What do Africanists vs East Asianists know (and never write down) that others don't?
Jiahong, Jim, Florian, Heriberto, Boyd
Syntagmatic vs Paradigmatic
African languages → syntagmatic relations are more important than in EA. Although some dialects of Chinese have complicated sandhi rules.
Prominent in EA; tonal melodies are used to distinguish lexical classes relevant in African languages (contour tones → longer syllables), but is not crucial. Long distance effects. Quite common in Africa, no present in EA.
Eastasianists. Tone analysis in EA → syllable analysis (consonant codas, onsets etc.) Do africanist pay attention to these factors?
Africanists. Common phenomena:Depressor consonants, breathiness; potential consequences for reconstruction?
Tonogenesis. Diversity of tone systems. Syllable type vocalism. Not enough information to propose historical reconstructions.
Contact in the development of tone system.
Borrowing of tone systems (Thai)
Very importatn in Africa. Some languages in EA have something similar, but not quite the african languages
Africa H – L categories, Chinese cannot be analyzed only as sequences of H- L. It may depend on the analysis. In african languages discrete categories seem to help. African systems seems to be very similar, EA systems are more diverse. It may be the case that the similarity of languages has some effect on the analyses.
Africanist do not pay attention to phonation, in EA phonation is a crucial factor that allows the analysis of the systems to be homogeneous “all L do X”
Some Khoisan languages have phonation or properties such as pharyngealization, breathiness.