fbpx
Wikipedia

Classification of the Japonic languages

The classification of the Japonic languages and their external relations is unclear. Linguists traditionally consider the Japonic languages to belong to an independent family; indeed, until the classification of Ryukyuan as separate languages within a Japonic family rather than as dialects of Japanese, Japanese was considered a language isolate.

Among more distant connections, the possibility of a genetic relationship to languages like Austronesian and or Kra–Dai, are discussed. A relation between Japonic and Koreanic is also considered plausible by some linguists, while others reject this idea.[1][2] Independent of the question of a Japonic–Koreanic connection, both the Japonic and Koreanic languages are sometimes included in the now largely discredited Altaic family.[3][4][5][6]

Primary language family Edit

The currently most supported view is that the Japonic languages (sometimes also "Japanic") are their own primary language family, consisting of Japanese and the Ryukyuan languages. The Hachijō language is sometimes classified as a third branch of the Japonic language family, but it is otherwise seen to be a very divergent dialect of Eastern Japanese.[7][8]

It has been suggested that the linguistic homeland of Japonic may be located somewhere in southern, south-eastern, or eastern China prior to a hypothetical migration of proto-Japanese to the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago.[9][10][11][12] Miyamoto suggests a homeland further north, around modern day Liaoning.[13] Koreanic speakers, then established in Manchuria, expanded southward to the Korean peninsula, displacing Japonic speakers that had been living there and causing the Yayoi migrations into Japan.[2][14][15][16]

Vovin suggests that Japonic languages were spoken in parts of Korea, especially southern Korea, and were then replaced and assimilated by proto-Korean speakers.[2] Similarly, Whitman (2012) suggests that Japonic is not related to Korean but that Japonic was present on the Korean peninsula during the Mumun pottery period (Yayoi people). According to him, Japonic arrived in the Korean peninsula around 1500 BC and was brought to the Japanese archipelago by the Yayoi at around 950 BC. In this scenario, the language family associated with both Mumun and Yayoi culture is Japonic. Koreanic arrived later from Manchuria to the Korean peninsula at around 300 BC and coexisted with the descendants of the Japonic Mumun cultivators (or assimilated them). Both had influence on each other and a later founder effect diminished the internal variety of both language families.[14]

Most linguists today see the Japonic languages as their own distinct family, not related to Korean, but acknowledge an influence from other language families (and vice versa).[10] Vovin (2015) shows evidence that the early Koreans borrowed words for rice cultivation from Peninsular Japonic. According to him, the middle Korean word psʌr (rice) is loaned from Peninsular Japonic *wasar.[17]

Juha Janhunen (2003) proposed that the Japonic languages originated on the coast of the Shandong Peninsula, and that they originally had similar typological characteristics to the Sinitic languages before they acquired Altaic typological features through contact with the Koreanic languages on the Korean Peninsula.[18]

The linguists Yurayong and Szeto in 2020 analyzed the stages of convergence between Japonic and other languages. They concluded that "our results indirectly speak in favour of a "Paleo-Asiatic" origin of the Japonic languages".[19]

Chaubey and van Driem (2020) propose that the Japonic languages may have already been present in Japan during the early Jōmon period. They suggest that the Japonic languages were already present within the Japanese archipelago and coastal Korea, before the Yayoi period, and can be linked to one of the Jōmon populations of southwestern Japan, rather than the later Yayoi or Kofun period rice-agriculturalists. Japonic-speakers then expanded during the Yayoi period, assimilating the newcomers, adopting rice-agriculture, and fusing mainland Asian technologies with local traditions.[20]

Possible external relations Edit

Japonic-Koreanic theory Edit

There is disagreement over the protohistorical or historical period during which this expansion occurs, ranging from the Korean Bronze Age period to the Three Kingdoms of Korea period. As there is disagreement among experts when the expansion of Koreanic languages started, there is room for interpretation on the proto-historical and historical extent of the Japonic language presence in the central and southern Korean peninsula.

Similarities between Japanese and Koreanic languages Edit

History Edit

Japanese and Korean languages also share some typological similarities, such as an agglutinative morphology, a subject–object–verb (SOV) normal word order, important systems of honorifics (however, the two languages' systems of honorifics are different in form and usage; see Japanese honorifics and Korean honorifics), besides a few lexical resemblances. Factors like these led some historical linguists to suggest a genetic relationship between the two languages.[citation needed]

William George Aston suggested in 1879 in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society that Japanese is related to Korean.[21] A relationship between Japanese and Korean was endorsed by the Japanese scholar Shōsaburō Kanazawa in 1910. Other scholars took this position in the twentieth century (Poppe 1965:137). Substantial arguments in favor of a Japanese–Korean relationship were presented by Samuel Martin, a leading specialist in Japanese and Korean, in 1966 and in subsequent publications (e.g. Martin 1990). Linguists who advocate this position include John Whitman (1985) and Barbara E. Riley (2004), and Sergei Starostin with his lexicostatistical research, The Altaic Problem and the Origins of the Japanese Language (Moscow, 1991). A Japanese–Korean connection does not necessarily exclude a Japanese–Koguryo or an Altaic relationship.

The two languages are thought to not share any cognates (other than loanwords),[22] for their vocabularies do not phonetically resemble each other. However, a recent 2016 paper proposing a common lineage between Korean and Japanese claims to trace around 500 core words that show a common origin including several numerals such as 5 and 10.[1]

Evidence Edit

Martine Robbeets and Remco Bouckaert from the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History used in 2018 for the first time a Bayesian phylogenetic inference analysis about "Transeurasian". Their study resulted in a "high probability" for a "Koreano-Japonic" group, but has not gained acceptance among mainstream linguists.[23]

Criticism Edit

This theory has been criticized for serious methodological flaws, such as rejecting mainstream reconstructions of Chinese and Japanese, for less accepted alternatives.[24] Other critics, like Alexander Vovin and Toh Soo Hee, argued that the connections between Japanese and Goguryeo are due to earlier Japonic languages that were present in parts of Korea, and that the Goguryeo language was closer to Sillan, and by extension, Korean.[25] Further studies (2019)[by whom?] deny and criticize a relation between Korean and Japanese. Vovin also argues that the claimed cognates are nothing more than early loanwords from when Japonic was still spoken in southern Korea.[8]

Similarly Whitman (2012) concluded that the proto-Koreans arrived in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula at around 300 BC and coexist with the native descendants of the Japonic Mumun rice-cultivators (or assimilated them). Both had influence on each other and a later founder effect diminished the internal variety of both language families, making them more similar. Thus Whitman sees a possible relation between Japonic and Koreanic as unlikely.[14]

The idea of a Japanese–Korean relationship overlaps the extended form of the Altaic hypothesis (see below), but not all scholars who argue for one also argue for the other. For example, Samuel Martin, who was a major advocate of a Japanese–Korean relationship, only provided cautious support to the inclusion of these languages in Altaic, and Talat Tekin, an Altaicist, includes Korean, but not Japanese, in Altaic (Georg et al. 1999:72, 74).

Possible connection between Japonic and Koguryoic Edit

The Japanese–Koguryoic proposal dates back to Shinmura Izuru's (1916) observation that the attested Goguryeo numerals—3, 5, 7, and 10—are very similar to Japanese.[26] The hypothesis proposes that Japanese is a relative of the extinct languages spoken by the Buyeo-Goguryeo cultures of Korea, southern Manchuria, and Liaodong. The best attested of these is the language of Goguryeo, with the more poorly attested Koguryoic languages of Baekje and Buyeo believed to also be related.

