Cover not available
Review published In:
Concentric
Vol. 46:2 (2020) ► pp.299–311
Book review

Nathan W. Hill. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019. 374 pp. ISBN 978-1-107-14648-8. $98 paperback.

Reviewed by
| Kansai University,
The book under review serves as a significant contribution to the field of Trans-Himalayan linguistics. Designed as a vade mecum for readers with little linguistic background in these three languages, Nathan W. Hill’s work attempts, on the one hand, a systematic exploration of the shared history of Burmese, Tibetan and Chinese, and, on the other, a general introduction to the reader interested in obtaining an overall understanding of the state of the art of the historical phonology of these three languages. Whilst it is acknowledged that the book in question has the potential to be a solid contribution to the field, it is also felt that few minor issues can be also addressed.
Keywords: Trans-Himalayan, Burmese, Tibetan, Chinese, historical phonology, sound laws
Published online: 28 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/consl.00020.orl
References (51)
References
Baxter, William Hubbard. 1992. A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995. Ongoing research: Old Chinese version 1.1. Paper presented at the Old Chinese Seminar, Leiden University, Leiden.
Baxter, William Hubbard, and Laurent Sagart. 1998. Word formation in old Chinese. New Approaches to Chinese Word Formation: Morphology, Phonology and the Lexicon in Modern and Ancient Chinese, ed. by Jerome Packard, 35–76. New York: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Behr, Wolfgang. 1994. ‘Largo forms’ as secondary evidence for the reconstruction of Old Chinese initial consonant clusters. Paper presented at the 27th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.
. 2001. Traces of loose prefixation in Old Chinese lento forms. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference of the European Association of Chinese Linguistics (CEACL-2), Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome.
Courant, Maurice. 1903. Note sur l’existence, pour certains caractères chinois, de deux lectures distinguées par les finales k-n, t-n, p-m [Notes on the existence for some Chinese characters of two distinguished pronunciations for the finals k-n, t-n, p-m ]. Mémoires de la Société Linguistique de Paris 121:67–72.Google Scholar
Das, Sarat Chandra. 1915. An Introduction to the Grammar of the Tibetan Language. Darjeeling, India: Darjeeling Branch Press.Google Scholar
Ferrari, Alfonsa. 1958. Mkhyen Brtse’s Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet. Rome: Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.Google Scholar
Gabelentz, Georg von der. 1881. Sur la possibilité de prouver l’existence d’une affinité généalogique entre les langues dites indochinoises [On the possibility of proving the existence of a genealogical affinity between so called Indo-Chinese languages]. Atti del IV Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti Tenutosi [Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of Orientalists], 283–293. Florence, Italy: Coi Tipi dei Successori Le Monnier.Google Scholar
Gao, Heng. 1980. Shijing Jinzhu [A Modern Translation of the Book of Odes]. Shanghai, China: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Goldstein, David M. 2015. Book review of Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction . Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 78.2:413–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grube, Wilhelm. 1881. Die Sprachgeschichtliche Stellung des Chinesischen [The Historical and Linguistic Position of Chinese]. Leipzig, Germany: TO Weigel.Google Scholar
Harbsmeier, Christoph. 2016. Irrefutable conjectures. A review of William Hubbard Baxter and Laurent Sagart, Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction . Monumenta Serica: Journal of Oriental Studies 64.2:445–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hashimoto, Mantaro Joseph. 1984. Phonology of Ancient Chinese, vol. 21 (2nd edition). Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Monograph Series, A012 (MO-11). Tokyo: The Japan Print Kamiya.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2019. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ho, Dah-an. 2016. Such errors could have been avoided – Review of Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction by William Hubbard Baxter and Laurent Sagart. The Journal of Chinese Linguistics 44.1:175–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Kan. 2013. Wenzi shengyun xungu biji: Wuhan Daxue bainian mingdian [Philological, phonological and exegetical notes: Wuhan Daxue famous classics]. Shanghai, China: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Janda, Richard D., and Brian D. Joseph. 2003. On language, change, and language change – Or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, ed. by Brian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda, 3–180. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 2013. Progress in Language: With Special Reference to English. London: Routledge. (Original work published 1894)Google Scholar
