Origin Of Japanese Language

[ToMach]

today's list (the first coming word is Korean ﾅ津??猫(native) word and the following words after --->marks are modern Japanese words)-the content inside ( ) mark shows the meaning of the words.

Again, these comparisons are heavily flawed. First, there are problems with the sound correspondences. Then, there are mistakes in the Japanese words. For Korean, I don't know, but I suspect there are similar problems.

aka(nursing baby)---------------->akago(nursing baby)-窶堋?窶堋ｩ-窶堋ｲ[ﾂ静版ｽq]

"aka" has not the meaning of "baby" but red, and a baby is just a "red child"

ojim(urine)*old korean word*------------>ositko(urine)-窶堋ｨ窶堋ｵ窶堙≫?堋ｱ

The Japanese word is actually "shikko" ("o" is a prefix), and it is a modern word, and also a childish word

ue(above)*old korean word*------------->ue(above)-ﾂ湘｣

Japanese ue comes from upe < *upa(C)i, which is then quite different from the putative Korean "ue"

obu(pick a person up on one's back)*southern korean local dialect word*
------------------->obuu(pick a person up on one's back)窶堋ｨ窶堙披?堋､-窶｢窶ｰ窶堙披?堋､

The Japanese word is not attested in Old Japanese, but it is clearly derived from opu "to carry a load" (not necessarily on the back)

This shows again the importance of checking each word for its history : we have to reject recent words and recover the original meaning and sound shape for every word.

 

[miles7tp]

to stupidumboy

English word---------------------> Japanese word

boy ----------------> bo-ya (child)
kill ----------------> ki-ru (kill by sword)

What time is it now? ---------------> hotta imo ijirun jane-- ﾅ叩窶堙≫?堋ｽﾋ?ｰ窶堋｢窶堋ｶ窶堙ｩ窶堙ｱ窶堋ｶ窶堙｡窶堙銀?堋･



If you want to mention the relation between Japanese and Korean, you had better study " old Japanese" and Silla language.

 

[stupidumboy]

@ToMach

1>ﾂ静版ｽq(窶堋?窶堋ｩ窶堋ｲ) -Does this word mean "red child" ?

The Korean word "Aka" means "nursing baby" and the Japanese word "Akago" means " red child" ?

Then I know the meaning wrong,

2>please explain the progress of changement in linguistic standpoint which you often love to mention and emphasize.
then I would be very much appreciated your providing the logical reason why those words are considered the previous forms of "ue"

ue< upe < *upa(C)i

3>assuming that your point was right that "obuu" came from "opu"
,but it still has possibility to have stemming from the Korean word "obu"

Korean word "obu" means "taking somebody on one's back"
What does Japanese "obuu-窶堋ｨ窶堙披?堋､-窶｢窶ｰ窶堙披?堋､ " means?

plus as you often like to mention,you need to show the clear linguistic evidence how you can say "obuu" came from "opu"

the words' must have various kind of changement.

 

[stupidumboy]

English word---------------------> Japanese word

boy ----------------> bo-ya (child)
kill ----------------> ki-ru (kill by sword)

What time is it now? ---------------> hotta imo ijirun jane-- ﾅ叩窶堙≫?堋ｽﾋ?ｰ窶堋｢窶堋ｶ窶堙ｩ窶堙ｱ窶堋ｶ窶堙｡窶堙銀?堋･



If you want to mention the relation between Japanese and Korean, you had better study " old Japanese" and Silla language.

I have 1,500 numbers of list and its too many to just say all of them are coincidence.

plus, the authors (who wrote the book shows 1,500 list) are now working for their second book which contains about 5,000 numbers of list.

 

[stupidumboy]

again @ToMach

What does the Japanese word "窶堋ｵ窶堙≫?堋ｱ-shikko" mean?

and how can you explain the reason of "o" is prefix from the word "oshitko" ?

 

[ToMach]

>please explain the progress of changement in linguistic standpoint which you often love to mention and emphasize.
then I would be very much appreciated your providing the logical reason why those words are considered the previous forms of "ue"
ue< upe < *upa(C)i

The modern Japanese word "ue" 窶堋､窶堋ｦﾂ（ﾂ湘｣ﾂ） was written in pre-war spelling as "uhe" 窶堋､窶堙? We know from the portuguese transcriptions and other evidence that modern /h/ was pronounced as a bilabial fricative [F], so it was uFe in Middle Japanese. In Old Japanese, it was a labial stop *p, as it is proven by old spellings in Chinese characters ex: ue < uFe is written 窶ｰFﾃｨy in Kojiki 窶愿ｺ窶怒ﾂ鞘?倪?ｹI, which was read *wu@?peyh (@=schwa, ?=glottal stop) in Early Middle Chinese (yubie in Modern Chinese) , with a *p. It agrees with evidence from Ryukyuan languages and internal reconstruction.
It has an alternate form *upa (see modern Japanese uwa- in uwagi ﾂ湘｣窶吮?ｦ), and according to other evidence, it is the root of the word, and "upe" derives from the suffixation of -(C)i (C=unknown hypothetical consonnant). The details are too complex to be exposed here, please refer to the books quoted above.

