Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The Ancestry of Tibetan

  • George van Driem

    Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

    Abstract

    The Tibeto-Burman linguistic phylum was identified in 1823. However, the term "Tibeto-Burman" was later used with two different meanings, one by scholars following Klaproth's polyphyletic framework and another by scholars operating within the Indo-Chinese paradigm. Yet the enduring failure of Sino-Tibetanists to produce any evidence for the Indo-Chinese phylogenetic model compels us to conclude that there is no such language family as Sino-Tibetan. Instead, Tibetan forms part of the Trans-Himalayan linguistic phylum, or Tibeto-Burman in Klaproth's sense. Robert Shafer coined the terms "Bodic" and "Bodish" for subgroups including Tibetan and languages with varying degrees of linguistic propinquity to Tibetan, and Nicolas Tournadre has also recently coined the term "Tibetic." What are Tibetic, Bodish, and Bodic? Which languages are the closest relatives of Tibetan? What do we know about the structure of the Trans-Himalayan linguistic phylum as a whole? Based on the phylogeny of the language family, which inferences can be made about the ethnolinguistic prehistory of the Tibetan Plateau and surrounding regions?
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages363-397
    Publication statusPublished - 2013
    EventThird International Conference on Tibetan Language - New York, United States of America
    Duration: 9 Dec 201114 Dec 2011

    Conference

    ConferenceThird International Conference on Tibetan Language
    CityNew York, United States of America
    Period9/12/1114/12/11

    Keywords

    • Language in Time and Space (incl Historical Linguistics, Dialectology)

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The Ancestry of Tibetan'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this