A monograph by Christopher Beckwith (2004) has established about 140 lexical items in the Goguryeo corpus. They mostly occur in place-name collocations, many of which may include grammatical morphemes (including cognates of the Japanese genitive marker no and the Japanese adjective-attributive morpheme -sa) and a few of which may show syntactical relationships. He postulates that the majority of the identified Goguryeo corpus, which includes all of the grammatical morphemes, is related to Japanese.

Altaic theory Edit

The Altaic language family is a theoretical group composed of, at its core, languages categorized as Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic. G.J. Ramstedt's Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft ('Introduction to Altaic Linguistics') in 1952–1957 included Korean in Altaic. Roy Andrew Miller's Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages (1971) included Japanese in Altaic as well. The most important recent work that favored the expanded Altaic family (i.e. that Korean and Japanese could both be included under the Altaic language family) is An Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages (3 volumes) by Sergei Starostin, Anna V. Dybo, and Oleg A. Mudrak (2003). Robbeets (2017) considers Japonic to be a "Transeurasian" (Altaic) language that is genetically unrelated to Austronesian, and argues that lexical similarities between Japonic and Austronesian are due to contact.

The Altaic proposal has largely been rejected (in both its core form of Turkic, Mongolic, and Tungusic as well as its expanded form that includes Korean and/or Japanese).[3][4][5][6] The best-known critiques are those by Gerard Clauson (1956) and Gerhard Doerfer (1963, 1988). Current critics include Stefan Georg and Alexander Vovin. Critics[who?] attribute the similarities in the putative Altaic languages to pre-historic areal contact having occurred between the languages of the expanded group (e.g. between Turkic and Japonic), contact which critics and proponents agree took place to some degree.[citation needed]

Linguists agree today that typological resemblances between Japanese, Korean and Altaic languages cannot be used to prove genetic relatedness of languages,[27] as these features are typologically connected and easily borrowed from one language to the other[citation needed] (e.g. due to geographical proximity with Manchuria). Such factors of typological divergence as Middle Mongolian's exhibition of gender agreement[citation needed] can be used to argue that a genetic relationship with Altaic is unlikely.[28]

Robbeets (2017) Edit

According to Robbeets (2017) Japanese and Korean originated as a hybrid language around the region of Liaoning in China,[29] incorporating an Austronesian-like language and Altaic (trans-Eurasian) elements. She suggests that proto-Japanese had an additional influence from Austronesian on the Japanese archipelago.

She lists the following agricultural vocabulary in proto-Japonic with parallels in Austronesian languages:

mortar
rice
  • proto-Japonic *kəmai 'dehusked rice'
  • proto-Austronesian *Semay 'cooked rice'
  • Old Chinese 糜 *C.maj 'rice gruel; destroy, crush'
early ripening crop
  • proto-Japonic *wasara ~ *wǝsǝrǝ 'early ripening crop, early ripening rice'
  • proto-Austronesian *baCaR 'broomcorn millet (Panicum miliaceum)'
  • proto-Koreanic *pʌsal 'hulled variety of grain, rice'

Proposals relating Japonic languages to Southeast Asian language families Edit

Several linguists have proposed that the Japonic languages are genetically related to the Austronesian languages.[30] Some linguists think it is more plausible that Japanese was instead influenced by Austronesian languages, perhaps by an Austronesian substratum. Those who propose the latter scenario suggest that the Austronesian family once covered most of southern Japan. The phonological similarities of Japanese to the Austronesian languages, and the geographical proximity of Japan to Formosa and the Malay Archipelago have led to the theory that Japanese may be a kind of mixed language, with a Korean (or Altaic) superstratum and an Austronesian substratum.[31]

Similarly Juha Janhunen claims that Austronesians lived in southern Japan, specifically on Shikoku, and that modern Japanese has an "Austronesian layer".[32] The linguist Ann Kumar (2009) believes that some Austronesians migrated to early Japan, possibly an elite group from Java, and created the "Japanese-hierarchical society", and identifies 82 plausible cognates between Austronesian and Japanese.[33] The morphology of Proto-Japanese shows similarities with several languages in South East Asia and southern China.[34] However, Kumar's theory was criticized for archaeological, genetic, and linguistic contradictions.[35]

Itabashi (2011) claims that similarities in morphology, phonology and basic vocabulary point towards "a strong genealogical connection between Japanese and Austronesian".[36]

Paul K. Benedict (1992) suggests a genetic relation between Japanese and the Austro-Tai languages, which include Kra-Dai and Austronesian. He proposes that Kra-Dai and Japanese form a genetic mainland group while Austronesian is the insular group.[37]

Vovin (2014) says that there is typological evidence that Proto-Japonic may have been a monosyllabic, SVO syntax and isolating language; which are features that the Kra-Dai languages also exhibit. He notes that Benedict's idea of a relation between Japanese and Kra-Dai should not be rejected out of hand, but he considers the relationship between them not to be genetic, but rather a contact one. According to him, this contact must be quite old and quite intense, as the borrowed words belong partially to a very basic vocabulary. He further says that this evidence refutes any genetic relations between Japanese and Altaic.[9]

Possible Austroasiatic substrate Edit

In a discussion of ten reconstructed Proto-Japanese agricultural terms, Vovin (1998) proposes an Austroasiatic origin for three of these terms:[38]

  • *(z/h)ina-Ci 'rice (plant)'
  • koma-Ci '(hulled) rice'
  • pwo 'ear of grain'

According to him early Japanese assimilated Austroasiatic tribes and adopted some vocabulary about rice cultivation. On the other hand, John Whitman (2011) does not support that these words were loanwords into proto-Japonic, but that these words are of Japonic origin and must be rather old.[14]

Other hypotheses Edit

Sino-Tibetan hypothesis Edit

Another theory was raised by the Japanese linguist Īno Mutsumi (1994). According to him, Japanese is closely related to the Sino-Tibetan languages, especially to the Lolo-Burmese languages of southern China and Southeast-Asia. Because of similar grammar rules (SOV word order, syntax), similar non-loan basic vocabulary and the fact that some Sino-Tibetan languages (including proto-Sino-Tibetan) were non-tonal, he proposed the "Sinitic" origin theory.[39]

Proto-Asian hypothesis Edit

The "Proto-Asian hypothesis" (Larish 2006) argues for a relation between languages of Southeast and East Asia. Japanese is grouped together with Korean as one group of the descendants of Proto-Asian. The proposal further includes the Austric languages, Kra-Dai, Hmong-Mien and Sino-Tibetan[40]

Dravidian hypothesis Edit

A more rarely encountered hypothesis is that Japanese (and Korean) are related to the Dravidian languages. The possibility that Japanese might be related to Dravidian was raised by Robert Caldwell (cf. Caldwell 1875:413) and more recently by Susumu Shiba, Akira Fujiwara, and Susumu Ōno (n.d., 2000). The Japanese professor Tsutomu Kambe claimed to have found more than 500 similar words about agriculture between Tamil and Japanese in 2011.[41]

Uralic hypothesis Edit

The Japanese linguist Kanehira Joji believes that the Japanese language is related to the Uralic languages. He based his hypothesis on some similar basic words, similar morphology and phonology. According to him early Japanese was influenced by Chinese, Austronesian and Ainu. He refers his theory to the "dual-structure model" of Japanese origin between Jōmon and Yayoi.[42][43]

Ainu hypothesis Edit

The Japanese linguist Tatsumine Katayama (2004) found many similar basic words between Ainu and Japanese. Because of a great amount of similar vocabulary, phonology, similar grammar, and geographical and cultural connections, he and Takeshi Umehara suggested that Japanese was closely related to the Ainu languages, and was influenced by other languages, especially Chinese and Korean.[44]

A linguistic analysis in 2015 proposed that the Japonic languages were related to the Ainu languages and to the Austroasiatic languages.[45] However, similarities between Ainu and Japonic are also due to extensive past contact. Analytic grammatical constructions acquired or transformed in Ainu were likely due to contact with Japanese and the Japonic languages, which had heavy influence on the Ainu languages with a large number of loanwords borrowed into the Ainu languages, and to a smaller extent, vice versa.[46]

