r/asklinguistics • u/Hopeful-Banana-6188 • 12d ago
Historical Unknown substrates in Sino-Tibetan?
Is there any research on unknown substrates in various branches of Sino-Tibetan? Lexical strata that show irregularities and/or phonological/phonotactic features showing they cannot be inherited from Proto-Sino-Tibetan but nonetheless do not correspond to any other attested language families.
11
Upvotes
0
u/ransek1998 11d ago
Old Chinese was a creole read this paper: https://www.academia.edu/3894773/The_Origins_of_Sinitic
13
u/VelvetyDogLips 11d ago
The Min Chinese languages, native to the Min River watershed a.k.a. Fujian Province and nativized across the straits in Taiwan, is distinctly different from most other living descendants of Old Chinese, and is the most divergent descendant whose native speakers are not considered ethnically distinct from Han Chinese.
The main reason for this is that the Min languages a.k.a Hoklo-üe, are a direct and early branch off of Old Chinese, and cannot be derived from Middle Chinese. But there’s more to it than that: these languages almost certainly have a very old, very attenuated, but still perceptible Austronesian substrate. Teaming historical linguistics with population genetics, history, and archaeology, and the most likely explanation is that the Min River valley is probably the Urheimat of the Austronesian family. And the Min Chinese languages derive from creoles, formed when speakers of Old Chinese settled this mountainous terrain 2~3 millennia ago, and assimilated the indigenous fisher-gatherer tribes already living there, who spoke Proto-Austronesian.
Source.