The origin of Mayan languages from Formosan language group of Austronesian

نویسنده

  • Koji Ohnishi
چکیده

: Basic body-part names (BBPNs) were defined as body-part names in Swadesh basic 200 words. Non-Mayan cognates of Mayan (MY) BBPNs were extensively searched for, by comparing with non-MY vocabulary, including ca.1300 basic words of 82 AN languages listed by Tryon (1985), etc. Thus found cognates (CGs) in non-MY are listed in Table 1, as classified by language groups to which most similar cognates (MSCs) of MY BBPNs belong. CGs of MY are classified to 23 mutually unrelated CGitems, of which 17.5 CG-items have their MSCs in Austronesian (AN), giving its closest similarity score (CSS), CSS(AN) = 17.5,which consists of 10.33 MSCs in Formosan, 1.83 MSCs in Western MalayoPolynesian (W.MP), 0.33 in Central MP, 0.0 in SHWNG, and 5.0 in Oceanic [i.e., CSS(FORM)= 10.33, CSS(W.MP) = 1.88, ..., CSS(OC)= 5.0 ]. These CSSs for language (sub)groups are also listed in the underline portion of every section of (§1 ~ §6) in Table 1. χ-test (degree of freedom = 1) using [Eq 1] and [Eqs.2] revealed that MSCs of MY BBPNs are distributed in Formosan in significantly higher frequency (P < 0.001) than in other subgroups of AN, as well as than in non-AN languages. MY is thus concluded to have been derived from Formosan of AN. Eskimo shows some BBPN similarities to FORM and MY. [I] 序論と先行研究: マヤ語族(Mayan family, Mayan = MY)と確実な系統関係を示す言語は 知られていない(八杉, 1992; Campbell, 1997)。語族間の遠縁の系統関係の語彙比較による解析 は、音韻対対法則を満足する成功例はまだ稀少で(Ohnishi, 2009a,b)、米先住民諸言語(NAmLs) と旧世界言語の系統関係の確実な例としては Dene語群と Yeniseianの近縁性(Vajda,2010)が広 く認められているが、NAmLsの南島語族(Austronesian =AN) 諸分枝との近縁性が最近強く示 唆された(Ohnishi, 2012b)。基礎身体部分名称(BBPN)語彙の比較によって、語族間などの遠縁 の系統関係が従従の方法よりも遥かに鋭敏な感度で検出できることが報告された(Ohnishi, 2012a,b)。本発表では身体部分名称語彙(BPN) のうち、Swadesh の基礎 200 語彙(安本・本 多,1978)の意味を持つ語彙を基礎 BPN(= BBPN = basic BPN)と定義し, MY の BBPNの同祖語 (cognate=CG) (意味変化を伴うものを含む)が、どの言語(群)に頻度高く分布するかを解析した。 [II] 方法: [1] BBPNとしての意味項目(BBP-meaning items = BBPM items)は, Swadesh基礎 100 語彙 としての 25 項目 [ = {belly (or bowels), blood, bone,breast,ear,egg,fat,feather, foot,hair,hand,head,heart,horn, knee,liver, meat,mouth,neck,nose, saliva(or spit),skin,tail,tongue, tooth }] とそれ以外の 6項目 [ = {arm, back,breath(or to breathe),leg,lip, wing}] の計 31項目であ る。これらの 31 BBPM項目に対対する意味をもつ語彙を MYより BBPNとして選び(1つの BBPMに複数の BBPNが存在し得る)、その BBPNをMY以外の諸言語の(基礎的)語彙と比較 して(MY BBPNの)CGを検索した。1つの BBPNに複数の互いに非同祖の CGが存在する場 合は、それぞれを異なる CG項目として解析した。█ [2] 南島語族(Austronesian =AN)との比 較には Tryon(1995) “Comparative AN Dictionary” (CAD*)の 80AN言語の ca.1300の基礎的語彙 や, 台北帝大言語学研究室(小川)(1935)の「付録 単語集」(pp.付 1~付 55) の台湾諸語(高砂族)12 言語の基礎語彙リストを用いた。MY 語彙としては、Kauffman(2003)のマヤ語語源辞典のほ か、Hoffring (1997), Tozzer (1921), Marin (1995), Vascuez (1980)を適宜参照した。MY以外の米 大陸諸言語語彙としては Swadesh (1954) や Greenberg(1987)の他、いくつかの米大陸言語の各 種辞書類や語彙リスト(表 1, §0.(3))を用い、Eurasia諸言語の語彙としては各言語の辞書類等 (表 1, §0.(3))を用いた。█ [3] 最酷似分析(CSA = Closest similarity analysis, Ohnishi, 2012b): 得 られた各CG項目について、MY以外の複数言語に互いに同祖のCGが存在するときは、最酷 似同祖語(most similar cognate = MSC) がどの言語グループに属するかを調べた、同祖語がた だ 1つしか発見できない場合はそれを MSCとした。各言語群ごとに、言語群 iに MSCが si 個の CG 項目について見出だされた場合、最酷似スコア(closest similarity score= CSS) を CSS(i) = si とする。あるMY BBPN について同程度に最酷似する言語群が m個あるときは、 m個の言語群のそれぞれに 1/m の scoreを加算する形で CSS(i)を計算し(m= 1~4)、1つのMSC についての合計 score が同等に 1 [=m×(1/m) ]の重みとなるようにした。█ [4] 南島語族(AN) については、CSS(AN)の他に、ANの 4つの subgroupとしての、台湾諸語(Formosan =FORM), 西マラヨ・ポリネシア亜族(Western Malayo-Polynesian = W.MP), 中央部MP(Central MP = C.MP), South Halmahera and West New Guinea (SHWNG), オセアニア語派(Oceanic = OC) の 5つの亜群 ごとに CSSを計算した。█ [5] CSAの結果としての語群 Y の亜群ごとの CSS値が偶然の結果 か否かを χ-テスト(自由度=1) (Snedecor, 1956; Zar, 1996) で統計評価した。ある語群 Y(=AN) の亜群 Xに対する χ値は, Freq( i, observed)= Oi =観察頻度 i , Freq( i, expected)= Ei =期待頻度 i として, χ(X) 2 = Σi (Freq( i, observed) – Freq( i, expected)) / Freq( i, expected) = (OX – EX ) /EX + (Onon-X – Enon-X ) /Enon-X [Eq.1]. であり, Σi は i=1 (=X), i=2 (= Y – X = non-X ) に関する和を示す。ここで, (CAD*所収+Ami+ Kanakanabの) AN言語数[(NY=) NAN=82] はAN (=Y)よりほぼランダムに選ばれたものと仮定し、 AN の亜群 X の言語数= nX とすると AN の非 X (non-AN)の言語数 nnon-AN = NAN – nX, OX = CSS(X), Onon-X = CSS(non-X),( OY =) OAN = CSS(AN) = OX + Onon-Xであり, Ex = OAN (nx /NAN ), Enon-X = OAN (nnon-X/NAN). [Eqs 2] である。Eq.1 と Eqs.2 から AN の亜群 X (= FORM, W.MP, etc.)に対する χ(X) 2 値を得て、 Zar(1996)の Table B1(App 13)を用いて, AN 内における MSC の分布を統計評価する。 [III] 結果と考察: MY の 31 BBPM 項目に対して、23 CG(同祖語)項目に属する CG が見い だされた。23 CG 項目を MSC の属する言語群ごとに分類し、語源解析結果と CSA 結果と共 に表 1 に示す。CSS 値は表中§1.~ §6 の各§の冒頭下線部に計算過程を含めて示した。 23 CG 項目に関する CSS の内訳は、23CSS={CSS(AN)=17.5, CSS (Eskimo)= 2.75, CSS(N. -W.Caucasian)=1, CSS(Turkic)= 0.5, CSS(Mongolic)= CSS(Nahali) = CSS(Tibeto-Burman) =CSS(Macro-Panoan)=CSS(Macro-Ge)= 0.25} = {CSS(AN)= 17.5, CSS(non-AN) = 5.5} であり、殆 どの最酷似 CG (MSC)が AN に見られ、Eskimo にもある程度の頻度でみられた。AN の MSCs 17.5 (BBPN) 項目の内訳は CSS(AN) =17.5 = {CSS(FORM)=10.33, CSS(MP) =7.16} = {CSS(FORM)=10.33, CSS(W.MP)=1.83, CSS (C.MP) =0.33, CSS(SHWNG)=0, CSS(OC)=5} であ り、殆どが FORM に集中してみられた。比較した 81AN 言語の構成は、{5FORM+ 26W.MP+6C.MP+2SHWNG+41OC}であるから、ANに発見された 17.5CG項目の 10.33/17.5 = 59.03% が、 FORM のわずか 5 言語 (AN の 5/82 = 6.1%) に集中分布している。 これらの CSS 値などを Eq.1, Eqs.2 に代入して AN の 5 亜群(X=FORM, ..., OC)について分 析すると、FORM について χ(FORM) 2 = 110.7を得た。CSS(FORM)が偶然の結果とする帰無仮説 は危険率 P < 0.001で棄却され、従って MYは FORMに最近縁で、FORMに由従することが 結論された。Table1の CGリストでは子音対対上の矛盾は特に指摘できず、この結論は妥当 である。台湾付近からの直接または間接の米大陸への北廻り移動である。 [IV] 結論: マヤ祖語(pMY)は台湾諸語に最近縁で、台湾諸語に起源すると結論できる。もし もアジア大陸の言語を経て pMY に進化したのであれば、その言語は死滅した可能性がかなり高い。 