Karlgren Wáng

Lì Li

Fang-Kuei Zhèngzhāng

Pān Baxter- Sagart

Consonant Clusters in Chinese Consonant Clusters in Chinese Consonant Clusters in Chinese Consonant Clusters in Chinese

→ → →Old Chinese (OC). The debate about their existence and inventory runs through the modern history of Chinese historical phonology and remains the most thorny and interesting aspect of the field. In recent reconstruction systems of OC, rhymes are mostly identical (given notational differences), while initials differ in a wide variety of ways, between clusters and singletons and especially between different cluster types (see Table 1). A reliable reconstruction of OC is immensely valuable in different fields of study, from ancient Chinese textual interpretation to the identification of Eurasian proper names in Chinese-language historical sources, let alone for an understanding of the history of the Chinese language and for the reconstruction of Proto-Sino-Tibetan and other language families. Yet largely because of uncertainty about the nature of consonant clusters, OC reconstructions are not yet reliable enough to serve these purposes.

Reconstructions of →

→ → →Middle Chinese (MC) have no consonant clusters, nor do most contemporary → → → →Chinese dialects. Exceptions are always shown to be secondary: Píngdìng 平 定 (a Jìn 晋 dialect, Xú 1981; Wáng Hóngjūn 1994) /˓tsɭɤŋ/ 'today' comes from rhotacization (érhuà 兒化) (cognate to Běijīng Mandarin jīnr 今兒); for Qīngyī Miáo 青衣苗 Chinese (a Xiāng 湘 dialect, [START_REF] Lán | Húnán Chéngbù Qīngyī Miáorén huà 湖南城部的青衣苗人话 [Qīngyī Miáo Chinese of Chéngbù, Húnán Province[END_REF], /ʿklu/ 'early' in the Fúróng 芙蓉 variety corresponds to affricate /ʿtlu/, /ʿtsu/ in other varieties (cognate to Standard Mandarin zǎo 早). In contrast, other Sino-Tibetan languages often show a richer syllable structure, like Khroskyabs (rGyalrongic) /ʁɴzbrɑ˥˥/ 'dare' or Classical Tibetan bsgrigs 'arrange, fix (past stem)'. Although Proto-Sino-Tibetan is yet to be reconstructed in detail, it clearly had consonant clusters like *sn-: Zbu Rgyalrong (rGyalrongic) /kə-snɑz˥˨/ 'seven' corresponds to Burmese khu.n̥ ac and Kinnauri (Bodic) /stiʃ/; Zbu Rgyalrong /tə-sɲəv˥˨/ 'nasal mucus' to Burmese n̥ ap, Kinnauri /stəmti/ and Tibetan snabs. As the Sino-Tibetan → → → →origin of Chinese is hardly in doubt, some linguistic system ancestral to MC must have once had consonant clusters. However, some scholars reconstruct consonant clusters within OC, while others consider that the syllable structure of OC had already been reduced to something essentially identical to that of modern Chinese.

