Austronesian languages

The Austronesian languages (/ˌɔːstrəˈniːʒən/ AW-strə-NEE-zhən) are a

language family widely spoken throughout Maritime Southeast Asia,
Austronesian
parts of Mainland Southeast Asia, Madagascar, the islands of the Pacific Ethnicity Austronesian peoples
Ocean and Taiwan (by Taiwanese indigenous peoples).[1] They are Geographic Taiwan, Maritime Southeast
spoken by about 328 million people (4.4% of the world population).[2][3] distribution Asia, Madagascar, parts of
This makes it the fifth-largest language family by number of speakers. Mainland Southeast Asia,
Major Austronesian languages include Malay (around 250–270 million Hainan (China), and Oceania
in Indonesia alone in its own literary standard named "Indonesian"),[4] Linguistic One of the world's primary
Javanese, Sundanese, Tagalog (standardized as Filipino[5]), Malagasy classification language families
and Cebuano. According to some estimates, the family contains 1,257
Proto- Proto-Austronesian
languages, which is the second most of any language family.[6] language

In 1706, the Dutch scholar Adriaan Reland first observed similarities Subdivisions Atayalic
between the languages spoken in the Malay Archipelago and by peoples Bunun
on islands in the Pacific Ocean.[7] In the 19th century, researchers (e.g. East Formosan
Wilhelm von Humboldt, Herman van der Tuuk) started to apply the
Malayo-Polynesian
comparative method to the Austronesian languages. The first extensive
Western Plains
study on the history of the phonology was made by the German linguist
Otto Dempwolff.[8] It included a reconstruction of the Proto- Northwest Formosan
Austronesian lexicon. The term Austronesian was coined (as German Paiwan
austronesisch) by Wilhelm Schmidt, deriving it from Latin auster Puyuma
"south" and Ancient Greek νῆσος (nêsos "island").[9] Rukai

Most Austronesian languages are spoken by island dwellers. Only a few Tsouic
languages, such as Malay and the Chamic languages, are indigenous to Language codes
mainland Asia. Many Austronesian languages have very few speakers, ISO 639-2 / 5 map
but the major Austronesian languages are spoken by tens of millions of
Glottolog aust1307 (https://glott
people. For example, Indonesian is spoken by around 197.7 million
people. This makes it the eleventh most-spoken language in the world. olog.org/resource/langu

Approximately twenty Austronesian languages are official in their oid/id/aust1307)

respective countries (see the list of major and official Austronesian
languages).

By the number of languages they include, Austronesian and Niger–

Congo are the two largest language families in the world. They each
contain roughly one-fifth of the world's languages. The geographical
span of Austronesian was the largest of any language family in the first
half of the second millennium CE, before the spread of Indo-European in The historical distribution of Austronesian
the colonial period. It ranged from Madagascar off the southeastern languages
coast of Africa to Easter Island in the eastern Pacific. Hawaiian, Rapa
Nui, Māori, and Malagasy (spoken on Madagascar) are the geographic outliers.

According to Robert Blust (1999), Austronesian is divided into several primary branches, all but one of which are found
exclusively in Taiwan. The Formosan languages of Taiwan are grouped into as many as nine first-order subgroups of
Austronesian. All Austronesian languages spoken outside the Taiwan mainland (including its offshore Yami language)
belong to the Malayo-Polynesian (sometimes called Extra-Formosan) branch.
Most Austronesian languages lack a long history of written attestation. This makes reconstructing earlier stages—up to
distant Proto-Austronesian—all the more remarkable. The oldest inscription in the Cham language, the Đông Yên Châu
inscription dated to c. 350 AD, is the first attestation of any Austronesian language.

Typological characteristics

Phonology
The Austronesian languages overall possess phoneme inventories which are smaller than the world average. Around 90% of
the Austronesian languages have inventories of 19–25 sounds (15–20 consonants and 4–5 vowels), thus lying at the lower
end of the global typical range of 20–37 sounds. However, extreme inventories are also found, such as Nemi (New
Caledonia) with 43 consonants.[10]

The canonical root type in Proto-Austronesian is disyllabic with the shape CV(C)CVC (C = consonant; V = vowel), and is
still found in many Austronesian languages.[11] In most languages, consonant clusters are only allowed in medial position,
and often, there are restrictions for the first element of the cluster.[12] There is a common drift to reduce the number of
consonants which can appear in final position, e.g. Buginese, which only allows the two consonants /ŋ/ and /ʔ/ as finals, out
of a total number of 18 consonants. Complete absence of final consonants is observed e.g. in Nias, Malagasy and many
Oceanic languages.[13]

Tonal contrasts are rare in Austronesian languages,[14] although Moken–Moklen and a few languages of the Chamic, South
Halmahera–West New Guinea and New Caledonian subgroups do show lexical tone.[15]

Morphology
Most Austronesian languages are agglutinative languages with a relatively high number of affixes, and clear morpheme
boundaries.[16] Most affixes are prefixes (Malay and Indonesian ber-jalan 'walk' < jalan 'road'), with a smaller number of
suffixes (Tagalog titis-án 'ashtray' < títis 'ash') and infixes (Roviana t<in>avete 'work (noun)' < tavete 'work (verb)').[17]

Reduplication is commonly employed in Austronesian languages. This includes full reduplication (Malay and Indonesian
anak-anak 'children' < anak 'child'; Karo Batak nipe-nipe 'caterpillar' < nipe 'snake') or partial reduplication (Agta taktakki
'legs' < takki 'leg', at-atu 'puppy' < atu 'dog').[18]

Syntax
It is difficult to make generalizations about the languages that make up a family as
diverse as Austronesian. Very broadly, one can divide the Austronesian languages
into three groups: Philippine-type languages, Indonesian-type languages and post-
Indonesian type languages:[19]

The first group includes, besides the languages of the Philippines, the
A 5 dollar banknote, Hawaii, c. 1839,
Austronesian languages of Taiwan, Sabah, North Sulawesi and
using Hawaiian language
Madagascar. It is primarily characterized by the retention of the original
system of Philippine-type voice alternations, where typically three or four
verb voices determine which semantic role the "subject"/"topic" expresses
(it may express either the actor, the patient, the location and the beneficiary, or various other circumstantial
roles such as instrument and concomitant). The phenomenon has frequently been referred to as focus (not to
be confused with the usual sense of that term in linguistics). Furthermore, the choice of voice is influenced by
the definiteness of the participants. The word order has a strong tendency to be verb-initial.
In contrast, the more innovative Indonesian-type languages, which are particularly represented in Malaysia
and western Indonesia, have reduced the voice system to a contrast between only two voices (actor voice
and "undergoer" voice), but these are supplemented by applicative morphological devices (originally two: the
more direct *-i and more oblique *-an/-[a]kən), which serve to modify the semantic role of the "undergoer".
They are also characterized by the presence of preposed clitic pronouns. Unlike the Philippine type, these
languages mostly tend towards verb-second word-orders. A number of languages, such as the Batak
 languages, Old Javanese, Balinese, Sasak and several Sulawesi languages seem to represent an
intermediate stage between these two types.[20][21]
Finally, in some languages, which Ross calls "post-Indonesian", the original voice system has broken down
completely and the voice-marking affixes no longer preserve their functions.

Lexicon
The Austronesian language family has been established by the linguistic comparative method on the basis of cognate sets,
sets of words from multiple languages, which are similar in sound and meaning which can be shown to be descended from
the same ancestral word in Proto-Austronesian according to regular rules. Some cognate sets are very stable. The word for
eye in many Austronesian languages is mata (from the most northerly Austronesian languages, Formosan languages such as
Bunun and Amis all the way south to Māori).[22]

Other words are harder to reconstruct. The word for two is also stable, in that it appears over the entire range of the
Austronesian family, but the forms (e.g. Bunun dusa; Amis tusa; Māori rua) require some linguistic expertise to recognise.
The Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database gives word lists (coded for cognateness) for approximately 1000 Austronesian
languages.[22]

Classification
The internal structure of the Austronesian languages is
complex. The family consists of many similar and
closely related languages with large numbers of dialect
continua, making it difficult to recognize boundaries
between branches. The first major step towards high-
order subgrouping was Dempwolff's recognition of the
Oceanic subgroup (called Melanesisch by
[8]
Dempwolff). The special position of the languages of
Taiwan was first recognized by André-Georges
Haudricourt (1965),[23] who divided the Austronesian
languages into three subgroups: Northern Austronesian
(= Formosan), Eastern Austronesian (= Oceanic), and
Western Austronesian (all remaining languages).

