʌʔ],etc.
C4: pusayeye⳶⸃√√[pʰu sɿ ie ie] ,etc.
C5: ritoupusa᪥㢌⳶⸃[ȵiɪʔ dæʏ bu sɐʔ] ኴ㝧⳶⸃[tʰa ɦiaN bu saʔ],etc.
C1 is mainly distributed in the northern Shanxi area; po፠ means “old woman.” C2 is seen in Chengdu
ᡂ㒔 and Haikangᾏᗣ; baoໟ means a “bundle,” however, the cognate labial syllable can also be
written as baoᐆ “treasure.” C3 is mainly distributed in the coastal area of Zhejiang province. Many C3
labial onset syllables are written as ష (Buddha). However, there are also forms like ⵦ[bu] or [bi],which have unclear etymologies. C4 and C5 contain pusa⳶⸃, “a Buddhist saint,” in the front (C4) orback (C5) of the forms.
 foష(Buddha) or pusa⳶⸃ is the Buddhists’ object of worship, so it is clear that these forms originate
from a social back-ground considering “sun” as an object of worship. However, it is not clear why they
contained the Buddhist term. Now, I wish to propose the following possibility: a form like bu existed at
first to represent the sun, and ri or taiyang followed and stayed as a stem of the form.
People forgot the original meaning of bu and newly interpreted it as foష or pusa⳶⸃ depending on thesound similarity.

5 The standard pinyin form of ❎㻌is ke, but I refer to the dialectal form here.

Map 4: The distribution of b-/ p- type in Sinitic, Tibeto-Burman, and Hmong-Mien
4.2

Continuous distribution of b-/ p- types between Sinitic, Tibeto-Burman, and Hmong-Mien

The most important fact supporting this possibility is that forms with b-/ p- onset syllables are also seenin Tibeto-Burman or Hmong-Mien, and their distribution are adjacent, especially in the Sichuan area.
In Tibet-Burman, b-/ p- onset syllables are found in forms like “pêi, paF, jbə, ɣbə, ʁmbɣi etc”.
(B(b/p-) type in Shirai, et al.2015). Forms with b-/ p- onset syllables found in Sinitic or Hmong-Mien
are all polysyllabic, and monosyllabic forms are only found in Tibeto-Burman, so these Tibeto-Burmanmonosyllabic forms may maintain the oldest form.
In Hmong-Mien, b-/ p- onset syllables are found in the previous positions of disyllabic forms likebu noi, pu n̥oi, bə nwai, and po n̥ɔŋ. The corresponding forms of the latter syllable, like nuai, n̥u, and noŋ
are used solely to represent “sun” in other Hmong-Mien dialects (Taguchi (2015)).



4.3 Distribution of buᲑ representing "today, the day before yesterday, etc."
In many languages, the word representing “sun” is also used to represent “day” (Fukushima,
forthcoming); ri᪥in Sinitic, and van in Tai-Kadai represent both “day” and “sun” as well. Therefore, it
is worthwhile to survey words representing “day.”
In southern China, some dialects contain buᲑ in the forms representing “today,” “tomorrow,”“yesterday,” “the day before yesterday,” “the day after tomorrow,” and so on (see Iwata 2009; Cao2008). For example, in Meixianᱵ┴, “today” is represented as [kim pu ŋit]ӺᲑᰕ,“yesterday” as[tshiu pu ŋit] ⿻Ბᰕ, and “the last day of the year” as[ŋian sam səp pu]ᒤйॱᲑ (Huang 1995).
I show an outline of the distribution of buᲑin map 4. For a precise distribution, see Iwata (2009).
This bilabial plosive onset syllable is similar to the labial syllable in the b-/ p- types in Sinitic orHmong-Mien. Besides, the distribution of buᲑadjoins the distribution of Hmong-Mien b-/ p- types
around Hunan and Guangdong as well as the distribution of Sinitic b-/ p- types (C3, C4) around
Zhejiang.
This situation can support the idea that southern China had wider distributions of b-/ p- types of “sun”
in the past.

5

Conclusion

In this article I proposed some new interpretations of “sun” in Sinitic, especially with respect toneighbouring languages.
In Section 2, I pointed out the continuous distribution of D (ye√) and C1 (yangpo㝧፠), and thesound similarity between them, and proposed the possibility that they have the same etymology “yang㝧,” and may stay in an older form than B (taiyangኴ㝧) because they still do not have the prepositional
element “taiኴ.”In Section 3, I discussed the formation of G (k-), and pointed out the similarity with Tai-Kadai or
Austroasiatic, that they possess the element “eye” in their forms.
In Section 4, I pointed out the continuous distribution of C (b-/ p-) type between Sinitic andTibeto-Burman or Hmong-Mien. At least some of them might have the same origin.
Sinitic languages are distributed over a vast area, and even though they have similar forms, it isuncertain whether they have a common origin. Therefore, we must continue discussing individual
dialects.

References
Cao, Zhiyun 㚡⽿俀 2008. ≹䈝᪉ゝᆅമ㞟·䇽≷༹㸪໭ி㸸ၟ࣑༳Җ侶.
Chen, Zhangtai 䱸❶ኴand Li, Xingjian ᮤ⾜೺ 1996. 㘖忂䈍ᇶ⹰᪉ゝᇶᮏ䇽≷㞟·䇽≷༹ୖ㸪໭ி㸸䈝ᩥฟ∧♫.
Endo, Mitsuaki 2015, “Sun” in Tai-Kadai : Studies in Asian Geolinguistics,1: 18-19
Guo,Xiaozhen and Zhang, Xianping 2005, ᾬ✖ᯩ䀰⹄ウ.ኡ㾯Ӫ≁ࠪ⡸⽮Guo, Xiliang 㒌㘏Ⰻ 2010 ₎Ꮠྂ㡢ᡭ෉.ၟົ༳᭩㤋
Ota, Itsuku⣒䓘㔶 2005. “⩛ྷ”̍敊͐͌㮹攻婆㸸ᶱ柴―ᷕ⚥婆大⊿㕡妨̯ἳ͓ᷕ⽫̬,䤆㇠⢾⣏婾⎊56-7:15-41.

Hebeisheng, Guantaodifangzhibianzuanweiyuanhui ⋣ेⴱ侶䲦ൠᯩᘇ㕆㒲ငઈՊ1999. 侶㝡৯ᚿѝॾҖተHou, Jingyi ὗ䱦ᶨ 1993.ġ Ⱉ大㕡妨䈳ḕ◊✲ᣕ࿌. ኴཎ : ᒣす㧗ᰯ㚄ྜฟ∧♫
Huang, Xuezhen㯤㞷㈆1995. ᱵ┴᪉ゝモ඾. Ụ⸽ᩍ⫱ฟ∧♫
Iwata, Ray ⱑ䓘䣤 2009. ≹䈝㕡妨妋䟺⛘മ. 㜙Ṕ: 䘥ⷅ䣦.
Kondo, Mika 2015 ͆Sun͇ in Austroasiatic : Studies in Asian Geolinguistics,1:20-21
Matsue, Takashi 㜦㰇ⲯ 2009. ⣒旛 : ≹䈝㕡妨妋䟺⛘മ. 㜙Ṕ:䘥ⷅ䣦.
Shirai, Satoko, Kurabe, Keita, Iwasa, Kazue, Suzuki, Hiroyuki and Ebihara, Shiho 2015. Sun: Tibeto-Burman:
Studies in Asian Geolinguistics,1: 14-17
Taguchi, Yoshihisa 2015, ͆Sun͇ in Hmong-Mien: Studies in Asian Geolinguistics,1:12-13
Ueya, Takashi and Yagi, Kenji 2015. ͆Sun͇ in Sinitic languages : Studies in Asian Geolinguistics,1: 10-11
Wang, Weihui 㰒㔤䖹 2014.ġ 䈤“᪥”“᭶”, ୰ᅜ䈝ゝᏛᣕ,16烉73-96.

Kinship Terms in China Guangxi Liujia Dialect
Takashi Ueyaaa

Kyoto University of Foreign Studies

Abstract
This paper discusses the Kinship terms for the Older Generation in Chinese Liujia dialect (六甲话). In this paper, we address two topics. 1) geographical distribution of the words for "Father'sYounger Brother (FyB)", and 2) kinship terms for "Father-in-law" and "Mother-in-law".

1

Introduction

The Liujia dialect is a sub-dialect of the Chinese Pinghua dialect(平话), spoken natively by the
Liujia ethnic group (六甲人) in the Sanjiang-Dong Autonomous County (三江侗族自治县) of Guangxi
Zhuang-nationality Autonomous District(广西壮族自治区). Sangjiang is located in northern Guangxi
province. (Map1)

2

Kinship terms for the older generation

Kinship terms for the Older Generation in the Liujia dialect are listed below.
FF
FM

公
婆

[koŋ53][po343]

MF
MM

外公
外婆

[mui22 koŋ53][mui22 po343]

F
M

爷
□1

[ie53][ȵie22]

FeB
FyB
FZ

大爷
□
□
□

[taai22 ie53][niaŋ33][maan35][pa33]

FeBW
FyBW
FZH

□□
□□
□□

[taai22 ȵie22][niaŋ33 ȵie22/ maan35 ȵie22][ku22 ie53]

MB
MeZ
MyZ

舅
大□□
姨

[kiau35][taai22 in343 ȵie22][i343]

1 □ represents dialectical elements which has no appropriate Han characters.

98

MBW
MZH

舅母□
姨夫爷

[kiau22 mu35 ȵie22][i343 fu53 ie53]

Key to abbreviations:
P=parents, F=father, M=mother, B=brother, Z=sister, S=son, D=daughter, G=sibling, C=child,
H=husband, W=wife, e=elder, y=younger

3

Kinship terms for FyB -[maan35] and [niaŋ33]-

As noted in the above list, two terms FyB exist in the Liujia dialect. In this chapter, we analyze theprocess by which the term for FyB came to be in the Liujia dialect, using a linguistic map. Map 2
indicates the geographical distribution of FyB in the Guangxi Chinese dialect. The data used in this map
is based on Xie (2007).
Kinship terms for FyB in the Guangxi Chinese dialect can be classified into five types.
Type A： 叔 [ʃuk] [su] [sɔo] etc.
Type B ： □ [man] [mɐi][ma ma] etc.
Type C ： □□ [ie ie]
Type D ： □□[ne ia]͡Type E ： □□ [tsie]
In northern Guangxi province, where Sanjiang is located, Type B, C and D are distributed. There seems
to be no doubt from geographical distribution that [maan35] and [niaŋ33] have strong relation to Type B
and Type D. The detailed data and locational point are as follows.
【Type B】
[man42][miɛ23 miɛ23][ma~53][mɐi21][ma55 ma55](Lingui Wutong Pinghua 临桂五通平话) ,(Guilin Chaoyang PInghua 桂林朝阳平话) ,(Yongfu Taocheng Pinghua 永福桃城平话),(Rongshui Xiancheng Tuguaihua 融水县城土拐话),(Guanyang Wenshi Xiangyu 灌阳文市湘语)【Type D】
[ne52 ia21]( Longsheng Hongyao Pinghua 龙胜红瑶平话)

According to informants, [maan35] has a slightly different meaning from [niaŋ33]. The informants statedthat if one’s father has younger brothers, one would refer to the older younger brothers as [niaŋ33], while
one would refer to the youngest younger brother of one’s father [maan35]. In short, [maan35] means "theyoungest FyB".
From this information, we can derive the following hypothesis.
(1) In Sanjiang, there is only one term for "FeB". However, it is unclear whether this term is [niaŋ33] or[maan35].
(2) Liujia speakers have taken to using the new term "FeB" in certain occasions. It may be that the term
was brought into Sanjiang from nearby areas.
(3) While the terms [niaŋ33] and [maan35] were in “competition” for a while, [maan35] subsequently
acquired the new meaning of "the youngest FyB", and since then the terms have coexisted. This situation
continues up to the present day.

99

4

Kinship terms for F/M by marriage

In this chapter, we discuss the kinship terms for F/M through marriage. Married couples in China
continue to have different surnames, thus in Liujia dialect, when we refer to F/M by marriage, we musttake their surname into consideration.
For example, If EGO's WM has the same surname, MM is regarded as Ego's FZ. At the same time, WF
becomes Ego's FZH.
[case1]
EGO's surname = WM's surname
WM → FS (pa33)
WF → FSH (ku22 ie53)ex.
荣Rong（WF）———————— 侯Hou（WM）｜
侯Hou (EGO) ———————— 荣Rong（W）
On the other hand, if EGO's WM has a different surname, WM is regarded as Ego's MZ. At the sametime, WF becomes Ego's MZH.
[case2]
EGO's surname ≠ WM's surname
WM → MS (taai22 in343 ȵie22)
WF → MSH (i343 fu53 ie53)ex.
荣Rong（WF）———————— 吴Wu（WM）｜
侯Hou (EGO) ———————— 荣Rong（W）

5

Conclusion

This paper addressed the process of formation of FyB in the Liujia dialect. Most notably, there exist
two terms for FyB, namely [maan35] and [niaŋ33]. It is highly possible that these two forms originate in
Chinese minority languages. I would like to address this question in in more detail in future research.

References
XIE, Jianyou 谢建猷. 2007. Studies on the Han Chinese dialects of Guangxi 广西汉语方言研究 ,Guangxi renminchubanshe.

100Map 1 Guangxi dialect of Chinese

Map 2 The geographical distribution of FyB in the Guangxi

101

Basic color terms in Ainu
Mika Fukazawa
Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Chiba University/JSPS Research Fellow

Abstract
This is the preliminary study of the basic color terms (BCTs) in the Ainu language. We will
review what colors are “basic” in the language and culture and test the validity of the current
evolutionary sequence proposed by Kay, Berlin, Maffi and Merrifield (1997). Ainu belongs to
the minor line of the sequence, which is related to the generic puzzle regarding the origin ofyellow/green terms. In this study, we drew the geographical distribution of the color foci ofyellow/green/blue (Y/G/Bu) terms and verified the “Composite Category Rule” and theevolution of the BCTs. The result for the developing process of Y, G and Bu in Ainu aligns with
Kay et al.’s (1997) sequence: Stage I and II (unknown) > Stage III (Y/G/Bu) > Stage IV (Y and
G/Bu) or (Y/G and Bu) > Stage V (Y, G, and Bu). In the Ainu culture, besides black, white, red
and Y/G/Bu, the colors of gold and silver have their own words, which were borrowed fromJapanese before the other intersections of primaries, e.g., pink, orange, brown and so on.

1

Introduction

Since Berlin and Kay (1969) proposed the influential hypothesis of “basic color terms” (BCTs),
empirical studies and the World Color Survey (WCS) 1 have developed the categorization and theevolutional sequence of BCTs. Berlin and Kay’s original sequence of BCTs is as follows: I – white andblack, II – red, III – green or yellow, IV – green and yellow, V – blue, VI – brown and VII – purple, pink,orange and gray. Against stage I (white and black), Heider insisted the Dugum Dani has two term
systems, mili ‘dark; cool colors’ and mola ‘light; warm colors’ (Heider 1972; Heider and Oliver 1972).
Regarding to stages III to V, Kay (1975) introduced the new category, “grue,” which should not divide
into green and blue or be labeled with two basic color terms.2 Kay and McDaniel (1978) suggested four“composite categories”: “warm” (red/yellow), “light-warm” (white/red/yellow), “dark-cool”(black/green/blue) and “grue” (blue/green). They also suggested “derived categories,” i.e. brown,orange, pink, purple and gray, which encode the intersection of the six primary categories: white, black,
red, yellow, green and blue. For example, the derived category of pink encodes the intersection of red
and white.
Figure 1 shows the evolutionary typology of BCT systems based on the WCS data (Kay, Berlin,
Maffi and Merrifield 1997). Ninety-one of the 110 WCS languages (83%) belong to the middle row of
Figure 1, which is the “main line” of evolutionary development. Ainu was known as a IIIY/G/Bu languagethat has one term for the yellow/green/blue (Y/G/Bu) category (c.f. Hattori 1964). Only two of the
IIIY/G/Bu languages, Karajá and Lele, are also found in the WCS data. There is not enough evidence tosuggest a scenario for the origins of Y/G composites, and we still need to discover the solution of theY/G mystery,3 since Y and G are separate composites in stage I of the main line. I will focus on the
BCTs and the historical evolution of Ainu as a stage IIIY/G/Bu language. Although it is difficult to do
1 “This project, a collaboration of researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, and the Summer Instituteof Linguistics (SIL), collected colour-naming data from 110 languages being studied by SIL linguist-translators in
the late 1970s.” (Kay and Maffi 2013)
2 One of the evidences was that Japanese ao represents both ‘green’ and ‘blue.’
3 Maclaury (1987) introduced a “yellow-with-green” category in Shuswap and suggested the idea that it diffused
among Salishan languages as a concept that yellow and green belong together.

fieldwork on this language at present, I will try to draw the historical outline of the BCTs in Ainu
through philological investigation and the geographical distribution of the terms.

