1887
Volume 48, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0731-3500
  • E-ISSN: 2214-5907
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, I examine two cases of merger, by comparing the fricatives (/s/, /ʃ/) and affricates (/ts/ and /tʃ/) in ten varieties of Mongsen-Ao, including Changki, which is structurally close to Mongsen. Based on the comparison of fricatives and affricates in the ten selected varieties, I show that the merger of /s/ and /ʃ/ as observed by Bruhn (2014) and merger of affricates /ts/ and /tʃ/ as proposed by Coupe (2003, 2007), did not take place in all varieties of Mongsen. The merger also had an impact on the following vowel, leading to a process of vowel reduction in most of the Mongsen varieties. As part of the analysis, two fricatives- and , and two affricates- and , are reconstructed with all the four vowels in Proto-Mongsen.

Given the phonological variation within Mongsen varieties spoken in different villages, this paper also sheds light on some of the phonological changes across varieties.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.25007.tem
2025-10-13
2025-11-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Benedict, Paul K.
    1972Sino-Tibetan: A conspectus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511753541
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511753541 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bruhn, Daniel Wayne
    2014 A phonological reconstruction of Proto-Central Naga. Ph.D dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
  3. Burling, Robbins
    2003 The Tibeto-Burman languages of north-east India. InGraham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.) The Sino-Tibetan languages, 169–191. London, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Coupe, Alexander Robertson
    2003A phonetic and phonological description of Ao: A Tibeto-Burman language of Nagaland, north-east India (Pacific Linguistics 543). Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2007A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110198522
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198522 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2020 Northern Sangtam phonetics, phonology and word list. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area43(1), 147–189. 10.1075/ltba.19014.cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.19014.cou [Google Scholar]
  7. 2023 Preliminary report on Wui: an undocumented language of Eastern Nagaland. Paper presented at56th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, 10–12 October 2023, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. van Driem, George
    2001Languages of the Himalayas: An ethnolinguistic handbook of the greater Himalayan region, containing an introduction to the symbiotic theory of language. 21v. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gait, Edward A.
    1891Census of India: Assam Report. Vol.I, PARTII, Chapter X. Assam Secretariat Printing Office: Shillong.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Grierson, George A.
    1909Linguistic survey of India. Vol.31, Part11. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing. Reprint: Delhi. Motilal Banarsidass 1967.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Jamir, Imlikumla
    2017 Influence of tone in the word structure of Mongsen Ao. MPhil dissertation, North Eastern Hill University, Shillong.
  12. Marrison, Geoffrey Edward
    1967 The classification of the Naga languages of north-east India. 21v. PhD dissertation, SOAS, University of London.
  13. Matisoff, James A.
    1974Alphabetical list of Tibeto-Burman languages with their genetic affiliations. Berkeley: STEDT, University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Matisoff, James A.
    1978Variational semantics in Tibeto-Burman: The ‘organic’ approach to linguistic comparison. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. Accessed viaSTEDT database 〈stedt.berkeley.edu/search/〉 on2024-10-26.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Miller, Roy Andrew
    1969 The Tibeto-Burman languages of South Asia. InMurray B. Emeneau & Charles A. Ferguson (eds.), Linguistics in South Asia. Current Trends in LinguisticsV.51, 431–449. The Hague, Paris: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Mills, James Phillip
    1926The Ao Nagas. London: Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Post, Mark W. & Robbins Burling
    2017 The Tibeto-Burman languages of northeastern India. InGraham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd ed., 213–242. London, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Shafer, Robert
    1966Introduction to Sino-Tibetan, V.11. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Temsunungsang, T.
    2003 The structure of Mongsen: Phonology and morphology. M.Phil dissertation, Hyderabad Central University.
  20. 2009 Aspects of the prosodic phonology of Ao: An inter-dialectal study. Ph.D. dissertation, English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad. hdl.handle.net/10603/108955
  21. 2014Syllable restrictions in Chungli (Ao). InGwendolyn Hyslop, Linda Konnerth, Stephen Morey & Priyankoo Sarmah (eds), North East Indian linguistics61, 39–62. hdl.handle.net/1885/12479
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Walling, Alemmenla
    2017 The Morpho-phonological interface in Khensa-Mongsen (Ao): A descriptive study. Ph.D dissertation, English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad.
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.25007.tem
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.25007.tem
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Ao; merger; Mongsen; palatalisation; Proto-Mongsen; vowel reduction
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error