DOCSLIB.ORG

Sino-Tibetan Languages 393

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sino-Tibetan Languages 393 Sino-Tibetan Languages 393 Gair J W (1998). Studies in South Asian linguistics: Sinhala Government Press. [Reprinted Sri Lanka Sahitya and other South Asian languages. Oxford: Oxford Uni- Mandalaya, Colombo: 1962.] versity Press. Karunatillake W S (1992). An introduction to spoken Sin- Gair J W & Karunatillake W S (1974). Literary Sinhala. hala. Colombo: Gunasena. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University South Asia Program. Karunatillake W S (2001). Historical phonology of Sinha- Gair J W & Karunatillake W S (1976). Literary Sinhala lese: from old Indo-Aryan to the 14th century AD. inflected forms: a synopsis with a transliteration guide to Colombo: S. Godage and Brothers. Sinhala script. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University South Asia Macdougall B G (1979). Sinhala: basic course. Program. Washington D.C.: Foreign Service Institute, Department Gair J W & Paolillo J C (1997). Sinhala (Languages of the of State. world/materials 34). Mu¨ nchen: Lincom. Matzel K & Jayawardena-Moser P (2001). Singhalesisch: Gair J W, Karunatillake W S & Paolillo J C (1987). Read- Eine Einfu¨ hrung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ings in colloquial Sinhala. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Reynolds C H B (ed.) (1970). An anthology of Sinhalese South Asia Program. literature up to 1815. London: George Allen and Unwin Geiger W (1938). A grammar of the Sinhalese language. (English translations). Colombo: Royal Asiatic Society. Reynolds C H B (ed.) (1987). An anthology of Sinhalese Godakumbura C E (1955). Sinhalese literature. Colombo: literature of the twentieth century. Woodchurch, Kent: Colombo Apothecaries Ltd. Paul Norbury/Unesco (English translations). Gunasekara A M (1891). A grammar of the Sinhalese Reynolds C H B (1995). Sinhalese: an introductory course language. Adapted for the use of English readers and (2nd edn.). London: School of Oriental and African prescribed for the Civil Service Examination. Colombo: Studies. [1st edn., 1980.] Sinhalese See: Sinhala. Sino-Tibetan Languages R J LaPolla, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia speakers of what became the rest of the TB languages ß 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. followed the river valleys down along the eastern edge of the Tibetan plateau and across into Burma, India, and Nepal). The large spread of Mandarin The Sino-Tibetan (ST) language family includes the Chinese to the northwest, southwest and northeast, Sinitic languages (what for political reasons are giving it its large population and geographic spread, known as Chinese ‘dialects’) and the 200 to 300 happened only in the last few hundred years. Tibeto-Burman (TB) languages. Geographically it In the past, and to some extent in China still today stretches from Northeast India, Burma, Bangladesh, (e.g., Ma, 2003), this family was also said to include and northern Thailand in the southeast, throughout the Tai-Kadai (Zhuang-Dong) and Hmong-Mien the Tibetan plateau to the north, across most of China (Miao-Yao) languages of southern China and South- and up to the Korean border in the northeast, and east Asia, but the resemblances found among Sinitic, down to Taiwan and Hainan Island in the southeast. Tai-Kadai, and Hmong-Mien are now understood to The family has come to be the way it is because of be a result of contact influence (these peoples origi- multiple migrations, often into areas where other nally inhabited southern China). Sino-Tibetan has the languages were spoken (LaPolla, 2001). Proto-Sino- second largest number of speakers of any language Tibetan (PST) would have been spoken in the Yellow family in the world, due largely to the over one billion River valley at least 6000 years ago. Waves of migra- Sinitic speakers; except for Burmese (see Bradley, tion followed: to the southeast, forming the Sinitic 1996), most Tibeto-Burman languages have relatively languages, and to the west and southwest, forming few speakers. the TB languages (the speakers of what became the Subgroupings within ST are still controversial, due Bodish languages migrated west into Tibet and then to differences in criteria for subgrouping, a paucity south, all the way to the Bay of Bengal, while the of reliable data, particularly on morphosyntactic 394 Sino-Tibetan Languages languages, but LaPolla (2003a), with reference to the morphological paradigms, argued that rGyalrong, the Kiranti languages (Bantawa, Athpare [Athapariya], Dumi, Khaling, Camling), Dulong-Rawang-Anong, the Kham