Kra–Dai languages

Template:Short description Template:Use dmy dates Template:Infobox language family

The Kra–Dai languages (Template:IPAc-en Template:Respell, also known as Tai–Kadai Template:IPAc-en Template:Respell and Daic Template:IPAc-en Template:Respell), are a language family in mainland Southeast Asia, southern China, and northeastern India. All languages in the family are tonal, including Thai and Lao, the national languages of Thailand and Laos, respectively.<ref>Diller, Anthony, Jerry Edmondson, Yongxian Luo. (2008). The Tai–Kadai Languages. London [etc.]: Routledge. Template:ISBN</ref> Around 93 million people speak Kra–Dai languages; 60% of those speak Thai.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> Ethnologue lists 95 languages in the family, with 62 of these being in the Tai branch.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

Names

The name "Kra–Dai" was proposed by Weera Ostapirat (2000), as Kra and Dai are the reconstructed autonyms of the Kra and Tai branches, respectively.<ref name=Ostapirat2000 /> "Kra–Dai" has since been used by the majority of specialists working on Southeast Asian linguistics, including Norquest (2007),<ref name=norquest /> Pittayaporn (2009),<ref name=pittayaporn>Pittayaporn, Pittayawat. 2009. The phonology of Proto-Tai. Ph.D. Thesis, Cornell University</ref><ref name=jenks>Peter Jenks and Pittayawat Pittayaporn. Kra-Dai Languages. Oxford Bibliographies in "Linguistics", Ed. Mark Aranoff. New York: Oxford University Press.</ref> Baxter & Sagart (2014),<ref>Template:Citation</ref> and Enfield & Comrie (2015).<ref>N. J. Enfield and B. Comrie, Eds. 2015. Languages of Mainland Southeast Asia: The State of the Art. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter.</ref>

The name "Tai–Kadai" is used in many references, as well as Ethnologue and Glottolog, but Ostapirat (2000) and others suggest that it is problematic and confusing, preferring the name "Kra–Dai" instead.<ref name="Ostapirat2000">Ostapirat, Weera. (2000). "Proto-Kra." Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 23 (1): 1–251.</ref> "Tai–Kadai" comes from an obsolete bifurcation of the family into two branches, Tai and Kadai, which had first been proposed by Paul K. Benedict (1942).<ref name="Benedict1942"/> In 1942, Benedict placed three Kra languages (Gelao, Laqua (Qabiao), and Lachi) together with Hlai in a group that he called "Kadai", from ka, meaning "person" in Gelao and Laqua and dai, a form of a Hlai autonym.<ref name="Benedict1942">Template:Cite journal</ref> Benedict's (1942) "Kadai" group was based on his observation that Kra and Hlai languages have Austronesian-like numerals. However, this classification is now universally rejected as obsolete after Ostapirat (2000) demonstrated the coherence of the Kra branch, which does not subgroup with the Hlai branch as Benedict (1942) had proposed. "Kadai" is sometimes used to refer to the entire Kra–Dai family, including by Solnit (1988).<ref name="Solnit1988">Solnit, David B. 1988. "The position of Lakkia within Kadai." In Comparative Kadai: Linguistic studies beyond Tai, Jerold A. Edmondson and David B. Solnit (eds.). pages 219–238. Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics 86. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington.</ref><ref name=edmondson1988 /> Adding to the confusion, some other referencesTemplate:Which restrict the usage of "Kadai" to only the Kra branch of the family.

The name "Daic" is used by Roger Blench (2008).<ref>Blench, Roger. 2008. The Prehistory of the Daic (Tai-Kadai) Speaking Peoples Template:Webarchive. Presented at the 12th EURASEAA meeting Leiden, 1–5 September 2008. (PPT slides)</ref>

Origin

File:Gerner Tai-Kadai migration route.png

Tai–Kadai migration route, according to Matthias Gerner's Northeast to Southwest Hypothesis.<ref>Template:Cite conference</ref>

James R. Chamberlain (2016) proposes that the Tai–Kadai (Kra–Dai) language family was formed as early as the 12th century BCE in the middle of the Yangtze basin, coinciding roughly with the establishment of the Chu fiefdom and the beginning of the Zhou dynasty.<ref name="Chamberlain-Kra-Dai">Chamberlain, James R. (2016). "Kra-Dai and the Proto-History of South China and Vietnam", pp. 27–77. In Journal of the Siam Society, Vol. 104, 2016.</ref> The high diversity of Kra–Dai languages in southern China, especially in Guizhou and Hainan, points to that being an origin of the Kra–Dai language family, founding the nations that later became Thailand and Laos in what had been Austroasiatic territory. Genetic and linguistic analyses show great homogeneity among Kra–Dai-speaking people in Thailand.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

