Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 41:1 (2018) ► pp.106–127

Linguistic history and historical linguistics

 | University of Bern
This invited response to a piece by LaPolla, published in issue 39/2 of LTBA, addresses both LaPolla’s misrepresentations of the history of linguistics and his flawed understanding of historical linguistics. The history of linguistic thought with regard to the Tibeto-Burman or Trans-Himalayan language family vs. the Indo-Chinese or “Sino-Tibetan” family tree model is elucidated and juxtaposed against the remarkable robustness of certain ahistorical myths and the persistence of unscientific argumentation by vocal proponents of the Sino-Tibetanist paradigm, such as LaPolla.
Keywords: Tibeto-Burman linguistics, Trans-Himalayan, historical linguistics, history of linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Rāvaṇa and Lapolla
  • 2.Julius von Klaproth and his time
  • 3.A legacy of enduring contributions
  • 4.Paradigm shift and scientific revolutions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 July 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.18005.dri
References (102)
References
Amsterdamska, Olga. 1987. Schools of Thought: The Development of Linguistics from Bopp to Saussure. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bässler, Paul. 1884. Klaproth (Martin Heinrich). In Johann Samuel Ersch und Johann Gottfried Gruber (eds.), Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste, Zweite Sektion, 361. Band, 360–361. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.Google Scholar
Bayer, Theophilus Sigefridus. 1730. Mvsevm Sinicvm, In quo Sinicae Linguae et Literaturae ratio explicatur (two1 vols.). Petropoli [St. Petersburg]: Typographia Academiae Imperatoriae.Google Scholar
Blažek, Václav, a Michal Kovář. 2013. Z historie uralistiky: pionýrské období (9. stol. – 1850). Linguistica Brunensia 61 (1–2): 273–292.Google Scholar
Blust, Robert. 2009. The Austronesian Languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Bodman, Nicholas Cleaveland. 1973. Some Chinese reflexes of Sino-Tibetan s- clusters. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 1 (3): 383–396.Google Scholar
. 1980. Proto-Chinese and Sino-Tibetan: data towards establishing the nature of the relationship. In Frans van Coetsem and Linda R. Waugh (eds.), Contributions to Historical Linguistics: Issues and Materials. 34–199. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
van Boxhorn, Marcus Zuerius. 1647a. Bediedinge van de tot noch toe onbekende Afgodinne Nehalennia, over de duſent ende ettelicke hondert Jaren onder het ſandt begraven, dan onlancx ontdeckt op het ſtrandt van VValcheren in Zeelandt. Leyden: Willem Christiaens van der Boxe.Google Scholar
. 1647b. Vraagen voorgheſtelt ende Opghedraaghen aan de Heer Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn over de Bediedinge van de tot noch toe onbekende Afgodinne Nehalennia, onlangs by Hem uytgegeven. Leyden: Willem Christiaens van der Boxe.Google Scholar
. 1647c. Antwoord van Marcus Zuerius van Boxhorn op de Vraaghen, hem voorgeſtelt over de Bediedinge van de tot noch toe onbekende Afgodinne Nehalennia, onlancx uytgegeven. In welcke de ghemeine herkomſte van der Griecken, Romeinen, ende Duytſchen Tale uyt den Scythen duydelijck beweſen, ende verſcheiden Oudheden van deſe Volckeren grondelijck ontdeckt ende verklaert. Leyden: Willem Christiaens van der Boxe.Google Scholar
. 1662 [posthumous]. V.Cl. Marci Zuerii Boxhornii Epistolæ & Poemata. Amstelodami [i.e. Amsterdam]: Ex Officinâ Caſpari Comelini.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1997. Tibeto-Burman languages and classification. In David Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman Languages of the Himalayas, Pacific Linguistics A-861, 1–71. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 2002. The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. In Christopher Beckwith (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages, 73–112. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Bryson, Megan. 2012. Mahākāla worship in the Dali kingdom (937–1253): A study and translation of the Dahei tianshen daochang yi . Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 35 (1–2): 3–69.Google Scholar
. 2017. Between China and Tibet: Mahākāla worship and esoteric Buddhism in the Dali kingdom. In Yael Bentor and Meir Shahar (eds.), Chinese and Tibetan Esoteric Buddhism, 402–428. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burnett, James, Lord Monboddo. 1774. Of the Origin and Progress of Language, Vol. I1 (Second Edition). Edinburgh: J. Balfour.Google Scholar
Campbell, Archibald. 1840. Note on the Limboos, and other Hill Tribes hitherto undescribed. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal IX (CII), Part I: 595–615.Google Scholar