Figure 1: Types and Evolutional Stages of Basic Color Term Systems;
Kay, Berlin, Maffi and Merrifield (1997) 4

2

What are “the basic color terms” in Ainu

The Ainu language5 is one of the indigenous languages in Japan, spoken throughout Hokkaido, Sakhalin,
and the Kuril Islands. It has five vowels /i, e, a, o, u/ and eleven (or twelve including a glottal stop)
consonants /p, t, k, c, s, m, n, r, w, y, h, (‘)/. There are few studies of BCTs in Ainu, but Hattori and Chiri(1960) and Hattori (1964) documented the rich words for color in the each dialect. In addition to this,Tamura (1974: 26) mentioned the BCTs and different color names in Ainu. Table 1 shows Tamura’s
description of the BCTs from her field data.
Term
kúnne

Gloss
‘black, dark’

retár‘white’

húre

‘red’

síwnin‘green’Reference
black~dark gray;dark colors: dark brown, dark blue, dark purple etc.
white ~ light gray;light colors: light yellow, light pink, light blue etc.
red ~ reddish brown/maroon;
reddish purple ~ orange
light green ~ deep green;
yellow ~ bluish purple

Table 2: Basic Color Terms in Ainu
According to Tamura (1974: 27), the terms for BCTs with the suffix -no stand for their color foci, “ideal
colors,” and those terms using the prefix ru- represent the marginal range of the colors as “non-ideal
colors”: i.e. blackish, whitish, reddish and greenish. Some derived categories may be expressed with theprefix ru- ‘-ish’: ru-hure means ‘pink’ and ‘orange’ and ru-siwnin means ‘light blue’ in the Obihiro
dialect (Hattori 1964; Sawai and Tamura 2005). McNeil (1972) also referred to the BCTs of Ainu and
4 W = white; Bk = black; R = red; Y = yellow; G = green; Bu = blue.
5 The

language is a polysynthetic SV/AOV, basically head-marking type and allows ‘pro-drop,’ which iscompensated with verbal agreement (singular/plural forms and personal affixes/clitics).

has been cited many times (c.f. Moss 1989), however, his description includes some errors. In the next
section, I will correct them and draw the geographical distributions of the BCTs in Ainu.

3

Geographical Distributions of the BCTs in Ainu

Here, we will discuss (i) the etymology of the BCTs in Table 1 above, (ii) the foci of the terms foryellow/green/blue and (iii) the evolutionary sequence of BCTs in Ainu.
3.1. Black
Figure 2: Blackkúnne:
Hokkaido (without unaccented
dialects)
kunne:
Sakhalin (Ochiho, Tarantomari,
Maoka)
Hokkaido (Samani, Bihoro,
Kushiro and Shizuai)
kurasno:Sakhalin (Shiraura, Raichishka,
Nairo)
ekuroku/ekuroko:
Northern Kurils (Shumshu)

The majority of Hokkaido dialects have a pitch accent,6 while in the Sakhalin dialects, vowel length isdistinctive (Chiri 1942 and Tamura 2000). The word kúnne for ‘black’ in Hokkaido corresponds tokunne in Sakhalin7 (Hattori and Chiri 1960). Etymologically, Hattori (1999 [1959]: 152) suggested thatkunne originated from √kur + the copula ne. The root kur is originated from the noun kur for ‘shadow.’
The words in Sakhalin and Northern Kurils, kurasno and ekurok(u/o), seem to have the root √kur
‘shadow.’ The suffix -asno is parallel with -asnu in Hokkaido, which attaches to roots or bases, andcreates adjective-like intransitive verbs, as in (1).
(1) a. kamásnu
b. tumásnu
c. monásnu
d. kurásnu

kam (‘meat’) -asnu
tum (‘power’) -asnu
mon (‘hand’) -asnu
kur (‘shadow’) -asnu‘to have a clear/beautiful skin’‘to be healthy; strong.’‘to be a quick worker’‘to be iridescence’(Tamura 1996; the Saru dialect)

Tamura (1974: 26) said that in Hokkaido, the term ekúrok is “an emotional expression” and means ‘to be
deep black; to be completely dark.’ As Hattori (1999 [1959]) and Tamura (1974) mentioned, if thesethree terms—kúnne, kurasno and ekuroku/ekuroko—include the root √kur ‘shadow,’ the term for‘black’ would be encoded by the low brightness. In Raichishka (Sakhalin), there is also the term kunne
in addition to kurasno, but it is specially used by old people. The term kúnne is older than the terms
6 The dialects of Samani, Bihoro, Kushiro and Shizunai in Hokkaido have no accent (Hattori and Chiri 1960).
7 In addition to this, Hattori and Chiri (1960) recorded the word for ‘black’ as kuɴne in Ochiho, Sakhalin.

Sometimes, maybe idiolectally, [ɴ] is pronounced as /n/, but not [n] in Ainu.

kurasno and ekuroku/ekuroko, which may be newly selected as forms for ‘black’ in Sakhalin andNorthern Kurils, respectively.

3.2. White
Figure 3: White
retár:
Hokkaido (without unaccented
dialects)
retar:
Hokkaido (Samani, Bihoro
Kushiro and Shizunai)
retara:Northern Kurils (Shumshu)
tetara:Sakhalin

According to Chiri (1942) and Tamura (2000), the coda /r/ in Hokkaido has changed to /h/, or /rV/ in
Sakhalin. Following this rule, the term retara is expected in Sakhalin dialects, but it does not exist. This
dialects have the term tetara, even though there is no generic rule of the onset /t/ and /r/ as a phonetic
correspondence between Sakhalin and Hokkaido. In Hattori and Chiri (1960), only the Nairo dialect(Sakhalin) tends to have the onset /t/, which corresponds to /r/ in the other dialects. Moreover, I will
mention the previous studies of tetara. Kindaichi (1931: 10-11) described that investigators often
mistake retara for detara because this is an intermediate sound between /t/ and /d/ and /r/. Chiri (1942:462) explained that in Sakhalin, the onset /r/ is confused with /t/ or /d/: e.g. retara > tetara ‘white.’ We
can see both forms in the writings record of Kurils, retara (Torii 1903) and tetar (Dybowski 1982).

3.3. Red
A uniform distribution of ‘red’ is shown on the map because the terms huure and húre comply with theaccentual pattern in Sakhalin and Hokkaido that we introduced in section 3.1 above. In Tamura (1974),
hure encodes the ranges of red ~ reddish brown/maroon and reddish purple ~ orange, and the focal color
is just red like the color of blood. According to McNeil (1972), the term hu represents ‘red-green,’
because Chiri (1953) shows the term hu for ‘row,’ which is translated in composite words as Japanese
kanji 㟷 (blue): hu-ham for green leaf (Japanese:㟷ⴥ) and hu-kina/hu-mun for green grass (Japanese:㟷ⲡ). However, this includes three matters at least. First, Japanese ao (㟷) reminds us of ‘fresh’ and thecolor of grue (green and blue). It cannot be equal to the terms blue and/or green in English. Second, Chiri(1953) does not refer to hu as the color of ‘blue/green.’ He just explains hu means ‘row,’ and the
opposite is the term ci for ‘mature/die.’ Third, it is a serious mistake to refer to hu as the term for ‘red.’
The term hure cannot be separated into hu and re. If the term hu were ‘red,’ re would be the causative
suffix and hure would mean ‘to make it red.’ The term hure is in fact an intransitive verb.

Figure 4: Red
húre:
Hokkaido (without unaccented
dialects)
hure:
Hokkaido (Samani, Bihoro
Kushiro and Shizunai)
Northern Kurils (Shumshu)
huure:
Sakhalin

3.4. Yellow/Green/BlueIn Ainu, besides the terms kunne ‘black’, retar ‘white’ and hure ‘red’ above, the term siwnin (suynin in
Bihoro) is assumed to be one of the BCTs. McNeil (1972) presented siwnin ‘blue-yellow’ as a BCT.
Hattori (1964) recorded that in some dialects, ‘reddish yellow’ is expressed by hure, while ‘bluishyellow’ is expressed by siwnin/suynin. Moreover, Tamura (1974) notes the dialectal differences in thefoci of siwnin/suynin: ‘light blue’ and ‘yellowish green.’ For example, in Biratori (Hokkaido), theprototypical color is a grass green, but in Bihoro (the northeastern Hokkaido) it is a blue such as thecolor of sky and the sea (Tamura 1996; Hattori 1964). Figure 5 shows the distribution of the terms for‘green/blue/yellow,’ and Figure 6 plots their color foci on the map.
Figure 5: Green/blue/yellow
síwnin:Hokkaido (without
unaccented dialects)
siwnin:Hokkaido (Samani and
Shizunai) and Sakhalinsuynin:Hokkaido (Bihoro andKushiro)teunin:
Northern Kurils (Shumshu)(no data): Hokkaido (Nukibetsu)

In Figure 5, the pair of iw and uy in the terms siwnin and suynin is a characteristic metathesis in Ainu.
The Bihoro and Kushiro dialects tend to have uy terms, e.g. riwka:ruyka ‘bridge,’ nociw:nocuy ‘star,’
ciw:cuy ‘to stab’ and so on. In Northern Kurils, the term teunin for ‘green’ might not have originallydisplayed the focal color of ‘green,’ since in Hokkaido, the term téwnin means ‘sparkle’ or ‘twinkle.’
This may be one piece of evidence for “brightness naming” in MacLaury (2005).8
Figure 6:
Yellow/Green/(Light) Blue;The foci of siwnin/suynin
and teunin
Blue
Light blue
Green
Green (< sparkle;
twinkle)Yellow

Now, let us look at the map of Figure 6, in which we indicated the color foci. There are many dialectsthat have a yellow-green(-blue) category, while no dialect has a yellow-blue (i.e. without green)
category. When the term can indicate a light blue, it is also possible to indicate just a blue. This can be
explained by Figure 7 and the “Composite Category Rule,” that is, “A possible composite category is
any fuzzy union of a subset of [primary categories] which, in Figure [7], forms an unbroken
associational chain not crossing the diagonal line” (Kay, Berlin and Merrifield 1991: 16).

Figure 7
8 With his

empirical data of Lele (Afro-Asiantic), Stage IIIY/G/Bu languages are classified into the type of“brightness naming” opposed to “hue naming.” MacLaury (2005: 209) reported “The Lele speaker focuses the
middle brightness range of bole in green [...] and extends it throughout the colors that an English speaker calls
yellow, red, and blue.”Roberson (2005: 65) also gives a detailed account of color categorization as follows; “No language hasever been reported to have a category that includes two areas of color space (e.g. yellow and blue) but
excludes an area between them (green). There is no associative chain of similarity that could connect
yellow to blue without passing through green.”
Note that even if a dialect is displayed with a stage V icon (‫ە‬, ؓ or ؑ ), it may in fact be positioned
in stage III in Figure 6. We assume that all of the dialects are situated in stage III and then marked onlywith the focal color on the map. This strategy would be successful for finding the evolutionary
development of the Y/G/Bu category in the Ainu language. The marginal dialects such as ABA
distribution have the stage III icon, while, as Tamura (1974) mentioned before, the focal color of
siwnin/suynin is blue in the eastern Hokkaido dialects, and it is green in the western dialects. The stage
IV icons are sandwiched between the icons of stages III and V. This is the evidence for the intermediatestage. Figure 8 shows the two possible developmental paths of Y/G/Bu systems, adapted from Figure 1(Kay, Berlin, Maffi and Merrifield 1997) above.

III

IV

V

Figure 8
Ainu can be considered as a non-partition language that conforms to the Emergence Hypothesis (EH),
according which “not all languages necessarily possess a small set of words or word senses that eachsignify a color concept and whose significata jointly partition the perceptual color space” (Kay and
Maffi 1999: 744; Kay et al. 2009: 9). Moreover, Kay and Maffi (1999: 755) and Kay et al. (2009: 41)
suggested “a plausible solution to the apparent mystery of Y/G composites”:
EH languages may develop somewhat along the lines of Yélî Dnye, assigning basic terms,
according to principles [Black & White and Red], only to restricted [Black, White, and Red]
violating Partition. Subsequently, Partition comes into play and a Y/G/Bu term appears, covering
the remaining primary colors. There is some suggestive that no reliable conclusion can be drawn
here. In some cases, the Y/G/Bu term may then divide into Bu and Y/G terms.
The term siwnin/suynin would be etymologically related to the term siw/suy ‘bitter, sour in taste.’ Insome dialects, siwnin itself can express this meaning. If it originated from the color of an ‘unripe or
immature (plant),’ it is no wonder that the Y/G/Bu composites occur in order to cover the remaining
primaries.

4

Non “Basic Color Terms” ― But Essential Colors

What is the ‘color’ for Ainu people? The term for ‘color’ in Ainu is not an original word, but rather iro(the possessive form iroho), which is borrowed from the Japanese iro (Ⰽ). In the Ainu cluture, barkused to make fabric and textiles is dyed the color of black, red or Y/G/Bu with bark or grass. One
common linguistic feature of the BCTs is that they have transitive forms with a causative suffix -ka:kunne-ka, retar-ka, hure-ka and siwnin-ka ‘to make it black, white, red and Y/G/Bu.’ This is why wesuggest that these colors are the BCTs for the Ainu language and culture.
As for the other essential colors, Refsing (2013: 220) mentioned, “besides black and white andpossibly gold and silver, there are only two words for colors: hure (red) and siwnin (yellow) in the Ainu
language.” Although the terms for ‘gold’ and ‘silver’ may indicate their minerals, certainly these color
terms appear frequently in Ainu oral literature and history. In some cases, they might intend to show

metonymically gorgeous, luxury and beauty. Only these colors are clearly expressed by borrowing
words from Japanese kogane (㯤㔠) and sikokane (ⓑ㔠), as compared to konkane/konkani andsirokane/sirokani. The beginning sentence of the first story in Yukie Chiri’s (1978[1923]: 10–35) “Ainu
Shin’yoshu (A collection of the Ainu epics of the gods)” would be famous in Ainu literature:“sirokanipe ranran piskan, konkanipe ranran piskan”—“(Silver raindrops are falling around and gold
raindrops are falling around).”5

Conclusions

This study has investigated the BCTs in the Ainu language and their geographical distribution. Ainu has
four BCTs: black, white, red and yellow/green/blue (Y/G/Bu). The terms for ‘white’ and ‘red’ show
uniform distributions, while the terms for ‘black’ show a dialectal distribution. The older form for‘black’ would be kúnne, and then ekuroku/ekuroko and kurasno appeared in Northern Kurils and
Sakhalin, respectively. These forms take the root √kur ‘shadow’ and originate from the meaning of‘dark.’ The terms for ‘Y/G/Bu’ are not very different formally, but the foci vary from dialect to dialect.
The result would not deny the current evolutionary sequence of WCS (Kay et al. 2009); however, thedistribution of the foci is suggestive for the other non-partition (i.e. EH) languages. It seems that the
Y/G/Bu terms in Ainu may be related to the word for ‘bitter’ and they may originally represent the colorof an ‘unripe or immature (plant).’ Interestingly, konkane/konkani ‘gold’ and sirokane/sirokani ‘silver’
are also essential color terms in the Ainu culture. These colors possess their own terms, which wereborrowed from Japanese prior to other terms that name the fuzzy intersections of primaries: brown, pink,
purple, orange, and gray.
At present, we cannot investigate the Ainu language in detail in the field, because a few “native
speakers” only know limited words and cannot speak this language freely. However, young generationsof Ainu people are now learning it as second language; they are writing articles in Ainu and speaking itin their community. They value their own dialects, and to some extent, have positive attitudes toward
newly coined words and borrowed words from Japanese. The movement and the study of the Ainu
language has entered a new phase. We will observe, in the future, how Y/G/Bu terms will be developed
and which terms the Ainu people will select for foci of Y, G and Bu in their current society.

