Misplaced Pages

The Naish languages are a low-level subgroup of Sino-Tibetan languages that include Naxi, Na (Mosuo), and Laze.

Classification

The Naish languages are:

• Naish
  • Naxi
  • Na (Narua, Mosuo)
  • Laze

In turn, Naish together with Namuyi and Shixing constitutes the Naic subgroup within Sino-Tibetan.

Arguments for relatedness include irregular morphotonology: tone patterns of numeral-plus-classifier phrases that constitute shared structural properties. Since these similarities are phonetically nontransparent, they cannot be due to borrowing.

Names

Note that in Mainland China, the term "Naxi" is commonly used for the entire language group, e.g. by the influential linguistic introduction by He and Jiang (2015). The terms "Naish" and "Naic" are derived from the endonym Na used by speakers of several of the languages. These concepts were initially proposed by Guillaume Jacques & Alexis Michaud (2011). Phylogenetic issues are summarized in the entry about the Naic subgroup. For a review of the literature about Naish languages, see Li (2015).

Lexical innovations

Jacques & Michaud (2011) list the following words as Naish lexical innovations.

Reconstruction

Proto-Naish, the proto-language ancestral to the Naish languages, has been reconstructed by Jacques & Michaud (2011).

See also

• List of Proto-Naish reconstructions (Wiktionary)

References

1. Michaud, Alexis (2011). "The tones of numerals and numeral-plus-classifier phrases: on structural similarities between Naxi, Na and Laze". Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. 34: 1–26 – via Hyper Articles en Ligne.
2. He Jiren 和即仁 & Jiang Zhuyi 姜竹仪. 1985. Naxiyu Jianzhi 纳西语简志 (A Brief Description of the Naxi Language). Beijing 北京: Minzu Chubanshe 民族出版社.
3. Michaud, Alexis, He Limin & Zhong Yaoping. 2015. "Naxi / Naish." In Rint Sybesma, Wolfgang Behr, Zev Handel & C.T. James Huang (eds.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Language and Linguistics. Leiden: Brill.
4. Jacques, Guillaume, and Alexis Michaud. 2011. "Approaching the historical phonology of three highly eroded Sino-Tibetan languages: Naxi, Na and Laze." Diachronica 28:468-498.
5. Li Zihe 李子鹤. 2015. 纳西语言研究回顾——兼论语言在文化研究中的基础地位 (A review of Naxi language studies, with a discussion of the fundamental role of cultural studies for linguistic research). 茶马古道研究期刊 4. 125–131.

v t e Sino-Tibetan branches
Western Himalayas (Himachal, Uttarakhand, Nepal, Sikkim)	West Himalayish Tamangic Newaric Newar Baram–Thangmi Kiranti Dhimalish Dhimal Toto Lhokpu Lepcha Greater Magaric Magaric Magar Kham Chepangic Chepang Bhujel Raji–Raute Dura–Tandrange
Eastern Himalayas (Tibet, Bhutan, Arunachal)	Bodish Tibetic East Bodish Tshangla Basum Nam? Gongduk ʼOle Tani Chamdo
Myanmar and Indo- Burmese border	Karbi Kuki-Chin Mruic Mru Hkongso Pyu Taman "Naga" Ao Angami–Pochuri Meitei Tangkhulic Zeme Sal Boro–Garo Konyak Jingpho–Luish
East and Southeast Asia	Sinitic Bai Tujia Nungish Karenic Gong Kathu Cai–Long Caijia Longjia Luren Burmo-Qiangic Qiangic Gyalrongic Ersuic Naic Lolo-Burmese Mondzish Burmish Loloish
Dubious (possible isolates) (Arunachal)	Hrusish Hruso Mijiic Kho-Bwa Puroik Miju–Meyor Songlin Greater Siangic Siangic Koro Milang Idu–Taraon
Proposed groupings	Central Tibeto-Burman Kuki-Chin–Naga Macro-Bai Mahakiranti Rung Tibeto-Burman Tibeto-Kanauri
Proto-languages	Proto-Sino-Tibetan Proto-Tibeto-Burman Proto-Loloish Proto-Karenic Proto-Min Proto-Hakka
Italics indicates single languages that are also considered to be separate branches.

• Loloish languages