Editing Austronesian languages (section)

==Hypothesized relations==
[[File:Mainland pre-Austronesian cultures.png|350px|thumb|right|An example of hypothetical Pre-Austronesian migration waves to Taiwan from the mainland. (The Amis migration from the Philippines is controversial).]]
[[File:Map07TN.png|350px|thumb|right|Path of Migration and Division of Some of the Major Ethnicities with their genetically distinctive markers, adapted from Edmondson and Gregerson (2007:732) [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00033.x]. The sketched migration route ''M119-Baiyue'' from Southeast Asia corresponds to the southern origin hypothesis of early Austronesians.]]
Genealogical links have been proposed between Austronesian and various families of East and [[Southeast Asia]].

===Austro-Tai===
{{Main|Austro-Tai languages}}

An [[Austro-Tai languages|Austro-Tai]] proposal linking Austronesian and the [[Kra-Dai]] languages of the southeastern continental Asian mainland was first proposed by [[Paul K. Benedict]], and is supported by Weera Ostapirat, [[Roger Blench]], and Laurent Sagart, based on the traditional [[comparative method]]. {{Harvcoltxt|Ostapirat|2005}} proposes a series of regular correspondences linking the two families and assumes a primary split, with Kra-Dai speakers being the people who stayed behind in their Chinese homeland. {{harvcoltxt|Blench|2004}} suggests that, if the connection is valid, the relationship is unlikely to be one of two sister families. Rather, he suggests that [[proto-Kra-Dai]] speakers were Austronesians who migrated to [[Hainan]] Island and back to the mainland from the northern Philippines, and that their distinctiveness results from radical restructuring following contact with [[Hmong–Mien languages|Hmong–Mien]] and [[Sinitic language|Sinitic]]. An extended version of Austro-Tai was hypothesized by Benedict who added the [[Japonic languages]] to the proposal as well.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Solnit, David B.|title=Japanese/Austro-Tai By Paul K. Benedict (review)|journal=[[Language (journal)|Language]]|publisher=[[Linguistic Society of America]]|volume=687|number=1|pages=188–196|date=March 1992|doi=10.1353/lan.1992.0061|s2cid=141811621}}</ref>

===Austric===
{{Main|Austric languages}}

A link with the [[Austroasiatic languages]] in an '[[Austric]]' [[phylum (linguistics)|phylum]] is based mostly on typological evidence. However, there is also morphological evidence of a connection between the conservative [[Nicobarese languages]] and Austronesian languages of the Philippines.{{citation needed|date=July 2021}} Robert Blust supports the hypothesis which connects the lower Yangtze neolithic Austro-Tai entity with the rice-cultivating Austro-Asiatic cultures, assuming the center of East Asian rice domestication, and putative Austric homeland, to be located in the Yunnan/Burma border area.{{sfn|Sagart|Hsu|Tsai|Hsing|2017|p = 188}} Under that view, there was an east-west genetic alignment, resulting from a rice-based population expansion, in the southern part of East Asia: Austroasiatic-Kra-Dai-Austronesian, with unrelated Sino-Tibetan occupying a more northerly tier.{{sfn|Sagart|Hsu|Tsai|Hsing|2017|p = 188}}

===Sino-Austronesian===
{{Main|Sino-Austronesian languages}}
French linguist and [[Sinology|Sinologist]] [[Laurent Sagart]] considers the Austronesian languages to be related to the [[Sino-Tibetan languages]], and also groups the [[Kra–Dai languages]] as more closely related to the [[Malayo-Polynesian languages]].<ref>{{cite book|last=van Driem|first=George|date=2005|chapter=Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory|title=Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics|publication-place=Kathmandu|publisher=Linguistic Society of Nepal|editor1=Yogendra Prasada Yadava|editor2=Govinda Bhattarai|editor3=Ram Raj Lohani|editor4=Balaram Prasain|editor5=Krishna Parajuli|pages=285–338 [304]|chapter-url=http://www.eastling.org/paper/Driem.pdf|access-date=2010-10-29|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726012439/http://www.eastling.org/paper/Driem.pdf|archive-date=2011-07-26}}</ref> Sagart argues for a north-south genetic relationship between Chinese and Austronesian, based on sound correspondences in the basic vocabulary and morphological parallels.{{sfn|Sagart|Hsu|Tsai|Hsing|2017|p = 188}} Laurent Sagart (2017) concludes that the possession of the two kinds of millets{{efn|''Setaria italica'' and ''Panicum miliaceum''.}} in Taiwanese Austronesian languages (not just Setaria, as previously thought) places the pre-Austronesians in northeastern China, adjacent to the probable Sino-Tibetan homeland.{{sfn|Sagart|Hsu|Tsai|Hsing|2017|p = 188}} Ko et al.'s genetic research (2014) appears to support Laurent Sagart's linguistic proposal, pointing out that the exclusively Austronesian mtDNA E-haplogroup and the largely Sino-Tibetan M9a haplogroup are twin sisters, indicative of an intimate connection between the early Austronesian and Sino-Tibetan maternal gene pools, at least.{{sfn|Sagart|Hsu|Tsai|Hsing|2017|p = 189}}{{sfn|Ko|2014|pp = 426–436}} Additionally, results from Wei et al. (2017) are also in agreement with Sagart's proposal, in which their analyses show that the predominantly Austronesian Y-DNA haplogroup O3a2b*-P164(xM134) belongs to a newly defined haplogroup O3a2b2-N6 being widely distributed along the eastern coastal regions of Asia, from Korea to Vietnam.{{sfn|Wei|Yan|Teo|Huang|2017|pp = 1–12}} Sagart also groups the Austronesian languages in a recursive-like fashion, placing Kra-Dai as a sister branch of Malayo-Polynesian. His methodology has been found to be spurious by his peers.{{sfnp|Winter|2010}}{{sfnp|Blust|2013|pp=710–713, 745–747}}

===Japanese===
{{Main|Classification of the Japonic languages#Proposals relating Japonic languages to Southeast Asian language families}}
Several linguists have proposed that [[Japanese language|Japanese]] is genetically related to the Austronesian family, cf. Benedict (1990), Matsumoto (1975), Miller (1967).

