 of transcriptions of foreign words, what distinction am I even making between the love words and transcriptions of foreign words? I think it's not a firm distinction you can make, but that, you know, in our own lives, we know, am I saying restaurants as an English word or am I saying, you know, Pratipya Samutpada as a sort of technical one-off, you know, transcription of a foreign word. Just to give you an overview, then we have transcriptions of foreign words in Western Han. The store of the texts, then we have the Bailanga, which is a three poems in a sign of Tibetan language that were transcribed into Chinese characters, but still in the Bailang language in the Han Dynasty. And then we have the earliest Indic transcriptions, and then we have Eastern Han Buddhist transcriptions. So these are in front of the order, right? And basically, the Western Han is the first time that Chinese civilization becomes, you know, routinely in contact with other civilizations from which we have written records, yeah. And then we have some later Indic transcriptions, so transcriptions in Western Han, historical texts. And then what I'm planning to do here is kind of talk you through one or two examples in detail, and then just give you long lists to look at with some overall observations, yeah. So let's look at this. So there's a place, and I never know how to pronounce it in English. Do you? Okay. Is this Chorism or? Chorism, yeah, okay. Chorism, yeah. They use everyone as a way to do that. While we're talking about, yeah, yeah, okay, well, what do I think I said? And where is it? Talk about it, you know, that I will see. Yeah, okay. Directly where? So which country is it in now? Four more. Four more. Okay. Okay, we'll say it's in Greater Persia. I would say... Greater Persia, yeah. If I can interject, I would say Chorism, and I would say it's in Eastern Uzbekistan. Eastern Uzbekistan, okay. So Chorism in Eastern Uzbekistan. So if we just read the first characters in old Chinese, we get Chor Zong, and then if we use Schumplers, Haundai is the reconstruction, which is the first time we're looking at it. So far, we've only looked at Middle Chinese, which is basically phymologically attested, and Baxter and Sergarde are all Chinese, but now we're talking about the Haundaisi, and there are these kind of off-the-shelf Haundaisi reconstructions from Axel Schussler, so why not use them? And then he reconstructs this as Juan Xi'an, yeah. And then it's about 107 BC is when we get this in the historical record, yeah. So some observations, it looks like by 107 BC, that this voiceless, labial, newbular that was burialized has changed into Hu, yeah. Already, and they own this sort of labial assimilation, which is this thing that happened to Bai, that already happened, yeah. And it points that to it being the case that the change on had not yet happened. So this is, I think, why this evidence is really useful is it can both kind of confirm aspects of our reconstruction and tell us about the historical, the absolute chronology of these samples. Okay, so then now on it's proposing what we think it maybe would have been pronounced like, so I just changed the end, what are basically in children's reconstruction and we did Bai and Xi'an. So the next one is this place, Hanita, I will stop soliciting your geographical knowledge because it will just slow us down. And this, I think, that was appendically, but Guilin Jock actually independently proposed it and had already written a blog post about it when I mentioned it to him as an idea. So if you think it's a bad idea, let him. But this again is about the placement of the R, where Baxter's cigar would, we can start off with it. But since we're allowing ourselves to move their Rs from medial to initial position, maybe we can reconstruct it as ta rumit. But if you feel like that's overdoing it, I would be okay with that. But another thing you can potentially do is infer that the T was a T, although you could also say, look, when they put the T after an eval in brackets, what they're saying is it could be a T or it could be a K. So it could also be that the sound change it to it had already happened by this time. So in any case, it either confirms the T or it confirms the dating of the it to it change. And then I just mentioned that it suggests rma rather than marat. So then we can maybe say it was pronounced parmit. Yeah, so that would be a good, and this is the citation for Guilin Jock's blog post. Okay, now, Alexandria. This is a fun one. This is, yeah, this is a fun one. So in old Chinese, according to past cigar, it would be Alex Rai, yeah, which seems like it may be a little bit more than what we mean by the late on period in Acts of Triflors, where reconstruction would be ah yik shan liai. So what do we have here? We have that this mna had already changed to sa or sa, actually, the rest of us, that the r to n final was already complete. So, if we just trust the evidence we're talking about here, then this one says that the r was still r in 107 BC, but then this one tells us that by 36 BC, the r changed into an n. Now, I think that would be overdoing it. We actually have another option, which is just to say that past cigar are incorrect in reconstructing in final r in this word, which may be a better solution, I think. But again, I'm just saying what do we see in front of us? We may have evidence that i for r have already happened, although again, I think it's too early for that for other reasons, which is why I have a question more aside for those. But something that I think is convincing is that l to yik in type B syllables had not yet happened. So that this would actually mean ah lek saan liai, and not yik, oh, and that's the, yeah, so I say it's ah lek, ah lek shan liai. Now, I would really like to have this l be a d, right? But there's no way I can get it, yeah. Even though some ls sometimes change into ds in the history of Chinese, it's not gonna work in this case. So instead, we have to maybe have some story about it, about the actual form that they were trying to approximate. Where was this from? Well, it's not in Egypt. Yeah, yeah. I suppose, yeah. It's gonna be another language in between. Yeah, no, there's apparently that Alexander, peopled all the world with towns named after him. And this is also in Central Asia, somewhere in Gondar or something, I don't know. Polly Blank and then before him, Paul Paleo are the ones who did this sort of philology to make these identification. Okay, so now since we've already run across two questions or two instances where we're interested in the question of reconstructed final R, which I'll say is one of the more controversial parts of Baction Cigar system. It's something they get from Sergei Starostin. Let's look at all the Rs in Western Han historical packs. So here they are, you can, well, you'll get the slide or whatnot, but we have all sorts of Saugdia and Greek and Parthia is in there and whatnot. And then you see that sometimes they reconstructed R, sometimes they reconstructed R in brackets, sometimes they reconstructed an N in brackets. So I don't know, I thought I would throw this evidence together and let you look at it. Yeah, and then there are some interesting things like this one where they think it's a N, but at least if it writes the word himgis and again, borrowing people knowing more than I do about under what circumstances they heard this word, you would expect both to be ours, right? Which is quite a change. I think it is allowed by their brackets because none merges with none and none merges with R, so in this connected environment. I think you could reconstruct here or here. Okay, so this is what you're talking about. Here are some people with black nubes that are going to do well for me. Yeah, they were all over the place. Well, so I think that's not been available any more in Chinese. Yeah. Yeah, but maybe the, what is the differentialization might be more important is that's often reconstructed through the values that they've already made. The fact that some of the values which are more like originalized values. Well, and as I mentioned, actually around this time period, the loans into probably around this time period, in a moment, the type A dealers are borrowing as users. So these actually may have been an asset dealers in this moment in Chinese history. That's what he said, when I went to get a pharyngealization, he didn't know it's not something. That's what I think. Yeah. Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah. Bacterialization, you know, actually reconstruct. So now just to sort of say this explicitly, Bacterialization, the way they handle type A, B distinction is with pharyngealization in type A, yeah. But I think we can't actually have that be the answer in oldest Chinese. And I think they think this as well, because then we would have pharyngealized and non-pharyngealized dealers and uvulars. And I don't think that works, yeah. So instead, I think that A, B has to be sort of some mysterious distinction at the time that we actually have a dealer uvular distinction. And then once the, let's say, the uvular is turned into fricatives, then the type A, B distinction maybe does become pharyngealization. And at that time, a pharyngealized K is pronounced as uvular, yeah. So we have sort of primary uvulars and secondary uvulars, if you like, yeah. So anyway, Western Han evidence for final R and then here's Western Han evidence for final N. And it's not, you know, Western Han evidence for final N, in general, it's Western Han evidence for final N where Bacterian cigar reconstruct R, which is, I think one way or another, these two slides need to be dealt with, right? So, and then this is again, as we saw, I think that what happened in Alexandria, the mountain world probably didn't end with an R. Yeah, personally, I don't think the evidence that they bring for that R is true, I think. And I would also like to suggest that this identification, and I'm not doing like this, I haven't looked back at the Secretary of Literature in Central Asian history, but this is a doneness, I don't think it's correct because in biolum, I think we still have a slug in this case, so it's not a zap, I think it's still a slug in this period so that I wonder whether this identification is correct. Now, you may rightfully feel annoyed with me that I'm sort of presuming you all know all of Chinese historical phonology when I'm going through this, but again, I'm sort of doing that on purpose and I hope it's not too painful because I think, first, you need to actually get familiar with what the evidence that's available is. And in the course of that, you will of course see sort of all of historical Chinese historical phonology, but then once you know the tools at your disposal and have kind of seen other people use them, then you're in a better position to kind of, in a sense, actually start from the ground up yourself, yeah. So that's where we end in our little time, so I will, I'll forget, you saw this slide and leave it with this one about evidence of places where maybe we should definitely have an end, yeah. So in and on, they're going to say both get both the vowels and the prepositions. Yeah, there's no way in terms of middle Chinese this English final R in my mind. Both get both the vowels. No, neither gets both the vowels. It's, it's medial R if you wrote it. And final doesn't have the vowel effect. That's correct. That's why. Well, it might be that it was already gone by then, right? And the evidence for reconstructing it is that it seems like in Eastern dialects, it changed not into anybody but yet. So there's certain kinds of like dialect variation, evidence, tradition, contact, evidence that we have sort of three classes of finals. The real ends, the real yugs and the kind of end yug confusion zone. Yeah. And actually I think the one way of understanding the disagreement in the field is back from cigar. I think that's a real, that that zone of confusion has boundaries whereas other people say like, oh, you know, yug, no. Kind of similar. So we don't need to reconstruct a third thing. So we're still in a Western Pond historical text. So we're looking at foreign words written in Western Pond historical texts. And I went through a couple in detail and then now I'm going to move a little bit more quickly to highlight certain, you know, linguistic features. And this one is that the middle Chinese chuxiang, that's an entering tongue. Oh, it's a bit of the English names mixed up. The departing tongue? No, Rujang is entry tongue. So it's the departing tongue, yeah? Yeah, it's the two, yeah, departing tongue. So the departing tongue of middle Chinese was an S, is the idea where it's flowing. So we look at these words and tajmir was something like just in, this is in actual chuxiang late on reconstructions, which come from two books fighting, one from 2007, one from 2009. So we have, you know, just in chuxiang or chuxiang, talas for talas, which is, you know, the river, that much later in this period would be the battle between the Arabs and the Tom, yeah? Another way of spelling chuxiang and then, of course, our Aspetida word again, yeah? Where, you know, there's a, so, you know, so to kind of avoid the perception of circularity, imagine that we don't have S over here, we have a big X where all the S's are, and we ask ourselves, what is it that the chuxiang is writing, then we would come up with S by looking at all these S's on the right, yeah? So these S's, we try to establish, chuxiang, chuxiang is love stuff, is what people say, but actually the evidence for that is much more murky. I think this is pretty, I think this is as good as it gets, basically, right? And they also write, generally speaking, so let me just repeat the question for those of you online, the question is, does rhyming keep track of tone or final S? And the simple answer is no, like in old Chinese poetry, ox, for instance, and ox are allowed to rhyme, yeah? But the more complicated answer is they were, you know, my impression is that like when the poet was able to keep track of it, like it wasn't, you know, it was like ox, ox and ox was considered a vowel of rhyme, but ox and ox was considered a better rhyme, right? That's my impression of the surgeon. So on the one hand, like we shouldn't use whether or not things rhyme in old Chinese to decide whether or not there was a final S, right? But it does seem like it was a linguistic realities, so they did like to rhyme or maybe even better, ox with ox is also, you know, these kind of pure rhymes are better rhymes than this, yeah? And I think this is, you know, like, I don't know, there's, on the one hand, I've been promoting through the whole course, we need, you know, we need precise hypotheses that we stick to despite all counter evidence, right? That's, I think, in a sense, how we make progress in science, yeah? But on the other hand, also, you know, old Chinese poets were human beings and were trying to write poets' poems that were not purely demonstrations of phonology, right? They were works of art, and you can back yourself into a corner or you can try and show off and we expect some kind of variation there, right? But