Introduction to Taic Consonant Phonology

3.4 Consonant System

Comparison We have seen that the tonal differences between Dai Zhuang and the other two Wenshan Central Taic languages are significant, indicating these two languages have developed relatively independently. We can, therefore, safely rule out the possibility of Dai Zhuang and Nong Zhuang speakers being able to use a common set of language materials, regardless of whether they be based on Nong or Dai and regardless of how carefully the spelling conventions are designed. Based on our analysis of the tone systems, Nong and Min Zhuang exhibit tone systems similar enough in their splitting patterns and pitch values to leave open the possibility of a quite recent separation. In terms of our language development objectives, this means that based on the tone systems alone, we cannot rule out the possibility that the inadequate intelligibility of Nong Zhuang recordings on the part of Min Zhuang speakers could be largely due to superficial phonetic differences, or certain key differences in grammatical structures or frequently used lexemes. Thus, given the similar tonal systems between these two varieties, it remains a possibility that with extended exposure to Nong Zhuang, Min Zhuang speakers could possibly use the same written and audio materials as the Nong Zhuang. Further analysis of the consonant and vowel systems of these two languages is necessary to answer this question more satisfactorily. We will not analyze Dai Zhuang consonant or vowel phonology in the present paper.

3.4.1 Introduction to Taic Consonant Phonology

As mentioned previously, Fang-Kuei Li’s 1977 reconstruction of Proto-Tai as published in his Handbook of Comparative Tai remains the basis for our understanding of the history of this group of languages, though we also take into account the suggested amendments of Luo 1997 and others. Li proposed a large number of consonants and consonant clusters in syllable initial position 70 distinct consonants and clusters, and only three nasal and three oral consonants in syllable final position to explain the data from the various Taic languages available to him. Li’s analysis did not require use of semi-vowels. Some of these Proto-Tai consonants are quite different from the modern reflexes found in most languages; others are virtually unchanged in the majority of Taic languages. The consonant clusters have undergone some degree of simplification in most Taic languages. For example, as mentioned previously, the simplification of the dental clusters tr to t ʰ and thr to tʰ leading to the complete merger of these PT clusters, with the retention of labial clusters pr-, ʔblr- and vlr in some form or another is a defining charactistic of the Central Taic group, according to Li. Luo 1997:54, §2.6.1.1 proposes assigning some items for which Li reconstructed tr- and thr- to the labial consonant cluster pr- instead, whose reflexes, such as those for prak ‘to expose to the sun,’ also show a t ʰ in many Central Taic languages. In addition to his reconstructions for Proto-Tai PT, Li also proposed reconstructions for Proto-Central Tai PCT, based largely on the Longzhou Lungchow, Debao T’ienpao, Nùng and Tày languages. Li divided the consonants into ten groups, each treated in its own chapter in his Handbook of Comparative Tai 1977: labials, labial clusters, dentals, dental clusters, liquids, sibilants, velars, velar clusters, labio-velars, and larygeals. We will use Li’s terminology for these consonant groups and treat them in his order. Although our data is transcribed using the current form of the International Phonetic Alphabet, we will present the Li’s Proto-Tai reconstructions using the Americanist transcription system he used. Italicized reflexes in the data tables are not believed to be cognate with the other reflexes.

3.4.2 Additional Sources of Central Taic Phonological Data