languages, and the Western Himalayan languages (Kinnauri, Rongpo, Chaudangsi, Darmiya; also often grouped with Bodish) should be seen as Figure 1 The subgrouping ofQiangic-Rung. forming a single higher-level grouping. This grouping was given the name ‘Rung’ because of the similarity (but not identity) of this proposal to an earlier one by patterns, and the fact that the development and dis- Thurgood (1985). The Rung languages most likely tribution of these languages has been greatly influ- split off from an even higher-level grouping with the enced by migration and language contact. Some of Qiangic languages, then rGyalrong split off from the influential proposals for subgrouping within TB the group as migrations moved south, then Western are Grierson 1909, Shafer 1955, Benedict 1972, Himalayan split off from Kiranti and Rawang, and DeLancey 1987, Sun 1988, Dai, Liu & Fu 1989, Brad- then these two groups split (Figure 1; see LaPolla, ley 1997, Matisoff 2003, and Thurgood 2003 (see Hale 2003a, for the evidence). 1982 for comparison of the older proposals). There is Within Sinitic, it is generally agreed there are now general agreement on the existence of the follow- at least six major dialect groups, initially distin- ing groupings (individual languages listed are only rep- guished on the basis of the reflexes of the historically resentative; see Matisoff 1996 for the many different voiced initial consonants (Li, 1936–1937): Mandarin names used for TB languages and groupings). (northern and southwestern China), Wu (Jiangsu and Zhejiang), Xiang (Hunan), Gan (Jiangxi), Yue . Qiangic (Qiang, Pumi, Muya, Namuyi, Shixing); (Guangdong and Guangxi), and Min (Guangdong, . Lolo-Burmese, comprising the Burmish languages Fujian, Hainan Island, and Taiwan). The Hakka (Burmese, Lawngwaw [Maru], Ngo Chang group of dialects (Guangdong, Fujian, Jiangxi, [Achang], Zaiwa, Lachik [Lashi]) and the Loloish Sichuan, and Taiwan) is seen by some as part of languages (further divided into Northern: Nosu the Gan group and by others as a separate group. [Yi, Yunnan or Sichuan], Nasu, Nisu; Central: Another three groups were proposed by Li (1987): Lahu, Lisu, Nusu, Jinuo; and Southern: Hani, Bisu, the Jin group (Shanxi and Inner Mongolia), the Hui Phunoi, Mpi; group (Anhui and Zhejiang), and the Pinghua group . Bodish (Tibetan, Dzongkha, Tamang (several vari- (Guangxi), but these groupings are not universally eties), Tshangla, Takpa); accepted. Norman (1988, 2003), based on a para- . Kuki-Chin (Lushai, Asho Chin, Tiddim [Chin, digmatic set of lexical and grammatical items, Tedim], Anal, Hmar); further grouped the dialect groups into the Northern . Bodo-Koch (Bodo, Garo, Dimasa, Kachari, Koch, (Mandarin) group, the Central group (some Xiang Rabha); dialects, Wu, Gan), and the Southern group (Yue, . Konyak (Tangsa [Naga, Tangsa], Chang [Naga, Hakka, and some Xiang dialects). He left out the Chang], Konyak [Naga, Konyak], Nocte [Naga, Min group because he felt that the Min dialects lay Nocte], Wancho [Naga, Wancho]); ‘‘outside the mainstream of Chinese linguistic devel- . Tani (Apatani, Mising [Miri], Adi); and opment’’ (2003: 81). That is, they cannot be recon- . Karenic (Pwo [Karen, Pwo], Karenni, Sgaw [Karen, ciled with the reconstructed Middle Chinese system S’gaw]). (seventh century A.D.) to which the other dialect There is much controversy over the affiliations groups can be traced. of many of the languages of Northeast India and Mandarin has the largest geographic spread and whether they all form a group together (see Burling, population, and can be subdivided into as many as 1999; Matisoff, 1999), as well as the positions of eight subgroups (see Li, 1987; cf. Ho, 2003), based the Bai language of Yunnan, China, Newari and the largely on the reflexes of the stopped tone category. Of Kiranti languages of Nepal, Dulong-Rawang-Anong these, the Southwestern (Sichuan, Yunnan, Guizhou), (Rawang) of Burma and China, the extinct Tangut Central Plains, and Jianghuai (Southeastern) groups language of northwest China, and the rGyalrong lan- are generally recognized. guage of Sichuan, China, among many others. The One variety of Mandarin, Put – onghu\a, the latter two are most often said to be part of the ‘Common Language’ of China today, was developed Qiangic group, and the Kiranti languages are often in the early 20th century (and dubbed Gu|o´ yuˇ , seen as forming a higher grouping with the Bodish ‘National Language,’ at that time), taking the Sino-Tibetan Languages 395 phonology of the Beijing dialect but the lexicon and case in most languages. Most have not grammatica- grammar from a more generalized Mandarin and lized the kind of constraints on referent identification from the vernacular literature of the time. Standardi- we associate with the concept of ‘subject’ and other zation and spread of the standard through aggressive grammatical relations. If noun phrases appeared in educational programs continues today. the clause, the verb would have been clause final. In Min does not have a large spread and popu- Sinitic the clause is largely verb medial, as the verb lation, but because of the complex nature of its his-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Journal Vol. LX. No. 2. 2018
    JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY VOLUME LX No. 4 2018 THE ASIATIC SOCIETY 1 PARK STREET KOLKATA © The Asiatic Society ISSN 0368-3308 Edited and published by Dr. Satyabrata Chakrabarti General Secretary The Asiatic Society 1 Park Street Kolkata 700 016 Published in February 2019 Printed at Desktop Printers 3A, Garstin Place, 4th Floor Kolkata 700 001 Price : 400 (Complete vol. of four nos.) CONTENTS ARTICLES The East Asian Linguistic Phylum : A Reconstruction Based on Language and Genes George v an Driem ... ... 1 Situating Buddhism in Mithila Region : Presence or Absence ? Nisha Thakur ... ... 39 Another Inscribed Image Dated in the Reign of Vigrahapäla III Rajat Sanyal ... ... 63 A Scottish Watchmaker — Educationist and Bengal Renaissance Saptarshi Mallick ... ... 79 GLEANINGS FROM THE PAST Notes on Charaka Sanhitá Dr. Mahendra Lal Sircar ... ... 97 Review on Dr. Mahendra Lal Sircar’s studies on Äyurveda Anjalika Mukhopadhyay ... ... 101 BOOK REVIEW Coin Hoards of the Bengal Sultans 1205-1576 AD from West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Assam and Bangladesh by Sutapa Sinha Danish Moin ... ... 107 THE EAST ASIAN LINGUISTIC PHYLUM : A RECONSTRUCTION BASED ON LANGUAGE AND GENES GEORGE VAN DRIEM 1. Trans-Himalayan Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, Xiâng, Hokkien, Teochew, Pínghuà, Gàn, Jìn, Wú and a number of other languages and dialects together comprise the Sinitic branch of the Trans-Himalayan language family. These languages all collectively descend from a prehistorical Sinitic language, the earliest reconstructible form of which was called Archaic Chinese by Bernard Karlgren and is currently referred to in the anglophone literature as Old Chinese. Today, Sinitic linguistic diversity is under threat by the advance of Mandarin as a standard language throughout China because Mandarin is gradually taking over domains of language use that were originally conducted primarily in the local Sinitic languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Grammaticalization Processes in the Languages of South Asia
    This document is downloaded from DR‑NTU (https://dr.ntu.edu.sg) Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Grammaticalization processes in the languages of South Asia Coupe, Alexander R. 2018 Coupe, A. R. (2018). Grammaticalization processes in the languages of South Asia. In H. Narrog, & B. Heine (Eds.), Grammaticalization from a Typological Perspective (pp. 189‑218). doi:10.1093/oso/9780198795841.003.0010 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/146316 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795841.003.0010 © 2018 Alexander R. Coupe. First published 2018 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. Downloaded on 28 Sep 2021 13:23:43 SGT OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/9/2018, SPi 10 Grammaticalization processes in the languages of South Asia ALEXANDER R. COUPE . INTRODUCTION This chapter addresses some patterns of grammaticalization in a broad selection of languages of South Asia, a region of considerable cultural and linguistic diversity inhabited by approximately . billion people living in eight countries (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Maldives, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) and speaking known languages (Simons and Fennig ). The primary purpose of the chapter is to present representative examples of grammaticalization in the languages of the region—a task that also offers the opportunity to discuss correlations between the South Asian linguistic area and evidence suggestive of contact-induced grammat- icalization. With this secondary objective in mind, the chapter intentionally focuses upon processes that either target semantically equivalent lexical roots and construc- tions or replicate syntactic structures across genetically unrelated languages. The theoretical concept of ‘grammaticalization’ adopted here is consistent with descriptions of the phenomenon first proposed by Meillet (), and subsequently developed by e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociolinguistic Survey of Mpi in Thailand
