페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

The most important conclusion to be drawn from these vocabularies is that three at least of the Tibeto-Ultraindian ones, the Manyak, Gyarung and Takpa, are allied to the Irawadi or Ultraindian branch of the family more than to the Bhotian. The general structure and phonetic form of the vocables resemble those of the Ultraindian vocabularies that have been least modified and emasculated by the influence of vocalic Chinese, and especially those of the Naga-Manipuri group. Manyak and Gyarung however have also Burman forms.

Gyarung, Horpa and Thochu have a considerable portion of final consonants. Manyak is vocalic in this respect, in its slender vowels and in the forms of several of its words resembling the emasculated Burman sub-formation.

Slender vowels (i, e) are more common in all the dialects than in Bhotian. They abound in Manyak and Gyarung, especially in the latter, which in more slender, but less elliptic than the former. Thochu and Horpa, especially the latter, have more frequently broad vowels as in Bhotian. But it is to be remarked that a special connection exists between Horpa and Thochu and between both and Manyak. The glossarial affinity between Thochu and Manyak in particular is often very decided. The common varieties have often a as the vowel where the other Tibetan or ChinoTibetan varieties of the same root have o, u, i, &c.

I give a few examples of the great attenuation some of the Tibeto-Ultraindian vocables undergo in Manyak " I," a (nga Gyarung); "arrow" m-a (w»-la Takpa); "bird" ha, (bhya Lhop.); "boat" g-u (0-ru Takpa, Bhot); "village" hu (khyu Gyar.); "ripe" <fo-mi (min Thochu, Aa-«-man Gyar.); "black" rfa-na (fez-nak Gyar., nya-nya Horp.). The vowel generally retains an archaic broad form.

The broad phonology appears to have predominated in archaic eras. Some of the remote Scythic and N. E. Asian languages still affect broad vowels. The Scythic languages vary amongst themselves in this respect, but in many there is now a disposition to slender vowels. The Turkish dialects frequently affect them. In the modern Chinese they are common, and the strong development of this tendency and of general emasculation in the Tibeto-Ultraindian languages, and especially in the eastern or Gyarung-Burman band, is chiefly ascribable to the predominance and diffusion of the modern North Chinese or Kwan-hwa phonology. But the slender forms of the Sif'an-Burman vocabularies are not always to be considered as the result of a native development of a soft phonology under Llie influence of Kwanhwa. On the contrary, many slender varieties are of the highest antiquity in all the East Asian formations,—Chinese, Scythic and Tibeto-Ultraindian. They are even preserved with the archaic' final consonants in many words. The co-existence of broad and slender forms, e. g. log, lik "hand," is in accordance with the unstable character of the vowel in the Scythic phonology. This vocable affords an illustration of the independent development of slender forms in the Scythic and in the Tibeto-Ultraindian provinces. The broad archaic form was common to both, e. g. log-oZ Ostiak, lag-/>a Bhot., e-lag Abor, luch-Ied " finger," Kamschatkan. The Abor e-lag, a-lak has the Turkish prefix, but in Turkish the slender phonology has produced the forms t-lik, a-li, e-li, while the archaic broad vowels are preserved in a-la, a-lo. In Bhotian &c the g has also become k, lak-pa, and the emasculated Burman has not only evolved a slender vowel but changed k to t, lat, let. In this case the Burman let and Turkish lik are obviously independent. But there are other cases in which archaic slender Scythic forms have spread not only through the TibetoUltraindian but through the Asoncsian provinces. For example, the Gyarung-Burman li "air," Asoncsian iri &c is clearly archaic and Scythic, lil, il &c (as well as Caucasian, Semitic &c) and not a modern variation of the Bhotian lung, lhak &c.

Even Thocliu and Horpa have several vocables with slender vowels where Bhotian has broad ones. Ex. Hog, phak Bhot., pi Thochu; Earth, sa B., x\-p T.; Road, lam B., raA Manyak, g-rih T., rri Gyarung; Salt, chha B., cheh T.; Snalte,shrvX B.,brigi T.; Bone, raspa, ruka B., ripat T., rera Horpa.

Gyarung has often e where Bhotian has o, u, a, or i ; i where Bhotian has « or e; and sometimes o where Bhotian has a. Ex. Bird, byu B., pye G.; Day, nyi B., nye G.; Ear, na B., ne G.; Moon, la B., Iheh G.; Water, chhu B., chi G.; Tooth, so B., syo Horpa, swe G., Thochu; Mouth, kha B., khe G. Gyarung is equally prefixua] with the more prefixual vocabularies of N. Ultraindia, the common prefixed definitive being ta-, varied to to-, ti-, tir-, tar-, [as in some Ullraindian and Himalayan vocables], da-, na-, and also passing into ha-, as in many Ultraindian vocabularies. Qualitives take ka-, corresponding with the Bodo ga

Manyak has fewer prefixes than Gyarung and they are more mixed. The labial which is rare in Gyarung occurs frequently under the forms ma-, m-, ba-, mer-, rvo-, and postfixually in the forms -bi, -mi (the Bodo prefix b in be). De-, da- is common with qualitives, corresponding with the Chinese possessive ti, di.

Thochu words have much more frequently a Bhotian form. The prefixes which are comparatively infrequent occur both in the Gyarung and Ultraindian vocalised form and in the Bhotian consonantal one, mo-; ki-, cha-, ra-, da-; cha-, ki-, r-, s-, g-, k-. Some words have also the Bhotian postfixed labial definitive {-mo, -pa, -rvo, &c.) The numerals take -ri, -re, the ScythicoTibetan poss.

