Rung languages explained

Rung
Also Known As:Eastern Tibeto-Burman
Region:China, Burma, Nepal, India
Familycolor:Sino-Tibetan
Child1:Rgyalrongic (?)
Child2:Nungish
Child3:Kiranti
Child4:Magaric
Child5:West Himalayan
Glotto:none

The Rung languages are a proposed branch of Sino-Tibetan languages. The branch was proposed by Randy LaPolla on the basis of morphological evidence such as pronominal paradigms. However, Guillaume Jacques and Thomas Pellard (2021) argues that these languages do not constitute a monophyly based on recent phylogenetic studies[1] [2] and on a thorough investigation of shared lexical innovations.[3]

LaPolla (2003) lists the following languages as part of his provisional "Rung" group.[4]

Kham, Magar, and Chepangic have also been proposed to form part of a Greater Magaric group.

References

Notes and References

  1. Sagart. Laurent. Jacques. Guillaume. Lai. Yunfan. Ryder. Robin J.. Thouzeau. Valentin. Greenhill. Simon J.. List. Johann-Mattis. 2019-05-21. Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. en. 116. 21. 10317–10322. 10.1073/pnas.1817972116. 0027-8424. 6534992. 31061123. free.
  2. Zhang. Hanzhi. Ji. Ting. Pagel. Mark. Mace. Ruth. 2020. Dated phylogeny suggests early Neolithic origin of Sino-Tibetan languages. Scientific Reports. en. 10. 1. 20792. 10.1038/s41598-020-77404-4. 2045-2322. 7695722. 33247154. 2020NatSR..1020792Z.
  3. Jacques. Guillaume. Pellard. Thomas. 2021-02-03. Phylogenies based on lexical innovations refute the Rung hypothesis. Diachronica. en. 38. 1. 1–24. 10.1075/dia.19058.jac. 0176-4225.
  4. LaPolla, Randy. 2003. "Overview of Sino-Tibetan Morphosyntax". In Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages. London: Routledge.