Acknowledgement
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 16J01055.

Appendix
List of Used Data:
Dialects
Yakumo, Horobetsu, Asahikawa, Nayoro,
Bihoro, Sooya and Raichishka
Oshamambe, Nukibetsu, Niikappu, Samani,
Ochiho, Tarantomari, Maoka, Shiraura andNairo
Biratori and Fukumitsu
ObihiroKushiro and Shiranuka
ChitoseShizunai
MukawaHombetsu
Shumushu (Northern Kuril)

Materials
Hattori and Chiri (1960) and Hattori (1964)
Hattori and Chiri (1960)
Hattori and Chiri (1960), Hattori (1964) andTamura (1996)
Hattori and Chiri (1960) and Sawai and Tamura(2005)
Hattori and Chiri (1960) and Fujimura (1986)
Nakagawa (1995)
Okuda (1999)
Nakagawa (2014)
Sawai (2006)
Torii (1903) and Murayama (1971)



The Atlas of Ainu Dialects

Hokkaido:
1. Yakumo, 2. Oshamambe, 3. Horobetsu, 4. Biratori, Fukumitsu, 5. Nukibetsu, 6. Niikappu, 7. Samani,
8. Obihiro, 9. Kushiro/Shiranuka, 10. Bihoro, 11. Asahikawa, 12. Nayoro, 13. Sooya, 14. Chitose,
15. Shizunai, 16. Hombetsu, 17. Mukawa, 18. Nemuro
Sakhalin:
19. Ochiho, 20. Tarantomari, 21. Maoka, 22. Shiraura, 23. Raichishka, 24. Nairo
Kuril Islands:
25. Shumshu
References
Berlin, B. and P. Kay. 1969. Basic color terms: Their universality and evolution. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.
Chiri, M. 1942. Ainu gohoo kenkyuu: Karafuto hoogen wo chuusin toshite [The study of Ainu grammar: Speciallyfor Sakhalin dialects]. Chiri Mashiho chosakushuu [Collected works of Chiri Mashiho], 3, 1973[1993].
Tokyo: Heibonsha.
Chiri, M. 1953. Bunrui Ainugo Jiten: Shokubutsu-hen [Classified Ainu Dictionary: The Plant volume]. Nihon
joomin bunka kenkyuu-jo Ihoo [Institute for Japanese Folk Culture Bulletin], 64. Kanagawa: Institute forJapanese Folk Culture.
Chiri, Y. 1978[1923]. Ainu Shin’yoshuu. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Dybowski, B. S. 1982. Słownik narzecza Ainów, zamieszkują wyspę Szumszu w łańcuchu Kurylskim przyKamczatce. Kitachishima Ainugo [Northern Kuril Ainu], 134–244, Murayama, S., 1971. Tokyo: Yoshikawa
Kobunkan.
Fujimura, H. 1986. Urawakai Sinutapka-bito no hanashi, Katari no naka no seikatsushi [Ainu Life in Oral
Tradition], 187–249. Sapporo: Ainu Mukeibunka Denshoo Hozonkai.
Hattori, S. 1999[1959]. Nihongo no Keitoo [The genealogy of the Japanese language]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Hattori, S. (ed.) 1964. Ainugo hoogen jiten [Ainu dialect dictionary]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Hattori, S. and M. Chiri. 1960. Ainugo shohoogen no kisogoi tookeigakuteki kenkyuu [A lexicostatistic study on
the Ainu dialects]. Minzokugaku kenkyuu [The Japanese journal of ethnology], 24(4): 31–66.
Heider, E. R. 1972. Probabilities, sampling, and the ethnographic method: The case of Dani Colour Names. Man,
7(3): 448–466.
Heider E. R. and D. C. Oliver. 1972. The structure of the color space for naming and memory in two languages.
Cognitive psychology, 3: 337–354.
Kay, P. 1975. Synchronic variability and diachronic change in basic color terms. Language in society, 4: 257-270.
Kay, K. and L. Maffi. 2013. Green and blue. The world atlas of language structures online. Dryer, M. S. and M.
Haspelmath (eds.). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at
http://wals.info/chapter/134, Accessed on 2016-05-04.)
Kay, P. and C.K. McDaniel 1978. The linguistic significance of the meanings of basic color terms. Language,54(3): 610–646.
Kay, P and L. Maffi. 1999. Color appearance and the emergence and evolution of basic color lexicons. American
anthropologist, 101: 743–760.
Kay, P., Berlin, B. Maffi, L., Merrifield, R. and C. Richard. 2009. The world color survey. Stanford: CSLI
Publications.
Kindaichi, K. 1931. Ainu yuukara gohoo tekiyoo. [An outline of the grammar of Ainu epic poetry]. Ainu jojishi:
Yuukara no kenkyuu [Ainu epic poetry: research on yukar], 1. Tokyo: Tooyoo Bunko.
MacLaury, R. E. 1987. Color-Category Evolution and Shuswap Yellow-with-Green. American Anthropologist,
89: 107–124.
MacLaury R. E. 2005. So-called Brightness in color ethnography: Potentials for LCD technology in Fieldwork andcategorization research. Cross-cultural research, 39(2): 205–227.
Moss, A.E. 1989. Basic Colour Terms: Problems and Hypotheses. Lingua, 78: 313–320.
Murayama, S. 1971. Kitachishima Ainugo [Northern Kuril Ainu]. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan.
Nakagawa, H. 1995. Ainugo Chitose hoogen jiten [The Ainu-Japanese dictionary: Chitose dialect]. Tokyo:
Sofukan.
Nakagawa, H. (ed.). 2014. Ainugo Mukawa hoogen Nihongo Ainugo jiten [The Japanese-Ainu dictionary:
Mukawa Dialect]. Chiba: Chiba University. (Available online at http://cas-chiba.net/Ainu-archives/)
Okuda, O. 1999. Ainugo Shizunai hoogen bunmyaku-tsuki goishuu (CD-ROM tsuki) [Ainu Shizunai dialect lexicon
in context (with CD-ROM)]. Ebetsu: Sapporo Gakuin University.
Refsing, K. 2013. Ainu Spririts singing: The living world of Chiri Yukie’s Ainu Shin’yōshū [Review]. Journal ofJapanese studies, 39(1): 216–221.
Roberson, D. 2005. Color categories are culturally diverse in cognition as well as in language. Cross-culturalresearch, 39(1): 56–71.
Sawai, H. 2006. Ms. Tomeno Sawai's basic vocabulary of the Tokachi dialect of Ainu[in Japanese]. Sapporo: The
Hokkaido Ainu Culture Research Center.
Sawai, H. and S. Tamura (eds.) 2005. Ainu language: Transcribed materials of the Obihiro Dialect ̿Basic
vocabulary of Haru Hirono recorded by Suzuko Tamura [in Japanese]. Ebetsu: Sapporo Gakuin University.
Tamura, S. 1996. Ainugo Saru hoogen jiten [The Ainu-Japanese dictionary: Saru dialect]. Tokyo: Sofukan.
Tamura, S. 2000. The Ainu language. Tokyo: Sanseido.
Torii, R. 1903. Chishima Ainu [Kuril Ainu]. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan.

Phonetic observations on Korean dialects made by Ogura Shinpei
Rei Fukui
Department of Korean Studies,
Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology,
The University of Tokyo

Abstract
This paper 1 discusses various problems found in phonetic descriptions on Korean dialects madeby Ogura Shinpei. Pitch accent, vowel length, the qualities of some Chejudo vowels, and some
initial consonants are discussed. As for pitch accent, two kinds of newly found manuscripts are
introduced. By comparing these manuscripts and the corresponding descriptions appeared in the
published version, we can understand more closely his observation of Korean pitch accent.

1

Introduction

Ogura Shinpei (1882–1944) was one of the early scholars who founded Korean linguistics in the firsthalf of the 20th century. He conducted a series of dialect surveys on Korean dialects throughout the
Korean peninsula in 1910s through 1930s, and the results had been published in numerous articles andmonographs. In 1944 he tried to publish a comprehensive work on Korean dialectology by bringing
together all the materials he had gathered through his entire life and major articles he had written on
Korean dialectology. The result was a two volume book entitled as &KǀVHQJRKǀJHQQRNHQN\ǌ (Studies
in Korean dialects, 1944). However, his health did not allow him to see its publication as he fell ill andpassed away early that year so that its publication was completed by his two disciples 2.
His observation of Korean dialects is priceless in two respects: first, it encompasses all the areasin the Korean peninsula, which is now impossible because of the political separation between North andSouth. Secondly, his observation was the earliest among any modern systematic dialect surveys. Despite
all the advances, however, it is sometimes difficult to understand what he had meant by his phonetictranscriptions. For example, we sometimes find inconsistent descriptions across different parts of thebook. In some cases, his observations can simply be wrong: vowels that we normally expect long areoften described as short, and in the case of a vowel found in the Chejudo dialect, all other researchers
after him make a different observation. As for pitch distinctions, which are prominent in some parts ofnorthern and southern dialects, he gives us very little information.
The purpose of this paper is to examine various problems found in his description of accent,vowel length, vowel system (especially that of the Chejudo dialect), some initial consonants (especiallythose beginning with /n/ and /r/ before /i/ and /j/) in order to evaluate correctly his description and makethe best of his data 3. As for the problems concerning the accent, although he made only fragmentary
descriptions in published work, we would like to introduce two kinds of hitherto unknown manuscripts
containing his account on Korean accent.

1 This paper is a revised version of my presentation at the 3rd International Conference on Asian Geolinguistics
held at the Royal University of Phnom Penh on 24 May 2016. Part of this study is supported by Grant-in-Aid for
Scientific Research ((C) 15K02504) from the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture.
2 A detailed account on how this book was published was written by Shibata Takeshi (1918–2007) in the postscriptof this book.
3 A more general acount on his dialect surveys is given in Fukui (2016). This paper discusses his phonetic
descriptions in more detail.

In a sense, examining his description of Korean dialects is a kind of text criticism that is needed
for historical linguistics, and we are dealing with what may be termed as the historical geolinguistics
since a little more than 100 years have passed when he first began to investigate Korean dialects.

2

Ogura Shinpei’s system of phonetic transcription

His system of phonetic transcription for describing Korean dialects differs slightly according to articles
but the one used in Ogura (1944) is like shown in Table 1. There are two kinds of transcriptions: for each
item, a Hangul letter is shown first, followed by a letter-to-letter transliteration for it, and then a phonetictranscription enclosed in square brackets. The former is used for citing examples from past literature
written in the Hangul script, and the latter for the purpose of indicating phonetic transcription of modern
dialect data.
Table 1. Phonetic transcription used in Ogura (1944).
1. ර= a [a]2. ල= ia [ja]3. ඿= ‫]ܧ[ ܧ‬4. ශ= i‫[ ܧ‬j‫]ܧ‬

5. ස= o [o]6. ෇= io [jo]7. ෈= u [u]8. ෌= iu [ju]9. ෍ Xࡆ>Xࡆ@

10. ා= i [i]11. 躂= ‫ܣ‬

12. ඼,躅= ai, ‫ܣ‬i [‫]ܭ‬

13. ඾= iai [j‫]ܭ‬

14. ව= ‫ܧ‬i [e]15. ෂ= i‫ܧ‬i [je]16. ෆ= oi [ø]17. ෋= ui [wi]18. ෎ XࡆL>XࡆL@

19. හ= oa [wa]20. ෉= u‫[ ܧ‬w‫]ܧ‬

21. ළ= oai [w‫]ܭ‬

22. ්= u‫ܧ‬i [we]23. ඝ = k [k, g]

24. ච= n [n]25. ඣ= t [t, d]

26. ඥ= r [l, r]

27. ත= m [m]28. ථ= p [p, b]

29. න= s [s, t]

30. ඳ ƾ>ƾ@31. ප þ>W‫ݕ‬, d‫]ݤ‬32. බ þ‫>ލ‬W‫]ލݕ‬33. භ N‫>ލ‬N‫@ލ‬

34. ම W‫>ލ‬W‫@ލ‬

35. ඹ S‫>ލ‬S‫@ލ‬

36. ය= h [h]37. 踑 VN>‫ސ‬N‫ސ‬J@

38. 踓 VW>‫ސ‬W‫ސ‬G@

39. 踖 VS>‫ސ‬S‫ސ‬E@ 40. ඲ VV>‫ސ‬V@

41. 踚 Vþ>‫ސ‬W‫ސݕ‬G‫ ]ݤ‬42. 踤 ĪThis system is basically in accordance with the IPA but there are several differences. First, the symbol[Xࡆ] (Overdot U) is used for the Hangul letter ‘㦒’ which is now usually transcribed by [ܺ] or [݁], and forvowels found in the Cheju island corresponding to Middle Korean ‘躂’ and ‘躅’, he uses [o] (Italic O)
and [ö] (Umlaut Italic O) respectively, apparently being used as ad hoc symbols.
As for the symbol [Xࡆ] (No. 9 in Table 1), he used [݁ࡆ] (Overdot ݁) in his previous works such as
Ogura (1931a, 1931b). He explains reasons for changing it as follows:
In the past I used [݁ࡆ] for ‘㦒’, but in order to simplify the symbol shape and to keep harmony withthe second class of the vowel ‘㠊’, I changed it to >Xࡆ@ࠕᚑ᮶⚾ࡣ 㦒 ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣ [݁ࡆ] ࢆ⏝ࡦ᮶ࡗࡓࡀ㸪Ꮠ⏬ࢆ⡆༢࡞ࡽࡋࡴࡿ࡜㸪㠊 ࡢ➨஧㢮࡟㛵ಀࢆಖࡓࡋࡴࡿ࡜ࡢ⌮⏤࡟ࡼࡾ㸪அࢆ >Xࡆ@࡜ᨵࡵࡓࠖ(Ogura 1934: 94, translation mine, the same hereafter).

The second reason has a relationship with vowels that correspond to the Hangul letter ‘㠊’. In somedialects including conservative Seoul, there are two kinds of pronunciation for this single letter: one is avowel usually transcribed as [‫]ܧ‬, and the other, a central (and usually long) vowel which is usuallytranscribed as [ԥ:] or [ܺ:]. He was well aware of this and had called the former the first class, and thelatter the second class, transcribing by the symbols [‫ ]ܧ‬and [‫ ]ݛ‬respectively.
As for the vowels found in Chejudo dialects, we will discuss later in section 5.



3

Pitch accent

Some dialects of the Korean language are known for having a distinctive pitch accent system. The twomost typical cases are found in Hamgyǂng dialects, located in the north-eastern area of the peninsula,and in Kyǂngsang dialects, located in the south-east area.
Despite this fact, Ogura Shinpei left us very few descriptions on Korean accent compared to thetotal amount of his works on Korean dialects 4. There are no articles or monographs that exclusively deal
with accent. But fragmentary descriptions are found sporadically in various works such as the following:
Kokugo oyobi chǀsengo hatsuon gaisetsu (An introduction to the pronunciation of Japanese andKorean) ࠗᅜㄒཬᮅ㩭ㄒⓎ㡢ᴫㄝ࠘(1923)
Nanbu chǀVHQno hǀJHQ(Southern Korean dialects)ࠗ༡㒊ᮅ㩭ࡢ᪉ゝ࠘(1924)&KǀVHQJRKǀJHQQRNHQN\ǌ (Studies in Korean dialects)ࠗᮅ㩭ㄒ᪉ゝࡢ◊✲࠘(1944)
Among these works the most detailed description is found in the last one, in which two kinds ofdescriptions on the accent system of several Kyǂngsang dialects and a tentative accentual classificationof the Chǂlla dialects are given (2nd vol., 431–439).
Recently I have found two kinds of manuscripts of his that correspond to the two kinds ofKyǂngsang accent description just mentioned. In the following, I will first cite all the passages in which
he touched upon Korean accent as exhaustively as possible, and then try to compare the most detailed
part of his published description and corresponding newly found manuscripts which contain a moreinteresting account on the Kyǂngsang accent.

