Skip to main content Accesibility Help
×
×
Home

On ‘Sino-Bodic’ and other symptoms of neosubgroupitis1

  • James A. Matisoff (a1)
Extract

The higher-order subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman has been recently up for debate. The modern era of TB/Sino-Tibetan subgrouping began with Benedict 1972 (henceforth /STC), where that great comparativist refrained from offering a Stammbaum of the conventional type, leaving several individual languages and language groups unclassified, and placing Jingpho at the centre of diversity of the whole vast TB family (see Fig. 1.) Despite several peculiarities, notably the special position accorded Karenic and the lack of information on Baic (then called ‘Minjia’) or Qiangic, this scheme showed a healthily agnostic approach.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Bauman, James. 1975. Pronouns and pronominal morphology in Tibeto-Burman.Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Baxter, Wiliam H., 1992. A handbook of old Chinese phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus (‘STC’). Contributing Editor, Matisoff, James A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bodman, Nicholas C. 1969. ‘A sampling of Chinese-Tibetan correspondences.’ Paper presented at the Second Conference on Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction,Columbia University.
Bodman, Nicholas C. 1971. ‘Some phonological correspondences between Chinese and Tibetan.’ Paper presented at the 4th ICSTLL,Indiana University,Bloomington.
Bodman, Nicholas C. 1980. ‘Proto-Chinese and Sino-Tibetan: data towards establishing the nature of the relationship.’ In van Coetsem, Frans and Waugh, Linda R. (ed.), Contributions to historical linguistics: issues and materials, 34 199. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Bradley, David. 1994. ‘The subgrouping of Proto-Tibeto-Burman.’ In Kitamura, H., Nishida, T., and Nagano, Y. (ed.), Current issues in Sino-Tibetan linguistics, 5978.
Bradley, David. 1995. ‘Grammaticalisation of extent in Mran-Ni.’ LTBA 18/1, 128.
Burling, Robbins. 1983. ‘The Sal languages.’ LTBA 7/2, 132.
Burling, Robbins. 1999. ‘On “Kamarupan”’, LTBA 22/2, 169171.
Coblin, W. South. 1986. A Sinologist's handlist of Sino-Tibetan lexical correspondences. Nettetal: Steyler Verlag.
Courant, Maurice. 1903. ‘Note sur l'existence, pour certains caractères chinois, de deux lectures, distinguées par les finales ’, Mémoires de la sociétée linguistique de Paris 12, 6772.
Driem, George (Sjors) van. 1987. A grammar of Limbu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Driem, George (Sjors) van. 1995. ‘Black Mountain conjugational morphology, Proto-Tibeto Burman morphosyntax, and the linguistic position of Chinese.’ In Nishi, Y., Matisoff, J. A. and Nagano, Y. (ed.), New horizons in Tibeto-Burman morphosyntax, 229259. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.
Driera, George (Sjors) van. 1997. ‘Sino-Bodic’ (‘ SB’), BSOAS 60/3, 455488.
Givón, Talmy. 1971. ‘Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: an archaeologist's field trip’, Chicago Linguistic Society 7, 394415.
SirGrierson, G. A. and Konow, Sten (ed.). 19031928. Linguistic survey of India, III, Parts 1–3, Tibeto-Burman Family. Reprinted 1967. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Bufan, Huang (ed.). 1992. Zang-Mian Yuzu Yuyan Cihui ‘A Tibeto-Burman Lexicon’. Beijing: Central Institute for Nationalities Press.
Karlgren, Bernhard. 1923. Analytic dictionary of Chinese and Sino-Japanese. Paris: Geuthner.
Karlgren, Bernhard. 1957. Grammata Serica Recensa (‘GSR’), BMFEA 29/1, 9120.
Lewis, Paul. 1989. Akha-English-Thai dictionary. Development and Agricultural Project for Akha (Chiang Rai). Bangkok: Darnsutha Press.
Luce, Gordon H. 1981. A comparative word-list of old Burmese, Chinese, and Tibetan. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.
