by Patrick C. Ryan
(9-28-2005)
Actually, Burmese (and Chinese) have sound systems that are quite similar.
Below is a table showing suggested correspondences.
(COMPARABLE OR EQUIVALENT)
Burmese Consonants (notation from Cornyn and Roop: Beginning Burmese)
Chinese Consonants (Chinese Phonetic Alphabet)
| Description | BILABIAL | APICAL | DORSAL | TRILL | FAUCAL |
| Glottalized Surd STOP | P[?] p/b b | T[?]
t/d d |
K[?]
k/g g |
?
q(1) - | |
| Aspirated Surd STOP | P[H]
hp p |
T[H]
ht t |
K[H]
hk k |
||
| Surd SPIRANT | F
w w |
S
s/z(2) r(3) |
X
y(4) x/h (5) |
R
r/l(6) l |
H / HH
h - |
| Aspirated Surd SPIRANT | F[H]
- f |
S[H]
hs s/sh(7) |
X[H]
hy(4) - |
R[H]
hl - |
|
| Glottalized Surd AFFRICATE | P[?]F
- - |
T[?]S
c/j(8) z(9) |
K[?]X
- j(10) |
|
|
| Aspirated Surd AFFRICATE | PF[H]
- - |
TS[H]
hc(11) c(12) |
KX[H]
- q(13) |
||
| NASAL | M
m m |
N
n n |
Q
ng ng |
||
| Aspirated NASAL | M[H]
hm - |
N[H]
hn - |
Q[H]
hng - |
COMMENTS
Both Burmese and Chinese oppose unaspirated to aspirated stops and affricates. Because
many languages I have investigated have developed voiced stops and affricates from the
postulated Proto-Language glottalized stops and affricates, I believe a reconstruction with
glottalization opposing aspiration is preferable. I assume, therefore, that my surd glottalized
stops and affricates are functionally equivalent to the Burmese and Chinese surd unaspirated
stops and affricates, with Burmese positional variants of -b-, -d-, -g-, and -j- for Proto-Language
P[?], T[?], K[?], T[?]S.
Proto-Language F([H]) seems to have been voiced at a very early date. In every language I
have investigated except Chinese, /f/ seems to be a result of PL P[H]. Based on the opposition of
voiced and voiceless which seems to replace the opposition of glottalized and aspirated, I have
included Chinese -w/f- and functionally equivalent to PL F/F[H].
Unaccounted for are Burmese -dh-, -th-; and for Chinese, -zh- (tsh), -ch- (tsh[h]) and - y-.
This is a fairly substantial match; and if we allow that Chinese -zh- and -ch- may be
substituting for the missing P[?]F and PF[H], and -y- for missing ¿ (its reflex in many other
languages).
NOTES
1. Burmese -q- is the laryngal glottal stop (/?/).
2. Burmese -s- and -z- are alternative reflexes of PL S.
3. Chinese -r- is /zh/, an alveolar articulation of */s/.
4. I interpret Burmese -y- and -hy- as essentially equivalent to /ç/ and /ç[h]/, palatal surd dorsal spirants.
5. Chinese -x- is /ç/ and Chinese -h- is /x/, palatal and velar articulations of PL X.
6. Burmese -r- and -l- are front and back reflexes of PL R.
7. Chinese -s- and -sh- are palatal and alveolar articulations of PL S[H].
8. Burmese -c- is /tsh/, an alveolar articulation of PL T[?]S, with the alternative reflex -j- (/dzh/).
9. Chinese -z- is /ts/.
10. Chinese -j- is /tç/, a development from */kç/.
11. Burmese -hc- is /tsh[h]/.
12. Chinese -c- is /ts[h]/.
13. Chinese -q- is /tç[h]/, a development from */kç[h]/.
the latest revision of this file is available at
HTTP://WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/Athens/Forum/2803/ProtoLanguage-Phonology.htm
Patrick C. Ryan * 9115 West 34th Street - Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 * (501)227-9947
PROTO-LANGUAGE@email.msn.com