Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 40:1 (2017) ► pp.59–89

On the origin of Gamale Kham labial-palatal approximants

| Payap University
The development of the Gamale Kham labial-palatal approximants /ɥ/ and /ɥ̊/ has previously been attributed to the loss of the Proto-Kham initial *p- or the coda *-p. The vowels /i/ and /e/ which occurred in the adjacent syllable nucleus were rounded, resulting in the front rounded vowels /y/ and /ø/. Following this development, /w/ and /j/ merged to /ɥ/ in Gamale and Eastern Parbate Kham (Watters 2002; 2004; 2005). This study evaluates this theory and suggests two alternative explanations: that Proto-Kham may have had either two front rounded vowels *y and *ø, or a *ɥ phoneme. In the second case, the work refers to a possible correspondence between a Proto-Kham *ɥ and the Proto-Tibeto-Burman complex *jw.
Keywords: Tibeto-Burman, Gamale Kham, labial-palatal approximant, sound change
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Phonology
    • 2.1Overview of Gamale Kham phonology
    • 2.2Central approximants in Gamale Kham
    • 2.3Front rounded elements in other Kham varieties
  • 3.Two previous hypotheses
    • 3.1Background
    • 3.2Proto-Kham *p-
    • 3.3Proto-Kham *-p
    • 3.4A further observation
  • 4.Alternative interpretation
    • 4.1Shifting of distinctive features
    • 4.2Option A: Proto-Kham *y and *ø
    • 4.3Option B: Proto-Kham *ɥ
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 3 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.40.1.03wil
References (28)
References
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: A Conspectus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boon, Sara A. n.d. The phonology of Maikoti Kham. Ms, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu.
Bradley, David. 2002. The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. In Christopher Beckwith (Ed.), Tibeto-Burman Medieval Languages, 73–112. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Caughley, Ross C. 1982. The Syntax and Morphology of the Verb in Chepang [Pacific Linguistics Series B 84]. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
2000. Dictionary of Chepang: A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal [Pacific Linguistics 502]. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Grunow-Hårsta, Karen. 2008. A Descriptive Grammar of Two Major Magar Dialects of Nepal: Tanahu and Syangja Magar, Vol. I1. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.Google Scholar
Henderson, Eugénie J. A. 1985. Feature shuffling in Southeast Asian languages. In Suriya Ratanakul, David D. Thomas & Suwilai Premsrirat (eds), Southeast Asian Linguistic Studies Presented to André G. Haudricourt, 1–22. Bangkok: Institute of Language and Culture for Rural Development, Mahidol University.Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich. 1991. Principles of Historical Linguistics, 2nd revised and updated edition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1973. Tonogenesis in Southeast Asia. In Larry M. Hyman (ed.), Consonant Types and Tone [Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1], 71–95. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA.Google Scholar
1985. God and the Sino-Tibetan copula, with some good news concerning selected Tibeto-Burman rhymes. Journal of Asian and African Studies 291: 1–81.Google Scholar
1989. Tone, intonation, and sound symbolism in Lahu: Loading the syllable canon. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 12(2): 147–163.Google Scholar
1992. Following the marrow: Two parallel Sino-Tibetan etymologies. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 15(1): 159–177.Google Scholar
2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mazaudon, Martine. 1973. Phonologie Tamang: Etude phonologique de dialecte Tamang de Risiangku (Langue Tibéto-Birmane de Népal). Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
. 1996. An outline of the historical phonology of the dialects of Nar-Phu (Nepal). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 19(1): 103–114.Google Scholar
Michaud, A. 2012. Monosyllabicization: Patterns of evolution in Asian Languages. In Timothy Stolz, Nicole Nau & Cornelia Stroh (eds), Monosyllables: From Phonology to Typology, 115–130. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Ringe, Don & Joseph F. Eska. 2013. Historical Linguistics: Toward a Twenty-first Century Reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, Gary. n.d. Magar-English Dictionary. Ms. Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus (STEDT). <[URL]>
Sun, Jackson T-S. 1993. A Historical-comparative Study of the Tani (Mirish) Branch in Tibeto-Burman. PhD dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Hector Javkin. 1975. An acoustic explanation of a sound change: *-ap to -o, -at to -e, and *-ak to -æ. Journal of Phonetics 31: 161–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watters, David E. 2002. A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003a. Kham. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), The Sino-Tibetan languages [Routledge Language Family Series], 683–704. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2003b. Some preliminary observations on the relationship between Kham, Magar (and Chepang). Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics. La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
2004. A Dictionary of Kham: Taka Dialect. (A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal). Kathmandu: Tribhuvan University.Google Scholar
2005. An overview of Kham-Magar languages and dialects. In Yogendra Yadava, Govinda Bhattarai, Ram Raj Lohani, Balaram Prasain & Krishna Parajuli (eds), Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics, 339–374. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Google Scholar
Wilde, Christopher Pekka. 2011. Observations on the phonology of Gamāle Kham. Himalayan Linguistics 10(1): 273–290.Google Scholar
. 2016. Gamale Kham phonology revisited, with Devanagari-based orthography and lexicon. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistic Society 91: 130–199.Google Scholar
. 2017. A phonological comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang – three Kham varieties. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistic Society 10(1): 67–90.Google Scholar