词条 | Austric languages |
释义 |
|name=Austric |acceptance=controversial |region=Southeast Asia, South Asia, Taiwan, Madagascar, East Asia |familycolor=superfamily |family=proposed language family |child1=Austroasiatic |child2=Austronesian |child3=Kra–Dai (sometimes) |child4=Hmong–Mien (sometimes) |child5= Ainu (rarely) |child6= Nihali (rarely) |child7= Japonic (sometimes) |glotto=none |map=Austric languages.png |mapcaption=Map of the Austric languages. }} Austric[1] is a large hypothetical grouping of languages primarily spoken in Southeast Asia and Pacific. It includes the Austronesian language family of Taiwan, the Malay Archipelago, Pacific Islands, and Madagascar, as well as the Austroasiatic language family of mainland Southeast Asia, India, Nepal and Bangladesh. The hypothesis of a genetic relationship between these two language families is not widely accepted among linguists. Additional sometimes the Kra–Dai languages, the Japonic languages and the Hmong–Mien languages are included by some linguists.[2][3] This proposal would be called Greater Austric languages.[4] Related proposals include Sino-Austronesian (Laurent Sagart) and Austro-Tai and Austro-Tai-Japanese (both from Paul K. Benedict).[5] HistoryThe Austric superfamily was first proposed by the German missionary Wilhelm Schmidt in 1906. He showed phonological, morphological, and lexical evidence to support the existence of an Austric phylum consisting of Austroasiatic and Austronesian (in particular, Malayo-Polynesian), but the lexical evidence was considered to be tenuous by the larger linguistic community. Consequently, the Austric hypothesis has never gained wide acceptance. In 1942, Paul K. Benedict extended the Austric hypothesis to include the Kra–Dai languages, Japanese language and the Hmong–Mien (Miao–Yao) languages. Despite the tenuous lexical evidence, the relationship of Austronesian with either Austroasiatic or Kra–Dai has many proponents to this day, mostly on morphological grounds. Some believe that recently discovered morphological similarities between Nicobarese and Austronesian constitute solid proof of a genetic relationship. Other researchers are still searching for the missing lexical link between Austronesian and Austroasiatic or Kra–Dai. Reid (2005) summarizes the present state of the Austric hypothesis. Murray Gell-Mann, Ilia Peiros, and Georgiy Starostin maintain that the Austric hypothesis is less well supported than several other linguistic macrofamilies, including Sino-Caucasian, Eurasiatic, and Afroasiatic since "no detailed proto-Austric glossaries or equally detailed tables of correspondences between the various daughter branches of Austric have been produced."[6] An expanded Greater-Austric has been suggested to include the Ainu languages and possibly the Nihali language though this is currently not a mainstream view.[7] In contrast to these older proposals subsumed under the label Austric, an exclusive relationship of Austronesian with the Ongan languages (but not other Andamanese languages) has been suggested (Blevins 2007) but has no support by mainstream linguists. Echoing part of Benedict's version of the Austric proposal, Kosaka (2002) argued specifically for a Miao–Dai family.[8] A 2015 analysis using the Automated Similarity Judgment Program resulted in support for the Austric and the Nostratic languages, where Japonic languages were most closely grouped with the Ainu and the Austroasiatic languages. Thought the linguist doing this research said himself that this program only compared today languages and not the proto-languages. Thus it can be not used to classify the origin of the languages.[9] Classification schemesThe following classification scheme, proposed by Paul K. Benedict, is the most commonly accepted one. Hmong–Mien languages are occasionally included, but are often rejected from the Austric superfamily. {{clade|label1=Austric |1={{clade |1= Hmong–Mien (?) |2={{clade |1= Austroasiatic |label2= Austro-Tai |3={{clade |1= Kra–Dai |label3= Austro-Japanese |4={{clade |1= Austronesian |2= Japanese-Ryukyuan }} }} }} }} }}Sergei Starostin, however, splits Austric into two main branches. The Austric branch would be considered to be most closely related to Dené–Caucasian, forming a Dene-Daic super-family:[10]{{clade |label1=Austric |1={{clade |1={{clade |1= Hmong–Mien |2= Austroasiatic |label2= Austro‑Tai |2={{clade |1= Kra–Dai |2= Austronesian }} }} }} Starosta (2005)Stanley Starosta (2005)[11] includes Sino-Tibetan, Austronesian, Kra–Dai, Austroasiatic, and Hmong–Mien as part of an East Asian superphylum, which he also alternatively refers to as Sino-Tibetan–Austronesian ("STAN") (see also Sino-Austronesian languages). Unlike Benedict's Austric family, Starosta's East Asian family includes Sino-Tibetan. Starosta (2005) considers Proto-East Asian to have been a disyllabic (CVCVC) language spoken from 6,500 to 6,000 BCE by Peiligang culture and Cishan culture millet farmers on the North China Plain (specifically the Han River, Wei River, and central Yellow River areas).
