Abstract
The article has an attempt to prove the genetic level of relationship between the Korean *mōi(h), *mòró “1) mountain; 2) forest” and Japanese *mǝ́rí “forest” that reach the Altaic *mōr[u] “tree, forest”. It is based on the comparison of the genetic matches of the Korean and Japanese languages, proposed by Starostin in The Global Lexicostatistical Database “Babel Tower”. The three versions of the degree of affinity between these languages are provided: genetic (according to Kyzlasov) and universal (according to Burykin), as well as its absence (according to Vynogradov). A historical note on the Korean-Japanese linguistic relations with the assumption of the areal contacts has been presented.Although the reconstruction of the Altaic took place based on the reconstructed etymons from different language groups: 1) Mongolian *mo-du (< *mor-du) “tree”; 2) Tungus Manchu *mō “tree”, the article focuses on 3) Korean *mōi(h), *mòró “1) mountain; 2) forest” and Japanese *mǝ́rí “forest”.In the process of the study, an attempt was made to prove the genetic relationship between the Korean and Japanese languages based on the phonomorphological processes that appeared to be common to these languages: 1) the law of prosody as a doctrine of emphasis in the Altaic languages, where the presence of low and high tones, as well as musical accent is observed; 2) the law of articulation; 3) the law of the morphemic structure of words, the effect of which is to fix the law of composition for the Korean and Japanese languages. In this case, the actions of certain laws are typical only for the Korean language: 1) the law of palatalization of the sonorat phoneme /m/, which hardness / softness becomes soft /m'/ in the Modern Korean language; 2) the law of articulation while pronouncing the palatalized consonants; 3) the law of harmony of vowels; 4) the law of prosody, in particular the presence of a long tone and force accent; the Japanese language: 1) the law of articulation, while pronouncing the velar consonants; 2) the law of the morphemic structure of words, in particular the law of the mora as a special unit of the Japanese language, which is absent in the composite languages, as well as the law of open composition.The comparison of the semantic structure of genetic matches has shown that the meaning of “forest” is common to the Korean *mōi(h), *mòró “1) mountain; 2) forest” and Japanese *mǝ́rí “forest” that reach the Altaic *mōr[u] “tree, forest”. Its choice is associated with the archeological culture of the Huns on the system of homebuilding and heating.
Highlights
The formation and development of Altaic Studies (Illich-Svitych (1963), Ramstedt (1957), Poppe (1960), Tsintsius (1949), Shcherbak (1970) et al.) continues to be at the center of attention of many scholars (Burykin (2014), Kizlasov (2008) et al.)
In the process of the study, an attempt was made to prove the genetic relationship between the Korean and Japanese languages based on the phonomorphological processes that appeared to be common to these languages: 1) the law of prosody as a doctrine of emphasis in the Altaic languages, where the presence of low and high tones, as well as musical accent is observed; 2) the law of articulation; 3) the law of the morphemic structure of words, the effect of which is to fix the law of composition for the Korean and Japanese languages
The actions of certain laws are typical only for the Korean language: 1) the law of palatalization of the sonorat phoneme /m/, which hardness / softness becomes soft /m'/ in the Modern Korean language; 2) the law of articulation while pronouncing the palatalized consonants; 3) the law of harmony of vowels; 4) the law of prosody, in particular the presence of a long tone and force accent; the Japanese language: 1) the law of articulation, while pronouncing the velar consonants; 2) the law of the morphemic structure of words, in particular the law of the mora as a special unit of the Japanese language, which is absent in the composite languages, as well as the law of open composition
Summary
The formation and development of Altaic Studies (Illich-Svitych (1963), Ramstedt (1957), Poppe (1960), Tsintsius (1949), Shcherbak (1970) et al.) continues to be at the center of attention of many scholars (Burykin (2014), Kizlasov (2008) et al.). The second version belongs to Burykin (2014), who notes that the Altaic hypothesis / theory “is little known to the general public of linguists of different generations”. This situation did not even change the significant successe that had been achieved by the Moscow Altaic School in the 90’s of the XIX century in the monograph by Starostin “The Altai Problem and the Origins of the Japanese Language” (Starostin, 1991), in Dybo’s work “Semantic reconstruction in Altai etymology” (Dybo, 1995), in the publication of the Etymological Dictionary of Altaic Languages (Starostin, Dybo, Mudrak, 2003). The problems, associated with the history of comparative-historical study of the Altaic languages, are not so much in the specifics of the material, but in explaining some special evolution of ideas about the origin of the Turkic, Mongolian, as well as TungusManchu languages, etc
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Scientific Journal of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Series 9. Current Trends in Language Development
Disclaimer: 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.