Proto Northern Chin

PROTO NORTHERN CHIN

Christopher Button School of Oriental and African Studies University of London

STEDT Monograph 10 University of California, Berkeley PROT0 NORTHERN CHIN by Christopher T.J. Button

Volume #10 in the STEDT Monograph Series

美國加州大學柏克萊分校語言學系

漢藏同源詞典研究所

Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project Department of Linguistics research unit University of California, Berkeley

James A. Matisoff, Series Editor Book design by Richard S. Cook.

For Cingh No

Series Editor’s Introduction

This impressive book originated as a doctoral dissertation submitted in 2009 to the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, based on fieldwork Chris Button conducted in Burma in 2006-07 on six Northern Chin languages. This dissertation ran to some 395 pages, whereas the present book has been compressed to less than 200, a testimony to the efficiency with which Button has managed to reformat and polish his manuscript in such a short period of time.

An especially interesting feature of Button’s study is the fact that his Northern Chin data supports but one leg of a reconstructive tripod that also includes Old Burmese and Old Chinese. Though his Proto-Northern-Chin (PNC) is reconstructed independently on the basis of internal data, Button sensibly allows his etymological judgments in difficult cases to be influenced “teleologically” by what is known about other branches of Sino- Tibeto-Burman (henceforth STB).

After some introductory remarks about the subgrouping of the Chin family, Button proceeds to a theoretically sophisticated treatment of Northern Chin phonology, supported by spectrographic evidence, and presented in enough detail to provide a firm basis for the comparative work to come. This is followed by a chapter on the relatively complicated Chin morphology, with special attention paid to reconstructing the history of the morphophonemic alternations between the two stems (“Form I” and “Form II”) that most Chin verbs display. Chapters on Old Burmese and Old Chinese come next, followed by a chapter discussing controversial points in general STB reconstruction. Chapter VI, entitled “Comparative Sets”, offers 185 comparisons of Northern Chin etyma with forms from Old Burmese and Old Chinese, noting cases where the etyma seem to have been borrowed into STB from another language family. Finally, the second half of this study is devoted entirely to lists of PNC reconstructions, presented both in the PNC alphabetical order and in the order of their English glosses.

Throughout this book, Button demonstrates a deep familiarity with the scholarly literature on the various branches of STB. In his discussions of particular etymologies, he painstakingly assembles the opinions of various scholars, comparing and evaluating them in order to come up with his own judgments as to their relative plausibility. As we all know, there is much guesswork involved in historical reconstruction, even when some of the languages involved have long literary traditions. In particular, there are now several competing systems of reconstructions for Old Chinese, and individual scholars frequently change their minds on certain points. Button negotiates his way through this minefield with aplomb.

i In the Concluding Remarks of the first part of this study, Button permits himself some speculative comparisons between the PSTB vowel system and those of Indo-European and Northwest Caucasian languages, leading him to surmise that there must exist some universal tendency to develop a primordial two-way vowel system consisting only of /a/ and /ə/. Button also ventures to hope that further research along these lines will eventually lead to a collapse of the distinction between vowels and consonants altogether.

While one might not want to go quite that far at the moment, we can confidently say that Button’s work, along with the previous invaluable contributions of Khoi Lam Thang (2001) and Kenneth VanBik (2009), have made the Chin languages one of the most important growth points in STB reconstruction.

We are proud to make Christopher Button’s highly original work available in the STEDT Monograph Series.

James A. Matisoff Principal Investigator, STEDT

Proto Northern Chin

Volume 1 An Old Burmese and Old Chinese Perspective

Table of Contents

Symbols & Abbreviations 7 i. General 7 ii. Lexical Categories 7 iii. Languages and Proto-Languages 7 iv. Transcriptions 7 v. Spectrograms 8 vi. Burmese Inscriptional Sources 8

Preface & Acknowledgements 10

Introduction 11 i. Nomenclature 12 ii. Subgrouping 12 iii. Representative Languages 13

Chapter 1: Northern Chin Phonology 15 1.1 Rhymes 15 1.1.1 Diphthongs 16 1.1.2 Codas 19 1.1.2.1 Rhotic -r 19 1.1.2.2 Sibilant -s 20 1.1.2.3 Zahau -w / -w 20 1.1.2.4 Glide Codas and Syllable Weight 21 1.1.2.5 Thado - and Syllable Weight 22 1.2 Initials 23 1.2.1 Velars 23 1.2.1.1 Velar Clusters 24 1.2.2 Rhotics 24 1.2.3 Affricates 25 1.2.4 Coronals 25 1.2.5 Glides 26 1.2.6 Glottal Stop 26 1.3 Tonality 27 1.3.1 Tone Category I 27 1.3.2 Tone Category II 29 1.3.3 Tone Category III 30

Chapter 2: Northern Chin Morphology 31 2.1 Verbal Inflections 31 2.1.1 Stopped Syllable Variation 32 2.1.2 Open Syllable Variation in TC-II 32 2.1.3 Origin in Suffixal -s 33 2.1.3.1 Glottality 34

2.1.3.2 Open syllables and -t / -k 34 2.1.4 Superadded -s Suffixation 34 2.1.5 Causativity Paradigms 35 2.1.6 Alternations of -k and -t 36 2.1.7 Alternation of - / -oIII and -w / -wIII 36 2.2 Nominalisation 36 2.3 Initial Aspiration 36 2.4 Vocalic Ablaut 37

Chapter 3: Old Burmese 38 3.1 Vocalism 38 3.1.1 Jones’ Three Vowel i/u/a System 38 3.1.2 Gong’s Three Vowel i/u/a System 39 3.1.3 Pulleyblank’s Two Vowel i/a System 39 3.1.4 A Two Vowel / System 40 3.2 Pure Initials 42 3.3 Medials 43 3.3.1 Medials -j- and -w- 43 3.3.1.1 c- < (j)-, tj- 44 3.3.1.2 - < j-, nj- 44 3.3.1.3 rj- 45 3.3.1.4 s- < sj- 46 3.3.2 Medials -l- and -r- 46 3.4 Tonality 46

Chapter 4: Old Chinese 49 4.1 Vocalism 49 4.1.1 Li’s Four Vowel i/u//a System 49 4.1.2 Pulleyblank’s Two Vowel /a System 49 4.1.3 Baxter’s Six Vowel i/u/e/o//a System 50 4.1.4 A Two Vowel /a System 51 4.2 The /a Ablaut 53 4.3 Tonality 53 4.4 The TYPE-A and TYPE-B Syllable Distinction 54 4.5 Initials 55 4.5.1 Pure Initials 55 4.5.2 Prefixation 55

Chapter 5: Sino-Tibetan / Tibeto-Burman 57 5.1 Rhymes 57 5.1.1 Open Rhymes & Glide Codas 59 5.1.1.1 Shafer’s ‘Graded’ i/u/e/o//a System 59 5.1.1.2 Benedict’s ‘Open’ i/u/e/o//a System 60 5.1.1.3 A Vertical /a System 61 5.1.2 Other Closed Rhymes 61 5.1.2.1 Liquid -r and -l 62

5.1.2.2 Sibilant -s 62 5.1.2.3 Uvular -q 62 5.2 Initials 62 5.2.1 Affricate h- and Coronal th- 63 5.2.2 Sibilant s- 64 5.2.3 Glide w- and Obstruent p- 64 5.2.4 Glottal - 64 5.2.5 Labiovelar kw- and w- 65 5.3 Tonality 65 5.3.1 Benedict’s Two Tone System 65 5.3.2 Weidert’s Four Phonation Types 66 5.3.3 A Segmentally Derived Three Tone System 66 5.4 Morphological Variation 67 5.4.1 Initials and Codas 67 5.4.2 Vocalism 67

Chapter 6: Comparative Sets 69

Chapter 7: Concluding Remarks 89 7.1 Vowelless Languages 89 7.1.1 Indo-European 89 7.1.2 Northwest Caucasian 90 7.1.2.1 Abaza 90 7.1.2.2 Kabardian 90 7.2 Indo-European versus Sino-Tibetan 91

Bibliography 92

Symbols & Abbreviations

i. General

* Precedes a reconstructed form. Precedes a TYPE-A syllable in Old Chinese as distinguished from TYPE-B. > Identifies the immediately following form as a derivative of the immediately preceding one. < Identifies the immediately preceding form as a derivative of the immediately following one. ~ Separates a Northern Chin FORM-I from its inflected FORM-II. / Separates a written Burmese form from its inscriptional predecessor if distinct; separates alternative forms in free variation or complementary distribution. ii. Lexical Categories n noun v verb vb benefactive verb vi intransitive verb vt transitive verb ATTR attributive PL plural SUBJ subject TC tone category iii. Languages and Proto-languages

AA Austroasiatic AN Austronesian LB Lolo-Burmese MC Middle Chinese MK Mon-Khmer NC Northern Chin OB Old Burmese OC Old Chinese ST Sino-Tibetan SC Southern Chin TB Tibeto-Burman TK Tai-Kadai iv. Transcriptions e Corresponds to in the same way as i to and u to . o Corresponds to in the same way as i to and u to .

A /a E /e I /i O /o U /u V Unspecified vowel

K Alternation of k with /h (or rarely t) Alternation of with k/ (or rarely w) T Alternation of t with d TS Alternation of with N Alternation of n with t P Alternation of p with b/w (or rarely f) M Alternation of m with p J Alternation of j with s L Alternation of l/r/n/d W Alternation of w with /h/b H Alternation of h with C Unspecified consonant

I Tone category I II Tone category II III Tone category III ¹ Tone 1 ² Tone 2 Unspecified tone v. Spectrograms s Seconds (on the horizontal axis) kHz Kilohertz (frequency on the left axis; pitch on the right axis) vi. Burmese Inscriptional Sources

BD Inscriptions Collected by King Bodawpaya bdk;awmfbk&m; in Upper Burma – Taw Sein Ko (1913) IB Inscriptions of Burma jrefrmwdkif;&if;ausmufpmrsm; – Luce & Pe Maung Tin (1933-56) LK The Lokahteikpan avmuxdyfyef; – Ba Shin (1962) MZ The Burmese Face of the Myazedi jrapwD Inscription at Pagan – Duroiselle (1919) OBEP Old Burma – Early Pagán (Volume 3) – Luce (1969-70)

SIP Selections from the Inscriptions of Pagan yk*HausmufpmñGefYaygif; – Pe Maung Tin & Luce (1928) UB Inscriptions Collected in Upper Burma (Volume 1) – Taw Sein Ko (1900-03) WK Wetkyi-in Kubyauk-gyi 0ufBuD;tif;*l;ajymufBuD; – Luce & Whitbread (1971)

Preface & Acknowledgements

This, along with Volume 2, is a thoroughly revised version of Button (2009) which was submitted as a Ph.D. dissertation to the School of Oriental and African studies, University of London.

The Northern Chin information presented herein was collected in Burma during 2006-07 and results from the immense efforts of many Chin people who willingly and patiently sacrificed their time. None of this would have been possible without them.

The moot distinction between the variant forms Arm bm¹ Burma and jrefrm / jrHrm mrm¹m¹ Myanmar of the same Old Burmese word,1 is of no consequence here; the former term is used in accordance with historical linguistic convention.

1 See Luce (1959b:53), Hla Pe (1967a:79) and Okell (1995:105-6).

Introduction

“I was brought up to regard Far Eastern languages generally as (i) Monosyllabic (consisting of words of one syllable); (ii) Invariable (not modified by any inflexions); and (iii) Isolating (destitute of syntax). Chin is a language which disproves all three statements.”

– G. H. Luce (1959a:30)

Broad generalisations Luce’s remarks may be, but even in today’s more informed linguistic environment, the verbal inflections and surface vocalic length distinctions2 of many Chin languages pit them against the norm for members of the Sino-Tibetan language family. The study here focuses on a reconstruction of the phonology and morphology of Northern Chin based on a closely related group of languages spoken in the Chin Hills on the Burmese side of the border with India. Specific attention is paid to external comparisons with Old Burmese, as attested in inscriptions,3 and Old Chinese.4 To compare evidence of such different time depths may seem anachronistic, but the unique insights afforded reveal striking typological similarities with the conservative Northern Chin languages that have not succumbed as easily to time’s gentle erosion as have the modern Burmese or Chinese languages.

Reliable descriptions of Northern Chin languages are scarce. The once promising future inaugurated by The Chin Hills Linguistic Tour of 1954 by Eugénie Henderson, Theodore Stern and Gordon Luce did not seem to have fate on its side; the foreshortening of the trip and the loss of much of Henderson’s data on the tour is recounted by Luce (1959a:20-3, 1968:106). The projected combined work based on the tour, Studies in Chin Linguistics, never made it to publication:5 Henderson’s reduced contribution appeared separately in 1965; Stern’s was partially published in 1963 but the textual data upon which it was based only appeared later in a different journal in 1984; Luce’s mammoth contribution, Common form in Burma Chin Languages, based on further research from his base in Rangoon and including much data from Southern Chin languages, still remains largely unpublished.6

2 Sun (1982:286-91) shows that the few instances of distinctive vowel length in other Tibeto-Burman languages are marginal or secondarily derived. 3 The traditional date for the earliest inscription is 1112-3 AD. Duroiselle (1913:1-2) notes a few inscriptions prior to this date but cautions (1921:v-vi) that due care must be applied in ascertaining the originality of many of these. Luce & Pe Maung Tin (1933-56:I.4;II.4-5;IV.8-10) are even more discerning than Duroiselle, although Luce (1969-70:I.96) does recognise that some undated inscriptions may well have an earlier provenance. 4 Old Chinese is traditionally reconstructed back to the time of the Shijing book of poetry compiled between 1000 - 600 BC. Palaeographical evidence in the earliest Chinese inscriptions takes this back two centuries earlier. 5 Henderson’s (1962) typed introduction, as well as her preface to Luce’s contribution, may be found in the collection of her papers at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London. 6 A small selection of it may be found in Luce (1985:I.82-6;II.70-87); the complete work may be found in the collection of Luce’s papers at the National Library of Australia.

i. Nomenclature

The term used by Northern Chins to refer to themselves is customarily transliterated as Zo which may be reconstructed in Northern Chin as jw¹. Konow (1904:1-2;58) notes the name Chin to be a Burmese exonym, csif; khj²,7 that is synonymous with the term Kuki, which Lehman (1963:5) suggests to be Manipuri in origin, on the Indian side of the border.8 The Chin are unequivocally attested in some of the later Burmese inscriptions:

oufjrKefcsifwdktpdk&aom...&cdkifrifonf (UB 49.21) Thet Mrun Chin PL rule ATTR… Arakan king SUBJ The Arakanese King… who ruled over the Thet, Mrun and Chin.9

Luce (1959a:25-6, 1959c:89, 1976:35, 1985:I.80) suggests the homophony shared with csif; khj² companion, ally is due to a history of relative amicability between the Chins and the Burmans. However, if Luce’s (1959a:25, 1959b:60, 1985:I.86) association of the Chin with the Chindwin valley is correct then earlier inscriptional evidence supports the reconstruction of an original medial -l- in Chin as c’if khl²:10

c’ifwGifuygaomuRef... (BD 38.10) Chindwin from include ATTR slaves… Slaves included from Chindwin…11

ii. Subgrouping

Bradley (1997:26-31, 2002:90-1) splits off a Central Chin group from what is classified here as Northern; Peiros’ (1998:180) conflation of Bradley’s Northern and Central branches represents the approach adopted here. Peterson (2000), who focuses in particular on the evolution of the r phoneme, retains Bradley’s distinction of a Central group but fuses his Northern and Southern groups together. Particularly as regards Southern Chin evidence, a thorough discussion of such subgrouping issues is beyond the scope of this work. While the phonological and morphological evidence to be presented here shows Bradley’s division of a Central Chin group to be not simply a geographical one, the overwhelming similarity between these Central languages and their more

7 Lehman (1979:1-2, 1992b:62) and VanBik (2009:4) reject an exonymic source and prefer to derive the name from a Southern Chin word meaning person which was co-opted into Burmese; the viability of this proposal is beyond the scope of this work. 8 A hyphenated form Kuki-Chin is often found; this is somewhat tautological and the term Chin is exclusively used here due to its Burma-specific focus. 9 See Luce (1959a:25) for the context of this inscription; see Luce (1985:I.94-5) for a suggestion that Mrun may refer to the Mru ethnic group. 10 The confusion of -l- with -j- in Old Burmese does not rule out the possibility of a medial -l- in companion, ally, but the uniqueness of forms in -j- makes this unlikely. 11 Luce & Pe Maung Tin (1933:4) question the originality of this inscription and Luce (1962:65) suggests it to be an early copy. Nevertheless, solid evidence for a medial -l- is found elsewhere in IB (294.24) where reference is made to a c’ifwGifO,ef Chindwin garden. Luce (1985:I.77) translates Chindwin literally as Hole of the Chins; Matisoff (1989a:600) suggests Wellspring of the Chins may be a nicer turn of phrase.

Northern counterparts, particularly in terms of degrees of mutual intelligibility as opposed to the Southern ones, supports the clumping of them together at least for the purposes of this exposition.

The number of Chin languages spoken in Burma is difficult to quantify; Luce (1962:2) suggests that his sampling of just over twenty northern and southern varieties may represent around half the actual number. Bradley (2007:168) suggests there to be around 550,000 speakers of Northern Chin languages in Burma; reliable figures for individual languages are mostly unavailable.12 iii. Representative Languages

The six Northern languages studied here may be viewed as generally spreading northwards from Zahau as the furthest south through to Sizang, Tedim, Zo and Thado in the North with Mizo flanking Zahau on the West. All six languages have missionary- based orthographies in which tone is never marked and surface vowel length is noted somewhat inconsistently if at all. Official orthographies for Zo and Sizang have only been established in recent years with projects to translate the Bible into their respective languages instead of having to rely on the Tedim standard. The languages are listed in the following order to reflect the most natural layout in terms of phonological linkages between them.

Mizo:

Reflecting a combination of miIIB person and zwI Zo, Chhangte (1993:32) notes the name Mizo to be a specific usage of a generic term originally applied to all Chin people. It now appears to be the preferred designation for both the Burmese Hualngo and Indian Lusei varieties as distinguished by Luce (1959a:22) and Lehman (1963:16). An account for the older transliteration of the latter as Lushai may perhaps be found in the occasional confusion in Northern Chin of -j and -j, discussed in 1.1.2.3, and Chhangte’s (1993:59) observation of an alveopalatal fricative allophone - of s-. Bradley (2007:168) notes that the large numbers of speakers in India make Mizo the most widely spoken of all Chin languages.

Zahau:

Often conflated with several languages spoken in and around Falam township under the general name Falam Chin,13 Zahau is barely distinguishable from its more prominent counterpart Laizo with which comparisons are occasionally drawn in the word list. Osburne (1975:4-5) and Bradley (2007:168) note a more generic usage of the term Laizo, composed of lajI middle and zwI Zo, in reference to the many languages within Bradley’s

12 Bradley actually divides this between 150,000 for his Northern Chin group and 400,000 for his Central Chin group. 13 See Lehman (1963:105) for a brief comment on the linguistic situation. The language Khualsim, as surveyed by Luce (1959a:22, 1962) and to which reference is occasionally made in the word list, may also be included here.

Central Chin group, but its usage parallels Mizo in its more specific designation of an individual language. Its first syllable Lai should be further differentiated from its reference to a distinct language spoken in Hakha township, south of Falam, to which reference is occasionally made.

Thado:

Sparsely represented in Burma, Thado is often referred to as Thado-Kuki to reflect its Indian base. Bradley (2007:168) notes it to be the largest Kuki language with over 50,000 speakers. Lehman (1963:5) suggests Thado speakers were pushed north into Manipur by Mizo speakers in the mid 19th century.

Zo:

Identical in name to that of the Chin people in general, Hartmann (1988:102) shows the usage of the name Zo in reference to a specific Chin language to be paralleled in the names of some Southern Chin languages albeit with different surface reflexes. Zo, as a distinct Northern Chin language, is spoken both in Tedim and Tonzang townships. The latter is the focus of the study here, although Luce (1962:noteA) notes the Zo to be the original inhabitants of Tedim before being largely ousted by those now referred to as Tedim below.

Tedim:

Transliterated as Tiddim in Henderson (1965), Tedim is the language of the township that bears its name. Bradley (2007:167) notes the adoption of the township name for this language to have replaced the name Kamhau. Luce (1962:noteA) more specifically notes Kamhau to have been the name of a 19th century chieftain, whose very closely related Sokte dialect persists in a few nearby villages, who led his followers into Tedim and drove the original Zo speakers northwards.14 Tedim is the only Chin language that had started to develop an orthography before the development of missionary orthographies in the early 20th century: the original logographic script is still used in textual recitation but never developed into a complete system; the later syllabary, described in Bennison (1933:194-5;217-8), is conversely rendered unwieldy by its marking of non-phonemic surface differences.

Sizang:

Confined to the Burmese side, Sizang is spoken in several scattered villages south of Tedim by a very small population. The occasionally encountered name Siyin is noted by Stern (1963:224) to be a transliteration of its Burmese pronunciation. Stern (1963:225) further notes that this small linguistic group rose to prominence as a result of their spirited resistance to the British colonial incursions into the Chin hills which later made them favoured recruits for colonial armies.

14 Reference is sometimes made in the word list to Saizang and Teizang which are treated by Luce (1962:5) and Henderson (1963:551) respectively as very closely related dialects to Tedim.

Chapter 1 Northern Chin Phonology

1.1 Rhymes

The five vowels of Northern Chin are generally regular across all six languages; they superficially appear to be divisible into two sets of distinctive length except in open syllables where the vowel naturally surfaces as long unless occurring as the short unstressed initial syllable of a disyllabic compound.15 Stern (1963:228-9) differs from other analyses of Northern Chin languages to suggest that in Sizang the length distinction may be better interpreted as syllabic peaking on the vocalic nucleus or on the sonorant coda. This is supported by some similar observations by Melnik (1997:17) on Lai Chin, and helps to account for the longer realisations of sonorant codas after short vowels such that, particularly in rising tones, the distinction in syllable length is relatively small whether the vowel surfaces as long or short. Stern’s distinction may be more conventionally noted in terms of syllable weight; with weight being unable to fall on an obstruent coda, in purely notational terms it makes more sense to mark the distinction on the vowel, although with sonorant finals it could equally well be marked on the coda instead.

For the purposes of exposition, the vowels e and o, for which a more conventional transcription would call for [] and [] will be treated here in the same structural relationship to and as i and u with and . This approach essentially follows the structural arrangement of the American phonetic system, as originally outlined by Boas et. al. (1916:2-3;9), while incorporating Halle & Mohanan’s (1985:72-6) refinements regarding tense e and lax to extend it further to o and . The intent here is not to assume any tense/lax distinction in Northern Chin vowels but rather to incorporate Pulleyblank’s (2003:723) observation that an association of syllable weight with the traditional tense/lax distinction may sometimes be drawn. Lindau’s (1978:557-9) observation that tense vowels are relatively more centralised in the vowel space sits well with the phonetically reasonable transcription of the low vowel as an alternation of and a to give the following vocalic distinctions in Northern Chin:

/i /u /e /o /a

The two spectrograms below of the Sizang words lmII image and limII ball of string show the difference in surface realisation of syllable weight on the coda or on the vowel:

15 This concomitantly renders such unstressed syllables unable to bear distinctive tone.

1.1.1 Diphthongs

The analysis here treats -j and -w as codas that may freely occur after all vowels excluding /i and /u respectively. Alternatively, Luce (1962:55-60) treats all such cases as rising diphthongs ending in -i or -u. Bright (1957a:25) suggests that the situation in Mizo, for which Henderson (1948:716), Bright (1957b:101) and Chhangte (1993:42) use -j and -w while Burling (1957:154-5) and Weidert (1975:7) use -i and -u, rests on little more than a question of priorities regarding phonemic minimalism or syllabic regularity. Phonetically there is of course no real distinction and the discussion is rendered somewhat inconsequential as linguists have naturally dwelled on the transcriptional distinction between the glides -j and -w and their vocalic counterparts -i and -u when the distinction is equally valid to all other sonorant codas which just happen to lack such transcriptional flexibility. However, in phonological terms and incorporating the opservations in Chhangte (1993:42;50-1), the divorcing of the synchronic from the diachronic entailed in the phonemic analysis means the syllable will be favoured in this work.

With the exception of the secondary dissimilatory diphthongisations of Sizang e to a in all environments except before -t, -n and in open syllables,16 and Sizang o to a before -j, the establishment of glide codas restricts diphthongs to two contrastive types distinguished by the presence or absence of rounding. Contrary to Stern’s (1963:229) suggestion that Sizang diphthongs have contrastive weight, which most likely stems from a confusion with Tedim, syllabic weight is manifested with the nucleus either at the end in Mizo, Zahau, Zo and Tedim or at the beginning in Thado and Sizang:

NC Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang *a a a e e a i *a a a o o a u

16 The diphthong a is not noted by Stern (1963), but is noted by Luce (1962:tableA).

The following surface variations may be noted: Zo o and Sizang u surface as e and u respectively before -j; Mizo, Zahau and Sizang reduce the unrounded diphthong to before -nIII in inflected forms while all six languages, excepting Tedim, reduce the rounded diphthong to in the same environment;17 all six languages reduce the rounded diphthong before -mIII to in inflected forms. It should also be remarked that the Thado diphthongs -o and -e tend to approximate the pure vowels [o] and [e] as noted by Luce (1962:57-9). In open syllables, they are very similar to the closed rhymes -w []18 and -j from which they are nonetheless consistently discernible in words like koIII burrow and kwIII call or the inflected forms hleIII snap and hljIII sift:

17 There is an exceptional case in the word for froth in Thado and Zo where the change does not appear to occur. 18 This surface realisation is supported by Luce (1962:60, 1985:II.70-87) who has [u].

Weidert’s (1981:31-2) rather arbitrary rejection of Henderson’s (1948:721) proposal to interpret the high vowel components in Mizo a and a as palatal and labial features of the syllable initial is questioned by Matisoff (1982:29) who suggests that in diachronic terms it is of little relevance whether one treats the feature as part of the initial or the nucleus. For most Tibeto-Burman languages Matisoff’s comment would be valid, but treating the first part of the diphthong as part of the initial reopens the possibility in Northern Chin for contrastive syllable weight in individual languages, as Stern supposed for Sizang diphthongs, which does not occur. The two spectrograms of Tedim paI and Sizang piI come into being below exemplify the difference in syllable weight between the two languages:

Benedict (1940:120, 1972a:58, 1977:12) supposes the pure vowels /e and /o to be secondary derivations from a and a but, as similarly noted by Matisoff (1972b:281) for Tangkhul Naga, is unable to account for cases where the diphthongs remain. Luce (1962:55;57-9, 1985:II.70-87), who transcribes the Northern Chin distinctions /e and /o as / and / or / and /, follows a proposal originally made in Luce (1959a:tableII), to suggest conversely that the diphthongs derived from the vowel-breaking of original [e] and [o] which he maintains to be still attested in Thado o [o] and e [e]. However, in addition to the respective alternations of a and a with /e and /o in certain morphological inflections discussed above, Stern (1963:236), Henderson (1965:24), Weidert (1975:69-70) and Chhangte (1993:49-50) note that the diphthongs a and a surface as and when forming the short unstressed initial syllable of a disyllabic compound. Furthermore, sporadic alternations of these diphthongs with their pure vowel correlates may be found throughout the word list. In a purely synchronic description, the restriction of the diphthongs to combinations with a may simply be regarded as a feature of the phonological system requiring no further explanation; in diachronic terms, the discussion in 5.1 shows that the weaker vowel in Sino-Tibetan j and w could not maintain a dipthongal articulation like ja and wa which gave a and a, although for reasons still to be elucidated sometimes developed into e and o. The source of the

diphthongs in medial glides suggests that the syllable weight in Sizang i is more likely a secondary development from an original placement in the latter part of the syllable as a, although it may simply reflect a slightly different evolution. Notably, the secondarily derived Sizang diphthongs a and a also have syllable weight in the latter part.

1.1.2 Codas

Codas are always unreleased and are voiceless unless sonorant. A discussion of the correspondences of morphological inflections requires a separate analysis that will be addressed in 2.1. The correspondences of uninflected forms are noted below:19

NC Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang *-k -k -k - - -k -k *- - - - - - - *-t -t -t -t -t -t -t *-n -n -n -n -n -n -n *-p -p -p -p -p -p -p *-m -m -m -m -m -m -m *-j -j -j -j -j -j -j *-r -r -r - - / -a -k -k *-l -l -l -l -l -l -l *-w -w -w -w -w -w -w *-s - / -III - / -III -III -III - / -III -III

1.1.2.1 Rhotic -r

The association of r with a velar articulation in Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang, further reduced in coda position to - in Thado and Zo, is dicussed in 1.2.2. When derived from original -r, the Zo glottal coda is only retained after the mid-vowels /e and /o; after /i, /u and /a it has vocalised to a.20 The resulting reflexes of a and a remain distinct from the original Zo diphthongs e and o discussed in 1.1.1. The glottal coda in Zo is much weaker than in Thado; the distinction between Zo - and Tedim -k in the spectrograms below for Zo peI back kick and Tedim pekI wag, bob is discernible but is not nearly as pronounced as in the Thado example discussed in 1.1.2.5.21

19 There is a sporadic shift of -k and - to -t and -n in all six languages. 20 There are a few exceptions in the word list which appear to provide a rare opportunity to clearly isolate inter-Chin loanwords. A good example is Zo naI nose which should regularly correspond to Mizo hnarI as naI but is most likely a late loan in place of the more commonly used binome npkoIII nose literally meaning snot burrow. 21 When uttered in isolation, there is a very faint glottalic constriction in Zo syllables in TC-II which makes them difficult to distinguish from a slightly more clearly articulated glottal coda.

1.1.2.2 Sibilant -s

An association of Tibeto-Burman -s with Mizo - is noted by Shafer (1944:141-2) and Benedict (1972a:16). Focusing on Tedim, Ostapirat (1998:239-40) develops Benedict’s observation by proposing that -s developed regularly to -h but then glottalised after surface short vowels while developing into TC-III after surface long vowels. Notably the distinction between - and TC-III only occurs in Mizo, Zahau and Tedim; Thado, Zo and Sizang unequivocally reflect TC-III.

1.1.2.3 Zahau -w / -w

Zahau -w tends to be pronounced with a more open articulation than in the other five languages where it surfaces as []. Consequently words like tw seat (vt) are barely distinguishable from the inflected form tw of tawIII sulk:

Luce (1962:60) notes this also to be the case in some Mizo dialects. VanBik’s (2009:401;411) assignation of free-variation to Northern Chin alternations of -aw with -w and -j with -j is contradicted by the evidence here. In light of the historical association, discussed in 1.1.1, of -a- with -- and -a- with --, the lack of the dipthongs -aj and -aw in Northern Chin may seem superficially supportive of VanBik’s suggestion. However, the discussion in 5.1 shows the source of -j and -w to be entirely distinct.

1.1.2.4 Glide Codas and Syllable Weight

Henderson (1948:716-7) makes no individual vocalic length distinctions before glide codas in Mizo, but Bright (1957a:25-6) notes a distinction before -j of all possible vowels in Mizo and tacitly assumes one before -w. Unless the surface vocalism is shortened for morphological reasons noted in 2.1, the Mizo data here only supports Bright’s (1957a:25- 6) distinctions of -j/-aj and -j/-oj such that his other distinctions may be rejected accordingly: the data in Weidert (1975:24) suggests Bright’s -ej, contrasting with regular -j, to be restricted to certain phonological exceptions associated with adverbial and onomatopoeic words which may be safely excluded;22 Bright’s case in point for -uj is the word hmujIII muzzle which, as the only instance in the word list, contrasts with -j in Zahau hmjIII visage and represents an Austroasiatic loanword; there are no cases of variation before -w, for which -iw, -ew, -w, -aw are attested, except for hrwI leech for which an external origin is suggested by its irregular correspondence with a lateral initial in Thado and Zo hlwI.

Excluding -j, to be discussed below, the Mizo rhymes -j/-aj, -j/-oj, -j, -iw, -ew, -w, - aw may be extended to the other five Northern Chin languages, although Thado FORM-II derivations with -ajIII, -ojIII and -ujIII tend to surface as -jIII, -jIII and -jIII such that gajI III III III pregnant may occur in FORM-II regularly as gaj or in a reduced form gj while gaj III impregnate and its regular FORM-II gj are invariable. The only exceptions are mainly confined to a handful of words in Thado: Thado has -w instead of -iw in kwIII elbow, which is the only word attesting this rhyme, such that whether this is a regular Thado reflex or the result of the word being a contraction of an original compound noun, as Luce (1962:60) tentatively suggests, remains unclear; Thado has howI reprove, quarrel as I II h II II an ablaut of haw elsewhere; Thado has xw scrape and t w graze, along with hw prune comparing with Zo hwII shave, cut hair, in an externally influenced word family attesting -ew elsewhere.

A clear distinction between -j and -uj may be found in both Thado and Tedim as supported by Luce’s (1985:II.70-87) transcriptions of -wi and -ui respectively. Zahau, excluding a shift to -i after coronal initials, and Sizang concur with Mizo in solely reflecting -j, while Zo conversely merges them as -uj to give the following distinctions:

22 These cases are not addressed in the work here; see Henderson (1965:94) and Bhaskararao (1989:110) and for a discussion of the special phonological characteristics of adverbial usage in Tedim.

Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang -j -j / -i -j -uj -j -j -j -j / -i -uj -uj -uj -j

A few exceptions may be noted: the status of Zo vjI– elephant as an Austroasiatic loanword is supported by its irregular initial in Sizang; Thado tjI egg and tjII water I II I II contrast with Tedim tuj and tuj , yet Luce (1962:59;85;tableA) has Thado tuj egg and ti water, while in Teizang, which would be expected to correlate with Tedim, Henderson (1963:551) has tjI egg and tjII water; Thado ujII sad, sleepy compares with Tedim jII tired out, but variations in initial and rhyme elsewhere suggest external influence.

1.1.2.5 Thado - and Syllable Weight

There is a reduction of the surface length of vowels bearing syllabic weight in Thado syllables before a glottal stop. In words in TC-I and TC-II, this is not to the extent of a vowel not bearing syllable weight and the distinction is not noted in the transcriptions 23 here; in words in TC-III, the vocalism merges with that of a vowel without syllable weight and is noted as such in the transcription. Consequently the inflected form of Thado peI back kick is p, which can no longer bear distinctive tone,24 rather than peIII as would be expected by analogy with Zo which, excluding tonal distinctions, is homophonous in the uninflected form. The two Thado forms are shown below:

23 If length rather than syllable weight were being marked, this could be distinguished as [] and [] after the vowel. 24 This change renders it homophonous with the uninflected Thado word p flat.

1.2 Initials

NC Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang *k- k- k- k- k- k- k- *kh- kh- kh- x- x- x- kh- *kr- - - k- k- k- k- *krh- h- h- x- x- x- kh- *kl- tl- tl- hl- t-, (-) t-, (-) t-, (-) *klh- tlh- tlh- hl- hl- / h- x- th- *- - - - - - - *h- h- h- - - - - *- - - - t-, (-) t-, (-) t-, (-) *h- h- s- s- s- s- s- *- f- f- - t-, (-) t-, (-) t-, (-) *t- t- t- t- t-, (-) t-, (-) t-, (-) *th- th- th- th- th-, (s-) th-, (s-) th-, (h-) *d- d- d- d- d- d- d- *n- n- n- n- n- n- n- *hn- hn- hn- n- n- n- n- *p- p- p- p- p- p- p- *ph- ph- ph- ph- ph- ph- ph- *b- b- b- b- b- b- b- *m- m- m- m- m- m- m- *hm- hm- hm- m- m- m- m- *r- r- r- g- g- g- - *hr- hr- hr- h-, (g-) h-, (g-) h-, (g-) h-, (-) *l- l- l- l- l- l- l- *hl- hl- hl- l- l- l- l- *j- z- z- - / z- z- z- z- *w- v- v- v- v- v- v-, (h-) *s- s- s- s- s- s- s- *h- h- h- h- h- h- h- *- Ø- - Ø- Ø- Ø- Ø-

1.2.1 Velars

The obvious attestation of b- and d- leads Ohno (1965:16-7) to suggest that it must be possible on distributional grounds to reconstruct an original g-, but that the actual processes are still unclear. Luce (1962:39) notes evidence for preglottalisation in some Southern Chin languages of b- and d- which he transcribes with the implosives - and -. VanBik (2009:64-5) suggests that implosion may have originally been characteristic of the voiced obstruent series with - shifting to k- due to a similar lack of - in some Austroasiatic and Tai-Kadai languages which attest - and -. However, VanBik’s analysis, based on Hartmann’s (1985, 2001) and Nolan’s (2001:68) respective analyses of two Southern Chin languages does not account for plain b- and d- in these languages. Furthermore, Hartmann’s (1985, 2001) analysis shows preglottalisation, along with

prenasalisation, to be a morphologically conditioned change resulting from nasal and glottal prefixes that are applicable to all initial types. A more likely cause is a simple devoicing of plain Tibeto-Burman g- to Northern Chin k- that is supported by the discussion in 1.2.2 where the Sizang shift of r- > /- > g- > - demonstrates the difficulty in maintaining the voicing of velar obstruents in Northern Chin.

1.2.1.1 Velar Clusters

For the purposes of exposition, kr - and kl- are treated as unitary clusters. Their original source in a k- prefix that has been retained before liquids is supported in a few cases in the word list where reflexes of original kr- and kl- are confused with r- and l-. Based on ideas in Shafer (1940:309-10) and Benedict (1972a:41-2), Solnit (1979:117-8) concludes that pr- and pl- may be treated as standard sources of Mizo - and tl- along with kr- and kl-, but this is unwarranted: Mizo halI summer and tluIII ~ tlukIIB fall do not correlate with Tedim phlIII winter and pukII fall, but with Tedim khalI summer and tukII fall; Mizo haIII ~ ht good and the avian name tlajI– do compare with Tedim phaIII ~ pht and bajI–,25 but are exceptional cases resulting from external influence via a bilabial pre-syllable that may 26 also account for the irregular FORM-II inflections of the former. Two further cases may also be noted: Mizo wI ~ wIII and Tedim pwI ~ pwIII sprout (v); Zahau hmI, for which there is no Mizo correlate, and Tedim phmI needle.27

The Zo hl- and h- reflexes of khl- generally reflect speaker idiosyncrasy. The evidence of one speaker suggests a lexical distinction between the two such that moon is always hlaIII and wing, feather is always haIII. Only the transcription hl- is used in the word list.

1.2.2 Rhotics

Luce (1962:52, 1985:I.81-2) and Peterson (2000:81-5) note that several Southern Chin reflexes of r- have a uvular - or velar-fricative - articulation. This supports Solnit’s (1979:115-6) suggestion for a shift r- > - > g- in languages like Zo, Tedim and Thado. This development was no doubt triggered by the shift of g- to k-, discussed in 1.2.1, due to g- becoming being an available slot in the phonemic inventory. Ohala’s (1983:195;199-200) observations that prenasalisation is often used as means to maintain voicing, which is harder to maintain for back articulations, provides a good account for Sizang’s further shift of g- > - which is also noted for Teizang by Henderson (1963:551). Notably, Luce (1962:52;noteA, 1985:II.70-87) actually transcribes Zo, Thado and Tedim g- as g-. Although this provides a nice bridge between Thado, Zo and Tedim g- and Sizang -, this prenasalisation is not noted by Henderson (1965:16) for Tedim. While there is possibly some faint nasalisation of g-, the spectrograms below of Tedim gmI forest, territory and mI dare do not conclusively warrant a transcription of g- for the former:

25 The avian name is not in the word list, but supported in Luce (1962:tableB). 26 IIA II For the latter, compare Mizo bak , in irregular TC-IIA rather than TC-IIB, and Tedim bak bat with IIA Khualsim plak from Luce (1962:tableB) and with the forms in VanBik (2009:85). 27 VanBik (2009:291-2) adduces a few other cases on the basis of Old Burmese and Southern Chin, but these do not pertain to Northern Chin reflexes.

The occasional failure of Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang to manifest hr- > h- and instead develop as if from unaspirated r- most likely reflects the instability of preaspiration before sonorants noted by Luce (1962:43-4) and supported in Southern Chin by Löffler (2002a:133-4). Luce’s (1962:50) suggestion that the reflexes in h- may reflect a local variant of h- in Mizo and Zahau, manifested as hr-, is belied by statistical evidence; Solnit’s (1979:116) suggestion of an original Tibeto-Burman distinction of sr- and s-r- finds little supporting evidence in 5.2.

1.2.3 Affricates

The voiceless affricates - and h- are retained as such in Mizo.28 Benedict’s (1940:123, 1972a:18) derivation of Mizo f- from Tibeto-Burman - is supported by Löffler (2002a:128-9) and may be adopted at the Northern Chin level.29 The change this entails is not too dissimilar from the fronting of - to f- in Cockney English; VanBik (2009:26;174) actually reconstructs original Chin -. The loss of voicing, paralleling the change of g- to k- discussed above, is readily accounted for by Ohala’s (1983:201-2) observation that fricatives have an even greater tendency to become voiceless than stops.

1.2.4 Coronals

The coronals t-, th-, d-, (h)n-, (h)l- have a dental articulation in Mizo and Zahau. Luce (1962:40) extends this to the other four languages which is supported by Stern (1963:226) for Sizang. However, the evidence here supports Henderson (1965:9-10;16) in noting purely alveolar articulations in Tedim, and contrasts Stern in only noting a dental articulation in Sizang for unaspirated t-; Zo appears to parallel Sizang while Thado inconsistently attests a dental articulation for th- as well. The dental articulation in Mizo

28 The shift of - to t- in Tedim leads Matisoff (1988b:4-9) to suggest an erroneous association between Northern Chin mI level and dmII full. 29 Benedict’s further derivation of Mizo f- from a voiced sibilant z- is rejected in 5.2.2.

and Zahau, 30 most likely represents the original state of affairs with the shift to an alveolar articulation possibly influenced by Burmese; in this regard it would be interesting to compare the reflexes on the Indian side.

There is an allophone - of Zo, Tedim and Sizang t- before /i which is reflected as s- when from underlying th- except in Sizang where it becomes h-. The origin of Northern Chin th-in Tibeto-Burman s-, discussed in 5.2.2, leads VanBik (2009:17) to suggest that /i inhibited the shift of s > thin Tedim, but the evidence for palatalisation elsewhere suggests a circular shift of s > th- > s- in this resticted environment.

1.2.5 Glides

Peterson’s (2000:94) observation that j- in some Southern Chin languages corresponds to z- in the Northern ones is supported by the data in Luce (1985:II.70-87). Peterson’s (2000:80) further suggestion that the shift to z- first occurred in lanaguages like Mizo and Zahau and then diffused northwards is supported by the fact that Thado, as the language furthest north, still retains a post-alveolar articulation - which appears to be slipping towards the alveolar z-; this variation is also noted by Luce (1962:noteB). In the word list only the transcription - is used.31 Peterson’s (2000:94) proposal for an original hj- in Southern Chin is not noted by Luce (1962:39) or VanBik (2009:271).

The provenance of v- from a labiovelar glide w- is well-supported: Benedict (1972a:18), relying on missionary orthographies, transcribes the Mizo reflex as w-; Luce (1962:55;noteB, 1985:II.70-87) records w- for some Southern Chin languages. The shift of w- > v- probably spread northwards in a similar manner to j- > z- and was possibly facilitated via the devoicing entailed in the Mizo and Zahau shift of - > f-. it is possible that the Sizang allophone of v- as h- before u may also reflect a previous non-fricated source.32 Luce (1962:51) explictly notes no evidence for hw- in Northern Chin.

1.2.6 Glottal Stop

The glottal stop is essentially a default feature of vocalic onset, but the overtly creaky phonation in Zahau in comparison to the other languages suggests Osburne’s (1975:3) tentative supposition of a distinct phoneme in Zahau to be preferable. Henderson (1965:13;16) and Stern (1963:226) both note a prominent glottalic onset in the word for dog in Tedim and Sizang respectively; Weidert (1981:9) questions Henderson’s transcription and the word list here provides no evidence for such an onset in either language. The glottalic onset in the spectrogram for Zahau jII dog is clearly evident when compared to Tedim jII dog:

30 This may also be extended to the lateral plosives tl- and tlh-. 31 Notably there are also a select few cases of x- being articulated as kh-; whether this represents dialect confusion or shift is unclear and only the transcription x- is used in the word list. 32 There are two words where Sizang reflects v- before u: vt ash; vjI(sajI) elephant. The latter is an Austroasiatic loanword that is internally irregular in Northern Chin.

1.3 Tonality

In syllables with weight falling on the vowel or the sonorant coda, Mizo and Zahau have four possible tones while Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang have three.

Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang I W IIA I Y IIB K [ III W W W W

The tripartite division follows Luce’s (1959a:28-9, 1985:I.83) assumption that Mizo and 33 Zahau have undergone a later split of TC-II. Löffler’s (2002b:128) suggestion that TC-I and TC-II are primary fits well with the common association of TC-III with derived verbal and nominal forms, to be discussed in 2.1 and 2.2, that pertains equally to Old Burmese and Old Chinese.

1.3.1 Tone Category I

This is attested in Mizo, Zo and Tedim as a level tone. Stern’s (1963:229-30) observation that in Sizang it often surfaces as a low level tone is also supported here, but his treatment of the frequent Sizang high level tone as part of the basic tone system is identified by Luce (1962:68) as a result of sandhi. The Thado and Zahau rising contours correlate with TC-II(A) elsewhere, but Hyman (2005) and Osburne (1975:16) note them respectively to have high level sandhi alternates. Although Osburne also notes an alternation in Zahau with the low falling tone in a separate environment, it is tempting to invoke Yue-Hashimoto’s (1986:171-3) suggestion that sandhi alternations of tones may

33 Luce’s TC-II and TC-III are inverted here.

reflect earlier forms. Treating TC-I as an original level tone and TC-II as an original rising tone would support the discussion in 5.3 regarding their historical origins, but further research into Northern Chin tone sandhi is required.34

Stopped syllables with syllable weight not falling directly on the vowel are generally not tone bearing units; their pitch tends to approximate that of TC-III. Consequently the occlusion of Mizo and Zahau -r to - or -k in Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang usually involves concomitant re-assignation of syllable weight to the vowel if not already there. However, in Tedim and Sizang there are a few exceptions in TC-I in which the syllable weight has not shifted solely to the vowel but the syllable has curiously retained the distinctive tone contour. The case of Tedim thkI new, corresponding to Mizo thrI new, is also noted by Henderson (1965:20), and may be contrasted with Tedim thk itch which, along with Mizo thk itch, is unable to bear distinctive tone. In the spectrograms below the Tedim word for new has a higher pitch contour than the default contour in the following word itch:

The same word, usually after the animal prefix s-, also means serow; the irregular correspondence between the Mizo and Zahau forms, tharI and thrII respectively, suggests an external origin which is the case for Tedim kkI peel from Austroasiatic. The sole other case in the word list involves Tedim hkI difficult which is confined to a binomial form that allows Henderson (1965:94) to suggest that its curious behaviour may be attributable to its adverbial status.35 The Tedim cases above are all equally applicable to

34 A brief discussion may be found in Luce (1962:11) with more detailed analyses for Sizang by Stern (1963:230-3), Tedim by Henderson (1965:13-4;34-9), Mizo by Weidert (1975:53-6) and Chhangte (1993:54-8), and Zahau by Osburne (1975:14-21). 35 The curious phonology of adverbs was noted in 1.1.2.4. Luce (1962:54) notes further difficulties with initial correspondences in Southern Chin reflexes.

Sizang, and although a specific account cannot be made for the curious tonal contour of new, its exceptional status likely stems from a previous adverbial or external source.36

1.3.2 Tone Category II

Osburne (1975:7;23) does not distinguish TC-IIA and TC-IIB in Zahau except as a result of surface intonation. The primary distinction posited here is supported by Luce (1959a:tableI, 1962:tableA;noteC).

Unlike the split of Old Chinese TC-I in Early-Mandarin, as discussed by Pulleyblank (1978:192), and the split of Lolo-Burmese TC-I and TC-II in Lahu and Lisu, as discussed by Matisoff (1970:14), the division of TC-II in Mizo and Zahau is not associated with manner features of initials. Luce (1959a:28) suggests that TC-IIA and TC-I, excepting when an obstruent coda in Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang corresponds to an original -r, never occur with obstruent codas. Löffler (2002a:129) notes a general association of TC- IIB with obstruent codas in Mizo, and Weidert (1975:11) attributes the few cases outside of TC-IIB in Mizo to a mostly phonoaesthetic origin; Ostapirat (1998:235-7) and Löffler (2002b:139) similarly note an association of TC-II with obstruent codas in Tedim. Luce’s (1962, 1985:II.84-7) data also has no cases of TC-IIB with final sonorants; there are actually numerous instances but they can generally be attributed to morphologically derived forms, discussed in 2.1, which are not recorded in Luce’s word list.37 In closed syllables, this allows TC-IIB to be limited to tone-bearing syllables with obstruent codas and to derived forms. Open syllables appear to occur in TC-IIA or TC-IIB, but while Luce (1962, 1985:I.83;II.82) and Weidert (1979:80;90;114-5) do not treat open rhymes in TC- 38 IIA as aberrant, they do both note an abundance in TC-IIB. Cases of TC-IIA in the correspondence sets suggest them to be loanwords or a result of onomatopoeia. Consequently, for native uninflected tone-bearing syllables the following correspondences may be suggested:

Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang open IIB IIB II II II II stop IIB IIB II II II II closed IIA IIA II II II II

In his “redundancy-free” representation of Mizo, Weidert (1975:4-8) removes a vowel length notation from syllables with obstruent codas suggesting that vowel length is a concomitant realisation of TC-IIB; Lehman’s (1978:720) logical counter that the argument could be inverted to treat syllabic shortness as the generator of reduced tone disregards the intrinsic association of TC-IIB, as opposed to TC-I, TC-IIA or TC-III, with obtruent codas.

36 It is perhaps of relevance that the Tedim form, unlike the Sizang form, does not inflect. However the failure of other morphemes to always exploit their inflectional potential due to the gradual reduction of inflections across all the languages makes this an unreliable indicator of anything being amiss. 37 The derived nature of TC-III excludes it from the discussion. 38 Luce’s tentative proposal that the open rhymes in TC-IIB may have been conditioned by the loss of an original final voiced obstruent is based on the now disfavoured proposal for voiced obstruents in Old Chinese; see Li (1974:249). It is likely Luce was influenced in this analysis by the association of TC-IIB with obstruent codas.

However, the fact that stopped syllables were originally not able to bear distinctive tone favours inverting Weidert’s argument to treat TC-IIB as the concomitant realisation of surface vowel length. Rather than following Weidert in his synchronically reasonable decision not to note the vowel distinction before obstruent codas, it would be preferable in diachronic terms not to note the tonal distinction. This is adopted for the Northern Chin reconstructions in the word list, but the distinction of verbal inflections in TC-III and onomatopoeic words or loanwords in category TC-I or TC-IIA with obstruent codas, requires vocalic and tonal distinctions to be noted before obstruent codas for the individual languages.

1.3.3 Tone Category III

This is attested as a falling tone in all the languages which concurs nicely with its historical source proposed in 5.3. Luce (1959a:tableI, 1962:noteC) only notes Thado TC-I and TC-II, but elsewhere Luce (1962:68;noteB) notes a TC-III contour possibly associated with phrase intonation. Luce’s comments are similar to those of Osburne (1975:23) on Zahau TC-IIB, discussed in 1.3.2, and, as with Zahau TC-IIB, Thado TC-III is unequivocally attested as a primary tone in the word list here. The contour of Zo TC-III is supported by Luce (1962:68,noteC), but it sometimes appears to approximate the contour W of Tedim TC-III which conversely has a sandhi variant, noted by Luce (1962:11), that parallels the Zo contour.

Chapter 2 Northern Chin Morphology

Northern Chin words may be classified as either nouns or verbs.39 Most Northern Chin verbs have a basic form FORM-I and an inflected form FORM-II; specific syntactic functions vary between languages.40

2.1 Verbal Inflections

41 The regular FORM-II derivations from a reconstructed FORM-I base are noted below:

Mizo Zahau Thado Zo Tedim Sizang *-k - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-kII - - -ØIII -ØIII -kIII / - -kIII / -ØIII *-kIII - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-t - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-tII - - -tIII -tIII -tIII / - -tIII / -ØIII *-tIII - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-p - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-pII - - -pIII -pIII -pIII / - -pIII / -ØIII *-pIII - - -ØIII -ØIII - -ØIII *-ØI -t -t -t -t -t -t *-ØII -kIIB / -tIIB -kIIB / -tIIB -II / -tII -II / -tII -kII / -tII -kII / -tII *-ØIII -k -k - - -k -k *-I/II -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII *-III -nIIB -IIB - - -t -k *-nI/II -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII -nIII *-nIII -nIIB -nIIB -t -t -t -t *-mI/II -mIII -mIII -mIII -mIII -mIII -mIII *-mIII -mIIB -mIIB -p -p -p -p *-rI -rIII -rIII - -III / -aIII -kIII -kIII *-rII -rIII -rIII - / -ØIII -III / -aIII -kIII / - -kIII / -ØIII *-rIII -r -r - -III / -aIII -kIII -kIII *-lI/II -lIII -lIII -lIII -lIII -lIII -lIII *-lIII -l -l -lIII -lIII -l -lIII *-jI/II -jIII -jIII -jIII -jIII -jIII -jIII *-jIII -j -j -jIII -jIII -j -jIII *-wI/II -wIII -wIII -wIII -wIII -wIII -wIII *-wIII -w -w -wIII -wIII -w -wIII

39 Following Osburne (1975:120) and Chhangte (1993:75), numerals may be classified as intransitive verbs. 40 See Henderson (1965:84-9), Stern (1963:243-51), Chhangte (1993:135-75) and Lehman (1996). 41 A reconstructed FORM-I base is used for simplicity of exposition. A coda *-s is not included due to its early convergence with -ØIII or, in the case of short surface vowel length in Mizo, Zahau and Tedim, its development into - which can no longer inflect. See the discussions in 1.1.2.2, 2.1.3 and 5.1.2.2.

The following restrictions to the chart should be noted: non-native or onomatopoeic FORM-I syllables with original obstruent codas in TC-I or TC-II(A) are not included in the chart and appear to develop TC-III in FORM-II without loss of the coda; in the case of sonorant codas, syllable weight may not be assigned to the vowel in Mizo and Zahau 42 derivations in TC-IIB, nor in Thado, Zo and Sizang derivations in TC-III corresponding to - in Mizo, Zahau and Tedim; open syllables with diphthongs tend to develop TC-II(B) in FORM-II regardless of original tone due to their surface vowel length before obstruent 43 codas having an inherent association with TC-II as discussed in 1.3.2.

2.1.1 Stopped Syllable Variation

The alternative Sizang reflexes of -k/t/pII are in free-variation; in Tedim they are only in free-variation after the diphthongs a and a otherwise only the former surfaces. It appears that the former variants in TC-III represent the earlier state of affairs that is gradually shifting to a complete loss of the original coda. 44 Significantly, Osburne (1975:140) notes a similar variation in a few verbs in Zahau where -k/t/pII give either - k/t/pIII or - although only reflexes in - exist in the Zahau recorded here.45 In Thado, the variation appears confined to reflexes of -II when derived from Northern Chin -r II, and only cases of variation across the word list rather than free-variation were noted.46

2.1.2 Open Syllable Variation in TC-II

The general FORM-II reflex is -k and is derived from regular syllables corresponding to TC-IIB in Mizo and Zahau. Like the grammatically conditioned tonal splits in certain Lolo-Burmese languages, noted by Burling (1967:57) and Matisoff (1978b:19-20;33), Mizo regularly shifts all verbs with open rhymes from TC-IIB to TC-III; this does not affect the form FORM-II inflections. Any nominal forms associated with FORM-I retain the original tone such that Mizo khuIIB smoke (n) correlates with khuIII smoke (v). The shift to TC-III in verbs renders Hillard (1975:12;16-9) unable to separate when Mizo -k develops IIB 47 from original TC-III, and when -k develops from secondarily derived TC-III. Cases with -t appear in words corresponding to irregular open syllables in TC-IIA discussed in 1.3.2. The suggestion that such words belong to a more recent layer is supported by Zahau syllables in -i, that are shown in 1.1.2.4 to have developed from -j after coronal initials, IIB always developing FORM-II inflections in -it regardless of tone. Occassional occurrences of -t instead of -k from TC-IIB are most likely further analogical extensions of the -t/-k alternations discussed in 2.1.6 and attributed to mutual influence between languages.

42 Exceptional cases of long vowels with sonorant codas in TC-IIB are externally influenced. 43 The few instances where TC-III develops, sometimes in free-variation, may be associated with the discussion in 2.1.1. 44 h In some cases a secondary semantic distinction has emerged: the variant FORM-II derivative p a of h II h III Tedim p at ~ p at sweep is only used in its nominal sense of broom; see 2.2 for the association of FORM- II with nominalisation. 45 The exceptional status of Zahau thukIIB ~ thukIII deep is also attested in Mizo, Thado and Zo. Benedict (1972a:66-7) compares thatha xdkufxdkuf thkthk thickly, but its rhyme shows it to be a non-native word whose verbal source xdkuf worthy, suitable is noted by Luce (1973:listA) to be Mon or Shan in origin. 46 The Zo reflexes in -a from an original rhotic correspond to the preceding vocalism as discussed in 1.1.2.1. 47 Hillard’s associated proposal that FORM-II may therefore be primary is discusssed in 2.1.3.