表 1. マヤ語族基礎身体部分名称の同祖語彙の最酷似同祖語彙(MSC)の所属による分類と その語源解析. Table 1. Etymological analysis of cognates of Mayan basic body-part names classified by the belongings of their most similar cognates (MSCs) ] __________________________________________________________________________________ §0. Abbreviations : (1) General: “A < B”, “B > A” =“A has/had been derived from B” ; “A < > B” = “A is (phylo)genetically related to B”; ;“A<>A” = “A has/had been borrowed from B” ; pXX, p-XX = proto-XX ; dial. = dialect ; E.= East(ern), W.= West(ern), N. = North(ern), S.= South(ern), C. = Central (2) Language names: MY =Mayan {Yuc. = Yucatec, (p,s,v,z,m, f,t, in Tozzer, 1921) = (Peto, Sotuta, Valladolid, Tizimin, Motul, San Francisco, Tieul, respective ly) } ; Esk = Eskimo (AAY=Alutiiq Alaskan Yupik, CAY= C. Alskan Yupic, CSY= C. Siberian Yupic, GRI = Greenlandic Inuit, NAI = N.Alaskan Inuit, SPI = Seward Peninsula Inuit), AN= Austronesian [FORM= Formosan, MP = Malayo-Polynesian {W.MP = Western MP(PHIL=Philippines, SND=Sundic, SLW=Sulawesi), OC= Oceanic {W.OC = Western OC, ReOC= Remote OC (NCal = New Caledonian, MicN= Micronesian, C.Pacif.= C. Pacific, PolyN = Polynesian )} ] ; Jpn = Japanese ; MNG=Mongolic; TbB= Tibeto-Burman; Cauc.= Caucasian (3) References: Bri* = Bricker et al., 1998; CAD* = Tryon, 1995; CED*= Fortescue et al., 1994; DTL*= Öztopçum 1996; EDAL*= Starostin et al., 2003); Hof*= Hofling,1997; IKJ*= Ohno,1990; Kauf* = Kaufman,2003; Marin*= Marin,1995; MTNFT* = 台北帝大言語研 , 1935; NCED*= Starostin & Nikolayev, 1994; Toz*= Tozzer, 1921; Vas* = Vásquez, 1980; UEW*= Rédei,1988 (4) Language group(s) having most similar cognate(s) (= MSC(s) ) are written in Bold type. __________________________________________________________________________________ §1. Eskimo(エスキモー語)-like: {CSS (Esk) = 2 (§1.1.)+ 0.25(§1.2.)+ 0.5(§ 1.3.) = 2.75} §1.1. Most similar to Esk : 2 items █ # BELLY(腹); p-Lowland MY *naq’ “belly” (< *na-q, where *na< > OC: na “stomach”), Ch’ortiʔ nak’ “belly”, naʔk “stomach” (Kauf*, 338) ||| Esk: pInuit *na(ž)aq /GRI naaq “belly, abdomen” (CED*) ||| OC:(ReOC: NCal) Cemuhi nà “stomach” ||| Jpn: Old Jpn na, na-ka “inside”, Mod. Jpn naka “inside, belly” (IKJ*, 964, 966 ; Ohnishi,2009a) █ # SALIVA/ SPIT (唾液,唾): MY: Itzaj k’a’chi’ “saliva, spit” (Hof*) ||| Esk: pEsk *qəciʀ”spit” ||| W.MP: (SND) Balinese mə-kəčuh “to spit” ██ §1.2. Most similar to Esk/FORM/MNG/Nahali : 1 item {0.25 score for each} █ #EAR (耳): pMY *xikin ( / ʃikin / ) /Yuc., Itzaj xikin / Tacana xhkyin “ear” (Kauf*, 270), (p,v,z,m,f,t) šikin “ear” (Toz*) ( pMY *ʃikin < *ʃikɨn < *ʃikun < *ʃiɣun ~ *siɣun < > pEsk *ciɣun “ear”, FORM: siku-tu “shellfish”)||| FORM: Tsou sikutu “shellfish” (< *siɣu-tu < > Esk: CSY siɣuta /pEsk *ciɣun //pMY