Influential recent systems of reconstructed OC include those of Li [START_REF] 李方桂 | Shànggǔyīn yánjiū 上古音研究[END_REF][START_REF] 李方桂 | Jǐgè shànggǔ shēngmǔ wèntí 幾個上古聲母問題[END_REF] later revised by [START_REF] Hwang-Cherng 龔煌城 | Reconstruction of some initials in Archaic Chinese from the viewpoint of comparative Sino-Tibetan[END_REF][START_REF] Hwang-Cherng 龔煌城 | Cóng Hàn, Zàng yǔ de bǐjiào kàn Hànyǔ shànggǔyīn liúyīn yùnwěi de nǐcè 從漢、藏語的比較看漢語上古音流音韻尾的擬測[END_REF][START_REF] Gong | The First Palatalization of Velars in Late Old Chinese[END_REF][START_REF] Hwang-Cherng 龔煌城 | The phonological system of Old Chinese as reconstructed by Fang-kuei Li[END_REF], Wáng [START_REF] Lì | Towards a history of the Chinese language[END_REF][START_REF] Lì | The phonological history of Chinese[END_REF] later revised by Guō (2010), [START_REF] Starostin | Rekonstrukcija drevnekitaiskoj fonologičeskoj sistemy [A reconstruction of the Old Chinese phonological system[END_REF][START_REF] Shàngfāng | Shànggǔ yīnxì 上古音系 [Old Chinese phonology[END_REF][START_REF] Shàngfāng | Shànggǔ yīnxì (dì èr bǎn) 上古音系(第二版) [Old Chinese phonology (2nd Edition)], Shànghǎi 上海[END_REF] and [START_REF] Wùyún | Hànyǔ lìshǐ yīnyùnxué 汉语历史音韵学 [Historical phonology of Chinese[END_REF], [START_REF] Baxter | A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology[END_REF], [START_REF] Schuessler | Minimal Old Chinese and later Han Chinese: A Companion to Grammata Serica Recensa[END_REF], and [START_REF] Baxter | Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction[END_REF]. All contain consonant clusters, except Wáng Lì's system, which remains to this day the version taught to mainland Chinese undergraduates.

In this article, we will mostly use the → → → →Baxter-Sagart system to illustrate recent OC reconstructions. Chinese words are transcribed in MC, with added asterisks, using Baxter's MC transcription, which we adapt into IPA and annotate with MC division (děng 等) numbers (see below) in roman-numeral subscript to facilitate discussion. The presence of these subscript numbers enables MC reconstructed forms to be readily distinguished from OC reconstructed forms. We can conjecture that the two words had more similar pronunciations during the formative centuries of the Chinese script. This does seem to be the case for the vowels: both words are attested in the Book of Odes, where they transitively rhyme with each other. This reflects a general principle formulated by Duàn Yùcái 段玉裁, in his Liùshū Yīnjūnbiǎo 六書音均表 (1776), as tóngshēng bì tóngbù 同聲必同部 'characters sharing a phonetic element must be in the same (OC) rhyming category'. Modern reconstructions of OC have *-ə for both words.

As for the initials, we could propose MC *m-in mái 霾 as originating in a consonant cluster *mlthat later simplified to *m-. A character like lí 貍 pronounced OC *lə would be judged good enough by literate speakers of OC as phonetic element to write *mlə. We have now a hypothesis where an OC initial cluster *ml-explains a graphic connection between MC *m-and *l-, a connection seen also in other sets of words written with the same phonetic element; such sets are called → → → →xiéshēng 諧聲 series. (See Table 1 for different modern reconstructions for mái 霾). This line of thinking underlies early hypotheses that postulate initial consonant clusters in OC, starting with [START_REF] Gabelentz | Chinesische Grammatik, mit Ausschluss des niederen Stils und der heutigen Umgangssprache <<PLEASE PROVIDE TRANSLATION PLEASE PROVIDE TRANSLATION PLEASE PROVIDE[END_REF], who conjectured a *kl-to explain the particularly common MC *k-/*l-connection. [START_REF] Maspero | Le dialecte de Tchang-ngan sous les T'ang" [The Chang'an dialect during the Tang Period[END_REF] and [START_REF] Karlgren | Analytic Dictionary of Chinese and Sino-Japanese[END_REF] in Europe, as well as [START_REF] Yǔtáng | On the existence of consonant clusters in older Chinese[END_REF] and [START_REF] Dúxiù | Zhōngguó gǔdài yǒu fùshēngmǔ shuō 中國古代有複聲母說[END_REF] in China all argued for initial clusters in OC to account for a range of phenomena centered on xiéshēng connections.

