Khitan Understanding The Language

Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts
University of Helsinki, Finland
Juha A. Janhunen
Khitan was the dynastic language of the Liao empire in Manchuria and Northern China (907-1115). Although today extinct, samples of Khitan are preserved in two native scripts, known as the Khitan Large Script and the Khitan Small Script. Both scripts may be classified as Sinitic or Sinoform in the typological sense, though only the Large Script has a direct connection with the Chinese script. Recent progress in the decipherment of, in particular, the Khitan Small Script allows the lexicon and grammar of the Khitan language to be assessed in much more detail than before. Khitan may be defined as a Para-Mongolic language, meaning that it represents a branch related to, but collateral with, the extant and historically known Mongolic languages. The present paper examines the genetic position of the Khitan language with regard to Mongolic with the help of the methods of comparative linguistics, as applied to the deciphered Khitan language material. Keywords: Sinitic scripts, Khitan Small Script, Khitan language, ParaMongolic, reconstruction, decipherment
In the global context of ancient scripts and their decipherment it is not widely known that some of the last great challenges posed by unknown systems of writing are those connected with the scripts of peripheral mediaeval China. Three non-Chinese ethnic groupsthe Khitan, the Jurchen, and the Tangut, corresponding to the alien dynasties of Liao (907-1125), Jin (1115-1234), and Xixia (1038-1227), respectively created scripts and literary languages of their own. After centuries of oblivion, samples of these scripts emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and became objects of intensive study. Even so, we cannot say
SCRIPTA, Volume 4 (October 2012): 107-132 2012 The Hunmin jeongeum Society
108
SCRIPTA, VOLUME 4 (2012)
that any of these scripts has been fully deciphered. The problems vary from script to script, however, and they are also connected with the level of knowledge we have of the underlying languagesKhitan, Jurchen, and Tangut. It happens that of these three languages, only Jurchen survived till later times, becoming the direct ancestor of Manchu, while both Khitan and Tangut became extinct soon after the fall of the political states that had used them as their dynastic languages.1
1. The Khitan Scripts

As far as Khitan is concerned, the situation is complicated by the circumstance that it was written in two different scripts, today known as the Khitan Large Script ( Dazi) and the Khitan Small Script ( Xiaozi). Like the Tangut Script and the Jurchen Script, the two Khitan scripts have a Chinese appearance, meaning that they are composed of the same type of primary and secondary elements (strokes, characters), presupposing the same type of writing instruments (brush, ink), as the Chinese script. We may therefore identify all these scripts as Sinitic or Sinoform in the typological and aesthetic sense. None of them is, however, identical with the Chinese script, and only two scripts, the Khitan Large Script and the Jurchen Script, are materially related to the Chinese script, meaning that they may be viewed as ancient regional derivatives of the latter, a situation which also allows them to be identified as Sinographic writing systems, and their characters as Sinograms. The Khitan Small Script and the Tangut Script, on the other hand, have no material relationship with the Chinese script, which suggests that their origination may have involved a factor of conscious invention.2 We know today that the Khitan Large Script and the Jurchen Script are very closely related with each other, both probably representing a
1
The present paper will not deal in any more detail with the Tangut script. However, from the point of view of graphemic analysis, this script offers a particularly difficult challenge, since nothing is known of the principles of how it was designed. For this reason, the assumptions conventionally made about the identity of the Tangut language are also detached from the graphic reality and cannot be considered as confirmed, as was already pointed out by Kwanten (1984, 1988).
2
For a more comprehensive survey of the chronological context of the scripts of mediaeval peripheral China, cf. Janhunen (1994).
109
continuation of a local Manchurian variety of the Chinese script. It is possible, though not verified, that this same variety, or an earlier form of it, was used already before the Liao-Jin period in other political contexts, including, perhaps, Beiwei (386-534) and/or Balhae (698-926). It is notable that the Khitan Large Script incorporates many Chinese characters, especially simple ones, in unchanged form, while in the Jurchen Script such characters are normally distinguished from their Chinese counterparts by using diacritics. We also know that both the Khitan and the Jurchen used this script as a mixed logo-syllabic system, with some characters functioning as logograms (with Khitan and Jurchen pronunciations) and others as syllabograms (for fixed sequences of sounds, not necessarily corresponding to phonetic syllables). In general, the number of separate characters in the Khitan Large and Jurchen Scripts is considerably smaller than in the Chinese script, and the forms of the characters are less complicated, with no functionally relevant radical components. Unfortunately, the Khitan Large Script is still very imperfectly deciphered, with only a small proportion of the characters identified with meanings (logograms) and/or sounds (syllabograms). One important direction of research that has not yet been properly initiated is the systematic comparison of the Khitan Large Script characters with those of the Jurchen Script. Due to the fact that the Jurchen Script survived relatively long (till the 16th century) and was used to write a wellknown language (Jurchen-Manchu), our knowledge of the Jurchen Script is rather close to decipherment in the sense that most of its elements have a known linguistic correlate, even if there still remain many open questions.3 On the other hand, the corpus of the Khitan Large Script is much more extensive, and in a much better state of preservation, than that of the Jurchen Script. Therefore, the Khitan Large Script is potentially a crucial source of information also for Jurchen studies. At the present stage, however, its potential cannot yet be exploited. This leaves us only the Khitan Small Script corpus as the most important currently available direct source on the Khitan language. Since several decades, it has been known that this is a basically syllabic script,
3
The principal works on the Jurchen Script are Grube (1896), Kiyose (1978), Kane (1989), Jin Qicong (1984), and Pevnov (2004), as well as, most recently, Golovachev & Ivliev & Pevnov & Rykin (2011). Of these, only Kane comments also on the Khitan Large Script.
110
using a limited number of graphically simple syllabic signs (syllabograms), known as the Khitan Small Script characters. What makes the graphic image visually complicated is the convention of accumulating the syllabic signs into blocks corresponding to linguistic words, a convention which, incidentally, has a close analogy in the Korean Hangeul.4 Since a Khitan word (with derivational and inflectional suffixes) can consist of up to eight syllables, a block can have a graphic appearance (stroke composition) even more complex than a Chinese charactera circumstance that caused confusion during the early stages of Khitan studies, when it was not yet clear how the Small and Large scripts should be properly distinguished.5 The decipherment of the Khitan Small Script has involved both slow progress and rapid steps forward starting with the early 1920s.6 A definitive breakthrough, which for the first time yielded concrete readings of Khitan words, was achieved by a team active in China in the 70s and 80s.7 Since then, the most important development has been the rapid increase of the corpus, conditioned by the discovery of new texts. The currently known corpus comprises 34 published and a few un published epigraphic texts plus a diffuse selection of minor materials. The standard of publication varies, however, and not all texts have been made available in a form that can be used for textological and linguistic analysis. Even so, and in spite of the fact that the epigraphic texts tend to be stereotypic in form and content, the corpus is large enough to allow relatively detailed conclusions to be made about the Khitan language and the properties of the Small Script. The phonetic value of the Khitan Small Script syllabic signs varies from
The differ ence between the two scripts is, of course, that the blocks in Hangeul are composed of phonograms. It is not known whether the Khitan Small Script can have inspired the creators of the Hangeul, for ultimately the blocks in both the Khitan Small Script and the Hangeul must have been modelled along the principle of Chinese characters.
4 5
Chingeltei & Liu Fengzhu & Chen Naixiong & Yu Baolin & and Xing Fuli (1985). For a more detailed history of Khitan Small Script studies, see Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010: 20-25).
7
A large part of the research on the Khitan Small Script has been communicated in scattered papers and a few monographs in Chinese. An important critical summary of all this work was made available for the international readership by Kane (2009).
6
The distinction between the two Khitan scripts was first correctly made and communicated inter nationally by Toyoda (1964).
111
one segment (consonant or vowel) to sequences of up to three segments. Some characters seem to be used also for longer words as what may be actual logograms. There are, of course, also undeciphered characters. Of the currently known 459 different characters, only 314 have been deciphered in one way or another.8 These include, however, a large proportion of the most frequent characters, while many of the undeciphered items are rare and may even involve mistakes. This means that even if the decipherment is not fully completed, it is already possible to render long sequences of continuous Khitan text a more or less consistent phonetic and/or semantic inter pretation, with only occasional lacunae. In this situation, attention may gradually be turned away from the script to the language behind the script.
2. The Khitan language

region in the period between the Beiwei and the historical Mongols.
The Khitan, or Qidan , were the dominant ethnic group in the Liaoxi
The Khitan survived as an ethnic group after the rise of the Jurchen, and written documents in the Khitan language continued to be produced almost till the end of the Jin period. It is well known from Chinese historical sources that Khitan was a distinct language, spoken by virtually all ethnic Khitan, a population whose size may have reached a million people during the height of the Liao dynasty. Khitan was not the only language spoken in the Liao state, however, for other languages, including Chinese and Jurchen, were also widely used especially in the areas conquered by the Khitan during the process of state formation. It is less clear how uniform Khitan was internally. The Khitan were composed of tribes, some of which played a more important political role in the Liao state than others, and it is quite possible that there were tribal forms of speech that deviated from the mainstream language.9 Apart from texts in the two Khitan scripts, there are two other types of sources on the Khitan language. These are, first, the occasional samples of Khitan, mainly lexical items, but also phrases and poems, preserved
8
On the tribes, as well as on the general social history and historical demography of the Khitan, see Wittfogel & Fng (1949).
9
An up-to-date list of the Khitan Small Script characters is given in Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010: 259-272, cf. also the discussion ibid. 35-48).
112
in Chinese transcription and glossing, and, second, the Khitan loanwords transmitted into neighbouring languages, especially Jurchen. As far as can be seen, these sources represent a language identical with that of the Khitan text corpus. The Chinese data are, however, often frustratingly difficult to interpret with any certainty due to the chronological, phonological, and semantic inaccuracies as well as outright errors contained in them.10 Loanword research could potentially yield much more informative results, for it may be taken for certain that Jurchen, as a subordinate language of the Liao state, received a considerable number of Khitan loanwords.11 It is also likely that the two languages were typologically similar, which means that we may occasionally use information from Jurchen to approach the structure of Khitan. The fact that Khitan is, or was, typologically speaking, an Altaic language, was known already before the original sources in the language could be read.12 This is now confirmed by the actual readings of the Khitan Small Script texts. We know, for instance, that Khitan had an elaborate system of nominal and verbal inflectional suffixes, most of which can be phonologically approximated.13 The syntax and morphosyntax, including the basic word order (SOV) and the various types of subordinated (converbial) and embedded (participial) sentence constructions, is also in full accordance with that attested in the other historical and modern Altaic languages in the region, including both Jurchen-Manchu and Mongolian. There are, however, some unexpected features, notably, traces of grammatical gender (marked masculine vs. unmarked or generic feminine), a category not typical of Altaic typology though, incidentally, present in Middle Mongol.14
10 Recent studies of Khitan words in Chinese sources include Sun Bojun & Nie Hongyin (2008) and Talpe (2010). The only linguistically competent work on the subject is Shimunek (2007). Selected details are also discussed by Vovin (2003) and Rna-Tas (2004). 11
A grammar and a collection of Khitan Small Script texts in digital form was compiled by a Russian team in the 1960s and 70s, cf. Starikov et al. (1970), Arapov (1982).
12 13 So far the only systematic grammatical sketch of Khitan has been compiled by Kane (2009: 131-166), who also gives a vocabulary of 354 items (ibid. 83-130). 14
Some pioneering work on the lexical parallels between Khitan and Jurchen has been carried out by Kane (2006).
The role of grammatical gender in Khitan is still far from completely understood.
113
It used to be more difficult to determine what genetic group (language family) Khitan represents. Altaic typology as such does not indicate whether a language is Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, or something else. In the past, when work on Khitan was solely based on the Chinese transcriptions and glosses of Khitan words, it was common to try to identify these words item by item with the different historical and extant Altaic languages. The result was ambiguous, since Khitan turned out to contain lexical items that could be identified variously with either Mongolic or Turkic, or also Tungusic.15 In many cases, parallel identifications were possible, leading to speculations that Khitan might be an intermediate idiom between, say, Turkic and Mongolic, or Mongolic and Tungusic. The problem here was that inherited elements were not properly distinguished from borrowed ones. A more reliable method is to operate with genetically diagnostic words, such as items of basic vocabulary, which are likely to have been inherited rather than borrowed. With this method, it was initially possible to identify the language of the Tabghach, or Tuoba , the leading ethnic group of the Beiwei state, as basically Mongolic. Since the Tabghach were the political and, quite possibly, the linguistic ancestors of the Khitan, the Mongolic identification of Khitan gained ground.16 This identification is now definitively confirmed by the information from the Khitan Small Script texts, which show beyond doubt that Khitan was a language whose basic vocabulary and grammatical resources were related to those attested in the Mongolic languages. It is important to note that this conclusion is exclusive, in the sense that Khitan is not an intermediate language and cannot share elements, except borrowings, with other Altaic languages than Mongolic.17 The term Mongolic needs, however, modification when used about
Work on this issue has been carried out by Wu Yingzhe (2005, 2007). In spite of its importance, the issue of grammatical gender is largely unstudied in Middle Mongol, cf. Rybatzki (2003: 75). Menges (1968) made an effort to identify Tungusic elements in Khitan, though we know today that most of his identifications are wrong. He had to admit himself that the material was not conclusive for the determination of the genetic position of Khitan.
15
16
17
The Mongolic identification of the Tabghach language was made by Ligeti (1971). A similar identifi cation for Khitan is implied by Doerfer (1992, 1993). Suggestions that violate this principle are occasionally encountered in the works of Khitan specialists not sufficiently familiar with comparative linguistics.
114
Khitan. All other extant and historical Mongolic languages represent a single genetic node, corresponding to the language of the historical Mongols, and linguistically identifiable as Proto-Mongolic. Khitan did not descend from Proto-Mongolic but was, rather, a sister language of the latter. In other words, Proto-Mongolic and Khitan represented two branches of an even older protolanguage, a certain stage of Pre-ProtoMongolic that could also be termed Khitano-Mongolic. Khitan itself may also have had sister languages belonging to the same branch, which, in that case, should be termed Khitanic. Technically, the most suitable term to describe the position of Khitan (and Khitanic) with regard to ProtoMongolic is to identify the former as Para-Mongolic, implying that it is a question of a genetically related, but collateral, branch of the much better known Mongolic language family.18
3. The position of Khitan

The availability of direct information on Para-Mongolic in the form of Khitan Small Script texts opens up extremely important new perspectives for studies on the history of the Mongolic language family. Working with the actual Mongolic languages alone, we used to have three kinds of diachronic information: first, the comparative evidence provided by the extant Mongolic languages; second, the information contained in the historical forms of Mongolic, especially Written Mongol and Middle Mongol; and third, the potential conclusions that can be made from the comparative and historical data by the method of internal reconstruction. Only the last type of information allows us to approach the period preceding Proto-Mongolic, which itself is of a rather shallow depth corresponding to no more that 800-900 years. The question is how far backwards the Khitan data allow us to go in the history of Mongolic. This, on the other hand, depends, on how different Khitan was as compared with Proto-Mongolic. Before the decipherment of the Khitan Small Script there was an opinion that Khitan may have been closely related to Proto-Mongolic, so closely that it was thought that
18
The term Para-Mongolic was introduced by Janhunen (1995, 2003) and has since found some support in specialist literature, cf. e.g. Kane (2009: x).
115
Khitan could perhaps be read in terms of the lexical and grammatical information we have from Middle Mongol. Today we know that this is not so: Khitan is, in fact, a language rather distantly related to the ProtoMongolic branch. To get an idea of how distant the relationship could be we may think of the neighbouring Tungusic language family, in which the southern branch, corresponding to Jurchen-Manchu (Jurchenic), is in many ways strikingly different from the northern branch, corresponding to Ewenki-Ewen (Ewenic).19 Assuming that the difference between Para-Mongolic and ProtoMongolic was of the same chronological scope as that between the southern and northern branches of Tungusic, the breakup of the original protolanguage (Proto-Khitano-Mongolic) would have taken place at least several centuries before the emergence of Khitan as a written language. The last possible historical context for the still uniform proto language would seem to have been the empire of the Xianbei (93-234), though the breakup may, of course, have taken place even earlier. A practical consequence of the chronological difference is that Khitan texts, which with one notable exception are not bilingual, are difficult to understand even if the script is no longer a major problem. It is not without reason that the situation has been compared with that of Etruscan: a known script but an unknown language.20 Fortunately, however, Khitanunlike Etruscanis not completely unknown, for it is still related to the Proto-Mongolic branch, although the relationship is so distant that it does not substantially facilitate the understanding of Khitan texts. The genetic connection is nevertheless evident from the existence of cognate words and shared morphological elements present in both Khitan and Proto-Mongolic. It is very likely that the number of cognates will continue to grow as more linguistic work is done on the Khitan Small Script texts. We should, however, not be too optimistic about the size of the comparative corpus. The total number of Khitan lexical items that can be assessed both phonetically and semantically today is still less than 500, and many of these items do not
19
The Tungusic family also has two transitional (or mixed) branches, collectively termed Amur Tungusic. For a more detailed taxonomy of Tungusic, cf. Janhunen (2012).
20 The Etruscan parallel is mentioned by Kane (2009: x), who also discusses the general challenge posed by languages that can be read without being understood. On the unique bilingual Khitan text, cf., most recently, Vovin (2011).
116
belong to the basic vocabulary; moreover, they also comprise a number of Chinese borrowings. As it is, the number of currently known certain or plausible cognates between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic is at the range of a few dozen, that is, about ten per cent of the total known Khitan lexicon.21 The only way to assess the taxonomic status of Khitan with regard to Proto-Mongolic is to analyze this corpus with the methods of comparative linguistics. It is particularly illustrative to see in what respects Khitan, as compared with Proto-Mongolic, is archaic and in what respects it is innovative. Since Khitan became a written language some 200 years before Middle Mongol, one would expect that it might be in some respects more archaic. The picture is not equivocal, however, for in other respects Khitan is surprisingly modern, often anti cipating innovations that took place in the Proto-Mongolic branch only after the breakup of the latter. This is compatible with the picture provided by the Tungusic family, in which Jurchen-Manchu may also be seen as a particularly innovative branch as compared with Ewenki-Ewen.22 Moreover, some of the innovations present in Khitan are likely to have been shared with Jurchen on an areal basis. At this point a word of caution concerning the notation is in place. The language behind the Khitan Small Script can be approached in terms of a Romanized approximation of its phonetic structure. The Romanization is, however, not an exact reconstruction of the segmental properties of the language. This situation is due to two circum stances: on the one hand, we simply do not know the exact segmental counter parts of many Khitan Small Script characters, although we can approximate them; on the other, we have to consider the fact that the orthography of Khitan is not always consistent with the actual sequences of sounds. In order to show the difference between orthography and sounds, it is useful to let the Romanizations be accompanied by a more phonemically accurate reading (marked ), which, in turn, should be distinguished from reconstructions (marked *).23
21 Many of the cognates have been identified over the years by Chinese scholars and are listed by Kane (2009), though his database involves some mistakes and omissions. 22
The conventional view that Jurchen-Manchu represents an innovative branch of Tungusic against the more conservative Ewenki-Ewen branch has recently been challenged by Alonso de la Fuente (2011). The issue is best seen as unconcluded.
23
The current system of Romanization for Khitan was introduced by Kane (2008, 2009)
like more simple and, hence, archaic, as they lack the stem extension -n 22 24 conventiona and the postclitic element =e, as attested in the Proto-Mongolic cognates.The chen-Manchu represents an innovative branch represents of Tungusic against the branch of Tungusic against the more conservative The conventional view that Jurchen-Manchu an innovative On the Mongolic side, the proximal pronoun has the oblique stem branch has recently been challenged byhas Alonso de la Fuente (2011). by Alonso de la Fuente (2011). The issue is best s more conservative Ewenki-Ewen branch recently been challenged 23 * e-x/n > * n -, which has been compared with the possibly pronominal The current syst ded. he issue is best seen as unconcluded.
rd of At caution concerning theofnotation in place. The this point a word caution is concerning the notation is in place. The language behin Small Script can be approached in terms of a Romanized anguage behind the Khitan Small Script can be approached in terms of a Romanized approximation ic structure. The Romanization is, however, not an exact is, however, not an exact reconstruction o pproximation of its phonetic structure. The Romanization ntal propertiesof thesegmental language. This Understanding situation is due to twoThis ofthe Khitan: the Language Behind the Scripts 117 econstruction properties of the language. situation is due to two circumstances: and, we simply do not know the exact segmental ircumstances: on the one hand, we simply do not counterknow the exact segmental counterparts of many Script characters, although we can approximate them; arts of many Khitan Small Script characters, although we can approximate them; on the other, w sider the fact that theto orthography offact Khitan not always of Khitan is not always consistent with n the other, we have consider the that is the orthography sequenceswith of 4. sounds. In properties order to show the difference onsistent the actual sequences of sounds. In order to show the difference between orthog Lexical unds, it is useful to let the Romanizations be accompanied etween orthography and sounds, it is useful to let the Romanizations be accompanied by a more pho ccurate reading (marked ), which, in turn, should be which, y a more phonemically accurate reading (marked ), in turn, should be distinguished fr As all length are memorial in character, 23 Khitan texts of any significant 23 uctions (marked *).reconstructions (marked *). istinguished from containing epitaphs, eulogies, lamentations, and/or historical records, 4. Lexical prop the lexicon used in them is thematically and functionally restricted. This . Lexical properties gives the decipherer the advantage of having many parallel repetitions As all Khitan with are minor variations, as in genealogical lists, which, in turn, allows the significant length memorial in character, containing As all Khitan texts of any significant length are memorial in character, containing epitaphs, eulog identification of the certain crucial items phrases multiply ions, and/or historical records, lexicon usedlexical in them isthe and pitaphs, eulogies, lamentations, and/or historical records, lexicon usedto in be them is thematically an verified. The obvious disadvantage is that large sections of the ly restricted. This gives the decipherer the advantage hematically and functionally restricted. This gives the of decipherer the advantagelexicon of having many pa never occur in texts, or occur so rarely that identification is impossible. ions with minor variations, asthe inwith genealogical lists, which, aving many parallel repetitions minor variations, as in genealogical lists, which, in turn, allows cation certain crucial lexical items and phrases to be A potentially important source of lexicon is supplied by phrases the poems which multiply verifie n turn, of allows the identification of certain crucial lexical items and to be us disadvantage is that large sections of theis lexicon never occur in the te often complement epitaphic texts, but the problem here is that poetic multiply verified. The obvious disadvantage that large sections of the lexicon never so rarely that identification is impossible. A potentially important sour ccur in the texts, or occur sovirtually rarely that identification iswithout impossible. A potentially expressions are hopeless to assess a parallel version in a n is supplied byofthe poems often mportant source lexicon is which supplied by complement the poems which often complement epitaphic texts, known language. blem heretexts, is that poetic expressions virtually hopeless pitaphic but the problem here are is expressions are virtually hopeless to assess witho In the following, a that few poetic lexical spheres relevant to comparative version a known language. In the f o assessin without a parallel version in a known language. linguistics are examined in some more detail: ew lexical spheres relevant to lexical comparative linguistics In the following, a few spheres relevant are to comparative linguistics are examined in so ail: xamined in some more detail: Pronouns. For genetic comparisons, personal pronouns would be an Pronouns. For ideal source of diagnostic information. Unfortunately, first and second parisons, personal pronouns would be an ideal source of Pronouns. For genetic comparisons, personal pronouns would be an ideal source of diagnostic info person pronouns do not seem to be attested in pronouns the extant Khitan corpus. ortunately, first and second person pronouns do not seem to be attested i iagnostic information. Unfortunately, first and second person do not seem h , but this item has no known A possible third person pronoun is Khitan corpus. A possible third person pronoun is h , o be attested in the extant Khitan corpus. A possible third person pronoun is h , but this item ha cognate in Proto-Mongolic. The proximal demonstrative is, cognate in Proto-Mongolic. The proximal demonstrative is, however,is, fully however, fully ut this item has no known cognate in Proto-Mongolic. The proximal demonstrative with Proto-Mongolic data. with The Khitan shape is e this Proto-Mongolic data. this :: tt these, s owever, fully comparable Proto-Mongolic The :Khitan shape is e this e readings : plural the e-d, readings which correspond ProtoMongolic *e-n= t these,e suggesting e : plural e-d , which correspond to Protothese, suggesting the readings e :to plural e-d, which correspond to Protoe-d=e. As may be seen, the Khitan shapes look like more Mongolic *e-n=e : plural*e *-e-d=e. As may be seen, Khitan shapes look like morelook Mongolic n=e : plural *ed= e. As the may be seen, the Khitan shapes
ation for Khitan was of introduced by Kane (2008, 2009) and developed The current system Romanization for Khitan was introduced by Kane (2008, 2009) and developed further by Wu Yin nen (2010). The phonetic reliability (2010). of the Romanized shapes varies, urther by Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen The phonetic reliability of the Romanized shapes varies, and not all Roman e regarded as fully verified. In the present paper, the Khitan items are nd not all Romanizations may be regarded as fully verified. In the present paper, the items are quoted both in th and developed further by Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010). TheKhitan phonetic reliability given when releva t (linearized) in Romanization, with avaries, phonetic approximation uoted both in and the script (linearized) and in Romanization, with a phonetic approximation of original the Romanized shapes and not all Romanizations may be regarded as fully iven when relevant or possible. verified. In the present paper, the Khitan items are quoted both in the original script
(linearized) and in Romanization, with a phonetic approxi mation given when relevant or possible.