In a study that represents the first lexicostatistical

The distribution of the Austronesian languages, per Blust (1999).
classification of the Austronesian languages, Isidore
Western Malayo-Polynesian and Central Malayo-Polynesian are
Dyen (1965) presented a radically different subgrouping no longer accepted.
scheme.[24] He posited 40 first-order subgroups, with the
highest degree of diversity found in the area of
Melanesia. The Oceanic languages are not recognized, but are distributed over more than 30 of his proposed first-order
subgroups. Dyen's classification was widely criticized and for the most part rejected,[25] but several of his lower-order
subgroups are still accepted (e.g. the Cordilleran languages, the Bilic languages or the Murutic languages).

Subsequently, the position of the Formosan languages as the most archaic group of Austronesian languages was recognized
by Otto Christian Dahl (1973),[26] followed by proposals from other scholars that the Formosan languages actually make up
more than one first-order subgroup of Austronesian. Robert Blust (1977) first presented the subgrouping model which is
currently accepted by virtually all scholars in the field,[27] with more than one first-order subgroup on Taiwan, and a single
first-order branch encompassing all Austronesian languages spoken outside of Taiwan, viz. Malayo-Polynesian. The
relationships of the Formosan languages to each other and the internal structure of Malayo-Polynesian continue to be
debated.

Primary branches on Taiwan (Formosan languages)

In addition to Malayo-Polynesian, thirteen Formosan subgroups are broadly accepted. The seminal article in the
classification of Formosan—and, by extension, the top-level structure of Austronesian—is Blust (1999). Prominent
Formosanists (linguists who specialize in Formosan languages) take issue with some of its details, but it remains the point
of reference for current linguistic analyses. Debate centers primarily around the relationships between these families. Of the
classifications presented here, Blust (1999) links two families into a Western Plains group, two more in a Northwestern
Formosan group, and three into an Eastern Formosan group, while Li (2008) also links five families into a Northern
Formosan group. Harvey (1982), Chang (2006) and Ross (2012) split Tsouic, and Blust (2013) agrees the group is probably
not valid.

Other studies have presented phonological evidence for a reduced Paiwanic family of Paiwanic, Puyuma, Bunun, Amis, and
Malayo-Polynesian, but this is not reflected in vocabulary. The Eastern Formosan peoples Basay, Kavalan, and Amis share a
homeland motif that has them coming originally from an island called Sinasay or Sanasay.[28] The Amis, in particular,
maintain that they came from the east, and were treated by the Puyuma, amongst whom they settled, as a subservient
group.[29]

Blust (1999)
Formosan
Tsouic
(abandoned in Blust 2013)
Tsou language
Saaroa language
Kanakanavu language
Western Plains
Thao language a.k.a. Sao: Brawbaw and Shtafari dialects
Central Western Plains
Babuza language; old Favorlang language: Taokas and
Poavosa dialects
Papora-Hoanya language: Papora, Hoanya dialects
Northwest Formosan
Saisiyat language: Taai and Tungho dialects
Pazeh language and Kulun
Atayalic
Atayal language
Seediq language a.k.a. Truku/Taroko
East Formosan Families of Formosan languages before
Minnanese colonization of Taiwan, per
(based on a single merger, of pAN *n and *j)
Northern (Kavalanic languages) Blust (1999)
Basay language: Trobiawa and Linaw–Qauqaut dialects
Kavalan language
Ketagalan language, or Ketangalan
Central (Ami)
Amis proper
Sakizaya
Siraya language
Bunun language
Rukai language
Mantauran, Tona, and Maga dialects of Rukai are divergent
Puyuma language
Paiwan language (south-eastern tip of Formosa)
(outside Formosa)
Malayo-Polynesian

Li (2008)
This classification retains Blust's East Formosan, and unites the other northern languages. Li (2008) proposes a Proto-
Formosan (F0) ancestor and equates it with Proto-Austronesian (PAN), following the model in Starosta (1995).[30] Rukai
and Tsouic are seen as highly divergent, although the position of Rukai is highly controversial.[31]
Formosan
F0: Proto-Formosan = Proto-Austronesian
Rukai
Mantauran
Maga–Tona, Budai–Labuan–Taromak
F1: (unnamed branch)
Central (Tsouic)
Tsou
Southern Tsouic
Saaroa
Kanakanavu
F2: (unnamed branch)
Northern Formosan
Northwestern (Plains)
Saisiyat–Kulon, Pazeh
Western
Thao
West Coast (Papora–Hoanya–Babuza–Taokas) Families of Formosan languages before
Atayalic Minnanese colonization, per Li (2008).
Squliq Atayal The three languages in green (Bunun,
Ts'ole' Atayal (= C'uli') Puyuma, Paiwan) may form a Southern
Seediq Formosan branch, but this is uncertain.
East Formosan
Kavalan–Basay
Siraya–Amis–Nataoran
Sakizaya
? Southern [uncertain]
Bunun
Isbukun
Northern and Central (Takitudu and Takbanuaz)
Paiwan–Puyuma [uncertain]

Sagart (2004, 2021)

Sagart (2004) proposes that the numerals of the Formosan languages reflect a nested
series of innovations, from languages in the northwest (near the putative landfall of
the Austronesian migration from the mainland), which share only the numerals 1–4
with proto-Malayo-Polynesian, counter-clockwise to the eastern languages (purple
on map), which share all numerals 1–10. Sagart (2021) finds other shared
innovations that follow the same pattern. He proposes that pMP *lima 'five' is a
lexical replacement (from 'hand'), and that pMP *pitu 'seven', *walu 'eight' and
*Siwa 'nine' are contractions of pAN *RaCep 'five', a ligature *a or *i 'and', and
*duSa 'two', *telu 'three', *Sepat 'four', an analogical pattern historically attested
from Pazeh. The fact that the Kradai languages share the numeral system (and other
lexical innovations) of pMP suggests that they are a coordinate branch with Malayo-
Polynesian, rather than a sister family to Austronesian.[32][33]

Sagart's resulting classification is:[34] Nested branches of Austronesian

languages according to Sagart.
Austronesian (pAN ca. 5200 BP) Languages colored red are outside
Saisiyat the other branches but are not
Luilang subgrouped. Kradai and Malayo-
Polynesian would also be purple.
Pazeh, Kulon
(These four languages are outside Pituish, but Sagart is ambivalent as to
any relationship among them, other than retaining Blust's connection between Pazeh and Kulon)
Pituish
(pAN *RaCepituSa 'five-and-two' truncated to *pitu 'seven'; *sa-ŋ-aCu 'nine' [lit. one taken away])
Favorlang–Taokas
 Limaish
(pAN *RaCep 'five' replaced by *lima 'hand'; *Ca~ reduplication to form the series of numerals for counting
humans)
Thao–Atayalic
Enemish
(additive 'five-and-one' or 'twice-three' replaced by reduplicated *Nem-Nem > *emnem [*Nem 'three' is
reflected in Basay, Siraya and Makatao]; pAN *kawaS 'year, sky' replaced by *CawiN)
Siraya
Walu-Siwaish
(*walu 'eight' and *Siwa 'nine' from *RaCepat(e)lu 'five-and-three' and *RaCepiSepat 'five-and-four')
West WS: Papora–Hoanya
(pAN *Sapuy 'fire' replaced by *[Z]apuR 'cooking fire'; pAN *qudem 'black replaced by *abi[Z]u,
found in MP as 'blue')
Central WS
(pAN *isa etc. 'one' replaced by *Ca~CiNi (reduplication of 'alone') in the human-counting series;
pAN *iCit 'ten' replaced by *ma-sa-N 'one times'.)
Bunun
Rukai–Tsouic
(CV~ reduplication in human-counting series replaced with competing pAN noun-marker *u-
[unknown whether Bunun once had the same]; eleven lexical innovations such as *cáni 'one',
*kəku 'leg')
East WS (pEWS ca. 4500 BP)
(innovations *baCaq-an 'ten'; *nanum 'water' alongside pAN *daNum)
Kavalanic languages
Puluqish
(innovative *sa-puluq 'ten', from *sa- 'one' + 'separate, set aside'; use of prefixes *paka- and
*maka- to mark abilitative)
Northern: Ami–Puyuma
(*sasay 'one'; *mukeCep 'ten' for the human and non-human series; *ukak 'bone', *kuCem
'cloud')
Paiwan
Southern Austronesian (pSAN ca. 4000 BP)
(linker *atu 'and' > *at after *sa-puluq in numerals 11–19; lexical innovations such as
*baqbaq 'mouth', *qa-sáuŋ 'canine tooth', *qi(d)zúR 'saliva', *píntu 'door', *-ŋel 'deaf')
Kra-Dai
Malayo-Polynesian

Malayo-Polynesian
The Malayo-Polynesian languages are—among other things—characterized by certain sound changes, such as the mergers
of Proto-Austronesian (PAN) *t/*C to Proto-Malayo-Polynesian (PMP) *t, and PAN *n/*N to PMP *n, and the shift of PAN
*S to PMP *h.[35]
There appear to have been two great migrations of Austronesian languages that quickly covered large areas, resulting in
multiple local groups with little large-scale structure. The first was Malayo-Polynesian, distributed across the Philippines,
Indonesia, and Melanesia. The second migration was that of the Oceanic languages into Polynesia and Micronesia.[36]

Major languages

History

A map of the Austronesian expansion. Periods are based on archeological studies, though the association of the archeological record
and linguistic reconstructions is disputed.