The most influential among early proponents of OC initial clusters was Bernhard Karlgren, who, in his later works, notably Grammata Serica Recensa (1957), reconstructed 19 initial clusters like *kl-, *xm-, *sn-, and *kʰs-, corresponding to various xiéshēng connection patterns. Karlgren's approach, probably influenced by [START_REF] Maspero | Le dialecte de Tchang-ngan sous les T'ang" [The Chang'an dialect during the Tang Period[END_REF][START_REF] Maspero | Préfixes et dérivation en chinois archaïque" [Prefixes and derivations in Archaic Chinese[END_REF], can be termed "consonant stacking": he reconstructed OC *AB-for a xiéshēng connection between MC onsets *A-and *B-. A xiéshēng connection is explained as either

(1) OC *AB-> MC *A-, OC *B-> MC *B-, or (2) OC *AB-> MC *B-, OC *A-> MC *A-.
A theory explaining patterns of xiéshēng connections with clusters is actually a bundle of three theories: a proto-phonology of OC, a theory of cluster simplification between Old and MC, and a theory on the workings of the Chinese script. Karlgren reconstructed only *AB-clusters with rising sonority (*bl-, *sn-and *kʰs-, but not *lb-or *skʰ); most of his OC *AB-clusters simplified to *A-in MC, except for *bl-, *ɡl-> MC *l-. A xiéshēng series with *AB-can include words with both *A-and *B-.

Consonant stacking was the first systematic method in the reconstruction of OC initial clusters. Perceived as synonymous with the hypothesis of initial clusters in OC, Karlgren's methodology invited widespread criticism, especially among Chinese scholars, starting with epigrapher Táng (1937, 1949:35-46). According to Wáng Lì's influential criticism (1958:68, 1987:32-34), Karlgren cherry-picked his xiéshēng patterns. If Karlgren had applied his reconstruction method consistently, the OC onset system would be full of bizarre stacked clusters like *ɕŋ-or *kʰȶʰ-and would lose all phonological systematicity. In general, there was a widespread sentiment that xiéshēng was too shaky a ground on which to base the existence of clusters. This view was upended by the *-r-hypothesis, to be discussed in Section 4, which demonstrated the reliability of xiéshēng evidence through corroboration by a wealth of other evidence. Apart from *Cr-clusters, *sC-clusters are now also reconstructed by most scholars, and will be discussed in Section 5. The reconstruction of OC *-r-proved a unifying element that gave a parsimonious explanation for a range of phenomena in Chinese historical phonology. The hypothesis is also supported by Sino-Tibetan cognates: bā 八 *pɛt II < *pˤret 'eight' and bǎi 百 *paek II < *pˤrak 'hundred' to Tibetan brgyad and brgya respectively (both from earlier *brj-as per Li Fang-Kuei's law: Tibetan rgy-< *rj-), pí 羆 *pie IIIb < *praj 'brown bear' to Zbu Rgyalrong /prɑʔ⁵⁵/, shī 蝨 *ʂit III < *srik 'louse' to Japhug Rgyalrong /zrɯɣ/, and by Wanderwörter of Greater Southeast Asia, notably jiāng 江 *kaewŋ II < *kˤroŋ 'river, Yangtze' to Thai คลอง /kʰlɔɔŋ³³/ 'canal' and Thổ (Vietic) /kʰrɔŋ¹/ 'river'. Finally, it is supported by regular alternations that suggest a causative infix *<r>, cf. zhì 至 *tɕijH III < *ti[t]-s 'to arrive' and zhì 致 *ʈijH III < *t<r>i[t]-s 'to send', between chū 出 *tɕʰwit III < *t-kʰut 'to go out' and chù 黜 ʈʰwit III < *t-kʰ<r>ut 'to expel'.

An important hypothesis that started with [START_REF] Coblin | A Sinologist's Handlist of Sino-Tibetan Lexical Comparisons[END_REF] suggests that coronal *T(S)r-clusters reconstructed in (3), rare in other Sino-Tibetan languages, should be revised to *rT(S)-. For example, zhuàng 撞 ɖaewŋH II , *N-tˤroŋ-s 'strike' in the Baxter-Sagart system, would be revised to *r-N-tˤoŋ-s and compared with Tibetan rdung < *rⁿd-'strike, pound'.

