Mruic languages
In today's world, Mruic languages has gained great relevance in various areas of society. Whether due to its impact on popular culture, its importance in the scientific field or its influence on history, Mruic languages has become a topic of general interest for people of all ages and professions. In this article, we will explore different aspects related to Mruic languages, analyzing its impact on today's society and its relevance over time. From its origins to its evolution today, Mruic languages has been the subject of study and debate, being a topic that arouses great interest and curiosity in those who wish to learn more about it.
| Mruic | |
|---|---|
| Mru–Hkongso | |
| Geographic distribution | Burma, Bangladesh |
| Linguistic classification | Sino-Tibetan
|
| Subdivisions | |
| Glottolog | mrui1235 |
Mruic or Mru–Hkongso is a small group of Sino-Tibetan languages consisting of two languages, Mru and Anu-Hkongso. Their relationship within Sino-Tibetan is unclear.
Peterson & Wright (2009) proposed the name Mru–Hkongso. DeLancey (2021) also uses the name Mru–Hkongso.
Classification
Matisoff (2015) classifies Mru as part of the Northeast Indian areal group, a linkage that includes Tani, Deng (Digaro), "Kuki-Chin–Naga", Meithei, Mikir, and Sal.
On the other hand, Bradley (1997) classifies Mru as part of Lolo-Burmese, based on Löffler's (1966) observations that Mru shares many phonological and lexical resemblances with Lolo-Burmese.
The Mru-Hkongso group was first proposed by Peterson & Wright (2009), who do not consider it to be a subgroup of Lolo-Burmese.
Peterson (2017:205) notes that Mru and Hkongso do not have any features characteristic of Kuki-Chin languages that have been identified by VanBik (2009), including lack of the sound change Proto-Tibeto-Burman *s > tʰ, lack of Kuki-Chin-type verb stem alternation, and lack of the singular first person pronoun (1.SG) *kaj which is present in most Kuki-Chin languages.
Peterson (2009) considers Mru-Hkongso to be a separate Tibeto-Burman branch, and notes the following similarities between Mru-Hkongso and Bodo–Garo languages.
- Bodo–Garo *=kho 'accusative'; Mru =k(öj) 'accusative' (Hkongso locative =ko)
- Bodo–Garo *=ba ‘also’; Mru-Hkongso =pö ‘also’
- Bodo–Garo *–ram 'locative nominalizer'; Mru –ram 'locative nominalizer'
- Bodo–Garo *=gVn 'future marker'; Mru –köm ~ kön 'irrealis marker' (Hkongso ham)
- Bodo–Garo *–(k)ha 'past marker'; Mru –khaj ~ -hö 'past marker' (Hkongso kö ?)
- Bodo–Garo *–dV 'imperative marker'; Mru –diö 'imperative marker' (Hkongso de)
Peterson (2009) considers the similarities with Bodo–Garo to be due to the possible early split of Mruic from a Tibeto-Burman branch that included Bodo–Garo (see also Central Tibeto-Burman languages and Sal languages).
Grammar
Both Mru and Hkongso display SVO (subject-verb-object) order instead of the SOV word order typical of most Tibeto-Burman languages. Bai, Sinitic, and Karenic are the only other Sino-Tibetan language branches with primarily verb-medial (SVO) word order.
References
- ^ a b Peterson, David A. and Jonathan Wright. 2009. Mru-Hkongso: a new Tibeto-Burman grouping. Paper presented at The 42nd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (ICSTLL 42), Chiang Mai.
- ^ DeLancey, Scott (2021). "Classifying Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan) languages". The Languages and Linguistics of Mainland Southeast Asia. De Gruyter. pp. 207–224. doi:10.1515/9783110558142-012. ISBN 978-3-11-055814-2.
- ^ Matisoff, James A. 2015. The Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus. Berkeley: University of California. (PDF)
- ^ Matisoff, James A. (2003). Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-520-09843-5.
- ^ DeLancey, Scott (2015). "Morphological Evidence for a Central Branch of Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan)". Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale. 44 (2): 122–149. doi:10.1163/19606028-00442p02.
- ^ Löffler, Lorenz G. (1966). "The contribution of Mru to Sino-Tibetan linguistics". Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft. 116 (1): 118–159. JSTOR 43369896.
- ^ Bradley, David (1997). "Tibeto-Burman languages and classification" (PDF). Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, Papers in South East Asian linguistics. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. pp. 1–71.
- ^ Peterson, David. 2017. "On Kuki-Chin subgrouping." In Picus Sizhi Ding and Jamin Pelkey, eds. Sociohistorical linguistics in Southeast Asia: New horizons for Tibeto-Burman studies in honor of David Bradley, 189-209. Leiden: Brill.
- ^ VanBik, Kenneth. 2009. Proto-Kuki-Chin: A Reconstructed Ancestor of the Kuki-Chin Languages. STEDT Monograph 8. ISBN 0-944613-47-0.
- ^ a b c Peterson, David A. 2009. "Where does Mru fit into Tibeto-Burman?" Paper presented at The 42nd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (ICSTLL 42), November 2009, Payap University, Chiangmai, Thailand.
- ^ Ebersole, Harold. 1996. The Mru Language: A preliminary grammatical sketch. Ms.
- ^ Jonathan Michael Wright. 2009. Hkongso Grammar Sketch. MA thesis, Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics.
Further reading
- Language and Social Development Organization. (2019). A Chin dialect survey (Part 1 of 2) . doi:10.5281/zenodo.3344667 (The 2008-03 Anu-Hkongso Chin survey contains data on both Anu-Hkongso and the Anok, Dawpreng, and Sungma dialects of Mru.)
External links
- Proto-Mru-Khongso reconstructions (Sino-Tibetan Branches Project)
Sino-Tibetan branches | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Western Himalayas (Himachal, Uttarakhand, Nepal, Sikkim) |
|  | |||
| Eastern Himalayas (Tibet, Bhutan, Arunachal) | |||||
| Myanmar and Indo-Burmese border |
| ||||
| East and Southeast Asia |
| ||||
| Dubious (possible isolates) (Arunachal) |
| ||||
| Proposed groupings | |||||
| Proto-languages | |||||
Italics indicates single languages that are also considered to be separate branches. | |||||