2.1.3 Origin in Suffixal -s

Although noting a general change to TC-III in form FORM-II, the variety of FORM-II reflexes leads Weidert (1979:98-107) to reconstruct a suffixal combination -(s-)dh whereby the dentalisation triggered by the -dh suffix could be modified by glottalisation caused by the -s- infix. Matisoff (1982:9-17) criticises Weidert’s proposal for being typologically bizarre and phonetically aberrant; preferring to opt out of any all-inclusive hypothesis, he proposes three separate suffixes -s, -t, and -k to which he can assign no semantic function nor account for the selection of one over another. Ostapirat (1998:244- 6) makes the interesting suggestion that in Tedim there is a tense-lax alternation such that syllables in TC-II (tense) give TC-III (lax) but syllables in TC-III (lax) give - (tense) but then admits that this leaves no account for the derived forms with -t and -k. In spite of Hillard’s (1974:78, 1975:1) suggestion that the alternation between FORM-I and FORM-II is not directly phonologically conditioned and, specifically in reference to Mizo, is largely irregular, Hillard (1975:9-12) suggests an inverse proposal that Mizo FORM-I open- rhymes may actually be derived from their FORM-II counterparts which retain etymological -t and -k suffixes, but notes that the lack of a -p coda in this analysis is a problem. Significantly, Hillard does note a correlation between tones and -t versus -k suffixes, but prefers to assume that the different tonal contours were triggered by the different status of the codas before they were lost. Noting a similar correlation, Löffler (2002b), in essentially a reversion of Hillard’s proposal back to a more plausible derivation of FORM-II from FORM-I, believes that all the verbal paradigms may be derived from a single suffix. Löffler (2002b:124;130) tentatively suggests this may be something like -t with two alternative surface realisations: -k in open syllables according to the tone contour; - in closed syllables that would either replace obstruent codas or, in the case of sonorant codas, would either disappear to leave a distinctive tonal reflex or remain as a coarticulation depending on the tone of the syllable and manner of articulation of the coda.48

Löffler succeeds in identifying most of the main derivational patterns outlined above, but the phonological development of his -t coda is rather arbitrary. Significantly Löffler (2002a:128), following his own proposals cited in Henderson (1976:16), notes that the Tibetan equivalent of his final -t appears to be final -s, but excludes this from consideration on the basis that Northern Chin root final -s becomes - as discussed in 5.1.2.2. A possible association with the Tibetan -s suffix is proposed in Pulleyblank (1966b:423); Henderson (1976:7;9) takes up this proposal and suggests a further possible comparison (1976:11) to the Old Chinese TC-III derivations. Unfortunately Henderson is unable to take the comparison out of the realms of speculation, but her hunch seems to be correct when the different conditioning environments are taken into account. Excluding the general association of -s with TC-III, as also attested in Old Burmese and Old Chinese in 3.4 and 4.3, and the loss of original stop codas before -s which is noted in 4.1.2 to also occur in Old Chinese, the developments of -, -t and -k remain to be discussed.

48 Löffler’s (2002b:129-30) proposal for distinctive tones on short stopped syllables to account for verbs that do not inflect seems unnecessary. Verbs in other categories sometimes do not inflect and the process rather represents the gradual depletion of inflections that, as shown in Hartmann (2002:81), has almost completely disappeared in many southern Chin languages.

2.1.3.1 Glottality

An association of -s with glottality in the development of TC-III in Old Burmese and Old Chinese is noted in 3.4; this renders its development here under the conditioning environments noted above phonologically possible. The association of root final -s with glottality, discussed in 5.1.2.2, may also be noted here. The attestation of glottalised nasals in Lai Chin where Mizo and Zahau have nasals in TC-IIB corresponding to obstruents in Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang suggests a glottalic development here also that parallels the glottalised liquids and glides in Lai Chin that are still maintained in Mizo, Zahau and Tedim. The typological naturalness of a development of -p/t/k from -m/-n/- is noted in Matisoff (1982:49). The alternative emergence of TC-IIB after nasals in Mizo and Zahau is suggestive of the glottalic origin of TC-II; this is supported by the occasional occurrence of liquids and glides in TC-IIB that tend to be in free-variation with their glottalised counterparts such that they are of no reconstructional significance.49 The further development of - to Mizo -nIIB and Tedim -t appears to be the result of the spreading of the coronal feature of suffixal -s.50

2.1.3.2 Open syllables and -t / -k

Matisoff (2003:431) shows the development of -s into -t to be a regular development in Tibeto-Burman; it is also noted in 5.1.2.2 to have occurred sporadically in Old Chinese. A development of -s into -k is less well-supported cross-linguistically, but the shift of -r to -k in certain Northern Chin languages, discussed in 1.1.2.1 and 1.2.2, via an intermediary uvular or velar fricative articulation certainly makes such a change less typologically unreasonable when the close relationship of -s with the laryngeal fricative -h, to be discussed below, is taken into account.

2.1.4 Superadded -s Suffixation

An issue with the -s hypothesis is that words in TC-III which were originally derived from suffixal -s are allowed to further inflect as if they were suffixed again. Pulleyblank (1966b:423) suggests the complexity of the inflectional system may be due to analogical extension affecting different layers of language; in the case of derived words from an original TC-III this seems to have indeed been the case. However, if a FORM-II derivation could be lexically reanalysed in FORM-I and inflected again, the -s suffix that triggered the first inflection must have developed into something else before -s could be suffixed again. This calls into question how -s suffixation could still exist as a formative process if there was no trace of suffixal -s left in the lexicon.

A solution to this lies in the development of -s in Old Chinese. Pulleyblank (1973b:371, 1978a:173-4) observes that the development of -s into a laryngeal fricative -h by the time of the Qieyun was a sporadic process that affected some rhymes earlier than others. In support of this diglossic situation, Pulleyblank (1978:200) notes a similarity with

49 Occasionally a semantic distinction appears to have emerged or the variant forms have been reanalysed via analogy as inflectional derivatives; see also Löffler (2002b:132). 50 See also the discussion in 5.1.2.2.

Henderson’s (1952:169-70) observation that the Cambodian final sibilant -s is not distinguished from final aspiration -h except in careful reading pronunciation. The most likely scenario in Northern Chin is that -s gradually started to shift to -h in some words which were then open to further suffixation by the lexically still viable -s remaining in other words. By the time all cases of -s had shifted to -h, the pattern was already set such that analogy was allowed to take over to derive the rest of the lexicon. A clear example of this distinction in suffixal levels, and the effect of analogy thereon, may be found in words of the type -III which should all be attested as -nIII if derived from an original -I/II with suffixal -s causing coronalisation. The situation is similar to that of III-s becoming -nIIB or -t in Mizo or Tedim respectively but -IIB, -k or - in Zahau, Sizang or Thado/Zo respectively.

2.1.5 Causativity Paradigms

The cases of superadded -s suffixation tend to mark an interesting process in Northern Chin of causativisation or, to use Chhangte’s (1993:86-9) broader terminology, valency change. Henderson (1965:83) shows a few examples of Tedim paradigms whereby FORM-II inflections of intransitive verbs may be used as transitive verbs in FORM-I while the FORM-II inflections of transitive verbs may be used as benefactive verbs in FORM-I which may also manifest a distinct FORM-II. Examples in Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang are relatively rare; Zahau and, to a lesser extent, Mizo show broader support, but usually show loss of the intermediate stage such that only the FORM-II inflection of the derived 51 FORM-I remains. This leads Osburne (1975:114), along with Peterson (1998:93-4) and Matisoff (2003:472-3) who focus on Lai, to suggest a distinctive FORM-III inflection in l II l III l IIB h II cases like Zahau t ~ t n return (vi) and t n return (vt). Correlates like Thado l h III h III h ~ ln arrive (vi) and ln ~ lt bring (vt) show these isolated third forms rather to evince the gradual reduction in verbal inflections that Hartmann (2002:81) shows has already occurred on a massive scale in Southern Chin languages. This is hinted at by Hillard (1974:82-3), who compares Henderson’s Tedim paradigms and some Mizo paradigms in Bright (1957b:110) to suggest that they may represent a similar process, but is unable to take the comparison further. The sporadic nature of this reduction means there are also several cases where the FORM-II of the derived transitive or benefactive FORM-I is not attested, although this may sometimes be attributed to phonological convergence preventing verbs from inflecting any further. The ascendancy of benefactive and causative particles in Northern Chin, as discussed by Peterson (1998:94-7) for Lai, seems to have been a major contributor in the reduction of verbal forms.

The ousting of original secondarily derived FORM-I inflections by their FORM-II counterparts in Mizo and Zahau provides clues towards the source of verbal inflections that appear not to fit the correspondences in 2.1. The FORM-II inflection in cases like I IIB Mizo de ~ dn throw (vi/t) appears superficially appear irregular, but its variant III IIB FORM-II den is entirely regular and shows dn , still attested in Zahau with its derived III benefactive sense throw (vb), to have simply merged grammatically with den while

51 There do still remain a few examples where Mizo and Zahau maintain the full paradigm as well as cases where Thado, Zo, Tedim and Sizang lose the derived FORM-I.

retaining its phonological distinctiveness. In certain cases, the transitive/benefactive FORM-II derivation has completely ousted the original FORM-II intransitive/transitive derivation from which it was originally derived. Direct evidence of the existence of original FORM-II may only be recovered from neighbouring languages, although Chhangte (1993:87) notes that variant use can occasionally distinguish Northern and Southern Mizo dialects.

2.1.6 Alternations of -k and -t

Sizang and Zo occassionally reflect -t instead of -k or - respectively in their derivations of III-s > - > -k (> -); in most cases the two are in free-variation. The explanation lies in the dominance of Tedim, discussed in the introduction, whose shift of -III-s > -n > -t appears to have been adopted by Zo and Sizang in some items. Sizang makes a secondary semantic distinction between nIII ~ nk sluggish and nIII ~ nt ill which also occurs in II III III II III III at ~ at / a tight (vi) and ak ~ ak / a tighten (vt) in which -t and -k do not II appear to be derived. Stern (1963:245) notes a similar distinction in the FORM-II of ta ~ II II II II tat / tak scare (v) which he treats as tat fear (vi) and tak fear (vt), but this is not supported in the Sizang recorded here. Occasional variation of -t and -k was noted in 2.1.2 where it was suggested to be isolated and not of reconstructional significance.

2.1.7 Alternation of -/-oIII and -w/-wIII

Some words with the rhyme -w have developed FORM-II reflexes in - in Mizo, Zahau III III and Tedim or -o in Thado, Zo and Sizang. The expected FORM-II reflex would be -w which even if ousted by a further derived form would be reflected as -w in Mizo, Zahau and Tedim or retained as -wIII in Thado, Zo and Tedim. Weidert’s (1979:100) failure to acknowledge the discrepancy, and Löffler’s (2002b:132-3) observation that this does not occur in the Southern Chin language Maraa, suggests that the distinction must have been a subtle one.

2.2 Nominalisation

Sporadic cases of denominal verbalisation with nouns being used as uninflected verbs in FORM-I are attested throughout the word list. More significant to a morphological study of Northern Chin are cases of nominalisation via FORM-II inflections as noted by Henderson (1976:9) and Chhangte (1993:79). The nominalising function of the -s suffix in Old Burmese and Old Chinese is discussed in 3.4 and 4.3 respectively and brings it into alignment with its function in Northern Chin.

2.3 Initial Aspiration

That a prefixal s- may have caused initial aspiration in Northern Chin transitive inflections is proposed by Wolfenden (1929a:185-6) who also makes a comparison with Burmese. As with Old Burmese, mentioned in 3.4, the process is no longer productive but a few isolated examples in Tedim and Sizang are provided by Henderson (1965:22) and Stern (1963:251) respectively and several more may be found in the word list. Although

the functions of the s- prefix and -s suffix tend to coalesce, the former only seems to represent an alternation of transitivity without attesting the full causativity paradigm associated with the latter. However, it seems unnecessary to draw a fundamental grammatical distinction here as the benefactive derivations of suffixal -s seem to be simply an extension of its transitive derivations under the broad notion of causativisation discussed in 2.1.5. Notably, there are a handful of cases where both prefix and suffix are attested that parallels the situation in Burmese discussed in 3.4.

2.4 Vocalic Ablaut

Noting a distinction between Mizo/Thado snI and Tedim snI red, Benedict (1972a:17-8) suggests that the variation results from an original medial -j- which has coloured the Mizo/Thado vowel. However, Benedict’s Old Burmese comparison supporting the medial is rejected in 3.3.1.1,52 and Benedict appears unaware that Thado actually reflects both snI and snI. The Thado case is reflective of a sporadic Northern Chin /a and e/ ablaut evinced in several cases throughout the word list. In certain cases the variation appears to have been exploited to create a new semantic distinction or more explicitly I define an already existing one: Zahau kk crack (vi) and kk crack (vt); Thado tr hard and trI elderly.

A less frequent ablaut also occurs with /u and /o. Excluding occassional evidence of secondary vowel rounding in a labial environment, other sporadic vocalic alternations tend to attest external influence or onomatopoeia.

52 Benedict’s (1972a:159) further comparison with Old Chinese կ tanI cinnabar, red, which is supported by Sagart (2006a:220), should also be rejected.

Chapter 3 Old Burmese The validity of orthographic evidence alongside modern dialect evidence has been the subject of several debates concerning the reconstruction of Lolo-Burmese and hence Old Burmese. As noted by Beckwith (2002b:213-4), the main difficulty stems from an over- reliance on modern Written Burmese forms in the literature. While Matisoff (1969:119- 20) chides Burling (1967:3) for rejecting Written Burmese as a valid source of evidence for his reconstruction of the Lolo-Burmese subgroup, Jones (1970:231) believes Matisoff goes too far in the other direction. Unfortunately, the lack of any real concordance of Inscriptional Burmese forms means that inscriptional evidence, gleaned haphazardly from sporadic citations in other academic works, tends to be unjustly conflated with Written Burmese in terms of usefulness. Benedict’s (1972a:41) dismissal of the pivotal role of Inscriptional Burmese in distinguishing Tibeto-Burman medials is approvingly cited by Matisoff (1978b:30, 2003:70) which will no doubt allay some of Jones’ concerns but not those of Beckwith. The unwieldiness of Inscriptional Burmese in terms of its inconsistent spellings is noted by Pe Maung Tin (1929:78), but he hastens to observe its paramount importance in elucidating the evolution of the language. Notably, Ba Shin’s (1962:36-9) study of the regularities behind the alternations shows them to represent little more than orthographic variation before script standardisation from which the fundamental underlying system, as will be presented below, may be deduced.

3.1 Vocalism

3.1.1 Jones’ Three Vowel i/u/a System

-d -i -k -u -m -a a- / -d,f -ij a-G / -k,f -uj -,f -aj -drf -im -krf (-Hk) -um -rf (-H) -am -def -in -kef -un -ef -an -dkif -i a-mif -u -if -a -dyf -ip -kyf -up -yf -ap -dwf -it -kwf -ut -wf -at -dkuf -ik a-muf -uk -uf -ak -dk / -dk0f -uw a-m / -0f -aw -pf -ac -nf -a

Jones’ (1976:45) three vowel system provides a symmetrical account for Old Burmese but struggles with the palatal codas. Following a line of thought similar to Duroiselle (1915:99-102), Jones (1988:207) later removes -nf -a due to its various non-nasal pronunciations in Modern Burmese; contrary to Duroiselle, and in line with the criticisms made by Blagden (1916a:94-5), Jones supposes that it once existed but was lost very

early on. However, his treatment of the two palatal codas as -pf -ac and -nf -a disregards Shafer’s proposal (1941:22) to treat them as reflecting Old Burmese -ik and -i in which the palatal feature of the vowel is assumed to have shifted to the coda.53 If Shafer’s proposal is correct, an account then has to be made for what -dkuf and -dkif, Jones’ -ik and -i, represent.

3.1.2 Gong’s Three Vowel i/u/a System

-d -i -k -u -m -a -d,f -ij -k,f -uj -,f -aj -drf -im -krf (-Hk) -um -rf (-H) -am -def -in -kef -un -ef -an -nf -i a-mif -u -if -a -dyf -ip -kyf -up -yf -ap -dwf -it -kwf -ut -wf -at -pf -ik a-muf -uk -uf -ak -dk0f -uw -0f -aw

Luce (1940:304, 1973:listA/B, 1985:I.100) suggests that most words with -dkuf and -dkif, Jones’ -ik and -i, appear to be Mon, Shan and Pali/Sanskrit loanwords. Shorto, in Pulleyblank (1963:217), also supports Luce’s proposal for an external source. Unaware of, or unwilling to accept, Luce’s proposal, Benedict (1972a:76-7) proposes that the source of these rhymes was Tibeto-Burman long -uk and -u in contrast to the short rhymes -uk and -u which gave a-muf and a-mif as in Jones’ scheme. Nishi (1997:983-4) marvels at Benedict’s ability to find such cognates in Tibeto-Burman when none are to be found in much more closely related Burmish languages. This conundrum is solved by Dempsey (2001:207-8) who, following Nishi’s (1999b:73-4) skepticism, shows that Benedict’s correspondence sets are based on faulty associations. Shafer’s (1941:22) proposal, with the additional observations by Luce and Shorto, allows Gong (1980:458- 61) to modify Jones’ scheme by omitting -dkuf and -dkif from consideration.

3.1.3 Pulleyblank’s Two Vowel i/a System

A distributional issue, not raised by Jones or Gong, occurs with medial -w-. The fact that it may freely occur after any consonant leads Matisoff (1976b:v, 1986a:83) to treat it as part of the rhyme rather than as part of an initial consonant cluster. A difficulty with this otherwise sound proposal is that medial -w- is restricted in distribution to before the low vowel a. Noting this complementary distribution of -u with -wa, Pulleyblank (1963:214-8) reanalyses -u as -wi thereby reducing the system to a two vowel i/a contrast.

53 Shafer, who makes no comment regarding the status of the orthographic form -def suggests that -in merged with -i to give -nf -a; this is discussed in 3.1.4.

-d -i -k -wi -m -a -Gm -wa -d,f -ij -k,f -wij -,f -aj -G,f -waj -drf -im -krf (-Hk) -wim -rf (-H) -am -Grf (-HG) -wam -def -in -kef -win -ef -an -Gef -wan -nf -i a-mif -wi -if -a -Gif -wa -dyf -ip -kyf -wip -yf -ap -Gyf -wap -dwf -it -kwf -wit -wf -at -Gwf -wat -pf -ik a-muf -wik -uf -ak -Guf -wak -dk0f -iw -0f -aw

Pulleyblank (1963:217-8) literally interprets -dk and OD, the latter composed of the individual form O of -k and the tonal variant -D of -d, to support an underlying wi, but these are orthographic conventions of no phonological import.54 Regardless of the symmetry afforded with wa, Nishi’s (1999a:678) suggestion that Pulleyblank’s system has little value is overly dismissive: Pulleyblank’s observation of the medial -G -w- in the Written Burmese form a-G of -k,f -wij, which rhymes with -ij a- / -d,f, is supported by Benedict (1972a:67) and provides a simpler diachronic account than Nishi’s (1999a:678) proposed vowel-breaking of -uj > -wij; 55 Pulleyblank’s treatment of Jones’ and Gong’s phonological distinction of u and uw as wi and iw resolves the lack of any real phonetic distinction, unless distinctive vowel length is assumed, in their systems; Pulleyblank’s (1963:218) suggestion that his i may originally stem from unwittingly resolves the similar lack of phonetic distinction between Jones’ and Gong’s -i and -ij which may be distinguished as - and -j.

3.1.4 A Two Vowel / System

-m - -k -w -Gm -w -d - -sm -j -,f -j -k,f -wj -G,f -wj -d,f -j – -rf -m -krf -wm -Grf -wm -drf -m -srf -jm -ef -n -kef -wn -Gef -wn (-def -n), -nf - -sef -jn -if - a-mif -w -Gif -w (-dkif -), -nf - -sif -j -yf -p -kyf -wp -Gyf -wp -dyf -p -syf -jp -wf -t -kwf -wt -Gwf -wt (-dwf -t), -pf -c -swf -jt -uf -k a-muf -wk -Guf -wk (-dkuf -k), -pf -c -suf -jk -0f -w – – -dk0f -w -s0f -jw

54 See Shorto’s comments in Pulleyblank (1963:218). 55 Nishi (1999a:678) suggests -uj > -wij on the basis of a few later inscriptional cases of -Gd,f, but the attestation of this form in a very early inscription, discussed by Luce (1969:I.108-9, 1973:81), suggests the -w- may be original rather than derived. Particularly as regards Benedict’s (1972a:67) difficulty in distinguishing -waj from -oj, Nishi’s (1999a:678) tentative suggestion that Benedict’s -wij may be better treated as -uj is nonetheless preferable to Matisoff’s (1992:170-3) treatment of -dk as -uj which falls victim to the same overly literal orthographic interpretation as Pulleyblank.

Pulleyblank’s system has two major drawbacks: the general lowering of Sino-Tibetan to Tibeto-Burman a, discussed in 5.1, renders his /a not directly comparable with his Old Chinese /a system, discussed in 4.1.2; there is evidence for an original medial -j-, discussed in 3.3.1, to parallel medial -w-. Positing medial -j- in the column headed by -d - would make the rhyme -d,f -j violate the phonotactic constraint prohibiting a parallel -jaj. The discussion in 5.1 shows the source of this rhyme to be -j > - > -j whose overlap in phonological development with -j > -j > - explains why Luce (1981:iii) is unable to disambiguate them in the inscriptions; the lack of any medial -j- in the latter case is explained by the palatal coda -j preventing the lowering of Sino-Tibetan to a.

Further confusion stems from -nf - and -pf -c which are vying with -def -n / -dkif - and -dwf -t / -dkuf -k for the same slots. Pulleyblank (1963:218) accepts Shafer’s derivation of -nf - and -pf -ac from -ik and -i. Bradley (1985:194) claims that -pf -ac has been pronounced -i, as its modern pronunciation would indicate, since at least 1450, but this results from a misreading of Miller (1954:383) and, as Dempsey (2001:219) observes, a prejudice towards later developments.56 Dempsey (2001:218) uses Hla Pe’s (1960:74;94) data on Pali loanwords to show that Shafer’s -ik must have been much closer in pronunciation to -pf -c as its conventional transcription would indicate. 57 Tacitly rejecting his previous proposal, Pulleyblank (1977-8:191-2) attempts to bolster his proposal for Old Chinese palatal codas, discussed in 4.1.2, by conversely suggesting that the palatal codas are original. Inscriptional evidence for -Gpf -wc and -Gnf -w, not noted by Pulleyblank, is superficially supportive, but the source of the palatal codas - and -c in Sino-Tibetan -j/n and -jk/t, discussed in 5.1, makes the source of medial -w-, which could not co-occur with -j-, curious. The sparseness of the evidence for the rhymes makes an alternative explanation likely: Luce (1981:50;60, n.d.) treats -wc as a scribal variant of -kwf -wt, which it settles as in Written Burmese; Luce’s (1973:17) observation of u’ k,f klw j for the sole nasal form auR; / u’ Gnf klw ² serve allows a similar suggestion for -Gnf -w and -k,f -wj.

Gong’s (1980:459) three vowel proposal does not mention Shafer’s (1941:22) suggestion that -in merged with -i as -nf -. Matisoff’s (1968:895) proposed shift of -it > -pf -c parallels that of -ik > -pf -c and restores symmetry to Shafer’s proposal. Benedict (1972a:75-6;79-80) suggests that -def -n may derive from a long vowel -in; Matisoff (1972a:65, 1979:19) extends Benedict’s proposal to derive -dwf -t from -it. Noting a paucity of Lolo-Burmese comparative sets, Thurgood (1974:100-1) cautiously accepts the proposal for -dwf -t, but suggests that -def -n may lie in loanwords or specially

56 The date cited by Bradley presumably refers to an unrelated Burmese tribute that, according to Miller, was made to the Chinese court in 1451. Miller (1954:371-2) suggests the Sino-Burmese vocabulary dates from works made sometime in the 16th century but notes that the compiler was born in 1649 and the preface to the work to which it is attached is dated 1683. 57 Hla Pe (1960:93) notes transcriptions to indicate that -nf appears to have already lost its nasality.

conditioned cases of phonological change.58 Although Thurgood (1977:182) later adopts Benedict’s and Matisoff’s proposals, his original caution regarding Benedict’s and Matisoff’s two main supporting cases is well-considered: Nishi (1974:37) criticises Matisoff’s (1972a:65, 1979:19) comparison, originally proposed by Benedict (1972a:80), of &dwf rt reap with Mizo ritI hoe which suffers from internal irregularities in Northern Chin; Benedict’s (1972a:79) comparison of csdef / cdef khn¹ weigh, reconstructed as Lolo- Burmese kjin¹ by Matisoff (1988a:555), with Mizo khinIII weigh is similarly problematic.59 Further support comes from the occupation of the -k and - slots by externally sourced -dkuf -k and -dkif -.60

Observing that the digraph -dk is restricted to the velar codas -0f -w, -uf -k, -if -, Jones (1976:45;49) logically concludes that the phonetic change undergone before velars by the sound represented by -d caused the scribes to use a different symbol -dk to represent it. This is synchronically reasonable and Nishi’s (1999a:676) berating of Jones for not acknowledging Shafer’s contribution is only partially warranted. The complementary distribution of -d and -dk makes it curious how much the phonological value of the latter has been debated since it was correctly identified by Blagden (1914:138).61 The value posited here is further supported by Okell’s (1995:8-9) observation that Arakanese has merged -dkuf - with -pf -c and -dkif - with the secondary palatalised rhyme -Of -a to be discussed in 3.3.1.2.

3.2 Pure Initials

Following Hla Pe (1948:62, 1960:97), Old Burmese initials are distinguished purely around aspiration which Okell (1969:205-8) and Thurgood (1981:35-7) show often marks a transitivity distinction in verbs; cases of secondary developed voicing sandhi are discussed by Nishi (1998:255-9).

58 See the discussion of rdef;(r) / rd,f(r) mj²(m) woman under [#128] Person in Chapter 6; Thurgood’s proposal for a suffixal -ef -n in Written Burmese is rather the result of assimilation of the glide coda to the following nasal. 59 It may be noted that the nominalised form tcsdef / tcdef khn¹ weight has merged with tcsdef / tNcdef khrn¹ time in Written Burmese which nullifies Stewart & Dunn’s (1940-80:53) suggestion that time may be a specialised use and renders unnecessary Matisoff’s (1978a:35, 2003:277) allofamic variation. 60 Thurgood (1974:100) also notes -kef -wn to correlate poorly in Lolo-Burmese. Burling’s (1967:55) reconstruction of -Gef -wn as -un on the basis of Lolo-Burmese reflexes is supported by Nishida (1972:258) in spite of Nishida’s (1956:30) earlier observation that Arakanese rhymes -Gef -wn with -ef -n; Matisoff (1968:894) tentatively reconstructs a separate -un rhyme to account for -kef -wn. It is possible that Sino- Tibetan -wn merged with -wan as -Gef -wn in Old Burmese rather than giving -kef -wn, but further research is needed. 61 The confusion stems mostly from the loss of orthographic -w -0f in the Written Burmese form -dk of -dk0f. Most recently, Yanson (2006:113-4) chides Dempsey (2002:208-11) for interpreting the combination as or on the basis of comparative Mon usage; see also the discussion in Lehman (2008). Whatever the provenance of the digraph, Yanson appears to be erroneously conflating Dempsey’s opinion with that of Nishida (1955:22, 1972:259-60), Miller (1957:42) and Gong (1980:461) who interpret -dk0f as the unrounded vowel - regardless of the orthographic -w -0f, while Dempsey treats -dk0f, and its reduced Written Burmese form -dk as -w.

u- k- c- kh- i- - iS- h- p- (c-) < - q- (ch-) < h- (n- -) (n§- h-) w- t- x- th- e- n- ES- hn- y- p- z- ph- r- m rS- hm- ,- j- ,S- hj- &- r- &S- hr- v- l- vS- hl- 0- w- 0S- hw- o- s- ([- h-) (t- -)

Initials with slightly misleading orthography under the effects of medials -j- and -w-, discussed in 3.3.1, are enclosed in parentheses: n- - < nj-/j- and n§- h- < hnj-/hj-; p- c- < (j)- and q- ch- < h(j)-. The laryngeals are also incuded in parentheses: the rare initial [- h- is shown in 5.2.4 not to be from original Lolo-Burmese; initial t- - appears to be a vocalic place holder with a purely orthographic function. A few late changes in the pronunciation of initials, dated by Pe Maung Tin (1922:129-30) to have begun around the end of the 18th century, had no effect on the orthography: the appropriation of the original sibilant value of o s-, which was shifting to a new dental fricative articulation, by palatal p c- whose aspirated partner q ch- became a typologically rare aspirated sibilant; the merger of & r- with , j-.62

3.3 Medials

Benedict’s (1972a:37-8) tentative suggestion that the distribution of Tibeto-Burman medial -j- parallels medial -w-, in contrast with -r- and -l-, is supported in the discussion of Old Burmese rhymes in 3.1.4.

3.3.1 Medials -j- and -w-

us- kj- uG- kw- ji-, n-, i- (- <) j- iG- w- p- (c- <) j- pG- w- p- c- (< tj) wG- tw- n- - (< nj-) EG- nw- ys- pj- yG- pw- rs- mj- rG- mw- - - ,G- jw- ½ß- rj- ½G- rw- vs- lj- vG- lw- o- s- < sj- oG- sw-

62 The merger of all obstruent codas to a glottal stop and the reduction of all remaining nasal codas to nasalisation of the preceding vowel most likely occurred around this time; Pe Maung Tin (1922:130) believes it to have occurred slightly later, but Yanson (2006:119) suggests the middle of the 18th century.

Following the discussion in 3.1.4, the medials -j- and -w- are only attested orthographically before . Medial -jw- clusters, including ñG- w- < njw-/jw-, are omitted due to their secondarily derived or external origins.63 Orthographic fluctuations of ,S~[s- hj-, from which os- may plausibly be excluded according to the discussion in 3.3.1.4, and &S- hr-, from which M[- may be excluded following Yanson’s (1978, 1994:366-7) demonstration of Mon scriptural influence, make disambiguating Old Burmese hj- and hr- somewhat complex.64

3.3.1.1 c- < (j)-, tj-

Nishi’s (1974:1, 1999a:668-9) correlation of Inscriptional Burmese -jn and -jt with Written Burmese - and -c via a palatalizing medial -j- attests a second wave of palatalisation after the development of original Old Burmese - and -c from Sino- Tibetan -jen and -jet as discussed in 5.1. Nishi (1974:26, 1997:979-80;992) notes that secondarily palatalised nasal codas may be distinguished from the original palatal nasals by their distinctive modern nasal articulation and the Written Burmese orthographic convention of distinguishing them as -Of and -nf respectively.65 Consequently, Nishi (1974:16) is able to distinguish Old Burmese - and j-, concurrent with Matisoff’s (1969:157) Lolo-Burmese distinction, which have merged as p- c- by the time of the inscriptions. 66 In spite of a few cases of ws- tj- in Written Burmese, which Nishi (1974:19;42-3) treats as peripheral to the Old Burmese phonological system,67 the shift of tj- > c- occurred prior to Old Burmese.

3.3.1.2 - < j-, nj-

An account for Pe Maung Tin & Luce’s (1963:97) remarks on inscriptional fluctuations between n- - and i- - is made by Nishi’s (1974:18-20) identification of confusion between j- and - in words like nD / iD ¹ younger brother,68 in which medial -j- is

63 The most common cluster kjw- may derive from k- prefixation on lw- in cases like [#159] Stone and [#30] Buffalo in Chapter 6. Several loans from Mon attesting -jw- are identified by Hla Pe (1967a). Binomial compounding, discussed in the notes to 3.3.2, is another possible cause. 64 Internal evidence is sometimes forthcoming in cases like ,SOf hrn¹ put side by side whose unaspirated intransitive form &ef rn¹ side by side supports an original rhotic and a secondary palatalised coda -Of. Note also Pe Maung Tin’s (1933:33) and Yanson’s (2002b) discussion of &dS / [d h be, have whose rare initial h- has developed via the same epenthetic medial -j-, discussed in 3.3.1.2, to give orthographic &S hr- in Written Burmese. 65 Bradley’s (1985:194) attribution of -Of mainly to loanwords is incorrect, but Hla Pe’s (1960:92-3) observation of frequent interchange between -Of and -ef in Pali loanwords does support a coronal origin. 66 Matisoff’s (1988b:6) comparison of jynfh / y’nf pl full with ysOf / ysef pjn¹ plank may be rejcted on these grounds. 67 This rejects Benedict’s (1972a:17-8;52) comparisons of the old literary form eDwsm n¹tj¹ of eDwm n¹t¹ very red, which Bernot (1978-92:VII:56-7) shows to attest such a meaning only when preceded by eD n¹ red, with Mizo snI red, as discussed further in 2.4, and wsufwsuf tjktjk of wufwuf tktk completely with Mizo tk real. Sagart’s (1999b:35) comparison of Old Chinese ݬ lj younger brother with nD / iD ¹ younger brother 68 does not take into account the original velar initial in Old Burmese.

epenthetic after a velar initial before ,69 and n§Of / iSef hjn¹ ill-treat in which Nishi suggests the medial -j- that palatalised the coda has been omitted in the inscriptional form. Similar cases like n ~ nOfh / i ~ nEf jn night70 and n§if; / iSif hj² trumpet, support Yanson’s (1990:57-9, 2006:104-5) observation that orthographic j- did not occur in the inscriptions; he alternatively draws an interesting link with orthographic ji- r-.

In spite of Okell’s (1971:23) observation of a distributional difficulty whereby -j-, -r-, and -l- may occur after k-, p- and m- while only -r- may occur after -, Bradley (1979:147) follows Benedict (1972a:38;44) to reconstruct r-. Alternatively, Yanson (1990:57-9, 2006:104-5) suggests that the occasional Written Burmese variant ji- r- of n- - represents original j- as a result of the merger of the medials -j- and -r- and the prior existence of the orthographic combination r- in the Sanskrit/Pali loanword i&J / ji,f rj² hell. In fact, Yanson’s sporadic association of orthographic ji- r- may be taken back to the inscriptional level: Nishi (1974:19) reluctantly reconstructs Old Burmese r- on the basis of Nidrf m¹ calm, but the medial -r- may be better treated as representing epenthetic -j-. The treatment of -dk0f as -w in 3.1.4 affords a similar analysis of cases like NidK / ndK w¹ dark (in colour) which Benedict (1972a:44) notes but is unable to explain. As with tj- > c-, the shift of nj- > - is assumed to have happened prior to Old Burmese. Evidence may be found in cases like nhH m inferior whose ablaut variant edrfh nm inferior retains the original coronal due to medial -j- being lost in its merger with to give .

3.3.1.3 rj-

Yanson’s (2002a:166) rejection of Benedict’s (1972a:54) suggestion that inscriptional ½ß- rj- has unequivocally simplified to Written Burmese & r- is problematic: Hla Pe (1967a:75), supported by Peiros (1997:245), provides a Mon source for ,m / ½ßm rj¹ dry field whose Written Burmese initial ,- j- is noted by Nishi (1975:3, 1977:46-7) to be the sole exception; Yanson misreads Hla Pe to assume that the date cited refers to its earliest attestation in Mon when it actually refers to the time of the loan into Burmese. No inscriptional evidence has been found for hrj- which appears to have simplified to hr- prior to Old Burmese.

69 This represents a development of Okell’s (1971:8-10) resolution of Pe Maung Tin’s (1933:32) conundrum as to why k- initialled words like aus; / ud,f kj² parrot attest no inscriptional medial -j-. 70 Benedict (1972a:100;188) appears unaware of the original initial - or coda -n, attested in cases like IB (170.46) and LK (221) respectively, in his comparison of Mizo/Zahau zanIII/anIII night via prefixal n- which would not have supported the shift of -ef -n to -Of - via medial -j- due to the merger of nj- with - prior to Old Burmese; see Luce (1981:3) and Thurgood (1981:10). Sagart’s (1999b:35) comparison of Old Chinese ࡙ la(k)-s night suffers from the same difficulties as younger brother discussed above.

3.3.1.4 s- < sj-

Original sj- has merged with s- by the time of Old Burmese. It seems only to be maintained in loanwords like &Srf; / osrf sjm² Shan, discussed in Luce (1959b:68-9), although Nishi (1999a:675) suggests it may simply represent a variant inscriptional form os- of ,S~[s- hj- and &S- hr-.

3.3.2 Medials -l- and -r-

Mu- kr- us- / u’- kl- jy- pr- jy- / y ’- pl- jr- mr- jr- / r ’- ml-

Disregarding orthographic ji- r- and M[- hr-, discussed in 3.3.1, the medials -l- and -r- are restricted to k- and p-/m- as a result of the retention of Sino-Tibetan prefixes before liquid initials.71 The shift of inscriptional -l- to Written Burmese -j- and -r- after k- and p-/m- respectively is noted by Pe Maung Tin (1933:31).72

3.4 Tonality

I – -¹ II -; / (-[f) -² III -Y / -f -

The inscriptions generally, albeit inconsistently, mark TC-III as -f - which is reduced to -Y in Written Burmese. The distinction between TC-I and TC-II is unmarked except in one inscription, discussed by Pe Maung Tin & Luce (1960:239-50) and Luce (1969-70:I.111- 3), where TC-II is often marked with -[f -h which appears to correspond to the later Written Burmese use of Sanskrit visarga -; which also represents -h. Egerod (1971:168- 9), Haudricourt (1975:342) and Pulleyblank (1978:175) note a similarity with the glotallic - and breathy -h (< -s) phonations of Middle Chinese TC-II and TC-III, discussed in 4.3, but Weidert (1987:83) notes this to imply a flip-flop whereby Old Burmese TC-II and TC-III appear to correspond to Old Chinese TC-III and TC-II respectively.

71 See Thurgood (1977:151-4) for a discussion of the velar prefix; see the discussion in 5.2 for prefixal m-, and Benedict (1972a:111) for the difficulty in distinguishing bilabial nasal and obstruent prefixes. Another source is binomial compounding in cases like ajrmuf / ar’muf mlwk north which Luce (1973:85, 1978:580) and Ohno (1976:87) show to be a compound of jrpf / r’pf mlc river and atmuf / Mouf wk under. 72 See Okell (1971:15-20) and Nishi (1977:44-7) for a discussion of some exceptional cases. Of particular notes is csOf / c’Of khl¹ ~ csef khjn¹ sour, as evinced in cases like IB (164.17) and WK (2.4a), whose secondary palatal coda yet concomitant evidence for an original medial -l- resolves Matisoff’s (1988a:459) query as to why his Lolo-Burmese reconstruction -kji¹ does not compare with his Lahu data that suggests -kjan¹.

Pe Maung Tin & Luce’s (1960:243) and Sawada’s (2003:330) observation that -[f -h is generally only used to mark TC-II in conjunction with short vowel symbols, which are usually reserved for glottalic TC-III in open syllables, is reminiscent of Shorto’s (1976:1060) comment that the vowel length distinction in Mon inscriptions was neutralised before -h and -. In spite of his comcomitant suggestion that it could have represented breathiness, Sawada’s (2003:339;346) suggestion that -[f -h may not have represented a separate tonal category tends toward the fact that the transcription of short vowels with -[f -h was simply a borrowed transcriptional convention from Mon, to parallel short vowels with glottal -f -, that was devoid of phonological significance. Unlike the development of -f to -Y, the orthographic form of -[f -h is unrelated to -; and, regardless of Bradley’s (1982:122) discussion of whether its usage represents a later breathy phonation, an original breathy phonation cannot be transferred back to Old Burmese as Lehman (1992a:236;240) and Nishi (1997:993) attempt. With Old Burmese evidence not precluding the derivation of TC-II from Sino-Tibetan - in 5.3, an account still needs to be made for TC-III: Pulleyblank’s (1986b:78-80) response to Sagart’s (1986:90, 1988:84) evidence for creaky phonation in some Chinese languages suggests a development of -s > -h > -, as espoused by Sagart (1999b:132-3), which concurs with the Burmese development. Matisoff’s (1999:11;18) observation that the preponderance of Old Chinese words in TC-I contrasts with a roughly equal frequency in Lolo-Burmese TC- I and TC-II is addressed in 5.1.2.2 where Matisoff’s (1982:45) suggestion that words with Tibeto-Burman final -s may have merged with Lolo-Burmese TC-II is discussed.

Alternatively, Thurgood (1977:166-8, 1981), developing Matisoff’s (1972a:16-22) 73 proposals for a Lolo-Burmese glottalising s- prefix, suggests that Burmese TC-III may have developed from a prefixal s-. Matisoff (1982:45) and Benedict (1983:16) are supportive, but Jones (1986:136) prefers the conservative assumption that it derived from a glottal suffix which may now be treated as derived from -s. Weidert (1987:156) crticises Thurgood’s (1977:168, 1981:49) proposal that this must have occurred independently from aspiration via prefixal s- which is the usual Burmese reflex for glottalised initials elsewhere in Lolo-Burmese. Benedict’s (1983:15-16) associated attempt to distinguish between root clusters beginning with s- that gave aspiration and root initials with s- prefixes that gave TC-III is unable to account for Burmese verbal forms with both aspiration and TC-III. In fact, Thurgood (1981:43;49-50;56) only proposes s- prefixation for certain TC-III verbs with TC-I provenances and notes that a separate account, which he accepts could theoretically derive from -s, is required elsewhere; evidence for TC-II verbs with TC-III counterparts are equally mitigating. Nevertheless, Thurgood’s association of causation with Old Burmese TC-III and initial aspiration nicely parallels Sun’s (1999:194-5) association of prefixal s- and suffixal -s with causation in Tibeto-Burman. While its prefixal and suffixal functions tend to coalesce, the discussion of Northern Chin in 2.1.5 shows the former solely to affect transitivity while the latter more broadly to affect valency in what Henderson (1965:83) terms cauativity paradigms. Thurgood’s (1981:67-9) further association of verbal

73 Thurgood (1977:162-8) merges Matisoff’s s- and - prefixes, which Matisoff (1972a:25) maintains as distinct only before nasal initials, on the basis that it pertains to a few peculiarities at the Loloish level that do not stem from Lolo-Burmese.

nominalisation with TC-III compares well with the discussions of Northern Chin and Old Chinese in 2.2 and 4.3 and respectively.

Chapter 4 Old Chinese

4.1 Vocalism

4.1.1 Li’s Four Vowel i/u//a System

Yin Yang Ru I ॿ -m, -im ᒲ -p, -ip II ᓫ -am, -iam జ -ap, -iap III პ -d, -id ֮ -n, -in ๬ -t, -it IV ዚ -ar, -uar, -iar ց -an, -uan, -ian ִ -at, -uat, -iat V ౟ -id ట -in ᔆ -it VI ֭ -ig ౙ -i ᙔ -ik VII հ -g, -ig ፣ -, -i ៭ -k, -ik VIII ູ -ag-, iag ၺ -a, -ia ᥵ -ak, -iak w ੅ʳ-kw-, ikw- מ IX ৩ -gw, -igw X ঀ -ug ࣟ -u ৢ -uk XI ᔺ -agw, -iagw ᢐ -akw, -iakw

Li’s (1974) four vowel system is premised upon the existence of three diphthongs i, ia and ua. While the roundness of ua explains its lack before bilabial codas and velar codas which would presumably have merged with the labiovelar series, its lack of a counterpart u before coronals is curious. Li (1974:260;264) suggests u results from a phonological shift of between a coronal initial and coda but can find no such conditioning environment for a which forces him to reconstruct ua as a temporary measure. Li (1974:264) follows Pulleyblank (1963:208-9) by rejecting Yakhontov’s (1970) proposal, later adopted by Baxter (1992:236-40) below, that ua may represent vowel breaking of a rounded vowel o in a similar manner to u for u. Li’s pure vowels also suffer from distibutional difficulties with i only occuring before dentals or velars and u only before velars. Li (1974:250;261) accounts for the distributional difficulty between -d and -r by assuming that -r developed as -ar into Middle Chinese while a possible -ad would have been very close to -ar in any case. Li’s proposals for -r are actually hitting on a more fundamental /a ablaut to be discussed below.

4.1.2 Pulleyblank’s Two Vowel /a System

Developing ideas in Pulleyblank (1963:207-14), Pulleyblank (1977-8) reconstructs a series of palatal -j/-c/-, labiovelar -w/-kw/-w, and uvular -/-q codas to reduce Li’s unbalanced four vowel system to a balanced two vowel /a system which is bolstered by solid evidence for a low a vowel in rows VI and X.

Yin Yang Ru I ॿ -m ᒲ -p II ᓫ -am జ -ap III პ -l ֮ -n ๬ -t IV ዚ -al ց -an ִ -at V ౟ -j ట - ᔆ -c VI ֭ -aj ౙ -a ᙔ -ac VII հ - ፣ - ៭ -k VIII ູ -a ၺ -a ᥵ -ak w ੅ -kw- מ IX ৩ -w X ঀ -aw ࣟ -aw ৢ -akw XI ᔺ -a ᢐ -aq

Pulleyblank’s convincing reductionism is mitigated by his handling of Li’s diphthongs: Pulleyblank (1977-8:200-2) accounts for Li’s ua via an original -w coda that metatheisized with the -a- vowel via the addition of dental suffixes -l, -n and -t; Pulleyblank (1977-8:184) accounts for Li’s i and ia via palatal features originally associated with initials. It seems unlikely that either proposal could account for all the relevant reflexes. Pulleyblank’s (1962:216-221, 1973b:371) replacement of Li’s voiced obstruents with glides follows a proposal by Haudricourt (1954b:364) to account for contacts between Ru and Yin rhymes as a result of suffixal -s on final obstruents.74 Pulleyblank (1977-8:185-6) follows Schuessler (1974a) in reconstructing final -l which he assumes to have merged with -j very early on.

4.1.3 Baxter’s Six Vowel i/u/e/o//a System

The precursor to Bodman’s (1980) and Baxter’s (1980) six vowel system was essentially that of Pulleyblank (1962:141-2). In spite of Pulleyblank’s (1963:207-8) later abandonment of the proposal, Bodman (1980:47) and Baxter (1980:8-9) correlate their vowel-breaking with Li’s system accordingly: e > ia; o > ua; i > i. The occasional correlation of Bodman’s i with Li’s is explained by Baxter’s (1992:251-5) modification of Baxter (1980:9-10) to note that Li’s i between coronals may be treated as due to Li’s being restricted to velar initials before coronal codas such that Li’s between coronals, which Li believed to develop into u, may be treated as original u. The difficulty with Bodman’s and Baxter’s proposal is that many new rhyme categories need to be established in order to obtain an equal distribution of vowels before codas. Rather than viewing these older rhymes as unattested in the Shijing dialect, Baxter (1992:235- 90;367-564) proposes statistical evidence to suggest several new rhyming categories in the Shijing that are unrecognized in Li’s and Pulleyblank’s systems where the main vowel in each row remains constant.

74 Pulleyblank (1977-8:186-7) vacillates over the status of - which he suggests to have very little frication; Pulleyblank (1995c:297-8) modifies it to -# and treats it as a case of epenthesis used to make open syllables well-formed.

Yin Yang Ru I ॿ -m, -um, -im ᒲ -p, -up, -ip II ᓫ -am, -om, -em జ -ap, -op, -ep III პ -j, -uj ֮ -n, -un ๬ -t, -ut IV ዚ -aj, oj ց -an, -on, -en ִ -at, -ot, -et V ౟ -ij ట -in, (-i) ᔆ -it, (-ik) VI ֭ -e ౙ -e ᙔ -ek VII հ - ፣ - ៭ -k VIII ູ -a ၺ -a ᥵ -ak u ੅ -uk, -iwk- מ IX ৩ -u, -iw X ঀ -o ࣟ -o ৢ -ok XI ᔺ -aw, -ew ᢐ -awk, -ewk

Baxter’s (1992:294;414) treatment of Pulleyblank’s -l as -j struggles to account for occasional rhyming contacts with -n. Schuessler’s (1974a:83) hypothesis that an original -r may have merged with -l is developed in Starostin’s (1989:338-41) suggestion, adopted by Baxter (1995), that -r merged with -n and -j dialectally. However, Baxter’s (2005:4-21) and Baxter & Sagart’s (2008:25-7;48-51) treatment of the -j reflex as a restricted dialect feature that was occasionally preserved mitigates its usefulness as a complete account for Shijing rhyme correspondences which Pulleyblank’s -l better serves. Baxter’s (1992:257) broadening of the more restricted proposals in Pulleyblank (1991a:66) to suggest a complete merger of -i/k with -in/t is well-founded, but difficulties with his further association of -i/k with -e/k will be discussed in 4.2 below. Baxter’s (1992:563) tentative suggestion that -i may have merged with -ij is unnecessary according to the discussion in 3.1.3; an explanation for the distributional lack of -ej will be found below.

4.1.4 A Two Vowel /a System75

Yin Yang Ru I ॿ -m, -jm ᒲ -p, -jp II ᓫ -am, -jam జ -ap, -jap III პ -j, -wj ֮ -n, -wn ๬ -t, -wt IV ዚ -aj, -waj ց -an, -wan, -jan ִ -at, -wat, -jat V ౟ -j ట - (< -jn/) ᔆʳ-c (< -jt/k) VI ֭ -ja ౙ -ja ᙔ -jak VII հ - ፣ - ៭ -k (~ -q) VIII ູ -a ၺ -a ᥵ -ak ʳ-w ੅ -wk, -jqמ IX ৩ -w (~ -w), -jw X ঀ -wa ࣟ -wa ৢ -wak XI ᔺ -aw, -jaw ᢐ -aq, -jaq

75 This is originally presented in Button (2010:7) without detailed discussion.

Pulleyblank’s (1977-8:188, 1979:29) suggestion that the coda of -a and -ac were retracted to velar articulations -j and -jk in Middle Chinese is unlikely. Pulleyblank’s (1991a:47) reinterpretation of Old Chinese - and -c as -j and -kj is phonologically more plausible in terms of Middle Chinese, but his concomitant reanalysis of -q as -kw, with his original labiovelars being reinterpreted as labiopalatovelars, results in an unlikely proliferation of velar codas. Nonetheless, Pulleyblank’s recognition of the ability of velar codas to maintain palatal and labial articulations is crucial in elucidating the separation of the rhyme categories. A reanalysis of Pulleyblank’s -a/c as -ja/k, to contrast with -/c from an original -j/k prior to the Shijing, allows a reanalysis of -aw/kw and -w/kw as -wa/k and -w/k. Their Middle Chinese reflexes with -w/k similarly support the reassignation of the glide to the coda as in the case of -j/k above. Applying the same logic to the other codas, but disregarding -jn/t which has merged with -j/k as -/c, accounts for all the variations noted by Li and Baxter. The inability of these codas to support the glides is manifested by their Middle Chinese reflexes, where combinations like -jm and -wn are unattested, and accounts for the convergence of rhyming categories regardless of the medial. The medials -j- and -w- are not assumed to be distinctive in the Shijing before codas with palatal and labial features respectively; the latter includes bilabials, contra Baxter (1992:356), and uvulars to be discussed below.

Pulleyblank reconstructs -a for -aw to correspond with -aq in its Ru counterpart. Pulleyblank’s (1977-8:197-200) uvular series accounts better for the lack of a typologically unusual uvular nasal Yang rhyme than Li’s and Baxter’s labiovelar series that would suggest -w or -w in their respective transcriptions. Unlike -aq whose Middle Chinese reflexes vary in labiality such that Li and Baxter must posit sporadic delabialisation,76 the reflexes of -a are always rounded such that Pulleyblank suggests a shift of -a > -a > -aw. Treating this as original -aw simplifies the reconstruction and, in terms of the merger of Ru with Yin as a result of suffixal -s, a shift of -q-s to -w, possibly via - > -, parallels the shift of -t-s to -j. The merger of the lost row XII with row IX suggests a possible account for why the Early Middle Chinese reflex -jk of -jq, representing -ikw and -iwk in Li’s and Baxter’s respective systems, is unrounded. The merger of -q with -k is addressed in 5.1.2.3, while the necessity to distinguish Sino- Tibetan -w from its merger with -w in Old Chinese is made apparent in 5.1.1.

Although Baxter’s -j coda is adopted for Pulleyblank’s -l, this represents a lack of distinction between -l and -j in the Shijing that eventually settled as -j, rather than an unequivocal -j coda which had completely merged with an obsolete -l as Baxter (1994b:156) concedes may have happened. Following Pulleyblank (1993a:362-3), and the discussion in 5.1.2.1, Sino-Tibetan -r is assumed to have shifted to -n or dialectally to -l > -j.

76 An association of labialisation with back articulations may be found in the Cockney English change of velarised/pharyngealised - into -w.

4.2 The /a Ablaut

Although the statistical evidence marshalled by Baxter (1992) in support of i, u, e, o is strong, the two vowel system above accounts for all of Baxter’s considerations while heeding Pulleyblank’s (1993a:371) suggestion that exceptional cases result from them ulitmately being allophones of what are treated here as underlying j, w, ja, wa. Furthermore, by taking its structural premise from Pulleyblank (1963, 1977-8), this system feeds cleanly into Pulleyblank’s (1984a, 1991b) meticulous reconstruction of Middle Chinese to form a complete system; Baxter’s (1992:27-32) Middle Chinese notation, in which o is allowed to stand for an unrounded vowel, provides no such testing ground for Old Chinese.

Morphological evidence for a vocalic ablaut between /a neatly accounts for haphazard alternations in Baxter’s system. In addition to the brief observations in Baxter (1992:348), Li’s (1974:274) sporadic merger of -in/t and -i/k corresponds with Baxter’s (1992:257) -in/t and -e/k which leads to a conflict with Baxter’s complete merger of -in/t with -i/k. The latter is represented as -jn/t and -j/k here while the former as -j/k and -ja/k in support of Pulleyblank’s (1982a) proposed /a ablaut. As Pulleyblank (1963:220-1, 1965a:238-9, 1989:8-14, 1994b:163, 2000:33-5) endeavours to show elsewhere, this ablaut extends across the lexicon. While the original morphological function, for which Pulleyblank proposes an extrovert/introvert distinction, requires further research, the phonological implication is apparent. Pulleyblank’s (1965a) further speculation that the ablaut may pertain to Sino-Tibetan as a whole is, albeit on somewhat different grounds,77 upheld in 5.1.

4.3 Tonality

I – II - III -s

78 The Old Chinese system with TC-I and TC-II as basic and TC-III as derived, corresponds to the Northern Chin and Old Burmese evidence discussed in 2.1.3 and 3.4 respectively.

The source of TC-II in a glottal stop is first suggested by Pulleyblank (1962:225), via analogy with Haudricourt’s (1954a:80-1) proposal for Vietnamese, and developed in detail by Mei (1970:88-97). The idea that TC-II may sometimes have been suffixal in origin like -s for TC-III is discussed in Sagart (1999b:133-4). The origin of TC-III in suffixal -s is proposed by Haudricourt (1954a:70-78, 1954b:346). Downer (1959) distinguishes several categories for TC-III as a derivational suffix in Classical Chinese, but his inability to isolate a specific grammatical function leads him to propose that any

77 Pulleyblank’s proposal that Tibetan verbal alternations represent this primitive ablaut is rejected by Róna-Tas (1985:178-179). 78 The late development of the Mandarin Chinese TC-IB category from different manner features of initials is discussed in Pulleyblank (1978:192).

regularity may be fortuitous with derived forms essentially being created on a need-by- need basis. Mei (1980:434-9) reduces Downer’s categories to three predominant ones in which he suggests the last may be attributed to later analogical developments: verbs to nouns; endoactive verbs to exoactive verbs; nouns to verbs.

Schuessler (1985), on the basis of pre-classical evidence from Early Zhou Chinese, questions Mei’s separation of Old Chinese into distinct layers to suggest that Downer’s categories obscure an underlying unilateral inversion of attention flow. The desirability of Schuessler’s proposal is that it attributes a single function to the -s suffix believed to have triggered the derivations; the difficulty lies in Schuessler’s (1985:354) counterintuitive treatment of -s as an intransitiviser which somehow triggers causativsation. The main obstacle to conciliation with Mei’s proposals, is Schuessler’s identification of verbal derivations from nouns in Early-Zhou Chinese that runs counter to Mei’s proposal for analogical development post Classical Chinese.

The force of Schuessler’s argumentation is strong enough that Mei (1989:47-8) is persuaded. Yet, whatever the significance of analogy in TC-III derivations may have been, I several examples in Northern Chin, like Tedim pol group only retaining its FORM-II derivation polIII for the verb associate such that it superficially appears to derive from the noun, show that the perceived association between a noun and a derived verb may rather reflect the loss of an original underived verb rather than any direct correlation between the two. This then allows TC-III as a nominaliser and transitiviser/causativiser of verbs in Old Chinese to correspond with its similar functions in Northern Chin and Old Burmese.

4.4 The TYPE-A and TYPE-B Syllable Distinction

Following Pulleyblank’s (1977-8:183) terminiology, Old Chinese syllables are bifurcated into TYPE-A and TYPE-B. Following Pulleyblank’s (1962:98-100) tentative suggestion of long vowels as the source of TYPE-B, Pulleyblank (1973a:118-20, 1994a:91-3, 2001:27;32) suggests a prosodic accent which he associates with syllabic weight in Sizang Chin, as discussed in 1.1. Conversely, Starostin (1989:328-9;516-7) suggests there to be a significant correlation between short surface vowel length in Mizo and TYPE-B.

As essentially the inverse of each other, it is unlikely that either Pulleyblank’s or Starostin’s proposal is valid: Pulleyblank’s (2001:34) discussion of the phonological difficulties with Starostin’s proposal may be extended to include the observation in 1.1 that Northern Chin vowel length is a surface phenomenon in any case; Pulleyblank’s proposal disregards Weidert’s (1975:4-8) observation, discussed in 1.3.2, of a concomitant realisation of TC-IIB with surface vowel length before obstruent codas in Mizo which would then violate Norman’s (1994:402-3) observation that TYPE-B syllables are unmarked in Old Chinese. Although Sagart (2006a:213) remains cautiously optimistic about Starostin’s proposal, Matisoff’s (2007:440) rejection of any correlation concurs with comparative evidence in chapters 5 and 6. Notably, Sagart & Baxter (2009:224-6) prefer to adopt Norman’s (1994) proposal, rejected by Pulleyblank (1996), that initial pharyngealisation blocked palatalisation in TYPE-A syllables. In the reconstructions here,

the diacritic is posited before TYPE-A syllables with no phonological implication intended.

4.5 Initials

4.5.1 Pure Initials

k- kh- g- - h- kw- kwh- gw- w- hw- - h- - t- th- d- n- hn- p- ph- b- m- hm- r- hr- l- hl- w- hw- s- -

The system adopted here essentially follows that of Sagart (1999b:25-42) and Baxter & Sagart (2008) without their uvular hypothesis. 79 Sagart & Baxter’s (2009) detailed proposal for uvulars tacitly expounds upon ideas briefly espoused, and later abandoned, by Pulleyblank (1977-8:198-9, 1982b). The unlikelihood of original uvular initials in Sino-Tibetan is discussed in 5.2.4.

