汉-蕃语族:德里姆的假说及其证据  

Sino-Bodic:George van Driem's Hypothesis and Its Evidence

作　　者：李艳[1] 李葆嘉[2] 

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学,南京210097 [2]南京交通职业技术学院,南京211188

出　　处：《外语学刊》2009年第3期139-142,共4页Foreign Language Research

基　　金：江苏省教育厅高校哲学社会科学基金项目"当代东亚历史比较语言学理论与方法研究"(08SJD7400010);南京师范大学"211工程"三期重点学科建设项目"语言科技创新及工作平台建设"的阶段性成果

摘　　要：迄今为止,汉藏语系仍是有待证明的假说。汉语在语言发生学谱系中的位置,同样争论不休。本文基于对汉藏语系和汉语系属假说的分歧的梳理,从古汉语和蕃语(Bodish,汉语音bo,吐蕃的"蕃")同源的形态证据、词汇证据、考古文化证据三方面,阐述德里姆(G.van Driem)的汉-蕃语族(Sino-Bodic)假说及其反响。可以肯定,某种或某支语言与古代汉语的同源词和形态对应最多,这种语言与汉语的亲缘度也就最高。至于此类同源词和形态对应的某些现象在其他语言也有存在,并不妨碍结论的成立。Till now Sino-Tibetan is a default theory. And where Chinese is put is still unresolved. This article first discussed Sino-Tibetan and the other hypothesis on Chinese, then from three sides-morphological, lexical and archaeological evidence-introduced George van Driem＇ s Sino-Bodic hypothesis and its reflection. We are sure that, if any language has more cognates and more corresponding morphology with Chinese, this language is more related with Chinese. Although less cognates and morphology exist in the other languages, the result is still the same.

关 键 词：德里姆 藏缅语系 汉-蕃语族 证据 反响 

分 类 号：H2-09[语言文字—少数民族语言]