Tibeto-Burman replaces Indo-Chinese in the 1990s: Review of a decade of a scholarship (original) (raw)
2002, Lingua, 112 (2): 79-102.
Tibeto-Burman is one of the world's greatest language families, second only to lndo-European in terms of populations of speakers. Advances made in the course of the decade have led to a major paradigm shift in Tibeto-Burman historical linguistics and phylogeny. The numerous contributions to the field in the 1990s are reviewed in a statement on the current state of the art.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
The Tibeto-Burman languages of Northeast India
2017. In Graham Thurgood and Randy J. LaPolla, Eds. The Sino-Tibetan Languages [Second Edition]. London, Routledge: 213-242.
Northeast India is the epicentre of phylogenetic diversity in the Sino-Tibetan family, with perhaps 20 independent Tibeto-Burman subgroups and as many as 300 languages spoken there. Politically, Northeast India is divided into the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura. Linguistically, it can be divided into Northern, Central and Eastern Border areas. The languages of this region remain relatively little-known and underdescribed. This chapter reviews the state of current knowledge concerning Northeast Indian Tibeto-Burman languages, and urges further research on individual languages and low-level subgroups in the area.
The Tibeto-Burman Languages of South Asia: The languages, histories, and genetic classification.
The Languages and Linguistics of South Asia: A Comprehensive Guide, ed. by Hans Henrich Hock and Elena Bashir. [The World of Linguistics, Volume 7.] Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 130-154., 2016
Designed to be a brief introduction to the Tibeto-Burman languages of South Asia. Includes basic information and references on most languages as well as comparisons of current classification schemes of van Driem, Matisoff, Bradley, and Thurgood and LaPolla.
Tibeto-Burman subgroups and historical grammar
Himalayan Linguistics, 10 (1): 31-39., 2011
Several distinct strains of thought on subgrouping, presented in memory of David Watters and Michael Noonan, are united by a golden thread. Tamangic consists of Tamangish and maybe something else, just as Shafer would have wanted it. Tamangic may represent a wave of peopling which washed over the Himalayas after Magaric and Kiranti but before Bodish. There is no such language family as Sino-Tibetan. The term 'trans-Himalayan' for the phylum merits consideration. A residue of Tibeto-Burman conjugational morphology shared between Kiranti and Tibetan does not go unnoticed, at least twice. Black Mountain Mönpa is not an East Bodish language, and this too does not go unnoticed. k e y wor d s
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
pp. 363-397 in Gray Tuttle, Kunsang Gya, Karma Dare and Johnathan Wilber, eds., The Third International Conference on Tibetan Language, Volume 1: Proceedings of the Panels on Domains of Use and Linguistic Interactions. New York: Trace Foundation., 2013
Tibeto-Burman vs. Sino-Tibetan
pp. 101-119 in Brigitte Bauer and Georges-Jean Pinault, eds., Language in Time and Space. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter., 2003