24
All Khitan data are quoted from Kane (2009) and Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010). On the demon strative pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011).
simple and, hence, as they as lack the lack stemthe extension -n simple and, archaic, hence, archaic, they stem exten 24 VOLUME 4 (2012) SCRIPTA element =e , ,as attested in the Proto-Mongolic cognates. element =e, as attested in the Proto-Mongolic cognates.24 simple simple and, and, hence, hence, archaic, archaic, as as Mongolic they they lack lack the the stem stem extension extension -n -n and and the the postclitic postcliti On the side, the proximal pronoun has the obliqu On the Mongolic side, the proximal pronoun has th 24 24 element element=e =e ,,as asattested attested in in the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic cognates. cognates. *n-, which has been compared with the possibly pronominal Kh *n-, which has been compared with the possibly pronom simple and, archaic, as they lack thepronoun stem the extension -n and stem the simple simple and, hence, hence, archaic, archaic, as as they they lack lack the stem stem extension extension -n -n postclitic and and the the po p p On Onhence, the theand, Mongolic Mongolic side, side, the the proximal proximal pronoun has has the the oblique oblique stem * * e-x/ne-x/n> Khitan monosyllable un . This comparison remains unverified, but it n n un. This comparison remains unverified, but it would seem n un. This comparison 24 remains 24 24 24 unverified, but it wo element =e , as attested in the Proto-Mongolic cognates. element element =e =e , , as as attested attested in in the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic cognates. cognates. -n and the postclitic * * nn, ,stem which which has has been been compared compared with with the the possibly possibly pronominal pronominal Khitan Khitan monosyllable monosyllabl c, ic, as they lack the the stem extension -n -n and and the postclitic postclitic ic,as asthey theylack lack the stem extension -n andthe the postclitic Khitan n.e une now, which formally corresponds to th would seem to extension correlate with Khitan n.e une now, which formally Khitan n.e une now, which formally correspon simple hence, archaic, as they lack the stem extension -n and the postc 24 24 On theand, Mongolic side, the proximal pronoun has the oblique stem *e-x/n> On On the the Mongolic Mongolic side, side, the the proximal proximal pronoun pronoun has has the the oblique oblique stem stem * *eee 24 n n un. un. This This comparison comparison remains remains unverified, unverified, but but it it would would seem seem to to correlate correlate with wit 24 he he Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic cognates. cognates. the Proto-Mongolic cognates. locative case form * e-x/n-e upon this, a case form also attested in locative case form * e-x/n-e upon this, a case form also a corresponds to the Proto-Mongolic locative case form * e-x/n-e upon element =e , as attested in the Proto-Mongolic cognates. * n, which has been compared with the possibly pronominal Khitan monosyllable * * nn, , which which has has been been compared compared with with the the possibly possibly pronominal pronominal Khitan Khitan monos mono mono lique stem *e-x/n> Khitan Khitan n.e n.e une une now, now, which which formally formally corresponds corresponds to to the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongoli de, ide, the the proximal proximal pronoun pronoun has has the the oblique oblique stem stem * * e-x/ne-x/n> > side, the proximal pronoun has the oblique stem * e-x/n> (> Modern Mongolian odoo ). The demonstratives are, however (> Modern Mongolian odoo ). The demonstratives are, this, a case form also attested in *e-d/-x-e now (> Modern Mongolian On the Mongolic side, the proximal pronoun has the oblique stem * e-x/ n un. This comparison remains unverified, but it would seem to correlate with n n un. un. This This comparison comparison remains remains unverified, unverified, but but it it would would seem seem to to correla correla correl Khitan monosyllable locative locative case case form form * * e-x/n-e e-x/n-e upon upon this, this, aa case case form form also also attested attested in in * * e-d/-x-e e-d/-x-e now now mpared mpared with with the the possibly possibly pronominal pronominal Khitan Khitan monosyllable monosyllable mpared with the possibly pronominal Khitan monosyllable among the most stable elements of a pronominal language, which ismonosyll why th among the most stable elements ofthe a language, which is * n, which has been compared with the possibly Khitan odoo ). The demonstratives are, however, not necessarily among most Khitan n.e une now, which formally corresponds to the Proto-Mongolic Khitan Khitan n.e n.e une une now, now, which which formally formally corresponds corresponds to to the the Proto-M Proto-M eem to correlate with (> (> Modern Modern Mongolian Mongolian odoo odoo ). ). The The demonstratives demonstratives are, are, however, however, not not necessarily necessaril on n remains remains unverified, unverified, but but it it would would seem seem to to correlate correlate with with son remains unverified, but it would seem to correlate with expect a full correspondence between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic. expect a full correspondence between Khitan and Proto-M n un. This comparison remains unverified, but it would seem to correlate stable elements of case a which is why there iscase no need to expect a is locative case form *language, e-x/n-e upon this, case form also attested in * e-d/-x-e now locative locative case form form * * e-x/n-e e-x/n-e upon upon this, this, a a case form form also also attested attested in in * *e-d/-x-e e-d/-xe-d/-xo the which Proto-Mongolic among among the the most most stable stable elements elements of of aaalanguage, language, which which is is why there no no need need to t now, ow, which formally corresponds corresponds to to the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic now, whichformally formally corresponds to the Proto-Mongolic surprising that the Khitan distal pronoun is why qi there that :is plural surprising that the Khitan distal pronoun is qi that : plu Khitan n.e une now, which formally corresponds to the Proto-Mong full correspondence between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic. It is are, therefore (> Modern Mongolian odoo ). The demonstratives are, however, not necessarily (> (> Modern Modern Mongolian Mongolian odoo odoo ). ). The The demonstratives demonstratives are, however, however, not not nec nec ed in * e-d/-x-e now 25 expect expect a a full full correspondence correspondence between between Khitan Khitan and and Proto-Mongolic. Proto-Mongolic. It It is is therefore therefore no no 25 -e e upon upon this, this, aa case case form form also also attested attested in in ** e-d/-x-e e-d/-x-e now now n-e upon this, a case form also attested in * e-d/-x-e now item totally different from Mongolic *te. attested item totally different fromform Mongolic *te-. in *e-d/-x-e n locative case form *e-x/n-e upon this, aqi case also among the most stable elements of a language, which is why there is no need to among among the the most most stable stable elements elements of of a a language, language, which which is is why why there there is is no no not surprising that the Khitan distal pronoun is qi that : plural qi.t ,,,suggesting ever, not necessarily surprising surprising that that the Khitan Khitan distal distal pronoun pronoun is is qi that that : : plural plural qi.t qi.t suggesting an an doo doo ). ). The The demonstratives demonstratives are, are, however, however, not not necessarily necessarily odoo). The demonstratives are, however, odoo not ). necessarily (> Modern Mongolian The demonstratives are, however, not necess 25 25 25 expect a full correspondence between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic. It is therefore not expect expect a a full full correspondence correspondence between between Khitan Khitan and and Proto-Mongolic. Proto-Mongolic. It It is is theref there y there is no need to suggesting an item totally different from Mongolic *te-. demonstrations of the relationshi item itemtotally totally different different from from Mongolic Mongolic * * tete..to ements ements of of language, which which is is why why there there is is no no need to lements ofaa alanguage, language, which is why there is noneed need to Numerals. One of the most simple Numerals. One of the most simple demonstrations the re among the most stable elements of a language, which is why there isof nee surprising that the Khitan distal pronoun is qi that plural qi.t, suggesting an surprising surprising that that the the Khitan Khitan distal distal pronoun pronoun is is :qi qi that that : : plural plural qi.t qi.t ,,no sugges sugge sugge olic. It is therefore not nce ce between between Khitan Khitan and and Proto-Mongolic. Proto-Mongolic. It It is is therefore therefore not not nce between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic. It is therefore not and Mongolic is offered by the basic numerals. Most numeral roots and Mongolic is offered by the basic numerals. Most nume 25 25 25 25 expect a full correspondence between Khitan Proto-Mongolic. It is therefore item totally different from Mongolic * te. an item item totally totally different different from from Mongolic Mongolic * *tete-.. and qi.t , suggesting an Numerals. Numerals. One One of of the the most most simple simple demonstrations demonstrations of of the the relationship relationship between between Khitan Khita Numerals .that One the most simple demonstrations of the relationship distal istal pronoun pronoun is is qi qi that :of :plural plural qi.t qi.t , ,distal suggesting an distal pronoun is qi that :that plural qi.t ,suggesting suggesting an written in two ways: either by a qi single character, often for cardinal written in two ways: either by a single character, often for surprising the Khitan pronoun is that : plural qi.t , suggestin 25 25 25 and and Mongolic Mongolic is is offered offered by by the the basic basic numerals. numerals. Most Most numeral numeral roots roots in in Khitan Khitan can can be b 25 for Mongolic Mongolic ** tete. .. item between Khitan and Mongolic is offered by the basic numerals. Most Mongolic * tesequence of characters, often ordinals. In both cases, it is a qu sequence of characters, often for ordinals. In both cases, totally different Mongolic *te. of Numerals. One of the most simple demonstrations the relationship between Khitan Numerals. Numerals. One One of offrom the the most most simple simple demonstrations demonstrations of of the the relationship relationship between between written written in in two two ways: ways: either either by by a a single single character, character, often often for for cardinals, cardinals, or or in in terms terms of of a signscan with a written phonetic value, though some of a the single characters numeral roots in Khitan be two ways: either by single signs with a in phonetic value, though some of the single ch and Mongolic is offered by the basic numerals. Most numeral roots in Khitan can be and and Mongolic Mongolic is is offered offered by by the the basic basic numerals. numerals. Most Most numeral numeral roots roots in in Khitan Khitan nship between Khitan sequence sequence of of characters, characters, often often for for ordinals. ordinals. In In both both cases, cases, it it is is a a question question of of syllabic syllabi tsimple simple demonstrations demonstrations of of the the relationship relationship between between Khitan Khitan st simple demonstrations of the relationship between Khitan lack a phonetic approximation. From the combined information of lack aterms phonetic approximation. From the combined inform character, often for cardinals, or in of a sequence of characters, often Numerals. One ofways: the most simple demonstrations of the relationship between Kh written in two ways: either by a single character, often for cardinals, or in terms a written written in in two two ways: either either by by a a single single character, character, often often for for cardinals, cardinals, or or of in instil ter ter oots in Khitan can be signs signs with with a a phonetic phonetic value, value, though though some some of of the the single single characters characters for for numerals numerals sti y y the the basic basic numerals. numerals. Most Most numeral numeral roots roots in in Khitan Khitan can can be be by the basicfor numerals. Most numeral roots in Khitan can be spelling we can establish the following basic numeral stems: 2 spelling we can establish the following basic numeral stem ordinals. In both cases, it is a question of syllabic signs with a phonetic and Mongolic is offered byoften the basic numerals. Most roots in Khitan ca sequence of characters, often or for ordinals. In both cases, it numeral is a question of syllabic sequence of of characters, characters, often for for ordinals. ordinals. In In both both cases, cases, it it is isthe a a question question of of inals, or in terms of asequence lack lack aa phonetic phonetic approximation. approximation. From From the the combined combined information of of two two types types o r by by aa single single character, character, often often for for cardinals, cardinals, in in terms terms of of a a er by a single character, often for cardinals, or in terms of a .loo hu.uror hur, 4 t.urdur, information 5 tau tau , 7the hu.ur hur, 4 t.ur dur,5 tau tau ,da 7 d 2 written in two ways: either by a single character, often for cardinals, or in terms value, though some of the single characters for numerals still lack a signs with a phonetic value, though some of the single characters for numerals still signs signs with with a a phonetic phonetic value, value, though though some some of the the single single characters characters for for numer numer a question of syllabic 26 of spelling spelling we we can can establish establish the the following following basic basic numeral numeral stems: stems: 2 2 ci.urci.ur jurjur, , 3 3 26 en ten for for ordinals. In In both both cases, it it is a question of of syllabic syllabic ften forordinals. ordinals. In bothcases, cases, itis isa aquestion question of syllabic to Mongolic 2 combined * jir(or jr), 3 *gur, the 4 *gurdr5a tab,7 tothe Mongolic 2 *jir(or *jr), 3 , 4 *dr5 *daltab,is 7 sequence of characters, often for ordinals. In both cases, itof is question of syll phonetic approximation. From information of types lack a phonetic approximation. From the combined information the two of lack lack a a phonetic phonetic approximation. approximation. From From the the information information of oftypes the the two two tt ters for numerals still .two lo.lo dal-. dal-. The The similarity similarit hu.urhu.ur hurhur,characters ,characters 4 4 t.urt.ur durdur,,be 5 5 tau tau tau tau ,combined ,combined 7 7 da da 2 2 ue, e, though though some some of of the the single single characters for for numerals numerals still still ue, though some of the single for numerals still it would be impossible to explain the situation by assuming borro it would impossible to explain the situation by assumi signs a phonetic value, some of the single characters for numerals 26 26 though ci.ur of spelling wewith can establish the following basic numeral stems: 2 spelling we can establish the following basic numeral stems: 2 ci.ur jur, 3 spelling spelling we we can can establish establish the the following following basic basic numeral numeral stems: stems: 2 2 ci.urci.ur ju ju n of the two types of 3 3 * * gurgur, , 4 4 * * drdr, , 5 5 * * tabtab, , 7 7 * * daldalis is unmistakable, unmistakable, and an to to Mongolic Mongolic 2 2 * * jirjir(or (or * * jrjr), ), ation. tion. From the combined information information of of the the two types types of of ation.From Fromthe thecombined combined information of thetwo two types of numerals for the powers ten 100 jau , 1000 ming , 10ming 000 numerals for the powers of teninformation 100 jau ,of 1000 lack phonetic approximation. From the combined the two type lo- borrowing. dal-. The similarity hu.ura hur, 4- t.ur dur, 5 tau tau , tau 7by da jur -, 3 hu.ur hur -, t.ur -jur dur -, tau tau lo - hu.urhu.ur hurhur, ,4 4 t.urt.ur durdur,, 5 5 tau ,, 7 7 da da2 ..lolo dal-. dal-. The The sim si si ci.ur- basic jur, would 3 2. it it would be be impossible impossible to to explain explain the the situation situation by assuming assuming borrowing. The The highe highe 2 2 2 he hefollowing following basic numeral numeral stems: stems: 2 2 ci.urci.ur jur, , 3 3 the following basic numeral stems: 2 ci.ur jur, 3 Mongolic cognates: * jaxu, * mingga, and * tme, though they ar Mongolic cognates: , *mingga,2 and *tme, though 26 the following 26 26 26 26 *jaxuspelling we can establish basic numeral stems: ci.ur jur, to Mongolic 2 * jir(or * jr), 3 * gur, 4 * dr, 5 * tab, 7 * dalis unmistakable, and to to Mongolic Mongolic 2 2 * * jirjir(or (or * * jrjr), ), 3 3 * * gurgur, , 4 4 * * drdr, , 5 5 * * tabtab, , 7 7 * * daldalis is unmistakab unmistaka dal-. The similarity dal -. The similarity to Mongolic 2 * jir (or * jr -), 3 * gur -, 4 * dr -, 5 * tab -, numerals numerals for for the the powers powers of of ten ten 100 100 jau jau , , 1000 1000 ming ming , , 10 10 000 000 tum tum also also have hav . lo. lo dal-. dal-. The The similarity similarity rr- durdur, ,5 tau tau tau tau , , 7 7 da da ur dur,5 5 tau tau , 7 da . lo dal-. The similarity since they would have been more liable to liable beda borrowed. 22 since they would have been more to be borrowed. 2 4 . lo dal-. The simil hu.ur hur, t.ur dur, 5 tau tau , 7 2 26 26 it would be impossible to explain the situation by assuming borrowing. The higher it would would be be impossible impossible to to26 explain explain the the situation situation by bythe assuming assuming borrowing. The The is unmistakable, and Mongolic Mongolic cognates: cognates: * * jaxujaxu,, * * minggamingga,, and and * * tmetme,,approximate though though they they are areborrowing. less less diagnostic 7 dal -dris ,unmistakable, and it would be impossible to explain situation r), ), 33 ** gurgur,, 4 4 * * drdr, 5 5 * * tabtab, ,7 ** daldalis is unmistakable, unmistakable, and and r),26 3 * gur,* 4 * ,it 5 * tab,7 7 * dalis unmistakable, and We also know the approximate phonetic shape ofdiagnostic the Khita We also know the phonetic shape of t to Mongolic 2 * jir(or * jr), 3 * gur, 4 * dr, 5 * tab, 7 * dalis unmistakable, numerals for the powers of ten 100 jau , 1000 ming , 10 000 tum also have numerals numerals for for the the powers powers of of ten ten 100 100 jau jau , , 1000 1000 ming ming , , 10 10 000 000 tum tum als al al orrowing. The higher since since they they would would have have been been more more liable liable to to be be borrowed. borrowed. by assuming borrowing. The higher numerals for powers ten 100 explain the situation situation by by assuming assuming borrowing. borrowing. The higher higher oexplain explainthe the situation by assuming borrowing. The higher is is-. This item is often compared withof the Modern is explain The is-. This item is the often compared with the Mongolian Modern Mo it would be impossible to the situation by assuming borrowing. The hi Mongolic cognates: * jaxu, * mingga, minggaand *tme, though they are less diagnostic, Mongolic Mongolic cognates: cognates: * *jaxujaxu,,also * * mingga,, and and * *tmetme, though though they they are are less less diag dia dia 000 tum also have We We also also know know the the approximate approximate phonetic phonetic shape shape of of,the the Khitan numeral numeral stem stem 9 jau ,, ming Mongolic cognates: * jaxu -, of f ten ten 100 100 jau jau ,, 1000 1000 ming ming ,This ,, 10 10 000 000 tum tum also have have of ten 100 jau 1000 ming 10 000 tum also have comparison is wrong, however, for the Khitan Mongolian deriv This comparison is wrong, however, the Mongolian ite numerals for the powers of ten 100 jau , 1000 ming , for 10 000 item tum also since they would have been more liable to be borrowed. since since they they would would have have been been more more liable liable to to be be borrowed. borrowed. y are less diagnostic, is is is-. is-. This This item item is is often often compared compared with with the the Modern Modern Mongolian Mongolian numeral numeral 9 9 is is ~ ~ yis yis , ,,** minggamingga,* ,mingga and tmetme, ,,though though they they are are less less diagnostic, diagnostic, u* mingga,and and** * tmethough they are less diagnostic, -, and * tme -, though they are since they would (as also in 90 * yer-e/n ), an innovation of the Proto-Mongolic li (as also inless 90 diagnostic, * yer-e/n ), an innovation ofare theless Proto-Mo Mongolic cognates: * jaxu, * mingga, and *tmethough they diagno We also We know the approximate phonetic shape of, shape the Khitan numeral stem 9 Weis also also know know the the approximate approximate phonetic phonetic shape of of the the Khitan Khitan numeral numeral 27 This This comparison comparison is wrong, wrong, however, however, for for the the Mongolian Mongolian item item derives derives from from * * yer-s/n yer-s/ n more more liable liable to to be be borrowed. borrowed. n more liable to be borrowed. confirmed by data from the teens in Jurchen-Manchu. Anot have been more liable to have be borrowed. confirmed by data from the teens in Jurchen-Manchu since they would been more liable toModern be borrowed. is is-. This item is Khitan often compared with the numeral 9 is ~ yis. is is is-. is-. This This item item is is often often compared compared with with the theMongolian Modern Modern Mongolian Mongolian numeral numeral 9 9 Khitan numeral stem 9 (as (as also also in in 90 90 * * yer-e/n yer-e/n ), ),Mongolic an an innovation innovation of of the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic lineage, lineage, as as is is also als approximate approximate phonetic phonetic shape shape of of the the Khitan numeral numeral stem stem 9 9 approximate phonetic shape of the Khitan numeral stem 9 Mongolic is the numeral 6 * jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), which must have rep is theshape numeral 6 shape *jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), which must We also know the approximate phonetic of the Khitan numeral We also know the approximate phonetic of Khitan numeral ste 27 27 the This comparison is wrong, however, for the Mongolian item derives from * yer-s/n This This comparison comparison is is wrong, wrong, however, however, for for the the Mongolian Mongolian item item derives derives from from * * y y ian numeral 9 is ~ yis. confirmed confirmed by by data data from fromnumeral the the teens teens in in Jurchen-Manchu. Jurchen-Manchu. Another Another innovation innovation in i n ncompared compared with with the the Modern Modern Mongolian Mongolian numeral 99 is is ~ ~ yis. yis. en compared with the Modern Mongolian numeral 9 is ~ yis. SIX. 9 Judg numeral likely to hide behind the Khitan character numeral likely to hide behind the Khitan character S stem 9 is is -. * This item is often compared the Modern Mongolian is is-. This item is often with the Modern Mongolian numeral is ~ (as also in 90 yer-e/n ), an innovation of the Proto-Mongolic lineage, as is also (as (as also also in in 90 90 * * yer-e/n yer-e/n ), ), an an innovation innovation of of the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic lineage, lineage, as as erives from * yer-s/n Mongolic Mongolic is is the the numeral numeral 6 6* * jir-gu-xa/n jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), (2x3), which which must must have have replaced replaced the the origina origina ,however, however, for for the the Mongolian Mongolian item item derives derives from from ** yer-s/n yer-s/n g, however, for the Mongolian item derives from * yer-s/n 27 item derives 27 27 27 This comparison is wrong, however, forcharacter the Mongolian from * yerconfirmed by data from the teens in Jurchen-Manchu. Another innovation in confirmed confirmed by by data data from from the the teens teens in in Jurchen-Manchu. Jurchen-Manchu. Another Another innova innova innov ic lineage, as is also numeral numeral likely likely to to hide hide behind behind the the Khitan Khitan character SIX SIX . . Judging Judging by by the the corre corre an an innovation of of the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic lineage, lineage, as as is is also aninnovation innovation ofthe the Proto-Mongolic lineage, as isalso also by 25 (as also in 90 * yer-e/n ), an innovation of the Proto-Mongolic lineage, as is In this case, the discrepancy has also been explained drawing the Romanization 27 27 Mongolic is the numeral 6 *jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), which must have replaced the original Mongolic is is the the numeral numeral 6 6* *jir-gu-xa/n jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), (2x3), which which must must have have replaced replaced the the 27 Another innovation inMongolic 27 he the teens in in Jurchen-Manchu. Jurchen-Manchu. Another Another innovation innovation in in Another innovation in theteens teens in Jurchen-Manchu. of the Khitan character into question. Most recently, Wu Yingzhe (2011: 73-76) has Another innovatio confirmed by data from the teens in Jurchen-Manchu. 24 24 numeral likely to likely hide the Khitan character Kane SIX . (2009) Judging the correnumeral numeral likely to to hide hide behind behind the the Khitan Khitan character character SIX SIX .. by Judging Judging by by& the the e replaced the original All behind Khitan data are quoted from Kane (2009) and Wu Janhunen (2 All Khitan data are quoted from and Wu& Yingzhe Ja 6 ** jir-gu-xa/n jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), (2x3), which which must must have have replaced replaced the the original original suggested the Romanization te , congruent with Mongolic *te , though mun , Yingzhe which 6 * jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), which must have replaced the original Mongolic is the numeral 6* jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), which must have replaced the orig strative pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011). udging by the correstrative pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011). would correspond to Mongolic * mn this, has also been proposed. Unfortunately, such ehind hind the Khitan character character SIX SIX . . Judging Judging by by the the correcorreSIX . Judging by the correehindthe theKhitan Khitan character 25 to hide 24 24 numeral likely 25 behind the Khitan character SIX. Judging by the co In this case, the discrepancy has also been explained by drawing the Roman
