The Influence of Non-Austroasiatic Languages on Numeral Classification in Austroasiatic

Abstract

In 1970, Jones (Classifier), speculating on origin and spread of numeral classification systems in Southeast Asia, argued Austroasiatic systems, in particular Mon-Khmer ones, were not native and, hence, were not source for this areal grammatical category. The Mon-Khmer systems, he argued, were influenced by other Southeast Asian languages, especially by Tai languages, with perhaps Chinese having a late influence on eastern Mon-Khmer languages in Southeast Asia (p. 6). Jones' relegation of Austroasiatic systems of numeral classification to category of derivative was based on several considerations, mostly structural. He argued lack of numeral classifier systems in some Mon-Khmer languages indicated their having been borrowed in languages had them, not their loss in those did not. He also pointed out word order of classifier phrase was variable among languages in Mon-Khmer, which he attributed to influence of order of phrase in languages from which Mon-Khmer borrowed. Lastly, he noted Tai and Mon-Khmer languages shared some classifiers and at least one of them, Tai classifier for animals, tua, was Tai in origin and borrowed by MonKhmer languages. All of these factors led him to the hypothesis ... use of classifiers in Mon-Khmer is not original (p. 3). At end of his article, however, Jones suggested more information was necessary to determine which language or language family is responsible for spread of classification as a grammatical system in Southeast Asia. He admitted that . . . structural studies alone may not provide definitive conclusions....