I think that the question is a good phonetic hypothesis is something that in the hands of the literature, people becomes useful, right? So that if you see a funny rhyme or something, then someone will say, oh, the reason why the funny rhyme is here is because in the love story that's being described, blah, blah, blah, yeah, which is the stuff I never do because I have totally the wrong train for it, but I think that that's, yeah. At some level, there should be the literature, the study of literature and the phonology should usefully cross-pollinate, and that's only the tiniest signs of that are starting to happen now with the analysis of rhyme actually in crows. Kind of, I would say, like Shakespeare writes in blank verse, but then every once in a while he throws in a historic, sorry, what do you call it, a heroic couplet, yeah? Like at the end of a speech, where it's like an end of a speech at the end of a scene or something, when someone's like, no. Then they'll have a heroic couplet at the end, right? So in a similar way, Chinese, sort of boring states, Chinese prose rhymes for sort of rhetorical, as a rhetorical device now and then, and I think that's one area where just very recently, the study of literature people and the historical phonologists have had useful interactions, but anyhow, slightly distracting by itself. And I have answered your question, I think, yeah? Okay. Do you know what's up with the question? Yeah. So a similar like must, with every rhyme in line? Yeah. That's, yeah, yeah. For some reason, probably why you asked, I feel like that is, you know, pots rhyming, like pots rhyming with pots feels better to me than lots of rhyming with lots, but yeah. But no, at least for the purpose of this class, there shouldn't be a problem there. Okay. So, yeah. So then here is another, this is a crazy observation of mine, but I will, yeah. What was this, there were ways out. There were, was there any evidence in the final? We looked at the initial. Oh, this is the first time you're being introduced to find this. Yeah. But I think not the reconstruction, but I mean with evidence from our time. Yeah, yeah. So we only looked at two kinds of evidence so far, right? Well, let's say three kinds. Yeah. One is, one is the structure of the Chinese character of the self, which is, which are transposers. Yeah. And then two imposers, one is cognates. And then the other one is loan, loan words, slash foreign transcripts, right? Yeah. So then the question is, are where do we expect to see evidence of S and do we get S there? Yeah. And in Shaitan series, S is not attractive. I mean, just suppose when you say the argument, yeah, there was no S in at this stage of Chinese. Yeah. Instead they had some kind of age. Again. Yes. So if this is the best thing that you do to write the S, then you could see. Oh, I see. Yeah. It's actually H or S or something. Yeah. I don't know of any. Yeah. That's a good point. So let me just paraphrase, which is safe. I've shown evidence that when Chinese people heard foreign Ss, they used Chu Xiang character to write those more, those symbols. Yeah. But that doesn't really say that in Chinese, it ended with an S. All that's saying is whatever the Chinese syllables ended in was the best available match for foreign S. Maybe it was a show or a ho. What you really want is to borrow the other way from Chinese into an alphabetically represented. I'm actually thinking of one. Yeah. I'm thinking of the word for. 10,000. Where you can start an S that the carry was a show. Yeah. So there's a program. My question. Yeah. I guess if you look at this, it really seems that there should be an S. Yeah. Yeah. Find the S. Yeah. What is there to get on? Well, yeah. So, I mean, let's say this gets into technical. Each of the languages that are relevant, right? So maybe to carry borrow the S and then later lost it through sound chain. I don't, you know, this is beyond my chain. What I would say is unless we have a reason to reconstruct something other than as we can stick with S for the time being, we can do that. It's not that, you know, maybe it was some voiceless. Yeah. And probably not an S. And for my purposes, then an S in reconstructions means a voiceless frigate that's probably not. I think for now, we can say that, right? But I, but that is a good point. And, and let's say maybe one of you wants to write your paper about Chinese long words into foreign languages that have S to them. Now, the trouble is, you know, if you, if you had East loans into Vietnamese loans in the I don't think any of those places would change the S. Yeah. So it's going to be, you know, it's like, you know, maybe really early loans into Japanese, but I think there's like only two or three that are old enough and they just happen to not be in the right syllables. So it would be hard to, I mean, but it's worthwhile. Actually, I say probably the best evidence to look at is these central Central Asian, you know, Silk Road. Maybe for the Turkic, I don't know. But it's a good point. So moving on, and now I move from the kind of most secure to something that's totally spectacular that I just came up with while I was, while I was preparing the slide, which is we have these two spellings of, of Greece, I think Greece. Yeah. Yeah. And, and actually they're mentioned in the literature as being the question being, why do we write the yaw, the foreign language, the Greek language, the Greek language. And we don't use that fact for doing anything in old technical construction. It's just kind of a weird thing. And I'm not going to, to just show you weird things. But in fact, what I think is interesting is the variation between the earlier spelling that didn't have those two characters and the later similar, didn't have those two characters and the later spelling that was three characters. And probably in this time period, in the Western Pond, this was actually I. And then later, it changed to I. So if they're trying to write this love, well, here, they write the love of the love. But I'm wondering whether this off-glide in the Western Pond was somehow representing the style L. And then that might be evidence of the off-glide. And if you were somewhat like John Dungchampon, it might even be evidence that the off-glide isn't L. That's for him. Like, we're Baxman Cigar. Baxman Cigar, right, this is J. Shutzler writes an I, which is why you see it as an I here. But John Dungchampon thinks he was originally an L. And that's for reasons to be cognizant in foreign languages. But I was trying to process it, and I said, oh, you know, this is something that if I were John Dungchampon, I would want to do as evidence that Chinese had a final L. So the old Chinese had a final L. And then that he, John Dungchampon, is right that it's a final L and not a final L. Although it's exactly the same argument that you just made, which is actually you're just showing that they have something that they use for writing final L. And that would probably, and yeah, would be fine. Nice. So, yeah. Well, if you're coming from that, L is nicer than J, though. Yeah, totally. But most people think, including me, that reconstructing this off-glide as an L in order to make silent Tibetan comparisons look better is not that that's really cool, baby. Yeah, that's forbidden, yes. And at some point, way back, it was probably an L at least some of the time. Like in my reconstructions of, let's say, protestant Tibetan had a final L, a final R, and a final L. And then Tibetan lost the L, and Chinese changed the L in the way he drew it out. That's what I think happened. Because