Although the position of Kra–Dai in relation to Austronesian is still contested, some propose that Kra–Dai and Austronesian are genetically connected. Weera Ostapirat (2005) sets out a series of regular sound correspondences between them, assuming a model of a primary split between the two; they would then be co-ordinate branches.Template:Sfn Ostapirat (2013) continues to maintain that Kra–Dai and Austronesian are sister language families, based on certain phonological correspondences.Template:Sfn On the other hand, Laurent Sagart (2008) proposes that Kra–Dai is a later form of what he calls "FATK" (Formosan Ancestor of Tai–Kadai) a branch of Austronesian belonging to the subgroup "Puluqic", developed in Taiwan, whose speakers migrated back to the mainland, to Guangdong, Hainan, and north Vietnam, around the second half of the 3rd millennium BCE.Template:Sfn Upon their arrival in this region, they underwent linguistic contact with an unknown population, resulting in a partial relexification of FATK<ref group=lower-alpha name="FATK">Formosan ancestor of Tai–Kadai.</ref> vocabulary.Template:Sfn Erica Brindley (2015) supports Sagart's hypothesis, arguing that the radically different Kra-Dai history of migration to the mainland (as opposed to the Philippines for Proto-Austronesian) and extended contact with Austro-Asiatic and Sinitic speakers would make the relationship appear more distant. She also suggests that the presence of only the most basic Austronesian vocabulary in Kra-Dai makes this scenario of relexification more plausible.Template:Sfn

Besides various concrete pieces of evidence for a Kra–Dai existence in present-day Guangdong, remnants of Kra–Dai languages spoken further north can be found in unearthed inscriptional materials and non-Han substrata in Min and Wu Chinese.Template:Citation needed

Wolfgang Behr (2002, 2006, 2009, 2017)Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Template:Sfn points out that most non-Sinitic words found in Chu inscriptional materials are of Kra–Dai origin. For example, the Chu graph for 'one, once' written as File:Neng2.svg (? < OC *nnəŋ) in the E jun qijie 鄂君啟筯 bronze tally and in Warring States bamboo inscriptions, which represents a Kra–Dai areal word; compare Proto-Tai *hnïŋ = *hnɯŋ (Siamese ²²nɯŋ, Dai ³³nɯŋ, Longzhou nəəŋ^A etc.) 'one, once'.Template:Sfn

In the early 1980s, Wei Qingwen (韦庆稳), a Zhuang linguist, proposed that the Old Yue language recorded in the Song of the Yue Boatman is in fact a language ancestral to Zhuang.Template:Sfn Wei used reconstructed Old Chinese for the characters and discovered that the resulting vocabulary showed strong resemblance to modern Zhuang.Template:Sfn Later, Zhengzhang Shangfang (1991) followed Wei's proposal but used Thai script for comparison, since this orthography dates from the 13th century and preserves archaisms not found in modern pronunciation.Template:Sfn Template:Sfn Zhengzhang notes that 'evening, night, dark' bears the C tone in Wuming Zhuang xam^C2 and ɣam^C2 'night'. The item raa normally means 'we (inclusive)' but in some places, e.g., Tai Lue and White Tai, it means 'I'.Template:Sfn However, Laurent Sagart criticizes Zhengzhang's interpretation as anachronistic, because however archaic the Thai script is, the Thai language was only written 2,000 years after the song had been recorded; even if Proto-Kam–Tai had emerged by the 6th century BCE, its pronunciation would have been substantially different from Thai.Template:Sfn

File:Chinese plain 5c. BC with Yue-en.png

Map of the Chinese plain at the start of the Warring States Period, in the 5th century BC.

Internal classification

File:"tooth" in Kra-Dai languages.svg

Example of the divergence among the Kra-Dai languages, using the word for "tooth".

Kra–Dai consists of at least five well-established branches, namely Kra, Kam–Sui, Tai, Be, and Hlai (Ostapirat 2005:109).

