Chapter 156Proto-Ainu Reconstruction: Segments and Prosody

156.1 What a reconstructed form represents

Proto-Ainu is the proposed common ancestor of the documented Ainu varieties. An asterisk marks a reconstructed form: its sounds are inferred from correspondences and alternations, rather than transcribed from a speaker. The evidence includes Hokkaido, Sakhalin, and Kuril records, whose dates, transcription systems, and coverage differ. Alonso de la Fuente reviews Vovin's reconstruction, proposes alternatives, and distinguishes lexical evidence from extensions suggested by typology Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §§1–2).

Alonso calls his approach internal reconstruction, including the explanation of differences among Ainu dialects. Whatever the methodological label, a proposed ancestral contrast must explain the recorded forms. Similarity to a neighboring language may instead reflect borrowing; a plausible sound inventory by itself supplies no missing correspondence Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §1).

156.2 Vowels and the interpretation of old spellings

The modern five vowel qualities provide the starting point. Vovin's larger reconstructed system differentiates stem vowels according to following vowels and proposed developments. Alonso questions how much phonetic detail these correspondences recover and presents an alternative with five qualities. His review's numerical description of Vovin's inventory is internally inconsistent, so the listed distinctions matter more than its stated total Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.1, Tables 1–4).

Early spellings that alternate between i and e, or o and u, require attention to the recorder's language and orthography. Likewise, an apparent final vowel can have more than one history. Alonso discusses Janhunen's contrast between proposed *CVC.V# > CVC and *CVC.Vx > CVC-Vx developments; the final consonant in the second reconstruction is part of that explanation Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.1).

156.3 Competing consonant reconstructions

A correspondence can be established more securely than the sound chosen to represent its ancestor. For example, Alonso compares Nayoro rera ‘wind’ and rarak ‘smooth’ with Nairo teera and taarak. He proposes a lateral ancestor for the relevant correspondence where Vovin used *d, while reporting De Boer's alternative involving dialect mixture Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.2.1).

Alonso also offers two alternative interpretations of three of Vovin's correspondence classes. The columns below align analyses of the same evidence; they are not successive stages of one agreed sound change Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.2.3, Table 7).

The proposal of a retroflex stop also draws on a modern Bihoro pronunciation [ɖ], reported for Ginosuke Kikuchi in Hattori's survey. That observation is evidence considered in a reconstruction, not a recording of the ancestral sound. Initial h, medial glottal stops, and possible prothetic consonants present further unresolved problems. Alonso considers convergence of *s and *ʔ in some varieties, with different outcomes elsewhere Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §§2.2.2, 2.2.4–2.2.5).

156.4 Palatalization and consonant sequences

Forms such as southwestern par and eastern car ‘mouth’ have motivated palatalized ancestors. Alonso's *pʲ and *hʲ proposals use particular lexical correspondences; extensions to a fuller series, including *kʲ, *mʲ, and *nʲ, rely more heavily on typological possibilities Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.2.6).

For pa/ca, Nakagawa and Fukazawa describe a geographically and lexically restricted distribution. Their review includes analyses in terms of distinct morphemes and lexical replacement, alongside a palatalization account. The concentration of examples around ‘mouth’ and the restriction to the vowel a limit its use as an unqualified sound law Nakagawa & Fukazawa (2022: §5.1, Maps 2–4). See Chapter 161 (Lexical Geography and Survey History).

Reconstruction also concerns sequences preserved with relatively little change. Alonso discusses geminates in *wakka ‘water’ and *kokka ‘knee’, whose presence need not result from assimilation, and medial clusters *nr, *rn, *rt, *tk, *pn, *ns. The disputed history of the cluster in ‘steal’ shows why one exceptional word is a weak basis for choosing between sound change and borrowing Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §2.2.7).

156.5 Length and accent

Sakhalin vowel length and Hokkaido pitch accent motivate competing historical accounts. Itabashi's own conclusion reconstructs both length and pitch; the length-only account he discusses belongs to Hattori Itabashi (2001: 92; 98–101, §5). Satō argues that Sakhalin length can develop secondarily, using tuuki ‘sake cup’, borrowed from Japanese, and the alternation of independent nii ‘tree’ with short-vowel forms in compounds. Long-vowel notation in early Japanese records consequently needs an explanation of how the recorder represented Ainu pronunciation Bugaeva (2022: Satō, chapter 3, §5.1).

Alonso's discussion contains conflicting length-only and pitch-only conclusions. These cannot jointly define a settled Proto-Ainu prosodic system Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §§2.3–2.4). The documented Sakhalin alternations and regional Hokkaido accents can be described more firmly than their common ancestor; see Chapter 157 (Sakhalin Final Consonants and Vowel Length) and Chapter 160 (Hokkaido Dialect Variation in Sound and Grammar).