3.1

An introduction to the pronunciation of Japanese and Korean (1923: 119)In this book he briefly mentions about the accent in Korean. He distinguishes ‘word accent’ and‘sentence accent’, and states that both Kyǂngsang and Chǂlla dialects have a kind of prominent accent.
As for the phonetic realization of the accent, both pitch and intensity seem relevant in this description.
(1) In Korean, word accent and sentence accent differ according to regions. In my own investigation,
people in south and north Kyǂngsang and Chǂlla dialects have in general a prominently lowering
accent. For example, ... (example sentences omitted) … putting accents in this way, they
constantly go on speaking with an alternating wave of intensity. … ࠕᮅ㩭ㄒ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣㄒ࢔ࢡࢭ
ࣥࢺཬࡧᩥ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡣᆅ᪉࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ኵࠎ┦㐪ࡀ࠶ࡿࠋవࡢᐇᰝࡋࡓᡤ࡛ࡣ៞ᑦ༡໭㐨࣭඲⨶༡㐨ࡢேࠎࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ㸪Ṧ࡟ᩥ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡣ㸪୍⯡࡟ⴭࡋࡃ㝆ୗⓗ༶ࡕ㢌࠶ࡀࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ౛
‫ە‬

̻

‫ە‬

̻

࡬ࡤṈ➼ࡢᆅ᪉ࡢேࠎࡢㄯヰࡣࠕ㌂⧢㧊Ⱒ䌖࣭ࠖࠕᒣ㧊⏟┺ࠖࡢ㌂࣭Ⱒ࣭ᒣ࣭⏟࡟࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࢆ
⨨ࡁ㸪⤯࠼ࡎᙉᙅࡢἼືࢆ⧞㏉ࡋ࡚㐍ࢇ࡛⾜ࡃࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ…ࠖ
AE

3.2

AE

EA

AE

AE

EA

Southern Korean dialects (1924: 47-48)

In this monograph the following description on ‘sentence accent’ is given for southern Korean dialects.
Also, a map indicating the area having a distinctive accent system is attached in the appendix (SeeFigure 1). In this description, a more detailed account on the geographical distribution of the dialects
having this kind of accent is given.
(2) It is easy to observe that South and North Kyǂngsang dialects have sentence accent, i.e.,
prominent highs and lows of pitch. The investigation of this system of accent is the most difficult
part in dialect surveys and I myself have been unable to fully attain the goal, but to sum up, it placesprominence on the first syllable and the discourse goes on with a head-rising tone in these areas.
4 The author (and perhaps many others ?) has been half unconsciously thinking that this has something to do withhis linguistic background. He was born and raised in Sendai, a city known for the lack of distinctive pitch likeTokyo, Kyoto and many other dialects.

And the geographical distribution is as follows: most prominent areas are all parts of South andNorth Kyǂngsang, (coastal) Kangwǂn area south of Chumunjin. Its influence goes on to all SouthChǂlla dialects but it is not so prominent as in the Kyǂngsang areas, except for southern coastal
placeVOLNH.RKǎQJ3ǂlgyo, Posǂng and Changsǂng, in which it is as prominent as in Kyǂngsang
areas. It is noteworthy that it is not found in South and North Chungch’ǂng, North Chǂlla, andKangwǂn area north of Yangyang, less prominent as in the case of Seoul areas.ࠕ៞ᑦ༡໭㐨ᆅ᪉ࡢᮅ㩭ㄒ࡟ᩥ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ (Sentence-accent) ༶ࡕㄒㄪࡢ㧗పࡢ㢧ⴭ࡞ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣఱேࡶᐜ᫆࡟ㄆࡵᚓ
ࡿᡤ࡛࠶ࡿࠋṈࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡢ◊✲ࡣ᪉ゝㄪᰝୖ᭱ࡶᅔ㞴ࢆឤࡎࡿᡤ࡛㸪వࡶᮍࡔ༑ศࡢ┠ⓗࢆ㐩ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆᚓࡠࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪せࡍࡿ࡟ྠᆅ᪉࡟᪊ࡅࡿṈࡢ✀ࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡣẖ㡢⠇ࡢึࡢ㒊ศ࡟ຊࢆ⨨ࡁ㸪༶ࡕ㢌ୖࡀࡾࡢㄪᏊࢆ௨࡚ㄯヰࢆ⥅⥆ࡋ࡚⾜ࡃࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⪋ࡋ࡚඼ࡢศᕸࡢ≧ែࢆぢࡿ࡟㸪៞ᑦ༡໭୧㐨ࡢ඲㒊ཬࡧỤཎ㐨ὀᩥὠ௨༡ࢆ௨࡚᭱ࡶ㢧ⴭ࡞ࡿᆅ᪉࡜ࡍࡿࠋ⪋ࡋ࡚඼ࡢᙳ㡪ࡢཬࡪ࡜ࡇࢁࡣ඲⨶༡㐨୍෇࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪ヱᆅ᪉࡟᪊ࡅࡿ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡣ៞ᑦ༡໭㐨࡟᪊ࡅࡿࡶ
ࡢ⛬㢧ⴭ࡞ࡽࡎ㸪၏༡᪉ᾏᓊ࡟㠃ࡋ៞༡ᆅ᪉࡜ẚ㍑ⓗ஺㏻ࡢ㢖⦾࡞ࡿ㧗⯆࣭⟁ᶫ࣭ᐆᇛ࣭㛗ᇛᆅ᪉ࡀ៞ᑦ㐨࡜ྠ⛬ᗘ࡟᪊࡚ⴭࡋࡁࢆⓎぢࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᛅΎ༡໭㐨࣭඲⨶໭㐨ࡢ඲㒊㸪Ụཎ㐨〴㝧௨໭࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣṈࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀㄆࡵࡽࢀࡎ㸪ிᇛᆅ᪉࡜኱ᕪ࡞ࡁࡣὀពࡍࡿ࡟㊊ࡿ⌧㇟࡛࠶ࡿࠖ

3.3

Studies in Korean dialects (1944)

Lastly, we would like to examine descriptions found in this work. First, all passages containing brief
descriptions on accent of any kind are listed, and then the above mentioned detailed description found on
pp. 431–439 will be discussed.
(3) … a kind of orange is also called [kam-d‫ݤ‬a], but in the case of potato the accent is placed on thesecond syllable whereas in the case of orange it is on the first syllable. ࠕ⻤᯿ࡶ [kam-d‫ݤ‬a] ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪㤿㕥⸉ࡣ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀ➨஧㡢⠇࡟࠶ࡾ㸪⻤᯿ࡣ➨୍㡢⠇࡟࠶ࡿࠋࠖ (1st vol., p. 196. A note forthe item ‘potato’ on Kyǂngsangdo Hapch’eong (㝏ᕝ))The word [kam-d‫ݤ‬a] denoting a kind of orange (᯿Ꮚ) is no longer used so that it seems difficult toverify its accent. In the case of the word for ‘potato’, the accent is placed on the second syllable in manyKyǂngsang dialects and this is in accordance with his observation.
(4) (explaining accusative markers) … In south Hamgyǂngdo north of Munch’ǂn [k‫ܭ‬-UXࡆ‫ސ‬W‫ܭ‬-rin-da](hit a dog), [sul-XࡆP‫ܧ‬ƾQXࡆn-da] (drink alcoholic beverages). (acFHQWLVSODFHGRQ>UXࡆ@DQG>Xࡆ@ ࠕဒ㙾༡㐨࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪ᩥᕝ௨໭࡛ࡣ㸪[k‫ܭ‬-UXࡆ‫ސ‬W‫ܭ‬-rin-da], [sul-XࡆP‫ܧ‬ƾQXࡆQ-da]㸦>UXࡆ@ཬࡧ >Xࡆ@࡟࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࢆ⨨ࡃ㸧
ࠖ(2nd vol., p. 327)

Although this is for the purpose of explaining accusative markers, he made a comment in passing, notingthat the accent is placed on the accusative markers, implying that in other cases accent is placed on thenoun. This seems to be his sole mention on the Hamgyǂngdo accent.
Next, the following passages all concern about dialects in the vicinity of Kyǂngsangdo, eitherwith or without an accent system. Some Chǂlla dialects are reported to have an accent system similar tothat of Kyǂngsang dialect ((5) and (6)), whereas no such accent is heard in North Ch’ungch’ ǂng dialects(7).
(5) ࠕ༡ཎ㒆㞼ᓠ㠃ࡢᮾ㞄࡞ࡿᮾ㠃ཬࡧᒣෆ㠃ࡢ୍㒊࡟ࡣ៞ᑦ༡㐨᪉ゝࡢᙳ㡪࠶ࡾ㸪Ṧ࡟៞ᑦ㐨᪉ゝ࡟Ꮡࡍࡿ⊂≉ࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀ⫈ྲྀࡉࢀࡿࠋ㞼ᓠ㠃⮬㌟ࡢ᪉ゝࡣᮾ㞄ࡢᮾ㠃ཬࡧす㞄ࡢ஧ⓑ㠃ࡢࡑࢀ࡜ࡶ㊃ࢆ␗࡟ࡋ㸪ᜦࡶ୧⪅ࡢ୰㛫࡟࠶ࡿዴࡁほࢆ࿊ࡋ࡚ᒃࡿࠋࠖ(2nd vol., p. 525)(6) ࠕ඲⨶༡໭㐨㡰ኳ࣭ồ♩࣭༡ཎ࣭㛗Ỉ࣭ⱱᮒㅖ㒆ෆࡢ៞ᑦ༡໭㐨࡟᥋ࡍࡿᆅ᪉࡟ࡣ㸪୍⯡࡟៞ᑦ㐨≉᭷ࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀ⾜ࡣࢀ࡚ᒃࡿࠋ
ࠖ(2nd vol., p. 608)(7) ࠕ៞ᑦ໭㐨ྛᆅ࡟ྠ㐨≉᭷ࡢᩥ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀ㢧ⴭ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪ᛅΎ໭㐨᪉ゝ࡛ࡣࡑࢀࡀ⪺࠿ࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࠖ(2nd vol., p. 616)
Next, the following passage is the most detailed description he had made on the accent system ofKyǂngsang dialects (2nd vol., pp. 431–439). As I said above, this passage consists of two kinds ofdescriptions. First, a comparison of ‘word accent’ for some eight places in Kyǂngsang dialects are given.
The number of words investigated is about eighty. The places are mostly located in North Kyǂngsang
area but a few South Kyǂngsang places are included as well.
(8-1) Everyone can notice that a kind of special accent exists in the Yǂngnam (=Kyǂngsang) dialects.
I have been unable to fully investigate it until now, but based on a few materials at hand I will try todeal with one aspect of this topic, although insufficient. First, as for word accent, I will cite a few
words from the dialects such as Taegu (኱㑪 .LPFK¶ǂQ 㔠Ἠ), ԂiVǂQJ ⩏ᇛ <ǂQJFK¶ǂQ Ọᕝ),Andong (Ᏻᮾ <HFK¶ǂQ 㔇Ἠ <ǂQJGǂN ┆ᚨ), Yangsan (ᱱᒣ), and compare among them. ࠕᕊ༡ᆅ᪉ࡢ᪉ゝ࡟୍✀≉ูࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡢᏑࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ㸪ఱே࡟ࡶ┤ࡕ࡟Ẽࡀࡘࡃࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⚾ࡣ௒᪥ࡲ࡛ࡑࢀ࡟㛵ࡋ༑ศ࡞ㄪᰝࢆ㐙ࡆࡓࡇ࡜ࡀ↓࠸ࡀ㸪ᡭチ࡟࠶ࡿ㈨ᩱࢆᇶ♏࡜ࡋ࡚㸪୙᏶඲࡞ࡀࡽᑡࡋࡃࡇࡢၥ㢟ࡢ୍➃࡟ゐࢀ࡚ぢࡼ࠺ࠋඛ࡙㸪༢ㄒࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪ࡑࢀ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚
ࡣ㸪኱㑪࣭㔠Ἠ࣭⩏ᇛ࣭Ọᕝ࣭Ᏻᮾ࣭㔇Ἠ࣭┆ᚨ࣭ᱱᒣㅖᆅⅬࡢ᪉ゝ୰ࡼࡾⱝᖸㄒࢆᢳฟࡋ㸪ẚ
㍑ࢆヨࡳࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡍࡿࠋࠖ

In this explanation he only mentions 8 places but in fact he sometimes adds data from Kimhae (㔠ᾏ) ,Ulsan (ⶢᒣ) and some other places.
He then presents accent data for disyllabic and trisyllabic words according to the place of accent
as are shown in Table 2. The labels such as 2-1, 2-2, 3-1 etc. are added by the author to indicate thenumber of syllable and the location of accent. (In this table only one example word for each accent groupis shown but a total of 80 words are presented in his description. Also, Square brackets and hyphens
indicating syllable boundary are omitted due to limited space in the table.)
Table 2. Accent group and example words.
gloss

Taegu

.LPFK¶ǂQ ԂLVǂQJ

2-1 womant‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬G‫ݤ‬ip

2-2 potatokamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬

3-1 lizardWR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬m WR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬m WR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬mkamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬<ǂQJFK¶ǂQ Andong<HFK¶ǂQ

t‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬G‫ݤ‬ipt‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬G‫ݤ‬ipt‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬G‫ݤ‬ipt‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬G‫ݤ‬ipkamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬kamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬kamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬kamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬kamd‫ݤ‬a‫ ޗ‬kamd‫ݤ‬D‫ޗ‬WR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬m WR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬mWR‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p‫ܭ‬m

3-2 wild goose kir‫ޗܧ‬JL

kir‫ޗܧ‬JL

3-3 boym‫ܧ‬VXࡆPD‫ޗ‬m‫ܧ‬VXࡆPD‫ ޗ‬m‫ܧ‬VXࡆPD‫ޗ‬kir‫ޗܧ‬JL

kir‫ޗܧ‬JL

NLUH‫ޗ‬JL<ǂQJGǂN Yangsant‫ݕ‬id‫ݤ‬ipkir‫ޗܧ‬JL

m‫ܧ‬VXࡆPD‫ ޗ‬m‫ܧ‬VXࡆPD‫ޗ‬

NLUL‫ޗ‬JL

Kimhaet‫ݕ‬id‫ݤ‬LS‫ޗ‬

NLUL‫ޗ‬JL
m‫ܧ‬VXࡆ‫ޗ‬ma( ‫ޗ‬DFFHQWZRUGVZLWKRXWan accent mark: level tone (ᖹᯈ), shaded cell: exceptional accent.)

Examples of words for each accent group are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Words belonging to each accent group.
2-1 [t‫ݕ‬L‫ޗ‬-d‫ݤ‬ip] (woman), [t‫ݕ‬LP‫ޗ‬-t‫ݕ‬i] (kimchi), >ND‫ޗ‬-m‫( ]ܭ‬iron pot), [ku‫ޗ‬-si] (manger), [k‫ޗܧ‬-buk] (turtle), [k‫ޗܧ‬-S‫ލ‬XP@(bubble), >QXࡆL‫ޗ‬-bi] (silkworm), >QD‫ޗ‬-bu] (butterfly), >WDO‫ޗ‬-bi] (hairpiece), >WR‫ޗ‬-m‫( ]ܭ‬chopping board), >WR‫ޗ‬-mi] (seabream), >PRO‫ޗ‬-g‫( ]ܭ‬sand), >PDO‫ޗ‬-bam] (water chestnut), etc.
2-2 [kam-d‫ݤ‬D‫( ]ޗ‬potato), [kun-GXࡆL‫ @ޗ‬swing), [ku-PX‫ @ޗ‬hole), [ka-UL‫ @ޗ‬powder), [ku-GX‫ @ޗ‬shoes), [no-UL‫ @ޗ‬deer),[tu-EX‫ @ޗ‬bean curd), [to-t‫ލݕ‬L‫ @ޗ‬axe), [t‫ܧ‬m-EXO‫ @ޗ‬bush), [t‫ܭ‬-t‫ލݕ‬X‫ @ޗ‬jujube  >WRƾ-W‫ @ޗܭލ‬ring), [tol-g‫ @ޗܭ‬broadbellflower), [mun-d‫ݤ‬L‫ @ޗ‬dust), etc.
3-1 [WR‫ޗ‬-m‫ܭ‬-p‫ܭ‬m] (lizard), >PL‫ޗ‬-nu-ri] (wife), >‫ސ‬S‫ޗܭ‬-da-d‫ݤ‬i] (drawer), >VD‫ޗ‬-ma-gu] (blotch), [‫ޗܧ‬-JXࡆP-ni] (molar),[t‫ܧݕ‬n‫ޗ‬-GXࡆQ-da] (endure)
3-2 [ki-r‫ޗܧ‬-gi] (wild goose), [ka-VL‫ޗ‬-g‫( ]ܭ‬scissors), >‫ސ‬N‫ܭ‬-JR‫ޗ‬-ri] (frog), [na-s‫ܭ‬ƾ‫ޗ‬-i] (shepherd’s-purse), [na-PDN‫ޗ‬-sin](wooden shoes), [mu-d‫ݤ‬L‫ޗ‬-g‫( ]ܭ‬rainbow), [p‫ܧ‬-b‫ޗܧ‬-ri] (dumb)
3-3 [m‫ܧ‬-VXࡆ-PD‫( ]ޗ‬boy)

He then concludes this section in the following way:(8-2)As can be seen from these accent groups, Taegu and neighbouring places have much in common
but places such as Yangsan ( ᱱᒣ ), Ulsan ( ⶢᒣ ) and Kimhae ( 㔠ᾏ ) show slightly different
tendencies.ࠕ௨ୖ㸦࢖㸧ࡼࡾ㸦࣍㸧࡟⮳ࡿ⌧㇟ࢆ㏻ぴࡍࡿ࡟㸪኱㑪௜㏆ࡢㄒ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ࡟ࡣ⮬ࡽ
ඹ㏻ⅬࢆⓎぢࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࡀ㸪ᱱᒣ࣭ⶢᒣ࣭㔠ᾏᆅ᪉࡟࡞ࡿ࡜㸪ᑡࡋࡃࡑࡢ㊃ࡀ␗࡞ࡗ࡚᮶
ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ┳ྲྀࡉࢀࡿࠋࠖ

The above is his description on ‘word accent’ of Kyǂngsang dialects. In this description, hemade only two kinds of accentual distinction for disyllabic words and three for trisyllabic words.
However, we now know that many of these dialects can distinguish four kinds of pitch patterns fordissyllabic words, and four or five kinds for trisyllabic words as can be seen in the following table.
Table 4. Typical Kyǂngsang accent systems.
A typical south Kyǂngsang system (Pusan)

A typical north Kyǂngsang system (Taegu)

H(H)

HH

HHL

H(H)

HH

HHL

H(L)

HL

HLL

H(L)

HL

HLL

L(H)

LH(L)

LHL

H:(H)

LH(L)

LHL

LH(H)

LHH

H:H

LHH(L)

H:HL(H = high, L = low, ‘:’ = long. The tones of case markers are shown in parentheses.)In view of the accentual system made by recent researchers, Ogura Shinpei did not seem to be able toobserve patterns like HH, HHL, and the ones having a long vowel in the initial syllable, and hence thedistinction between HHL and LHL, etc. However, he sometime mentions a pitch pattern like ‘level (orflat)’ (ᖹᯈ) for a dialect like Yangsan seen above so that he seemed to have been aware of the existenceof pitch patterns that cannot be described simply by the location of accent.
Recently, two kinds of handwritten manuscripts are found in one of his documents recently
donated to the Research institute for Oriental cultures, Gakushuin University (Tsuji et al. (eds.) (2016)).
In the following, these two manuscripts will be referred to as M1 and M2. M1 is entitled as ‘Akusentoshirabe (Accent survey)’, consisting of five sheets of manuscript paper (see Figure 2, at the end of thispaper). By comparing M1 with the description we have just seen above, it is easy to see that he had
written the published version based on the data included in this manuscript. However, there are several
differences: in the manuscript, three more places (Yǂngju ᰤᕞ, P’ohang ᾆ㡯 and Hamyang ဒ㝧) areadded, and it has a more complicate system of symbols indicating accents than the published version.
Basically a small circle (‫ )ۑ‬seems to indicate the accent but two other symbols, namely ̿‫ ۑ‬and ‫ ۔‬arealso used. Meanings of these two symbols are not obvious. The symbol ̿‫ۑ‬is sometimes placed
between two syllables, possibly meaning level pitch. The symbol ‫ ۔‬is used, for example, for the word[t‫ݕ‬id‫ݤ‬ip‫( ]ޗ‬woman) for the Kimhae dialect. It may be the case that this symbol was used to emphasizethat this place had a different accent than all other places.

Next, we would like to turn to the second part of the descriptions on the accent of Kyǂngsang
dialects. It deals with the ‘sentence accent’, making contrast with the previous section that deals with the‘word accent’. However, the dialects discussed here is not the same as the previous section in that it only
deals with south Kyǂngsang dialects such as Tongnae, Pusan and Kimhae.
(9-1) The above is a description of phenomena based on independent word accent. I did not have yet
chance to investigate accentual alternation when a case marker or particle is attached to a word,
making a phrase or a sentence. However, I would like to present some results obtained from myinvestigation conducted in Tongnae, Pusan and Kimhae (results of the three places coincided) inorder to be served for reference. ࠕ௨ୖࡣ⊂❧ࡏࡿ༢ㄒࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ⌧㇟࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀ࡟ຓモࡀ㝃ࡁྃࢆ࡞ࡋ㸪ᩥࢆ࡞ࡍሙྜ࡟㉳ࡿ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺኚ໬⌧㇟࡞࡝ࡣ㸪ᮍࡔࡇࢀࢆㄪᰝࡍࡿᶵ఍ࢆᚓ࡞࠿
ࡗࡓࡀ㸪ḟ࡟ა࡚⚾ࡀᮾⳛ࣭㔩ᒣ࣭㔠ᾏ࡟࠾࠸࡚ᐇᰝࡋࡓ⤖ᯝ㸦୕⟠ᡤㄪᰝࡢ⤖ᯝࡀ᏶඲࡟୍⮴ࡋࡓ㸧ࢆᥖࡆ㸪ཧ⪃࡟౪ࡍࡿ㸦ୖ㒊ࡢㄒࡣ༢⊂࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿሙྜࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ㸪ୗ㒊ࡣᩥ୰࡟࠾
࠸࡚Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿሙྜࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺ࡛࠶ࡿ㸧ࠋࠖHe then presents the following data. The leftmost word in square brackets shows the word accent, andthe following sentence the ‘sentence accent’.
 (9-2)[ka-VL‫ޗ‬-g‫]ܭ‬㸦scissors㸧 t‫ޗܧݕ‬-sa-ram- XࡆLND-VL‫ޗ‬-g‫ܭ‬-UXࡆOND‫ޗ‬-d‫ܧݤ‬-o-QXࡆ-ra (Bring his scissors.)[ka-UL‫@ޗ‬㸦powder㸧ko-t‫ލݕ‬L‫ޗ‬-ka-ri-QXࡆQP‫ܭ‬-X‫ޗ‬P‫ܭ‬p-ta (Red pepper powder is very hot.)[j‫ޗܧ‬-rum]㸦summer㸧j‫ޗܧ‬-rum-i 5 t‫ݕ‬i-QD‫ޗ‬-go ka-Xࡆ‫ޗ‬-ULW¡‫ޗ‬-j‫ܧ‬t-ta (Summer is past and autumn has come.)>KD‫ޗ‬-nal]㸦sky, heaven㸧pj‫ܧ‬-UL‫ޗ‬KD‫ޗ‬-na-UH‫ސ‬S‫ܧ‬n-t‫ܧݕ‬N‫ސޗ‬S‫ܧ‬n-t‫ܧݕ‬N‫ޗ‬-han-da (Stars twinkle in the sky.)[sa-UDP‫@ޗ‬㸦person㸧 t‫ݕ‬o-KXࡆQVD-UDP‫ޗ‬-XࡆOVD-UDƾ‫ޗ‬-han-da (To love a good person.)>ND‫ޗ‬-ma-gi]㸦crow㸧ND‫ޗ‬-ma-gi han-PD‫ޗ‬-ri-ga na-PX‫ޗ‬X‫ޗ‬-HDQ‫ޗ‬-d‫ܧݤ‬-it-ta (A crow is sitting on the
branch.)In this description, only the location of accent is indicated by the symbol ‫ ޗ‬as before. However, we haveanother manuscript (M2) for this part of description which is much more interesting than M1. M2 iswritten on a sheet of paper and entitled as the ‘Example of Tongnae dialect accent (ᮾⳛ᪉ゝAccent౛)’.
The date and place are also recorded: ‘Recorded on Nov. 14, 1932, at the Tongnae elementary school(ࠕ᫛࿴୐ᖺ༑୍᭶༑ᅄ᪥ㄪ ᮾⳛᬑ㏻Ꮫᰯ࡟࡚ࠖ)’.
It is easy to see that this manuscript corresponds to the published version of the passage we havejust seen. However, the method of description is quite different (see Figure 3 attached at the end of thispaper). Three kinds of symbols are used: acute accent (´), grave accent (`) and bar (㸫). Sometimes nosymbol is written on a syllable especially near the end of a sentence. If we count this case as a kind ofzero notation, then we have four kinds of symbols. The meanings of these symbols are not explained inanywhere so that we only have to guess. The following is a tentative reading by the author based on theactual south Kyǂngsang pitch patterns and the way these symbols are combined.
 
 
 
 

´
`
㸫

No symbol

High (accented)
Low
Mid
Extra lowH
L
M
(unmarked)

In this manuscript, words and sentences appeared in (9-2) are all included, with the addition ofsome monosyllabic words like ‘star’, ‘dog’, ‘cow’, ‘horse’ and ‘water’. Also, in the published version,transcription of words and sentences is made in phonetic symbols whereas it is recorded in the Hangul
script in M2.
5 [j‫ޗܧ‬-rum] must be a mistake for [j‫ޗܧ‬-UXࡆP@



 
 
 
 

MML
㞜 ඇᤃඇG
MHM㗑 ୗ∳୳GMH⢊ ୗᤃGGHMኟ ╃ᣛGGMMML HL MMGGඇᤃඇୗG࿷⒛G୛ሻG (wild goose—A wild goose flies.)
HMML MHLHM
GG➏ ᛣ⚯Gୗ∳୳ᣓGୗ➏╻ᇧᛓGG(scissors—Bring his scissors.)
MHMM
MH
MM
GGష⶯ୗᤃᇫG≃㛟V᤻☇GꦫሻGG(powder—Red pepper powder is very hot.)
HLM MH
MHL HM
GG╃ᣛ⛋G⤗࿯షGୗ⚛⛋G፯╖┺GG(summer—Summer is past and autumn hascome.) 

HL
MMH HLM MH MH Hኳ 㒯ᇯ ᫍ ᮏG GGᰛ⛋G㒯࿷┧G꽦뀩꽦뀩G㒳ሻGG(stars—Stars twinkle in the sky.)
M M M MH HL HL≟ ୳ ∵ ⃣ 㤿 ᤧGG୳▗G⃣▗Gᤧ⛋G╿ሻG (dog, cow, horse—A dog, a cow and a horse come.)G
MH
MH MH
MH MH
ே ᛣ
⟇㚫G ᛣ⚛G⟇▗O ᛨP㒳ሻGG(person—To love a good person.)
HM HM HL HLỈG᪓ᤨ⚗G᪓⛋G㚯ၟG୛ሻ (water—Clean water flows.)
MML
MML MHLM MH HL HL MM
ⅲ ୗ᤟ඇ㒳᤟ᤃGୗ᤟ඇG㒳᤟ᤃୗG࿯᪋G☇┧G⒟❗G⛞ሻGG(crow—A crow is sitting on the(ka-ma:-gi)

branch.)If we compare the description of accent in M2 with that of the published version, the high pitch (H)found in M2 generally coincide with the location of accent in the published version. All other pitch
variations like mid, low, extra-low are omitted in it. Also, pitch patterns such as HH, HHL are notrecorded as such and they tend to be transcribed as HL, HM, MML. Such a tendency is the same as in thecase of M1. It is also interesting to note that pitch patterns like LH, and HL tend to be recorded as MH
and HM and so on, which reminds us of the way tones are recorded in the works by Hǂ Ung (1963) andKim Ch’agyun (1980).
The pitch patterns for the word ‘wild goose’ and ‘crow’ in M2 is almost the same (MML) but theformer is deleted in the published version and the latter does not coincide with the data found in the
published version. Let us compare these data with those of some modern Kyǂngsang dialects, based on
the data found in Kim Ch’agyun (1980) and Son Chaehyǂn (2007).6
Ch’ang’wǂn(ᫀཎ)
 Wild goose M3
 crow
H2M

Chinju(᫴ᕞ)
M3
H2M

Kyǂngju
(៞ᕞ)
M3
H2M

Mup’ung
(ⱱ㇏)
M3
H2M

Taegu
(኱㑪)
3D (=H2M)
3D (=H2M)

If Ogura Shinpei’s data for ‘wild goose’ (MML) is correct, it coincides with all the data shown in Kim(1980). But the data for ‘crow’ does not coincide with any of these data.

3.4

Accentual Classification of Chǂlla dialects

After the detailed discussion on Kyǂngsang dialects, he briefly mentions about Chǂllado dialects,
thereby classifying the types of accents found in these areas.
(10-1) The accent system of Chǂlla dialects is different from that of Kyǂngsang dialects in many
respects. I did not have had a chance to closely examine the difference until now, but it seems likethere are three types of accent systems in Chǂllado. ࠕ඲⨶㐨᪉ゝࡢ࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡣ៞ᑦ᪉ゝࡢࡑࢀ
6 Data for the Taegu dialect are taken from Son (2007) and all others are from Kim (1980). In the notation by Kim(1980), M3 is phonetically eqauvalent to MML, and H2M is equivalent to MHM. The notaion 3D in Son (2007) isequivalent to Kim’s H2M.

࡜㊃ࢆ␗࡟ࡏࡿⅬࡀከ࠸ࠋ⚾ࡣ௒᪥ࡲ࡛ࡑࡢ␗ྠࢆ⢭ᰝࡍࡿᶵ఍ࢆᚓ࡞࠸ࡀ㸪඲⨶㐨᪉ゝ࡟ࡣ኱యḟࡢዴࡁ୕✀ࡢᆺࡀᏑࡍࡿࡸ࠺࡟ᛮࡣࢀࡿࠋࠖ

And then he describes the three accent types in the following way:
 (10-2)
A. Kwangju type: the accent is always located on the second syllable for disyllabic or longer words.
ࠕගᕞᆺ ஧㡢⠇ࡲࡓ୕㡢⠇௨ୖࡢㄒ࡟࠾࠸࡚㸪࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀᖖ࡟➨஧㡢⠇࡟᮶ࡿࠋࠖ

B. Yǂsu type: the accent is located on the first syllable in the case of disyllabic words, and for words
longer than that it is located on the second syllable. ࠕ㯇Ỉᆺ ஧㡢⠇ࡢㄒ࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ➨୍㡢⠇࡟㸪୕㡢⠇௨ୖࡢㄒ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣ➨஧㡢⠇࡟࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀ᮶ࡿࠋ
ࠖ

C. Mokp’o type: the accent is always located on the first syllable for disyllabic or longer words.ࠕᮌᾆᆺ ஧㡢⠇ࡲࡓ୕㡢⠇௨ୖࡢㄒ࡟࠾࠸࡚㸪࢔ࢡࢭࣥࢺࡀᖖ࡟➨୍㡢⠇࡟᮶ࡿࠋࠖ

4Long vowels

In this section we would like to examine his description of long vowels. In order to do so it is convenient
to classify long vowels according to their sources:(1) those that correspond to Middle Korean rising tone
(2) those that emerged as the result of the contraction of adjacent vowels(3) those with unknown origin, especially in the case of borrowings
The following words, taken from the first volume of Ogura (1944), show examples of the above
three types of long vowels.
(1) [p‫ܭ‬:l], [pi:l] (star), [s‫ܭ‬:m] 7 (fountain, spring), [sa:-ram] (person), [to:-k‫ލ‬i], [to:-t‫ݕ‬i] (axe), [pu:-ri](beak), [ko:m] (bear), [p‫ܧ‬:l], [p‫ܧ‬:-ri] (bee), ……
(2) [no:l], [no:-ri] (sunset glow), [ka:l] (autumn)㸪[kj‫ܧ‬:l], [t‫ݛݕ‬:k], [t‫ݕ‬XࡆO@>W‫ݕ‬u:l-gi] (winter)㸪[ma:l],[m‫ܧ‬:l], [mo:l] (village)㸪[j‫ܧ‬:l] (shallows), [k‫ܭ‬P@>‫ސ‬N‫ܭ‬:m], [k‫ܭ‬:mi] (hazel nut), [m‫ܭ‬:m], [m‫ܭ‬:-mi](cicada), ……
(3) [kol-lo:-si]㸪[kol-lo:-sin] (rubber shoes (Hg. 8) < Rus. ɝɚɥɨɲɢ), [ka-rXࡆm-da:-si] (pencil (Hg.) <Rus. ɤɚɪɚɧɞɚɲ), [h‫ܭ‬:m] (a side dish (Hg.)), [mu-du:-k‫( ]ܭ‬beer bottle (Hg.) < Rus. ɛɭɬɵɥɤɚ),……
Among these three types, the first group of words with a long vowel corresponding to the MK
rising tone pose a question. That is, there are plenty of words that had originally a rising tone andpronounced with a long vowel in many modern dialects and yet are transcribed without the vowel length
in Ogura (1944). For example, words such as [øn] 9 (left), [pj‫ܧ‬ƾ@ illness), [kj‫ܭ‬-d‫ݤ‬ip], [k‫ܭ‬-d‫ݤ‬ip], [ke-d‫ݤ‬ip](woman), [hjo-d‫ݤ‬a] (dutiful son), [mu-GDƾ@ shaman), [sa-ma-gui] (blotch), [tol] (stone), [p‫ܧ‬m] (tiger),etc. are always written without vowel length for any dialects in his data.
Compared to this, the second type of long vowels seems to be transcribed fairly correctly.
As for the third type of long vowels, it is usually difficult to know the reason why they have along vowel. However, it is interesting to note that in the cases of borrowing from Russian the location oflong vowel seems to coincide with that of the accent in Russian.