Tai: southern China and Southeast Asia
Kra: southern China, northern Vietnam; called Kadai in Ethnologue and Geyang (仡央) in Chinese
Kam–Sui: Guizhou and Guangxi, China
Be: Hainan; possibly also includes Jizhao of Guangdong
Hlai: Hainan

Chinese linguists have also proposed a Kam–Tai group that includes Kam–Sui, Tai, and Be.<ref name="ReferenceA">Liang Min 梁敏 & Zhang Junru 张均如. 1996. Dongtai yuzu gailun 侗台语族概论 / An introduction to the Kam–Tai languages. Beijing: China Social Sciences Academy Press 中国社会科学出版社. Template:ISBN</ref><ref>Ni Dabai 倪大白. 1990. Dongtai yu gailun 侗台语概论 / An introduction to the Kam–Tai languages. Beijing: Central Nationalities Research Institute Press 中央民族学院出版社.</ref>

Kra–Dai languages that are not securely classified and may constitute independent Kra–Dai branches include the following:

Lakkia and Biao, which may or may not subgroup with each other, are difficult to classify due to aberrant vocabulary but are sometimes classified as sisters of Kam–Sui (Solnit 1988).<ref name="Solnit1988"/>
Jiamao of southern Hainan, China, is an aberrant Kra–Dai language traditionally classified as a Hlai language, although Jiamao contains many words of non-Hlai origin.
Jizhao of Guangdong, China, is currently unclassified within Kra–Dai but appears to be most closely related to Be (Ostapirat 1998).<ref name="Ostapirat1998">Ostapirat, W. (1998). A Mainland Bê Language? / 大陆的Bê语言?. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 26(2), 338–344</ref>

Kra–Dai languages of mixed origins are:

Hezhang Buyi: Northern Tai and Kra
E: Northern Tai and Pinghua Chinese
Caolan: Northern Tai and Central Tai
Jiamao: Hlai and other unknown elements (Austroasiatic?)

Edmondson and Solnit (1988)

An early but influential classification, with the traditional Kam–Tai clade, was Edmondson and Solnit's classification from 1988:<ref name=edmondson1988>Edmondson, Jerold A. and David B. Solnit, editors. 1988. Comparative Kadai: Linguistic studies beyond Tai. Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington Publications in Linguistics, 86. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington. vii, 374 p.</ref><ref name="Tai">Edmondson, Jerold A. and David B. Solnit, editors. 1997. Comparative Kadai: the Tai branch. Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington Publications in Linguistics, 124. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Texas at Arlington. vi, 382 p.</ref>

Template:Tree list

Kra–Dai
- Kra (Geyang)
- Hlai
- Kam–Tai
  - Template:Tree list/branching
    - Lakkia–Biao
    - Kam–Sui
  - Template:Tree list/branching
    - Be
    - Tai

Template:Tree list/end This classification is also used by Liang and Zhang (1996),<ref>Liang Min & Zhang Junru. 1996. An introduction to the Kam–Tai languages. Beijing: China Social Sciences Academy Press.</ref> Chamberlain (2016: 38),<ref>Chamberlain, James R. 2016. Kra–Dai and the proto-history of South China and Vietnam. Journal of the Siam Society 104. 27–77.</ref> and Ethnologue, though by 2009 Lakkia was made a third branch of Kam–Tai and Biao was moved into Kam–Sui.

Ostapirat (2005); Norquest (2007)

Weera Ostapirat (2005:128) suggests the possibility of Kra and Kam–Sui being grouped together as Northern Kra–Dai and Hlai with Tai as Southern Kra–Dai.<ref name=Ostapirat2005/> Norquest (2007) has further updated this classification to include Lakkia and Be. Norquest notes that Lakkia shares some similarities with Kam–Sui, while Be shares some similarities with Tai. Norquest (2007:15) notes that Be shares various similarities with Northern Tai languages in particular.<ref name="norquest">Norquest, Peter K. 2007. A Phonological Reconstruction of Proto-Hlai. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona.</ref> Following Ostapirat, Norquest adopts the name Kra–Dai for the family as a whole. The following tree of Kra–Dai is from Norquest (2007:16):

Template:Tree list

Kra–Dai
- Northern
  - Kra
  - Northeastern
    - Lakkia
    - Kam–Sui
- Southern
  - Hlai
  - Be–Tai
    - Tai
    - Be

Template:Tree list/end

Additionally, Norquest (2007) also proposes a reconstruction for Proto-Southern Kra–Dai.

