Reconstruction:Proto-Sino-Tibetan/pə-rjat
Appearance
(Redirected from Reconstruction:Proto-Sino-Tibetan/b-r-gjat ~ b-g-rjat)
Proto-Sino-Tibetan
[edit]Etymology
[edit]- Proto-Sino-Tibetan: *pərjat (Jacques, 2021)
- Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *b-r-gyat = *(b-)g-ryat (Matisoff, STEDT); *b-rgyat (Benedict, 1972); *b-r-gyat (LaPolla, 1987).
Tibetan -g- is a secondary epenthetic development per Li Fang-kuei’s law.[1]
The voiceless p- in Chinese and voiced b- in Tibetan are, according to Jacques, divergent treatments of an original pre-syllable *pə-.
Hill reconstructs *e as the main vowel to account for Chinese, presuming the non-Chinese a to be a secondary development. Jacques disagrees with Hill, going back to the traditionally reconstructed *a and presuming the Chinese *e as secondary after a change *ja > *e.
Numeral
[edit]← 7 | 8 | 9 → |
---|---|---|
Cardinal: *pə-rjat |
*pə-rjat[2]
Descendants
[edit]- Chinese: 八 (OC /pˤret/ (B-S), /*preːd/ (ZS)) (see there for further descendants)
- Kamarupan
- North Assam
- Tani
- Deng
- Kuki-Chin:
- /*riat/ ("eight")
- Peripheral Chin
- Northern Chin
- Southern Plains Chin
- Central Chin
- Lushai (Mizo): /riat/
- Maraic
- "Old Kuki"
- "Naga"
- Northern Naga
- Central Naga (Ao Group)
- Ao (Mongsen): /tsʰət/
- Angami-Pochuri Group
- Zeme Group
- Tangkhulic:
- /*ʃɐt/ ("eight")
- Meithei
- Mikir
- Mru
- Bodo-Garo = Barish
- Chairel
- North Assam
- Himalayish
- Tibeto-Kanauri
- Newar
- Mahakiranti
- Kham-Magar-Chepang-Sunwar
- Kiranti
- Eastern Kiranti = Rai
- Western Kiranti
- Bahing: /ja/
- Dumi: /ri/
- Thulung: /let/, /jet/
- Tangut-Qiang
- Jingpho-Asakian
- Jingpho
- Jingpho [Kachin]: matsat (“eight”)
- Nungic
- Anong: /əʃat/
- Asakian
- Jingpho
- Tujia
- Lolo-Burmese-Naxi
- Proto-Karen: *khrɔtᴰ ~ grɔtᴰ (Luangthongkum, 2013)
- Bai
See also
[edit]- *b-r-gja (“hundred”)
References
[edit]- ^ Hill NW. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge University Press; 2019.
- ^ Jacques, Guillaume (2021) “Review of Hill (2019): The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese”, in Journal of Historical Linguistics[1], volume 11, number 1, , →ISSN, pages 143–158