J East Asian Linguist (2011) 20:219228

DOI 10.1007/s10831-011-9075-2

On one more source of Old Japanese i2

Alexander Vovin

Received: 4 April 2010 / Accepted: 8 March 2011 / Published online: 11 May 2011
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract The goal of this article is to provide further and systematic evidence for
an idea suggested only in passing that the Old Japanese vowel i2 derives diachro-
e
nically not only from * y and *uy, as traditionally believed, but also from *oy. This
solution proves to be a key to solving some puzzles in the phonological history of a
number of common Old Japanese words.

Keywords Western Old Japanese  Eastern Old Japanese  Ryukyuan 

Vocalism  Monophthongization

1 Introduction

It is well known that among eight WOJ1 vowels: a, u, i1 [i], i2 [], e1 [e], e2
[ y], o1 [o], o2 [ ],2 three vowels i2, e1, and e2 clearly have a diphthongal origin.
e e
The discussion of the origin of e1 and e2 falls outside the scope of the present article,
as it deals exclusively with diachronic sources of i2. Traditionally it is believed

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Samuel E. Martin.

1
The following abbreviations for languages are used in this article: EOJEastern Old Japanese,
MdJModern Japanese, MJMiddle Japanese, MKMiddle Korean, OJOld Japanese (both WOJ
and EOJ), PAProto-Ainu, PJProto-Japonic, PJNProto-Japanese, PRProto-Ryukyuan, WOJ-
Western Old Japanese.
2
The sound values given here for WOJ vowels follow Miyake (2003). Note that there is no contradiction
between PJ * y > WOJ i2 and WOJ e2 [ y], since PJ * y is a diachronic source for WOJ i2, and WOJ
e e e
[ y] is a synchronic sound value for WOJ e2, which ultimately goes back to PJ *ay.
e

A. Vovin (&)
Department of East Asian Languages and Literature,
University of Hawaii at Manoa, 382 Moore Hall,
1892 East-West Rd., Honoululu, HI 96822, USA
e-mail: vovin@hawaii.edu

123
220 A. Vovin

that i2 is derived from monophthongization3 of the diphthongs * y or *uy (Hattorie

19781979), (Whitman 1985, pp. 4142), (Martin 1987, p. 63), (Unger 1993, p. 26),
and (Miyake 2003, pp. 8081). The vowel i2 contrasts with i1 only in the position
after labial consonants p, mb, m, and velar consonants k, Ng. After all coronals, the
distinction between i1 and i2 is neutralized as i. Nevertheless, the particular original
source, * y or *uy, can normally be deduced in most cases even after coronals due
e
to morphophonological alternations that take place in OJ. The same is true for the
cases when a form with i2 is not attested phonographically in OJ. These alternations
mainly involve the alternations between free and bound forms for nouns and
alternations between transitive and intransitive forms for verbs. Examples:

* y e
Nouns
Free form Bound form
ki2 tree (KK 47) ko2-no2 pa tree leaves (KK 20),
ko2-ndat-i grove (NK 105)
*yo2mi24Hades (M 9.1804) yo2mo2-tu siko2 me1 stupid woman
of Hades (KJK 1.9b)
Verbs
Intransitive Transitive
oki2- to rise (NK 83) oko2s- to raise (M 19.4164)
opi2-to grow (KK 57) opo2s- to cultivate (M 18.4113)
MJ5 ori- to descend oro2s- to lower (M 15.3603)
oti- to fall (KK 82) oto2s- to drop (NR 2.4)
pi2- to get dry (M 5.798) pos- to make dry (M 15.3712)

*uy
Nouns
Free form Bound form
kami2 deity (KK 2) kamu-kara divine nature (M 17.4001)
kuki2 stalk, stem (KKHS 2) kuku-tat-i group of stalks (M 14.3406)6
kuti mouth (KKF 11) kutu-mbami1 bit, bridle (NR 2.preface)
mi2 body (KK 23) mu-kuro2 body (NSK 1.10)
sati bounty (KJK 1.52b) satu-yumi1 hunting bow (M 5.804)
tuki2 moon (KK 28) tuku-yo1 moonlit night, moonlight
(M 20.4489)

3
One of the anonymous reviewers suggested that monophthongization should be replaced by con-
traction. However, the important distinction between monophthongization and contraction was estab-
lished by Russell (2003), and consequently accepted elsewhere (Vovin 2005, pp. 4550).
4
WOJ *yo2mi2 is not attested phonographically in texts. yo2mi1 with i1 in manyogana script appears
only in later Norito, and this is too late for the preservation of mi1 versus. mi2 contrast. The morpho-
phonological alternations clearly point to *yo2mi2 with i2.
5
Ori- is not attested phonographically in OJ.
6
Although M 14.3406 is technically an Eastern poem (Azuma-uta), it has no typical Eastern features, so
I treat it as a WOJ text.