Apart from *Cr-, many scholars have also reconstructed *Cl-, where *-l-disappeared in MC without trace. The word gè 各 *kak I 'each' in the same xiéshēng category as 落 lak I 'fall' is reconstructed by [START_REF] Shàngfāng | Shànggǔ yīnxì 上古音系 [Old Chinese phonology[END_REF] as *klaːɡ in contrast to gé 格 *kaek II 'go to' < *kraːɡ. In earlier studies [START_REF] Maspero | Le dialecte de Tchang-ngan sous les T'ang" [The Chang'an dialect during the Tang Period[END_REF][START_REF] Maspero | Préfixes et dérivation en chinois archaïque" [Prefixes and derivations in Archaic Chinese[END_REF][START_REF] Karlgren | Grammatica Serica Recensa[END_REF]), these are reconstructed by consonant stacking, as *mx-(later *xm-), *xŋ-and *thn-. [START_REF] Yakhontov | Sočetanija soglasnyx v drevnekitajskom jazyke[END_REF] proposed that the prenasal element in Karlgren's *xm-, *thn-and *xŋ-should be unified into an archiphoneme, which comes from a common earlier *s-.

On the other hand, Li [START_REF] Fang-Kuei | Archaic Chinese *-i̯ wəng, *-i̯ wək, and *-i̯ wəg[END_REF] and [START_REF] Tung | Shànggǔ yīnyùn biǎogǎo 上古音韵表稿" [Tentative tables of Old Chinese phonology[END_REF] analyzed the *m-/*x(w)-connection in terms of a voiceless sonorant *m̥ -> *x(w)-. [START_REF] Pulleyblank | The Consonantal System of Old Chinese[END_REF] The reconstruction of voiceless sonorants as above permitted clusters of the *sN-type to instead be postulated, following Li [START_REF] 李方桂 | Shànggǔyīn yánjiū 上古音研究[END_REF][START_REF] 李方桂 | Jǐgè shànggǔ shēngmǔ wèntí 幾個上古聲母問題[END_REF] [START_REF] Goad | The Representation of sC Clusters[END_REF]. However, competing hypotheses typically reconstruct *s-stop clusters in a more limited scope:

In his 1958 talk, Bodman first mentioned the possibility of a metathesis, or rather affrication, MC *ts-< OC *st-. This proposition was later elaborated in [START_REF] Pulleyblank | The Consonantal System of Old Chinese[END_REF] and [START_REF] Bodman | Tibetan Sdud "Folds of a Garment", the Character 卒, and the *St-Hypothesis[END_REF], where they are extended to other stops: OC *sk-, *sp-are also reconstructed for MC *ts-.

1.

A competing hypothesis, first proposed in Li [START_REF] 李方桂 | Shànggǔyīn yánjiū 上古音研究[END_REF], had OC *sk-, *stsimplifying to *s-. 2. [START_REF] Baxter | Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction[END_REF] reconstructed a fricativizing effect for *s-, with OC *sts-> MC *s-, OC *st-> *stɕ-> MC *ɕ-.

3.

Recent reconstructions agree on some clusters and differ on others (see Table 1 for some examples). This difficulty of reconstructing *s-stop clusters can be understood by analogy to Tibetan, where Old Tibetan *s-sonorant clusters show distinctive modern reflexes in most Karlgren (1923:31) and Wáng Lì (1987:19) hoped that (Greater) Sino-Tibetan comparison could settle problems concerning Chinese clusters. But Sino-Tibetan <<XREF>> <<XREF>> <<XREF>> <<XREF>> genetic position of Chinese actually plays a limited role in recent constructions [START_REF] Hwang-Cherng 龔煌城 | Reconstruction of some initials in Archaic Chinese from the viewpoint of comparative Sino-Tibetan[END_REF] being a notable exception). The usual approach privileges one language, Old Tibetan, as the object of comparison, but this approach does not yield enough cognates for systematic comparison. Usually only one or two genuine cognates can be found corresponding to any given proposed OC cluster. As a result, conflicting hypotheses can often all be justified by the careful selection of one or two Tibetan comparanda. Broadening comparison to lesser-known Sino-Tibetan languages that preserve consonant clusters is one avenue for future research that remains promising.