118
been proposed. Unfortunately, such reinterpretations are not the compatible with the character character into intoquestion. question. Most Most recently, recently, Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2011: (2011: 73-76) 73-76) has hassuggested suggested theRomanization Romanization te t 26strative been proposed. Unfortunately, such reinterpretations pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011). strative strative pronouns, pronouns, cf. cf. also also Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2009, (2009, 2011). 2011). Since the Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, in principle, well known, the presentare not compatib en (2010). On the demon25 25 25 25 om m Kane Kane (2009) (2009) and and Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe & & Janhunen Janhunen (2010). (2010). On On the the demondemonthe Romanization qi , as established on the basis of another (ethnonymic) attestatio 24 congruent congruent with with Mongolic Mongolic * * te te , , though though mun mun , , which which would would correspond correspond to to Mongolic Mongolic * * mn mn this, this, has has also als rom Kane (2009) and Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010). On the demonthe Romanization qi , as established on the basis of another (ethnonymic In will this not case, the discrepancy has also been by drawing the Romanization of theOn Khitan In In this this case, case, the the discrepancy discrepancy has has explained also also been been explained explained by by drawing drawing the the Romanization Romanization of of de th th All Khitan data are from Kane (2009) and Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010). the paper discuss them in quoted the detail. It may nevertheless be noted that the numeral ngzhe ingzhe(2009, (2009, 2011). 2011). cf. also Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010: 65-66). been been proposed. proposed. Unfortunately, Unfortunately, such such reinterpretations reinterpretations are are not not compatible compatible with with the the evidence evidence supporting supportin Yingzhe (2009, 2011). cf. also Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen (2010: 65-66). character into question. Most recently, Wu Yingzhe (2011: 73-76) has suggested the Romanization te, character character into into question. Most Most recently, recently, Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2011: (2011: 73-76) has has suggested suggested the the Romani Romani strative pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011). root for 2 is harmonically ambiguous: palatal vocalism is suggested by73-76) *ji-txer second omanization of the Khitan 26 question. 26 has has also also been been explained explained by drawing drawing the the Romanization Romanization of the the Khitan Khitan Since the Since Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, inattestation principle, well known, the p 25 by the the Romanization Romanization qi qi ,the ,as as established established on on the the basis basis of of (ethnonymic) (ethnonymic) attestation by Kane Kane (2009: (2009: 73 73 y has also been explained by drawing the Romanization of the Khitan Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, in by principle, well kn congruent with Mongolic * te , though mun ,the which would correspond to Mongolic * mn this, has also congruent congruent with with Mongolic Mongolic * * te te ,, of though though mun mun ,another ,another which which would would correspond correspond to to Mongolic Mongolic * *mn mn this, this this (wife) and possibly *jirin two (females), while velar vocalism is suggested by *Romanization jr-a/n In this case, discrepancy has also been explained by drawing the of the K ested the Romanization te , cently, cently, Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2011: (2011: 73-76) 73-76) has has suggested suggested the the Romanization Romanization te te , , discuss them in the detail. It may nevertheless be noted that the numeral root cf. cf. also also Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe & & Janhunen Janhunen (2010: (2010: 65-66). 65-66). ecently, Wu Yingzhe (2011: 73-76) has suggested the Romanization te , discuss them in the detail. It may nevertheless be noted that the num been proposed. Unfortunately, such reinterpretations are not compatible with the evidence supporting been been proposed. proposed. Unfortunately, Unfortunately, such suchWu reinterpretations reinterpretations are are not not compatible compatible with with the the theRomanizati evidence evidence su s sixty character into question. Most recently, Yingzhe (2011: 73-76) has suggested golic mun *mn this, has also 26 26(2x3x10). hough ough , ,which would would correspond correspond to Mongolic Mongolic * * mn mn this, this, has has also also ambiguous: palatal vocalism is suggested by *ji-txer (wife) and Since Since the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, are, in in principle, principle, well well known, known, the thesecond present present paper paper will will no no houghmun mun ,which which would correspond to Mongolic * mn this, has also ambiguous: palatal vocalism is suggested by * ji-txer second (w the Romanization qi, to as established on the basis of another (ethnonymic) attestation by Kane (2009: 73), the the Romanization Romanization qi qi,,reconstructions as as established established on on the basis basis of of another another (ethnonymic) (ethnonymic) attestation attestation by by Kane Kane (2 ( congruent with Mongolic * te , though mun ,the which would correspond to Mongolic *mn this, ha h the evidence supporting uch such reinterpretations reinterpretations are are not not compatible compatible with with the the evidence evidence supporting supporting (females), while velar vocalism is suggested by *jr-a/n sixty (2x3x10). discuss discuss them them in in the the detail. detail. It It may may nevertheless nevertheless be be noted noted that that the the numeral numeral root root for for 2 2 is is harmonically harmonicall such reinterpretations are not compatible with the evidence supporting (females), while velar vocalism is suggested by *jr-a/n sixty (2x3x1 cf. also Wu Yingzhe &Yingzhe Janhunen (2010: 65-66). cf. cf. also also Wu Wu Yingzhe & & Janhunen Janhunen (2010: (2010: 65-66). 65-66). been proposed. Unfortunately, such reinterpretations are not compatible with the evidence suppo station by Kane (2009: 73), 27 27 by 26 26 26 26 hed ed on on the the basis basis of of another another (ethnonymic) (ethnonymic) attestation attestation by Kane Kane (2009: (2009: 73), 73), On the teens in Jurchen-Manchu, cf. Janhunen (1993). Although these items we ambiguous: ambiguous: palatal palatal vocalism vocalism is isOn suggested suggested by by * * ji-txer ji-txer second second (wife) (wife) and and possibly possibly * * jirin jirin two tw shed on the basis of another (ethnonymic) attestation by Kane (2009: 73), the teens in cf. Janhunen (1993). Although thes Since the Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, inJurchen-Manchu, principle, well known, theknown, present paper will not Since Since the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic reconstructions reconstructions are, are, in in principle, principle, well well known, the the present present paper paper pape the Romanization qi , as established on the basis of another (ethnonymic) attestation by Kane (2009 n(2010: (2010: 65-66). 65-66). from a Mongolic language, we do not know whether the borrowing happened befo (females), (females), while while velar velar vocalism vocalism is is suggested suggested by by * * jr-a/n jr-a/n sixty sixty (2x3x10). (2x3x10). en (2010: 65-66). from a Mongolic language, we do not know whether the borrowing hap discuss them in the detail. It nevertheless be noted that the numeral root for 2 root is harmonically discuss discuss them them in in the the detail. detail. It It(2010: may may nevertheless nevertheless be be noted noted that that the the numeral numeral root for for 2 2 is is harm harm also Wu Yingzhe & may Janhunen 65-66). the present paper will not 27 27 cf. constructions onstructions are, are, in in principle, principle, well well known, known, the the present present paper paper will will not not the Proto-Mongolic Para-Mongolic lineages. The structure of the teens in Ju 26 On On the the teens teens in in Jurchen-Manchu, Jurchen-Manchu, cf. cf. Janhunen Janhunen (1993). (1993). Although Although these these items items were were certainly borrowed borrowe constructions are, in principle, well known, the present paper will not the Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic lineages. The structure of the ambiguous: palatal vocalism is suggested by *ji-txer second (wife) and possibly *possibly jirin two ambiguous: ambiguous: palatal palatal vocalism vocalism is isand suggested suggested by by * *ji-txer ji-txer second second (wife) (wife) and and possibly * *ji jt Since the Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, in principle, well known, thecertainly present paper wi root for 2 is harmonically may ay nevertheless nevertheless be be noted noted that that the the numeral numeral root for for 2 2 is is harmonically harmonically fromroot that attested in the language of the Khitan texts. On the reconstruction from from aaMongolic Mongolic language, language, we we do do not not know know whether whether theborrowing borrowing happened happened before before or or after after the therecons split splitan o o may nevertheless be noted that the numeral root for 2 is harmonically from that attested in the language of the Khitan texts. On the
All AllKhitan Khitanare data data are are quoted quotedfrom from Kane Kane (2009) (2009) and and Wu WuYingzhe Yingzhe & & Janhunen Janhunen (2010). (2010). On the demon demon In this case, the discrepancy has also been explained bythe drawing t reinterpretations not compatible with the evidence supporting the Romanization qi, On character into question. recently, (2011: 73-76) has73-76) suggested strative strativepronouns, pronouns, cf. cf. also also Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2009, (2009, 2011). 2011). character into Most question. MostWu recently, Yingzhe (2011: has as established on the basis of Wu another (ethnonymic) attestation by Yingzhe Kane Wu (2009: 73), cf. 25 24 25 24 24 24 congruent with Mongolic * te(2009) ,(2009) though mun ,& which would correspond to the Mongolic In In this this case, case, the the discrepancy discrepancy has has also also been been explained explained by by drawing the the Romanization of of theOn Khitan Khita congruent with Mongolic * te , drawing though mun , Romanization which would correspond to also Wu Yingzhe & Janhunen 65-66). All Khitan data are quoted from Kane (2009) and Wu Yingzhe Janhunen On(2010). the demonAll All Khitan Khitan data data(2010: are are quoted quoted from from Kane Kane and and Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe & &(2010). Janhunen Janhunen (2010). On the th th
teen in Jurchen-Manchu, the Khitan item may have been nil-, but this shape cannot yet be confirmed by the Khitan Small Script. It may be noted further that the Khitan numerals seem to lack sponding teen in & Jurchen-Manchu, the item may item havemay bee sponding teen inbasic Jurchen-Manchu, the Khitan Khitan data are quoted from Kane (2009) and Wu Yingzhe Janhunen (2010). On theKhitan demonthe stem extension *pA/n > *bA/n ~ *xA/n , which is present in the shape cannot yetcannot be confirmed by the Khitan Small Script. e pronouns, cf. also Wu Yingzhe (2009, 2011). an item may have been nil, but this shape yet be confirmed by the Khitan Small Script. hu, the Khitan item may have been nil, but this his the Small discrepancy has also been explained by be drawing Romanization of Khitan the Khitan Mongolic items for the first decade 3 *the gur-ba/n ,that 4 further *dr-be/n ,7 *dal.u-xa/ It may noted further the basic numerals mall Script. It may be noted that the Khitan basic seem nume he case, Khitan Script. ter into question.nMost recently, Wu Yingzhe (2011: 73-76) has suggested the an Romanization te, specific extension * -pA/n > * -bA/n ~ * -xA/n , which is present in the Mongo , and others. This element might, then, represent innovation basic numerals seem to lack the stem extension -pA/n > -bA/n ~ * -xA/n , which is present in t at the Khitan basic numerals seem to lack the stem uent with Mongolic *te, though mun, which would correspond to Mongolic *mn this, has also first decade 3 * gur-ba/n , 4 * dr-be/n , 7 * dal.u-xa/n , and others. Thi to the Proto-Mongolic lineage, though it is also possible that the Khitan present in the Mongolic items for the first decade 3 * gur-ba/n , 4 * dr-be/n , 7 * dal.u-xa/n , and o A/n , which is present such in the Mongolic items for the proposed. Unfortunately, reinterpretations are not compatible with the evidence supporting then, represent an innovation specific to the Proto-Mongolic lineage, -xa/n , and others. element might, then, represent anin innovation specific to the Proto-Mongoli e/n ,7 *dal.u-xa/n ,This andsystem others. This element might, was secondarily simplified; fact, do not know what manization qi , asnumeral established on the basis of another (ethnonymic) attestation bywe Kane (2009: 73), that Khitan numeral system was secondarily simplified; i o Wuto Yingzhe &lineage, Janhunen (2010: 65-66). oto-Mongolic though itpossible is the also possible that the Khitan numeral system was secondarily sim ific the Proto-Mongolic lineage, though itthe is also the exact shapes of Khitan numerals were in absolute cardinal use. On e the Proto-Mongolic reconstructions are, in principle, well known, the present paper will not know what thedo exact of the Khitan numerals were condarily insimplified; fact, we do not know what the exact ofthe Khitan numerals were in ystem wassimplified; secondarily in fact, we not shapes the other the Khitan numerals 2 jur -, 3 shapes hur 4 dur contain thein absolute s them in the detail. It may hand, nevertheless be noted thatthe the Khitan numeral root for 2 -, is harmonically the other hand, numerals 2 jur-, 3 2 hur, ,43 durcontain erals were in absolute cardinal use. On the other hand, the Khitan numerals jurhur, 4 du Khitan numerals were in absolute cardinal use. On segment r, which by most probably is a derivative element. This element is uous: palatal vocalism is * suggested *ji-txer second (wife) and possibly *jirin two which most probably is a derivative element. This element is also pres hur, 4 durcontain the segment * r , which most probably is a derivative element. This element i ls 2 jur, 3 hur, 4 durcontain the segment * r , es), while velar also vocalism is suggested by *jr-a/nmeaning sixty (2x3x10). present in Mongolic, that it must represent an innovation meaning that it must represent an innovation common to both the Pro his element is also present in Mongolic, meaning that it must represent an innovation common to bo he teens in Jurchen-Manchu, cf. Janhunen (1993). Although these items were certainly borrowed e element. This element is also present in Mongolic, 28 common the Proto-Mongolic and the28 Para-Mongolic lineage. 28 the Mongolic language, we do to notboth knowthe whether the borrowing happened before or after split of Para-Mongolic lineage.
ongolic 2 *jir- (or *jr-),26 3 *gur-, 4 *dr-, 5 *tab-, 7 *dalis unmistakable, and uld be impossible to explain the situation by assuming borrowing. The higher rals for the powers of ten 100 jau, 1000 ming, 10 000 tum also have Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts 119 golic cognates: *jaxu-, *mingga-, and *tme-, though they are less diagnostic, they would have been more liable to be borrowed. We also know the approximate phonetic shape of the Khitan numeral stem 9 numeral 9 is ~ yis. This comparison is wrong, however, for the Mongolian is-. This item is often compared with the Modern Mongolian numeral 9 is ~ yis. derives from for *yer-s/n (as also in 90 derives *yer-e/nfrom ), an * innovation comparison isitem wrong, however, the Mongolian item yer-s/n of the Proto-Mongolic lineage, as is also confirmed by data from the teens in lso in 90 *yer-e/n), an innovation of the Proto-Mongolic lineage, as is also 27 27 innovation in Mongolic is the numeral rmed by dataJurchen-Manchu. from the teens Another in Jurchen-Manchu. Another innovation in 6 *jirgu-xa/n (2x3), which must which have replaced the original numeral golic is the numeral 6* jir-gu-xa/n (2x3), must have replaced the originallikely to hide behind behind the the Khitan character sponding SIX. Judging Judging by the the corre correral likely to hide character SIX.
material are thematerial terms the four seasons, which are virtually identical are thefor terms for the four which arewhich virtually es offered by the comparative are the terms for seasons, the four seasons, are identical virtually in id g the surprises offered by the comparative material heu.r haur = kabur in Khitan () and Proto-Mongolic (*): )*( : Proto-Mongolic heu.r haur =** kabur spring, ju3 virtually identical in Khitan () Proto-Mongolic heu.r haurspring, = *kabur spring s, which are virtually identical inand Khitan () (*): and n.am.r namur = namur= autumn, u.ul junsummer, = * junjun summer, * namur = namurautumn, bur spring, ju3 jun = summer, n.am.r namur ** namur haur = *kabur spring, ju* .un = *jun 3.un 3jun * ebl ) winter. Since the possibility of a wholesale borrowing is ext autumn, u.ul uul = * bl (< * ebl ) winter. Since the possibility of a wholesale borrow autumn, u.ul uul ur = *namur autumn, u.ul uul = =* *bl bl (< (< *ebl) winter. Since the possibility it must be a question of cognates. Moreover, the Khitan items, esale extremely is unlikely, it must be aunlikely, questionitof cognates. Moreover, ity of borrowing a wholesale extremely of is a borrowing wholesale borrowing is unlikely, extremely must be a question of the Khita identical with Proto-Mongolic counterparts, show a somewhat g r, Khitancognates. items, when not fully identical with theirnot Proto-Mongolic counterparts, show a so es.the Moreover, the Khitan items, when nottheir fully Moreover, the Khitan items, when fully identical with their phonological innovation. This would seem to confirm that Khitan waK s, counterparts, show a somewhat degree of phonological This would seem to confirm that c show greater a somewhat greater degree of innovation. innovative, or also more worn, than Proto-Mongolic. 27 onfirm that was generally more innovative, or also more worn, than Proto-Mongolic. uld seem to Khitan confirm that Khitan was generally more On the teens in Jurchen-Manchu, cf. Janhunen (1993). Although these items were The terms for the four seasons also provide an important clue ongolic. The terms for the four seasons provide an impo han Proto-Mongolic. certainly borrowed from a Mongolic language, we do not know whether thealso borrowing the innovations shared by Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. The happened before or after the split of the Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic lineages. ide an important clue to understanding the innovations shared by Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mong ons also provide an important clue to understanding TheThe structure of the teens in Jurchen-Manchu differs from that represent attested in segment the language in * namur autumn must represent the same as the medial Para-Mongolic. medial nasal * m in * namur autumn must the same segment as t Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. The medial nasal *m of the Khitan texts. On the reconstruction and connections of the Khitan numerals, cf. * kabur spring. In other words, it is a question of a suffix, possibly segment as the medial obstruent *b obstruent in *kabur In other words, it is a question of a suffix,re nt the same segment as the medial *bspring. in also Chingeltei (1997). Pre-Proto-Mongolic * -pUr , which is, represented as *-mUr as after a of a a question suffix, possibly reconstructable as Pre-Proto-Mongolic *-pUr which is represented *-mU 28 a suffix, is of reconstructable as Using the possibly method of internal reconstruction, the *r in 3 *gurmay be compared nasal onset, and asan *-bUr elsewhere. Possibly, the element *(-) bl in * *-mUr with after a-mUr syllable with an nasal onset, and as *-bUr elsewhere. Possibly, the element hed is as represented asthe * after syllable with *t present in a Mongolic 30 *guc-i/n < *gut-/n , though the background of this also relevant in this any may case, the change *pchange > *m, which he Possibly, element *(-) bl in *bl winter is The also relevant in :this context. In any case, the *p > *m correspondence is unknown. case of 4 *dr40In * dcin be more complicated re. the element *(-) bl in * bl winter iscontext. this basic is also in some Mongolic languages (Shirongolic) as * der-, taken case of progressive assimilation, is likely to place ange *p >* m,since which may seen as aattested case ofas progressive distant assimilation, is have likely to have ta y case, the change * p> *mbe , digit which may be seen adistant 29 29 while the corresponding decade is present, as a loanword, inand Tungusic in the unexpected protolanguage of Proto-Mongolic Para-Mongolic. ly to have taken place in the common protolanguage of Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. ation, is likely to have taken place in the common shape (*)deki(n), cf. Doerfer (1985: 78-79). 29 ngolic. and Para-Mongolic.29 Kinship terms. In view ofIn the numerals the terms four sea Kinship terms. view of the and numerals and for the the terms for th that there is no overall correspondence in the realm of kinship term termsand for the the terms four seasons it is curious there is no overall correspondence in the realm of kin erals for the four seasons itthat is curious Khitan terms, including ai father, ia elder realm in of the kinship terminology. Severalkinship Khitan kinship terms, including ai father, brother, ia elder dence realm of kinship terminology. Several sister, have obvious on the Mongolic side. In s elder brother, and brother, au elder sister, have no cognates obvious cognates on the Mongolic and au no elder aiia father, ia elder
oto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic lineages. The structure of the teens in Jurchen-Manchu differs hat attested in the language of the Khitan texts. On the the reconstruction and connections the Terms for the four seasons. surprises offered by theof comparative Terms forAmong the four seasons. the surprises byoffered the com Terms for the fourAmong seasons. Among the offered surprises by n numerals, cf. also Chingeltei (1997).
