Hi,
I have some questions about "Van der Tuuk's second law", also called the
R-L-D rule. Without access to many of the older documents I've not been
able to answer them on my own, and I'm hoping someone out there can help.
First of all, what has been termed the R-G-H rule (and which I assume is
Van der Tuuk's first law??) was a recognition of the frequent
correspondence of r in Malay, g in Tagalog and h in Ngaju-Dayak, for
example (data from Dyen 1953):
Malay Tagalog Ngaju Dayak
'abcess' barah bagáq baha
'vein, tendon' urat qugát uhat
'stingray' pari pá:gi pahi
This correspondence is reconstructed today as *R, e.g. for the above forms:
PAN *baReq, *uRaC and *paRiS.
My questions about the R-L-D rule are: (a) r, l and d in which
languages? These same three languages? (b) Would it be correct to say
that the core of Van der Tuuk's examples are today reconstructed with *j,
but that some of his correspondence sets are today reconstructed with other
phonemes, particularly *d and *Z? I'm a bit curious as to why Conant (1915
"Notes on the phonology of the Palau language") divided Van der Tuuk's
correspondence sets into G-type and non-G-types, and Lafeber (1922
Vergelijkende klankleer van het Niasisch) into type A and type B.
A bit of the data which Van der Tuuk was working with would be very much
appreciated!
Thanks much,
David Mead
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/an-lang/attachments/20040210/4a39b108/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
An-lang mailing list
An-lang at anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/an-lang