7 For this item, it is interesting to note that there are dissyllabic varieties such as [s‫ܭ‬-am] and [si-am] besides theones with a long vowel.
8 Hg. is the abreviation for the Hamgyǂng dialect.
9 It seems like the vowel [ø] always appears without vowel length.

To say a few more words on the problem of type (1), he was well aware that MK rising tone
(indicated by two dots) corresponded to the long vowel as can be seen from the following explanation.
[pu:] in the word [pu:-ri] (beak) is pronounced long. In Hunmongjahoe 10, this word was recorded as pu-ri
with two dots at its left side, in order to indicate that this syllable should be pronounced long. ࠕ[pu:-ri] (ნ)ࡢ [pu:] ࡟࠶ࡿẕ㡢ࡣ㛗㡢࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࠋࠕカⵚᏐ఍ࠖ࡟ࠕნࠖࢆpu-ri࡜ࡋࠊpuࡢᕥഃ࡟஧Ⅼࢆ㝃ࡋ࡚࠶ࡿࡢࡣpuࢆ㛗ẕ㡢࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡍ࡭ࡁࡇ࡜ࢆ♧ࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࠖ(Ogura 1944, 2nd vol., p. 87)

5

On Chejudo vowel system

In this section we would like to discuss problems found in his descriptions on the Chejudo vowel system.
This dialect is famous for preserving the phonological contrast between the vowel corresponding to theMiddle Korean vowel 늯 /‫ݞ‬/ and all other vowels. In all other dialects this phonological distinction islost and in many cases it merged with the vowel /a/ in the first syllable.
Ogura (1944) transcribes this vowel by the symbol [o] (Italic O), but this is obviously not a good
selection because it will be easily confused with a normal [o], and having a phonetic distinction between
italic and upright shapes is not a typographically good solution. The symbol that comes most closely tothis Chejudo vowel is [‫ ]ܧ‬in the current IPA framework. Unfortunately, however, this symbol was used torepresent the vowel corresponding to the Hangul letter ┋S in spite of the fact that this vowel isphonetically a central vowel [ԥ] in this dialect, so that he seemed to have no other choices.
Next, we would like to discuss a yet unresolved problem concerning the vowel system of thisdialect, namely the phonetic quality of the vowel corresponding a Middle Korean diphthong 㞜. Ogura(1944) represents this vowel by the symbol [ö] (Italic Umlaut O). Although he does not give any
explanation at the introductory part of this book, a detailed description is given in the chapter describing
various characteristics of the Cheju dialect (2nd vol., pp. 459–461).
As I told above, there is a clear distinction between [o] (늯) and [a] (⒛). However, this kind offeature manifests itself not only in the cases of single vowels but in the cases of vowels combinedwith other vowels. Therefore, there is a clear distinction between the vowels ⒷG(represented by [‫)]ܭ‬and 닋 (represented by [ö]). For example:Ⓑ [‫]ܭ‬닋 [ö][k‫ܭ‬-mat] (bay)࣭[k‫( ]ܭ‬dog)࣭
[p‫ܧ‬n-gö] (thunder)࣭>‫ސ‬VLO-gö] (liver)࣭
[pe-g‫( ]ܭ‬pillow)࣭[t‫ݕ‬o-g‫ܭ‬ƾ-i] (clam).
[kö-u-ri] (earthworm)࣭[kök] (guest).
͐͐͐͐[h‫ ]ܭ‬㓋 (harm).
[hö]G롷 (sun, year).
These examples clearly preserve the distinction in pronunciation in every places (in Cheju).
ࠕ[o] (늯)࡜ [a] (⒛)࡜ࡢ㛫࡟᫂࠿࡟Ⓨ㡢ୖࡢ༊ูࡢᏑࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ㸪ୖ㏙ࡢ㏻ࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪ࡑࡢ≉㉁ࡣ⊂ࡾ༢ẕ㡢ࡢሙྜ࡟᪊࡚ࡢࡳ࡞ࡽࡎ㸪ࡇࢀࡀ௚ࡢẕ㡢࡜⤖ྜࡋࡓሙྜ࡟᪊࡚ࡶ㸪Ⓨ㡢ୖ࡟༊ูࡀ⌧ࡣࢀ࡚᮶ࡿࠋ༶ࡕⒷ㸦[‫ࢆ]ܭ‬௨࡚࠶ࡽࡣࡍ㸧࡜닋㸦[ö]ࢆ௨࡚࠶ࡽࡣࡍ㸧࡜ࡢ㛫࡟ࡶ᫂ⓑ࡞༊ูࡀ⾜ࡣࢀࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ౛࠼ࡤ㸪Ⓑ [‫]ܭ‬닋 [ö][k‫ܭ‬-mat] (ᾆ)࣭[k‫࣭)≟( ]ܭ‬[p‫ܧ‬n-gö] (㟁)࣭>‫ސ‬VLO-gö] (⫢)࣭[pe-g‫( ]ܭ‬ᯖ)࣭[t‫ݕ‬o-g‫ܭ‬ƾ-i] (⺾)ࠋ[kö-u-ri] (⺛⺊)࣭[kök] (ᐈ)ࠋ͐͐㸦୰␎㸧͐͐[h‫ ]ܭ‬㓋 (ᐖ)ࠋ[hö]G롷 (᪥)ࠋࡢዴࡁࡣྛᆅ࡜ࡶ᭱ࡶ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟Ⓨ㡢ୖࡢ༊ูࢆಖᏑࡍࡿࠋࠖ

10 A Sino-korean dictionary compiled in 1527.

Similar explanation is also found in Ogura (1931a: 32–33, also 1944: 2nd vol.).
닋  ୍⯡࡟ࡣ ⒷG࡜ྠ㡢࡛࠶ࡿᨾ࡟㸪‫ࢆ ܭ‬௨ࡗ࡚⾲ࡣࡍࠋణࡋ㸪῭ᕞᓥ᪉ゝ࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪늯Gࡣ
୧၁ࡢ෇ࡳࢆᖏࡧࡓ㡢࡛࠶ࡿᨾ࡟㸪ⒷGࡢዴࡃ඲↛㛤ཱྀ㡢࡜ࡣ࡞ࡽࡎ㸪●㸦඼ࡢ᮲ཧ↷㸧✀ࡢ㡢࡜࡞ࡾ㸪၏ ●Gࡼࡾࡶ⛮ࠎ㛤ཱྀࡢᙧࢆྲྀࡿࠋ⚾ࡣஅ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚öࡢグྕࢆ୚࠼ࡿࠋ῭ᕞᓥேࡀ ⒷGG࡜닋G࡜ࢆ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟༊ูࡋ࡚Ⓨ㡢ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ㸪㝣ᆅேࡢወ␗࡟ឤࡎࡿ⛬࡛࠶ࡿࠋ౛࠼ࡤ㝣ᆅ᪉㠃࡛ࡣ ቗㸦➉㸧࣭꟏㸦ᑐ㸧࡜ࡶఱࢀࡶ t‫ܭ‬: ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡍࡿࡀ㸪῭ᕞᓥேࡣ๓⪅ࢆ t‫ܭ‬:㸪ᚋ⪅ࢆ tö ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡋ㸪ཪ㝣ᆅ᪉㠃࡛ࡣ 㓋㸦ᐖ㸧࣭롷㸦᪥㸧࡜ࡶఱࢀࡶ h‫ܭ‬: ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡍࡿࡀ㸪ᓥேࡣ๓⪅ࢆ h‫ܭ‬:㸪ᚋ⪅ࢆ hö ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡋ࡚༊ูࡍࡿࠋࠖIn short, the vowel represented by the symbol [ö] by him is a front rounded vowel that is a little more
open than the vowel corresponding to the Hangul letter ●G([ø]). In the framework of the current IPA
system the vowel symbol that comes most closely to such a vowel would be [œ], front, half-open,
rounded vowel. (See Figure 4, attached at the end of this paper, for a vowel diagram shown in Ogura(1931a))By the way, this observation by Ogura Shinpei has not been followed by other researchers.
Umeda Hiroyuki (1960: 34), Lee Kimun (1977), Hyǂn P’yǂnghyo (1985: 372–375, 461), Chǂng
Sԃngch’ǂl (1995) almost unanimously state that this vowel is pronounced as [e], so that his observation
may be simply wrong. However, it may be equally possible that this vowel had lost lip rounding andchanged ([ö] > [e]) sometime after his observation, because he states the quality of this vowel so clearlyin the above mentioned two works.

6

Problems in initial consonants /n, r/ before /i, j/

The initial consonants /n/ and /r/ are not generally pronounced when followed the vowel /i/ or the glide/j/ in almost all central and southern dialects so that, for example, the surname Lee (ᮤ)is pronounced
as [i:] in these areas. However, in northern dialects such as P’yǂng’an and Hamgyǂng, these
combinations can be pronounced. It is also noteworthy that the combination /ni/ can also appear in the
Cheju dialect. Ogura (1944) gives minute descriptions for these cases, as shown in the following
examples (all taken from the 2nd volume of Ogura (1944)):P’yǂng’an (ᖹᏳ㐨)ࠕni ࡣㄒ㢌࡟࠶ࡿሙྜ࡟ࡣிᇛᆅ᪉࡛ࡣ [i] ࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࡀ㸪ᮏ㐨࠙㸻ᖹᏳ㐨ࠚ࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ᫂࠿࡟ཎ㡢ࢆᏑࡍࡿࠋ౛࡬ࡤ ni㸦ṑ㸧࣭nip-sa-kui㸦ⴥ㸧࣭ni-þ‫ܧ‬-p‫ܧ‬-rita㸦ᛀࢀࡿ㸧࣭nik-ta㸦⇍ࡍ㸧࣭ni-r‫ܧ‬-na-ta㸦㉳ࡘ㸧ࡣிᇛࡢⓎ㡢࡛ࡣ ͐ (୰␎) ͐ ࡛࠶ࡿࡀ㸪ᮏ㐨࡛ࡣ [ni], [nip-sa-gui], [ni-d‫ܧݤ‬-pe-ri-da] , [nik-ta], [ni-r‫ܧ‬-na-da] ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࠋ㯤ᕞ㑚ෆ࡛ࡣ[ni] ᡈࡣ [i] ࡢఱࢀ࡟ࡶⓎ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࡀ㸪㒆ෆኳᰕ㠃࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪ᖹᏳ༡㐨ࡢዴࡃ [ni] ࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡩࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࠖ(p. 258)
P’yǂng’an (ᖹᏳ㐨)ࠕri ࡣㄒ㢌࡟࠶ࡿሙྜ࡟ࡣ㸪ிᇛᆅ᪉࡛ࡣ [i] ࡜࡞ࡿࡀ㸪ᮏ㐨࡛ࡣከࡃࡢ
ሙྜཎ㡢ࡢࡲࡲ࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࠋ౛࡬ࡤࠕᮤ᭩ᡣࠖ
࣭
ࠕ⮫ὠỤࠖ
࣭
ࠕ㞄ᐙࠖ
࣭
ࠕ㔛Ὕࠖ͐㸦୰␎㸧͐ణࡋࡇࡢሙྜࡢⓎ㡢ࢆ⢭⣽࡟ほᐹࡍࡿ࡜ [ni] ࡢዴࡃ࡟ࡶ [ri] ࡢዴࡃ࡟ࡶ [di] ࡢዴࡃ࡟ࡶ⪺࠿ࢀࡿࠋࠖ(p. 260)
Hamgyǂng (ဒ㙾㐨)ࠕni ࡣᖹᏳ༡໭㐨࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪ㄒ㢌࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡶ᫂࠿࡟ [ni]㸦ᡈࡣ [di] ࡟㏆ࡃ㸧࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿ≉ᚩࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡀ㸦౛㸪ࠕṑࠖ[ni]㸪ࠕⴥࠖ[nip-sa-gui] ࡞࡝㸧㸪ဒ㙾༡㐨࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪㇏ᒣ࣭㛗ὠ㒆ෆ࡟ഹ࠿࡟ࠕⴥࠖࢆ [nip-sa-gui] ࡜࠸ࡩࡇ࡜௨እ㸪ࡍ࡭࡚ிᇛ
ᆅ᪉࡜ྠࡌࡃ ni ࡣ [i] ࡜࡞ࡾ㸪㯤ᾏ㐨࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪㯤ᕞ࡟᪊࡚ⴭࡋࡃᖹᏳ㐨ࡢᙳ㡪ࢆཷࡅ࡚ࠕṑࠖ[ni]࣭ࠕⴥࠖ[nip-sa-gui]࣭ࠕ⇍ࡍࠖ[nik-ta] ࡞࡝ㄒ㢌࡟ [n] ࢆᏑࡍࡿࡀ㸪༡ୗࡍࡿ࡟
ᚑࡗ࡚₞ࡃࡑࡢᙳࢆ₯ࡵ㍕ᑀ࣭⍞⯆࡟᪊࡚ഹ࠿࡟ࠕṑࠖࢆ [i] ཬࡧ [ni] ࡜Ⓨ㡢ࡍࡿእ㸪௚ࡢᆅ᪉࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪ࡍ࡭࡚ிᇛᆅ᪉࡜ྠࡌࡃ [i] ࡢ㡢࡟ኚ໬ࡍࡿࠋࠖ(p. 305)

Hamgyǂng (ဒ㙾㐨)ࠕri ࡣㄒ㢌࡟࠶ࡾ࡚ࡣ㸪ဒ㙾໭㐨ࡢᅜቃᆅ᪉ཬࡧᖹᏳ༡໭㐨ࡢ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝
඲㒊࡟ரࡗ࡚ཎ㡢ࢆᏑࡋ㸪[ri] ࡟Ⓨ㡢ࡉࢀࡿࡀ㸪ဒ㙾༡㐨ཬࡧ㯤ᾏ㐨࡟᪊࡚ࡇࡢ⌧㇟ࡢᏑࡍࡿࡢࡣ㇏ᒣᆅ᪉ࡢࡳ࡛࠶ࡾ㸪͐͐ࠖ(p. 308)
Cheju (῭ᕞᓥ)ࠕn ࢆ㢌㡢࡜ࡍࡿㄒࡢ࠺ࡕ㸪͐ i ࡜⤖ྜࡍࡿ ni㸦⹻㸧࣭ni㸦ṑ㸧ࡢዴࡁࡣ㸪ḟࡢዴࡁᙧ࡟᪊࡚ n ࡢཎ㡢ࢆᏑࡋ㸪ࡋࡤࡋࡤᒗࠎ [di] 㡢ࡢዴࡃ࡟ࡍࡿ⪺࠿ࢀࡿࠋࠖ(p. 464)