123
Otso-rui i2 221

tuki2 zelkova (KK 100) tuku-yumi1 zelkova-wood bow (NK 28)

tuki2 tribute (M 20.4360) tuku-nop- to compensate, to offer as a
tribute (NR 2.25)

To the same group we can also add the word tuti hammer, mallet (NK 29), because
the uncontracted form tutui mallet appears four times in KK 10 and twice in NK 9,
although the bound form *tutu- is not attested in OJ. This archaism is interesting,
but the full discussion of it falls outside the scope of this paper.

Verbs
Intransitive
ami2- to bathe oneself (NR 1.8)
puri- to get old (M 17.3919)
tuki2- be exhausted (M 20.4458)
Transitive
amus- to bathe someone (M 16.3824)
purus- to make old (M 7.1326)7
tukus- to exhaust (M 18.4094)

There is also a small group of words with i2 for which no alternations are attested.
If any of these words has i2 after /k/, it is possible to trace the original proto-Japonic
form depending on whether a cognate in Shuri has any palatalization. The Shuri
palatalization k > c indicates original *uy, while the lack of the palatalization points
to * y, cf. Shuri cici moon (OGJ 1998, p. 144) < PJ *tukuy, but Shuri kii tree
e
(OGJ 1998, p. 320) < PJ *k y. Thus, both ki2si bank, stone edge (M 10.1818) and
e
ki2ri fog (M 15.3615) can be reconstructed as PJ *kuysi and PJ *kuyri, respec-
tively, on the basis of Shuri evidence: Shuri cisi bank (OGJ 1998, p. 164) and
Shuri ciri fog (OGJ 1998, p. 162).
In addition, there are two OJ words, pasi chopsticks (KJGC) and mi28 winnow
(HFK, Kamo-gun), (M 4.509) that should be reconstructed as PJ *pasuy and *muy
on the basis of pre-OJ loans into Ainu: Ainu pasy chopsticks and my winnow.

2 Another source for OJ i2

Martin (1987, p. 63) claimed that OJ i2 never alternates with OJ o1, but as the reader
will see below this statement turns out to be incorrect. I will argue that, in fact, OJ i2
has one more source besides PJ * y and *uy, namely PJ *oy. Strictly speaking, this
e
is not the first time that this idea is presented, but my predecessors always limited
themselves either to one example without any discussion or to a mention in passing
at best. Whitman (1985, p. 44) was the first to mention that MJ kuri black mud in
the water, black color (see #6 below) has to be derived from kuro1 black + -i. The
same example was apparently rediscovered independently by Majtczak (2008,
7
One of the anonymous reviewers pointed out that WOJ PURUs-u to make someone old is spelled
mostly semantographically in M 7.1326 as . I have no access at this point to book seven of the
Manyoshu in the oldest manuscript that preserves this poem: Genryaku kohon Manyoshu, but in the
second oldest, Ruiju koshu, dating from the end of the Heian period, is clearly glossed as purusu
(RJKS 8: 21).
8
mi2 winnow in OJ texts occurs only in semantographic writing, but we know that the word must have
been phonetically [mi2], because the kun-yomi of the character winnow was used for writing the
syllable /mi2/, e.g. URAmi2 circumference of a bay is written as (M 4.509).