that's what the quote, it looks like a three-way correspondence pattern. But that's not what John Mishankam does. He says, old Chinese goes at L, and that L goes greater back. But I just thought this was, I don't know, this variation. I think also, because it is a variation historically, it's like the same work. It's written two different ways, or at least slightly different ways, with a couple on a real part. Just because I think it's sort of meaning somehow to only look at the West, we can do this in the East as well, where there's an island in the Japanese archipelago, which is called Ichi. And it is written as Ichi in the Han period. And I don't know what that T is doing there. But the point is that the K has not yet parallelized. Whereas this K parallelizes quite early. It's the K's parallelized before the chronologically before the dentals do. So we know from this case that, well, whenever this book was in the West one, that K had not yet parallelized. And that's what I just said. And then this is an article by Axis Trüffler, where he collects all these historical forms that I presented some of to you just now. OK, so that was it for Western Han historical sources. And now I'm turning to the Bialonga, which was written in this specific period, between 58 and 35 C. And the circumstances, once again, I said this two days ago or something, but some Southern barbarians wanted to pay tribute. And they came, and they said, here's your tribute. And we also have a dance we'd like to perform for you. Now, ethnic minorities are very good at dancing. They always have, and they still are today. You can see that in the opening ceremony for the 2008 Olympics, for instance. And so they offer these peons to how great the Chinese are. We can have a song and dance. They have a song and dance routine. And the emperor loves it. He says, these Bialonga, they have such great songs and dances. I want this to be recorded for posterity. So the three poems are then written down with Chinese characters, but in the Bialonga language, and then also translated into Chinese. And this gets preserved in a commentary on the Ohamshu, I think. But, Angus, I've written an article about it. You can check all the details there. Now, this is really what's the Latin phrase, obscurum obscurum, doing more than one thing. The only thing we know about Bialong is these three poems, which are written with Chinese characters. So using them to interpret Chinese pronunciation is going to be an uphill battle. But no, let's do it. So it looks like, which is no surprise, S before nasal flutters had already simplified because this word means meat. And if it was pronounced sa, it compares very well with the Vietnamese shah, and Burmese sa, and leaves of sa. But if it was pronounced snot, then it doesn't compare very well with them at all. So we think also it's just clear for all kinds of reasons that these kind of S clusters had simplified at a time. But here's a piece of concrete evidence they have. But here's an interesting example where it looks like this had not happened before, well, yes. And I think this is, I don't think these are widely held views. This is from my article about the Bialong really. But it's nice. The Bialong really helps us slice between different, must be for this, must be after that. So why do I think that? Because this slum becomes zin in Middle Chinese. But if we compare it to the Burmese word for warm, it's lume. So I think probably the Bialong word was slum and not zin. OK. Is there any s in the Burmese? I mean, or Burmese? Burmese cannot have sl clusters. But look, Bialong isn't going to be Burmese, right? So we have to allow ourselves a lot of leeway because we don't know anything about Bialong. So I mean, it could also be lume. So the Bialong word couldn't have been lume because then the Chinese would have chosen a character that was like lume, not like slum, right? Yeah, I think. Now, it could be that this actually belongs to the Brazilian word or something like that in Burmese. But anyways, I think what does it know about Chinese? I think it's strong evidence that Chinese are not catching slum for zin. And then it could be lume. Yeah. We are assuming that Bialong is the word of that language. Yeah. Lume is the person. And few of the characters also did the slum. So like, is it jume? Now, that's something we do in Burmese. That Bialong is the slum. OK, so there's two questions in there. And one I understood and one I didn't. One is, is it clear that Bialong is a bit of a language? And I feel like the answer is yes. Like that if you look at the characters and what they mean and you put those characters into anybody's reconstructions from anything around the right time period, the language is just obviously a bit of one. Correct. So the characters, I'm not sure about the methodology. That's looking like, OK, we assume this is pronounced like this. And in Burmese, this means wong. But if the character also means wong. No, the character does not mean wong. Like this word. So we have to guess the meaning. No, we don't guess the meaning. We look at the meaning by looking at the Chinese translation. Ah, the translation. Yeah. We have the poems in Bialong and in Chinese. That's really good. Yeah. Now, winding up the specific characters is not totally true. But it's pretty true. For one reason, because there's a lot of Chinese loanwords and because they're talking about China, they're saying, oh, China's so great. Yeah. And so then you see the word China in Bialong. And so the loanword, the Chinese loanword in Bialong, gives you a kind of matrix of correspondence in locations, which basically everything else slots right in. Not to say that there are no mystery. There are serious mystery, especially in the more morphological stuff. There's like things that seem to be genitives or relativizers, but we only have these three poems and they're in, written in the worst possible phonetic representation. So I don't think Bialong studies is ever going to get very advanced. But yeah. So this is about the L, right? OK, so just some more observations. R has not yet changed to La probably because we have this word that means spend the night somewhere. And it would be black in Middle Chinese and it would be a black in sort of, let's say, late old Chinese or early, you know, or it's hot in Chinese, yeah. And I think that here is very nicely with the Tibetan word for, sorry, for the old Burmese word for the day, the end. Now, there's also a Tibetan cognate, but I would have to go into Tibetan sorbetology, so I'm not going to. But in Tibetan, it actually also means to stay overnight and isn't the word for the day. So I think that's nice. And then another example of these evidence that the ra is still a ra and not that la is that the word for rain is probably rai. Maybe it was already gone, so then it was more ra. And that matches, for me, is ra, streaming well. So it's all the laterals that are fun, right? So l had already changed to ya in Taipei syllables because the word for home is yin. And in order to match, mostly the Burmese in rather than ling long, or something like that, yeah. And I already gave this one, yeah, OK. Oh, yeah, OK. So I'm just going to mention that l had changed to ya, but l had not changed to da. We get type b, l's, sorry. We get type a, l's in Chinese writing by long l's. And I expected a slide about it right there, and it wasn't there. OK, so one of the big watersheds that we'll see later is this a, t, u, and i changes into a. So which morphemes have the final a in them switches from one class of morphemes to another class