mmon to both the Proto-Mongolic and the Para-Mongolic lineage. nnovation common to both the Proto-Mongolic and
numerals 2numerals jur-, 3 2 hur, 4, contain thecontain segment *rsegment , which most he Khitan jur3durhur, 4 durthe *r, probably is a derivative elem meaning that must represent an innovation common toan both the P ent. This element is also present inalso Mongolic, meaning that it must represent an innovation commo that it must represent innova erivative This element is present init Mongolic, ably is a element. derivative element. This element is also present in meaning Mongolic, 28 28 28 28 the Para-Mongolic lineage. on common to both the Proto-Mongolic and the Para-Mongolic lineage. lineage. ent an innovation common tocommon both the to Proto-Mongolic and the Para-Mongolic must represent an innovation both the Proto-Mongolic and 8 ic lineage.28120 SCRIPTA, VOLUME 4 (2012) Terms for the Terms four seasons. Among the four surprises offered by the co cs for the four seasons. Among the Among surprises off Terms for the seasons. the are the terms for the four seasons, which are virtually identical urprises offered by the comparative material are the terms for the four seasons, which are virtu are the terms for the four seasons, whi Among theAmong surprises offered by offered the comparative material material ur seasons. the surprises by the comparative Proto-Mongolic (*): heu.r haur heu.r = *kabur spring, ch are four virtually identical incounterparts, Khitan () in and Proto-Mongolic haur = *kabur Proto-Mongolic (*): heu.r haur seasons, which are which virtually identical Khitan () and r the seasons, are virtually identical in Khitan ()(*): and Proto-Mongolic show a somewhat greater degree of phono summer, n.am.r namur = * namur autumn, = * kabur spring, ju . un jun = * jun summer, n.am.r namur = * 3 kabur summer, n.am.r namur namur autu = u. *n heu.r haur = *kabur ju3.un jun = *jun (*): heu.r innovation. haur spring, =* spring, jun =* jun 3.un logical This would seem toju confirm that Khitan wasgenerally * ebl ) winter. Since the possibility of a wholesale borrowing is a amur autumn, u.ul uul = * bl (< * ebl )uul winter. Since the possibility of a wholesale * ebl ) winter. Since the possibility of namur = more *namur autumn, u.ul uul = * bl (< n.am.r = * namur autumn, u.ul = * bl (< innovative, or also more worn, than Proto-Mongolic. it unlikely, must be ais cognates. Moreover, the Khitan item wholesale borrowing isaextremely itquestion must beof question of cognates. Moreover, th ita must be a question of cognates. M ossibility of a wholesale borrowing is extremely unlikely, Since the possibility of wholesale borrowing extremely unlikely, The terms for the four seasons also provide an important clue to identical with their Proto-Mongolic counterparts, show a somewh oreover, the Khitan items, when the not fully identical with their Proto-Mongolic counterparts, sh identical with their Proto-Mongolic coun cognates. Moreover, the Khitan items, when not when fully uestion of cognates. Moreover, Khitan items, not fully understanding the innovations by Proto-Mongolic and Paraphonological innovation. This would to confirm that erparts, show a somewhat greater degree of shared phonological innovation. This would seem toKhitan confirm innovation. This would see Mongolic counterparts, show a somewhat degree of phonological eir Proto-Mongolic counterparts, show a greater somewhat greater degree of seem Mongolic. The medial nasal * m in * namur autumn must represent the innovative, or also more worn, than Proto-Mongolic. m to confirm that Khitan was generally more innovative, or also more worn, than Proto-Mongol Pr innovative, or also more worn, than Pro his wouldThis seem to confirm that Khitanthat wasKhitan generally ovation. would seem to confirm wasmore generally more The terms for the four seasons also provide an important cl same segment as the medial obstruent * b in * kabur spring. In other words, to-Mongolic. The terms for the four seasons also provide a The terms for the four seasons als orn, than Proto-Mongolic. so more worn, than Proto-Mongolic. the innovations shared by Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. T o provide an important clue to understanding it is a question of a suffix, possibly reconstructable as Pre-Proto-Mongolic the shared by Proto-Mongolic and Para Proto-Mongo the innovations shared by Proto-Mongol ur seasons also provide an provide important to understanding s for the four seasons also anclue important clueinnovations to understanding in * namur autumn must represent the same segment as the med me c and Para-Mongolic. The medial nasal * m *pUr , which is and represented as *-mUr after am syllable with an nasal onset, in *namur autumn represent the same segm in *namur autumn must represent the Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. The medial nasal * shared by Proto-Mongolic Para-Mongolic. The medial nasal *mmust * kabur spring. In other words, it is a question of a suffix, possibl ame segment asas the medial obstruent * b in * kabur In other it is words, a question a In winter other it isof a qu and *bUr elsewhere. Possibly, the element *(-) bl bl epresent the same segment as the medial obstruent *obstruent bspring. in *kabur mn must represent the same segment as the medial * b spring. inin *words, Pre-Proto-Mongolic * -pUr , which is represented as * -mUr after estion possibly reconstructable as Pre-Proto-Mongolic * -pUr , which is represented as re Pre-Proto-Mongolic * -pUr , which is rep ords, itof isa asuffix, question of a suffix, possibly reconstructable as In other words, it is a question of a suffix, possibly reconstructable as is also relevant in this context. In any case, the change *p > *m, which nasal onset, and as * -bUr elsewhere. Possibly, the element *(-) bl resented as * -mUr after a syllable with an nasal onset, and as * -bUr elsewhere. Possibly, the el nasal onset, and as * -bUr elsewhere. Pos which is represented as * -mUr after a syllable with an olic *-pUr, may which represented *-mUr afterdistant a syllable with an is likely to have be is seen as a case as of progressive assimilation, also in this context. any case, *p >any *change m,case, whi ibly, the element *(-) bl in *bl winter also inIn this context. In change any case, the also relevant in the this context. In sewhere. Possibly, the element *(-) bl relevant inproto *is bl winter is as *-bUr elsewhere. Possibly, element *(-) bl in relevant *bl is taken place in thethe common language of winter Proto-Mongolic and Paracase of progressive distant assimilation, is likely to have taken pl he change * p > * m , which may be seen as a case of progressive distant assimilation, is likely to 29 distant assimilation, .his In context. any case, the change *p > *m, which be seen as a In any case, the change *p > may *m, which may becase seenof asprogressive a 29 Mongolic. protolanguage of Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic. s likely to have taken place in the common protolanguage of Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic of Proto-Mongolic and Pa assimilation, is likely to is have taken placetaken in the common ive distant assimilation, likely to have place in theprotolanguage common 29 29 a-Mongolic. ngolic and Para-Mongolic. f Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic.29 Kinship terms. In view Kinship of the numerals the terms for the and seasons terms. Inand view ofKinship theIn numerals the terms for the Kinship terms. view of four the numerals and the four term terms. In view of the numerals as it is curious that there is no overall correspondence in the realm of kinship that there no overall correspondence the realm of te nd the terms for the seasons itfour is curious that there it is no overall in kinship the realm that there is correspondence noin overall correspondence i he numerals and thefour terms for the seasons it is curious n view of the numerals and the terms for the is four seasons is curious father, ia terminology. Several Khitan kinship terms, including elder brothe Khitan kinship terms, ai father, ia n the realm of kinship terminology. Several Khitan kinship terms, including ai father, ia Khitan kinship terms, including ai fa respondence in the realm kinship terminology. Several Several overall correspondence in of the realm of kinship terminology. sister, have no obvious cognates on the side. I elder brother, and sister, no obvious cognates onMongolic the on elder brother, and au elder her, ia sister, have no obvious the Mon sister, have nocognates obvious cognates on brother, and au have elder ding ai father, ia elder elder brother, and au elder erms, including ai father, ia correspondences are uncertain: mo woman, mother, wife (pl the Mongolic side. In other cases the Mongolic side. In other cases the correspondences are uncertain: mo woman, mo are uncertain: mo w the Mongolic side. In other cases the correspondences o cognates obvious on cognates on the Mongolic side. correspondences In other cases are theuncertain: bu grandfather (in (in ai id.) have compared w oman, mother, wife (plural mo.t ) and bu grandfather bu been ai id.) have been mother, wife (plural and bu grandfather (in bu grandfather (in bu ai id. ain: mo woman, woman, mother, wife (plural mo.t ) and are uncertain: mo woman, mother, wife (plural mo.t ) bu and woman resp. *Mongolic eb-gen old man, but the cannot be bu have been compared with Mongolic *eme woman eb-gen old man, but the issue bc woman resp. * eb-gen man, bu ai have been compared with Mongolic * emeresp. bu ai have been compared with *eme woman resp. *issue eb-old her (in id.) bu aiid.) id.) have been compared with Mongolic *eme 30 t theman, issue cannot bebut considered ascannot fully old but the man, issue cannot be considered as fully as * eb-gen old man, thethe issue be fully concluded. The gen old but issue cannot beconsidered considered as fully 30 30 30 30 comparison between b.qo child (plural b.hu.n ))and Mongolic 30 ded. d. The The comparison comparison between between b.qo b.qo child child (plural (plural b.hu.n b.hu.n and ) and 30 concluded. concluded. The The comparison comparison between between b.qo b.qo child child (plural (plural b.hu.n b.hu. concluded. The comparison between b.qo child (plural concluded. The comparison between b.qo child 28 28 28 28 Using the method of internal reconstruction, the * r in 3 *gurmay be compare compar olic c * baga * baga small small > child > child is is also also problematic. problematic. * baga small > child is also problematic. Using the method of internal reconstruction, the * r in 3 * gurUsing the method of internal reconstruction, th Mongolic Mongolic * * baga baga small small > > child child is is also also problematic. problematic. ld (plural b.hu.n ) and Mongolic *baga small > small child is also problematic. b.qo child (plural b.hu.n ) and Mongolic *baga >the child is also problematic. Mongolic 30 *guc-i/n < *gut-/n , though of this correspondenc Mongolic 30 * guc-i/n <in *gut-/n , though the background of th here There are, however, however, also also good good and and non-trivial non-trivial correspondences. correspondences. These These include include Mongolic 30 *background guc-i/n <* gut-/n , corresponden though the bac * r in 3 *are, gurmay be with * t also present in There however, good and non-trivial correspondences. These There There are, are, however, however, also good good and and non-trivial non-trivial correspondences. correspondences. These These in i construction, the * r incompared 3 *are, gurmay be compared with the *also t present in of internal reconstruction, the * r in 3the * gurmay be compared with the * t present There are, however, also good and non-trivial oblematic. There are, however, also good and non-trivial cor of 4 * dr: 40 * dcin may be more complicated since this basic digit isthis also att of 4 * dr: 40 * dcin may be more complicated since basi of 4 * dr: 40 * dcin may be more complicated ground of this correspondence is unknown. The case ha a.ha naha naha (plural (plural na.ha.n.er na.ha.n.er ) maternal ) maternal uncle uncle = * = naga-cu * naga-cu id., id., though the background of this correspondence is unknown. The case /n < * gut-/n , though the background of this correspondence is unknown. The case include (plural ) maternal uncle na.ha na.ha naha naha (plural (plural na.ha.n.er na.ha.n.er ) maternal maternal uncle uncle = = * * naga-cu naga-cu id., id correspondences. These include na.ha naha (plural na.ha.n.er )as maternal uncle = non-trivial correspondences. These include languages (Shirongolic) * der, while the corresponding decade is the prese na.ha as naha (plural na.ha.n.er ) materna languages (Shirongolic) as *der, while the corresponding languages (Shirongolic) * der, while c ince this basic digit is this alsobasic attested in some Mongolic ore complicated since digit is also attested in some Mongolic in may be complicated since this basic digit is also attested in some Mongolic x.i x.i more keu keu younger younger sister sister = * = ke * ke child, child, and and very very probably probably deu deu deu deu k.i k.i ~ ~ x.i x.i keu keu younger younger sister sister = = * * ke ke child, child, and and very very probably probably deu deu Tungusic in the unexpected shape (*) deki (nthe ), cf. Doerfer (1985: 78-79). = * naga-cu id ., k.i ~ x.i keu younger sister = child, ernal uncle = * naga-cu id., k.i ~ x.i keu younger sister = * ke child, and very pro n.er ) maternal uncle = * naga-cu id., Tungusic in the unexpected shape (*) deki ( n ), cf. Doerfer (1985 k.i ~ x.i keu younger sister = * ke child, and Tungusic in unexpected shape (*) deki ( n ), cf. D rresponding decade is present, as a loanword, in 31 31 r, while the corresponding decade is present, as a loanword, in 29 olic) as * der, while the corresponding decade is present, as a loanword, in 31 31 29In In 31 Khitan 29 29 ve deu.un deu.un ) younger )very younger brother brother = * = de * de ( x)( x )id. id. two two items, items, Khitan Khitan would would 31 The reconstruction of the original consonant behind the variation * btwo ~ *va m In In two two items, items, Khitan w (genitive (genitive deu.un deu.un ) ) younger younger brother brother = = * * de de ( x ( x ) ) id. id. The reconstruction of the original consonant behind the The reconstruction of the original consonant and very probably deu deu oerfer (1985: 78-79). In it (genitive deu.un ) younger brother = * de ( x ) id. and deu deu (genitive deu.un ) younger brother = ke child, probably deu deu (genitive deu.un ) younger brother = * de ( x ) id. e (*)dekishape (n), cf.(*) Doerfer (1985: 78-79). xpected deki(n), cf. Doerfer (1985: 78-79). course, and it is course, possible that * b would be better choice than *p. In other i 31 a have o have monosyllabic a monosyllabic root root (CV) (CV) where where Mongolic Mongolic has has a bisyllable, a bisyllable, apparently apparently a 31 *b ~ and itcourse, is possible that * ba would be a better choice tha and it ais possible *b would be a be ehind the variation *items, m is not a trivial task, of seem seem to to have have a amonosyllabic root root (CV) (CV) where where Mongolic Mongolic has has athat a bisyllable, bisyllable, appare appar In two items, Khitan would d. inal consonant behind the variation * b ~ *monosyllabic m is not a task, seem to have am monosyllabic root (CV) where Mongolic has a bisy n* of the consonant behind the variation * b ~ trivial * is not a of task, of In two Khitan would = de (x )original id. seem to have atrivial monosyllabic root (CV) where Mongolic 32 32 numerals, involves * x , as in the numerals, in which * m is present in Mongolic 832 *nai-ma/n 32 involves * x , as in the in which * m is present in Mong p involves * x , as in the numerals, in which * m is pr er choice than * p. In other items, the variation also e: ive: ku ku ku ku person person (genitive (genitive ku..un ku..un ) = ) * = k-xn * k-xn id., id., n.o n.o no no would be abbetter choice than *choice p. In other items, the variation also ssible that * would be a better than * p. In other items, the variation also derivative: ku ku ku ku person person (genitive (genitive ku..un ku..un ) )==** k-xn k-xn id., id., n. n lic has a bisyllable, apparently a derivative: ku ku person (genitive ku..un )= * k-xn 29 ere Mongolic has a derivative: bisyllable, apparently a derivative: ku ku person ku..un ) = do not know what phonetic shape of the corresponding Khitan numeral wa dothe not know what the phonetic shape of the corresponding Kh The reconstruction of the original consonant behind the variation * b (genitive ~ * mphonetic is not a do not know what the shape of the cor sent in Mongolic 8* nai-ma/n. For the time being we 32 n which *m is present in Mongolic 8 * nai-ma/n. For the time being we e = * = n-kr * n-kr id., id., friend. friend. In In the the item item n.ai.ci n.ai.ci naiji naiji friend friend = * = nai-ji * nai-ji id. id. 32 e numerals, in which * m is present in Mongolic 8 * nai-ma/n. For the time being we spouse spouse = = * * n-kr n-kr id., id., friend. friend. In In the the item item n.ai.ci n.ai.ci naiji naiji friend friend = = * * nai na n.o no n ) = * k-xn id., for the four seasons, cf. also Toyoda (1998). spouse = *n-kr id., friend. In the item n.ai.ci naiji f ku..un ) = * k-xn id., n.o no spouse = * n-kr id., friend. In the item n.ai.c trivial task, of course, and it is possible that * b would be a better choice than * p. In for the four seasons, cf. also Toyoda (1998). for the four seasons, cf. also Toyoda (1998). esponding Khitan numeral was. On the Khitan terms hape of the corresponding Khitan numeral On the Khitan terms he phonetic shape of the corresponding Khitan numeral was.is On the Khitanin terms nches ranches have have a derivative; a derivative; the the root root * nai *was. nai friendship friendship is preserved preserved in Mongolic, Mongolic, both both branches branches have have a aderivative; derivative; the root root ** nai friendship friendship is is preserved preserved in inMon Mon ai.ci naiji friend = * nai-ji id. other items, the variation also involves *x, as in the numerals, in which *m * is present in both branches have athe derivative; the root nai friendship is pres m n.ai.ci naiji friend =* nai-ji id. both branches have anai derivative; the root *nai friendshi oda (1998). cf. also Toyoda (1998). also s also attested attested in in other other derivatives derivatives like like * nai-r * nai-r concord, concord, festivity. festivity. Mongolic 8 * nai-ma/n. For the time being we do not know what the phonetic shape of and and it it is is also also attested attested in in other other derivatives derivatives like like * * nai-r nai-r concord, concord, festivity. festivity. dship is preserved Mongolic, and it is also in other derivatives like *nai-r concord, festiv *nai friendship is in preserved in Mongolic, andattested it is also attested in other derivatives like *nai-r conc the corresponding Khitan numeral was. On the Khitan terms for the four seasons, cf. also concord, ke *nai-rfestivity. concord, festivity. Toyoda (1998). ucture. tructure. Khitan Khitan seems seems to to have have been been characterized characterized by by the the same same type type of of basic basic Root Root structure. structure. Khitan Khitan seems seems to to have have been been characterized characterized by bythe thesame same type type of of Root structure. Khitan seems to have been characterized by the Root structure. Khitan seems to have been characterize 30 Wu Yingzhe (2009) argues, certainly correctly, that inboth some cases a Khitan character tic actic restrictions restrictions as as the the other other Altaic Altaic languages, languages, including including both Jurchen Jurchen and and phonotactic phonotactic restrictions restrictions as as the the other other Altaic Altaic languages, languages, including including both both Jurchen Jurche rized by the same type of basic phonotactic restrictions as the other Altaic languages, including n characterized by the same type basic phonotactic restrictions as the something other Altaic languages, can imply a hidden initialof vowel. If the Khitan phonemic shapes were like ongolic. Mongolic. This This means, means, among among other other things, things, that that there there were were no no syllable-initial syllable-initial or or were Proto-Mongolic. This This means, means, among among other other things, things, that that there there were no no syllable-init syllable-in ges, including both Jurchen and Proto-Mongolic. This means, among other things, that there were n ic languages, including both Jurchen and eme resp.Proto-Mongolic. ebu the cognateship with Mongolic would be in no doubt. Proto-Mongolic. This means, among other things, that the final e-final consonant consonant clusters. clusters. Most Most lexical lexical items items are are bisyllabic bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), ((C)V(C)CV(C)), syllable-final syllable-final consonant consonant clusters. clusters. Most Most lexical lexical items items are are bisyllabic bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV ((C)V(C)C there were no syllable-initial or syllable-final consonantconsonant clusters. Most lexical items are items bisyllabic things, that there were no syllable-initial orsyllable-final clusters. Most lexical are re are are also also conspicuously conspicuously many many monosyllables. monosyllables. Among the the latter, latter, those those ending ending but butthere there are are also also conspicuously conspicuously many many monosyllables. monosyllables. Among Among the thelatter, latter, those those e are bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), but there are also conspicuously many monosyllables. Among the xical items are bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), butAmong there are also conspicuously many monosyllables. Am onant nsonant ((C)VC) ((C)VC) can can have have direct direct cognates cognates in in Mongolic, Mongolic, as as in in the the case case of of in inaa consonant consonant ((C)VC) can can have havedirect direct cognates cognates in in Mongolic, Mongolic, as as in inthe thecase case of o . Among theAmong latter, those ending in((C)VC) a consonant ((C)VC) can have can direct cognates Mongolic, as nosyllables. the latter, ending in a consonant ((C)VC) have direct in cognates in Mon 33 33those 33 33 many 33however, tent nt >> household household = *ger. * ger. Khitan Khitan has, has, however, however, also also monosyllabic Khitan Khitan has, has, however, also also many many monos go.er go.er tent tent >go.er >household household = ** ger. ger. Mongolic, as in the = case of tent >= household = monosyllabic *ger. Khitan has, however, also m gnates in Mongolic, as in the case of go.er tent > many household = *ger.33 Khitan has,monosy howev ems stems ((C)V), ((C)V), a type a type absent absent in in Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic (except (except in in pronouns). pronouns). In In the the vowel vowel stems stems ((C)V), ((C)V),aatype type absent absent in in Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic (except (exceptin inpronouns). pronouns).I
concluded.30 The comparison be Mongolic *baga) small ed. ed. concluded. The The comparison comparison between between b.qo b.qo child child (plural (plural b.hu.n b.hu.n )) and and The comparison between b.qo child (plural b.hu.n and > child There are, however, also ic c* * baga baga small small > > child child is is also also problematic. problematic. Mongolic *baga small > child is also problematic. Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts 121 na.ha naha (plural There There are, are, however, however, also also good good and and non-trivial non-trivial correspondences. These These include include There are, however, also good and correspondences. non-trivial correspondences. These include 30 k.i ~ x.i keu ed. Thena.ha comparison between b.qo child (plural b.hu.n ) and id., younger s .ha ha naha naha (plural (plural na.ha.n.er na.ha.n.er )) maternal maternal uncle uncle = =* *naga-cu naga-cu id., id., naha (plural na.ha.n.er ) maternal uncle = *naga-cu (genitive ic * baga small > child is also problematic. x.i x.i~ keu keu younger younger sister sister = =* * ke ke child, child, and and very very probably probably deu deu deu deu k.i x.i keu younger sister = *ke child, and very probably deudeu.un deu ) younger 31 31 31 to have * (x ) id.31 In two items, Khitan would a include monosyllabic root seem toKhitan have a would monosyllabic roo There are, however, also good and= non-trivial correspondences. These In In two two items, items, Khitan Khitan would would e e deu.un deu.un ) ) de younger younger brother brother = * *de de((x x)) id. id. In two items, (genitive deu.un ) younger brother = * de (x )seem id. (CV) where Mongolic a bisyllable, a derivative: een b.qo child (plural b.hu.n ) and .ha naha (plural na.ha.n.er ) maternal uncle =* naga-cu id., have have a a monosyllabic monosyllabic root root (CV) (CV) where where Mongolic Mongolic has has a aapparently bisyllable, bisyllable, apparently a a ku ku seem to have a monosyllabic root has (CV) where Mongolic has a apparently bisyllable, apparently a person (g 32 32 32 32 = spouse spouse *n-kr id., friend. ku..un ) * k-xn id., = person also problematic. x.i keu younger sister = *(genitive ke child, and very probably deu deu ve: ve: ku ku ku ku person person (genitive (genitive ku..un ku..un )) = = =* * k-xn k-xn id., n.o n.o no no derivative: ku ku person ku..un )id., = *k-xn id., n.o no 31 both branches have a derivative; od and non-trivial correspondences. These include In two items, Khitan would e= deu.un ) younger brother = *de (xitem )n.ai.ci id. = * *n-kr n-kr id., id., friend. friend. In In the the item item n.ai.ci naiji naiji friend friend = =* * nai-ji nai-ji id. id. id., friend. In the n.ai.ci friend = spouse =* *nkr n-kr id., friend. In the n.ai.ci naiji naiji friend = *nai-ji id. and it is also attested na.ha.n.er ) uncle = where *naga-cu id.,* have ahave monosyllabic root (CV) Mongolic has apreserved bisyllable, apparently a Mongolic, anches nches have a amaternal derivative; derivative; the the root root * * nai nai friendship friendship is is preserved in Mongolic, Mongolic, both branches have a derivative; the root nai friendship isin preserved both branches have a derivative; the root *nai friendship is in preserved in in other der 32 er = *ku ke child, and very probably deu deu ve: ku person (genitive ku..un )in = *k-xn id., n.o* no concord, also also attested attested in in other other derivatives derivatives like like * * nai-r nai-r concord, concord, festivity. festivity. and it is also attested in other derivatives like * nai-r concord, festivity. Mongolic, and it is also attested other derivatives like nai-r 31 Root structure. Khitan seems to In two items, Khitan would = *de (x ) id. other = *n-kr id., friend. In the item n.ai.ci naiji friend = * nai-ji id. festivity. phonotactic CV) where Mongolic has a bisyllable, apparently a by anches have a derivative; the root *nai friendship is the preserved in Mongolic, ucture. ucture. Khitan Khitan seems seems to to have have been been characterized characterized by the same same type of of basic basic Root structure. Khitan seems to have been characterized bytype the same type restrictions of basic as the o 32 Proto-Mongolic. This itive )= *k-xn id., n.o no also attestedku..un in restrictions other derivatives like * nai-r concord, festivity. ctic ctic restrictions restrictions as as the the other other Altaic Altaic languages, languages, including including both both Jurchen Jurchen and and phonotactic as the other Altaic languages, including both Jurchen and means, am Root structure. Khitan seems to have been characterized by the same type syllable-final consonant the item n.ai.ci naiji friend = * nai-ji id. Mongolic. ongolic. This This means, means, among among other other things, things, that that there there were were no no syllable-initial syllable-initial or or Proto-Mongolic. This means, among other things, that there were no syllable-initial or clusters of basic phonotactic restrictions as the other Altaic but languages, including there are also conspicuously e root *nai friendship preserved initems Mongolic, ucture. Khitan seems tois have been characterized by the same type of((C)V(C)CV(C)), basic -final final consonant consonant clusters. clusters. Most Most lexical lexical items are are bisyllabic bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), ((C)V(C)CV(C)), syllable-final consonant clusters. Most lexical items are bisyllabic both Jurchen and Proto-Mongolic. This means, among other things, that can hav in a consonant ((C)VC) atives like * nai-r concord, festivity. ctic restrictions as the other Altaic languages, including both those Jurchen and e e are are also also conspicuously conspicuously many many monosyllables. monosyllables. Among Among the theAmong latter, latter, those ending ending but there are also conspicuously many monosyllables. the latter, those ending there were no syllable-initial or syllable-final consonant clusters. Most go.er tent household = *g Mongolic. This means, among other things, that there were or sonant sonant ((C)VC) can can have have direct direct cognates cognates in in Mongolic, Mongolic, asno in in syllable-initial the the case case of of the in a ((C)VC) consonant ((C)VC) can have direct cognates in as Mongolic, as in case>of 33 33 bisyllabic 33 ((C)V(C)CV(C)), but there are lexical are also stems conspicuously vowel ((C)V), a type abs ave been characterized byMost the same type of basic -final lexical items arehas, bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), Khitan Khitan has, has, however, however, also also many many monosyllabic monosyllabic ent ent > >consonant household household = =items * *ger. ger. Khitan however, also many monosyllabic go.er tent >clusters. household = *ger. many monosyllables. Among the latter, those ending in pronouns). a consonant comparative r are Altaic languages, including both Jurchen and e also conspicuously many Among the those ending tems tems ((C)V), ((C)V), a a type type absent absent in in monosyllables. Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic (except (except in inlatter, pronouns). pronouns). In In the the context vowel stems ((C)V), a type absent in Proto-Mongolic (except in In ((C) the it seems th archaic trait eliminated VC) can have direct cognates in Mongolic, as in the case of go.er tent g other things, that there were no syllable-initial or sonant ((C)VC) can have direct cognates in Mongolic, as in the case of ative tive context context it it seems seems that that the the monosyllabic monosyllabic vowel vowel stems stems in in Khitan Khitan are are an an comparative context it seems that the monosyllabic vowel stems in Khitan are an on the M 33 the above-mentioned Most lexical items are bisyllabic ((C)V(C)CV(C)), ent > household = * ger.on Khitan has, however, also monosyllabic trait trait eliminated eliminated on the the Mongolic Mongolic side side by by way way of of secondary secondary suffixation, as asmonosyllabic in in >on household = * ger .33 Khitan has, however, also many archaic trait eliminated the Mongolic side by way many of suffixation, secondary suffixation, as in items ku Importantly, the method any monosyllables. Among the those ending tems ((C)V), a type absent inlatter, Proto-Mongolic (except in pronouns). In the ve-mentioned e-mentioned items items ku ku person, person, no no spouse. spouse. the above-mentioned items ku person, no spouse. vowel stems ((C)V), a type absent in Proto-Mongolic (except in pronouns). stems to be established irect cognates in Mongolic, as in the case of ative context it seems that the monosyllabic vowel stems in Khitan are an mportantly, mportantly, the the method method of of internal internal reconstruction reconstruction allows allows monosyllabic monosyllabic vowel vowel Importantly, the method of internal reconstruction allows monosyllabic In the comparative context it seems that the monosyllabic vowel vowel stems also for 33 collective formed by *-d ( Khitan has, however, eliminated on the Mongolic side by way of secondary suffixation, as innouns otrait be be established established also also for for a aalso very very early early stage stage of of the the Mongolic Mongolic lineage, lineage, as as lineage, in in the the stems to be established also for a monosyllabic very early stage ofon the Mongolic asway in the in Khitan are anmany archaic trait eliminated the Mongolic side by of these isof so farone identified in the te in Proto-Mongolic (except in pronouns). In the ve-mentioned items ku person, no spouse. ve nouns nouns formed formed by by * * -d -d (for (for countables) countables) and and * * -s -s (for (for liquifiables). liquifiables). Only Only one one of collective nouns formed by * -d (for countables) and * -s (for liquifiables). Only of secondary suffixation, as in the above-mentioned items ku person, no blood > blood relative = *ci-s the monosyllabic vowel stems in Khitan are an mportantly, thefar method of internal reconstruction allows monosyllabic vowel so sothese far far identified identified in in the the Khitan Khitan Small Small Script Script database: database: ci.i.is ci.i.is cis cis is so identified in the Khitan Small Script database: ci.i.is cis spouse. As may be seen, this ngolic side by way secondary suffixation, in o established also for a very stage of as the Mongolic lineage, as in* the > >be blood blood relative relative = = of * * ci-s-/n ci-s-/n blood, blood, presupposing presupposing the the monosyllabic monosyllabic root root * ci. ci. blood > blood relative = *early ci-s-/n blood, presupposing the monosyllabic root * ci. item show Importantly, the method of internal reconstructionthat allows monosyllabic this group of nouns was fo son, no spouse. ve nouns formed byshows *this -d (for countables) *-s* liquifiables). one of suggesting be be seen, seen, this this item shows the the collective collective suffix suffix *(for -s -s also also in in * Khitan, Khitan, suggesting suggesting As may beitem seen, item shows theand collective suffix -s alsoOnly in Khitan, vowel stems to be established also for a very early stage of the Mongolic Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongo reconstruction allows monosyllabic vowel so far this identified in Khitan Small Script database: ci.i.is cis sinternal group group of of nouns nouns was formed formed already already in in the the common common protolanguage protolanguage of of the the that groupwas of the nouns was formed already in the common protolanguage of the 34 34 34formed by *-d (for countables) and *-s lineage, as in the collective nouns very early stage of=the Mongolic lineage, as in the the monosyllabic root *ci. > blood relative *ci-s-/n blood, presupposing Mongolic ongolic and and Para-Mongolic Para-Mongolic lineages. lineages. Proto-Mongolic and Para-Mongolic lineages. (for Only one of one these so far the Khitanphonology Small 5.in Diachronic countables) *liquifiables). -s (for liquifiables). Only be seen, thisand item shows the collective suffix *of -sisalso in identified Khitan, suggesting Script database: cis bloodprotolanguage > blood relative = *ci-s-/n Khitan Small Script database: ci.i.is cis sronic group of nouns was formed already ci.i.is in the common of the hronic phonology phonology 5. Diachronic phonology 34 No be systematic picture n blood, presupposing the lineages. monosyllabic root *ci. root *ci. As may Mongolic and Para-Mongolic blood, presupposing the monosyllabic seen, this item of Khitan instance, reconstruct he No collective suffix * -s also in Khitan, suggesting ematic ematic picture picture of of Khitan Khitan phonology phonology is is yet yet possible possible to to draw. draw. We We cannot, cannot, for for systematic picture of Khitan phonology is yet possible to draw. We cannot, forthe exact co This is due to the nature of the med already in the common protolanguage of the hronic phonology ,, reconstruct reconstruct the the exact exact configuration configuration of of the the systems systems of of vowels vowels and and consonants. consonants. instance, reconstruct the exact configuration of the systems of vowels and consonants. 31 34 The only problem in the item for younger brother is that the Romanization of the lineages. due due to to the the nature of the the script, script, which involves involves multiple multiple cases cases of of both both underunderThis is nature due to of the nature of which the script, which involves multiple cases of both undercharacter is not verified by independent information. The genitive form confirms, 30 ematic picturehowever, of Khitan is syllable yet possible tou draw. We cannot, for Wu Yingzhe (2009) argues, certainl that phonology the underlying ended in , suggesting that the Romanization is hidden initial vowel. If the Khitan 30 , reconstruct the exact configuration of the systems of vowels and consonants. correct. ngzhe ngzhe Wu (2009) (2009) argues, argues, certainly certainly correctly, correctly, that that in in some some cases cases asome Khitan Khitan character character can cancharacter imply imply a a can imply a Yingzhe (2009) argues, certainly correctly, that ina cases a Khitan cognateship with Mongolic would be in 32 due to the nature of the script, which involves multiple cases of both underinitial initial vowel. vowel. If If the the Khitan Khitan phonemic phonemic shapes shapes were were something something like like eme eme resp. resp. ebu ebu the the hidden initial vowel. If the Khitan phonemic shapes(as were something like eme resp.suggesting ebu the Mongolic *kxn has the variant *kmn in Written Mongol Oirat), 31 and The only problem in the item for y ip ip with with Mongolic Mongolic would would be be in in no no doubt. doubt. cognateship with Mongolic would be in no doubt. honology is yet possible to draw. We cannot, for early dialectal nasalization of the medial that the original shape was * k-pn (with verified by independent information. T 31 ly y problem problem in in the the item item for for younger younger brother brother is is that that the the Romanization Romanization of of the the character character is is not not The only problem in the for younger brother is that the Romanization of the character is not consonant). iguration of argues, the systems ofitem vowels and consonants. ngzhe (2009) certainly correctly, that confirms, in some cases a Khitan character can syllable imply ended in ua , suggesting that the Roman y y independent independent information. The The genitive genitive form form confirms, however, however, that that the the underlying underlying syllable 33 verified byinformation. independent information. The genitive form confirms, however, that the underlying syllable 32 TheKhitan exact reading of the Khitan word is difficult to reconstruct. ript, which involves multiple cases of both underinitial vowel. If the phonemic shapes were something like eme resp. ebuThe the comparative Mongolic *kxn has the variant * u u,, suggesting suggesting that that the the Romanization Romanization is is correct. correct. ended in u , suggesting that the Romanization is correct.
