Chapter 161Lexical Geography and Survey History
Overlapping distributions of mouth terms, interrogatives, and kinship vocabulary, with competing histories and changing survey coverage.
161.1 Reading a distribution map
A dialect map shows where a form was recorded. Different words produce different distributions: an east–west division, a central form surrounded by another form, or a pattern linking only particular regions. Nakagawa and Fukazawa compare maps of ‘mouth’, ‘tongue’, interrogatives, and kinship terms to show why one branching diagram cannot express every relationship Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5).
The history inferred from a map also depends on dates, consultant usage, and lexical analysis. A form recorded late may have been known long before it entered a survey. Multiple forms at one locality may be synonyms, differ in meaning, or differ between active use and recognition Fukazawa (2025: 136–140).
161.2 Mouth, lip, and tongue
The well-known comparison of par and car ‘mouth’ has several historical interpretations. Nakagawa and Fukazawa report an early pa > ca proposal, Naert's common-source reconstruction, Kirikae's proposal of two older morphemes, and Fukazawa's account involving lexical replacement. They call the distribution a pseudo-correspondence because it is restricted to a and concentrated in words connected with the mouth Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.1).
‘Lip’ illustrates the lexical detail. The forms capus, papus, catoy, patoy combine the mouth element with different second members. Asahikawa and Nayoro have several variants whose usage differences remain unclear. For Chitose, Nakagawa distinguishes papus, a projecting part, from patoy, the lips as a whole Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.1, Maps 2–3, citing Nakagawa 1995:323).
Parunpe ‘tongue’, analyzed as par ‘mouth’ + un ‘be in’ + pe ‘thing’, occurs even in regions with car. The account reports no corresponding carunpe. Peripheral aw around central parunpe motivates the hypothesis that aw is older; the map itself does not date that replacement. The wider pan/can ‘thin’ and pas/cas ‘run’ comparisons remain problems for a purely mouth-based explanation Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.1, Map 4).
Place names provide another kind of record. The same discussion reports Ishikari counts of eleven par and no car names, against nine car and no par names in Kushiro, and four car names in Nemuro. These are counts in the cited place-name material, not modern lexical-frequency measurements Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.1, Table 22, through Kirikae 1994:109–110 and Nagata 1909).
161.3 Interrogatives and kinship cross different boundaries
The Saru–Chitose–Mukawa interrogative group includes forms such as hemanta ‘what’ and hunna ‘who’. Their relation to nep and nen differs from that in other varieties, where those forms can serve both interrogative and indefinite functions Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.2, Tables 23–24). The constructional qualifications appear in Chapter 51 (Interrogative and Indefinite Expressions).
Kinship vocabulary draws another map. Coastal mici ‘father’ crosses the usual northeastern–southwestern division, while iyapo is associated with the Saru river mouth. Historical explanations of this distribution, including Yamada's proposed Pacific-coast grouping, remain interpretations of the lexical geography Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.3).
161.4 Survey history and apparent lexical change
Fukazawa examines Chiri's preliminary survey records, probably from April 1955, against later surveys. The preliminary material covers fourteen dialects, with separate Tarantomari consultants. She tentatively distinguishes earlier recorded usage vocabulary from some later additions reflecting comprehension vocabulary Fukazawa (2025: 136–139).
For ‘three’, preliminary Yakumo and Oshamambe records have reppis; the 1960 comparison has rep for both; the 1964 dictionary has both forms for Yakumo. These records show why survey differences cannot automatically be read as successive innovations in speech. Fukazawa uses the wider distribution to propose a history for the reppis family Fukazawa (2025: 139). For quantitative comparisons and their sampling limits, see Chapter 159 (Dialect Classification and Dialectometry).