摘要
<中国语文>2000年第6期刊登了丁邦新先生的<汉藏系语言研究法的检讨>一文,能进一步促进语言学界的批评风气,这是值得欢迎的.被丁先生批判的三种说法中,'深层对应说'就是我提出的.提出一种说法却得不到读者的同意,这个责任往往就在原提出者的身上,因为他没有把关键所在说清楚.丁先生给了我一个把问题说清楚的机会,这是要感谢他的.当时我立即写了一篇题为<说'深层对应'>的文章.但是这篇文章因故未能发表,以致2002年聂鸿音先生在<民族语文>第1期上仍然引用了丁氏此文的主要理由,并补充了其他理由,发表了<'深层对应'献疑>一文,以批判'深层对应说'.现在我把<说'深层对应'>那篇旧稿加以修改补充,用来回答丁、聂两位先生的质疑.
Deep-layer correspondence' is not a theory to research the source of Kam-Tai languages. It is a method for illustrating the genetic relationship between the archaic Chinese and another language which has the same cultural origin as the Han by using several groups of homonymous cognates as the evidence. So it must have the testimony of archaic correspondence phonetic law,but only a method of primary survey in the scope mentioned above. In the study of Sino-Tibetan languages we see long dim vistas stretching in many directions through the forest, but of none can we descry the end.
出处
《民族语文》
CSSCI
北大核心
2002年第6期20-28,共9页
Minority Languages of China