ʃikin “ear”) ||| Esk: CAY ciun /SPI siun /CSY siɣuta “ear” (< pEsk *ciɣun “ear” ), GRI suit “ear” ; pEsk *ciɣtə-quʀ / CAY ciutə-quluk “snail shell”, NAI = siuti-ʀu(q) “sheshell” (CED*) (< > GRI suit “ear” ) ||| MNG: pMNG *čiki /Written Mongolian čiki(n) “ear” (EDAL*,438; YH*) ||| Nahali cikn “to hear”, cigam “ear” (Kuiper,1962) ||| Note: xikin = šikin “ear” < *šikɨn < *šiɣɨn < * šiɣun “ear” < *šiɣu-n < > Esk: CAY ciun “ear” (< *ciɣun ) ██ §1.3. Most similar to Esk/Turkic: 1 item {1 = Esk 0.5 + Turkic 0.5} █ #BREAST (胸) (of woman): pMY *ʔiim /Yuc. iim “breast” | (MY) im (p,s,z), yim (v) “breast” (Toz*) (< *yim ~ *Ɂim ) ||| Esk: SPI, NAI immuk “milk” (< *im-muk < *im“breast (of woman)” + *muk, where *im< *yim~ *Ɂim < > MY im, yim ~ pMY *Ɂiim “breast (of woman)”, and *muk < >AAY muk “teat”, muɣ“to suck at breast”.) |||Turkic: Kazakh yemshek /Kyrgys emchek /Tatar imchäk (DTL*) (< *yim-ček < *yim“breast ?”) § 2. Formosan(台湾諸語)-like: {CSS(FORM)= 0.25 (§1.2.) + 9(§ 2.1.)+ 0.5 (§2.2.)+ 0.33(§2.3.) +0.25 (§2.4.)= 10.33 } ██ § 2.1. Most similar to FORM: 9 items █ # BLOOD(血): pMY *kik’ / Yuc. k’iʔk’ / Itzaj k’ik’ / Ch’ol ch’ich’ “blood”, PQMp kik’ “blood”, kiik’ “hule” (Kauf* 322-324) | qiq (s, m, f ), qiiq (p,v,z) “blood” (Toz*) ( < pMY *k’iik’ (= *qiiq )< *qii-q < *qii< *qɨii~ *qɨi < *quii~ *qui < *quʔiʔi ~ *quʔi < *qu-ɟiɟi ~ *qu-ɟi < FORM *quɟiɟil ~ *quɟi “red” < *qu-didil ~ *qu-di “red” ) ; pMY *kik’ (Kauf*) ||| FORM: Paiwan ḳu-ɟiɟil (= quɟiɟil < *qu-didil ) “red” (quɟiɟil < qu-ɟil < *qu-ǰil < *qu-diL ~ *ku-diL ) || C.MP: Dobel *kudi “red” ( < *qu-di ~ *qu-diL “red” ), kudu “blood” █ #BONE(骨): pMY *b’aaq / Itzaj b’ak / MAMo b’aaq “bone”, Ixil b’aq “bone” (< *βaq ~ *baq )||| FORM: Atayal βaqniʔ “bone” (< *βaq-niʔ ) || W.MP: (PHIL) Kagayanen bəkkəg “bone” [ < *bəkkəg < *bək(<*baq-) “bone” + *-kəg (<*qaɣ ~ *qag ) “rib”, where *qaɣ < > (FORM: Atayal) qaɣ “rib”. ] █ # FOOT/LEG(足/脚): pMY *Ɂooq / Yuc. ook / Itzaj ok / pCh’olan *Ɂok / Chuj yok / Tuzeltai Ɂo:k “foot, leg” (*Ɂooq < *ɁoɁoq ) “foot, leg” < > FORM: ʔoʔoʔ ̣ “leg ~ foot”) ; Izaj utan ok / Mopan utaɁn ok / Ch’ortiɁ utajn yok “sole (= chest of foot)” ( ok, yok “foot” ) ||| FORM: Ami (dialects: 馬蘭社, 奇密社) ʔoʔoʔ ɔ ̣ “foot ~ leg” (< *ɁoɁok ~ *ɁoɁoq ) (From MTFNT*, Appendix p.6) || W.MP: Gorontaro ʔoʔoato “foot” (< *ʔoʔo-ato, where *ɁoɁo< > Ami ʔoʔoʔ ɔ ̣ “foot ~ leg” ) ||| Note: Cf. Ami (dial.: 荳蘭社) koko ɔ ̣ // Rukai (dial.) koko “leg ~ foot” (From MTFNT*, Appendix p.6) ( koko > *ɁoɁo < > Ami ʔoʔoʔ ɔ ̣ // pMY *Ɂooq “foot, leg” ) █ # HORN (角): pMY *ʔuuk’aaʔ “horn” (< *ʔuuk’-aaʔ, where *ʔuuk’< *ʔuuk’ “bovine ~ calf”. ) ||| FORM: Atayal ūk “calf” █ # HAND(手): pMaya *q’ab’ (= *qab) /Yuc. k’ab’ (< *qhabh~ *ghabh< *qabh~ *qaβ) ||| Quechuan: Quechua ccapa “hand” (< *qaba “hand” ) ||| FORM: Atayal qaβaʔ “arm” || OC: Lau ʔab “hand, arm”, Rotuman ʔu-hapa "hand" (< *-hapa < *qaba ) ||| Uralic: p-Finno-Volgaic *käppä /Finnish käppä /Estonian käpp “hand, paw” (< *käp-pä < *qap); Mordvin kepe, käpä, “barfuss” (UEW*, 651) ||| IE: pIE *ghabh"to give, to receive, to seize" ( < MP: *qab-. Ohnishi, 2009b ) █ # MOUTH (口): pMY *tyiiʔ / (MY) chiʔ, tiʔ, tik. tih-ej “mouth” (Kauf*) ; Itzaj chi’ “mouse, lip, edge” (Hof*) ; MY (p,v,z,m,f) tši / (s,t) tšii /Yuc. ciʔ “mouth” ||| FORM(MTNFT*): Ami tsidaɹ, tsil̥aɹ “mouth” (< *tsi-daɹ) ; Kanakanab iβitşi (< *iβi-tşi < *iβi“lip ?” + *-tşi “mouth”, where *-tşi < *tşi(i) “mouth” < > Mayan tši(i) “mouth” ) █ # EYE / FACE (目/顔): Tzotzil, Tojol sat / Tzeltal sit “eye, face, fruit” (Kauf*) (< *sat < *sati < > *saptʂi “face” ) ||| FORM: Tsou saptʂi “face” (MTFNT*)) █ # EYE/ FACE: pMY *Haty (H = weak / h / ) ~ *wachi “face ~ eye”/ Itzaj ichi “eye” ( < *watşi(i) “eye” < *watşɨ(ɨ)< *waɖɨ(ɨ)“to see”) ||| FORM: Rukai (dial.) oatşɨɨlɨ, waɖɨlɨ “to see” (MTFNT*, Appendix p.44) < *waɖɨɨlɨ “to see” < *waɖɨɨ-lɨ ~ *waɖɨ-ɨlɨ (?), where *waɖɨ(ɨ)< > pMY *wachi ~ *Haty “face, eye” ), Rukai wa-ɖǝ̅lǝ “to see” (CAD*, #15.510) ( < *wa-ɖɨlɨ “to see”) █ # FOOT(足): MY: Tzeltol akan / Q’anjob’al aqanej, yaqan / Akateko aqaneh / Mam qan / Tacana, Ostuncalco tqan “foot” (Kauf*, p.346-347) (< pMY *tqan ~ *taqan “foot”. Cf. pMY *Ɂqan (Kauf*) ) ||| FORM: Tsou tʔaŋo (CAD*), tʔaŋŋo “leg” (*tʔaŋ-ŋo < *tʔan-ŋo, where *tʔan-< *tqan ) ██ §2.2. Most similar to FORM/W.MP: 1 item = {1 = FORM 0.5, W.MP(SLW) 0.5} █ # NECK (首): MY: pYukatecan *kaal /Yuc., Mopa kaal, kal “neck, throat” (< *kāl “throat ~ to say” ) ||| FORM: Atayal k-um-āl “to speak, to say” (= kāl + -um(infix) ) || W.MP:(SLW) Konjo kalloŋ “neck” (< *kal-loŋ ? < *kal“throat” ) ||| Esk: pEsk *qaɬa“to talk”, CSY qaɬǝɣ“to speak, to talk, to say” ( > “throat” > Maya kal “neck” ? ) ██ §2.3. Most similar to: FORM/W.MP(PHIL (Yami)) /C.MP: 1 item {1 = FORM 0.33, W.MP(PHIL) 0.33, C.MP 0.33 } █ # HEAD (頭): MY: Yuc. (Hocabá dial.) “head, hair”, Itzaj hoɁol “head”, San Luis Jilotepeque jaluam (= haluam) / Palin jaloom (= haloom) “head” (Kauf*, pp.274-275), (p,z; m,f,t) hool’ “head” (Toz*) ; From these, we can reconstruct pMY *hoɁol ~ *hoɁol’ “head” < *hoɁo-l ~ *hoɁo-l’, where *hoʔo< *hoʔo~ *hoo < > FORM *ʔoḷo ~ *ʔoo ~ *qoḷo “head” ( < *ʔoḷu ~ *ʔuḷo ~ *qoḷu < *ʔuḷu ~ *qulu < pMP *qulu “head” ) ||| FORM: Rukai aoḷo (CAD*), aoro, auro (MTPNT*) “head” (< *a-uḷo, where *-uḷo < > Yami oʁo / Tagalog ūlo // pMY hoɁol “head”) ; Paiwan quḷu (CAD*), (dialects) Ɂoḷo, qoḷo, qoo (MTPNT*) “head” ( pAN *qúḷuH (CAD*) “head” > qulu > qoḷo ~ *Ɂoḷo > *hoḷo > *hoʁo ~ *hoɁo < > pMY