Some other linguists think it is more plausible that Japanese is not genetically related to the Austronesian languages, but instead was influenced by an Austronesian [[Substrata (linguistics)|substratum]] or [[adstratum]].

Those who propose this scenario suggest that the Austronesian family once covered the islands to the north as well as to the south. [[Martine Robbeets]] (2017)<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Robbeets |first=Martine |year=2017 |title=Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese: A case of farming/language dispersal |journal=Language Dynamics and Change |volume=7 |issue=2 |doi=10.1163/22105832-00702005 |pages=210–251 |doi-access=free |hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002E-8635-7 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> claims that Japanese genetically belongs to the "Transeurasian" (= [[Altaic languages|Macro-Altaic]]) languages, but underwent lexical influence from "para-Austronesian", a presumed sister language of [[Proto-Austronesian]].

The linguist Ann Kumar (2009) proposed that some Austronesians might have migrated to Japan, possibly an elite-group from [[Java]], and created the Japanese-hierarchical society. She also identifies 82 possible cognates between Austronesian and Japanese, however her theory remains very controversial.<ref>{{cite book |last=Kumar |first=Ann |year=2009 |title=Globalizing the Prehistory of Japan: Language, Genes and Civilization. |location=Oxford |publisher=Routledge}}</ref> The linguist [[Asya Pereltsvaig|Asha Pereltsvaig]] criticized Kumar's theory on several points.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> The archaeological problem with that theory is that, contrary to the claim that there was no rice farming in China and Korea in [[Prehistory|prehistoric times]], excavations have indicated that rice farming has been practiced in this area since at least 5000 BC.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> There are also genetic problems. The pre-Yayoi Japanese lineage was not shared with Southeast Asians, but was shared with Northwest Chinese, [[Tibetan people|Tibetans]] and [[Central Asians]].<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Linguistic problems were also pointed out. Kumar did not claim that Japanese was an Austronesian language derived from proto-Javanese language, but only that it provided a superstratum language for [[old Japanese]], based on 82 plausible Javanese-Japanese cognates, mostly related to rice farming.<ref name="ReferenceB">{{Cite web |date=2011-05-09 |title=Javanese influence on Japanese |url=https://www.languagesoftheworld.info/historical-linguistics/javanese-influence-on-japanese.html |access-date=2023-06-13 |website=Languages Of The World |language=en-US}}</ref>

===East Asian===
{{Main|East Asian languages}}
In 2001, [[Stanley Starosta]] proposed a new language family named [[East Asian languages|East Asian]], that includes all primary language families in the broader [[East Asia]] region except [[Japonic]] and [[Koreanic]]. This proposed family consists of two branches, Austronesian and Sino-Tibetan-Yangzian, with the [[Kra-Dai]] family considered to be a branch of Austronesian, and "Yangzian" to be a new sister branch of Sino-Tibetan consisting of the [[Austroasiatic]] and [[Hmong-Mien]] languages.<ref name="EastAsianOrigin">{{cite book | given = Stanley | surname = Starosta | chapter = Proto-East Asian and the origin and dispersal of languages of east and southeast Asia and the Pacific | pages = [https://archive.org/details/peoplingeastasia00blen/page/n210 182]–197 | title = The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics | url = https://archive.org/details/peoplingeastasia00blen | url-access = limited | editor-given1 = Laurent | editor-surname1 = Sagart | editor-given2 = Roger | editor-surname2 = Blench | editor-given3 = Alicia | editor-surname3 = Sanchez-Mazas | location = London | publisher = Routledge Curzon | year = 2005 | isbn = 978-0-415-32242-3 }}</ref> This proposal was further researched by linguists like Michael D. Larish in 2006, who also included the Japonic and Koreanic languages in the macrofamily. The proposal has since been adopted by linguists such as [[George van Driem]], albeit without the inclusion of Japonic and Koreanic.<ref>van Driem, George. 2018. "{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20210110235952/https://himalayanlanguages.org/files/driem/pdfs/2018i.pdf The East Asian linguistic phylum: A reconstruction based on language and genes]}}", ''Journal of the Asiatic Society'', LX (4): 1–38.</ref>

===Ongan===
{{Main|Austronesian–Ongan languages}}
{{harvp|Blevins|2007}} proposed that the Austronesian and the [[Ongan languages|Ongan]] protolanguage are the descendants of an Austronesian–Ongan protolanguage.{{sfnp|Blevins|2007}} This view is not supported by mainstream linguists and remains very controversial. Robert Blust rejects Blevins' proposal as far-fetched and based solely on chance resemblances and methodologically flawed comparisons.{{sfnp|Blust|2014}}