123
222 A. Vovin

p. 26), as Whitman (1985) is not listed in his bibliography. Frellesvig and Whitman
(2008, p. 39) mention in passing the development PJ *oy > WOJ i2, again with just
one example: iso1 rock~isi stone (see #7 below). Finally, Serafim (2008, pp. 88
89) also provides one more example, suNgo1s-~suNgi2- (see #4 below), mentioning
again in passing the development PJ *oy > WOJ i2. I provide here, with extensive
discussion, all the examples where, as I believe, one can safely reconstruct PJ *oy as
a source of OJ i2.
(1) Let me start with a case which also has clear philological support. Martin
(1987, p. 405) believes that OJ pi2 fire goes back to PJ *p -Ci. This belief is
e
probably based on the form fo2-no2-fo1 flame, cited in Martin (1987, p. 64). Why
Martin attributed a ko-otsu distinction to the MJ form fo-no fo flame (lit. top of
fire or grain-ear of fire) that is attested phonographically9 for the first time only
from the Heian period (KKS 1102), is unclear to me. It is even less clear to me what
the basis is for assigning the o2 to the bound form po2- fire in po2-no po1 flame.
Quite to the contrary, Kojiki, the only text that differentiates between po1 and po2,
has clearly po1-naka inside the fire, where po1 is spelled with (KJK 2.42a),10 the
Kojiki manyogana sign for /po1/ (Mabuchi 1972, p. 63).11 Moreover, EOJ has pu
fire, a hapax legomenon attested only in one poem from Munzasi (MdJ Musashi)
province (M 20.4419). It is well known that OJ o2 and u do not alternate; what is
more, the correspondence of WOJ o2 to Musashi EOJ /u/ is not otherwise attested.
Thus, the development of *p y or *p to EOJ pu is irregular and puzzling. Mean-
e e
while, Munzashi EOJ u can be easily understood as the result of the raising of
PJ *o>u. With the overall EOJ tendency to have bound stems to be used for both
WOJ free and bound stems as a result of a diphthong simplification process, e.g.
WOJ tuki2~tuku- moon, but EOJ tuku moon (M 14.3476), the correspondence of
EOJ pu fire to WOJ pi2 is expected.12 Consequently, we can surmise that WOJ pi2
and EOJ pu fire underwent the following developments from PJ:
WOJ line of development: PJ *poy > WOJ pi2 (monophthongization of the
diphthong *oy)
EOJ line of development: PJ *poy > *puy > EOJ pu (raising of the diphthong
*oys nucleus with subsequent deletion of -y).

9
PO-NO PO flame is attested semantographically as in M 13.3344, therefore there is no indication
that PO fire should be read as /po1/ or /po2/. In addition, the contrast between /po1/ and /po2/ was
already lost by the time of the Manyoshu.
10
This spelling plus the change of o1+i>i2 was implicitly noticed by Shirafuji (1987, p. 98), but
curiously enough he used it for the argument in favor of the loss of contrast between po1 and po2 in the
Kojiki.
11
While Mabuchi (1957) theory that claimed that the manyogana script in the Kojiki differentiated po1
and po2 syllables found little support in Japan, it was accepted in the West (Martin 1987); (Whitman
1985); (Bentley 1997); (Miyake 2003); (Vovin 2005).
12
Other examples besides PJ *tukuy > EOJ tuku moon exemplifying the development of PJ *uy or *oy
> EOJ u: EOJ ko1pusi (M 14.3476) and kupusi (M 20.4345) to be longed for < PJ *kopoysi, EOJ kandu
mulberry tree (M 14.3432) (cf. WOJ kandi) < PJ *kantuy or *kantoy, EOJ paru needle (M 20.4420)
(cf. WOJ pari) < PJ *paruy or *paroy, WOJ usiro1 back, siri back, EOJ siru back (M 20.4385) < PJ
*siroy.

