Cover not available
Review published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 11:1 (2021) ► pp.143–158
Book review

Nathan W. Hill. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge University Press, 2019.

Reviewed by
| CNRS-(CRLAO)- INALCO - EHESS, France
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Tibetan
    • 2.1Li Fang-Kuei’s law
    • 2.2Controversies
    • 2.3Analogy
  • 3.Chinese
  • 4.Trans-Himalayan comparison
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 April 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.20001.jac
References (68)
References
Baxter, William H. & Laurent Sagart. 2014. Old Chinese: a New Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baxter, William H. III. 1992. A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology [Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 64]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bodman, Nicolas. 1980. Proto-Chinese and Sino-Tibetan: Data towards Establishing the Nature of the Relationship. Contributions to Historical Linguistics: Issues and Materials, ed. by Frans van Coetsem & Linda R. Waugh, 34–199. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Bodt, Tim & Johann-Mattis List. 2019. Testing the Predictive Strength of the Comparative Method: An Ongoing Experiment on Unattested Words in Western Kho-Bwa Languages. Papers in Historical Phonology 41.22–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coblin, Weldon South. 1976. Notes on Tibetan Verbal Morphology. T’oung Pao 62(1/3). 45–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. A Sinologist’s Handlist of Sino-Tibetan Lexical Comparisons. Sankt Augustin: Steyler Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2002. On Certain Functions of ’A-chung In Early Tibetan Transcriptional texts. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25:2. 169–184.Google Scholar
Conrady, August. 1896. Eine indochinesische causativ-denominativ-Bildung und ihr Zusammenhang mit den Tonaccenten. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Doornenbal, Marius. 2009. A Grammar of Bantawa. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden, Leiden University.
van Driem, George. 1993. A Grammar of Dumi. Berlin and New York: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Tibeto-Burman Subgroups and Historical Grammar. Himalayan Linguistics 10:1. 31–39.Google Scholar
Fellner, Hannes A. & Nathan W. Hill. 2019a. The Differing Status of Reconstruction in Trans-Himalayan and Indo-European. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48:2. 159–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019b. Word Families, Allofams, and the Comparative Method. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48:2. 91–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gong, Hwang-cherng. 1977. Gǔ zàngwén de y jíqí xiāngguān wèntí 古藏 文的y及其相關問題 [Old Tibetan y and related problems]. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 48:2. 205–228.Google Scholar
. 1980. A Comparative Study of the Chinese, Tibetan, and Burmese Vowel Systems. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 51:3. 455–490.Google Scholar
. 1995. The System of Finals in Proto-Sino-Tibetan. The Ancestry of Chinese, ed. by William S-.-Y. Wang, 41–92. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series.Google Scholar
Gong, Xun. 2016. A Phonological History of Amdo Tibetan Rhymes. Bulletin of the School of African and Oriental Studies 79:2. 347–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Jiāróng yǔzǔ yǔyán yǔ shànggǔ hànyǔ de xíngtàixué 嘉绒语组语言与上古汉语的形态学. ed. by Haeree Park & Shaoxuan Cheng, 134–156, gǔ wénzì yǔ hànyǔ lìshǐ yīnyùnxué 古文字与汉语历史音韵学 复旦中 华文明研究专刊. Shanghai: Fudan daxue chubanshe.Google Scholar
. 2018. Le rgyalrong zbu, une langue tibéto-birmane de Chine du Sud-ouest : une étude descriptive, typologique et comparative. Doctoral dissertation, Paris, Institut national des langues et civilisations orientales.
Handel, Zev. 2019. A Brief Response to Fellner and Hill’s “Word Families, Allofams, and the Comparative Method”. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48:2. 125–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2005a. Once More on the Letter ’. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 28:2. 111–141.Google Scholar
2005b. The Verb ’bri ‘to write’ in Old Tibetan. Journal of Asian and African Studies 681. 177–182.Google Scholar
2009. Tibetan <h> as a Plain Initial and its Place in Old Tibetan phonology. Linguistics of the Tibeto Burman Area 32:1. 115–140.Google Scholar
2013. Relative Ordering of Tibetan Sound Changes Affecting Laterals. Language and Linguistics 14:1. 193–209.Google Scholar
2014a. Grammatically Conditioned Sound Change. Language and Linguistics Compass 8:6. 211–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014b. Some Tibetan Verb Forms that Violate Dempsey’s Law. Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 291. 91–101.Google Scholar
2014c. Tibetan. The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, ed. by Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer, 620–630. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2016a. A refutation of Song’s (2014) Explanation of the ’Stop Coda Problem’ in Old Chinese. International Journal of Chinese Linguistics 3:2. 270–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016b. Tibetan *-as > -os. International Journal of Diachronic Linguistics and Reconstruction 121. 163–173.Google Scholar
2019a. The derivation of the Tibetan Present Prefix g- from ḥ-. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 72:3. 325–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019b. The historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. & Johann-Mattis List. 2017. Challenges of Annotation and Analysis in Computer-Assisted Language Comparison: A Case Study on Burmish Languages. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting 3:1. 47–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendolyn. 2017. A Grammar of Kurtöp. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2004. Phonologie et morphologie du japhug (Rgyalrong). Doctoral dissertation, Paris, Université Paris VII – Denis Diderot.