4.5.2 Prefixation

Although Pulleyblank’s (1973a:114-6) proposal for an intransitivising voicing prefix is well-founded, his phonological treatment of this prefix is criticised by Beckwith (1996) and Sagart (1999b:77). Sagart’s (1999b:77, 2003, 2006b) proposal for prenasalisation, speculatively from an original m-, is better supported: Sagart (2006b:66) effectively reconciles the conundrum in Benedict (1972a:124-5) whereby Lolo-Burmese does not have intransitive voicing due to it already having prenasalised initials as reconstructed by Matisoff (1972a:14). However, an account for Sagart’s (1999b:63-73) observation that prefixal s- generally gives distinct sibilant reflexes in Old Chinese rather than initial aspiration as in Old Burmese and Northern Chin still needs to be made. To facilitate comparisons with Old Burmese and Northern Chin, distinctive voicing is simply noted as part of the initial itself (e.g. m-t- and d- are both treated as d-) in the Old Chinese reconstructions presented here.

Other morphological prefixes convincingly identified by Sagart (2001, 2005b) are k- and m- with the latter being distinct from the source of intransitive prenasalisation.80 Sagart’s (1999b:124-130) differentiation of monosyllabic and iambisyllabic prefixes concurs with

79 See the original presentation in Button (2010:7) without detailed discussion. Sagart’s (1999b:28) initial w- is treated as w- which is functionally - followed by medial -w-, but see the discussion in 5.2.4 80 Sagart’s (1997) proposal for prefixal t- identifies some interesting correspondences but it remains to be seen whether they may be subsumed under such a prefix.

similar proposals for Tibeto-Burman by Matisoff (1972a:25-6), but requires further research.81

Pulleyblank’s (1965c:205) reconstruction of medial -r- provides a neat account for certain Middle Chinese reflexes. Accounting for Coblin’s (1986:13) and Benedict’s (1987a:30-1, 1988b:18) observations of a more restricted distribution in Tibeto-Burman is problematic: Pulleyblank (1973a:118), supported by Handel (2002), suggests it may sometimes reflect an original prefixal -r- that has been dropped; Baxter (1994a:26) suggests an original morphological function may have proliferated via analogy and may correspond to other Tibeto-Burman phonemes as well as -r-.

81 Possibly of relevance are Northern Chin forms like (k)ra¹ white and (k)ral¹ stripe.

Chapter 5 Sino-Tibetan / Tibeto-Burman

The term Tibeto-Burman is noted by Matisoff (1991b:472) to have been applied in the 1850s to a group of related languages, including Northern Chin, with the name stemming from the value attached to the extensive, and still extant, literary traditions of Tibetan and Burmese. The term Sino-Tibetan appears to stem from an original coinage by Przyluski (1924) which is first used in English by Kroeber in his editorial forward to Shafer (1938); this precipitated a discussion between Maspero (1938:206) and Shafer (1940:302) concerning its validity. The term Sino-Tibetan is used here in accordance with the generally accepted notion of a genetic relationship between the Sinitic and Tibeto- Burman languages; 82 no position is adopted here regarding the various approaches towards the exact nature of this association.

5.1 Rhymes

ST NC OB OC - -a - - -a -a - -a -j -i -j -j -ja -e, -a -j -ja -w -w -w -w -wa -o, -a -w -wa

-k -k/-ak -k -k -ak -k/-ak -k -ak -jk -k/-ik -c -c -jak -k/-ek, -ak -jk -jak -wk -k/-uk -wk -wk -wak -k/-ok -wk -wak

- -/-a - - -a -/-a - -a -j -/-i - - -ja -/-e, -a -j -ja -w -/-u -w -w -wa -/-o -w -wa

-t -t/-at -t -t -at -t/-at -t -at -jt -t/-it -c -c -jat -t/et, -at -jt -jat

82 See Miller (1988) and Beckwith (2002a) for dissenting views.

-wt -t/-ut -wt -wt -wat -t/-ot, -at -wt -wat

-n -n/-an -n -n -an -n/-an -n -an -jn -n/-in - - -jan -n/en, -an -jn -jan -wn -n/-un -wn -wn -wan -n/on, -an -wn -wan

-p -p/-ap -p -p -ap -p/-ap -p -ap -jp -p/-ip -p -jp -jap -p/-ep, -ap -jp -jap -wp -p/-up -wp -p -wap -p/-op, -ap -wp -ap

-m -m/-am -m -m -am -m/-am -m -am -jm -m/-im -m -jm -jam -m/-em, -am -jm -jam -wm -m/-um -wm -m -wam -m/-om, -am -wm -am

-j -j - -j -aj -j/-aj -j -aj -wj -j/-uj -wj -wj -waj -j/-oj, -aj -wj -waj

-l -l/-al -j -j -al -l/-al -j -aj -jl -l/il -j -j -jal -l/-el, -al -j -aj

-wl -l/-ul -wj -wj

-wal -l/-ol, -al -wj -waj

-r -r/-ar - -n -ar -r/-ar - -an -jr -r/-ir - - -jar -r/-er, -ar -j -jan -wr -r/-ur -w -wn

-war -r/-or, -ar -w -wan

-w -u -w -w -aw -aw -w -aw

-jw -iw -w -w -jaw -ew -jw -jaw

-s -s/-as -²/ -s -as -s/-as -²/ -as -js -s/-is -²/ -js -jas -s/-es -j²/ -jas -ws -s/-us -w²/ -ws -was -s/-os -w²/ -was

-q -k/-ak -k -k -aq -k/-ak -k -aq -jq -k/-ik -c -jq -jaq -k/-ek, -ak -jk -jaq

5.1.1 Open Rhymes & Glide Codas

5.1.1.1 Shafer’s ‘Graded’ i/u/e/o//a System

i u ~ ui e ~ ei o ai au a

Shafer’s (1940, 1941, 1966-7:57-73) vowel system is tentatively premised on vowel gradation between i ~ e/ei ~ai and u/ui ~ o ~ au in which diphthongs are limited to open syllables. Shafer’s (1940:332) speculative hankering for an original i/u/a system, in which Sino-Tibetan has lowered to Tibeto-Burman a,83 appears further influenced by the restricted occurrence of medial -w- before -i and -a, with phonotactic constraints preventing a parallel case before -u.

Nishida (1968:17-9), Miller (1968:404-5) and Benedict (1972a:69) criticize Shafer’s proposals for vowel gradation which represent an all-encompassing attempt to rein in unwieldly data. Furthermore, Shafer’s over-reliance on Written Burmese orthographic evidence results in the curious combination -ui and the restriction of -wi to open syllables as opposed to wa in open and closed syllables; Shafer (1940:313) seems to attribute Written Burmese ja in open and closed syllables to gradation.

83 See Shafer (1941:31) from which only the Old Chinese evidence is relevant due to Tai-Kadai being removed from Tibeto-Burman by Benedict (1942:587-91).

5.1.1.2 Benedict’s ‘Open’ i/u/e/o//a System

(i), j (u), w (e), ej (o), ow aj aw a

In spite of Benedict’s (1972a:69) explicit rejection of Shafer’s vowel gradation, Egerod (1973) and Miller (1974) note that Benedict’s (1972a:57-9) system, replete with extra distinctions, struggles to achieve any completely convincing regularity. Excluding Benedict’s diphthongs -ew and -oj, which will be discussed separately below due to their exploitation of the blurring between open and closed syllables in Benedict’s counterintuitive treatment of Shafer’s diphthongs as open syllables closed with -j and -w, the above layout of Benedict’s phonemes demonstrates the pervasive influence of Shafer’s system.84 Benedict (1972a:58;65) implicitly supports his reanalysis of Shafer’s diphthongs via a length distinction of -aj and -aw from -aj and -aw to account for a supposed merger of -aj and -aw with -ej and -ow in Northern Chin. Benedict’s separate patterning of -aj/-aw from -j/-w and -ej/-ow retains the association of the latter two pairs with their pure vowel counterparts -i/-u and -e/-o, included by Benedict in parentheses due to their rarity, that Matisoff (2003:160) notes could be viewed as a typologically curious vowel length distinction in open syllables.

Ironically, Benedict’s (1973b:11, 1977:2;8-9, 1988b:11) attempt to regularise his system by allowing a length distinction in all vowels closed with glides to parallel the situation before obstruent and nasal codas, removes any regularity in the system by violating the very ground upon which such syllables could be treated as open if representative of a length distinction. The phonological curiousness of aside, while Shafer’s -e/-ei and -u/-ui pairs may be distinguished via closed and open syllable types, an account for Benedict’s corresponding -e/-ej and -u/-w, further augmented by his new distinctions of -i/-j and -o/-ow, is difficult to make: Benedict’s (1973b:7;13, 1977:3) suggestion that -j and -w had essentially replaced original -i and -u by the time of Sino-Tibetan minimises the Old Burmese distinction upon which it is based; 85 Benedict’s (1972a:58-9) association of -e and -o with Northern Chin -a and -a concurs well with the discussion in 1.1.1 and leads Benedict (1973b:7;13) to hanker for the same original i/u/()/a system as Shafer, but Benedict is not explicit regarding -ej and -ow whose evolution is made problematic by the lack of the Northern Chin diphthongs -aj and -aw as discussed in 1.1.2.3. Although a secondary evolution for Benedict’s rare diphthongs -ew and -oj, not included above for simplicity, is tenable, lacking from the system are -iw and -uj: Nishi (1999a:678) tentatively suggests that the latter may be a better reconstruction for Benedict’s -wj which, paralleling Shafer’s -wi, is limited to open syllables, but the

84 Benedict’s (1972a:187) discussion of Old Chinese â, which he follows Shafer (1941:29) to note is indistinguishable from Tibeto-Burman a, represents an artefact of Karglren’s (1957) system that may be safely conflated with -a. 85 See the discussion in 3.1. Benedict’s -u/-w actually merged in Old Chinese prior to the time of the Shijing.

phonological difficulties this poses are discussed in 3.1.3; Matisoff (1992:170-3) suggests that the latter may reflect the correlate -wi of -wj, but Matisoff falls victim to the same overly literal interpretation of Written Burmese -dk, discussed in 3.1.3, which is correctly analysed by Benedict (1972a:60;69) in his rejection of Shafer’s diphthong -ui.

5.1.1.3 A Vertical /a System

j w j w ja wa aj aw a

Benedict’s dipthongs may be unequivocally analysed as closed rhymes with a -j or -w coda that pattern as all other closed syllables in the vertical vowel system. By treating Shafer’s dipthongs with -i and -u as -j and -w, Benedict draws tantalizingly close to achieving a vertical /a system which may be achieved by some reanalysis:86 Benedict (1972a:61-2) contrasts the pure vowels -i/-u with -j/-w, treated here as -j/-w and -j/-w respectively, to account for Old Burmese -/-w as opposed to -j/w, yet Benedict’s -i and -u are actually the sources of Northern Chin -j and -w thereby concomitantly removing the need for Benedict’s -ej and -ow;87 Benedict’s (1972a:58-9) -e and -o may be removed due to his general identification of them with -ia and -wa, treated here as -ja and -wa respetively, and the lack of supporting evidence for the handful of cases where he retains pure vowels. It is perhaps not insiginifcant that Benedict (1972a:69-70) retains the possibility of Pulleyblank’s (1965) proposals for a Sino-Tibetan /a ablaut as an account for Shafer’s vowel gradation. 88 Furthermore, Matisoff (2003:159) compares Hockett’s (1947:266-7) two vowel system for Mandarin Chinese that Pulleyblank (1984a:46-57, 1984b) uses to justify his proposal for a basic /a system underlying Old Chinese.

5.1.2 Other Closed Rhymes

Benedict’s (1972a:76;79-80, 1977:2) distinction of i from i, before velars and coronals, and u from u, before -k, to account for Old Burmese reflexes is dismissed in 3.1.2. With Benedict’s tacit implication of distinctive vowel length in open syllables and explicit proposal for distinctive vowel length before glides being rejected in 5.1.1.2, Benedict’s (1973b:7-10, 1977:2;13-21) extension of distinctive length to all closed rhymes is

86 It is notable that Benedict maintains his anomalous -wj without adoping Nishi’s suggestion of -uj as discussed in 3.1.3. 87 Benedict’s (1972a:16;91;61-2) association of his -i and -u with Mizo -i and -u is untenable: an association of eD n¹ red with Mizo hniIIB gums is semantically unlikely; the onomatopoeic association between wl tw¹ hammer and Mizo tuIII- hammer is bolstered by the Mizo verbal inflection tk carve being compared by Benedict (1972a:82) with awmuf twk fillip with which Shorto (2006:143) proposes a MK association via onomatopoeia. 88 See the discussion in 5.4.2.

unlikely. Excluding cases of palatalisation via medial -j- of -/n and -k/t to - and -c respectively in Old Burmese and Old Chinese, reflexes which are divergent from their Sino-Tibetan source will be discussed below.

5.1.2.1 Liquid -r and -l

Benedict (1940:114-27) and Shafer (1944:137-41) give lengthy treatments to the codas -r and -l and their confusion with -n but fail to elucidate them convincingly. Erreoneous comparisons and loanwords aside, the evidence here suggests the following:89 lateral -l is generally retained in Northern Chin and shifts to -j in Old Burmese and Old Chinese, yet Luce (1962:55;noteB) notes a dialect of Thado where it vacilates with -j and sporadic evidence for original -l in Old Chinese is noted in 4.1; rhotic -r is retained in Northern Chin but disappeared in Old Burmese while generally giving Old Chinese -n along with a dialect shift of -r > -l > -j as noted in 4.1.

5.1.2.2 Sibilant -s

While Old Chinese appears to pattern as Thado, Zo and Sizang in solely reflecting TC-III, the Lolo-Burmese development of TC-II and TC-III where Mizo, Zahau and Tedim have - and TC-III respectively resolves a couple of conundrums: Weidert’s (1987:83;95-6) observation of an occasional flip-flop of Lolo-Burmese TC-II and Old Chinese TC-III; Matisoff’s (1999:11;18) observation of a preponderance of Old Chinese words in TC-I in contrast with a roughly equal frequency in Lolo-Burmese TC-I and TC-II that leads Matisoff (1982:45) to suggest that words with Tibeto-Burman final -s may have sometimes merged with Lolo-Burmese TC-II. An occasional hardening of -s to -t in Old Burmese and Old Chinese appears restricted to numerals and loanwords.

5.1.2.3 Uvular -q

Evidence in Old Chinese, where they have mostly disappeared, suggests an original uvular coda -q. Following Jacques (2004:262-5), this may tentatively be extended to Sino-Tibetan. It is assumed that Sino-Tibetan -jq would have given Old Burmese -c in the same way as -jk, but supporting evidence is not forthcoming at present.

5.2 Initials

Benedict’s (1972a:17-8;20-1) proposal for a two-way voicing distinction in Tibeto- Burman is criticized by Miller (1974:196-7;200) as inexplicit. Matisoff’s (1972a:12-26) evidence for a Lolo-Burmese voicing m- prefix, giving Old Burmese unvoiced initials due to devoicing, and an aspirating s- prefix90 supports such an assumption in one branch.

89 Matisoff (2003:409-13) credits VanBik with associating Northern Chin -l/il and Old Burmese -wj, but, even disregarding issues of labialisation, the comparisons are either semantically tenous or internally problematic in Northern Chin. Matisoff’s (2003:409-13) alternative association of Northern Chin -l/il and Old Burmese - follows Benedict’s (1972a:37) curious semantic association of testicle with earthworm, supported by Matisoff (2004:364), but this stems from a faulty transcription of Thado -telIII earthworm. 90 See Thurgood (1977:162-8) for a discussion of this.

Sagart’s (1999b:77, 2003, 2006b) discussion of m- in Old Chinese, discussed in 4.5.2, compares favourably with the former, but the role of s- in Old Chinese, which appears to require a separate series of aspirated initials, does not compare. Hartmann’s (1985, 2001) discussion of southern Chin prenasalisation and preglottalisation, discussed in 1.2.1, also bears some association but again a distinct aspirated series is required. In the correspondences, no attempt is made to identify s- or m- prefixes, although a distinct aspirated series may nonetheless be identified.

ST NC OB OC

*k- ~ g- k- k(h)- k- ~ g- *kh- kh- kh- kh- *(h)- (h)- (h)- (h)-

*kw- ~ gw- k- k(h)w- kw- ~ gw- *khw- kh- khw- khw- *(h)w- (h)- (h)w- (h)w-

*- ~ - - ~ - (h)- - ~ - *h- s- h- h-

*t- ~ d- t- ~ d- t(h)- t- ~ d- *th- h- th- th- *(h)n- (h)n- (h)n- (h)n-

*p- ~ b- p- ~ b- p(h)- p- ~ b- *ph- ph- ph- ph- *(h)m- (h)m- (h)m- (h)m-

*(h)r- (h)r- (h)r- (h)r- *(h)l- (h)l- (h)l- (h)l-

*(h)j- j- (h)j- j- *(h)w- w- (h)w- (h)w-

*s- th- s- s-

*- - Ø- -

5.2.1 Affricate h- and Coronal th-

Benedict (1972a:18) treats Tibeto-Burman - as a source of Northern Chin s-. However, the data here suggests that Tibeto-Burman - remains unchanged in Northern Chin while h- gives Northern Chin s-. Benedict’s (1972a:17) proposal that Tibeto-Burman this the

source of Northern Chin h- is supported here.91 When not derived from -, a further source of Northern Chin - and Old Burmese (h)- is tj- which, as with sj- > -s in 5.2.2, is restricted to a vocalism and does not pertain to cases where diphthongs in -a- have developed.

5.2.2 Sibilant s-

Sino-Tibetan s- regularly gives Northern Chin th-. Benedict’s (1972a:53) further suggestion that sj- gives Northern Chin s- should be restricted to a vocalism in the same environment as tj- > - discussed in 5.2.1.92 VanBik (2009:186) distinguishes sh- from s- on the basis of Southern Chin evidence, but Luce (1962:40) treats them as allophones. A Lolo-Burmese voiced sibilant z-, which following Thurgood (1977:170-2) does not appear to support medial -j-, is reconstructed by Matisoff (1968:886) as a further source of Old Burmese s-; its lack of direct support in Northern Chin and Old Chinese suggests this to reflect local variation between - and z- at the Lolo-Burmese level without any further implication.

5.2.3 Glide w- and Obstruent p-

Benedict (1972a:23-4) notes a sporadic lenition of p- to w- across Sino-Tibetan for which he suggests two alternative causes: the influence of prefixes as favoured by Sagart (2006a:211-2); extrusion of w- from p- as favoured by Matisoff (2000a:175-82, 2007:438-9). Matisoff, who concomitantly rejects Matisoff’s (1997b:33) proposal for an unspecified p- prefix on a disproportionately large number of words with initial w-, rejects Benedict’s prefixal explanation due to insufficient evidence. However, a difficulty with an extrusional hypothesis over a prefixal one is that an account for the irregularity of the lenition process can no longer be made. Rather than seeking a precise phonological explanation, the evidence here suggests that the cause may be external.

5.2.4 Glottal -

A glottal initial - is noted in 1.2.6, 3.2 and 4.5 for Northern Chin, Old Burmese and Old Chinese. From a synchronic perspective, Benedict’s (1972a:36) and Matisoff’s (1997b:29;34) suggestion that this may represent a default onset rather than a distinct phoneme in Tibeto-Burman is not unreasonable: the distinct glottalic creak in Zahau, discussed in 1.2.6, is not necessarily of any diachronic significance; the discussion in 3.2 suggests orthographic t - to be a vocalic place holder in Inscriptional/Written Burmese. However, a Sino-Tibetan system premised around two medials -j- and -w-, requires the glide initials j- and w- to be distinguished from the glottal initial and medial glide combinations j- and w-. Pulleyblank’s (1995c:291-3) suggestion that the lack of Old Chinese initial j- results from it being treated as a vowel and assigned a default glottalic

91 More specifically, Benedict suggests that th- reflects t- when aspirated by default in initial position. 92 Benedict’s (1972a:46) comparison of Mizo sjIIB whittle with OB aoG; / ok,f swj² whittle appears exceptional, but its internal correspondences in Northern Chin are irregular; see [#76] Follow in Chapter 6.

onset to give j- may alternatively represent a merger of j- and j-,93 but w- and w- remain distinct.94

Benedict (1972a:33, 1988b:20) discusses another laryngeal initial h-, but treats it as very marginal. It is unattested in Old Chinese and its relative scarcity in Old Burmese is maintained throughout Lolo-Burmese; Matisoff (1988a:220, 1997b:38) and Thurgood (1977:188) only uncover three possible cases. Nevertheless, Matisoff (1997b, 2009) proposes several Tibeto-Burman correspondence sets with the cautionary note that the fragility of such initials may account for the lack of correspondences with broad support. Matisoff (2009:6) points to several cases of original h- in Northern Chin, proposed by Button (2009:240-5), but most of these now appear attributable to external influence or phonoaesthetics. Peiros & Starostin’s (1996:V.iii-iv) proposal for a separate Sino-Tibetan uvular series to account for some of the alternations in daughter languages between -, h- and k(h)-/g- is strongly repudiated by Benedict (1998:151). Sagart (2006a:212) takes up Peiros & Starostin’s mantle to concur with Sagart & Baxter’s (2009) proposals for Old Chinese, but this is rejected by Matisoff (2007:439, 2009:20-1) for Tibeto-Burman and is not adopted for Old Chinese in 4.5.

5.2.5 Labiovelar kw- and w-

The attestation of kw- and w- in Old Chinese suggests an original Sino-Tibetan source. Although in Old Burmese there appears to have been a merger with kw- and w-, Matisoff (1978b:6-7, 1980:11, 1986, 2006:101), and Matisoff in Benedict (1979:27), reconstructs Lolo-Burmese kw- to account for correspondences between velars and bilabials in daughter languages. The evidence here suggests that while the Old Burmese reflexes of kw- merged with those of kw-, in Northern Chin kw- remained distinct from kw- long enough to allow vowel lowering of to a in spite of the labial environment.

5.3 Tonality

ST NC OB OC I – -¹ -¹ – II *- -² -² - III *-s -s - -s

5.3.1 Benedict’s Two Tone System

I LOW / FALLING II HIGH / RISING

93 The tentative correlation of Old Chinese j- with Tibeto-Burman (h)j- requires confirmatory evidence. 94 Although Pulleyblank’s account of the emergence of a glottalic onset w- is not adopted here, the co- occurrence of w- and w- in xiesheng series does raise the possibility that there was an element of free- variation.

Benedict (1972b:27, 1973a, 1991a) proposes a Sino-Tibetan two tone system that corresponds to TC-I and TC-II here. Several irregularities in Benedict’s correspondences of TC-I and TC-II lead Benedict (1972b:28-30;33) to propose that prefixal s- and suffixal -n 95 may have caused a shift of TC-II to TC-I in Old Chinese. However, Benedict notes exceptions for both cases, and Matisoff (1973:81-4, 1999:24-5) suggests the correspondences do not fully represent the situation. Sagart (2006a:212-3) speculates that Benedict’s basic formulation may be correct if TC-II is assigned the same glottalic origin as in Old Chinese; Benedict (1984:65-6, 1988b:7), who is misled by the creaky phonation in Old Burmese discussed in 3.4, is reluctant to accept such a proposal but does modify his original proposal for low and high tones in TC-I and TC-II to falling and rising in an attempt to accommodate the evidence for glottality.

Benedict’s treatment of TC-III in Old Chinese as a peripheral sandhi phenomenon, unrelated to Old Burmese TC-III for which Benedict (1983:16) prefers to follow Thurgood’s (1977:166-8, 1981) prefixal s- proposals that are rejected in 3.4, is criticized by Weidert (1987:178). Benedict (1973a:128, 1991a:16) explicitly rejects the Old Chinese -s hypothesis on the basis of Benedict’s (1972a:159;169, 1973b:4, 1979:28, 1987a:27-8) association of Tibeto-Burman root-final and suffixal -s with Old Chinese -t; see the discussion in 5.1.2.2.

5.3.2 Weidert’s Four Phonation Types

I VOICE II CREAK - h III BREATH - s IV WHISPER -

Weidert (1979, 1987) attempts to reconstruct four phontation types as the source of the Sino-Tibetan tonal system. Weidert (1987:83;95-6;115-34) identifies several significant problems: an apparent flip-flop of Lolo-Burmese TC-II and Old Chinese TC-III; discrepancies between TC-III and TC-IV which are distinguished to account for a merger of the latter with Lolo-Burmese TC-II; occasional inversions of Lolo-Burmese TC-I and TC-II. Matisoff (1982:6-17, 1994a) remains unconvinced as ultimately does Weidert (1987:491) who concludes that his system cannot be assigned to Sino-Tibetan as a whole but rather to later periods in different branches.

5.3.3 A Segmentally Derived Three Tone System

I – II - III -s

95 Benedict’s proposal for suffixal -n is possibly influenced by Wolfenden’s (1929b:64-5) ruminations on Burmese.

A distinction of TC-II from TC-I via a glottalic feature - , and a further derivational TC-III from suffixal -s, parallels the Old Chinese evidence discussed in 3.4 and 4.3. This supports Sagart’s (2006a:212-3) hunch regarding Benedict’s original identification of TC-I and TC-II while merging Weidert’s category TC-IV with his category TC-III according to the discussion in 5.1.2.2. An account for remaining mismatches between categories TC- I and TC-II may be made accordingly: a better identification of loanwords or sporadic internal variation; an incompatability of TC-II with - in Old Chinese and Old Burmese as dicussed in 5.4.1; Weidert’s (1987:51;166;213;337-8) discussion of particular uses of kinship terms; analogical levelling of tonal reflexes of numerals in a similar manner to their verbal inflections, mentioned at the start of Chapter 2, and Matisoff’s (1997:100-2) prefixal runs.

5.4 Morphological Variation

Lexical variations among words that appear to be derived from the same root are noted by Benedict (1972a:68-9;83-5;124-7) who attributes them to unclearly defined phonological/morphological alternations. Matisoff (1978a:16-7) prefers to assume proto- variation and coins the term allofam to account for such words, but Peiros (1998:206-7) and Sagart (2006a:210-1) suggest such an approach to lack methodological rigour.96 An account for many of these supposed variations can be made via recognition of external influence and removal of erroneous comparisons. Many others may be elucidated by a clearer understanding of Sino-Tibetan morphology.

5.4.1 Initials and Codas

The effects of the Sino-Tibetan prefixes s- and m- on initials, and the various reflexes of suffixal -s in terms of coda development are discussed in 5.1.2.2 and 5.2.

To the above may be added the role of glottalic TC-II on the velar nasal coda - which Weidert (1987:134) notes sometimes to cause its hardening to -k. Matisoff (1994a:257) is sceptical, but Weidert’s proposal is borne out in Old Burmese providing that the rhyme is from original . Northern Chin generally retains the velar nasal in such an environment, although there are several cases in the word list of sporadic alternations between -II and -k; Old Chinese retains the velar nasal but shifts TC-II to TC-I which helps explain the paltry evidence for Old Chinese -II.97

5.4.2 Vocalism

Northern Chin surface vocalic alternations, discussed in 1.1, are unrelated to the Tibeto- Burman level where Benedict (1972a:68-9;83-5) reluctantly admits several vocalic alternations. Benedict’s (1976a:178-9) attempt to remove some by extending the parameters of his original vocalic system is criticised by Matisoff (1978a:240-1) as being no better than assuming proto-variation. Better reconstructions of Tibeto-Burman and the

96 Sagart (2006a:210-1) specifically criticises Matisoff for disregarding Benedict’s (1972a:124) observation of an association in initial position of voicing with intransitivity and voicelessness with transitivity. 97 See Sagart (1999b:61-2).

identification of loanwords account for Benedict’s cases pertinent to the languages here. However, in the case of [#118] Near in Chapter 6, Benedict appears to be hitting on the basic /a vocalic alternation underlying Sino-Tibetan as a whole.

Pulleyblank (1963:220-1, 1965a:237-40) believes a morphological ablaut can be set up for Old Chinese that can be extended back to Sino-Tibetan as a whole. The idea of a morphological ablaut in Tibeto-Burman is first proposed by Shafer (1941:312-3) and first seriously investigated by Miller (1956:47-9) in his study of Burmese for which he suggests two systems of ablaut based on three different vowels in each. 98 Benedict (1972a:69) criticises Shafer’s tentative suggestion, while Miller’s proposals are strongly criticized by Nishida (1957:57-8), Benedict (1972a:69-70) and Matisoff (1975:166) who note that little attention has been paid to semantics. Benedict’s (1972a:69-70) attraction to Pulleyblank’s (1963:220-1, 1965a:237-40) /a ablaut is observed in 5.1.1.3, but he notes a lack of evidence. Morphologically, Pulleyblank’s proposal for an extrovert/introvert distinction, discussed in an Old Chinese context in 4.2 and for which Pulleyblank (1965a:239) is unable to find Old Burmese examples, requires further work. 99 Phonologically, the reconstructions of Old Burmese, Old Chinese and Sino- Tibetan proposed in chapters 3,4 and 5 show that Pulleyblank’s /a ablaut, albeit in modified form, has much to recommend it.

98 Miller (1957:42-3) further proposes that vocalic mismatches, treated by Duroiselle (1919:15) as representing a language in transition, between early Inscriptional Burmese and Written Burmese are evidence for an original ablaut. As discussed at the start of Chapter 3, Ba Shin’s (1962:36-9) identification of the regularities behind such alternations shows them to represent little more than orthographic variation before the script was standardised. 99 Pulleyblank’s (1965a:233-7) proposals for Written Tibetan are beyond the scope of this paper, but see Róna-Tas (1985:178-179).

Chapter 6 Comparative Sets

The following comparisons of Northern Chin with Old Burmese and Old Chinese are predominantly from the works of Benedict (1972a) and Matisoff (2003). However, no agreement should necessarily be assumed on their part for additional comparisons presented herein. Old Burmese and Old Chinese glosses that do not correspond neatly with their respective headwords are provided in the footnotes; all Northern Chin glosses may be found in Volume 2.

[#1] 100 s-rja, ॹ s-hrja س NC hr¹; OB &Sif hr¹; OC

[#2] (Areal)101 NC jk; OB *suf- / csuf- khjk–; OC ࿻/൵/ٍ lakʳ

[#3] –102 NC jk; OB &Suf hrak; OC ᎒ hlrak

[#4] 103 NC hn¹; OB aemif ~ aESmif; (h)nw¹/², aemuf nwk

[#5] 104 NC ra¹; OB 0g; w²; OC ు r-ba

[#6] (Austroasiatic)105 NC bj¹; OB ayG; pwj²

[#7] NC khi¹; OB acs / cd,f khj¹

[#8] (Austronesian)106 pwn ء NC bVL; OC

100 OB alive. The simplification of hrj- to OB hr- accounts for Matisoff’s (2008:52) allofamic variation. 101 See Shorto (2006:128) and Schuessler (2007:252;568) for the Areal association. 102 OC glowing red. Benedict (1972a:34;106;113) assigns NC and OB to separate roots; Matisoff (1972a:68, 1988a:1269) posits allofamic variation. A loan of Gong’s (2000:45) OC comparison into TB is possible. 103 See Luce (1981:86) for the OB variation between aemif hereafter and aESmif late; TC-II concurs well with a hardening - to -k. 104 Weidert (1987:135-6) notes NC to be irregular when compared with Naga evidence reflecting TC-II. Schuessler (2007:152) suggests that OC may reflect a TB loan. 105 See Luce (1959a:25, 1962:85-6), Shafer (1952:156) and Shorto (2006:398) for the AA association. 106 See Matisoff (1976:286) for the AN association. Matisoff (2000a:179) notes internal irregularities in LB.

[#9] (Austroasiatic)107 NC P-lak; OC –ᓙ –pk

[#10] (Austroasiatic)108 NC be²; OB yJ / y,f pj²

[#11] (n) NC wm¹; OB 0H wm¹; OC ዼ wm¹

[#12] (v) 109 NC wn¹; OB 0ef wan¹

[#13] (Sinitic)110 NC mOj¹; OC ભ mrj

[#14] (Austroasiatic)111 NC khn¯; OB ckH khwm¹

[#15] (Areal)112 NC khaj¹; OB uGJ / uG,f kwj²; OC ⪶– kwaj–

[#16] (Austroasiatic)113 o h NC Puk; OB ydkuf pk; OC ᆮ pwk, ᇅ p wk

114 [#17] (Austroasiatic) / NC kVL; OB auG; ~ auGU kwj² , ukef; kwn²

115 [#18] (Austronesian) khwak, ݝ gwak ڴ ,NC khuk; OB aumuf kwk; OC ឋ kwk

107 See Luce (1985:II.96) and Shorto (2006:200;564) for the AA association. 108 See Luce (1940:284;292;297, 1959a:23, 1962:85-6;tableB), Hla Pe (1967a:78) and Benedict (1994:3) for the AA association. 109 OB load. Matisoff’s (2000a:141-2) comparison of OB 0rf; wam² belly to Mizo vnIIIsorI have diarrhoea is not supported. 110 See Sagart (1995a:251, 1999b:173) for the Sinitic origin. 111 Hla Pe’s (1967a:83) treatment of OB raised platform as a Mon loanword may be extended to ckH; khwm² convex which Benedict (1972a:78) compares with Mizo kmI shrug, cup hand. 112 See Schuessler (2007:269) for the areal origin. 113 OC stomach; cave. See Shorto (2006:148-9) for the AA association. 114 See Shafer (1952:145) and Shorto (2006:121) for the AA association. See Thurgood (1981:48-9) and Nishi (1999b:98) for a discussion of the OB variation. 115 OB/OC bend. See Sagart (2005a:164) for the AN link; see Wilkins (1996:284) for the semantics. Benedict (1972a:74) compares the nominalised form of the OB transitive derivative acguf khwk fold to h Mizo k k peel, but Shorto (2006:170) notes MK influence.

[#19] 116 NC kha²; OB cg; kh²; OC ે kha

[#20] (Areal)117 (h) h h NC mV²; OB rif / rSif m¹, rdkuf mk, rdIif m¹; OC ႕ mk, ᕠ mk

[#21] (Sinitic)118 NC thi²; OB aoG; / ok,f swj²; OC ۨ hmc

[#22] (Austroasiatic)119 NC lO¯; OB avmif; lw²

[#23] NC sw¹; OB ql hw¹

120 [#24] NC rs; OB ½kd; / ½kd0f rw²

121 [#25] NC ra¹; OB jcif– khr¹–

[#26] 122 NC t; OB qwf ht; OC މ tjat / djat

[#27] (Areal)123 NC hnu¯; OB EdkY nw; OC ࠂ nwa

[#28] (Austronesian)124 NC (h)lj¯; OB avS– hlj¹–; OC ඪ hlj

116 Miller (1974:197-8) rejects Benedict’s (1972a:158;165) comparison of ߗ kan liver. 117 OB ink; dark; downcast; OC black; ink. See Hla Pe (1967a:82) and Luce (1973:listA) for the AA association. Benedict (1972:88;155) compares euf nk black, deep, but it is associated with ESuf hnk cram. 118 See Sagart (1999a) for the Sinitic source. Sagart (1999a:178, 1999b:67) rejects Matisoff’s (1978a:184, 1992:169) alternative comparison of ᧮ s-hlwaj marrow. 119 See Luce (1940:306), Shafer (1952:145) and Hla Pe (1976a:83) for the AA association. 120 Sagart (2008b) rejects Benedict’s (1972a:155) comparison of ೎ kwt bone, which Sagart (2005a:163) links with AN, in favour of ৳ rwt as a counter for pitch-pipes; neither is supported here. 121 Matisoff (1983:470-1) compares Mizo tlhiIIA marrow, but OB jcifqD khr¹h¹ only attests this meaning via a literal sense of bone fat. 122 OB brittle. 123 See Matisoff (1976:270), Benedict (1994:1) and Schuessler (2007:446) for the areal origin. 124 OB stairs; OC ladder. See Benedict (1967:282;311) for the AN association.

[#29] (Austroasiatic)125

NC mVm; OB rkH mwm¹

[#30] (Tai-Kadai)126

NC loj¹; OB uRJ / u’ G,f klwj²

[#31] (Austroasiatic)127 h NC KV(w)¹; OB ac: / c0f k w¹, aMumf krw¹; OC ᇆ gaw¹

[#32] (Austroasiatic) 128 h NC p (L); OB ydk; / ydk0f pw²; OC ૤ b , ࣄ bw

[#33] (Austroasiatic)129 NC le²; OB vSnf; hl²

[#34] –130 h NC Waj¹; OB zGJ / zG,f p wj²

[#35] 131 I NC Kra¹; OB &if r

[#36] 132 NC a²; OB om; s²; OC ՗

[#37] (Austroasiatic)133 NC WVL¯; OB 0ef; wn²; OC ୉ wn

[#38] (Austroasiatic)134 NC kp; OC ݈ krjap

125 See Shorto (2006:376-7) for the AA association. 126 See Luce (1940:334) and Benedict (1967:301) for the TK association. 127 See Shafer (1952:145) for the AA association; see also Shorto (2006:474). 128 OB carry on back; OC carry on back; carry in arms. See Shafer (1952:153) and Schuessler (2007:245-6) for the AA association; see also Shorto (2006:97). 129 See Luce (1962:tableB) for the AA association; Lehman (1963:38) associates [#22] Boat in NC. The OB inscriptional form with hr- in WK (3.367) may evince scribal error rather than an external source. 130 OB husk. The alternation between Mizo vajI chaff and phajI shavings suggests external influence. Matisoff’s (2000b:365) compares OC ᐾ paj-s < par-s sow which Matisoff (2003:394;425) compares with the Mizo vr sow. 131 OB breast, chest. Luce (1962:85) notes problems with the initials; Matisoff (1976a:272) associates AN and TK. See [#47] Distend. 132 See Matisoff (1978a:55, 1995:63) for Lahu support of an original LB variation between - and z-, corresponding to OB - and s-, respectively. Sagart (2006a:219) rejects Benedict’s (1972a:158, 1972b:30) comparison of ᘣ h parents, relatives. 133 OB circular; OC circle. See Shorto (1973:378-81, 2006:438-9;464-5) for the AA association. 134 See Shafer (1952:157) and Shorto (2006:342) for the AA association.

[#39] 135 h h NC k aL²; OB cJ / c,f k j²

[#40] (Austroasiatic)136 h gwp, జ gwap ٽ NC K VM; OB tkyf wp, 0yf wp; OC

[#41] NC (h)rj²; OB a½G; / ½k,f rwj²; OC ㍽ rwj

[#42] –137 NC AM; OB 0Hh wm ; OC ཊ kam

[#43] NC rak; OB &uf / ½ßuf rjk

[#44] 138 sj ڽ NC thi¹; OB ao / od,f sj¹; OC

[#45] 139 NC w²; OB pl; ~ ql; (h)w²

[#46] 140 NC paj; OB y,f ~ z,f p(h)j¹; OC ࢶʳphaj

[#47] (Austroasiatic)141 NCkr¯; OB &ifh r, Muifh kr; OC ് tra

[#48] (Areal)142 NC j²; OB acG; / ck,f khwj²; OC ׅ khw < khwjn < khwjr

135 The variation of liquid coda in NC suggests external influence. 136 OB cover, control; brood; OC join; cover. See Shafer (1952:142), Schuessler (2007:274-5) and Matisoff (2009:16) for the AA association; see also Shorto (2006:339-40). 137 See Schuessler (2007:250) for Vietnamese and Tai forms with initial j- from Maspero (1912:69). 138 Schuessler (2007:47;478) suggests OC TC-II to be derived. 139 I Luce (1981:32) conflates OB pl; awl, pierce and ql; thorn. Benedict (1972a:63-4) compares Thado sw (< sw¹) panji, but VanBik’s (2009:160) comparison here is preferable. 140 Okell (1969:208) suggests OB y,f reject, decline and z,f push/set aside may reflect a lost transitivity distinction. OB yJh pj break off and OC ధ phaj break, smash are plausibly related, but Benedict’s (h) (1972a:59) comparison of Mizo p (< p eC) bore is unlikely; Matisoff (2008:31-2) compares NC paj²due to its common meaning of pregnant, but the root meaning is carry on self rather than conceive. 141 OB firm, mature; tense, tight. See Schuessler (2007:605-6) for the AA association supporting Gong’s (1995:74) comparison of OB wif; t² taut. 142 See Benedict (1996a) and Pulleyblank (1995a:179-80) for areal associations.

[#49] 143 NC khru¹; OB cdk / cdk0f ~ csdK; / NcdK0f kh(r)w¹/²; OC ቑ k(r)w

[#50] 144 NC m²; OB ruf mk; OC ኄ m(-s)

[#51] (Austroasiatic)145 NC kA¯; OB uif k¹

[#52] 146 NC a²; OB t ; OC ೼ (r)a

[#53] 147 ()NC hna¹; OB em n¹, em; n²; OC ۘ n

[#54] 148 h NC Lat; OB &Spf / a[wf rjt; OC Զ p-rjat

[#55] (Austroasiatic)149 NC wj¹; OC ੡ waj¹

[#56] * NC hak; OB xGuf thwk

[#57] (Austroasiatic)150 NC h(r)a¹; OB 0if; w²

[#58] 151 NC k; OB apmuf wk

143 Matisoff (1969:168) suggests the vacillation of medial -r-, which Luce (1981:27) treats as variants in cases like WK (3.42) and SIP (43.30), to be due to onomatopoeia. 144 h I OC TC-I is established by Mattos (1971:309). Benedict’s (1972a:31) comparison of rSif m composure in compounds concerning somnambulism is unrelated. 145 See Schuessler (2007:261-3) for the AA association. 146 Matisoff (1978b:25, 1998a:235) reconstructs LB TC-II. MC suggests OC medial -r-, but Schuessler (2007:550) attributes it to onomatopoeia. 147 OB listen; ear. See Sagart (1995b:346-7, 1999b:61-2) and the discussion in 5.4.1 for OC -. 148 See Nishi (1974:18) for the OB reconstruction. 149 See Schuessler (2007:510) for the OC sense of elephant and the AA association. Matisoff’s (1988b:10-3) proposal that Mizo sajI elephant and zajIII temperament may both be related to OC թ/ತ/ޗ material, talent is rejected by Baxter (1994a:28-9). 150 See Hla Pe (1967a:85) and Shorto (1973:377, 2006:233) for the AA association. 151 OB steep with a transitive derivative aqmuf hwk build, erect. Benedict’s (1972a:76-8) comparison of NC with OB pdkuf k plant and OB with Mizo hk descend is not supported.

[#59] (Areal)152 NC lj²; OB vJ ~ vSJ ~ vS,f (h)lj¹/²

[#60] 153 h h OB acs; / cD ’,f k lj²; OC য় lj

[#61] 154 NC mt; OC ᄰ mc < mjt, ᓎ mjat

[#62] (Austroasiatic)155 NC mt; OB rsuf mjk; OC ؾ mwk

[#63] (Austroasiatic) 156 h NC mVL; OC ܭ mwn , ૿ mjan-s

[#64] (Austroasiatic)157 NC KL V ²; OB us / u’ kl ; OC Հ gra (-s)

[#65] 158 NC thaw¹; OC メ saw

[#66] 159 ba / pa ׀ NC pa²; OB b / z ph; OC

152 See Benedict (1967:321-2) for AN and TK associations which Shorto (2006:408-9) links with AA; see Stewart & Dunn (1940-81:348) and Thurgood (1981:36) for the OB variants. 153 Matisoff (1969:168;198) notes OB k- to be prefixal, but Shafer (1952:158), Benedict (1994:5) and Shorto (2006:238-9) assign an AA source to his comparison of NC e² defecate, excrement. 154 Matisoff (1983:472) compares OB rSdwf hmt shut eyes, which Benedict (1972a:99) treats as a variant of rSdef; hmn² have eyes closed, doze, yet the discussion in 3.1.4 shows the rhymes -n and -t to be suggestive of external influence. OC ᄰ has an MC ablaut in a. 155 Luce (1985:II.78-9) notes evidence for -k in Southern Chin. Stewart & Dunn’s (1940-81:280) MK association with OB is supported by Norman’s (1984:181-5) discussion of two competing Min Chinese forms with -t and -k as a result of AA influence. Norman is more cautious regarding an AN link, as proposed by Shafer (1952:148), which is dismissed by Benedict (1967:275-6, 1991b:8) and Starostin (1995:230). 156 OC lips; face. See Shafer (1952:142;154) and Schuessler (2007:515) for the AA association; see Matisoff (1976a:270) for possible AN and TK connections. 157 OC descend, below. See Schuessler (2007:371) for the AA association; see also Shorto (2006:521- 2;524;527). Sagart (2006a:214-5, 2008a:154) is misled by the shift of OB -l- to -r-. 158 Matisoff (1974:189) tentatively compares ql hw¹ fat, but Matisoff (2001:14) reverts back to Benedict’s (1972a:63-4) original distinction. 159 OB b/z father, z male suffix; OC father / honorific-suffix. See Weidert (1987:51;166;213) for the vocative and referential distinction between TC-II and derived TC-III within NC and across ST. Stewart & Dunn’s (1940-81:267) suggestion that taz / tzd,f phj¹ father may perhaps be a later variant is supported by similar forms under [#114] Mother.

[#67] 160 (h) NC lAm¹; OB vH lam¹; OC ိ lm¹, ༈ s-lm¹

[#68] 161 NC s; OB pm; ²

[#69] 162 hmj ־ NC mj²; OB rD; m²; OC

[#70] 163 NC (h)a²; OB ig; ²; OC ູ a

[#71] * 164 NC a¹; OB ig; ²; OC ն a

[#72] (Austroasiatic)165 (h) (h) h NC (k)l Vp, lVM, jap; OB vSyf ~ vsyf ljp, vdyf lp, ,yf jp; OC ᆺ lap, ᅎ/ᓘ ljap

[#73] 166 NC hli¹; OB avS; / vS,f hlj²

[#74] 167 NC sa²; OB om; s²

[#75] (Austroasiatic)168 E NC Par¹, pAL, HVL; OB 0g w¹, y pa , yef; pn²; OC ゐ baj, ⺐ ban

160 OC extend; measure of length. NC may be influenced by lam¹ dance via its characteristic style with arms outstretched. 161 OB eat. Matisoff (1978b:11-2;31) reconstructs LB j-, but notes Thurgood’s (1977:193) - also to be supported; see Shafer (1952:138) and Shorto (2006:71) for a good AA association. 162 See Sagart (1999b:158-9) for OC hm-; MC has an ablaut variant in a. 163 Shafer’s (1965:5-6) MK association with NC is represented as OB u k in Hla Pe’s (1967a:88-9) piscine loanwords from Mon, yet Hla Pe’s (1967a:86) identification of wHig ~ wHiSg tm¹(h)¹ fisherman as a Mon loanword suggests possible AA influence and compares favourably with OC TC-I. 164 NC TC-I is a result of the same analogical leveling attested in [#167] Three and [#80] Four. 165 OB thin, fine ~ flake off, flash; roll, curl; fan; OC leaf; tablet/butterfly. See Stewart & Dunn (1940- 81:346) for the variation between OB vSyf and vsyf. See Shorto (2006:344;349;355-6) for the AA link. 166 Weidert (1987:440-1) suggests TC-I to be original; OB as a verb means tiny, with a nominalised sense of insignificant thing, pest, which suggests convergence of two separate forms. 167 See Thurgood (1977:171) for LB support of sj- discussed in 3.3.1.4 and 5.2.2. 168 OB yellow; shine; flower; OC white; burn. See Shorto (2006:441;416;439;468) for the AA association; see Schuessler (2006:156;408) for the semantics supported by the lack of a Loloish counterpart to OB yef; pn² flower and accounting for Weidert’s (1987:125-6;132) difficulty in associating TC-II with NC TC-I.

[#76] (Sinitic)169 NC JVL; OC ᙟ s-lwaj

[#77] 170 NC rm¹; OC ࣥ rm, ཤ s-rm

[#78] 171 NC phj; OB bd- / zd- ph–

[#79] (Austroasiatic) 172 h I h h NC ka(), k a²; OB um; k², (wH)cg; (tm )k ², cuf k k; OC ֪ ga

[#80] 173 NC li¹; OB av; / vd,f lj²; OC ؄ s-lj-s

174 [#81] NC thj²; OB oD; s²

175 [#82] (Austronesian) NC rs; OC 㗄 ras

[#83] (Areal) 176 NC thi¹; OB csif; khj²; OC ᜶ ka

[#84] 177 e NC pa²; OB ay; / yd,f pj²; OC ᳩ pj-s

169 See Sagart (1995a:251) for the Sinitic association. Matisoff’s (1992:164-5) comparison of odkY sw to, thus stems from his overly literal interpretation of -dk as -k u and -d i as discussed in 3.1.3. 170 Shafer (1952:139) and Schuessler (2007:358-9) suggest a MK link, but the forms in Shorto (2006:378) suggest different semantic fields. Schuessler (2007:359) notes different vocalism in OB ½kH ~ ½kH; rwm¹/² cluster, gather which Hla Pe (1967a:85) and Shorto (2006:213) identify as a MK loan. 171 Matisoff (1978b:30) rejects Nishida’s (1968:22) proposal that OB ph- corresponds to velar initials elsewhere. Hla Pe (1967a:84) identifies the second syllable of zdeyf phnp sandal as a Mon loanword. 172 OB divaricate; door; branch; OC door. See Shafer (1952:151-2) and Shorto (2006:177) for the AA link. 173 OB TC-II attests the analogical leveling in [#167] Three and [#71] Five. Pulleyblank’s (1973b:372, 1998b:205) observation of the dual MC reflexes sit and sih shows OC suffixal -s hardening to -t in the same way as root-final -s in [#173] Two and [#138] Seven. 174 Shorto (2006:257) makes an AA association. 175 OC coarse grain. See Maspero (1933:69), Peiros & Starostin (1984:124), Matisoff (2003:437), Sagart (2005a:165) and Schuessler (2007:352) for the AN association. Benedict (1967:304, 1972a:17, 1996b:1) is sceptical, but the dual MC reflexes lajh and lat attest the sporadic hardening of -s in numerals and loanwords. 176 See Luce (1940:295, 1959a:23, 1962:86), Shafer (1952:157), Benedict (1967:303) and Matisoff (1968:886) for the areal association. 177 Matisoff’s (2000b:365) use of Baxter’s (1992:603) reconstruction of OC -t to support Benedict’s (1972a:101) ruminations of an association between Tibeto-Burman -t and NC -k is problematic: NC -k is a regular FORM-II derivation via suffixal -s; Baxter’s OC -t is based on Ꮧ bj-s nose whose MC reflexes bjit and bjih evince a special development of -s as discussed under [#80] Four, [#138] Seven and [#173] Two.

[#85] (Austroasiatic)178 h NC (r)Vp; OB [yf hp; OC ࡁ gap

[#86] 179 NC pu¹; OB bdk; / zdk0f phw², zdk / zdk0f phw

[#87] 180 NC pi¹; OB ab; / zd,f phj²; OC ݍ pj

[#88] 181 NC hrak; OB &uf / ½ßuf rjk

[#89] (Austroasiatic)182 ljaj-s چ NC lj²; OB ajr / rd’,f mlj¹; OC

[#90] NC hml²; OB arG; / rk,f mwj²

[#91] (Austronesian)183 NC sm²; OB qH hm¹; OC sram

[#92] (Austronesian)184 NC lu¹; OC ଈ hlw

[#93] 185 NC rk; OC ொ rc

[#94] (Austroasiatic)186 h h NC HV; OB acgif; k w²; OC ़ k wa

178 OB bite, snap at; OC suck up. See Shorto (2006:356-7) for the AA link. 179 OB grandfather; masculine suffix. See the discussion under [#87] Grandmother for OB TC-II. 180 OC deceased mother. See Luce (1981:13) for the original sense of OB grandmother; see Weidert (1987:337-8) for the vocative and referential distinction between TC-I and TC-II. Matisoff (1991a:319-20, ʳbj femaleی 2000a:172) associates Mizo pjIIA big (of female animals), an irregular reflex of NC pi², and of animals. 181 OB liquid extract. Confusion with t&uf rk liquor, a Semitic loanword via Mon that is discussed by Hla Pe (1967a:81) and Stewart & Dunn (1940-81:303), may account for similarities with OC ෈ lak liquid. 182 See Shafer (1952:134;148) and Schuessler (2007:210) for the AA association. The OC comparison is from Sagart (2006a:218). 183 See Matisoff (1976:271-2) for the AN association. 184 See Peiros & Starostin (1984:125) and Sagart (1999b:155, 2005a:163) for the AN association. 185 OC dense, compact. Benedict’s (1972a:104) comparison of OB av; lj² heavy is not supported. 186 See Matisoff (1976a:285) and Shorto (2006:237) for the AA association.

[#95] (Areal)187 NC ra²; OB jrif; mr²; OC ್ mra

[#96] * 188 NC sa¹; OB qm h¹

[#97] 189 NC na¹; OB em n¹

[#98] (Areal)190 ʳa, ݺ ajܠ NC kj¹; OB ig ¹; OC

191 [#99] NC jV²; OB ,m; j²

192 [#100] NC thk; OB ouf sk; OC ஒ sk

[#101] NC tht; OB owf st; OC ව srat

[#102] 193 NC thj; OB od s

[#103] 194 NC wt; OB uRwf /

[#104] (Austroasiatic)195 NC Wj; OB -0J –wj², b,f bj¹; OC ၔ paj

187 See Pulleyblank (1966a:11) and Shorto (2006:220) for the areal association. 188 See Benedict (1972a:27) for the semantics of OB hungry. 189 Matisoff’s (1978a:110) comparison of ewf nt spirit is misled by NC -t which represents a FORM-II derivation via suffixal -s. Benedict’s (1972a:158-9) comparison of OC ᣄ nan difficult is not supported. 190 See Sagart (1995a:252) and Jacques (2007) for the areal association. 191 Mizo/Zahau TC-IIA and the Tedim/Sizang irregular vocalism suggests external influence. The discussion in Matisoff (1970:31) suggests there may be a link with the AA loan [#2] Armpit. 192 OB slightly bitter, breath, life; OC breathe. The OB semantic link could be due to accidental ֨ homophony, but eYH nm odor, smell, for which see [#147] Smell, and oH sm¹ sound, voice, related to sm¹ heart, mind by Benedict (1972a:51;184), seem to carry the semantic weight in the compounds teYHtouf nmsk odor and toHtouf sam¹sak voice. 193 Matisoff (1988a:1185) reconstructs Loloish TC-II. 194 See Matisoff (1972a:65) and Thurgood (1977:149) for OB prefixal k- followed by medial -r-. 195 OB left; OC lame. See Hla Pe (1967a:76;89) for the AA association.

[#105] 196 I NC T¹; OB awmif tw

[#106] (Sinitic)197 NC ju¹; OC ߸/ᬓ lw²

[#107] 198 NC thn; OB onf; s²

[#108] NC hrk; OC ᓜ s-rc

[#109] NC l²; OB avmuf lwk; OC ៽ lrw

[#110] NC laj¹; OB (t)v,f ()lj¹

[#111] (Austronesian)199 NC hlk; OB arsmuf mjwk

[#112] 200 NC klhas; OB v l; OC ࡙ la(k)-s, Ք s-lak

[#113] (Tai-Kadai)201 NC sm²; OB qkH hwm¹

[#114] 202 m ئ OB r m; OC

196 The NC variation suggests external influence. 197 See Sagart (1995a:251) for the Sinitic source. 198 Weidert (1987:36) provides further support for TC-II. Benedict (1972a:180) compares ߬ s < sj bitter but, phonological issues aside, Matisoff’s (2004:357-8) association of bitter with liver via bile introduces a very different semantic field from Wilkins’ (1996:284) areal associations of liver and heart as supported in NC and OB by Matisoff (1986). 199 See Benedict (1967:278-9) for the AN association. Benedict (1972a:112) notes a liquid medial in Intha Burmese which Okell (1995:59;66) notes to be discordant with OB. 200 OC night; evening. See Schuessler (2007:561) and [#163] Sun for evidence that OC -k was a later development. 201 See Benedict (1967:295) for the TK association. 202 See the discussion under [#66] Father for OB TC-III. Benedict’s (1972a:66;193) comparison of Mizo mwI daughter/sister-in-law is not supported phonologically or semantically. OB trd m mother, whose TC-II form is still attested in Bradley’s (1979:312-3) comparison of a compound with om; s² child as orD; sm² daughter, and tar / trd,f mj¹ mother, suggested by Stewart & Dunn (1940-81:276) to be a later variant, shows similar vocalic alternations to those under [#66] Father.

[#115] (Austroasiatic)203 NC km¹; OB urf; ~ crf; / crf khm²; OC ܶ gm, ᙯ gm, ℾ m

[#116] 204 NC tn²; OB (vuf)onf; (lk)s²

[#117] 205 mja ټ NC hm¹; OB rnf m¹, rSnfh hm; OC

[#118] 206 NC (h)naj²; OB eD; n²; OC ᠑ nj

[#119] (Areal)207 (h) NC rV; OB vnf l¹; OC Ꮖ rja

[#120] 208 NC thr¹; OB o s; OC ធ san¹

[#121] 209 NC ka²; OB udk; / udk0f kw²; OC ԰ kw < kww

[#122] 210 NC hnar¹; OB ESm hn¹; OC ቮ s-nan-s

[#123] (Austroasiatic)211 o NC san; OB -oGef / -oGef –swn¹; OC ፡ swan-s [#124] 212 NC hrm²; OB zsH phjm¹

203 OB bank, shore; OC hold in mouth; jaw; hold/put in mouth. See Shorto (2006:361-2) for the AA link. 204 French’s (1983:190;469) observation that in Northern Naga this always occurs in a compound beginning with hand parallels the situation in OB and perhaps explains the lack of aspiration in NC. 205 See Button (2010:24) for an OC ablaut. 206 Matisoff’s (1998:778) difficulty correlating Loloish naj² with OB stems from the /a ablaut; the MC reflex suggests an OC a ablaut. 207 See Matisoff (1976:271) for the areal association. 208 OB titivate; OC fresh. Gong’s (1995:69) OB comparison may represent a transitive derivation from TC-I. 209 Matisoff’s (1980:17, 1997a:107) suggestion that NC developed via an -a suffix from kw-a is criticised by Weidert (1981:10;12); Lehman’s (1973:544) proposal for a lost -l is equally unlikely. The dissimilation of OC -w to - after kw- seems to have also occurred in NC to allow lowering of - to -a. The discussion in 5.2.5 presupposes a Lahu bilabial initial whose absence may be related to the special status of numerals. 210 OC sigh. 211 See Luce (1959a:tableIII), Hla Pe (1967a:78) and Benedict (1976b:90) for the AA association. 212 Luce’s (1962:84) suggestion of an MK association with OB, supported by Matisoff’s (1989b, 2009b) suggestion that OB p- represents a reduced full-syllable borrowed from MK and compounded with the TB root, may explain the irregularities: medial -j- rather than -r-; TC-I rather than TC-II.