3>assuming that your point was right that "obuu" came from "opu"
,but it still has possibility to have stemming from the Korean word "obu"
Korean word "obu" means "taking somebody on one's back"
What does Japanese "obuu-窶堋ｨ窶堙披?堋､-窶｢窶ｰ窶堙披?堋､ " means?
plus as you often like to mention,you need to show the clear linguistic evidence how you can say "obuu" came from "opu"
the words' must have various kind of changement.

"obuu" and related forms are later developments, the only attested form in ancient texts is opu, reconstructed as explained above (modern ou 窶堋ｨ窶堋､ < oFu 窶堋ｨ窶堙 < opu), and its meaning is "to carry a load". The meaning "to take somebody on one's back" is a later semantic development. To relate this opu to Korean "obu" you will have to show that the latter word existed at least in Middle Korean.

again @Tomach
What does the Japanese word "窶堋ｵ窶堙≫?堋ｱ-shikko" mean?
and how can you explain the reason of "o" is prefix from the word "oshitko" ?

The word is also found simply as shikko 窶堋ｵ窶堙≫?堋ｱ "pee", and the o- is clearly the same suffix of o-shiri (butt), o-naka (belly), etc. Being a "baby-word", (o)shikko is better left out the picture, remember also that it is not attested in ancient texts.

I have 1,500 numbers of list and its too many to just say all of them are coincidence.

If you cut off all the comparisons with bad semantics, with modern words, with wrong root analysis, and with phonetic problems, what will be left? You gave 6 comparisons above, I rejected 4 of them from the Japanese point of view only : imagine what would happen if a specialist in Korean linguistic made the same work as me. And it took me just a glance to see the flaws of the comparisons : what would result of a deep analysis?
What will be left will be a few mere coincidences if not supported by regular correspondences rules.
You should also read the following article about the "too many to be coincidence"-like argumentation:
How likely are chance resemblances between languages?

 

[miles7tp]

to stupidumboy

stupidumboy, let's compare modern Japanese and modern Korean in very basic words.

Words of number and body

modern Japanese

one ------ hitotsu
two ------ hutatsu
three ----- mittsu
four ------ 'yottsu
five ------ 'itsutsu
six ------- muttsu
seven ---- nanatsu
eight ---- 'yattsu
nine ---- kokonotsu
ten ------ too

hand ----- te
foot ----- 'ashi
nose ---- hana
eye ------ me
tooth ----- ha
ear ------ mimi
hair ------ ke
head ----- 'atama
tongue ---- sita
belly ----- hara
back ----- senaka

Please tell me the modern Korean words of number and body.


And you had better compare English and German in these words.

 

[miles7tp]

to stupidumboy 2

While Japan ruled Korea, many Japanese words went into Korean.

 

[bossel]

And you had better compare English and German in these words.

Well, I can provide the German versions:

one ---eins--- hitotsu
two ---zwei--- hutatsu
three ---drei-- mittsu
four ---vier--- 'yottsu
five ---fünf--- 'itsutsu
six ---sechs---- muttsu
seven --sieben-- nanatsu
eight --acht-- 'yattsu
nine --neun-- kokonotsu
ten ---zehn--- too

hand ---Hand-- te
foot ---Fuß-- 'ashi
nose --Nase-- hana
eye ---Auge--- me
tooth ---Zahn-- ha
ear ---Ohr--- mimi
hair ---Haar--- ke
head ---Kopf-- 'atama
tongue --Zunge-- sita
belly ---Bauch-- hara
back ---Rücken-- senaka

German & English separated roughly 1500 years ago.

 

[lexico]

languages in contact; asking for some courtesy...

While Japan ruled Korea, many Japanese words went into Korean.

True, but I would have appreciated it if you had said "between 1910 and 1945," instead of the alternative; it's better to keep politics out of academic discussions, in my humble opinion.

Moreover may I remind you that many Korean words were borrowed into Japanese during that same period? This is a very natural 2-way process that is observed between many languages that come into contact with another, and one must strive to get the "whole picture."