7

Concluding remarks

Ogura Shinpei was born and raised in Sendai. One of the most famous features of the Sendai dialect isthe lack of distinctive pitch. Therefore, it may be possible to speculate that this linguistic background
had something to do with the fact that he left us so little information on the accent system of Koreandialects. However, as we have seen above, he was in fact very conscious of the accent system ofKyǂngsang dialects. Newly found manuscripts on word and sentence accent of Kyǂngsang dialects also
reveals his concern on this topic. He was at least able to identify the location of accent but he seemed tohave difficulty in treating words with a level pitch pattern, or patterns that cannot be stated simply interms of the location of accent. On the other hand, the reason why the accent system of Hamgyǂng
dialects are ignored, except for a brief mention of it, is unclear.
His descriptions of long vowels are not satisfactory, especially in the cases of the ones thatoriginate from Middle Korean rising tone. It may also be possible that it had something to do with his
linguistic background, because Sendai is located at the south border of the area so-called ‘syllabeme’
dialect where the distinction of syllable length is not so punctual or at least not the same as in the case of
the so-called moraic dialects including Tokyo and many other dialects.
His description on the Chejudo vowel [ö] has not been verified by any other researches so that
this still remains as an open question.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Mitsuaki Endo for inviting me to this conference and to all theparticipants who gave me useful comments.
ReferencesChǂng, Sԃngch’ǂl (1995) Cheju paQJ¶ǂQ·L t’ongsa ·munron (Diachronic phonology of the Cheju dialect). Seoul:
T’aehaksa.
&KRL+DNNǎQ  +DQ¶JXNSDQJǂQVDMǂQ. (A Dictionary of Korean dialects) Seoul: Hyǂnmunsa.
Fukui, Rei (2016) Dialect Surveys Conducted by Ogura Shinpei: In Order to Make Use of the Data Contained in&KǀVHQJR +ǀJHQQR.HQN\ǌ. Tokyo University Linguistic Papers 37. Departmet of Linguistics, the Universityof Tokyo.
+DQ¶JXN&KǂQJVLQ0XQKZD<ǂQ¶JXZǂQ HG  –1995) +DQ¶JXN3DQJǂQ&KDU\RFKLS (Materials in Korean
GLDOHFWV YROV+DQ¶JXN&KǂQJVLQ0XQKZD<ǂQ¶JXZǂQHǂ Ung (1963) Chungse kugǂ <ǂQJX (A study of Middle Korean). Seoul: &KǂQJ¶ԃPVDHyǂn, P’yǂnghyo (1985) &KHMXGRSDQJ¶ǂQ\ǂQJX (A Study of the Cheju dialect). Seoul: Yiyu Ch’ulp’ansa.
Kim Ch’agyun (1980) KyǂQJVDQGR3DQJ¶ǂQ·LVǂQJMR<ǂQJX(A study of Korean tones). Seoul: Kwahaksa.
Lee, Iksop et al. (2008) +DQ¶JXNSDQJǂQVDMǂQ (Linguistic atlas of Korea). Seoul: T’aehaksa.

Lee, Kimun (1977) Chejudo SDQJ¶ǂQԃL ‘‫¶ݞ‬HNZDOO\ǂQWRHQP\ǂWPXQMH(Some problems concerning the vowel ‘‫’ݞ‬of the Cheju dialect). Kuge kungmunhak nonch’ong (Festschrift for the 70th birthday of Professr Lee
Sung’nyǂn). Seoul: Tower Press.
Ogura, Shinpei (1923) Kokugo oyobi chǀsengo hatsuon gaisetsu (An introduction to the pronunciation of Japaneseand Korean). Keijǀ 6HRXO &KLND]DZDLQVDWVXMRVKXSSDQEX
Ogura, Shinpei (1924) Nanbu chǀVHQQR hǀJHQ(Southern Korean dialects). Keijǀ 6HRXO &Kǀsenshi gakkai.
Ogura, ShinpHL D 6DLVKǌWǀKRJHQ 7KH&KHMXGRGLDOHFW 6HLN\ǌJDNXVǀ (㟷ୣᏛྀ) 5: 26–70. Keijǀ Seoul):
6HLN\ǌJDNNDL UHSULQWHd with modification in Ogura (1944, 2nd vol.: 453–500)
Ogura, Shinpei (1931b) On the phonetic notation of Korean vowel. Study of Sounds. 4: 139–148. Phonetic societyof Japan.
2JXUD6KLQSHL  *HQEXQQRUǀPDMLK\ǀNLKǀ 0HWKRGRIWUDQVFULSWLRQRIWKH+DQJXOVFULSW 2GDVHQVHLVKǀMXNLQHQFKǀVHQURQV\ǌ. Keijǀ 6HRXO ƿVDND\DJǀVKRWHQㅗᩥࡢ࣮࣐ࣟᏐ⾲グἲ. ࠗᑠ⏣ඛ⏕㡴ኖグᛕᮅ㩭ㄽ㞟࠘ிᇛ : ኱㜰ᒇ⹰᭩ᗑ
Ogura, Shinpei (1944) &KǀVHQJR KRJHQ QR NHQN\ǌ (Studies in the Korean dialects). 2 vols. Tokyo: Iwanami
Shoten.
Son, Chaehyǂn (2007) .DQNRNXJRVKRKǀJHQQRNLMXWXWHNLNHQN\ǌ (Accent in Korean dialects). Ph D dissertation.
University of Tokyo.
Tsuji, Yamato et al. (eds.) (2016) Ogura Shinpei kankei bunsho mokuroku: Gakushǌin Daigaku Tǀyǀbunka
kenkyuujo shozǀ (A catalog of documents related to Ogura Shinpei: Research institute for Oriental cultures,
Gakushuin University). Ocasional Papers 60.
Umeda, Hiroyuki (1960) On the phonemes of Cheju dialect of Korean. Nagoya Daigaku Bungakubu Kenkyuu
Ronsyuu 22, Bungaku 8: 17–46. Nagoya University.

Figure 1. Geographical distribution of southern dialects with ‘sentence accent’ (Ogura 1924, appendix)

Figure 2. The first sheet of the manuscript entitled ‘akusento shirabe (accent survey)’.

Figure 3. Manuscript entitled ‘Tǀrai hǀgen no akusento rei (example of accent in the Tongnae dialect)’
written in November 14, 1932.

Figure 4. Vowel diagram drawn by Ogura Shinpei (Ogura (1931a)).

Geographical Distribution of Quasi-Nominal Particles in Japanese Dialects
Chitsuko Fukushima
Faculty of International Studies and Regional Development
University of Niigata Prefecture

Abstract
The author has compared the results from different geolinguistic surveys made decades
apart to examine dialectal variation and changes.

The data of the third nation-wide

geographical survey of Japan (FPJD) are now comparable with those of the older
surveys (LAJ and GAJ). With a focus on quasi-nominal particles in Niigata dialects,
linguistic maps from FPJD and GAJ were integrated to show the differences in variation.
In this study, the local variants of quasi-nominal particles in previous dialectal studies
were examined and mapped.
particles got simpler.

It was shown that a complicated system of quasi-nominal

The evidence of regional changes and generational changes

confirmed the existence of a retreating isogloss of the peculiar form (C)an, ex. aran.

Keywords
mapping integrated geolinguistic data, generational change, retreating isogloss

1

Introduction

The author has been involved in the study of dialectal variation and changes by comparing theresults from different geolinguistic surveys made decades apart (Fukushima 2013 and 2016).
The data of the third nation-wide geographical survey of Japan, the Field-Research Project for
Analyzing the Formation Process of Japanese Dialects (FPJD), are now available andcomparable with those of the older surveys such as Language Atlas of Japan (LAJ) andGrammar Atlas of Japan (GAJ). The author was in charge of the FPJD survey in Niigata
Prefecture. Linguistic maps of Niigata Prefecture were produced from the data of FPJD and
GAJ with a focus on quasi-nominal particles (Fukushima 2014a and 2014b)1.

In addition to

linguistic maps of individual questionnaire items, geolinguistic data of relevant forms were
integrated and plotted in the maps to show the differences in variation.

In this study, previous

dialectal researches were studied to find the local variants of quasi-nominal particles in order toexplain what really happened in this area.

1

The GAJ data and the FPJD data used for this study can be downloaded at the websites cited below.



2

Quasi-nominal particles in Japanese

Quasi-nominal particles in Standard Japanese are no or n as shown below. There are two
typical uses of quasi-nominal particles (“Q-N p.” in the gloss).

The first type is the

pronominal use.
(1) sorewawatasinodapronoun particle pronoun Q-N p.
Ⱦit”

topic

(2) sokoni

pronoun“I”
iru

pronominalno“That is mine.”aux.
copulawa

particle verb Q-N p. particle

sensei da“the one who is there is a teacher”

noun aux.

“there” locative “exist” pronominal topic “teacher” copula
The second type is quasi-nominal particles that are used to make functional words such as noda,
noni, node etc.; thus called the functional use. This type often appears as n in conversation.
(3) karewa jakuba e

iku no daroo “I think he will probably go to the city hall”

pronoun particle noun particle verb Q-N p. aux.
3rd p. sing. topic “city hall” allative “go” inference
Since no or n is used as pronouns or as part of functional words which conclude nominal
phrases/clauses, they are called quasi-nominal particles.

3

Change in quasi-nominal particles in Niigata dialects

It has been found out that there is much variety of quasi-nominal particles in Niigata dialects.
Based on the comparison of GAJ and FPJD data, the following linguistic maps have beendrawn2 (Fukushima, in press). The maps are those of three examples shown above from twosurveys (Figure 1A to 3B): 1A & 1B, WATSHI/ORE NO “mine”; 2A & 2B, ARU/IRU NO“one that exists”; and 3A & 3B, IKU NO DAROO “will probably go”.

The variants found in

the maps include:no, nsame as standard Japanesenon

a local variant of noga

an older variant found in classical Japanese

gan and its variants
The form gan which probably originated from ga + no and its variants are found in many
localities in GAJ. The variants include (cf. aru “to exist”) :2

gan

aru gan(V)anaru an (< aru gan)wan

aru wan (< aru gan)

The software Illustrator CS2 is used to draw original maps of Figure 1A to 3B.



jan

soi jan (< soi gan “it is so.”)(C)anaran (< aru gan)gat(ta)aru gatta (< aru gan da) [Irihirose in Central Niigata](ak)kan akkan (<aru gan) [Awashima, a small island in the north]
Here (V) denotes a vowel preceding the form involved, and (C) denotes a consonant preceding
the form involved. The form expressed as (C)an (denoted by a black triangle) is peculiar
because it is the same form as a negative form in Western dialects when a particle follows averb (ex. aru gan > aran). The probable direction of the change is as follows:
gan > (V)an > wan > (C)an
> jan



(after a vowel /u/ or /o/)(after a vowel /i/ or /e/)

The form (C)an is found at three separate localities in FPJD, and its distribution in GAJ maps issimilar but different.

4

If the form (C)an is new, then why does it show such a distribution?

Integrating the distribution of quasi-nominal particles in Niigata dialects

Quasi-nominal particles were also found in other linguistic maps; thus they were integrated ateach locality by adding frequencies of each form (Fukushima 2014b).

When tallied, examples

were divided into the two types of quasi-nominal particles: pronominal and functional.

Basedon the table of frequencies, a colorful pie chart showing the percentage of each form was drawn
at each locality3. The distribution of these maps can be interpreted as follows. As for Figure
4 and 5 mapped from the GAJ data:
1. For the pronominal use, the typical dialectal form gan (red) and the standard form no(blue) are found especially in the central area of Niigata. The variants of gan (white, green,
yellow, and pink) are found surrounding the gan area. The classical form ga (gray) isfound in the western area of Niigata. The newer word non is used on Sado Island.
2. For the functional use, the variants of gan are found more than gan. The form n (black)is used more than no, which also applies to Standard Japanese.
3. Among the variants of gan, (V)an (white) is used at more localities than (C)an (yellow).
As for Figure 6 and 7 mapped from FPJD:
1. The points 1) and 2) shown by GAJ figures also apply to the FPJD figures.
2. The form (V)an (white) is not found in the pronominal use but is used at more localities in
the functional use. The form (C)an (yellow) is used frequently at three localities in both of
the two uses and sporadically at other localities in the functional use.

3

The GIS software SIS 7.0 is used to draw these maps.

The GAJ and FPJD maps were redrawn

because the colors should be reassigned to compare with new maps and the table of frequency wasrevised to correct some misclassification, ex. igannesse [(C)an >> not counted] (in Murakami).



5

Variants of quasi-nominal particles shown by previous dialectal studies

Considering the change of distribution, it seems that the form (V)an changed into the form(C)an in the peripheral area in Niigata.

However, why the distribution of the form (C)an islimited to the separate localities is still unknown.

Ohno (1983:66) stated that the form (C)an

was used after the adverbial form of a verb in the dialect of Nagaoka located in the central areaof Niigata in the 1980s, ex., asobu an > asoban. Therefore, older dialectal researches werestudied to search for the examples of quasi-nominal particles in local dialects.
Ohashi (2002) which included reports of dialectal surveys conducted from 1970 to 1999 was
examined. The frequency of examples of quasi-nominal particles found in each report wasalso added up to make maps similar to those mapped from GAJ and FPJD (See Figure 8 and 9)4.
The distribution pattern is not so different from that of Figure 4 to 7, but we can see more
localities where more variants such as gan, (V)an, wan, jan, and additionally (C)an are used at
the same time.

These variants are used for different functions or with different connotations.

For example, in Furutsu, Niitsu, gan is used for pronominal use or for special collocations suchas ganni, (V)an is an old-fashioned form but is used most frequently, jan and wan appear as
variants of (V)an, and the form n is also used as a standard form but mostly as part of the formnda (Ohashi 2002:208).
We can find three linguistic areas in Niigata: (Area A) most of mountainous Niigata where
gan and its variants are used, (Area B) the western part of Niigata where ga is used, and (AreaC) Sado and part of Niigata where non is used.
gan decreases and that of (C)an increases.

In the peripheral parts of Area A, the ratio of

Actually these are also shown by Figure 4-7.

The pie chart does not show the existence of low frequency forms clearly, so the bar graphis used to show the system of quasi-nominal particles at each locality (see Figure 10).

Hereeven one example is treated as a member of the system. Thus you can see what kind ofvariants of quasi-nominal particles are used in each locality.

This map denotes the distributionof different sets of variants of quasi-nominal particles. The map showing different sets ofvariants was made for the FPJD data (see Figure 11). If you compare Figure 11 with Figure 10,
you can find changes to opposite directions in Area A.

At some localities close to the sea, gan

is still used but the variants of gan are not. At some peripheral localities, gan is not used andthe variants of gan prevail, which is the case of three separate localities where the form (C)an
prevails.

In both cases, traditional variants declined while standard variants are added.

The two figures also tell us that the form (C)an was used in larger area in Niigata before but
now its use is limited at separate localities. This means that the isogloss of (C)an is not
4

The point of Furutsu, Niitsu is moved a little westwards in the maps to show the distribution moreclearly. This also applies to the following maps.

“advancing” but “retreating” according to the term Tokugawa (1964) used. However, weshould not forget that the form developed its use in the local speech in such localities.

6

Regional changes and generational changes

This interpretation can be confirmed by other evidences. First, the regional changes of(C)an forms are shown in a map based on Ohashi (2002), GAJ, and FPJD (see Figure 12).
The localities where (C)an is used sporadically surround or connect those where it isused frequently. Second, using two databases of dialectal conversation, NHK (1999)
and NINJAL (2013), the informants’ usage of (C)an forms were examined and plotted ona map (see Figure 13). The generational changes were found at all four localities.
The older generation used (C)an and the younger generation did not use it. At one
locality in the west, the form used by the older generation was not (C)an but (C)a:(mitora:da < mitoru an da), which could be a variant of (C)an; the form used by theyounger generation was ja after /i/, soi ja da.

