Reconstruction:Proto-Sino-Tibetan/sV-ɢip
Proto-Sino-Tibetan
Reconstruction
- Proto-Sino-Tibetan: *grip (Coblin, 1986); *[t/s]V.ɢip ~ *[t/s]V.ɢəp (Sagart, 2024)
- Proto-Tibeto-Burman: *gip (Matisoff, STEDT; Benedict, 1972; Chou, 1972); *sɢip (Sagart, 2024)
The sole evidence of a uvular comes from rGyalrongic.
Sagart points out rGyalrongic has a different pre-initial than the one he reconstructs to Old Chinese: Chinese with *t- and rGyalrongic with *s-. His reconstructed *t- seemingly presumes that 十 is in the same phonetic series as 針 (OC *t.qəm), but this assumption is not generally accepted.
Sagart also proposes that the *i ~ *ə variation originally arose from a dichotomy where *i forms were used in stressed position while *ə arose from reduction to schwa in unstressed position (e.g. when serving as a non-final member of a compound).
The *-m in Tani is due to assimilation to the nasal initials of following numerals (Tani forms multiples of ten by prefixing *čam to a base number) like *kV-ni-s (“two”) and *l-ŋaʔ (“five”).
Conversely, the loss of *-p in rGyalrongic is due to rebracketing of the *p onto a following numeral (this is evident in Japhug, where an "extra" labial consonant appears between sqa and a following numeral).
The initial velar in Burmese may be due to the uvular being fronted when in contact with the *s- pre-initial.
The Tujia words are compared to the rGyalrongic words by Jacques (2021).
Numeral
| 100 | ||||
| [a], [b], [c], [d] ← 1 | ← 9 | 10 | 20 → | 100 → |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1[a], [b], [c], [d] | ||||
| Cardinal: *sV-ɢip, *ts(j)i(j) ~ tsjaj | ||||
*sV-ɢip
Descendants
- Chinese: 十 (/*t.ɡəp/ (B-S), /*ɡjub/ (ZS)) (see there for further descendants)
- rGyalrongic
- Lolo-Burmese
- Burmish
- Burmese: ကျိပ် (kyip, “numerical classifier denoting "tens"”)
- Burmish
- Proto-Tani: *čam (used only in compounds to form multiples of 10)
- Tujia
- Northern Tujia: [Term?] (/xɯ̌35/)
- Southern Tujia: [Term?] (/xɯ33/)
- Karbi: kep
See also
- *ts(j)i(j) ~ tsjaj (“ten”)