123
Otso-rui i2 223

(2) OJ ko1pi2- to long for (M 5.819) has five different derived adjectival forms:
WOJ ko1pi2si (M 17.3987) and ko1posi (M 5.875) be longed for and EOJ ko1pi1si
(M 20.4407), ko1pusi (M 14.3476), and kupusi (M 20.4345) id. Martin (1987: 63)
derived WOJ ko1posi from ko1po2-si(-), but this is impossible, since o1 and o2 can
never occur together within the same morpheme (Ono 1977, pp. 203206). The
raising of o1 to u is well attested in EOJ and in the history of Japanese in general
(Hattori 19781979); (Hayata 1998); (Frellesvig and Whitman 2008), etc.; for EOJ
cf. (1) above and also WOJ kumo1 cloud (KK 1), but EOJ kumu id. (M 20.4403).
But the reverse process, namely the lowering of u to o1 cannot be supported by any
evidence (see also (4), below). Thus, I can rule out PJ *kopuy- as well. Therefore,
the only possible solution is to reconstruct PJ *kopoy- > OJ ko1pi2- to long for.
(3) Unfortunately, WOJ *ki2 yellow is not attested phonographically in the
texts, but we can safely conclude that it was *ki2, and not *ki1 on the basis of the
bound form ku- found in WOJ ku-Ngane gold (lit. yellow metal) (M 18.4094).
Shuri ci-iru yellow (OGJ 1998, p. 149) with palatalization k- > c- indicates PJ
*kuy, too. However, MJ ko-Ngane gold (TM 2913) with ko- rather than ku- creates
a puzzle if one goes along with the traditional point of view that recognized that OJ
i2 can be derived only from PJ *uy or * y: MJ ko- points to PJ *k y, but *k- before
e e
* y does not palatalize in Shuri. In addition, u and o2 do not alternate. Therefore, the
e
simplest solution is to propose that WOJ *ki2 yellow < PJ *koy: this will account
for the correspondence of WOJ u in ku-14 to MJ o in ko-, and for the palatalization in
Shuri ci-iru. We will see the same palatalization before *oy again in (4), below.
(4) OJ suNgi2- to pass (intr.) (M 5.816) has two different transitive counterparts:
WOJ suNgus- to pass (tr.) (M 5.804) and EOJ suNgo1s- id. (M 14.3564). Martin
believes that suNgus- > suNgo1s- and posits here the lowering of o1 to u (1987, p. 63).
Although his assumption follows the Japanese tradition (Saeki and Mabuchi 1969,
pp. 474, 476), it seems that there is no actual evidence supporting the lowering of o1
to u.15 Although we have seen the raising of o1 to u in EOJ in (2) above, we also know
that EOJ sporadically preserves PJ *o (Thorpe 1983, p. 235). There are doublets in
MJ: suNgus- (MS 86)16 and suNgos- (TM 31). The existence of lexical doublets always
indicates that one form is inherited, and another is borrowed.17 Since we already saw

13
Numbers after TM indicate the page number according to the NKBT edition of this text.
14
WOJ ku- is a result of the raising of PJ *o1 to WOJ u; see also (4) below.
15
This belief in Japanese tradition probably rests on the ad hoc assumption that all phenomena found in
WOJ are archaisms, just because WOJ is the oldest attested standard form of Japanese. Thus, any later
attestations, or even contemporary attestations in dialects are automatically viewed as deviations, and
WOJ is essentially treated as though it stands in the same relationship to all other known varieties of
Japonic as Latin to all Romance languages (Vovin 2010, p. 4).
16
Numbers after MS indicate the number of the dan according to the NKBT edition of this text.
17
An anonymous reviewer raised the issue that lexical doublets cannot be always explained as loans, and
as an example s/he provided Mandarin de and zhi that are in his/her opinion both native to Mandarin.
This is an excellent example that perfectly illustrates my point: Mandarin zhi is, of course, borrowed
from Classical Chinese and is not native to Mandarin. Borrowings are certainly not limited to bor-
rowings from other language families: they can come from an earlier stage of the same language (as MdJ
ware-ware we is borrowed from bungo), from a different dialect (like MdJ dekkai big), or from a
closely related language (like chanpuru from Okinawan). The same holds true for MJ suNgos- and suNgus-
(the latter borrowed from OJ suNgus-).

123
224 A. Vovin

in (3) above that MJ is more conservative than WOJ as far as the preservation of o1 is
concerned, it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the form suNgos- is native to
MJ, while the form suNgus- is borrowed from WOJ, even though the latter is more
frequent than the former. Thus, the original nature of EOJ suNgo1s- is supported both
by directionality of change and additional evidence from MJ. Consequently, OJ
suNgi2- to pass (intr.) can go back only to PJ *suNgoy-, but not *suNguy-. It is worth
noting that the Shuri form is siji- to pass (intr.) (OGJ 1998, p. 487), demonstrating
the palatalization g > j. Note that in (3) above we also had the palatalization k > c.
Compare also Shuri cici moon (OGJ 1998, p. 144) < PJ *tukuy, but Shuri kii tree
(OGJ 1998, p. 320) < PJ *k y. The examples in (3) and (4), as well as these two
e
examples, show that both PJ velars *k and *Ng have the same development in Shuri
involving palatalization before *uy or *oy in contrast to the position before PJ * y e
that does not palatalize. Thus the developments of PJ *kuy, *koy, and *k y in Shuri e
probably underwent the following paths:
PJ *kuy > PR *kwi > pre-Shuri *ki > Shuri ci
PJ *koy > PR *kwi > pre-Shuri *ki > Shuri ci
PJ * k y > PR *k > pre-Shuri *k > Shuri ki
e