30 30 30
evidence suggest the shape ger, but the orthographical image is exceptional ip with Mongolic would bewould in no doubt. original shape *k-pn (with early 32 lic ic * * kxn kxn has has the the variant variant * kmn kmn (as (as in in Written Written Mongol Mongol and and Oirat), Oirat), suggesting suggesting that that the the was Mongolic * kxn has* the variant *kmn (as in Written Mongol and Oirat), suggesting that the 33 and might imply something more complex, especially as character far as the vowel quality is the Khitan w ly problem in the item for younger brother is that the Romanization of the is not The exact reading of hape hape was was that * *k-pn k-pn (with (with earlya dialectal dialectal nasalization nasalization of of the the medial medial consonant). consonant). original shape was *early k-pn (with early dialectal nasalization of the medial consonant). orrectly, in some cases Khitan character can imply a concerned. y information. The genitive form confirms, however, that the underlying syllable suggest the shape ger, but the orthog 33 act ctindependent reading reading of of the the Khitan Khitan word word is difficult difficult to to reconstruct. reconstruct. The comparative comparative evidence would would The exact reading of the is Khitan word is difficult toThe reconstruct. The evidence comparative evidence would onemic shapes were something like eme resp. ebu the u , suggesting that the Romanization is correct. complex, especially as far as the vowel he e shape shape ger ger , , but but the the orthographical orthographical image image is is exceptional exceptional and and might might imply imply something something more more suggest the shape ger , but the orthographical image is exceptional and might imply something more doubt. 34 lic * kxn has the variant * kmn (as in Written Mongol and Oirat), suggesting that the On the Pre-Proto-Mongolic collect especially especially as asis far far as as the the vowel quality is is concerned. concerned. complex, especially as farquality as the vowel quality is concerned. ger brother that thevowel Romanization of the character is not hape Mongolic side, these nouns are always 34was *k-pn (with early dialectal nasalization of the medial consonant). Pre-Proto-Mongolic Pre-Proto-Mongolic collectives collectives in in * * -d -d resp. resp. * * -s -s , , cf. cf. Janhunen Janhunen (1996: (1996: 210-215). 210-215). On On the the On the Pre-Proto-Mongolic collectives in * -d resp. * -s , cf. Janhunen (1996: 210-215). On the genitive form confirms, however, that the underlying syllable act reading of the Khitan word is difficult to element reconstruct. The comparative evidence would for be blood isthat alsothe theitem base for the Khita side, side, these nouns nouns are always always expanded expanded by by the the element * -U/n. -U/n. It It may may be noted noted that that the the item item Mongolic side,are these nouns are always expanded by* the element *be -U/n. It may noted ion is these correct. he shape ger , but the orthographical image is exceptional and(2004), might imply something more is is for also also the the base base for for the the Khitan Khitan term term for for filial filial piety, piety, see see Kane Kane (2004), Shimunek Shimunek (2007: (2007: 71). 71). blood is also the base for the Khitan term for filial piety, see Kane (2004), Shimunek (2007: 71).
122
shows the collective suffix *-s also in Khitan, suggesting that this group of nouns was formed already in the common protolanguage of the ProtoMongolic and Para-Mongolic lineages.34
5. Diachronic phonology
No systematic picture of Khitan phonology is yet possible to draw. We cannot, for instance, reconstruct the exact configuration of the systems of vowels and consonants. This is due to the nature of the script, which involves multiple cases of both under- and over-differentiation, as well as a considerable amount of orthographical variation. We also have to reckon with the possibility that Khitan changed in the course of time: the currently available corpus of Khitan Small Script texts covers a period of over a hundred years (c. 1041-1171),35 while some of the orthographical con ventions are likely to date from the time when the script was created (924-925). In general, work on the Khitan phonological system is closely connected with the reconstruction of Liao Chinese, a little known form of speech, transitional between local Late Middle Chinese and Early Mandarin.36 On the other hand, Khitan phonology is likely to share many features with Jurchen on an areal basis. In the following some general points of relevance in the diachronic context are discussed in comparison with the Proto-Mongolic lineage: Vowel Rotation. As a working hypothesis it is reasonable to assume that Khitan originally had a vowel system similar to Pre-Proto-Mongolic. This system would have comprised 8 vowels, divided into 4 back (*a *o *u *) and 4 front (*e * * *i), as well as 4 lower (*a *e *o *) and 4 higher (* *i *u *) vowels. A similar system, with minor modifications, may be
On the Pre-Proto-Mongolic collectives in *-d resp. *-s, cf. Janhunen (1996: 210-215). On the Mongolic side, these nouns are always expanded by the element *-U/n. It may be noted that the item for blood is also the base for the Khitan term for filial piety, see Kane (2004), Shimunek (2007: 71).
34 35
On Liao Chinese, cf. Kane (2009: 227-264). Tentative outlines on Khitan phonology are given by Shimunek (2007: 38-52) and Takeuchi (2007).
36
These datings are based on the most recent summary of Khitan Small Script epitaphic documents by Wu Yingzhe (2012).
working hypothesis it is reasonable to assume Khitan Vowel Rotation. As athat working hypothesis reasonable to assum Vowel Vowel Rotation. Rotation. As Asit aais working working hypothesis hypothesis it it system similar to Pre-Proto-Mongolic. This system would have originally had a vowel system similar to Pre-Proto-Mongolic. This syste originally originally had had a a vowel vowel system system similar similar to to Pre-Pro Pre-Pr reconstructed for Proto-Tungusic, even Proto-Koreanic. ivided into 4 back (*a *o *u *)Proto-Turkic, and 4 8 front (* e * * *i), as and comprised vowels, divided into 4 back (*a divided * o *u * ) and 4 front (* e comprised comprised 88 vowels, vowels, divided into into 44back back (* (* a a* *o *) and 4All higher *i *u * ) vowels. similar system, over (* the region, the has, however, undergone a process of vowel well as 4system lower A (*a *e *o * ) and 4 higher (* *o *i *u * ) vowels. A(* s well well as as 44 lower lower (* (* aa*e *e *o* * )) and and 44 higher higher (* ons, may be reconstructed for Proto-Turkic, Proto-Tungusic, rotation, in which the original front vowels have been raised and velarized, with minor modifications, may be reconstructed for Proto-Turkic, Pr with with minor minor modifications, modifications, may may be be reconstruct reconstruc nic. ic. All over the region, the system has, however, undergone a while the original have been lowered and, in some languages, and back even vowels Proto-Koreanic. All over the region, the system has, however and andeven evenProto-Koreanic. Proto-Koreanic.All Allover overthe theregion, region, ion, in which pharyngealized. the original front have been and ofthe A vowels typical example ofraised the vowel rotation the the process of vowel rotation, ineffect which original front vowels have be process process of of vowel vowel rotation, rotation, in inis which which the origin origin ginal back vowels have been lowered in some languages, development of the pair and, * u-* the = phonetically [u y] to o u = [o u], as velarized, while original back vowels have been lowered and, in so velarized, velarized,while whilethe theoriginal originalback backvowels vowelshave have cal example of the effect of pharyngealized. vowel rotation isA the development 37 typical example of the effect ofexample vowel rotation is the observed in languages such as Manchu, Dagur, and Korean. pharyngealized. pharyngealized. A A typical typical example of ofthe theeffec effec honetically [u - y] to o - u =of [othe - u], as * observed in languages [u - y] to o - u = [o - u], as observed u - * = phonetically of the thepair pair* * uu--* * = =phonetically phonetically [u [u--y] y]to toooin pair Northeast Asia is of a relatively recent phenomenon, not 37 37 Vowel rotation 37 r, , and Korean. 37 37 such Manchu, and Korean. such such as asManchu, Manchu, Dagur, Dagur,and and Korean. Korean. yet observable withas certainty inDagur, Proto-Mongolic. It is, therefore, important in Northeast Asia is a relatively recent phenomenon, not yet in Northeast Asia is a relatively recent phenom Vowel rotation rotation in inthe Northeast Northeast Asia Asia is is aa r to note that ittherefore, seems Vowel to haverotation beento present in Vowel Khitan. Although vowel nty ty in Proto-Mongolic. It is, note that it observableimportant with certainty in Proto-Mongolic. It is, therefore, important observable observable with with certainty certainty in in Proto-Mongolic. Proto-Mongolic. It I letters contained in the Romanizations should not be taken at face value, resent esent in Khitan. Although the vowel letters contained in seems to have been present inthe Khitan. Although thein vowel letters co seems seems to to have have been been present present in Khitan. Khitan. Althou Althou there examples suggesting the developments * > u and *u > o, not be taken at faceare value, there are examples suggesting the at Romanizations should not be taken face value, are at examples s Romanizations Romanizations should should not notthere be be taken taken at face faceval va in uni uni uni uni ox = * ni-xe/n cow, on on to ride = * unu id. and *u > o, as in ox = * ni-xe/n cow, ondevelopments * > u and *u > o, as** in uni uni ox = * ni-xe/n developments developments > > u uand and ** uu > > oo , ,as as in in un u d. The ultimate impact of vowel is=the reduction the The ultimate impact of vowel rotation is of the reduction of of the paradigm on-rotation to ride * unuid. The ultimate impact vowel rotation is the re ononto to ride ride = = * * unuunuid. id. The The ultimate ultimate impact impact o o 38 We do not whether mple five-vowel system a e paradigm i o five-vowel u).38 towards a (simple system (a paradigm e i five-vowel o u).38 towards We do not know whether towards a know simple system (a e ifive-vowel o u).38 We system do not ( paradigm towards aasimple simple five-vowel system is s stage, but there arehad indications of, at stage, least, a neutralization Khitan reached this but there are indications of, stage, at least, athere Khitan had reached this stage, but there are this indications of, at least, Khitan Khitan had had reached reached this stage, but but there are area in i s.uni night = * sni id. On the other hand, there iss.uni also night neutralization between between * * and and * * ,, cf. cf. = * sni id. On the s.uni night = * sni id. On the other hand between between** and and** , ,cf. cf. s.uni s.uninight night= =** s s neral neutralization of rounded vowels, e.g. the numerals 3general of evidence ofcf. a more general neutralization rounded vowels, t other hand, there is also evidence of a more neutralization of cf. e.g. evidence evidence of ofaamore more general general neutralization neutralization of ofro r 39 39 39 ur- vs, 4 t.urdur- = *dr-. hur= *gurvs, hu.ur4 t.urdur= -* dr-. rounded vowels, cf. hu.ure.g. the numerals 3 hu.ur - hur - = gur vs, hu.ur hurhur= =** gurgurvs, vs,44 t.urt.ur- durdur
t.urdur- = *dr-.39 Preservation of *p. Another widespread areal feature in Northeast Asia
chen on an areal basis. many features with Jurchen onfeatures an arealwith basis. many many features withJurchen Jurchenon onan anareal arealbasis. basis. g some general points of relevance inIn the diachronic are points of relevance in the diachron the followingcontext some general In Inthe thefollowing followingsome somegeneral generalpoints pointsof of n with the Proto-Mongolic lineage: discussed in comparisondiscussed with the Proto-Mongolic lineage: discussedin incomparison comparisonwith withthe theProto-Mongol Proto-Mongo Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts
123
on n the the most most recent recent summary summary of of Khitan Khitan Small Small Script Script epitaphic epitaphic documents documents by 35 35 most by These datings are based on35 the recent summary of Khitan Small Script epitaph concerns the original strong (voiceless/aspirated) labial stop (* p), which These Thesedatings datings are arebased based on on the the most most recent recent summary summary o Wu Yingzhe (2012). Wu Wu Yingzhe Yingzhe (2012). (2012). hasTentative been variously spirantized (> f ), velarized (> x ), pharyngealized ne ne (2009: (2009: 227-264). 227-264). Tentative outlines outlines on on Khitan Khitan phonology phonology are are given given by by 36 36 36 On Liao Chinese, cf. Kane (2009: 227-264). Tentative outlines on KhitanTentativ phonolo On OnLiao Liao Chinese, Chinese, cf. cf.Kane Kane (2009: (2009:227-264). 227-264). Tentativ d d Takeuchi Takeuchi (2007). (2007). (> h), or lostShimunek (> ) in almost all languages and language families of (2007: 38-52) and Takeuchi (2007). Shimunek Shimunek (2007: (2007: 38-52) 38-52) and and Takeuchi Takeuchi (2007). (2007). of of the the areal areal and and typological typological background background of of vowel vowel rotation rotation in in the the languages languages 37 37 For a general discussion of37 the areal and typological background of vowel rotation For For aageneral general discussion discussion of ofthe theareal areal and and typological typological b unen nen (1981). (1981). This This model model of of vowel vowel rotation rotation has has recently recently been been challenged challenged by by of Northeast Asia, cf. Janhunen (1981). This model of vowel (1981). rotation has model recently be of of Northeast Northeast Asia, Asia, cf. cf. Janhunen Janhunen (1981). This This model of of v v claims claims that that the the diachronic diachronic process process took took place place in in the the opposite opposite direction, direction, that that Ko Seongyeon (2011), who claims that the diachronic process took place in the oppos Ko Ko Seongyeon Seongyeon (2011), (2011),who who claims claims that that the thediachronic diachronic pr p pharyngeal pharyngeal (RTR (RTR = = retracted retracted tongue tongue root) root) harmony harmony to to palatal palatal harmony. harmony. is, from an apertural and/or pharyngeal (RTR = retracted tongue root) harmony to is, is,from from an an apertural apertural and/or and/orpharyngeal pharyngeal (RTR (RTR ==retracte retrac inor nor relevance relevance to to37 the the number number of of oppositions oppositions in in the the the paradigm, paradigm, and and the the two two For a general discussionthe of areal typological background of vowel rotation in the paradi Although issue is ofand minor relevance to the number of oppositions Although Althoughin the theissue issueis isof ofminor minorrelevance relevanceto tothe thenumber numbe alatal alatal and and apertural) apertural) coexist coexist in in Northeast Northeast Asia, Asia, the the arguments arguments presented presented in in the languages of Northeast Asia, cf. Janhunen (1981). This model ofin vowel rotation types of vowel harmony (palatal and apertural) coexist Northeast Asia, the argumi types types of ofvowel vowelharmony harmony (palatal (palatal and andapertural) apertural) coexist coexist do do not not seem seem to to be be tenable. tenable. has recently been challenged by Ko Seongyeon (2011), who claims that the diachronic favour of the revised model do not seem torevised be tenable. favour favour of of the the revised model modeldo donot notseem seemto tobe betenable. tenable. darily darily increased increased by by the the introduction introduction ofin a a new new set set of of palatal palatal vowels, vowels, as as has has 38 of process took place the opposite direction, that is, from an apertural of and/or 38 38 The system can be secondarily increased by the introduction a newby set of introd palata The The system system can can be besecondarily secondarily increased increased bythe the intro l as as in in several several varieties varieties of of Mongolic. Mongolic. pharyngeal (RTRhappened = retracted tongue root) harmony to palatal harmony. Although the in Korean, as well as in several varieties of Mongolic. happened happened in in Korean, Korean, as as well well as as in in several several varieties varieties of of Mo Mo f course, course, to to consider consider also the possibility possibility of of to analogical analogical levelling levelling between in the paradigm, and the two 39 issue also is of the minor relevance the of 39 oppositions 39 between In numerals wenumber have, of course, to consider also the possibility of analogical le In In numerals numerals we we have, have, of of course, course, to to consider consider also also th th types of vowel harmony (palatal and apertural) coexist in Northeast Asia, the arguments consecutive items. consecutive consecutive items. items. presented in favour of the revised model do not seem to be tenable.
38 39
In numerals we have, of course, to consider also the possibility of analogical levelling between consecutive items.
The system can be secondarily increased by the introduction of a new set of palatal vowels, as has happened in Korean, as well as in several varieties of Mongolic.
124
spread feature Northeast Asia feature concerns the f *p. Another widespread areal feature in areal Northeast Asia concerns the ation ofareal *p. Another widespread areal in Northeast Asia concerns the Preservation of *p. in Another widespread feature in Northeast Asia concerns the 40 ed) labial stop (* p ), which has been variously the region, including Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, and even g original (voiceless/aspirated) labial labial stop (* plabial ), which has variously strong (voiceless/aspirated) stop (*pstop ), which been variously strong (voiceless/aspirated) (*pbeen ), has which has been Japonic. variously pharyngealized (> h), x or lost ) almost fspirantized ), velarized (> f), x ), pharyngealized (> in h), or lost (> ) all While vowel to proceeded from east toall west, the zed (> f), velarized (> ),rotation pharyngealized (>have h),all or lost (> ) in(> almost (> velarized (> (> x), seems pharyngealized (> h),in oralmost lost ) in almost all f the region, including Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, language families of the region, including Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, es and language families of the region, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, spirantization of the strong labial stop moved in the opposite direction, languages and language families of theincluding region, including Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, 40 40 40 otation seems to have proceeded from east to (Turkic) west, nic. While vowel rotation seems to have proceeded from east to east west, n Japonic. While vowel rotation seems to have proceeded from to west, and even Japonic. While vowel rotation seems to have proceeded from east to west, being most ancient in the west and most recent in the east ial stop moved in the opposite direction, being most on of the strong labial stop moved in the opposite direction, being most antization of the strong labial stop moved in the opposite direction, being most the spirantization of the strong labial stop moved the oppositefamily direction, being most (Tungusic and Japonic). There is only in one language of the Altaic ost recent the east (Tungusic and Japonic). There 41 west (Turkic) and most recent in the east (Tungusic There in the west (Turkic) and mostand recent inthis the east (Tungusic Japonic). There ancient inin the west (Turkic) most recent in the and eastJaponic). (Tungusic and Japonic). There sphere, Koreanic, in which phenomenon is and totally absent. f the Altaic sphere, Koreanic, in which this anguage family of the Altaic sphere, Koreanic, in which this one language family of the Altaic sphere, Koreanic, in which this is only one Importantly, language family of the Altaic sphere, Koreanic, in which this the strong labial stop is also preserved in Khitan. The same 41 41 41 totally enon is absent. totally is absent. phenomenon totally absent. seems to have been the The situation in early Jurchen, while spirantization (> ial stop is also preserved in Khitan. same seems ntly, the strong labial stop is also preserved Khitan. The same seems mportantly, the strong labial stop is also preserved in Khitan. same seems Importantly, the strong labial stop isin also preserved inThe Khitan. The same seems f ) took place in later Jurchen, attested in The status of Khitan y while spirantization (> f)Jurchen, tookas place in(> he situation in early while spirantization f) Manchu. took place in been thebeen situation inJurchen, early in Jurchen, while spirantization (> f) took place in place in toJurchen, have the situation early while spirantization (> f) took inManchu. this respect was known already from therespect lexical data preserved in hu. The status of Khitan in this respect was known as attested in The status of Khitan in this respect was known chen, as attested in Manchu. The status of Khitan in this was known later Jurchen, as attested in Manchu. The status of Khitan in this respect was known Chinese rendering, as in time = *pon served infrom Chinese rendering, as in po = as po in he lexical data preserved in Chinese rendering, poPre-Proto-Mongolic = as po from the lexical data preserved in Chinese rendering, as in po = already the lexical data preserved in= Chinese rendering, in po = po 42 (= Jurchen po ) > Proto-Mongolic * xon > Modern (= Jurchen pon ) > Proto-Mongolic * xon > Modern Mongolian on year. oto-Mongolic * pon (= Jurchen po ) > Proto-Mongolic * xon > Modern Pre-Proto-Mongolic *pon (= Jurchen po) > Proto-Mongolic *xon > Modern time = Pre-Proto-Mongolic *pon (= Jurchen po) > Proto-Mongolic *xon > Modern 42 42 42 e have a Today, few more examples, including p.ar Today, we have a few examples, including p.ar par (a ) people we have a have few more examples, including including p.ar year. ian on year. Today, we amore few more examples, including p.ar Mongolian on year. Today, we have a few more examples, p.ar a/n : (plural) * xara-d > ar ( a ) d id., p.ul.uh e =* para > *para xara/n :*xara/n (plural) xara-d > ar(a) d id., * :* (plural) * xara-d > ar (a )d id., pulu (-h) people == *para >> * xara/n (plural) xara-d > ar (a ) d p.ul.uh par (a ) people = * para >: *xara/n :* (plural) * xara-d >id., ar( ap.ul.uh )d id.,p.ul.uh p.ul.uh more * more, extra, as well as rcalary month < more = *ple-x more, extra, as wellas as h ) intercalary month < more = *ple-x more, extra, well as intercalary month < more =* * ple-x more, extra, as well as pulu (= -h ) ple-x intercalary month < more = ple-x more, extra, as well ural) seeds. descendants =descendants (plural) *descendants pre-s seeds. pur (e)* spre-s descendants (plural) pre-s = seeds. p.r.s purp.r.s (e) s =* (plural) *pre-s seeds. pur= (e) s (plural)* pre-s seeds.
ke theVery strong labial stop * p ,much the corresponding of *k. much the strong labial stop *pstop ,velar the corresponding velar zation of *k. Very much like the labial * p,the the corresponding velar Spirantization of like *k. Very like the strong labial stop *p, thelabial corresponding Spirantization of * kstrong . Very much like strong stop * p ,velar the spirantization (> x ) and pharyngealization (> h ), o tended to undergo spirantization (> x ) and pharyngealization (> h), (> h), (> h), has tended to undergo spirantization (> x ) and pharyngealization stopalso *k has also tended to undergo spirantization (> x ) and pharyngealization corresponding velar stop * k has also tended to undergo spirantization (> uages ofin Northeast Asia. This tendency is typically s (> loss ), the languages of Northeast Asia. This tendency is typically rely (> ), in(> the languages of Northeast Asia. This tendency is typically more rarely loss ), in the languages of Northeast Asia. This tendency is typically x ) and pharyngealization (> h ), more rarely loss (> ), in the languages hose languages that preserve, have recently ore prominent in those thatuntil preserve, or have until recently d/or more prominent inlanguages thoseor languages that preserve, or have until recently older and/or more prominent in those languages that preserve, or have until recently of Northeast Asia. This tendency is > typically older and/or more prominent e find the development * k > h as a relatively early ntact. we find the development *k h* as a relatively early d, *p Therefore, intact. Therefore, we find the development k > h as a relatively early preserved, *p intact. Therefore, we find the development * k > h as a relatively early 43 43 have 43until recently in those languages that preserve, or preserved, * p 43 Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, while in the Protowhile in the Proton languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, while in the Protoenon in languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, phenomenon in languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, while in the Protourkic) is(as much Depending on the language, intact. Therefore, find the development k> hthe as language, a on relatively early ge (as it well aswell in later. Turkic) it as is we much later. Depending on * the language, ic lineage as in Turkic) is much later. Depending on Mongolic lineage (as well in it Turkic) it is much later. Depending the language, 43 tual restrictions; it is particularly common that it is phenomenon in languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, while in the nt may have contextual restrictions; it is particularly common that it is elopment may have contextual restrictions; it is particularly commoncommon that it is that it the development may have contextual restrictions; it is particularly is vowels. fore original back vowels. only before original vowels. present only before back original back vowels. ct, examples of preserved *kexamples before original front an, we have, fact, examples of preserved * kof before original front n Khitan, have, in fact, of preserved *k before front 40 in In we Khitan, we have, in fact, examples preserved *koriginal before original front The phenomenon is also attested in a few Uralic languages. Starting with Pelliot genitive ku..un ) = * k-xn id. The variation ku ku ku person (genitive ku..un ) = *k-xn id. The variation as in ku person (genitive ku..un ) ku..un = *k-xn id. The vowels, as (1925), in ku ku person (genitive ) = has * k-xn id. The variation particular attention in comparative Altaic studies been variation paid to the h-stage, unger sister = ke child might suggest that child there x.i keu younger sister = ke child might suggest that there though implications of * the issue have not always beensuggest correctly understood. k.i ~ x.i the keu younger sister = *ke might that there in k.i ~* x.i keu younger sister =* ke child might suggest that there 41 so in this position, another possible example being yndency to spirantize * k also in this position, another possible example being Another language family in which the phenomenon is not attested is Amuric, today to spirantize * k also in this position, another possible example being was a tendency to spirantize *k also in this position, another possible example being may or may not correspond to Proto-Mongolic * krrepresented by the single language (isolate) of Ghilyak (Nivkh), but earlier distributed to arrive, which may or may not correspond to Proto-Mongolic * krx.ui.ri to arrive, which may or may not correspond to Proto-Mongolic * kr x.ui.ri to arrive, which may or may not correspond to Proto-Mongolic *krmore in Manchuria, including, quite possibly, the northern spirantization is widely confirmed by heu.r haur = ginal back vowels, spirantization isspirantization confirmed byis heu.r haur = ore original back vowels, is confirmed by heu.r neighbourhood haur = haur of id.44 Before original back spirantization vowels, confirmed by heu.r = Korean.