Today, a relation between Ainu and Japanese (or Austroasiatic) is not supported and Ainu remains a language isolate.[47]

See also Edit

References Edit

  1. ^ a b Francis-Ratte, Alexander Takenobu (2016). (Thesis). The Ohio State University. Archived from the original on 2018-08-30. Retrieved 2019-03-28.
  2. ^ a b c Vovin, Alexander (2013). "From Koguryo to Tamna: Slowly riding to the South with speakers of Proto-Korean". Korean Linguistics. 15 (2): 222–240. doi:10.1075/kl.15.2.03vov.
  3. ^ a b "While 'Altaic' is repeated in encyclopedias and handbooks most specialists in these languages no longer believe that the three traditional supposed Altaic groups, Turkic, Mongolian and Tungusic, are related." Lyle Campbell & Mauricio J. Mixco, A Glossary of Historical Linguistics (2007, University of Utah Press), pg. 7.
  4. ^ a b "When cognates proved not to be valid, Altaic was abandoned, and the received view now is that Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic are unrelated." Johanna Nichols, Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time (1992, Chicago), pg. 4.
  5. ^ a b "Careful examination indicates that the established families, Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic, form a linguistic area (called Altaic)...Sufficient criteria have not been given that would justify talking of a genetic relationship here." R.M.W. Dixon, The Rise and Fall of Languages (1997, Cambridge), pg. 32.
  6. ^ a b "...[T]his selection of features does not provide good evidence for common descent....we can observe convergence rather than divergence between Turkic and Mongolic languages--a pattern than is easily explainable by borrowing and diffusion rather than common descent," Asya Pereltsvaig, Languages of the World, An Introduction (2012, Cambridge). This source has a good discussion of the Altaic hypothesis on pp. 211-216.
  7. ^ Thomas Pellard. The comparative study of the Japonic languages. Approaches to endangered languages in Japan and Northeast Asia: Description, documentation and revitalization, National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, Aug 2018, Tachikawa, Japan. ffhal-01856152
  8. ^ a b Vovin, Alexander (26 September 2017). "Origins of the Japanese Language". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics.
  9. ^ a b Vovin, Alexander (2014). Out of Southern China? – Philological and linguistic musings on the possible Urheimat of Proto-Japonic. Journées de CRLAO June 27–28, 2014. INALCO, Paris.
  10. ^ a b RECONSTRUCTING THE LANGUAGE MAP OF PREHISTORICAL NORTHEAST ASIA - Juha Janhunen Studia Orientalia 108 (2010)
  11. ^ Lee, Sean; Hasegawa, Toshikazu (2011-12-22). "Bayesian phylogenetic analysis supports an agricultural origin of Japonic languages". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 278 (1725): 3662–3669. doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0518. PMC 3203502. PMID 21543358.
  12. ^ Bellwood, Peter (2013). The Global Prehistory of Human Migration. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 9781118970591.
  13. ^ Archaeological Explanation for the Diffusion Theory of the Japonic and Koreanic Languages - MIYAMOTO Kazuo
  14. ^ a b c d Whitman, John (2011). "Northeast Asian Linguistic Ecology and the Advent of Rice Agriculture in Korea and Japan". Rice. 4 (Suppl. 3-4): 149–158. doi:10.1007/s12284-011-9080-0. ISSN 1939-8433.
  15. ^ Lee, Ki-Moon; Ramsey, S. Robert (2011). A History of the Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-66189-8.
  16. ^ Unger, J. Marshall (2009). The role of contact in the origins of the Japanese and Korean languages. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. ISBN 978-0-8248-3279-7.
  17. ^ Vovin, Alexander (2015). "On The Etymology of Middle Korean psʌr 'rice'". Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları. 25 (2): 229–238 – via Acedmia.edu.
  18. ^ Janhunen, Juha (2003). 日本語系統論の現在 (in Japanese). 国際日本文化センター. pp. 477–490.
  19. ^ Yurayong, Szeto (August 2020). "Altaicization and De-Altaicization of Japonic and Koreanic". International Journal of Eurasian Linguistics.
  20. ^ Chaubey, Gyaneshwer; Driem, George van (2020). "Munda languages are father tongues, but Japanese and Korean are not". Evolutionary Human Sciences. 2. doi:10.1017/ehs.2020.14. ISSN 2513-843X. The Japonic-speaking Early Jōmon people must have been drawn in to avail themselves of the pickings of Yayoi agricultural yields, and the Yayoi may have prospered and succeeded in multiplying their paternal lineages precisely because they managed to accommodate the Jōmon linguistically and in material ways."
    "The dual nature of Japanese population structure was advanced by Miller, who proposed that the resident Jōmon population spoke an Altaic language ancestral to modern Japanese, and this Altaic tongue underwent Austronesian influence when the islanders absorbed the bearers of the incursive Yayoi culture.
  21. ^ Kornicki, Peter (December 2005). (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on May 29, 2008.
  22. ^ Martin (1966), Martin (1990).
  23. ^ Robbeets, Martine; Bouckaert, Remco (2018). "Bayesian phylolinguistics reveals the internal structure of the Transeurasian family". Journal of Language Evolution. 3 (2): 145–162. doi:10.1093/jole/lzy007.
  24. ^ Pellard, Thomas (2005). "Koguryo, the Language of Japan's Continental Relatives: An Introduction to the Historical-Comparative Study of the Japanese-Kgouryoic Languages with a Preliminary Description of Archaic Northeastern Middle Chinese (review)" (PDF). Korean Studies. 29: 167–170. doi:10.1353/ks.2006.0008. S2CID 145029765.
  25. ^ Toh Soo-Hee (2005). "About Early Paekche Language Mistaken as Being Koguryo Language". Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies. 2(2): 10–31.
  26. ^ Shinmura, Izuru (1916). "國語及び朝 鮮語の數詞について [Regarding numerals in Japanese and Korean]". Geibun. 7 (2–4).
  27. ^ Vovin (2008), p. 1.[failed verification]
  28. ^ Vovin (2008), p. 5.[failed verification]
  29. ^ Robbeets, Martine (2017). "Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese: A case of farming/language dispersal". Language Dynamics and Change. 7 (2): 210–251. doi:10.1163/22105832-00702005.
  30. ^ Benedict (1990), Matsumoto (1975), Miller (1967).
  31. ^ Lewin (1976), Matsumoto (1975), Miller (1967), Murayama (1976).
  32. ^ ユハ・ヤンフネン 「A Framework for the Study of Japanese Language Origins」『日本語系統論の現在』(pdf) 国際日本文化センター、京都、2003年、477-490頁。
  33. ^ Kumar, Ann (2009). Globalizing the Prehistory of Japan: Language, Genes and Civilization. Oxford: Routledge.
  34. ^ Vovin, Alexander (2008). "Proto-Japanese beyond the accent system". In Frellesvig, Bjarne; Whitman, John (eds.). Proto-Japanese: Issues and Prospects. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. Vol. 294. John Benjamins. pp. 141–156. doi:10.1075/cilt.294.11vov. ISBN 978-90-272-4809-1.
  35. ^ "Javanese influence on Japanese". Languages Of The World. 2011-05-09. Retrieved 2023-06-13.
  36. ^ Itabashi, Yoshizo (April 2011). (PDF). Language and Linguistics in Oceania. 3. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-04-23. Retrieved 2019-04-23.
  37. ^ Solnit, David B. (1992). "Japanese/Austro-Tai By Paul K. Benedict (review)". Language. 68 (1): 188–196. doi:10.1353/lan.1992.0061. ISSN 1535-0665. S2CID 141811621.
  38. ^ Vovin, Alexander (1998). "Japanese rice agriculture terminology and linguistic affiliation of Yayoi culture". In Blench, Roger; Spriggs, Matthew (eds.). Archaeology and Language II: Archaeological Data and Linguistic Hypotheses. Routledge. pp. 366–378. ISBN 9781134828692. However, the above evidence suggests that mounted invaders from the mainland subjugated the native Yayoi population once and for all, assimilating them linguistically... (Page 375 and 376)
  39. ^ 飯野睦毅 (1994)『奈良時代の日本語を解読する』東陽出版
  40. ^ Larish, Michael D. (January 2006). Possible Proto-Asian Archaic Residue and the Statigraphy of Diffusional Cumulation in Austro-Asian Languages (PDF). Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics. Retrieved 2019-01-07.
  41. ^ "Researchers find Tamil connection in Japanese - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 2017-05-21.
  42. ^ "日本語の意外な歴史" (in Japanese). Retrieved 2018-08-21.
  43. ^ 日本語の意外な歴史 第1話 金平譲司 Joji Kanehira
  44. ^ Tatsumine Katayama (2004) "Japanese and Ainu (new version)" Tokyo: Suzusawa library
  45. ^ Jäger, Gerhard (24 September 2015). "Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment". PNAS. 112 (41): 12752–12757. doi:10.1073/pnas.1500331112.
  46. ^ Tranter, Nicolas (25 June 2012). The Languages of Japan and Korea. Routledge. ISBN 9781136446580 – via Google Books.
  47. ^ Vovin, Alexander. 2016. "On the Linguistic Prehistory of Hokkaidō." In Crosslinguistics and linguistic crossings in Northeast Asia: papers on the languages of Sakhalin and adjacent regions (Studia Orientalia 117).

