Reconstruction:Proto-Sino-Tibetan/mə-l(j)ək
Proto-Sino-Tibetan
Reconstruction
- Proto-Sino-Tibetan: *liek (Coblin, 1986); *ljək (Schuessler, 2007)
- Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *m-lyak ⪤ *s-lyak ⪤ *g-lyak (Matisoff, STEDT); *(m-)lyak ~ (s-)lyak (Benedict, 1972; Weidert, 1987; Coblin, 1986); *m-lyak ⪤ *s-lyak (LaPolla, 1987; Michailovsky, 1991)
Other cognate roots in STEDT:
- *m/s-laj ~ s-lej (“tongue”)
- *s-l(j)a (“tongue”)
- *s-ljam (“tongue, flame”)
- *s-ljaːw (“to lick, tongue”)
The words for "to lick" and "tongue" in many languages have similar shapes, compare:
- Indo-European
- Proto-Indo-European: *dn̥ǵʰwéh₂s (“tongue”) (English tongue, Latin lingua; the change *dn̥- to l- occured in three branches: Lithuanian, Armenian, Latin)
- Proto-Indo-European: *leyǵʰ- (“to lick”) (English lick, Latin lingō)
- Hmong-Mien
- Proto-Hmong-Mien: *mblet (“tongue”) (Hmong RPA nplaig)
- Tai-Kadai
- Austroasiatic:
- Austronesian:
- Proto-Malayo-Polynesian: *dilaq (“tongue”) (Malay lidah)
- Malay: jilat/dilat ("to lick")
- Afroasiatic: *lis- ("tongue"), *lVḳ- ("to lick")
- Kartvelian:
- Proto-Kartvelian *loḳ- (“to lick”) (Georgian: ლოკვა (loḳva, “to lick”))
Verb
*mə-l(j)ək
- to lick
Reconstruction notes
- It is unexplained in the literature why the medial *-j- is missing in Bodish (Tibetan **ljag instead of ldag would be expected). Given how Tibetan ལྗགས (ljags, “tongue (honorific)”) is a derivative honorific form, however, it could be surmised that the *-j- was reinterpreted as inserted secondarily, leading to the *-j- being lost via back-formation.
Descendants
- Chinese: (see there for further descendants)
- Proto-Bodish: *'lak
- Lolo-Burmese
- Naic
- Tangkhulic: *lek
- Tangkhul Naga: khamalek
- Proto-Karen: *hlajᴮ (Luangthongkum, 2013)
- S'gaw Karen: လ့ၣ် (laỳ, “to lick; to lap”)
- Proto-Kuki-Chin: *liak
- Central Kuki-Chin:
- Mizo: lı̂ak
- Khomic
- Khumi Chin: bäleite (“to lick”)
- Central Kuki-Chin:
See also
- *dzaʔ (“to eat”)