Abstract
*mbl-/*mbr- (Ratliff 2010) and *m.l(ɣ)-/*m.r(ɣ)- (Ostapirat 2016) have been proposed as reconstructions for correspondence sets that include NCL-, CL-, N-, and C- onsets across the Hmong-Mien family. Ostapirat assumes that the stop arose by a regular rule of epenthesis in the protolanguage. I examine the arguments for these two reconstructions and conclude that epenthesis in an onset is not without cross-linguistic support, but it is not the better analysis in this case. The arguments against a regular epenthesis rule for Hmong-Mien are based primarily on laryngeal contrasts in stops occurring in this position and the relationship of NCL- onsets to Proto-Hmong-Mien prenasalized stops. Secondary arguments involve exceptions to an epenthesis rule, and a reconsideration of the loanword evidence.
Highlights
*mbl-/*mbr- (Ratliff 2010) and *m.l(ɣ)-/*m.r(ɣ)- (Ostapirat 2016) have been proposed as reconstructions for correspondence sets that include NCL, CL, N, and C- onsets across the Hmong-Mien family
His proposal is supported by evidence from Chinese loanwords that fall into this correspondence set: most clearly, the word for ‘tongue’ (ProtoHM3 *mblet; Old Chinese 舌 *mə.lat > Mandarin shé), and more controversially, as will be discussed in section 4.4.1 below, the word for ‘rice’ (Proto-HM *mbleu ‘rice plant; unhusked rice’; Old Chinese 稻 *[l]ʕuʔ ‘rice; paddy’ > Mandarin dào)
The purpose of this paper is to examine the arguments for these two reconstructions, a matter that will concern Asianists, and to address the likelihood of a regular rule of epenthesis in an onset, a matter that may be of interest to the larger community of historical linguists
Summary
*mbl-/*mbr- (Ratliff 2010) and *m.l(ɣ)-/*m.r(ɣ)- (Ostapirat 2016) have been proposed as reconstructions for correspondence sets that include NCL-, CL-, N-, and C- onsets across the Hmong-Mien family, as exemplified by words with medial -l- in the following table (Chen 2013).. Ostapirat’s reconstruction of *m.l(ɣ)- and *m.r(ɣ)- assumes that the stop arose by a regular rule of epenthesis in the protolanguage.. His proposal is supported by evidence from Chinese loanwords that fall into this correspondence set: most clearly, the word for ‘tongue’ (ProtoHM3 *mblet; Old Chinese 舌 *mə.lat > Mandarin shé), and more controversially, as will be discussed in section 4.4.1 below, the word for ‘rice’ (Proto-HM *mbleu ‘rice plant; unhusked rice’; Old Chinese 稻 *[l]ʕuʔ ‘rice; paddy’ > Mandarin dào). Correspondence sets with NCL- reflexes at other places of articulation are not addressed in Ostapirat’s 2016 paper, I assume that he would treat all such correspondences the same way. The purpose of this paper is to examine the arguments for these two reconstructions, a matter that will concern Asianists, and to address the likelihood of a regular rule of epenthesis in an onset, a matter that may be of interest to the larger community of historical linguists. Secondary arguments involve exceptions to an epenthesis rule, and a reconsideration of the loanword evidence
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