    Sociolinguistic Survey of Mpi in Thailand Ramzi W. Nahhas SIL International 2007 SIL Electronic Survey Report 2007-016, August 2007 Copyright © 2007 Ramzi W. Nahhas and SIL International All rights reserved 2 Abstract Ramzi W. Nahhas, PhD Survey Unit, Department of Linguistics School of Graduate Studies Payap University/SIL International Chiang Mai, Thailand Mpi is a language spoken mainly in only two villages in Thailand, and possibly in one location in China, as well. Currently, Mpi does not have vernacular literature, and may not have sufficient language vitality to warrant the development of such literature. Since there are only two Mpi villages in Thailand, and they are surrounded by Northern Thai communities, it is reasonable to be concerned about the vitality of the Mpi language. The purposes of this study were to assess the need for vernacular literature development among the Mpi of Northern Thailand and to determine which (if any) Mpi varieties should be developed. This assessment focused on language vitality and bilingualism in Northern Thai. Additionally, lexicostatistics were used to measure lexical similarity between Mpi varieties. Acknowledgments This research was conducted under the auspices of the Payap University Linguistics Department, Chiang Mai, Thailand. The research team consisted of the author, Jenvit Suknaphasawat (SIL International), and Noel Mann (Technical Director, Survey Unit, Payap University Linguistics Department, and SIL International). The fieldwork would not have been possible without the assistance of the residents of Ban Dong (in Phrae Province) and Ban Sakoen (in Nan Province). A number of individuals gave many hours to help the researchers learn about the Mpi people and about their village, and to introduce us to others in their village.
    [Show full text]
  • )53Lt- I'\.' -- the ENGLISH and FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD 500605, INDIA
    DZONGKHA SEGMENTS AND TONES: A PHONETIC AND PHONOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION KINLEY DORJEE . I Supervisor PROFESSOR K.G. VIJA Y AKRISHNAN Department of Linguistics and Contemporary English Hyderabad Co-supervisor Dr. T. Temsunungsang The English and Foreign Languages University Shillong Campus A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics SCHOOL OF LANGUAGE SCIENCES >. )53lt- I'\.' -- THE ENGLISH AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD 500605, INDIA JULY 2011 To my mother ABSTRACT In this thesis, we make, for the first time, an acoustic investigation of supposedly unique phonemic contrasts: a four-way stop phonation contrast (voiceless, voiceless aspirated, voiced and devoiced), a three-way fricative contrast (voiceless, voiced and devoiced) and a two-way sonorant contrast (voiced and voiceless) in Dzongkha, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken in Western Bhutan. Paying special attention to the 'Devoiced' (as recorded in the literature) obstruent and the 'Voiceless' sonorants, we examine the durational and spectral characteristics, including the vowel quality (following the initial consonant types), in comparison with four other languages, viz .. Hindi. Korean (for obstruents), Mizo and Tenyidie (for sonorants). While the 'devoiced' phonation type in Dzongkha is not attested in any language in the region, we show that the devoiced type is very different from the 'breathy' phonation type, found in Hindi. However, when compared to the three-way voiceless stop phonation types (Tense, Lax and Aspirated) in Korean, we find striking similarities in the way the two stops CDevoiced' and 'Lax') employ their acoustic correlates. We extend our analysis of stops to fricatives, and analyse the three fricatives in Dzongkha as: Tense, Lax and Voiced.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of South Asian Linguistics
    Volume 8, Issue 1 July 2018 Journal of South Asian Linguistics Volume 8 Published by CSLI Publications Contents 1 Review of The Languages and Linguistics of South Asia: A Contemporary Guide 3 Farhat Jabeen 1 JSAL volume 8, issue 1 July 2018 Review of The Languages and Linguistics of South Asia: A Contemporary Guide Farhat Jabeen, University of Konstanz Received December 2018; Revised January 2019 Bibliographic Information: The Languages and Linguistics of South Asia: A Contemporary Guide. Edited by Hans Heinrich Hock and Elena Bashir. De Gruyter Mouton. 2016. 