南方大語系
| 南方大語系 | |
|---|---|
| 有爭議 | |
| 地理分佈 | 臺灣、東南亞、南亞、馬達加斯加、大洋洲 |
| 譜系學分類 | 世界主要語系之一（有爭議） |
| 分支 |
苗瑤語系（有爭議）
漢藏語系（有爭議）
阿伊努語（有爭議）
尼哈利語（有爭議）
日琉語系（有爭議）
|
| – | |
 南方大語系分佈圖 | |
南方大語系（英語：Austric languages），又稱南方語系、南方語門，或音譯為奧斯垂克諸語，是一個有爭議的構想大語系，其認為位在東亞的臺灣、非洲的馬達加斯加，以及東南亞、大洋洲的南島語系，以及位於東南亞、南亞的南亞語系、中國西南的壯侗語系彼此間有關聯，屬於一個更大的語系。在一些學者版本中，還包含了中國西南的苗瑤語系，甚至還包含東亞的漢藏語系，還有孤立語言阿伊努語跟尼哈利語。
歷史
[編輯]南方大語系的假設首先由德國傳教士威廉·施密特（Wilhelm Schmidt）於1906年提出。他試圖用音系學、詞法學和詞彙語義的證據證明南亞語系和南島語系屬於一個南方大語系。[1][a]施密特的假設在東南亞語言專家間的接受度參差不齊，在接下來幾個十年收穫的關注微乎其微。[2]:697
南方大語系的研究在20世紀晚期重新受到關注，[3]臻極於La Vaughn H. Hayes的一系列論文，他給出了原始南方語詞表和原始南方語音系；[4]Lawrence Reid則專注於形態證據。[5]
證據
[編輯]Reid (2005)列出原始南亞語和原始南島語下列「可能的」同源詞。[6]:150–151
| 詞義 | 灰 | 狗 | 蛇 | 腹 | 目 | 父 | 母 | 腐爛 | 買 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 原始南亞語 | *qabuh | *cu(q) | *[su](l̩)aR | *ta?al/*ti?al | *mə(n)ta(q) | *(qa)ma(ma) | *(na)na | *ɣok | *pə[l̩]i |
| 原始南島語 | *qabu | *asu | *SulaR | *tiaN | *maCa | *t-ama | *t-ina | *ma-buRuk | *beli |
- 前綴*pa-「使役」(原始南亞語、原始南島語)
- 中綴*-um-「施事格」(原始南亞語、原始南島語)
- 中綴*-in-「工具格」(原始南亞語)、「名詞化」(原始南島語)
分類
[編輯]| 南方大語系 |
| ||||||||||||||||||
- 謝爾蓋·阿納托利耶維奇·斯塔羅斯金採用了另一個分法，將南方大語系分為兩大分支，並認為南方大語系和得內-高加索語系組成更大的一個語系「得內-傣超語系」。[7]:309
| 得內‑傣超語系 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 南島‑傣超語系 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||
分佈圖
[編輯]
_02.png)
註釋
[編輯]- ^ 「南亞語系」和「南島語系」其實都是施密特創造的。以前通用的名稱「孟高棉」和「馬來-波利尼西亞」雖然仍在使用，但適用範圍比「南亞語系」和「南島語系」小得多。
腳註
[編輯]- ^ Schmidt (1906).
- ^ Blust (2013).
- ^ Shorto (1976), Diffloth (1990), Diffloth (1994).
- ^ Hayes (1992), Hayes (1997), Hayes (1999), Hayes (2000), Hayes (2001).
- ^ Reid (1994), Reid (1999), Reid (2005).
- ^ 6.0 6.1 Reid (2005).
- ^ van Driem, George. Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory (PDF). Yadava, Yogendra P. (編). Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics. Linguistic Society of Nepal. 2005: 285–338 [2016-11-08]. ISBN 978-99946-57-69-8. （原始內容 (PDF)存檔於2011-07-26）.
- ^ Alexander Vovin. Proto-Japanese beyond the accent system. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. [2017-01-16]. （原始內容存檔於2018-05-11）.