Horpa has also prefixes and they are generally in the consonantal Bhotian form s-, 1-, r-, h-, »-. Qualitives have frequently ha&c, and asserti ves ta-, tan-, tarn-, ta-r, Mia-, gu-, gu-r-, na-, na-ka-, na-p-, ya-, rha-, rhang-, zu-, zu-r-, ma-, wa-n-, &c as in Gyarung, Thochu and Bhotian.

The use of prefixes in languages so far north as Gyarung, Thochu and Horpa renders it probably that this habit also characterised the eastern and southern branch of Tibeto-UItraindian in its primary form, thus confirming the opinion expressed in chap. iv. (Journ. Ind. Arch, vii, 12G) that the system of prefixed and proposed definitives was the original one of the whole Chino-Tibetati linguistic province, as of a much wider area, and probably also the earliest in the world.

In harmonic power the Gvarung appears to be somewhat in advance of Bhotian, but this may arise from the curt and consonantal phonology of the latter having obscured the vowel changes. In agglutination they arc probably nearly alike. In Gyarung the vowel of the definitive appears to be affected by that of the principal word as much as in the closely connected Dhimal and Bodo (see chap. iv. sec. 3). Hence the superiority in this respect of these Gangclic dialects over most of the Ultraindian can no longer be exclusively ascribed to the influence of the Dravirian phonology. In Gyarung it must be considered as an acquired Scythic trait and in Bodo and Dhimal it must be Scythic through Tibetan so far as it is Tibetan. Mr Hodgson gives we-pe " his father," wo-mo "his mother" &c. In like manner the vowel of the root is modified by that of a postfix.

Mr Hodgson gives a few examples of the formative system of Gyarung. The formatives are prefixual as well as postfixual and they are to some extent combinable, as in Bhotian on the one side and Burman on the other. From these examples it may be gathered that the common definitive prefix ka, ta, da, na, or ya is, when the sense requires it, assertive (present) or generic. In the sonant Bhotian the definitives g- [=A-], d- [=<-], which I have considered as identical with the localitive na, la, ra, &c (Journ. Ind. Arch, vii, 113), m-, h- &c, are all assertive, with a variable tense power. In Gyarung the repetition or addition of ta (ka-fa-, ta-,ta- tec,) distinguishes the past from the present. In the negative assertive ka-, ta- &c is replaced by ma-, corresponding with the Bhotian mi-; Chinese m &c. Sa, postfixed to the common assertive definitive, renders it causative. It is the Bhotian instrumental, active, intensive and causative particle $, which in that language is postfixed to the root. But it is also postfixed to the definitive la, na &c to form the ex-transitive. In Gyarung si, -ti is personative and participial.

The use of double and even triple definitives is common to Gyarung with most languages which retain such particles. The power of combining them and of using both prefixes and postfixes with the same root is Tibetan-Ultraindian, N. E. Asian, American, Caucasian, Euskarian, Semitico-African, Asonesian and archaic Indo-European, that is, it is common to all the formative alliances.

From the proximity of Gyarung to the Chinese and ChinoUltraindian province it will probably prove to be more prefixual or less Scythic than Bhotian. But without even excepting the prefixual position of the qualitive (possessive) definitive ka- (in Bhotian -kyi &c, Changlo -ga), the examples hitherto given have parallels in Bhotian. In Chinese itself the poss. and qualitive particle is postposed, and although Gyarung generally dispenses with declensional signs, as Chinese does when they can be avoided, it preserves the Chinese and Bhotian idiom when it uses a possessive particle, as in Lama urn boroh, "the Lama's horse." That Bhotian also used the qualitive and poss. definitive prefixually is proved by several examples amongst the numerals and qualitives. Thus gchig 1, <piyis 2, ysum 3, correspond with the Gyarung kali 1, kanes 2, Aasam 3. When the qualitive prefixes of Bhotian do not agree with the Oyarang ha- they are sometimes similar to the Manyak and Dhimal di- &c, or to other TibetoUltraindian forms. The Gyarung verbs like the Chinese and Bhotian are simply substantives or crudes and the particles of tense, mood &c stand ideologically on the same footing as the definitive and directive particles. In Chinese some of these are proposed and some postposed. In Bhotian the definitive d- or dais used as a generic assertive, while with some words it is future or aorist (past and future). B- or ba- is generic, past or aorist. M- or ma- is commonly generic, but with some words it is aorist exclusively. H- or ha- is generally present, but sometimes present and future. In Gyarung the prefixual definitives are more fully preserved and freely used than in the old or written Bhotian. But their redundant cumulation is not peculiar to the verb, as substantives and qualitives occur with double and triple prefixes (Hodgson, 134). In the ordinary possessive use of the pronouns they are proposed, in accordance with the regular idiom of Chinese, Bhotian, Scytliic and Dravirian, and not postfixed as in the abnormal or secondary and euphonic pronominal habit of most of the Scythic and Dravirian languages. Ex. nga-pe "my father"; na-pe, "thy father"; wa-pe, "am father". The same idiom is followed with assertives. Nanrv na-syo, thou ridest. It does not appear that the pronoun is always thus proposed in its separate form as well as prefixed in its radical form. The assertive idiom is obviously the simple possessive na-syo, my-riding. In the first person the assertive or attributive root takes a postfix -ang. Mr Hodgson appears to consider it as representing the 1st pronoun, and generally indicating a reflexive character. To this he attributes its employment in the poss. case and its so frequently designating the first person when appended to verbs and their

« 이전계속 »