18 Facts About Sino-Tibetan languages


Genetic relationship between Chinese, Tibetan, Burmese and other Sino-Tibetan languages was first proposed in the early 19th century and is broadly accepted.

FactSnippet No. 616,907

Sino-Tibetan languages divided them into three groups: Tibeto-Burman, Chinese and Tai, and was uncertain about the affinity of Karen and Hmong–Mien.

FactSnippet No. 616,908

The English translation "Sino-Tibetan languages" first appeared in a short note by Przyluski and Luce in 1931.

FactSnippet No. 616,909

Sino-Tibetan languages reconstructed a two-way distinction on initial consonants based on voicing, with aspiration conditioned by pre-initial consonants that had been retained in Tibetic but lost in many other languages.

FactSnippet No. 616,910

Sino-Tibetan languages found that Tibetic and Burmese correspond to two Old Chinese vowels, *a and *?.

FactSnippet No. 616,911

Descriptions of non-literary Sino-Tibetan languages used by Shafer and Benedict were often produced by missionaries and colonial administrators of varying linguistic skill.

FactSnippet No. 616,912

The remaining Sino-Tibetan languages are spoken in mountainous areas, along the southern slopes of the Himalayas, the Southeast Asian Massif and the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau.

FactSnippet No. 616,913

The closely related Loloish Sino-Tibetan languages are spoken by 9 million people in the mountains of western Sichuan, Yunnan and nearby areas in northern Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Vietnam.

FactSnippet No. 616,914

Tibetic Sino-Tibetan languages are spoken by some 6 million people on the Tibetan Plateau and neighbouring areas in the Himalayas and western Sichuan.

FactSnippet No. 616,915

Southernmost are the Karen Sino-Tibetan languages, spoken by 4 million people in the hill country along the Myanmar–Thailand border, with the greatest diversity in the Karen Hills, which are believed to be the homeland of the group.

FactSnippet No. 616,916

Sino-Tibetan languages otherwise retained the outlines of Conrady's Indo-Chinese classification, though putting Karen in an intermediate position:.

FactSnippet No. 616,917

Shafer criticized the division of the family into Tibeto-Burman and Sino-Daic branches, which he attributed to the different groups of Sino-Tibetan languages studied by Konow and other scholars in British India on the one hand and by Henri Maspero and other French linguists on the other.

FactSnippet No. 616,918

Sino-Tibetan languages proposed a detailed classification, with six top-level divisions:.

FactSnippet No. 616,919

Internal structure of Sino-Tibetan languages has been tentatively revised as the following Stammbaum by Matisoff in the final print release of the Sino-Tibetan languages Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus (STEDT).

FactSnippet No. 616,920

Sino-Tibetan languages calls the entire family "Tibeto-Burman", a name he says has historical primacy, but other linguists who reject a privileged position for Chinese nevertheless continue to call the resulting family "Sino-Tibetan".

FactSnippet No. 616,921

Sino-Tibetan languages has proposed several hypotheses, including the reclassification of Chinese to a Sino-Bodic subgroup:.

FactSnippet No. 616,922

Hodgson had in 1849 noted a dichotomy between "pronominalized" Sino-Tibetan languages, stretching across the Himalayas from Himachal Pradesh to eastern Nepal, and "non-pronominalized" (isolating) Sino-Tibetan languages.

FactSnippet No. 616,923

Sino-Tibetan languages suggests that the Sino-Tibetan languages are related to the Na-Dene languages.

FactSnippet No. 616,924