Bibliography Edit

Works cited Edit

  • Aston, William George (1879). "A comparative study of the Japanese and Korean languages". Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Britain and Ireland. New Series. 11: 317–364. doi:10.1017/s0035869x00017305. S2CID 161676140.
  • Beckwith, Christopher I. 2004. Koguryo: The Language of Japan's Continental Relatives: An Introduction to the Historical-Comparative Study of the Japanese-Koguryoic Languages. Leiden: Brill.
  • Beckwith, Christopher I (2005). (PDF). Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies. 2 (2): 34–64. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-02-26.
  • Beckwith, Christopher I (2006). "Methodological observations on some recent studies of the early ethnolinguistic history of Korea and vicinity". Altai Hakpo. 16: 199–234.
  • Benedict, Paul K. (1990). Japanese/Austro-Tai. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
  • Caldwell, Robert. 1875. A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian Family of Languages, second edition. London: Trübner.
  • Georg, Stefan, Peter A. Michalove, Alexis Manaster Ramer, and Paul J. Sidwell. 1999. "Telling general linguists about Altaic." Journal of Linguistics 35, 65-98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Greenberg, Joseph H. 2000–2002. Indo-European and Its Closest Relatives: The Eurasiatic Language Family, 2 volumes. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Greenberg, Joseph H. 2005. Genetic Linguistics: Essays on Theory and Method, edited by William Croft. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Kanazawa, Shōsaburō. 1910. The Common Origin of the Japanese and Korean Languages. Tokyo: Sanseidō.
  • Lewin, Bruno (1976). "Japanese and Korean: The Problems and History of a Linguistic Comparison". Journal of Japanese Studies. 2 (2): 389–412. doi:10.2307/132059. JSTOR 132059.
  • Martin, Samuel E. (1966). "Lexical evidence relating Korean to Japanese". Language. 12 (2): 185–251. doi:10.2307/411687. JSTOR 411687.
  • Martin, Samuel E. (1990). "Morphological clues to the relationships of Japanese and Korean". In Philip Baldi (ed.). Linguistic Change and Reconstruction Methodology. Berlin: de Gruyter.
  • Matsumoto, Katsumi (1975). "Kodai nihongoboin soshikikõ: naiteki saiken no kokoromi". Bulletin of the Faculty of Law and Letters. Kanazawa University. 22: 83–152.
  • Miller, Roy Andrew (1967). The Japanese language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Miller, Roy Andrew (1971). Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Murayama, Shichiro (1976). "The Malayo-Polynesian Component in the Japanese Language". Journal of Japanese Studies. 2 (2): 413–436. doi:10.2307/132060. JSTOR 132060.
  • Ōno, Susumu. n.d. "The genealogy of the Japanese language: Tamil and Japanese."
  • Ōno, Susumu. 2000. 日本語の形成. 岩波書店. ISBN 4-00-001758-6.
  • Poppe, Nicholas. 1965. Introduction to Altaic Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
  • Riley, Barbara E. 2003. Aspects of the Genetic Relationship of the Korean and Japanese Languages. PhD thesis, University of Hawaii.
  • Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  • Starostin, Sergei A. 1991. Altajskaja problema i proisxoždenie japonskogo jazyka, 'The Altaic Problem and the Origin of the Japanese Language'. Moscow: Nauka.
  • Starostin, Sergei A., Anna V. Dybo, and Oleg A. Mudrak. 2003. Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages, 3 volumes. Leiden: Brill. (Also: database version.)
  • Trombetti, Alfredo. 1922–1923. Elementi di glottologia, 2 volumes. Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli.
  • Vovin, Alexander. 2003. 日本語系統論の現在:これからどこへ 'The genetic relationship of the Japanese language: Where do we go from here?'. In 日本語系統論の現在 'Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese Language', edited by Alexander Vovin and Toshiki Osada. Kyoto: International Center for Japanese Studies. ISSN 1346-6585.
  • Whitman, John Bradford. 1985. The Phonological Basis for the Comparison of Japanese and Korean. PhD thesis, Harvard University.

Further reading Edit

  • Francis-Ratte, Alexander Takenobu. 2016. Proto-Korean-Japanese: A New Reconstruction of the Common Origin of the Japanese and Korean Languages. PhD dissertation: Ohio State University.
  • Janhunen, Juha (2003). . In Vovin, Alexander; Osada, Toshiki (eds.). Nihongo keitōron no ima 日本語系統論の現在 [Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese Language]. International Research Center for Japanese Studies. pp. 477–490. ISBN 978-4-9015-5817-4. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-08-06. Retrieved 2018-08-06.
  • Katsumi, Matsumoto. 2007. 世界言語のなかの日本語 Sekaigengo no nakano Nihongo, 'Japanese in the World's Languages'. Tokyo: 三省堂 Sanseido.
  • Martin, Samuel E. 1968. "Grammatical elements relating Korean to Japanese." In Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences B.9, 405-407.
  • Martin, Samuel E. 1975. "Problems in establishing the prehistoric relationships of Korean and Japanese." In Proceedings, International Symposium Commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Korean Liberation. Seoul: National Academy of Sciences.
  • Martin, Samuel E. 1991. "Recent research on the relationships of Japanese and Korean." In Sprung from Some Common Source: Investigations into the Prehistory of Languages, edited by Sydney M. Lamb and E. Douglas Mitchell. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Martin, Samuel E. 1996. Consonant Lenition in Korean and the Macro-Altaic Question. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
  • Miller, Roy Andrew. 1980. Origins of the Japanese Language: Lectures in Japan during the Academic Year 1977-78. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
  • Miller, Roy Andrew. 1996. Languages and History: Japanese, Korean and Altaic. Oslo: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.
  • Robbeets, Martine. 2004a. "Belief or argument? The classification of the Japanese language." Eurasia Newsletter 8. Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University.
  • Robbeets, Martine. 2004b. Tokyo University Linguistic Papers, TULIP 23, 99–118.
  • Robbeets, Martine. 2005. Is Japanese related to Korean, Tungusic, Mongolic and Turkic? Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
  • Robbeets, Martine (2007). "How the actional suffix chain connects Japanese to Altaic". Turkic Languages. 11 (1): 3–58.
  • Unger, J. Marshall (2014). "No rush to judgment: the case against Japanese as an isolate". NINJAL Project Review. 4 (3): 211–230. doi:10.15084/00000755.