Castrén, Matthias Alexander. 1850. De Affixis Personalibus Linguarum Altaicarum (Dissertatio). Helsingforsiae: Litteris Frenckelianis.Google Scholar
Cordier, Henri. 1917. Un orientaliste allemand: Jules Klaproth. Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 61 (4): 297–308.Google Scholar
Cust, Robert N. 1878. A Sketch of the Modern Languages of East India. London: Trübner and Company.Google Scholar
Dahl, Otto Christian. 1951. Malgache et maanyan: une comparaison linquistique [Avhandlinger utgitt av Instituttet, 3]. Oslo: Egede Instituttet.Google Scholar
Dann, Georg Edmund. 1958. Martin Heinrich Klaproth, ein deutscher Apotheker und Chemiker: sein Weg und seine Leistung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1977. Klaproth, Martin Heinrich. In Fritz Wagner et al. (eds.), Neue Deutsche Biographie, Vol. XI1, 707–709. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. forthcoming. The comparative method, subgrouping and the antiquity of verb agreement in Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan).
van Driem, George. 1991. Tangut verbal agreement and the patient category in Tibeto-Burman. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies LIV (3): 520–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993a. A Grammar of Dumi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993b. Language change, conjugational morphology and the Sino-Tibetan Urheimat . Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 261: 45–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. Sino-Bodic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, LX (3): 455–488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Languages of the Himalayas: An Ethnolinguistic Handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region, containing an Introduction to the Symbiotic Theory of Language (21 vols.). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
. 2002. Tibeto-Burman replaces Indo-Chinese in the 1990s: Review of a decade of scholarship. Lingua 1111: 79–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory. In Yogendra Prasada Yadava, Govinda Bhattarai, Ram Raj Lohani, Balaram Prasain and Krishna Parajuli (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics, 285–338 Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Google Scholar
. 2007. The diversity of the Tibeto-Burman language family and the linguistic ancestry of Chinese. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 1 (2): 211–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Tibeto-Burman subgroups and historical grammar. Himalayan Linguistics 10 (1): 31–39.Google Scholar
. 2014. Trans-Himalayan. In Thomas Owen-Smith and Nathan Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan Linguistics, 11–40. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2017. Converging views on Asian prehistory from different windows on the past. Man In India 97 (1): 5–16.Google Scholar
Eyriès, Jean-Baptiste Benoît. 1857. Klaproth (Jules-Henri), orientaliste célèbre. In Louis-Gabriel Michaud (ed.), Biographie universelle ancienne et moderne (nouvelle édition), Vol. 221, 1–11. Paris: Madame C. Desplaces.Google Scholar
Forbes Charles, James F. S. 1878. On Tibeto-Burman languages. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 101: 210–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von der Gabelentz, Georg. 1884. Klaproth (Heinrich Julius). In Johann Samuel Ersch und Johann Gottfried Gruber (eds.), Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste, Zweite Sektion, 361. Band, 359–360. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.Google Scholar
Handel, Zev. 2008. Sino-Tibetan: A snapshot. Language and Linguistics Compass 2/31: 422–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedin, Sven Anders. 1909. Transhimalaya: Upptäckter och äfventyr i Tibet (three1 vols.). Stockholm: Albert Bonniers Förlag.Google Scholar
. 1909. Transhimalaja: Entdeckungen und Abenteuer in Tibet (three1 vols.). Leipzig: Friedrich Arnold Brockhaus.Google Scholar
. 1909. Trans-Himalaya: Discoveries and Adventures in Tibet (two1 vols.). London: Macmillan and Company.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan Wayne. 2013. Come as Lord of the Black-Headed. In Christoph Cüppers, Robert Mayer and Michael Walter (eds.), Tibet after Empire: Culture, Society and Religion between 850–1000 (Lumbini International Research Institute Proceedings Series, Volume 4: Proceedings of the seminar held in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2011), 169–179. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute.Google Scholar
. 2015. The contribution of Tangut to Trans-Himalayan comparative linguistics. Archiv Orientální 831: 187–200.Google Scholar
. forthcoming. Word families, allofams and the comparative method.
