The Challenge of Semantic Reconstruction 3: Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *guntiŋ ‘scissors’?

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Robert Blust
{"title":"The Challenge of Semantic Reconstruction 3: Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *guntiŋ ‘scissors’?","authors":"Robert Blust","doi":"10.1353/ol.2021.0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While a fair amount has been written on semantic change, semantic reconstruction is in some ways the last frontier in historical linguistics. Following principles laid down in past publications starting in 1987, I argue here that Dempwolff's classic reconstruction of “Original Austronesian” *guntiŋ ‘scissors’ is questionable, based both on records of the history of technology, and on evidence that *guntiŋ had another, more plausible meaning by at least PMP times (correlated with the Philippine Neolithic starting circa 2,200 BC). In particular, reflexes of this form (which appears as *sala-guntiŋ in some Philippine languages) refer to an X-shaped architectural structure used to support roof beams in traditional house construction. In addition, in languagesranging from the northeast Philippines to the Malay peninsula, it evidently designated a similar structure used to hold a spear in horizontal position prior to being triggered by an animal taking the bait in a *balatik spring-set spear trap used to take wild pigs. Both of these are features of Neolithic technology that was widely-shared by PMP times, and there is little need to assume that they were borrowed. Scissors, on the other hand, which share the same X-shape when opened, were extremely useful in hair-cutting when once obtained, and quickly acquired the name guntiŋ because of their shape. If they arrived from the Middle East, as seems likely, they would probably have first been acquired by Malays, who then passed them on (along with many other loanwords) to languages all over the Indo-Malaysian archipelago and the Philippines to their north.","PeriodicalId":51848,"journal":{"name":"OCEANIC LINGUISTICS","volume":"0 1","pages":"-"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OCEANIC LINGUISTICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2021.0024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

While a fair amount has been written on semantic change, semantic reconstruction is in some ways the last frontier in historical linguistics. Following principles laid down in past publications starting in 1987, I argue here that Dempwolff's classic reconstruction of “Original Austronesian” *guntiŋ ‘scissors’ is questionable, based both on records of the history of technology, and on evidence that *guntiŋ had another, more plausible meaning by at least PMP times (correlated with the Philippine Neolithic starting circa 2,200 BC). In particular, reflexes of this form (which appears as *sala-guntiŋ in some Philippine languages) refer to an X-shaped architectural structure used to support roof beams in traditional house construction. In addition, in languagesranging from the northeast Philippines to the Malay peninsula, it evidently designated a similar structure used to hold a spear in horizontal position prior to being triggered by an animal taking the bait in a *balatik spring-set spear trap used to take wild pigs. Both of these are features of Neolithic technology that was widely-shared by PMP times, and there is little need to assume that they were borrowed. Scissors, on the other hand, which share the same X-shape when opened, were extremely useful in hair-cutting when once obtained, and quickly acquired the name guntiŋ because of their shape. If they arrived from the Middle East, as seems likely, they would probably have first been acquired by Malays, who then passed them on (along with many other loanwords) to languages all over the Indo-Malaysian archipelago and the Philippines to their north.
语义重构的挑战3:原始马来-波利尼西亚语*gunti * '剪刀' ?
虽然关于语义变化的著述相当多,但语义重构在某种程度上是历史语言学的最后一个前沿领域。根据从1987年开始的过去出版物中提出的原则,我在这里认为,Dempwolff对“原始南岛人”* guntii“剪刀”的经典重建是有问题的,这既基于技术历史的记录,也基于至少在PMP时代(与大约公元前2200年开始的菲律宾新石器时代相关)* guntii有另一种更合理的含义的证据。特别地,这种形式的反射(在一些菲律宾语言中出现为*sala- guntik)指的是传统房屋建筑中用于支撑屋顶梁的x形建筑结构。此外,在从菲律宾东北部到马来半岛的语言中,它显然指的是一种类似的结构,用于在动物上钩之前将矛保持在水平位置,这种陷阱是用来捕捉野猪的巴拉提克弹簧式矛陷阱。这两种技术都是新石器时代的特征,在PMP时代被广泛使用,没有必要假设它们是借来的。另一方面,剪刀在打开时呈相同的x形,在剪头发时非常有用,并很快因其形状而得名。如果这些词是从中东传入的(这似乎很有可能),那么它们很可能首先被马来人获得,然后被马来人传递给印度-马来西亚群岛和北部菲律宾的所有语言(以及许多其他外来词)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
OCEANIC LINGUISTICS
OCEANIC LINGUISTICS LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
44.40%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Oceanic Linguistics is the only journal devoted exclusively to the study of the indigenous languages of the Oceanic area and parts of Southeast Asia. The thousand-odd languages within the scope of the journal are the aboriginal languages of Australia, the Papuan languages of New Guinea, and the languages of the Austronesian (or Malayo-Polynesian) family. Articles in Oceanic Linguistics cover issues of linguistic theory that pertain to languages of the area, report research on historical relations, or furnish new information about inadequately described languages.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信