Karlgren, Bernhard. 1915. Études Sur la Phonologie Chinoise [Studies on Chinese Phonology]. Archives d’études orientales, vol. I1. Leiden & Stockholm: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
. 1946. Glosses on the Taya and Sung Odes. Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 181:1–198.Google Scholar
Inaba, Shōju. 1954. Chibetto-go Koten Bunpō-gaku [Ancient Tibetan Grammar]. Kyōto: Hōzōkan.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter. 1971. Preliminaries to Linguistic Phonetics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lepsius, Carl Richard. 1861. Über die Umschrift und Lautverhältnisse einiger hinterasiatischer Sprachen, namentlich der Chinesischen und der Tibetischen [On the transcription and phonetic relationship of some of the far Asian languages, especially Chinese and Tibetan]. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, aus dem Jahre [Treatises of the Berlin Royal Academy of Sciences] 18601:449–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maspéro, Henri. 1920. Le dialecte de Tch’ang-ngan sous les T’ang [The Chang’an dialect during Tang dynasty]. Bulletin de l’Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient 20.2:1–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1935. Préfixes et dérivation en Chinois Archaïque [Prefixes and derivation in Archaic Chinese]. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique 23.5:317–327.Google Scholar
Milroy, James. 1992. Linguistic Variation and Change. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mao, Qiling. 2015. Sishu Gaicuo [Correcting Mistakes in the Four Books]. Jinan, China: Shandong Shifan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Orlandi, Giorgio (Georg). 2017. Does the Shijing contain traces of Old Chinese prefixation? Paper presented at the 30th Paris Meetings on East Asian Linguistics, Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales (INALCO), Paris.
. 2019. Yuyan chongjian yu “leixing xianshizhuyi” [Language reconstruction and typological realism]. Yuwen Yu Guoji Yanjiu 211:1–16.Google Scholar
Owen-Smith, Thomas, and Nathan Hill (eds.) 2014. Trans-Himalayan Linguistics: Historical and Descriptive Linguistics of the Himalayan Area. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ōya, Tōru. 1914. Shū Dai Ko’on Kō [A Study of Zhou Dynasty Ancient Rimes]. Tokyo: Monbusho.Google Scholar
Qian, Zongwu. 1996. Jinwén Shangshu Yuyan Yanjiu [A Study on the Language of the New Chapters of the Book of History]. Hunan, China: Yuelu Shushe.Google Scholar
Qian, Daxin. 2000. Shijia zhaiyang xinlu. Suzhou, China: Jiangsu Guji Chubanshe (Original published 1804)Google Scholar
Schuessler, Axel. 2007. ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
. 2009. Minimal Old Chinese. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. New Old Chinese. Diachronica 32.4:571–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Michael. 1991. The Sense of Change: Language as History. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. A case of distant assimilation: /str/ → /ʃtr/. American Speech 701:101–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starostin, Sergei A. 1989. Rekonstruktsiya Drevnekitaiskoi Fonologicheskoi Sistemy [A Reconstruction of the Old Chinese Phonological System]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Starostin, George. 2015. Book Reviews: William Hubbard Baxter and Laurent Sagart, Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction . Journal of Language Relationship 13.3–4:383–389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tucci, Giuseppe. 1949. Tibetan notes. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 12.3–4:477–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tung, Fan. 1937. Fan xun zuan li [A codification of fan xun ‘reverse glosses’]. Yenching Journal of Chinese Studies 221:119–174.Google Scholar
Wang, Yinzhi. 1985. Jing Zhuan Shi Ci [Explaining the Words in the Classics]. Nanjing, China: Jiangsu Guji Chubanshe. (Original work published 1798)Google Scholar
Wang, Li. 1988. Hanyu Shigao [A draft on the history of Chinese]․ In Wang Li Wenji di jiu juan [Selected Essays of Wang Li, 9th Roll]. Jinan, China. Shandong Jiaoyu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zeng, Yungan. 1945. Shengyunxue [Chinese historical phonology]. Changsha, China: Hunan Jiaoyu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhang, Taiyan. 1967. Guo Gu Lun Heng [Disquisitions on the National Heritage]. Taipei: Kwangwen Book Company. (Original work published 1908)Google Scholar
. 1982. Zhang Binglin lun xue ji [Collected essays of Zhang Binglin]. Beijing, China: Beijing Shifan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhang, Menghan, Shi Yan, Wuyun Pan, and Li Jin. 2019. Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the late Neolithic. Nature 5691:112–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhengzhang, Shangfang. 2003. Shangguyin Xi [Old Chinese Phonology]. Shanghai, China: Shanghai Jiaoyu Chubanshe.Google Scholar