參考文獻
[編輯]- Benedict, Paul K. 1976. Austro-Thai and Austroasiatic. In: Philip N. Jenner, Laurence C. Thompson, and Stanley Starosta, eds., Austroasiatic Studies, Part I, pp. 1–36. Honolulu: University of Hawai『i Press.
- Blazhek, Vaclav. 2000. Comments on Hayes "The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants". Mother Tongue V:15-17.
- Blevins, Juliette (2007). "A Long Lost Sister of Proto-Austronesian? Proto-Ongan, Mother of Jarawa and Onge of the Andaman Islands". Oceanic Linguistics 46 (1): 154–198.
- Blust, Robert. 1996. Beyond the Austronesian homeland: The Austric hypothesis and its implications for archaeology. In: Prehistoric Settlement of the Pacific, ed. by Ward H.Goodenough, ISBN 978-0-87169-865-0 DIANE Publishing Co, Collingdale PA, 1996, pp. 117-137. (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 86.5. (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society).
- Blust, Robert. 2000. Comments on Hayes, "The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants". Mother Tongue V:19-21.
- Blust, Robert. The Austronesian Languages revised. Australian National University. 2013. ISBN 978-1-922185-07-5. hdl:1885/10191.
- Diffloth, Gerard F. 1989. What Happened to Austric? Mon–Khmer Studies XVI-XVII:1-9.
- Diffloth, Gerard. 1994. The lexical evidence for Austric so far. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):309-321.
- Fleming, Hal. 2000. LaVaughn Hayes and Robert Blust Discuss Austric. Mother Tongue V:29-32.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1992. On the Track of Austric, Part I: Introduction. Mon–Khmer Studies XXI:143-77.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1997. On the Track of Austric, Part II: Consonant Mutation in Early Austroasiatic. Mon–Khmer Studies XXVII:13-41.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 1999. On the Track of Austric, Part III: Basic Vocabulary Correspondence. Mon–Khmer Studies XXIX:1-34.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. The Austric Denti-alveolar Sibilants. Mother Tongue V:1-12.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Blazhek's Comments. Mother Tongue V:33-4.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Blust's Comments. Mother Tongue V:35-7.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2000. Response to Fleming's Comments. Mother Tongue V:39-40.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2001. On the Origin of Affricates in Austric. Mother Tongue VI:95-117.
- Hayes, La Vaughn H. 2001. Response to Sidwell. Mother Tongue VI:123-7.
- Reid, Lawrence A. 1994. Morphological evidence for Austric. Oceanic Linguistics 33(2):323-344.
- Reid, Lawrence A. 1996. The current state of linguistic research on the relatedness of the language families of East and Southeast Asia. In: Ian C. Glover and Peter Bellwood, editorial co-ordinators, Indo-Pacific Prehistory: The Chiang Mai Papers, Volume 2, pp . 87-91. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 15. Canberra: Australian National University.
- Reid, Lawrence A. 1999. New linguistic evidence for the Austric hypothesis. In Selected Papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, pp. 5–30. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
- ———. The current status of Austric: A review and evaluation of the lexical and morphosyntactic evidence. Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (編). The peopling of East Asia: putting together archaeology, linguistics and genetics. London: Routledge Curzon. 2005. hdl:10125/33009.
- Schmidt, Wilhelm. Die Mon–Khmer-Völker, ein Bindeglied zwischen Völkern Zentralasiens und Austronesiens ('[The Mon–Khmer Peoples, a Link between the Peoples of Central Asia and Austronesia'). Archiv für Anthropologie. 1906, 5: 59–109.
- Schmidt, Wilhelm. 1930. Die Beziehungen der austrischen Sprachen zum Japanischen [The Connections of the Austric Languages to Japanese]. Wien Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik 1:239-51.
- Shorto, H. L. 1976. In Defense of Austric. Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 6:95-104.
- Sidwell, Paul. 2001. Comments on La Vaughn H. Hayes' "On the Origin of Affricates in Austric". Mother Tongue VI:119-121.
- Van Driem, George. 2000. Four Austric Theories. Mother Tongue V:23-27.