Now the subject could be more interesting if you could provide concrete examples so everyone can get to participate. Can you provide some?

 

[shiroma]

"aka" has not the meaning of "baby" but red, and a baby is just a "red child"

It is also important to keep it in mind that the word "aka" might not have meant "red" in ancient Japanese language. It would be a good example of color perception difference that modern Japanese still call green "blue" in some cases (just like ancient Chinese,) for instance traffic lights and vegetables.
They say that "aka" used to include yellow, and meant "bright" ("akarui" in modern Japanese.)

 

[stupidumboy]

@ToMach,


What you'd provided me with the webpage link(How likely are chance resemblances between languages?
-- How likely are chance resemblances between languages?) that explained the formula of calculating the probability (in terms of matched chance between two far flung languages)is still very lack of convincing me to be awared of the coincidence is not surprising part of comparative linguistics or happend a lot than we expected because the author only considered fixed examples.-you know what -for example the first part CVC it only makes sense when both comparative languages has the same number and kind of consonant. The page has no flaw in terms of calculating probablity method methmatically but thats only when there are *dozens number* of resemblance words plus the the whole sample number of lexicons just lomited by hundreds or thosands of numbers.

Anyways ,Let's just make the chance that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.
Let me explain about the meaning of 1,250 and 100,000 respectively.
1,250 is the matches number from the list what I mentioned (Yes the 5,000 list by two authors) by the way,I made the number become lessened because you rejected 4 out of 6 list therefore I pick the number 1,250 instead of 5,000 (although I do not very much agree with your refutation because you only showed historicalyl likely hapend evidence -you did not make your refutation in linguistic standpoint,I can do that too anyways let me discuss about that part later)


To make fair calculation which allows more yield to your advantage Tomach,
100,000 is the number of my Japanese-Korean dictionary lexemes.(how many number of the whole Japanese words that to be known so far? )

By the way ,we should make an exemption of the Japanese words that consist of "Chinese characters" and completely foreign borrowed ones.
But I'd just skip this part here -remember that I am yielding to sweep as many variables as possible ;-)

Here is the formula for making <the number of chances that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.>-

!: factorial

100,000 !/(1,250!*(100,000-1,250)!)=A=
(Probablity of a single match in two phonemes word between Korean and Japanese,by the way in this calculation I can only use modern known consonant and vowels due to my short linguistic knowledge)---B
(1-B)-----C

AB(100,000-1,250)C(100,000-1,250)=ABC(100,000-1,250)^ =<the number of chances that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.>

To get B -we need to arrange the whole consonant and vowel in both of Korean and Japanese but the way please forgive my limitation that only available to show modern ones.
We should take consideration the number of overlapped part as well.

modern Korean consonant (ㄱ[g] ㄲ[gg] ㄴ[n] ㄷ[d] ㄸ[dd] ㄹ[l] ㅁ[m] ㅂ ㅃ[bb] ㅅ ㅆ[ss] ㅇ[ŋ] ㅈ[j] ㅉ[jj]ㅋ[k]ㅍ

)19 number
modern Korean vowel(ㅏ[a]ㅓ[ﾂ??ㅕ[yu]ㅖ[ye]ㅗ[o]ㅘ[wa]ㅙ[we]ㅚ[oi]ㅛ[yo]ㅜ[wu]ㅝ[wo]ㅞ[wﾆ津テ]ㅟ[wi]ㅠ[yu]ㅡ[eu]ㅢ[eui]ㅣ)-21 number

Since I am not very familiar with linguistics,I just wrote those pronounciation mark blatantly loughly.

I am not sure about modern Japanese but I would just say
consonant number is about 14 and the vowel number is about 7.
(Again I can be wrong- i just can read and write 窶堙絶?堙ｧ窶堋ｪ窶堙 and 窶堋ｩ窶堋ｽ窶堋ｩ窶堙 but not so sure about classify them grammartically,I am just showing mathmatical method only here)

So here we just need to calculate the probability of 2 phoneme words correspondence between two languages.

Its simple (1/19+14-13)*1/21+7-7)*(1/19)
then we need to square this number.Thats B.



Can you get these calculated result number ?
Use your window calculator for engineering use-if that does not tell you anything -I recommend you to use matrix calculating programe.
The 5,000 number of resemblance is again too many to say put into coincidence list even if we just want to put prove it probablity methmatical method.

<the number of chances that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.>
Then you need to divide it by the number of every possible chances that you can make 2 phonemes words with using both languages' consonant and vowels as I mentioned above-thats the probability of <the number of chances that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.> towards every possible chance of making two.