42
borrowing from some early Mongolic form of speech. It may be noted that the Khitan few languages. Starting with Pelliot (1925), particular 40 is Uralic on also attested in a Uralic languages. Starting with Pelliot (1925), particular enomenon is also attested in a Uralic languages. Starting with Pelliot (1925), particular The phenomenon isfew also attested in a few Uralic languages. Starting Pelliot (1925), particular reading is though po , few while Mongolic and Jurchen suggest the with presence of a final nasal, i.e. s been paid to the hstage, the implications of the issue rative Altaic studies has been paid to the h-stage, though the implications of the the implications issue n comparative Altaic studies has been paid to the hstage, though the implications of the issue attention in comparative Altaic studies has been paid to the hstage, though of thediffer issue * pon. There are also other cases in which Khitan and the Proto-Mongolic lineage d. een correctly understood. always been correctly understood. have not always been correctly understood. in use of the nasal *n inrepresented nominals. The reasons underlying these differences are phenomenon is the not attested isfinal Amuric, today by ge family in which the phenomenon isthe not attested is Amuric, today represented by r41 language family in which the phenomenon is not attested is attested Amuric, today represented by Another language family in which phenomenon is not is Amuric, today represented by not known. (Nivkh), distributed more widely in Manchuria, ge (isolate) of43earlier Ghilyak (Nivkh), but earlier distributed more widely Manchuria, language (isolate) of Ghilyak but earlier distributed more in widely in widely Manchuria, the singlebut language (isolate) of(Nivkh), Ghilyak (Nivkh), but earlier distributed more in Manchuria, The neighbourhood spirantization of of *k in Jurchen-Manchu has been the object of some dispute. ghbourhood of Korean. ossibly, the northern quite possibly, the northern neighbourhood of Korean.of Korean. including, quite possibly, the northern Korean. neighbourhood However, the development seemsis, toof have been regular initial position, as maintained 123). The Jurchen word is, of course, a borrowing from some 42 . item, Kane (2009: 68, 122-123). The 68, Jurchen word course, a borrowing from some Kane (2009: 68, (2009: 122-123). The Jurchen word is, ofword course, ain borrowing from somefrom some On cf. this item, cf. Kane 122-123). The Jurchen is, of course, a borrowing e noted that the Khitan reading is po , while Mongolic and rm of speech. It may be noted that the Khitan reading is po , while Mongolic and ngolic form of speech. It may be noted that the Khitan reading is po , while Mongolic early Mongolic form of speech. It may be noted that the Khitan reading is po , while and Mongolic and asal, i.e. * pon. There are also other cases in which Khitan and e presence of a final nasal, i.e. *pon. There are also other cases in also which Khitan and uggest the presence a final nasal, i.e. * pon. There are also other cases in which Khitan and Jurchen suggest theof presence of a final nasal, i.e. * pon. There are other cases in which Khitan and use of the differ final nasal *use n in inof nominals. The reasons underlying ic lineage in differ the the final nasal *of nnasal in nominals. The Mongolic lineage the use of the the final *n in nominals. The underlying reasons underlying the Proto-Mongolic lineage differ in use the final nasal *nreasons in nominals. The reasons underlying re not differences known. erences are not known. these are not known. Manchu been object of some dispute. However, the 43 of *has on k inof Jurchen-Manchu has been thebeen object of some dispute. However, the irantization *k the in Jurchen-Manchu has the object of some the The spirantization of *k in Jurchen-Manchu has been the object dispute. of someHowever, dispute. However, the
On this item, cf. Kane (2009: 68, 122-123). The Jurchen word is, of course, a
4242 ngle language (isolate) of Ghilyak (Nivkh), but earlier distributed more widely in word Manchuria, 42 42Kane 42 On On this this item, item, cf. cf. Kane (2009: (2009: 68, 68, 122-123). The The Jurchen Jurchen word is, is, of of course, course, aa borrowing borrowing fro fr On On this this item, item, cf. cf.122-123). Kane Kane (2009: (2009: 68, 68, 122-123). 122-123). The The Jurchen Jurchen word word is, is, of of course cours On this item, Kane (2009: 68, 122-123). The J spirantized velar in Khitan can also correspond to cf. the Mongolic weak velar stop e noted that, least at the level of Romanization, a be noted that,at atthe least at the level of Romanization, a ing, quite possibly, northern neighbourhood of Korean. early early Mongolic Mongolic form form of of speech. speech. Itform It may may be be noted noted that that the the Khitan Khitan reading reading isis po po , be while , while Mong Mon early early Mongolic Mongolic form of of speech. speech. It It may may be be noted noted that that the the Khitan Khitan reading reading is is early Mongolic form of speech. It may noted tha Vowel contraction. The Proto-Mongolic lineage h in 3 hu.ur hur= * gur-. Vowel contraction . The Proto-Mongolic lineage had a medial velo-laryngeal his item, cf. Kane (2009: 68, 122-123). The Jurchen word is, of course, a borrowing from some lso correspond Mongolic weak velar stop * g ,final also correspondto tothe the Mongolic weak velar stop g ,as as Jurchen Jurchen suggest suggest the the presence presence of of a* a final nasal, nasal, i.e. i.e. pon. *final pon. There There are also also other other cases in in which which Kh Jurchen Jurchen suggest suggest the the presence presence of of* a a final nasal, nasal, i.e. i.e. * * pon. pon. There There are are also also other other c c Jurchen the are presence of a cases final nasal, i.e. *K p * x [h], which is represented as a segment in Writte Mongolic form of speech.the It bewhich noted that the Khitan reading isof po , suggest while Mongolic and spirant * xmay [h], islineage represented as ause segment in Written Mongol, but the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic lineage differ differ in in the the use of the the final final nasal nasal * n *the n in in nominals. nominals. The The reasons reasons un uf the the Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic lineage lineage differ differ in in the the use use of of the final final nasal nasal * *n n use in in nominal nominal the Proto-Mongolic lineage differ in the of the n suggest the presence of athese final nasal, i.e.are *are pon. There are in also other cases in which Khitan and all extant Mongolic languages, and even in Mids contraction. The Proto-Mongolic lineage had a medial velo-laryngeal these differences differences not not known. known. these these differences differences are are not not known. known. which Vowel has been lost in all extant Mongolic languages, and even in Middle these differences are not known. 4343in the use of the oto-Mongolic lineage differ nasal * n in nominals. The reasons underlying 43 43 final 43 The Thespirantization spirantization of ofspirantization * k *kin in Jurchen-Manchu Jurchen-Manchu has has been been the the object object of of some some dispute. dispute. Howe How (long vowels and diphthongs) as a result. The seg The The spirantization of of * * k k in in Jurchen-Manchu Jurchen-Manchu has has been been the the object object of of som som * x [h], which is represented as a segment in Written Mongol, but which has bee The spirantization of * k in Jurchen-Manchu has Mongolic lineage had aa medial velo-laryngeal spirant Mongolicare lineage had medial velo-laryngeal spirant Mongol, with vowel contraction (long vowels and diphthongs) as a result. differences not known. development development seems seems to to have have been been regular regular in in initial initial position, position, as as maintained maintained by by Nher Nher (1999 (199 development development seems seems to to have have been been regular regular in in initial initial position, position, as as maintained maintained development seems to have been regular in initia origin and may in some cases even have been o in all extant Mongolic languages, and even in Middle Mongol, with vowel contr segment Mongol, but which has been lost of * k in Jurchen-Manchu has been the object of some dispute. However, the aspirantization segmentin inWritten Written Mongol, but which has been lost The segment itself was of aVovin heterogeneous origin and may in some (1997). cases different different explanation, explanation, cf. cf. Vovin (1997). (1997). different different explanation, explanation, cf. cf. possibility Vovin Vovin (1997). (1997). different explanation, cf. Vovin by the that there may also have existed 4444 regular (long vowels and diphthongs) as a result. The segment itself was of ato pment seems toMiddle have been in initial position, as maintained byKhitan Nher (1999); aberead 44 44 45 would 44 s, and Mongol, with vowel contraction es, andeven evenin in Middle Mongol, with vowel contraction This This correspondence correspondence would be be valid valid if ifThis the the Khitan item item is isfor to to be read huris hur,heteroge ,but but the This This correspondence correspondence would would be be valid valid if if the the Khitan Khitan item item is to be be read read even have been original. The issue is complicated by the possibility that correspondence would be valid if thethe Kh 45 nt explanation, cf. Vovin (1997). though the comparative material does not allow the origin and may in some cases even have been original. The issue is compl orthographical orthographical image image may may actually actually point point to to a a different different shape. shape. In In any any case, case, there there must must have hav orthographical orthographical image image may may actually actually point point to to a a different different shape. shape. In In any any case, case s aaresult. segment itself was of a heterogeneous as result.The The segment itself was of a heterogeneous orthographical image may actually point to a diffe there may also have existed original diphthongs (like *ai *au ), though s correspondence would be valid if the Khitan item is to 3 be hur,abut the peculiar 45 45 with sequences with medial *to x (like *axi *axu). difference difference with regard regard to to the the numeral numeral 3 to hur-. read hur-. by the possibility that there may also have existed original diphthongs (like *a difference difference with with regard regard to the the numeral numeral 3 3 hur-. hur-. difference with regard the ven have been original. The issue is complicated even have been original. The issue is complicated raphical image may actually point to a different shape. In any case, there must have been a numeral 3 hur-.
4040 spring. Again, caution be exercised with regard to the letters used 40 40 should 40 The The phenomenon phenomenon isis also also attested attested in in aa few few Uralic Uralic languages. languages. Starting Starting with with Pelliot Pelliot (1925), (1925), p The The phenomenon phenomenon is is also also attested attested in in a a few few Uralic Uralic languages. Starting Starting with with *kabur spring. Again, caution should be exercise The phenomenon is also languages. attested in a few Uralic in the Romanization (<k x Altaic h>), the exact phonetic values and phonemic attention attention in in comparative comparative Altaic studies studies has has been been paid paid to to the the hhstage, stage, though though the the implications implications of of t attention attention in in comparative comparative Altaic Altaic studies studies has has been been paid paid to to the the hhstage, stage, though though th th attention in(1925), comparative Altaic has been paid the Romanization (<k x h>), the studies exact phonetic va phenomenon is also attested in a always few Uralic languages. Starting with Pelliot particular have have not not always been been correctly correctly understood. understood. have have not not always always been been correctly correctly understood. understood. have not always been correctly understood. relationships of which are not known. It may be noted that, at least at the which are not known. It may be noted that, at le 41 41 kabur spring. caution should be exercised with regard toattested the letters u on in comparative Altaic* studies has been paid to the hstage, though the implications ofattested the issue 41 41 Again, 41 Another Another language language family family in in which which the the phenomenon phenomenon is is not not attested is is Amuric, Amuric, today today represe Another Another language language family family in in which which the the phenomenon phenomenon is is not not attested is isrepre Amu Amu Another language family in which the phenomen level of Romanization, a spirantized velar in Khitan can also correspond to ot always been correctly understood. spirantized velar in Khitan can also correspond to t the Romanization (<k x language h>), the exact phonetic values and phonemic relationsh the the single single language language (isolate) (isolate) of of Ghilyak Ghilyak (Nivkh), (Nivkh), but but earlier earlier distributed distributed more moredistributed widely widely in inMa M the single single language (isolate) (isolate) of of Ghilyak Ghilyak (Nivkh), (Nivkh), but but earlier earlier distributed mo m should be with regard to the letters used in nther should beexercised exercised with regard tothe the letters used in the single language (isolate) of Ghilyak (Nivkh), b language family in which which the phenomenon is not attested is Amuric, today represented by the Mongolic weak velar stop * g , as 3 hu.ur hur = gur -. including, including, quite quite possibly, possibly, the the northern northern neighbourhood neighbourhood of of Korean. Korean. in 3 hu.ur hur= * gur-. are not known. It may be that, quite atneighbourhood least at the level ofneighbourhoo Romanizat including, including, quite quite possibly, possibly, the the northern northern neighbourhood of Korean. Korean. including, possibly, the of northern phonemic relationships of eexact exactphonetic phoneticvalues valuesand and phonemic relationships ofnoted
pur(e)s descendants = (plural) *pre-s seeds. Spirantization Spirantization of of *k. *k. Very Very much much like like the the strong strong labial labial stop stop ** pp , much , the the correspondin correspondi Spirantization of *k. Very much like strong labial stopthe *p,str th Spirantization ofthe *k. Very like stop stop * * k k has has also also tended tended to to undergo undergo spirantization spirantization (> (> x ) x ) and and pharyngealization pharyngealizatio stop * k has also tended to undergo spirantization (> x ) and pha *k has also tended ntization of *k. Very much like the strong labial stop *p, stop the corresponding velar to undergo spirant more more rarely rarely loss loss (> (>), ),in inthe the languages languages ofNortheast Northeast Asia. Asia. This This tendency tendency isis ty t more rarely loss (> ), in of the languages of Northeast Asia. This more rarely loss (> ), in the125 languages of *k has also tended to undergo spirantization (> x ) and pharyngealization (> h), Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts older older and/or and/or more more prominent prominent in in those those languages languages that that preserve, preserve, or or have have until until re older and/or more prominent in those languages that preserve, o older and/or is more prominent in those langu rarely loss (> ), in the languages of Northeast Asia. This tendency typically preserved, preserved, * * p p intact. intact. Therefore, Therefore, we we find find the the development development * * k k > > h h as as a a relatively relative preserved, *ppreserve, intact. preserved, Therefore, we find the development *k > h * p intact. Therefore, we find the and/or more prominent in those languages that or have until recently 43 43 4 4 phenomenon phenomenon in in languages languages like like Korean Korean and and Jurchen-Manchu, Jurchen-Manchu, while while in in the the phenomenon in languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, phenomenon in languages like Korean an rved, *p intact. Therefore, we lineage find the development *k > h as a relatively early Proto-Mongolic (as well as in Turkic) it is much later. Depending Mongolic Mongolic lineage lineage (as (as well well as asin inTurkic) Turkic) itisis much much later. later. Depending on on the thelan 43 it Mongolic lineage (as well as in Turkic) it Depending is much later. Depend Depen Mongolic lineage (as well as in Turkic) itla i omenon in languages like Korean and Jurchen-Manchu, while in the Protoon the the language, the development may haverestrictions; contextual restrictions; it is common the development development may may have have contextual contextual restrictions; it it is is particularly particularly common th t the development may have contextual restrictions; it is particula the development may have contextual restr golic lineage (as well as incommon Turkic) that it is it much later. only Depending on the language, particularly isonly present before back original back vowels. present present only only before before original original back back vowels. vowels. present before original vowels. present only before back vowels. evelopment may have contextual restrictions; it is particularly common that original it is In Khitan, we have, in fact, examples ofexamples preserved *k before original In InKhitan, Khitan, we we have, have, in infact, fact, examples of of preserved preserved *of * k kin before before origin In Khitan, we have, in Khitan, fact, examples preserved *k In we have, fact, origina examp nt only before original back vowels. front vowels, as in ku ku person (genitive = * kvowels, vowels, as as in in ku ku ku person person (genitive (genitive ku..un ku..un ) ) = = * * k-xn k-xn id. id. The The va v vowels, aspreserved in ku * ku (genitive ku..un ) = *k vowels, asoriginal in kufront ku person (genitive In Khitan, we have, in fact, examples of k person before in in k.i k.i ~ ~ x.i x.i keu keu younger younger sister sister = = * * ke ke child child might might suggest suggest tha th xn id. The variation in k.i ~ x.i keu younger sister = * ke k.i ~ keu younger sister *ke childsist mi in k.i ~ x.i = keu younger ls, as in ku ku person (genitivein ku..un ) = *x.i k-xn id. The variation was was a a tendency tendency to to spirantize spirantize * * k k also also in in this this position, position, another another possible possible example examp was a tendency to spirantize * k also in this position, another po child might suggest that there was a tendency to spirantize * k also in this was a tendency to spirantize * k also in this k.i ~ x.i keu younger sister = *ke child might suggest that there x.ui.ri x.ui.ri to to arrive, arrive, which which may may or or may may not not correspond correspond to to Proto-Mongolic Proto-Mongol x.ui.ri to arrive, which may or may not correspond to P position, another possible example being arrive, x.ui.ri to arrive, which may or ma a tendency to spirantize 44 * k also in this44 position, another possible example being 44 44 44 vowels, is 44 Before Before original original back back vowels, vowels, spirantization spirantization is confirmed confirmed by by heu.r heu.r id. id. id. Before original back spirantization is confirmed by id. Before original back vowels, spirantiza may or may not Proto-Mongolic *kr- id. Before original x.ui.ri to arrive, which maycorrespond or may not to correspond to Proto-Mongolic *krback Before original backvowels, vowels,spirantization spirantization is is confirmed confirmed by heu.r haur haur = = *kabur
*x be is,distinguished in any case, normal though the comparative material does not allow them to reliably also have existed diphthongs (like ** ai au ), ynce also have existed original diphthongs (like ai** au ), Proto-Mongolic with regard to theoriginal 3 hur-. fromnumeral sequences with aamedial ** xx(like ** axi ** axu ).). probably be understood as diphthongs in Khitan, sequences with medial (like axi axu ldoes doesnot notallow allowthem themto tobe bedistinguished distinguishedreliably reliablyfrom from Proto-Mongolic *x is, in any case, normally represented ascounterpart zero in what the segmental Proto-Mo Proto-Mongolic *x is,However, in any case, normally represented asof zero in wha axi axu ). e** axi** axu ). may probably be understood as diphthongs in Khitan, as in 100 jau Khitan when followed by a rounded vowel, as= in*5 probably be as understood as diphthongs in Khitan, as in 100 jau jau j represented may nany anycase, case,normally normally represented aszero zeroin inwhat what may haur = * kabur spring. The fact that there is no However, the segmental counterpart of Proto-Mongolic * b also seems to be l jau = * jaxu/n . However, the segmental counterpart of Proto-Mongolic hthongs in Khitan, as in 100 jau jau = * jaxu/n. hthongs in Khitan, as in 100 jau jau = *jaxu/n. confirmed by the use of the characters jau and Khitan when followed by a rounded vowel, as in 5 tau tau = * tabu/n , h * b also seems to be lost in Khitan when followed by a rounded vowel, as rpart of bbalso erpart ofProto-Mongolic Proto-Mongolic** alsoseems seemsto tobe belost lostin in jau.tau jautau punitive commissioner = haur = * kabur spring. The fact that there is no medial consonant in these ca in tau tau tabu/n heu.r ded vowel, in tau ==** tabu/n , , heu.r nded vowel,as as in55 tau tau= heu.r haur = *kabur spring. The fact character tau in the word tau.li.a term har confirmed by thein use of the characters is jau and tau the ct that medial these cases is act thatthere thereis isno nothere medial consonant in these cases is cases that is consonant no medial consonant in these confirmed by for the use Chinese of though the phonological background of this rebus jau.tau jautau punitive commissioner = * jawtaw ( zhaotao ). The use racters aracters jau jauand and tau taufor forthe theChinese Chineseterm term The fate hare of *x in monophthongoid contex character tau in theuse word tau.li.a =* taula-i id. is also signi issioner == * jawtaw ( zhaotao ). The of the missioner * jawtaw ( zhaotao ). The use of the 46 by Nher (1999); for a different explanation, cf. comparisons Vovin (1997). like n un = ?*e-x/nwhy are u though the phonological background of this rebus remains unclear. tau.li.a = * taula-i id. is also significant, tau.li.ahare hare = * taula-i id. is also significant, 44 This correspondence would be if be the Khitan item is qa to be read hur-but , but the 46 46 offered by emperor, this item is amb The fate of * x valid in monophthongoid contexts in Khitan is less clear, wh ound remains unclear. oundof ofthis thisrebus rebus remains unclear. peculiar orthographical image may actually point to a different shape. In any case, there either * ka.n prince or * kaxa.n emperor on the M why comparisons like n un = ?* e-x/nare uncertain. A possible example phthongoid in Khitan is clear, which is phthongoidcontexts contexts inbeen Khitan isless lesswith clear, which isnumeral 3 hur-. must have a difference regard to the qa.ha.n of the emperor is also enigmatic since it be offered by qa emperor, but this item is ambiguous, since it could corresp 45 e-x/nuncertain. A example would n==?* ?* e-x/n-are are uncertain. Apossible possible example would On *x in Mongolic, cf. Janhunen (1999). In earlier research, this segment was often na.ha naha maternal uncle *naga-cu id. either * prince orgraphically *kaxa.n emperor on in the Mongolic side. = The genitive confused with since * gka.n , with which it is indinguishable Written Mongol. ut this ambiguous, it could correspond to but thisitem itemis is ambiguous, since it could correspond to readings should be kaga : kaga-n , in which case qa.ha.n of the emperor is also enigmatic since it seems to contain a medial * g emperor emperoron onthe theMongolic Mongolicside. side.The Thegenitive genitive to Turkic *kaga.nid. , rather than to Mongolic *kaxa na.ha naha maternal = *naga-cu It is possible that the actual K to aamedial gg , ,uncle as oenigmatic enigmaticsince sinceititseems seems tocontain contain medial** asin in seems to involve an unknown network of borrowin readings should be kaga :Khitan kaga-n, in which case the Khitan word would corre le ==** naga-cu is that actual cle naga-cuid. id.It It ispossible possible thatthe the actual Khitan to Khitan Turkic * kaga.n , rather than to Mongolic *kaxa.n. Altogether, this is a wor a-n, ,in would correspond ga-n inwhich whichcase casethe the Khitanword word would correspond Vowel elision. The loss of vowels in non-initial sy
the comparative material does not allow them to be distinguished reliably
