Katuic Comparative Dictionary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PACIFIC LINGUISTICS Series C-132 KATUIC COMPARATIVE DICTIONARY Ilia Peiros Department of Linguistics Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Peiros, I. Katuic comparative dictionary (Southeast Asia). C-132, xiv + 216 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1996. DOI:10.15144/PL-C132.cover ©1996 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative. Pacific Linguistics specialises in publishing linguistic material relating to languages of East Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Linguistic and anthropological manuscripts related to other areas, and to general theoretical issues, are also considered on a case by case basis. Manuscripts are published in one of four series: SERIES A: Occasional Papers SERIES C: Books SERIES B: Monographs SERIES D: Special Publications FOUNDING EDITOR: S.A. Wurrn EDITORIAL BOARD: T.E. Dutton (Managing Editor), A.K. Pawley, M.D. Ross, D.T. Tryon EDITORIAL ADVISERS: B.W. Bender K.A. McElhanon University of Hawaii Summer Institute of Linguistics David Bradley H.P. McKaughan La Trobe University University of Hawaii Michael G. Clyne P. Miihlhausler Monash University University of Adelaide S.H. Elbert G.N. O'Grady University of Hawaii University of Victoria, B.C. K.J. Franklin K.L. Pike Summer Institute of Linguistics Summer Institute of Linguistics W.W. Glover E.C. Polome Summer Institute of Linguistics University of Texas G.W. Grace Gillian Sankoff University of Hawaii University of Pennsylvania M.A.K. Halliday W.A.L. Stokhof University of Sydney University of Leiden E. Haugen B.K. T'sou HarvardUniversity City Polytechnic of Hong Kong A. Healey E.M. Uhlenbeck Summer Institute of Linguistics University of Leiden L.A. Hercus J.W.M. Verhaar Australian National University University of Leiden John Lynch C.L. Voorhoeve University of the South Pacific University of Leiden The editors are indebted to the Australian National University for assistance in the production of this series. All correspondence concerning Pacific Linguistics, including orders and subscriptions, should be addressed to: PACIFIC LINGUISTICS Department of Linguistics Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200 Australia Copyright © The author First published 1996 Copyedited by Joan Birnie Typeset by Jeanette Coombes Proofread by Pam Rosser Printed by Goanna Print Pty Ltd Bound by F & M Perfect Bookbinding This publication was made possible by an initial grant from the Hunter Douglas Fund. No royalties are paid on this or any other PacificLing uistics publication. ISSN 0078-7558 ISBN 0 85883 435 9 ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION v 1 . Background v 2. Language data vii 2.1 Bru vii 2.2 Kui viii 2.3 Pakoh x 2.4 Katu xi 3. Proto Katuic phonological reconstruction xii 4. Abbreviations and symbols xix 5. Bibliography xxi KATUIC COMPARATIVE DICfIONARY 1-84 INDEX OF PROTO KATUIC ROOTS 85-109 INDEX OF PROTO KATUlC MEANINGS 110-137 APPENDIX 1: Bru word list 138-149 APPENDIX2: Kui word list 150- 157 APPENDIX 3: Pakoh word list 158- 168 APPENDIX4: Katu (An Diem dialect) word list 169- 176 APPENDIX5: Katu (High Katu) word list 177- 180 APPENDIX6: Katu (Phu Hoa dialect) word list 181-182 APPENDIX7: Data for Katuic lexicostatistics 183-198 iii INTRODUCTION 1. BACKGROUND The Katuic languages belong to the Mon-Khmer language family and are spoken mostly in Vietnam, Laos and Thailand (Wurm & Hattori 1983, Maps 36-37). Four of them (Bru, Kui, Pakoh and Katu) have good dictionaries and thus, the way is open for a detailed lexical reconstruction.l This work is an attempt at such an investigation. The fIrst stage in the compilation of this dictionary was a comparison of all the words found in the source dictionaries (see Appendices 1-6).From this was compiled a provisional list of cognates. In the second stage of the work, phonological correspondences were established and a phonological reconstruction of Proto Katuic was worked out. With a knowledge of historical phonology the provisional list of cognates was worked through again, and words which seemed to be of Proto Katuic origin were reconstructed. Using such an approach, it is fairly certain that most of the true cognates between the languages have been discovered, and all of these are included in this dictionary. To be sure, a few cognates are still likely to be missing, but the number should be fairly insignifIcant. The phonological correspondences do not provide any information that helps in classifying the languages, so, on the basis of phonological correspondences, we can treat the languages as four independent branches of the family. A lexicostatistical analysis gives the following matrix (see Appendix 7 for the word list used): Katu2 Bru Kui Pakoh Katu 45% 39% 46% Bru 45% 54% 56% Kui 39% 54% 45% Pakoh 46% 56% 45% The best interpretation of the matrix is the following tree: This work was supported by small grants from the Australian Research Council in 1992 and 1993. I would like to express my gratitude to David Bradley for giving me the opportunity to work with his copies of the Kui and Bru dictionaries, to Mark Durie for his encouraging interest in the project, to John Bowden for his help with my English and to Elena Gvirtsman who helped with the preparation and editing of the manuscript. I am also grateful to one of the two anonymous referees for comments on the earlier version of this dictionary. 