Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
…
40 pages
Toward the reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 2: Algonquian-Wakashan sound correspondences
AI
This paper describes a candidtae for a uniquely shared phonological innovation of the Tibeto-Burman languages: the merger of two Sino-Tibetan word endings reflected by Old Chinese as *-ʔ and *-k. This merger has been verified in 21 Tibeto-Burman languages, including 8 reconstructed meso-languages, chosen to represent the diversity of Tibeto-Burman. An alternative explanation is discussed and rejected on the strength of Austronesian cognates.
2019
A Storm of Words is the third volume, but nevertheless main book of the series of books A Song of Sheep and Horses. This book deals with the reconstruction of the North-West Indo-European dialect exclusively from a linguistic point of view and, as a consequence, with the reconstruction of different Proto-Indo-European stages and dialects, as well as neighbouring languages, including especially Uralic and its dialects.
2014
This dissertation presents a preliminary reconstruction of the phonology and lexicon (268 items) of Proto-Central Naga (PCN), the putative ancestor of a group of Tibeto-Burman languages spoken primarily in Nagaland, a state in northeast India: Ao, Lotha, Sangtam, and Yimchungrü. Also reconstructed in the process is the phonology and lexicon (386 items) of Proto-Ao (PAo), the intermediate ancestor of the Ao lects. Teleo-reconstructions of Proto-Tibeto-Burman (PTB) are drawn upon to examine the sound changes that took place in the development from PTB to the Central Naga languages.
Handout of talk at workshop "The precursors of Proto-Indo-European: the Indo-Hittite and Indo-Uralic hypotheses", Leiden, June 2015
2019
In this paper up to twenty-eight new loanword etymologies are described as Yup’ik borrowings into the Yukaghir languages and dialects of far northeastern Siberia, with phonological and semantic considerations for each suggestion. These findings add some new insights into the historical phonology of such ancient borrowings, and provide clear etymologies for a number of isolated Yukaghir words. The chronology of the borrowings is also considered, and various factors point at different borrowing layers continuously from very ancient times until modern days. It is argued that these Eskimo borrowings are invariably of the Yup’ik variety (instead of Inuit variety), and that Yup’ik language(s) was spoken in much earlier times around the Kolyma River where Yukaghir is currently still spoken, and then in particular closeness to the Tundra Yukaghirs. The semantic categorization of the borrowings place most as elementary phenomena, actions and perceptions, and if not actually describing a real genetic language relationship, this at least suggests very intense linguistic contacts for Yup’ik and Yukaghir under bi- or multi-lingual conditions likely with tribal marriage and where code-switching was the norm for generations. [Draft paper version]
In this paper, more Turkic borrowings into the Samoyed languages are described in phonological and semantical terms. Turkic loanword etymologies are given for several non-etymologized Proto-Samoyed (PS) roots, including PS *kürə̂-~*kür- ‘to run‘; PS *jumpə̂ ‘moss’; PS *jårə̂- ‘to cry’; PS *jär ’center, middle’; PS *kə̂j- ‘to go’, and PS *kə̂jm- ‘short’. These six borrowings add to the previously known corpus of around thirty other Turkic borrowings into PS. Local Turkic borrowings are found as Samoyed Mator kargui~xargoj ’raven’ and Karagas karhúl ’raven’, as well as Kamassian ber~bə̂ r̀ ‘smoke, dust’, and possibly Nenets pārontāj (O) ‘snowdrift’. Further, the hitherto undiscovered Wanderwort character of PS *kün ‘navel’ is comparatively discussed.
In Hot Pursuit of Language in Prehistory: Essays in the …, 2008
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
AI
The paper identifies over 30 distinct sound correspondences between Proto-Algonquian and Proto-Wakashan phonemes, including reflexes such as PAW *gilV yielding Quil. q á :ʔl and PNi *ce.
The study reveals that modern Algic languages exhibit significant phonological shifts, making cognates often unrecognizable compared to their Proto-Algonquian roots.
Challenges include the assimilation/dissimilation of glottal features across languages, complicating the identification of corresponding roots, particularly evident in the reconstruction of alternates like PAW *k'i:wŋV.
Revisions to protoforms were conducted in 2016, slightly adjusting entries previously established in Nikolaev 2015, indicating ongoing refinements in reconstructive methodology.
The research highlights that borrowed forms from Proto-Wakashan, like *tōKī for 'elk', provide critical comparative data, demonstrating interlingual influences among Northeast Asian languages.
The first part of the present study, following a general introduction, presents a classification and approximate glottochronological dating for the Algonquian-Wakashan languages, a preliminary discussion of regular sound correspondences between Proto-Wakashan, Proto-Nivkh, and Proto-Algic, and an analysis of the Algonquian-Wakashan “basic lexicon”.
Aspects Of Comparative Linguistics (Аспекты компаративистики), vol. 3, 2007
В статье суммированы результаты пятилетней работы автора над материалом койсанской семьи языков в сравнительно-историческом освещении. После краткого изложения основных проблем, связанных с койсанской реконструкцией (недоказанность существования койсанской семьи как таковой; уникальность фонологических систем современных койсанских языков; нехватка новых языковых данных и неадекватная транскрипция старых), автор приходит к выводу, что только тщательная реконструкция ряда промежуточных праязыков (северно-койсанский, южно-койсанский, центрально-койсанский и т. п.) может позволить приблизиться к окончательному ответу на вопрос о возможном родстве всех языков этой предположительной макросемьи.
The goal of this draft paper is to quickly check if a genetic relationship between Uralic and Indo-European (IE) language families is likely or not. The conclusion is that such relationship is very likely and deserves further research, because almost 50% of the most stable part of Proto-Uralic reconstructed basic lexicon has promising Indo-European correspondences. This is well above the percentages to be expected from mere chance resemblances and loans. On the other hand, the PU-PIE genetic relationship does not look exclusive at all: many other Eurasian language families share several PU-PIE isoglosses.
Sergei L Nikolaev / Сергей Львович Николаев