Is Puyuma a Primary Branch of Austronesian? A Reply to Sagart Author(s): Stacy F. Teng and Malcolm Ross Source: Oceanic Linguistics, Vol. 49, No. 2 (DECEMBER 2010), pp. 543-558 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40983978 Accessed: 16-03-2016 02:41 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected]. University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oceanic Linguistics. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 140.109.150.53 on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 02:41:41 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Squib Is Puyuma a Primary Branch of Austronesian? A Reply to Sagart Stacy F. Teng and Malcolm Ross ACADEMIA SINICA AND AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Ross (2009) proposes the Nuclear Austronesian hypothesis, according to which the Formosan languages Puyuma, Rukai, and Tsou are each probably a primary branch of Austronesian and all Austronesian languages other than these three belong to a single, Nuclear Austronesian, branch defined by the nominalization-to-verb innovation originally proposed by Starosta, Pawley, and Reid (1981, 1982) for Proto-Austronesian itself.