Norquest (2015, 2020)

A classification of Kra–Dai by Norquest (2015, 2020) is provided as follows:<ref name="Norquest-Brill">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Norquest, Peter. 2020. A Hypothesis on the Origin of Preglottalized Sonorants in Kra–Dai. 38th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Vancouver: Department of Linguistics, University of British Columbia. Template:Doi</ref>

Template:Tree list

Kra–Dai
- Kra
- Eastern Kra–Dai
  - Biao
  - Lakkja–Kam–Tai
    - Lakkja
    - Kam–Tai
      - Kam–Sui
      - Western Kam–Tai
        Hlai
        
        Be–Tai
        Ong-Be
        
        Tai

Template:Tree list/end

Norquest (2021)

Based on shared lexical innovations, Norquest (2021) significantly revised his classification of Kra–Dai. Together, Biao and Lakkja form the most divergent subgroup of Kra–Dai. Be–Tai and Hlai are placed together as part of a "Hlai–Tai" group.<ref name="WOL-MSEA-13">Template:Cite book</ref>

Template:Tree list

Kra–Dai
- Biao–Lakkja
- Kam–Tai
  - Kam–Sui
  - Kra–Tai
    - Kra
    - Hlai–Tai
      - Hlai
      - Be–Tai
        Be
        
        Tai

Template:Tree list/end

Hypotheses regarding external relationships

Austro-Tai

Template:Main

File:Genesis of Daic languages and their relation with Austronesians.png

Proposed genesis of Daic languages and their relation to Austronesian languages (Blench, 2018)<ref name="Blench2018">Template:Cite book</ref>

Several scholars have presented evidence that Kra–Dai may be related to, or even a branch of, the Austronesian language family.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> There are a number of possible cognates in the core vocabulary, displaying regular sound correspondences. Among proponents, there is yet no agreement as to whether they are a sister group to Austronesian in a family called Austro-Tai, a back-migration from Taiwan to the mainland or a later migration from the Philippines to Hainan during the Austronesian expansion.Template:Sfn

The inclusion of Japanese in the Austro-Tai family, as proposed by Paul K. Benedict in the late 20th century,<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> is not supported by the current proponents of the Austro-Tai hypothesis.

Sino-Tai

The Kra–Dai languages were formerly considered to be part of the Sino-Tibetan family, partly because they contain large numbers of words that are similar to Sino-Tibetan languages. However, Western scholars generally consider them to be Sinitic loanwords and note that basic vocabulary words in Kra–Dai languages often have cognates with Austronesian instead.<ref name=Ostapirat2005>Ostapirat, Weera. (2005). "Kra–Dai and Austronesian: Notes on phonological correspondences and vocabulary distribution", pp. 107–131 in Sagart, Laurent, Blench, Roger & Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.), The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics. London/New York: Routledge-Curzon.</ref> Outside China, the Kra–Dai languages are now classified as an independent family. In China, they are called Dong–Tai (侗台) or Zhuang–Dong (壮侗) languages and are generally included, along with the Hmong–Mien languages, in the Sino-Tibetan family.<ref>Luo, Yongxian. 2008. Sino-Tai and Tai-Kadai: Another look. In Anthony V. N. Diller and Jerold A. Edmondson and Yongxian Luo (eds.), The Tai-Kadai Languages, 9–28. London & New York: Routledge.</ref>

Hmong–Mien

Kosaka (2002) has argued specifically for a Miao–Dai family. Based on proposed lexical cognates, he proposes a genetic relation between Hmong–Mien and Kra–Dai languages. He further suggests that similarities between Kra–Dai and Austronesian are due to later areal contact in the coastal areas of eastern and southeastern China or an older ancestral relation (Proto-East Asian).<ref name="Kosaka">Kosaka, Ryuichi. 2002. "On the affiliation of Miao-Yao and Kadai: Can we posit the Miao–Dai family." Mon-Khmer Studies 32:71–100.</ref>

Japonic

Vovin (2014) has proposed that the location of the Japonic Urheimat (linguistic homeland) is in southern China. He argues for typological evidence that Proto-Japanese may have been a monosyllabic, SVO syntax and isolating language, which is also characteristic of Kra–Dai languages. According to him, these common features are however not due to a genetic relationship but rather the result of intense contact.<ref name=Vovin>Vovin, Alexander (2014). Out Of Southern China? --some linguistic and philological musings on the possible Urheimat of the Japonic language family-- XXVIIes Journées de Linguistique d'Asie Orientale 26–27 juin 2014.</ref>