Yahoo Web Search

  1. About 333,000 search results
  1. The Austronesian languages ( / ˌɒstrəˈniːʒən /) are a language family widely spoken throughout Maritime Southeast Asia, Madagascar, the islands of the Pacific Ocean and Taiwan (by Taiwanese aborigines ). There are also a number of speakers in continental Asia. They are spoken by about 386 million people (4.9% of the world population ).

  2. The Austronesian languages are a language family.They were originally spoken in Southeast Asia and on islands in the Pacific Ocean.. List of Austronesian languages. Anus ...

    • Overview
    • Classification
    • Criticism

    Sino-Austronesian or Sino-Tibetan-Austronesian is a proposed language family suggested by Laurent Sagart in 1990. Using reconstructions of Old Chinese, Sagart argued that the Austronesian languages are related to the Sinitic languages phonologically, lexically and morphologically. Sagart later accepted the Sino-Tibetan languages as a valid group and extended his proposal to include the rest of Sino-Tibetan. He also placed the Tai–Kadai languages within the Austronesian family as a sister...

    Stanley Starosta expands Sagart's Sino-Austronesian tree with a "Yangzian" branch, consisting of Austroasiatic and Hmong–Mien, to form an East Asian superphylum.

    Weera Ostapirat supports the link between Austronesian and Kra–Dai, though as sister groups. However, he rejects a link to Sino-Tibetan, noting that the apparent cognates are rarely found in all branches of Kra–Dai, and almost none are in core vocabulary. Austronesian linguists Paul Jen-kuei Li and Robert Blust have criticized Sagart's comparisons, on the grounds of loose semantic matches, inconsistent correspondences, and that basic vocabulary is hardly represented. They also note that ...

    • Overview
    • Grammatical correspondences
    • Criticism

    Austronesian–Ongan is a proposed connection between the Ongan and Austronesian language families, proposed by Juliette Blevins. Ongan is a small family of two attested languages in the Andaman Islands, while Austronesian is one of the largest language families in the world, with a thousand languages spread across the Pacific. The proposed connection has been rejected by other linguists.

    Most derivational morphology and grammatical words are so short that the several resemblances between Proto-Ongan and Proto-AN may be chance. However, Ongan morphology does appear to explain an odd situation in Austronesian. Proto-Austronesian has a limited set of reconstructed vowel-initial roots, all of which are kin terms, body parts, or other readily possessed nouns. Ongan languages have inalienable possession, and inalienably possessed nouns are all vowel initial. Elsewhere, vowel-initial r

    The proposal of a genealogical connection between Austronesian and Ongan has not been well received by other linguists. Van Driem considers Blevins' evidence as "not compelling", although he leaves the possibility open that some resemblances could be the result of contact/borrowing, a position also held by Hoogervorst. Blust argues that Blevins' conclusions are not supported by her data, and that of her first 25 reconstructions, none are reproducible using the comparative method. Blust concludes

    • Southeast Asia, East Asia, the Pacific and Madagascar
    • Proposed language family
  3. en.wikipedia.org › wiki › AustronesianAustronesian - Wikipedia

    Austronesian may refer to: The Austronesian languages. The historical Austronesian peoples who carried Austronesian languages on their migrations. Topics referred to by the same term. This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Austronesian. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point ...

    • Etymology
    • Typology
    • Proto-Language
    • Internal Classification
    • Writing Systems
    • External Relations
    • Austroasiatic Migrations
    • Further Reading
    • External Links

    The name Austroasiatic comes from a combination of the Latinwords for "South" and "Asia", hence "South Asia".

    Regarding word structure, Austroasiatic languages are well known for having an iambic "sesquisyllabic" pattern, with basic nouns and verbs consisting of an initial, unstressed, reduced minor syllable followed by a stressed, full syllable. This reduction of presyllables has led to a variety among modern languages of phonological shapes of the same original Proto-Austroasiatic prefixes, such as the causative prefix, ranging from CVC syllables to consonant clusters to single consonants. As for word formation, most Austroasiatic languages have a variety of derivational prefixes, many have infixes, but suffixes are almost completely non-existent in most branches except Munda, and a few specialized exceptions in other Austroasiatic branches. The Austroasiatic languages are further characterized as having unusually large vowel inventories and employing some sort of register contrast, either between modal (normal) voice and breathy (lax) voice or between modal voice and creaky voice.Languag...

    Much work has been done on the reconstruction of Proto-Mon–Khmer in Harry L. Shorto's Mon–Khmer Comparative Dictionary. Little work has been done on the Munda languages, which are not well documented. With their demotion from a primary branch, Proto-Mon–Khmer becomes synonymous with Proto-Austroasiatic. Paul Sidwell (2005) reconstructs the consonant inventory of Proto-Mon–Khmer as follows: This is identical to earlier reconstructions except for *ʄ. *ʄ is better preserved in the Katuic languages, which Sidwell has specialized in.