Compared to Sino-Tibetan cognates, Chinese loanwords in Bai, Hmong-Mien, Kra-Dai and Austroasiatic are often more reliably identified and contain features that predate MC. Also, it is agreed that → → → →Mǐn 閩 dialects of Chinese do not descend from MC and preserve some OC features. One highly convincing hypothesis in Baxter and Sagart (2014:163-165) combines evidence from Mǐn and loans in Southeast Asian languages. Proto-Mǐn is reconstructed by [START_REF] Norman | Tonal Development in Min[END_REF][START_REF] Norman | The Initials of Proto-Min[END_REF] A renewal of interest in OC morphological processes [START_REF] Sagart | The Roots of Old Chinese[END_REF], Jīn 2006[START_REF] Schuessler | ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese[END_REF] are some recent examples) has profoundly changed the nature of OC reconstruction. Reconstructed affixes like *-s, *<r> and *s-mutually support hypotheses concerning clusters *-Cs, *Cr-and *sC-. To take a recent example, the debate between the two hypotheses involving *sC-clusters mentioned before (Mei 2012, Sagart and[START_REF] Sagart | Reconstructing the *s-Prefix in Old Chinese[END_REF]) crucially involves the nature and regularity of the morphological processes that are integrated with these hypotheses.

C C C CONCLUSION ONCLUSION ONCLUSION

ONCLUSION

Disagreements about the reconstruction of OC clusters are apparent from Table 1, which provides reconstructions in six different systems.

Table 1. Comparison of OC reconstructions Note: Brackets mark extrapolated forms. For Wáng Lì, Pān, and Baxter-Sagart, forms are not taken from their respective monographs, but books or online resources with a more exhaustive coverage. [START_REF] Karlgren | Grammatica Serica Recensa[END_REF], Wáng Lì = Guō (2010[START_REF] 李方桂 | Zhōngguó shànggǔyīn shēngmǔ wèntí 中國上古音聲母問題[END_REF][START_REF] 李方桂 | Shànggǔyīn yánjiū 上古音研究[END_REF], Zhèngzhāng = Zhèngzhāng (2013), Pān = Dōngfāng Yǔyánxué (2015), http://www.eastling.org /oc/oldage.aspx, [START_REF] Baxter | Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction[END_REF], Version 1.1, http://ocbaxtersagart.lsait.lsa.umich.edu/.

Despite the inherent difficulty of reconstructing OC initial consonants given methodological and evidential constraints, there is reason to hope that improved understanding of OC morphology and judicious use of comparative data from Southeast Asian and Sino-Tibetan languages will drive significant improvements in future research into the reconstruction of OC and its consonant clusters.

R R R REFERENCES EFERENCES EFERENCES

  *pr-, *sn-and *-ks are postulated by various scholars for →

  -has xiéshēng connections with a wide variety of onsets, for which Karlgren reconstructed *Cl-clusters. Every rhyme in the → → → →MC phonological system belongs to a division (děng): I, II, III(a/b) or IV, a distinction whose nature remains controversial today but which most scholars believe was related to vowel quality and medial glides. The first definite breakthrough on OC clusters was made by[START_REF] Yakhontov | Sočetanija soglasnyx v drevnekitajskom jazyke[END_REF], who noticed that, in a xiéshēng series containing MC *l-and a non-lateral initial *C-, *C-frequently occur in Division-II syllables, while *l-often correlates with Division I. For example, the phonetic element jiān 監 *kaem II 'inspect' occurs in jiàn 鑑 *kaemH II 'mirror', lán 藍 *lam I 'indigo' and làn 濫 *lamH I 'excess'. Moreover, laem II is not a possible MC syllable. Accordingly, Yakhontov reconstructed OC *Cl-clusters as the origin of Division II vocalism: MC *kaem II < OC *klam. OC *lam stayed MC *lam I , whence the absence of laem II .Yakhontov's *Cl-is revised to *Cr-in later treatments. With important contributions by[START_REF] Pulleyblank | The Consonantal System of Old Chinese[END_REF][START_REF] 李方桂 | Zhōngguó shànggǔyīn shēngmǔ wèntí 中國上古音聲母問題[END_REF], scholars gradually converged on a set of hypotheses, collectively dubbed the *-r-hypothesis: Division II syllables, unlike Division I or IV, come from OC *Cr-: compare bái 白 *baek II < *bˤrak 'white' and bó 泊 *bak I < *[b]ˤak 'calm'; 1. For the controversial → → → →chóngniǔ rhymes, Division IIIb syllables (chóngniǔ sānděng 重紐三 等) had OC *-r-, while Division IIIa (chóngniǔ sìděng 重紐四等) did not: compare mì 密 *mit IIIb < *mri[t] 'dense' and mì 蜜 *mjit IIIa < *mit 'honey'; 2. MC retroflex initials, non-existent in Divisions I and IV, come from *T(S)r-clusters: zhī 知 *ʈie III < *tre 'know', zhāi 齋 *tʂɛj II < *tsˤr[ə]j 'purify oneself'. 3.

