Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!news.pop.psu.edu!psuvax1!uwm.edu!msunews!uchinews!ellis!deb5
From: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: How did Korean lose the tones?
Message-ID: <1995Jan7.221246.28151@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
References: <1995Jan6.215248.9102@galileo.physics.arizona.edu>
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 1995 22:12:46 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <1995Jan6.215248.9102@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> hjlu@soliton.physics.arizona.edu (Hung Jung Lu) writes:
>Middle Korean has tones. Modern Korean does not
>(in the sense that words are not distinguished by tones.)
>How did this language lose the tones? When did it
>happen? Does the use of Hangul writing (circa 1400 A.D.?)
>have something to do with it? Are there other examples
>where a language becomes atonal?

Some Korean dialects (particularly those of Kyeongsang and Hamgyeong)
are still tonal.  In those that aren't, vowel length has generally
replace tone as a contrastive feature.

If you're asking if the use of Han'geul contributed to the loss of
tones, the answer is, "No"; there's absolutely no plausible way this
could have happened.

I've heard of several examples of non-tonal languages becoming
tonal (particularly in Southeast Asia), but I can't think of another
example of the converse.  Perhaps Mandarin in a few more centuries? ^_^

-- 
	Daniel "Da" von Brighoff (deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /\
	5242 S. Hyde Park Blvd., Apt. 303		    /__\
	Chicago, IL  60615				   /____\