By the way,does that really happend in reality?

How many number of the whole Japanese words that to be known so far?-we need to get this number first to design the method to make more reliable result.

 

[stupidumboy]

The modern Japanese word "ue" 窶堋､窶堋ｦﾂ（ﾂ湘｣ﾂ） was written in pre-war spelling as "uhe" 窶堋､窶堙? We know from the portuguese transcriptions and other evidence that modern /h/ was pronounced as a bilabial fricative [F], so it was uFe in Middle Japanese. In Old Japanese, it was a labial stop *p, as it is proven by old spellings in Chinese characters ex: ue < uFe is written 窶ｰFﾃｨy in Kojiki 窶愿ｺ窶怒ﾂ鞘?倪?ｹI, which was read *wu@?peyh (@=schwa, ?=glottal stop) in Early Middle Chinese (yubie in Modern Chinese) , with a *p. It agrees with evidence from Ryukyuan languages and internal reconstruction.
It has an alternate form *upa (see modern Japanese uwa- in uwagi ﾂ湘｣窶吮?ｦ), and according to other evidence, it is the root of the word, and "upe" derives from the suffixation of -(C)i (C=unknown hypothetical consonnant). The details are too complex to be exposed here, please refer to the books quoted above.
"obuu" and related forms are later developments, the only attested form in ancient texts is opu, reconstructed as explained above (modern ou 窶堋ｨ窶堋､ < oFu 窶堋ｨ窶堙 < opu), and its meaning is "to carry a load". The meaning "to take somebody on one's back" is a later semantic development. To relate this opu to Korean "obu" you will have to show that the latter word existed at least in Middle Korean.
The word is also found simply as shikko 窶堋ｵ窶堙≫?堋ｱ "pee", and the o- is clearly the same suffix of o-shiri (butt), o-naka (belly), etc. Being a "baby-word", (o)shikko is better left out the picture, remember also that it is not attested in ancient texts.

If you cut off all the comparisons with bad semantics, with modern words, with wrong root analysis, and with phonetic problems, what will be left? You gave 6 comparisons above, I rejected 4 of them from the Japanese point of view only : imagine what would happen if a specialist in Korean linguistic made the same work as me. And it took me just a glance to see the flaws of the comparisons : what would result of a deep analysis?
What will be left will be a few mere coincidences if not supported by regular correspondences rules.
You should also read the following article about the "too many to be coincidence"-like argumentation:
How likely are chance resemblances between languages?

Did you successfully show the evidence in these following standpoints?

The scientific study of human language, including:

Phonetics (physical nature of speech)
Phonology (use of sounds in language)
Morphology (word formation)
Syntax (sentence structure) -I will minus this aspect because we are only compare words here-ok.
Semantics (meaning of words & how they combine into sentences)
Pragmatics (effect of situation on language use)

Those parts should be explained if you really want to make linguistic evidence.

 

[ToMach]

It is also important to keep it in mind that the word "aka" might not have meant "red" in ancient Japanese language. It would be a good example of color perception difference that modern Japanese still call green "blue" in some cases (just like ancient Chinese,) for instance traffic lights and vegetables.
They say that "aka" used to include yellow, and meant "bright" ("akarui" in modern Japanese.)

Very good point. In fact "aka" was always used to refer to the color "red", but it clearly derives form the same root as "akari" ("light"), "akebono" ("dawn"), "akiraka" (clear, evident).

@Tomach,What you'd provided me with the webpage link(How likely are chance resemblances between languages?
-- How likely are chance resemblances between languages?) that explained the formula of calculating the probability (in terms of matched chance between two far flung languages)is still very lack of convincing me

My point is not that much about statistics but about methodology : what is acceptable as a comparison and what is not. With elastic semantics (ex: face vs familiar), use of recent words (ex: shikko), wrong analysis (ex: akago), ignorance of the history of the languages (ex: ue) and no care for regularity in sound correspondances, you can build a list of cognates (related words) out of nothing.
Using the same flawed method, Japanese has been said to be related to Tamil, Sumerian, etc.

Anyways ,Let's just make the chance that we can find 1,250 matches in 100,000 words.
Let me explain about the meaning of 1,250 and 100,000 respectively.
1,250 is the matches number from the list what I mentioned (Yes the 5,000 list by two authors) by the way,I made the number become lessened because you rejected 4 out of 6 list therefore I pick the number 1,250 instead of 5,000

You will have first to prove that there are 1,250 words matching! I rejected most of your list with a quick glance from the Japanese point of view only. With a careful inspection of both Japanese and Korean words, I am pretty sure that only a few words will remain. And even then, without clear regular sound correspondences, you CANNOT say that these words are related.

