Burma: Census of India 1901 Vol. I - Khamkoo

—
"]i
REPORT ON THE CENSUS OF BURMA.
particular language a particular sound is a pitch tone or not ? The answer is that
there is no test but the ear, and it follows that, when the distinctions are, as they
very frequently are, extraordinarily subtle, the dividing line must of necessity be
drawn at different points by different observers. For my own part I am very
doubtful whether there are in Burmese, Talaing and Kachin any "tones" within
the meaning of Sir Thomas Wade's definition, though such are indubitably present
in Shan and Karen. I am aware that here I am not one with competent
authorities. Mr. Lonsdale, in his recently published Burmese grammar ,_
has gone
very fully into the question of Burmese tones. He calls them the simple, the
•
checked, and the heavy, and explains how they differ from accent. I must confess
that his explanation still leaves me doubting. As I hear the sounds, pitch does
not enter into their composition. In fact I consider it questionable whether, if
Chinese, Shan and Karen had been unknown to scholars in Burma, there would
ever have been any talk of tones in Burmese. The existence of tones in Talaing
has been so disputed that it seems clear that those that exist are not such as force
themselves on the ear. I am given to understand too that in Kachin " pitch "
tones are non-existent. In Chin the number of tones is, according to Mr.
Houghton, three, but it appears that little or no inconvenience is caused by amalgamating
the three into two. Moreover, the difference between these two tones
seems barely more marked than between the two " oo " sounds in the words " foot
"
and " boot." So far as I can gather, there is here no inflection of the musical
pitch such as arrests the hearer when listening to Chinese and Shan, and I am inclined
to hold that, had there been no Sinitic analogy, the tonal element in Chin
would flot have been recognized as differing in quality from those variations of
sounds which are indicated by accents.
It may be argued of course that " stress " as well as " pitch " tones should be
allowed into the tone scheme. The question then will be when does the stress tone
become an accent proper ; if the absence of pitch is no criterion, where do tones
end and accents begin ? and new matter for argument is created. It is useless
venturing on this disputable ground. If, as I have already stated, it is understood
that " tone " is used in its most catholic sense, all the languages with which we
are concerned can be denominated polytonic and for the purposes of classification
a comprehensive term of this kind is useful.
98. Professor Forchhammer, in the Essay on Indo-Chinese languages contributed
by him to the Indian Antiquary, writes as follows of the position which
in these languages the tonal system assumed towards words borrowed from
foreign tongues :
" The Chinese, we have seen, devised means, by transliterating Sanskrit words with
Chinese graphic signs and pronouncing them as such, which deprived foreign elements of
all disturbing influence upon tonal inflection. Talaing, Burmese, and Shan, partly because
fettered by Indian alphabets, were forced to grant important concessions to intruders. Shan
assigned to all borrowed words, whether Aryan or Burmese, the deepest, dullest tone, to
some unaccented syllables, suffixes and affixes, the short jerking fifth tone- * * *
Thus the Shan limited the destructive influence of foreign .atonal words by apportioning to
them a fixed position in the tone scale. Talaing and Burmese made no similar provisions
and this neglect resulted in the decomposition of their tonal system."
The last sentence would appear to indicate that Talaing and Burmese had
once been more tonic than they now are, and it would be interesting if it could be
shown that this were the case. If it were so, the process by which tones were
discarded would be rightly described as one of recuperation rather than of decomposition
or disintegration, that is, if the more recent theory in regard to the origin
of tones is
correct.
99. On this last point the views of. philologists appear to have been modified of
recent years. In his
qh . 1 891 report Mr. Eales, elaborating
an idea thrown out by Mr. Cust, is of opinion that
(
the use of tones marks " the radical stage through which all languages have passed
or in which those that are still tonic have been stereotyped." He says :—
" To use a simile which exactly conveys our meaning, the savage, having but few sounds,
was forced to make as many words as he could out of the sounds he possessed by uttering
the sounds in different tones,- like Paganini, who could play on one string pf hjs violin/'