[#125] (Austroasiatic)213 NC bo; OB ajymif prw¹; OC ❬ prwa

[#126] (Areal)214 NC phs; OB -0g; w²; OC ݿ pa

[#127] 215 NC ki²; OB aus; / ud,f kj²

[#128] 216 NC mi²; OB rdef;(r) ~ rdr® / rd,f(r) mj²(m)

[#129] (Sinitic)217 (h) NC Lk; OB &pf rc; OC ፉ ljaq

[#130] 218 NC wk; OB 0uf wk; OC ⍈ pra

[#131] 219 NC r-ws; OB &Gm rw¹; OC ॸ wa(-s)

[#132] 220 NC hmn¹; OB rSnfh hm

[#133] NC lm²; OB vrf; lm²

213 OB mithun; OC wild humped bovine. See Hla Pe (1967a:88) for the AA association. 214 OC breadth of four fingers. See Sagart (2005a:163) and Schuessler (2007:240) for AN and TK associations respectively. OB z0g; / z’ Gm phlw² palm, sole probably stems from zvuf0g; phlkw² in which zvuf phlk, from a MK root for palm in Shorto (2006:166), has been reanalysed as z ph, from abbreviated zd ph foot as discussed in [#78] Foot, Leg and vuf lk hand to give z0g; pw² sole and vuf0g; ~ vuGg; lkw² palm. See [#141] Side. 215 Mizo/Zahau TC-IIA suggests external influence; Matisoff (1988a:506, 2003:189) does not reconstruct beyond the LB level. 216 Written Burmese rdef;r woman superficially represents mn²m, but its inscriptional form rd,fr mj²m, in which the second syllable is a female suffix, is discussed by Nishi (1974:26-7). Pulleyblank (1995a:178-9) m people, but Sagart’s ا supports Benedict’s (1972a:158) supposition of an -n suffix to compare (1999b:135) connection with ࣶ mrja people suggests original mj rather than mjn. 217 See Sagart (1995b:370-1) for the Sinitic source; Matisoff (1988a:1141, 2000c:223) notes phonological issues in LB. 218 See Jacques (2004:263) for evidence of an original final uvular. Schuessler’s (2007:152) suggestion that OC may have been influenced by MK provides a possible explanation for its bilabial initial. 219 See Thurgood (1977:149;178) for the effect of prefixal r- on LB tones which may account for Weidert’s (1987:97) observation that OB TC-I is an exception to the correlation of -s and LB TC-II discussed in 5.1.2.2. An OC -s coda would be expected, but TC-II suggests -s to be suffixal. 220 The evidence in Matisoff (1988a:1017) shows OB TC-III to be derived from LB TC-I.

[#134] (Sinitic)221 NC ju²; OC ᡌ lw-s

[#135] NC thu²; OB odk; / odk0f sw²

[#136] h NC lVm²; OB vkH; lwm²

[#137] 222 NC i²; OB -aph / -pd,fh –j

[#138] 223 h h NC Ls; OB -epf / -ESpf – nc; OC Ԯ s- nc

[#139] 224 NC hram¹; OB oH sm¹; OC ⬌ s-hrjam¹

[#140] (Austroasiatic)225 NC Vp; OB pdyf p, pyf p

[#141] (Austroasiatic)226 (h) h h NCP ¯; OB buf / zuf p k, zif p ¹; OC ல ba

[#142] –227 NC un¹; OB aiG / ik,f wj¹; OC Ꭼ rn

221 OC weasel. Sagart’s (1995a:251) association of OC l- with Tibeto-Burman j- suggests a Sinitic source. Benedict’s (1972a:32;158, 1972b:30) comparisons of ,kef jwn¹ hare and Ɖ (h)n(-s) hare are unlikely. 222 The lack of aspiration in OB stems from its occurrence solely as a bound morpheme; see Luce (1973:49, 1981:11) for inscriptional examples. Sagart’s (2006a:215) comparison of ᇷʳ j granary is not supported phonologically. 223 See Matisoff (1997a:85) for the NC liquid initial. OB and OC manifest the same hardening of -js to -jt which, possibly for purposes of differentiation, happened earlier than in [#173] Two. Benedict (1972a:16;93) suggests that ckepf seven reflects a quinary system of five and two: Matisoff (1985b:432) suggests that ck khw unit may refer to the five fingers of the hand and tentatively compares NC k(h)t hand; Luce (1977) notes inscriptional ajcmufESpf seven curiously reflects ajcmuf khrwk six. 224 Following Benedict (1972a:53, 1973b:6-7), a shift of s-(h)rj- to LB sj- to Old Burmese s- may be assumed; see Chang (1972:440-1) for the semantics of OB iron. See Button (2010:22) for the OC rhotic initial. Benedict (1994:3-4) notes an AA link but suggests ST to be the source. 225 OB set close; join. See Shorto (2006:342-4) for the AA association. 226 See Shorto (2006:200) for the AA association. Contra Matisoff (1972a:43), the discussion in 3.2 shows the Written Burmese voiced bilabial plosive b- to be of no reconstructional significance. See [#126] Palm, Sole. 227 Benedict (1976b:69) notes the lack of OC labialisation to suggest a possible external source discussed in more detail by Sagart (1999b:202-3); Bradley (1978:332-3) notes OB to be a LB isolate.

[#143] 228 h NC Lk; OB ajcmuf k rwk; OC ք rwk

[#144] (Austroasiatic)229 NC C; OB tdyf p

[#145] 230 hlj ـ NC li²; OB av; / vd,f lj²; OC

[#146] (Austroasiatic)231 NC ar¹; OC ㇈/㘶 an-s

[#147] 232 NC nm¹; OB eH nm¹/²

[#148] 233 NC khu²; OB cdk; / cdk0f khw²

[#149] 234 NC rul¹; OB a>r / jrK,f mrwj¹; OC ۧ/૛ hrwj

[#150] 235 NC hnp; OB ESyf hnp

[#151] 236 NC am¹; OB pH m¹

228 OB prefixal k- is noted by Benedict (1987:64) elsewhere in TB. 229 Luce (1985:II.78-9) notes -p in SC; see Shafer (1952:124;158) for the AA association. See Thurgood (1977:150;165) and Matisoff (1986b:54) for Benedict’s (1972a:37) suggestion that odyf sp compress, cram, put to sleep is a causative derivative. 230 OB bow; OC arrow. Matisoff’s (2003:404;422) comparison of Mizo thlIIAarrow and Tedim thlII bow with OC is criticised by Sagart (2006a:218) with the phonologically tenous comparison of ᐘ dan shoot pellets at. 231 See Schuessler (2007:556), supported by the forms in Shorto (2006:415), for the AA association. 232 The OB tonal variation, marking a transitivity distinction, is supported in LB by Thurgood (1977:202); Benedict’s (1991a:18-9) broader ruminations about transitivity and tones in TB are unlikely. See [#150] Snot. 233 Benedict’s (1972a:159, 1972b:30) comparison of ⧷ hwn smoke, steam is phonologically unlikely. 234 h The OC comparison is from Jacques (2004:222) who reconstructs m-. Luce (1962:tableA) shows prefixal m- to be retained in some SC languages; the NC and OB shift to TC-I is likely related to this prefix discussed further in Matisoff (2000a:170-1). 235 See [#147] Smell for a possible association. 236 The comparison is from VanBik (2009:165). OB lacks aspiration due to its occurrence solely as a bound morpheme; see Stewart & Dunn (1940-81:84).

237 [#152] NC nw²; OB El; nw²; OC ਫ nw

238 [#153](Areal) (h) h NC nVm¯, nam²; OB nhH am , edyf ~ edrf nM¹; OC ਩ njam (-s), ౾ njm

[#154] NC mak; OB -ruf –mk

[#155] (Austroasiatic)239 NC thur²; OC Ꭸ swan

[#156] NC hmj²; OB arTU hmwj

[#157] NC d¹; OB wnf t¹; OC ॼ dja, ࡳ dja-s

[#158] (Tai-Kadai)240 h NC kV; OB tudkif; k², acsmif; k jw²

[#159] 241 NC l²; OB ausmuf / au’muf klwk

[#160] NC an¹; OB pefY n

237 Luce (1981:33) treats OB El; nw² and Ek nw soft, attested in cases like OBEP (44e) and IB (107b.16) respectively, as variants. Matisoff (1978b:27) derives the latter from prefixal s-, but this is the source of Eª; hnw² soften; it possibly represents a back-formation of the Pali loan tPk nw that refers to minute objects. Gong’s (1980:480) OC comparison, with which Pulleyblank (1973:121) associates the ablaut variant ᚫ nwa weak, soft, is tonally problematic; see [#153] Soft2, Low. 238 OB soft; subside; OC soft. Hla Pe (1960:83) and Stewart & Dunn (1940-81:198;200) identify edyf np subside as a Pali/Sanskrit loanword. It is related to ESdyf hnp press and edrf nm¹ subside with derivatives edrfh nm low, ESdrf hnm¹ suppress and ESdrfh hnm lower. See Schuessler (2007:442) for AA influence; see

Pulleyblank (1973a:121) and [#152] Soft1 for several OC words for soft beginning with n- but with discrepant rhymes. 239 See Schuessler (2007:484) for the AA association. 240 OB bough; counter of rod-like objects. See Luce (1973:listA) for the TK association. An association of Tedim keII leg with xeIII foot, as per Matisoff (2003:293), is rightly queried by Luce (1962:57). Benedict (1972a:76-7) and Weidert (1987:184) compare Mizo zIIB finger with OB acsmif; khjw² on the basis that the coda of the first syllable in vufacsmif; lkkhjw² finger has spread to the initial of the second syllable. However, in apite of Ohno (2005:277-9) not noting it in the inscriptions, Hla Pe (1967b:183-4) treats acsmif; khjw² as one of the main Burmese classifiers. 241 See Thurgood (1977:153) for OB prefixal k-. See also the AA forms in Shorto (2006:163).

[#161] (Areal)242 NC Vp; OB pkwf ~ pkyf wp

[#162] (Indo-Aryan)243 NC kaN; OB uefY kn

[#163] 244 NC ni¹; OB ae / ed,f nj¹; OC ֲ nc < njk

[#164] 245 h NC PVM; OB zHGU p wam

[#165] 246 NC mj²; OB NrD; mr²; OC ݠ mj

[#166] 247 NC pa(L)²; OB yg; p²

[#167] 248 NC thm¹; OB okH; swm²; OC Կ sm < swm

[#168] (Austroasiatic)249 h NC klV²; OB usm; / u’m kl²; OC ॡ la

[#169] hh250 NC kht; OB (wef)uspf / uswf (tn)kjt; OC ࿨ʳkc

242 See Benedict (1976c:93) and Shorto (2006:353) for the areal associations. NC ap lungs may be related, but see Matisoff (1978a:113-9). 243 See Matisoff (1985a:149) for the Indo-Aryan association. 244 See [#112] Moon for OC suffixal -k. Sagart (1999a:175) suggests TB to reflect a Sinitic loan. 245 Matisoff (1972a:47) notes LB alternations with -p. 246 The source of OB medial -r- is discussed by Benedict (1972a:64) and Matisoff (1985a:31). 247 There is a possible association with [#75] Flower, Burn. 248 OB TC-II is a result of analogical levelling also attested in [#80] Four and [#71] Five. The MC reflex of OC shows an ablaut in a. 249 Sagart (1999b:41) reconstructs OC hr-, while Norman & Mei (1976:286-8) and Pulleyblank (1983:427-8) favour hl-. See Blagden (1916a:94), Shafer (1952:137), Hla Pe (1967a:87), Norman & Mei (1976:286) and Benedict (1994:5-7) for the AA association. Luce (1962:86) and VanBik (2009:117) suggest that NC kj¹ tiger may ultimately be related to OB, while Benedict (1972a:116) prefers to compare OB acs;(opf) khj²(sc) leopard, but the semantic core is opf leopard; neither is particularly likely. 250 OB lacks initial aspiration due to it being a bound morpheme. Benedict (1972a:145) compares OB uspf kjc compact, twist, but Nishi (1974:5;36) reconstructs original -k.

[#170] (Areal)251 NC lj¹, lak; OB vQm hlj¹, vsuf ljk; OC ۡ lat, ౯ lja

[#171] (Austroasiatic)252 ra ׃ NC ha¹; OC

[#172] 253 NC th²; OB opf sc; OC ᜲʳs

[#173] 254 NC hns; OB ESpf hnc; OC Բ njs

[#174] * 255 NC hu²; OC ᝲ thw

[#175] 256 NC kha¹; OC ׋ khw¹

[#176] 257 NC hna²; OB ESif; hn²; OC 㒾/㙳 na()

[#177] 258 NC (h)lm¹; OB vHk lwm¹, vHI hlwm¹, vHIY hlwm; OC ᘜ lwm

259 [#178] NC sl²; OB aq; / qd,f hj²; OC ḥ s-hj

251 OB/OC tongue; lick. See Shafer (1952:138;144), Sagart (2005a:163) and Shorto (2006:305;383-4) for the areal associations. See Button (2010:22) for a discussion of OC l-. 252 See Norman & Mei (1976:288-92) for the AA association. VanBik’s (2009:196) and Simon’s (1954:512) respective comparisons of NC and OC with oGm; sw² tooth are difficult to reconcile phonologically. 253 OC firewood. Matisoff (1975:167, 1978a:174) rejects Miller’s (1974:208) criticism of the semantics. 254 See [#138] Seven. 255 OC anus. Benedict’s (1972a:53) comparison of apmuf cwk vulva is is kept separate by Matisoff (2008:130-4). 256 Benedict (1972a:109) compares ½Gm / ½Gm[f rw¹ village by treating initial r- as a prefix and demoting NC k- to prefixal status. However, Bradley (1979:326) notes no Loloish correlates and the inscriptions attest a superfluous -[f -h with the earliest example a½Gm[f in MZ (A.8-9) attesting a curious -waw rhyme that violates OB phonotactic constraints. Duroiselle (1919:37), Ba Shin (1962:38-9), Nishida (1956:30, 1972:258) and Nishi (1997:994) tentatively associate -[f -h with TC-II, discussed in 3.4, but ½Gm rwa¹ is in TC-I and Ohno (1967:88) is more sceptical. 257 OB dew, fog, mist; OC heavy with dew/grain. See Schuessler (2007:439) for the OC TC-I/II distinction. 258 See Bodman (1980:124) for the OC -m coda. The NC comparison is from Löffler (1966:134). The OC initial is supported by its phonetic ۫ west 259 which is homophonous with ཨ s-hj nest, roost; the merger with ੑ sj < sr wash occurred later. Pulleyblank (1962:132;215-6, 2001:48) and Sagart (2004:71-2) alternatively reconstruct OC s-n-.

260 [#179] (Austroasiatic) NC su²; OC ✾˂⻧ srw

[#180] 261 NC tuj²; OB (wH)awG; / (wH)xk,f (tam¹)thwj²; OC ֽ s-twj, ᲼ twj

[#181] 262 NC tk; OB &uf rk; OC ៣ tk

[#182] 263 NC krp; OC ࣸ khrp

[#183] NC klhi¹; OB av / vd,f lj¹

[#184] 264 NC raw¹; OB a&mf rw¹

[#185] (Areal) 265 ()na, ዿ n, ԯ n ڿ NC n²; OB eif n¹; OC

260 See Weidert (1987:366-7) for the comparison and Schuessler (2007:543) for the AA association. 261 OB spittle. The reconstruction of OC t- follows Starostin (1995:241). Sagart (1999b:157-8), following Benedict’s (1972a:169, 1972b:30) association of ՟ khwjn river, stream, reconstructs a lateral. 262 See Jacques (2004:263) for ST -q. Jacques (p.c.) suggests a prefix may have caused lenition of t- to r- in OB. Benedict (1967:315-6, 1972a:19) suggests AN and TK links, but Matisoff (2003:76) is sceptical. 263 Schuessler (2007:423) suggests the OC aspiration may have an onomatopoeic source. 264 Benedict’s (1972a:263) comparison of Mizo rwI dry is problematic. 265 See Sagart (1995a:252) and Jacques (2007) for the areal association. Matisoff (1993:127) notes the - coda to be haphazardly attested in Tibeto-Burman; see [#53] Ear for a possible - in OC ԯ. Hla Pe (1967:89) notes Schuessler’s (2007:33) comparison of nnf; ~ nJ j² you (female term of address) to be directly from Mon.

Chapter 7 Concluding Remarks

The establishment in the preceding chapters of regular sounds laws and morphological paradigms attempts to provide greater legitimacy to the Sino-Tibetan hypothesis. Most contentious is the reconstruction of an underlying /a vowel system that threatens the very nature of the dichotomy between vowels and consonants.

7.1 Vowelless Languages

Although languages attesting vertical vowel systems have been accorded some legitimacy by Ladefoged & Maddieson (1995:286), Colarusso’s (1997:122-3) treatment of them as rare developments from original triangular systems only mildly tempers Szemerényi’s (1967:74-5) charges of statistical insignificance.266 The reconstruction of a Sino-Tibetan /a vowel system suggests that rather than being left languishing in a linguistic hinterland, vertical vowel systems are representative of a more primordial situation underlying the very phonological foundations of language. It is unlikely mere coincidence that the Indo- European language family, upon which the whole enterprise of historical linguistics was founded, is also suggestive of such a system.

7.1.1 Indo-European

Under the premise that i and u pattern as glides267 and a is too insignificant to be a primary vowel, Saussure (1879:70-1;135) reduces the Indo-European vowel system to a single vowel a1 with an ablaut variant a2 for which he acknowledges a correlation with e and o in other analyses. The typological peculiarity of the remaining e/o vowel system leads Allen (1956:172-4, 1965), Pulleyblank (1965b:91-2, 1993b:68-74), and Colarusso (1981:499-501) to suggest that this may actually reflect a vertical /a system. It is ironic that this reanalysis represents an attempt to make the Indo-European vowel system typologically more reasonable by appealing to a construct generally dismissed as typologically anomalous. Interestingly, reconstructing a for o allows an account for the sporadic a vowel in Saussure’s analysis to be made: Pulleyblank’s (1965b:89, 1993b:73-4) and Colarusso’s (1981:499-501;536) proposal that a new a vowel emerged from an original laryngeal to displace original a to o is supported by Villar (1993:152, 1993:148) who adds that the many a reflexes of original o in daughter languages make a shift from a to o as likely as one of o to a.268 An association of e with is questioned by Villar (1993:157-8) due to a lack of direct evidence, but Allen (1965:116) and Colarusso (1981:499-500) note the salient features behind the vowel to reflect one that is neither back nor maximally open and that a shift from of to e nicely parallels that of a to o; Pulleyblank (1993b:74) further proposes that the phonological reanalysis of j and w as i and u would have triggered a shift from to e in accordance with the proposals in

266 See Kuipers (1968:78-80) for a criticism of Szemerényi’s position. 267 Note also the observation in 1.1 that the distinction between sonorant consonants and vowels in Northern Chin is blurred. 268 Pulleyblank (1993b:83) notes solid evidence in the evolution of Chinese.

Crothers (1978:109) that the common vowel system i, u, e, a derived from an original and i, u, , a.269

7.1.2 Northwest Caucasian

7.1.2.1 Abaza

Saussure’s reduction of the Indo-European vowel system to a single vowel with an ablaut variant leads Jakobson (1958:23) to comment that such a unitary vowel system is not supported anywhere in the world. Allen (1958:28), referring back to Allen’s (1956:142;172) earlier study of the Northwest Caucasian language Abaza, responds that the vertical /a vowel system attested there may be treated as only having one vowel a if is treated as an epenthetic product of syllabic stress placement that alternates with zero in unstressed positions. Jakobson (1958:34) responds that this violates established principles of phonemic differentiation but, as Kuipers (1968:83) remarks, this does not necessarily make the establishment correct. A more interesting line of query could have centred on the fact that Allen is treating a as the solitary vowel in Abaza while Saussure believes the Indo-European root vowel to be the one represented as in the analysis proposed here. Lehmann’s (1952:112) quite valid proposal to treat the solitary Indo- European vowel as a default feature of syllabicity, due to it having nothing else with which to compare, essentially sets up a vowelless analysis of Indo-European to which Kuipers’ (1960) study of another Northwest Caucasian language, Kabardian, provides an interesting comparison.

7.1.2.2 Kabardian

In his /a analysis of Kabardian, Kuipers (1960:50-1) takes Allen’s approach one step further by suggesting that the vowel a should be reanalysed as a feature of openness rather than a vowel due to it having no other vocalic elements with which to compare. Halle (1970:99-103), who is accepting of Kuipers’ /a analysis, dismisses both the analyses of by Allen and Kuipers as well as Kuipers’ further analysis of a on the following grounds: the symbols for stress and juncture required to dispense with are merely notational distinctions; 270 treating a as a specific feature instead of a vowel represents a terminological readjustment that could be applied to any vowel phoneme. Kuipers (1976:106-7;111-4;119-20) responds accordingly: if is predictable in environments that are unequivocally identifiable as stress and juncture then marking an underlying violates basic phonemic principles; the feature openness, unlike closeness which is dependent on its position in the word, always yields a phonetic vowel but this is not valid grounds for establishing a consonant-vowel distinction. In purely synchronic terms, Kuipers’ response seems justified, but the special treatment that must be accorded to a could have been more persuasively critiqued by Halle had he appealed to diachronic

269 Crothers’ analysis is also noted by Villar (1993:144;157-8) whose preference for treating i and u as vowel phonemes, regardless of their different function from e and a, leaves him no typological grounds for favouring any vocalic system other than i, u, e, a. 270 According to Kuipers (1976:108-9), the issue of juncture does not concern Abaza. Nonetheless, Halle (1970:101) is able to level the same criticisms regarding stress.

evidence. In this regard, although Szemerényi’s (1967:75-9) denunciation of Kuipers on typological grounds is countered by Kuipers’ (1968:74-7) response that this represents a confusion of the phonetic with the phonemic and a lack of familiarity with Northwest Caucasian languages, Szemerényi’s (1967:81) observation that the /a systems proposed for Indo-European and Kabardian are fundamentally incomparable is valid. 271 While Kuipers’ vowelless analysis, upon which Pulleyblank’s (1984a:57, 1984b) similar proposal for Mandarin is based, superficially appears to parallel the Indo-European evidence, this cannot be projected back to the Indo-European level where a is an apophonic derivative of that cannot be compared with j and w due to it being able to function as a syllabic base like ; this differs from Kuipers’ and Pulleyblank’s synchronic analyses of Kabardian and Mandarin respectively where a is allowed to pattern as a feature of openness in the same way that j and w pattern as features of palatility and labiality that only become vocalised when occupying the requisite slot in the syllable.272 A similar situation exists in the Sino-Tibetan reconstruction proposed here where and a, albeit with the former being underlyingly zero, represent the two basic building blocks for the syllable.

7.2 Indo-European versus Sino-Tibetan

Pulleyblank (1965b:95-8) proposes a controversial alternative approach by treating Indo- European a as a phonemic vowel with an originally defined morphological function rather than a result of undefined phonetic conditioning with secondary semantic differentiation. However, in addition to Szemerényi’s (1967:83-4) querying of the semantic grounds for the /a alternation, Pulleyblank (1965b:98) himself notes the inherent paradox whereby if is originally zero then the vowel a would have existed phonemically beforehand. Following Pulleyblank’s (1986a:9, 1989:8-14) proposals for Old Chinese, Pulleyblank (1993b:79-82) attempts to resolve the paradox by suggesting the a vowel to be a product of infixation rather than a derived ablaut. Pulleyblank’s proposal is interesting but not conclusive even for Old Chinese; when transferred to Indo- European, Lehmann’s (1993:119-120) criticism that supposed external parallels do not remove the need for solid internal reconstruction based on Indo-European evidence becomes all the more pertinent. Consequently, although the Sino-Tibetan and Indo- European evidence provides good support for a theory of /a as the underlying vocalic structure of language that is still manifested at the phonemic level in several languages around the world, at this stage of knowledge it can only tantalizingly hint at a complete rejection of the consonant/vowel distinction that will hopefully be achieved with further advancements in the field.

271 Kuipers’ (1968:77) response suggests that in this case he has not fully grasped the significance of Szemerényi’s point. 272 A fundamental difference between Kuipers’ and Pulleyblank’s analyses is that Pulleyblank (1998a:5-13) does actually posit a syllabic glide phoneme a, corresponding to a in the same way j and w corresponds to i and u, while Kuipers’ does not need to appeal to such a recourse in Kabardian.

Bibliography

Allen, W. Sidney 1956 “Structure and System in the Abaza Verbal Complex.” Transactions of the Philological Society 127-76. 1958 Discussion of Jakobson 1958. In Sivertsen (ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguistics. Oslo: Oslo University Press, 27-8. 1965 “On One Vowel Systems.” Lingua 13:111-24.

Ba Shin 1962 The Lokahteikpan. Rangoon: Rangoon University Press.

Baxter, William H. 1980 “Some Proposals on Old Chinese Phonology.” In Coetsem & Waugh (eds.) Contributions to Historical Linguistics: Issues and Materials. Cornell Linguistic Contributions #3. Leiden: Brill, 1033. 1992 A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1994a “Some Phonological Correspondences between Chinese and Tibeto- Burman.” In Kitamura, Nishida & Nagano (eds.) Current Issues in Sino- Tibetan Linguistics. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 25-35. 1994b “Reply to Pulleyblank.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 22.1:139-59. 1995 “Ongoing Research: Old Chinese, Version 1.1.” Paper presented at the Old Chinese Seminar, Leiden University, Netherlands. 2005 “Early Chinese Dialects.” Paper presented at the Centre de recherches linguistiques sur l'Asie orientale, Paris, France.

Baxter, William H. & Laurent Sagart 2008 “Old Chinese: The Baxter-Sagart Reconstruction 0.98.” Paper Presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #41, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

Beckwith, Christopher I. 1996 “The Morphological Argument for the Existence of Sino-Tibetan.” In Pan- Asiatic Linguistics. Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Language and Linguistics (Volume III). Salaya: Institute of Language and Culture for Rural Development, Mahidol University, 812-26. 2002a “The Sino-Tibetan Problem.” In Beckwith (ed.) Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages. Leiden: Brill, 113-57. 2002b Review of Sagart 1999b. Anthropological Linguistics 44.2:207-15.

Benedict, Paul K. 1939 “Semantic Differentiation in Indo-Chinese.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 4.3/4:213-29. 1940 “Studies in Indo-Chinese Phonology.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 5.2:101-27.

1942 “Thai, Kadai, and Indonesian: A New Alignment in Southeastern Asia.” American Anthropologist 44/4.1:576-601. 1967 “Austro-Thai and Chinese.” Behavior Science Notes 3:275-333. 1972a Sino-Tibetan, a Conspectus. Contributing editor: J. A. Matisoff. Cambridge: University Press. 1972b “The Sino-Tibetan Tonal System.” In Thomas & Bernot (eds.) Langues et techniques, nature et société. Paris: Editions Klincksieck, 25-33. 1973a “Tibeto-Burman Tones with a Note on Teleo-Reconstruction.” Acta Orientalia 35:127-38. 1973b “The Proto-Sino-Tibetan (PST) Reconstruction.” Paper Presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #6, San Diego, University of California. 1975 “A Note on Proto-Burmese-Lolo Prefixation.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 2.2:289-91. 1976a “Sino-Tibetan: Another Look.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 96.2:167-97. 1976b “Early Chinese Borrowings.” In Hashimoto (ed.) Genetic Relationship, Diffusion and Typological Similarities of East and Southeast Asian languages. Tokyo: Society for the Promotion of Science, 60-100. 1976c “Matisoff: Austro-Thai and Sino-Tibetan: An Examination of Body-part Contact Relationships – Comment.” Computational Analyses of African and Asian Linguistics 6:93-4. 1977 “Proto-Sino-Tibetan Vowels.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #10, Georgetown University, Washington D.C. 1979 “Four Forays into Karen Linguistic History.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 5.1:1-35. 1983 “TB/Karen Cluster vs. Prefix *s.” In Chu, Coblin & Tsao (eds.) Papers from the 14th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Taipei: Student Book Company, 11-20. 1984 “W. L. Ballard: Mother Soup – Comment.” Computational Analyses of African and Asian Linguistics 22:65-70. 1987a “Archaic Chinese Initials.” In Wang Li Memorial Volume. Hong Kong: Joint Publishing, 25-71. 1987b “Early MY/TB Loan Relationships.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 10.2:12-21. 1988a “Sino-Tibetan Snot/Nose.” In Bradley, Henderson & Mazaudon (eds.) Prosodic Analysis and Asian Linguistics. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. 1988b “Sino-Tibetan Reconstructions – Agreements and Disagreements.” Paper Presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #21, University of Lund, Sweden. 1991a “Suprasegmentals in Southeast Asia.” In Ratliff & Schiller (eds.) Papers from the First Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society. Tempe: Arizona State University, 15-33.

1991b “Austric: An ‘Extinct’ Proto-Language.” In Davidson (ed.) Austroasiatic Languages, Essays in Honour of H. L. Shorto. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 7-12. 1993 “Tibeto-Burman Split Cognates.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 16.2:121-2. 1994 “Austroasiatic Loanwords in Sino-Tibetan.” Mon-Khmer Studies 18/19:1-13. 1996a “Monic *clur and Other Southeast Asian ‘Dogs’.” Mon-Khmer Studies 26:3- 6. 1996b “Interphyla Flow in Southeast Asia.” In Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Language and Linguistics” Salaya: Mahidol University, 1579-90. 1998 “Remarks on A Comparative Vocabulary of Five Sino-Tibetan Languages, by Ilia Peiros and Sergei A. Starostin.” Mother Tongue 4:151-2.

Bennison, J. J. 1933 Census of India 1931, Volume XI, Burma: Part I – Report. Rangoon: Government Printing.

Bernot, Denise 1978-92 Dictionnaire birman-français (15 volumes). Paris: Société d’études linguistiques et anthropologiques de France.

Bhaskararao, Peri 1989 “The Process of Chiming in Tiddim Chin.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 12.1:110-32. _ݶĵǃ܂Tiddim Chin Verbs and Their Alternants.” E[EExN“ 1994 ƽ Ajia Afurika Gengo Bunka Kenky 46-7:333-60. 1996 “A Computerized Lexical Database of Tiddim Chin and Lushai.” In Nara & Machida (eds.) A Computer-Assisted Study of South-Asian Languages. Report #6. Tokyo: Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, 27-143.

Blagden, Charles O. 1914 “The Transliteration of Old Burmese Inscriptions.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 4:136-9. 1916 “Klañjo-Kye:z:” Journal of the Burma Research Society 6.92-5.

Boas, Franz & Pliny E. Goddard, Edward Sapir, Alfred L. Kroeber 1916 Phonetic Transcription of Indian Languages. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 66.6. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.

Bodman, Nicholas, C. 1980 “Proto-Chinese and Sino-Tibetan: Data Towards Establishing the Nature of the Relationship.” In Coetsem & Waugh (eds.) Contributions to Historical Linguistics: Issues and Materials. Cornell Linguistic Contributions #3. Leiden: Brill, 34-199.

Bradley, David 1979 Proto-Loloish. Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies, Monograph #39. London & Malmö: Curzon Press. 1982 “Register in Burmese.” In Bradley (ed.) Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics #8: Tonation. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 117-132. 1985 “The Arakanese Dialect of Burmese and Proto-Burmish Reconstruction.” In Thurgood, Matisoff & Bradley (eds.) Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan Area: the State of the Art. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 180-200. 1997 “Tibeto-Burman Languages and Classification.” In Bradley (ed.) Papers in South East Asian Linguistics #14: Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 1-71. 2002 “The Subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman.” In Beckwith (ed.) Medieval Tibeto- Burman Languages. Leiden: Brill, 73-112. 2007 “East and South-East Asia.” In Asher and Mosley (eds.) Atlas of the World’s Languages (2nd Edition). London: Routledge, 157-208.

Bright, William 1957a “Singing in Lushai.” Indian Linguistics 17:24-8. 1957b “Alternations in Lushai.” Indian Linguistics 18:101-10.

Burling, Robbins 1957 “Lushai Phonemics.” Indian Linguistics 17:148-55. 1967 Proto-Lolo-Burmese. Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics Publication 43; International Journal of American Linguistics 33.2/2. Bloomington: Indiana University.

Button, Christopher T. J. 2009 A Reconstruction of Proto Northern Chin in Old Burmese and Old Chinese Perspective. Ph.D. Dissertation, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. 2010 Phonetic Ambiguity in the Chinese Script: A Palaeographical and Phonological Analysis. München: Lincom Europa.

Chang, Kun 1972 “Sino-Tibetan ‘Iron’: *Qhleks.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 92.3:436-46.

Chhangte, Lalnunthangi 1993 Mizo Syntax. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Oregon.

Coblin, W. South 1986 A Sinologist’s Handlist of Sino-Tibetan Lexical Comparisons. Monumenta Serica Monograph Series #18. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag.

Colarusso, John 1981 “Typological Parallels between Proto-Indo-European and the Northwest Caucasian Languages.” In Arbeitman & Bombard (eds.) Bono Homini Donum: Essays in Historical Linguistics in Memory of J. Alexander Kerns, Volume 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 475-557. 1997 “Proto-Pontic: Phyletic Links between Proto-Indo-European and Proto- Northwest Caucasian.” The Journal of Indo-European Studies 25.1-2:119- 151.

Crothers, John 1978 “Typology and Universals of Vowel systems.” In Greenberg (ed.) Universals of Human Language (Volume 2). Stanford: Stanford university Press, 93-152.

Dempsey, Jakob 2001 “Remarks on the Vowel System of Old Burmese.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 24.2:205-34.

Downer, Gordon B. 1959 “Derivation by Tone-Change in Classical Chinese.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 22.1/3:258-90.

Duroiselle, Charles 1913 Preface to Taw Sein Ko 1913. 1915 “Klañjo-Kye:z:” Journal of the Burma Research Society 5:98-102. 1919 “The Burmese Face of the Myazedi Inscription at Pagan.” Epigraphica Birmanica 1.1:1-46. 1921 A List of Inscriptions Found in Burma. Rangoon: Government Printing.

Egerod, Søren 1971 “Phonation Types in Chinese and South East Asian Languages.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 13.2:159-71. 1973 Review of Benedict 1972a. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1.3:498-505.

French, Walter T. 1983 Northern Naga: A Tibeto-Burman Mesolanguage. Ph.D. Dissertation, City University of New York.

Gong Hwang-Cherng ᧍ᅇৄ 1980 “A Comparative Study of the Chinese, Tibetan and Burmese Vowel Systems.” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 51.3:455-89. 1995 “The System of Finals in Proto-Sino-Tibetan.” In Wang (ed.) The Ancestry of the Chinese Language. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series #8. Berkeley: California, 41-92. ዧ፿ऱဲᙰംᠲ “Cong Hanzangyu de Bijiao Kanײൕዧ៲፿ऱֺለ઎Ղ 2000 Shanggu Hanyu de Citou Wenti”. Language and Linguistics 1.2:39-62.

Halle, Morris 1970 “Is Kabardian a Vowel-less Language?” Foundations of Language 6:95-103

Halle, Morris & K. P. Mohanan 1985 “The Segmental Phonology of Modern English.” Linguistic Inquiry 16:57- 116.

Handel, Zev J. 2002 “Rethinking the Medials of Old Chinese: Where are the r’s?” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 31.1:3-32.

Hartmann, Helga 1985 “Morphophonemic Changes in Daai Chin.” In Ratanakul, Thomas & Premsrirat (eds.) Southeast Asian Linguistic Studies presented to André-G Haudricourt. Bangkok: Mahidol University, 178-202. 1988 “Notes on Southern Chin Languages.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 11.2:98-119. 2002 “Verb Stem Alternation in Daai Chin.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25.2:81-97.

Hashimoto Mantaro J. 1970 “Internal Evidence for Ancient Chinese Palatal Endings.” Language 46.2/1:336-65.

Haudricourt, André-Georges 1954a “De l’origine des tons en viêtnamien.” Journal Asiatique 242:69-82. 1954b “Comment reconstruire le chinois archaïque.” Word 10.2/3:351-64. 1975 “Le système de tons du karen comun.” Bulletin de la société linguistique de Paris 70:339-43.

Henderson, Eugénie, J. A. 1948 “Notes on the Syllable Structure of Lushai.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 12.3/4:713-25. 1952 “The Main Features of Cambodian Pronunciation.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 14.1:149-74. 1962 Chin Linguistic Studies. Editorial Foreword to an unpublished volume originally projected to contain Luce 1962a, Stern 1963 and Henderson 1965. 1963 “Notes on Teizang, a Northern Chin Dialect.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 26.3:551-8. 1965 Tiddim Chin, A Descriptive Analysis of Two Texts. London Oriental Series #15. London: Oxford University Press. 1976 “Vestiges of Morphology in Some Tibeto-Burman Languages.” In Nguyen (ed.) South-East Asian Linguistic Studies #2. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 1-17.

Hillard, Edward J. 1974 “Some Aspects of Chin Verb Morphology.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 1:178-85. 1975 “On a Phonological Regularity in the Lushei Verbal Alternation.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #8, University of California, Berkeley.

Hla Pe 1948 “Curiosities in the Burmese Language.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 32:62-72. 1960 “Some Adapted Pali Loanwords in Burmese.” Burma Research Society Fiftieth Anniversary Publications #1. Rangoon: Burma Research Society, 71-99. 1967a “A Tentative List of Mon Loanwords in Burmese.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 50.1:71-94 1967b “A Re-examination of Burmese Classifiers.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 50.2:177-93.

Hockett, Charles, F. 1947 “Peiping Phonology.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 67.4:253-67.

Hyman, Larry M. 2005 “Tone in Kùkí-Thàadw.” Paper Presented at the Workshop on Making Sense of Prosody, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

Jakobson, Roman O. 1958 “Typological Studies and their Contribution to Historical Linguistics.” In Sivertsen (ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Linguistics. Oslo: University Press, 17-25 (with discussion on pages 25-35).

Jacques, Guillaume 2004 Phonologie et morphologie du japhug (rGyalrong). Ph.D. Dissertation, Paris 7 – Denise Diderot. 2007 A Shared Suppletive Pattern in the Pronominal Systems of Chang Naga and Southern Qiang. Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 30.1:61-78.

Jones, Robert B. 1970 Review of Matisoff 1969. Journal of Asian Studies 30.1:230-1. 1976 Prolegomena to a Phonology of Old Burmese.” In Cowan & Wolters (eds.) Southeast Asian History and Historiography. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 43-50. 1986 “Pitch Register Languages.” In McCoy & Light (eds.) Contributions to Sino-Tibetan Studies. Leiden: Brill, 135-43.

1988 “Proto-Burmese as a Test of Reconstruction.” In Duncan-Rose & Vennemann (eds.) On Language: Rhetorica, Phonologica, Syntactica. London: Routledge, 203-11.

Khoi Lam Thang 2001 A Phonological Reconstruction of Proto Chin. M.A. Thesis, Payap University.

Konow, Sten 1904 Linguistic Survey of India, Volume III, Tibeto-Burman Family: Part III, Specimens of the Kuki-Chin and Burma Groups. Series editor: G.A. Grierson. Calcutta: Government Printing.

Kuipers, Aert H. 1960 Phoneme and Morpheme in Kabardian. The Hague: Mouton & Co. 1968 “Unique Types and Typological Universals.” In Heesterman, Schokker, & Subramoniam (eds.) Overdruk uit Pratidnam. Indian, Iranian and Indo- European Studies Presented to Franciscus Bernardus Jacobus Kuiper on his Sixtieth Birthday. The Hague: Mouton, 68-88. 1976 “Typologically Salient Features of Some North-West Caucasian Languages.” Studia Caucasica 3.101-27.

Ladefoged, Peter & Ian Maddieson 1996 The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lehman, F. K. (Chit Hlaing) 1963 The Structure of Chin Society. Illinois Studies in Anthropology #3. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 1970 “Some Diachronic Rules of Burmese Phonology: The Problem of Final ‘Palatals’.” In Lehman (ed.) Occasional Papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics #2. Urbana: University of Illinois, 1-34. 1973 “Tibeto-Burman Syllable Structure, Tone, and the Theory of Phonological Conspiracies.” In Kachru, Lees, Malkiel, Pietrangeli & Saporta (eds.) Issues in Linguistics: Papers in Honor of Henry and Renée Kahane. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 515-47. 1978 Review of Weidert 1975. Language 54.3:719-22. 1979 “Etymological Speculations on some Chin Words.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 4.2:1-6. 1992a “The Phonology of Standard Upper Burmese (Mandalay-Sagaing Dialect) with Particular Reference to its Implications for Burmese Historical Phonology.” In Ratliff & Schiller (eds.), Papers from the First Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society. Tempe: Arizona State University, 225-42. 1992b “Chin.” In Hockings (ed.) Encyclopedia of World Cultures, Volume III, South Asia. Boston: G. K. Hall, 62-8.

1996 “Relative Clauses in Lai Chin, with Special Reference to Verb Stem Alternations and the Extension of Control Theory.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 19.1:43-58. 2008 “The Puzzle of dk loun:gyi: tin tahcaung: ngin in Burmese: A Problem in Phonetics and History” Paper presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #41, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London

Lehmann, Winfred P. 1952 Proto-Indo-European Phonology. Austin: University of Texas Press & Linguistic Society of America. 1993 “Comment on the Typology of Indo-European by Edwin G. Pulleyblank.” The Journal of Indo-European Studies 22.1-2:119-21.

Li Fang-kuei 1974 “Studies on Archaic Chinese.” Translation by G. L. Mattos. Monumenta Serica 31:219-87.

Lindau, Mona 1978 “Vowel Features.” Language 54.3:541-63.

Löffler, Lorenz G. 1966 “The Contribution of Mru to Sino-Tibetan Linguistics.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gessellschaft 116:118-59. 2002a “Some Notes on Maraa.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25.1:123- 36. 2002b “The tonal System of Chin Final Stops.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25.2:123-53.

Lorrain, J. Herbert 1940 Dictionary of the Lushai Language. Bibliotheca Indica 261. Calcutta: Asiatic Society.

Luce, Gordon H. 1940 “Economic Life of the Early Burman.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 30.1:283-335. 1956 “The 550 Jtakas in Old Burma.” Artibus Asiae 19.3/4:291-307 1959a “Chin Hills – Linguistic Tour (Dec 1954) – University Project.” Four supplementary tables (I – Chin, Karen and Burmese Tone Patterns; II – Chin, Karen and Burmese Initials & Finals; III – Old Loanwords in Chin; IV – Non Chin Words in K’umi). Journal of the Burma Research Society 42.1:19-31. 1959b “Notes on the People of Burma in the 12th to 13th Century A.D.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 42.1:52-74. 1959c “Old Kyaukse and the Coming of the Burmans.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 42.1:75-112.

100

1962 “Common Form in Burma Chin Languages.” Unpublished 76 page manuscript originally scheduled to appear in Henderson 1962. Three supplementary tables: A – 189 words in 22 Chin languages; B – 683 words in 7 Chin languages; C – 192 words from table B compared with Burmese, Karen, Tibetan and Chinese. Three supplementary notes: A – Tèdim (Kamhow); B – Xôsai; C – Basic Tones in Chin. 1968 Review of Henderson 1965. Asia Major (New Series) 14.1:106-7. 1969-70 Old Burma – Early Pagán (3 volumes). Artibus Asiae, Supplementum 25. Locust Valley, New York: J. J. Augustin for the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University. 1973 Glossary of Pre-Standard Old Burmese. Unpublished 119 page manuscript with two supplementary lists: A – Shan & Mon Borrowings; B – Indo- Aryan Borrowings. 1976 “Sources of Early Burma History.” In Cowan & Wolters (eds.) Southeast Asian History and Historiography. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 31-42. 1977 “Sino-Tibeto-Burmese Note 3: Numerals.” Unpublished 3 page manuscript dated from its partial inclusion in “Two Sino-Tibeto-Burmese Notes” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 40.1:127-8. 1978 “Tangut or Proto-Burman.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 41.3:579-82. 1981 Comparative Word-list of Old Burmese, Chinese and Tibetan. London: School of Oriental and African Studies. 1985 Phases of Pre-Pagán Burma (2 volumes). Oxford: Oxford University Press. n.d. “Memoranda on Old Burmese.” Unpublished 1 page manuscript.

Luce, Gordon H. & K. J. Whitbread 1971 “Pagan, Wetkyi-in Kubyauk-gyi, an Early Burmese Temple with Ink- Glosses.” Artibus Asiae 33.3:167-218.

Luce, Gordon H. & Pe Maung Tin 1933-56 Inscriptions of Burma (5 Portfolios). University of Rangoon Oriental Studies Publications #2-6. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Maspero, Henri 1912 “Études sur la phonétique historique de la langue annamite: les initials.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrème-Orient 21.1:1-124. 1933 “La Langue chinoise.” Conférences de l’institut de linguistique de l‘université de Paris, 33-70. 1938 Review of Shafer 1938 (monographs 1 & 2). Bulletin de la société linguistique de Paris 39:206-7.

Matisoff, James A. 1968 Review of Burling 1967. Language 44.4:879-97. 1969 “Lahu and Proto-Lolo-Burmese.” In Becker (ed.) Occasional Papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics #1, 117-221. Michigan: University of Michigan.

101

1970 “Glottal Dissimilation and the Lahu High-Rising Tone: A Tonogenetic Case-study.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 90.1:13-44. 1972a The Loloish Tonal Split Revisited. Center for South and Southeast Asia Studies Research Monograph #7. Berkeley: University of California. 1972b “Tangkhul Naga and Comparative Tibeto-Burman.” ʂǸE[E_ƽ Tnan Ajia Kenky 10.2:271-83. 1973 “Tonogenesis in Southeast Asia.” In Hyman (ed.) Consonant Types and Tone. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 71-95. 1974 “The tones of Jinghpaw and Lolo-Burmese: Common Origin vs. Independent Development.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 15.2:153-212. 1975 “Benedict’s Sino-Tibetan: A Rejection of Miller’s Conspectus Inspection.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 2.1:155-72. 1976a “Austro-Thai and Sino-Tibetan: an Examination of Body-Part Contact Relationships.” In Hashimoto (ed.) Genetic Relationship, Diffusion, and Typological Similarities of East and Southeast Asian Languages. Tokyo: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, 256-89. 1976b Introduction to the Written Burmese Rhyming Dictionary. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 3.1:iii-x. 1978a Variational Semantics in Tibeto-Burman: The ‘Organic’ Approach to Linguistic Comparison. Occasional Papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics #4. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. 1978b Mpi and Lolo-Burmese Microlinguistics. Monumenta Serindica #4. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. 1979 “Problems and Progress in Lolo-Burmese: Quo Vadimus?” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 4.2:11-43. ݶ܂ ”.Stars, Moon, and Spirits: Bright Beings of the Night in Sino-Tibetan“ 1980 _ƽ Gengo Kenky 77:1-45. 1982 “Proto-Languages and Proto-Sprachgefühl.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 6.2:1-64. 1983 “Translucent Insights: A Look at Proto-Sino-Tibetan through Gordon H. Luce’s ‘Comparative Word-List.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 462-76. 1985a “God and the Sino-Tibetan Copula, with Some Good News Concerning ݶĵǃ_ƽ Ajia܂Selected Tibeto-Burman Rhymes.” E[EExN Afurika Gengo Bunka Kenky 29:1-81. 1985b “Out on a limb: Arm, Hand, and Wing in Sino-Tibetan.” In Thurgood, Matisoff & Bradley (eds.) Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan Area: the State of the Art. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 421-50. 1986a “Labiovelar Unit Phonemes in Lolo-Burmese? A Case to Chew Over: Lahu b ‘chew’ < PLB *N-gwya2.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 9.1:83- 8. 1986b “Hearts and minds in Southeast Asian languages and English: an essay in the comparative lexical semantics of psycho-collocations.” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 15.1:5-57.

102

1988a The Dictionary of Lahu. University of California Publications in Linguistics #111. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press. 1988b “Universal Semantics and Allofamic Identification – Two Sino-Tibetan Case-studies – ‘straight/flat/full’ and ‘property/livestock/talent’.” In Sato (ed.) Languages and History in East Asia: Festschrift for Tatsuo Nishida on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday. Kyoto: Shokado, 3-14. 1989a Review of Luce 1985. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 52.3:599-602. 1989b “Toward a Eurasian Bestiary: the Otter and the Jackal.” Paper presented at International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #22, University of Hawaii. 1991a “The Mother of All Morphemes: Augmentatives and Diminutives in Areal and Universal Perspective.” In Ratliff & Schiller (eds.) Papers from the First Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society. Tempe: Arizona State University, 293-349. 1991b “Sino-Tibetan Linguistics: Present State and Future Prospects.” Annual Review of Anthropology 20:469-504. 1992 “Following the Marrow: Two Parallel Sino-Tibetan Etymologies.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 15.1:159-77. 1993 “Sangkong of Yunnan: Secondary Verb Pronominalization in Southern Loloish.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 16.2:123-42. 1994a “Protean Prosodies: Alfons Weidert’s Tibeto-Burman Tonology.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.2:254-58. 1994b “Regularity and Variation in Sino-Tibetan.” In Kitamura, Nishida & Nagano (eds.) Current Issues in Sino-Tibetan Linguistics. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 36-58. 1995 “Sino-Tibetan Palatal Suffixes Revisited.” In Nishi, Matisoff & Nagano (eds.) New Horizons in Tibeto-Burman Morphosyntax, 35-91. 1997a Sino-Tibetan Numeral Systems: Prefixes, Protoforms and Problems. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. 1997b “Primary and Secondary Laryngeal Initials in Tibeto-Burman.” In Yue & Endo (eds.) In Memory of Mantaro J. Hashimoto. Tokyo: Uchiyama Books Company, 29-50. 1999 “Tibeto-Burman Tonology in an Areal Context.” In Kaji (ed.) Proceedings of the Symposium ‘Cross-Linguistic Studies of Tonal Phenomena: Tonogenesis, Typology, and Related Topics’.” Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, 3-32. 2000a “An Extrusional Approach to *p-/w- Variation in Sino-Tibetan”. Language and Linguistics 1.2:135-86. 2000b “On 'Sino-Bodic' and Other Symptoms of Neosubgroupitis.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 63.3:356-69. 2000c “Three Tibeto-Burman/Sino-Tibetan Word Families: Set (of the Sun); Pheasant/Peacock; Scatter/Pour.” In Macken (ed.) Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Southeast Asia Linguistics Society. Tempe: Arizona State University, 215-32.

103

2001 “The Interest of Zhangzhung for Comparative Tibeto-Burman.” In Nagano & LaPolla (eds.) New Research on Zhangzhung and Related Himalayan Languages. Bon Studies 3, Senri Ethnological Reports #19. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 155-80. 2003 Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. University of California Publications in Linguistics #135. Berkeley: University of California Press. 2004 “Areal Semantics: Is There Such a Thing?” In Saxena (ed.) Himalayan Languages, Past and Present. The Hague: Mouton, 347-393. 2005 “The Dinguist’s Dilemma: Deltacism of Laterals in Sino-Tibetan and Elsewhere.” Unpublished revision of paper presented in 1990 at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #23, Arlington, Texas. 2006 “Much Adu ॳຟ about Something: Extrusional Labiovelars in a Northern Yi Patois.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 29.1:95-106. 2007 “Response to Laurent Sagart’s Review of Handbook of Proto-Tibeto- Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction.” Diachronica 24.2:435-44. 2008 The Tibeto-Burman Reproductive System: Toward an Etymological Thesaurus. University of California Publications in Linguistics #140. Berkeley: University of California Press. 2009a “Sur les initiales laryngales primaires et secondaires en tibéto-birman.” Paper presented at the Laboratoire des langues et civilisations à tradition orale, Centre national de la recherche scientifique. Paris, France. 2009b “Toward a Eurasian Bestiary: (I) OTTER in Tibeto-Burman and Mon- Khmer; (2) JACKAL in Sino-Tibetan and Indo-European. Paper presented at International Conference of Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #42, Chiang Mai, Thailand.

Mattos, Gilbert L. 1971 “Tonal ‘Anomalies’ in the Kuo Feng Odes.” 堚ဎᖂ໴ Qinghua Xuebao (Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies) 9.1/2:306-24.

Mei Tsu-lin මల᧵ 1970 “Tones and Prosody and the Origin of the Rising Tone.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 30:86-110. Sisheng Bieyi zhong de Shijian Cengci.” խ㧺兿“ ڻխऱ㦍吗䪾א؄㥔㤤 1980 .Zhongguo Yuwen 6.427-43 ֮ 1989 “The Causative and Denominative Functions of the *s- Prefix in Old Chinese.” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sinology. Taipei: Academia Sinica, 33-51.

Melnik, Nurit 1997 “The Sound System of Lai.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 20.2:9- 19.

104

Miller, Roy A. 1954 “The Sino-Burmese Vocabulary of the I-shih chi-yu.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 17.3/4:370-93. 1956 “The Tibeto-Burman Ablaut System.” Transactions of the International Conference of Orientalists in Japan 1:29-55. 1957 “The Phonology of the Old Burmese Vowel System as Seen in the Myazedi Inscription.” Transactions of the International Conference of Orientalists in Japan 2:39-43. 1968 Review of Shafer 1966-7. 1974 “Sino-Tibetan: Inspection of a Conspectus.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 94.2:195-209. 1988 “The Sino-Tibetan Hypothesis.” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 59.2:509-540.

å૒ڿ Nishi Yoshio vݶ-ac ϗ “Birumago no -ac ni Tsuite.” ʂǿʧî Ty 1974 Gakuh 56:1-43. 1975 OB ry-ϗ “OB ry- ni Tsuite.” ᇞ ΩƂʧɤౣ Kagoshima Daigaku Shiroku 8:1-16. 1977 “Medials in Burmese.” ᇞ ΩƂʧɤʧŁîʜ Kagoshima Daigaku Shigakury Hkoku 26:41-52. 1997 “The Orthographic Standardization of Burmese: Linguistic and Sociolinguistic Speculations.” 6ǱūŦʧǻÛཊ_ƽîʜ Kokuritsu Minzokugaku Hakubutsukan Kenky Hkoku 22.4:975-98. 1998 “The Development of Voicing Rules in Standard Burmese.” 6ǱūŦʧǻ Ûཊ_ƽîʜ Kokuritsu Minzokugaku Hakubutsukan Kenky Hkoku 23.1:253-60. 1999a “Old Burmese: Toward the History of Burmese.” 6ǱūŦʧǻÛཊ_ƽ îʜ Kokuritsu Minzokugaku Hakubutsukan Kenky Hkoku 23.3:659-92 1999b Four Papers on Burmese: Toward the History of Burmese (the Myanmar Language). Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

ɰኆ෦ڿ Nishida Tatsuo ĵϝϤ6ɋɖvݶ_ƽ(1) “Hibun ni Okeru Chko Birumago 1955 no Kenky (1).” ɖʽʧ Kodaigaku (Palaeologia) 4.1:17-32. ĵϝϤ6ɋɖvݶ_ƽ(2) “Hibun ni Okeru Chko Birumago 1956 no Kenky (2).” ɖʽʧ Kodaigaku (Palaeologia) 5.1:22-40. d|fkݶvݶݶĭŏফϝϤ6̯໤ “Chibettogo-Birumago Goi 1957 Hikaku ni Okeru Mondai.” ʂŗʧ Thgaku 15:48-64. 1968a \ݶŏফ_ƽ I “Risugo Hikaku Kenky I.” ʂǸE[E_ƽ Tnan Ajia Kenky 6.1:2-35. -Shina ށ 1968b Review of Shafer 1966-7 ( ZmVd|fkݶŦ_ƽ Chibettogozoku Kenky Josetsu). ʂǿʧî Ty Gakuh 51:1-29.

105

:Mentenkan Yakugo no Kenky ށ ݶʧ܂ݶ_ƽJvܦɶཊ 1972 Biruma Gengogaku Josetsu. Kyoto: ʋཱུÔ Shkad.

Nolan, Stephen 2001 “An Initial Description of Tone in ‘Cho.” In The 33rd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Bangkok: Ramkhamhaeng University, 69-78

Norman, Jerry L. 1984 “Three Min Etymologies.” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 13.2:175-89. 1994 “Pharyngealization in Early Chinese.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.3:397-408.

Norman, Jerry L. & Mei Tsu-Lin 1976 “The Austroasiatics in Ancient South China: Some Lexical Evidence.” Monumenta Serica 32:274-301.

Ohala, John J. 1983 “The Origin of Sound Patterns in Vocal Tract Constraints.” In MacNeilage (ed.) The Production of Speech. New York: Springer-Verlag, 189-216.

Ohno Toru ƂୱŸ ̉ά(1) ݶ໑ʖຨ “Kyts Kuki-Chingo no੒RPdݶ« 1965 .ݶ_ƽ Gengo Kenky 47:8-20܂ ”.Saiksei, (1) Gotshion Seiki no 14-11“ ܕ؛īۉ76ʁƋȷ؛Ⱦ͗vݶĵ 11-14 1967 ݶ_ƽ Gengo܂ ”.Birumago Hibun ni Arawareru Nishu Fukisoku no Hyki Kenky 51:87-8. 2005 “The Structure of Pagan Period Burmese.” In Watkins (ed.) Studies in Burmese Linguistics. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 241-305.g

Okell, John W. A. 1969 A Reference Grammar of Colloquial Burmese (2 volumes). London: Oxford University Press. 1971 “K Clusters in Proto-Burmese.” Paper Presented at the International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics #4, Bloomington, Indiana. 1995 “Three Burmese Dialects.” In Bradley (ed.) Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics #13, Studies in Burmese Languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 1-138.

Osburne, Andrea G. 1975 A Transformational Analysis of Tone in the Verb System of Zahao (Laizo) Chin. Ph.D. Dissertation, Cornell University.

106

Ostapirat, Weerat 1998 “Tiddim Chin Tones in Historical Perspective.” Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area 21.1: 235- 47.

