LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hill, Nathan W. (2014)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: 8630, 2200, 3100
Following a suggestion of Starostin (1989), Baxter & Sagart (2011) reconstruct *-n, *-j, and *-r as distinct finals in Old Chinese. These three finals have regular correspondences\ud in Tibetan and Burmese. The Trans-Himalayan proto-language distinguished *-n, *-j, *-r, *-l, and *-rl. Burmese loses *-r and generally loses *-l, except after -u-, where it changes to -y. Tibetan loses *-y and changes *-rl to -l. Chinese changes *-rl to *-r. Because Burmese shows different reflexes for *aj (-ay) and *əj (> -i), the merger of *ə and *a in Tibetan and Burmese are independent innovations; and this merger does not confirm a ‘Tibeto-\ud Burman’ subgroup (contra Handel 2008). These correspondences require confirmation through further research on evidence of *-r in the Min dialects and Han dynasty Buddhist transcriptions from Indic languages in Chinese characters.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article