From the standpoint of historical linguistics, the place of origin (in linguistic terminology, Urheimat) of the Austronesian
languages (Proto-Austronesian language) is most likely the main island of Taiwan, also known as Formosa; on this island
the deepest divisions in Austronesian are found along small geographic distances, among the families of the native
Formosan languages.

According to Robert Blust, the Formosan languages form nine of the ten primary branches of the Austronesian language
family.[37] Comrie (2001:28) noted this when he wrote:

... the internal diversity among the... Formosan languages... is greater than that in all the rest of Austronesian
put together, so there is a major genetic split within Austronesian between Formosan and the rest... Indeed, the
genetic diversity within Formosan is so great that it may well consist of several primary branches of the overall
Austronesian family.

At least since Sapir (1968), writing in 1949, linguists have generally accepted that the chronology of the dispersal of
languages within a given language family can be traced from the area of greatest linguistic variety to that of the least. For
example, English in North America has large numbers of speakers, but relatively low dialectal diversity, while English in
Great Britain has much higher diversity; such low linguistic variety by Sapir's thesis suggests a more recent spread of
English in North America. While some scholars suspect that the number of principal branches among the Formosan
languages may be somewhat less than Blust's estimate of nine (e.g. Li 2006), there is little contention among linguists with
this analysis and the resulting view of the origin and direction of the migration. For a recent dissenting analysis, see Peiros
(2004).

The protohistory of the Austronesian people can be traced farther back through time. To get an idea of the original homeland
of the populations ancestral to the Austronesian peoples (as opposed to strictly linguistic arguments), evidence from
archaeology and population genetics may be adduced. Studies from the science of genetics have produced conflicting
outcomes. Some researchers find evidence for a proto-Austronesian homeland on the Asian mainland (e.g., Melton et al.
1998), while others mirror the linguistic research, rejecting an East Asian origin in favor of Taiwan (e.g., Trejaut et al.
2005). Archaeological evidence (e.g., Bellwood 1997) is more consistent, suggesting that the ancestors of the Austronesians
spread from the South Chinese mainland to Taiwan at some time around 8,000 years ago.

Evidence from historical linguistics suggests that it is from this island that seafaring peoples migrated, perhaps in distinct
waves separated by millennia, to the entire region encompassed by the Austronesian languages.[38] It is believed that this
migration began around 6,000 years ago.[39] However, evidence from historical linguistics cannot bridge the gap between
those two periods. The view that linguistic evidence connects Austronesian languages to the Sino-Tibetan ones, as proposed
for example by Sagart (2002), is a minority one. As Fox (2004:8) states:

Implied in... discussions of subgrouping [of Austronesian languages] is a broad consensus that the homeland of
the Austronesians was in Taiwan. This homeland area may have also included the P'eng-hu (Pescadores) islands
between Taiwan and China and possibly even sites on the coast of mainland China, especially if one were to
view the early Austronesians as a population of related dialect communities living in scattered coastal
settlements.

Linguistic analysis of the Proto-Austronesian language stops at the western shores of Taiwan; any related mainland
language(s) have not survived. The only exceptions, the Chamic languages, derive from more recent migration to the
mainland.[40] However, according to Ostapirat's interpretation of the seriously discussed Austro-Tai hypothesis, the Kra–Dai
languages (also known as Tai–Kadai) are exactly those related mainland languages.

Hypothesized relations
Genealogical links have been proposed between Austronesian
and various families of East and Southeast Asia.

Austro-Tai
An Austro-Tai proposal linking Austronesian and the Kra-Dai
languages of the southeastern continental Asian mainland was
first proposed by Paul K. Benedict, and is supported by Weera
Ostapirat, Roger Blench, and Laurent Sagart, based on the
traditional comparative method. Ostapirat (2005) proposes a
series of regular correspondences linking the two families and
assumes a primary split, with Kra-Dai speakers being the people
who stayed behind in their Chinese homeland. Blench (2004)
suggests that, if the connection is valid, the relationship is
unlikely to be one of two sister families. Rather, he suggests that An example of hypothetical Pre-Austronesian migration
proto-Kra-Dai speakers were Austronesians who migrated to waves to Taiwan from the mainland. (The Amis migration
from the Philippines is controversial).
Hainan Island and back to the mainland from the northern
Philippines, and that their distinctiveness results from radical
restructuring following contact with Hmong–Mien and Sinitic. An extended version of Austro-Tai was hypothesized by
Benedict who added the Japonic languages to the proposal as well.[41]

Austric
A link with the Austroasiatic languages in an 'Austric' phylum is based mostly on typological evidence. However, there is
also morphological evidence of a connection between the conservative Nicobarese languages and Austronesian languages of
the Philippines. Robert Blust supports the hypothesis which connects the lower Yangtze neolithic Austro-Tai entity with the
rice-cultivating Austro-Asiatic cultures, assuming the center of East Asian rice domestication, and putative Austric
homeland, to be located in the Yunnan/Burma border area.[42]
Under that view, there was an east-west genetic alignment,
resulting from a rice-based population expansion, in the southern
part of East Asia: Austroasiatic-Kra-Dai-Austronesian, with
unrelated Sino-Tibetan occupying a more northerly tier.[42]

Sino-Austronesian
French linguist and Sinologist Laurent Sagart considers the
Austronesian languages to be related to the Sino-Tibetan
languages, and also groups the Kra–Dai languages as more
closely related to the Malayo-Polynesian languages.[43] Sagart
argues for a north-south genetic relationship between Chinese Path of Migration and Division of Some of the Major
and Austronesian, based on sound correspondences in the basic Ethnicities with their genetically distinctive markers,
vocabulary and morphological parallels.[42] Laurent Sagart adapted from Edmondson and Gregerson (2007:732) [1]
(2017) concludes that the possession of the two kinds of (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1749-818
[a]
millets in Taiwanese Austronesian languages (not just Setaria, X.2007.00033.x). The sketched migration route M119-
Baiyue from Southeast Asia corresponds to the southern
as previously thought) places the pre-Austronesians in
origin hypothesis of early Austronesians.
northeastern China, adjacent to the probable Sino-Tibetan
homeland.[42] Ko et al.'s genetic research (2014) appears to
support Laurent Sagart's linguistic proposal, pointing out that the exclusively Austronesian mtDNA E-haplogroup and the
largely Sino-Tibetan M9a haplogroup are twin sisters, indicative of an intimate connection between the early Austronesian
and Sino-Tibetan maternal gene pools, at least.[44][45] Additionally, results from Wei et al. (2017) are also in agreement with
Sagart's proposal, in which their analyses show that the predominantly Austronesian Y-DNA haplogroup O3a2b*-
P164(xM134) belongs to a newly defined haplogroup O3a2b2-N6 being widely distributed along the eastern coastal regions
of Asia, from Korea to Vietnam.[46] Sagart also groups the Austronesian languages in a recursive-like fashion, placing Kra-
Dai as a sister branch of Malayo-Polynesian. His methodology has been found to be spurious by his peers.[47][48]

Japanese
Several linguists have proposed that Japanese is genetically related to the Austronesian family, cf. Benedict (1990),
Matsumoto (1975), Miller (1967).

Some other linguists think it is more plausible that Japanese is not genetically related to the Austronesian languages, but
instead was influenced by an Austronesian substratum or adstratum.

Those who propose this scenario suggest that the Austronesian family once covered the islands to the north as well as to the
south. Martine Robbeets (2017)[49] claims that Japanese genetically belongs to the "Transeurasian" (= Macro-Altaic)
languages, but underwent lexical influence from "para-Austronesian", a presumed sister language of Proto-Austronesian.

The linguist Ann Kumar (2009) proposed that some Austronesians might have migrated to Japan, possibly an elite-group
from Java, and created the Japanese-hierarchical society. She also identifies 82 possible cognates between Austronesian and
Japanese, however her theory remains very controversial.[50] The linguist Asha Pereltsvaig criticized Kumar's theory on
several points.[51] The archaeological problem with that theory is that, contrary to the claim that there was no rice farming in
China and Korea in prehistoric times, excavations have indicated that rice farming has been practiced in this area since at
least 5000 BC.[51] There are also genetic problems. The pre-Yayoi Japanese lineage was not shared with Southeast Asians,
but was shared with Northwest Chinese, Tibetans and Central Asians.[51] Linguistic problems were also pointed out. Kumar
did not claim that Japanese was an Austronesian language derived from proto-Javanese language, but only that it provided a
superstratum language for old Japanese, based on 82 plausible Javanese-Japanese cognates, mostly related to rice
farming.[51]

East Asian
In 2001, Stanley Starosta proposed a new language family named East Asian, that includes all primary language families in
the broader East Asia region except Japonic and Koreanic. This proposed family consists of two branches, Austronesian and
Sino-Tibetan-Yangzian, with the Kra-Dai family considered to be a branch of Austronesian, and "Yangzian" to be a new
sister branch of Sino-Tibetan consisting of the Austroasiatic and Hmong-Mien languages.[52] This proposal was further
researched on by linguists such as Michael D. Larish in 2006, who also included the Japonic and Koreanic languages in the
macrofamily. The proposal has since been adopted by linguists such as George van Driem, albeit without the inclusion of
Japonic and Koreanic.[53]

Ongan
Blevins (2007) proposed that the Austronesian and the Ongan protolanguage are the descendants of an Austronesian–Ongan
protolanguage.[54] This view is not supported by mainstream linguists and remains very controversial. Robert Blust rejects
Blevins' proposal as far-fetched and based solely on chance resemblances and methodologically flawed comparisons.[55]

Writing systems
Most Austronesian languages have Latin-based writing systems today. Some non-Latin-
based writing systems are listed below.

Brahmi script
Kawi script
Balinese alphabet – used to write Balinese, Kawi, Malay, Sasak, and
Sanskrit.
A sign in Balinese and Latin
Batak alphabet – used to write several Batak languages. script at a Hindu temple in Bali
Baybayin – used to write Tagalog and several Philippine languages.
Bima alphabet – once used to write the Bima language.
Buhid alphabet – used to write Buhid language.
Hanunó'o alphabet – used to write Hanuno'o language.
Javanese script – used to write the Javanese language and several
neighbouring languages like Madurese.
Kerinci alphabet (Kaganga) – used to write the Kerinci language. A manuscript from the early
Kulitan alphabet – used to write the Kapampangan language. 1800s using the Batak script
Lampung alphabet – used to write Lampung and Komering.
Linggi alphabet – used to write Peninsular Malayic languages.
Lontara alphabet – used to write the Buginese, Makassarese and
several languages of Sulawesi.
Sundanese script – standardized script based on Old Sundanese
script, used to write the Sundanese language.
Rejang alphabet – used to write the Rejang language.
Rongorongo glyph, assumed to
Rencong alphabet – once used to write the Malay language.
be the writing system of the
Tagbanwa alphabet – once used to write various Palawan Rapa Nui language
languages.
Lota alphabet – used to write the Ende-Li'o language.
Cham alphabet – used to write Cham language.
Arabic script
Pegon alphabet – used to write Javanese, Sundanese and Madurese as well as several smaller
neighbouring languages.
Jawi alphabet – used to write Malay, Acehnese, Banjar, Minangkabau, Maguindanao, Tausug, Western
Cham and others.
Sorabe alphabet – once used to write several dialects of Malagasy language.
Hangul – used to write the Cia-Cia language but the project is no longer active.
Dunging – used to write the Iban language
Avoiuli – used to write the Raga language.
 Eskayan – used to write the Eskayan language, a secret language based on Boholano.
Woleai script (Caroline Island script) – used to write the Carolinian language (Refaluwasch).
Rongorongo – possibly used to write the Rapa Nui language.
Gagarit Abada – used to write Dusunic languages but it was not widely used.
Gangga Melayu – used to write Perak Malay
Braille – used in Filipino, Malaysian, Indonesian, Tolai, Motu, Māori, Samoan, Malagasy, and many other
Austronesian languages.

Comparison charts
Below are two charts comparing list of numbers of 1–10 and thirteen words in Austronesian languages; spoken in Taiwan,
the Philippines, the Mariana Islands, Indonesia, Malaysia, Chams or Champa (in Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam), East
Timor, Papua, New Zealand, Hawaii, Madagascar, Borneo, Kiribati, Caroline Islands, and Tuvalu.
 Comparison chart-numerals

Austronesian
List of Numbers 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1–10

Proto- *əsa
*duSa *təlu *Səpat *lima *ənəm *pitu *walu
Austronesian *isa

Formosan
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
languages

mtzyu / mspat /
Atayal qutux sazing cyugal payat magal mpitu / pitu
tzyu spat
Seediq kingal daha teru sepac rima mmteru mpitu mmsepac

Truku kingal dha tru spat rima mataru empitu maspat

Thao taha tusha turu shpat tarima katuru pitu kashpat

Papora tanu nya tul pat lima minum pitu mehal

Hoanya mital misa miru mipal lima rom pito talo

Babuza nata naroa natool'a napat nahup natap natu maaspat n

Favorlang natta narroa natorra naspat nachab nataap naito maaspat

Taokas tatanu rua tool'a lapat hasap tahap yuweto mahalpat

Pazeh/Kaxabu adang dusa tu'u supat xasep xasebuza xasebidusa xasebitu'u x

Saisiyat 'aeihae' roSa' to:lo' Sopat haseb SayboSi: SayboSi: 'aeihae' maykaSpat

Tsou coni yuso tuyu sʉptʉ eimo nomʉ pitu voyu

Hla'alua canni suua tuulu paatʉ kulima kʉnʉmʉ kupitu kualu

Kanakanavu cani cusa turu sʉʉpatʉ rima nʉmʉ pitu aru

Bunun tasʔa dusa tau paat hima nuum pitu vau

Rukai itha drusa tulru supate lrima eneme pitu valru

Paiwan ita drusa tjelu sepatj lima enem pitju alu

Puyuma sa druwa telu pat lima unem pitu walu

Kavalan usiq uzusa utulu uspat ulima unem upitu uwalu

Basay tsa lusa tsu səpat tsjima anəm pitu wasu

Amis cecay tosa tolo spat lima enem pito falo

Sakizaya cacay tosa tolo sepat lima enem pito walo

Siraya sasaat duha turu tapat tu-rima tu-num pitu pipa

Taivoan tsaha' ruha toho paha' hima lom kito' kipa'

ra-
Makatao na-saad ra-ruha ra-sipat ra-lima ra-hurum ra-pito ra-haru
ruma

Qauqaut ca lusa cuu səpat cima anəm pitu wacu

Malayo-
Polynesian 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
languages

Proto-Malayo- *əsa
*duha *təlu *əpat *lima *ənəm *pitu *walu
Polynesian *isa

Yami(Tao) asa adoa atlo apat alima anem apito awao

sifar
Acehnese sa duwa lhee peuet limong nam tujoh lapan
soh
 Balinesea
siki kalih tiga
nul papat lima nenem pitu kutus
besik dua telu
Banjar asa dua talu ampat lima anam pitu walu

Batak, Toba sada dua tolu opat lima onom pitu ualu

Buginese séddi dua tellu eppa’ lima enneng pitu arua

dise rua walu
Cia-Cia tolu pa'a lima no'o picu
ise ghua oalu

Cham sa dua klau pak lima nam tujuh dalapan

siji
Old Javanese[56] rwa tĕlu pāt lima nĕm pitu walu
sa-

Javanese[57] nol siji loro telu papat lima enem pitu wolu

Kelantan-Pattani kosong so duwo tigo pak limo ne tujoh lape

Komering nul osay ruwa tolu pak lima nom pitu walu

Madurese nol settong dhuwa' tello' empa' lema' ennem petto' ballu'
lobbang
Makassarese se're rua tallu appa' lima annang tuju sangantuju
nolo'

kosong sa/se delapan

Indonesian/Malay sifar[58] satu dua tiga empat lima enam tujuh
lapan[60]
nol[59] suatu

Minangkabau ciek duo tigo ampek limo anam tujuah salapan

teloj waloj
Moken cha:? thuwa:? pa:t lema:? nam luɟuːk
(təlɔy) (walɔy)

Rejang do duai tlau pat lêmo num tujuak dêlapên

Sasak sekek due telo empat lime enam pituk baluk

Sundanese nol hiji dua tilu opat lima genep tujuh dalapan

Terengganu
kosong se duwe tige pak lime nang tujoh lapang
Malay

Tetun nol ida rua tolu hat lima nen hitu ualu

sa˧ *
Tsat (HuiHui)c tʰua˩ kiə˧ pa˨˦ ma˧ naːn˧˨ su˥ paːn˧˨
ta˩ **

There are two forms for numbers 'one' in Tsat (Hui Hui; Hainan Cham) :
^* The word sa˧ is used for serial counting.
^** The word ta˩ is used with hundreds and thousands and before qualifiers.

ibbong
Ilocano maysa dua tallo uppat lima innem pito walo
awan

Ibanag awan tadday duwa tallu appa' lima annam pitu walu
Pangasinan sakey duwa talo apat lima anem pito walo

métung/
Kapampangan alá adwá atlú ápat limá ánam pitú walú
isá

Tagalog walâ isá dalawá tatló apat limá anim pitó waló
Bikol warâ sarô duwá tuló apát limá anóm pitó waló

isaea
Aklanon uwa daywa tatlo ap-at lima an-om pito waeo
sambilog

Karay-a wara (i)sara darwa tatlo apat lima anəm pito walo

Onhan isya darwa tatlo upat lima an-om pito walo

Romblomanon isá duhá tuyó upát limá onúm pitó wayó

 isád duwá
Masbatenyo tuló upát limá unóm pitó waló
usád duhá
Hiligaynon walâ isá duhá tatló apat limá anom pitó waló

Cebuano walâ usá duhá tuló upát limá unóm pitó waló

Waray waráy usá duhá tuló upát limá unóm pitó waló
Tausug sipar isa duwa tū upat lima unum pitu walu

Maranao isa dowa təlo pat lima nəm pito walo

Benuaq (Dayak
eray duaq toluu opaat limaq jawatn turu walo
Benuaq)
Lun Bawang/ na luk
eceh dueh teluh epat limeh enem tudu' waluh
Lundayeh dih

Dusun aiso iso duo tolu apat limo onom turu walu

isa
Malagasy aotra roa telo efatra dimy enina fito valo
iray
Sangirese
(Sangir- sembau darua tatelu epa lima eneng pitu walu
Minahasan)

Biak bei oser suru kyor fyak rim wonem fik war

Oceanic
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
languagesd
Chuukese eet érúúw één fáán niim woon fúús waan

Fijian saiva dua rua tolu vaa lima ono vitu walu

Gilbertese akea teuana uoua tenua aua nimaua onoua itua wanua
Hawaiian 'ole 'e-kahi 'e-lua 'e-kolu 'e-hā 'e-lima 'e-ono 'e-hiku 'e-walu

Māori kore tahi rua toru whā rima ono whitu waru

Marshallese[61] o̧ o juon ruo jilu emān ļalem jiljino jimjuon ralitōk

Motue[62] ta rua toi hani ima tauratoi hitu taurahani t

Niuean nakai taha ua tolu fā lima ono fitu valu

Rapanui tahi rua toru hā rima ono hitu va'u

Rarotongan
kare ta'i rua toru 'ā rima ono 'itu varu
Māori

Rotuman ta rua folu hake lima ono hifu vạlu

Samoan o tasi lua tolu fa lima ono fitu valu

Samoan
o kasi lua kolu fa lima ogo fiku valu
(K-type)
hō'ē
Tahitian piti toru maha pae ōno hitu va'u
tahi

Tongan noa taha ua tolu fa nima ono fitu valu

tahi
Tuvaluan lua tolu fa lima ono fitu valu
tasi
dæriiy
Yapese t’aareeb l’ugruw dalip anngeeg laal neel’ medlip meeruuk
dæriiq
 Comparison chart-thirt
English one two three four person house

Proto-
*əsa, *isa *duSa *təlu *əpat *Cau *balay, *Rumaq
Austronesian

Tetum ida rua tolu haat ema uma

Amis cecay tosa tolo sepat tamdaw luma

Puyuma sa dua telu pat taw rumah

Tagalog isa dalawa tatlo apat tao bahay

Bikol sarô duwá tuló apát táwo haróng

Rinconada Bikol əsad darwā tolō əpat tawō baləy

Waray usa duha tulo upat tawo balay

usa,
Cebuano duha tulo upat tawo balay
isa

Hiligaynon isa duha tatlo apat tawo balay

isaea,
Aklanon daywa tatlo ap-at tawo baeay
sambilog
Kinaray-a (i)sara darwa tatlo apat tawo balay

Tausug hambuuk duwa tu upat tau bay

Maranao isa dowa təlo pat taw walay

Kapampangan métung adwá atlú ápat táu balé

dua, talo, apat,

Pangasinan sakey too abong
duara talora apatira
Ilokano maysa dua tallo uppat lima innem

Ivatan asa dadowa tatdo apat tao vahay

Ibanag tadday dua tallu appa' tolay balay

Yogad tata addu tallu appat tolay binalay

Gaddang antet addwa tallo appat tolay balay

Tboli sotu lewu tlu fat tau gunu

Lun Bawang/
eceh dueh teluh epat lemulun/lun ruma'
Lundayeh

sa/se,
rumah,
Indonesian/Malay satu, dua tiga empat orang
balai
suatu

esa, rwa, tĕlu, pat,

Old Javanese wwang umah
eka dwi tri catur[63]
uwong, omah,
siji, loro, tĕlu, papat,
Javanese tiyang, griya,
setunggal kalih tiga[66] sekawan
priyantun[66] dalem[66]
hiji, urang, imah,
dua, tilu,
Sundanese saésé opat jalma, jalmi rorompok, bumi
salayan tolu

rumoh,
Acehnese sa duwa lhèë peuët ureuëng balè,
seuëng

Minangkabau ciek duo tigo ampek urang rumah

Rejang do duai tlau pat tun umêak

 Lampungese sai khua telu pak jelema lamban

Komering osay ruwa tolu pak jolma lombahan

Buginese se'di dua tellu eppa' tau bola

uwang, gumah,
Temuan satuk duak tigak empat
eang umah

Toba Batak sada dua tolu opat halak jabu

ghumoh,
Kelantan-Pattani so duwo tigo pak oghe
dumoh

Biak oser suru kyor fyak snon rum

håcha,
Chamorro hugua tulu fatfat taotao/tautau guma'
maisa

ta,
Motu rua toi hani tau ruma
tamona

Māori tahi rua toru whā tangata whare

uma,
Gilbertese teuana uoua tenua aua aomata bata,
auti (from house)

Tuvaluan tasi lua tolu fá toko fale

Hawaiian kahi lua kolu hā kanaka hale

Banjarese asa duwa talu ampat urang rūmah

Malagasy isa roa telo efatra olona trano

walai,
Dusun iso duo tolu apat tulun
lamin

Kadazan iso duvo tohu apat tuhun hamin

tolu, tulun, valai,

Rungus iso duvo apat
tolzu tulzun valzai

Sungai/Tambanuo ido duo tolu opat lobuw waloi

satu, sa, orang,
Iban dua tiga empat rumah
siti, sigi urang

satu,
Sarawak Malay dua tiga empat orang rumah
sigek

ghumoh,
Terengganuan se duwe tige pak oghang
dumoh

Kanayatn sa dua talu ampat urakng rumah

Yapese t’aareeb l’ugruw dalip anngeeg beaq noqun

See also
Languages of Taiwan
Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association
List of Austronesian languages
 List of Austronesian regions

Notes
a. Setaria italica and Panicum miliaceum.

