Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T15:45:04.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Proto–Chamic and Acehnese mid vowels: towards Proto–Aceh–Chamic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Mark Durie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aims of this paper are: (i) to report new dialect data for a vowel contrast in Acehnese which was not recorded in earlier descriptive work, (ii) to show that this contrast is cognate with a contrast reconstructed for Proto–Chamic, and (iii) to reconstruct this part of the vowel system of Proto–Aceh–Chamic.

A close genetic relationship between Acehnese and Chamic was first suggested by Nieman (1891). Although a contrary view was expressed by Blagden (1929), the issue has been conclusively put to rest by the work of Cowan (1933, 1948, 1974, 1981, 1983, 1988), Shorto (1975, 1977) and Collins (1975) who all agree on the existence of a distinct Aceh–Chamic sub–group within Austronesian.

Unfortunately, comparative work on Aceh-Chamic (Cowan: Chamo- Achehic, Shorto: Achino-Cham) has been hampered by problems of access to the data. In Lee's (1966) and Burnham's (1976) reconstructions of Proto-Chamic no mention is made of Acehnese. On the other hand, Cowan and Shorto, the two scholars who have furthered Aceh-Chamic studies the most, have not had access to Lee (1966), nor, in more recent works, to Burnham (1976). Another problem has been that Acehnese source materials have been restricted to just one dialect, as reflected by Djajadiningrat's (1934) and Kreemer's (1931) Acehnese-Dutch dictionaries.

This paper represents one step towards addressing some of these problems, by comparing new Acehnese dialect data with the comparative Chamic wordlist compiled by Lee and augmented by Burnham. I focus here upon a specific

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , February 1990 , pp. 100 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blagden, C. O. 1929. ‘Achinese and Mon–Kmer’, in Feestbundel, uitgegeven door het Koninklijk Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen bij gelegenheid van zijn 150 Jarig Bestaan 1778–1928. Vol. i. Weltevreden: G. Kolff, 35–38.Google Scholar
Burnham, E. C.. 1976. The place of Haroi in the Chamic languages. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Collins, I. V.. 1975. The Austro–Asiatic substratum in Acehnese. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1933. ‘Het Atjeh'sch metrum “sanja” in verband met een Tjamsch Gedicht’, Bijdragen tot de Taal–, Land– en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch–Indië, 90: 149–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1948. ‘Aanteekeningen betreffende de verhouding van het Atjèhsch tot de Mon–Khmer–talen’, Bijdragen tot de Taal– Land– en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch–Indie, 104:429–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1974. ‘Evidence of long vowels in early Acehnese’, Oceanic Linguistics, 13:187–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J.. 1981. ‘An outline of Achehnese phonology and morphology’, BSOAS, LXIV, 3:552–49.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J.. 1982. ‘The Achehnese metre sanja' and the Thai khm pv.t’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, no. 2: 156–60.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1983. ‘The Achehnese diphthong ma and its possible implications for proto–Austronesian’, Ada Orientalia, 44: 153–85.Google Scholar
Cowan, H. K. J. 1988. ‘Achehnese dialects in connection with Chamic migrations’. Paper presented at the fifth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics.Google Scholar
Dempwolff, O.. 1938. Austronesisches Wörterverzeichnis. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
Djajadiningrat, H. 1934. Atjehsch–Nederlandsch Woordenboek. 's Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Diffloth, G. 1976. ‘Jah–hut, an Austroasiatic language of Malyasia’, in Liem, N. D. (ed.), South–East Asian Linguistic Studies, Vol. 2. (Pacific Linguistics Series C, no. 42.) Canberra:Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Durie, M. 1985. A grammar of Acehnese on the basis of a dialect of North Aceh. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Headley, R. K. 1976. ‘Some sources of Chamic vocabulary’, Austroasiatic Studies, 1: 453–76.(Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication No. 13.)Google Scholar
Karlgren, B. 1923. Analytic dictionary of Chinese and Sino–Japanese. ParisLibrairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.Google Scholar
Kreemer, J. 1931. Atjehsch Handwoordenboek. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Lee, E. W. 1966. Proto-Chamic phonologic word and vocabulary. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Lee, E. W. 1974 ‘Southeast Asian areal features in Austronesian strata of the Chamic languages’, Oceanic Linguistics, 13: 643–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, E. W. 1977. ‘Devoicing, aspiration, and vowel split in Haroi: evidence for register (contrastive tongue-root position)’ in Thomas, D.Lee, E. W. and Liem, N. D. (ed.), Papers in South East Asian Linguistics No. 4: Chamic Studies. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Niemann, G. K.. 1891. ‘Bijdrage tot de Kennis der Verhouding van het Tjam tot de Talen van Indonesië’, Bijdragen tot de Taal– Land–, en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch–Indië, 40:27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorto, H. L. 1975. ‘Achinese and mainland Austronesian’, BSOAS, xxxvm, 1: 81–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorto, H.L.. 1977. ‘Proto–Austronesian *taqan: an anomaly removed’, BSOAS, XL, 1: 128–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snouck, Hurgronje C. 1893. ‘Studiën over atjèsche klank– en schriftleer’, Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal–, Land–, en Volkenkunde, 35: 346–442.Google Scholar