So here we just need to calculate the probability of 2 phoneme words correspondence between two languages.

Sorry, I didn't understand, I am not a mathematician. But again, everything depends on what you accept to include in your list.

Did you successfully show the evidence in these following standpoints?
The scientific study of human language, including:
Phonetics (physical nature of speech)
Phonology (use of sounds in language)
Morphology (word formation)
Syntax (sentence structure) -I will minus this aspect because we are only compare words here-ok.
Semantics (meaning of words & how they combine into sentences)
Pragmatics (effect of situation on language use)
Those parts should be explained if you really want to make linguistic evidence.

I don't understand what you mean.
I rejected your words because some of them had in ancient times very different pronunciation (phonetics and phonology : ue<*upa-i), some have their structure wrongly analyzed (morphology : o-shikko), some in fact don't have the meaning assumed (semantics : aka), some are not ordinary words (pragmatics/sociolinguistics : shikko - child(ish) language -), and finally some are recent creations (historical linguistics : obuu)
Isn't that sufficient?

 

[stupidumboy]

but I am very curious why you cannot see any clear sound correspondence from the list below.

At least for me,the below listed words correspondent in terms of sound and meaning at the same time.
I do not bring Korean nationalistic here (I know that Koreans are very different from Japanese in many aspects )but seriously I want to know the relation between languages.
Sure there are coincidence happend but if those resemblance number is over thousands-I think not only coincidence can clearly explain but there are others.

there is only 1/1,000 probablity that an one-phonemed word can have a match with another one-phonemed counterpart. (assuming consonant number is 14,vowel is 5)


Korean word<----------->Japanese words
1.me(female)<---->mesu(pistil),mesu(animal female),megami(goddess),siutome(mother in law),yome(daughter in law),ohime(princess),imo(sisters),mei(niece)

2.mot(highest)<-->motomo(highest)
3.tongmu(pal)<--->tomo(friend)
4.koji(beggar)<--->kojiki(beggar)
5.si(husband family side)<--->siuto(father in law),siutome(mother in law)
6.bo(a person)<--->tumbo(a deaf),akanbo(baby),torobo(thief),nobpo(a tall person)

 

[Konoike no neko]

窶愬停?ｹﾅｾﾅ?Oﾂ坂?佛津ｪ窶佚･ﾅ?w ﾅ?Oﾂ坂?佛津ｪﾅ?w窶｢窶 ﾅ陳ｾﾅ津ｪﾂ・ﾂ湘ｮ窶｢ﾃｱﾂ講ﾂ催?ﾂ（窶卍ｩ窶朗ﾅ津ｪﾂ静ｪﾂ攻ﾂ） ﾃｦﾃ｢窶ｹ`ﾂ青ｬﾅ陳､窶ｹ窶?ﾅｽﾂｺ
CHO, Eui-sung
Senior Lecturer of Korean Linguistics
Division of Language and Information Studies
Department of Foreign Languages
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
趙義成の朝鮮語研究室

ﾂ静債債ｹﾂ湘ｬﾂ静 ﾂ蝕ﾅｽ窶｡ﾂ人 ﾋ?ｦ窶懌?ｹ
일본어를 안다――일본어의 역사와 계통
窶卍ｩ窶朗ﾅ津ｪ窶堙娯?氾ｰﾅｽj窶堙?地窶慊
朝鮮語を知る ― 歴史
ﾅ津??佚｣窶卍ｩ窶朗ﾅ津ｪ窶ｰﾃｰ窶愿??堙娯?堋ｳ窶堙ｭ窶堙ｨ
古代朝鮮語解読のさわり

 

[miles7tp]

to stupidumboy

thank you, bossel

one ---eins--- hitotsu
two ---zwei--- hutatsu
three ---drei-- mittsu
four ---vier--- 'yottsu
five ---f&uuml;nf--- 'itsutsu
six ---sechs---- muttsu
seven --sieben-- nanatsu
eight --acht-- 'yattsu
nine --neun-- kokonotsu
ten ---zehn--- too

hand ---Hand-- te
foot ---Fu&szlig;-- 'ashi
nose --Nase-- hana
eye ---Auge--- me
tooth ---Zahn-- ha
ear ---Ohr--- mimi
hair ---Haar--- ke
head ---Kopf-- 'atama
tongue --Zunge-- sita
belly ---Bauch-- hara
back ---R&uuml;cken-- senaka

stupidumboy, please tell me the Korean words.
☝

Originally Posted by stupidumboy
Korean word<----------->Japanese words
1.me(female)<---->mesu(pistil),mesu(animal female),megami(goddess),siutome(mother in law),yome(daughter in law),ohime(princess),imo(sisters),mei(niece)