of morphemes. And I'm using here the traditional Chinese terminology for these kind of classes of morphemes that have the same rhyme. And they're used kind of pan chronically in Chinese historical languages, if you like. There's words in the gubu and there are words in the ubu. And then what was the pronunciation of the gubu? Well, that changes. And then they can split and they can merge and whatnot. But it's sort of, we can do the traditional kinds in historical monologues done sort of with categories of words without IPA recommendations, right? So that's what this term is in practice. So the a had not become uya. And we see this because they're just low to the great correspondence, right? So son sa, which corresponds to lahu, which is probably actually also sa. I don't know a lot of what it's written chan. Then we have sector. Maybe this was not so strong compared to the face. Mother, this was really, you can't do this, right? So it was probably not mine. It was sorry. We're going to not move, which is what all changes into the middle change. But it was mine. And then sol, it was sa. It was not sum. And then some great comparison. Even more, I don't think. I think this is a vulnerable solve. But anyhow, and I had already changed, I think, the arm. Now, this is a problem, right? You think, well, what if I had already changed to a, but a had not yet changed to u, then historically inherited a, and historically inherited a's couldn't work. And I think it's a really easy problem to get around. Like I said, they were two different kinds of a's. Yeah. But I do think that Bylon is pointing to this as an interesting problem. So in these words, the old Chinese as this young final, but the development of the public's subjective Bylon didn't come with Byron. So we have Rayne with the morning scene for a while. And lovely, I think, Ernestine with the young one worked with Snow with this pop. And then a relative visor piece of grammar, which throughout to Byron should be a pot and not a pie. So it looks to me like I had already changed to a, and that a had not yet changed to u, which means that let's call it primary a and secondary a. Had to be kept apart somehow in vowel quality or something. But who knows? And Schruppler kind of makes this thing to be his only constructions of probably an a or something versus an a, and I won't do much, a good job for me, I think. So the a comes out as an a, correct. But the colors are right. Yeah, the colors are right. And then actually that's interesting. We can say we can say maybe there was something going on by long that they were, that they were capturing these two, that they were capturing with this distinction that they had in Chinese, I don't know. I've been treating them as, as Bylon has up on both cases. And the location of the language? Probably they say something about it. Like, you know, now I'm so worried about recording it, but you know, so they're, they're kind of traditionally considered to be E, because you just call everyone from Yunnan, E, but in the, in the way that happens with sort of nomenclature in China, like these, like, like in, let's say, in classical Chinese, E just means barbarian from the South, right? Today, E is a, you know, legally recognized nationality, but as the, the category is today, that was invented through the long arm of the states in, you know, 1955. Yeah. So, so, and actually the E is a particular, they're a particularly messy thing, because let's say there's about eight closely related low-low Burmese languages that are classified as E, but equally closely related low-low Burmese languages are not classified as E. So, so there's a uniquely bad map, not, it's one of the worst maps between, like mapping, I should say, between linguistic reality and official ethnic classification in China. So I don't want to say that they spoke E, because they would be a meaningless thing to say. Well, you could say that maybe they spoke a low-low Burmese, right? Now, the question is, how can you tell, right? So what I will say is, is, is I'm happy to say that Bailong was Burmo Changi, which is kind of one level up from low-low Burmese and has low-low Burmese, Changi and Yawarong inside, I would say I'm quite agnostic about that. And the only reason I would say that is because in looking for cognates, I found it quite easy to find them in Yawarong and Burmese compared to in Tibet, right? If I could find a cognate in Tibetan, I could also find it in Burmese, but the reverse was not the case. So it sort of seems lexically closer to the Burmese-Changi language than to Tibetan, in case. But I don't think we're, this is one instance, I don't think we're gonna do a lot better than that because there's only, you know, like, about 50 morphemes or something like that, yeah. So, anyhow, that's- It's not very common, it's not very common. It's a poem and it's, you know, it's a Burmese final. You know, they have a pa. It looks like there's a pa and a da that are doing some morphological stuff, but, you know, like, I mean, I commend to you to study a violin. It's great, great little language. You can become one of the world's leading violinologists in, you know, a couple of weeks. They're not long. They're like three, four stanzas in four lines and they're three poems. Yeah. How do you write the scheme? What is the character of the book? What is the sequel that I would put the scheme in? Lord, there's, there's, there's this, so, so, so there's a character that I do not feel sufficiently competent to write on the board, which is the traditional character for West, for Southern Barbarian. But then in the National Classification Project, they decided that one was slightly too pejorative. So they used another character, I think, is what's going on. But if you just say, you know, wiki, epeople, you'll see it, yeah. And hopefully see a nice objective detail and discussion of the, you know, of the history of it. But also, like, I mean, just to say, this is a thing that happened, right? So like the chong are another group, the chong. So chong also is just historically just a word for kind of Western Barbarian, right? They, I mean, the throughout Chinese history, it's like, well, the capital is sort of where where the capital is, and then they just had words for sort of barbarians over there, and barbarians over there, yeah. And then at some point, those get mapped onto a specific happy group. So the chong are another example where there are people who are called chong, and then the kind of default narrative in public discourse in China is, oh, they're the chong, you know? The same ones in the Zhou dynasty and in the Tang dynasty, it's ridiculous. And yeah. So that was it for the bylaw. So now on to Indian transcriptions. So this first one is not so useful for us, but I wanted to throw it in there because it's too perverse. It's like in more in-state classes, yeah. And my friends and Senpai at Harvard, Pong-Tek-Kho, wrote an article about it, and it somehow works, yeah. And it comes up in Daoist texts, and it does show the A-Hack in Daoist, yeah. Like, yeah, and then here's the citation of this article. But that's good to say there's one in the glow word that's really quite cool. Okay. Then we have this one text in the title of the article, which is key 731, which looks like it is Western Pong, and this is an observation pointed out by Antonello Colombo, but not widely. I mean, I think he's been telling people about it, but it's not sort of totally incorporated into Chinese studies or Buddhist studies, that there's this one text that's sort of, the earliest Chinese Buddhist