Starosta (2005) proposes the following Proto-East Asian morphological affixes, which are found in Proto-Tibeto-Burman and Proto-Austronesian, as well as in some morphologically conservative Austroasiatic branches such as Nicobaric.[12]
The linguist Juha Janhunen found during his analysis of Asian languages strong similarities between proto-Japanese and language like Sino-Tibetan, Tai-Kadai and Hmong-Mien languages. He says, similar to Vovin, that proto-Japanese originated somewhere in southeast China or the Shandong peninsula.[13] Distributions{{gallery|lines=2 |width=225 |File:Taikadai-en.svg|Distribution of Kra–Dai languages |File:Austroasiatic-en.svg|Distribution of Austroasiatic languages |File:Hmong-Mien-en.svg|Distribution of Hmong–Mien languages |File:Chronological dispersal of Austronesian people across the Pacific (per Bellwood in Chambers, 2008).png|Distribution of Austronesian languages }} See also
References1. ^http://ehl.santafe.edu/EhlforWeb.pdf 2. ^Schmidt, Wilhelm (1930). ""Die Beziehungen der austrischen Sprachen zum Japanischen", 'The connections of the Austric languages to Japanese'". Wiener Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik. 1: 239–51. 3. ^{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.nl/books/about/Japanese_Austro_Tai.html?id=gB1kAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y|title=Japanese/Austro-Tai|last=Benedict|first=Paul K.|date=1990|publisher=Karoma|isbn=9780897200783|language=en}} 4. ^{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.at/books?id=fiavPYCz4dYC&pg=PA298&lpg=PA298&dq=austric+and+japanese&source=bl&ots=MG5s8_8a6v&sig=cOOvsxQVSYnDtM52hDgDlxfLK7A&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjcwtremIHeAhXDLlAKHUPFCuw4ChDoATAHegQIBRAB#v=onepage&q=austric%20and%20japanese&f=false|title=Handbuch Der Orientalistik|last=Driem|first=George van|date=2001|publisher=BRILL|isbn=9004120629|language=en}} 5. ^{{Cite journal|last=Solnit|first=David B.|date=1992|title=Japanese/Austro-Tai By Paul K. Benedict (review)|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/452870/summary|journal=Language|language=en|volume=68|issue=1|pages=188–196|doi=10.1353/lan.1992.0061|issn=1535-0665}} 6. ^{{cite journal |title=Distant Language Relationship: The Current Perspective |last1=Gell-Mann |first1=Murray |author-link1=Murray Gell-Mann |last2=Peiros |first2=Ilia |last3=Starostin |first3=George |author-link3=Georgiy Starostin |journal=Journal of Language Relationship |volume=1 |year=2009 |pages=13–30 |url=http://jolr.ru/files/(3)jlr2009-1(13-30).pdf }} 7. ^{{cite web |last=Bengtson |first=John |author-link=John Bengtson |title=The "Greater Austric" Hypothesis |year=2010 |url=http://jdbengt.net/articles/Austric.pdf }} 8. ^{{cite journal |last=Kosaka |first=Ryuichi |title=On the affiliation of Miao-Yao and Kadai: Can we posit the Miao-Dai family |journal=Mon-Khmer Studies |volume=32 |pages=71–100 |year=2002 |url=http://sealang.net/sala/archives/pdf8/kosaka2002affiliation.pdf }} 9. ^Gerhard Jäger, "Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment." PNAS vol. 112 no. 41, 12752–12757, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1500331112. Published online before print September 24, 2015. 10. ^{{cite book |last=van Driem |first=George |author-link=George van Driem |chapter=Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory |pages=285–338 |chapter-url=http://himalayanlanguages.org/files/driem/pdfs/2005Sino-Caucasian.pdf |title=Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics |editor-first=Yogendra P. |editor-last=Yadava |publisher=Linguistic Society of Nepal |year=2005 |isbn=978-99946-57-69-8 }} (see page 309) 11. ^Starosta, Stanley. 2005. "Proto-East Asian and the origin and dispersal of the languages of East and Southeast Asia and the Pacific." Laurent Sagart, Roger Blench & Alicia Sanchez-Mazas, eds. The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics. London: Routledge Curzon, pp. 182–197. 12. ^Reid, Lawrence A. 1994. [https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/32987/1/A39.1994.pdf Morphological evidence for Austric]. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):323-344. 13. ^ユハ・ヤンフネン 「A Framework for the Study of Japanese Language Origins」『日本語系統論の現在』(pdf) 国際日本文化センター、京都、2003年、477-490頁。 Further reading{{refbegin|2}}
External links{{refbegin|2}}
2 : Proposed language families|Austric languages |
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。