Abstract
Abstract Fellner and Hill (this volume) argue that the recourse to the notion of word families has prevented scholars specializing in Sino-Tibetan comparative linguistics from working out regular sound correspondences. This paper disputes this evaluation of the state of the art in the field, and suggests that F&H’s appraisal is due to severe misunderstandings.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