. 2007. Le nom des nakṣatrāṇi en tibétain. Revue d’études tibétaines 121. 4–10.Google Scholar
. 2010. A Possible Trace of Verbal Agreement in Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 9:1. 41–49.Google Scholar
. 2013. On pre-Tibetan Semi-vowels. Bulletin of the School of African and Oriental Studies 76:2. 289–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. On Coblin’s law. Studies in Chinese and Sino-Tibetan Linguistics, ed. by Richard VanNess Simmons & Newell Ann Van Auken, 155–166. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2016. Le sino-tibétain: polysynthétique ou isolant? Faits de langues 47:1. 61–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. A reconstruction of Proto-Kiranti Verb Roots. Folia Linguistica Historica 381. 177–215.Google Scholar
. 2019. The Labial Causative in Trans-Himalayan. Journal of the South-East Asian Linguistic Society 12:1. 1–11.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Aimée Lahaussois, Boyd Michailovsky & Dhan Bahadur Rai. 2012. An Overview of Khaling Verbal Morphology. Language and Linguistics 13:6. 1095–1170.Google Scholar
Lejeune, Michel. 1987. Phonétique historique du mycénien et du grec ancien. Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1933. Certain Phonetic Influences of the Tibetan Prefixes upon the Root Initials. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 6:2. 135–157.Google Scholar
. 1959. Tibetan Glo-ba-’dring. Studia Serica Bernhard Karlgren dedicata, ed by. Søren Egerod & Else Glahn. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 55–59.Google Scholar
Lin, Youjing. 2016. Jiāróngyǔ Zhuókèjīhuà yǔfǎ biāozhù wénběn 嘉戎语卓 克基话语法标注文本 [Cogtse Rgyalrong Texts: Fully Analyzed Spontaeous Narratives with an Updated Sketch Grammar of the Language]. Beijing: Shehui Kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Mao, Zongwu. 1992. Hàn-Yáo cídiǎn (miǎnyǔ) 汉 瑶 词 典 （勉 语） [A Chinese-Mien dictionary]. Chengdu: Sichuan minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California press.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1975 [1921]. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd. 2002. Limbu-English Dictionary. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point.Google Scholar
Michaud, Alexis. 2012. Monosyllabicization: Patterns of Evolution in Asian languages. Monosyllables: from Phonology to Typology ed. by Thomas Stolz, Nicole Nau & Cornelia Stroh, 115–130. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Ratliff, Martha. 2010. Hmong-Mien language history. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent, Guillaume Jacques, Yunfan Lai, Robin J. Ryder, Valentin Thouzeau, Simon J. Greenhill & Johann-Mattis List. 2019. Dated Language Phylogenies Shed Light on the Ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116:21. 10317–10322. DOI logo. [URL]
Schiefner, Anton. 1852. Tibetischen Studien. Mélanges asiatiques tirés du Bulletin historico-philologique de l’Académie impériale des sciences de St.Pétersbourg 11. 324–394.Google Scholar
Schuessler, Axel. 2015. New Old Chinese. Diachronica 32:4. 571–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Comments on Fellner and Hill: “Word Families, Allofams, and the Comparative Method”. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48:2. 142–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shefts-Chang, Betty. 1971. The Tibetan Causative: Phonology. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 42:4. 623–765.Google Scholar
Snellgrove, David. 1967. The Nine Ways of Bon: Excerpts from gZi-brjid. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergej Anatoljevich. 1989. Реконструкция древнекитайской фонологической системы [A Reconstruction of the Old Chinese Phonological System]. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2000. Parallelisms in the Verb Morphology of Sidaba rGyalrong and Lavrung in rGyalrongic. Language and Linguistics 1:1. 161–190.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2019. A Review of Fellner and Hill’s “Word Families, Allofams, and the Comparative Method”. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48:2. 154–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Randy LaPolla (eds.). 2017. The Sino-Tibetan languages. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
VanBik, Kenneth. 2009. Proto Kuki-Chin. Berkeley, CA: STEDT Monograph.Google Scholar
Wang, Fushi & Zongwu Mao. 1995. Miáoyáoyǔ gǔyīn gòunǐ 苗瑶语古音构 拟 [A Reconstruction of proto-Miao-Yao]. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Wang, William S.-Y. 1969. Competing Changes as a Cause of Residue. Language 45:1. 9–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeisler, Bettina. 2015. Eat and drink – if you can! A Language Internal Explanation for the ‘Irregular’ Paradigm of Tibetan za, zos, zo ‘eat’. Himalayan Linguistics 14:1. 34–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Hypothetical Sound Laws and Sound Potential Meaning. Once Again on the Uncommon Tibetan Verb Paradigm za, zos, zo ‘eat’. International Journal of Diachronic Linguistics and Linguistic Reconstruction 141. 77–117.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya, Guillaume Jacques & Yunfan Lai. 2019. A Study of Cognates between Gyalrong Languages and Old Chinese. Journal of Language Relationship 7:1. 73–92.Google Scholar