1 Introduction With its amazing linguistic diversity and the language contact situation caused by centuries of mi- gration, invasion, and cultural incorporation, South Asia offers an excellent opportunity for linguists to exercise their skill and challenge established theoretical linguistic claims. South Asian languages, with their unique array of linguistic features, have offered interesting challenges to prevalent formal linguistic theories and emphasized the need to expand their horizons and modify their theoretical assumptions. This book is the 7th volume of The World of Linguistics series edited by Hans Heinrich Hock. The current book is jointly edited by Hans Heinrich Hock and Elena Bashir, two excellent South Asian linguists with extensive experience of working in the field on a number of South Asian languages. At more than 900 pages, the volume is divided into ten sections pertaining to different linguistic levels (morphology, phonetics and phonology, syntax and semantics), grammatical traditions to study South Asian languages, sociological phenomena (contact and convergence) and sociolinguistics of South Asia, writing systems, as well as the use of computational linguistics approach to study South Asian languages in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • De Sousa Sinitic MSEA
    THE FAR SOUTHERN SINITIC LANGUAGES AS PART OF MAINLAND SOUTHEAST ASIA (DRAFT: for MPI MSEA workshop. 21st November 2012 version.) Hilário de Sousa ERC project SINOTYPE — École des hautes études en sciences sociales [email protected]; [email protected] Within the Mainland Southeast Asian (MSEA) linguistic area (e.g. Matisoff 2003; Bisang 2006; Enfield 2005, 2011), some languages are said to be in the core of the language area, while others are said to be periphery. In the core are Mon-Khmer languages like Vietnamese and Khmer, and Kra-Dai languages like Lao and Thai. The core languages generally have: – Lexical tonal and/or phonational contrasts (except that most Khmer dialects lost their phonational contrasts; languages which are primarily tonal often have five or more tonemes); – Analytic morphological profile with many sesquisyllabic or monosyllabic words; – Strong left-headedness, including prepositions and SVO word order. The Sino-Tibetan languages, like Burmese and Mandarin, are said to be periphery to the MSEA linguistic area. The periphery languages have fewer traits that are typical to MSEA. For instance, Burmese is SOV and right-headed in general, but it has some left-headed traits like post-nominal adjectives (‘stative verbs’) and numerals. Mandarin is SVO and has prepositions, but it is otherwise strongly right-headed. These two languages also have fewer lexical tones. This paper aims at discussing some of the phonological and word order typological traits amongst the Sinitic languages, and comparing them with the MSEA typological canon. While none of the Sinitic languages could be considered to be in the core of the MSEA language area, the Far Southern Sinitic languages, namely Yuè, Pínghuà, the Sinitic dialects of Hǎinán and Léizhōu, and perhaps also Hakka in Guǎngdōng (largely corresponding to Chappell (2012, in press)’s ‘Southern Zone’) are less ‘fringe’ than the other Sinitic languages from the point of view of the MSEA linguistic area.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2017 Review of Lauren Gawne Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2), 285–303 Widmer, Manuel DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.00002.wid Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-168681 Journal Article Accepted Version Originally published at: Widmer, Manuel (2017). Review of Lauren Gawne Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2), 285–303. Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area, 40(2):285-303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.00002.wid Review of Evidential systems of Tibetan languages Gawne, Lauren & Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. de Gruyter: Berlin. vi + 472 pp. ISBN 978-3-11-047374-2 Reviewed by Manuel Widmer 1 Tibetan evidentiality systems and their relevance for the typology of evidentiality The evidentiality1 systems of Tibetan languages rank among the most complex in the world. According to Tournadre & Dorje (2003: 110), the evidentiality systeM of Lhasa Tibetan (LT) distinguishes no less than four “evidential Moods”: (i) egophoric, (ii) testiMonial, (iii) inferential, and (iv) assertive. If one also takes into account the hearsay Marker, which is cOMMonly considered as an evidential category in typological survey studies (e.g. Aikhenvald 2004; Hengeveld & Dall’Aglio Hattnher 2015; inter alia), LT displays a five-fold evidential distinction. The LT systeM, however, is clearly not the Most cOMplex of its kind within the Tibetan linguistic area.
    [Show full text]
  • Day 1: Handouts (Tibet)
    Handout One: Introducing Tibet [With Country Names] First, let’s look at this world map. Find the United States. Now let’s find China! Tibet is a region within China. This is a map of Tibet’s six prefectures and its capital city, Lhasa. On the map of China below, find Tibet. What color is Tibet on this map? Did you find it? [Teacher’s Key] Handout One: Introducing Tibet [Without Country Names] First, let’s look at this world map. Find the United States. Now let’s find China! Hint: It’s light green! Tibet is a region within China. This is a map of Tibet’s six prefectures and its capital city, Lhasa. On the map of China below, find Tibet. What color is Tibet on this map? Did you find it? [Teacher’s Key] Handout Two: Quick Facts about Tibet and the Tibet Autonomous Region ★ Tibet is historically made up of three provinces of Amdo, Kham and U-Tsang. It was split up by the People’s Republic of China. The main Tibetan region now is the Tibet Autonomous Region. ★ The Tibet Autonomous Region, is a province within the People’s Republic of China. ★ Before 1950, Tibet was an independent country, but China invaded the country and took over. ★ The capital of the Tibet Autonomous Region is Lhasa. ★ The official language of the Tibet Autonomous Region is Lhasa Tibetan. ○ In schools, children are also taught Mandarin Chinese. ★ The main religion among the Tibetan people is Tibetan Buddhism. ★ In 1959, the Dalai Lama and 80,000 Tibetans fled to India for their safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Reproduction and Migrant Education: a Critical Sociolinguistic Ethnography of Burmese Students’ Learning Experiences at a Border High School in China
    Department of Linguistics Faculty of Human Sciences Social Reproduction and Migrant Education: A Critical Sociolinguistic Ethnography of Burmese Students’ Learning Experiences at a Border High School in China By Jia Li (李佳) This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2016 i Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................ viii Statement of Candidate ................................................................................................... x Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... xi List of Figures .............................................................................................................. xvi List of Tables .............................................................................................................. xvii List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ........................................................................xviii Glossary of Burmese and Chinese terms ..................................................................... xix Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Research problem ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Introducing the research context at the China-and-Myanmar border ................... 4 1.3 China’s rise and Chinese language
    [Show full text]
  • Toponymic Culture of China's Ethnic Minorities' Languages
    E/CONF.94/CRP.24 7 June 2002 English only Eighth United Nations Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names Berlin, 27 August-5 September 2002 Item 9 (c) of the provisional agenda* National standardization: treatment of names in multilingual areas Toponymic culture of China’s ethnic minorities’ languages Submitted by China** * E/CONF.94/1. ** Prepared by Wang Jitong, General-Director, China Institute of Toponymy. 02-41902 (E) *0241902* E/CONF.94/CRP.24 Toponymic Culture of China’s Ethnic Minorities’ Languages Geographical names are fossil of history and culture. Many important meanings are contained in the geographical names of China’s Ethnic Minorities’ languages. I. The number and distribution of China’s Ethnic Minorities There are 55 minorities in China have been determined now. 53 of them have their own languages, which belong to 5 language families, but the Hui and the Man use Chinese (Han language). There are 29 nationalities’ languages belong to Sino-Tibetan family, including Zang, Menba, Zhuang, Bouyei, Dai, Dong, Mulam, Shui, Maonan, Li, Yi, Lisu, Naxi, Hani, Lahu, Jino, Bai, Jingpo, Derung, Qiang, Primi, Lhoba, Nu, Aching, Miao, Yao, She, Tujia and Gelao. These nationalities distribute mainly in west and center of Southern China. There are 17 minority nationalities’ languages belong to Altaic family, including Uygul, Kazak, Uzbek, Salar, Tatar, Yugur, Kirgiz, Mongol, Tu, Dongxiang, Baoan, Daur, Xibe, Hezhen, Oroqin, Ewenki and Chaoxian. These nationalities distribute mainly in west and east of Northern China. There are 3 minority nationalities’ languages belong to South- Asian family, including Va, Benglong and Blang. These nationalities distribute mainly in Southwest China’s Yunnan Province.
