| Naic | |
|---|---|
| Naxish | |
| Geographic distribution | Yunnan andSichuan |
| Linguistic classification | Sino-Tibetan |
| Subdivisions | |
| Language codes | |
| Glottolog | naic1235 |
TheNaic orNaxish languages are a group ofSino-Tibetan languages that includeNaxi,Na (Mosuo),Laze (Muli Shuitian),Shixing (Xumi), andNamuyi (Namuzi). They have been variously classified as part of theLoloish or theQiangic branch of Sino-Tibetan.
The name "Naic" is derived from the endonymNa used by speakers of several of the languages.
Lama (2012) lists the following languages in hisNaxish clade, which he places in theLoloish branch.
Lama (2012)[1] lists the following sound changes fromProto-Loloish as Naxish innovations.
The Naic group (corresponding to Lama's Naxish clade) is classified asQiangic and notLoloish byGuillaume Jacques &Alexis Michaud (2011).[2]
The argument is based on the discovery of cognates withQiangic languages, that are superficially undetectable due to the high degree of phonological erosion of the Naic languages, but can be uncovered through a systematic examination of lexical correspondences. Progress in the reconstruction ofrGyalrongic languages and other languages of theQiangic branch offers an improved basis for reconstruction. For instance, it appears that Proto-Naish *-o corresponds both to Proto-Rgyalrong *-o and *-aŋ, suggesting a merger between a closed syllable and an open syllable.
Chirkova (2012)[3] confirms that "Shixing displays significant similarity with Na [i.e. Naish] languages in all its linguistic subsystems and no comparable similarity with any other local language or group of languages" (p. 154). From a detailed comparison, the author concludes that "Shixing can be hypothesized to be a Na language that has undergone considerable restructuring" (p. 157).
Lidz (2010)[4] groups the Naxi varieties as follows, but does not consider where these languages fit withinSino-Tibetan. Lidz notes that the western groups call themselves "Naxi", whereas the eastern groups call themselves "Na" — hence the parentheses. Lidz (2010) also notes that the Na (Eastern) speakers ofSichuan are officially classified as ethnic Mongols by the Chinese government.Namuyi andShixing are not addressed.
Sino-Tibetan branches | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WesternHimalayas (Himachal, Uttarakhand,Nepal,Sikkim) |
|  | |||
| EasternHimalayas (Tibet,Bhutan,Arunachal) | |||||
| Myanmar and Indo- Burmese border |
| ||||
| East andSoutheast Asia |
| ||||
| Dubious (possible isolates) (Arunachal) |
| ||||
| Proposed groupings | |||||
| Proto-languages | |||||
Italics indicates single languages that are also considered to be separate branches. | |||||