  reconstruct *s-sonorant clusters in OC for different lexical sets. The first hypothesis postulates *s-sonorant clusters for the voiceless element in the xiéshēng connections *m-/*x(w)-(měi 每 *mwəjX I 'every' and huǐ 悔 *xwəjX I 'regret'), *ŋ-/*x-(yí 儀 *ŋie IIIb 'ceremony' and xī 犧 *xie IIIb 'sacrificial animal'), *n-/*th-(nán 難 *nan I 'difficult' and tān 灘 *than I 'foreshore').

  extended their proposals and reconstructed not only *m̥ -, *n̥ -and *ŋ̥ -, but also *l̥ -(*r̥ -in later reconstructions), for the xiéshēng connections *th-/*l-: tǐ 體 *thejX IV < *r̥ ˤijʔ 'body' and lǐ 禮 *lejX IV < *rˤijʔ 'rites', as well as *θ-(*l̥in later reconstructions) for *th-/*j-: tōu 偷 *thuw I < *l̥ ˤo 'steal' and yú 俞 *ju III < *lo 'yes'. Recent reconstructions mostly prefer the voiceless sonorant treatment.

  This hypothesis entails OC *-Nʔ and *-Ns for syllables with a nasal coda in MC. Scholars also reconstruct *-ks, *-(N)ʔs > *-H; *-ps, *-ts > *-jH to explain, among other things, derived qù-toned forms, reconstructed with an OC suffix *-s with several functions: wù 惡 *uH I < *ʔˤas < OC *ʔˤak-s 'hate (v.)', cf. è 惡 *ak I < OC *ʔˤak 'bad'; nèi 內 *nwʌjH I < *nˤuts < OC *nˤ[u]p-s 'inside', cf. nà 內 (later 納) *nʌp I < OC *nˤ[u]p 'bring in'.

	1954b), it is generally accepted that MC → → → →tonal distinctions come from lost codas: shǎng 上 (*-X) < *-ʔ, qù 去 (*-H) < *-s. 3. R 3. R 3. R 3. RECONSTRUCTING ECONSTRUCTING ECONSTRUCTING ECONSTRUCTING I I I INITIAL NITIAL NITIAL NITIAL C C C CLUSTERS LUSTERS LUSTERS LUSTERS U U U USING SING SING SING XIÉSHĒNG XIÉSHĒNG XIÉSHĒNG XIÉSHĒNG
	Consider the character mái 霾 *mɛj II 'dust storm'. In Shuōwén Jiězì 說文解字, a 2nd-century
	character dictionary, it is analyzed as a phono-semantic compound, with lí 貍 *li III 'a kind of wild
	cat' functioning as a phonetic element. To a speaker of Middle or later Chinese, it is hard to understand how *li III could indicate the pronunciation of *mɛj II .
	2. F 2. F 2. F 2. FINAL INAL INAL INAL C C C CLUSTERS LUSTERS LUSTERS LUSTERS IN IN IN IN O O O OLD LD LD LD C C C CHINESE HINESE HINESE HINESE
	We briefly discuss final clusters before confining the scope of the remainder of this article to initial clusters. Following a hypothesis first propounded by André-Georges Haudricourt (1954a,