2.mot(highest)<-->motomo(highest)
3.tongmu(pal)<--->tomo(friend)
4.koji(beggar)<--->kojiki(beggar)
5.si(husband family side)<--->siuto(father in law),siutome(mother in law)
6.bo(a person)<--->tumbo(a deaf),akanbo(baby),torobo(thief),nobpo(a tall person)

nonsense :sorry:
You had better study Japanese.
If you study Japanese, you understand your mistake.ﾂ 窶堙?窶堋､ﾂ渉ｭ窶堋ｵ窶堋ｪ窶堙ｱ窶堙寂?堙ｨ窶堙懌?堋ｵ窶堙･窶堋､ﾂ。

 

[shiroma]

清水義範

English word---------------------> Japanese word

The hypothesis was already proposed in a short story Forward written by a novelist Yoshinori Shimizu...


Link

 

[ToMach]

but I am very curious why you cannot see any clear sound correspondence from the list below.

Read again : I said clear regular sound correspondences. The basis of comparative & historical linguistics is the principle of regularity in sound change : you don't have some words coming up with their "a" becoming "o", others becoming "e" and still others simply losing it. A sound change X>Y apply to every occurence of X in every word, and every exception have an explanation.
If you assume that 2 languages A and B are related, it means that they come from a common ancestor "proto-AB". In language A, the sound X of proto-AB became regularly Y according to the rule above, while in language B it became Z. In consequence we have a regular correspondance of Y-Z in language A and B, reflecting the sound X of proto-AB.
To prove that two language are related, you have to show correspondence rules of the type :
The sound Y in the environment W in language A always correspond to sound Z in language B
It doesn't matter if the sounds are similar or not : similarity can be coincidental, not correspondence regularity.
Take for example the folowing words for numerals :
"1" : one (English) / un (French) / eka (Sanskrit) / heis (Greek) / nane (Celtic Manx) / aiwa (Iranian)
"4" : four (Eng) / quatre (Fr) / catvar (Skr)/ tettares (Grk) / kiare (CMx) cÛaùwaßrah (Ira)
"5" : five (Eng) / cinq (Fr) / pañca (Skr)/ pente (Grk) / queig (CMx) / pancÛa (Ira)
Most of those words don't really look like, but they are still related because their sounds correspond regularly, and they derive from the proto-Indo-European words :
1 = *oinos
4 = *kwetores
5 = *penkwe

1.me(female)<---->mesu(pistil),mesu(animal female),megami(goddess),siutome(mother in law),yome(daughter in law),ohime(princess),imo(sisters),mei(niece)

OK I accept the Japanese word. But what about the Korean one?

2.mot(highest)<-->motomo(highest)

The meaning is problematic, because motomo means "very much", "more". And how do you explain that the ending "-omo" is not there in Korean?

3.tongmu(pal)<--->tomo(friend)

Japanese word is OK, but how do you explain that the same vowel "o" (in fact a central vowel in Old Japanese) corresponds to 2 different vowels in Korean?

4.koji(beggar)<--->kojiki(beggar)

Rejected : kojiki is a corruption of kot(u)-jiki, the reading of the chinese word ﾅ津ｮﾂ食

5.si(husband family side)<--->siuto(father in law),siutome(mother in law)

Problematic : si-uto(me) can refer to the father/mother of both husband and wife side. The correct reconstruction would be : si- = "parent"-in-law

6.bo(a person)<--->tumbo(a deaf),akanbo(baby),torobo(thief),nobpo(a tall person)

Rejected : none of those words appear at least before 1600, and the bo(u) in it is the chinese word 窶天.

In conclusion, those word again prove nothing.

 

[stupidumboy]

1.me(female)<---->mesu(pistil),mesu(animal female),megami(goddess),siutome(mother in law),yome(daughter in law),ohime(princess),imo(sisters),mei(niece)

OK I accept the Japanese word. But what about the Korean one?

메[me] means "female" but its southern dialect morpheme -for example halme(grandmother),ome (mother) are korean southern local dialect words.
halmoni(grandmother),omoni(mother) are standard seoul local language and they are more widely spoken in the whole korea but if you come down to the southern province of peninsula -you would be likely to hear halme,ome more often.

2.mot(highest)<-->motomo(highest)

The meaning is problematic, because motomo means "very much", "more". And how do you explain that the ending "-omo" is not there in Korean?