2 Note that figures given for the Katu language in this table are for the An Diem dialect. v vi Proto Katuic I I Brn Kui Pakoh Katu The classification shown in this tree is based on the assumption that there has been borrowing between Brn and Pakoh since the break-up of their mother language while Kui speakers have had little contact with speakers of their sister languages. There are three works dealing with Katuic reconstructions: theses written by Thomas (1967) and Efimov(19 83), as well as an articleby Diffloth(1 982). The thesis by Thomas includes a Katuic (or in the author's terminology, 'Eastern Katuic') comparative phonology and a representative list of cognates (667 words) between three languages: Brn, Pakoh and Katu. The work is based on published and unpublished data collected in South Vietnam during the late 1960s and early 1970s by members of the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIl.,). Efimov's thesis is based on data published by the SIl..: the Katu dictionary (Costello 1971) and some data for other languages (Watson 1964, Wallace 1969, Johnston, R. 1969, etc.). His list of cognates is not as long as that of Thomas. Diffloth's article deals with registers in the Katuic languages: these are explained as traces of an old complex system of Proto language vowels. The Katuic languages were, and still are, subject to intensive influences from Thai, Vietnamese and perhaps also Khmer. Some borrowings came into Proto Katuic, but the majority have been adopted independently by the daughter languages. Given our present understanding of Katuic linguistic history it is often impossible to determine at what stage a word has been borrowed. Even if there is a similar word in Vietnamese or Khmer we cannot prove that there has been borrowing: the word could simply be of Proto Mon-Khmer origin and have been retained in the Katuic languages. Provisional comparisons with Vietnamese3 and Khmer are given in this dictionary. At this stage of investigation these comparisons include both words of common origin which can be traced back to Proto Mon-Khmer and ancient borrowings into Proto Katuic. To separate these two types of comparisons we need a detailed Mon-Khmer phonological reconstruction which is not available yet. 3 I use Proto Viet-Muong reconstruction suggested by N.K. Sokolovskaja (1980-81) shortly before her tragic death in 1981. Several linguists including her late husband I. Kozinski, S. Starostin and myself were later involved in final preparation of this manuscript, which still remains unpublished. vii 2. LANGUAGE DATA 2.1 BRU Information about the Bru language is extracted from A Bruu-Thai-English dictionary (1980) compiled by Theraphan L. Thongkum (who also edited the Kui dictionary) and See Puengpa, a native speaker of Bru from Ban Woen Buek near the Thailand - Laos border. The following description of the Bru phonological system is based on information provided in that dictionary (Theraphan L. Thongkum & See Puengpa 1980:ii-vi), and on an analysis of its lexical data. Bru words can include up to three parts: a prefix, a major syllable and a suffix. Only the major syllable is obligatory. Two of the Bru suffixes are formed by single consonants: h and '1. These do not have any grammatical meaning but simply follow finalj, w or a final vowel (e.g. be.j?.L 'little', baw'1.L 'wound', cajb.B 'sneeze', blAwh .L 'termite hill', ca '1.L 'body', bab.L 'ashes'). Bru prefixes canbe divided into two groups: • A syllabic nasal followed by a stop, S, 10r r, forming the following combinations: mp mb mr nt ns nl nr Ijk • Prefixes containing a: pa ma a tha na sa4 la ra ca ka '1a :ga phar5 sar man kan hI ra:g Before h the following prefixes are recorded without a: kah > kh, mab > mh, :gah > :gb, pah > ph, tab >th. Each major syllable in Bru is formed with a register and a sequence of three segments: initial consonant; vowel or diphthong; finalconsonant or zero. The Bru segmental phonemes are: (i) Consonants Initial consonants Final consonants p b m w P m w t d n s 1 r t n 1 r c J1 j j k :g k :g '1 b (b and dare glottalised initials: '1b and '1d) 4 Recorded without OJ before 1 and r initials: s1 and sr.