Pe Maung Tin 1922 “Phonetics in a Passport.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 12:127-32. 1929 “Philological Features of the Inscriptions.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 19:78-9. 1930 “Some Old Words in the Inscriptions.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 20:20-1. 1933 “The Dialect of Tavoy.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 23.1:31-46.

Pe Maung Tin & Gordon H. Luce 1928 Selections from the Inscriptions of Pagan. University of Rangoon Oriental Studies Publications #1. Rangoon: British Burma Press. 1960 “Inscriptions of Burma, Portfolio I.” Plates 3-5. Bulletin of the Burma Historical Commission 1.1:1-28. 1963 “Inscriptions of Burma, Portfolio I.” Plates 6-20. Bulletin of the Burma Historical Commission 3:59-142.

Peiros, Ilia 1997 “Lolo-Burmese Linguistic Archaeology.” Mon-Khmer Studies 27:233-48. 1998 Comparative Linguistics in Southeast Asia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

Peiros, Ilia & Sergei A. Starostin 1984 “Sino-Tibetan and Austro-Tai.” Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 22:123-7. 1996 A Comparative Vocabulary of Five Sino-Tibetan Languages (5 fascicles). Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

Peterson, David. A. 1998 “The Morphosyntax of Transitivization in Lai (Haka Chin).” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 21.1:87-153. 2000 “On the Status of the Southern Chin Subgroup.” In The 33rd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Bangkok, Thailand: Ramkhamhaeng University, 79-98.

Przyluski, Jean A. 1924 “Le sino-tibétain.” In Meillet & Cohen (eds.) Les Langues du monde. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Édouard Champion.

Pulleyblank, Edwin G. 1962 “The Consonantal System of Old Chinese.” Asia Major (New Series) 9:58- 144;206-265. 1963 “An Interpretation of the Vowel Systems of Old Chinese and of Written Burmese.” Asia Major (New Series) 10.2:200-21. 1965a “Close/Open Ablaut in Sino-Tibetan.” Lingua 34.:230-40.

107

1965b “The Indo-European Vowel System and the Qualitative Ablaut.” Word 21:86-101. 1965c “The Transcription of Sanskrit k- and kh- in Chinese.” Asia Major (New Series) 11:199-210. 1966a “Chinese and Indo-Europeans.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 9-39. 1966b Review of Henderson 1965. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 29.2:421-3. 1973a “Some New Hypotheses Concerning Word Families in Chinese.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1.1:111-25. 1973b “Some Further Evidence Regarding Old Chinese -s and the Time of Its Disappearance.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 36.2: 368-73. 1977-8 “The Final Consonants of Old Chinese.” Monumenta Serica 33:180-206. 1978 “The Nature of the Middle Chinese Tones and their Development to Early Mandarin.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 6.2:173-203. 1979 “The Chinese Cyclical Signs as Phonograms.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 99.1:24-38. 1982a “Some Evidence on the Reconstruction of the Zhen Rhyme Category in Old Chinese.” Tsing-Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 47.1/2:249-55. 1982b “Loanwords as Evidence for Old Chinese Uvular Initials.” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 53.2:205-12. 1983 “The Chinese and their Neighbors in Prehistoric and Early Historic Times.” In Keightley (ed.) The Origins of Chinese Civilization. Berkeley: University of California Press, 411-66. 1984a Middle Chinese: A Study in Historical Phonology. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. 1984b “Vowelless Chinese? An Application of the Three Tiered Theory of Syllable Structure to Pekingese.” In M. K. M. Chan Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. Seattle: University of Washington, 568-619. 1986a “The Locative Particles Yü Պ, Yü ࣍ and Hu ׏.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 106.1:1-12. 1986b “Tonogenesis as an Index of Areal Relationships in East Asia.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 9.1:65-82. 1989 “Ablaut and Initial Voicing in Old Chinese Morphology: *a as an Infix and Prefix.” In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Sinology. Taipei: Academia Sinica, 1-21. 1991a “The Ganzhi as Phonograms and their Application to the Calendar.” Early China 16:39-80. 1991b Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. 1993a “Old Chinese Phonology: A Review Article.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 21.2:337-80. 1993b “The Typology of Indo-European.” The Journal of Indo-European Studies 21.1-2:63-118

108

1994a “The Old Chinese Origin of Type A and B Syllables.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 22.1:73-100. 1994b “Reply to Baxter’s Reply.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 22.1:161-9. 1995a “The Historical and Prehistorical Relationships of Chinese.” In Wang (ed.) The Ancestry of the Chinese Language, Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series No. 8. Berkeley, California, 145-194. 1995b “The Ganzhi as Phonograms: An Emendation.” Early China News 8:29-30. 1995c “The Role of Glottal Stop in Old Chinese.” In Cheng, Li & Zhang (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL) and the 4th International Conference on Chinese Linguistics (ICCL). Los Angeles: GSIL Publications, University of Southern California, 289-305. 1996 “Prosody or Pharyngealization in Old Chinese? The Origin of the Distinction between Type A and Type B syllables.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 116.1:105-7. 1997 “Longitudinal Reconstruction in Chinese Historical Phonology: Palatal Endings in Middle and Old Chinese.” In Yue & Endo (eds.) In Memory of Mantaro J. Hashimoto. Tokyo: Uchiyama Shoten, 5-20. 1998a “Pharyngeal Glides and Zero Initials in Chinese.” In T'sou (ed.) Studia Linguistica Serica. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong. 1-26. 1998b “Qieyun and Yunjing: The Essential Foundation for Chinese Historical Linguistics.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 118.2:200-16. 1999 “Central Asia at the Dawn of History.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 27.2:146-74. 2000 “Morphology in Old Chinese.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 28.1:26-51. 2001 “Syllable Structure and Morphology in Old Chinese.” In Djamouri (ed.) Collected Essays in Ancient Chinese Grammar. Paris: Centre de recherches linguistiques sur l'asie orientale. 2003 “Non-contrastive Features or Enhancement by Redundant Features?” Language and Linguistics 4.4:713-55.

Róna-Tas, András 1985 Wiener Vorlesungen zur Sprach- und Kulturgeschichte Tibets. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde Heft 13. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien.

Sagart, Laurent 1986 “On the Departing Tone.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 14.1:90-113. 1988 “Glottalised Tones in China and South-East Asia.” In Bradley, Henderson & Mazaudon (eds.) Prosodic Analysis and Asian Linguistics. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 83-93. 1993 “New Views on Old Chinese Phonology.” Diachronica 10.2:237-60. 1995a “Questions of Method in Chinese-Tibeto-Burman Comparison.” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 24.2:245-55. 1995b “Comments from Sagart.” In Wang (ed.) The Ancestry of the Chinese Language, Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series No. 8. Berkeley, California, 337-72.

109

1997 “Prefix T- in Old Chinese.” Paper presented at the 16ème Conférence Internationale des Linguistes, Paris. 1999a “The Chinese and Tibeto-Burman Words for Blood.” In Peyraube & Sun (ed.) In Honor of Mei Tsu-Lin: Studies in Historical Syntax and Morphology.” Paris: Ecole des hautes études en sciences sociales, 165-81. 1999b The Roots of Old Chinese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 2001 “Vestiges of Archaic Chinese Derivational Affixes in Modern Chinese Dialects.” In Chapell (ed.) Sinitic Grammar: Synchronic and Diachronic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 123-42. 2003 “Sources of Middle Chinese Manner Types: Old Chinese Prenasalized Initials in Hmong-Mien and Sino-Tibetan Perspective.” Language and Linguistics 4.4:757-68. 2004 “The Chinese Names of the Four Directions.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 124.1:69-76. 2005a “Sino-Tibetan – Austronesian.” In Sagart, Blench & Sanchez-Mazas (eds.) The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics.New York: Routledge Curzon, 161-176. 2005b “The m- Prefix of Old Chinese.” Paper presented at the International Symposium on Old Chinese, Shanghai, China. 2006a Review of Matisoff 2003. Diachronica 23.1:206-23. 2006b “On Intransitive Nasal Prefixation in Sino-Tibetan Languages.” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 35.1:57-70. 2008a “Reply to Matisoff on the Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction.” Diachronica 25.1:153-5. 2008b “Sino-Tibetan Bones.” Paper presented at the 22èmes journées de linguistique Asie Orientale, Paris.

Sagart, Laurent & William H. Baxter 2009 “Reconstructing Old Chinese Uvulars in the Baxter-Sagart System (version 0.99).” Cahiers de linguistique – Asie orientale 38.2:221-44.

Saussure, Ferdinand de 1879 Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo- européennes. Leipsick: B. G. Teubner.

Sawada Hideo 2003 “Tonal Notations of Indic Scripts in Mainland Southeast Asia” In Bhaskararao (ed.) Working Papers of the International Symposium on Indic Scripts: Past and Present. Tokyo: Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, 318-49.

Schuessler, Axel 1974a “Final -l in Archaic Chinese.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 2.1:79-87. 1974b “R and l in Archaic Chinese.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 2.2:186-99.

110

1985 “The Function of Qusheng in Early Zhou Chinese.” In Thurgood, Matisoff & Bradley (eds.) Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan Area: the State of the Art. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 344-62. 2007 ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Shafer, Robert 1938 Sino-Tibetica (4 monographs edited by Alfred L. Kroeber). Berkeley: np. 1940 “The Vocalism of Sino-Tibetan.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 60.3:302-37. 1941 “The Vocalism of Sino-Tibetan (Part 2. Consonantal Finals).” Journal of the American Oriental Society 61.1:18-31. 1944 “Problems in Sino-Tibetan Phonetics.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 64.3:137-43. 1952 “Etudes sur l’austroasien.” Bulletin de la société linguistique de Paris 48.1:111-58. 1965 “Studies in Austroasian II.” Studia Orientalia 30.5:3-69. 1966-7 Introduction to Sino-Tibetan (Parts 1 & 2). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Shorto, Harry L. 1973 “Three Mon-Khmer Word Families.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 36.2:374-81. 1976 “The Vocalism of Proto-Mon-Khmer.” In Jenner, Thompson & Starosta (eds.) Austroasiatic Studies (2 volumes). Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1041-67. 2006 A Mon-Khmer Comparative Dictionary. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

Simon, Walter 1956 “Tibetan so and Chinese ya ‘tooth’.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 18.3:512-3.

Solnit, David B. 1979 “Proto-Tibeto-Burman *r in Tiddim Chin and Lushai.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 4.2:111-21.

Starostin, Sergei. A. , . . 1989 rekonstrukcija drevnekitajskoj fonologieskoj sistemy. Moscow: Nauka. 1995 “Old Chinese Vocabulary: A Historical Perspective.” In Wang (ed.) The Ancestry of the Chinese Language. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series #8. Berkeley: California, 225-51.

Stern, Theodore 1963 “A Provisional Sketch of Sizang (Siyin) Chin.” Asia Major (New Series) 10.2:222-78. 1984 “Sizang (Siyin) Texts.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 8.1:43-58.

111

Stewart, John A. & Charles W. Dunn 1940-81 A Burmese-English Dictionary (6 volumes). Contributing editors: Hla Pe, H. F. Searle, A. J. Allott, J. W. A. Okell. London: Luzac & School of Oriental and African Studies.

Sun Hongkai 䪘ݛ䬞 1982 ៲佞兿ૉեଃ䦣൶ᄭ “Zangmianyu Ruogan Yinbian Tanyuan.” խ㧺兿ߢ 䝤㦅 Zhongguo Yuyan Xuebao 1:269-98.

Szemerényi, Oswald 1967 “The New Look of Indo-European.” Phonetica 17.2:65-99.

Taw Sein Ko 1900-03 Inscriptions Collected in Upper Burma (2 volumes). Rangoon: Government Printing. 1913 Original Inscriptions Collected by King Bodawpaya in Upper Burma. Rangoon: Government Printing.

Thurgood, Graham 1974 “Lolo-Burmese Rhymes.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 1.1:98-107. 1977 “Lisu and Proto-Lolo-Burmese.” Acta Orientalia 38:147-307. 1981 Notes on the Origins of Burmese Creaky Tone. Monumenta Serindica #9. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.

VanBik, Kenneth 2009 Proto-Kuki-Chin: A Reconstructed Anscestor of the Kuki-Chin Languages. STEDT Monograph 8. Berkeley: University of California STEDT.

Villar, Francisco 1993 “The Indo-European Vowels /a/ and /o/ Revisited.” In Brogyanyi & Lipp (eds.) Comparative-Historical Linguistics: Indo-European and Finno-Ugric. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 139-60.

Vul Za Thang & J. Gin Za Twang 1975 Chin-English Dictionary (Tiddim Chin). Tedim: np

Weidert, Alfons 1975 Componential Analysis of Lushai Phonology. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1979 “The Sino-Tibetan Tongogenetic Laryngeal Reconstruction Theory.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 5.1:49-127. 1981 “Star, Moon, Spirits, and the Affricates of Angami Naga: A Reply to James A. Matisoff.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 6.1:1-38. 1987 Tibeto-Burman Tonology. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

112

Wilkins, David P. 1996 “Natural Tendencies of Semantic Change and the Search for Cognates.” In Durie & Ross (eds.) The Comparative Method Reviewed: Regularity and Irregularity in Language Change. New York: Oxford University Press, 264- 304.

Wolfenden, Stuart N. 1929a Outlines of Tibeto-Burman Linguistic Morphology. Prize Publication #12. London: Royal Asiatic Society. 1929b “On Ok Myit and She Pok, with a Proposed Revision of the Terminology of Burmese ‘Tones’.” Journal of the Burma Research Society 19.2:57-66. 1938 “On the Restitution of Final Consonants in Certain Word Types of Burmese.” Acta Orientalia 17:153-68.

Yakhontov, Sergei E. 1970 “The Phonology of Chinese of the First Millenium B.C. (Rounded Vowels).” Translation by J. L. Norman. Chi-Lin (Unicorn) 6:52-75.

Yanson, Rudolf A. , P. A. 1978 “ hr rh (XI-XIII .).” “So6etanija hr i rh v drevnebirmanskom jazyke (XI-XIII vv.).” vostokovedeniye 6:59-65. 1990 Booc - voprosy fonologii Drevne-birmanskogo jazyka. Moscow: Nauka. 1994 “Mon and Pali Influence on Burmese: How Essential Was It?” In Gärtner & Lorenz (eds.)Tradition and Modernity in Myanmar,365-72. 2002a “A List of Old Burmese Words from 12th Century Inscriptions.” In Beckwith (ed.) Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages. Leiden: Brill, 163-7. 2002b “On the Role of the Medial Palatal Sonant in the History of the Burmese Language.” Paper presented at the conference on Burma-Myanma(r) Research and its Future, Gothenburg, Sweden. 2006 “Notes on the Evolution of the Burmese Phonological System.” In Beckwith (ed.) Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages II. Leiden: Brill, 103-20.

Yue-Hashimoto, Anne O. 1986 “Tonal Flip-flop in Chinese Dialects.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics 14.2:161-83.

113

Proto Northern Chin

For Cingh No

Proto Northern Chin

Volume 2 An Etymological Dictionary of Northern Chin

Symbols & Abbreviations

i. General

~ Separates a Northern Chin FORM-I from its inflected FORM-II. / Separates alternative forms in free variation or complementary distribution. – Precedes a bound morpheme. _ Underlines an irregular correspondence not pertaining to the discussions in Volume 1. ii. Lexical Categories n noun v verb vb benefactive verb vi intransitive verb vt transitive verb iii. Languages

MI Mizo ZA Zahau (reference is occasionally made to Laizo and Khualsim under LA and KH) TH Thado ZO Zo TE Tedim (reference is occasionally made to Saizang and Teizang under SA and TI) SI Sizang iv. Transcriptions e Corresponds to in the same way as i to and u to . o Corresponds to in the same way as i to and u to .

A Alternation of /a E Alternation of /e I Alternation of /i O Alternation of /o U Alternation of /u V Unspecified vowel

K Alternation of k with /h (or rarely t) Alternation of with k/ (or rarely w) T Alternation of t with d TS Alternation of with N Alternation of n with t P Alternation of p with b/w (or rarely f)

M Alternation of m with p J Alternation of j with s L Alternation of l/r/n/d W Alternation of w with /h/b H Alternation of h with C Unspecified consonant n Possible derivation from - as opposed to -n.

I Tone category I II Tone category II III Tone category III (I/II/III) Sandhi altered tone with the presumed original tone category noted ¹ Tone 1 ² Tone 2 ¯ Unspecified tone

Preface & Acknowledgements

This, along with Volume 1, is a thoroughly revised version of Button (2009) which was submitted as a Ph.D. dissertation to the School of Oriental and African studies, University of London.

Wherever possible, Sino-Tibetan reconstructions from Volume 1 or external influences are noted. When external influences have not been discussed in Volume 1, they are noted in the footnotes here.

The reconstructed Northern Chin headwords are arranged in the following order:

Consonants -, b-, d-, -, h-, j-, k-, kh-, kl-, kl h-, kr-, kr h-, l-, hl-, m-, hm-, n-, hn-, -, h-, p-, ph-, r-, hr-, s-, t-, th-, -, h-, w-

Vowels , a, , e, , i, , o, , u

I III I III ¹ 2 MI/TH ~ n , ZA ~ n I III I III yellow (v); ZO ~ n , TE ~ n I III I III I green (v); SI ~ n yellow, green, l¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI l ~ l , ZA l ~ III blue (v). cf. e² l salty (v). 4 III IIB IIA IIA e² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI e ~ ek , ZA n² 2 MI n , ZA n – vegetable (n); IIB II II II II ek , SI e ~ ak defecate (v). MI TH TH ZO TE SI IIB IIB II II n , / / / n food (n). ek , ZA ek , TH/ZO e , TE ek , SI II 1 IIA ak faeces (n). a² 2 (ST *a , onomatopoeic). MI a IIB IIA IIB ~ at , ZA a ~ at foolish (v). I I el¹ 2 MI/SI el , ZA el lower back (n); I IIA IIA II ZO/TE el back (n). cf. EL¯ aj² 2 MI aj , ZA aj , TH/ZO/TE aj , SI II aj – crab (n). IIA III II III e² 2 MI e ~ en , TH/ZO e ~ en , II III II III IIB IIB II SI a ~ en envy (v); TE e ~ en ak 2 MI –ak , ZA –ak , TH –a / II (II) (II) II idolise (v). cf. ¹ a , ZO –a , TE –ak , SI –ak crow (n). I 5 IIA EL¯ 2 MI r plot against (v); ZA el III II III IIA III IIA ~ el , TH l ~ l contradict (v); am² 2 MI am ~ am , ZA –am ~ I III III II III ZO/TE/SI l ~ l clash in personality am , TE/SI am ~ am greedy (v); II II III II III (v); ZO l –, TE l ~ l TH/ZO am ~ am emulous (v). contemptuous (v). cf. el¹

2 I I ar¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ar , ZA ar , 6 I I I C 2 (Austroasiatic). ZA t ~ , TH TH a , ZO a , TE/SI ak fowl (n). III ~ i , TE sleep (v).

I I (I) I ar¹ 2 MI ar –, ZA ar –, TH a –, ZO a –, I III I I n¹ 2 MI n ~ n drink (v); ZA n ~ TE/SI ak – star (n). III IIB n drink (vi/t), n drink (vb). IIB II III at 2 MI/ZA at ~ , TE at ~ at cut IIA IIA II II III II n² 2 MI n , ZA n , TH/ZO/TE/SI n (v); TH/ZO at ~ at notch (v); SI at ~ III III house (n). at / a cleave (v). IIB IIA I III I III o² 2 (onomatopoeic). MI o , ZA o , j¹ 2 MI j ~ j , ZA j ~ j eat II 3 TH/ZO/TE/SI o voice (n). (v). I III I Ol¯ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI l ~ l , ZA l ~ k 2 MI/TE k ~ chop (v); ZA k ~ III IIA III III l easy (v). MI ol ~ ol , pluck a banana (v); TH ~ e , SI II III III III TH/ZO/TE/SI ol ~ ol unengaged (v); k ~ e tear, chop (v); ZO ~ e IIA III ZA ol ~ ol unengaged (v ), l tear (v). i relieve (vt). IIB II n² 2 MI n , ZO/TE/SI n ~ t look (v).

1 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #52. 4 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #60. 2 5 I See Vol.1, Ch.6, #146. MI r from VanBik (2009:154). 3 I III ZA has an abbreviated form i ~ i . 6 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #144.

o I III I a¹ 2 MI a ~ an , ZA a boast III III (v); TH o exaggerate (v); ZO o III III ~ ot, TE a ~ at, SI u boast, III III exaggerate (v). TH o ~ , ZO o III ~ / t, TE o ~ t, SI k– / t– shout (v).

7 IIA IIA j² 2 (areal). MI j , ZA j , II II TH/TE/SI j , ZO uj dog (n).

k 2 ZA k, TH/ZO , TE/SI k govern (v).

IIA III IIA III m² 2 MI m ~ m , ZA m ~ m , II III II III TH m ~ m , ZO/TE/SI m ~ m exist (v).

I I u¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI u , ZA u elder sibling (n).

I I Vr¹ 2 MI r throat (n); ZA r outer throat of human (n). MI r, ZA r, III III ZO a , TE k (~ ), TH , SI k ~ i 8 I burp, hiccup (v). MI r outer throat I (n); ZA r outer throat of animal (n). III III MI r, ZA r, zo ~ o , TH/SI o , TE k ~ wear around neck (v).

7 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #48. 8 TE from Bhaskararao (1996:50).

I III bal¹ 2 MI bal ~ bal circular (v); ZA b I III bal ~ bal rounded (edges) (v); TE – I III I bal ~ bal sit on floor/cushion (v). ba¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI ba ~ bt owe (v).

I I III III ba¹ 2 MI/ZA/TE ba , TH be , ZO bal¯ 2 MI/ZA/TE bal ~ bl, TH bal , SI I I III III III be , SI bi cheek (n). bal ~ bl dirty (v). ZA/ZO bal dirt

(n). III IIB IIB IIB bas 2 MI ba ~ bak , ZA ba ~ bak III II III I converse (v); TH be ~ be , ZO be ban¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/SI ban arm (n); TE II III II/III III I I III ~ be , TE ba ~ bak , SI bi ~ ban upper arm (n). TE/SI bn ~ bn II 10 III IIB bik propitiate (v). take shortcut (v). MI ban ~ bn III reach for, arrive (v); TH/ZO/TE ban II II bl² 2 TH bl outer ear (n); ZO/TE/SI bl ~ bt reach for (v). ear (n).

I III I bar¹ 2 MI/ZA bar ~ bar , TH ba ~ b, I III I III bk 2 MI/ZA/TE bk ~ b, TH b, ZO ZO ba ~ ba , TE/SI bak ~ bak feed III III III b ~ bo , SI bk ~ bo prostrate (v). (vi/t); MI br, TH b, ZO ba , TE III III bak ~ b, SI bak feed (v ); ZA II III b bw² 2 ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI bw ~ bw III bar feed child (vb), b r feed guest swell (v). (vb) 11 IIB I III bo¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI bo , bj¹ 2 TH/TE bj ~ bj used up (vi); ZO I I III TH/ZO/TE bo ox (n). bj ~ bj finished (time) (vi); TE III bj use up (v ). o IIB III II t ba¯ 2 MI bo , ZA ba , TH/ZO/TE/SI bo

II III sperm (n). bl² 2 ZO/TE/SI bl ~ bl do

thoroughly (v). I III I bal¹ 2 MI/TE bal ~ bal , TH bol ~ III I III I I I bol , ZO bol ~ bol , SI bul ~ b¹ 2 MI/TE b ear (n); ZA b ear III I III III bul wallow (v); ZA bal ~ bal wax (n); TH –b hare (n). III III wash body (v). MI/TE bal , TH bol , III III 9 IIB ZO bol , SI bul wallow (n). be² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA be , II TH/ZO/TE/SI be bean (n). III IIB/III III bas 2 MI ba ~ bak , TH bo ~ III 12 III III I bo pour (v); ZO bo ~ bo , bel¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI bel pot (n). III III III II TE ba ~ bak , SI bu ~ buk II III II I III IIB III pour (vi); ZO bo ~ bo , TE bak bEB 2 MI be ~ ben / bn , ZA be ~ III III III IIB III III ~ bak / ba, SI buk ~ bu pour b , TH/ZO be ~ b, TE be ~ III (v ). bt, SI ba ~ bk / bt clap, slap (v). t II III TH/TE b ~ bn herd by slapping, II III scare off (v); SI b ~ bn scare off IIB (v). MI b press with hands (v). 10 III TE bak from Bhaskararao (1994:336;340). 11 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #125. 12 IIB 9 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #10. MI bak from Hillard (1975:19).

13 bj¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/TH/TE/SI I I I bj , ZA –bj , ZO buj bamboo rat (n).

III bs 2 MI/ZA/TE b, TH/ZO bu cooked rice (n).

IIB II bu² 2 MI/ZA bu , TH/ZO/TE/SI bu nest (n).

I III bu¯ 2 ZO bu ~ bt, TE/SI bu ~ bk hide (v).

14 IIA bVL¯ 2 (Austronesian). MI/ZA bl , II IIA TH/ZO/TE/SI bl base (n). MI bl ~ III III III II III bl , ZA bl , LA bl , ZO bl ~ bl , I III SI bl – blunt (v). MI bul ~ bl III lopped off (v); TE/SI bl stunted (v); III TE buj ~ bj maimed (v).

IIB bVL¯ 2 MI bn put on hand/foot (vi/t), III affix (v); ZA bn affix (v); TH/ZO/SI III III bl , ZO/SI bn ~ bt, TE bl put III on hand/foot (v). MI/TE bel ~ bl, III III III III TH/ZO bel ~ bl , SI bal ~ bl IIB seek refuge (v); MI bl daub (v), put on (vb); ZA bl patch, add more (v); III TH/ZO/SI bl , TE bl stick (v).

III III bV¯ 2 MI b –, ZA b –, TH/ZO/TE/SI I III b container (n); SI b counter IIB for containers (n). MI b sacrificial container (n).

13 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #6. 14 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #8.

I III IIB I de¹ 2 MI de ~ den / dn , TE de ~ d III I III den , SI da ~ den throw (v); ZA I III IIB I III de ~ den throw (vi/t), dn throw dj¯ 2 ZO/TE/SI dj ~ dj shallow I III II III II (vb); TH/ZO de ~ den strike over (vessel) (v). ZO/TE dj ~ dj , SI dj arm with stick (v). shallow (v).

I III dEp 2 MI dp ~ d adjacent (v); TH dm¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI dm ~ dm I III II III I III dep ~ dep , ZO/TE dep ~ dep , SI heal (v); ZA dm ~ dm heal (v ), II III i dap ~ dap overshadow (v). dmIIB heal (v ). t II III I dm² 2 TH/ZO/TE/SI dm ~ dm full (vi), d¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI d palate III dm ~ dp fill (v ). (n). t

15 I III IIA III d¹ 2 (ST *dj). MI/ZA d ~ dn d² 2 MI d ~ dn TH/ZO/TE/SI, IIB II III IIA stand (vi), dn establish (vt); d ~ dn different (v); ZA d ~ I III III III TH/ZO/TE/SI d ~ dn stand (v). dn differentiate (v); TH/TE/SI dn III ~ dt discriminate (v); ZO dn ~ dt d-² 2 MI/ZA/TE/SI dk, TH/ZO d partition (v). IIB correct, true (v); MI/ZA d straight

III (v). ds 2 MI/ZA d, TH/SI da addle (v); ZO III da sad (v); TE d addle, sad (v). II II dil² 2 MI, TH dil lake (n); TE –dil , SI (II) III –dil lakeside village name (n). dan¯ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI dan method

(n). II III dip 2 TH dip ~ dip inhale deeply (v), II II IIB IIB SI dip – regurgitate (v); ZO/TE dip , dAM¯ 2 MI dap ~ d, MI dm , ZA III II III solar plexus (n). dm , TH dap ~ dap (/ dp), ZO II dap (~ dp), TE/SI dp overlay (v). IIB II III III dit 2 MI dit ~ d gnaw (v); ZO/TE dit MI/ZA dam , TE dam ~ dp shaded III II III III III ~ dit , SI dit ~ dit / di shave (v). (v); TH/ZO dam secluded place in

forest (n). ZA/TH/SI dp chilly (v); ZO I I dw¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI dw ~ dw dp deathly silent (v). fight (v).

II III dj² 2 ZO/TE/SI dj ~ dj segregate (v). III I doj¹ 2 MI doj ensorcel (v); SI daj ~ III II III d aj trouble indirectly (v). MI/ZA dm² 2 TH/ZO/TE/SI dm ~ dm III III doj sorcery (n); TH/ZO/TE doj , SI compete (v). III daj spirit (n).

ds 2 MI/ZA d crack a flea (v); IIB II III dot 2 ZA dot ~ d, TH/ZO/TE dot ~ TH/ZO/SI de , TE d crack a flea, III II III III dot , SI dot ~ dot / do pierce (v). sting (v).

I de¹ 2 ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI de ~ dt light a wick (v). 15 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #157.

IIB I dOk 2 MI dk ~ d slip out, stretch (v); ZA daj , TH/ZO/TE/SI daj dew (n). IIB III III III MI dok ~ d slip off (v); ZA dk ~ MI/ZA daj ~ dj, TH/SI daj ~ dj III III III d leak (v); ZO d ~ do , TE dk ~ quiet, cool (v); ZO daj ~ dj , TE II III III III d, SI dok ~ dok / do pull out (v); daj ~ dj quiet (v). II III II III TH/ZO do ~ do , TE dok ~ dok , SI I I I III dk / dok protude (v); TE dok jut (v). dVN¹ 2 (onomatopoeic). MI dut ~ dut , I III I dot ~ dot suck up (v); MI don , II III I III I dOm² 2 MI dom ~ dom hold, support TH/ZO/TE/SI don ~ don , TI dut ~ IIB II III III 16 I (v); MI/ZA dm , SI dm ~ dm dut drink (v). MI dot tube (n). cf. II III support below (v); TH dm ~ dm / dVk II III dp, TE dm ~ dm lift (v), ZO dmII ~ dp support below, lift (v). III TH/ZO/TE/SI dom ~ dp handle carefully (v).

I III dm¹ 2 MI/ZA dm ~ dm black (vi), IIB I dm blacken (vt); TH/TE dm ~ III I dm blue, green (v); ZO dm ~ III dm black (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI blacken (vi). ds 2 MI d want (v); ZA d love III familially (v); TH/ZO/SI du , TE d crave food (v).

IIA dum² 2 MI dum stream pool (n); TH II IIA III dum nook (n); MI dum ~ dum , TH dumII pool (v).

I III dVk 2 (onomatopoeic). MI duk ~ duk , I III SI dup ~ dup suck an egg (v); ZA I III I dok ~ dok guzzle (v); ZA dik ~ III I dik peel with teeth (v); ZO di ~ III I III di , TE/SI dik ~ dik inhale (v). cf. dVN¹

I dVL¯ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI daj fence, hedge IIA III IIA (n). MI dal ~ dal , ZA dal , II III TH/ZO/TE/SI dal ~ dal defend (v). IIA III III MI/ZA dol ~ dol dam (v); MI dol III III succeed (v); SI dol ~ dl layer (v). III III MI dol dam (n); ZO/TE/SI dol storey, IIA layer (n). MI dl membrane (n); II II ZO/TE/SI dl sheet (n); TE dal iron III III 16 I sheet (n); SI dal fence (n). MI daj , MI don from VanBik (2009:77).

IIA III l² 2 MI/ZA fl ~ fl certain, II III righteous (v); ZO/TE/SI tl ~ tl

IIA II understand (v). ² 2 MI/ZA f , TH , ZO/TE/SI II t axe head (n). I eM¹ 2 MI fep long feathers near I I I I I bird’s tail (n); MI/ZA fem , TH ep , r¹ 2 MI fr , ZA fr drip (n); MI fr ~ I I I III I III I III ZO/TE tep , SI t ap fringe (n); SI t am fr , ZA fr ~ fr , ZO ta ~ ta , TE III I III I III t am underdeveloped (v). tak ~ tak drip (v); SI tak ~ tak I III I III drop (v). e¹ 2 MI fe ~ fen , TH e ~ en , I III I III 17 ZO/TE te ~ ten , SI t a ~ ten put s 2 (ST *as). MI/ZA f feed III III on lower body (v); ZA –fen child’s regurgitatively (v); ZO ta feed skirt (n). elderly/sick (v); TE t feed via hand (v). cf. s aC 2 MI f go to fields (v); ZA f, TH III III 18 IIB II e go (v); TE a , SI i return a² 2 (ST * ). MI/ZA fa , TH a , II (vi). ZO/TE/SI ta offspring (n). I I IIA III IIa am¹ 2 MI f am , TH e m ~ e p play aj² 2 MI faj ~ faj clean (v); ZA faj III III I III (v); ZO em – , TE am –, SI i m – ~ faj clean (vi), fj clean (vt); TH II III III II III joke (v). aj ~ aj / j , ZO/TE/SI taj ~ taj III III IIB III husked (v); ZO t j wash away (vt); B 2 MI f ~ fn , TE ~ t III III TE t j wash away, plane (vt). wise (v); TH ~ , ZO ~ III SI 19 I III / it generous (v); ~ k an¹ 2 (ST *an). MI fan ~ fan III obedient (v). cf. im¹ stretch (v); ZO/TE/SI tan – spacious I III I (v). im¹ 2 MI fim ~ fim clear (v); ZA fim III I III I I I ~ fim , SI im ~ im wise (v); TH ar¹ 2 MI/ZA far , TH a , ZO ta , TE/SI I III I I im ~ im clever (v); ZO im ~ tak pine (n). III I im clever, clear (v); TE im ~ III IIA II im obedient, intelligent (v). cf. A¯ 2 MI/ZA f , TH , ZO/TE/SI II I B t rice grain (n). MI/ZA fa , TH I I I a , ZO/SI ta rice (n); TE ta millet IIA III II al² 2 MI/ZA fal ~ fal , TH ol ~ (n). III II III II ol , ZO tol ~ tol , TE tal ~ III II III IIA II tal , SI tul ~ tul overlong (v). j² 2 MI/ZA fj ; ZO/TE/SI tj spear

(n). 20 k 2 (ST *wk). MI fk erect (v);

MI/ZA fk, TH , TE/SI tk erect (phallus) (v).

17 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #68. 18 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #36. 19 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #160. 20 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #58.

I I I u¹ 2 MI/ZA fu , TH u , TE/SI tu I sugarcane (n); ZO –tu village name (n).

IIA III II III un² 2 MI fun ~ fun , TH un ~ un , II III ZO/TE/SI tun ~ tun wrap (v); ZA IIA III IIB fun ~ fun wrap (vt), fun wrap (vb).

III III ur¯ 2 MI/ZA fur , TH , ZO ta , III TE/SI tuk rainy season (n).

III III us 2 MI fu , TE/SI tu ~ tk perch 21 (vi).

22 IIB Vp 2 (areal). MI/ZA fep ~ f, TH II III II III ep ~ ep , ZO/TE tep ~ tep , SI II III III tap ~ tap / te suck on (v). MI IIB II III fop ~ f, TH op ~ op , ZO/TE II III II III III top ~ top , SI top ~ top / to suck IIB up (v); ZA fop ~ f suckle (vi); ZA II III f suckle (vt). TH ip ~ ip slurp, lap up (v).

21 III MI fu from Chhangte (1993:42). 22 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #161.

I h ho¹ 2 MI/ZA/TE ho bark (n). cf. K ok

h IIB II hn² 2 MI hn , TH/ZO/TE/SI hn time II III II hl² 2 TH/ZO h l ~ h l , TH/TE/SI h l ~ (n). III h l mix (v). IIB HV MI I III k 2 (onomatopoeic). hak gasp IIB II III II h m¹ 2 MI hm ~ h m claw (v); ZA TE SI I III (v); hak , hak ~ hak , hak III III I I I ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI h m ~ h m scoop ZA TH ZO IIB ~ hak / ha , ok , o , o ~ III I III into arms (v). ZA h m make run o , TE/SI ok ~ ok choke (v). MI IIB IIB II into mouth (by mythical human- ok ~ , ZA ok ~ , TH/ZO o III II III II III III eating snake) (v). ~ o , TE ok ~ ok , SI ok ~ ok / o IIA III I III I halter (v); MI ok ~ ok retch (v). hr¹ 2 MI/ZA hr ~ hr , TH ha ~ h, I III I ZO ha ~ ha , TE/SI hk – difficult (v). 25 HVL¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI l flame III 23 (n/v); ZA l flame (v); TH/SI l , TE ha¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). III I l red hot (v); ZO l cinder (n). MI MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI ha tooth (n). I 26 I ur fumigate (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI l ~ III IIA III I l stuffy (v). MI hal ~ hal , haj¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI haj mango (n). II III TH/ZO/TE/SI hal ~ hal burn (v); ZA IIA III IIA I III I hal ~ hal thirst (v). MI hl , ZA – haj¹ 2 MI haj ~ haj / hj, ZA haj ~ IIA II III III hl , TH/ZO/TE/SI hl charcoal (n); haj , TH/ZO/SI hj , TE hj forget IIA III IIA 24 MI hl ~ hl calescent (v). MI hl (v). III I ~ hl dry, watertight (v); MI hl ~ III IIA II III III hl , ZA hl , TH/ZO hl ~ hl dry har¯ 2 MI har pewter, solder (n); TH II III III III to touch (v); TE hl ~ hl boil off h, ZO ha , TE/SI hak lead (n). II III (v); SI h l ~ h l boil off, watertight o I III a I III (v); ZA hil ~ hil dry to touch (food) h w¹ 2 MI haw ~ haw / h w reprove I III I III (v); MI/ZA hul ~ hul dry food over (v); TH how ~ how reprove, quarrel I III I III I fire (v); TH hl ~ hl dry, steam (v); (v); TI haw ~ haw , ZO/SI haw ~ I III I III ZO/TE hl ~ hl singe (v), SI hl ~ haw quarrel (v). III hl wilt (v). cf. Par¹

I III hem¹ 2 MI hem ~ hem wobble, wag IIA II II III hV² 2 MI ho , TH h , ZO h –, (v); TH/ZO/SI hem ~ hp shift (v); TE II IIA I III III TE/SI h – come (v); ZA h come hem ~ hem squint (v ), hem ~ hp i up (v). shift (v ). t 27 I I III III HV¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/TH/SI h hi¹ 2 MI hi ~ hin sour (v); ZA hi III I III IIB III ~ hn , ZA ~ n open (v); h stink (v); ZO/TE hi ~ ht, SI I III III ZO/TE h ~ hn open (vi/t), ZO/TE hi ~ hk ferment (v). III IIB hn ~ ht open (vb). MI o holey IIB II III (v), hole (n); ZA hole; TH o ~ hj¯ 2 TH/ZO/SI hj , TE hj beautiful I (v). cf. mOj 25 See vol.1. ch.6, #75. 23 26 I See Vol.1, Ch.6, #171. MI ur from Schuessler (2007:514). 24 MI hj from Chhangte (1996:87). 27 See vol.1. ch.6, #94.

III II III on vacant (v); ZO/TE/SI o ~ on III vacant (vi), on ~ t vacate (vt). MI I III I he ~ hen hollow (v); TE he ~ III I hen perforate, cavitied (v); SI ha cavitied (v), hoI ~ honIII hollow, perforate (v).

IIA III II II jn² 2 MI zn ~ zn , TH n ~ n j II III III ZO/TE zn ~ zn , SI zn travel (v); II II 28 TH n , ZO/TE zn traveller (n). jk 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA zk, TH

a, TE/SI zk– armpit (n). I III j¹ 2 MI/TE/SI z ~ zn seek (v). cf.

29 III jo¹ jk 2 MI/ZA zk ~ z, TH a –, ZO III III I I za – / ze –, TE z – / z –, SI z k– ~ MI ZA ZO TE SI TH III j w¹ 2 / / / / z w , w Zo. za ashamed, humble (v). IIA IIA MI ZA III III j w² 2 z w ~ z , –z w finish II III II III j ¯ 2 TH ~ , ZO z ~ / TH ZO SI III III (v); w ~ o , / z w ~ zo II z t, TE z ~ z t, SI z ~ k / z t TE zw ~ z finish, win (v). use (v). I III II II II II II JolB 2 MI sol ~ sol , ZA/ZO/TE/SI zol ~ ja² 2 TH a ~ a , ZO za ~ za , TE/SI III II III II II zol , TH ol ~ ol oval (v). za ~ zak hear (v). II III I jom² 2 TH om ~ om weak (v) ja¹ 2 MI za upper back (n); II III I I ZO/TE/SI zom ~ zom languid (v). ZA/ZO/TE/SI za dorsum (n); TH a I III I I crown of head (n). TH a ~ an , TH ZO TE I III jon¹ 2 on , / zon rod for ZO/TE/SI za ~ zan level (v). corncobs (n).

IIA II I III 32 ja² 2 MI/ZA za , TH a , ZO/TE/SI jo¹ 2 TE zo ~ zon carry jointly (v). II III za lightweight (v). ZO/TE zon ~ zt summon assistance (v). cf. j¹ 30 IIB jap 2 (Austroasiatic). MI zap ~ z , IIB II III II I I ZA zap , TH ap ~ ap , ZO/TE zap jo¹ 2 MI/ZA/ZO/TE/SI zo , TH o II II II III ~ zap , SI zap ~ zap / za flap (v). cf. monkey (n) (h) (h) (k)l Vp, lVM¯ I III jo¹ 2 ZO/TE/SI zo ~ zon poor (v ); TH III II/III i MI ZA ZO TE SI TH I III jas 2 / / / / za , a o ~ on ill-natured (vi). 31 hundred (n). IIB IIB MI ZA I III I jot 2 zot ~ z ask (v); zot II jaw¹ 2 MI zaw ~ zaw vast (v); ZA zaw TH III I III follow animal tracks (v); ot ~ III II III II ~ zaw lie down (v); TH aw ~ aw TE SI III ot walk (v); zot ~ zot , zot ~ III II wide (v); ZO zaw fields within I III zot / zo ask, grope (v). region (n); SI zaw ~ zaw sprawl on III TH I III 33 back (v); aw surroundings (n). ja¹ 2 MI za ~ zan leap (vi), III I 34 TE III III z an leap on (vt); –z a fly (v). III III j p 2 TH p ~ e , ZO z p ~ ze , TE TH on ~ t, ZO zon ~ zt, TE III z p ~ z wedge (v). zan ~ zat head for pastures new

28 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #2. 32 I III 29 See Vol.1, Ch.6 #3. TE jo ~ zon from Bhaskararao (1996:103). 33 I III 30 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #72. MI za ~ zan from VanBik (2009:285). 31 III 34 I TH a from Luce (1962:tableB). TE –za from Khoi Lam Thang (2001:143).

III I I I (v), SI zun ~ zt elope, leave jVj¯ 2 MI zaj , TH j –, ZO/TE/SI zj – I III mother to live with father (v). song (n); MI zaj ~ zaj sing (v); MI IIA III I III zj ~ zj , ZA zj ~ zj skilful (v); 35 I III jar¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA zar ~ MI zaj temperament (n). III zar sell (vi/t), zr sell (vb); TH I III I III I III I III o ~ o , ZO za ~ za , TE jVL¯ 2 MI zar ~ zar , TH l ~ l , I III I III I I I III II zak ~ zak , SI zuk ~ zuk sell ZO/SI zl ~ zl , SI zal ~ zal , TE zl III I III (v). ~ zl spread out (v); ZA zar ~ zar I hang out/down (v); TH a lay out (v); I I III jk 2 MI/ZA/TE/SI –zk, TH –, SI –z TH ~ , ZO ze ~ ze spread I III sambur deer (n). wings (v); TE zak ~ zak spread (v); I III I III TE zek ~ zek , SI zak ~ zak I III j m¹ 2 MI/ZA/ZO/TE/SI z m ~ z m , TH MI TE I III IIB distribute (v); –z r reveal (v); I m ~ m taper (vi); MI/ZA z m , MI III z l / z l flatten out (v). –z l I III TE/SI z m ~ z p taper (vt). smooth (v); MI zal ~ zal recline, I III I III level (road) (v); MI zol ~ zol level j¹ 2 MI/SI z ~ zn urinate (v); TH I III I I III I III (land) (v); TH al ~ al , SI zal ~ ~ n , ZO z ~ zn melt (v). III I III III III zal recline (v); TE zal ~ zal sleep I I I MI/ZA/ZO/TE/SI z n , TH n urine (v). MI zar , ZO zal branch (n); TH al I I (n). shelf (n); TH ol , ZO/TE/SI zol beam IIA III 36 I (n). MI zaj ~ zaj proliferate (v); ju¹ 2 (Sinitic). MI/ZA/ZO/TE/SI zu , TH II III ZO/TE/SI zj ~ zj wide (v). I u liquor (n). 40 I III I 37 IIB IIA JVL¯ 2 (Sinitic). MI z r ~ z r , ZA z r ju² 2 (Sinitic). MI –zu , ZA zu –, TH I III II II ~ z r , TH l ~ l learn (v); ZA z r u , ZO/TE zu ; SI z– rodent (n). I III teach (v); ZO/TE zl ~ zl recall, I III III III retrace (v); SI zl ~ zl imitate (v). jus 2 MI zu – (~ zk), TH u ~ , ZO I III III III III MI zul ~ zul / zl follow course (v); zu ~ z / zt, TE zu ~ zk, SI zu ~ I III ZA zul ~ zul pool resources (v); TH zk / zt rain (v). II III II l ~ l dissolve (v); TH n ZO II III II III 38 I zl ~ zl , TE/SI zn ~ zn squishy jut 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA zut ~ IIB IIB III I III II (fruit) (v); ZA zn leak (v). MI zj , zut , TH ut ~ ut , ZO/TE/SI zut ~ II III II III II III TH uj ~ uj , ZO zuj ~ zuj , TE zuj zut stroke (v). II III ~ zj, SI zj ~ zj follow (v); MI

39 IIA IIB zj taper (v). ZA zl peel fruit skin jV² 2 (ST *ja ). MI/ZA za ~ zat , TH III III III II II II II II with knife (v); TH l , ZO zel ~ zl , a ~ at , ZO za ~ zat , TE za ~ III III II II II IIB TE zel ~ zl, SI zl permeate (v). zat , SI ze ~ zet itch (vi). MI zat ~ II I I IIB TH/TE/SI sul – pursue (v). ZO suj ~ za, ZA zat LA zat file (v); TE III II III II suj search (v). TE zul ~ zul , SI zat tickle (v). III III zul ~ zl skim past target (v). MI IIB II III III sj ~ sj, TH suj ~ suj / sj , ZO 35 See Shorto (2006:450). II III II II 36 suj ~ suj , TE suj ~ s j , SI s j ~ See Vol.1, Ch.6, #106. III 37 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #134. s j whittle (v). 38 See the data in Shorto (2006:296). 39 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #99. 40 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #76.

I III jVm¹ 2 MI zam ~ zam sprawl, float IIB I (vi), MI zm spread (vt); ZA zam , I III I TH am ~ am , ZO/TE/SI zam ~ III I III zam sprawl (v). ZA zm ~ zm fly I III (v); TH m ~ m lie across/on- I III back (v); TE –zm ~ zm swim (v), I III droop (eyelids) (v); SI zm ~ zm I go far (projectile) (vi); TH m , ZO/SI I III zm strand (n); TH m ~ p, III ZO/TE/SI zm ~ zp reach for (v). MI IIB III III zm , TH m ~ p, ZO/TE/SI zm ~ zp join (v).

I I I jV¹ 2 TH – , ZO z –, SI –z I intestines (n); TE z – intestines, I III strand (n). MI/ZA z , TH , III ZO/TE/SI z partition (n). cf. jV²

IIA II jV² 2 MI/ZA z finger (n); TH , II II ZO z root (n), TE/SI z finger, IIA II root (n). MI z , SI z penis, bee IIA II stinger (n); ZA z , TH , ZO/TE II z penis (n). cf. jV¹

I jV¯ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI zi morning I III (n); MI zi ~ zin be early morning, I III gather (clouds) (v); ZA zi ~ zin I gather (morning clouds) (v); TH i III I III ~ in dark (v); ZO/TE/SI zi ~ zin I (I) gloomy (v). MI –zo , ZA –zo dusk III (n). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI zan night (n); III IIA TE zan ~ zt be night (v). MI z ~ III II III II zn , TH i ~ in , ZO/TE/SI zi ~ zinIII dense (v).

E II III kAk 2 MI kk, TH/ZO ke ~ ke , SI kk k III ~ ke crack (v); ZA kk ~ k crack II III 41 (vi), kak crack (vt); TE kek ~ kek k m¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). I tear (v). MI k shatter (v); TH/ZO/SI MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI k m mouth (n). III IIB IIB I ke , TE k leaky (v). MI kek ~ k MI/ZA km , TH/ZO/TE/SI k m ~ h III pull out/apart (v). cf. k V km set trap (v).

IIB I I 42 kAL¯ 2 MI kar , TH ka ~ k, ZO ka kp 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA kp III I ~ ka widen, stride (v); ZA kar crotch (n). cf. kap I III stride (v); TE/SI kak ~ kak widen (v). I III IIA 43 MI/TE kl ~ kl walk (v). MI kl , kaN¯ 2 (Indo-Aryan). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE II I III TH/ZO/TE/SI kl kidney (n); ZA kat , SI kn sulphur (n). IIA I I kl – groin (n); ZA/ZO kl , LA kar I IIA II footstep (n); TH/SI kl footstep, groin ka² 2 MI –ka , TH/ZO/TE/SI –ka I I (n). MI kar , TH/ZO/TE/SI kal interval mosquito (n). III (n); ZA kr between (v). MI/ZA kl, III III 44 IIA TH ZO SI TE ka(-)¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ka ~ / / k l lever, bolt (v); k l III IIB ~ kl lever (v), kl bolt (v). MI/ZA kan elevated (v); MI kak fork of IIB II III IIA III kan , TH/ZO/TE/SI kan ~ kan tree (n), fork (v); ZA ka ~ kan , ZA I III IIA III II traverse (v); TH kl ~ kl ascend, kak ~ kak apart (v); TH ka ~ I III III traverse (v). M/ZO/TE/SI kaj ~ kaj , kan rise, convalesce, apart (v); I III III II III TH ZO/TE ka ~ kan convalesce (v); SI kaj ~ kaj / k j ford (v). cf. klaj¹ II III ka ~ kan convalesce, apart (v). 45 I III II II kA¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ka ~ kan , TH/ZO/TE/SI ka ~ kat fork (v). MI/ZA IIB I III I I MI k , ZA k ~ kn , TH/ZO/TE/SI ka mouth (n). TH ka ~ k t / k , TE II III I I II I k ~ kn evaporate (v); MI ka ~ ka ~ kat , SI ka ~ k t open mouth (v). III III IIB h h kan , MI ka ~ kn burn (v); ZA k a². cf. k a² III IIB IIB ka ~ k burn (vi), k burn I III IIB II (vt). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI k ~ kn kap 2 MI/ZA kap ~ k , TH/ZO/TE kap III II III III II III III ~ kap , SI kap ~ kap / ka shoot (v). fry (v); TE ka ~ k t / kat , SI ka 46 ~ k t scorch (v). a k p 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI k p couple (n). 47 I II kj¹ 2 (areal). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI kj TH/ZO/TE/SI kap couple of oxen (n). 48 cf. kp I.

I I I III kj¹ 2 MI/ZO kj , SI –kj tiger (n); ZA – kaw¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/SI kaw ~ kaw , ZA I I III kj mythical tiger (n); TH kj lion (n); kaw ~ kw divaricate (v). I TE –kj leopard (n).

III III kAj¯ 2 MI/ZA kj –, TH/ZO/TE/SI kaj – prawn (n).

41 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #115. 45 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #51. 46 42 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #38. TE kt from Bhaskararao (1996:51). 43 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #162. 47 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #98. 48 I 44 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #79. ZA has an abbreviated form ki .

III III III IIB III kj¯ 2 MI kj, ZO kj , TE kj ~ kj kI-¯ 2 MI kk, ZA ki ~ k , SI ki ~ bite (v). kk knock (v).

I III III III k¹ 2 MI/ZA k ~ kn bring (vt), kIw¯ 2 MI/ZA/ZO/TE kiw , TH kw IIB I kn bring (vb); TH/ZO/TE/SI k ~ elbow (n). III (h) kn bring (v). cf. (k)l V¯ 51 kk 2 (Austroasiatic). ZA kk ~ k III kp 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI kp mollusc fade (v); TH k, ZO k ~ ko , TE I I III h (n). kk , SI kk ~ ko peel (vi). K Vk

III III IIA II kel¯ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE kel , SI kal goat kl² 2 MI kl , TH/ZO/TE/SI kl yoke, (n). hand-cuffs (n).

IIB 52 IIA kew¯ 2 MI kew ~ kw, ZA/TE kw, kL² 2 (Indo-Aryan). MI –kr , III III III II TH kew ~ kw , ZO/SI kw hatch TH/ZO/TE –kl horse (n). (v). I k¹ 2 MI k path, doorway (n); ZA II III II I I kam² 2 MI/TE kam ~ kam , TH kem k path (n); TE k door (n); SI III II III II ~ kem , ZO kem ~ kem , SI kim kI entrance, road home (n). cf. kt III h ~ kim decrease (vi). k am² kt 2 MI kt dooryard (n); ZA kt gate III k l² 2 MI/TE kl , TH/ZO/SI kl fasten (n); TH/ZO kt door (n). cf. k IIA III ¹ (v); ZA kl ~ kl guard (v). I/IIA II kw² 2 MI kw , TH/TE/SI kw IIA III kM¯ 2 MI km ~ km complete (v); shoulder (n). II II III II TH km , TE km ~ km , SI km (~ III I I km ) equal (v). ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI km kol¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI kol Burman III ~ km entire (v). MI kp every (v); (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI kp stable (v). I I kom¹ 2 MI kom pod, shell (n); ZA kom IIB II I ki² 2 MI/ZA ki , TH/ZO/TE/SI ki horn husk (n); TH kom cob (n); ZO/TE I I III (n). kom wall (n). TH/ZO kom ~ kom I III visit person (v); TE kom ~ kom 49 IIA IIA I ki² 2 (ST *gj ). MI –ki , ZA ki –, gather (relatives) (vi), SI kom ~ II TH/ZO/TE/SI ki parrot (n). komIII in touch (v). khom¹

IIA III II IIB IIB kir² 2 MI/ZA kir ~ kir , TH ki ~ k , ko² 2 MI ko loins (n); ZA ko II III II III II ZO k a ~ k a , TE kik ~ kik return upper leg (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI ko waist II III III (vi); SI kik ~ kik / ki discolour (n). cf. kV¯ 50 h (v). k ir². cf. kVL¯

49 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #127. 50 See VanBik (2009:324) for the possible 51 See Shorto (2006:170). 52 association with kVL¯. See Matisoff (2003:400).

w 53 IIA III II III IIB ka² 2 (ST *k w ). MI ka ~ ka , MI kl ~ kl remote (v); ZA kl IIA IIB II II IIA III ZA ka ~ kat , TH ko , ZO ko , corner (v). MI kun ~ kun , II II II III TE ka , SI ku nine (v). TH/ZO/TE kun ~ kun bow (v); SI II III kun ~ kun bow at neck (v); ZA I I IIA III ka¹ 2 MI/ZA/TE ka , TH ko , ZO kun ~ kun bow, hunchbacked (v); I I II III II ko , SI ku coffin (n). TH kon ~ kon bend (v); ZO kon ~ III II kon hunchbacked (v); SI kon ~ I III I III kar¹ 2 ZO ko ~ ko , TE kak ~ kon bow at waist (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI III I I III III kak hollow (vi). ZA kar hollow kn ~ kn crouch (v). MI kon h IIA III (n). k ar¹ saddle of hill (n). ZA kaj ~ kaj IIA III III askew (v), TH kaj ~ kaj / kj , ZO III III IIA III II kas 2 MI/ZA/TE ka , TH ko , ZO kaj ~ kaj low (sun) (v), TE/SI kaj ~ III III III ko , SI ku burrow (n). kaj askew/low (eyes/sun) (v). cf. -(a)j¯, wVL¯, kir² 54 I kl¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). ZA/SI kl 57 IIA twenty (n). kV¯ 2 (Tai-Kadai). MI ku trunk IIB IIA (n), ku branches (n); MI ka III IIA ks 2 MI/ZA/TE –k, TH/ZO –ku , SI stalk (n); ZA ku trunk, stalk (n); (III) 55 II II –ku porcupine (n). TH/ZO/TE k , SI ku stalk (n); TH I I II k , ZO/TE k rod (n), TH/TE ke II I kUl¯ 2 MI/ZA kl stockade (v); MI/TE leg (n), ZO ke foot, leg (n); SI ku III kl, TH/ZO/SI kl city wall (n). rod-shaped handle (n). cf. ko²

56 I I III kVL¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI kal ~ KVm¯ 2 MI km ~ km shrug, cup III IIA III II h I kal , ZA kal ~ kal , TH kol ~ hand (v); ZA km concave (v); III II III II I III kol , ZO kol ~ kol , TE kal ~ ZO/TE kum ~ kum concave, cup III II III III kal , SI kul ~ kul coil (v). MI hand (v). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI km I III III II 58 IIA III kal , TH kol , TE kal , SI kul year (n). MI kam ~ kam , III I III coil (n). MI/ZA kaj ~ kj bend (v) TH/ZO/TE/SI km ~ km indented I I III IIA III I TH koj , ZO kej ~ kej ready for (v). MI km ~ km , TH km ~ I III III III harvesting (rice) (v); TE kaj ~ kaj , km bend (v). MI/TE kam , TH I III III I III I/III SI kuj ~ kuj sag (v). MI koj ~ km , ZO kom , SI kum valley IIB III II III IIA kj, ZA koj ~ koj , TH koj ~ koj / (n); MI km shallow depression (n); III II III II IIA II III kj , ZO/TE koj ~ koj , SI kaj ~ ZA hom , ZO/TE/SI hom ~ hom III I III I III kaj bend (v). MI kul ~ kul / kl, empty (v); TH hom ~ hom hollow III III III I I ZA kul , TE kl ~ kl, SI kul ~ (v); TH/ZO/TE hom hole (n). MI hm III IIA kl bend (v). MI kl angled (v); pit trap (n). II III TH/TE/SI kil ~ kil curl (hair) (vi). IIA I 59 III MI kl , TE kil edge, corner (n); ZA KV(w)¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI kw ~ I/IIB I I kil corner (n); ZO/SI kil edge (n). kw, ZA kw ~ kw call (v); TH III I kw call, inform (v); ZO/TE/SI kw

53 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #121. 54 See Shorto (2006:570). 57 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #158. 55 Shafer (1965:4) suggests an Austroasiatic link. 58 See Matisoff (1972a:35) for similar semantics. 56 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #17. 59 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #31.