Hodgson, Brian Houghton. 1857. Comparative vocabulary of the languages of the broken tribes of Népál. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 261: 317–371.Google Scholar
Houghton, Bernard. 1896. Outlines of Tibeto-Burman linguistic palæontology. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1896: 23–55.Google Scholar
de Houtman, Frederick. 1603. Spraeck ende woord-boeck, Inde Maleyſche ende Madagaſkarsche Talen met vele Arabiſche ende Turcſche Woorden: Inhoudende twaelf tſamenſprekinghen inde Maleyſche ende drie inde Madagaſkarſche ſpraken met alderhande woorden ende namen, gheſtelt naer ordre vanden A.B.C. alles int Nederduytſch verduyſst. Amsterdam: Jan Evertsz. Cloppenburch.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2014. Esquisse de phonologie et de morphologie historique du tangoute. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Tangut, Gyalrongic, Kiranti and the nature of person indexation in Sino-Tibetan/Trans-Himalayan. Linguistics Vanguard. ISSN (online) 2199–174X, DOI logo, May 2016.Google Scholar
. 2017. Genetic position of Chinese. In Rint Sybesma, et al. (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Chinese Language and Linguistics, Vol. II1, 297–306. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Jones, William. 1807a [1786]. The third anniversary discourse, on the Hindus, delivered 2 February, 1786. In John Shore, Lord Teignmouth (ed.), The Works of Sir William Jones, Vol. III1, 24–46. London: John Stockdale.Google Scholar
. 1807b [1792]. The ninth anniversary discourse, on the origin and families of nations, delivered 23 February, 1792. In John Shore, Lord Teignmouth (ed.), The Works of Sir William Jones, Vol. III1, 185–204. London: John Stockdale.Google Scholar
. 1807c [1793]. The tenth anniversary discourse, on Asiatick history, civil and natural, delivered 28 February, 1793. In John Shore, Lord Teignmouth (ed.), The Works of Sir William Jones, Vol. III1, 205–228. London: John Stockdale.Google Scholar
ten Kate, Lambert Hermansz. 1699. Verhandeling over de Klankkunde [manuscript formerly kept in the library of the Athenaeum Illustre on the Oudezijds Voorburgwal, which was transformed into the gemeentelijke universiteit van Amsterdam in the second half of the 19th century, currently Universiteit van Amsterdam, and the contents of which were later largely incorporated into ten Kate (1723)].Google Scholar
. 1710. Gemeenſchap tuſſchen de Gottiſche Spraeke en de Nederduytſche. Amsterdam: Jan Rieuwertsz.Google Scholar
. 1723. Aanleiding tot de Kenniſſe van het Verhevene Deel der Nederduitſche Sprake. Amsterdam: Rudolph en Gerard Wetstein.Google Scholar
Kepping, Ksenija Borisovna. 1994. The conjugation of the Tangut verb. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies LVII (2): 339–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003 [posthumously]. The black-headed and the red-faced in Tangut indigenous texts. Studia Orientalia 951: 275–298.Google Scholar
von Klaproth, Julius. 1802. Aſiatiſches Magazin (two1 vols.). Weimar: im Verlage des Induſtrie-Comptoirs.Google Scholar
. 1822. Sur la langue des indigènes de l’Île de Formose. Journal Asiatique I1: 193–202.Google Scholar
. 1823. Asia Polyglotta [the first volume includes the separate instalment « Leben des Budd‛a nach mongolischen Nachrichten » on pp. 121–144 following p. 384, and the rarer second volume contains an atlas and diagrams]. Paris: J. M. Eberhart.Google Scholar