texts we have, and it has these hell names in it, yeah. And in these hell names, you will notice that all Chinese are, it's still being used for indigo. It's not being used for indiku, so it, so that's one way we know this is a really old text. It also kind of feels like an old text, it's not very philosophical. It's telling people, you know, be good or you'll go to hell. Let me tell you about the different hells that we're going to do, but any of you see it, let's just read one of them. So we have sanggata, and then it's sanggata, right? So, nice, yeah. Okay, then we have gotten, you know, with these two sort of preliminary slides out of the way, we get to kind of real Buddhist history, yeah, which are the Han dynasty, Buddhist translators, and these are Eastern Han. So on Dukau, he was the first Chinese translator, and then Lovachemma, who was the second one, and then Kham-Mang-Cham, who was the third one. These guys are all Central Asians. Let me see if I remember, if it says here, does it say here that, so I think, gosh, there should be, yeah, so each sanggata, and Kham means sanggata, and then on means Parthian, and then jure means to carry, yeah. So, you know, so we know where they're from. Although I think Kham was from a, he's a, you know, what, he would have to hyphenate. He wasn't the soggyan, he was a soggyan Chinese, he was from a family that they'd already been China for a while. But so they're all Central Asians, and their approach to Indian terminology was quite different, with the extremes being, Lovachemma really liked to write the Indian words. So let me give you an example from sort of Buddhist hybrid English. I can say something like dependent arising, or I can say Pratikya Samudvada, or I could say the awakened one, or I could say Buddha, okay. So, you know, people translating books for a popular audience in English today have this concern in English, they have it in China, and Lovachemma liked to leave things in it, and Kham liked to translate everything, whereas Anshun Gow is in the kind of intermediate section. So now let's look at their transcriptions. Oh, and then this is, this material I presented before the conference, and so I'm also just going to vaunt a little bit and say, we made the data sets of this material, and our data set is bigger than Kham's. So, okay, he had 33 entregaux data points, and we have 75, and he had 257, and we have 280 for Lovachemma, and we have the same for Kham's. And actually this is slightly out of date because Julian, who spoke about the project, has been combing through yet more Lovachemma, and I think he has another 200 or something like that, although how many of them are repeats we don't quite know. So now this is, and now you're getting the sense that, you know, as we move forward in time, of course it's sad because Chinese phenology is changing, so we're not getting information about the good old times, but on the other hand we're getting more information, and that's good, right? So, yeah, so just notice that the Indic language that these gentlemen were translating from seems to be Gandhari, you know, and that's something that was sort of noticed, was speculated about even before we had very much Gandhari, and then was sort of notice starting in the 90s, but still has this feeling of being like a new and exciting idea, to me it is, right? As I was already alive in the 90s. But actually it's kind of obvious if you just look at the Gandhari forms and the Chinese form, and here I'm just pointing out that the siblings match very closely. So let's just, I mean, you can see they're in full, right? So we have here in like, in Sanskrit, we have a shra here in Pali, it's just a sa, and like in Gandhari it's a shra, and then in Shuzhu or like on Chinese it's shra, yeah. So a very nice match with Gandhari on the siblings. Okay, and then. Sorry, question about your smile. Yep. What is the amount of, what can you do with the eyes? So I'm giving these eyes because this, because if I didn't put the eye in, this would not be Shuzhu or like on Chinese reconstruction, but the eyes were gone, right? Because we were just saying eye, it had already happened in the Bailanggo, so now they're post-Bailanggo, so they're gone. Yeah. And this is for a shra, very, yeah. Yeah, so, yeah, that also bothered me. Yeah, and then I'll just point out that this is the difference, right? Queen, let me just go back to this super old one, right? These are in Chinese terms, these o's are being written with characters from the, from the nirgoo, right? But these are. Sorry, sorry, yeah. Can you go back to this super one? Yeah. Yeah. This Mahala, the nirgoo. Yeah. The turn fright with the mox, that stands for the thing of where it's known as S, or? Yeah, okay, yeah. So the thing is I'm playing all sorts of tricks on you in order to make it easier, because actually this should be a KS in old Chinese, but then I thought you might say, well, Mahala as mox, ah, doesn't seem right, yeah. So I sort of was tacitly saying, ah, probably at this time and I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna make it up to the slide, right? It's actually coming back to what we were saying before. When they wanted to write S's, foreign S's, they never use, I'm talking about like Western home, Western home, yeah, they never used KS. So it seemed like KS, you know, maybe was never KS, but maybe had changed into something like KS, yeah. That's, you know. So I was trying to make it look more plausible as a transcription, but then I was kind of sneaking something along, right? Well, that could be plus S, the, yeah, that's, yeah, yeah. And actually like, I'll tell you what Schüffler actually does, is he said that, let's say this is vacuum cigar, this is Schüffler. So vacuum cigar have ups and ups, yeah. And Schüffler says, this one's fine, but this one I don't like, because it's never written S in foreign sources. So he writes it like this, yeah, where it's some kind of voice description. But I think this is not going to work. And the reason why though, I think it's going to work, it has to do with the relative chronology of the sound changes. And will I be able to remember what it is? No, I don't. But Schüffler needs some funny sound changes in order for things to work out, right? So I think it's probably better to say something like this and then this, yeah. What is that supposed to be? A feel for it, yeah. They all end up dropping, like these all end up as just, this is, I'm right of it. I would wanna double check this, but I think ox in middle Chinese ends up as ox, or ox, or ox, yeah, because it's a high comment. Whereas ox ends up as, as ice, and then as, oh, I forget to do that. But anyhow, it ended up being indexed as a distinction in the rhyme, yeah. And then I think some of those changes just kind of work better if we didn't have this. And actually this is weird, right? Like what you had, you had a voice, you had a aspirate's outslout. Like I know that's not, you know, the weirdest thing in the world, but it's pretty weird. Usually you don't distinguish, no, we don't, yeah. It would also be the only one, but. Yeah, it would also be the only one, yeah, yeah. So there's a, I mean, and this is a sort of, there's a kind of a question of what counts as elegant to different people, right? Where like back to the cigar long, symmetry and phonological plausibility, where the principle wants kind of phonetic accuracy with the actual primary sources. And I think that's a tension in China with this phonology, and it's important, actually, to have some people who go way too far one way and way too far the