(University of Helsinki & Seoul National University)
(De)generalising the Altaic typology from a Southern Asian perspective
68th Annual Meeting of the PIAC, Bangkok 2026
In the Altaistic tradition, Altaic typological unity has rarely been considered from a broader Asian perspective. While some comparisons with Uralic, Yukaghir, and Amuric languages of the northern hemisphere have been made, insights from Southern Asian languages remain underexplored. Such perspectives can further refine our understanding of Altaic typological characteristics beyond the conventional east–west axis. This presentation focuses on three structural domains—lexicon, phonology, and syntax—in which parallels emerge between Altaic and Southern Asian languages.
First, purported common etymologies within the Macro-Altaic sphere, sometimes extending to Koreanic and Japonic, are frequently cited in the literature despite their potential expressive or onomatopoeic origins (e.g. sum/som- ‘to hide’, cap/ǯap- ‘to catch’). Given that similar phonological patterns are also attested in Mainland Southeast Asian languages, these correspondences raise broader questions about universals in human language.
Second, tongue root vowel harmony is synchronically widespread across Mongolic, Tungusic, and Koreanic languages. Although it has received considerable attention in the vowel harmony literature, comparable phenomena have also been diachronically described in detail for Austroasiatic languages. These parallels can provide valuable insights into the reconstruction of vowel harmony systems for dissecting their subtle developmental stages in Altaic languages.
Third, Altaic languages encode a wide range of grammatical meanings through postverbal auxiliaries, such as BE/SIT/STAND/STAY as continuity, PUT/KEEP/THROW/LEAVE as completeness, and SEE/LOOK as attempt. Comparable grammaticalisation pathways are likewise observed in many South and Southeast Asian languages. This is particularly striking given the typological differences involved, including agglutinative vs. isolating structures or verb-final vs. verb-medial basic word orders.
By (de)generalising frequently discussed Altaic typological features and demonstrating their broader distribution, this study also points to a notable and geographical gap. This gap is represented by Sinitic languages, which do not transparently share these tendencies and instead form a typological “sandwich,” interrupting the Pan-Asiatic north–south continuum.