Sorry I wanted to mention "窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] " -I apologize for my carelessness and error.
"窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] " means "the top" ,"the highest","No 1",is it right?

Korean word 맏(mat) is known to be stemming from the old word mot(I cannot write the old writing here sorry ) and mot has the same meaning of "窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] "

I cannot answer for your question that asking about additional "omo",sorry.

3.tongmu(pal)<--->tomo(friend)

Japanese word is OK, but how do you explain that the same vowel "o" (in fact a central vowel in Old Japanese) corresponds to 2 different vowels in Korean?

Does it matter? I do not know anything about the "central vowel"
Just both words look very similiar plus they have the same meaning.
But again,as you like often mention-they might have been coincidence or whatever.
Who knows if the Jpaanese word "tomo" came from Korean word "tongmu" ?

4.koji(beggar)<--->kojiki(beggar)

Rejected : kojiki is a corruption of kot(u)-jiki, the reading of the chinese word ﾅ津ｮﾂ食

You are right.I agree , That(Kojiki)s Chinese charactered word.
Meanwhile Korean word Koji is native word(ﾅ津??猫ﾅ津ｪ)
The sino Korean version is "Kolin (ﾅ津ｮﾂ人)"

5.si(husband family side)<--->siuto(father in law),siutome(mother in law)

Problematic : si-uto(me) can refer to the father/mother of both husband and wife side. The correct reconstruction would be : si- = "parent"-in-law

I see, in korea 시[si] only refers to the "husband family side"

6.bo(a person)<--->tumbo(a deaf),akanbo(baby),torobo(thief),nobpo(a tall person)

Rejected : none of those words appear at least before 1600, and the bo(u) in it is the chinese word 窶天.

ok BUT regardless of the year,what if the Japanese people just agreed to use Chinese word "窶天" when they wrote the pronounciation "bo" in those Japanese words above?

Do you think every Japanese word has correspondenting writing and meaning towards Chinese words? I think the people could have agreeded to write some Chinese characters that shows similiar pronounciation or (whatever) other reasons with Japanese words regardless of the matched meaning.

But again thats just my assumption.

 

[stupidumboy]

you don't have some words coming up with their "a" becoming "o", others becoming "e" and still others simply losing it. A sound change X>Y apply to every occurence of X in every word, and every exception have an explanation.
If you assume that 2 languages A and B are related, it means that they come from a common ancestor "proto-AB". In language A, the sound X of proto-AB became regularly Y according to the rule above, while in language B it became Z. In consequence we have a regular correspondance of Y-Z in language A and B, reflecting the sound X of proto-AB.
To prove that two language are related, you have to show correspondence rules of the type :
The sound Y in the environment W in language A always correspond to sound Z in language B
It doesn't matter if the sounds are similar or not : similarity can be coincidental, not correspondence regularity.
Take for example the folowing words for numerals :
"1" : one (English) / un (French) / eka (Sanskrit) / heis (Greek) / nane (Celtic Manx) / aiwa (Iranian)
"4" : four (Eng) / quatre (Fr) / catvar (Skr)/ tettares (Grk) / kiare (CMx) c&Ucirc;a&ugrave;wa&szlig;rah (Ira)
"5" : five (Eng) / cinq (Fr) / pa&ntilde;ca (Skr)/ pente (Grk) / queig (CMx) / panc&Ucirc;a (Ira)
Most of those words don't really look like, but they are still related because their sounds correspond regularly, and they derive from the proto-Indo-European words :
1 = *oinos
4 = *kwetores
5 = *penkwe

OK I appreciate your explanations very much.
Thank you.

The basis of comparative & historical linguistics is the principle of regularity in sound change

That seems very reasonable and rational.

But there could be exceptions everywhere,the linguistic regulation is only according to the some agreements that made by only so called "linguists" people.

Thats just one of the standards for the studying by their interets -however we cannot solve every language related problems by linguistic theories only.(by the way,do not get me wrong,I am not looking down linguisitc itself ,sure its very great study.but that cannot tell every language related mysteries but yes so far ,in humans conception,its the most scientific and trustworthy method to solve language related problems rationally)

Listen even the natural science or engineering -we are just playing under very "little sum " part of the working principles of the universe.

Well the God is watching us playing but nobody knows how many % of the complete providences of the universe that we can understad.

In other words,we are making efforts to find as many regulations of God's playing the chess as possible we can.
In this aspect,preconception is not good.

