《重建华夷语系的理论和证据》序——兼谈詹姆士·A.马蒂索夫的《回复》

A Preface to the Reconstruction of Hua(华)-Yi(夷)Languages:Theory and Evidence:Also Discussing James A.Matisoff’s Reply

＂橘生淮南则为橘,生于淮北则为枳。＂历史比较法用于印欧语系的研究成功,用于汉藏语系的研究则不成功,因为汉语基本没有形态特点,而＂农耕民型语言＂存在＂同化的组合过程＂。在不了解民族的历史谱系、文化谱系,对新石器时代汉语亲属语言的同化组合过程尚未研究清楚的情况下,要运用基于形态特点的历史比较法,去＂建立庞大的词汇谱系,为整个语义群建立某种规范的构拟形式＂,对一些＂构拟＂进行分类,这种做法是在沙滩上盖没有地基的大洋楼。是时候了,该反思一个多世纪以来汉语与亲属语言关系的研究其方法论是否正确了。语言属于开放系统,汉语与亲属语言关系的研究,必须抛弃线性模式、垂直整合的方法。我主张用口传历史、亲属语言、考古文化三证合一的方法,尤其是运用破译化石词的方式,证明四大语族即羌戎语族、百越语族、苗蛮语族和华夏语族的关系,是它们共同构成了华夷语系。

The historical comparative method has been successfully applied in the study of Indo-European language family,but not in that of Sino-Tibetan language family.The Chinese language has no strict morphological characteristics and the languages of"agricultural people"went through a combination process of assimilation.With no knowledge of the nation’s historical and cultural pedigrees and the combination process of assimilation of the relative languages in the Neolithic era,to construct a large vocabulary pedigree,establish a certain formal reconstructive form and make classifications of these reconstructions by applying the historical comparative method is like to build a house without a foundation.It is the time to reflect the validity of the methodology in the study of the Chinese language and its relative languages.Language is an open system.The study of the Chinese language and its relative languages should cast away the method of linear model and vertical integration.It is proposed that the multiple methods of oral history,relative languages,and archaeological culture,especially deciphering the fossil words,be adopted to prove the kinship between the four language families,which are Qiangrong(羌戎),Baiyue(百越),Miaoman(苗 蛮),and Huaxia(华夏).These four make up the Hua-Yi(华夷)languages.