classification, japonic, languages, this, article, includes, list, general, references, lacks, sufficient, corresponding, inline, citations, please, help, improve, this, article, introducing, more, precise, citations, january, 2015, learn, when, remove, this, . This article includes a list of general references but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations January 2015 Learn how and when to remove this template message The classification of the Japonic languages and their external relations is unclear Linguists traditionally consider the Japonic languages to belong to an independent family indeed until the classification of Ryukyuan as separate languages within a Japonic family rather than as dialects of Japanese Japanese was considered a language isolate Among more distant connections the possibility of a genetic relationship to languages like Austronesian and or Kra Dai are discussed A relation between Japonic and Koreanic is also considered plausible by some linguists while others reject this idea 1 2 Independent of the question of a Japonic Koreanic connection both the Japonic and Koreanic languages are sometimes included in the now largely discredited Altaic family 3 4 5 6 Contents 1 Primary language family 2 Possible external relations 2 1 Japonic Koreanic theory 2 1 1 Similarities between Japanese and Koreanic languages 2 1 1 1 History 2 1 2 Evidence 2 1 3 Criticism 2 1 4 Possible connection between Japonic and Koguryoic 2 2 Altaic theory 2 2 1 Robbeets 2017 2 3 Proposals relating Japonic languages to Southeast Asian language families 2 3 1 Possible Austroasiatic substrate 3 Other hypotheses 3 1 Sino Tibetan hypothesis 3 2 Proto Asian hypothesis 3 3 Dravidian hypothesis 3 4 Uralic hypothesis 3 5 Ainu hypothesis 4 See also 5 References 6 Bibliography 6 1 Works cited 6 2 Further readingPrimary language family EditThe currently most supported view is that the Japonic languages sometimes also Japanic are their own primary language family consisting of Japanese and the Ryukyuan languages The Hachijō language is sometimes classified as a third branch of the Japonic language family but it is otherwise seen to be a very divergent dialect of Eastern Japanese 7 8 It has been suggested that the linguistic homeland of Japonic may be located somewhere in southern south eastern or eastern China prior to a hypothetical migration of proto Japanese to the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago 9 10 11 12 Miyamoto suggests a homeland further north around modern day Liaoning 13 Koreanic speakers then established in Manchuria expanded southward to the Korean peninsula displacing Japonic speakers that had been living there and causing the Yayoi migrations into Japan 2 14 15 16 Vovin suggests that Japonic languages were spoken in parts of Korea especially southern Korea and were then replaced and assimilated by proto Korean speakers 2 Similarly Whitman 2012 suggests that Japonic is not related to Korean but that Japonic was present on the Korean peninsula during the Mumun pottery period Yayoi people According to him Japonic arrived in the Korean peninsula around 1500 BC and was brought to the Japanese archipelago by the Yayoi at around 950 BC In this scenario the language family associated with both Mumun and Yayoi culture is Japonic Koreanic arrived later from Manchuria to the Korean peninsula at around 300 BC and coexisted with the descendants of the Japonic Mumun cultivators or assimilated them Both had influence on each other and a later founder effect diminished the internal variety of both language families 14 Most linguists today see the Japonic languages as their own distinct family not related to Korean but acknowledge an influence from other language families and vice versa 10 Vovin 2015 shows evidence that the early Koreans borrowed words for rice cultivation from Peninsular Japonic According to him the middle Korean word psʌr rice is loaned from Peninsular Japonic wasar 17 Juha Janhunen 2003 proposed that the Japonic languages originated on the coast of the Shandong Peninsula and that they originally had similar typological characteristics to the Sinitic languages before they acquired Altaic typological features through contact with the Koreanic languages on the Korean Peninsula 18 The linguists Yurayong and Szeto in 2020 analyzed the stages of convergence between Japonic and other languages They concluded that our results indirectly speak in favour of a Paleo Asiatic origin of the Japonic languages 19 Chaubey and van Driem 2020 propose that the Japonic languages may have already been present in Japan during the early Jōmon period They suggest that the Japonic languages were already present within the Japanese archipelago and coastal Korea before the Yayoi period and can be linked to one of the Jōmon populations of southwestern Japan rather than the later Yayoi or Kofun period rice agriculturalists Japonic speakers then expanded during the Yayoi period assimilating the newcomers adopting rice agriculture and fusing mainland Asian technologies with local traditions 20 Possible external relations EditJaponic Koreanic theory Edit There is disagreement over the protohistorical or historical period during which this expansion occurs ranging from the Korean Bronze Age period to the Three Kingdoms of Korea period As there is disagreement among experts when the expansion of Koreanic languages started there is room for interpretation on the proto historical and historical extent of the Japonic language presence in the central and southern Korean peninsula Similarities between Japanese and Koreanic languages Edit Further information Comparison of Japanese and Korean History of Korean Korean language Classification and Japanese language History History Edit Japanese and Korean languages also share some typological similarities such as an agglutinative morphology a subject object verb SOV normal word order important systems of honorifics however the two languages systems of honorifics are different in form and usage see Japanese honorifics and Korean honorifics besides a few lexical resemblances Factors like these led some historical linguists to suggest a genetic relationship between the two languages citation needed William George Aston suggested in 1879 in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society that Japanese is related to Korean 21 A relationship between Japanese and Korean was endorsed by the Japanese scholar Shōsaburō Kanazawa in 1910 Other scholars took this position in the twentieth century Poppe 1965 137 Substantial arguments in favor of a Japanese Korean relationship were presented by Samuel Martin a leading specialist in Japanese and Korean in 1966 and in subsequent publications e g Martin 1990 Linguists who advocate this position include John Whitman 1985 and Barbara E Riley 2004 and Sergei Starostin with his lexicostatistical research The Altaic Problem and the Origins of the Japanese Language Moscow 1991 A Japanese Korean connection does not necessarily exclude a Japanese Koguryo or an Altaic relationship The two languages are thought to not share any cognates other than loanwords 22 for their vocabularies do not phonetically resemble each other However a recent 2016 paper proposing a common lineage between Korean and Japanese claims to trace around 500 core words that show a common origin including several numerals such as 5 and 10 1 Evidence Edit Martine Robbeets and Remco Bouckaert from the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History used in 2018 for the first time a Bayesian phylogenetic inference analysis about Transeurasian Their study resulted in a high probability for a Koreano Japonic group but has not gained acceptance among mainstream linguists 23 Criticism Edit This theory has been criticized for serious methodological flaws such as rejecting mainstream reconstructions of Chinese and Japanese for less accepted alternatives 24 Other critics like Alexander Vovin and Toh Soo Hee argued that the connections between Japanese and Goguryeo are due to earlier Japonic languages that were present in parts of Korea and that the Goguryeo language was closer to Sillan and by extension Korean 25 Further studies 2019 by whom deny and criticize a relation between Korean and Japanese Vovin also argues that the claimed