 

[stupidumboy]

@kaerupop

sorry for late reply.

native Korean numeral:1[hana] 2[tul] 3[set] 4[net] 5[tasot] 6[yosot] 7[ilgop] 8[yodol] 9[ahop] 10[yol]

Sino-Korean numeral :ﾋ?ｪ[il]窶愿ｱ[ i]ﾅｽO [sam] ﾅｽl [sa] ﾅ津彈o] 六[yuk] ﾅｽﾂｵ[ch'il] 窶敖ｪ[p'al] 窶ｹﾃ｣[ku] ﾂ十[sip]

 

[ToMach]

메[me] means "female" but its southern dialect morpheme -for example halme(grandmother),ome (mother) are korean southern local dialect words.
halmoni(grandmother),omoni(mother) are standard seoul local language and they are more widely spoken in the whole korea but if you come down to the southern province of peninsula -you would be likely to hear halme,ome more often.

So you have to prove that this dialectal "me" is an archaic form and not just a derivation of Seoul "moni"

Sorry I wanted to mention "窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] " -I apologize for my carelessness and error."窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] " means "the top" ,"the highest","No 1",is it right?
Korean word 맏(mat) is known to be stemming from the old word mot(I cannot write the old writing here sorry ) and mot has the same meaning of "窶堙?窶堙≫?堙??堙?[ﾂ催??堙?] "

The word is originally "motomo" and means "more", "much", not "the highest"

I cannot answer for your question that asking about additional "omo",sorry.

So we have no choice than to reject this comparions : half of the word cannot just vanish like that

Does it matter? I do not know anything about the "central vowel"
Just both words look very similiar plus they have the same meaning.
But again,as you like often mention-they might have been coincidence or whatever.
Who knows if the Jpaanese word "tomo" came from Korean word "tongmu" ?

Yes it matters : if rewritten as proto-Japanese *t@m@, the japanese word looks then less "similar". But the most important is that the same vowel "o" of Japanese corresponds to both Korean "o" and "u", which requires an explanation

ok BUT regardless of the year,what if the Japanese people just agreed to use Chinese word "窶天" when they wrote the pronounciation "bo" in those Japanese words above?
Do you think every Japanese word has correspondenting writing and meaning towards Chinese words? I think the people could have agreeded to write some Chinese characters that shows similiar pronounciation or (whatever) other reasons with Japanese words regardless of the matched meaning.

Possible, but unlikely. Those words can be compared to the use of sino-japanese word bôzu 窶天ﾅｽﾃ･ ("monk") to call some men.

But there could be exceptions everywhere,the linguistic regulation is only according to the some agreements that made by only so called "linguists" people.
Thats just one of the standards for the studying by their interets

Stop : as you said yourself, you are not a linguist, so don't speak too much about what you clearly don't know.
Regularity of sound change is not a fancy theory which pseudo-linguists came up with just in order to make up with their incompetence. It is scientifically established from the observation of the history of dozens of languages, and even for languages without attested ancient records, we find regularity in sound correspondance between related languages. Give me only one example of a language with chaotic sound change.

we cannot solve every language related problems by linguistic theories only.

Then how do you intend to resolve language issues? You study language with linguistics, scientific analysis of the human language(s). Even if you can look for a little help from psychology, biology, archeology, etc for different matters, linguistics remain at the core.

that cannot tell every language related mysteries but yes so far ,in humans conception,its the most scientific and trustworthy method to solve language related problems rationally)

Yes, linguistics may not be able to recover every relationship between languages, but this is because of lack of data/research, and there nothing except linguistics able to demonstrate relationship between languages

Well the God is watching us playing but nobody knows how many % of the complete providences of the universe that we can understad.
In other words,we are making efforts to find as many regulations of God's playing the chess as possible we can.

Please do not bring up religious matters in the discussion.

 

[miles7tp]

to lexico

Moreover may I remind you that many Korean words were borrowed into Japanese during that same period? This is a very natural 2-way process that is observed between many languages that come into contact with another, and one must strive to get the "whole picture."

surprised :futon:

The Korean will never say " This is [a very natural] 2-way....", I think.
☝
You should read the report of the Korean newspaper(Japanese edition).
notice: In English edition, the important view (the relation between Japanese and Korean) is removed.
中央日報 - 韓国の最新ニュースを日本語でサービスします

 

[miles7tp]

The hypothesis was already proposed in a short story Forward written by a novelist Yoshinori Shimizu...

I'll read it.

native Korean numeral:1[hana] 2[tul] 3[set] 4[net] 5[tasot] 6[yosot] 7[ilgop] 8[yodol] 9[ahop] 10[yol]

Why do you think Japanese is different from Korean in these basic words?
☝