南方大語系

维基百科,自由的百科全书
跳到导航 跳到搜索
南方大語系
有争议
地理分佈臺灣東南亞南亞馬達加斯加大洋洲
谱系学分类世界主要語系之一(有爭議)
分支
苗瑤語系(有爭議)
漢藏語系(有爭議)
阿伊努語(有爭議)
尼哈利語英语Nihali language(有爭議)
日琉語系(有爭議)
Austric languages.png
南方大語系分布圖

南方大語系(英語:Austric languages),又稱南方语系南方語門,或音譯為奥斯垂克諸語,是一個有爭議的構想大語系,其認為位在東亞的臺灣、非洲的馬達加斯加,以及東南亞、大洋洲的南島語系,以及位於東南亞、南亞的南亞語系、中國西南的壯侗語系彼此間有關聯,屬於一個更大的語系。在一些學者版本中,還包含了中國西南的苗瑤語系,甚至還包含東亞的漢藏語系,還有孤立語言阿伊努語尼哈利语

历史[编辑]

南方大语系的假设首先由德国传教士威廉·施密特(Wilhelm Schmidt)于1906年提出。他试图用音系学词法学词汇语义的证据证明南亚语系南岛语系属于一个南方大语系。[1][a]施密特的假设在东南亚语言专家间的接受度参差不齐,在接下来几个十年收获的关注微乎其微。[2]:697

南方大语系的研究在20世纪晚期重新受到关注,[3]臻极于La Vaughn H. Hayes的一系列论文,他给出了原始南方语词表和原始南方语音系;[4]Lawrence Reid则专注于形态证据。[5]

证据[编辑]

Reid (2005)列出原始南亚语和原始南岛语下列“可能的”同源词。[6]:150–151

词义 腐烂
原始南亚语 *qabuh *cu(q) *[su](l̩)aR *ta?al/*ti?al *mə(n)ta(q) *(qa)ma(ma) *(na)na *ɣok *pə[l̩]i
原始南岛语 *qabu *asu *SulaR *tiaN *maCa *t-ama *t-ina *ma-buRuk *beli

在形态学证据中,他比较了一些构拟的词缀:[6]:146

  • 前缀*pa-“使役”(原始南亚语、原始南岛语)
  • 中缀*-um-“施事格”(原始南亚语、原始南岛语)
  • 中缀*-in-“工具格”(原始南亚语)、“名词化”(原始南岛语)

分類[编辑]

  • 南方大語系中最廣泛使用的分法為白保羅版本:
南方大語系

苗瑶语系

南亞語系

澳台語系

南島語系

壯侗語系

得內‑傣超語系

得内-高加索语系

南方大語系

苗瑶语系

南亚语系

澳台語系

南島語系

壯侗語系

南島‑傣超語系

苗瑶语系

南島‑卡岱語系

壯侗語系(卡岱語系)

南島‑日語系

南島語系

日琉語系

分布圖[编辑]

註釋[编辑]

  1. ^ “南亚语系”和“南岛语系”其实都是施密特创造的。以前通用的名称“孟高棉”和“马来-波利尼西亚”虽然仍在使用,但适用范围比“南亚语系”和“南岛语系”小得多。

腳註[编辑]

  1. ^ Schmidt (1906).
  2. ^ Blust (2013).
  3. ^ Shorto (1976), Diffloth (1990), Diffloth (1994).
  4. ^ Hayes (1992), Hayes (1997), Hayes (1999), Hayes (2000), Hayes (2001).
  5. ^ Reid (1994), Reid (1999), Reid (2005).
  6. ^ 6.0 6.1 Reid (2005).
  7. ^ van Driem, George. Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory (PDF). Yadava, Yogendra P. (编). Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics. Linguistic Society of Nepal. 2005: 285–338 [2016-11-08]. ISBN 978-99946-57-69-8. (原始内容 (PDF)存档于2011-07-26). 
  8. ^ Alexander Vovin. Proto-Japanese beyond the accent system. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. [2017-01-16]. (原始内容存档于2018-05-11). 