III III ~ kw disparage (v); TE kw ~ III I kw, ZO/SI kw inform (v). MI aw III ~ aw shout (vi/t), MI w shout (vb); I III ZA aw ~ aw shout (vi/t), w I III shout (vb); SI aw ~ aw shout (v); TH I III I III ew ~ ew , TH/ZO aw ~ aw II II vociferous (v). TH/TE/SI ku ~ kut exclaim (v).

h III h k an raise, lay over (gap) (v); ZO/TE k IIA III xa ~ xan raise (v). ka²

h h MI ZA h 62 h I k l¯ 2 k l herd, overtake (v); MI ZA h III h k ap 2 (Austroasiatic). k ap , k al ~ k l watch over herd (v); TH h IIB II h II III III III k ap , TH/ZO/TE xap , SI kap h I h III x l / x l , ZO x l , TE –x l handspan (n). MI k ap ~ k ap span overtake (v). with hand (v).

h III h III h h I k m¯ 2 ZO/TE x m , SI k m gold (n). k aw¹ 2 MI k aw bark used for rope (n); I h I h h TH/ZO/TE xaw , SI k aw rope (n). k t 2 MI/ZA/SI k t, TH/ZO/TE xt one h h h h I h III (v). MI/ZA k t ~ k full (v); TH/TE k AM¯ 2 MI/ZA k m ~ k m block (v); h I III I III x t, SI k t same (v); ZO x t co-occur TH/ZO xm ~ xm , TE xm ~ xm h I h III h (v). / xp, SI k m ~ k m / k p terrace h III h IIB h III h h IIB II h II (v). MI k m ~ k m , ZA k m , k a² 2 MI/ZA k a , TH/ZO/TE xa , SI k a III h III TH/ZO/TE xm ~ xp, SI k m ~ jaw, chin (n). cf. ka(-)¯ h h h II k p pillow (v). MI kp, SI k am h h h 60 h III h IIB prohibit (v); ZA k p gird (v); TH/ZO k a² 2 (ST *k a ). MI k a ~ k ak , I II h IIB h IIB II II xam , TE xam obstruct (v). MI ZA k a ~ k at , TH/ZO xa ~ xat , TE h IIA h III II II II h II h II k m ~ k m sate, ache (v); ZA xa ~ xat / xak , SI k a ~ k at bitter h IIA h III III h III k m ~ k m ache (v); TH/ZO/TE (v). TH/ZO/TE –xa , SI –k a bile (n). II III h II h III xm ~ xm , SI k m ~ k m sate,

h h III nauseate (v). k a(K) 2 (onomatopoeic). MI k a ~ h IIB h I h IIA k ak , ZA k ak phlegm (v). MI k ak , h h IIA h III II h I II II II k j² 2 MI k j ~ k j , ZO/TE x j ~ ZA k ak , TH xa / xat , ZO xa – / III h II h III II II h II x j , SI k j ~ k j ferret (v); ZA xat –, TE xak –, SI k ak phlegm (n). IIA III khj ~ khj sift (v). cf. kl hj²

h h 61 h IIB k aL² 2 (ST *k al ). MI k l congeal h II III h IIA h III III k l² 2 TH/TE x l ~ x l cunning (v); (v), ZA k l ~ k l , TH x l , ZO II III h II h III II III III h III ZO x l ~ x l , SI k l ~ k l witty xl ~ xl , TE xl ~ xl, SI k l h IIA (v). solid, congeal (v). MI/ZA kar ~ h III II III II III k ar , TH xa ~ xa , ZO xa ~ xa , h h IIB II II III h II h III k el² 2 MI k el , TH/ZO xel hip (n). TE xak ~ xak , SI kak ~ k ak / h III h IIA (h) III III k a close, shut (v). MI k ar crust, MI ZA TE h IIA k es 2 / ke , xe foot (n). dam (n); ZA k ar glutinous mass (n). h h K E MI h h III w¯ 2 k w pick with finger nail k am¹ 2 MI/ZA k am precipice (n), h I (v); ZA k w scratch with hands (v), h II III III precipitous (v); SI k am steep (v). TH xw ~ xw , ZO xw , TE xw, h III I h h IIA h III SI k w scrape (v). MI/ZA hew ~ k a² 2 MI/ZA k a ~ k an lay over III II III IIA III h II hew , TH/ZO/TE hew ~ hew , SI gap (v); TH xa ~ xan , SI k a ~ II III II hw ~ hw deplete (v). TH hw ~ III III III hw , ZO hw , TE hw, SI hw

60 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #19. 61 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #39. 62 See the data in Shorto (2006:567).

II III h h II III prune (v). ZO hw ~ hw shave, cut k M² 2 MI k p, ZO xm ~ xm h II h III h hair (v). TH/ZO/TE t ew ~ t ew , SI sufficient (v); ZA k p satiated (v); TH h II h III II II III t aw ~ t aw diminish (rain) (v); xm ~ xp, TE xm ~ xm , SI h h II h III h III h II h III ZA t w, TH t w ~ t w , ZO t w k m ~ k m sufficient graze (v). (consumables) (v).

h III III h h IIB III k am² 2 ZO xem ~ xep, TE xam ~ k om¹ 2 MI/ZA k om , TH/ZO/TE xom h III h h III h xap, SI k im ~ k p decrease (vt). ~ xp, SI k om ~ k p gather (vt). h kam² kom¹. cf. K VM¯

h h I h III h hw 66 h I K m¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH t m ~ t m , ZO/TE k a¹ 2 (ST *k ). MI/ZA ka , TH I h I h III I I I h I –sm soul (n); SI m ~ m dark xo , ZO xo , TE xa , SI k u village h IIB (sky), quiet (people) (vi). ZA t m (n). h black (inside of fruit) (v); TH tp, h h 67 h I I ZO/TE sp quiet (v); SI p quieten k aj¹ 2 (areal). MI/ZA k aj , TH xoj , III I I h I (vt). TE xm – pitch black (v); ZO ZO x ej , TE x aj , SI k u j bee (n). III h III 63 xm –, SI km – dark (v). cf. h h III III thum² k al¯ 2 MI/ZA kal , TH xol , ZO III III h III xol , TE xal , SI kul stranger h h 64 h h k t 2 (ST *k jt). ZA k t ~ k bind (n). III h h III (v); TH xt ~ xi , TE x, SI k t ~ k i III h h I I tie (v); ZO xi tie, bind (v). k a¹ 2 MI/ZA k a , TH xo , ZO I I h I 68 xo , TE xa , SI k u drum (n). h h 65 h I k i¹ 2 (ST *k j). MI/ZA/SI –k i , I h h I h III TH/ZO/TE –xi barking deer (n). cf. k a¹ 2 MI/ZA k a ~ k an , TH I III I III khi² xo ~ xon , ZO xo ~ xon , TE I III h I h III xa ~ xan , SI ku ~ k un h h IIB h IIB h k i² 2 ZA k i ~ k ik gore (v). cf. k i¹ crow (v).

h h III h h I h III h I k i¯ 2 MI k i surprisingly heavy (v); k ar¹ 2 MI k ar ~ k ar , ZA k ar h III h IIB h III III I MI k in ~ k n weigh (v); ZA k i hollow (vt); TH xo , ZO xo ~ III h I h III heavy (human) (v). xo , TE k ak ~ k ak hollow (vt). h I I MI kar , TH xo hollow (n). h h h k ir² 2 MI/ZA k r return (vt). kir² kar¹. cf. k UL¹

h h I h III h II III II k L¯ 2 MI/SI k n ~ k n , TH/ZO/TE k at 2 TH xot ~ xot , ZO xot ~ I III II III II III h II xn ~ xn collect (v). TH/ZO/TE xl xot , TE xat ~ xat , SI k ut ~ III h II h III h III 69 ~ xl , SI k l ~ k l store (v). ZA k ut scratch, itch (vt). khnIII lumber (n).

66 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #175. 67 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #15. 63 See Shorto (2006:372). 68 Shafer (1952:155) suggests an Austroasiatic 64 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #169. link. 65 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #7. 69 VanBik (2009:146) has initial h- in Lai.

h 70 h III IIB k n¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI k m , ZA dig with hands (v); ZA haj brush h III h III III k n , SI –k n , TH/ZO/TE xn bed aside debris (v). MI/TE hj, TH/SI III III (n). hj , ZO huj wind (n); ZA hj wind III III carrying debris (n). TH kuj ~ kj , h h h III III III k p 2 MI k p (~ kh), ZA/SI kp, ZO kuj , TE kuj ~ kj, SI kj rake h TH/ZO/TE xp upturn, close book (v). (v). MI k j comb (n/v).

h h III h 74 h h k s 2 MI/ZA k , ZO xu , TE x, SI K Vk 2 (Austroasiatic). MI k k ~ k , h III h h h h III k u ~ k k cough (v). cf. K u² ZA t, MI/ZA k , TH/ZO xe , TE h III 75 x, SI k e peel (v); TH x, ZO x (h) h III h h III k t 2 MI/ZA kt, TH/ZO/TE xt, SI k t ~ xo , TE xk ~ x, SI k k ~ k o IIB hand (n). peel (vt). MI/ZA hok ~ h, TH/ZO II III II III II ho ~ ho , TE hok ~ hok , SI hok ~ h h 71 K u² 2 (ST *k w , onomatopoeic). MI hokIII / hoIII skin (v). kk. cf. ho¹ h III h IIB h IIB h IIB k u ~ k uk , ZA k u ~ k ut , II II h II h II h h I h III h I h III ZO/TE xu ~ xut , SI k u ~ k ut K Vl¹ 2 MI/TH t l ~ t l , ZA t l ~ t l II II I III I III h I smoke (v); TH xu ~ xut smoke, ZO sl ~ sl , TE xl ~ xl , SI k l ~ h IIB h IIB cough (v). MI k u , ZA k u , khlIII thread (v). II h II TH/ZO/TE xu , SI k u smoke (n). MI III IIB IIA h 76 h IIB hu ~ huk steam (v); ZA hu ~ K VM¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI k m / IIB IIB h IIB III h III hut steam food (v). MI hu , k m , ZO/TE xm ~ xp, SI k m ~ III h h 77 h IIB TH/ZO/TE/SI hu steam (n). cf. k s k p put on head (v); ZA k m put on head, shut up animals in a pen (v); h 72 h IIB II III k uk 2 (Austronesian). MI k up , ZA TH/ZO xm ~ xm herd into (v); TE h IIB II II h II II III h II h III k uk , TH/ZO xup , TE xuk , SI k up xm ~ xm , SI km ~ k m III knee (n). insert, herd into (v). ZO xm ~ xp, h III h SI III III k um ~ k p disappear from view h III k us 2 TH x , ZO xu ~ x , TE xu ~ (v); TE xm ~ xp put on head, h III h x k, SI k u ~ k k cover head (v). submerge, disappear from view (v). h III I III h I h III MI/ZA k , TH/ZO xu , TE x cover TE xm ~ xm , SI k m ~ k m (v). attempt sex with sleeping woman, I TH SI h I I I target (v). x m lidded pot (n); h h I I k UL¹ 2 MI/ZA k r , TH/ZO xu , TE xuk , MI TH ZO TE SI h I k m basket (n). / / / / um , I II SI kuk man-made hole (n). TH/TE ZA TH ZO TE SI I um gourd (n). / / / um 73 h I xul cave (n). cf. k uar¹ surround (v). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI om , ZA I II om , TH p, ZO op chest (n). (h) IIB K Vj¯ 2 MI h j / h j rake, skim off MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI p, ZA p brood (v). (vt); ZA h j carry debris (wind) (v); MI p, ZA p cover pot (v); TH/ZO p II III III II III TH haj ~ haj / h j , ZO haj ~ haj , put vegetables on hot rice (v); TE p II III IIB TE hoj ~ hoj skim off (vt). MI h j cover (v); SI p put back strained

70 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #14. 71 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #148. 74 See Shorto (2006:170). 75 h 72 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #18. ZA t from Osburne (1975:138). 73 I I 76 TH xul from VanBik (2009:140); TE xul from See Vol.1, Ch.6, #40. 77 h IIB Khoi Lam Thang (2001:116). MI k m from Chhangte (1993:99).

I rice on stove (v). MI/ZO/TE/SI m ~ III I m cover to ferment (v). MI am ~ III I I am , ZA am ~ am cover fruit IIB IIB (v). MI ap , ZA ap swaddle (v); II III TH op ~ op nurse, attend funeral II III (v); ZO op ~ op attend, console I III I (v); TE ap ~ ap attend (v); SI up ~ upIII attend funeral/wedding, III IIB console (v). MI m ~ m babysit IIB I III (v); ZA m , TH/ZO om ~ om , TE III III om ~ p serve tea (v); SI m ~ p IIA III babysit, serve tea (v). MI ip ~ ip , II II I III TH ip ~ ip ZO/TE/SI ip ~ ip retain II III urine/laughter (v); TH im ~ im / p, III ZO/TE/SI im ~ p keep secret (v). MI/ZO/TE/SI p, ZA/TH dp bag (n). I III MI/ZA hm ~ hm protect (v), MI/ZA II hp ~ h conceal (v); TH/ZO hum ~ III II III hum , TE/SI hm ~ hm conceal with hands (v). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI III I I hum husk (n). TH hom , ZO hom I III bud (n); ZO hom ~ hom inclusive (v). cf. khom¹

h h IIB I III k V¯ 2 MI/ZA k , TH/ZO xa ~ xan crack (v). cf. kVk

h h I h III h IIB K V¹ 2 MI k e ~ k en / k n , ZA h I h III III k e ~ k en , TH/ZO/TE xen ~ xt I III hammer (v); TH xe ~ xen forge (v); h I h III I MI/ZA t ~ t n , ZO/TE xe ~ III I III xen , TE xo ~ xon resound (v); h II h III h III h TH/SI t o ~ t on , ZO/TE t on ~ t t h II h III echo (v); TE to ~ t on hear an echo (v).78

78 h II h III TE t o ~ t on from Bhaskararao (1996:98).

l I l III kl()a¹ 2 MI t a ~ t an glossy (v); kl I III I ZO/SI ta ~ tan radiate (v); TE ta ~ III III l I l III h I h III tan radiate (vi), tan ~ tt irradiate, klj¹ 2 MI t j ~ t j , TH lj ~ lj , ZO flash at (v ).79 tjI ~ tjIII satiate (v). t

l I l III h I h I I III l I kl ¹ 2 MI t ~ t n , TH l ~ l , ZO k(l)aj¹ 2 MI kaj ~ kaj rise (v); ZA taj I III l I l I I III ~ n complete (v). ZA t ~ ~ t aj hang (vi); ZO/TE/SI kaj ~ kaj , l III I III I III III t n , TE/SI ~ n complete (vi); TH kaj ~ kaj / k j rise, hang (vi). l IIB III III III ZA t n , TE/SI n complete (vt). MI/TE kaj ~ kj, TH/ZO/SI kaj ~ III III kj pull (v); ZA kaj ~ kj hold (v). l I I III I klr¹ 2 MI tr , ZO to ~ to , TE/SI tok h k(l) aj¹. cf. kAL¯ ~ tokIII greasy (v).80

l IIA l III (II) klaj² 2 MI/ZA t aj ~ t aj , SI –taj ~ l I l III h I III klw¹ 2 MI tw ~ t w , TH lw ~ taj late (v). h III I III lw , ZO/TE tw ~ tw durable (v).

l I l I h I kla¹ 2 MI –t a , ZA t a , TH la ZO/TE l I l III h I I I klm¹ 2 MI t m ~ t m , TH lm ~ ta –, SI ta public (n). h III I III lm sink (v); ZO/TE/SI tm ~ tm

l I sink, enter (v). kla¹ 2 MI/ZA ta mountain (n); TH h I I la mountain range (n); ZO/TE ta 81 l III l IIB kl V² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ta ~ t ak hill (n). l IIB prowl (v). ZA ta – leopard (n); TH h II II l IIA l III h I lo mythical tiger (n); ZO to tiger kl AL¯ 2 MI/ZA t an ~ t an , TH lj ~ h III I III (n); TE/SI to– mythical man-tiger (n). lj , ZO/TE/SI taj ~ taj run (v).

82 l III l IIB l IIA l III II III KL V ² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI t a ~ t ak , klj² 2 MI tj ~ t j , TH/ZO tj ~ tj l IIB l IIB III l IIA l III ZA ta ~ t ak drop (vi). ZO –ta ~ obedient (v); ZA t j ~ t j rearable II III II (II) II II III tat , TE –ta ~ tak , SI –ta ~ tak / by foster mother (v); SI tj ~ tj II l III l IIB l IIB tat free (vi). MI t u ~ t uk , ZA tu capable (v). l IIB h III h II II ~ t uk , TH lu ~ lu , TE tuk fall 83 III II II III l (vi). ZO ke ~ ke / ket , TE ka klp 2 MI t p turned (edge of knife) (v); II/III III II 84 l ~ kat , SI ki ~ kit drop (vi). ZA t p shrink when cooked (v). IIB IIB MI ak ~ a, ZA ak disperse h l IIA l IIB II II (v ). KL V². kle² 2 MI/ZA t e ~ t et , TH te ~ tet i IIA IIB II bright (v); MI de ~ det , TE/SI te ~ l I l III h I II kl Vm¹ 2 MI t em ~ t em , TH lom ~ tet twinkle (v). h III I III lom , ZO/TE/SI tom ~ tom few (v).

l III l IIB l III kle¯ 2 MI t e ~ (t n ), LA te , TH h III h IIB le ~ l rinse (v); ZA tl 79 III transfer from pot to pot (v). TE tan ~ tt from Henderson (1965:83) and Bhaskararao (1996:92). 80 l I l IIB hl IIB MI t r from VanBik (2009:295). k(l)ak 2 MI tak ~ t a, ZA kak ~ 81 h II III See Vol.1, Ch.6, #168. k a , TI i k ~ i k snap (vi). 82 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #64. h 83 II k(l) ak TE tuk from Bhaskararao (1996:96). 84 III TE kat from Bhaskararao (1994:336;345).

h temporarily from container (v); xjII kl III h II ~ xj slit belly open (v) , SI t j ~ h III h h lh I lh I t j choose (v). cf. k j² kl ¹ 2 MI t west (n); ZA t , TH h I h I I h I l , ZO l , TE x , SI t south h lh h h kl k 2 MI t k, ZO l, xk, SI kk (n). stunted (v).

(h) hl I hl III h I MI ZA TH h lh IIA lh III kl ¹ 2 / t ~ t n , l ~ MI ZA TH h III I III kl em² 2 / t em ~ t em , h II h III h h II h III l n , ZO/TE/SI t ~ t n choose (v). ZO h lem ~ lem / l p, lem ~ lem , II III h II h III cf. kl E-² TE xem ~ xem , SI t am ~ t am

h lh I h I I deceive (v). kl a¹ 2 MI/ZA t a , TH/ZO la , TE xa , SI h I h lh III h III t a spirit (n). kl e¯ 2 MI t e , TH le dish (n).

h lh III h lh IIB h II h III kl aj¯ 2 MI/ZA t aj vegetable (n); TE E- MI ZA ZO III h III kl ² 2 / t , l ~ l n , h II h III II III II xaj , SI t aj seed (n). TH le ~ le , TE x ~ xn xek III h II h III h III h h I h III I III ~ xek , SI t ak ~ t ak / t e k(l) aj¹ 2 MI k aj ~ k aj , TH xaj ~ xaj h II h III III I exchange (v); TH l ~ l n h / x j carry, hoist, hang (vt); ZA k aj (h) I h III h substitute (v). cf. kl ~ k aj carry, hoist (vt), k j carry hl I hl III hl (vb); ZA t aj ~ t aj hang (vt), t j h lh IIB lh h IIB I III h I k(l) ak 2 MI t ak ~ t a , ZA k ak hang (v ); ZO/TE xaj ~ xaj , SI k aj ~ h h II h III h II b ~ k a, TH le ~ le , ZO le ~ h III III k aj hang (vt). ZO xj , TE xj h III II III h II III h III l e , TE x ak ~ x ak / x a , SI i k TE xaj , SI kaj h III h III siphon (v). ~ ik / i snap (v ). k(l)ak unspecified mass (n). k(l)aj¹. t

h lh I lh III h h IIA h III h II kl m¹ 2 MI t m ~ t m stealthy (v); k(l) aj² 2 ZA k aj ~ k aj , TH laj ~ lh IIB h I h III h III h III h II h III II MI t m , TH/ZO lm ~ lm put to laj / lj , ZO laj ~ laj , SA xaj ~ III h II h II sleep (v). xaj , SI t aj ~ t aj chew (v).

h 86 lh I I h lh I h I kl i¹ 2 (ST *k-lj). MI/ZA t i , TE –xi kl am¹ 2 MI/ZA t am , TH/ZO lam h I I wind (n); TH li breeze (n). jhoom hut (n); TE xam bachelor’s h II bed, temporary hut (n); SI tam h hl I h I I h I h II kl i¹ 2 MI/ZA t i , TH/ZO li , TE xi , SI i sleeping platform (n), t om lh I lh h I tears (n). MI t i ~ t t, TH/ZO li ~ bachelor’s quarters (n). h I h h III lt, TE (xi ~) xt, SI t ~ i strain

h h I (v). kl a¹ 2 TH/ZO la jaw (n).

h lh IIA lh h II h 85 lh III kl I-² 2 MI t i , ZA t k, TH l n kl as 2 (ST *k-las). MI/ZA t a , TH/ZO h III III h III marrow (n). la , TE xa , SI t a moon (n). h lh III lh IIB lh III h lh IIA lh III h II kl ¯ 2 MI t n ~ t n , ZA t ~ kl j² 2 MI/ZA t j ~ t j , TH lj ~ lh IIB h III h III h III h II h III t , TH/ZO l ~ l , TE x ~ lj sift (v); ZO lj ~ lj remove h III h xt, SI t ~ t k dislocate (v).

85 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #112. 86 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #183.

h III I III h I h III ln , TE x ~ xn , SI t ~ t n h lh IIA lh I III (k)l w² 2 MI/ZA t w ~ t , TH/ZO suspend across (v). MI/ZA la ~ lan h II h III II h II lw ~ lo , TE xw ~ x, SI t w go and return the same day (v); MI h III IIA I III I ~ t o weed (v). MI/ZA lw ~ l, le ~ len visit, epidemic (v); ZA le II III II III I III TH/ZO/SI lw ~ lo , TE lw ~ l ~ len visit (v); TH la ~ lan h I III pluck (v). cf. lw², lw¹ epidemic (v); ZO/TE/SI la ~ lan I haunt, epidemic (v); TH/ZO/TE le ~ h lh IIB h II III I III kl ak 2 MI/ZA t ak , TH lo , ZO len visit, fly (v); SI la ~ len jump, h II II h II lo , TE xak , SI t uk brain (n). fly (v). cf. k¹

h lh I lh III h I (h) 90 lh kl m¹ 2 MI t m ~ t m , TH/ZO lm (k)l Vp 2 (Austroasiatic). MI t p ~ h III I III h I lh lh h h ~ lm , TE xm ~ xm , SI t m ~ t , ZA t p, TH lp, ZO lp, TE xp, h III lh I lh III h h III h I h III t m sweet (v); ZA t m ~ t m SI t p ~ t e fold (v). MI lip ~ lip , lh IIB h IIB h h I h III sweet (vi), t m sweeten (vt). MI lip ~ l, ZA lip ~ lip , I III II TH/ZO/TE lip ~ lip curl (v); SI lip ~ h 87 lh III III I III KL V² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI t a ~ lip curl (vi), lip ~ lip curl (vt). MI lh IIB lh IIB lh IIB h t ak , ZA t a ~ t ak drop (vt); TH lp, ZA lp, TH/ZO/TE/SI lp scales (n). h III h II h II h h la ~ la drop, free (vt); TH la , MI lip ~ li skin (v). MI/ZA lp ~ l h III h II III II h III I III ZO la ~ la , TE xa ~ xak , SI t a pare (v). MI lep ~ lep dice (v). ZA h II h II h II l II h II (h) ~ t ak send (vt). TH la , ZO – la t ap , TH lep sheet (n). cf. lVM¯, lh descendant (n). MI/ZA t free (vt), jap h III descendant (n); ZO la , TE x, SI h III lh III lh IIB t a free (vt). MI t u , ZA t u fell III II II III (vt). ZO xe ~ xe / xet , TE xa II/III h III h II 88 ~ xat , SI k i ~ k it drop (vt). h IIB h MI at ~ a demolish, fell (vt); h IIB h ZA at demolish (vt); MI a, TE xia pound rice again (v). KL V ²

(h) 89 (k)l V¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA lh I lh III h I h III h t ~ t n , SI t ~ t n / t t, h II h III II III TH l ~ ln , ZO/TE t ~ tn h I h III arrive (vi); ZO l ~ ln arrive II III (time) (vi); SI t ~ tn attain (v); l IIA l III l IIB ZA t ~ t n return (vi), ZA t un lh IIB h III return (vt); MI/ZA t n , TH ln ~ h h III lt, SI tn arrive, bring (vt). III ZO/TE/SI tn ~ tt reach (symptom I III time) (v). TE x ~ xn overtake, l I l III overshoot (v). ZA to ~ t on travel lh I lh III h I (v). MI t ~ t n , TH/ZO l ~

87 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #64. 88 III TE xat from Bhaskararao (1994:336;347). 89 See Shorto (2006:222). 90 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #72.

I kri¹ 2 MI i ~ t scared (vi), scared kr III of (vt); ZA scared (vi); TH/SI ki , III h 91 I III ZO ki –, TE k disgusted (v). kr i¹ kr¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ~ n I III exert, dry (v); ZA ~ n exert (v); II III I III krin² 2 ZO/TE/SI kin ~ kin move (vi). TH/TE/SI k ~ kn distend (v); ZO h I III IIA kr in² k ~ kn steadfast (v). MI ~ III IIA III III n distend (breasts) (v); ZA ~ I MI ZA III h kr l² 2 il ~ l , l drop (vi). h n dry (v). cf. kr ¹, Kra¹ kr Il²

92 I III I kr p 2 (ST *krp). MI/ZA p ~ , I TH ZO III kr ¹ 2 ki ~ kin sooty (v); ki , I I 95 TH/ZO k p ~ ka , TE k p ~ k , SI k p TE SI III –k , –ki soot (n). ~ ka weep (v). I III TH ZO I III krom¹ 2 / kom ~ kom borrow, I III (k)ra¹ 2 MI ra ~ ran piebald (v); ZA TE SI I III IIB lend (v); / kom ~ kom borrow III ra ~ ran white (vi), r n whiten (v), kom ~ kp lend (v).96 93 I III (vt); TH/ZO/TE/SI ka ~ kan white IIA III (v). krm² 2 MI m ~ m , TH/ZO/TE II III 94 I k m ~ k m descend, decrease (v), Kra¹ 2 (ST *ra). MI/ZA a , IIA III I I ZA m ~ m decrease (vi). II TH/ZO/TE a , SI ka bosom (n). MI kr hm I chest (n). cf. kr ¯ I III I III III kr Vn¹ 2 MI/ZA on ~ on , TH kan ~ III I III kraw¯ 2 MI aw , TH/ZO/TE/SI kaw evil kan bind (v); ZO/TE kan ~ kan spirit (n). weave basket/net (v). krt 2 MI t ~ tear (vi); ZA t ~ h tatter (vi). kr t

IIB II II krek 2 MI/ZA ek , ZO ke , TE kek , II II lightning (n); TH ke , SI kak lightning concretion (n).

IIA III kren¯ 2 MI en ~ en , TH/ZO/TE/SI kenI ~ kenIII steep (v).

I III I (k)ral¹ 2 MI/ZA al ~ al , TH gel ~ III I III gel stripe (v); ZO gel ~ gel , TE I III I III gal ~ gal , SI il ~ il stripe (vi); III III III ZO gel , TE gal ~ gal, SI il stripe (vt).

91 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #47. 92 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #182. 93 IIB 95 ZA ran from Osburne (1975:112). VanBik (2009:307) has Lai -. 96 94 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #35. See Lorrain (1940:434) for possible MI -.

h h III III h kr am¯ 2 MI/ZA am , TH xom , ZO kr III III h III xom , TE xam , SI k um column

h h I h III (n). kr ¹ 2 MI/ZA ~ n , TH/ZO/TE I III h I h III x ~ xn , SI k ~ k n increase h h III III kr aC 2 MI/ZA a, TH xo , ZO xo , (v). cf. kr¯ h III TE xa, SI k u swill (v).

h h IIB h III h IIB kr ¯ 2 MI , ZA ~ h h IIA h III III h III h III kr m² 2 ZA m ~ m decrease TH/ZO x ~ x, SI k ~ k n (vt). krm² wake (v). h h 97 h I h h I I kr u¹ 2 (ST *k rw). MI/ZA u –, kr al¹ 2 MI/ZA al , TH/ZO/TE xal , SI I h I TH/ZO/TE –xu , SI –k u dove (n). khalI summer (n).

(h) h I h I h h III III kr u¹ 2 MI u ~ t, TE tu ~ t t sit (v). kr al¯ 2 MI al , TH/ZO/TE xal crotch

(n). h h I h III h I h IIB kr uj¹ 2 MI j ~ j , ZA i ~ it , I III III I h h I h III TH xuj ~ xuj / xj , ZO/TE xuj ~ kr n¹ 2 MI n ~ n separate (v). III h I h III h I h III I III xuj , SI k j ~ k j sew (v). ZA n ~ n , TH/ZO xn ~ xn , I III h I h III TE xn ~ xn , SI kn ~ k n h III h IIB separate (vt); ZA n ~ n , III III h III TH/ZO xn ~ xt, TE xn , SI k n ~ h h k t separate (vb). cf. kr t

h h h h kr t 2 MI t ~ tear (vt); ZA t ~ h h tatter (vt). krt. cf. kr n¹

h h kr i¹ 2 ZA scare (vt). kri¹

h h IIB II III kr in² 2 MI in , TH xin ~ xin move II III h II (v); ZO/TE xin ~ xin , SI kin ~ h III k in move (vt). krin²

h h II h III kr Il² 2 MI il ~ il uncongealed (v); h III ZA l drop (vt). krIl²

h o h I h III h I K (r)aL¯ 2 MI k oj ~ k oj , ZA k oj , TE I III h I h III xoj ~ xoj , SI k aj ~ k aj breed III I III h I (v). TH xj , ZO/TE xj ~ xj , k j h III I III I ~ k j , TH xol ~ xol , ZO xol ~ III I III h I xol , TE xal ~ xal , SI kul ~ h III II III k ul tend (v). ZO hej ~ hej , TE II III II III haj ~ haj , SI huj ~ huj nurse h I h III II (v). MI/ZA raj ~ raj , TH hoj ~ hojIII escort (v). 97 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #49.

I III I lam¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO lam ~ lam , SI lam l III I ~ lam / lp dance (v); ZO lam ~ lp I III 98 IIA float (v); TE lam ~ lam dance, float lm² 2 (ST *lam ). MI/ZA lm , IIB II (v); MI lm spin a top (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI lm road (n). III TH/ZO/TE/SI lam ~ lp lift (v).

IIA III lm² 2 MI lm ~ lm retrieve, 102 I II III lj¹ 2 (areal). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI lj articulate (v); TH/SI lm ~ lm seek II III tongue (n). out (v); ZO lm ~ lm earn, build IIA III (house) (v); TE lm ~ lm earn I III lj¹ 2 MI/ZA lj ~ lj slant (v). III (vi/t), l m ~ l p earn (vb). I I III IIB III IIB l j¹ 2 MI/SI l j , ZA/TH/ZO/TE l j – debt l¯ 2 MI l ~ ln , ZA l ~ l , III III (n). cf. l j². TH/ZO l ~ l, TE l ~ lt, SI III 103 IIA III l ~ l k / l t appear (v). lj² 2 (areal). MI lj ~ lj , ZO/TE/SI II III IIA III lj ~ lj buy (v); ZA lj ~ lj buy lp 2 MI/SI –l p, TH –l p twinkle (v); ZO (v ), lj buy (v ). cf. lj¹ i/t b –l p dart (v); TE –l p flash (v). 104 IIA MI ZA I l j² 2 (Austroasiatic). / lj , II la¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH la female animal (n); TH ZO TE SI I / / / l j ground (n). ZO/TE/SI la female animal suffix (n). I IIB III MI/ZA la ~ lat nubile (v). lk 2 MI/TE lk ~ l, SI lp ~ le ZA IIB II brandish (v); l k ~ l play (v); III la² 2 MI/ZA la , TH/ZO la spleen (n); TH ZO II / l ~ le toss (v). TE/SI la diaphragm (n). I III TH ZO TE SI III IIB IIB IIB l m¹ 2 / / / lm ~ l m III III la² 2 MI la ~ lak , ZA la ~ lak , TH ZO II II II II peaceful (vi); l m , l m – ~ TH/ZO la ~ la , TE/SI la ~ lak take III lp, TE/SI lm ~ lp pacify (vt). (v). IIB IIB MI ZA 99 I l m¯ 2 l m swallow (v); l m laj¹ 2 (ST *laj). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI laj swallow saliva (v). middle, navel (n). 105 IIA III le² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA le , II II laj¯ 2 ZA/ZO/TE/SI laj writing (n). TH/ZO/TE le , SI la cart (n). cf. lO¯ III III laj¯ 2 MI laj ~ l j harrow (v); ZA laj III III ~ l j dig (v); TH/ZO/SI laj ~ l j , TE E MI ZA MI TE III l t 2 / l t ~ l , l p ~ l , – III III laj ~ l j harrow, dig (v). lt ~ l, TH lt ~ le , ZO/SI –lt ~ le IIB MI 100 IIA invert (v). let (~ l ) alter (v); P-lak 2 (Austroasiatic). MI bak , KH IIA II II –lak , TH/ZO ba , TE/SI bak bat 101 (h) (n). cf. lVM¯ 101 IIA KH plak from Luce (1962:tableB). 102 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #170. 98 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #133. 103 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #59. 99 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #110. 104 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #89. 100 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #9. 105 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #33.

II III II III IIA II TH/ZO/TE let ~ let , SI let ~ let / lw² 2 MI/ZA lw , TH/ZO/TE/SI lw leIII overflow (v). field (n). cf. khlw², hlw¹

106 IIB 111 I lak 2 (areal). MI/ZA lak ~ la, TH loj¹ 2 (Tai-Kadai). MI/TH/ZO/TE loj , II III II III II I le ~ le ZO le ~ le , TE lak ~ SI laj buffalo (n). III II III III lak / la, SI lik ~ lik / li lick I III (v). ZA la lick (n). lom¹ 2 MI lom ~ lom mutually assist I III (v); TH lom ~ lom / lp, ZO/TE/SI III IIB III I III lan¯ 2 MI lan ~ ln , TH len ~ let, lom ~ lom suitable (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI III III I ZO len ~ let, TE lan ~ lat, SI lom friend (n). III III IIB lin ~ lt big (v); ZA lan ~ ln II III rich (v). lom² 2 MI lom ~ lom rejoice (vi). MI IIB III IIB lm , ZA lom ~ lom , TH/ZO/TE/SI I I I III la¹ 2 MI/ZA/TE la , TH le , ZO le , lom ~ lp rejoice (vt). I SI li shoulder (n). 112 III lO¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/TH l , 107 IIB III III Lat 2 (ST *rjat). MI/ZA rat , TH ZA lo boat (n); SI lo raft (n). cf. II II II II get , ZO get , TE gat , SI lit eight le² (v). IIB IIB II lºak 2 MI lok ~ l, ZA lak , TH lo 108 III II III II Ls 2 (ST *–njs). MI/ZA –r, TH/ZO ~ lo , ZO lo ~ lo , TE lak ~ III (II) III II III III –gi , TE –g, SI –li seven (v) lak / la, SI luk ~ luk / lu II III scoop up (v). TE lok ~ lok 109 I III I li¹ 2 (ST *lj). MI li ~ li , ZA li ~ repossess (v). MI/ZA la occupy (v); IIB I III I III III III lit , TH li ~ li , ZO/TE/SI li four (v). TH lo , ZO lo , TE la, SI lu inherit (v). I I li¹ 2 MI li pool (n), li ~ lt pool (v); I I I I III I ZA/SI –li lake (n); TH/ZO li , TE –li la¹ 2 MI/TE la ~ lan , TH lo ~ III I III I stream pool (n). lon , ZO lo ~ lon , SI lu ~ III I III lun flow (v). ZA la ~ lan flow 110 IIB MI IIB III li² 2 (ST *lj ). li hairspring (n); (vi), ln carry in flow (vt). MI lan , IIB II II III III ZA li bow (n); TH li , ZO/TE/SI –li TH lon , TE lan ~ lat plate (v).

slingshot (n). IIA IIB I L - MI ZA TH IIA III II a ¯ 2 r a , r ak , lo , I I I Li-² 2 ZA –ri ~ rin , TH/ZO gi ~ ZO TE SI III II III l o , l a , lu corpse (n). IIA II II gin , scare (vi); TE/SI li ~ lin ZA ra , ZO do , TE da , SI frozen with fear/excitement (v). MI duII body (n). cf. rak IIB II II II rik , TH gi , ZO gi (~ git ) III IIB IIB threaten (vt). las 2 MI la ~ lak , ZA lak , TH III II III II III lo ~ lo , ZO lo ~ lo , TE la II/III III II ~ lak , SI lu ~ luk vomit 106 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #170. 107 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #54. 108 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #138. 109 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #80. 111 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #30. 110 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #145. 112 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #22.

113 IIB II III (v). MI/ZA lak , TH lo , ZO LVl¯ 2 ZA ril ~ rl roll along (vi). II II h lo , SI luk vomit (n). LVl¯. cf. wVL¯

114 Lk 2 (ST *rwk). MI/ZA rk, TH III gup , ZO g, TE gk, SI lk six (v).

III IIB III lm¯ 2 MI lm ~ lm , ZA lm (~ IIB III lm ) lie (vi). TH/ZO/TE/SI lm ~ lp lie (v). hlm¯

I l¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI l heart (n).

115 IIA l² 2 (ST *lw ). MI/ZA l , II 116 TH/ZO/TE/SI l – stone (n).

117 IIA l² 2 (ST *lw ). MI/ZA l , TH II II l maggot (n); ZO/TE/SI l insect IIA III (n). MI l ~ ln maggoty (v).

ls 2 MI l eat from pot (v); ZA l III bring in (v); TH/ZO/SI lu , TE l rob (v).

lu¹ 2 (Austronesian). 118 I MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI lu head (n).

III IIB IIB IIB lu² 2 MI lu ~ luk , ZA lu ~ luk , II II II II TH/ZO lu ~ lu , TE lu ~ luk copulate (v).

III III luj¯ 2 MI/SI lj , TH/ZO/TE luj stream (n).

IIB IIB lut 2 MI lut ~ l, ZA lut (~ l), II III II III TH/ZO/TE lut ~ lut , SI lut ~ lut / luIII enter (v).

113 III TE lak from Bhaskararao (1994:336;349). 114 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #143. 115 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #159. 116 II TE l – from Vul Za Thang & J. Gin Za Twang (1975:74). 117 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #109. 118 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #92.

h h I h III h lm¹ 2 MI/ZA lm ~ lm joyful (v); l I III TH/TE/SI lm ~ lm delicious (v).

h I lm¹ 2 TH/ZO/TE lm membrane (n). h h 123 h I h III III li¹ 2 (ST * lj). MI/ZA li , MI/ZA lm , TH/ZO/TE/SI lm I TH/ZO/TE/SI li flea (n). placenta (n). (h) III IIB h IIA h III h h IIA II li¯ 2 MI li ~ lik , ZA lik ~ lik , la² 2 MI/ZA la , TH/ZO/TE/SI la song II II TH/ZO/TE/SI li ~ lit retract to reveal (n). IIB IIA II (v). MI li / lik , TE lk, SI li glans III III h h I h h IIA h IIB penis (n). ZO/TE/SI li , TE li ~ l k la¯ 2 MI la ~ l t, ZA la ~ lat , 124 III II II slough (v); TH l, TE/SI lik wax TH/ZO/TE/SI la ~ lat far (v). (v).

(h) h IIA IIA la² 2 MI la , ZA la bier, machan h h IIB h IIB h II II Lit 2 MI lit , ZA nit , TH/ZO lit , (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI la bier (n); II II TE/SI lit leech (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI la machan (n).

h h I h I I (h) (h) 119 h I lI¹ 2 MI li , ZA l , TH/ZO/TE/SI l lAm¹ 2 (ST * lm). MI lm , ZA I I thorn (n). lm , TH/ZO/TE/SI lam fathom (n); MI h I h III lm ~ lm fathom (v). h h III l s 2 MI l , TH/SI lo , TE l wage (n). h III h 120 h IIA ZA l , ZO lo earn (v). lj² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA – lj , II TH/ZO/TE/SI –lj squirrel (n). h h I I l w¹ 2 MI l w , TH/ZO/TE/SI l w weed h (h) 121 III (n). cf. k l w², l w² lj¯ 2 (Austronesian). MI lj , ZA h III III lj –, TH/ZO/TE/SI lj bridge (n). h I III lon¹ 2 MI lon ~ lon launch (v); ZA h IIB I h h I h I l n throw (v); TH/TE/SI lon ~ l t Lw¹ 2 MI rw , TH/ZO lw leech (n). throw (vi/vt); TE/SI l t throw (vb). h h I h III I l am¹ 2 MI l am ~ l am , TH le m ~ h h I h III III I III I Lom¹ 2 MI/ZA lom ~ lom , TH/ZO/TE lem , ZO lem ~ lem , TE lam ~ I III I III III I III hom ~ hom / h p, SI hom ~ hom lam , SI lim ~ lim wound (v). distribute (v). h h I h III I law¹ 2 MI/ZA law ~ law , TH lew h 125 h III I III I l k 2 (Austronesian). MI/ZA l k, TH ~ lew , ZO lew ~ lew , TE law ~ lup, ZO l, TE/SI lk colugo (n). III I III l aw , SI li w ~ li w lick (flame) h h III h IIB h III (v). lm¯ 2 MI – lm ~ lm , ZA lm ~ h IIB (h) 122 h l m lay (vt). l m¯ Lk 2 (Sinitic). MI – rt, ZA –rt, TH/ZO –g, TE –gk, SI –lk pheasant (h) (h) 126 I l m¹ 2 (ST * lwm). MI l m ~ (n). III IIB h I h III lm / lm , ZA lm ~ lm warm

119 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #67. 122 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #129. 120 See Shafer (1952:154) and the data in Shorto 123 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #73. 124 (2006:569). TE FORM-II lk from Bhaskararao (1994:349). 121 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #28. 125 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #111.

IIB h IIB II III II III (vi); MI lm , ZA lm warm (vt); (v). ZO lep ~ lep , TE lap ~ lap , I III II III TH/ZO/TE/SI lm ~ lm warm (v). SI lip ~ lip shade (v). MI/ZA IIA III I lam ~ lam overflow (v); TH lem h h I h III I III III III luj¹ 2 MI lj ~ lj , TH luj ~ luj / ~ lem pass away (v); ZO lem ~ III I III I III I III II lj , ZO/TE luj ~ luj , SI lj ~ lj lep, TE lam ~ lam , SI lim ~ old (v). limIII disappear over horizon (v).

h h I h I I (h) 129 h luj¹ 2 MI lj , KH li , ZO/TE –luj , SI – lVM¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI – lp, I 127 I III lj cock (n). ZA/TH –lp, ZO –lam TE –lek , SI – III h II lap butterfly (n). MI –lip , ZA – h h I h III II h I I I LVl¯ 2 MI/ZA ral ~ ral , TH hol ~ lim , TH –lp, ZO –lm , TE –lum III II III II (h) hol , ZO hol ~ hol , TE hal ~ flying ant (n). cf. P-lak, (k)l Vp III II III hal , SI hul ~ hul twine (v). I III I III MI/TE zal ~ zal , TH el ~ el , ZO I III I III I zel ~ zel , TE zal zal /SI zil ~ III I III zil roll (v); ZA zal ~ zal roll III (vt); ZA zl roll (vb). MI zal , TH III III III el , ZO zel , SI zil roll (n). ZA h III h ril ~ rl roll along (vt). LVl¯. cf. wVL¯

h h 128 h IIA lVm² 2 (ST * lwm ). MI lum ~ h III h IIB II III lum / lum , SI lim ~ lim coil (v). h IIA h III h IIB ZA lum ~ lum coil (vi/t), lum II III coil (vb). TH/ZO/TE lum ~ lum , SI II h IIA lum sphericalise (vi). MI lom ~ h III lom knead into lump (v); II III TH/ZO/TE/SI lm ~ lm sphericalise h IIA II (vt). MI lum ball (n), TH lom , II ZO/TE lim string ball (n). h h I h III I lVm¯ 2 MI lim ~ lim , TH/TE lem ~ III I/II III I/II lem , ZO lem ~ lem , SI lam ~ III II III lam strip (v); TE lem ~ lem flip (v).

(h) III II lVM¯ 2 MI/ZA lm , TH/ZO/TE/SI lim III image (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI lm ~ lp h III h II rehearse (v). MI lm , ZA t lam , TH III h III III III lim , ZO lim , TE lim , SI lm h III h shadow (n); ZO lim ~ lp shadow

126 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #177. 127 MI and KH from Luce (1962:tableB). 128 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #136. 129 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #72.

mI ~ mnIII suffer night seizure (v). m I I III TE m , SI m ~ m n nap (v). cf. IIA III m² ml² 2 MI ml ~ ml blurry (eyesight) III (v); ZA m l dim (v). IIB met 2 MI/ZA met ~ m , TH/ZO/TE II III II III III I IIB I met ~ met , SI met ~ met / me mn¹ 2 MI mn ~ mn , ZA mn catch I III shave (v). (v); ZA mn ~ mn stick (v); I 134 TH/ZO/TE/SI m n ~ m t catch, stick mt 2 (Austroasiatic). (vi), m t stick (vt). TE m t prisoner MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI mt eye (n).

(n). 135 MI ZA TE 130 IIA m t 2 (ST *mjt). / / , m t ~ m² 2 (ST *m ). MI/ZA m , III II m , TH/ZO/SI mt ~ mi extinguish TH/ZO/TE/SI m dream (n); MI IIA IIB IIB (v). m ~ mn , ZA mn , III 136 IIB TH/ZO/TE/SI m n ~ m t dream (v). mi² 2 (ST *mj ). MI/ZA mi , II cf. m ¹ TH/ZO/TE/SI mi person (n).

III IIB IIB IIB ma² 2 MI ma ~ mak , ZA mak , TE m² 2 MI m river mouth, posterior II IIB II ma ~ mak leave wife (v); TH/ZO (n); ZO/SI m river mouth, edge, II II II II ma ~ ma disapprove (v). top (n); TH m edge (n); TE m II SI I end, top, extremity (n). m ~ maj¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI maj pumpkin mnIII die off (v). (n). MI ZA TH ZO SI 131 IIB II m s 2 / m misdeed (n). / / mak 2 (ST *mak). MI mak , ZO ma , III II mo , TE m err (v). TE/SI mak brother-in-law, son-in- IIB I law (n); ZA mak son-in-law (n). mw¹ 2 MI/TH mw daughter/sister-in- I (I) law (n); ZA/TE/SI m w daughter-in- I m j¹ 2 MI –m j haze (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI law (n); ZO mw sister-in-law (n). I m j cloud (n). IIA III IIB MI ZA TH 132 IIA mol¯ 2 mol ~ mol , m l , mj² 2 (ST *mj ). MI/ZA mj , I III I III II mol (~ m l ), ZO/TE mol ~ mol I III TH/ZO/TE/SI m j fire (n). stupid (v). SI mol ~ mol muddle (v). III II III 133 IIA TH m l , TE/SI mol ~ mol blunt (v), mj² 2 (ST *mj ). MI/ZA mj , II III II ZO mol ~ mol dull (colour) (v). MI TH/ZO/TE/SI mj tail (n). IIB ml , LA ml forget (v).

I IIB m¹ 2 MI m open eyes (v), mn 137 I III I III mOj¹ 2 (Sinitic). MI/ZA moj ~ moj suffer insomnia (v); ZA m ~ mn I III beautiful (v). ZO/TE/SI mj ~ mj open eyes (v), suffer insomnia (v). TE young (v). cf. hj¯

130 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #50. 134 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #62. 131 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #154. 135 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #61. 132 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #69. 136 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #128. 133 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #165. 137 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #13.

I I mal¹ 2 MI mal hill (n); ZA/TE mal , I I I TH mol , ZO mol , SI mul mountain (n).

IIB mat 2 MI mat ~ ma brittle (v). ZA IIB II III II mat , TH mot ~ mot , ZO mot III II III II ~ mot , TE mat ~ mat , SI mut ~ mutIII rot (v).

I mu¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI mu vulture (n).

II mu² 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/SI mu kernel (n). II TE mu seed pit (n)

IIB IIB mut 2 MI mut ~ m, ZA mut , II III smoulder (v); TH/ZO mut ~ mut II III blow (v); TE/SI mut ~ mut smoulder, blow (v).

138 II mVm¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI mm ~ III I III mm , TH/ZO mm ~ mm sprout I III II (v); TE mm ~ mm , SI mm (~ III IIA mm ) very young (v). MI/ZA mum III I ~ mum closed (flower) (v). MI mim II II nut (n); SI mm / mm bud (n). (h) o mam¹

III mVn¯ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI mon , TH/ZO/TE menIII clitoris (n)

139 IIA III mV-² 2 (areal). MI m ~ mn , IIA II II ZA –m , TH m , ZO/TE/SI –m IIB black (pot) (v). MI mok sallow (v); IIB MI muk dull (colour), sit obediently II II (v); ZO mo , TE mok , SI mk fog (n).

138 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #29. 139 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #20.

III III hm mom ~ mp, TE mam ~ mp feed regurgitatively (v). mVm¯ h h mj² 2 MI mj overlook (v). h h 143 h IIA II III m j² 2 (ST * mwj ). MI/ZA m j , TH/ZO/TE/SI mj ~ mj fumble (v). II III TH/ZO/TE/SI m j spindle (n). ZO mj , TE mj smear (v). h h 144 h IIA (h) h IIB IIB m l² 2 (ST * mwl ). MI/ZA m l , mn² 2 MI mn , ZA mn footloose II II III TH/ZO/TE/SI m l body hair (n). (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI mn ~ mn h h III footloose, finish (v). mn¯ 2 MI/ZA mn , TH/ZO/TE/SI III h h I h III h IIB m n place (n). m¹ 2 MI m ~ mn / mn , ZA h I h III I m ~ mn , TH/ZO/TE/SI m ~ h h III h III mu¯ 2 MI/ZA mu ~ m , TH/ZO/SI mn utilise (v). III III mu , TE mu ~ m see (v). h h I I ma¹ 2 MI/ZA ma , TH/ZO/TE/SI ma (h) I h I h I mu¹ 2 MI mu ~ m t lie, sleep (vi), wound (n). ZA ma ~ ma -s wound 145 h I mt put to sleep (vt); ZA mu ~ (v). h IIB I mut sleepy (v); TH mu ~ mt sleep I (h) h III (v); ZO/TE/SI mu ~ mt fall asleep (v). ms 2 MI/ZA m, TH/ZO/SI me , TE

m curry (n), eat curry (v); LA m h 146 h III mVL¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI mur curry (n). h III point, tip, teat (n); ZA mur , TH m, III III h h h I ZO ma , TE/SI muk lips, beak (n). mEC 2 MI/ZA mt ~ m, TH –me ~ h III h I III I III MI muj muzzle (n). MI/ZA mel , ZA m, ZO/SI mt ~ me , ZO me ~ me , h III I I III muj , TH/ZO/TE/SI mel visage (n). TE mek ~ mek massage (v). h IIA II MI/ZA maj , TH/ZO/TE/SI maj face,

front (n). hmn¹ 2 (ST *hmjn). 140 h I h III MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI mn ~ mn ripe h IIB h IIB (v); MI mn subdue (v); ZA mn prepare (v). h h 141 h I m¹ 2 (ST * mj). MI m , ZA h I I mn , TH/ZO/TE/SI mn name (n).

(h) o 142 h I mam¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI mam h III h I h III ~ mam , mom ~ mom , TH I III I mom ~ mom , ZO mom ~ III I III mom , TE mam ~ mam , SI I III mum ~ mum hold in mouth (v). h IIB MI mm put in mouth (v). ZA IIB mm devour (v). TH/SI mp, ZO

143 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #156. 140 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #132. 144 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #90. 145 141 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #117. MI FORM-I mt from Chhangte (1996:87). 142 See the data in Shorto (2006:376-7). 146 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #63.

IIB II not 2 MI not ~ n, TH/ZO/TE not ~ n III II III III not , SI not ~ not / no rub (v). cf. (h) nVL¹, nVk nm¹ 2 (ST *nam). 147 I III MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI nm ~ nm smell IIA III II h n ² 2 MI n ~ n n , TH/SI n ~ (v ). nVm¹ III II III i nn , ZO/TE n – ~ nn alive (v); IIA III IIB I III ZA n ~ nn alive (vi), nn n¹ 2 MI n ~ nn catch in time (v). 153 I III survive (vt). TH/ZO/TE/SI n ~ nn prop up (v).

I 148 IIA nu¹ 2 MI/SI nu ~ n t murky (v); TH/ZO n² 2 (areal). MI/ZA n , III II nu , TE n smear (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI n you (n).

IIB II 149 I nu² 2 MI/ZA nu , TH/ZO/TE/SI nu na¹ 2 (ST *na). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI na ~ III MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI nu I mother (n). n t hurt, ill (v). ZA na ~ n t hurt, ill female (n). (vi), n t hurt (vt). I I nVk 2 (onomatopoeic). MI/TE/SI nok ~ naw¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE naw child (n), III I III IIB I III nok , MI nek ~ nek , MI nok ~ n , SI naw infant (n). ZO –naw I I III TH ne ~ n, ZO no ~ no jostle undercooked (v). I (v); TH no ~ n wade (v); TH n, III III III TE nek ~ ne, SI nak approach (v). nj¯ 2 MI/ZA/TE nj ~ nj, TH/ZO/SI (h) III cf. nVL¹, not n j have (v). IIA III III II III nVl¯ 2 MI/ZA nal ~ nal , TH/ZO/TE/SI n² 2 ZO nn nt, TE/SI n nn II III nal ~ nal smooth, slippery (v); MI press (v). cf. n¹ I III I nl ~ nl pliant (v); ZA/TE/SI nl ~ III I III 150 I n l damp (v); ZO n l ~ n l greasy ni¹ 2 (ST *nj). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI ni I III (v). MI nel ~ nel soft (texture), sun (n). I III intimate (v); ZA nel ~ nel intimate I III II III I (v); TH/ZO nel ~ nel , TE nel ~ nel , ni¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI ni paternal II III SI nal ~ nal soft (texture) (v). ZA aunt (n). IIA III II II nel , TH nel , TH/TE –nel , ZO nel , SI II (h) 151 IIA –nal sand (n). cf. nVL¹ nw² 2 (ST *nw ). MI/ZA nw ~ III II III n w , TH/ZO n w ~ n w young (v); IIA III II III nVm² 2 MI nm ~ nm , ZO/TE/SI TE n w ~ n w young, small (v); SI II III IIA II III 152 nm ~ nm push (v); ZA nm ~ n w ~ n w small (v). III II III nm compress (v); TH nm ~ nm II III barge (v); TH/ZO nm ~ nm cram IIB (v); MI nm press (v).

147 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #147. 154 I 148 nVm¯ 2 (areal). MI/ZA/TH/ZO nem ~ See Vol.1, Ch.6, #185. III I III 149 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #97. nem soft (v); TE/SI nem ~ nem 150 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #163. 151 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #152. 152 153 IIB TE gloss of small from Vul Za Thang & J. Gin ZA nn from Osburne (1975:112). Za Twang (1975:87). 154 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #153.

II III flexible (v). TH nom ~ nom / np, II III II ZO nom ~ nom / np, TE nam ~ III II III nam , SI num ~ num / np III IIB happy (v). MI/ZA nam ~ nm , TH III III nom ~ np, ZO nom ~ np, TE III III nam ~ np, SI num ~ np h h comfortable (v). nVM¯. cf. nam²

h h ns 2 MI h lower lip (n); TH/ZO/SI n III ne , TE n lip (n).

h h IIA II nm² 2 MI nm , TH/ZO/TE/SI nm h h III h IIB ne² 2 MI ne ~ nek suckle (v), clan (n). II II II II TH/ZO ne ~ ne , TE ne ~ nek , SI II II h h 155 h ne ~ nak eat (v). np 2 (ST np). MI/ZA np, h TH/ZO/TE/SI np snot (n). cf. nVm¹ h h IIA h III II nal² 2 MI nal ~ nal , SI nil ~ III II III h h III nil contradict (v); TH nel ~ nel ns 2 MI/ZA n, TH/ZO na , TE n , II III II III deny (v); ZO nel ~ nel , TE nal ~ SI –na leaf (n). III nal contradict, deny (v). h h 156 h I na¹ 2 (ST * n). ZA na ear (n); TH (h) 161 h IIA I nam² 2 (areal). MI nam ~ na inner ear (n). h III IIA III nam , ZA nam ~ nam , TH II III II III h h I I nem ~ nem , ZO nem ~ nem , TE naj¹ 2 MI/ZA naj , TH/ZO/TE/SI naj pus, II III II III h I h III nam ~ nam , SI nim ~ nim low sap (n). MI naj ~ naj tap (v). cf. h h (v). cf. nVM¯ noj²

h (h) 162 h (h) (h) 157 h IIa ns 2 (ST * njs). MI/ZA n, naj² 2 (ST * naj ). MI naj ~ III h III IIa h III II III TH/ZO/TE ni , SI n two (v). naj , ZA naj ~ naj , TH naj ~ naj III II III / nj , ZO/TE/SI naj ~ naj near (vi). (h) h IIB IIB II h III III III ni² 2 MI ni , ZA –ni , TH ni , TE/SI MI/ZA nj , TH naj ~ nj , ZO (naj II III III III –ni gums (n). ~) nj , TE (naj ~) nj, SI nj near, approach (vt). h h I h III I nim¹ 2 MI nim ~ nim , TH nim ~ III h I h h 158 h IIA nim overcast, immerse (v); ZA nim na² 2 (ST * na ). MI na ~ h III I h III II III ~ nim immerse (v); ZO/TE/SI nim ~ nan , ZO na ~ nan viscous (v); ZA III h IIA h III II III nim overcast (v). na ~ nan , TH na ~ nan sticky II III III (v); SI na ~ nan / na trickle (v). h h I h I nit 2 (onomatopoeic). MI/ZA nit ~ nit , II III II III III h h 159 h I h III TH/ZO/TE nit ~ nit , SI nit ~ nit / ni nar¹ 2 (ST * nar). MI nar ~ nar , I III blow nose (v). SI nak ~ nak snore (v); TH n I III I smell (vt); ZO na ~ na , TE nak ~ h h I h III III h I/III h III nm¹ 2 MI nm ~ nm , TH/ZO/TE nak breathe (v). MI nar , ZA nar , I III I I III nm ~ nm damp (v). TH na , ZO na , TE/SI nak nose 160 (n). h h IIB II II noj² 2 ZA nj , TH/ZO/TE noj , SI naj

breast, milk (n). cf. hnaj¹

155 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #150. h h 163 h I 156 n ¹ 2 (ST * nw). MI n , See Vol.1, Ch.6, #53. I h I 157 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #118. TH/TE/SI n back (n). MI n ~ 158 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #176. 159 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #122. 160 Weidert, in Benedict (1988a:263), 161 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #153. h I h III distinguishes MI nar nose (n) and nar elephant 162 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #173. trunk (n). 163 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #4.

h III h IIB IIA III II II nn rejected (vi), MI nn , ZA n ~ nn , TH n , ZO/TE/SI n ~ h I h III III 167 n ~ nn reject (vt). nn tired of (v). h 164 h III 165 nu¯ 2 (areal). MI nu breast (n).