hoɁol “head” ) ||| W.MP: (PHIL) Yami oʁo “head” (<*oḷo < *ʔoḷo < *qoḷo “head” ), Tagalog ūlo / Isnag ūlu // (SND) Sundanese hulu Sasak ulu “head” (< pAN *qúḷuH ) || C.MP Buru olo-n “head” ||| Esk: pEsk *quliʀ “upper part”, *qulə“area above”||| Note 1: ḷ = / ɭ / || Note 2: Cf. pMY *hoɁl “head” (Kauf*). ██ §2.4. Most similar to: FORM/TbB/ Macro-Panoan/ Macro-Ge: 1 item (0.25 score for each) █ # NOSE (鼻): MY: Yuc. niɁ / Chuj nhiʔ “nose” (Kauf*, 314) (< pMY *nhiɁ < *ŋhiɁ ~ *nihiɁ <*ŋihiɁ “nose ~ mucus” < > Atayal ŋihiɁ “mucus”) [Cf. pMY *nhiiɁ “nose” (Kauf*)] ||| Macro-Panoan: (Guaicuru) Mocovi niih /(Mataco)Vilela nihim “nose” (LAm*, 248) ||| Macro-Ge: (Kamakan) Cotoxo nihieko, niiko /(Mashakali) Kumanasho nišikoi “nose” (LAm*, 248) ||| FORM: Atayal ŋihiɁ “mucus” ||| TbB: (W.Himalayan) Rangpa nhimi “nose” (< *nhi-mi ) §3. Most similar to W.MP(西マラヨポリネシア亜族): 1 item (= SND 1) {CSS(W.MP)= SLW 0.5(§2.2.) + PHIL 0.33 (§2.3.) + SND 1.0(§3.) = 1.83} █ # BREAST(胸): MY: (m, f) tan “breast” (Toz*) (< AN taŋ) ||| W.MP: (SND) Balinese taŋkah “chest” (< *taŋ-kah ) § 4. Most similar to OC(オセアニア語派): 5 items ={CSS(OC) =W.OC 4 (§4. 1.)+ C.Pacif. 1(§4. 2.) = 5} § 4. 1. Most similar to W.OC: 4 items █ # EGG(卵): p-Greater K’iche’an *molo / Q’eqchiɁ mol (Kauf*) ||| OC: (W.OC) Kaulong molmol “egg” (< *mol ) █ # LIP(唇): Yuc. (u) boxel chi’ “lip”, chi’ “mouth”, xel (= šel ) “piece” (Vas*) ( boxel chi’ < *bo-šel + chi’ “mouth”, where *bo-šel < *bo“mouth” + šel “piece” ); Itzaj chi’ “mouth, lip, edge” (Hof*, 207) ||| OC: (W.OC) Kaulong βo-n “mouth” (< *βo-n < *bo“mouth” ) █ # TOOTH (歯): pMY *kooh / Yuc. ko / Itzaj koj (= koh ) “tooth” (Kauf*, 260) ( pMY *koh ~ *kooh < > OC:*koh “to bite” ) ||| OC: (W.OC) Kaulong koh “to bite” (CAD*, #04.580) █ # TAIL (尾): pMY *nheh / Yuc. ne / pCh’olan *neh /PoptiɁ nheh (Kauf*, 312) ( < *ŋheh < > OC: aŋe “tail” ?) ||| OC: (W.OC) Mekeo (N.-W. Mekeo dial.) aŋe “tail” (< *a-ŋe ?) ██ § 4. 2. Most similar to ReOC: 1 item █ # FEATHER(羽): Yuc. p’ut “pluma” (Vas*) (< *but ~ *buti “feather” < *budi ) ||| OC: (C.Pacif.) Eastern Fijian βuti“feather” (< *buti) § 5. Most similar to N.-W. Caucacian (北・西部コーカサス語族): 1 item {CSS(N.-W.Cauc.) =1} █ # HEAR (心臓): MY: Itzaj, Mopan pixan (=/piʃan /) “soul,spirit”, Yuc pixaɁn “soul” ||| N.W. Cauc. (W.Cauc.) Abaza psə / Adyghe psa “soul, spirit” (NCED*, 243) (< pW.Cauc.*psa ~ *psə “soul”) § 6. Most similar to other language groups(その他の語群): CSS(C.MP) = 0.33(§ 2.3.), CSS (Turkic)=0.5 (§1.3.), CSS(MNG)=0.25(§1.2.), CSS (Nahali)=0.25(§1.2.), CSS(TbB) = CSS(MacroPanoan) = CSS(Macro-Ge) = 0.25 (§2.4.) __________________________________________________________________________________ 参考文献(References) Campbell (1997): American Indian Languages. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford █ Greenberg, J.H. (1987): Languages in the Americas, Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford. █ Fortesque,M., Jacobson, S., Kaplan,L.(1994) Comparative Eskimo Dictionary, Univ. of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks. █ Kauffman, T.(2003): A Preliminary Mayan Etymoligical Dictionary. http://www. famsi.org/reports/01051 /pmed.pdf █ Kuiper, F.B.J.(1962) Nahali. A Comparative Study, Amsterdam █ Hoffring (1997) Itzaj MayaSpanish-English Dictionary , The Univ. of Utah Pr., Salt Lake City █ Martin, R.A. (1995): Calepino de Motul. Diccionario Maya-Español, Tom III, Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México, México. █ Ohnishi,K. (2009a): Artificial Life and Robotics 14(4): 545550.( http://www.springerlink.com/content/ f7376pw131272804/) █ Ohnishi,K. (2009b): Artificial Life and Robotics 14(4): 567-73. (http://www. springerlink.com/content/250567h113225021/) █ Ohnishi,K. (2012a): Proc. of the 17th Intn. Conf. on Artif.Life and Robotics, Oita, pp.696 -700. ( http:// www.researchgate.net/publication/230933801_) █ Ohnishi, K. (2012b): Proc. of the 17th Intn. Conf. on Artif.Life and Robotics, Oita, pp.730-734.( http://www. researchgate.net/publication/230933128_) █ Ohno, S. (大野晋), et al. (ed.) (1990) 岩波古語辞典 補訂版, 岩波書店, 東京 █ Öztopçum, K., et al. (1996): Dictionary of the Turkic Languages, Routledge, London █ Rédei, K. (1988): Uralisches Etymologisches Wöterbuch, Band I-III, O. Harrassowitz, Wikesbaden █ Snedecor GW (1956), Statistical Method (Fifth ed.), Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames. █ Starostin, S.A. & Nikolayev, S.L. (1994): A North Caucasian Etymological Dictionary, Vols. 1-3, Caravan Books, Ann Arbor █ Starostin, S., Dybo, A., Mudrak, O. (2003): Etymol. Dict. of the Altaic Languages, Brill, Leiden/Boston █ 台北帝國大學言語學研究室 (小川尚義) (1935): 原語による台湾高砂族伝説集 (含:「付録 単語 集」p.付 1~p.付 55 ), (台北二刷,南天書局有限公司,台北,1996) █ Tozzer, A.M.(1921):A Maya Grammar, the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. ( Republication by Dover Publications, New York, 1977) █ Tryon (1995) “Comparative Austronesian Dictionary, Parts 1-4”, Mouton de Gruyter, New York. █ Vajda,E.J. (2010): In: The Dene-Yeniseian Conne tion, ed. by J. Kari and B. Potter, pp.33-99, pp.100118, Univ.of Alaska, Fairbanks. █ Váscuez, A.B.(ed.) (1980), Diccionario Cordemex, Ediciones Cordemex, Mérida, Mécico. █ Swadesh, M. (1954): Word 10: 306-332. █ 八杉佳穂(1992): マヤ語族. In: 亀井孝ほか(編)「言語学大辞典」(三省堂) 4: 120-129. █ 安本美 典・本多正久(1978): 日本語の誕生, 大修館書店,東京 █ Zar, J.H. (1996): Biological Analysis. Third ed., Printice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The Great Diversity of Formosan Languages