other way, and then we can talk about it. But anyhow, that's why I made that answer. I was, because I wanted to make it seem plausible that it was right in my heart. But anyhow, the point here is these are inherited odds, we can later become who, right? And that's called the guh-guh, whereas with these gentlemen, they're not using the guh-guh, they're using the guh-guh, which is this eye, but was clearly off by that eye. So that's nice. We have this real like kind of Western Han, it was like this Eastern Han, it had changed to this. So yeah, these are just some more nice matches with Gandhari. So we have cha and ta, right? So those match, and we have yah, matching with yah, whereas in the point, it's like, Sanskrit has other stuff going on. That is tya, and the jah, and whatnot. So very nice matches with Gandhari. So we can definitely feel like using Gandhari is what we should do with this. Unfortunately, Gandhari applications aren't available for other words. And I'm not in the position to make up Gandhari words based on the Sanskrit, although we may ask some colleagues to do that. Oh, this is what I was just mentioning. So all the time, I think the guh-guh has this way, and we get off, and here's a bunch of example, you are using guh-guh in that. Now, one thing I find really weird that it's as far as I can tell, no one has commented about in the Han period, is Chinese final t for index r. So you get this sa-gara written as sa-yat, and this divangara as the one yat. Now, in later forms of Chinese, this is by which I mean Tong Dynasty, this is totally normal, that a final t would write, that final t had developed into r in what we call Old Norquist Chinese. So basically, Tong Dynasty kind of spoke at the capital of Chang'an. They had changed their final t's in the final r's, which is a slightly strange thing, but the evidence for it is totally overwhelming. But at this early period, it's very strange, and most of their r's, they don't write the t's, and most of the r's, they rather love us, initial love. So, please tell me what it means. But Chinese t for index t is also very common. So here, for example, that, Chakrabag t is a Chak-gai-wacht, yeah. So we're not able to say that Chinese had, you know, that it's, that when you could date that t of r change and have it on much earlier, that's definitely not the right word, because they're using their own t for both foreign t and foreign r. You could have said, all that is that they're both using their own t. There was flax, yeah, that's a, that's a nice idea. I mean, generally speaking, we think that these final r's are, oh no, I was gonna say, yeah, like, I don't know what to say. In our area, I even just love to drop short final r's, but I think that r's, but here's one of these there. So, you know, maybe, yeah. Maybe that's something to consider. Anyhow. And then evidence for s, now you say, weren't we just talking about this? Yes, we were, but we were talking about evidence from Western Han historical facts. And now we're talking about evidence from Eastern Han Buddhist fair, yeah. So, Badanasi, nice s. Shavasthi, nice s at the end. And then I will point out this, I'll talk about it a little bit, because Holy Grail in the article that he proposed that the true Shalva wasn't s, knew about this one, but we didn't have the Gandhari at that point. And he was like, I don't know, Samadhi, you know, close enough to an s, yeah. But then it turns out that the Gandhari, it was Shalva and s. So then this, the match was somewhat extremely good. So, yeah, and then this is just some more from my third guide, because it didn't alter on my screen, okay. But now some evidence against s. Now, I'm not suggesting that I doubt s. I don't, I don't, but this is weird, right? So, we have the Guru Dala. I don't see the s as the Guru Dala. Now, maybe the problem is I'm missing the Gandhari. And we just saw an example of the Gandhari writing dha as s. So maybe the problem is just that I'm missing the Gandhari. But in the case of Kuru, I have the Gandhari. And so I wonder why aren't they for an s stick, right? Okay. Now, evidence against s from look at Shemma here are some more examples. We saw Vici before, right? Vici is a hell. And here we have why? I don't know. There's something going on here. And one thing I'll mention is that it doesn't take its forms, right? So, let's look at a Vici, actually, which in Gandhari is abhibi, is the lemma in the Gandhari dictionary. And abhis doesn't look so good. But it's in the, I guess, direct. I don't know anything about Gandhari yet. But one of the case forms is abhibi. So, you know, chah, imagine it's so, is it at least better than imagine it would be, yeah, right? So it could be some case forms. And then on this case form that gets me my s in, in which word was abhibhakti? No, yeah, it was abhibhakti, yeah. So we have abhibhakti ga in Gandhari, but in the genitive, it's abhibhakti yasa. So that would actually look great, abhibhakti yasa, right? But of course, if I start using genitives to give me acid, I can get them anywhere I want, right? So we would really need a close philological scrutiny of what is presuming a genitive in the forelogger here. You know, doesn't make sense, is it? Yeah, so there's work to be done there, but it gives me a little bit of hope, right? Like, yeah, we have some acid we don't want, but maybe there are ways we can get rid of that. A question, what is Gandhari? Is it an early Procret spoken in Kandahar, Afghanistan? Exactly. Okay. So you nailed it. It's also the language that has the earliest extent Buddhist stuff in it, yeah. It's the 19th century CE, I think. Right at our time, yeah. That's where the Chinese definitely got their food from Kandahar. I see, thank you. Yeah, that's just an example. Okay, so now evidence for final R. Final R is one of the controversial points, so let's look at final R. It's not lovely, yeah. I'm trying to now, a slightly later guy, Joe Chan, who we haven't collected from, but I just found this in the secondary literature, so there you go. This character, this one, is used for two syllables in this guy's work. One is Vin and one is Big. Now, the reason that we reconstruct final R at all, it's Starostin's idea, is this, it's kind of contact between N and Y, where, you know, he thinks, let's write it down. So old Chinese on, days on, old Chinese I, we know, Chinese isn't the ah, and then old Chinese are, he thinks in most dialects, it becomes an, but in some dialects, it becomes I, and then we're with the, we have an I, so, so we have in certain words, certain kinds of messy, you know, disappearing, reappearing, ends, and the others, and that's the evidence for R. So, so here we have something, and now you say, well, why was Mr. Church and so inconsistent, either his dialect of Chinese had R, sorry, who didn't have R, it either had none in this word, or it had no none, but these are not, each of these translators should be understood as the, the foreman of some kind of team. But maybe, you know, one guy was from a region where they changed R, yeah, one guy was from a region where they changed R into not, yeah. Anyhow, I don't know what you make of this evidence, but I wanted to give it to you. Well, the word is quite complex. Don't you think of it as kind of a team, somebody speaking from dialects, people writing Chinese, maybe more, right? Oh yeah, it was MS. Yeah, I mean, yeah. And then break next week too, because they were trying to, you know, win souls. All I'm saying is like, if you, if you're in the R hop, you know, the, that's a, the R camp, there we go. If you're in the, in