(h) I III nuj¹ 2 MI nj ~ nj / nj laugh (vi), h I h nj laught at (vt); ZA ni ~ n, TH I III III I III nuj ~ nuj / nj , ZO nuj ~ nuj , TE I I III nuj ~ nj, SI nj ~ nj laugh (v).

(h) I III nVL¹ 2 MI nul ~ nul brush past, rub h I h III I against (v); ZA nul ~ nul , TE nul ~ I I III nul wipe (v). MI nol ~ nol graze (v), I III ZA nol ~ nol relocate (v). I III TH/ZO/TE/SI nol ~ nol brush (v). I III I MI/ZA/TE naj ~ naj , TH noj ~ III I III I noj , ZO nej ~ nej , SI nuj ~ III h I nuj rub between hands (v). ZA noj h III II III ~ noj , TH/ZO/TE noj ~ noj murky h III III (v); MI nj, SI naj ~ nj smear (v). cf. nVl¯, nVk, not h h III h IIB nVm¹ 2 MI/ZA nm ~ nm sniff h III h IIB affectionately (v); MI nim ~ nm , h III h IIB III ZA nim (~ nm ), ZO/TE/SI nm ~ III h np smell (vt). nm¹. cf. np h 166 h III nVM¯ 2 (areal). MI/ZA nem ~ h IIB III III nm , ZO/TE nem ~ np, SI nam h ~ np comfort (vt). MI/ZA np, TH/ZO np malleable (v); TE/SI np soft (v). (h) nVM¯. cf. nam²

(h) h III h IIB h III nV¯ 2 MI n (~ nn ), ZA n , I III III TH/ZO na ~ nan , SI n ~ nk III III sluggish (v); TH n ~ n, TE n III ~ nt exhausted (v); ZO n ~ n III on deathbed (v); SI n ~ nt ill (v). I III TE n ~ nn disdain (v). MI/ZA

164 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #27. 165 MI from Löffler (1985:284) and Luce (1985:II.86). 167 I III 166 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #153. TE n ~ nn from VanBik (2009:209).

I III I quiet (v). MI vaj ~ vaj , MI aj , ZA I III I III v aj ~ v aj , ZA aj ~ aj , TH I III I III I I vo j ~ vo j , ZO ej ~ ej , TE v aj l¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI l shin (n). III I III I ~ v aj , TE g aj ~ g aj , SI hu j ~ III 171 I III huj wither (v). cf. kVL¯ m¹ 2 MI/ZA m ~ m tame (v); III TH/ZO/TE/SI m ~ p lean on (v). III I um¹ 2 MI um , TH/ZO um spine (n).

III s 2 MI/ZA/TE , TH/ZO/SI a 172 I un¹ 2 (external). MI/ZA un , receive (v). III ZO/TE/SI un silver (n). 168 I III a¹ 2 (ST *a ). MI/TH a ~ a , ZA I III I IIB I V¹ 2 MI e ~ en dawdle (v); TH a ~ at , ZO/TE/SI a five (v). I III IIB o – slow (v). MI/ZA en ~ n , III 173 I ZO/TE/SI en ~ t request (v). a¹ 2 TH/ZO/TE/SI a ~ t face (v).

I III aj¹ 2 MI aj ~ aj / j love (v); MI I I III aj ~ j listen (v); ZA/SI aj ~ aj I III love, pine (v); TH/ZO aj ~ j , TE I aj ~ j love, listen (v); ZA/TE j, III TH/ZO j palatable, pleasing (v).

I aw¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI aw monkey (n).

169 I/IIB I IIB -AM¯ 2 MI m / ham , ZA m 170 I III dare (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI m ~ m II III dare (vt); TH/ZO/TE ap ~ ap , SI II III III nap ~ nap / na dare (vi).

I III ¹ 2 MI/TH/TE/SI ~ n deaf (v); IIA ZA deaf and stupid (v).

I I w¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI w ~ w pale (v).

IIA III IIB -(a)j¯ 2 MI j ~ j , MI aj II II miserable (v); TH uj / noj sad, II II III sleepy (v); ZO j –, TE j ~ j , I III III TE aj ~ aj tired out (v); SI j I III nauseated (v). MI oj ~ oj / j

168 171 I See Vol.1, Ch.6, #71. MI aj from VanBik (2009:157). 169 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #42. 172 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #142. 170 I MI ham from Weidert (1975:61). See Vol.1, 173 Compare the senses of harass for the Ch.6, #42. semantics.

h h I h III I l¹ 2 MI/ZA l ~ l , TE l – rude III I III (v); TE l scowl (v); TH l ~ l , I III I SI l ~ l unabashed (v); ZO l ~ III l barren (v).

(h) h III III l¹ 2 MI l , ZA l , TH/ZO/TE/SI lIII wild boar (n).

(h) (h) 174 h IIB IIB a² 2 (ST * a ). MI a , ZA a , II TH/ZO/TE a , SI – fish (n).

h h IIB h II ak 2 MI/ZA ak ~ , TH/ZO a III II III II III ~ a , TE ak ~ ak , SI ak ~ ak aIII wait (v).

h h III III III w¯ 2 MI w , ZA hw , TE w – tusk (n).

h h I ok 2 (onomatopoeic). MI ok ~ h III h IIA h III ok , ZA ok ~ ok snore (v).

h 175 h I o¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA o , I (h) TH/ZO/TE/SI o neck (n). cf. rV-¯

h h h IIB O-² 2 MI k elbow (v), elbow, h IIB II recoil (v); ZA butt (v); TE ok III II III III ~ ok , SI ok ~ ok / o shake (v).

(h) III h III Vr¯ 2 MI r , ZA r , TH , ZO III III i , TE ik growl (v).

174 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #70. 175 See Benedict (1994:5).

III I pal in prime of life (v), TE pal ~ p III III pal , SI pl blossom, bloom (v); ZO III II III p l over bloom (v); TE p l flower pj¯ 2 MI/ZA pj ~ pj stagger (v); ZO III III III II III I III (v). MI per ~ p r , ZA per , SI p ak pj ~ pj , TE/SI pj ~ pj go (v). II II I III flatten (vt). TH pe ~ p , TE pek ~ TH/ZO/TE/SI pj ~ pj revolve (v). III III I pek , flat (vi). ZO pe plank (n). SI – TH/ZO pj wheel (n). II hE h pak foot (n). p AL¯. cf. Par¹, p -¯

I pl¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO pl palisade (n). 179 I III Par¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI var ~ var I III IIA II II illuminate, white (v); ZA var ~ var pa² 2 MI/ZA pa , TH/ZO/TE pa , SI –pa I I white (v); TH va ~ v, ZO va ~ mushroom (n). III I III va , TE/SI vak ~ vak illuminate (v). I 176 IIB TH pa ~ p white spotted (v); ZO pa² 2 (ST *pa ). MI/ZA pa , I III I III II III pa ~ pa , TE/SI pak ~ pak white (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI pa father (n). MI/ZA pa , E III A TH/ZO/TE/SI pa male (n). cf. p L¯, HVL¯

I III I I MI TH ZO TE SI p r¹ 2 MI p r ~ p r catapult (v), TH paj¹ 2 paj , / / / paj sheath I I III II pe ~ p, ZO pe ~ pe , TE pek ~ (n). cf. paj² III I III pek , SI pak ~ pak back kick (v). IIA III II I III paj² 2 MI/ZA paj ~ paj , ZO/TE/SI paj TE pek ~ pek wag, bob (v). ~ pajIII carry on self (v). cf. paj¹ pt 2 MI/TE pt ~ p, TH/ZO/SI pt ~ 177 III III paj¯ 2 (ST *paj). MI pj, TH/ZO paj pe bite (v); ZA p t ~ p hop (v). III III ~ pj , TE paj ~ pj discard (v); ZA III e 180 III IIB pj discard on fire (v); SI paj ~ pa² 2 (ST *pja ). MI pe ~ pek , ZA IIB IIB II II II pjIII misplace (v). pe ~ pek , TH pe ~ pe , ZO pe II II II II ~ pe , TE pa ~ pak , SI pi ~ 178 IIA IIB II pa(L)² 2 ZA pa ~ pat , TH/ZO/TE/SI pik give (v). II II I III pa ~ pat thin (v). MI pn ~ pn II II I 181 I thin (v); TH/SA pn / pn , TE pn ~ pi¹ 2 (ST *pj). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI pi III I III pn , SI pn ~ pn very thin (v). grandmother (n). cf. pi²

I IIA III IIA IIB paw¹ 2 MI paw – speech, word (n), pi² 2 MI pj ~ pj , ZA pi ~ pit , I III II II II TH/TE/SI paw ~ paw speak (v). TH/TE/SI pi ~ pit , ZO –pi big (female animal) (v). cf. pi¹ E I I pAL¯ 2 MI/ZA par , TH p, ZO pa , TE/SI I I III pak flower (n). MI/ZA par ~ par p p 2 MI pp ~ p , ZA/TH pp I flower (v); TH pa ~ p flower (v); perforate (v). MI/ZA/TH pp I III I III ZO pa ~ pa , TE/SI pak ~ pak perforation (n).

flower (v); MI par unfurl (flower) III I (vi). TH pal fully bloom (v); ZO pal ~

176 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #66. 179 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #75. 177 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #46. 180 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #84. 178 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #166. 181 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #87.

II III II III II Pt 2 MI pt ~ p, ZA/TE bt ~ b, pa ~ pa , TE puk ~ puk , SI puk III III III III IIA TH/ZO bt ~ bo , SI bt ~ bo pluck ~ puk / pu fall (vi). MI pal ~ III III III (v). TH/ZO/SI pt ~ po comb (v). pal slip, deviate (v); ZA pal , TH II II III II pel , ZO pel ~ pel , TE pal ~ I III II III pol¹ 2 MI/ZA/ZO/TE/SI pol group (n). pal , SI pil ~ pil deviate (v); ZA I III III IIA III MI/ZA/TH/ZO/SI pol ~ pol , TE pol pal stopover (v). MI pel ~ pl III III III III associate (v). MI/ZA pl, TH pl pass (v); ZO pel ~ pl , TE pel ~ III III III mix (vt); SI pl dilute (vt). pl, SI pal ~ pl avoid (v). MI/ZA II III II III pl, TH pl ~ pl , ZO pl ~ pl , SI IIA III II III h pol² 2 MI pol ~ pol blue, bloomy, pal ~pal detach (vi). p VL¯ IIA dusty (v); ZA pol off-colour (v); II III I III I TH/ZO/TE/SI pol ~ pol piebald (v). pV-¯ 2 MI/ZA/TE pa ~ pan , TH pe III I III I ~ pen , ZO pe ~ pen , SI pi ~ III pO-¯ 2 MI/ZA pk ~ p stand (vi). pin come into being (v). MI/ZA h IIA III III p O-¯. cf. pV-¯ po ~ pon bulge (v). TE/SI po bulge (navel) (v). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI IIA II I III I pan² 2 MI/ZA pan , TH pon , ZO p ~ pn multiply (v); ZA p ~ II II II III I III pon , TE pan , SI pun garment (n). pn pile up (v). MI pa ~ pan IIB divulge (vi). MI pak ~ pa, TH I III I I I III II P a¹ 2 MI b a ~ b an , TH bo ~ po ~ p, ZO po ~ po , TE pak III I III I III II III bo n , ZO p o ~ p on , TE p a ~ ~ pak / pa, SI puk ~ puk / III I III SI III IIB p an , pu ~ pu n grey (v). pu burst (v); ZA pak burst (vi), h pa burst (v ). p V-¯. c.f. pO-¯. 182 t pu¹ 2 (ST *pw). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI I 184 I pu grandfather (n). PVM¯ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI pm ~ III II III o p m hug (v). TH pom ~ pom , ZO u IIB IIB II II III p t 2 MI put ~ p , ZA put , TH put ~ pom ~ pom swell from impact (v); III II II III II III put trickle out (v); TH/ZO/TE pot ~ TE pom ~ pom , SI pom ~ pom III II III III III pot leave (v); SI pot ~ pot / po bloat (v); ZO pom ~ pp exaggerate h III pop (burning firewood) (v). cf. p it (v); TE pom ~ pp participate (v); SI pomIII ~ pp exaggerate, participate o 183 IIB I III P u k 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA buk , (v). MI/TE/SI pam ~ pam unripe II II TH/ZO bu , TE/SI buk hut (n); MI but swollen (v); ZA swell in water (v); IIB IIB I III bok shack (n). MI/ZA puk concave TH/ZO pam ~ pam unripe (v). IIB I (v). MI puk cave (n). MI/ZA pm counter for spherical IIA II objects (n); MI pum ; TH/SI pm I III IIB pVL¯ 2 MI/ZA p l ~ p l sink (vi); MI/TE forge pot (n). MI pm plump (fruit) IIB IIA II pl peel off (v); MI pl , ZA pl peel (v); ZA pum , TH/ZO/TE/SI pm ~ III III III III (n). MI/ZA/TE pul ~ pl, TH pul , SI pm spherical (v). MI/ZA pm III III III III pul ~ pl die out (v); TH pul ~ belly (n); TH/ZO/SI pm body (n); TE III III III I pl , TE pl, SI pl drop off (v); ZO pm upper body (n). MI/TH/TE pem III III III I III pul ~ pl die out, drop off (v). ZO ~ pem , SI pam ~ pam migrate III III (v); TE pem ~ p p, SI p am ~ p p 182 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #86. 183 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #16. 184 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #164.

III extend house (v). TH pem extension II III II (n). TH/ZO/TE bem ~ bem , SI bam III III ~ bam circular (v). MI bem small III seed basket (n); TH/ZO/TE bem , SI bamIII large cylindrical rice basket I (n). MI/ZO bom coop (n); ZA/TE/SI I II bom , ZO bom back basket (n); TE II bom small shoulder basket (n); SI II II bm small waist basket (n). TE bm , II III IIB SI bm bunch (n). MI bom ~ bm , I III ZA bom , TH/ZO/TE/SI bom ~ bp IIB swarm (v); ZA bm hold to bosom (v). MI bp upper leg (n); ZA bp occiput (n).

I PVr¹ 2 MI por (~ pr) arrogant (vi); MI pr form proud flesh (v); ZA pr praise (vt), arrogant (vi); TH/ZO p, III SI pk praise (vt). ZA por ~ pr widen/thick (rope/river) (v). MI/ZA I III I III par ~ par , TH po ~ po , ZO I III I III po ~ po , TE pak ~ pak , SI I III I puk ~ puk bloat (v). MI/ZA bor ~ III I bor swarm (vi); TH bo ~ b, TE/SI I III bok ~ bok bulge (v); MI br, ZA II III III bur ~ bur , TE bok swarm (vt).

h I h I h p a flat (v); TH/ZO p a palm, sole p h I h II (n); SI p a slice (n); SI p ak flat A h h III h III (v ), slice (n). cf. pEL¯ p l¯ 2 TH p l , ZO/TE/SI p l – winter i

(n). h h I h III p j¹ 2 MI/ZA/ZO/SI p j ~ p j , TH/TE h I h h IIA h III h II p j level (road) (v). p n² 2 MI p n ~ p n , ZO/TE p n h III ~ p n weave net (v). h h 187 h III p j¯ 2 (ST *p j). MI p j lower leg, h III h 185 h foot (n), ZA pj – calf (n), p s 2 (areal). MI/ZA/TE p , h III h III TH/ZO/TE/SI p j upper leg (n). TH/ZO/SI p a splay (v).

h h IIA h III h II hE h h p n² 2 MI p n ~ p n , ZO p en ~ A p L¯ 2 MI/ZA p r unfurl (vt), MI p r h III h II h III h h p en , TE/SI p n ~ p n divaricate spread, scatter (vi); ZA p r, TE p k h IIA h III h h h III (v); ZA p n ~ p n divaricate (vt), ~ p , SI p k ~ p e lay out meat to h IIB h I h III h I p n divaricate (vb). dry (v). MI/ZA p ar ~ p ar , TH p e h h I h III h I ~ p , ZO p e ~ p e , TE p ek ~ (h) h I h III h III h I h I p eC 2 MI p, ZO p e ~ p e , TE p ek , SI p ak ~ p ak braid (v). h h III h II h I h I h I p , SI p e bore (v). TH p e ox’s MI/ZA p r , TH p e , TE p ek mat (n). E nose piercing (n). A p L¯ h e h IIA h IIB h IIB p a¯ 2 MI p e ~ p et flash (v ), p et h I I i P m¹ 2 MI f m ~ f m , TH/ZO/TE/SI h I h h I h III flash (vt), TH p e ~ p t twinkle (v), p m ~ p m die (v). h h I h h II p t blink (v); ZO p e ~ p t, TE p a h II h II (h) 186 IIA ~ p at , TE p e twinkle, blink (v); SI P -¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI b , h I h II I p e ~ p t flash, blink (v). TH/ZO b , ZO/SI p wall (n); TE II II b door (n); SI b main entrance h h IIB h h II III p at 2 MI/ZA p at ~ p a , SI p i t ~ (n). MI/TH p side of body (n); h III h III h III III p i t / p i sweep (v); ZA p a ZO/TE p side (n); SI p side of h II h II I wash face (v); TH p e t ~ p e t , ZO body/head (n). MI/ZA pa pelvis (n); h II h II h II h III I I p et ~ p et , TE p at ~ p at TH pa , ZO –pa forehead (n); TE h I I sweep, wash face (v). MI/ZA/TE p a , pa pelvis, forehead (n). MI ba ~ h III h III III I III ZO –p e , SI –p i broom (n). ban stop, hang up, ZA ba ~ ban I III h h IIB h stop; TH/ZO/TE ba ~ ban hang up, MI I III p it 2 p it snort (v), p i wash face h II h III h II stopover, catch on; SI ba ~ ban TH ZO SI I III (v). / pit ~ p it , pit ~ h III h III h II h III stopover. TH/SI p ~ p n waylay p it / p i spew (v ); TE p it ~ p it I III I/II III i/t (v); ZO p ~ p n , TE p ~ p n II III blow air between lips in disgust (v); waylay, stop (v); SI pa ~ pn stop h III u IIA III II TH/ZO/TE/SI p i spew (vb). cf. pot (v). MI ba ~ ban , TE ba remain (II) h h h IIB h II (v); SI –ba exempt (v). MI/ZA p k p o² 2 ZA p o , TH/ZO/TE/SI p o shell h h palm (n); ZO p , SI p k mat (n). (n). h I h III MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE pe ~ p en , SI

185 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #126. 186 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #141. 187 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #78.

h h h h h h I h III p O-¯ 2 MI p k ~ p , ZA p k (~ p ) split (v); ZA p l ~ p l share/split h III h IIB h I h III stand (vt); MI p ~ p n open up, (food) (v); SI p l ~ p l split into h III h h I uncover (v); TH p ~ p , ZO big chunks (v). MI/TH/TE/SI p l , ZA h III h h h III h h III h I h I p ~ p / p t, TE p ~ p t, p l , ZO pl piece (n). MI p l ~ h III h h h III h I SI p ~ p k / p t wake, stand (vt). p l share out, permit (v); ZA p l ~ h I h III h I h III h III h I MI p ok ~ p ok , TE p o ~ p on , SI p l pay, consign (v); TH/ZO/TE p l h I h III h I h III h p o ~ p on startle (v); ZO p o ~ ~ p l permit (v). MI/ZA pl h III h II III p on inform about death (v). TH/ZO TH/ZO/SI pl ~ pl detach (vt). h II h III h II h II h III h p o ~ p o , TE pok ~ p ok /SI TH/ZO/SI pl , TE pl extinguish h II h III h III h p ok ~ p ok / p o recall (v). (vt). pVL¯. cf. p ur¹ h pO-¯. c.f. p V-¯ h h I h III h I p V-¯ 2 TH p o ~ p on , ZO p o ~ h 188 I h III h I h III h I p (L)¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI pu ~ p on , TE p a ~ p an , SI p u h III h III pt carry on shoulder/head (v); ~ p un divulge (vt). MI p an , TH I h III h III h III ZA/TH pu ~ pt carry on shoulder (v); p on , ZO pon , TE pan , SI I h III h III SI pu ~ pt carry on head (v). MI p un froth, foam (n). MI p an ~ III IIB IIB IIB h IIB h III h pa ~ pak , ZA po ~ pok carry p n , TH pon (~ p ot), ZO II II h III h h III h baby on back (v); TH po ~ po , p on ~ p ot, TE p an ~ p at, SI II II II II h III h h III ZO po ~ po , TE pa ~ pak , SI p un ~ p t froth (v), ZA pan II II h h III pu ~ puk carry on back (v). MI float (v). MI/ZA p a, TH p o , ZO h I h h III h II h III h p r ~ p r carry on back (v); ZA p o , TE p ak ~ p ak / p a, SI phrI ~ phr carry on phukII ~ phukIII / phuIII compose (v). h shoulder/head/back (v). pV-¯. c.f. p O-¯

h h I p um¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI p um ~ phumIII bury (v).

h h I h I h I p ur¹ 2 TH pu , ZO pa , TE p uk h paunch (n). cf. p VL¯

h h I h III p VL¯ 2 MI p l ~ p l assassinate (v). h I h III ZA p l ~ p l do secretely (v). TH h I h III p l ~ p l assassinate, rid (v), SI h I h III h II p l ~ p l dispel (v). ZO/TE p il ~ h III h II h III p il snout (v); TE p ul ~ p ul , SI h II h III h I p l ~ p l butt (v). MI/ZA p ul ~ h III h I h III p ul bubble, froth (v); p ul ~ p ul h h IIB gush out (v). MI pl / p l , ZA h h III p l sprinkle (v); TH/ZO p ul , TE h III h h III h III p ul ~ p l, SI p ul ~ p l boil h II h III h II over (v). TH p u ~ p u , ZO p a ~ h III h II h III h II p a , TE p uk ~ p uk , SI p uk ~ h III h III h I h III p uk / p u fell (vt). MI p l ~ p l

188 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #32.

192 IIA ra² 2 (areal). ZA ra horse (n). r 193 I III 189 I raw¹ 2 (ST *raw). MI raw ~ raw , rm¹ 2 (ST *rm). MI/ZA rm , I III I I I TH/ZO/TE gaw ~ gaw , SI aw ~ TH/ZO/TE gm , SI m forest, III I aw darken (leaf/fruit) (v). ZA raw territory (n). III ~ raw dry (leaf/laundry) (v).

IIA III rm² 2 MI rm ~ rm , TH/ZO/TE IIA II II III II III raw² 2 MI/ZA raw , TH/ZO/TE gaw , SI gm ~ gm , SI m ~ m brittle II IIB aw spirit (n). (v). ZA rm decrepit (v).

IIA III I I rA² 2 MI/ZA r ~ rn , TH/ZO/TE rn¹ 2 MI rn , SI n domesticated II III II III III I g ~ gn , SI a ~ an fast (v). animal (n); ZA rn , TH/ZO/TE gn

animal (n). I III I rel¹ 2 MI rel ~ rel , TH/ZO/TE gel ~ III I III I I I I gel , SI al ~ al plan (v); ZA rel r¹ 2 ZA r , TH/ZO/TE g , SI III ~ rel discuss (v). paternal aunt’s husband (n).

194 IIB rak 2 (ST *rjak). MI/ZA rak ~ ra, rp 2 MI/ZA rp, TH/ZO gp, SI p II III II II TH g ~ g , ZO ge ~ ge , TE mantel (n). II III II III gak ~ gak / ga, SI ik ~ ik / III 190 rs 2 (Austronesian). MI/ZA r, i stay over night (v). III III TH/ZO ga , TE g , SI a fruit (n/v). I III I I ral¹ 2 MI ral , ZA ral , TH gel , ZO gel , I I I III I III TE gal , SI il hail (n). raj¹ 2 MI/ZA raj ~ raj , TH gaj ~ gaj / III I III I III g j , ZO/TE gaj ~ gaj , SI aj ~ aj 195 III rk 2 (ST *rjk). MI/ZA rt ~ r, pregnant (vi). MI/ZA r j , TH/ZO gaj III III III IIII III TH/ZO g, TE gk ~ g, SI t ~ i ~ gj , TE gaj ~ gj, SI aj ~ j impregnate (v ). heavy (v). t II II IIB IIA III rl² 2 TH/ZO/TE gl , SI l birdcoop (n). rk 2 MI rek ~ r, ZA rek ~ rek , II III II cf. rl¹ TH/ZO ga ~ ga tight (v). TE gak ~ III II III gak , SI ak ~ ak tighten (vt). SI I III II III III IIA r¹ 2 MI/ZA r ~ rn loud (v); at ~ at / a tight (v ). MI rek ~ I III I III i TH/ZO/TE g ~ gn , SI ~ n rekIII slender in one place (v). emit sound (v).

I ral¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI ral enemy (n). III r p 2 TH/ZO/TE g p, SI p lac (n). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI ral opposite side (n). cf. rol¹, rVl¯ IIA II II ri² 2 MI/ZA ri , TH/ZO/TE gi , SI i

191 I boundary (n). ra¹ 2 (ST *ra). ZA ra bones (n).

192 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #95. 189 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #77. 193 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #184. 190 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #82. 194 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #43. 191 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #25. 195 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #93.

I III I 197 riN¹ 2 MI/ZA rin ~ rin , TH/ZO/TE git ~ rs 2 (ST *rws). MI/ZA r bone (n), III I III III git , SI it ~ it delineate (v). MI/ZA firm (v). TH/ZO gu , TE g bone (n); III I III III rin line (n); rit ~ rit hoe (v). SI u stubborn (v).

I I I III II II rIl¹ 2 MI ril , ZA rl , TH gl intestines (n); ru² 2 MI ru , TH/ZO/TE gu , SI u I I III ZO/TE gl , SI l belly (n). cf. rl² poison (n); ZA ru intoxicant (n).

I III III IIB IIB IIB P-rw¹ 2 MI/ZA w ~ w , ru² 2 ru ~ ruk , ZA ru ~ ruk , TH/ZO I III II II II II II TH/ZO/TE/SI pw ~ pw sprout (v). gu ~ gu , TE gu ~ guk , SI u ~ ukII steal (v). III III rol¹ 2 TH/TE gol , SI ol fence (n); ZO III I III 198 I gol lane (n). ZO/TE gol ~ gol rul¹ 2 (ST *rwl ). MI/ZA rul , I I withhold (v). cf. ral¹, rVl¯ TH/ZO/TE gul , SI ul snake (n).

I III I I I rot 2 (onomatopoeic). MI/ZA rot ~ rot , run¹ 2 MI run , TH/ZO/TE gun , SI un I III II I TH/ZO got ~ got grind (v); TE got ~ river (n); ZA run Manipur river. III II III got , SI ot ~ ot torture (v). II III II rVl¯ 2 MI rl, ZO/TE gl ~ gl , SI l III rOM¯ 2 MI/ZA rp deteriorate (v); TH ~ l sneak off (v); ZA rl hide (v). I I III IIB (h) gom ~ gop, TE gom ~ gom shrivel MI/ZA rl evade (v). rVl¯. cf. II III II (v); TH gop ~ gop dry (v); ZO gop ~ ral¹, rol¹ III I III gop shrink (v); SI om ~ om I III gaunt (v). rVm¯ 2 MI/ZA rm ~ rm harmonise IIB II (vi), rm harmonise (vt); TH gom ~ I III I II III II rO(w)¹ 2 MI/ZA rw ~ rw , TH go ~ gp, ZO/TE gom ~ gom , SI om ~ I III I II gt, ZO go ~ go , TE go ~ gt / got , omIII combine (v). I III III SI o ~ t dry (v). TH gw ~ go roast (v).

196 I ra¹ 2 (ST *r-wa ). MI/ZA ra , TH I I I I go , ZO go , TE ga , SI u bamboo (n).

IIB II rak 2 MI rak ~ ra, TH go ~ III II II go , ZO go empty (v). TH go , II II II ZO go , TE gak , SI uk individual (n). cf. La-¯

II II II ram² 2 TH gom , ZO gom , TE gam canyon, ravine (n).

III III rl¯ 2 TH/ZO gl , TE –gl, SI l desire (v).

197 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #24. 196 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #5. 198 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #149.

h h h rs 2 MI/ZA r averse (v); TE h r III angry (v); SI he sad, angry (v). h h 199 h IIA rm² 2 (ST * ram ). MI – rm , ZA – h h I h III I IIA II (II) re¹ 2 MI/ZA re ~ ren , TH/ZO hen h III I III r m , TH/ZO/TE –h m , SI –h m ~ hen tether (v); TE/SI hen ~ hen otter (n). bind (v). h h IIA h III h I e rAm¯ 2 MI r m ~ r m , ZA ram , h a h IIA h IIB II II II III r ² 2 MI r a ~ r at , TH (he ~) het , ZO/SI hm ~ hm weedy, rough (v); II II II III SI he ~ h ak sense (v). TH/TE hm ~ hm rough (v). MI h I h III ram ~ ram dry (hair) (v); h h 201 h IIB I III r ak 2 (ST * rjak). MI/ZA r ak TH/ZO/TE/SI hm ~ hm haggard h IIA grease (n). (v). ZA rm tree root, base (n). III III h h h 202 h I MI/ZA r m , TH/ZO/TE/SI h m weed ram¹ 2 (ST * rjam). MI/ZA ram ~ h III I I (n). ram , TH hem ~ hem sharp (v); I I I I h h I h I I ZO h em ~ h em , TE h am ~ h am , SI ra¹ 2 MI – ra , ZA ra , TH ha , ZO/TE/SI I I III I hi m ~ hi m sharp (vi); ZO h em ~ ha – yam (n). III III hep, TE ham ~ hap, SI him ~ h h I hi p sharpen (vt). ra¹ 2 ZA ra ten (n). h IIB h III III (r) at 2 MI hat ~ h a scratch itch, (r)aj¯ 2 ZA haj , TH/ZO/TE/SI haj cup h IIB h 200 clean out hole (v); ZA r at ~ r a (n). II III scrape, scratch; TH het ~ het II III h h IIA h III scrape; ZO het ~ het scrape, comb; (r)am² 2 MI ram ~ ram , II III II III TE hat ~ hat scratch, comb; SI TH/ZO/TE/SI hm ~ hm howl (v); II III III h IIA h III hit ~ hit / hi prune (v). ZA ram ~ ram complain (v). MI III IIB IIA ham ~ hm , ZA –hm , ZO/TE/SI h h 203 h rk 2 (ST * rjk). MI/ZA rk, TH/ZO hamIII ~ hp yawn (v). ht, TE/SI hk louse (n). h h I h III ra¹ 2 MI/ZA ra ~ ran audacious h h I h III I I III rl¹ 2 MI rl ~ rl , TH/ZO/TE/SI hl ~ (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI ha ~ han brave (v). III h I h III hl inform (vt); ZA rl ~ rl choose h III h h III h (vt). MI rl, TH/ZO/SI hl , TE hl P- ras 2 MI/ZA a ~ t, TH/ZO/TE/SI h 204 h III h teach (v); ZA rl choose (vb). p a ~ p t good (v).

h h I h I h h IIB P- rm¹ 2 MI m , ZO/TE p m needle rat 2 MI/ZA rat resolute (v); II III II III (n). TH/ZO/TE hat ~ hat , SI hat ~ hat / haIII strong (v). h h III III rj¯ 2 MI/ZA rj , TH/ZO/TE/SI hj axe (n). 201 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #88. 202 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #139. 199 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #124. 203 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #108. 200 VanBik (2006:269) shows evidence for hr- in 204 Compare the association between lecture and Lai. select for the semantics.

h h 205 h I h III I III r¹ 2 (ST * rj). MI r ~ rn / SI hil ~ hil desist temporarily (v). h IIB 206 h rn beget, green, fresh, raw (v); ZA rl leave behind accidentally (v). h I h III ZA r ~ rn green, fresh, raw (v), rVl¯ hIIB beget (vt), rn beget (vb); I III (h) I III 210 TH/ZO/TE/SI h ~ hn beget, green, rV¹ 2 MI ru ~ run help (v); I III alive (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI h ~ hn prevent (v); III IIB III ZA run ~ rn , ZO/TE/SI hn ~ ht, h h I h III II III rl¯ 2 MI rl ~ rl , TH/ZO/TE gl ~ ZO/TE hn ~ ht rescue (v). glIII big (v). (h) 211 I I rV-¯ 2 (areal). MI r , ZO/TE g h I III IIB (r)ol¹ 2 MI hol ~ hol brandish (v). bottle neck (n). MI r nape (n). MI I III h h III III TH/ZO/SI/TE hol ~ hol drive (v). MI rk, ZA r –, TH/ZO/TE g throat III I hl, TH/ZO/SI hl , TE hl prod (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI lo tube (n). 207 I III (v). TH/ZO/TE go ~ gon scrawny (v). cf. ho¹ h 208 I (r)a¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI ha , h I h ZA ra enclosure, fence (n); TH (r)Vp 2 (Austroasiatic, I I I I 212 I I ho , ZO ho ,TE ha , SI hu onomatopoeic). ZA hop ~ hop eat III III h II h III enclosure (n). MI han , TE han , with spoon (v); ZA rop ~ rop eat III III III II III TH hon , ZO hon , SI hun from ladle (v); TH/ZO/TE hop ~ hop , II III III acreage (n). SI hop ~ hop / ho drink soup (v). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI hp gobble (v). ZA (h) (h) 209 h IIA I rj² 2 (ST * rwj ). MI rj , hp ~ h scoop out (v). MI/ZA hip ~ II II II III I III TH/TE gj , ZO guj , SI j rope, hip gasp (v). MI hup ~ hup drink h IIA III I III creeper (n); ZA ri rope (n). ZO huj , from hands (v); TH hup ~ hup sip III (III) I III TE –hj , SI –hj vein (n). (v), ZO hup ~ hup suck up (v); TE/SI hupI ~ hupIII suck/lap up (v). h h I I ru¹ 2 MI – ru , TH –hu nit (n).

h h III h IIB III ru¯ 2 ZA ru ~ rut , TH/ZO hu ~ h, III h III TE/SI hu ~ hk block (v). ZA ru , TE III II IIB II hu stopper (n). TE hu ~ hut , SI hu IIB II ~ hut protect (v); TH hu rescue III I III (v). TH/ZO hu , TE h, SI hu ~ hu help (v).

(h) III h II I rVl¯ 2 MI ral , ZA ral , TH hel ~ III I III I III hel , ZO hel ~ hel , TE hal ~ hal ,

205 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #1. 206 h IIB MI rn from Chhangte (1993:88) who associates it with beget as opposed to hrnIII with green. 210 I III 207 VanBik (2009:262) has Lai hr-. MI ru ~ run from VanBik (2006:244). 208 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #57. 211 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #119. 209 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #41. 212 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #85.

I III sm¯ 2 MI sm ~ sm apportion (v); s III II ZA sm fillet (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI sm ~ III sm dissect (v). sk 2 MI/TE/SI sk, ZA hk ~ h, ZO s

hard (v). I III sEn¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO sen ~ sen very young III I III I IIA II (v); ZA sen –, TE sen ~ sen , SI sn ~ sl² 2 MI/ZA sl , TH/ZO/TE/SI sl III sn young (v). captive (n).

IIB II II 213 IIA sak 2 MI/ZA sak , TH set , ZO set , TE sm² 2 (Austronesian). MI/ZA sm , II II II sak , SI sik cockspur (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI sm head hair (n).

I (I) I I III sal¹ 2 MI/TE sal , ZA –sal , TH sel , ZO sn¹ 2 MI/TH sn ~ sn , TH/ZO/TE/SI I I I III I III sel , SI sil mithun (n). sn ~ sn red (v); ZA sn ~ sn IIB red (v ), sn redden (v ). IIA III II i t sal² 2 MI/ZA sal ~ sal , TH sel ~ III II III II III h 214 se l , ZO s el ~ s el , TE s al ~ s al , sa¹ 2 (ST * a). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI II III SI sil ~ sil clear a road (v). saI ~ st hot (v).

I III 215 IIB s am¹ 2 MI sam ~ s am compose, sa² 2 (ST *sja ). MI/ZA sa , I III II create (v); ZA sam ~ sam hew, TH/ZO/TE/SI sa meat (n). I III create (v); TH sem ~ sem compose I III I (v); ZO sem ~ sem hew, create, saj¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI saj elephant I III decorate (v); TE sam ~ sam , SI (n). I III sim ~ sim hew, bless (v).

I III I saj¹ 2 MI/ZA/ ZO/TE/SI saj ~ saj , TH saj III III III sk 2 MI/ZA/TE sk ~ s, TH/ZO s ~ si , ~ saj / sj fire slingshot (v). III SI sk ~ si pinch (v). MI/ZA/TE/SI sk,

I III TH s cold (v). sa¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI sa ~ san 216 high (v). h 218 II sl² 2 (ST * jl ). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI sl III III ~ sl wash (v). sas 2 MI/TE/SI sa ~ sk, ZA sk ~ s, III TH/ZO sa ~ s sing (v). II IIB sL² 2 MI sn ~ sn , MI/TE sl, III IIA III TH ZO SI MI TH ZO TE SI / / s l put on above waist saw² 2 saw ~ saw , / / / 219 II III IIA (v); ZA sl refill (v). saw ~ saw long (v); ZA saw ~ sawIII long (v ), sw lengthen (v ).217 i t III s s 2 MI s , TH/ZO/SI si , LA/TE s – salt water spring (n).

h 220 sw¹ 2 (ST * w). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI I III I III 213 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #91. s w ~ s w boil (v); ZA s w ~ s w 214 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #96. boil (vi), sw boil (vt). 215 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #74. 216 Shafer (1952:140) suggests an Austroasiatic link. 218 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #178. 217 219 II IIB ZA sw from Osburne (1975:113). MI sn ~ sn from Chhangte (1993:86;99).

I III III sw¹ 2 ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI sw panji (n). TE san ~ sat, SI sun ~ st III II III MI/ZA s prod (v); TH/ZO/SI so , TE entrust (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI son ~ son s season (v). push (v).

III II III o 221 III soj² 2 MI/TE soj ~ sj, TH soj ~ soj , s an¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). ZA –san , II III III III II II II ZO soj ~ soj / sj , SI saj askew TH –son , ZO –son , TE –san , SI – (v). sunII onion, garlic (n).222

I III IIA II II so¹ 2 MI/ZA so ~ son shrivel (v). sa² 2 MI sa , TH so , ZO so , II II TE sa , SI su stone (n). IIB IIB sop 2 MI sop , ZA sop ~ s, II III 223 IIA TH/ZO/TE/SI sop ~ sop launder (v). sm² 2 (Tai-Kadai). MI/ZA sm , II TH/ZO/TE/SI sm mortar (n). o IIB sak 2 MI sok ~ s take a pinch (v); IIB I ZA sok pick up sticky object (v); TH su¯ 2 MI su ~ st collide (v). MI/TE/SI II III II II III I III so ~ so , TE sok ~ s, SI sok ~ su ~ sk, ZA su ~ st, TH/ZO su ~ III III II III sok / so take out (v); ZO so ~ so s pound (v). take out, take a pinch (v). MI/ZA IIB II III 224 III IIB sak ~ sa, TE sak ~ sak / su² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI su ~ suk , II III III II II sa, SI suk ~ suk / su ladle (v). SI su ~ suk launder (v).

I III o I III I sal¯ 2 MI sal ~ sal rape (v). ZA/TE sur¹ 2 MI sur ~ sur rain (v); ZA sur ~ I III I III III s al ~ s al , SI su l ~ su l fight (v). sur rain (vi), sr rain on (vt). MI/ZA IIB III II III I III I III MI/ZA sal ~ sal , ZO sol ~ sol sor ~ sor , TE/SI suk ~ suk wring wicked (v). (v).

I III I IIB IIB sam¹ 2 MI sam ~ sam , TH som ~ sut 2 MI sut ~ s, ZA sut (~ s), III I III I II III II III som , TH som ~ som , ZO som TH/ZO/TE sut ~ sut , SI sut ~ sut / III I III I ~ som , TE sam ~ sam , SI sum suIII untie (v). III I ~ sum assassinate (v). ZA sam ~ III IIA III II III sam disdain (v). sVj² 2 MI sj ~ sj , TH sj ~ sj , TI II II IIA III sj ~ sj say (v); ZA sj ~ sj o I I san¹ 2 MI son , ZA –son bastard (n); TH criticise (v). III III son , ZO –son new generation (n); III I III TH son great grandchild (n); ZO sVM¯ 2 MI/ZA som ~ som invite (v); III III I III son , SI sun descendants (n); TE TH/SI som ~ som bind together (v); I III sonI grandchild (n). ZO som ~ som complain (v); TE I III som ~ som contemplate (v); 225 o IIA III II I III san² 2 MI san ~ san , TH son ~ TH/ZO/TE/SI sim ~ sim gather to eat III II III II son , ZO son ~ son , TE san ~ III II III 221 san , SI sun ~ sun usurp (v). MI See Vol.1, Ch.6, #123. 222 II IIB III IIB TE san from Luce (1962:tableB). s n shift (v). ZA san ~ s n 223 III III See Vol.1, Ch.6, #113. contaminate (v); TH so n , ZO s on , 224 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #179. 225 I III TE som ~ som from Bhaskararao (1996:88); 220 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #23. see VanBik (2009:182) for the semantics.

II II III (v). TH/TE/SI som , ZO som ~ som I III gather to sleep (v). MI sum ~ sum , III III ZA sup withhold (v). MI sum , TH III II III I sm ~ sp, TE sm ~ sm , SI sum III III ~ sum clench (v). MI/ZA sum fist- III measure (n). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI som ten (n).

IIA IIA sV² 2 MI sa thousand (n), si ten II thousand (n); TH/TE/SI sa hundred thousand (n).

III taw² 2 MI/ZA taw ~ tw moan (v). t II III TH/ZO/TE/SI taw ~ taw sulk (v).

tk 2 MI/ZA tk real (v); TH/ZO t, IIA IIB I te² 2 MI/ZA te ~ tet , TH te ~ tt small TE/SI tk real (v), right (n). II II (v); SI te ~ tet granular (v).

tk 2 MI/ZA tk, ZO t flesh (n); TH IIA III tEl¯ 2 MI/ZA tl ~ tl include (vi), tl t– flesh, muscle (n); TE –tk, SI tk I III include (vt); MI tel ~ tel bunch (v). muscle (n). I III IIA MI tel , ZA tel bunch (n); MI/ZA tl , II I 226 III TH tl bundle (n); ZO tl fillet (n). tk 2 (ST *tq). MI/ZA t, TH ta , SI III tk ~ ta weave (v). III III I tam¹ 2 MI tam , ZA –tam , TH tem ~ III I III I I tem / tep, ZO em ~ em , TE tl¹ 2 MI –tl , TH tl muscle (n). I III I III am ~ am , SI im ~ im III IIA III promise (v). ZO em – ~ ep tm² 2 MI/ZA tm ~ tm , TH/ZO/TE/SI II III mentally note (v). t m ~ t m many (v). I III IIA III taM¹ 2 MI tm ~ tm , MI tp, ZA tp ~ tn² 2 MI/ZA tn ~ tn , TH/ZO/TE/SI III III II III t, TH/SI tp ~ te , ZO em ~ ep, tn ~ tn saw, cut (v). III III TE am ~ ap taste (v); TH tem ~

I I tep try (v). t¹ 2 ZA t winter (n); TE t dry/hot

weather (n). IIA II II ta² 2 MI ta , ZO e , TE a , SI II II i stick (n); TH te javelin (n). tp 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI tp hearth (n).

I h I III I tar¹ 2 ZA tar relocate (v ). t ar¹ tr¹ 2 MI/ZA tr ~ tr , TH te ~ t, ZO i I III I III I te ~ te , TE tek ~ tek , SI tak ~ IIA II II III I tl² 2 MI/ZA tl , TH tl , ZO/TE/SI l tak elderly (v). TH ta ~ t hard I III I III testicle (n). (v); ZO ta ~ ta , TE tak ~ tak firm

(v). 227 IIA II tn² 2 (ST *sjn ). MI/ZA tn , TH tn , II IIA ZO/TE/SI n nail, claw (n). taj² 2 MI/ZA taj waist (n); TH/ZO/TE/SI II taj underbelly (n). IIB II II ti² 2 MI ti –, TH ti –, ZO/SI i – nervous

I III I (v). tar¹ 2 MI/ZA tar ~ tar , TH ta ~ t, ZO I III I III ta ~ ta , SI tak ~ tak display on III III III tis 2 MI ti ~ t, ZA/TH ti , ZO/SI i , TE pole (v). MI/ZA t r bait (v). cf. s iIII ~ say (v).

IIB IIB tat 2 MI tat ~ t, ZA tat , TH/ZO/TE I III I II III II III III t w¹ 2 MI –t w ~ t w , TH/ZO/SI t w ~ tat ~ tat , SI tat ~ tat / ta sharpen III I III tw sit (v); ZA tw ~ tw sit (vi), (v). tw sit (v ). t

226 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #181. 227 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #116.

I I I tk 2 MI tk ~ t, TH t– touch with tuj¹ 2 MI/TH/SI tj , ZA ti , ZO/TE tuj egg I III I IIB hand (v); ZA tk ~ t knock down (n). MI/TH/SI tj ~ tj , ZA ti ~ tit , I III fruit with stick, point (v). ZO/TE tuj ~ tuj lay egg (v).

IIA I III I III III toj² 2 MI/ZA toj short (v). tuj¹ 2 MI tj ~ tj , TH tuj ~ tuj / tj , I III I III I ZO tuj ~ tuj , TE –tuj ~ tuj , SI –tj ~ I III I taj¹ 2 MI/TE taj ~ taj , TH toj ~ tjIII delicious (v). III I I I toj , ZO tej ~ tej , SI tuj young 229 IIA II (v). tuj² 2 (ST *twj ). MI tj , TH/SI tj , IIA II IIA ZA ti , ZO/TE tuj water (n). MI tj I I I III IIA II III tal¹ 2 MI/ZA/TE tal , TH tol , ZO tol , ~ tj , ZA ti , TH/SI tj ~ tj , ZO/TE I SI tul locality (n). tujII ~ tujIII melt (v).

I I tk 2 MI/TE tk, TH/ZO t hair bob (n); tul¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE tul , ZA –tul skewer ZA tk crown of head (n); SI tk (n). indent at back head (n). III tul¯ 2 ZO/TE/SI tul thousand (n). IIA III tm² 2 MI/ZA tm ~ tm , TH/ZO/TE/SI II III III III tm ~ tm drum (v). tur¯ 2 MI tur , TH t, ZO ta , TE/SI tukIII pungent (v). I III tm¯ 2 MI tm ~ tm intend, wish (v); II III III III ZA tm ~ tm , tm ~ tp intend tus 2 MI tu – hammer (n); ZA/TH/ZO/TE III III III (v); TH/ /TE/SI tm ~ tp wish (v). tu , SI tu – small hoe (n). MI/ZA tk III III carve (v); TH/ZO tu ~ t, TE tu ~ I t¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI t warp (n); tk chop (v). I III t ~ tn erect (v). cf. T¹ IIA III tVl¯ 2 MI/ZA tal ~ tal wriggle (v). MI 228 IIB II III T¹ 2 (ST *dw). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI tl , ZO/TE/SI tal ~ tal slither (v). I III II III d length (n). MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI t , TH/ZO/TE tl ~ tl slide out (v). MI III IIB III ZA d cubit (n). cf. t¹ tl / tl , ZA/TE tl, ZO/SI tl slide h (vi). t Vl¯. cf. el¯ IIB I III tr¹ 2 MI tr , ZA tr ~ tr pulsate (v). 230 II I TVl¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). ZA dil , TH tal , III I I ts 2 MI/ZA/TE t, TH/ZO/SI tu plant ZO tul , TE/SI –tul heel (n). seed (v). IIA III II tVm¯ 2 MI/ZA tam ~ tam , TH tom I I III II III tu¹ 2 ZA/TH/ZO tu , SI –tu jungle (n); TE ~ tom , ZO tom ~ tom , TE I II III II III tu – tall grass area (n). tam ~ tam , SI tum ~ tum I III wrap (v). MI tm ~ tm crouch, IIB II I tu² 2 MI/ZA tu , TH/ZO/TE/SI tu huddle up, tie hair bob (v); ZA tm ~ III III grandchild (n). tm bind up (v). MI/ZA tm hair III bob (n). MI/ZA tm , TH/ZO/TE/SI IIA II tu² 2 ZA tu , TH/ZO/TE/SI tu now (n).

229 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #180. 228 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #105. 230 See Shorto (2006:455).

I III III tm ~ tm clench (v). MI/ZA tm , I fist, block (n); TH/ZO/SI tm fist, hair III bob (n); TE tm fist, block, hair bob (n).

IIB IIB TV - ¯ 2 MI/ZA tak pair (n). MI tok ~ II III II III t, TH to ~ to , ZO to ~ to , II III II TE tak ~ tak / ta, SI tuk ~ III III I tuk / tu meet (v). MI/ZA t ~ III I tn meet (v). TH t speak (v). MI III IIB III to ~ tn , ZA to fight (v); TE/SI II III I to ~ ton provoke (v). MI d ~ III IIA III dn , ZA d ~ dn catch, I III intercept (v); TH/ZO d ~ dn I III solicit, intercept (v); TE d ~ dn I solict donation, host party (v); SI d III ~ dn solicit donation, catch, I III intercept (v). TH/ZO/TE do ~ don I reply (v), SI do reply in verse (v). MI IIA III II d ~ dn , TH/ZO/TE/SI d ~ III III dn hinder (v). TH d ~ d, ZO III III d ~ d / dt, TE d ~ dt, SI III d ~ dk / dt ask (v). TH/TE/SI II III don ~ don unburden, meet (v). MI h III h IIB III IIB on ~ n , ZA son ~ sn reply (v).

h h I h IIA h I h t Ar¯ 2 MI tar , ZA tr , TE/SI tk t serow (n).

h 231 h t k 2 (ST *sk). MI/ZA/TE tk ~ h 235 h IIA h II h h h t j² 2 (ST *sj ). MI/ZA t j , TH t j t , TH/ZO t , SI t k itch, spicy (v). h II fruit, fig (n); ZO/TE/SI t j fig (n).

h h I h III t l¹ 2 MI/ZA t l , ZO/TE/SI t l oak (n). h 236 h III h t j¯ 2 (ST *sj ). MI t j ~ t j, SI h III h III h h h IIA t j capable (v); ZA t j ~ t j , t l² 2 MI/ZA t l arrow (n); ZO/TE/SI h III h III h TH/ZO t j know (v); TE t j ~ t j h II t l bow (n). know, capable (v).

h h IIA h III t m² 2 MI/ZA tm ~ t m handle h h IIA h III h II h II h III t am² 2 MI t am ~ t am , TH t e m (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI t m ~ t m touch h III h II III ~ t em / t ep, ZO sem ~ sem , TE with hand (v). II III h II h III sam ~ sam , SI im ~ im . h IIA h III h h I h III proficient (v); ZA tam ~ tam t ¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI t ~ t n h IIB understand (v). famous (v); ZA t n broadcast (v).

h h I h III h I h h IIA h IIA h III t a¹ 2 MI/ZA t a ~ t an , TH t e MI ZA h III I III I t ¯ 2 ta , te ~ t en ZO TE h I h III ~ t e n , s e ~ s en , s a ~ III h I h III TH/ZO/TE/SI ta ~ t an reek (v); SI h I h III s an , i ~ i n clean (v). t a ~ t an flavoursome (v). h h I h III MI ZA h 232 h I h III t ar¹ 2 / t ar ~ t ar relocate (vt); h I h III I III t r¹ 2 (ST *sar). MI/ZA t r ~ t r , TH ZO TE h I h h I h III h I t e ~ t e , s a ~ s a , I III h I h III TH t a ~ t , ZO t a ~ t a , TE t k , sak ~ sak , SI ik ~ ik wipe h I h III SI t k ~ t k new (v). (v). tar¹

h 233 h h h 237 h III t t 2 (ST *sat). MI/ZA/TE t t ~ t , MI ZA TH h h III t n¯ 2 (ST *sjn ). / / t n , III h III TH/ZO/SI t t ~ t a kill (v). ZO/TE sn , SI n liver (n).

h h IIB h II h h I h III h I t a² 2 MI/ZA t a , TH/ZO/TE/SI t a sinew t ¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH t ~ t n , ZO t ~ h III I III h I h III (n). t n , TE s ~ sn , SI ~ n

h h I h III h I shake (v) t al¹ 2 MI t al ~ t al bale (v); ZO/SI t al h III h 238 h IIA ~ t al funnel (v). t ² 2 (ST *sj ). MI/ZA t , TH h II II h II h 234 t , ZO/TE s , SI tree, wood t aw¹ 2 (ST *saw). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI h I h III h III (n). t aw ~ t aw fat (v), t aw fat (n). h h h h III h h IIA h II t s 2 MI t oil hair (v). ZA t , TH t i , t A² 2 MI/ZA t , TH/ZO/TE/SI t a III h III ZO si , TE s, SI i comb (n). trap (n).

231 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #100. 235 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #81. 232 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #120. 236 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #102. 233 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #101. 237 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #107. 234 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #65. 238 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #172.

h 239 h I h h h h t i¹ 2 (ST *sj). MI/ZA t i ~ t , TH t k 2 MI/TE/SI tk, TH/ZO t stove h I h III I III I t i ~ t i , ZO si ~ si , TE si ~ s, SI (n). hiI ~ hiIII die (v). h 242 h I t m¹ 2 (ST *swm). MI/TH t m ~ h 240 h IIA h II h III h I h IIB t i² 2 (Sinitic). MI/ZA t i , TH t i , t m , ZA tm ~ t m , ZO/TE/SI II h II h IIA h I ZO/TE si , SI i blood (n). MI/ZA t i t m three (v). ~ thitIIB bleed (v). h h I h III t n¹ 2 MI/ZA/ZO t n ~ t n insert h h II h I h III t ik 2 MI/ZA t ik jealous (v). lengthwise (v); TH t n ~ t n pour h I h III into (v); TE/SI t n ~ t n insert h 241 h I t i¹ 2 (areal). MI/ZA/TH t i , ZO/TE lengthwise, pour into (v). I h I si , SI i ginger (n). h h h t p 2 MI/ZA t p ~ t hide (v). h h IIB h II h III t ip 2 MI/ZA t ip , TH t ip ~ t ip , II III h II h III h h I h III h I h ZO/TE sip ~ sip , SI ip ~ ip t r¹ 2 MI t r ~ t r , TH t u ~ t , h I h III h I h III sting (v). ZO t a ~ t a , TE/SI tuk ~ t uk h I h III ladle (v); ZA t r ~ t r ladle (vt), h h IIA h II II h t ir² 2 MI/ZA t ir , TH t i , ZO sa , TE t r ladle (vb). II h II sik , SI ik iron (n). h h IIB h (III) t u² 2 MI/ZA –t u , TH/ZO/TE –t u , SI h h IIA h h II II t w² 2 MI t w ~ t , TH/ZO/SI t w –thu trivet (n). h III h II h ~ t o , TE t w ~ t arise (v). ZA h IIA h h h 243 h IIB h IIB t w ~ t arise (vi), t rouse (vt). t u² 2 (ST *sw ). ZA t u ~ t ut rot (v). h h III t w¯ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI t w fly (n). h h IIA h II t u² 2 MI/ZA t u , TH/ZO/TE/SI t u news h h III h IIB h III h IIB t o² 2 MI t o ~ t ok ZA t o ~ t ot (n). h IIB breathe (v). MI t o breath (n). h h IIB h III h II t uk 2 MI/ZA tuk ~ t uk , TH tu h h IIA h II h h II h III h II t om² 2 MI/ZA t om , ZO/SI t om , TE t , ZO tu ~ t u , TE tuk ~ II h III h II h III h III thom – sound (n). t uk , SI t uk ~ t uk / t u deep (v).

h h IIB h III h h IIA h III t Oj¯ 2 MI/ZA t oj , TH/ZO/SI t j , TE t um² 2 MI/ZA tum ~ t um deep h thj appease nats (v). (voice) (v). cf. K m¹

h h III IIB h III h h II h III t am² 2 MI t am ~ tm , ZA t am t um² 2 TH/ZO t um ~ t um request h II h III dress in finest (v). tVm¯ (v). TE/SI t um ~ t um apologise (v).

h h h II h 244 h IIA t ap 2 MI/ZA ta, TH top , ZO/TE t ur² 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA t ur ~ h II h III h II h III h III h II h h II h III t op ~ t op , SI t up ~ t up t ur , TH t u ~ t , ZO t a ~ t a , h II h III h II h III layer (v). SI t up layer (n). ZO t o TE/SI t uk ~ t uk sour (v). h h III pair (v); TE t a, SI t u repeat (v).

