Descripción multimodal de los segmentos de Tomás Manrique

In this study, I found that the Sukhothai language develops length distinction for upper mid vowels /e - eː/, /ɤ - ɤː/, /o - oː/ that is absent in PSWT. One possible explanation for the emergence of length distinction is that length contrast for upper mid vowels is a result of language contact with OK. This proposal is not entirely new, as Dhananjayananda (1993) in her study on the emergence of length distinction of mid vowels in diachronic Thai also proposed a similar idea. Note that she suggested the length distinction to emerge much later than the Sukhothai period.

Even though it is clear that the language contact plays an important role in the emergence of the length distinction, the contact situation is still puzzling. There are two competing proposals on contact situation between the Sukhothai language and OK that induced change. I would use the terminology proposed by Thomason and Kaufman (1988) to capture the two basic types of language contact or interference: (i) borrowing and (ii) interference through shift. The first approach, borrowing, was proposed by Li (1977) and Dhananjayananda (1993). They claimed that the vowels /eː/, /ɤː/, /oː/ might

Papers from Chula-ISSSEAL – Maspong

88

have been introduced into the vowel system through borrowing. It is assumed that these vowels are borrowed through loanwords into the Sukhothai language by Sukhothai speakers.

On the other hand, Diller (1988) suggested the other situation in which numbers of OK speakers coming to speak the Sukhothai language (or Tai varieties) in the fourteenth century failed to learn the target language perfectly and imported features from their source language to the target language. This situation is the case of interference through shift. Note that Diller did not propose this to capture the emergence of the length contrast, but the merger of velar consonants.

The length contrast in the Sukhothai language, as a case of contact-induced change, supports the first approach, in which the contact situation between Sukhothai and OK is borrowing. Since vowel length distinction is a structural element, if it emerged from interference through shift, we would expect the source language to have length distinction. However, upper mid vowels are not contrastive for length in OK in contrast to the Sukhothai language. It is therefore unlikely for length distinction to be directly transferred to the language through shift. The emergence of the length distinction seems to be the result of lexical borrowing instead. To be more specific, borrowing of OK loanwords into the Sukhothai language filled in the gap in the system, since long upper mid vowels are absent in PSWT. This led to the emergence of the vowel length contrast of upper mid vowels.

In conclusion, the emergence of the length distinction from PSWT in the Sukhothai language gives more insights on the contact situation of OK and the Sukhothai language or Tai varieties in general that it is borrowing instead of interference through shift that led to vowel length contrast. However, more studies are needed to reach a stronger conclusion.

7 Conclusion

In an attempt to study the vowel length distinction in the Thai language of the Sukhothai period, this paper analyzed the graphemic system and spelling variations found in the Sukhothai inscriptions. In addition, Sukhothai graphemes were also compared with vowel phonemes in PSWT, the direct ancestor, and OK, the donor language of loanwords. Length distinctions were analyzed from the correspondence of graphemes and proto-phonemes with additional evidence from the distribution of the vowel graphemes.

The results show that length contrast is retained in the Sukhothai vowel system. However, not all vowels in the system are contrastive for length. High, upper mid vowels, and /a - aː/ have length distinction, while lower mid vowels and diphthongs do not have length distinction. All PSWT vowels are retained in the Sukhothai language. The significant innovation is the length distinction in upper mid vowels, which is the result of borrowing. The Sukhothai language was also proposed to be a possible direct ancestor of Thai.

References

Brown, J. Marvin. 1965. From ancient Thai to modern dialects. Bangkok: Social Science Association Press.

—. 1966. The language of Sukhothai: Where did it come from? And where did it go? Social Science Review 3:40-42.

—. 1979. Vowel length in Thai. Studies in Tai and Mon-Khmer Phonetics and Phonology in Honor of Eugenie J. A. Henderson,10-25.

Coedès, George. 1924. Recueil des inscriptions du Siam. Bangkok: Bangkok Times Press.

Danvivathana, Nantana. 1981. The Thai writing system. Ph.D. dissertation: University of Edinburgh. Dhananjayananda, Puttachart. 1993. The emergence of length distinction of mid and low vowels in

Thai. Ph.D. dissertation: Chulalongkorn University.

Diller, Anthony V. N. 1988. Consonant mergers and Inscription One. The Journal of the Siam Society 76:46-63.

Ittaratana, Chuanpis. 1975. Kān Chai Kham Lae Samnuen Nai Samai Sukhothai [A study of Thai words and idiomatic expressions in the Sukhothai period]. M.A. thesis: Chulalongkorn University. (in Thai)

Jacob, Judith M. 1960. The Structure of the Word in Old Khmer. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 23:351-68.

Jansomwong, Kruawan. 1987. Nuey Sieng Phāsā Sukhothai Jāk Jāreuk [The phonemes of the language used in the Sukhothai Inscriptions]. M.A. thesis: Silpakorn University. (in Thai) Jenner, Philip N. 2009a. A dictionary of Angkorian Khmer. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research

School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.

—. 2009b. A dictionary of pre-Angkorian Khmer. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.

Li, Fang Kuei. 1977. A handbook of comparative Tai. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Maspong, Sireemas. 2016a. Vowel Length Contrast in The Thai Language of Sukhothai Period:

Chulalongkorn University.

—. 2016b. Kwām Tāng Thī Mī Naj Samkhan Dān Kwām San Yāw Khōng Nuaj Sieng Sara (e) (ɛ) (o) Lae (ɔ) Naj Phāsā Thai Samaj Sukhothai [Vowel length contrast of (e) (ɛ) (o) and (ɔ) in the Thai language of Sukhothai period]. Journal of Letters 45(2):59-92. (in Thai)

Maspong, Sireemas & Pittayawat Pittayaporn. to appear. Length contrast of high vowels in the Thai language of the Sukhothai period: What do the inscriptions say? Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale.

Na Nagara, Presert & Alexader B. Griswold. 1992. Epigraphic and Historical Studies. Bangkok: Historical Society Under the Royal Patronage of H.R.H. Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn. Nacaskul, Karnchana. 1962. A study of cognate words in Thai and Cambodian. M.A. thesis:

University of London.

Pittayaporn, Pittayawat. 2009. Proto-Southwestern-Tai revised: a new reconstruction. Journal of Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 5:119-143.

Prajum Jāreuk Bhāk VII: Jāreuk Sukhothai [Collection of inscriptions, part VIII: Sukhothai inscriptions]. 2005. Bangkok: Fine Arts Department. (in Thai)

Rod-in, Chanida. 1991. A phonological reconstruction of the Sukhothai initial consonants in 3 inscriptions of the 14th century A.D., with a comparison to Inscription 1. M.A. thesis: Mahidol University.

Sarawit, Mary E. 1973. The Proto-Tai vowel system. Ph.D. dissertation: University of Michigan. Shorto, Harry L. 1965. The interpretation of archaic writing system. Lingua 14:88-97.

Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Varasarin, U. 1984. Les éléments khmers dans la formation de la langue siamoise. Paris: Société d’Etudes Linguistiques et Anthropologiques de France.

Wimonkasem, Kannika. 2009. Tamrā Rian Aksorn Thai Borān: Aksorn Khōm Thai, Aksorn Dharmma Lanna, Aksorn Dharmma Isan [Textbook of anciant Thai scripts: Thai Khmer scripts, Lanna Dharmma scripts, Isan Dharmma script]. Bangkok: Department of Eastern Language, Faculty of Archeology, Silpakorn University. (in Thai).

90

SERIAL VERB CONSTRUCTIONS IN INDONESIAN: