Peninsular Japonic
Peninsular Japonic is a label for hypothesized extinct Japonic varieties on the Korean peninsula. Discussion centres on the interpretation of ancient place names and other fragmentary records, rather than a surviving language with a directly documented grammar. The label belongs to historical linguistics: it does not identify a modern national population. [1,2]
Evidence from names
A major source is the Samguk sagi, compiled in 1145, which preserves older place names alongside later names. Researchers compare Chinese-character phonographic transcriptions with the meanings of corresponding names and with Japonic vocabulary. [1,2]
Endo's study maps selected elements of names from 783 locations identifiable with present-day places. It examines words for water, valleys, mountains and settlements. Some items admit more than one proposed linguistic origin; Endo therefore maps the evidence word by word. [2] Identifying a comparable element in a name is different from recovering the grammar or full vocabulary of its speakers' language.
Vovin proposes Japonic interpretations of evidence associated with Paekche, Silla and T'amna. These are attributed analyses, not interchangeable direct attestations of a single uniform language. The cited publisher abstract describes his argument; it should not be treated as access to the entire paper. [3]
Interpretation and uncertainty
A place name recorded within a kingdom does not by itself identify that kingdom's principal language. Whitman distinguishes interpretations assigning the so-called Koguryo place names to Koguryo itself from interpretations assigning them to linguistically distinct populations under its rule. Different researchers also reach different conclusions about the language of Koguryo. [1]
Endo cautions that reconstructing the exact sounds represented by individual Chinese characters remains premature and uses approximate forms. [2] The date of the surviving compilation, the history of a locality and the interpretation of its written name are distinct questions. Geographic claims require attention to particular items and their proposed readings, rather than assigning a single language to an entire political territory.
Contact and common ancestry
A former Japonic presence on the peninsula does not itself establish a common ancestor of Koreanic and Japonic. Language contact and descent are different explanations of similarities. The publisher's account of Vovin's Koreo-Japonica describes his argument that many proposed correspondences are better explained by borrowing and contact. This is an attributed scholarly position, not a proof that every relationship hypothesis has been resolved. [4]
Editorial perspective
Shiori's position: the strength of a historical-language hypothesis should be assessed through its individual readings and comparisons. Turning a suggestive place name into a complete language map exceeds what that item establishes.
Related topics
Japonic languages, Samguk sagi
Sources
- [1] John Whitman, Northeast Asian Linguistic Ecology and the Advent of Rice Agriculture in Korea and Japan, Rice 4 (2011), 149-158, section on toponymic evidence.
- [2] Mitsuaki Endo, Geographical distribution of certain toponyms in the Samguk Sagi, Anthropological Science 129(1) (2021), 35-44.
- [3] Alexander Vovin, From Koguryo to T'amna, Korean Linguistics 15(2) (2013), 217-235; online publication 21 February 2014; publisher abstract.
- [4] University of Hawai'i Press, publisher description of Koreo-Japonica.