- This paper was prepared in connection with the project work of the Linguistic Survey of Asia and was made possible by funds granted by the Ford Foundation. That Foundation is not, however, the author, owner, publisher, or proprietor of this paper and is not to be understood as approving by virtue of its grant any of the statements made or expressed therein.
- Cyrillic forms are cited herein in a transcription which differs somewhat from the system of The American Slavic and East European Review but which corresponds to widespread practice and is, therefore, unlikely to cause confusion. The Cyrillic alphabet in this transcription is as follows, the transcriptions of the special letters employed for Mongolian being given in parenthesis: a, b, v, g, d, je, jo, ž, z, i, j, k, l, m, n, (o), ö, p, r, s, t, u, (ü), f, x, c, č, š, šč, z, y, b, e, ju, ja. In the Cyrillic, the ö is written with an o with a horizontal line in it, like theta, and the ü with a y which is differentiated from the sign for u by being more angular and having a straight, rather than looped, tail. We were tempted to effect a typographical economy by using y for the weak jer, and w for the sign of nonpalatalization, but in the end diffidence prevailed against our making this radical, but sensible, break with tradition. Unless otherwise indicated, all Mongolian names etc. are given in transliteration of the modern orthography. Following custom, transliterated forms are given herein in italics, phonemic transcriptions between diagonal bars, and phonetic approximations between square brackets.
- Khalka-Mongolisclie Grammatik. Wiesbaden, 1951. (Akademic der Wissenschaften und der Literatur: Veröffentlichungen der orientalischen Kommission, Band I.) p. 3.
- La description phonologique, avec application au parler franco-procençal d'Hauleville (Savoie), 1956.
- The view, apparently, of E. P. Hamp, cf. S. Hattori in article cited in f. n. 7
- Moscow, 1951.
- ‘Phonemic Structure of Mongol (Chakhar Dialect)’. Gengo Kenkyû, Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan, Nos. 19–20, 1951, pp. 68–102. (In Japanese).
- Cf. Karl H. Menges: The Oriental Elements in the Vocabulary of the Oldest Russian Epos, the Igor Tale, Supp. to Word, Vol. 7 (l951), pp. 32–35, for a discussion of the etymology of this word
- Cf. T. Chiba: Japanese Vowels, 1931, pp. 27–28, and T. Chiba and M. Kujiyama: The Vowel, Its nature and Structure, 1941, p. 150.
- J. Vowels. p. 30
- Op. cit. p. 12.
- A. R. Rinˇine: Kralkij Mongol'cko-russkij slovar', Moscow, 1947. p. 118
- To a certain extent the modern Cyrillic orthography does this. Though greatly complicating the spelling, the writing in of the non-distinctive reduced vowels does not obscure the pronunciation, if the practice of writing the phonologically distinctive vowels as long or double is consistently followed Unfortunately, the modern orthography is not altogether consistent: some of the exceptional spellings of native words can be explained, e.g. morior /morior/ and bariax /bariax/ which are so written in conformity with an orthographic rule prohibiting the writing of three vowel signs together and ill which it is clear from the position that a true distinctive vowel is intended; the pronunciation of such loan words as kapital and kilogram is not clear from the spelling.
- Op. cit. p. 101.
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research