Austronesian–Ongan languages - Revision history

UpdateBot: robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)

2021-11-15T15:29:41Z

robot: Update article (please report if you notice any mistake or error in this edit)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:59, 15 November 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Infobox language family		{{Infobox language family
	\|name=Austronesian–Ongan		\|name=Austronesian–Ongan
	\|acceptance=~~disputed~~		\|acceptance=widely rejected
	\|region=Southeast Asia, the Pacific and Madagascar		\|region=Southeast Asia, East Asia, the Pacific and Madagascar
	\|familycolor=~~superfamily~~		\|familycolor=Andamanese
	\|family=Proposed [[language family]]		\|family=Proposed [[language family]]
	\|child1=[[Ongan languages\|Ongan]]		\|child1=[[Ongan languages\|Ongan]]
	\|child2=[[Austronesian languages\|Austronesian]]		\|child2=[[Jarawa language (Andaman Islands)\|Jarawa]]
			\|child3=[[Austronesian languages\|Austronesian]]
	\|glotto=none		\|glotto=none
	}}		}}

	'''Austronesian–Ongan''' is a proposed connection between the [[Ongan languages\|Ongan]] and [[Austronesian languages\|Austronesian]] [[language family\|language families]], proposed by [[Juliette Blevins]] (2007). Ongan is a small family of two attested languages in the [[Andaman Islands]], while Austronesian is one of the largest language families in the world, with a thousand languages spread across the Pacific. The proposed connection has been ~~criticized and~~ rejected by other linguists.~~<ref>Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages", ''Oceanic Linguistics'' 53:2:300–391.</ref>~~		'''Austronesian–Ongan''' is a proposed connection between the [[Ongan languages\|Ongan]] and [[Austronesian languages\|Austronesian]] [[language family\|language families]], proposed by [[Juliette Blevins]] (2007). Ongan is a small family of two attested languages in the [[Andaman Islands]], while Austronesian is one of the largest language families in the world, with a thousand languages spread across the Pacific. The proposed connection has been rejected by other linguists.

	==Sound correspondences==		==Sound correspondences==
Line 62:		Line 63:

	==Criticism==		==Criticism==
	The connection between Austronesian and Ongan has not been ~~supported~~ by ~~most Austronesian~~ linguists. [[Robert Blust]] (2014) ~~finds~~ that Blevins' conclusions are not supported by her data~~: Of~~ her first 25 reconstructions, none are reproducible using the comparative method~~, and~~ Blust concludes that the grammatical comparison does not hold up~~. Blust~~ also cites non-linguistic (such as cultural, archaeological, and biological) evidence against Blevins' hypothesis.<ref>Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages", ''Oceanic Linguistics'' 53:2:300–391.</ref>		The proposal of a genealogical connection between Austronesian and Ongan has not been well received by other linguists. [[George van Driem\|Van Driem]] (2011) considers Blevins' evidence as "not compelling", although he leaves the possibility open that some resemblances could be the result of contact/borrowing, a position also held by Hoogervorst (2012).<ref>{{cite book \|last=van Driem \|first=George \|year=2011 \|chapter=Rice and the Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien homelands \|chapter-url=https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sian-Halcrow/publication/256442016_Halcrow_S_E_and_N_Tayles_2011_Human_diversity_in_mainland_Southeast_Asia_a_view_from_bioarchaeology_N_Enfield_ed_Dynamics_of_human_diversity_in_mainland_Southeast_Asia_Wenner-Gren_International_Sympos/links/00b7d528a94b2323cf000000/Halcrow-S-E-and-N-Tayles-2011-Human-diversity-in-mainland-Southeast-Asia-a-view-from-bioarchaeology-N-Enfield-ed-Dynamics-of-human-diversity-in-mainland-Southeast-Asia-Wenner-Gren-International-Sympo.pdf#page=368 \|accessdate= 13 November 2021 \|editor=N.J Enfield \|title=Dynamics of human diversity: the case of mainland Southeast Asia \|location=Canberra \|publisher=Pacific Linguistics}}</ref><ref>{{cite thesis \|last=Hoogervorst \|first=Tom \|year=2012 \|title=Southeast Asia in the ancient Indian Ocean world: combining historical linguistic and archaeological approaches \|type=PhD thesis \|publisher=University of Oxford \|url=https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b8b47816-7184-42ab-958e-026bc3431ea3 \|accessdate=13 November 2021 \|quote=Nevertheless, it is conceivable that some of the given forms are genuinely related, though better explained as loans than common inheritance (p. 91).}}</ref> [[Robert Blust\|Blust]] (2014) argues that Blevins' conclusions are not supported by her data, and that of her first 25 reconstructions, none are reproducible using the comparative method. Blust concludes that the grammatical comparison does not hold up, and also cites non-linguistic (such as cultural, archaeological, and biological) evidence against Blevins' hypothesis.<ref>Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages", ''Oceanic Linguistics'' 53:2:300–391. "To put it bluntly, the AON hypothesis is a castle built on sand, an elaborate illusion fostered by the misplaced hope that a major discovery has been made that somehow eluded the investigations of all other scholars."</ref>

	==References==		==References==

>Sagotreespirit: Rewording

2021-03-01T14:10:54Z

Rewording

New page

{{Infobox language family
|name=Austronesian–Ongan
|acceptance=disputed
|region=Southeast Asia, the Pacific and Madagascar
|familycolor=superfamily
|family=Proposed [[language family]]
|child1=[[Ongan languages|Ongan]]
|child2=[[Austronesian languages|Austronesian]]
|glotto=none
}}