7

Conclusion

In order to understand the regional variation, the variants of quasi-nominal particles in each
locality were considered.

The variation is actually a combination of different sets ofquasi-nominal particles, and there are transitional areas.

A complicated system with morevariants rolled to a simpler system with less variants in some localities but in more than one way.
Figure 8, 9 and 10 show regional variants such as (V)a, (V)on, (V)on at some localities, but they
are not found in the FPJD data. This might be another example of the system getting simpler
in newer dialects. Finally, the isogloss of the peculiar form (C)an is retreating, not advancing,from the geographical point of view.

Acknowledgements
This paper is part of the outcomes of the collaborative research project “Field-Research Projectfor Analyzing the Formation Process of Japanese Dialects”, carried out at the National Institutefor Japanese Language and Linguistics, and was supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
Research (A) 23242024, (C) 25370487, and (C) 16K02688.
References
Fukushima, C.

2013.

Revisiting regional variation on an island after thirty years.

Proceedings of

Methods XIV: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on Methods in Dialectology,
2011, 305-314.

Peter Lang.

Fukushima, C.

2014a.

Regional Variation and Change of Quasi-Nominal Particles in Japanese

Dialects.

A paper presented at ICAG-2 at Pathumwan Princess Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand on May

24, 2014.

Papers from the 2nd International Conference on Asian Geolinguistics, 32-40.

Fukushima, C.

2014b.

Niigata-ken ni okeru juntai-joshi no bumpu to henka: GAJ to FPJD o hikaku

site [Distribution and changes of quasi-nominal particles in Niigata Prefecture: Comparing GAJ andFPJD].

A paper presented at gengo chirigaku forum (Forum for Linguistic Geography) at Toyama

University on November 30, 2014.
Fukushima, C.

2016. Tracing real and apparent time language changes by comparing linguistic maps.

In: Marie-Hélène Côté, Remco Knooihuizen & John Nerbonne (eds.), The future of dialects, 363–376.
Language Science Press, Berlin, German.
Fukushima, C.
particles].
time].

in press.

Juntai-joshi no bumpu to henka [Distribution and changes of quasi-nominal

In: Takuichiro Onishi (ed.), Kukan to jikan no naka no gengo [Language in space andAsakura Shoten, Tokyo, Japan.

National Institute of Japanese Language and Linguistics (NINJAL) (ed.).

2003.

Nihon no fukusato

kotoba shusei. [Collection of Japanese dialects] Vol. 7 Gunma & Niigata.

Kokusho Kankokai,

Tokyo, Japan.
National Language Research Institute (present NINJAL) (ed.)[Linguistic atlas of Japan (LAJ)].

chizu. [Grammar atlas of Japan (GAJ)].

National dialect data].
Ohashi, K.

2002.

Nihon gengo chizu.

National Printing Bureau, Tokyo, Japan.

National Language Research Institute (present NINJAL) (ed.)

Nihon Hoso Kyokai (NHK) (ed.)

1966-1974.

1999.

1989-2006.

Hogen bumpo zenkoku

National Printing Bureau, Tokyo, Japan.
CD-ROM ban zenkoku hogen shiryo. [CD-ROM version

NHK Shuppan, Tokyo, Japan.

Niigata-ken hogen no kijutsu-teki kenkyu 2: Hyogen-ho hen [Descriptive studies ofdialects in Niigata Prefecture Vol.2: Volume of Expressions]. Koshi Shoin, Niigata, Japan.
Ohno, S.

1983.

Gendai hogen ni okeru rentai kaku-joshi to juntai-joshi. [Adnominal case particles andquasi-nominal particles in contemporary dialects]. Nihon gakuho 2, Department of Japanese Studies,
Graduate School of Letters, Osaka University. 
Tokugawa, M.

1964.

Togosen o megutte [On isoglosses].

In: Nihon hogen kenkyukai (ed.) Nihon no

hogen kukaku [Dialect demarcation in Japan]. Tokyo-do, Tokyo, Japan.
Referred URLs
GAJ Data Download

http://www2.ninjal.ac.jp/hogen/dp/gaj_all/gaj_all.html

FPJD Data Download

http://www2.ninjal.ac.jp/hogen/dp/fpjd/fpjd_index.html

Figure 1A

WATASHI NO ‘mine’ from GAJ

Figure 1B

ORE NO “mine” from FPJD

Figure 2A

ORU NO “one that exist” from GAJ

Figure 2B

IRU NO “one that exist” from FPJD

Figure 3A

IKU NO DAROO “will probably go” from GAJ

Figure 3B

IKU NO DAROO “will probably go” from FPJD

Figures adapted from Fukushima (in press)Figure 4

GAJ Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles 1: Pronominal use

Figure 5

GAJ Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles 2: Functional useFigure 6

FPJD Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles 1: Pronominal use

Figure 7

FPJD Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles 2: Functional useFigure 8 Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles from Ohashi data 1:
Pronominal use

Figure 9 Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles from Ohashi data 2:
Functional useFigure 10 Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles from Ohashi data 3:
Sets of variants in each locality

Figure 11 Integrated map of quasi-nominal particles from FPJD data 3:
Sets of variants in each localityFigure 12 Regional Changes of (C)an forms in the data of Ohashi (2002), GAJ, andFPJD

Figure 13 Generational changes of (C)an forms in the data from NHK (1999) andNINJAL (2003)



The Linguistic Atlas of Cambodia and Standard Khmer Language

Jean-Michel Filippi and Chem Vatho
Royal University of Phnom Penh
Master Program in Linguistics
xunwu41@gmail.com

chemvatho@gmail.com

Abstract
The project of the Linguistic Atlas of Cambodia (LAC) relies on the necessity to give an accurate
representation of the spatial linguistic variation on the territory of the Kingdom of Cambodia. We intend
to present here our preliminary work that has consisted in defining Standard Khmer Language (SKL)from a phonetic / phonemic point of view. Our approach doesn’t consist only in general terms but inorder to make it easily available, we created a “Khmer Pronouncing Dictionary”. As far as Khmer
language is concerned, this work is the first of the kind, and it aims to describe the phonetics of bothStandard Khmer and Phnom Penh dialect.
In the future, this Phonetic / phonological variation survey will be based on our Khmer Pronouncing
Dictionary (KPD).
As a matter of fact, even if the notion of SKL is often quoted, its content has never been identified in a
substantial way. Most of SKL definitions are negative in the way that they use but a limited number offeatures (the “r” treatment has been almost proverbial) to tell us what SKL is not, but certainly not what it
is. Such an intuitive approach of SKL cannot replace a positive knowledge of its content.
Our approach aimed at defining 1. The very notion of SKL and its origin, 2. At describing its content and3. At examining its relationship to Phnom Penh dialect.
The results we obtained may now allow us to use SKL as a substantial base of comparison. SKL being, atleast in theory, used in the media and in teaching, it can exert an influence on the local pronunciations andas SKL can be more or less identified to Phnom Penh dialect, the general improvement of the road andcommunication network may lead us to contemplate the effects of a diffusion.

1. The current knowledge about Khmer geolinguistics
Khmer language spatial variation has never really been a consistent research field. Prior to 1975, a
number of surveys were published about the phonetic and phonemic of Khmer. They can be divided into
two types: traditional structural descriptions and a few attempts to define standard Khmer as opposed to
nonstandard and / or local dialects.
1.1 Structural descriptions
Most of our current knowledge about Khmer language is related to surveys published in a rather long
period that started from the early 20th century to 1975. These surveys greatly differ from each othermainly in the description of Khmer vowels, their inventory and their systemic representation. Above all,what is particularly confusing is the fact that the authors never mentioned the dialectal origin, social or
spatial, of the language they described.
Amongst the first real linguistic descriptions 1 , Finot (1902) and Maspéro’s (1915) work are totallydisembodied and it is almost impossible to guess where their informants were from.
With Martini (1946) we are better informed for the first time as he warns us that the local source of his
description is Phnom Penh2. Unfortunately this is true only in appearance for several reasons. At that time,
the biggest part of Phnom Penh population was Chinese Tew Chiu and there wasn’t a deeply rooted
ethnic Khmer population. I fact a closer examination of Martini’s description leads us to suspect that thebase of the pronunciation he described consisted of several dialects. The reason is that Martini chose his
informants in the Buddhist Institute among monks and laymen with very different origins.
The next descriptions, Henderson (1952), Gorgoniyev (1966) and Khuon Sokhmapu (1970) are not reallybased on a real spoken language, but on the social dialect of one leading scholar of the time who wastrying hard to forget his local dialectal features in order to produce a hyper normative level of language inwhich the influence of the Khmer script is obviously dominant.
1.2 The first mentions of “dialects”
A number of surveys mentioned in passing the word dialect. Huffman (1967) claimed to have based his
description of Khmer language on “the Takeo” dialect. As a matter of fact, Huffman worked with only
one of Takeo province.
In the 1960s, the problem of standard Khmer was raised for the first time by Noss (1966) and Sakamoto(1968). It didn’t rely on a detailed survey of a social dialect in a given formal context and its potential
location in Cambodia but in a simpler way that opposed standard Khmer to the Phnom Penh dialect. We
can at least know what standard Khmer is not.
As a conclusion, we can assert that spatial linguistic variation in Cambodia has not been until now a
research field and the reason of it pertains to two facts.

1

There are other non-linguistic descriptions like the Abhitiensap that was found in Kompong Cham and that canbe considered as the first text about Khmer language. The Abhitiensap is mentioned in passing by Maspéro
in his grammar.

On the one side, there was never in Cambodia any appeal for a survey about language spatial variation.
Variation is an essentially comparative notion and its study very often implies the existence of a center(the norm) and a periphery (various forms differing form the norm). In Cambodia each monastery had its
own script rules based on the local pronunciation and that resulted in a one monastery-one peculiar script
strategy, in other words: a total atomization.
A second reason is that Khmer language was often seen as a language that didn’t display any serious
variation worthy of study. According to Huffman (1967): “The dialects of Cambodian are remarkably
homogeneous, and the degree of dialect variation seems to be roughly comparable to that between thevarious dialects of American English. Even the dialects spoken in northeastern Thailand and westernSouth Vietnam appear to be mutually comprehensible with the dialects spoken in Cambodia, thedifferences being perhaps on the order of those between British and American English.”
There is of course no evidence at all to back Huffman’s assertion as notions such as “remarkably
homogeneous” and “mutually comprehensible” are too ambiguous to be used as criteria (Filippi, 2007)
and in fact, apart the small number of surveys at our disposal (Filippi, 2002), we have until now no realmaterial to discuss Khmer language geographic variation.

2. The survey of spatial variation and the notion of standard Khmer
Within the Royal University of Phnom Penh Master Program in Linguistics, it has been possible to put inplace an introductory course in descriptive phonetics. This course aimed at presenting the framework andprinciples of phonetic analysis, to train the students in the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet(IPA). Another course about language variation was put in place too, the major part of it being dedicatedto the teaching of dialectology, history and methodology.
2.1 Surveying standard Khmer pronunciation
Prior to the description, we needed to elucidate the very notion of standard Khmer, at least to have astarting point to construct a questionnaire and to have a base of comparison3. We soon discovered that
there was not, at least from an official point of view, such a notion as standard Khmer. As a matter of fact,
there didn’t exist any book, recommendation or any set of prescribed rules that would define a “good”
pronunciation.
We then carried out a survey about testing the “desirable and less desirable ways of speaking”. We
selected a number of persons working in fields including administration and education. All of them held
degrees such as BA, MA, in short, they were educated people from Phnom Penh and other parts of thecountry. The survey consisted in having the informant reading minimal pairs, words in a formal context
and small passages, answering a questionnaire of more than 2000 words, and collecting informants’opinions on recordings of Khmer language in formal and less formal contexts.
In spite of the fact that the notion of standard Khmer was never mentioned, there was a recurring
theme:“nijiey cbah”. It means literally “to speak clearly” and it refers to is a desirable way of speaking
that could be identified as standard Khmer. It corresponds roughly to the language level that should be
used in formal contexts such as administration, radio, television and teaching.
The following is an overview of our results. The data is displayed in a broad transcription. For thepresent purpose, we don’t really need to take smaller details into consideration.

2.1.1

Consonants

2.1.2

Vowels and diphthongThe interesting fact is that these 31 distinctive units appeared to be more or less equivalent to the Phnom
Penh dialect.

2.2 The Khmer pronouncing dictionary. Standard Khmer and Phnom Penh dialect.
In order to have a clear overview of the situation, we decided to make a dictionary with all the data we got.
This meant a dictionary that would display for each word: the standard pronunciation and a less formal
local Phnom Penh pronunciation.

2.2.1

The dictionary
We attempted to display as many variants as we could. Below is an example of the way data has been
displayed:

We displayed first the most formal pronunciation and in the end the most casual.
It can be noticed that an important feature that characterizes Phnom Penh casual speech is the total
absence of “r” in the initial position or after a consonant. Phonetically, the non-formal variant is acomplex realization that involves:-

Breathy voice-

Pitch variation



-

Diphthongization-

A higher degree of closure

A few examples are given in the table below:

This feature has generally been described as belonging to Phnom Penh. It is not really the case as we canfind it all along the Mekong and the Bassac Rivers.

2.2.2

Standard Khmer pronunciation and its diffusion
A question remained to be asked: why would standard Khmer pronunciation be a prerequisite in order todescribe Khmer language phonetic variation?
First of all, we need to indicate a pronunciation that reflects a formal use and that could be used as a baseof comparison and this pronunciation has never been extensively described with its peculiar formalfeatures as well as in opposition to a more casual one. Then, we have seen that the main phonetic featuresof standard Khmer are equivalent to the ones of the Phnom Penh dialect.
These two facts will have an important consequence: the diffusion of a number of features from Phnom
Penh to the province.
This formal way of speaking (standard Khmer) is actually exerting a non negligible influence in thevarious urban centers through education and media. This doesn’t mean that the existence of the local
dialects is under a threat, but that a part of the educated population of the province is or will be able to use
at least two variants: the formal and the local one.
The Phnom dialect has already began spreading along the most important communication ways to themost important urban centers.
An obvious example can be found in the Kompong Spoeu Province, South West of Phnom Penh:The Phnom Penh diphthongs are realized as monophthongues in Kompong Spoeu province. This
monophthongization can be further exemplified by the following maps:





It is nevertheless interesting to notice that diphthongs predominate in the Kompong Spoeu province
urban centers all along the national road. These centers are much more subject to Phnom Penh linguistic
influence.

3. Conclusion
In its first step, this Linguistic Atlas of Cambodia (LAC) will deal primarily with phonetics andphonology. For practical reasons we have to postpone the remaining lexical, morphological and syntactic
components to a further step.

References

Filippi, J-M. 2002. « La description des dialectes du Khmer ». Actes du Congrès de l’Agence Universitaire
Francophone.
Filippi, J-M. 2007. Norme et phonétisme dans le Cambodge moderne. Udaya. Number 4.
Filippi, J-M et Hiep, C. V. 2006. Introduction to phonetics. Phnom Penh, FUNAN. (In Khmer language).
Finot, L. 1902. « Notre transcription du cambodgien ». BEFEO, T. 2, PP. 1-15
Gorgonijev, Ju. 1966. Grammatika khmerskogo jazika. Moskva, Nauka.
Henderson, E.J.A. 1952. “The Main Features of Cambodian Pronunciation”. BSOAS, Vol. XIV: Part 1: 151-174.
Huffman, F.E. 1967. An Outline of Cambodian Grammar. Cornell University, PhD.
Khuon, S. 1970. Système de la phonétique khmère. Section de linguistique appliquée de la faculté des lettres et dessciences humaines de l’Université de Phnom Penh. (En langue Khmère).
Martini, F. 1946. « Aperçu phonologique du cambodgien ». BSLP 42, Fascicule 1, No.124, PP. 112-131.
Maspero, G. 1915. Grammaire de la langue khmère (Cambodgien). Paris, Imprimerie nationale.
Noss, R.B. 1966. “The treatment of /r/ in two modern Khmer dialects”. Studies in comparative Austro-Asiatic
linguistics, Norman Zide (ed).
Sakamoto, Y. 1968. "The standard Khmer Language and its Phnom Penh Dialect". Tônan ajia Kenkyû 6 - 2.