cognates are nothing more than early loanwords from when Japonic was still spoken in southern Korea 8 Similarly Whitman 2012 concluded that the proto Koreans arrived in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula at around 300 BC and coexist with the native descendants of the Japonic Mumun rice cultivators or assimilated them Both had influence on each other and a later founder effect diminished the internal variety of both language families making them more similar Thus Whitman sees a possible relation between Japonic and Koreanic as unlikely 14 The idea of a Japanese Korean relationship overlaps the extended form of the Altaic hypothesis see below but not all scholars who argue for one also argue for the other For example Samuel Martin who was a major advocate of a Japanese Korean relationship only provided cautious support to the inclusion of these languages in Altaic and Talat Tekin an Altaicist includes Korean but not Japanese in Altaic Georg et al 1999 72 74 Possible connection between Japonic and Koguryoic Edit The Japanese Koguryoic proposal dates back to Shinmura Izuru s 1916 observation that the attested Goguryeo numerals 3 5 7 and 10 are very similar to Japanese 26 The hypothesis proposes that Japanese is a relative of the extinct languages spoken by the Buyeo Goguryeo cultures of Korea southern Manchuria and Liaodong The best attested of these is the language of Goguryeo with the more poorly attested Koguryoic languages of Baekje and Buyeo believed to also be related A monograph by Christopher Beckwith 2004 has established about 140 lexical items in the Goguryeo corpus They mostly occur in place name collocations many of which may include grammatical morphemes including cognates of the Japanese genitive marker no and the Japanese adjective attributive morpheme sa and a few of which may show syntactical relationships He postulates that the majority of the identified Goguryeo corpus which includes all of the grammatical morphemes is related to Japanese Altaic theory Edit Main article Altaic languages The Altaic language family is a theoretical group composed of at its core languages categorized as Turkic Mongolic and Tungusic G J Ramstedt s Einfuhrung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft Introduction to Altaic Linguistics in 1952 1957 included Korean in Altaic Roy Andrew Miller s Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages 1971 included Japanese in Altaic as well The most important recent work that favored the expanded Altaic family i e that Korean and Japanese could both be included under the Altaic language family is An Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages 3 volumes by Sergei Starostin Anna V Dybo and Oleg A Mudrak 2003 Robbeets 2017 considers Japonic to be a Transeurasian Altaic language that is genetically unrelated to Austronesian and argues that lexical similarities between Japonic and Austronesian are due to contact The Altaic proposal has largely been rejected in both its core form of Turkic Mongolic and Tungusic as well as its expanded form that includes Korean and or Japanese 3 4 5 6 The best known critiques are those by Gerard Clauson 1956 and Gerhard Doerfer 1963 1988 Current critics include Stefan Georg and Alexander Vovin Critics who attribute the similarities in the putative Altaic languages to pre historic areal contact having occurred between the languages of the expanded group e g between Turkic and Japonic contact which critics and proponents agree took place to some degree citation needed Linguists agree today that typological resemblances between Japanese Korean and Altaic languages cannot be used to prove genetic relatedness of languages 27 as these features are typologically connected and easily borrowed from one language to the other citation needed e g due to geographical proximity with Manchuria Such factors of typological divergence as Middle Mongolian s exhibition of gender agreement citation needed can be used to argue that a genetic relationship with Altaic is unlikely 28 Robbeets 2017 Edit According to Robbeets 2017 Japanese and Korean originated as a hybrid language around the region of Liaoning in China 29 incorporating an Austronesian like language and Altaic trans Eurasian elements She suggests that proto Japanese had an additional influence from Austronesian on the Japanese archipelago She lists the following agricultural vocabulary in proto Japonic with parallels in Austronesian languages mortarproto Japonic usu rice and grain mortar proto Austronesian lusuŋ rice mortar riceproto Japonic kemai dehusked rice proto Austronesian Semay cooked rice Old Chinese 糜 C maj rice gruel destroy crush early ripening cropproto Japonic wasara wǝsǝrǝ early ripening crop early ripening rice proto Austronesian baCaR broomcorn millet Panicum miliaceum proto Koreanic pʌsal hulled variety of grain rice Proposals relating Japonic languages to Southeast Asian language families Edit Several linguists have proposed that the Japonic languages are genetically related to the Austronesian languages 30 Some linguists think it is more plausible that Japanese was instead influenced by Austronesian languages perhaps by an Austronesian substratum Those who propose the latter scenario suggest that the Austronesian family once covered most of southern Japan The phonological similarities of Japanese to the Austronesian languages and the geographical proximity of Japan to Formosa and the Malay Archipelago have led to the theory that Japanese may be a kind of mixed language with a Korean or Altaic superstratum and an Austronesian substratum 31 Similarly Juha Janhunen claims that Austronesians lived in southern Japan specifically on Shikoku and that modern Japanese has an Austronesian layer 32 The linguist Ann Kumar 2009 believes that some Austronesians migrated to early Japan possibly an elite group from Java and created the Japanese hierarchical society and identifies 82 plausible cognates between Austronesian and Japanese 33 The morphology of Proto Japanese shows similarities with several languages in South East Asia and southern China 34 However Kumar s theory was criticized for archaeological genetic and linguistic contradictions 35 Itabashi 2011 claims that similarities in morphology phonology and basic vocabulary point towards a strong genealogical connection between Japanese and Austronesian 36 Paul K Benedict 1992 suggests a genetic relation between Japanese and the Austro Tai languages which include Kra Dai and Austronesian He proposes that Kra Dai and Japanese form a genetic mainland group while Austronesian is the insular group 37 Vovin 2014 says that there is typological evidence that Proto Japonic may have been a monosyllabic SVO syntax and isolating language which are features that the Kra Dai languages also exhibit He notes that Benedict s idea of a relation between Japanese and Kra Dai should not be rejected out of hand but he considers the relationship between them not to be genetic but rather a contact one According to him this contact must be quite old and quite intense as the borrowed words belong partially to a very basic vocabulary He further says that this evidence refutes any genetic relations between Japanese and Altaic 9 Possible Austroasiatic substrate Edit In a discussion of ten reconstructed Proto Japanese agricultural terms Vovin 1998 proposes an Austroasiatic origin for three of these terms 38 z h ina Ci rice plant koma Ci hulled rice pwo ear of grain According to him early Japanese assimilated Austroasiatic tribes and adopted some vocabulary about rice cultivation On the other hand John Whitman 2011 does not support that these words were loanwords into proto Japonic but that these words are of Japonic origin and must be rather old 14 Other hypotheses EditSino Tibetan hypothesis Edit Another theory was raised by the Japanese linguist ino Mutsumi 1994 According to him Japanese is closely related to the Sino Tibetan languages especially to the Lolo Burmese languages of southern China and Southeast Asia Because of similar grammar rules SOV word order syntax similar non loan basic vocabulary and the fact that some Sino Tibetan languages including proto Sino Tibetan were non tonal he proposed the Sinitic origin theory 39 Proto Asian hypothesis Edit Main article East Asian languages The Proto