Burma: Census of India 1901 Vol. I - Khamkoo

—
1
—
REPORT ON THE CENSUS OF BURMA. 73
This is practically the position taken up by a far earlier scholar, Logan, who
in his scholarly Ethnology of the Indo-Pacific Islands (Journal of the Indian
Archipelago, Volume VI, Singapore, 1852) says:
" Language is a natural and necessary attribute of the developed human intellect and
organism. In its first origin it is imitative. Its sounds are entoned, chanted, varied, complex,
and often harsh, like those of nature."
It cannot be denied that, with Messrs. Cust and Logan at his back, Mr.
Eales has a strong case. Further research, however, appears to have led to the
conclusion that another view is more probably correct. In his Ethnology Professor
Keane states that, just as monosyllabism is not a necessary condition of
primitive speech, so
" It is now clear that tone gives no support to the theory of a supposed primitive singsong
utterance, but that it is a compensating element, unconsciously introduced to distinguish
the numerous homophones resulting from the ravages of phonetic disintegration."
Professor Keane's conclusion is, so far as he himself is concerned, based
largely on his observations in regard to Chinese, where a comparison of the
modern with the primitive tongue exhibits in a marked degree the phonetic decay
or, as Dr. Grierson has called it, the "phonetic attrition" alluded to. The languages
of Burma were doubtless never as far removed from what they now are as
Terrien de La Couperie has shown Chinese in its earliest forms to have been, but
the principle no doubt holds good in their case. The above theory appears to have
borne the test of criticism and gained general acceptance. Mr. Houghton is even
more out-spoken than Professor Keane. He looks upon tones in the Indo-Chinese
languages as an unmistakable sign of degeneracy, talks of them as a " disease of
speech " and gives as a probable explanation of their coming into being the soft
and luxurious nature of the climate in which the chief members of this family found
themselves. Holding this view, one would logically be bound to regard the reversion
by means of synonyms and the like to an atonic system as a symptom
of renewed virility rather than of decay. No doubt, however, a number of factors
have been at work.
100. The morphological order in which the languages of the province find a
place is the " isolating." It must not be forgotten,
The morphologtcal order.
however> that there are feW; possibly none, of them
that are entirely free from agglutinative characteristics. Agglutination is in fact
so prominent a feature of Burmese that, as Mr. Eales has pointed out, Professor
Max Miiller has classed it, with Shan, among the agglutinative languages. In
Burmese the relational particles, in so far as they possess the power to be detached
and shift their places in the combined form, fulfil entirely what Professor Keane
calls the " true test of agglutination." It seems to me, however, that in the
languages of this class in Burma the isolating element usually preponderates
over
have
' ' 1 1 — -.-1.! -
tonic).
portion of the term would appear to be redundant.
< .1 •-
Here, however, Mr. Houghton
is at issue with Professor Keane, according to whom the Khassi language, though
isolating, has no tones. This may mean nothing more than that Khassi is no
more tonic than Burmese, still, all things considered, it will be best, in my judgment,
to qualify the " isolating " in the manner suggested. *
* Since writing the preceding few paragraphs, I have received from Dr. Grierson a copy of a draft note
on the Malay and Indo-Chinese families of languages in which conclusions are arrived at differing slightly
from those expressed above. Dr. Grierson demurs to the use of the term " polytonic " in describing the
Indo-Chinese forms of speech, first because some Indo-Chinese languages possess only one tone and
secondly because, where there are more than cne, they are, so to speak, an accidental feature of the language-
The grounds for the first of these objections are, no doubt, sound. I have myself questioned the existence
of tones proper in Burmese, Talaing and Kachin. I ^
have, however, explained above that in dealing
with the languages of the province, I am using "tone" in what is, perhaps, not its orthodox sense and
including for convenience of identification, not only tones proper but also those inflections of the voice which
are not real tones but come almost within the category of rudimentary tones and have come in Burma to be
spoken of as such. On the understanding, therefore, that the term "polytonic" is used in this Report in a
special sense, I have decided to leave my previous remarks unaltered. I gather from another portion of Dr.
Grierson 's note that he considers the languages of Burma to be more agglutinative in form than isolating. I
understand however, that it is admitted that there are characteristic features of both orders in the tongues in
ouestion and I conceive, therefore, that but little exception will be taken to my classification, which gives full
recognition to this fact Dr. Grierson divides the tones of Indo-Chinese languages into "pitch tones"
and *' time tones." I take it that his " time " practically corresponds to my " stress " tones.
19
_