Palaungic languages


The nearly thirty Palaungic or Palaung–Wa languages form a branch of the Austroasiatic languages.

Phonological developments

Most of the Palaungic languages lost the contrastive voicing of the ancestral Austroasiatic consonants, with the distinction often shifting to the following vowel. In the Wa branch, this is generally realized as breathy voice vowel phonation; in Palaung–Riang, as a two-way register tone system. The Angkuic languages have contour tone — the U language, for example, has four tones, high, low, rising, falling, — but these developed from vowel length and the nature of final consonants, not from the voicing of initial consonants.

Homeland

suggests that the Palaungic Urheimat was in what is now the border region of Laos and Sipsongpanna in Yunnan, China. The Khmuic homeland was adjacent to the Palaungic homeland, resulting in many lexical borrowings among the two branches due to intense contact. Sidwell suggests that the word for 'water', which Gérard Diffloth had used as one of the defining lexical innovations for his Northern Mon-Khmer branch, was likely borrowed from Palaungic into Khmuic.

Classification

Diffloth & Zide (1992)

The Palaungic family includes at least three branches, with the position of some languages as yet unclear. Lamet, for example, is sometimes classified as a separate branch. The following classification follows that of Diffloth & Zide, as quoted in Sidwell.
Some researchers include the Mangic languages as well, instead of grouping them with the Pakanic languages.

Sidwell (2010)

The following classification follows the branching given by Sidwell.
Sidwell proposes an additional branch, consisting of:
Sidwell provides a revised classification of Palaungic. Bit–Khang is clearly Palaungic, but contains many Khmuic loanwords. Sidwell believes it likely groups within East Palaungic. On the other hand, Sidwell considers Danaw to be the most divergent Palaungic language.
Sidwell notes that Palaungic and Khmuic share many lexical items, but considers this phenomenon to be a result of lexical diffusion due to intense language contact. Sidwell lists the following Proto-Palaungic forms as having diffused from Palaungic into Khmuic.
;Palaungic > Khmuic lexical forms
Sidwell lists the following Proto-Palaungic forms as having diffused from Khmuic into Palaungic.
;Khmuic > Palaungic lexical forms
Sidwell lists the following Proto-Palaungic forms that are also shared with Khmuic but not with other Austroasiatic branches, and is unsure of whether they diffused from Palaungic to Khmuic or vice versa.