    Linguists traditionally recognize two primary divisions of Austroasiatic: the Mon–Khmer languages of Southeast Asia, Northeast India and the Nicobar Islands, and the Munda languages of East and Central India and parts of Bangladesh, parts of Nepal. However, no evidence for this classification has ever been published. Each of the families that is written in boldface type below is accepted as a valid clade.[clarification needed] By contrast, the relationships betweenthese families within Austroasiatic are debated. In addition to the traditional classification, two recent proposals are given, neither of which accepts traditional "Mon–Khmer" as a valid unit. However, little of the data used for competing classifications has ever been published, and therefore cannot be evaluated by peer review. In addition, there are suggestions that additional branches of Austroasiatic might be preserved in substrata of Acehnese in Sumatra (Diffloth), the Chamic languages of Vietnam, and the Land Dayak...

    Other than Latin-based alphabets, many Austroasiatic languages are written with the Khmer, Thai, Lao, and Burmesealphabets. Vietnamese divergently had an indigenous script based on Chinese logographic writing. This has since been supplanted by the Latin alphabet in the 20th century. The following are examples of past-used alphabets or current alphabets of Austroasiatic languages. 1. Chữ Nôm 2. Khmer alphabet 3. Khom script(used for a short period in the early 20th century for indigenous languages in Laos) 4. Old Mon script 5. Mon script 6. Pahawh Hmong was once used to write Khmu, under the name "Pahawh Khmu" 7. Tai Le (Palaung, Blang) 8. Tai Tham (Blang) 9. Ol Chiki alphabet (Santalialphabet) 10. Mundari Bani (Mundarialphabet) 11. Warang Citi (Hoalphabet) 12. Sorang Sompeng alphabet (Soraalphabet)

    Austric languages

    Austroasiatic is an integral part of the controversial Austric hypothesis, which also includes the Austronesian languages, and in some proposals also the Kra–Dai languages and the Hmong–Mien languages.

    Hmong-Mien

    Several lexical resemblances are found between the Hmong-Mien and Austroasiatic language families (Ratliff 2010), some of which had earlier been proposed by Haudricourt (1951). This could imply a relation or early language contact along the Yangtze. According to Cai (et al. 2011), Hmong–Mien is at least partially related to Austroasiatic but was heavily influenced by Sino-Tibetan, especially Tibeto-Burman languages.

    Indo-Aryan languages

    It is suggested that the Austroasiatic languages have some influence on Indo-Aryan languages including Sanskrit and middle Indo-Aryan languages. Indian linguist Suniti Kumar Chatterji pointed that a specific number of substantives in languages such as Hindi, Punjabi and Bengali were borrowed from Munda languages. Additionally, French linguist Jean Przyluski suggested a similarity between the tales from the Austroasiatic realm and the Indian mythological stories of Matsyagandha (from Mahabhara...

    Mitsuru Sakitani suggests that Haplogroup O1b1, which is common in Austroasiatic people and some other ethnic groups in southern China, and haplogroup O1b2, which is common in today Japanese, Koreans and some Manchu, are the carriers of Yangtze civilization (Baiyue). Another study suggests that the haplogroup O1b1 is the major Austroasiatic paternal lineage and O1b2 the "para-Austroasiatic" lineage of the Yayoi people. A 2021 study by Tagore et al. found that proto-Austroasiatic-speakers originated from an Basal-East Asian source population, native to Mainland Southeast Asia and Northeast India, which also gave rise to other East Asian-related lineages, including Northeast Asians and Native Americans. From Mainland Southeast Asia, the Austroasiatic-speakers expanded into the Indian-subcontinent and Maritime Southeast Asia. There is evidence that continuing migration of agriculturalists from more northerly East Asia merged with "southern East Asians", forming modern day Southeast Asi...

    Sidwell, Paul; Jenny, Mathias, eds. (2021). The Languages and Linguistics of Mainland Southeast Asia (PDF). De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110558142. ISBN 978-3-11-055814-2.
    Mann, Noel, Wendy Smith and Eva Ujlakyova. 2009. Linguistic clusters of Mainland Southeast Asia: an overview of the language families.Chiang Mai: Payap University.
    Mason, Francis (1854). "The Talaing Language". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 4: 277, 279–288. JSTOR 592280.
    Sidwell, Paul (2013). "Issues in Austroasiatic Classification". Language and Linguistics Compass. 7 (8): 437–457. doi:10.1111/lnc3.12038.
  1. People also search for