Cover not available
Article In:
Concentric
Vol. 51:1 (2025) ► pp.32–68

Formosan loanwords in four Atayal dialects

ORCID logo | National Changhua University of Education
Lexical borrowings in Formosan languages from Japanese and Sinitic languages are frequently discussed in linguistic literature. Borrowings between Formosan languages themselves are more difficult to disentangle. This paper presents loanwords from Formosan languages in four Atayal dialects: Matu’uwal, Matu’aw, Plngawan, and Klesan. All four dialects were found to have been in contact with their immediate neighbors. The donor languages range from distantly related Pazih and Saisiyat (for Matu’uwal), to closely related Seediq (for Plngawan), to other Atayal dialects (for Matu’aw and Klesan). Knowledge of lexical borrowings is useful when reconstructing protolanguages. It also helps with understanding the cultural history of the Atayal people and their relationships with their neighbors.
Keywords: Formosan, Atayal, language contact, historical linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Plngawan
    • 2.2Klesan
    • 2.3Matu’uwal
    • 2.4Matu’aw
  • 3.Phonological aspects
    • 3.1Phoneme inventories
      • 3.1.1Atayal
        • 3.1.1.1Consonants
        • 3.1.1.2Vowels
      • 3.1.2Seediq
      • 3.1.3Pazih
      • 3.1.4Saisiyat
    • 3.2Regular sound correspondences
  • 4.Loanwords
    • 4.1Seediq loanwords in Plngawan
    • 4.2Squliq loanwords in Klesan
    • 4.3Pazih and Saisiyat loanwords in Matu’uwal
    • 4.4Matu’uwal loanwords in Matu’aw
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (38)
References
Blust, Robert. 1999a. Notes on Pazeh phonology and morphology. Oceanic Linguistics 38.21:321–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999b. Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: Some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, 31–94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2013. The Austronesian Languages. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Blust, Robert, and Stephen Trussel. 2010. Austronesian Comparative Dictionary. Retrieved February 1, 2024, from [URL]
Chen, Christina Yin-Ling. 2011. Issues in the Phonology of Ilan Atayal. Doctoral dissertation, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Chien, Yuehchen, and Shinji Sanada. 2010. Yilan creole in Taiwan. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 25.21:350–357.Google Scholar
Chou, Wan-Yao. 2003. Chen Di “Dongfan Ji”: Shiqi shiji chu Taiwan xinan diqu de shidi diaocha baogao [Chen Di’s “Dongfan Ji”: An on-site investigation report in southwest Taiwan from the beginning of the 17th century]. National Palace Museum Monthly of Chinese Art 2411:22–45.Google Scholar
Egerod, Søren. 1980. Atayal-English Dictionary. London: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Atayal-English Dictionary (2nd edition). London: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
Ferrell, Raleigh. 1969. Taiwan Aboriginal Groups: Problems in Cultural and Linguistic Classification. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 1982. Paiwan Dictionary. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Goderich, Andre. 2020. Atayal Phonology, Reconstruction, and Subgrouping. Doctoral dissertation, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
. 2021. Taokas-10 revisited: Taokas or Atayal? Oceanic Linguistics 60.21:447–473. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hetay Payan. 2018. Encyclopedia of Atayal Culture. Taipei: Hetay Payan.Google Scholar
Huang, Hui-chuan J. 2006. Squliq Atayal syllable onset: Simple or complex? Streams Converging into an Ocean: Festschrift in Honor of Professor Paul Jen-Kuei Li on His 70th Birthday, ed. by Henry Yungli Chang, Lillian M. Huang and Dah-an Ho, 489–505. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
2015a. The phonemic status of /z/ in Squliq Atayal revisited. Capturing Phonological Shades within and across Languages, ed. by Yuchau E. Hsiao and Lian-Hee Wee, 243–265. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
2015b. Syllable types in Bunun, Saisiyat, and Atayal. New Advances in Formosan Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun, Stacy F. Teng and Joy J. Wu, 47–74. Canberra: Asia-Pacific Linguistics, Australian National University.Google Scholar
2018. The nature of pretonic weak vowels in Squliq Atayal. Oceanic Linguistics 57.21:265–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1978. A comparative vocabulary of Saisiyat dialects. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 49.21:133–199.Google Scholar
. 1980. The phonological rules of Atayal dialects. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 51.21:349–405.Google Scholar
. 1981. Reconstruction of Proto-Atayalic phonology. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 52.21:235–301.Google Scholar
. 1982a. Male and female forms of speech in the Atayalic group. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 53.21:265–304.Google Scholar
. 1982b. Atayalic final voiced stops. Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Vol.2: Tracking the Travellers, ed. by Amran Halim, Lois Carrington and Stephen Wurm, 171–185. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics Press.Google Scholar
. 1983. Types of lexical derivation of men’s speech in Mayrinax. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 54.31:1–18.Google Scholar
. 1985. Linguistic criteria for classifying the Atayalic dialect groups. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 56.41:699–718.Google Scholar
. 1991. Vowel deletion and vowel assimilation in Sediq. Currents in Pacific Linguistics: Papers on Austronesian Languages and Ethnolinguistics in Honour of George W. Grace, ed. by Robert Blust, 163–169. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics Press.Google Scholar
Li, Paul Jen-kuei, and Shigeru Tsuchida. 2001. Pazih Dictionary. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Mabuchi, Tōichi. 1954. Migration and distribution of the Formosan native tribes (Part 1). Japanese Society of Cultural Anthropology 18.1–21:123–154.Google Scholar
Ochiai, Izumi. 2019. Fossilized person marker in Atayal. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistic Society (SEALS-29), Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo.
Rau, Der-Hwa Victoria. 2004. Lexical similarity, sound change and intelligibility of Atayalic dialects. Papers on Austronesian Subgrouping and Dialectology, ed. by John Bowden and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, 37–96. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics Press.Google Scholar
Shibata, Kye. 2020. A Reconstruction of Proto-Bunun Phonology and Lexicon. MA thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Sung, Li-May. 2018. An Introduction to Seediq Grammar (2nd edition). New Taipei City: Council of Indigenous Peoples.Google Scholar
Tashiro, Antei. 1896. Taitou Shokuminchi Yosatsu Junkai Nisshi [Diaries from Patrolling the Taitung Colony]. Retrieved July 28, 2023, from [URL]
Tsuchida, Shigeru. 1982. A Comparative Vocabulary of Austronesian Languages of Sinicized Ethnic Groups in Taiwan Part I: West Taiwan. Tokyo: University of Tokyo.Google Scholar
Tsukida, Naomi. 2005. Seediq. The Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. by Alexander Adelaar and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, 291–325. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wu, Wendy Ko-shin. 2014. Language Contact and Lexical Borrowings in Atayal. MA thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.
Yeh, Marie Meili. 2018. An Introduction to Saisiyat Grammar (2nd edition). New Taipei City: Council of Indigenous Peoples.Google Scholar
Zeitoun, Elizabeth, and Chen-huei Wu. 2005. Saisiyat reduplication revisited. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 31.21:31–56.Google Scholar