Discussion note: reply to James A. Matisoff's "A key etymology"

• Main Author: Sagart, Laurent
• Other Authors: Centre de Recherches Linguistiques sur l'Asie Orientale
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: 2024
• Subjects: Arts and Humanities
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/179355
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

In LTBA 15.1 (1992:139-143) 'A key etymology, James A. Matisoff investigated the etymology of Thai kuncee, Malay kuntji 'lock - key'. After stating that there is no plausible Austronesian etymology for the Malay word, that the source of Thai kuncee and Malay kuntji is not to be traced to Chinese, and that a reasonable etymology cannot be found in Sanskrit/Pali or in Khmer either (pp. 139-140), he proposed for these two words a Romance origin in the word-family of Lat. dineus 'wedge', dineare 'secure with wedges'. In his view, an extra-Asiatic etymology is indicated by the "'technological' semantic content of these words" (p. 140). According to him, the terms were introduced by the crews of Portuguese ships in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Portuguese word for 'key', however, is chave, which obviously will not do as a source for the Malay and Thai words, as Matisoff acknowledges: he offers no solution, but observes (p. 142) that "it would be interesting to find out about the ethnic mix of the crews of Portuguese vessels in the 16th century".