ay also have existed original diphthongs (like *ai *au ), (like the comparative m ility that there may also the have possibility existed that original there diphthongs also have *ai original *au ), a though diphthongs (like *ai * result. (long The vowels segment and itself diphthongs) was a heterogeneous a* result. The segment itself was of heterogeneous lt. The segment itself was of a heterogeneous sequences with aby medial * x (like *as axi axu ). may sequences with aof medial * x (like *axi * ). existed sequences with a medial *axu x (like *axi 45to 45 *axu). ial does not allow them be distinguished reliably from 45 sequences with a medial mparative material though does not the allow comparative them to material be distinguished does not allow reliably them from to be fr* have origin been and original. may in some The cases issue is even complicated have been original. The issue isdistinguished complicated ve been original. The issue is complicated Proto-Mongolic * x is, in any case, normally as zero in what may in reliably Proto-Mongolic *x is, in any case, represented as zero what may Proto-Mongolic * xrepresented is, normally in any case, normally represented as zero ke * axi * axu ). Proto-Mongolic * th a medial *x understood (like sequences *axi * axu with ). a medial * xKhitan, (like * axu ). o have by existed the original possibility original that diphthongs there may (like also have * ai *existed au),*axi original diphthongs *ai* au), ve existed diphthongs (like *ai au ), probably be as diphthongs in as in 100 jau jau (like = * jaxu/n. probably be understood as diphthongs Khitan, as in 100 jau jau = *jaxu/n. probably be understood asin diphthongs in Khitan, as in be 100 jau ja in any case, normally represented as zero in what may probably understood ,from VOLUME 4 zero (2012) SCRIPTA Mongolic *the x to is, any case, Proto-Mongolic normally represented * x is, in any as case, normally what may represented as in zero in what m 126 in es not though allow them comparative todistinguished be distinguished material does reliably not allow them to be distinguished reliably from ot allow them be reliably from However, segmental counterpart of Proto-Mongolic *in b also seems be lost However, the segmental counterpart of Proto-Mongolic *bto also seems be lost in However, the segmental counterpart of Proto-Mongolic * btoalso seems iphthongs in Khitan, as in 100 jau in jau = * jaxu/n. However, the segmental understood as diphthongs probably in be Khitan, understood as as 100 diphthongs jau in jau Khitan, = * jaxu/n. as in 100 jau jau = * jaxu xi * axu sequences ). with a medial * x (like * axi * axu ). axu ). Khitan when followed by afollowed rounded vowel, as in 5 tau tau = *tabu/n , in Khitan when by afollowed rounded vowel, as in 5 tauas tau = *heu.r tabu/n , Khitan when by a rounded vowel, 5 tau tau = *heu.r tabu/n nterpart of Proto-Mongolic * b also seems to be lost in Khitan when followed by segmental counterpart However, of Proto-Mongolic the segmental counterpart * b also seems of Proto-Mongolic to be lost in * b also seems to be lost y case, normally Proto-Mongolic represented * as x is, zero in any in what case, may normally represented as zero in what may se, normally represented as zero in what may haur = *kabur spring. The fact that there is no medial consonant in these cases is haur = * kabur spring. The fact that there is no medial consonant in these cases is haur = * kabur spring. The fact that there is no medial consonant in unded vowel, as in 5 tau tau = * tabu/n , heu.r haur = * kabur spring. the characters jau and tau for the Chinese term jau.tau jautau followed by a rounded Khitan vowel, when as followed in 5 by tau a rounded tau = * tabu/n vowel, , as in heu.r 5 tau tau = * tabu/n , heu ngs probably in Khitan, be asunderstood in 100 as jau diphthongs jau = *jaxu/n. in Khitan, as in 100 jaufor jau =Chinese *jaxu/n. in Khitan, as in 100 jau jau =of *by jaxu/n. confirmed by the use of by the characters jau and tau for the Chinese term confirmed the use the characters jau and tau the term confirmed the use of the characters jau and tau for the Chines fact that there isfact no medial consonant in these cases isin confirmed by the use of ur spring. The haur that =also there * kabur isto spring. no medial The consonant fact that there these is no medial is the consonant in these cases t of However, Proto-Mongolic the segmental * b counterpart seems to be of lost Proto-Mongolic in * b cases also seems to be lost in punitive = * jawtaw (zhaotao ). The use of character Proto-Mongolic * b commissioner also seems be lost in jau.tau jautau punitive commissioner = * jawtaw (zhaotao ). use of). the jau.tau jautau punitive commissioner = * jawtaw (zhaotao The use of jau.tau jautau punitive commissioner = The *jawtaw (zhaotao ).the T haracters jau and tau for the Chinese term jau.tau jautau punitive the use of the characters confirmed by jau the use of tau the for characters the Chinese jau term and tausignificant, for the Chinese term vowel, Khitan as when 5tau followed tau tau by = * a tabu/n rounded , vowel, heu.r as in tau.li.a 5 tau tau = * tabu/n , heu.r in the tau.li.a hare = taula-i id. is also wel, as in 5in tau = * tabu/n ,and heu.r character word tau.li.a hare = * taula-i id. is also significant, character tau in the word hare = * taula-i id. is also significant, character tau in the word tau.li.a hare = * taula-i id. is als mmissioner = * jawtaw (zhaotao ). The use ofno the 46 in character tau in the 46 cases au punitive commissioner jau.tau jautau =in punitive *of jawtaw commissioner (zhaotao ). The = unclear. use of *jawtaw the (zhaotao ). is The use ofw 46 hat there haur is= no * kabur medial spring. consonant The in fact these that cases there is is medial consonant these there is no medial consonant these cases is though the phonological background this rebus remains though the phonological background of this rebus remains unclear. though the phonological background of this rebus unclear. though the phonological background ofremains this rebus remains unclear.46 b tau.li.a hare = * taula-i id. is also significant, though the phonological taujau in the word character tau.li.a tau hare in the = word *taula-i id. is tau.li.a also significant, hare =clear, *taula-i id. is also significa ers confirmed jau and by the tau use for of the the Chinese characters term jau and tau for Chinese term which and tau for the Chinese term The fate of *The x in monophthongoid contexts in Khitan isthe less which is 46 The fate of * x in monophthongoid contexts in Khitan is less clear, which fate of * x in monophthongoid is less clear, is The fate of *x in monophthongoid contexts inThe Khitan less cl 46 contexts in Khitan 46fate is ground of this rebus remains unclear. of *x in onological background though of the this phonological rebus remains background unclear. of this rebus remains unclear. oner jau.tau = jautau * jawtaw punitive ( zhaotao commissioner ). The use of = the * jawtaw ( zhaotao ). The use of the rwhy = *is jawtaw (zhaotao ). The use of the comparisons like n un = ?* e-x/nare uncertain. A possible example would why comparisons like n un = ?* e-x/n are uncertain. A possible why comparisons n = ?* e-x/nare uncertain. A possible example would why comparisons like n un = ?*e-x/n- are uncertain. A possible ex nophthongoid contexts in Khitan is less clear, which is why comparisons like ate of *x in monophthongoid The fate contexts of *x in intau.li.a Khitan monophthongoid is less clear, contexts which is Khitan is less clear, which tau.li.a character hare = tau *taula-i in id. the id. word is also significant, hare = * taula-i id.in issince also significant, au.li.a hare = *taula-i is also significant, be offered by qa emperor, but this item is ambiguous, since it item could correspond tosince be offered bybe qa but this item is ambiguous, it could correspond to example would offered emperor, but this is ambiguous, be by qa qa emperor, but is ambiguous, it could 46 emperor, 46 un = ?* e-x/nare uncertain. A possible example would 46 be offered by qa emp sons like n un why = ?* comparisons e-x/nare uncertain. like n A un possible = ?* e-x/nexample are would uncertain. A possible example wo dthis of this though rebus the phonological remains background of this rebus remains unclear. rebus remains unclear. either * ka.n prince or unclear. *kaxa.n emperor on emperor the Mongolic side. The genitive either * ka.n prince or * kaxa.n on the Mongolic side. The genitive either * ka.n prince or * kaxa.n emperor on the Mongolic side. The ge since it could correspond to either * ka.n prince or * kaxa.n emperor , but this item isfate ambiguous, since it could correspond to item either * ka.n prince or * qa emperor, be but offered this by is ambiguous, qa emperor, since but itseems this could correspond is it ambiguous, to since it ongoid contexts The in Khitan of *xitem in is monophthongoid less clear, which contexts is in Khitan is aless clear, iscorrespond oid contexts in Khitan is less clear, which is qa.ha.n of the emperor is also enigmatic since it to contain medial g,which as in qa.ha.n of the emperor is also enigmatic since seems to emperor contain acould medial *g, as in qa.ha.n of the emperor is also enigmatic since it* seems to the contain a me on the Mongolic side. The genitive qa.ha.n of the is .n emperor on the Mongolic side. The genitive qa.ha.n of emperor prince or *kaxa.n either emperor *ka.n on prince the Mongolic * kaxa.n side. emperor The genitive on the Mongolic side. The genitive * e-x/nwhy comparisons are uncertain. like A possible n un example =or ?* e-x/nwould are uncertain. A possible example would x/nare uncertain. A possible example would na.ha naha maternal uncle = * naga-cu id. It is uncle possible that the actual Khitan na.ha naha maternal uncle = * naga-cu id. It is possible that the actual Khitan na.ha naha maternal = * naga-cu id. It is possible that the lso enigmatic since it seems to contain a medial * g,ambiguous, as in also enigmatic since it seems to contain a medial medial *, g as na.haamedial na.ha naha mater he emperor is also qa.ha.n enigmatic of since the emperor it seems is to also contain enigmatic a since *g it, as seems inin to contain *g, as his item be offered is should ambiguous, by qa since emperor, it could but correspond this item to is since it could correspond to tem is ambiguous, since it could correspond to readings be kaga : readings kaga-n ,should in which case the Khitan word would correspond readings should be kaga : kaga-n , in which case the Khitan word would correspond be kaga : kaga-n , in which case the Khitan word wou ncle = * naga-cu id. It is possible that the actual Khitan readings should be kaga naha maternal uncle = * naga-cu id. It is possible that the actual Khitan naha maternal uncle = na.ha * naga-cu naha id. maternal It is possible uncle that = * the naga-cu actual id. Khitan It is possible that the actual Khi peror either on the * ka.n Mongolic prince side. or * kaxa.n The genitive emperor on the Mongolic side. The genitive or the Mongolic The genitive to on Turkic *kaga.n , side. rather than torather Mongolic *kaxa.n. Altogether, this is a word that to case Turkic * kaga.n , thancorrespond to Mongolic *kaxa.n. Altogether, this is a word that to Turkic * kaga.n , rather than to Mongolic * kaxa.n. Altogether, this i aga-n , in which the Khitan word would to Turkic * kaga.n , rathe readings should be kaga : kaga-n , in which case the Khitan word would ld be kaga : kaga-n readings , in which should case be the kaga Khitan : kaga-n word , in would which correspond case the Khitan word would correspo gmatic qa.ha.n since it of seems the emperor to contain is a also medial enigmatic * g , as since in it seems to contain a medial * g , as in atic since seems to contain a medial * g , as in seems toit involve an unknown network of borrowings. seems to involve an to unknown network of borrowings. seems involve an unknown network of borrowings. n to Mongolic * kaxa.n. Altogether, this is a word that to involve unkn aga.n , rather than to to Turkic Mongolic * kaga.n * kaxa.n. , actual rather than than to id. Mongolic this ispossible a word *kaxa.n. thatAltogether, this is aan word t correspond to Turkic * kaga.n , Altogether, rather to *kaxa.n . seems Altogether, = *naga-cu na.ha id. naha is possible maternal that uncle the = * naga-cu Khitan ItMongolic is that the actual Khitan aga-cu id. It isIt possible that the actual Khitan network of borrowings. lve an unknown network seems of involve borrowings. an unknown network of Khitan borrowings. in which readings case should the be to kaga word : would kaga-n correspond , in which case the word would correspond this is aKhitan word that seems to involve an unknown network of borrowings. which case the Khitan word would correspond Vowel elision. The loss of vowels in non-initial syllables is a in trivial process observed Vowel elision. The loss of vowels in non-initial syllables is a trivial process observed Vowel elision. The loss of vowels non-initial syllables is a trivial proc Vowel elision. loss o Mongolic to*kaxa.n. Turkic * kaxa.n. * kaga.n Altogether, , rather than this is to a Mongolic word that * kaxa.n. Altogether, this is a word that The golic Altogether, this is a word that in many languages. The phenomenon may concern all short (single) vowels, or only in many languages. The phenomenon may concern all short (single) vowels, or only in many languages. The phenomenon may concern all short (single) vo wels in non-initial syllables is a trivial process observed in many languages. The . The loss of vowels Vowel incertain non-initial elision. The syllables loss of vowels is anon-initial trivial in non-initial process observed syllables is aan trivial process rk of seems borrowings. to involve an unknown network of borrowings. fthose borrowings. in certain positions, or those with certain qualities. In Northeast Asia, early Vowel elision . The loss of vowels in syllables a trivial process those in positions, or those with certain qualities. In those Northeast Asia, anobserv early those in certain positions, or those withis certain qualities. In Northeast A omenon may concern allmay short (single) vowels, or only in certain positions uages. The phenomenon in many languages. concern The all short phenomenon (single) may vowels, concern or only all short (single) vowels, or o vowel elision may be established for several language families, including Turkic and observed in many languages. The phenomenon may concern all short vowel elision may be established for several language families, including Turkic and vowel elision may be established for several language families, includin those with certain qualities. In Northeast Asia, an early vowel elision may be est in positions, or those those with in certain certain positions, qualities. or In those Northeast with and Asia, certain an qualities. early In Northeast Asia, an ea n non-initial Vowel elision. syllables The loss a trivial of vowels process infamilies, observed non-initial syllables isTungusic, a trivial process observed n-initial syllables is a is trivial process observed Korean(ic), while other families, including Mongolic show a less Korean(ic), while other including Mongolic and Tungusic, show a less (single) vowels, or only those in Turkic certain positions, or those with certain Korean(ic), while other families, including Mongolic and Tungusic, hed for several language families, including and 47 Korean(ic), while other may be established vowel for elision several may language be established families, including for several Turkic language and families, including Turkic a 47 on may in many concern languages. all short The (single) phenomenon vowels, or may only concern all short (single) vowels, or only may concern all short (single) vowels, or only A special systematic, or at least chronologically later, tendency to lose vowels. systematic, or at least chronologically later, tendency to lose vowels. A special qualities. In Northeast Asia, an early vowel elision may be established for systematic, or at least chronologically later, tendency to or lose vowels ilies, including Mongolic and Tungusic, show a less systematic, at least c while other families, Korean(ic), including while Mongolic other families, and Tungusic, including show Mongolic a less and Tungusic, show a l with those certain in qualities. certain In Northeast or those Asia, with an47 early certain qualities. In Northeast Asia, an early h certain qualities. Inpositions, Northeast Asia, an early 47 Korean(ic), while other 47 several language families, including Turkic and A special ologically later, tendency to lose vowels. 45 45 systematic, AIn special A spec r at least chronologically later, or at tendency least chronologically to lose later, tendency to lose vowels. On *x inlanguage Mongolic, cf. Janhunen (1999). In earlier research, this segment was often confused with *g , several vowel elision may families, be established including for Turkic several and language families, including Turkic and 45 veral language families, including Turkic and On * x in Mongolic, cf. Janhunen (1999). Invowels. earlier research, this segment often confused with *g 45 was On * x in Mongolic, cf. Janhunen (1999). earlier research, this segment was often c On *x in at Mongolic, cf. Janh families, including Mongolic and Tungusic, show a less systematic, or with which it is graphically indinguishable in Written Mongol. ncluding Korean(ic), Mongolic while and other Tungusic, families, show including a less Mongolic and Tungusic, show a less with which it is graphically indinguishable in Written Mongol. uding Mongolic and Tungusic, show a less with which it is graphically indinguishable in Written Mongol. 46 47 with which it is graphically ind 45 (1999). In earlier research, this segment was often confused with * g , 46 chronologically 47 The issue depends on what part the Proto-Mongolic numeral Khitan tau to: was only to confused 46 of 47 Acorresponds special feature of least later, tendency to lose vowels. golic, cf. Janhunen (1999). * In x lose in earlier Mongolic, research, cf. Janhunen this (1999). was often In earlier confused research, with this *g, segment often with The issue depends on what part oflater, the Proto-Mongolic numeral Khitan 47 tau corresponds to: corresp only to 46numeral The issue on what part of the Proto-Mongolic Khitan tau A segment special special ally systematic, later, tendency or at to least chronologically vowels. tendency to lose vowels. later, toOn lose vowels. A depends special TheA issue depends on what shable intendency Written Mongol.
the root *tab , orthe to the entire sequence *tabu. The word taulai , on the * other hand, is one of hand, graphically indinguishable with which in Written it is graphically Mongol. indinguishable in Written Mongol. root * tab ,bisyllabic or to the entire sequence ** tabu. The word * taulai ,vowels on the other is one of the root *tab , bisyllabic or to the entire bisyllabic sequence tabu. The word * taulai , on the othe Jurchen-Manchu (and certain forms of Mongolic) is the loss of in the root *tab , or to the entire b 46an of the Proto-Mongolic numeral Khitan tau corresponds to: only to the items containing original diphthong with no medial consonant in Written Mongol, a situation ends 45 on what part of items the The Proto-Mongolic issue the depends numeral on what Khitan part oforiginal the tauProto-Mongolic corresponds to:consonant numeral onlyno to medial Khitan tau Mongol, corresponds to: Mo onl the containing an original diphthong with no medial in Written a situation items containing an diphthong with consonant in Written In earlier On research, * x in Mongolic, this segment cf. Janhunen was often (1999). confused In earlier with * research, g , this segment was often confused with * g , the items containing an origi open second syllables (the so-called Mittelsilbenschwund). abic sequence * tabu. The word * taulai , on the other hand, is one of arlier research, this segment was often confused with * g , further complicated bysequence the fact that Turkic counterpart * tabsh-gan has a medial b. However this to the entire bisyllabic the root *tab * , tabu. or the to the The entire word bisyllabic *taulai , on sequence the other *tabu. hand, The is one word of** taulai ,medial on the other hand, isthis on further complicated by the fact that the Turkic counterpart * tabsh-gan has atabsh-gan * b.has However further complicated by a the fact that the Turkic counterpart * aby medial * n Written with which Mongol. it is graphically indinguishable in Written Mongol. further complicated the fac diphthong with no medial consonant Written Mongol, situation ritten Mongol. may be, the connection between five and was among the five strongest pieces of evidence in favour ning an original diphthong the items with containing noin medial anhare original consonant diphthong in Written with Mongol, no medial a situation consonant inthe Written Mongol, a situa may be, the connection between five and hare was among the strongest pieces of evidence in favour 46 may be, the connection between and hare was among strongest pieces of ev roto-Mongolic The issue numeral depends Khitan on what tau part corresponds of the Proto-Mongolic to: only to numeral Khitan tau corresponds to: only to may be, the connection betwee the Turkic counterpart * tabsh-gan has a medial * b. However this Mongolic numeral Khitan tau corresponds to: only to 46 of the Mongolic identification of Khitan during the early phases of the decipherment of the Khitan ated by the fact that the further Turkic complicated counterpart by * the tabsh-gan fact that has the aTurkic medial counterpart *b. However *tabsh-gan this has a medial *b. However of Mongolic identification ofidentification Khitan during the early phases of other the decipherment of the Khitan The issue depends on what part of the Proto-Mongolic Khitan tau of the Mongolic of Khitan during the early phases of the deciphermen uence the *hare tabu. root The tab ,word or to * the taulai entire , on bisyllabic the other sequence hand, is one *tabu. of The word *taulai , numeral on the hand, is one of of the Mongolic identification ve was among the strongest pieces of in favour eSmall *and tabu. The * word *taulai ,hare on the other hand, is evidence one of Script, cf. e.g. Kara (1975: 165-166). On the diachrony of the Turko-Mongolic item for hare, nection between five may and be, the connection was among between the strongest five pieces and hare of evidence was among in favour the strongest pieces of evidence in fav Small Script, cf. e.g. Kara (1975: 165-166). On the diachrony of the Turko-Mongolic item for hare, corresponds to: only to the root * tab , or to the entire bisyllabic sequence * tabu. The word Small Script, cf. e.g. Kara (1975: 165-166). On the diachrony of the Turko-Mongolic ng with the no items medial containing consonant an original in Written diphthong Mongol, a with situation no medial consonant in Written Mongol, a situation Small Script, cf. e.g. Kara (19 Khitan during the early phases ofthe the decipherment of the Khitan no medial consonant inrecently, Written Mongol, a situation cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). cth identification of Khitan of the during Mongolic early identification phases of of the Khitan decipherment during the of early the Khitan phases of the decipherment of the Kh cf., most Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). * taulai , on the other hand, is one of the items containing an original diphthong with cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). 47 counterpart rkic further complicated * tabsh-gan by the has fact a medial that the * b. Turkic However counterpart this * tabsh-gan has a medial * b. However this cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2 65-166). On the diachrony of the Turko-Mongolic item for hare, counterpart * tabsh-gan has a medial * b. However this 47 The diachronic fact of vowel elision in a Mongol, language can belanguage easily established and demonstrated by 47 e.g. Kara (1975: 165-166). Small Script, On the cf. diachrony e.g. Kara of (1975: the Turko-Mongolic 165-166). On the item diachrony for hare, of established the Turko-Mongolic item for ha The diachronic fact vowel elision in a can belanguage easily and demonstrated by no medial consonant in Written aof situation further complicated by the fact that 47 The diachronic fact vowel elision in a can be easily established d hare may was be, among the connection the strongest between pieces five ofof evidence and hare in favour was among the strongest pieces of evidence in favour The diachronic fact ofand vow 188-189). e was among the strongest pieces of evidence in favour external comparisons with other languages with preserved vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instance, y, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). external comparisons with other languages with preserved vowels. In and Korean, for and instance, thephases Turkic counterpart *tabsh-gan has a medial *b.phases However this may be,Turkic the connection external comparisons with other languages with preserved vowels. In Turkic Kore during of the the early Mongolic of the decipherment of Khitan of during the Khitan the early of the decipherment of the Khitan external comparisons with oth 47identification sion in a language can be easily established and demonstrated by g the early phases of the decipherment of the Khitan c fact of vowel elisionThe in a diachronic language fact of easily vowelthe established elision in a and language demonstrated can be easily byin favour established and demonstrated between five and harecan wasbe among strongest pieces evidence ). OnSmall the diachrony Script, cf. ofe.g. the Kara Turko-Mongolic (1975: 165-166). item for On hare, the diachrony of theof Turko-Mongolic item of forthe hare, guages with preserved vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instance, the diachrony of the Turko-Mongolic item for hare, isons with other languages external with comparisons preserved with vowels. other In languages Turkic and with Korean, preserved for instance, vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instan Mongolic identification of Khitan during the early phases of the decipherment of the ). cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). Khitan Small Script, cf. e.g. Kara (1975: 165-166). On the diachrony of the Turko47 a language The caneasily be easily factestablished of vowel and demonstrated in a language can be easily established and demonstrated by nguage can diachronic be established and elision demonstrated by by Mongolic item for hare, cf., most recently, Rybatzki (2010: 188-189). with external preserved comparisons vowels. In with Turkic other andlanguages Korean, for with instance, preserved vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instance, preserved vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instance, 47
The diachronic fact of vowel elision in a language can be easily established and demonstrated by external comparisons with other languages with preserved vowels. In Turkic and Korean, for instance, the phenomenon is confirmed by comparisons such as Turkic *er man = Mongolic *ere, Korean kom bear = Japanese kuma. Another language that has lost vowels is Ghilyak, as may be seen from examples such as Ghilyak camng shaman = Manchu saman. Note that all these examples involve areal contacts (loanwords), rather than cases of genetic relationship.
127
feature of Jurchen-Manchu (a open second syllables (the of so-c ure of Jurchen-Manchu (and certain forms of Mongolic) the loss of vowels in certain feature ofis Jurchen-Manchu (and forms M feature of Jurchen-Manchu (and certain f In Khitan, the nature of the script makes it often difficult to verify In Khitan, the nature of n second syllables (the so-called Mittelsilbenschwund). open second syllables (the so-called Mittelsilbensch open second syllables (the so-called Mitt the nature presence or script absence of vowels in all positions, including evenof wordor absence vowels in all p In Khitan, the of the makes it often difficult to verify the presence In Khitan, the nature of the script it of In Khitan, the nature of makes the script m initially. Many Khitan characters, irrespective of what Romanizational characters, irrespective of wha bsence of vowels in all positions, including even word-initially. Many Khitan urchen-Manchu of Jurchen-Manchu (and certain (and (and certain forms forms of Mongolic) of Mongolic) is absence theis loss the of loss of vowels in vowels ature of Jurchen-Manchu certain forms of Mongolic) is the loss in all positions, or of vowels allin positions, including in e or absence of shape iswhat usedRomanizational for them, refer shape basically to a consonantal which may tocore, a consonantal core, which m acters, irrespective is used for them, refer basically econd syllables syllables (the so-called (the of so-called Mittelsilbenschwund). Mittelsilbenschwund). en second syllables (the so-called Mittelsilbenschwund). characters, irrespective of what Romanizational shap characters, irrespective of what Romaniza be preceded (VC) and/or followed (CV) by a the vowel. such as b.as again Items such as consonantal core, which may be script preceded and/or followed (CV) by a presence vowel. hitan, In Khitan, the nature the nature of the of script the makes makes it often it(VC) often difficult difficult verify to presence theItems presence In Khitan, the nature ofscript the makes it often difficult verify the to ato consonantal core, which may be preceded toverify ato consonantal core, which may be (VC) prece may, therefore, well have con b.as again, also = * basa id. and p.ar people = * para id. may, s such as b.as again, also = * basa id. and p.ar people = * paraid. ence of vowels of vowels in all in positions, all positions, including including even even word-initially. word-initially. Many Many Khitan Khitan absence of vowels in all positions, including Items even word-initially. Many Khitan such as b.as again, also = *basa Items such as b.as again, alsoid. = an *b presence of ahand, vowel letter in ,ers, therefore, well have contained a contained final vowel in Khitan. On the other hand, the therefore, well have a final vowel in Khitan. On the other rrespective irrespective of what of Romanizational what Romanizational shape shape is used is for used them, for may, them, refer basically refer basically aracters, irrespective of what Romanizational shape is used for them, refer basically may, therefore, well have contained a final vowel therefore, well have contained a fin was aa segmental vowel in the K ence of a core, vowel letter in the does not necessarily that there the presence ofRomanization a vowel letter in the Romanization does not necessarily nsonantal ntal core, which which may be may preceded be preceded (VC) (VC) and/or and/or followed followed (CV) by amean vowel. by a by vowel. a consonantal core, which may be preceded (VC) and/or followed (CV) vowel. presence of a(CV) vowel letter in the Romanization doe presence of vowel letter in the Romani such as, for instance, i.ri a segmental vowel in the Khitan word. We cannot, therefore, be certain that items mean that there was a and segmental vowel in the Khitan word. We cannot, s uch as b.as again, b.as again, also also = *basa = *id. basa id. and people p.ar people =people *para= *paraid. id. ms such as b.as again, also = * basa id. p.ar and p.ar = *the paraid. was a segmental vowel in Khitan word. We word cann was a segmental vowel in the Khitan m.ri horse =* *nere mori/n id. as,therefore, for instance, i.ri = * nere id. aas, secondary initial nasal) and herefore, re, well have well well have contained contained a name final a vowel final vowel initems Khitan. in(with Khitan. On the On other the other hand, hand, the the ay, have contained athat final vowel in Khitan. On the other hand, the such as, for instance, i.ri name = id. i.ri name = therefore, be certain such for instance, such as, for instance, i.ri name = (w * Even so, the circumsta m.ri horse = * mori/n id. ended in a vowel. ce a vowel of a of vowel letter letter in the in Romanization the does initial not does necessarily not necessarily mean that there that that there esence a vowel letter in Romanization the Romanization does not necessarily there m.ri horse = mean * mori/n id. ended in vowel. * nere id. (with a secondary nasal) and horse = * mori/n id.aended mean m.ri horse = in a suggests that that Khitan most pr so, circumstance that final vowels are retained in Jurchen-Manchu ntal egmental vowel vowel inthe the in Khitan the word. word. We word. cannot, We cannot, therefore, therefore, be Even certain be certain that items that items as aEven segmental vowel inKhitan the Khitan We cannot, therefore, be certain that items so, the circumstance final vowels Even so, the circumstance that fin ended in a vowel. suggested by the fact that cert gests Khitan most probably also retained them. is, incidentally, also s, instance, for instance, i.ri name i.riso, name = * nere =* id. nere id. (with aid. secondary afinal secondary initial initial nasal) nasal) and and ch as,that for instance, i.ri name = (with * nere (with aThis secondary nasal) and suggests that Khitan most probably retained suggests that Khitan most also probably also Even the circumstance that vowels areinitial retained in Jurchenalternating variants, although gested the certain suffixes in suggested a vowel (-CV) have positionally orse .ri m.ri horse =by * mori/n = *fact mori/n id. ended id. ended in vowel. inthat a vowel. horse = *that mori/n id.aended inKhitan aending vowel. by the fact that certain suffixes in suggested by thethem. fact that certain suffixes 48 Manchu suggests most probably also retained This is, ending harmony. It is also importan nating variants, although it is not necessarily a question of regular vowel Even so, the so, circumstance the circumstance that final that vowels final vowels are retained are retained in Jurchen-Manchu in Jurchen-Manchu Even so, the circumstance that final vowels are retained in Jurchen-Manchu alternating variants, although it is not necessari alternating variants, although it is not 48 incidentally, also suggested by the fact that certain suffixes ending in 48 Mongolic elements (diphthongs and co mony. It is also important to note the counterparts of long vowel 48also ts t Khitan that that Khitan most most probably probably also retained also that retained them. them. This This is, incidentally, is, ggests Khitan most probably also retained them. This is, also incidentally, also Itincidentally, is important to note that cou harmony. It is also important to the note th harmony. a vowel (-CV) have positionally alternating variants, although it is notletters, as additional vowel ments (diphthongs and contracted vowels) are in Khitan rendered by using y ted the by fact the that fact that that certain suffixes suffixes ending ending in ending a vowel in a in vowel (-CV) (-CV) have positionally have positionally ggested by thecertain fact certain suffixes a vowel (-CV) have positionally elements (diphthongs and contracted vowels) ar elements (diphthongs and contracted v 48 necessarily a of regular vowel It is also important to *moga-i id mu.ho.o snake tional vowel letters, as it inquestion t.qo.a chicken = regular *of tak-xa id., = variants, ting variants, although although it is not is necessarily not necessarily a question a question of regular vowel vowel ernating variants, although it is not necessarily a harmony. question of regular vowel additional vowel letters, as in t.qo.a c additional vowel letters, as in 48 snake time being we cannot reconstr ho.o =note *moga-i id., and also tau.li.a hare = *taula-i id. For the that the counterparts of long vowel (diphthongs ny. t is also It 48 is important also important to note to that note that counterparts the counterparts of Mongolic of Mongolic long vowel long vowel rmony. It is also important to the note that theMongolic counterparts of Mongolic long vowel mu.ho.o snake = elements * moga-i and also tau mu.ho.o snake =id., *moga-i id., and also but the suggests being we cannot reconstruct the Khitan of Khitan such items with any certainty, and contracted vowels) areshapes in Khitan rendered using additional vowel iphthongs ts (diphthongs and contracted and contracted vowels) vowels) are in are Khitan in rendered rendered by using by using ements (diphthongs and contracted vowels) are in Khitan rendered by orthography using time being weby cannot reconstruct the Khitan shapes time being we cannot reconstruct the Khi (diphthongs or long vowels) the orthography suggests they may have involved complex vowel elements chicken *= tak-xa id., mu.ho.o snake letters, asin in nal owel vowel letters, letters, asletters, in as t.qo.a t.qo.a t.qo.a chicken chicken == *the tak-xa *tak-xa id., ditional vowel asthat in t.qo.a chicken = id., * tak-xa id., but orthography suggests that they may have al i but the orthography suggests that they m hthongs or long vowels) also in Khitan. ake o snake = snake *moga-i = *moga-i and id.,also and also also tau.li.a tau.li.a hare hare =* taula-i =(diphthongs *or taula-i For id. the For the = *moga-i moga-i id., and tau.li.a hare = id. For the time u.ho.o =id., * id., tau.li.a hare =id. *taula-i taula-i id. For (diphthongs long vowels) also in Khitan. or long vowels) also in Khitan we eing cannot we cannot reconstruct reconstruct thecannot Khitan the Khitan shapes shapes of shapes such of items such items with any withcertainty, any certainty, me being we cannot reconstruct the Khitan of such items with anyitems certainty, being we reconstruct the Khitan shapes of such with any * ography suggests suggests that they that may they have may have involved involved complex complex vowel vowel elements elements t orthography the orthography suggests that they may have involved complex vowel elements certainty, but the orthography suggests that they may have involved * It has to be stressed that only or ongs long or vowels) long vowels) also in also Khitan. in Khitan. phthongs or long vowels) also in Khitan. complex vowel elements (diphthongs or long vowels) also in Khitan. properties of Khitan has been s to be stressed that only a small selection of diagnostic and phonological It has to lexical be that only a small selection di It stressed has to be stressed that only a small of sele even more remains to be disco erties of Khitan has been discussed Much more remains to be said, and * * above. * properties of Khitan has been discussed above. Mu properties of Khitan has been discussed * consistent with What the status of n more remains to be discovered. What is, however, is that the material is evencertain more remains to be discovered. is, howe even more remains to be discovered. Wha between Khitan and Proto-Mo istent with the status of Khitan as a Para-Mongolic language. The distance stressed o beto stressed that only that a only small a small selection selection of diagnostic of diagnostic lexical lexical and phonological andthe phonological has be stressed that only a small selection of diagnostic lexical andwith phonological consistent with status of status Khitanof asKhitan a Para-M consistent the as It has to be stressed that only a small selection of diagnostic lexical and communication between the t ween Khitan and Proto-Mongolic isabove. clearly large enough to have made immediate fies Khitan of Khitan has been has been discussed discussed above. Much Much more more remains remains to be to said, be said, and and operties of Khitan has been discussed above. Much more remains to be said, and between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic is clearly large between Khitan and Proto-Mongolic is cl similarities are conspicuous e phonological properties of Khitan has been discussed above. Much more munication between the two speech communities impossible. At the same, the more emains remains to be to discovered. be discovered. What What is, however, is, however, certain is that is the that material the material is en more remains to be discovered. What is, certain however, certain is that theis material communication between the twois speech communi communication between the two speech speaker. The real situation ma larities conspicuous enough to and have evident even forbe the nave native remains be said, even more remains to discovered. What is, with ent with the are status the status of status Khitan ofto Khitan asKhitan a as Para-Mongolic aas Para-Mongolic language. language. The distance The distance nsistent with the of abeen Para-Mongolic language. The distance similarities are conspicuous enough to have been similarities are conspicuous enough to h idioms of which we have no di ker. The real situation may have been modified by the of intermediate however, certain isclearly that the material is consistent with thereal status ofhave Khitan n tan Khitan and Proto-Mongolic and Proto-Mongolic is clearly is large large enough enough to have to presence made have made immediate immediate tween Khitan and Proto-Mongolic is clearly large enough to have made immediate speaker. The real situation may beenhave modifie speaker. The situation may bee As far as the position o ms of which we no direct information. ashave a Para-Mongolic language. The distance between Khitan and Protounication ion between between the two the speech two speech communities communities impossible. impossible. Atwhich the Atsame, the same, the same, the mmunication between the two speech communities impossible. Atwhich the the idioms of we have no direct information. idioms of we have no direct inform the situation is ambiguous. Ev As far as the position of Khitan on the archaicinnovative scale is concerned, are ities conspicuous are conspicuous enough enough to have to have been been evident evident even even forAs the for nave the nave native native milarities are conspicuous enough to have been even for the nave native Mongolic is clearly large enough toevident have made immediate communication far as the position of Khitan on Khitan the archa As far as the position of on terized as an innovative langu situation is ambiguous. Even so, at least phonologically, Khitan may be charace r. real Thesituation real real situation may have may have been been modified modified by the by presence the presence of intermediate of intermediate eaker. The situation may have been modified by the presence of At intermediate the situation is ambiguous. Even so,the at least phono between the two speech communities impossible. same, the situation is the ambiguous. Even so, at le than the lineage leading to Pr ed as an innovative which in most respects evolved more rapidly hich of which we have we no have direct nolanguage, direct information. information. oms of which we have no direct information. terized had as terized an innovative language, which in most r as an innovative language, which earlier than the Proto-Mongo the lineage leading to Proto-Mongolic. Many areal innovations reached Khitan r As asfar the position the position of Khitan of Khitan on Khitan the on archaicinnovative the scale scale is concerned, is concerned, Asas far as the position of onarchaicinnovative the archaicinnovative scale is concerned, than the lineage leading to Proto-Mongolic. Many than the lineage leading to Proto-Mongo 48 evolution must be searched in than the Proto-Mongolic lineage. The reasons for the different speed of An example is offered by least the dative case ending, Romanized as -de -do ~ -du , cf. uation is ambiguous. is ambiguous. Even Even so, at so, least at phonologically, least phonologically, Khitan Khitan may be may characbe characeer situation is ambiguous. Even so, at phonologically, Khitan may be~ characearlier than the Proto-Mongolic lineage. The rea earlier than the Proto-Mongolic lineage In the centuries precedingdem th must searched in the geographical, demographical and political situation. Kane (2009: 136-138). The of vowel harmony in Khitan is still an open nution as innovative an innovative language, language, which which in most innature most respects respects had evolved had evolved more rapidly rapidly ized as an be innovative language, which in most respects had evolved more rapidly evolution must bemore searched in the issue. geographical, evolution must be searched in the geograp rapidly growing and highly mo he centuries preceding the Liao period, Khitan had become the language of a eage e lineage leading leading toleading Proto-Mongolic. to Proto-Mongolic. ManyMany areal areal innovations innovations reached reached Khitan Khitan an the lineage to Proto-Mongolic. Many areal reached Khitan In the innovations centuries preceding the Liao period, Khitan In the centuries preceding the Liao peri dly and highly mobile population, which, moreover, contacted on speed a mobile wide than thegrowing Proto-Mongolic the Proto-Mongolic lineage. lineage. The reasons The The reasons for the for different the different speed speed of of highly rlier than the Proto-Mongolic lineage. reasons for the different of population, rapidly growing and highly whic rapidly growing and mobile popula ust on be must searched be searched thein geographical, the demographical demographical and political and political situation. olution must bein searched ingeographical, the geographical, demographical andsituation. political situation. the phenomenon is confirmed by com ries centuries preceding preceding the Liao the Liao period, period, Khitan Khitan had become had had become the language the language of a a of a kuma. Another l the centuries preceding the Liao period, Khitan become the language bearof = Japanese
henomenon is confirmed by comparisons such as Turkic *er man = Mongolic *ere, Korean kom
128
similarities are conspicuous enough to have been evident even for the nave native speaker. The real situation may have been modified by the presence of intermediate idioms of which we have no direct information. As far as the position of Khitan on the archaicinnovative scale is concerned, the situation is ambiguous. Even so, at least phonologically, Khitan may be charac terized as an innovative language, which in most respects had evolved more rapidly than the lineage leading to ProtoMongolic. Many areal innovations reached Khitan earlier than the ProtoMongolic lineage. The reasons for the different speed of evolution must be searched in the geographical, demographical and political situation. In the centuries preceding the Liao period, Khitan had become the language of a rapidly growing and highly mobile population, which, moreover, contacted on a wide scale with a variety of other speech communities. For the ProtoMongolic lineage, such a period of intensive growth and contacts was yet to come.
References
Alonso de la Fuente, Jos (2011). Tense, Voice and Aktionsart in Tungusic: Another Case of Analysis to Synthesis? Tunguso-Sibirica 32. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Arapov, M. V. (1982). Leksika i morfologiia tekstov malogo kidan skogo pisma. In: Zabytye sistemy pisma: Materialy po deshif rovke. Moskva: Izdatelstvo Nauka. 211-239. Chingeltei [Qinggeertai] (1997). Qidanyu shuci ji Qidan Xiaozi pindufa . Altai Hakpo 7. 143-152. Chingeltei , Liu Fengzhu , Chen Naixiong , Yu Baolin , and Xing Fuli (1985). Qidan Xiaozi Yanjiu . Beijing : Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chubanshe . Doerfer, Gerhard (1985). Mongolo-Tungusica. Tungusica 3. Wiesbaden: Otto Harras sowitz. Doerfer, Gerhard (1992). Mongolica im Alttrkischen. In Bruno Lewin zu Ehren 3. Bochum. 30-56. Doerfer, Gerhard (1993). The Older Mongolian Layer in Ancient Turkic. Trk Dilleri Aratrmalar 1993:3. 79-86. Golovachev, V. C., A. L. Ivliev, A. M. Pevnov, and P. O. Rykin (2011).
129
Tyrskie stely XV veka: Perevod, kommentari, issledovanie kitaiskix, mongolskogo i chzhurchzhenskogo tekstov. Sankt-Peterburg: Nauka. Grube, Wilhelm (1896). Die Sprache und Schrift der Juen. Leipzig: Kommissions-Verlag von O. Harrassowitz [Reprints: Peking 1936, Tientsin 1941]. Janhunen, Juha (1981). Korean Vowel System in North Asian Perspective. Han-geul 172. 129-146. Janhunen, Juha (1993). The Teens in Jurchen and Manchu Revisited. In Festschrift fr Raija Bartens. Ulla-Maija Kulonen (ed.) Mmoires de la Socit Finno-Ougrienne 215. Helsinki. 169-184. Janhunen, Juha (1994). On the Formation of Sinitic Scripts in Medi aeval Northern China. Journal de la Socit Finno-Ougrienne 85. 107-124. Janhunen, Juha (1995). Kittanjin ha nanigo wo hanashite ita ka . Minpaku Tsuushin 68. 82-85. Janhunen, Juha (1996). Prolegomena to a Comparative Analysis of Mongolic and Tungusic. In Proceedings of the 38th Permanent Inter nation al Altaistic Conference (PIAC) (Kawasaki, Japan: August 7-12, 1995). Giovanni Stary (ed.). Wies baden: Harrassowitz Verlag. 209218. Janhunen, Juha (1999). Laryngeals and Pseudolaryngeals in Mongolic: Problems of Phonological Interpretation. Central Asiatic Journal 43. 115-131. Janhunen, Juha (2003). Para-Mongolic. In The Mongolic Languages, Juha Janhunen (ed.), Rout ledge Language Family Series 5. Routledge: London & New York. 391-402. Janhunen, Juha (2012). The Expansion of Tungusic as an Ethnic and Linguistic Process. In Recent Advances in Tungusic Studies, Andrej L. Malchukov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.) Turcology 89. Wies baden: Harrasso witz Verlag. 5-16. Jin Qicong (1984). Nzhen wen cidian . Beijing : Wenwu Chubanshe . Kane, Daniel (1989). The Sino-Jurchen Vocabulary of the Bureau of Interpreters. Indiana University Uralic and Altaic Series 153. Bloomington. Kane, Daniel (2004). A Note on *isdeben. Central Asiatic Journal 48. 223225. Kane, Daniel (2006). Khitan and Jurchen. In Alessan dra Pozzi, Juha
130
Janhunen, and Michael Weiers (eds.) Tumen Jalafun Jecen Ak: Man chu Studies in Honour of Giovanni Stary. Tun guso-Sibiri ca 20. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. 121-132. Kane, Daniel (2008). A Transcription System for Texts in the Qidan Small Script. Handout presented at International Conference on Qi dan, Tan gut, Jurchen and Mongolian Historical Documents Liao Xia Jin Yuan Lishi Wen xian Guoji Yantaohui (Beijing, 2008.11.3-5). Kane, Daniel (2009). The Kitan Language and Script. Handbook of Orien tal Studies VIII, 19. Brill: Leiden & Boston. Kara, Gyrgy (1975). Apropos de linscription khitane de 1150. Annales Universitatis Scientiarum Budapestinensis. Sectio Linguistica 6. 163167. Kiyose, Gisaburo N. (1977). A Study of the Jurchen Language and Script: Recon struction and Decipherment. Kyoto: Hritsubunka-sha. Ko Seongyen (2011). Vowel Contrast and Vowel Harmony Shift in the Mongolic languages. Language Research 47:1. 23-43. Kwanten, Luc (1984). The Phonological Hypothesis of the Hsi Hsia (Tangut) Language. Toung Pao 70. 159-184. Kwanten, Luc (1988). The Structure of the Tangut (Hsi Hsia) Characters. Journal of Asian and African Studies 36. 69-105. Ligeti, Louis (1970). Le tabghatch, un dialecte de la language sien-pi. In Louis Ligeti (ed.) Mongolian Studies. Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica 14. Buda pest. 265-308. Menges, Karl H. (1968). Tungusen und Ljao. Abhandlungen fr die Kunde des Morgenlandes 38:1. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner GmbH. Nher, Carsten (1999). Der urtungusische stimmlose velare Plosiv im Mandschu. Journal de la Socit Finno-Ougrienne 88. 113-130. Pelliot, Paul (1925). Les mots h initiale, aujourdhui amuie, dans le mongol des XIIIe et XIVe sicles. Journal Asiatique 206. 193-263. Pevnov, A. M. (2004). Chtenie chzhurchzhenskix pismen. Sankt-Peterburg: Rossii skaia Akademiia Nauk, Institut lingvisticheskix issledovanii & Nauka. Rna-Tas, Andrs (2004). A Khitan Word for Marmot. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scien tiarum Hungaricae 57. 27-29. Rybatzki, Volker (2003). Middle Mongol. In Juha Janhunen (ed.) The Mongolic Languages, Rout ledge Language Family Series 5. Routledge:
131
London & New York. 57-82. Rybatzki, Volker (2011). Classification of Old Turkic loanwords in Mongolic. In Mehmet lmez, Erhan Aydn, Peter Zieme, and Mustafa S. Kaalin (eds.) From tken to Istanbul: 1290 Years of Turkish. Istanbul Bykehir Belediyesi. 185-202. Shimunek, Andrew A. (2007). Towards a Reconstruction of the Kitan Lan guage, with Notes on Northern Late Middle Chinese Phono logy. MA Thesis, Indiana Uni versity, Depart ment of Lin guistics & Department of Central Eurasian Studies. Starikov, V. S., M. Arapov, A. Karapetianc, Z. Malinovskaia, and M. Probst (1970). Materialy po deshifrovke kidanskogo pisma 1-2. Moskva: Aka de miia Nauk SSSR. Sun Bojun & Nie Hongyin (2008). Qidanyu Yanjiu , Zhongguo Shehui Kexueyuan Wenku Wenxue Yuyan Yanjiu Xilie . Beijing . Takeuchi Yasunori (2007). Kittan Shouji de Hyouki Sa re ta Kanjion kara Mita Kittango Onin Taikei no Kenkyuu . MA Thesis. Kyoto University: Kyo to Daigaku Daigakuin Bungaku Kenkyuuka . Talpe, Lode (2010). Some Qidan Words in Chinese Poems. Central Asiatic Journal 54. 79-91. Toyoda Gorou [Gor] (1964). An Analysis of the Major Chi-tan Char acters. Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko 23. 119-135. Toyoda Gorou [Gor] [Fengtian Wulang] (1998). Qidan Xiaozi dui siji de chenghu . Minzu Yuwen 1998:1. 7881. Vovin, Alexander (1997). Voiceless Velars in Manchu. Journal de la Socit Finno-Ougrienne 87. 263-280. Vovin, Alexander (2003). Once Again on Khitan Words in Chinese-Khitan Mixed Verses. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scien tiarum Hungaricae 56. 237-244. Vovin, Alexander (2011). A Modest Proposal on the Decipherment of the Khitan-Chinese Bilingual Text of 1134 (the Langjun In scription). In Michael Knppel & Alos van Tongerloo (eds.). Life and Afterlife & Apocalyptic Concepts in the Altaic World, Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Permanent International Altaistic Conference (PIAC), Tunguso-Sibirica 31. Wiesbaden: Harras so witz Verlag. 123-
132
130. Wittfogel, Karl A. & Fng Chia-shng (1949). History of Chinese Society: Liao (907-1125). Trans actions of the Amer ic a n Philosophical Society. New Series 36. Philadelphia. Wu Yingzhe (2005). Qidan Xiaozi xing de yufa fanchou chutan . Nei Menggu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexueban) () 2005:3. 25-28. Wu Yingzhe (2007). Qidanyu Jingci Yufa Fanchou Yanjiu [Re search on the grammatical cat egories of the noun in the Khitan language]. Huhe-haote : Nei Menggu Daxue Chu ban she . Wu Yingzhe (2009). A Brief Discussion on the Vowel Attachment in the Khitan Small Script. Voprosy filologi, Seriia Uralo-altaiskie issle dovaniia 1. 26-30. Wu Yingzhe (2011). Deciphering Some Demonstrative Pronouns in Khitan Small Script. Altai Hakpo 21. 69-77. Wu Yingzhe (2012). Organization of the Khitan materials kept in Inner Mongolia, Unpub lished Powerpoint presentation (Tokyo University of Foreign Studies). 1-67. Wu Yingzhe & Juha Janhunen (2010). New Materials on the Khitan Small Script: A Critical Edition of Xiao Dilu and Yel Xiangwen. Corpus Scriptorum Chitanorum 1, The Languages of Asia Series. Folkestone, Kent: Global Oriental.
Juha A. Janhunen Institute for Asian and African Studies University of Helsinki, Finland <asiemajeure@yahoo.com> [Received 10 May 2012; accepted 10 August 2012]

Khitan Understanding The Language

Cargado por

Información del documento

Descripción original:

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Khitan Understanding The Language

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Khitan: Understanding the Language Behind the Scripts

University of Helsinki, Finland

SCRIPTA, VOLUME 4 (2012)

1. The Khitan Scripts