HOME
The Info List - Bodic Languages





The Tibeto-Kanauri languages, also called Bodic, Bodish–Himalayish, and Western Tibeto-Burman, are a proposed intermediate level of classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages, centered on the Tibetic languages and the Kinnauri dialect cluster. The conception of the relationship, or if it is even a valid group, varies between researchers. Conceptions of Tibeto-Kanauri[edit]

Western Tibeto-Burman languages, largely following Thurgood and La Polla (2003).[2]

Benedict (1972) originally posited the Tibeto-Kanauri aka Bodish–Himalayish relationship, but had a more expansive conception of Himalayish than generally found today, including Qiangic, Magaric, and Lepcha. Within Benedict's conception, Tibeto-Kanauri is one of seven linguistic nuclei, or centers of gravity along a spectrum, within Tibeto-Burman languages. The center-most nucleus identified by Benedict is the Jingpho language (including perhaps the Kachin–Luic and Tamangic languages); other peripheral nuclei besides Tibeto-Kanauri include the Kiranti languages (Bahing–Vayu and perhaps the Newar language); the Tani languages; the Bodo–Garo languages and perhaps the Konyak languages); the Kukish languages (Kuki–Naga plus perhaps the Karbi language, the Meitei language and the Mru language); and the Burmish languages
Burmish languages
(Lolo-Burmese languages, perhaps also the Nung language and Trung).[3] Matisoff (1978, 2003) largely follows Benedict's scheme, stressing the teleological value of identifying related characteristics over mapping detailed family trees in the study of Tibeto-Burman and Sino-Tibetan languages. Matisoff includes Bodish and West Himalayish with the Lepcha language as a third branch. He unites these at a higher level with Mahakiranti as Himalayish.[4][5] Van Driem (2001) notes that the Bodish, West Himalayish, and Tamangic languages (but not Benedict's other families) appear to have a common origin.[6] Bradley (1997) takes much the same approach but words things differently: he incorporates West Himalayish and Tamangic as branches within his "Bodish", which thus becomes close to Tibeto-Kanauri. This and his Himalayan family[same as Mahakiranti?] constitute his Bodic family.[7] References[edit]

^ Hammarström, Harald; Forkel, Robert; Haspelmath, Martin, eds. (2017). "Bodic". Glottolog
Glottolog
3.0. Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.  ^ Thurgood, Graham; LaPolla, Randy J. (ed.s) (2003). Sino-Tibetan Languages. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-7007-1129-5.  ^ Benedict, Paul K. (1972). Sino-Tibetan: a Conspectus. Princeton-Cambridge Studies in Chinese Linguistics. 2. CUP Archive. pp. 4–11.  ^ Matisoff, James A. (1978). Variational semantics in Tibeto-Burman: The "Organic" Approach to Linguistic Comparison. Occasional papers, Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics. 6. Institute for the Study of Human Issues. ISBN 0-915980-85-1.  ^ Matisoff, James A. (2003). Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction. University of California Publications in Linguistics. 135. University of California Press. pp. 1–9. ISBN 0-520-09843-9.  ^ van Driem, George (2001). Languages of the Himalayas: an Ethnolinguistic Handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region: Containing an Introduction to the Symbiotic Theory of Language. Handbuch der Orientalistik. Zweite Abteilung, Indien. 10. BRILL. ISBN 90-04-10390-2.  ^ Bradley, David (1997). Tibeto-Burman Languages of the Himalayas. Occasional Papers in South-East Asian linguistics. Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University. ISBN 0-85883-456-1. 

Further reading[edit]

Bradley, David (2002). "The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman". In Christopher I. Beckwith. Medieval Tibeto-Burman languages: proceedings of a symposium held in Leiden, June 26, 2000, at the 9th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies. Brill's Tibetan studies library. 1. BRILL. pp. 73–112. ISBN 978-90-04-12424-0.  Hale, Austin (1982). "Review of Research". Research on Tibeto-Burman languages. Trends in Linguistics. 14. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 30–49 passim. ISBN 978-90-279-3379-9.  Singh, Rajendra (2009). Annual Review of South Asian Languages and Linguistics: 2009. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs. 222. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 154–161. ISBN 978-3-11-022559-4. 

v t e

Bodic (Tibeto-Kanauri) languages

Bodish

Tibetic

Central

Central Tibetan Standard Tibetan
Standard Tibetan
(Old, Classical) Mugom Basum

Amdo

Amdo Tibetan Choni

Kham-Hor

Khams Tibetan Tseku Khamba

Western

Ladakhi Purgi Zangskari Balti Lahuli–Spiti

Southern

Groma Sikkimese Sherpa Jirel Dzongkha Brokkat Brokpa Chocangaca Lakha Naapa Laya Lunana

Mixed

Baima Dao

Unclassified

Kyirong-Kagate (Yolmo) Zhongu Khalong Dongwang Gserpa Zitsadegu Drugchu

East Bodish

Dakpa Tawang Dzala Nyen Chali Bumthang Kheng Kurtöp Nupbi

Tshangla

West Himalayish

Kinnauri Sunam Jangshung Shumcho Pattani Tinan Gahri Kanashi Rangpo Darma Byangsi Chaudangsi Rangkas Zhangzhung

Tamangic

Tamang Gurung Thakali Manang Gyasumdo Nar Phu Chantyal Ghale Kutang Kaike

v t e

Sino-Tibetan branches

Western Himalayas

West Himalayish Tamangic Magaric Chepangic Raji–Raute Dura Newar

Eastern Himalayas

Bodish (Tibetic, East Bodish) Kiranti Baram–Thangmi Lepcha Tshangla Gongduk Lhokpu 'Ole Tani

circum- Myanmar
Myanmar
tribal belts (G–Hk–J–R–C)

Karbi Kukish (aka Chin, Zo) Mruic Nungish Pyu

"Naga"

Ao Angami–Pochuri Meithei Tangkhul Zeme

Sal

Bodo–Koch Konyak Dhimal Kachin–Luic

East Asia

Sinitic (Chinese, Bai) Tujia Karenic Naic Ersu Qiangic (rGyalrongic)

Lolo-Burmese

Mondzish Burmish Loloish

Dubious (possible isolates)

Greater Siangic

Siangic Idu–Taraon

Hrusish (Hruso, Miji) Puroik Kho-Bwa Kaman–Zakhring

Proposed groupings

Burmo-Qiangic Greater Bai Mahakiranti Rung Tibeto-Kanauri Tibeto-Burman Greater Magaric

Proto-languages

Proto-Tibeto-Burman P

.