No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
THERE would seem little to commend the establishment of an etymological equation between Tibetan so ‘tooth’ and Chinese ya
of the same meaning, even after substituting for the northern pronunciation ya of the latter word the Cantonese pronunciation nga, which is identical with Karlgren's reconstruction of the ‘ancient’ Chinese sound, and almost identical with his reconstruction of the ‘archaic’ sound value as nga.1
page 512 note 1Karlgren, B., Orammata Serica, Stockholm, 1940, p. 134, No. 37 a-b.Google Scholar
page 512 note 2Karlgren, loc. cit., p. 125, No. 2 a-g.
page 512 note 3Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, VIII, 1944–1945, 333–2.Google Scholar
page 512 note 4loc. cit., 339. See now also Bodman, N.C., A linguistic study of the Shih Ming, Cambridge, Mass., 1954, 61CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who avails himself of this suggestion.
page 512 note 5Prolegomena to the study of the Chinese dialects of Han time according to FANG YEN, by Serruys, Paul L.M., C.I.C.M., University of California, Berkeley, 1955.Google Scholar
page 513 note 1See Mitt. Sem. Or. Sprachen, xxx, Abt. I, 1927, p. 152.Google Scholar
page 513 note 2Dr. Serrnys also suggests a M-vocalization of.
page 513 note 3Shuowen jieetzyh, J. 6 shiah, Radical No. 229 :