    [Show full text]
  • CDC) Dataset Codebook
    The Categorically Disaggregated Conflict (CDC) Dataset Codebook (Version 1.0, 2015.07) (Presented in Bartusevičius, Henrikas (2015) Introducing the Categorically Disaggregated Conflict (CDC) dataset. Forthcoming in Conflict Management and Peace Science) The Categorically Disaggregated Conflict (CDC) Dataset provides a categorization of 331 intrastate armed conflicts recorded between 1946 and 2010 into four categories: 1. Ethnic governmental; 2. Ethnic territorial; 3. Non-ethnic governmental; 4. Non-ethnic territorial. The dataset uses the UCDP/PRIO Armed Conflict Dataset v.4-2011, 1946 – 2010 (Themnér & Wallensteen, 2011; also Gleditsch et al., 2002) as a base (and thus is an extension of the UCDP/PRIO dataset). Therefore, the dataset employs the UCDP/PRIO’s operational definition of an aggregate armed conflict: a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths (Themnér, 2011: 1). The dataset contains only internal and internationalized internal armed conflicts listed in the UCDP/PRIO dataset. Internal armed conflict ‘occurs between the government of a state and one or more internal opposition group(s) without intervention from other states’ (ibid.: 9). Internationalized internal armed conflict ‘occurs between the government of a state and one or more internal opposition group(s) with intervention from other states (secondary parties) on one or both sides’(ibid.). For full definitions and further details please consult the 1 codebook of the UCDP/PRIO dataset (ibid.) and the website of the Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University: http://www.pcr.uu.se/research/ucdp/definitions/.
    [Show full text]
  • The Survey on the Distribution of MC Fei and Xiao Initial Groups in Chinese Dialects
    IALP 2020, Kuala Lumpur, Dec 4-6, 2020 The Survey on the Distribution of MC Fei and Xiao Initial Groups in Chinese Dialects Yan Li Xiaochuan Song School of Foreign Languages, School of Foreign Languages, Shaanxi Normal University, Shaanxi Normal University Xi’an, China /Henan Agricultural University e-mail: [email protected] Xi’an/Zhengzhou, China e-mail:[email protected] Abstract — MC Fei 非 and Xiao 晓 initial group discussed in this paper includes Fei 非, Fu groups are always mixed together in the southern 敷 and Feng 奉 initials, but does not include Wei part of China. It can be divided into four sections 微, while MC Xiao 晓 initial group includes according to the distribution: the northern area, the Xiao 晓 and Xia 匣 initials. The third and fourth southwestern area, the southern area, the class of Xiao 晓 initial group have almost southeastern area. The mixing is very simple in the palatalized as [ɕ] which doesn’t mix with Fei northern area, while in Sichuan it is the most initial group. This paper mainly discusses the first extensive and complex. The southern area only and the second class of Xiao and Xia initials. The includes Hunan and Guangxi where ethnic mixing of Fei and Xiao initials is a relatively minorities gather, and the mixing is very recent phonetic change, which has no direct complicated. Ancient languages are preserved in the inheritance with the phonological system of southeastern area where there are still bilabial Qieyun. The mixing mainly occurs in the southern sounds and initial consonant [h], but the mixing is part of the mainland of China.
    [Show full text]