Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Sino-Tibetan languages
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Blench and Post (2014)=== [[Roger Blench]] and Mark W. Post have criticized the applicability of conventional Sino–Tibetan classification schemes to minor languages lacking an extensive written history (unlike Chinese, Tibetic, and Burmese). They find that the evidence for the subclassification or even ST affiliation in all of several minor languages of northeastern India, in particular, is either poor or absent altogether. {{blockquote|While relatively little has been known about the languages of this region up to and including the present time, this has not stopped scholars from proposing that these languages either constitute or fall within some other Tibeto-Burman subgroup. However, in the absence of any sort of systematic comparison – whether the data are thought reliable or not – such "subgroupings" are essentially vacuous. The use of pseudo-genetic labels such as "Himalayish" and "Kamarupan" inevitably gives an impression of coherence which is at best misleading.|{{harvtxt|Blench|Post|2014}}, p. 3}} In their view, many such languages would for now be best considered unclassified, or "internal isolates" within the family. They propose a provisional classification of the remaining languages: {{tree list}} *Sino-Tibetan **[[Karbi language|Karbi]] (Mikir) **[[Mruic languages|Mruish]] **{{tree list/branching}} ***{{tree list/branching}} ****[[Tani languages|Tani]] ****Nagish: [[Ao languages|Ao]], [[Kuki-Chin languages|Kuki-Chin]], [[Tangkhul languages|Tangkhul]], [[Zeme languages|Zeme]], [[Angami–Pochuri languages|Angami–Pochuri]] and [[Meitei language|Meitei]] ***{{tree list/branching}} ****Western: [[Gongduk language|Gongduk]], [['Ole language|'Ole]], [[Mahakiranti languages|Mahakiranti]], [[Lepcha language|Lepcha]], [[Magaric languages|Kham–Magaric–Chepang]], [[Tamangic languages|Tamangic]], and [[Lhokpu language|Lhokpu]] ****[[Karen languages|Karenic]] ****[[Sal languages|Jingpho–Konyak–Bodo]] ****Eastern *****[[Tujia language|Tujia]] *****[[Macro-Bai languages|Bai]] *****[[Northern Qiang language|Northern Qiangic]] *****[[Southern Qiang language|Southern Qiangic]] *****{{tree list/branching}} ******[[Varieties of Chinese|Chinese]] (Sinitic) ******[[Lolo-Burmese languages|Lolo-Burmese]]–[[Naic languages|Naic]] ******[[Bodish languages|Bodish]] *****[[Nungish languages|Nungish]] {{tree list/end}} Following that, because they propose that the three best-known branches may be much closer related to each other than they are to "minor" Sino–Tibetan languages, Blench and Post argue that "Sino–Tibetan" or "Tibeto–Burman" are inappropriate names for a family whose earliest divergences led to different languages altogether. They support the proposed name "Trans–Himalayan".
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Sino-Tibetan languages
(section)
Add topic