Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Sino-Tibetan (also referred to as Trans-Himalayan) [1] [2] is a family of more than 400 languages, second only to Indo-European in number of native speakers. [3] Around 1.4 billion people speak a Sino-Tibetan language. [4]
Afrikaans; Alemannisch; Anarâškielâ; Ænglisc; العربية; Aragonés; Asturianu; Azərbaycanca; বাংলা; 閩南語 / Bân-lâm-gú; Башҡортса
NE Indian languages and NE Indian languages and the origin of Sino the origin of Sino-Tibetan (2010). p. 20. Map in background: File:East_Asia_topographic_map.png by Ksiom . Author
Though the division of Sino-Tibetan into Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman branches (e.g. Benedict, Matisoff) is widely used, some historical linguists criticize this classification, as the non-Sinitic Sino-Tibetan languages lack any shared innovations in phonology or morphology [2] to show that they comprise a clade of the phylogenetic tree. [3] [4] [5]
The Language families of Asia. Asia is home to hundreds of languages comprising several families and some unrelated isolates. The most spoken language families on the continent include Austroasiatic, Austronesian, Japonic, Dravidian, Indo-European, Afroasiatic, Turkic, Sino-Tibetan, Kra–Dai and Koreanic.
The Tibetic languages form a well-defined group of languages descending from Old Tibetan (7th to 9th centuries, [2] or to the 11th/12th centuries). According to Nicolas Tournadre, there are 50 Tibetic languages, which branch into more than 200 dialects, which could be grouped into eight dialect continua. [2]
The Austroasiatic languages include Vietnamese and Khmer, as well as many other languages spoken in scattered pockets as far afield as Malaya and eastern India.Most linguists believe that Austroasiatic languages once ranged continuously across southeast Asia and that their scattered distribution today is the result of the subsequent migration of speakers of other language groups from southern ...
Central Tibeto-Burman or Central Trans-Himalayan is a proposed branch of the Sino-Tibetan language family proposed by Scott DeLancey (2015) [1] on the basis of shared morphological evidence. DeLancey (2018) [2] considers Central Tibeto-Burman to be a linkage rather than a branch with a clearly nested internal structure.