References
1. Blust, Robert Andrew. "Austronesian Languages" (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Austronesian-languages).
Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
2. "Statistical Summaries; Ethnologue" (https://www.ethnologue.com/statistics/).
3. "Austronesian; Ethnologue" (https://www.ethnologue.com/subgroup/447/).
4. Sneddon, James Neil (2004). The Indonesian Language: Its History and Role in Modern Society. UNSW
Press. p. 14.)
5. Gonzalez, Andrew B. (1980). Language and Nationalism: The Philippine Experience Thus Far. Manila:
Ateneo de Manila University Press. p. 76. ISBN 9711130009.
6. Robert Blust (2016). History of the Austronesian Languages. University of Hawaii at Manoa.
7. Pereltsvaig (2018), p. 143.
8. Dempwolff, Otto. Vergleichende Lautlehre des austronesischen Wortschatzes [Comparative phonology of the
Austronesian vocabularies] (3 vols). Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für Eingeborenen-Sprachen (Supplements to the
Journal of Native Languages) 15; 17; 19 (in German). Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
9. John Simpson; Edmund Weiner, eds. (1989). Official Oxford English Dictionary (OED2) (Dictionary). Oxford
University Press.
10. Blust (2013), p. 169.
11. Blust (2013), p. 212.
12. Blust (2013), pp. 215–218.
13. Blust (2013), pp. 220–222.
14. Crowley (2009), p. 100.
15. Blust (2013), pp. 188–189, 200, 206.
16. Blust (2013), p. 355.
17. Blust (2013), pp. 370–399.
18. Blust (2013), pp. 406–431.
19. Ross (2002), p. 453.
20. Adelaar, K. Alexander; Himmelmann, Nikolaus (2005). The Austronesian Languages of Asia and
Madagascar. Routledge. pp. 6–7. ISBN 978-0415681537.
21. Croft, William (2012). Verbs: Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford University Press. p. 261. ISBN 978-
0199248599.
22. Greenhill, Blust & Gray 2003–2019.
23. Haudricourt (1965), p. 315.
24. Dyen (1965).
25. Grace (1966).
26. Dahl (1973).
27. Blust (1977).
28. Li (2004).
29. Taylor, G. (1888). "A ramble through southern Formosa". The China Review. 16: 137–161. "The Tipuns... are
certainly descended from emigrants, and I have not the least doubt but that the Amias are of similar origin;
only of later date, and most probably from the Mejaco Simas [that is, Miyako-jima], a group of islands lying
110 miles to the North-east.... By all accounts the old Pilam savages, who merged into the Tipuns, were the
first settlers on the plain; then came the Tipuns, and a long time afterwards the Amias. The Tipuns, for some
time, acknowledged the Pilam Chief as supreme, but soon absorbed both the chieftainship and the people, in
fact the only trace left of them now, is a few words peculiar to the Pilam village, one of which, makan (to eat),
is pure Malay. The Amias submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the Tipuns."
30. Starosta, S (1995). "A grammatical subgrouping of Formosan languages". In P. Li; Cheng-hwa Tsang; Ying-
kuei Huang; Dah-an Ho & Chiu-yu Tseng (eds.). Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan. Taipei: Institute of
History and Philology, Academia Sinica. pp. 683–726.
31. Li (2008), p. 216: "The position of Rukai is the most controversial: Tsuchida... treats it as more closely related
to Tsouic languages, based on lexicostatistic evidence, while Ho... believes it to be one of the Paiwanic
languages, i.e. part of my Southern group, as based on a comparison of fourteen grammatical features. In
fact, Japanese anthropologists did not distinguish between Rukai, Paiwan and Puyuma in the early stage of
their studies"
32. Laurent Sagart (2004) The Higher Phylogeny of Austronesian and the Position of Tai-Kadai
33. Laurent Sagart (2021) A more detailed early Austronesian phylogeny. Plenary talk at the 15th International
Conference on Austronesian Linguistics.
34. The tree can be found at the following link. Click on the nodes to see the proposed shared innovations for
each.
Laurent Sagart (July 2021). "Shared innovations in early Austronesian phylogeny" (https://f-origin.hypothese
s.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/3902/files/2020/12/Clickable-Austronesian-phylogeny_2020-.pdf) (PDF).
35. Blust (2013), p. 742.
36. Greenhill, Blust & Gray (2008).
37. Sagart (2002).
38. Diamond (2000).
39. Blust (1999).
40. Thurgood (1999), p. 225.
41. Solnit, David B. (March 1992). "Japanese/Austro-Tai By Paul K. Benedict (review)". Language. 687 (1).
Linguistic Society of America: 188–196. doi:10.1353/lan.1992.0061 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Flan.1992.006
1). S2CID 141811621 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:141811621).
42. Sagart et al. 2017, p. 188.
43. van Driem, George (2005). "Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-
Burman as default theory" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110726012439/http://www.eastling.org/paper/Drie
m.pdf) (PDF). In Yogendra Prasada Yadava; Govinda Bhattarai; Ram Raj Lohani; Balaram Prasain; Krishna
Parajuli (eds.). Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.
pp. 285–338 [304]. Archived from the original (http://www.eastling.org/paper/Driem.pdf) (PDF) on 2011-07-
26. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
44. Sagart et al. 2017, p. 189.
45. Ko 2014, pp. 426–436.
46. Wei et al. 2017, pp. 1–12.
47. Winter (2010).
48. Blust (2013), pp. 710–713, 745–747.
49. Robbeets, Martine (2017). "Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese: A case of
farming/language dispersal" (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F22105832-00702005). Language Dynamics and
Change. 7 (2): 210–251. doi:10.1163/22105832-00702005 (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F22105832-0070200
5). hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-002E-8635-7 (https://hdl.handle.net/11858%2F00-001M-0000-002E-8635-7).
50. Kumar, Ann (2009). Globalizing the Prehistory of Japan: Language, Genes and Civilization. Oxford:
Routledge.
51. "Javanese influence on Japanese" (https://www.languagesoftheworld.info/historical-linguistics/javanese-influ
ence-on-japanese.html). Languages Of The World. 2011-05-09. Retrieved 2023-06-13.
52. Starosta, Stanley (2005). "Proto-East Asian and the origin and dispersal of languages of east and southeast
Asia and the Pacific". In Sagart, Laurent; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of East
Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics (https://archive.org/details/peoplingeastasia00b
len). London: Routledge Curzon. pp. 182 (https://archive.org/details/peoplingeastasia00blen/page/n210)–
197. ISBN 978-0-415-32242-3.
53. van Driem, George. 2018. "The East Asian linguistic phylum: A reconstruction based on language and genes
(https://web.archive.org/web/20210110235952/https://himalayanlanguages.org/files/driem/pdfs/2018i.pdf)
[usurped]", Journal of the Asiatic Society, LX (4): 1–38.

54. Blevins (2007).

55. Blust (2014).
56. Zoetmulder, P.J., Kamus Jawa Kuno-Indonesia. Vol. I-II. Terjemahan Darusuprapto-Sumarti Suprayitno.
Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 1995.
57. "Javanese alphabet (Carakan)" (http://www.omniglot.com/writing/javanese.htm). Omniglot.
58. from the Arabic ‫ ِصْفر‬ṣifr
59. Predominantly in Indonesia, comes from the Latin nullus
60. lapan is a known contraction of delapan; predominant in Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei.
61. Cook, Richard (1992). Peace Corps Marshall Islands: Marshallese Language Training Manual (http://linguisti
cs.berkeley.edu/~rscook/pdf/PCMLT-JejeinM.pdf) (PDF), pg. 22. Accessed August 27, 2007.
62. Percy Chatterton, (1975). Say It In Motu: An instant introduction to the common language of Papua (http://ww
w.exkiap.net/other/tok_pisin/Say_It_In_Motu.pdf). Pacific Publications. ISBN 978-0-85807-025-7
63. s.v. kawan, Old Javanese-English Dictionary, P.J. Zoetmulder and Stuart Robson, 1982
64. s.v. hañar, Old Javanese-English Dictionary, P.J. Zoetmulder and Stuart Robson, 1982
65. s.v. kami, this could mean both first person singular and plural, Old Javanese-English Dictionary, P.J.
Zoetmulder and Stuart Robson, 1982
66. Javanese English Dictionary, Stuart Robson and Singgih Wibisono, 2002
67. From Spanish "galgo"
68. From Spanish "nuevo"

Bibliography
Bellwood, Peter (July 1991). "The Austronesian Dispersal and the Origin of Languages". Scientific American.
265 (1): 88–93. Bibcode:1991SciAm.265a..88B (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991SciAm.265a..88B).
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0791-88 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fscientificamerican0791-88).
Bellwood, Peter (1997). Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian archipelago. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
Bellwood, Peter (1998). "Taiwan and the Prehistory of the Austronesians-speaking Peoples". Review of
Archaeology. 18: 39–48.
Bellwood, Peter; Fox, James; Tryon, Darrell (1995). The Austronesians: Historical and comparative
perspectives. Department of Anthropology, Australian National University. ISBN 978-0-7315-2132-6.
Bellwood, Peter; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (June 2005). "Human Migrations in Continental East Asia and
Taiwan: Genetic, Linguistic, and Archaeological Evidence". Current Anthropology. 46 (3): 480–484.
doi:10.1086/430018 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F430018). S2CID 145495386 (https://api.semanticscholar.or
g/CorpusID:145495386).
Blench, Roger (June 10–13, 2004). Stratification in the peopling of China: how far does the linguistic
evidence match genetics and archaeology? (http://www.rogerblench.info/Language/China/Geneva%20pape
r%202004%20submit.pdf) (PDF). Human migrations in continental East Asia and Taiwan: genetic, linguistic
and archaeological evidence. Geneva.
Blevins, Juliette (2007). "A Long Lost Sister of Proto-Austronesian? Proto-Ongan, Mother of Jarawa and
Onge of the Andaman Islands" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110111172242/http://email.eva.mpg.de/~blevi
ns/pdf/webpub2007a.pdf) (PDF). Oceanic Linguistics. 46 (1): 154–198. doi:10.1353/ol.2007.0015 (https://doi.
org/10.1353%2Fol.2007.0015). S2CID 143141296 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143141296).
Archived from the original (http://email.eva.mpg.de/~blevins/pdf/webpub2007a.pdf) (PDF) on 2011-01-11.
Blust, Robert (1977). "The Proto-Austronesian pronouns and Austronesian subgrouping: a preliminary
report". Working Papers in Linguistics. 9 (2). Honolulu: Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii: 1–15.
Blust, Robert (1985). "The Austronesian Homeland: A Linguistic Perspective". Asian Perspectives. 26: 46–67.
Blust, Robert (1999). "Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: some issues in Austronesian comparative
linguistics". In Zeitoun, E.; Li, P.J.K (eds.). Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on
Austronesian Linguistics. Taipei: Academia Sinica. pp. 31–94.
Blust, Robert (2013). The Austronesian Languages (revised ed.). Australian National University.
hdl:1885/10191 (https://hdl.handle.net/1885%2F10191). ISBN 978-1-922185-07-5.
Blust, Robert (2014). "Some Recent Proposals Concerning the Classification of the Austronesian
Languages". Oceanic Linguistics. 53 (2): 300–391. doi:10.1353/ol.2014.0025 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fol.2
014.0025). S2CID 144931249 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:144931249).
Comrie, Bernard (2001). "Languages of the world". In Aronoff, Mark; Rees-Miller, Janie (eds.). The Handbook
of Linguistics. Languages of the world. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 19–42. ISBN 1-4051-0252-7.
Crowley, Terry (2009). "Austronesian languages". In Brown, Keith; Ogilvie, Sarah (eds.). Concise
Encyclopaedia of Languages of the World. Oxford: Elsevier. pp. 96–105.
Dahl, Otto Christian (1973). Proto-Austronesian. Lund: Skandinavian Institute of Asian Studies.
Diamond, Jared M (2000). "Taiwan's gift to the world" (https://doi.org/10.1038%2F35001685). Nature. 403
(6771): 709–10. Bibcode:2000Natur.403..709D (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000Natur.403..709D).
doi:10.1038/35001685 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2F35001685). PMID 10693781 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/10693781).
Dyen, Isidore (1965). "A Lexicostatistical classification of the Austronesian languages". International Journal
of American Linguistics (Memoir 19).
Fox, James J. (19–20 August 2004). Current Developments in Comparative Austronesian Studies (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20061012145718/http://dspace.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/43158/1/Comparative_Austron
esian_Studies.pdf) (PDF). Symposium Austronesia Pascasarjana Linguististik dan Kajian Budaya.
Universitas Udayana, Bali. Archived from the original (http://dspace.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/43158/1/Com
parative_Austronesian_Studies.pdf) (PDF) on 12 October 2006. Retrieved 10 August 2006.
Fuller, Peter (2002). "Reading the Full Picture" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110927085103/http://rspas.an
u.edu.au/qb/articleFile.php?searchterm=3-4-3). Asia Pacific Research. Canberra, Australia: Research School
of Pacific and Asian Studies. Archived from the original (http://rspas.anu.edu.au/qb/articleFile.php?searchter
m=3-4-3) on September 27, 2011. Retrieved July 28, 2005.
Grace, George W. (1966). "Austronesian Lexicostatistical Classification:a review article (Review of Dyen
1965)". Oceanic Linguistics. 5 (1): 13–58. doi:10.2307/3622788 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3622788).
JSTOR 3622788 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/3622788).
Greenhill, S.J.; Blust, R.; Gray, R.D. (2008). "The Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database: From
Bioinformatics to Lexomics" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2614200). Evolutionary
Bioinformatics. 4. SAGE Publications: 271–283. doi:10.4137/EBO.S893 (https://doi.org/10.4137%2FEBO.S8
93). PMC 2614200 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2614200). PMID 19204825 (https://pubm
ed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19204825).
Greenhill, S.J.; Blust, R.; Gray, R.D. (2003–2019). "Austronesian Basic Vocabulary Database" (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20181219182305/https://abvd.shh.mpg.de/austronesian/). Archived from the original (https://a
bvd.shh.mpg.de/austronesian/) on 2018-12-19. Retrieved 2018-12-19.
Haudricourt, André G. (1965). "Problems of Austronesian comparative philology". Lingua. 14: 315–329.
doi:10.1016/0024-3841(65)90048-3 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0024-3841%2865%2990048-3).
Ko, Albert Min-Shan; et al. (2014). "Early Austronesians: Into and Out Of Taiwan" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC3951936). The American Journal of Human Genetics. 94 (3): 426–36.
doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.02.003 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ajhg.2014.02.003). PMC 3951936 (https://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3951936). PMID 24607387 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24607387).
Li, Paul Jen-kuei (2004). "Origins of the East Formosans:Basay, Kavalan, Amis, and Siraya" (https://web.arch
ive.org/web/20190418173953/http://www.ling.sinica.edu.tw/files/publication/j2004_2_03_9423.pdf) (PDF).
Language and Linguistics. 5 (2): 363–376. Archived from the original (http://www.ling.sinica.edu.tw/files/publi
cation/j2004_2_03_9423.pdf) (PDF) on 2019-04-18. Retrieved 2019-04-18.
Li, Paul Jen-kuei (2006). The Internal Relationships of Formosan Languages (https://www.sil.org/resources/a
rchives/25819). Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics (ICAL). Puerto Princesa City,
Palawan, Philippines.
Li, Paul Jen-kuei (2008). "Time perspective of Formosan Aborigines". In Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia; Blench,
Roger; Ross, Malcolm D.; Peiros, Ilia; Lin, Marie (eds.). Past human migrations in East Asia: matching
archaeology, linguistics and genetics. London: Routledge. pp. 211–218.
McColl, Hugh; Racimo, Fernando; Vinner, Lasse; Demeter, Fabrice; Gakuhari, Takashi; et al. (2018-07-05).
"The prehistoric peopling of Southeast Asia". Science. 361 (6397). American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS): 88–92. Bibcode:2018Sci...361...88M (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/20
18Sci...361...88M). bioRxiv 10.1101/278374 (https://doi.org/10.1101%2F278374).
doi:10.1126/science.aat3628 (https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.aat3628). hdl:10072/383365 (https://hdl.ha
ndle.net/10072%2F383365). ISSN 0036-8075 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0036-8075). PMID 29976827
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29976827). S2CID 206667111 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2
06667111).
Lynch, John; Ross, Malcolm; Crowley, Terry (2002). The Oceanic languages. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon
Press. ISBN 0-415-68155-3.
Melton, T.; Clifford, S.; Martinson, J.; Batzer, M.; Stoneking, M. (1998). "Genetic evidence for the proto-
Austronesian homeland in Asia: mtDNA and nuclear DNA variation in Taiwanese aboriginal tribes" (https://ww
w.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1377653). American Journal of Human Genetics. 63 (6): 1807–23.
doi:10.1086/302131 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F302131). PMC 1377653 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC1377653). PMID 9837834 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9837834).
Ostapirat, Weera (2005). "Kra–Dai and Austronesian: Notes on phonological correspondences and
vocabulary distribution". In Laurent, Sagart; Blench, Roger; Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of
East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics. London: Routledge Curzon. pp. 107–131.
Peiros, Ilia (2004). Austronesian: What linguists know and what they believe they know. The workshop on
Human migrations in continental East Asia and Taiwan. Geneva.
Pereltsvaig, Asya (2018). Languages of the World. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-316-62196-7.
Ross, Malcolm (2009). "Proto Austronesian verbal morphology: a reappraisal". In Adelaar, K. Alexander;
Pawley, Andrew (eds.). Austronesian Historical Linguistics and Culture History: A Festschrift for Robert Blust.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. pp. 295–326.
 Ross, Malcolm; Pawley, Andrew (1993). "Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history". Annual
Review of Anthropology. 22: 425–459. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.22.100193.002233 (https://doi.org/10.1146%2
Fannurev.an.22.100193.002233). OCLC 1783647 (https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/1783647).
Ross, John (2002). "Final words: research themes in the history and typology of western Austronesian
languages". In Wouk, Fay; Malcolm, Ross (eds.). The history and typology of Western Austronesian voice
systems. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. pp. 451–474.
Sagart, Laurent; Hsu, Tze-Fu; Tsai, Yuan-Ching; Hsing, Yue-Ie C. (2017). "Austronesian and Chinese words
for the millets" (https://www.academia.edu/35149421). Language Dynamics and Change. 7 (2): 187–209.
doi:10.1163/22105832-00702002 (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F22105832-00702002). S2CID 165587524 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:165587524).
Sagart, Laurent (8–11 January 2002). Sino-Tibeto-Austronesian: An updated and improved argument (http://
halshs.ccsd.cnrs.fr/docs/00/08/50/59/PDF/canberra.pdf) (PDF). Ninth International Conference on
Austronesian Linguistics (ICAL9). Canberra, Australia.
Sagart, Laurent (2004). "The higher phylogeny of Austronesian and the position of Tai–Kadai" (https://halshs.
archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00090906/document). Oceanic Linguistics. 43 (2): 411–440.
doi:10.1353/ol.2005.0012 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fol.2005.0012). S2CID 49547647 (https://api.semantics
cholar.org/CorpusID:49547647).
Sagart, Laurent (2005). "Sino-Tibeto-Austronesian: An updated and improved argument". In Blench, Roger;
Sanchez-Mazas, Alicia (eds.). The Peopling of East Asia: Putting Together Archaeology, Linguistics and
Genetics. London: Routledge Curzon. pp. 161–176. ISBN 978-0-415-32242-3.
Sapir, Edward (1968) [1949]. "Time perspective in aboriginal American culture: a study in method". In
Mandelbaum, D.G. (ed.). Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture and personality. Berkeley:
University of California Press. pp. 389–467. ISBN 0-520-01115-5.
Taylor, G. (1888). "A ramble through southern Formosa" (https://web.archive.org/web/20210411020008/http
s://www.reed.edu/formosa/texts/Taylor1888.html). The China Review. 16: 137–161. Archived from the
original (https://www.reed.edu/formosa/texts/Taylor1888.html) on 2021-04-11. Retrieved 2019-04-18.
Thurgood, Graham (1999). From Ancient Cham to Modern Dialects. Two Thousand Years of Language
Contact and Change. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publications No. 28. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
ISBN 0-8248-2131-9.
Trejaut, J. A.; Kivisild, T.; Loo, J. H.; Lee, C. L.; He, C. L. (2005). "Traces of archaic mitochondrial lineages
persist in Austronesian-speaking Formosan populations" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC116
6350). PLOS Biol. 3 (8): e247. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030247 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.003
0247). PMC 1166350 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1166350). PMID 15984912 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15984912).
Wei, Lan-Hai; Yan, Shi; Teo, Yik-Ying; Huang, Yun-Zhi; et al. (2017). "Phylogeography of Y-chromosome
haplogroup O3a2b2-N6 reveals patrilineal traces of Austronesian populations on the eastern coastal regions
of Asia" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5381892). PLOS ONE. 12 (4): 1–12.
Bibcode:2017PLoSO..1275080W (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017PLoSO..1275080W).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175080 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0175080). PMC 5381892 (http
s://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5381892). PMID 28380021 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/283
80021).
Winter, Bodo (2010). "A Note on the Higher Phylogeny of Austronesian". Oceanic Linguistics. 49 (1): 282–
287. doi:10.1353/ol.0.0067 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fol.0.0067). JSTOR 40783595 (https://www.jstor.org/st
able/40783595). S2CID 143458895 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143458895).
Wouk, Fay; Ross, Malcolm, eds. (2002). The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems.
Pacific Linguistics. Canberra: Australian National University.