(5) WOJ naNgi2- to get calm (M 4.753) and corresponding adjective forms: OJ
na go1-ya calm (M 4.524, M 14.3499), and especially WOJ naNgo1 id.
N

(M 6.963) that is not derived, but represents the root and has -o1 in the final position,
demonstrate that WOJ naNgi2- < PJ *naNgoy-, contrary to Martins claim that
naNgo1(-ya-ka) is a secondary formation from *naNgu, as attested in naNgusam- to
become calm (1987, p. 63). Since, normally, PJ *o is preserved in WOJ as o1 only
in the last syllable of a disyllabic nominal stem (Hayata 1998), the raising of *o1>u
in naNgusam- is expected.
(6) MJ kuri black mud in the water, black color (SJ 10.32a), which is not attested
phonographically in OJ texts, must be derived from WOJ kuro1 black (KK 4). As I
mentioned before, this was already noticed by Whitman (1985, p. 44) and Majtczak
(2008, p. 26). The latter specifically notes that this derivation involves o1, and not o2.
But if kuri is derived from kuro1, then it surely must go back to PJ *kuroy.
(7) OJ isi 2.2 stone (KK 10, M 14.3398) is likely to be etymologically con-
nected with OJ iso1 2.1 rock, rocky shore (KK 5, M 14.3563). The latter also has
other specifically EOJ forms: osi (M 14.3359) and osu (M 14.3385). The relation-
ship between OJ isi stone and OJ iso1 rock, rocky shore is further strengthened
by the fact that the name of the shrine Iso1-no2 kami1 Top of the rock is con-
sistently spelled semantographically with the characters stone top (Omodaka
etal. 1967, p. 76). There is also a secondary version of the same name Isu-no2 kami1
(Omodaka et al. 1967, p. 76) that has already undergone raising o1>u.
Consequently, if OJ isi stone is a derivative of OJ iso1 rock, its reconstruction
must be PJ *esoy.18 The -y in *esoy probably can be analyzed as a diminutive; thus,

18
On the reconstruction of initial *e- rather than *i- for both PJ *esoy stone and *eso1 rock primarily
based on EOJ data, see Vovin (2010, pp. 126127).

