Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T01:26:06.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Achinese And Mainland Austronesian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

H. L. Shorto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Achinese and the Austronesian languages spoken on the South-East Asian mainland (‘Chamic’) are known to have borrowed numerous words from Mon-Khmer and to show other effects of Mon-Khmer contact. Systematic comparison especially of their historico-phonological peculiarities makes it appear that they are closely related, irrespective of this, within Austronesian. Such a postulated relationship is at variance with the findings of lexicostatistics. It is suggested that the discrepancy results from the very high incidence of Malay loans in Achinese.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , February 1975 , pp. 81 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aymonier, E. F. 1889. Grammaire de la langue chame. Saigon: Imprimerie ColonialeGoogle Scholar
(= Cochin-chine Française. Excursions et Reconnaissances, xiv, 31, 5–92).Google Scholar
Aymonier, E. F., AND Cabaton, A. 1906. Dictionnaire čam-français. (Publications de l'École Française d'Extrĉme-Orient, 7.) Paris: E. Leroux.Google Scholar
Blood, D. W. 1962. ‘Reflexes of Proto-Malayo-Polynesian in Cham’, Anthropological Linguistics, iv, 9, 11–20.Google Scholar
Blust, R. A. 1973. ‘The origins of Bintulu 6, d', BSOAS, xxxvi, 3, 603–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boohet, G., AND Dournes, J. 1953. Lexique polyglotte: köho-français-viêtnamien-rōglai. Saïigon: Éditions France-Asie.Google Scholar
Collins, I. V. 1969. ‘The position of Atjehnese among Southeast Asian languages’, in Johnston, R., and others, Mon-Khmer studies III. (Publication No. 4 of the Linguistic Circle of Saigon.) [Saigon]: Linguistic Circle of Saigon and Summer Institute of Linguistics, 48–60.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1948. ‘Aanteekeningen betreffende de verhouding van het Atjèhsch tot de Mon-Khmer-talen’, BTLV, civ, 4, 429–514.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. In press. ‘Evidence of long vowels in early Achehnese’, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Comparative Austronesian Linguistics.Google Scholar
Dahl, O. C. 1973. Proto-Austronesian. (Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies Monograph Series, No. 15.) Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Dempwolff, O. 1934–1938. Vergleichende Lautlehre des austronesischen Wortschatzes. (Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen-Sprachen, Beihefte 15, 17, 19.) Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
Dyen, I. 1951. ‘Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *Z’, Language, xxvii, 4, 534–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, I. 1953a. ‘Dempwolff's *R’, Language, xxix, 3, 359–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, I. 1953b. The Proto-Malayo-Polynesian laryngeals. Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, I. 1965a. ‘Formosan evidence for some new Proto-Austronesian phonemes’, Lingua, xiv, 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, I. 1965b. ‘A lexicostatistical classification of the Austronesian languages’, Supplement to IJAL, xxxi, 1.Google Scholar
Hendon, R. S. 1964. ‘The Proto-Malayopolynesian word for “ladder, staircase”’, JAOS, LXXXIV, 3, 259–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreemer, J. 1931. Atjèhsch handwoordenboek (Atjèhsch-Nederlandsch). Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Lafont, P.-B. 1968. Lexique français-jarai-viêtnamien. (Publications de 1'École Française d'Extrême-Orient, 63.) Paris: École Française d'Extrême-Orient.Google Scholar
Landes, A. 1886. Contes tjames: texte en caractères tjames…et…lexique. Saigon: [the author ?].Google Scholar
Moussay, G. 1971. Dictionnaire căm-vietnamien-français. Phanrang: Centre Cultural Căm.Google Scholar
Niemann, G. K. 1891. ‘Bijdrage tot de kennis der verhouding van het Tjam tot de talen van Indonesië’, BTLV, XL, 1, 27–44.Google Scholar
Scott, N. C. 1956. A dictionary of Sea Dayak. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.Google Scholar
Shorto, H. L. 1973. ‘Three Mon-Khmer word families’, BSOAS, xxxvi, 2, 374–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorto, H. L. In press. ‘The vocalism of Proto-Mon-Khmer’, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Austroasiatic Linguistics.Google Scholar
Smalley, W. A. 1954. ‘Srê phonemes and syllables’, JAOS, LXXIV, 4, 217–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D. D., AND Healey, A. 1962. ‘Some Philippine language subgroupings: a lexicostatistical study’, Anthropological Linguistics, iv, 9, 21–33.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. M. 1963. ‘Proto-Malayo-Polynesian reflexes in Rade, Jarai and Chru’, Studies in Linguistics, xvn, 59–75.Google Scholar