参考文献[编辑]

  • Benedict, Paul K. 1976. Austro-Thai and Austroasiatic. In: Philip N. Jenner, Laurence C. Thompson, and Stanley Starosta, eds., Austroasiatic Studies, Part I, pp. 1–36. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
  • Blazhek, Vaclav. 2000. Comments on Hayes "The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants". Mother Tongue V:15-17.
  • Blevins, Juliette (2007). "A Long Lost Sister of Proto-Austronesian? Proto-Ongan, Mother of Jarawa and Onge of the Andaman Islands". Oceanic Linguistics 46 (1): 154–198.
  • Blust, Robert. 1996. Beyond the Austronesian homeland: The Austric hypothesis and its implications for archaeology. In: Prehistoric Settlement of the Pacific, ed. by Ward H.Goodenough, ISBN 978-0-87169-865-0 DIANE Publishing Co, Collingdale PA, 1996, pp. 117-137. (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 86.5. (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society).
  • Blust, Robert. 2000. Comments on Hayes, "The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants". Mother Tongue V:19-21.
  • Blust, Robert. The Austronesian Languages revised. Australian National University. 2013. ISBN 978-1-922185-07-5. hdl:1885/10191. 
  • Diffloth, Gerard F. 1989. What Happened to Austric? Mon–Khmer Studies XVI-XVII:1-9.
  • Diffloth, Gerard. 1994. The lexical evidence for Austric so far. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):309-321.
  • Fleming, Hal. 2000. LaVaughn Hayes and Robert Blust Discuss Austric. Mother Tongue V:29-32.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1992. On the Track of Austric, Part I: Introduction. Mon–Khmer Studies XXI:143-77.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1997. On the Track of Austric, Part II: Consonant Mutation in Early Austroasiatic. Mon–Khmer Studies XXVII:13-41.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1999. On the Track of Austric, Part III: Basic Vocabulary Correspondence. Mon–Khmer Studies XXIX:1-34.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants. Mother Tongue V:1-12.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Blazhek's Comments. Mother Tongue V:33-4.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Blust's Comments. Mother Tongue V:35-7.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Fleming's Comments. Mother Tongue V:39-40.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2001. On the Origin of Affricates in Austric. Mother Tongue VI:95-117.
  • Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2001. Response to Sidwell. Mother Tongue VI:123-7.
  • Reid, Lawrence A. 1994. Morphological evidence for Austric. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):323-344.
  • Reid, Lawrence A. 1996. The current state of linguistic research on the relatedness of the language families of East and Southeast Asia. In: Ian C. Glover and Peter Bellwood, editorial co-ordinators, Indo-Pacific Prehistory: The Chiang Mai Papers, Volume 2, pp . 87-91. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 15. Canberra: Australian National University.
  • Reid, Lawrence A. 1999. New linguistic evidence for the Austric hypothesis. In Selected Papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, pp. 5–30. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
  • ———. The current status of Austric: A review and evaluation of the lexical and morphosyntactic evidence. Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (编). The peopling of East Asia: putting together archaeology, linguistics and genetics. London: Routledge Curzon. 2005. hdl:10125/33009. 
  • Schmidt, Wilhelm. Die Mon–Khmer-Völker, ein Bindeglied zwischen Völkern Zentralasiens und Austronesiens ('[The Mon–Khmer Peoples, a Link between the Peoples of Central Asia and Austronesia'). Archiv für Anthropologie. 1906, 5: 59–109. 
  • Schmidt, Wilhelm. 1930. Die Beziehungen der austrischen Sprachen zum Japanischen [The Connections of the Austric Languages to Japanese]. Wien Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik 1:239-51.
  • Shorto, H. L. 1976. In Defense of Austric. Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 6:95-104.
  • Sidwell, Paul. 2001. Comments on La Vaughn H. Hayes' "On the Origin of Affricates in Austric". Mother Tongue VI:119-121.
  • Van Driem, George. 2000. Four Austric Theories. Mother Tongue V:23-27.

參見[编辑]