Formosan languages are extremely diverse at all linguistic levels, from phonology to morphology to syntax. In fact, the Formosan languages are the most diverse within the entire Austronesian language family. This great linguistic diversity indicates a great time depth for an early settlement on the island, so as to make Taiwan the prime candidate for Austronesian homeland and the center of Aust...

متن کامل

On the diachronic development of C1V1- reduplication in some Austronesian languages

This paper traces the diachronic developments of C1V1reduplicative processes and their functions in some Austronesian languages. In the first half of the paper, we first examine the possible precursors of this reduplication, in particular the wide range of meanings that are associated with C1V1reduplication in Formosan languages. One of the issues that is addressed is the diachronic relationshi...

متن کامل

Networking Phylogeny for Indo-European and Austronesian Languages

Harnessing cognitive abilities of many individuals, a language evolves upon their mutual interactions establishing a persistent social environment to which language is closely attuned. Human history is encoded in the rich sets of linguistic data by means of symmetry patterns that are not always feasibly represented by trees. Here we use the methods developed in the study of complex networks to ...

متن کامل

AF verbs: transitive, intransitive, or both

As far as the transitivity of AF verbs is concerned, there are two conflicting hypotheses in the Austronesian literature. In the ergative hypothesis (Starosta 1997), AF verbs are uniformly identified as antipassive/intransitive; in the symmetrical-voice hypothesis (Kroeger 1993), AF verbs are claimed to be able to occur as transitive on a par with NAF verbs. In this paper, we address the issue ...

متن کامل

Geometric representations of language taxonomies

A Markov chain analysis of a network generated by the matrix of lexical distances allows for representing complex relationships between different languages in a language family geometrically, in terms of distances and angles. The fully automated method for construction of language taxonomy is tested on a sample of fifty languages of the Indo-European language group and applied to a sample of fi...

متن کامل

Relativization in Sasak and Sumbawa, Eastern Indonesia

On the basis of a detailed study of the relativization phenomena in the dialects of Sasak and Sumbawa in eastern Indonesia, this paper shows that the two crucial assumptions made by Keenan & Comrie on Western Malayo-Polynesian languages are untenable. That is, the Topic in these languages cannot be reinterpreted as Subject and that Austronesian non-Actor focus constructions cannot be considered...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • CoRR

دوره abs/1210.5321  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2012