. 1830. Réponse à quelques passages de la préface du roman chinois intitule: Hao khieou tchhouan, traduit par M. J. F. Davis. Journal Asiatique V1: 112–113.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Ernst. 1883. Ueber Herkunft und Sprache der transgangetischen Völker. Festrede zur Vorfeier des Allerhöchsten Geburts- und Namensfestes Seiner Majestät des Königs Ludwig II., gehalten in der öffentlichen Sitzung der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München am 25. Juli 1881. München: Verlag der Königlichen Bayerischen Akademie.Google Scholar
. 1889. Beiträge zur Sprachenkunde Hinterindiens (Sitzung vom 2. März 1889). Sitzungsberichte der Königlichen Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (München), Philosophisch-philologische Classe II1: 189–236.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Franz Felix Adalbert. 1845. Zur ältesten Geschichte der indogermanischen Völker. Berlin: Nauck.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas Samuel. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (second edition, enlarged). Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy John. 1992. On the dating and nature of verb agreement in Tibeto-Burman. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies LV (2): 298–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Parallel grammaticalizations in Tibeto-Burman: Evidence of Sapir’s “drift”. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 17 (1): 61–80.Google Scholar
. 2001. The role of migration and language contact in the development of the Sino-Tibetan language family. In Robert Malcolm Ward Dixon and Alexandra Yurievna Aikhenvald (eds.), Areal Diffusion and Genetic Inheritance: Case Studies in Language Change, 225–254. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2012a. Comments on methodology and evidence in Sino-Tibetan comparative linguistics. Language and Linguistics 13 (1): 117–132.Google Scholar
. 2012b. Once again on person-marking in Tibeto-Burman: A reply to DeLancey 2010. Unpublished paper presented at the 45th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 26 October 2010.
. 2013. Subgrouping in Tibeto-Burman: Can an individual-identifying standard be developed? How do we factor in the history of migrations and language contact? In Balthasar Bickel, Lenore A. Grenoble, David A. Peterson and Alan Timberlake (eds.), Language Typology and Historical Contingency, 463–474. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lepsius, Carl Richard. 1861. Über die Umschrift und Lautverhältnisse einiger hinterasiatischer Sprachen, namentlich der Chinesischen und der Tibetischen. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, aus dem Jahre 1860: 449–496.Google Scholar
Lessing, Ferdinand Diedrich, and Mattai Haltod, John Gombojab Hangin and Serge Kassatkin. 1960. Mongolian-English Dictionary. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Malte-Brun, Conrad, Pierre Lapie et Jean-Baptiste Poirson. 1810. Précis de la géographie universelle, ou description de toutes les parties du monde sur un plan nouveau, d’après les grandes divisions naturelles du globe: Collection de cartes géographiques dirigées par M. Malte-Brun, dressées par MM. Lapie et Poirson (eight1 vols.). Paris: François Buisson.Google Scholar
Malte-Brun, Conrad. 1832 [posthumous]. Précis de la géographie universelle, ou description de toutes les parties du monde sur un plan nouveau, d’après les grandes divisions naturelles du globe: Nouvelle édition, revue, corrigée, mise dans un nouvel ordre et augmentée de toutes les nouvelles découvertes par J. J. N. Huot (six1 vols.). Bruxelles: Th. Lejeune.Google Scholar
Melnick, Alison, and Christopher Bell. 2017. The Maṇi Kambum (updated 7 September 2017) <[URL]>.
