A note on Tilung and its position within Kiranti

This paper discusses the existence of phonological and lexical isoglosses in Tilung (Rai) and other Kiranti groups on the basis of the scanty materials available, which are some 140 words and other morphemes extracted from one article written by Sueyoshi Toba (2004) and a book written by Lal Rapaca (2006). The Tilung data were compared with language data from various other Kiranti languages and reconstructed Proto-Kiranti etyma. More than half of the collected Tilung words and other morphemes could be assigned to particular cognate groups. These groups illustrate the various phonological developments that have taken place in Tilung and mark important lexical isoglosses in Kiranti. It is shown that, with respect to development of initial obstruents, Tilung is remarkably similar to the Western Kiranti language Thulung. The shared phonological developments may perhaps have taken place at a time when pre-Tilung and pre-Thulung were spoken in a contiguous area. From a lexical view point, though, Tilung shares more etyma with Central and Eastern Kiranti languages than it does with Western Kiranti. The data presented support Hanßon’s (1991) claim that Tilung may well be a marginal member of Western Kiranti, since it shares a unique phonological isogloss with Thulung, but also confirms Toba’s (2004) report that Tilung is lexically more close to Central and Eastern Kiranti

A note on Tilung and its position within Kiranti

This paper discusses the existence of phonological and lexical isoglosses in Tilung (Rai) and other Kiranti groups on the basis of the scanty materials available, which are some 140 words and other morphemes extracted from one article written by Sueyoshi Toba (2004) and a book written by Lal Rapaca (2006). The Tilung data were compared with language data from various other Kiranti languages and reconstructed Proto-Kiranti etyma. More than half of the collected Tilung words and other morphemes could be assigned to particular cognate groups. These groups illustrate the various phonological developments that have taken place in Tilung and mark important lexical isoglosses in Kiranti. It is shown that, with respect to development of initial obstruents, Tilung is remarkably similar to the Western Kiranti language Thulung. The shared phonological developments may perhaps have taken place at a time when pre-Tilung and pre-Thulung were spoken in a contiguous area. From a lexical view point, though, Tilung shares more etyma with Central and Eastern Kiranti languages than it does with Western Kiranti. The data presented support Hanßon’s (1991) claim that Tilung may well be a marginal member of Western Kiranti, since it shares a unique phonological isogloss with Thulung, but also confirms Toba’s (2004) report that Tilung is lexically more close to Central and Eastern Kiranti

Diversity of 26-locus Y-STR haplotypes in a Nepalese population sample: Isolation and drift in the Himalayas

Twenty-six Y-chromosomal short tandem repeat (STR) loci were amplified in a sample of 769 unrelated males from Nepal, using two multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays. The 26 loci gave a discriminating power of 0.997, with 59% unique haplotypes, and the highest frequency haplotype occurring 12 times. We identified novel alleles at four loci, microvariants at a further two, and nine examples of amelogenin-Y deletions (1.2%). Comparison with a similarly sized Bhutanese sample typed with the same markers suggested histories of isolation and drift, with drift having a greater effect in Bhutan. Extended (11-locus) haplotypes for the Nepalese samples have been submitted to the Y-STR Haplotype Reference Database (YHRD)

A Linguistically Informed Autosomal STR Survey of Human Populations Residing in the Greater Himalayan Region

The greater Himalayan region demarcates two of the most prominent linguistic phyla in Asia: Tibeto-Burman and IndoEuropean. Previous genetic surveys, mainly using Y-chromosome polymorphisms and/or mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms suggested a substantially reduced geneflow between populations belonging to these two phyla. These studies, however, have mainly focussed on populations residing far to the north and/or south of this mountain range, and have not been able to study geneflow patterns within the greater Himalayan region itself. We now report a detailed, linguistically informed, genetic survey of Tibeto-Burman and Indo-European speakers from the Himalayan countries Nepal and Bhutan based on autosomal microsatellite markers and compare these populations with surrounding regions. The genetic differentiation between populations within the Himalayas seems to be much higher than between populations in the neighbouring countries. We also observe a remarkable genetic differentiation between the Tibeto-Burman speaking populations on the one hand and Indo-European speaking populations on the other, suggesting that language and geography have played an equally large role in defining the genetic composition of present-day populations within the Himalayas

Summary of Mantel tests in zt.

<p>The results of the simple Mantel tests are shown above the diagonal; the results of the partial Mantel tests are shown below the diagonal. r_p: correlation coefficient for Mantel test on population level with 100 thousand randomisations, r_i: correlation coefficient for Mantel test on individual level with 10 thousand randomisations. Corresponding p-values are shown between brackets.</p

Summary of Mantel tests in zt.

<p>The results of the simple Mantel tests are shown above the diagonal; the results of the partial Mantel tests are shown below the diagonal. r_p: correlation coefficient for Mantel test on population level with 100 thousand randomisations, r_i: correlation coefficient for Mantel test on individual level with 10 thousand randomisations. Corresponding p-values are shown between brackets.</p

Summary of Admixture analysis.

<p>IE: Indo-European, TB: Tibeto-Burman, DR: Dravidian, AL: Altaic.</p

MDS plot.

<p>Populations have been colour coded according to linguistic phylum and geographical origin, as is explained within the figure. The population-codes used in this plot are explained in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0091534#pone-0091534-t001" target="_blank">table 1</a> and <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0091534#pone.0091534.s005" target="_blank">table S1</a>. The stress values for the dimensions used to construct this plot were 0.333475 and 0.216317 respectively.</p

Distribution of ethnolinguistic groups/pools sampled in Nepal and Bhutan.

<p>Blue dots indicate the approximate geographical centres of the Indo-European groups/pools and red dots indicate the approximate geographical centres of the Tibeto-Burman groups/pools. Populations from Nepal: 1 = Kham, 2 = Chantyal, 3 = Thakali, 4 = Magar, 5 = Dura, 6 = Gurung, 7 = Ghale, 8 = Barām, 9 = Chepang, 10 = Tamang, 11 = Newar, 12 = High caste Newar, 13 = Thangmi, 14 = Sherpa, 15 = Western Kiranti (pool), 16 = Central Kiranti (pool), 17 = Eastern Kiranti (pool), 18 = Limbu (pool), 19 = Dhimal, 20 = Artisanal caste Indo-Aryan (pool), 21 = Bahun, 22 = Chetri, 23 = Tharu, 24 = Majhi, 25 = Kumal, 26 = Danuwar & Kachadiya Danuwar (pool). Populations from Bhutan and India: 27 = Toto (India), 28 = Lhokpu, 29 = Layap, 30 = 'Ngalop, 31 = Lakha, 32 = Mangde, 33 = Black Mountain Mönpa, 34 = Nup, 35 = Bodo (India), 36 = Brokkat, 37 = Bumthang, 38 = Khengpa, 39 = Kurtöp, 40 = Gongduk, 41 = Chali, 42 = Dzala, 43 = Tshangla, 44 = Dakpa, 45 = Brokpa. © John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.</p