Matisoff, James A. 1969. ‘Lahu and Proto-Lolo-Burmese’, Occasional papers of the Wolfenden society on Tibeto-Burman linguistics, I, 117221. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Matisoff, James A. 1972. The Loloish Tonal Split Revisited (‘TSR’). University of California, Berkeley: Center for South and Southeast Asia Studies.
Matisoff, James A. 1976. ‘Lahu causative constructions: case hierarchies and the morphology/syntax cycle in a Tibeto-Burman perspective.’ In Shibatani, Masayoshi (ed.), The grammar of causative constructions, 413442. New York: Academic Press.
Matisoff, James A. 1978. Variational semantics in Tibeto-Burman: the ‘organic’ approach to linguistic comparison (‘ VSTB’). Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues.
Matisoff, James A. 1983. ‘Translucent insights: a look at Proto-Sino-Tibetan through Gordon H. Luce's Comparative word-list’, BSOAS 46/3, 462476.
Matisoff, James A. 1985a. ‘God and the Sino-Tibetan copula, with some good news concerning selected Tibeto-Burman rhymes’, Journal of Asian and African Studies (Tokyo) 29, 181.
Matisoff, James A. 1985b. ‘Out on a limb: arm, hand, and wing in Sino-Tibetan.’ In Thurgood, Graham, Matisoff, James A., and Bradley, David (ed.), Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan area: the state of the art, 421450. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics C-87.
Matisoff, James A. 1988. The dictionary of Lahu. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Matisoff, James A. 1990. ‘On megalocomparison’, Language 66/1, 106120.
Matisoff, James A. 1991a. ‘Sino-Tibetan linguistics: present state and future prospects’, Annual Review of Anthropology 20, 469504.
Matisoff, James A. 1991b. ‘Jiburish revisited: tonal splits and heterogenesis in Burmo-Naxi-Lolo checked syllables’, Acta Orientalia 52, 91114.
Matisoff, James A. 1994a. ‘Regularity and variation in Sino-Tibetan.’ In Kitamura, H., Nishida, T. and Nagano, Y. (ed.), Current issues in Sino-Tibetan linguistics, 36–58. Osaka: Organizing Committee of ICSTLL, 26.
Matisoff, James A. 1994b. ‘Sangkong of Yunnan: secondary verb pronominalization in Southern Loloish.’ In Kitamura, H., Nishida, T., and Nagano, Y. (ed.), Current issues in Sino-Tibetian linguistics, 588–607. Osaka: Organizing Committee of ICSTLL, 26.
Matisoff, James A. 1994/1998. ‘How dull can you get? buttock and heel in Tibeto-Burman.’ In Pichard, Pierre and Rabine, Francois (ed.), Etudes birmanes en hommage àa Denise Bernot, 373–83. (Etudes Thématiques, 9.) Paris: Ecole Française d'Extrême-Orient. [Originally appeared in LTBA 17/2,. 1994, 137–51.]
Matisoff, James A. 1999a. ‘On the uselessness of glottochronology for the subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman.’ Paper presented at Symposium on Time Depth in Historical Linguistics,Cambridge University,19–22 August.
Matisoff, James A. 1999b. ‘On the interest of Zhangzhung for comparative Tibeto-Burman.’ Paper presented at Symposium on New Horizons in Bon Studies, National Museum of Ethnology,Osaka.23–27 August.
Matisoff, James A. 1999c. ‘In defense of “Kamarupan”’, LTBA 22/2, 173182.
Simon, Walter. 1929. ‘Tibetisch-chinesische Wortgleichungen: ein Versuch’, Mitteilungen des Seminars für Orientalische Sprachen an der Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Berlin 32/1, 157228.
Starostin, S. A. 1994. ‘The reconstruction of Proto-Kiranti.’Paper presented at ICSTLL 27, Sèvres.
Sun, Hongkai. 1985. ‘Peoples and languages of the Six River Valleys and their genetic classification’, [in Chinese] Minzu Xuebao 3, 99274.
Sun, Hongkai. 1990. ‘Languages of the ethnic corridor in Western Sichuan’, LTBA 13/1, 131.
Sun, Jackson Tianshin. 1993. A historical-comparative study of the Tani (Mirish) branch of Tibeto-Burman. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Thurgood, Graham. 1984. ‘The “Rung” languages: a major new Tibeto-Burman subgroup’, Proceedings of the Berkeley linguistic society 10, 338349.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies
  • ISSN: 0041-977X
  • EISSN: 1474-0699
  • URL: /core/journals/bulletin-of-the-school-of-oriental-and-african-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed