Combinatory Sound Alternations in Proto-, Pre-, and Real Tibetan

« previous post | next post »

Sino-Platonic Papers is pleased to announce the publication of its three-hundred-and-thirty-first issue:

Bettina Zeisler, “Combinatory Sound Alternations in Proto-, Pre-, and Real Tibetan: The Case of the Word Family *Mra(o) ‘Speak,’ ‘Speaker,’ ‘Human,’ ‘Lord’” (free pdf), Sino-Platonic Papers, 331 (March, 2023), 1-165.

Among many other terms, discusses the Eurasian word for "horse" often mentioned on Language Log (see "Selected readings" below for examples).   Gets into IIr and (P)IE.

ABSTRACT

At least four sound alternations apply in Tibetan and its predecessor(s): regressive metathesis, alternation between nasals and oral stops, jotization, and vowel alternations. All except the first are attested widely among the Tibeto-Burman languages, without there being sound laws in the strict sense. This is a threat for any reconstruction of the proto-language. The first sound alternation also shows that reconstructions based on the complex Tibetan syllable structure are misleading, as this complexity is of only a secondary nature. In combination, the four sound alternations may yield large word families. A particular case is the word family centering on the words for speaking and human beings. It will be argued that these words ultimately go back to a loan from Eastern Iranian.

—–
 
This and all other issues of Sino-Platonic Papers are available in full for no charge.

To view the SPP catalog, visit here.

 

Selected readings

 



2 Comments

  1. Chris Button said,

    April 10, 2023 @ 10:49 am

    I tend to refrain from commenting that much on languages I am not familiar with. Many of my gripes with issues related to Old Chinese, Old Burmese and (northern) Kuki-Chin languages, including Chinese and Burmese inscriptional evidence, come from people making ill-informed comparisons without sufficient understanding of the material.

    Therefore, without being able to say much on the actual publication here, I particularly appreciate this statement as quoted in the OP: "… complex Tibetan syllable structure are misleading, as this complexity is of only a secondary nature."

  2. Chris Button said,

    April 10, 2023 @ 5:52 pm

    I think the case of rm- in rmang “horse” reflecting earlier mrang via metathesis of mr- rather than being evidence for a prefixal r- came up a few years back on LLog.

RSS feed for comments on this post