123
Otso-rui i2 225

PJ *eso-y stone is historically little rock.19 The words for stone and rock were
traditionally considered to have a complex phonological history, particularly due to
the correspondence of -i to -o1. With the introduction of *oy as another source of OJ
i2, I hope that this complex history is essentially explained.
(8) It is traditionally believed that the WOJ form corresponding to MdJ usiro
back was usiro2 with otsu-rui vowel o2 (Omodaka et al. 1967, p. 115). However,
the basis for such a belief is actually rather meager. WOJ usiro2 back occurs once
in the Kojiki (KK 42), twice in two very late imperial edicts (SM 51 and SM 58) and
once in a late Heian period manyogana gloss in Konkomyo saisho-o kyo ongi (1079
AD). On the other hand, WOJ usiro1 back appears once in the Nihonshoki (NK
120). As far as the phonetic accuracy of transcription is concerned, the Nihonshoki
should have the precedence over the Kojiki, as it has a much better history of
transmission. Apparently related to this word are WOJ siri back (KK 22, 45, 46),
(NK 37, 38), (M 18.4108), EOJ siri id. (M 14.3431), and EOJ siru id.
(M 20.4385). Since EOJ u does not alternate with o2, the only possible source for
WOJ and EOJ siri is PJ *siroy, which is further confirmed by WOJ usiro1. Thus, in
this case, philology and historical phonology are remarkably concordant.
I believe that in the eight cases listed above, PJ *oy can be reconstructed
uncontroversially as the source of OJ i2. In addition, there are three other groups of
examples : (A) the evidence for *oy is extremely compelling, but not altogether
conclusive, (B), the evidence remains inconclusive: both PJ *oy and *uy are pos-
sible, and (C) there is no evidence for *oy, although superficially it may initially
look like a possibility.
(A) Compelling evidence for *oy:
(9) WOJ niko1- gentle, soft (M 20.4309) and EOJ niko1- id. (M 14.3370), as
well as the WOJ derivatives niko1-yo2-ka n-i gently, softly (M 11.2762,
M 20.4309) and niko1-ya-ka n-i id. (NR II.27) are apparently somehow connected
to WOJ niki1 soft, gentle (NSK IX: 246.3). However, in this case we have an
unexpected form niki1 with i1 instead of the expected *niki2 with *i2. Since the
alternation of i1 with o1 is virtually unknown except in this case and in example (11)
below, this turns out to be a puzzle. The case is reminiscent, though, of WOJ -ki1
sake in WOJ mi1-ki1 honorable sake (KK 39), (M 19.4262). As Murayama
(1988, pp. 251253) demonstrated, the vowel i1 in mi1-ki1 is a result of progressive
assimilation under the influence of the vowel in the prefix mi1-, because the WOJ
word is otherwise attested as -ki2 in KURO1 ki2 black sake (SM 38) and SIRO1 ki2
white sake (SM 39). Thus, the evidence for reconstructing WOJ niko1 -~niki1
soft, gentle as PJ *nikoy is compelling, but, unfortunately not completely con-
clusive as, in contrast to WOJ mi1-ki1 honorable sake, we have no way to tell
whether ni- goes back to pre-OJ *ni1 or *ni2.
(10) There is a famous puzzling correspondence of WOJ ninzi rainbow
(NR I: 5) to EOJ no1nzi id. from Kami1tuke2no1 province (M 14.3414). Both WOJ
and EOJ words are hapax legomenoi, but there is no lack of attestations for MJ ninzi
id. and later corresponding forms. The most sensible solution that seems to

19
Note, however, that *-y in PJ *k y tree, *muy body, *tukuy moon as well as in most other words
e
ending in -*y in all probability belongs to the stem, as it cannot be explained away as a suffix.

123
226 A. Vovin

reconcile these two forms is PJN *noynsi, although, unfortunately, as in the case
above, we have no way to tell whether WOJ ni- in ninzi goes back to pre-OJ *ni1 or
*ni2. The case for original *oy, however, might be further strengthened by
Ryukyuan data: Yuwan n:dziN, Kumejima nidzi (Uchima and Arakaki 2000,
p. 431), indicating PR *e (that can correspond to either PJ *e or to PJ sources of OJ
i2), although many other Ryukyuan dialects show contradictory evidence, essen-
tially supporting the EOJ form: Izena, Maejima no:dzi, Hateruma no:dzN, etc.
(Uchima and Arakaki 2000, p. 431). In light of these forms agreeing with EOJ in the
vocalism of the first syllable, one might want to claim that WOJ ninzi underwent the
regressive assimilation, but caution must be taken as they all exhibit long vowels that
are secondary in the dialects cited above and might well have a diphthongal origin.
(B) Inconclusive evidence for either *oy or *uy:
(11) A very similar case to the one described in (9) above is presented by the
alternation of WOJ nipi1 new (KK 25, 100, 101), (M 17.4000) and EOJ nipi1 id.
(M 14.3350, 14.3506, 14.3537a) with EOJ nipu- id. (M 14.3460). It is not possible
to tell whether the PJN form was *nipuy or *nipoy, although we have evidence from
Ryukyuan for the development of pre-OJ *ni1- > ni- in this case, since Ryukyuan
languages show mii-: Shuri mii- (OGJ 1998, p. 371), Nase mii-, Ishigaki m-, etc.
(Hirayama 1966, p. 425).20
(12) With WOJ kandi mulberry tree (KMJ 24) and EOJ kandu id. (M 14.3432),
the evidence for either PJ *kantuy or *kantoy is inconclusive.
(13) With WOJ pari needle (M 18.4128) and EOJ paru id. (M 20.4420), the
evidence for either PJ *paruy or *paroy is inconclusive.
(C) No evidence for *oy:
(14) One of the anonymous reviewers brought up the personal communication
with Leon Serafim, where the latter suggested that OJ kami2 deity may be from
*kamoy, and the name Kamo may be from *kamo1. The anonymous reviewer
further pointed out that Ainu has kamy and not *kamoy, and posited two questions:
whether it is possible that Ainu kamy was borrowed after raising and whether there
are any traces of PJ *e and *o in Japonic loanwords in Ainu. I believe that there are
several practically insurmountable difficulties to derive OJ kami2 from PJ *kamoy,
as well as to identify it with the placename Kamo. First, there is indeed Ainu
evidence for PJ *e and *o in early loanwords from Japonic (better for the latter than
for the former) (Vovin 2010, pp. 3435). Second, it is not really clear whether Ainu
kamy is a loanword from Japonic, or PJ *kamuy (> OJ kami2) is a loanword from
Ainu. In any case, there is no evidence for PA *kamoy deity, and the word is
clearly reconstructed as *kamuy (Vovin 1993, p. 99). Third, there is no evidence
that the placename Kamo (whether a name of the shrine or the river) indeed goes
back to kamo1: the earliest manyogana spellings that I am familiar with are
kamo and gamo that include the character mo that does not indicate either mo1
or mo2. In addition, both spellings are attested only in a fragment of the Yamashiro
Fudoki that is found itself in the late Kamakura text Shaku Nihongi, which makes
the point of derivation even more moot. Fourth, the river name must precede the

20
As far as the initial consonant is concerned, Ryukyuan is more archaic than Old Japanese, since only
*mi- can palatalize to *ni-, but not vice versa.

123
Otso-rui i2 227

name of the shrine, and not vice versa, as river names as a rule precede the names of
settlements or edifices that are erected on their banks. Fifth, even if we opt for
reading Kamo1, the reality might be much more prosaic: Kamo1-Ngapa might mean
simply duck river, and not divine river. After all, there are plenty of ducks
swimming in the Kamo river nowadays, and there is no reason to believe that they
were not engaging in the same kind of activity 12 or 13 hundred years ago.

3 Conclusion

As a conclusion, I would like to say that the establishment of the fact that OJ i2 has
yet another source *oy, in addition to the traditionally recognized * y and *uy, not e
only allows us to solve some puzzles in PJ reconstruction and to achieve more
precision in this reconstruction, but also allows us to better evaluate certain external
etymological proposals for Japanese. Thus, for example, the reconstruction of the
Japonic word for fire as *poy rather than *p y completely rules out a comparison
e
with MK pl [pr] fire, because PJ *o does not correspond to MK u [].21 In a
similar vein, a reconstruction of the Japonic word for stone as *eso-y little rock
holds little hope for the comparison with MK tw olh stone, or other Altaic words
for stone, such as Old Turkic ta, Middle Mongolian cilaun, and Ewenki jolo.
Similarly, a comparison of PJ *koy yellow with Proto-Austronesian *kuniN id.
turns out to be an etymology based exclusively on the initial phoneme.

Acknowledgments I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Sven Osterkamp (Bochum University/Kyoto

University) and to Prof. Tomasz Majtczak (Jagiellonian University/Bochum University), with whom the
underlying idea for this article was discussed during my stay in Bochum University 2008-2009, and to
two anonymous reviewers whose comments helped to make this article much better than it was in its
original version.

References

Primary sources

HFK Harima Fudoki, ca. 713 AD

KJK Kojiki, 712 AD
KJGC Kotai Jingu Gisiki cho, 804 AD
KK Kojiki kayo, 712 AD
KKF Kinkafu, eighth century AD
KKHS Kakyo hyosiki, 775 AD
KKWS Kokin waka shu, 921 AD
KMJ Shosoin komonjo, from 702 AD
M Manyoshu, ca. 759 AD
MS Makura-no so shi, ca. 1000 AD
NK Nihonshoki kayo, 720 AD
NR Nihon ryo iki, 824 AD

21
Being driven by the mistaken assumption that WOJ pi2 < PJ *p y, and not *poy, and, in spite of the
e
fact that I am very critical of the suggested Japonic-Korean genetic relationship, I have recently claimed
that this comparison can be acceptable as a potential cognate (Vovin 2010, p. 107), but the reconstruction
of a different vowel in the PJ form completely rules it out.