Asian hypothesis Larish 2006 argues for a relation between languages of Southeast and East Asia Japanese is grouped together with Korean as one group of the descendants of Proto Asian The proposal further includes the Austric languages Kra Dai Hmong Mien and Sino Tibetan 40 Dravidian hypothesis Edit Further information Dravidian languages and Dravido Korean languagesA more rarely encountered hypothesis is that Japanese and Korean are related to the Dravidian languages The possibility that Japanese might be related to Dravidian was raised by Robert Caldwell cf Caldwell 1875 413 and more recently by Susumu Shiba Akira Fujiwara and Susumu Ōno n d 2000 The Japanese professor Tsutomu Kambe claimed to have found more than 500 similar words about agriculture between Tamil and Japanese in 2011 41 Uralic hypothesis Edit The Japanese linguist Kanehira Joji believes that the Japanese language is related to the Uralic languages He based his hypothesis on some similar basic words similar morphology and phonology According to him early Japanese was influenced by Chinese Austronesian and Ainu He refers his theory to the dual structure model of Japanese origin between Jōmon and Yayoi 42 43 Ainu hypothesis Edit The Japanese linguist Tatsumine Katayama 2004 found many similar basic words between Ainu and Japanese Because of a great amount of similar vocabulary phonology similar grammar and geographical and cultural connections he and Takeshi Umehara suggested that Japanese was closely related to the Ainu languages and was influenced by other languages especially Chinese and Korean 44 A linguistic analysis in 2015 proposed that the Japonic languages were related to the Ainu languages and to the Austroasiatic languages 45 However similarities between Ainu and Japonic are also due to extensive past contact Analytic grammatical constructions acquired or transformed in Ainu were likely due to contact with Japanese and the Japonic languages which had heavy influence on the Ainu languages with a large number of loanwords borrowed into the Ainu languages and to a smaller extent vice versa 46 Today a relation between Ainu and Japanese or Austroasiatic is not supported and Ainu remains a language isolate 47 See also EditLinguistic reconstruction Comparison of Japanese and Korean Eurasiatic languages Nostratic languagesReferences Edit a b Francis Ratte Alexander Takenobu 2016 Proto Korean Japanese A New Reconstruction of the Common Origin of the Japanese and Korean Languages Thesis The Ohio State University Archived from the original on 2018 08 30 Retrieved 2019 03 28 a b c Vovin Alexander 2013 From Koguryo to Tamna Slowly riding to the South with speakers of Proto Korean Korean Linguistics 15 2 222 240 doi 10 1075 kl 15 2 03vov a b While Altaic is repeated in encyclopedias and handbooks most specialists in these languages no longer believe that the three traditional supposed Altaic groups Turkic Mongolian and Tungusic are related Lyle Campbell amp Mauricio J Mixco A Glossary of Historical Linguistics 2007 University of Utah Press pg 7 a b When cognates proved not to be valid Altaic was abandoned and the received view now is that Turkic Mongolian and Tungusic are unrelated Johanna Nichols Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time 1992 Chicago pg 4 a b Careful examination indicates that the established families Turkic Mongolian and Tungusic form a linguistic area called Altaic Sufficient criteria have not been given that would justify talking of a genetic relationship here R M W Dixon The Rise and Fall of Languages 1997 Cambridge pg 32 a b T his selection of features does not provide good evidence for common descent we can observe convergence rather than divergence between Turkic and Mongolic languages a pattern than is easily explainable by borrowing and diffusion rather than common descent Asya Pereltsvaig Languages of the World An Introduction 2012 Cambridge This source has a good discussion of the Altaic hypothesis on pp 211 216 Thomas Pellard The comparative study of the Japonic languages Approaches to endangered languages in Japan and Northeast Asia Description documentation and revitalization National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics Aug 2018 Tachikawa Japan ffhal 01856152 a b Vovin Alexander 26 September 2017 Origins of the Japanese Language Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics a b Vovin Alexander 2014 Out of Southern China Philological and linguistic musings on the possible Urheimat of Proto Japonic Journees de CRLAO June 27 28 2014 INALCO Paris a b RECONSTRUCTING THE LANGUAGE MAP OF PREHISTORICAL NORTHEAST ASIA Juha Janhunen Studia Orientalia 108 2010 Lee Sean Hasegawa Toshikazu 2011 12 22 Bayesian phylogenetic analysis supports an agricultural origin of Japonic languages Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 278 1725 3662 3669 doi 10 1098 rspb 2011 0518 PMC 3203502 PMID 21543358 Bellwood Peter 2013 The Global Prehistory of Human Migration Malden Blackwell Publishing ISBN 9781118970591 Archaeological Explanation for the Diffusion Theory of the Japonic and Koreanic Languages MIYAMOTO Kazuo a b c d Whitman John 2011 Northeast Asian Linguistic Ecology and the Advent of Rice Agriculture in Korea and Japan Rice 4 Suppl 3 4 149 158 doi 10 1007 s12284 011 9080 0 ISSN 1939 8433 Lee Ki Moon Ramsey S Robert 2011 A History of the Korean language Cambridge Cambridge University Press ISBN 978 0 521 66189 8 Unger J Marshall 2009 The role of contact in the origins of the Japanese and Korean languages Honolulu University of Hawaii Press ISBN 978 0 8248 3279 7 Vovin Alexander 2015 On The Etymology of Middle Korean psʌr rice Turk Dilleri Arastirmalari 25 2 229 238 via Acedmia edu Janhunen Juha 2003 日本語系統論の現在 in Japanese 国際日本文化センター pp 477 490 Yurayong Szeto August 2020 Altaicization and De Altaicization of Japonic and Koreanic International Journal of Eurasian Linguistics Chaubey Gyaneshwer Driem George van 2020 Munda languages are father tongues but Japanese and Korean are not Evolutionary Human Sciences 2 doi 10 1017 ehs 2020 14 ISSN 2513 843X The Japonic speaking Early Jōmon people must have been drawn in to avail themselves of the pickings of Yayoi agricultural yields and the Yayoi may have prospered and succeeded in multiplying their paternal lineages precisely because they managed to accommodate the Jōmon linguistically and in material ways The dual nature of Japanese population structure was advanced by Miller who proposed that the resident Jōmon population spoke an Altaic language ancestral to modern Japanese and this Altaic tongue underwent Austronesian influence when the islanders absorbed the bearers of the incursive Yayoi culture Kornicki Peter December 2005 Aston Cambridge and Korea PDF Archived from the original PDF on May 29 2008 Martin 1966 Martin 1990 Robbeets Martine Bouckaert Remco 2018 Bayesian phylolinguistics reveals the internal structure of the Transeurasian family Journal of Language Evolution 3 2 145 162 doi 10 1093 jole lzy007 Pellard Thomas 2005 Koguryo the Language of Japan s Continental Relatives An Introduction to the Historical Comparative Study of the Japanese Kgouryoic Languages with a Preliminary Description of Archaic Northeastern Middle Chinese review PDF Korean Studies 29 167 170 doi 10 1353 ks 2006 0008 S2CID 145029765 Toh Soo Hee 2005 About Early Paekche Language Mistaken as Being Koguryo Language Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies 2 2 10 31 Shinmura Izuru 1916 國語及び朝 鮮語の數詞について Regarding numerals in Japanese and Korean Geibun 7 2 4 Vovin 2008 p 1 failed verification Vovin 2008 p 5 failed verification Robbeets Martine 2017 Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese A case of farming language dispersal Language Dynamics and Change 7 2 210 251 doi 10 1163 22105832 00702005 Benedict 1990 Matsumoto 1975 Miller 1967 Lewin 1976 Matsumoto 1975 Miller 1967 Murayama 1976 ユハ ヤンフネン A Framework for the Study of Japanese Language Origins 日本語系統論の現在 pdf 国際日本文化センター 京都 2003年 477 490頁 Kumar Ann 2009 Globalizing the Prehistory of Japan Language Genes and Civilization Oxford Routledge Vovin Alexander 2008 Proto Japanese beyond the accent system In Frellesvig Bjarne Whitman John eds Proto Japanese Issues and Prospects Current Issues in Linguistic Theory Vol 294 John Benjamins pp 141 156 doi 10 1075 