239 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #44. 242 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #167. 240 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #21. 243 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #135. 241 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #83. 244 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #155.

h h h IIB t Vl¯ 2 MI tl / t l slide h under/between (v), ZA/TE tl, h III h I TH/ZO/SI tl slide (vt). MI t ol ~ h III h II h III t ol , ZA tol ~ t ol loose (v). h I h III TH/ZO/TE/SI t ol ~ t ol fittable (v). tVl¯ h h IIB h I h III t Vp 2 MI t ep , ZA tep ~ t ep , TH h I/II h II h II h III t ep ~ t ep , ZO/TE t ep ~ t ep SI h II h III h III t ap ~ t ap / t e deflate (v). MI h II h III h I/II t op ~ t op spongy (v); TH t op ~ thopIII shrivel (v).

IIA III aj² 2 MI aj ~ aj play (vi); ZA III h aj play tug-of-war (v). aj²

III k 2 MI/ZA k ~ , TH ~ a , 247 I am¹ 2 (ST *am). MI/ZA am ~ TE/SI tk sturdy (v). III I III I am , TH am ~ am , ZO/TE/SI tam III I I I I ~ tam sojourn (v). l¹ 2 MI l , TH l / l , ZO/TE/SI tl III III III I I I male (n). MI l , ZA l , TH l , a¹ 2 MI/ZA a , TH a , ZO/TE/SI ta III ZO/TE/SI t l forehead (n). joint (n).

IIA I II h IIA III II l¯ 2 MI/ZA l , TH l , SI t l small a² 2 MI/ZA a ~ an , TH a ~ III II III bamboo (n). an , SA ta ~ tan wait for prey (v). II I III I ZO ta hunting ground (n). m¹ 2 MI m ~ m , TH m ~ III I III III III m , ZO/TE/SI t m ~ t m level (v). aw¯ 2 MI/ZA aw w, TH aw III III III ZO TE IIA III II tire (v). –taw ~ t w , – taw ~ III III n² 2 MI/ZA n ~ n , TH n ~ tw worry (v). SI taw ~ tw III II III n , ZO tn ~ tn slice (v); TE grieve (v). II III II III tn ~ tn cleave (v). SI tn ~ tn III III I I I desist (v). MI n slice (n). TH n , m¹ 2 MI m , TH m , ZO tm –, III I ZO/TE/SI tn portion (n). TE/SI tm knife (n).

I III I IIB ¹ 2 TH ~ n , ZO/TE/SI t ~ ek 2 MI/ZA ek ~ axe (v). III tn straight (v). III III III el¯ 2 ZA –el , TH –tel , ZO/TE –tel , IIA III II (II) I ² 2 MI/ZA ~ n , TH ~ SI –tal earthworm (n). TH al ~ III II III III n , ZO/TE/SI t ~ tn obtain (v). al slither (v). cf. tVl¯

III IIB s 2 MI a, TE t, SI ta bait (v). cf. ap 2 MI a soak (v); ZA ap soak s (vi), a soak (vt).

245 I III t 2 (ST *tjat). MI/ZA t ~ , ZA ar¹ 2 MI –ar (~ ar ) chatter (v), III III I III t ~ , ZO/SI tt ~ ta , TE tt ~ t ar boil (vt); ZA –ar ~ ar III I III snap (rope) (v); TH t ~ a snap grumble (v); TH e ~ e , ZO I III I III (chicken’s neck) (v). e ~ e , TE ak ~ ak , SI ikI ~ ikIII grumble, chatter, II II II II II a² 2 TH a ~ at , TE ta ~ tat / tak wheeze, bubble (v). II II II scare (v); SI ta ~ tat / tak scare 246 I I (v). l¹ 2 MI/ZA l , TH/ZO/TE/SI l saliva (n).

II III III m² 2 TH m ~ m , ZO/TE/SI m ~ p collapse (v). 245 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #26. 246 II Stern (1963:245) glosses SI FORM-II tat as II 247 scare (vi) and tak as scare (vt). See Vol.1, Ch.6, #151.

IIA III II III ² 2 MI ~ n tend (v). um² 2 SI tum ~ tum increase (water) II III III IIB III TH/ZO/TE/SI ~ n guard (v). (v). MI um ~ um , SI tum ~ tp III IIB punch (v); ZA um ~ um thump 248 IIB III i² 2 (ST *j ). MI/ZA i , fist down (v); TH um ~ p, ZO/TE II III TH/ZO/TE/SI i seed (n). tum ~ tp flood, punch (v).

III III IIA IIA II is 2 MI/ZA i , TH/ZO/TE/SI i salt (n). ² 2 MI , ZA – , TH , II ZO/TE/SI t top, above (n). III k 2 MI/ZA k ~ , TH ~ o , III III ZO/SI t ~ to , TE tk ~ t stir (v). us 2 MI u ~ k, ZA k ~ , TH III III III u ~ , ZO tu ~ t, TE/SI tu ~ IIB II l¯ 2 MI l , ZA l, TH l , tk peck (v). II ZO/TE/SI tl yeast (n). IIA III II V² 2 MI e ~ en , ZA en ~ IIA III II III II III II m² 2 MI m ~ m , ZA m en , TH/ZO/TE in ~ in , SI i ~ II III shrink (v); ZA m ~ m curl up inIII downpour (v). II III II (v); TH m ~ m , ZO/TE/SI tm ~ III 250 tm short (v). Vp 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA p ~ III III , TH p ~ e , ZO/TE/SI tp ~ te 249 IIA IIB w² 2 (ST *w ). MI w ~ , clamp (v). MI ep cramp (v). MI/ZA II III II III III TH w ~ o , ZO/SI tw ~ to , TE p ~ , TH/SI p ~ i nibble, shut II IIB tw ~ t dig (v). (v). MI ip , ZO/TE p ~ shut II from both sides (v). ZO/TE/SI ip ~ II III II III ol² 2 TH ol ~ ol , ZO/TE tol ~ tol ipIII compact (v). III III tired (v). MI ol ~ l, TH ol , ZO III III III tol –, TE tol , SI tol – rest, stop (v); Vp 2 MI p adze (v); ZA p adze (n); III ZA ol ~ l, rest, stop (vi), l TH p felled tree (n). stop (vt). Vr¯ 2 MI r mire (n); TH pond (n); o I III I III aj¹ 2 MI oj ~ oj / j, ZA oj ~ ZA r, LA r, ZO a , TE/SI k III I III III I oj , TH oj ~ oj / j , ZO/TE toj spring (n). III I III ~ toj , SI taj ~ taj heft (v). ZA ajI weight (n).

I III I a¹ 2 MI a ~ an , TH o ~ III I III I on , ZO to ~ ton , TE ta ~ III I III tan , SI tu ~ tun ride (v). ha¹

IIB II ap 2 MI/ZA ap , TH op , ZO II II II top , TE tap , SI tup lungs (n).

248 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #137. 249 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #45. 250 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #140.

h IIB 251 h (v). MI a something bad (n). II II ZO set deprecate (v); TE sat , SI s II s III s III h h h i t ~ i t / i blame (v). MI a , k 2 MI k east (n); ZA/TE/SI sk, ZA sa offer food to deceased (v), TH/ZO s north (n). III III sIII tax (n); TH se , ZO s e , SI i h h IIB I III earmark food (v), tax (n); TE s a m¹ 2 MI m , TH –sm ~ sm , 252 I III earmark (v), tax (n). ZO/TE/SI sm ~ sm chant (v). cf. h h I IIB m¹ m¹ 2 ZA sm ~ sm say, tell (v); I III TH/ZO/TE/SI sm ~ sm count, read h h III h IIB III m¯ 2 MI m ~ m , ZA s m (v). cf. hm¹ IIB III ~ s m , TH/ZO/TE/SI s m ~ s p h II III need (v). m² 2 TH/ZO/SI sm ~ sm attack 253 h h III (v). s 2 MI , ZA/TE s, TH/ZO/SI sa (h) h I h III thick (v). i-¯ 2 MI i ~ in , TH/ZO/TE/SI I III si ~ sin short, shut eyes (v); ZA h h aj² 2 MI j tease (vt); ZA s j kick I III IIA si ~ sin shut eyes (v). ZA i ~ in jest (v). aj² III IIB in short (vi), in shorten (vt). MI IIA III h h I h III ik ~ ik disproportionately a¹ 2 MI a ~ an requite (v); II III I III IIB small (v); ZO i ~ i narrow (v); ZA sa ~ san borrow (v), sn lend III I III TE/SI ik concentrated (v); SI k (v); TH/ZO/TE/SI sa ~ san accept tiny (v). (v).

(h) h IIB IIB h h TS Om¯ 2 MI m , ZA s m make a k 2 MI k, ZA sk hatchet (n); I III I bonfire (v). MI fm ~ fm , TH m TH/ZO s, TE/SI sk hammer (n). III I III ~ m / p, ZO/TE/SI tm ~ tm III h h I h I I I gather firewood (v). MI fom , TH r¹ 2 MI r ~ r , ZA sr ~ sr , III III I I I III om / p, TE/SI tom ~ tp pick up TE sek ~ sek , SI sak ~ sak forge (v). (v).

h h 254 h IIB h h I h III h IIB ak 2 (ST *t wak). MI ak ~ em¹ 2 MI em ~ em / m h IIB II III a, ZA sak ~ sa, TH sok ~ blow, fan flames (v); ZA sem ~ III II III II IIB I I so , ZO sok ~ so , TE sak ~ sm , TH/ZO sem ~ sem blow (v); III II III III I I I I sak / sa, SI suk ~ suk / su TE sem ~ sem , SI sam ~ sam fan h emerge (vi). MI a, ZA sa, TH flames (v). III III so , TE s a produce (vt); ZO s o III h h IIB h IIB unload (vt); SI su produce, unload e-² 2 MI ek ~ , ZA sek , LA IIB II III (vt). s , ZO/TE/SI s ~ sn store (v).

h h III h IIB s IIB a² 2 MI a ~ at , ZA a ~ IIB II II II II 251 h IIB sat , TH se ~ set , ZO se ~ set , MI a from Chhangte (1993:88). II II II II 252 TE sa ~ sat , SI si ~ sit ruin, bad See Lehman (1963:141) for the semantics. 253 VanBik (2009:171) has Lai h-. 254 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #56.

h h I I I III II a¹ 2 MI a , ZA sa , TH so , l squash (v). ZO sia , TE sik ~ I I I III II III III ZO so , TE sa , SI su cockscomb sik , SI sik ~ sik / si tread (v). h I h III I (n). MI a ~ an , ZA sa ~ IIB I III I sn , TH so ~ son , ZO so ~ III I III son , TE sa ~ san perch (vt); SI suI ~ sunIII perch on stove/head III (v). TE sa protrude (forehead) (v); III SI su ~ sut protrude (occiput) (v). a¹. cf. ha²

h IIA III a² 2 ZA sa ~ san perch on IIB stove (vt), sn perch on stove (vb). cf. ha¹

h h h k 2 MI k ~ , ZA sk ~ s, TH/ZO s, TE/SI sk descend (v).

h h III h IIB III n¯ 2 MI n ~ n , ZA sn ~ IIB III sn , TH/ZO/TE/SI sn ~ st prick (v).

h h t 2 MI , ZO st, TE st ~ s, SI st ~ suIII snatch (v).

h h 255 h IIB IIB u² 2 (ST *t w ). MI u , ZA su , II TH/ZO/TE/SI su vagina (n).

h h III un¯ 2 MI un daytime (n). III ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI sun noon (n).

h h III III III Ul¯ 2 MI ul , ZA/TE sul , TH/SI sl womb (n).

h h I I U¹ 2 MI u , ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI s inside (n).

h h IIA h III IIA U² 2 MI u ~ un , ZA su ~ III II III sun , TH/ZO/TE/SI s ~ sn pour (v).

(h) I III VL¯ 2 MI/ZA il ~ il , TH/ZO/TE/SI I III l ~ l trample (v). MI l, ZA

255 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #174.

IIB II wak 2 MI/ZA vak ~ v, TE vak ~ w III II III vak walk (v); TH/ZO va ~ va II III III 256 IIA roam (v); SI vak ~ vak / va exit (v). Wj¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA baj ~ III I III III I baj , TH baj ~ baj / bj , ZO vaj ~ 262 III I III r-w s 2 (ST *r-was). MI/ZA r a , TH III III III vaj , ZO/TE/SI baj ~ baj lame (v). MI go , ZO go , TE ga, SI u rain IIA II v j , TH/ZO/TE/SI v j left (n). (n).

I III III II III WM¯ 2 MI m ~ m scorch (v); ZA wEl¯ 2 MI/ZA vel ~ vl, TH vel ~ vel , I III IIB I III m ~ m dry over fire (vi), m ZO/TE/SI vl ~ vl strike (v). I III dry over fire (vt); ZO/TE/SI m ~ m III IIA III III roast (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI am ~ p glow w l¹ 2 MI vl ~ vl , ZA vl –, II III I III (embers) (v); TH em ~ em glow TH/ZO/TE/SI vl ~ vl tend (v). MI/ZA IIA III (charcoal) (v). MI/ZA vam embers vl, TH/ZO vl rear animals (v); TE II II III III (n); MI vap , TH/ZO/TE/SI vam ashes vl ~ vl, SI hl rear (v ). IIA III b (n). MI/ZA vam ~ vam red hot (v). III w t 2 MI/ZA v t ~ v , TH/ZO v t ~ vu , 257 I III III w n¹ 2 (ST *wan). ZA v n ~ v n , TE vt ~ v, SI ht ~ hu pierce (v). I III LA v n ~ v n pregnant (vi), ZA IIB IIB 263 v n , LA vn impregnate (vt). wk 2 (ST *waq). MI/ZA/TE/SI vk, I III ZO/TE/SI vn offspring (n). MI vn –, TH/ZO v pig (n). III 258 ZO/TE/SI vn load (n). cf. wn² 264 I wm¹ 2 (ST *wm). MI –vm , 259 I wt 2 (ST *wat). MI/ZA –vt, ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI vm bear (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI vt leech (n). I III wm¹ 2 TH/ZO/TE/SI vm ~ vm black IIB II wa² 2 MI/ZA va , TH/ZO/TE va , SI v– (v). bird (n). I III III wor¹ 2 MI vor ~ vor sing (v); ZA vor , I I III I waj¹ 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI vaj foreigner SI vok ~ vok discard (v); TE vok ~ III (n). vok throw (v). MI/ZA vr, TH/ZO/SI III vo , TE v sow (v). 260 I Waj¹ 2 MI/TH/ZO/TE/SI vaj chaff (n); I h I 265 I ZA vaj parboiled rice (n). MI p aj wj¹ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI/ZA vj , ZO I I I shavings (n).261 vj –, TE vj –, SI vj – elephant (n).

IIA II wn² 2 MI/ZA vn , TH/ZO/TE vn , SI II II III hn skin (n). TH/ZO vn ~ vn III wear (v). TH vn clothes (n). cf. 256 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #104. wn¹ 257 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #12. 258 Compare the association between bear and bairn for the semantics. 262 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #131. 259 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #103. 263 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #130. 260 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #34. 264 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #11. 261 h I MI p aj from Weidert (1987:144). 265 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #55.

I III wt 2 MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE vt, SI vt ash (n). hak ~ hak twist (v); MI/ZA hr III revolve (vt); TH/ZO h ~ he , TE hk I I I III Wur¹ 2 MI/ZA vur , TH bu , ZO va , TE ~ h, SI hk ~ he sprain (v). MI I I IIA III II III vuk , SI huk frost, snow (n). hel ~ hel , TH/ZO/TE hel ~ hel , SI II III hal ~ hal court, woo (v); MI/ZA III IIB IIA wVj¯ 2 MI/ZA vj, TH vj fart (n/v); hel go/walk around (v). ZA hol ~ III III II ZO/SI v j , TE v j fart (n). hol seek (vi/t), hl seek (vb); TH hol III h ~ hol seek (v). cf. LVl¯, LVl¯ 266 I WVL¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI vl , III 267 I TH/ZO/SI vl , TE vl ring shaped wV¯ 2 (Austroasiatic). MI va ~ III I stand (n). MI vl noose (n), make a van sparse, extensive (v), ZA v IIA III I III noose (v); vl ~ vl circular, widened (hole) (v), TH va ~ van III I III radiate in a circle (v); vl ring (n). perforated (v), ZO/TE/SI va ~ van IIB I ZA vl wrap with string (v). MI – sparse, hollow (v). TE v hole (n). IIB IIB II III IIA IIa III vel , ZA vl , TH vel ~ vel , TE – MI va width (n); ZA va ~ van III III III IIB vel ~ v l , SI vel ~ v l encircle illuminate (vi), vn illuminate (vt); II III II III II (v); ZO vel ~ vel look all over (v); TH va ~ van illuminate (v). SI va II I III TH vel surroundings (n). MI val ~ twilight (n). MI/ZA/TH/ZO/TE/SI van III III II III val coil (vi), val coil (vt); TH vel sky (n). TH/ZO/TE/SI va glory (n). III III III I I ~ vel , ZO vel , TE val ~ val, SI MI ve neighbourhood (n). TH ve III II III I I vil coil (v); SI vil ~ vil wander ward (n); ZO/TE ve , SI va I I I (v). ZO –vel , TE val ringlet (n). TH neighbour, ward (n). MI/TH ve ~ II II II II III I III vel , ZO vel , TE val , SI vil times ven guard (v); ZA ve ~ ven gird II III III II IIB I III (n). TH vaj ~ vaj / v j , ZO v j ~ (vi), vn gird (vt); ZO/TE ve ~ ven III II III IIB vj , SI vaj ~ vaj hunt (v); TH/SI neighbour (v). MI vet ~ v, II II III vaj , ZO vaj – work commute (n). MI TH/ZO/SI vt ~ ve , TE vt ~ v gird III III II III vaj ~ vj, ZA –vaj bewildered (v). (v). MI v ~ vn keep (v). III IIB ZA vaj ~ vj migrate (v). MI vj , IIB ZA vj ~ vj wave (v). TH/ZO/SI III III III vaj ~ vj , TE vaj ~ vj dizzy (v). III III MI vj , ZA vj complete (yearly III cycle), swing (v). MI vj times (n). III I III ZA vj , TH/ZO/TE/SI vj ~ vj I III swing (v). TH/ZO/TE/SI val ~ val II III excessive (v); TE/SI val ~ val bulge I (eyes / pregnant belly) (v). MI hj ~ hjIII turn to face (v), hj– I accommodate guest (v); ZA hj ~ III hj face (vi), hj turn to face (vt); I III TH/ZO/TE/SI hj ~ hj rotate (v); II II ZO/TE/SI hj ~ hj sway (v). MI/ZA I III I hr ~ hr revolve (vi); TH he ~ h, I III I III ZO he ~ he , TE hek ~ hek , SI 267 See the data in Shorto (1973:375-8, 266 See Vol.1, Ch.6, #37. 2006:232-3).

Index by English Gloss

h h above (²); accept ( a¹); accommodate guest (WVL¯); ache (k AM¯); acreage h ( (r)a¹); add more (bVL¯); addle (ds); adjacent (dEp); adze (Vp); affix (bVL¯); alive h h (n², r¹); alter (lEt); angled (kVL¯); angry ( rs); animal (rn¹); apart (ka(-)¯); h h apologise (t um²); appear (l¯); appease nats (t Oj¯); apportion (sm¯); approach (nVk, (h) h (h) naj²); arise (t w²); arm (ban¹); armpit (jk); arrive (ban¹, (k)l V¯); arrogant (PVr¹); h arrow (t l²); articulate (lm²); ascend (kAL); ash (wt); ashamed (jk); ashes (WM¯); h ask (jot, TV - ¯); askew (kVL¯, soj²); assassinate (p VL¯, sam¹); associate (pol¹); attack h (h) h h ( m²); attain ((k)l V¯); attempt sex with sleeping woman (K VM¯); attend (K VM¯); h h h audacious ( ra¹); aunt (ni¹); averse ( rs); avoid (pVL¯); axe ( rj¯, ek); axe head (²)

h h h babysit (K VM¯); bachelor’s bed/quarters (kl am¹); back (el¹, ja¹, n¹); back kick h h h h (pr¹); bad ( a²); bag (K VM¯); bait (tar¹, s); bale (t al¹); ball ( lVm²); bamboo (ra¹, h h l¯); bamboo rat (bj¹); barge (nVm²); bark (ho¹, k aw¹); barking deer (k i¹); barren h h h o ( l¹); base (bVL¯, rAm¯); basket (K VM¯, PVM¯,) ; bastard (san¹); bat (P-lak); beak h h ( mVL¯); beam (jVL¯); bean (be²); bear (wm¹); beautiful (hj¯, mOj¹); bed (k n¯); bee h h (k aj¹); bee stinger (jV²); beget ( r¹); belly (PVM¯, rIl¹); bend (kVL¯, KVm¯); between (h) h h h (kAL¯); bewildered (WVL¯); bier ( la²); big (lan¯, pi², rl¯); bile (k a²); bind (k t, h h kr Vn¹, re¹, sVM¯, tVm¯); birdcoop (rl²); bite (kj¯, pt); bitter (k a²); black (dm¹, h h h h e K m¹, mV-², wm¹); blame ( a²); bleed (t i²); bless (sam¹); blink (p a¯); bloat (PVM¯, h h h E E PVr¹); block (k AM¯, ru¯, tVm¯); blood (t i²); bloom (pAL¯); bloomy (pol²); blossom (pA h h h L¯); blow (mut, em¹); blow air between lips in disgust (p it); blow nose ( nit); blue o (¹, dm¹, pol²); blunt (bVL¯, mol¯); boast (a¹); boat (lO¯); bob (pr¹, tk, tVm¯); h h body (La-¯, PVM¯); body hair ( ml²); boil (HVL¯, p VL¯, sw¹, ar¹); bolt (kAL¯); bone (h) (h) h (ra¹, rs); bonfire (TS Om¯); bore (p eC); borrow (krom¹, a¹); bosom (Kra¹); (h) h hE h bottle neck ( rV-¯); boundary (ri²); bow (kVL¯, li², t l²); braid (p AL¯); brain (kl ak); h h h h branch (jVL¯, kV¯); brandish (lk, (r)ol¹); brave ( ra¹); breast ( noj², nu¯); breath h h h h o h (h) (t o²); breathe ( nar¹, t o²); breed (K (r)aL¯); breeze (kl i¹); bridge ( lj¯); bright (kle²); (h) h h bring (k¹, (k)l V¯, ls); brittle (mat, rm²); broadcast (t ¹); brood (K VM¯); h (h) (h) h broom (p at); brother-in-law (mak²); brush (K Vj¯, nVL¹); bubble (p VL¯, ar¹); bud h I (K VM¯, mVm¯); buffalo (loj ); build (lm²); bulge (pV-¯, PVr¹, WVL¯); bunch (PVM¯, tEl¯); bundle (tEl¯); Burman (kol¹); burn (HVL¯, kA¯); burp (Vr¹); burrow (kas); burst h h h (h) (pV-¯); bury (p um¹); butt ( O-², p VL¯); butterfly ( lVM¯); buy (lj²)

h h calescent (HVL¯); calf (p j¯); call (KV(w)¹); canyon (ram²); capable (klj², t j¯); (h) h h captive (sl²); carry (jo¹, K Vj¯, k(l) aj¹, la¹, paj², p (L)¯); cart (le²); carve (tus); (h) h o catapult (pr¹); catch (mn¹, n¹, P -¯, TV-¯); cave (k UL¹, Puk); cavitied (HV¯); h certain (l²); chaff (Waj¹); chant ( m¹); charcoal (HVL¯); chatter (ar¹); cheek h h (ba¹); chest (K VM¯, Kra¹); chew (k(l) aj²); child (naw¹); child’s skirt (e¹); chilly h (h) h h (dAM¯); chin (k a²); choke (HVk); choose (kl ¹, kl j², rl¹); chop (k, tus); cinder h (HVL¯); circular (bal¹, PVM¯, WVL¯); city wall (kUl¯); clamp (Vp); clan ( nm²); clap h h (bEB); clash (EL¯); claw (hm¹, tn²); clean (aj², (r)at, t a¹); clear (im¹, sal²); h cleave (at, n²); clench (sVM¯, tVm¯); clever (im¹); clitoris (mVn¯); close (k aL², h h h k p, mVm¯); clothes (wn²); cloud (mj¹); cob (kom¹); cock ( luj¹); cockscomb ( a¹); h cockspur (sak); coffin (ka¹); coil (kVL¯, lVm², WVL¯); cold (sk); collapse (m²); h h h (h) h collect (k L¯); collide (su¯); colugo ( lk); column (kr am¯); comb (K Vj¯, Pt, (r)at, h h t s); combine (rVm¯); come (hV²); come into being (pV-¯); comfort ( nVM¯); comfortable (nVm¯); commute (WVL¯); compact (Vp); compete (dm²); complain h h ( (r)am², sVM¯); complete (kM¯, kl¹, WVL¯); compose (p V-¯, sam¹); compress (nVm²); o h (h) h concave (KVm¯, Puk); conceal (K VM¯); concentrated ( i-¯); congeal (k aL²); consign h h o (p VL¯); console (K VM¯); container (bV¯); contaminate (san²); contemplate (sVM¯); h contemptuous (EL¯); contradict (EL¯, nal²); convalesce (ka(-)¯); converse (bas); co- h occur (k t); cooked rice (bs); cool (dVL¯); coop (PVM¯, rl²); copulate (lu²); corner h h h (kVL¯); corpse (La-¯); correct (d-²); cough (k s, K u²); count ( m¹); counter for containers (bV¯); counter for spherical objects (PVM¯); couple (kap); court (WVL¯); h h E h cover (k us, K VM¯); crab (aj²); crack (kAk, k V¯); crack a flea (ds); cram (nVm²); (h) cramp (Vp); crave food (ds); create (sam¹); creeper ( rj²); criticise (sVj²); crotch h h (kp, kr al¯); crouch (kVL¯, tVm¯); crow (ak, k a¹); crown of head (ja¹, tk); crust h h h (k aL²); cubit (T ¹); cunning (k l²); cup ( (r)aj¯); cup hand (KVm¯); curl (kVL¯, (h) (h) h (k)l Vp, m²); curry ( ms); cut (at, K Ew¯, tn²)

h h h dam (dVL¯, k aL²); damp (nVl¯, nm¹); dance (lam¹); dare (-AM¯); dark (jV¯, K m¹, h raw¹); daub (bVL¯); daughter-in-law (mw¹); dawdle (V¹); daytime ( un¯); deaf (¹); debt (lj¹); deceive (kl hem²); decorate (sam¹); decrease (kam², kham², krm², kr hm²); decrepit (rm²); deep (thuk, thum²); deer (khi¹, jk); defecate (e²); defend h h h (dVL¯); deflate (t Vp); delicious ( lm¹, tuj¹); delineate (riN¹); demolish (KL V²); dense h h h h (jV¯); deny ( nal²); deplete (K Ew¯); deprecate ( a²); descend (krm², k); h o (h) h descendant (KL V², san¹); desire (rl¯); desist ( rVl¯, n²); detach (pVL¯, p VL¯); (h) o deteriorate (rOM¯); deviate (pVL¯); devour ( mam¹); dew (dVL¯); diaphragm (la²); dice (h) h h (h) ((k)l Vp); die (m², pVL¯, P m¹, t i¹); different (d²); difficult (hr¹); dig (K Vj¯, h laj¯, w²); dilute (pol¹); dim (ml²); diminish (K Ew¯); dirt (bal¯); dirty (bal¯); h (h) disappear (K VM¯, lVM¯); disapprove (ma²); discard (paj¯, wor¹); discolour (kir²);

(h) discriminate (d²); discuss (rel¹); disdain ( nV¯, sam¹); disgusted (kri¹); dish h h h (kl e¯); dislocate (kl ¯); disparage (KV(w)¹); dispel (p VL¯); disperse (KL V ²); display (h) on pole (tar¹); disproportionately small ( i-¯); dissect (sm¯); dissolve (JVL¯); distend (kr¯); h h h distribute (jVL¯, Lom¹); divaricate (kaw¹, p n²); divulge (pV-¯, p V-¯); dizzy (WVL¯); h (h) do secretly (p VL¯); do thoroughly (bl²); dog (j²); door (k¹, kt, P -¯); doorway h (k¹); dooryard (kt); dorsum (ja¹); dove (kr u¹); downpour (V²); dream (m²); h h h dress in finest (t am²); drink (n¹, dVN¹, (r)Vp); drip (r¹); drive ( (r)ol¹); droop h h h (jVm¹); drop (r¹, KLV², KL V², krIl², kr Il², pVL¯); drum (k a¹, tm²); dry (HVL¯, kr¯, h raw¹, rOM¯, rO(w)¹, rAm¯, t¹, WM¯); dull (mol¯, mV-²); durable (klw¹); dusk (jV¯); dusty (pol²)

ear (b¹, bl², hna¹); ear wax (b¹); earmark (ha²); earn (lm², hls); earthworm h (h) h h h (el¯); east ( k); easy (Ol¯); eat (j¹, ls, ms, ne², (r)Vp); echo (K V¹); edge h (kVL¯, m²); egg (tuj¹); eight (Lat); elbow (kIw¯, O-²); elder sibling (u¹); elderly (t r¹); elephant (saj¹, wj¹); elevated (ka(-)¯); elope (ja¹); embers (W M¯); emerge h ( ak); emit (r¹); empty (KVm¯, rak); emulous (am²); encircle (WVL¯); enclosure h ( (r)a¹); end (m²); enemy (ral¹); ensorcel (doj¹); enter (klm¹, lut); entire (kM¯); (h) o (h) entrance (k¹, P -¯); entrust (san²); envy (e²); epidemic ((k)l V¯); equal (kM¯); h o erect (k, t¹); err (ms); escort (K (r)aL¯); establish (d¹); evade (rVl¯); evaporate o h (kA¯); evil spirit (kraw¯); exaggerate (a¹, PVM¯); excessive (WVL¯); exchange (kl E-²); (h) (h) exclaim (KV(w)¹); exempt (P -¯); exert (kr¯); exhausted ( nV¯); exist (m²); exit h (wak); extend (PVM¯); extension (PVM¯); extensive (wV¯); extinguish (mt, pVL¯); extremity (m²); eye (mt)

(h) h fade (kk); faeces (e²); fall (KL V ², pVL¯); fall asleep ( mu¹); famous (t ¹); fan flames h h h ( em¹); far ( la¯); fart (wVj¯); fast (rA²); fasten (kl²); fat (t aw¹); father (pa²); fathom (h) (h) o h h ( lAm¹); feed (bar¹, s, mam¹); fell (KL V², p VL¯); felled tree (Vp); female (nu²) h h female animal (la¹); fence (dVL¯, rol¹, (r)a¹); ferment (hi¹); ferret (k j²); few h (kl Vm¹); field (lw²); fields within region (jaw¹); fig (t j²); fight (dw¹, sal¯, TV - ¯); file (h) (jV²); fill (dm²); fillet (sm¯, tEl¯); finger (jV²); finish (bj¹, jw², mn²); fire (mj²); (h) fire slingshot (saj¹); firm (rs, tr¹); fish ( a²); fist (tVm¯); fist-measure (sVM¯); fittable h h e E (h) (t Vl¯); five (a¹); flame (HVL¯); flap (jap); flash (kl()a¹, lp, p a¯); flat (pAL¯, P -¯, h h h jVL¯); flavoursome (t ¯); flea ( li¹); flesh (tk); flexible (nVm¯); flip ( lVm¯); float h E (h) (jVm¹, lam¹, p V-¯); flood (um²); flow (la¹); flower (pAL¯); fly (ja¹, jVm¹, (k)l V¯, h (h) h (h) t w¯); flying ant ( lVM¯); foam (p V-¯); fog (mV-²); fold ((k)l Vp); follow (jot, JVL¯); (h) E h (h) food (n²); foolish (a²); foot (kV¯, k es, pAL¯, p j¯); footloose ( mn²); footstep

(h) h (kAL¯); ford (kAL¯); forehead (P -¯, l¹); foreigner (waj¹); forest (rm¹); forge (K V¹, h r¹); forge pot (PVM¯); forget (haj¹, mol¯); fork (ka(-)¯); form proud flesh (PVr¹); four h h (li¹); fowl (ar¹); free (KL V ², KL V²); fresh ( r¹); friend (lom¹); fringe (eM¹); front h h h ( mVL¯); frost (Wur¹); froth (p VL¯, p V-¯); frozen with excitement/fear (Li-²); fruit (rs, h h h h t j²); fry (kA¯); full (dm², k t); fumble ( mj²); fumigate (HVL¯); funnel (t al¹)

o h garlic (san¯); garment (pan²); gasp (HVk, (r)Vp); gate (kt); gather (jV¯, kom¹, h (h) o h k om¹, sVM¯, TS Om¯); gaunt (rOM¯); generation (san¹); generous (B); ginger (t i¹); h e (h) gird (k AM¯, wV¯); give (pa²); glans penis ( li¯); gloomy (jV¯); glory (wV¯); glossy h (kl()a¹); glow (WM¯); glutinous mass (k aL²); gnaw (dit); go (aC, pj¯); go and (h) h return the same day ((k)l V¯); go far (jVm¹); goat (kel¯); gobble ( (r)Vp); gold h h h h o (k m¯); good (P- ras); gore (k i²); gourd (K VM¯); govern (k); grandchild (san¹, tu²); h (h) grandfather (pu¹); grandmother (pi¹); granular (te²); graze (K Ew¯, nVL¹); grease h o ( rak); greasy (klr¹, nVl¯); great grandchild (san¹); greedy (am²); green (¹, dm¹, h r¹); grey (Pa¹); grieve (aw¯); grind (rot); groin (kAL¯); grope (jot); ground (lj²); (h) (h) group (pol¹); growl ( Vr¯); grumble (ar¹); guard (kl², ², wV¯); gums ( ni²); h gush (p VL¯); guzzle (dVk)

h h haggard ( rAm¯); hail (ral¹); hair ( ml², sm²); hair bob (tk, tVm¯); hairspring (li²); h h (h) halter (HVk); hammer (K V¹, tus, k); hand (k t); hand-cuffs (kl²); handle (dOm², h h h (h) kV¯, t m²); handspan (k ap); hang (jVL¯, k(l)aj¹, k(l) aj¹, P -¯); happy (nVm¯); hard h (sk, tr¹); hare (b¹); harmonise (rVm¯); harrow (laj¯); hatch (kew¯); hatchet ( k); (h) haunt ((k)l V¯); have (nj¯); haze (mj¹); head (lu¹); head for pastures new (ja¹); h h head hair (sm²); heal (dm¹); hear (ja², K V¹); heart (l¹); hearth (tp); heavy (k i¯, o I h (h) h rk); hedge (dVL¯); heel (TVl¯); heft (aj ); help ( ru¯, rV¹); herd (bEB, k l¯, h h K VM¯); hew (sam¹); hiccup (Vr¹); hide (bu¯, rVl¯, tp); high (sa¹); hill (kla¹, h h mal¹); hinder (TV - ¯); hip (k el²); hoe (riN¹, tus); hoist (k(l) aj¹); hold (dOm², k(l)aj¹); (h) o h hold in mouth ( mam¹); hold to bosom (PVM¯); hole (HV¯, KVm¯, k UL¹, wV¯); holey h (HV¯); hollow (HV¯, kar¹, KVm¯, k ar¹, wV¯); hop (pt); horn (ki²); horse (kL², h ra²); host party (TV - ¯); hot (HVL¯, sa¹, t¹, WM¯); house (n²); howl ( (r)am²); huddle (tVm¯); hug (PVM¯); humble (jk); hunchbacked (kVL¯); hundred (jas); hundred thousand h (sV²); hunt (WVL¯); hunting ground (a²); hurt (na¹); husk (kom¹, K VM¯); husked h o (aj²); hut (kl am¹, Puk)

(h) I (kj¹); idolise (e²); ill (na¹, nV¯); ill-natured (jo¹); illuminate (Par¹, wV¯); image (h) h E ( lVM¯); imitate (JVL¯); immerse ( nim¹); impregnate (raj¹, wn¹); in prime of life (pAL¯); h h in touch (kom¹); include (tEl¯); inclusive (K VM¯); increase (kr ¹, um²); indent at back of head (tk); indented (KVm¯); individual (rak); infant (naw¹); inform (KV(w)¹, h h h p O-¯, rl¹); inhale (dip, dVk); inherit (lºak); inner ear ( na¹); insect (l²); insert h h h (K VM¯, t n¹); inside ( U¹); intelligent (im¹); intend (tm¯); intercept (TV - ¯); interval (kAL¯); intestines (jV¹, rIl¹); intimate (nVl¯); intoxicant (ru²); invert (lEt); invite h h h h (sVM¯); iron (t ir²); irradiate (kl()a¹); itch (jV², k at, (r)at, t k)

h h h h javelin (ta²); jaw (k a², kl a¹); jealous (t ik); jhoom hut (kl am¹); join (jVm¹); joint h (h) (a¹); joke (am¹); joyful ( lm¹); jump ((k)l V¯); jungle (tu¹); jut (dOk)

h h keep (wV¯); keep secret (K VM¯); kernel (mu²); kick (pr¹, aj²); kidney (kAL¯); kill h h h h (t t); knead ( lVm²); knee (k uk); knife (m¹); knock (kI-¯, tk); know (t j¯)

o h lac (rp); ladle (sak, t r¹); lake (dil², li¹); lame (Wj¯); lane (rol¹); languid (jom²); lap h (h) h up (Vp, (r)Vp); late (klaj²); laugh ( nuj¹); launch ( lon¹); launder (sop, su²); lay h h hE h h lay (jVL¯, k a², lm¯, p AL¯, tuj¹); layer (dVL¯, t ap); lead (har¯); leaf ( ns); leak E o (dOk, JVL¯); leaky (kAk); lean (m¹); leap (ja¹); learn (JVL¯); leave (ja¹, ma², put, (h) h h h rVl¯); leech ( Lw¹, Lit, wt); left (Wj¯); leg (ko², kV¯, PVM¯, p j¯); lend (krom¹, h h a¹); length (T¹); lengthen (saw²); leopard (kj¹, kl V²); level (ja¹, jVL¯, p j¹, m¹); h h (h) lever (kAL¯); lick (lak, law¹); lidded pot (K VM¯); lie (jaw¹, jVm¹, lm¯, mu¹); lift (dOm², lam¹); light a wick (de¹); lightning (krek); lightning concretion (krek); h h lightweight (ja²); line (riN¹); lion (kj¹); lip ( ns, mVL¯); liquor (ju¹); listen (aj¹); liver (thn¯); load (wn¹); locality (tal¹); loins (ko²); long (saw²); long feathers near h h bird’s tail (eM¹); look (n², WVL¯); loose (t Vl¯); lopped off (bVL¯); louse ( rk); love (h) h (ds, aj¹); low (kVL¯, nam²); lumber (k L¯); lungs (ap)

(h) (h) machan ( la²); maggot (l²); maggoty (l²); maimed (bVL¯); main entrance (P -¯) (h) make a bonfire (TS Om¯); make a noose (WVL¯); make run into mouth (by mythical h human-eating snake) (hm¹); male (pa², l¹); malleable ( nVM¯); mango (haj¹);

h Manipur river (run¹); man-made hole (k UL¹); mantel (rp); many (tm²); marrow h h h hE (h) (kl I-²); mass (k(l) aj¹); massage ( mEC); mat (p AL¯, P -¯); meat (sa²); meet (TV - ¯); h melt (j¹, tuj²); membrane (dVL¯, lm¹); mentally note (tam¹); method (dan¯); middle h (laj¹); migrate (PVM¯, WVL¯); milk ( noj²); millet (A¯); mire (Vr¯); misdeed (ms); miserable (-(a)j¯); misplace (paj¯); mithun (sal¹); mix (h l², pol¹); moan (taw²); h mollusc (kp); monkey (jo¹, aw¹); moon (kl as); morning (jV¯); mortar (sm²); mosquito (ka²); mother (nu²); mountain (kla¹, mal¹); mountain range (kla¹); mouth h (h) (km¹, ka(-)¯, m²); move (krin², kr in²); muddle (mol¯); murky (nu¹, nVL¹); muscle h (tk, tl¹); mushroom (pa²); mutually assist (lom¹); muzzle ( mVL¯); mythical man-tiger (kl V²); mythical tiger (kj¹, kl V²)

h (h) (h) h nail (tn²); name ( m¹); nap (m¹); nape ( rV-¯); narrow ( i-¯); nauseate (k AM¯, (h) h (h) h h -(a)j¯); navel (laj¹); near ( naj²); neck ( o¹, rV-¯); need ( m¯); needle (P- rm¹); h neighbour (wV¯); neighbourhood (wV¯); nervous (ti²); nest (bu²); new (t r¹); new o h h generation (san¹); news (t u²); nibble (Vp); night (jV¯); nine (ka²); nit ( ru¹); nook h h h (dum²); noon ( un¯); noose (WVL¯); north ( k); nose ( nar¹); notch (at); now (tu²); h h o nubile (la¹); nurse (K VM¯, K (r)aL¯); nut (mVm¯)

h h oak (t l¹); obedient (B, im¹, klj²); obstruct (k AM¯); obtain (²); occiput (PVM¯); h occupy (lºak); off-colour (pol²); offer food to deceased ( a²); offspring (a², wn¹); oil h h (h) h o hair (t s); old ( luj¹); on deathbed ( nV¯); one (k t); onion (san¯); open (HV¯, h h h ka(-)¯, m¹, pO-¯); opposite (ral¹); otter ( r m²); oval (JolB); overcast ( nim¹); (h) h overflow (lEt, lVM¯); overlay (dAM¯); overlong (al²); overlook ( mj²); overshadow (h) h (h) (dEp); overshoot ((k)l V¯); overtake (k l¯, (k)l V¯); owe (ba¹); ox (bo¯); ox’s nose (h) piercing (p eC)

h pacify (lm¹); pair (TV - ¯, t ap); palatable (aj¹); palate (d¹); pale (w¹); palisade (h) (h) (pl¹); palm (P -¯); parboiled rice (Waj¹); pare ((k)l Vp); parrot (ki²); participate (h) (PVM¯); partition (d²); pass (pVL¯); pass away ( lVM¯); patch (bVL¯); paternal aunt h h (ni¹); paternal aunt’s husband (r¹); path (k¹); paunch (p ur¹); pay (p VL¯); peaceful h (h) (h) (lm¹); peck (us); peel (dVk, JVL¯, kk, K Vk, pVL¯); pelvis (P -¯); penis (jV², li¯); h h perch (us, a¹, a²); perforate (HV¯, pp, wV¯); perforation (pp); permeate h (h) h (JVL¯); permit (p VL¯); person (mi²); pewter (har¯); pheasant ( Lk); phlegm (k a(K)); h o (h) h pick (K Ew¯); pick up (sak, TS Om¯); piebald ((k)ra¹, pol²); piece (p VL¯); pierce (dot, h o wt); pig (wk); pile (pV-¯); pillow (k AM¯); pinch (sk, sak); pine (ar¹, aj¹); pit trap

h h E (KVm¯); place ( mn¯); placenta ( lm¹); plan (rel¹); plane (aj²); plank (pAL¯); plant (ts); play (am¹, lk, aj²); play tug-of-war (aj²); pleasing (aj¹); pliant (nVl¯); plot h h (EL¯); pluck (k, (k)l w², Pt); plump (PVM¯); pod (kom¹); point ( mVL¯, tk); poison o (ru²); pond (Vr¯); pool (dum², li¹, JVL¯); poor (jo¹); pop (pu t); porcupine (ks); h h portion (n²); posterior (m²); pot (bel¹, K VM¯, PVM¯); pound (KL V², su¯); pour (bas, h h h h t n¹, U²); praise (PVr¹); prawn (kAj¯); precipice (k am¹); precipitous (k am¹); h (h) pregnant (raj¹, wn¹); prepare ( mn¹); press (bEB, n², nVm²); prevent ( rV¹); prick (hn¯); prisoner (mn¹); prod (h(r)ol¹, sw¹); produce (hak); proficient (tham²); h prohibit (k AM¯); proliferate (jVL¯); promise (tam¹); prop up (n¹); propitiate (bas); h h h prostrate (bk); protect (K VM¯, ru¯); protrude ( a¹); provoke (TV - ¯); prowl (kl V²); h h E prune (K Ew¯, (r)at); public (kla¹); pull (dOk, kAk, k(l)aj¹); pulsate (tr¹); pumpkin h o (maj¹); punch (um²); pungent (tur¯); pursue (JVL¯); pus ( naj¹); push (nVm², san²); put (h) o h h (h) in mouth ( mam¹); put on (bVL¯, e¹, K VM¯, sL²); put to sleep (kl m¹, mu¹)

o h quarrel (haw¹); quiet (dVL¯, K m¹, -(a)j¯)

o radiate (kl()a¹, WVL¯); raft (lO¯); rain (jus, sur¹, r-ws); rainy season (ur¯); raise h (h) h (k a²); rake (K Vj¯); rape (sal¯); ravine (ram²); raw ( r¹); reach (ban¹, jVm¹, (h) h (k)l V¯); read ( m¹); ready for harvesting (kVL¯); real (tk); rear (wl¹); rearable h h (klj²); recall (JVL¯, p O-¯); receive (s); recline (jVL¯); recoil ( O-²); red (sn¹); red h (h) hot (HVL¯, WM¯); reek (t ¯); refill (sL²); regurgitate (dip); rehearse ( lVM¯); reject h (h) h (h) ( n¹); rejoice (lom²); relieve (Ol¯); relocate ( nVL¹, tar¹, t ar¹); remain (P -¯); h h o remote (kVL¯); remove (kl j²); repeat (t ap); reply (TV - ¯); repossess (lºak); reprove (ha h h h (h) h w¹); request (V¹, t um²); requite ( a¹); rescue ( ru¯, rV¹); resolute ( rat); h h (h) resound (K V¹); rest (ol²); retain (K VM¯); retch (HVk); retrace (JVL¯); retract ( li¯); h (h) (h) retrieve (lm²); return (aC, kir², k ir², (k)l V¯); reveal (jVL¯, li¯); revolve (pj¯, h WVL¯); rice (bs, A¯, Waj¹); rice grain (A¯); rich (lan¯); rid (p VL¯); ride (a¹); h right (tk); righteous (l²); ring (WVL¯); ringlet (WVL¯); rinse (kle¯); ripe ( mn¹); rise (ka(-)¯, k(l)aj¹); river (run¹); road (k¹, lm²); roam (wak); roast (rO(w)¹, WM¯); rob h h h (ls); rod (jon¹, kV¯); rodent (ju²); roll (LVl¯, LVl¯); root (jV², rAm¯); rope (k aw¹, (h) h h h rj²); rot (mat, t u²); rotate (WVL¯); rough ( rAm¯); rounded (bal¹); rouse (t w²); (h) h rub (not, nVL¹); ruin ( a²); run (kl AL¯)

h sad (ds, -(a)j¯, rs); saddle of hill (kVL¯); saliva (l¹); sallow (mV-²); salt (is); salt h h water spring (ss); salty (l¹); sambur deer (jk); same (k t); sand (nVl¯); sap ( naj¹);

h h h (h) sate (k AM¯); satiate (klj¹, k M²); saw (tn²); say (sVj², tis, m¹); scales ((k)l Vp); h hE h scare (bEB, kr i¹, Li-², a²); scatter (p AL¯); scoop (hm¹, lºak, (r)Vp); scorch (kA¯, h h h h h h WM¯); scowl ( l¹); scrape (K Ew¯, (r)at); scratch (K Ew¯, k at, (r)at); scrawny (h) h h ( rV-¯); search (JVL¯); season (sw¹); secluded place (dAM¯); see ( mu¯); seed (kl aj¯, i²); seed pit (mu²); seek (j¹, lm², WVL¯); seek refuge (bVL¯); segregate (dj²); sell h h e h h h (jar¹); send (KL V²); sense ( ra²); separate (kr n¹); serow (t Ar¯); serve tea (K VM¯); h o (h) set trap (km¹); seven (Ls); sew (kr uj¹); shack (Puk); shade (dAM¯, lVM¯); shadow (h) h h h ( lVM¯); shake ( O-², t ¹); shallow (dj¯); shallow depression (KVm¯); share (p VL¯); h E h sharp ( ram¹, tat); shatter (kAk); shave (dit, K Ew¯, met); shavings (Waj¹); sheath (paj¹); (h) h o sheet (dVL¯, (k)l Vp); shelf (jVL¯); shell (kom¹, p o²); shift (hem¹, san²); shin (l¹); (h) o shoot (kap); short (toj², m², i-¯); shortcut (ban¹); shoulder (kw², la¹); shout (a h ¹, KV(w)¹); shrink (klp, rOM¯, m²); shrivel (rOM¯, so¹, t Vp); shrug (KVm¯); shut h h (h) (h) h h (k aL², K VM¯, Vp, i-¯); side (P -¯); sift (k j², kl j²); silent (dAM¯); silver (un¹); h h sinew (t a²); sing (jVj¯, sas, wor¹); singe (HVL¯); sink (klm¹, pVL¯); sip ( (r)Vp); siphon h (h) (k(l) aj¹); sister-in-law (mw¹); sit (bal¹, kr u¹, mV-², tw¹); six (Lk); skewer (tul¹); (h) h (h) skilful (jVj¯); skim (JVL¯, K Vj¯); skin (K Vk, (k)l Vp, wn²); slant (lj¹); slap (bEB); h (h) h (h) sleep (C, jVL¯, klm¹, mu¹); sleeping platform (kl am¹); sleepy ( mu¹, -(a)j¯); (h) h slender (rk); slice (P -¯, n²); slide (tVl¯, t Vl¯); slingshot (li²); slip (dOk, pVL¯); h (h) slippery (nVl¯); slit (kl j²); slither (tVl¯, el¯); slough ( li¯); slow (V¹); sluggish (h) (h) h (h) ( nV¯); slurp (Vp); small (nw², te², i-¯); smear ( mj², nu¹, nVL¹); smell h h h (nm¹, nar¹, nVm¹); smoke (K u²); smooth (jVL¯, nVl¯); smoulder (mut); snake (rul¹); h h h h snap (k(l)ak, k(l) ak, t); snatch ( t); sneak (rVl¯); sniff ( nVm¹); snore ( nar¹, h h h h ok); snort (p it); snot ( np); snow (Wur¹); soak (ap); soft (nVl¯, nVm¯, nVM¯); (h) sojourn (am¹); solar plexus (dip); solder (har¯); sole (P -¯); solicit (TV - ¯); solid h h (k aL²); song (jVj¯, la²); son-in-law (mak²); soot (kr I¹); sooty (kr I¹); sorcery (doj¹); h h h h soul (K m¹); sound (t om², r¹); sour (hi¹, t ur²); south (kl ¹); sow (wor¹); spacious h (an¹); span (k ap); sparse (wV¯); speak (paw¹, TV - ¯); spear (j²); speech (paw¹); o h h h sperm (ba¯); spew (p it); spherical ( lVm², PVM¯); spicy (t k); spin a top (lam¹); spindle (hmj²); spine (um¹); spirit (doj¹, kl ha¹, kraw¯, raw²); splay (phs); spleen (la²); h h split (p VL¯); spongy (t Vp); spotted (Par¹); sprain (WVL¯); sprawl (jaw¹, jVm¹); spread hE h (jVL¯, jVm¹, p AL¯); spring (ss, Vr¯); sprinkle (p VL¯); sprout (mVm¯, P-rw¹); squash (h) h ( VL¯); squint (hem¹); squirrel ( lj²); squishy (JVL¯); stable (kM¯); stagger (pj¯); h h stalk (kV¯); stand (d¹, pO-¯, p O-¯, WVL¯); star (ar¹); startle (p O-¯); stay (rak); h h h steadfast (kr¯); steal (ru²); stealthy (kl m¹); steam (HVL¯, K u²); steep (k am¹, kren¯); h h stick (bVL¯, m n¹, ta²); sticky ( na²); sting (ds, t ip); stink (hi¹); stir (k); (h) (h) stockade (kUl¯); stone (l², sa²); stop (P -¯, ol²); stopover (pVL¯, P -¯); stopper h h h h ( ru¯); store (k L¯, e-²); storey (dVL¯); stove (t k); straight (d-², ¹); strain h h (kl i¹); strand (jVm¹, jV¹); stranger (k al¯); stream (luj¯); stream pool (dum², li¹); h h stretch (dOk, an¹); stride (kAL¯); strike (de¹, wEl¯); string ball ( lVm²); strip ( lVm¯); h stripe ((k)ral¹); stroke (jut); strong ( rat); stubborn (rs); stuffy (HVL¯); stunted (bVL¯, h h h kl k); stupid (mol¯, ¹); sturdy (k); subdue ( mn¹); submerge (K VM¯); substitute h h h (kl E-²); succeed (dVL¯); suck (dVk, dVN¹, Vp, (r)Vp); suckle (Vp, ne²); suffer

h insomnia / night-seizure (m¹); sufficient (k M²); sugarcane (u¹); suitable (lom¹); h sulk (taw²); sulphur (kaN¯); summer (kr al¹); summon (jo¹); sun (ni¹); support (dOm²); h (h) surround (K VM¯); surroundings (jaw¹, WVL¯); survive (n²); suspend ((k)l V¯); h h swaddle (K VM¯); swallow (lm¯); swarm (PVM¯, PVr¹); sway (WVL¯); sweep (p at); h h sweet (kl m¹); swell (bw², PVM¯); swill (kr as); swim (jVm¹); swing (WVL¯)

o tail (mj²); take (la², sak); take shortcut (ban¹); tall grass area (tu¹); tame (m¹); tap h h h h ( naj¹); taper (jm¹, JVL¯); target (K VM¯); taste (taM¹); tatter (krt, kr t); tax ( a²); h E h h h h teach (JVL¯, rl¹); tear (k, kAk, krt, kr t); tears (kl i¹); tease ( aj²); teat ( mVL¯); h h h tell ( m¹); temperament (jVj¯); temporary hut (kl am¹); ten ( ra¹, sVM¯); ten thousand h o h (sV²); tend (K (r)aL¯, ², wl¹); terrace (k AM¯); territory (rm¹); testicle (tl²); tether h h h ( re¹); thick (PVr¹, s); thin (pa(L)²); thirst (HVL¯); thorn ( lI¹); thousand (sV², tul¯); h h (h) h thread (K Vl¹); three (t m¹); throat (Vr¹, rV-¯); throw (de¹, lon¹, wor¹); thump h (um²); tickle (jV²); tie (k t, tVm¯); tiger (kj¹, kl V²); tight (rk); time (hn²); times (h) h (h) (WVL¯); tiny ( i-¯); tip ( mVL¯); tire ( nV¯, -(a)j¯, aw¯, ol²); tongue (lj¹); tooth (h) (ha¹); top (m², ²); torture (rot); toss (lk); touch (kom¹, tk); trample ( VL¯); h (h) transfer (kle¯); trap (km¹, KVm¯, tA²); travel (jn², (k)l V¯); traveller (jn²); (h) h h o h traverse (kAL¯); tread ( VL¯); tree (t ²); trickle ( na², put); trivet (t u²); trouble (h) indirectly (doj¹); true (d-²); trunk (kV¯); try (taM¹); tube (dVN¹, rV-¯); turn (klp, h h h e WVL¯); tusk ( w¯); twenty (kl¹); twine ( LVl¯); twinkle (kle², lp, p a¯); twist (WVL¯); two (hns)

h h h unabashed ( l¹); unburden (TV - ¯); uncongealed (kr Il²); uncover (p O-¯); underbelly h (taj²); undercooked (naw¹); underdeveloped (eM¹); understand (l², t am²); E hE h unengaged (Ol¯); unfurl (pAL¯, p AL¯); unload ( ak); unripe (PVM¯); unspecified mass (k(l)haj¹); untie (sut); upturn (khp); urinate (j¹); urine (j¹); use (bj¹, j¯); usurp o h (san²); utilise ( m¹)

h h vacant (HV¯); vacate (HV¯); vagina ( u²); valley (KVm¯); vegetable (n², kl aj¯); vein (h) h h (h) ( rj²); village (k a¹); viscous ( na²); visit (kom¹, (k)l V¯); vociferous (KV(w)¹); voice (o²); vomit (las); vulture (mu¹)

h h wade (nVk); wag (hem¹, pr¹); wage ( ls); waist (ko², taj²); wait ( ak, a²); wake h h (h) (kr ¯, p O-¯); walk (jot, kAL¯, wak); wall (kom¹, kUl¯, P -¯); wallow (bal¹); (h) wander (WVL¯); want (ds); ward (wV¯); warm ( lm¹); warp (t¹); wash (bal¹, aj², h h h p at, p it, sl²); watch (k l¯); water (tuj²); watertight (HVL¯); wave (WVL¯); wax (b¹, (h) (h) h li¯); waylay (P -¯); weak (jom²); wear (Vr¹, wn²); weave (kr Vn¹, p n², tk); wedge h h h h h (jp); weed ((k)l w², lw¹, rAm¯); weedy ( rAm¯); weep (krp); weigh (k i¯); weight o h (aj¹); west (kl ¹); wheel (pj¯); wheeze (ar¹); white ((k)ra¹, Par¹); whittle (JVL¯); (h) wicked (sal¯); wide (jaw¹, jVL¯, kAL¯, PVr¹, wV¯); width (wV¯); wild boar ( l¹); (h) h h (h) h wilt (HVL¯); win (jw²); wind (K Vj¯, kl i¹); winter (p l¯, t¹); wipe ( nVL¹, t ar¹); h wise (B, im¹); wish (tm¯); wither (-(a)j¯); withhold (rol¹, sVM¯); witty (k l²); h h wobble (hem¹); womb ( Ul¯); woo (WVL¯); wood (t ²); word (paw¹); worry (aw¯); h h o wound ( lam¹, ma¹); wrap (un², tVm¯, WVL¯); wriggle (tVl¯); wring (sur¹); writing (laj¯)

h h yam ( ra¹); yawn ( (r)am²); year (KVm¯); yeast (l¯); yellow (¹); yoke (kl²); you (n²); young (mOj¹, mVm¯, nw², sEn¹, taj¹)

Zo (jw¹)