the, in the camp of people who want there to be an old Chinese R, you would look at this and say, yes, evidence for old Chinese R. And interestingly, actually, back since the war, it was for an N, but they're allowing R as possible. So like, you know, if you really want it to be, to squeeze as much blood as stone as possible, you would say, the color is inconsistent in this use of this character for a final N, but we can change this R in old Chinese. Yeah, I think that would be a little bit rash, but I, but I want to, but I'm looking for this kind of evidence. So I wanted to give it to you. Final R is, I think, or where and when and whether to read for final R is, is, is where the action is in, in the old Chinese. It's still going to be right now. Yeah, as far as I'm concerned. Okay. Now back since the war actually turned to look at Shema as evidence for reconstructing final R in the book, and they use this word as their example of bus, but Shuba, which is a bus. And they don't read it. Well, that's the, that's the silver word about it. Yeah. Shiffler doesn't read his breakfast. I can't give it to Shiffler's reconstruction. But they think that it was, you know, something like swagger. Yeah. The problem here is that this piece of evidence is totally isolated in a way and generally speaking, what we like, you know, we looked at R and Western Mon, and then there was some quite strong evidence and some ambiguous evidence, but generally speaking, this is too vague, I think. And even in his own corpus, if we look at, by which I say look at Shema, if other characters from the same initiation series, the fact that Shibara also read and start with final R, they are consistently with N. Yeah. So here's another character, and we get one. We don't get one. Here is, and I went and got the evidence together. And here's, here it is in books like it looks like, I mean you could say, but not this, you know, but no, it was, it was the R's were not there. I'm sorry. So, so I think that in look at Shema's milieu, certainly R finally had changed into final N for those people who made that change, and for those people who changed into final Y, they changed into final Y. So I don't know what to do then with this piece of evidence that they gave here, except where is it? Yeah, here, because he is using it to transcribe an R here, right? So maybe I'll know when I know what the gandhar is. Maybe it will be a Y. I know it will be an N. So anyhow, now you've seen the evidence. Yeah. And then I'll just point out, speaking about specific, you know, characters. We saw this character in the Western Mamba for the Abar. So there, you know, if, if you don't want to believe that, you could say, well N was the closest thing they had, but I think it's pretty strong, but Loka Chema uses it for fun. So, so this is where I'm saying, you know, gentlemen, back from cigar, I generally agree with your reconstruction of final R, but let's not bring Loka Chema into this. So that was it for my discussion of R, and then I'll just say a problem in, or a problem, an interesting phenomenon in Loka Chema is inconsistent transcriptions of the same thing in the Indic form, right? So here we have Abar Rajidda, where he says, oh, I'm going to make that a P, up a lot of P, die, but here Divan Karak, he says I'm going to do a lot. Yeah. So I don't, it doesn't bother me very much, but interesting. Yeah. And the poly, I don't have it. Oh, the Sanskrit has a poly. Yeah. And so this, so, so maybe in some cases, they knew the Sanskrit or who knows. Yeah. But anyhow, I think it's interesting phenomenon that the V is being inconsistently transliterated. And then another phenomenon that I mean, it's just interesting that no one is coming about. So I know he's using D, D for chip or J, which suggests that it penalize. Well, the question I have is, why wouldn't you use a historical D? Like, why wouldn't you use? Okay. Yeah. Why wouldn't you use did, which comes out as Joe, right? Which comes out as Joe. That's what I would love. So I think there's something peculiar about it in any case. Yeah. So again, back to the Indo-Aryan loans. Yeah. Oh, Chinese. We talked about, they have the horse and the chariot words, right? Yeah. I mean, like just from my mere understanding of phenology, I feel like it might work, but my concern is like the time I feel like do you have like, you know, a good story for the sort of like the approximate date when these two words have been blown into Chinese. So I feel like to meet the low grams of horse and chariots. I think someone else in the chat also brought that up earlier, that it looks really basic. It looks like super old to me because it feel like, you know, the chariot just looks like the shape of the chariot and also, well, well, compared with, you know, the honey, the character for honey, it looks like more derived. And I mean, I accept that it might be blown or borrowed in from to carrying like much later. And also you have so many characters that is sort of like derived based on the chariot and the horse character. So, you know, that's kind of like my concern. Like, do you have a good story for. You're right that they're extremely early, but it's no problem because into a area right in the early, and the, the, in terms of the archaeological record, the early Sean does not have the horse and chariot. And the horse chariot are introduced basically in the archaeological record exactly in, in 1250 BC, which is when writing starts. Yeah. And we also know that this is when a, the Andronovan, I think culture was in contact with the Chinese. And that, and that, you know, the story we have is basically that you have Indo-Aryans who were down in as far as the Hurrians were, I mean, I'm really out of my comfort zone here, but the Hurrians were run by the Mataanis, right. And the Mataanis were Indo-Aryan speakers also at this time. So, so there's like, so we have people with the right, there's also a question of the particular type of chariot and the particular type of chariot found in Sean dynasty tombs is the sort of specifically Indo-Aryan chariot. It has to do with its axle. I don't know that literature very well. So I think you have the right type of chariot in the right place at the right time. And it's perfect. And I'll also just to say something super controversial. I also think that it's not a coincidence that writing was introduced at that time. Yeah. So, I see. And also, I mean, that question might be, you know, my next question might be a bit of a stretch, but do you have like any idea of like the actual like geographic location for, you know, the contact that happens? Because, to carry instead of like contacting with the, with the Han, with the Chinese people much later on, and what they're like, you know, Aryans, like what might be, you know, it would have been the Sean place in the mid Sean. Yeah. What might be like the place? You know, oh, in, in, in, in, right? Right. That's where they're stronger. I think it's okay. Yeah. Because I have like this idea in my mind that, you know, it must be like trading or somewhere that happens like between, you know, the Indian. No, no, no, no. I mean, I'll actually say, you know, like, I think lady, lady, who is it? Or lady foo. The only kind of complete excavation of a Sean dynasty tune was this was his wife. I think of who ding. Yeah. I think so. Yeah. It has a complete chariot in it. So we like, we know that. And she like, let's say she may have been confused with foreign bride. Maybe. So I think maybe she was in the area. Yeah. I think the archeological circumstantial evidence could not be better.