  modern dialects, while *s-stop clusters are distinguished from other cluster or simplex initials only under specific phonological environments, and only in some dialects. The prefix /s-/ is a common causativizer in other Sino-Tibetan languages, so a transitivizing function is reconstructed for OC *s-in many systems. The Baxter-Sagart system, for example, has shì 示 *ʑijH III < *s-dʑijs < *s-gijʔ-s 'show' derived from shì 視 *dʑijH III < *gijʔ-s 'look, see'.Xiéshēng still forms the primary justification of many clusters in recent reconstructions of OC. As is shown byZhèngzhāng's (2003:121) reassessment of Wáng Lì's criticism, the treatment of xiéshēng evidence in recent reconstructions has made good progress since Karlgren's time. More systematic proto-phonologies, inspired by Old Tibetan or Austroasiatic languages, achieved a better coverage of xiéshēng patterns. Karlgren's hypothesis that *AB-almost always simplifies into *A-is replaced by less simplistic models. However, an upper limit exists to the amount of phonetic information that can be mined from xiéshēng. One problem is a lack of agreed-upon constraints: scholars have a great degree of freedom both in the choice of xiéshēng connections to explain by clustering and in the cluster reconstructions themselves. As an extreme example, scholars who work in Wáng Lì's tradition regard all cases of *k-/*lconnections as exceptional (Sūn 2005). Hence, hypotheses that integrate xiéshēng with other sources of evidence achieve a better explanatory power than those relying on xiéshēng interpretation alone like Karlgren's.Other sources of evidence that have been used include: Sino-Tibetan comparanda, Chinese loanwords in languages of Mainland Southeast Asia, daughter languages apart from MC, and reconstructed Chinese morphology. They are used to corroborate hypotheses suggested by xiéshēng evidence, but also permit the discovery of clusters invisible from xiéshēng evidence. Scholars like

	Consonant Clusters in Chinese http://brill.stippweb.nl/srw/producten/previewUitOverzicht.asp?id=25027
	6. M 6. M 6. M 6. METHODOLOGICAL ETHODOLOGICAL ETHODOLOGICAL ETHODOLOGICAL A A A ADVANCES DVANCES DVANCES DVANCES AND AND AND AND F F F FUTURE UTURE UTURE UTURE D D D DIRECTIONS IRECTIONS IRECTIONS IRECTIONS
	van 8	12-10-2015 9:58

  with voiceless sonorants such as *lh-and *nh-. Chinese loans in other languages often have a stop prefix in cognate words: for example, liù 六 *liuwk III 'six' (PLEASE REVISE>> IS LISTED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, PLEASE REVISE>> and Proto-Tai *krok D (Pittayaporn 2009); ròu 肉 *ɲuwk III 'meat' (Proto-Mǐn *nh-) is borrowed as /kɲuk⁷/ in Pong (Vietic). Words with Proto-Min voiceless sonorants are therefore reconstructed by Baxter and Sagart as sonorants with preinitials: *k.ruk (distinguished from *kruk), *k.nuk.

	Proto-Mǐn
	*lh-) is borrowed as Proto-Hmong-Mien *kruk (Ratliff 2010) <<NO RATLIFF 2010 <<NO RATLIFF 2010 <<NO RATLIFF 2010 <<NO RATLIFF 2010
	IS LISTED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, PLEASE REVISE>> IS LISTED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, PLEASE REVISE>> IS LISTED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY,

  Duàn Yùcái 段玉裁, Liùshū yīnjūnbiǎo 六書音均表, Fùshùn Guānxiè 富順官廨, 1776, reprinted in Shuōwén Jiězì zhù 說文解字注, Jīngyùnlóu 經韻樓, 1815.

	P P P PRIMARY RIMARY RIMARY RIMARY S S S SOURCES OURCES OURCES OURCES

12-10-2015 9:58