cilt 294 11vov ISBN 978 90 272 4809 1 Javanese influence on Japanese Languages Of The World 2011 05 09 Retrieved 2023 06 13 Itabashi Yoshizo April 2011 An examination of a possible correlation between the tone distinction of the word initial mora of Old Japanese words and the voicing distinction of the word initial consonant of the putative matching Austronesian words PDF Language and Linguistics in Oceania 3 Archived from the original PDF on 2019 04 23 Retrieved 2019 04 23 Solnit David B 1992 Japanese Austro Tai By Paul K Benedict review Language 68 1 188 196 doi 10 1353 lan 1992 0061 ISSN 1535 0665 S2CID 141811621 Vovin Alexander 1998 Japanese rice agriculture terminology and linguistic affiliation of Yayoi culture In Blench Roger Spriggs Matthew eds Archaeology and Language II Archaeological Data and Linguistic Hypotheses Routledge pp 366 378 ISBN 9781134828692 However the above evidence suggests that mounted invaders from the mainland subjugated the native Yayoi population once and for all assimilating them linguistically Page 375 and 376 飯野睦毅 1994 奈良時代の日本語を解読する 東陽出版 Larish Michael D January 2006 Possible Proto Asian Archaic Residue and the Statigraphy of Diffusional Cumulation in Austro Asian Languages PDF Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics Retrieved 2019 01 07 Researchers find Tamil connection in Japanese Times of India The Times of India Retrieved 2017 05 21 日本語の意外な歴史 in Japanese Retrieved 2018 08 21 日本語の意外な歴史 第1話 金平譲司 Joji Kanehira Tatsumine Katayama 2004 Japanese and Ainu new version Tokyo Suzusawa library Jager Gerhard 24 September 2015 Support for linguistic macrofamilies from weighted sequence alignment PNAS 112 41 12752 12757 doi 10 1073 pnas 1500331112 Tranter Nicolas 25 June 2012 The Languages of Japan and Korea Routledge ISBN 9781136446580 via Google Books Vovin Alexander 2016 On the Linguistic Prehistory of Hokkaidō In Crosslinguistics and linguistic crossings in Northeast Asia papers on the languages of Sakhalin and adjacent regions Studia Orientalia 117 Bibliography EditWorks cited Edit Aston William George 1879 A comparative study of the Japanese and Korean languages Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Britain and Ireland New Series 11 317 364 doi 10 1017 s0035869x00017305 S2CID 161676140 Beckwith Christopher I 2004 Koguryo The Language of Japan s Continental Relatives An Introduction to the Historical Comparative Study of the Japanese Koguryoic Languages Leiden Brill Beckwith Christopher I 2005 The ethnolinguistic history of the early Korean peninsula region Japanese Koguryŏic and other languages in the Koguryŏ Paekche and Silla kingdoms PDF Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies 2 2 34 64 Archived from the original PDF on 2009 02 26 Beckwith Christopher I 2006 Methodological observations on some recent studies of the early ethnolinguistic history of Korea and vicinity Altai Hakpo 16 199 234 Benedict Paul K 1990 Japanese Austro Tai Ann Arbor Karoma Caldwell Robert 1875 A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of Languages second edition London Trubner Georg Stefan Peter A Michalove Alexis Manaster Ramer and Paul J Sidwell 1999 Telling general linguists about Altaic Journal of Linguistics 35 65 98 Cambridge Cambridge University Press Greenberg Joseph H 2000 2002 Indo European and Its Closest Relatives The Eurasiatic Language Family 2 volumes Stanford Stanford University Press Greenberg Joseph H 2005 Genetic Linguistics Essays on Theory and Method edited by William Croft Oxford Oxford University Press Kanazawa Shōsaburō 1910 The Common Origin of the Japanese and Korean Languages Tokyo Sanseidō Lewin Bruno 1976 Japanese and Korean The Problems and History of a Linguistic Comparison Journal of Japanese Studies 2 2 389 412 doi 10 2307 132059 JSTOR 132059 Martin Samuel E 1966 Lexical evidence relating Korean to Japanese Language 12 2 185 251 doi 10 2307 411687 JSTOR 411687 Martin Samuel E 1990 Morphological clues to the relationships of Japanese and Korean In Philip Baldi ed Linguistic Change and Reconstruction Methodology Berlin de Gruyter Matsumoto Katsumi 1975 Kodai nihongoboin soshikiko naiteki saiken no kokoromi Bulletin of the Faculty of Law and Letters Kanazawa University 22 83 152 Miller Roy Andrew 1967 The Japanese language Chicago University of Chicago Press Miller Roy Andrew 1971 Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages Chicago University of Chicago Press Murayama Shichiro 1976 The Malayo Polynesian Component in the Japanese Language Journal of Japanese Studies 2 2 413 436 doi 10 2307 132060 JSTOR 132060 Ōno Susumu n d The genealogy of the Japanese language Tamil and Japanese Ōno Susumu 2000 日本語の形成 岩波書店 ISBN 4 00 001758 6 Poppe Nicholas 1965 Introduction to Altaic Linguistics Wiesbaden Otto Harrassowitz Riley Barbara E 2003 Aspects of the Genetic Relationship of the Korean and Japanese Languages PhD thesis University of Hawaii Shibatani Masayoshi 1990 The languages of Japan Cambridge Cambridge UP Starostin Sergei A 1991 Altajskaja problema i proisxozdenie japonskogo jazyka The Altaic Problem and the Origin of the Japanese Language Moscow Nauka Starostin Sergei A Anna V Dybo and Oleg A Mudrak 2003 Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages 3 volumes Leiden Brill Also database version Trombetti Alfredo 1922 1923 Elementi di glottologia 2 volumes Bologna Nicola Zanichelli Vovin Alexander 2003 日本語系統論の現在 これからどこへ The genetic relationship of the Japanese language Where do we go from here In 日本語系統論の現在 Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese Language edited by Alexander Vovin and Toshiki Osada Kyoto International Center for Japanese Studies ISSN 1346 6585 Whitman John Bradford 1985 The Phonological Basis for the Comparison of Japanese and Korean PhD thesis Harvard University Further reading Edit Francis Ratte Alexander Takenobu 2016 Proto Korean Japanese A New Reconstruction of the Common Origin of the Japanese and Korean Languages PhD dissertation Ohio State University Janhunen Juha 2003 A Framework for the Study of Japanese Language Origins In Vovin Alexander Osada Toshiki eds Nihongo keitōron no ima 日本語系統論の現在 Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese Language International Research Center for Japanese Studies pp 477 490 ISBN 978 4 9015 5817 4 Archived from the original PDF on 2018 08 06 Retrieved 2018 08 06 Katsumi Matsumoto 2007 世界言語のなかの日本語 Sekaigengo no nakano Nihongo Japanese in the World s Languages Tokyo 三省堂 Sanseido Martin Samuel E 1968 Grammatical elements relating Korean to Japanese In Proceedings of the Eighth Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences B 9 405 407 Martin Samuel E 1975 Problems in establishing the prehistoric relationships of Korean and Japanese In Proceedings International Symposium Commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Korean Liberation Seoul National Academy of Sciences Martin Samuel E 1991 Recent research on the relationships of Japanese and Korean In Sprung from Some Common Source Investigations into the Prehistory of Languages edited by Sydney M Lamb and E Douglas Mitchell Stanford Stanford University Press Martin Samuel E 1996 Consonant Lenition in Korean and the Macro Altaic Question Honolulu University of Hawaii Press Miller Roy Andrew 1980 Origins of the Japanese Language Lectures in Japan during the Academic Year 1977 78 Seattle University of Washington Press Miller Roy Andrew 1996 Languages and History Japanese Korean and Altaic Oslo Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture Robbeets Martine 2004a Belief or argument The classification of the Japanese language Eurasia Newsletter 8 Graduate School of Letters Kyoto University Robbeets Martine 2004b Swadesh 100 on Japanese Korean and Altaic Tokyo University Linguistic Papers TULIP 23 99 118 Robbeets Martine 2005 Is Japanese related to Korean Tungusic Mongolic and Turkic Wiesbaden Otto Harrassowitz Robbeets Martine 2007 How the actional suffix chain connects Japanese to Altaic Turkic Languages 11 1 3 58 Unger J Marshall 2014 No rush to judgment the case against Japanese as an isolate NINJAL Project Review 4 3 211 230 doi 10 15084 00000755 Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Classification of the Japonic languages amp oldid 1178894260, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.