'''Austronesian–Ongan''' is a proposed connection between the [[Ongan languages|Ongan]] and [[Austronesian languages|Austronesian]] [[language family|language families]], proposed by [[Juliette Blevins]] (2007). Ongan is a small family of two attested languages in the [[Andaman Islands]], while Austronesian is one of the largest language families in the world, with a thousand languages spread across the Pacific. The proposed connection has been criticized and rejected by other linguists.<ref>Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages", ''Oceanic Linguistics'' 53:2:300–391.</ref>

==Sound correspondences==
Blevins (2007) proposes the following [[sound correspondence]]s:

{|class=wikitable
|+Consonants
|-align=center
![[Proto-Austronesian]] (PAN)
|*p||*t||*k||*q||*ku||*qu||*ʔ||*b||*d||*g||*s, *S||*c, *C||*z||*j||*h||*m||*n||*ny||*ŋ||*N||*l||*r||*R||*w
|-align=center
!Proto-Ongan (PO)
|*p||*t||colspan=2|*k||colspan=2|*kw||*ʔ||*b||*d||*j, *g||colspan=3|*c||*j, *y||*h, *y, *∅||*m||*n||*ny||*ŋ||*l, *y||*l||*r||*l, *r||*w
|}
There is neutralization and sometimes loss of final nasals in Proto-Ongan, with final **n merged into Proto-Ongan *ŋ, and final **m and **ny partially merged into *ŋ. (The latter merger, and loss, may post-date Proto-Ongan.) Final (oral) stops are lost in multisyllabic words (unstressed syllables?) in Proto-Ongan.

Initial **b drops from Proto-Ongan before **u and perhaps before **i.

<nowiki>**</nowiki>qw and **kw become *kw in Proto-Ongan, and *q/k or *w in Proto-AN.

Proto-Ongan and Proto-AN share a typologically odd restriction against root-initial *m-.

Vowel-initial words in Proto-Ongan correspond to *q in Proto-AN; because the Austronesian forms often include doublets, Blevins believes this is due to epenthesis in Proto-AN.

{|class=wikitable
|+Vowels in open, non-final syllables
|-align=center
!Proto-Austronesian (PAN)
|*i||*u||*a||*ə||*ay#
|-align=center
!Proto-Ongan (PO)
|*i||*u, *o||*a, *e||*e||*e#
|}

Final **ay has become *e in Proto-Ongan. *e also derives from **a before palatals, word-finally, and when unstressed.

Proto-Ongan *o typically derives from **u in a checked syllable, or from assimilation as in **wa.

Proto-Ongan *ə is thought to have been an allophone of *e, found before coda nasals except after palatals.

==Grammatical correspondences==
Most derivational morphology and grammatical words are so short that the several resemblances between Proto-Ongan and Proto-AN may be chance. However, Ongan morphology does appear to explain an odd situation in Austronesian.

Proto-Austronesian has a limited set of reconstructed vowel-initial roots, all of which are kin terms, body parts, or other readily possessed nouns. Ongan languages have [[inalienable possession]], and inalienably possessed nouns are all vowel initial. Elsewhere, vowel-initial roots in Proto-Ongan correspond to initial *q- in Proto-Austronesian. The complete list of vowel-initial Proto-AN roots reconstructed by Blust is as follows:

;Kin: *aki grandfather; *ama father, paternal uncle; *aNak child; *apu grandparent/grandchild; *aya paternal aunt; *ina mother, maternal aunt
;Body: *ujung/ijung nose; *ikuR tail; *iSeq urine; *uRat vein, sinew; *utaq vomit
;Other: *asu/wasu dog; *aCab cover; *ian home; *uNay splinter

These are all the kinds of words expected in inalienable-possession systems.<ref>*aCab 'cover' may be cognate with Proto-Ongan *otab 'head',</ref> Blevins suggests that inalienable possession was lost from Proto-Austronesian, presumably after epenthetic *q- was added to vowel-initial words. There are many Proto-AN doublets like *wasu, *asu 'dog'; initial *w- has also been lost from *w-anaN 'right side' and *w-iRi 'left side' in [[Pazeh language|Pazeh]] and other languages, from what Blust describes as "some now-obscured morphological process".<ref>Blevins, p 183</ref> Blevins suggests that in all three cases, the Proto-Austronesian *w- reflects the Proto-Ongan possessive prefix *gw- 'his, her', which remained as a fossil in some daughter languages. Thus proto-Austronesian–Ongan may explain some of the odd patterns found in proto-Austronesian.

==Criticism==
The connection between Austronesian and Ongan has not been supported by most Austronesian linguists. [[Robert Blust]] (2014) finds that Blevins' conclusions are not supported by her data: Of her first 25 reconstructions, none are reproducible using the comparative method, and Blust concludes that the grammatical comparison does not hold up. Blust also cites non-linguistic (such as cultural, archaeological, and biological) evidence against Blevins' hypothesis.<ref>Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian Languages", ''Oceanic Linguistics'' 53:2:300–391.</ref>

==References==
<references/>
*{{Citation
|last=Blevins
|first=Juliette
|year=2007
|title=A Long Lost Sister of Proto-Austronesian? Proto-Ongan, Mother of Jarawa and Onge of the Andaman Islands
|journal=Oceanic Linguistics
|volume=46
|issue=1
|pages=154–198
|url=http://email.eva.mpg.de/~blevins/pdf/webpub2007a.pdf
|doi=10.1353/ol.2007.0015
|s2cid=143141296
|url-status=dead
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110111172242/http://email.eva.mpg.de/~blevins/pdf/webpub2007a.pdf
|archivedate=2011-01-11
}} (available [http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/reprints/Blevins/rep-blevins.htm here])

{{Language families}}
{{Eurasian languages}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Austronesian-Ongan languages}}
[[Category:Andamanese languages|*]]
[[Category:Austronesian languages|*]]
[[Category:Proposed language families]]