123
228 A. Vovin

NSK Nihonshoki, 720 AD

RJKS Ruiju koshu, mid to late twelfth century AD
SJ Shinsen jikyo, ca. 898901 AD
SM Senmyo, seventheighth centuries AD
TM Taketori monogatari, late nineth or early tenth
century

Secondary sources

Bentley, John R. 1997. MO and PO in Old Japanese. MA thesis, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
Honolulu.
Frellesvig, Bjarke, and John Whitman. 2008. Evidence for seven vowels in proto-Japanese. In Proto-
Japanese: Issues and prospects, ed. B. Frellesvig and J. Whitman, 1541. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Hattori, Shiro. 19781979. Nihon sogo ni tsuite [On Proto-Japonic]. Gekkan Gengo 122.
Hayata, Teruhiro. 1998. Jodai Nihongo no onsetsu kozo to o-retsu ko-otsu no betsu [The syllabic structure
of Old Japanese and ko-otsu distinctions in the o row]. Onsei kenkyu 2(1): 2533.
Hirayama, Teruo, ed. 1966. Ryukyu hogen no sogoteki kenkyu [A comprehensive study of the Ryukyuan
dialects]. Tokyo: Meiji shoin.
Mabuchi, Kazuo. 1957. Kojiki no SI, O, PO no kana [The Kana signs SI, O, PO in Kojiki]. Kokugogaku
31: 6190.
Mabuchi, Kazuo. 1972. Jodai no kotoba [Old Japanese]. Tokyo: Shibundo.
Majtczak, Tomasz. 2008. Japonskie klasy czasownikowe w perspektywe diachronicznej [Japanese verbal
classes in a diachronic perspective]. KrakoW: WydaWnictwo Universytetu Jagiellonskiego.
Martin, Samuel E. 1987. The Japanese Language through time. New Haven and London: Yale University
Press.
Miyake, Marc H. 2003. Old Japanese: A phonetic reconstruction. London: RoutledgeCurzon.
Murayama, Shichiro . 1988. Nihongo no kigen to gogen [The origins and etymology of the Japanese
language]. Tokyo: Sanichi shobo.
OGJ. 1998. Okinawa go jiten [A dictionary of the Okinawan language]. Tokyo: okurasho.
Omodaka, Hisataka et al., eds. 1967. Jidai betsu kokugo dai jiten. Jodai hen [A big dictionary of Japanese
by periods. Ancient period]. Tokyo: Sanseido.
Ono, Susumu. 1977. Onin no hensen [Phonological changes]. In Iwanami Koza Nihongo [Iwanami
lectures on the Japanese Language], ed. S. Ono and T. Shibata, Vol. 5, 148219. Tokyo: Iwanami.
Russell, Kerri. 2003. Contraction and Monophthongization in Old Japanese. In Nihongo keitoron no
genzai [Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese Language], ed. A. Vovin and T. Osada,
511539. Kyoto: International Center for Japanese Studies.
Saeki, Umetomo, and Kazuo Mabuchi. 1969. Kogo jiten [A dictionary of premodern Japanese]. Tokyo:
Kodansha.
Serafim, Leon A. 2008. The uses of Ryukyuan in understanding Japanese language history. In Proto-
Japanese: Issues and prospects, ed. B. Frellesvig and J. Whitman, 7999. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Shirafuji, Noriyuki. 1987. Nara jidai no kokugo [The Japanese language in the Nara period]. Tokyo:
Tokyodo.
Thorpe, Maner L. 1983. Ryukyuan language history. PhD diss., University of Southern California,
San Diego.
Uchima, Chokujin, and Arakaki, Kumiko. 2000. Okinawa hokubu nanbu hogen no kijutsuteki kenkyu
[A Descriptive Study of Northern and Southern Okinawan dialects]. Tokyo: Kazama shobo.
Unger, J. Marshall. 1993[1977]. Studies in Early Japanese Morphophonemics. Bloomington: Indiana
University Linguistics Club.
Vovin, Alexander. 1993. A reconstruction of Proto-Ainu. Leiden & Koln: Brill.
Vovin, Alexander. 2005. A descriptive and comparative grammar of Western Old Japanese. Part 1:
Phonology, script, lexicon, and nominals. Folkestone: Global Oriental.
Vovin, Alexander. 2010. Koreo-Japonica. A re-evaluation of a common genetic origin. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press.
Whitman, John B. 1985. The phonological basis for the comparison of Japanese and Korean. PhD diss.,
Harvard University, Cambridge.

123