Michailovsky, Boyd. 1981. Grammaire de la langue Hayu (Népal). University of California at Berkeley: Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
. 1988. La langue hayu (Collection «Sciences du Langage»). Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
Muniev, B. D. (ed.). 1977. Калмыцко-русский словарь [Kalmycko-russkij slovar’]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Russkij Jazyk.Google Scholar
Murray, Stephen O. 1980. Gatekeepers and the Chomskian revolution. Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences, XVI (1): 73–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. Theory Groups and the Study of Language in North America: A Social History. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, Friedrich Max. 1872. Über die Resultate der Sprachwissenschaft: Vorlesung gehalten in der kaiserlichen Universitæt zu Strassburg am XXIII. Mai MDCCCLXXII. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner, und London: Trübner & Co.Google Scholar
Naundorf, Gert. 1977. Klaproth, Heinrich Julius. In Fritz Wagner et al. (eds.), Neue Deutsche Biographie, Vol. XI1, 706–707. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Pictet, Adolphe. 1859, 1863. Les origines indo-européennes ou les aryas primitifs: Essai de paléontologie linguistique (première partie, seconde partie). Paris: Joël Cherbuliez.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, Gustaf John. 1935. Kalmückisches Wörterbuch. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.Google Scholar
. 1957 [posthumous]. Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft: Lautlehre [Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia, Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 104, 1]. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seura.Google Scholar
Relandus, Hadrianus [i.e Adriaan van Reeland]. 1706, 1707, 1708. Dissertationum Miscellanearum, Pars Prima, Pars Altera, Pars Tertia et Ultima. Trajecti ad Rhenum (i.e. Alphen aan den Rijn): Gulielmus Broedelet (esp. Pars Tertia et Ultima, Chapter XI “Dissertatio de linguis insularum quarundam orientalium”).Google Scholar
Ritter von Xylander, Joseph. 1835. Die Sprache der Albanesen oder Schkipetaren. Frankfurt am Main: die Andreäische Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Salmasius, Claudius. 1643. De Hellenistica commentarius, controversiam De Lingua Hellenistica decidens, & plenissimè pertractans Originem & Dialectos græcæ Linguæ. Leiden: Elseviers.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1925. Les Langues du Monde, par un groupe de linguistes sous la direction de A. MEILLET et MARCEL COHEN (Collection Linguistique publiée par la Société Linguistique de Paris, XVI; Paris, Librairie Ancienne Edouard Champion, 1924. 811 pp., 18 plates of maps). Modern Language Notes XL (6): 373–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Wilhelm. 1904. Grundzüge einer Lautlehre der Khasi-Sprache in ihren Beziehungen zu derjenigen der Mon-Khmer-Sprachen, mit einem Anhang: Die Palaung-, Wa- und Riang-Sprachen der mittleren Salwin. München: Kaiserliche Akademie.Google Scholar
von Siebold, Philipp Franz Balthazar. 1832a. Verhandeling over de afkomst der Japanners. Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen 131: 183–275.Google Scholar
. 1832b. Nippon: Archiv zur Beschreibung von Japan (four1 vols.). Leyden: ausgegeben unter dem Schutze Seiner Majestät des Königs der Niederlande bei dem Verfasser.Google Scholar
Simon, Walter. 1929. Tibetisch-chinesische Wortgleichungen, ein Versuch. Mitteilungen des Seminars für Orientalische Sprachen an der Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Berlin XXXII (1): 157–228.Google Scholar
Starostin, Sergej Anatol’evič. 1994. The reconstruction of Proto-Kiranti. Paper presented at the 27ème Congrès International sur les Langues et la Linguistique Sino-Tibétaines, Centre International d’Études Pédagogiques, Sèvres, 14 octobre 1994.
Walravens, Hartmut. 1999. Julius Klaproth (1783–1835): Leben und Werk. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. 2002. Julius Klaproth (1783–1835): Briefwechsel mit Gelehrten, großenteils aus dem Akademiearchiv in St. Petersburg. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. 2006. Julius Klaproth: His life and works with special emphasis on Japan. Japonica Humboldtiana 101: 177–191.Google Scholar
Witsen, Nicolaes. 1692. Noord en Oost Tartarye, ofte Bondigh Ontwerp van Eenige dier Landen, en Volken, zo als voormaels bekent zyn geweeſt, Beneffens Verſcheide tot noch toe onbekende, en meeſt noit voorheen beſchreve Tarterſche en nabeurige geweſten, lantſtreken, ſteden, rivieren, en plaetzen, in de Noorder en Oosterlykste Gedeelten van Asia en Europa (21 vols.). Amsterdam: François Halma.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Klöter, Henning
2024. Interwoven processes in linguistic historiography. Historiographia Linguistica DOI logo
Pons, Marie-Caroline
2021. On the origin of 2nd person prefix #tV- in Trans-Himalayan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 44:2 ► pp. 226 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.