Further reading
Bengtson, John D., The "Greater Austric" Hypothesis (http://jdbengt.net/articles/Austric.pdf), Association for
the Study of Language in Prehistory.
Blundell, David. "Austronesian Dispersal". Newsletter of Chinese Ethnology. 35: 1–26.
Blust, R. A. (1983). Lexical reconstruction and semantic reconstruction: the case of the Austronesian "house"
words. Hawaii: R. Blust.
Cohen, E. M. K. (1999). Fundaments of Austronesian roots and etymology. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
ISBN 0-85883-436-7
Marion, P., Liste Swadesh élargie de onze langues austronésiennes, éd. Carré de sucre, 2009
Pawley, A., & Ross, M. (1994). Austronesian terminologies: continuity and change. Canberra, Australia: Dept.
of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University. ISBN 0-
 85883-424-3
Sagart, Laurent, Roger Blench, and Alicia Sanchez-Nazas (Eds.) (2004). The peopling of East Asia: Putting
Together Archaeology, Linguistics and Genetics. London: RoutledgeCurzon. ISBN 0-415-32242-1.
Terrell, John Edward (December 2004). "Introduction: 'Austronesia' and the great Austronesian migration".
World Archaeology. 36 (4): 586–590. doi:10.1080/0043824042000303764 (https://doi.org/10.1080%2F00438
24042000303764). S2CID 162244203 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:162244203).
Tryon, D. T., & Tsuchida, S. (1995). Comparative Austronesian dictionary: an introduction to Austronesian
studies. Trends in linguistics, 10. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 3110127296
Wittmann, Henri (1972). "Le caractère génétiquement composite des changements phonétiques du
malgache." Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (http://www.nou-la.org/ling/1972
a-malgache.pdf) 7.807–810. La Haye: Mouton.
Wolff, John U., "Comparative Austronesian Dictionary. An Introduction to Austronesian Studies", Language,
vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 145–156, Mar 1997, ISSN 0097-8507 (https://www.worldcat.org/search?fq=x0:jrnl&q=n2:00
97-8507)

External links
Blust's Austronesian Comparative Dictionary (https://acd.clld.org/)
Swadesh lists of Austronesian basic vocabulary words (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Swadesh_lists
_for_Austronesian_languages) (from Wiktionary's Swadesh-list appendix (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appe
ndix:Swadesh_lists))
"Homepage of linguist Dr. Lawrence Reid" (http://www2.hawaii.edu/~reid/). Retrieved July 28, 2005.
Summer Institute of Linguistics site showing languages (Austronesian and Papuan) of Papua New Guinea. (h
ttp://www.sil.org/pacific/png)
"Austronesian Language Resources" (https://web.archive.org/web/20041122214717/http://www-personal.umi
ch.edu/~rustyb/112/austronesian.htm). Archived from the original (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~rustyb/11
2/austronesian.htm) on November 22, 2004.
Spreadsheet of 1600+ Austronesian and Papuan number names and systems – ongoing study to determine
their relationships and distribution (http://coconutstudio.com/Austro%20Nos%20Mar2008%2011-3.xls)
Languages of the World: The Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) Language Family (https://www.nvtc.gov/lot
w/months/june/austronesianLanguageFamily.html)
Introduction to Austronesian Languages and Culture (video) (Malayo-Polynesian) Language Family (https://w
ww.youtube.com/watch?v=mYSr2k4buqU) on YouTube
南島語族分布圖 (http://www.pro-classic.com/ethnicgv/maps/map_index.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20140630020425/http://www.pro-classic.com/ethnicgv/maps/map_index.htm) 2014-06-30 at the
Wayback Machine

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Austronesian_languages&oldid=1248242944"