The present state of PST/PTB reconstruction: can we even write a fable in Proto-Lolo-Burmese?
How much can we really recover from the past history of languages? What do we mean when we claim to have "reconstructed a proto-language"? In sober moments, all historical linguists have to admit that a "proto-language" is at best only a pale reflection of a real living language...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/178025 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | How much can we really recover from the past history of languages? What do we mean when we claim to have "reconstructed a proto-language"?
In sober moments, all historical linguists have to admit that a "proto-language" is at best only a pale reflection of a real living language. Often all that can be salvaged is the proto-phonemic system, along with a collection of mostly unrelated individual lexical items. If we are lucky, and work in a family with anciently attested texts in several languages, we can also achieve some understanding of the proto-grammar, especially if the languages are rich in morphology. In these respects, Indo-Europeanists have been much better off than Sino-Tibetanists, to the point where the 19th century scholar August Schleicher once dared to compose a fable in Proto-Indo-European.' |
|---|