Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:01:58.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The internal classification of the Malayic subgroup

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

K. Alexander Adelaar
K. Alexander Adelaar
Affiliation:
Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

My This paper is a critical evaluation of B. Nothofer's definition of ‘Malayic’ (§1). It also discusses his classification of Iban (or ‘Sea Dayak’) as a separate primary branch in the Malayic language group, and his analysis of some aspects of Iban phonological history (§ 2).

The Malayic language group consists of (literary, standard) Malay and all dialects and languages that are sufficiently close to Malay in order to form an exclusive subgroup with it within the Austronesian language family. In 1985 I finished a PhD thesis which is a phonological, lexical and morphological reconstruction of Proto-Malayic, the hypothetical stock-language of the Malayic subgroup. The reconstruction is made on the basis of six members of the Malayic subgroup, viz. Malay, Minangkabau, Banjarese, Middle Malay (Seraway variant) Iban and Jakartanese. In August 1986 the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka in Kuala Lumpur organized the International Workshop on the History of Malay, the contributions to which were published in 1988 (Mohd. Thani Ahmad and Zaini Mohamed Zain, 1988). Nothofer's paper treated the various views on the definition of the Malayic subgroup (Nothofer, 1988). Concerning my 1985 study, Nothofer made the following criticisms: definition of ‘Malayic’ is different from that of previous scholars and I do not explain in which way it differs. More particularly, my definition differs from that of Blust (1981), who also includes the Chamic languages of Vietnam and Rejang.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , October 1993 , pp. 566 - 581
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1993

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

Abinal, Malzac. 1930. Dictionnaire malgache–français. Tananarive: Imprimerie de la mission catholique.Google Scholar
Adelaar, K. Alexander. 1985. Proto-Malayic: the reconstruction of its phonology and parts of its morphology and lexicon. [Ph.D. Dissertation, Leiden.] Alblasserdam: Kanters.Google Scholar
Alexander, Adelaar K.. 1988. More on Proto-Malayic, in Mohd. Thani, Ahmad and Zaini Mohamad, Zain (ed.), 1988: 59–77.Google Scholar
Alexander, Adelaar K.. 1992. Proto-Malayic: the reconstruction of its phonology and parts of its morphology and lexicon [revised version of Adelaar, 1985]. (Pacific Linguistics, Series C-l 19.) Canberra:Research School of Pacific Studies, ANU.Google Scholar
Alexander, Adelaar K., (in press a). ‘The classification of Tamanic languages (West Kalimantan)’, in Language contact and change in the Austronesian world, to appear in (ed.) Dutton, T. E. and Tryon, D.. (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Alexander, Adelaar K.. (in press, b). ‘On the history of [thing], [animal], [person] and related words in Malay’. Paper presented at the Conference on Austronesian Terminologies, Canberra: Australian National University (18–22 October 1990). (To appear in Pacific Linguistics.)Google Scholar
Aymonier, Étienne, and Cabaton, Antoine. 1906. Dictionnaire cam–fraçnais. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.Google Scholar
Blust, R. A. 1981. ‘The reconstruction of Proto-Malayo-Javanic...an appreciation’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 137:456–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blust, R. A. 1984. ‘On the history of the Rejang vowels and diphthongs’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 140:422–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blust, R. A. 1989. ‘PAN etymologies IV’, Oceanic Linguistics, 28/2:111–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charles, Matthew. n.d. (Unpublished PAN etyma.)Google Scholar
Coady, James and McGinn, Richard. 1982. ‘On the so-called implosive nasals of Rejang’, in Gava' Studies in Austronesian languages and cultures dedicated to Hans Kähler, Reiner, Carle et al. (ed.). Berlin: Deitrich Reimer: 437–49.Google Scholar
Dempwolff, Otto. 1934, 1937, 1938. Vergleichende Lautlehre des Austronesischen Wortschatzes. (3 vols.). (Beihefte Zeitschrift für Eingeborenensprachen, 15, 17, 19.) Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
Djajadiningrat, Hoesein. 1934. Atjéhsch–Nederlandsch woordenboek. Batavia (Jakarta).Google Scholar
Dunnebier, W. 1951. Bolaang–Mongondowsch–Nederlandsch woordenboek. The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Dunselman, D. 1955. Kana Sera: Zang der Zwangerschap. (Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap, 17.) The Hague: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyen, Isidore. 1965. A lexicostatistical classification of the Austronesian languages. (Internal Journal of American Linguistics, Memoire, 19 [Vol. 31 No. 1].) Baltimore.Google Scholar
Gonda, J. 1973. Sanskrit in Indonesia. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.Google Scholar
Hardeland, August. 1858. Dajacksch–Deutsches Wörterbuch. Amsterdam: Muller.Google Scholar
Hudson, A. B. 1970. ‘A note on Selako: Malayic Dayak and Land Dayak languages in West Borneo’, Sarawak Museum Journal, 18:301–18.Google Scholar
Mauss, Marcel. 1923–24. ‘Essai sur le don: forme et raison de l'échange dans les sociétés archaїques’, Année Sociologique, I (second series).Google Scholar
Mills, Roger F., 1975. ‘Proto-South-Sulawesi and Proto-Austronesian phonology.’ (2 vols.) Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (University Microfilms International, 1978).Google Scholar
Mohd Thani, Ahmad and Zaini Mohamed, Zain (ed.). 1988. Rekonstruksi dan cabang-cabang bahasa Melayu Induk. (Siri Monograf sejarah bahasa Melayu.) Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Nothofer, Bernd. 1975. The reconstruction of Proto–Malayo–Javanic. (Verhandelingen van het KITLV, 73.) The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Nothofer, Bernd. 1988. 'A discussion of two Austronesian subgroups: Proto-Malay and Proto-Malayic, Mohd. Thani, Ahmad and Zaini Mohamed, Zain (ed.), 1988: 34–58.Google Scholar
Panganiban, José Villa, 1966. Talahuluganang Pilipino–Ingles. Maynila: Kawanihan ng Palimbagan.Google Scholar
Prentice, D. J. Timugon Murut–English dictionary [unpublished].Google Scholar
Richards, A. 1981. An Iban–English dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Scott, N. C. 1956. A dictionary of Sea-Dayak. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Southwell, C. H. 1980. Kayan–English dictionary. Marudi, Baram (Sarawak): C. H. Southwell.Google Scholar
Verheijen, A. J. 1986. The Sama/Bajau language in the Lesser Sunda Islands. (Pacific Linguistics, Series D-70). Canberra: Research School of Pacific Studies, Dept. of Linguistics, ANU.Google Scholar
Warneck, Joh. 1977. Toba-Batak–Deutsches Wörterbuch (neu hrsg. von R. Roolvink).The Hague: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, R. J. 1959. A Malay–English dictionary. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar