Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 15(1), 2025. ISSN: 2232-3317, http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/ala/ DOI: 10.4312/ala.15.1.79-123 Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two Distinct Language Groups of the Early Korean Peninsula Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Woosong University, Republic of Korea andrewshimunek@woosong.org Abstract There were many different languages spoken on the Korean Peninsula in the past, and not all of them were Han (Koreanic). In the traditional approach, Puyŏ and Han – the two best attested non-Chinese languages of early Korea – are treated as daughter branches of a common Puyŏ-Han proto-language. Christopher I. Beckwith has solidly demonstrated that the Puyŏ or Puyo-Koguryoic languages form a unique branch of the Japanese-Koguryoic language family, unrelated to the Han or Koreanic languages. Nevertheless, speculation on Puyŏ-Han linguistic unity continues to persist. The comparative data in this paper, focusing on the earliest attested Puyo-Koguryoic grammatical morphemes and content words and their translational equivalents in early Han (Koreanic), thoroughly disproves the Puyŏ- Han hypothesis, demonstrating that Puyŏ (Puyo-Koguryoic) and Han (Koreanic) are two mutually distinct unrelated language groups. Keywords: Puyo-Koguryoic languages, Koreanic languages, historical-comparative linguistics, ethnolinguistic contact, history of the early Korean Peninsula Povzetek Na Korejskem polotoku so v preteklosti govorili veliko različnih jezikov in vsi niso bili del skupine hanskih jezikov 韓 (korejske jezikovne družine). Tradicionalno gledano sta pujščina in hanščina – dva najbolj dokazana jezika zgodnje Koreje, ki ne spadata med kitajske jezike – obravnavana kot hčerinski veji skupnega pujohanskega prajezika. Christopher I. Beckwith je prepričljivo dokazal, da pujski ali pujokogurjojski jeziki tvorijo edinstveno vejo japonsko-kogurjojske jezikovne družine, ki ni povezana s hanskimi ali korejskimi jeziki. Kljub temu se domneve o jezikovni enotnosti pujohanskega prajezika še vedno pojavljajo. V tem članku s primerjavo podatkov, ki se osredotočajo na najzgodnejše dokazane pujokogurjojske slovnične morfeme in polnopomenske besede ter njihove prevodne ustreznice v zgodnji hanščini, ovržemo hipotezo o pujohanskem prajeziku in dokažemo, da sta pujščina (pujokogurjojski jeziki) in hanščina (korejska jezikovna družina) dve medsebojno različni, nepovezani jezikovni skupini. Ključne besede: pujokogurjojski jeziki, korejska jezikovna družina, zgodovinsko- primerjalno jezikoslovje, etnolingvistični stik, zgodovina zgodnjega Korejskega polotoka 80 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 1 Introduction In Korea today, the language family to which Modern Standard Korean, Korean dialects, and other closely related languages such as Cheju (Jeju), Koryŏ-mar, and Yukchin belong is conventionally called Han’guk ŏjok, literally, ‘Korean National Language Family’.1 The inclusion of the word kuk ‘country’ in the term ‘Korean National Language Family’ implies an a priori assumption that all languages spoken within the modern borders of the modern states of Korea (i.e., South and North) are included in this ‘national language family’. By this same logic, Old Chinese, which was spoken in the Four Han Chinese Commanderies ( Han sagun) of Korea’s early history and which was spoken in the state of Chin Han (Beckwith, 2010, p. 215), as well as Middle Chinese, Middle Mongol, Yuan Mandarin, Jurchen, and other languages spoken at one time or another in the area that is now modern Korea should all be included in this ‘national language family.’ Given the inherent logical problem of the ‘national language family’ terminology, I prefer to call the language family to which Modern Standard Korean belongs the Han ŏjok ‘Han language family’ or in English, the Koreanic language family. This terminology correctly asserts a connection with the Han (earlier read Kara) ethnolinguistic group and removes the unintentional or intentional connotations of the kuk ‘country’ element. The dominant variant of the ‘Korean National Language Family’ theory treats Puyŏ and Han – the two best-attested non-Chinese languages of early Korea – as daughter branches of a common Puyŏ-Han proto-language, which some have labeled as “ ” Puyŏ-Han choŏ, or ‘Puyŏ-Han Ancestral Language’ (e.g. Lee, 1972; Lee, 2017, p. 414). Christopher I. Beckwith (KLJ) has demonstrated the Japanese-Koguryoic language family and the Koguryŏ language’s place within that family. In this paper, I will incorporate additional Han (hereafter: ‘Koreanic’) and Puyo- Koguryoic data and offer functional morphological and lexical data further demonstrating that Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic are separate language groups: Koreanic is a unique language family in its own right, and Puyo- Koguryoic is a divergent branch of the Japanese-Koguryoic language family. Claims of Puyŏ-Han linguistic unity are often based on little to no actual linguistic data, and no study has yet systematically and comprehensively examined the primary sources on the Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic languages to demonstrate or disprove a relationship between Koreanic and 1 For the romanization of Modern Standard Korean I employ the McCune-Reischauer system because of its phonetic precision and because it is the international standard for the fields of Korean history and historical-comparative linguistics. Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 81 Puyo-Koguryoic. In this paper, I analyze the Chinese, Korean, and Japanese primary historical sources on the early Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic languages, including the Zhou shu, the Samguk sagi, the Samguk yusa, and the Nihon shoki. This data is supplemented by Chinese, Korean, and Japanese primary sources on Early Middle Korean, including the 12th century Jilin Leishi (Kyerim yusa), the Koryŏ Toijanga (1120 CE), the 12th century Middle Japanese sources Nichūreki and Sezokujiruishō, and the 13th century Hyang’yak Kugŭppang, as well as Koryŏ kugyŏl readings (q.v. Lee, 2011), supplemented by references to Chosŏn Late Middle Korean as attested in the earliest Hangŭl texts. Thus, this work focuses on the earliest solidly attested linguistic data on the Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic languages. Through a systematic comparison of grammatical morphemes and content words from both language groups, I demonstrate that the correspondences between Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic are exceedingly few. Those that do exist are loanwords, the primary directionality being from the Puyo-Koguryoic languages to the Koreanic languages as a result of the prestige associated with the Puyŏ dialects after the Puyŏ invasion and subsequent political domination of the Korean Peninsula which lasted until the Tang-Silla alliance led to the unification of the Korean Peninsula under the Unified Silla state in 668 CE. Fascinating sporadic loanword correspondences with Nivkh (Gilyak), Serbi-Mongolic, and Jurchen-Manchu are highlighted when etymologically relevant. Following a strictly data-based approach (following KLJ), this paper provides new lexica on both Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic languages. As much as possible, I focus on phonetic readings, and words and grammatical morphemes with semantically glossed or clearly discernible meanings. Speculative traditional readings have been avoided, with few exceptions. Some traditional readings are undoubtedly correct. For example, it has been long known in the field of Korean studies that the Chinese glyph (MChi ☆χʷa) is sometimes used to render the phonetic value (MChi ☆buar) (KLJ 74n, 77n, 78, 83) in transcriptions of early Koreanic languages. That is, the glyph functioning phonetically as can render the phonetic sequences ☆pʊr ~ ☆pɨr ~ ☆puar in non-Chinese languages of the early Korean Peninsula: For example, early Koreanic ☆pʊr ‘city’ and ☆pɨr ‘fire’ are sometimes written with the Chinese glyph ‘fire’. Another, albeit lower frequency, example may be the glyph ‘writing’ for the phonetic value ☆kɨr in rendering Old Koguryŏ *kɨr ‘writing’ (KLJ 87). The hyangch’al writing system of the Samguk yusa also includes some well-known examples of this kind of mixed, partially semantic and partially phonetic writing. However, such traditional readings are only accepted in this paper if they are solidly 82 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK confirmed, especially with unambiguous phonetic transcriptions, ideally with variant transcriptions, such as the example of the partially semantic, partially phonetic rendering of Han-Silla with the semantic value ‘tooth’ and the final phonetic sequence *-tś-kɨm and its purely phonetic variants *ni-tś-kɨm and *ni-s-kɨm, which clearly indicate that in Silla territory, the Chinese glyph ‘tooth’ could be traditionally read with the phonetic value *ni rendering the Han-Silla word for ‘tooth’, cognate to Koryŏ Early Middle Korean *ni, Chosŏn Late Middle Korean ní, and Modern Standard Korean i ‘tooth’ (see section §6 lexicon below). By and large, the most reliable data on early Koreanic and Puyo- Koguryoic languages are straightforward phonetic transcriptions in Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese. This Chinese dialect is not the same as that spoken in the Tang capital. Beckwith has termed it ‘Archaic Northeastern Middle Chinese’ for which Shimunek prefers the term ‘Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese’. I will employ the latter term in this paper. (On this phonetically conservative variety of Chinese, see KLJ 93-105; LASM 81-82, 84, 86, 87-88; Shimunek, 2021a, pp. 65-67, 72-75; Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 133, 152, 156, 160; and Shimunek, 2023, p. 85.) This article does not provide an exhaustive listing of all identifiable Puyo- Koguryoic and early Koreanic linguistic lexica – there are many more grammatical morphemes and words attested in early Koreanic and also some additional data in Puyo-Koguryoic languages, especially from Puyŏ- Paekche and Han-Paekche. The data set in this paper has naturally been limited to Puyo-Koguryoic words and grammatical morphemes which have semantic translational equivalents in Koreanic. 2 Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese Traditional studies on languages of the early Korean Peninsula often rely on Modern Standard Korean readings, or at best, Late Middle Korean readings, but these are inaccurate. “The Middle Chinese dialect or dialects of the Korean Peninsula before the middle of the Unified Silla period were highly conservative, retaining phonological characteristics of Late Old Chinese” (Shimunek, 2021b, p. 133). This uniquely Korean Peninsular variety of Early Middle Chinese – hereafter ‘Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese’ (equivalent to Beckwith’s ‘Archaic Northeastern Middle Chinese’, KLJ 93-105) – is a sine qua non for historical-comparative work on the languages of the early Korean Peninsula. The author has employed Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese readings to reconstruct the phonetic forms of Puyo- Koguryoic and early Koreanic data. Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 83 3 Language families of the early Korean Peninsula Historically documented and identified languages of the early Korean Peninsula, defined here as Korea before the Koryŏ period, include languages belonging to the Koreanic language family, languages belonging to the Puyo-Koguryoic branch of the Japanese-Koguryoic language family and varieties of Chinese (Beckwith, 2005, pp. 34-64; KLJ 28, 118-163; Shimunek, 2021a, p. 66; Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 129-167; Shimunek, 2023, pp. 98-100, 102-103). This is not an exhaustive list – as the author has demonstrated elsewhere, there may be other distinctive and previously unidentified extinct languages of the early Korean Peninsula, vestiges of which remain in the Samguk sagi toponym corpora. Some fascinating and unique lexical data is attested in Kara and Paekche, indicating a third (or more), non-Han, non-Puyŏ language of unknown identity. This data will be the subject of a separate study in the future. 4 Koreanic languages vs. Puyo-Koguryoic languages The Puyo-Koguryoic languages are demonstrably divergently related to Japanese, and do not form a cognate relationship with the Koreanic language family (KLJ 1-28, 232; Beckwith, 2005, pp. 49-51 et passim). In the currently dominant tradition, Puyŏ (Puyo-Koguryoic) and Han (Koreanic) are often portrayed as two divergent branches of a common proto-language, as exemplified by Lee Seungjae’s summary of Lee Ki-Moon’s view (Lee, 2017, p. 414). The traditionalists’ primary motivation for including the Puyŏ languages as a sister branch to Han seems to be the preconceived view that they should be related, rather than a scientific approach to the data. 4.1 Koreanic vs. Puyo-Koguryoic functional morphology If we examine the earliest attested Puyo-Koguryoic grammatical morphemes and words, they are clearly unrelated to early Koreanic (see Table 1).2 2 For a discussion on grammaticalization in the Korean aspectual system, see Kumar (2025) in the same issue. 84 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Table 1: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic grammatical morphemes Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic* CJK *na ‘genitive’ > AKog *na : AJpn *nâ > OJpn *nö > MSJ no ≠ CKor *-ɦɨy > HS *-ɦɨy : HP *-ɨy : MSK /-ɨy/ ‘genitive’ CJK *si ~ *śi ‘attributive’ > OKog *si ~ *śi : OJpn *-si- > MSJ -shi ≠ CKor *-tś ~ *-ts > HK *-s : HK/HP *-(t)s : HS *-tś ~ *-ts > LMK -s ‘genitive- attributive’ * ‘Early Koreanic’ denotes the earliest attested Han languages and dialects. 4.2 Koreanic vs. Puyo-Koguryoic content words A comparison of content words in Puyo-Koguryoic and early Koreanic languages reveals no regular cognates. If Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic were indeed related as two branches of a common source node (i.e. a common proto-language) as is claimed in most variants of the traditional ‘Korean National Language Family’, one should expect a significant number of lexical cognates, especially in the highest frequency words. This basic law of language change is summarized below: THE LAW OF FREQUENCY AND RETENTION “The highest frequency morphemes in any language have heavy functional load and light semantic load, and are inherited from the proto-language” (Beckwith, 2008, p. 19; cited here from LASM 283). Hypothetically, any words and morphemes can be borrowed between any languages, but if the Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic languages were indeed two branches of a “Korean National Language Family” as is often claimed, the highest frequency morphemes (including both grammatical morphemes as well as content words) of these two language groups should exhibit many regular correspondences. The Puyo-Koguryoic and early Koreanic words compared below are very close to being an exhaustive list of all the Puyo-Koguryoic words and early Koreanic words available to the author at the time of writing for which semantic equivalents or near-equivalents exist in the respective languages. That is, the lists below consist of near-exhaustive lists of semantically or functionally equivalent words and morphemes in the two language groups. I am not an adherent of any of the ‘basic vocabulary’ theories: As shown by Beckwith and many others, Swadesh lists, lexicostatistics, and glottochronology are untenable at best, if not pseudoscience (KLJ). Nevertheless, organizing the data into semantic categories is useful for Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 85 demonstrating that the earliest grammatical morphemes and words in Han languages exhibit no regular cognates with Puyŏ. In the current data set employed in this article, there are exceedingly few lexical correspondences between Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic, and the few that exist are well- known loanwords with very clear or inferable historical contexts (e.g., see notes below on Han-Silla *paɦɨy ‘rock, precipice’, and Koryŏ Early Middle Korean *namur ‘lead (metal)’ and *kɨr ‘writing’ in Table 5 and in entries §6.1.1.14 and §6.1.2.1.15). In order to aid the reader in processing the lexical data, I have organized the lexical items by general semantic spheres. I do not advocate for any of the ‘basic vocabulary’ theories; the general semantic groupings employed below are simply to help the reader see the scope of lexical comparisons available to the comparativist. The content words discussed below are listed by their lexical categories: numerals, nouns, adjectival verbs, and verbs. The nouns are further divided into the following semantic groupings: • direction words; • body part terms; • rocks, minerals, metals, and geological formations; • human made structures; • plant names; • zoonyms; • people; • water and watercourses; • and supernatural concepts. Unless otherwise noted, Archaic Koguryŏ (AKog), Old Koguryŏ (OKog), Old Japanese (OJpn), and Common Japanese-Koguryoic (CJK) data cited below are from Christopher I. Beckwith (KLJ). The semantic values in the tables below have been abbreviated and simplified for ease of reading. The reader is advised to consult section §6 for detailed notes on the semantic values of each word listed below, etymological notes, and sources. 4.2.1 Numerals The Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic languages have clearly distinct numeral systems which do not exhibit any cognates between them (see Table 2). 86 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Table 2: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic numerals Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic ‘one’ Not attested; cf. OJpn *pitö ≠ HS *…tʌ : EMK *hatʌn ~ *harʌn : LMK hʌ̀nàh ~ hʌ̀n- : MSK hana ‘two’ Not attested; cf. OJpn *puta ≠ HS *…ɣɨr ~ *…r > EMK *tuβur(h?) (KYS, NCR, SZR) : LMK tǔrh ~ tǔ- > MSK /tur/ ~ /tu-/ ‘three’ OKog *mir : OJpn *mi ≠ HK *ts(ʷ)əy(h) : EMK *səyh > LMK səˇyh ~ sə̀- ~ sə̀k- > MSK set ~ se- ~ sək- ‘four’ Not attested; cf. OJpn *yö ≠ HS *(nə?)ri : EMK *nəyh ~ *ndəyh : LMK nəˇyh ~ nə̀- ~ nə̀k- > MSK net ~ ne- ~ nək- (cf. Nivkh) ‘five’ OKog *ütsi : OJpn *itu ≠ EMK *tasɨs ~ *tasʌs : LMK tàsʌ́s ~ tày- ‘six’ Not attested; cf. OJpn *mu ≠ EMK *yəsɨs ~ *yəsʌs : LMK yə̀sɨ́s ~ yə̀y- ~ yə̀s- > MSK /yəsət/ ‘seven’ OKog *nan : OJpn *nana ≠ EMK *irkip ~ *nirkup ~ *nirkʊp : LMK nìrkúp : MSK /irkʊp/ [iɭgʊp] ‘eight’ Not attested; cf. OJpn *ya ≠ EMK *yətʌrp : LMK yə̀tɨ́rp > MSK /yətər/ [jədəɭ] ‘nine’ PP *tɨr (≠ OJpn *koko ← Ch.) ≠ EMK *ahʊrp : LMK àhʊ́p > MSK /ahʊp/ ‘ten’ OKog *tək : OJpn *tə ~ *təwo ≠ EMK *yər(h?) : LMK yə́rh > MSK /yər/ [jəɭ] ‘hundred’ Not attested ≠ EMK *ɦʊn : LMK ɦʊ́n ‘thousand’ ~ ‘ten thousand’ PP *tɨ ~ *tsir ~ *tir ‘1,000 ~ 10,000, abundant’ → OJpn *ti ≠ LMK tsɨ́mɨ̀n ‘thousand’ As shown above, the attested Puyo-Koguryoic numerals exhibit cognates only with Japanese, not with any of the Koreanic languages. The Puyo- Koguryoic numerals and the Koreanic numerals thus form two clearly distinct lexical sets unrelated to each other. By contrast, the numeral sets of well-demonstrated language families of the world regularly exhibit systematic correspondences in their numeral systems. For example, English three, German drei /dʁaɪ̯̯ /, Italian tre, French trois /tʀwa/, Persian se(h), Pashto dre, Agnean tre, Kuchean trey ~ trai /trəi/, Hittite teri, and numerous others are cognate reflexes of a common Indo- European root denoting ‘three’. Likewise, for the Serbi-Mongolic languages: Kitan *ɢur ‘three’ (LASM), Middle Mongol qurban ~ γurban /gʊrban/, Khalkha ɢʊrəw, Buryat gʊrbən, Kalmyk ɢurwn, Daur kʷarpə, Shira Yoghor kʊrwan, Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 87 Kangjia kʊrɔ, Santa quraŋ, Moghol qurban ‘three’, and others are cognates (Svantesson et al., 2005, p. 164). Numerous other examples could be cited from any of the world’s well-demonstrated language families. There are also counterexamples in languages of the world, but most have very clear contexts. For example, the numerals of Mangghuer (a Mongolic language) have been replaced by Chinese in the speech of younger speakers due to intensive language contact with Chinese (Dpal-ldan-bkra- shis et al., 1996, p. 4). Modern Standard Korean also has a unique set of Sino- Korean numerals alongside ‘native’ Koreanic numerals, with each set used in overwhelmingly (but not entirely) mutually exclusive environments (e.g., when telling time, ‘native’ numerals are used for telling the hour and Sino- Korean numerals are used for telling the minute). (One rare but striking example of free variation between ‘native’ and Sino-Korean numerals is Modern Standard Korean sagŏri /sakəri/ and its free variant negŏri /nekəri/, both denoting ‘intersection’, literally ‘four roads’, and which both occur in daily speech with free variation between Sino-Korean sa ‘four’ and the ‘native’ numeral root ne- ‘four’). Even English numerals have been borrowed in Modern Standard Korean, albeit in a highly limited context – for tallying baseball scores – but all of these are exceptions to a general trend of numerals retained in divergently related languages. 4.2.2 Nouns Direction words The attested Puyo-Koguryoic and Early Koreanic direction words exhibit numerous cognates within each language grouping but no cognates between each other (see Table 3). Table 3: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic direction words Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic * front ~ south AKog *kor ‘front’ : PS *kʊr ‘south’ : PP *kʊrʊ ≠ HS *mak ‘south’ : LMK màh ‘south’ HK/HP *arp : LMK àrpʰ ‘south, front’ > MSK /apʰ/ ‘front’ back ~ behind ~ north ~ west ~ above ~ evening AKog *tsɨar ‘back, behind’ > OKog *tśɨri ‘north’ : OJpn *tsiri ~ *siri ‘back, behind; rump, buttocks’ OKog *ɦaɨp ‘west’ : OJpn *yami ‘darkness, evening’ ≠ HS *tɨra/*tʊra ‘west’ ~ *tɨy ‘north’ : HP *ti : LMK tùýh > MSK twi ‘behind; north’ HK/HP *ʊk/*uk ‘above, top’ : HS *ukʊk/*uyʊk/*urʊk ‘north’ : LMK ùh > MSK wi ‘above’ 88 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic * HS 夜音 *…m (genitive 夜未 *…m-ɨy) : LMK pàm ~ pám > MSK pam ‘evening’ east OKog *kati ‘east’, OJpn *kəti ~ *koti ‘east wind’ ~ *pimukatśi ‘east’ > MSJ higashi ‘east’ ≠ HK *śa ‘east’ : HS *sɛyra ‘east’ ~ HS dial. *sey ‘south’ : LMK sʌ́y ‘east’ > MSK /sɛ-/ ‘east’ root/base > below OKog *tśɨəm ‘root, base’, OJpn *tśɨməw ‘below’ > MSJ shimo ‘below’ ≠ HK/HP *arɨ : HS *ara : LMK ara : MSK /arɛ/ ‘below’ * (See ‘Body part terms’ for the metaphorical extension of ‘heart’ > ‘center’.) The attested Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic direction words are distinct and clearly unrelated to each other. The only words that appear even hypothetically relatable are Archaic Koguryŏ *tsɨar ‘back, behind’ and Han- Silla dial. *tɨra/*tʊra ‘west’ ~ Han-Silla dial. *tɨy ‘north’. If the primary semantic value of the Han-Silla word-forms is ‘behind’, then one could exploratorily hypothesize a loanword scenario between these Puyo- Koguryoic and Koreanic words, but before such a proposal can be demonstrated or disproven, the Korean-internal etymologies of the Han- Silla words and their cognates in Koreanic must first be established. If the hypothetical metathesis and affrication that must be proposed for such a scenario to be possible can be explained, it could be a loanword of uncertain directionality. All other direction words listed above exhibit no cognates between Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic. Body part terms The attested body part terms in Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic are strikingly different (see Table 4). Table 4: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic body part terms Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic tooth OKog *keyr ‘tooth’ : OJpn *ki ~ *gi ‘canine tooth’ ≠ HS *ni > EMK *ni > LMK ní ‘tooth’ heart > center PS *kɨr ‘center, central’ : OKog *kɨr : OJpn ‘heart’ > MSJ kokoro ≠ HS *…m ‘heart’ LMK mʌ̀zʌ̀m ‘heart; mind’ LMK ryə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ ~ nyə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ ‘heart (anat.)’ LMK kàβʌ́ntʌ́y ‘center, central’ foot OKog *ɦa : OJpn *a- ≠ EMK *par : LMK pár Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 89 Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic arm ~ shoulder OKog *maɨ ‘arm, shoulder’ ≠ LMK pʌ̀rh ‘arm’ LMK ə̀skə́y ‘shoulder’ head OKog *kan : OJpn *ka- ≠ EMK *mati : LMK mə̀rí ~ màrí Words for ‘tooth’ and ‘heart’ are usually cognate in many of the world’s demonstrated language families. For example, English tooth, Latin dens, Armenian atam, Ancient Greek odoús, Sanskrit dát ~ dánta and others derived from a common Indo-European word for ‘tooth’; Hungarian fog, Mansi puŋk, Finnish pii and others from a common Proto-Uralic word for ‘tooth’; and Akkadian šinnum, Arabic sinn, Hebrew šén, Ge’ez sənn and others derived from a common Proto-Semitic word for ‘tooth’, to name just a few examples from well-known language families. In contrast, Puyo-Koguryoic *keyr ‘tooth’ and early Koreanic *ni ‘tooth’ are distinct from each other and are unrelatable. Likewise, Puyo-Koguryoic *kɨr ‘heart’ and early Koreanic ‘heart’ (e.g. LMK mʌ̀zʌ̀m ~ ryə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ) exhibit no demonstrable connection. Rocks, minerals, metals, and geological formations Table 5: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic words for rocks, minerals, and geological formations Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic mountain AKog *ɣapma > OKog *ɦaɨp : MSJ yama OKog *tar ‘mountain, high’, Puyo-Kara *ta ‘mountain; high’ < CJK *tar ≠ HS *mʊr : HK *pʊ : HP *mʊra ~ *mʊre : EMK mʊy(h?): LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h HS *…ɨm : Old Cheju (T’amna) *ʊrɨm valley OKog *tan ‘valley’ : OJpn *tani ‘valley’ ≠ LMK kʊˇr ‘valley’ mountain pass ~ highland CJK *taw ‘pass’ > OKog *taw ‘mountain pass’ : PP ‘highland’ : OJpn *təwpu ~ *təpu ~ *təpaw ‘pass’ ≠ HS *tsɛyra ‘highland’ : LMK tsáy > MSK S. /ʨɛ/ ~ N. /tsɛ/ ‘ridge, mountain pass’ stone/rock, cliff, precipice Nivkh ⇄ OKog *paɦɨy ‘cliff, mountain, crag, precipice’ → HS *paɦɨy > LMK pàhʊ́y > MSK pawi ‘rock, stone; cliff; precipice’ 90 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic silver/white/gold OKog *tśiar ‘silver’ : OJpn *tśira- ~ *śirö- > MSJ shiro ~ shira- ‘white, silver’ : PS *sɨra ‘gold; Silla’ ≠ EMK *tʊr : LMK tʊˇrh > MSK /tʊr/ [tʊɭ] ‘stone’ → HS *sɨra ‘Silla’ metal ~ iron OKog *taw ‘iron’ ← Ch. dial. ≠ HP *zɨrɨ/*zirɨ : EMK *sʊy : LMK sʊ́y ‘iron, metal’ jade OKog *kʊ ‘jade’ ← Ch. → LMK ʊ́k ‘jade’ lead (metal) OJpn *namari : OKog *namur → EMK *namur ≠ LMK náp Among the currently decipherable and reconstructible Puyo-Koguryoic and early Koreanic words for geological formations, only one exhibits a clear connection between Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic: Old Koguryŏ *paɦɨy and Han-Silla *paɦɨy both denote ‘rock, stone; cliff, crag, precipice’. These words are clearly related to the Nivkh word for ‘stone’ (KLJ). Given the political dominance of Puyŏ speakers after their invasion of the Korean Peninsula, the directionality must be from Puyo-Koguryoic to Koreanic. The word is retained in Modern Standard Korean as pawi ‘rock, stone, cliff, crag, reef’. In the territory of Paekche, the attested word for ‘rock, stone’ is *tśirak ‘stone, rock ( )’ (SS 36, 37). This interpretation relies on a regular Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese (KPEMC) phonetic reading of the characters *tśir and *ak, and supersedes previous a priori attempts to force a Koreanic reading (pace Toh, 2005). As the Puyŏ people were located in Manchuria, neighboring the *Serbi (Xianbei) and other Serbi-Mongolic speakers before their invasion of the Korean Peninsula, it is highly likely that this should be identified as a Puyŏ-Paekche word. I thus propose the following etymologies: Puyŏ-Paekche *tśirak ‘stone, rock’ ← ? early Serbi-Mongolic dialect *čʰɪlaɣ < *čʰɪla-ɣU < Common Serbi-Mongolic *čʰɪla ‘stone, rock’ > Kitan *čala ‘stone, rock’. (The Kitan word was discussed by György Kara (2021)). Common Serbi-Mongolic *čʰɪla ‘stone, rock’ > pre-Proto-Mongolic *čʰɪla- ɣU > Proto-Mongolic *čʰɪlaɣʊ > MMgl čila’u-n [ʧʰilaɦʊ-n] > modern Khalkha Mongolian чулуу [ʧʰʊˈɮʊ] ~ attributive чулуун [ʧʰʊˈɮʊ̃] ‘stone, rock’. Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 91 These words are clearly unrelated to Han-Silla *paɦɨy (and its reflexes Late Middle Korean pàhʊ́y and MSK pawi ‘rock, stone; cliff; precipice’) and are likewise unrelated to Early Middle Korean *tʊr ~ Late Middle Korean tʊˇrh ~ MSK /tʊr/ [tʊɭ] ‘stone, rock’. The retention of the velar *k in the Paekche form indicates a borrowing from a language of the Mongolic branch of Serbi-Mongolic as it exhibits a reduced reflex of the *-ɣU suffix which is one of the morphological innovations distinguishing the Mongolic branch from the Serbi branch of the Serbi-Mongolic language family (see LASM 415-416, 449, 459). One may speculate a loanword scenario connected with the historically documented interaction between the Jou-jan (Rouran) Avar Empire of Mongolia and the Koguryŏ kingdom in 479 CE. Alternatively, it could be the result of a much earlier borrowing from a Serbi-Mongolic dialect into Proto-Puyo-Koguryoic before the establishment of the Koguryŏ kingdom, at a time when Serbi- Mongolic and Puyo-Koguryoic speakers lived together in Manchuria. (On the linguistic homeland of Serbi-Mongolic in Manchuria and North China, see LASM.) Human-made structures and inventions The earliest unambiguous attestation of a Koreanic word for ‘writing’ is Koryŏ Early Middle Korean *kɨr ‘writing’, a well-known borrowing from Old Koguryŏ with a plausible historical context (KLJ 174). Attested words for humanmade structures and human inventions exhibit no cognates between Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic (see Table 6 below). Table 6: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic words for humanmade structures and inventions Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic fortress/city/capital ~ mound ~ place ~ land ~ plot of land AKog *kuru > OKog *kuər ~ *kɨr : PP *ki ~ *kɨ ~ *kur : PK *kʊr : PS *kɨr ~ *kʊr PS *na : OKog *na ‘land’ ≠ HK *pʊr : HP *pʊri : HS *pʊri ~ *pʊr ‘mound, fortress, city’ HK/HP *(t)sas : HS *…tśʰ : LMK *tsás ‘walled city’ HS *miti : HP *meti ~ *miti : LMK màtʰ ~ màt ‘plot of land’ LMK stáh ~ stàh ‘land’ ford OKog *ʊ ~ *ʊy ~ *wəy ≠ LMK nʌ̀rʌ̀ well (for water) PS *ɨr : OKog *ɨr : OJpn *wi ≠ EMK *umur > LMK ùmɨ́r door ~ gate PK tʊk ~ *tʊ : OJpn *tö ≠ LMK ʊ̀ráy writing OKog *kɨr → EMK *kɨr 92 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic drum (musical instrument) OKog *taw : OJpn *tʊtʊmi ≠ EMK *puk : LMK púp ~ púpʰ ~ pùpʰ : MSK puk Plant names Table 7: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic plant names Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic tree, wood, forest OKog *kɨr ~ *key : OJpn *ki : PP *ki ≠ EMK *namk > LMK nàmk ~ nàmʊ́ HP *sɨp : LMK súp ~ sùpʰɨ́r bamboo OKog *na : OJpn *nö ≠ HK *tay : EMK *tay : LMK táy vegetable ~ vine PS *na : OJpn *na ≠ LMK nə̀tsʰúr LMK nʌ̀mʌ̀rh soybean OKog *pɨy ≠ LMK kʰʊ̀ŋ orchid ~ bloom ~ cherry ~ flower OKog *śayk : OJpn *sakura ~ *tsakura OJpn *pana ‘flower’ ≠ LMK pə̀s ~ pə̀t ‘cherry’ LMK pʰɨ́y- ‘to bloom’ EMK *kʊr/*kʊ(ts?) : LMK kʊ̀ts ~ kʊ̀s ‘flower’ garlic ~ chives OKog *meyr : OJpn *mira ≠ LMK mànʌ́r leek ~ onion OKog *kakey : OJpn *ki ≠ LMK pʰá chestnut OKog *taw ≠ LMK pǎm pine OKog *kur ~ *ku ≠ LMK sʊ́r willow ~ poplar ~ aspen OKog *kü ~ *kɨ OKog *ya ≠ LMK pə̀tɨ́r Early Modern Korean sasʌ (17th c.) ~ sasɨy (18th c.) ‘aspen, white poplar’* * MSK /sasi-namu/ [sʰaɕinamu] ‘aspen, white poplar’ is now read in as sashi and folk-etymologizable as Sino-Korean ‘four seasons’, but perhaps the tree name was originally a distinct non-Chinese word. Zoonyms It is not uncommon in languages of the world for zoonyms to be borrowed. The currently deciphered Puyo-Koguryoic words for ‘ox’ are loanwords from Chinese and Serbi-Mongolic, and are unrelated to the earliest Koreanic words for ‘ox’. It is well known that words for ‘horse’, ‘bear’, and certain other animal names are widespread areal words transcending language boundaries and Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 93 are thus not usable for determining language family relationships (KLJ). See Table 8 below. Table 8: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic zoonyms Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic ox ~ cow ~ cattle OKog *ʊ ← Ch. PP *ker ← ? SM ≠ HS *śu > EMK > LMK syʊ́ > MSK /sʊ/ pig OKog *ʊ ≠ EMK *tʊr/*tʊ(t?) ← Ch. horse OKog *merʊ ← areal → EMK *mar/*mʌr owl OKog *tsʊ ≠ LMK ʊ́tpámí LMK púhə̀ŋ vulture ~ eagle OKog *kami ≠ LMK sùrí bear OKog *kum ← areal → HP *kʊma (*kʊ̀má) LMK kʊˇm fowl ~ bird ~ pheasant ~ chicken OKog *tawr ← Ch. ≠ LMK skwə̀ŋ (onom.) LMK sǎy ‘bird, fowl’ LMK tʌ̀rk ‘chicken, hen’ (← areal word) People Table 9: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic words for people Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic human ~ person OKog *pen : OJpn *pi- ≠ LMK nʊ́m LMK sǎrʌ́m ~ sǎrʌ̀m ~ sàrʌ̀m man ~ boy ~ child OKog *paɨ ‘man’ : PS *paɨ ‘boy’ OKog *ku ‘child’ < CJK ← SM ≠ HS *pʊk : HK *mʊk ‘child, boy’ king ~ ruler ~ lord OKog *kay ~ *key ‘king’ ← East Scythian ≠ HK/HP *nirim : LMK nǐm Water and watercourses Table 10: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic words for water and watercourses Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic water ~ river OKog *mey : OJpn *mi ≠ HK *mur ‘water’ HK *ta ~ *tay : HP *nari ~ *nare : LMK nǎyh ‘river’ HS *kuər ~ *kur : LMK kʌ̀rʌ́m > MSK karam ‘river’ 94 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic sea ~ ocean OKog *pa : OJpn *pa- ? HS *…tʌ ~ *…ak LMK pàtáh ~ pàrʌ́r “If the Old Koguryo word and the root of the Middle Korean words are related, it is by convergence—Korean having borrowing *pa ‘sea’ from Koguryo and subsequently adding further derivational elements to it” (KLJ 178-179). Supernatural concepts Attested words for ‘spirit, soul, ghost’ exhibit no cognates across Puyo- Koguryoic and Koreanic (see Table 11 below). Table 11: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic words for supernatural concepts Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic spirit ~ ghost ~ soul PS *tɨ : PP *tɨr ~ *tśɨr ~ *tɨ : OJpn *ti ≠ EMK *(nək?)ś-i : LMK nə̀ks (cf. MSK /kwisin/ ← Ch. ) 4.2.3 Adjectives and Adjectival Verbs Table 12: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic adjectives and adjectival verbs Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic yellow AKog *kweru > OKog *kuər : OJpn *ki ~ *ku ≠ HK *tʊra- : LMK nʊ́rá- red OKog *śapɨy : OJpn *(t)sapi ~ *(t)sabi ≠ MSK /p͈arka-/ < /parkah-/ < LMK pʌ̀rk-ʌ hʌ- ~ LMK pʌ ̀rk- ‘bright, brilliant’ (cf. Common Nivkh *baɣla- ‘red’) shallow ~ flat ~ level ~ wide ~ broad ~ vast OKog *pirar ~ *piriar ~ OKog *piar : OJpn *pira- ~ *pirö ≠ LMK nyə̀tʰ- ‘shallow’ LMK nə̀p- ‘wide, broad, vast’ deep OKog *puk : OJpn *pʊka- ≠ EMK *kipʰ- : LMK kìpʰ- abundant ~ flourishing ~ rich OKog *śa : OJpn *sa- ≠ LMK nə̀k nə̀k LMK mǎn hʌ́- ~ màn hʌ́- cool ~ cold OKog *śamiar < CJK *sam- ≠ LMK tsʰíp- ~ tsʰíβ- (cf. Common Nivkh *tiv-) Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 95 Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic good OKog *mey ‘good’ : PP *mey ‘peaceful’ ≠ HK *na- ‘outstanding’ long OKog *namey, OJpn *naga- ~ *naŋga- ≠ HK *kir : LMK kǐr- (cf. Common Nivkh *gəl- ‘long’) happy ~ praise ~ enjoy Not attested; cf. OJpn *tanō- ‘enjoy’ ≠ HK *ki : HS *ki : LMK kìs- 4.2.4 Verbs Attested verbs in Puyo-Koguryoic and early Koreanic reveal no cognates (see Table 13 below). However, there may be one Serbi-Mongolic verb borrowed into Puyo-Koguryoic (details in the entry for Puyŏ-Paekche *tɨ ‘gather, meet’ in §6.2.2.13 below). Table 13: Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic verbs Puyo-Koguryoic Early Koreanic overlook ~ look OKog *ɦa ≠ HS *pʊ- take OKog *taw : OJpn *təwr- < CJK *taw- ‘take’ ≠ LMK kàtsí- ‘take’ LMK pàt- ‘receive’ LMK əˇt- ‘acquire’ enter OKog *i ~ *yi- : OJpn *ir ~ *yir- ≠ LMK tɨ́r- encounter ~ meet OKog *paɨk ≠ LMK màts- open OKog *tawpi ≠ LMK yəˇr- gather ~ meet PP *tɨ (← ? SM) ≠ LMK mʊ̀t- exist Not attested; cf. OJpn *ar- ≠ HS *itś- ~ *ɨtś- > LMK ìs- 5 Concluding remarks As demonstrated by the grammatical morpheme comparisons in §4.1 Table 1 and by the numerous lexical comparisons in section §4.2, the Puyo- Koguryoic languages and the Koreanic languages clearly do not form a language family relationship. (See section §6 below for primary and secondary sources and for detailed etymological notes.) The available linguistic data thus cannot support the traditional speculative attempts to connect the Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic languages as two branches of a common source node: That is, Puyo- 96 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Koguryoic and Koreanic are unrelated and mutually distinctive language groups. From this sample of attested Puyo-Koguryoic words and their semantic equivalents in early Koreanic, it is clear that the functional morphology and the vast majority of the lexicon of these two language groups are distinct, aside from a few loanwords from Puyŏ to Han. Other loanwords include borrowings from Chinese to Puyŏ, Serbi- Mongolic to Puyŏ, and from Puyo-Koguryoic to Jurchen-Manchu. There are also a few Nivkh-Puyŏ and Nivkh-Koreanic lexical correspondences indicative of loanwords. The Han (Koreanic) data in this paper exhibits only one possible connection with Serbi-Mongolic but this is doubtful: Early Koreanic *mur ‘water’ resembles Common Serbi-Mongolic *murə ‘large river’ (LASM 354). The logical conclusion is that Puyo-Koguryoic and Koreanic are two distinct, mutually exclusive language groups: That is, Puyŏ or Puyo- Koguryoic is a branch of the Japanese-Koguryoic language family (as demonstrated by Beckwith, KLJ) and Koreanic (Han) is a unique language family. 6 Attested and reconstructed Early Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic forms Early Koreanic and Puyo-Koguryoic words and morphemes in this article are discussed in detail below with cognates, etymologies, sources, and earliest reconstructible etyma. 6.1 Early and Medieval Koreanic This paper addresses some of the earliest linguistic data from the Koreanic language family, including Early Koreanic and Middle Korean. Common Koreanic (CKor) denotes reconstructions based on the comparative method applied to the earliest Koreanic linguistic data. Lexical entries in the sections below are organized alphabetically by their reconstructed forms. Words transcribed in the Samguk sagi (SS) and the Samguk yusa (SY) are reconstructed based on Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese (KPEMC) readings (q.v. KLJ; Shimunek, 2021b; Shimunek, 2021a; and Shimunek, 2023). Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 97 6.1.1 Early Koreanic ('Old Korean dialects') Early Koreanic languages or ‘Old Korean dialects’ in this paper include Han- Silla, Han-Paekche, and Han-Kara. 6.1.1.1 Han-Silla (HS) Han-Silla is the Koreanic language spoken Silla. The data here primarily dates to the Unified Silla period, and encompasses the earliest hyangga data, semantically glossed and phonetically transcribed words in the Silla toponym corpus in the Samguk sagi as well as data from the Samguk yusa. 1. HS 肹 (SY) *…ɣɨr ~ (SY) *…r ‘two’ < CKor > EMK *tuβur (KYS, NCR, SZR) : LMK tǔr(h) > MSK tur [tuɭ] ~ tu- ‘two’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145-147). 2. HS ~ (SY) *-ɦɨy : HP *-ɨy (see HP *sɨp ‘forest’ below) < CKor *-ɦɨy ~ *-ɨy ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ > > MSK /-ɨy/ ‘genitive suffix’. 3. HS (SY) *-ɨn : EMK *-n < CKor *-ɨn ~ *-n ‘deverbal relative clause forming suffix’. 4. HS ~ (SY) *itś-/*ɨtś- > LMK ìs- > MSK - /is̯ -/ [it̯ - ~ is̯ -] ‘to exist’ (Shimunek, 2021b, p. 146; Shimunek, 2023, p. 96 n. 74, p. 101). The kugyŏl orthographic form in the 13th century text Kuyŏk Inwanggyŏng (Lee, 2011, p. 60) renders the same verbal root, which I reconstruct as EMK *itś-/*its- ‘to exist’. On the change of final *tś/*ts to later s, see entry for HS *-tś ~ *-ts ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ below. 5. HS (SY) *…ɨm ‘mountain’ : Old Cheju (T’amna) *ʊrɨm ‘mountain’ < CKor *ʊrɨ- ‘to ascend, go up’. Cf. Common Nivkh *ul- ‘high’ (CND 186). 6. HS (SS) *kɨ-r ~ (SS) *ki-r ‘good, praise, commend ( )’ < HS *kɨ- ~ *ki- ‘to praise, commend, be good’ + *-r ‘relative clause forming suffix’ (cf. *ki- ‘praise’ + *itś- ‘exist’ > LMK kìs- ‘to rejoice, to be happy’). 7. HS (SS) *kuər ~ *kur ‘river ( )’, perhaps cognate to LMK kʌ̀rʌ́m > MSK karam ‘river’, though the vocalism is problematic. 8. HS (SY) *…m ‘heart’ (also attested as *…m-ɨy with *-ɨy ‘genitive-attributive suffix’) : LMK mʌ̀zʌ̀m ‘heart’ > MSK maɨm ‘heart’. 9. HS *mak ‘south’ (erroneously glossed in SS as ‘north’, corrected to * ‘south’ by Toh, 1987) : LMK màh ‘south’. 10. HS (SS) *miti ‘vicinity of the capital, royal domain ( )’ : HP *meti ~ *miti ‘city’ : LMK màtʰ ~ màt ‘plot of land’ < CKor *mati (perhaps *mat-i with -i ‘nominative case suffix’). Cf. Jpn miti (MSJ michi) ‘street, road’, mati (MSJ machi) ‘town’ ← ? early Koreanic. 98 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 11. HS (SS) *mʊr (KPEMC *mur rendering foreign *mʊr) : HP *mʊra ~ *mʊrɪ : LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h > MSK moe [mwe] ~ me [me] ‘mountain’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 98-101). 12. HS (HW) *(nə?)ri ‘four’ < CKor *nəri(h?) > EMK *nəyh : LMK nəˇyh (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 142-143; revised from Lee, 2017, p. 143). Cf. Common Nivkh *nə(r)- ‘four’ (CND). 13. HS (SS) *ni ~ (SY) ~ (SY) *ni ‘tooth’ (attested in HP *ni- s-kɨm and its variants ~ *ni-tś-kɨm, composed of HS *ni ‘tooth’ + *-s ~ *-tś ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ + *kɨm (noun of unknown meaning) : EMK *ni > LMK ní > MSK i ‘tooth’ < CKor *ni ‘tooth’. 14. HS (SY) *paɦɨy ‘rock, cliff, precipice’← OKog *paɦɨy ⇄ pre- Nivkh > Common Nivkh *baʀ ‘stone’ (CND, pace Kang, 1983, p. 124). 15. HS ~ ~ (SY) *pʊk ‘child, youth, boy’ : HK *mʊk ‘child, son’; no cognates in medieval or modern Koreanic (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 92- 94, pace Lee, 1970, pp. 201-210). 16. HS (SS) [= ] *pʊr ‘mound ( ); fortress, walled city ( )’ : HP *pʊri ‘soil mountain; mound; high level ground’ : HK *pʊ ‘mountain’ < CKor *pʊr ‘mound; fortress, city’ (cf. Kōno, 1987, p. 83). 17. HS (SS) [= ] *pʊ-r ‘overlook ( )’, analyzable as HS *pʊ- ‘to look, overlook’ (cognate to EMK > LMK pʊˇ- ~ pʊ́- ~ pʊ̀- ‘to look’ > MSK /pʊ-/ ‘to look’) + *-r ‘relative clause forming suffix’. 18. HS *-r ‘relative clause forming suffix’ (see HS *kɨ-r ~ *ki-r ‘good’ and HS *pʊ-r ‘overlook’ above) (cf. also Sin, 2002, p. 63, for this suffix in .). 19. HS (HW) *...r ~ (HW) *...i ~ (HW) *…ri ‘bamboo’ : HK *tay ‘bamboo’ : EMK *tay : LMK táy > MSK /tɛ/ ‘bamboo’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 142-143; revised from Lee, 2017, pp. 272-273). 20. HS *...r ‘garlic’ (compare LMK mànʌ́r ‘garlic’). 21. HS (SS) *sɛyra ~ (SY) *sʌyr ‘east’ : HK *śa ‘east’ (~ dialectal ‘south’) : LMK sʌ́y ‘east’ > MSK /sɛ-/ ‘east’ in sailor’s jargon /sɛ- param/ [sɛbaram] ‘east wind’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 90-91, 100-101). 22. HS *sɨra ~ *sira ~ *sɨrʊ ‘Silla’ (← PS *sɨra ~ *sira ~ *sɨrʊ ‘gold; Silla’ q.v. infra). With the added Han-Silla word *pʊr ‘city’, the capital city of early Silla is *sɨra *pʊr ‘Golden City ( )’ (SS) or ‘Silla City’. Although the Silla capital was located in what is now the modern city of Kyŏngju (Gyeongju), this city name, originally two separate words, was reanalyzed as a single word, and was semantically extended to denote ‘capital city’ in general: Its Late Middle Korean reflex syəˇβɨ̀r ‘capital city’ is the immediate origin of the capital city of modern South Korea, MSK /səur/ [sʰəuɭ] Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 99 ‘Seoul’ (see Kōno, 1987, p. 83, and Lee & Ramsey, 2011, pp. 47, 75 for similar proposals). The Han-Silla reading *sɨra ~ *sira ‘Silla’ – and specifically the form (KPEMC *sirla), read as HS *sira – was replaced in MSK with the later, modern Sino-Korean reading [ɕʰilːa] ‘Silla’. 23. HS (SS) *śu ‘ox, cow, cattle ( )’ > EMK *śʊ : LMK syʊ́ > MSK /sʊ/ ‘ox’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 96, 101; KLJ 168) 24. HS (SY) *…tʌ(N) ‘one’ : EMK *hatʌn ~ *harʌn (KYS, NCR, SZR) : LMK hʌ̀nàh ~ hʌ ̀n- : MSK hana ~ han- ‘one’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145-147, revised; Lee Seungjae 2017, p. 145, revised; Tsuji, 2000a, 2000b). 25. HS (SY) *…tʌ(N) ~ (SY) *…ak ‘ocean, sea’. Insufficient phonetic details to confirm or demonstrate a connection with LMK pàrʌ́r ~ pàtáh ‘ocean, sea’ nor for a loanword relationship with OKog *pa ‘ocean, sea’ (q.v. infra). 26. HS dial. (SS) *tɨra/*tʊra ‘west ( )’ ~ HS dial. (SS) *tɨy/*ti ‘north ( )’ : HP *ti ‘north’ : LMK tǔyh ‘behind, back; north’ > MSK twi ‘back, behind’. 27. HS (SS) *-tś ~ HS northern dial. (SS) *-ts ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ : HK *-s : HK/HP *-(t)s : LMK -s (- ) ‘genitive-attributive’ < CKor *-tś ~ *-ts (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 94-98). As noted by Ross King, 19th century Russian sources on northern dialects attest an affricate /-ts/ ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ corresponding to Modern Standard Korean orthographic -s ‘genitive-attributive’ (King, 1991, p. 121; Shimunek, 2023, p. 96). 28. HS (SY) *…tś (☆tśatś) : HK/HP *(t)sas : LMK tsás ‘walled city, fortification’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 95-96 n. 72, p. 101, with revision pace Kōno, 1987, p. 79). 29. HS (SS) *tsɛyra ‘highland (臯)’ : LMK tsáy ‘ridge, mountain pass, ridge’ > MSK chae S. [ʨɛ] ~ N. [tsɛ] ‘ridge, mountain pass’ < CKor *tsayră ‘ridge, mountain pass’. On the KPEMC reading of the HS transcription, see Shimunek, 2023, p. 86 n. 12. 30. HS (SS) *ukʊk/*uyʊk/*urʊk ‘north ( )’ : HK/HP *ʊk-/*uk- ‘above’ : LMK ùh ‘above’ > MSK wi ‘above, upper’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97, 101). 6.1.1.2 Han-Paekche (HP) Han-Paekche is the Koreanic language spoken in the bilingual Paekche kingdom. This language, like all Han languages, is divergently related to the modern Korean language. It was spoken alongside the unrelated Puyŏ- Paekche language (below). 100 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 1. HP *-ɨy ‘genitive-attributive case suffix’ (see entry for HP *sɨp ‘forest’ below). 2. HP *kʊma (*kʊ̀má) ‘bear’, attested in transmitted form in Late Middle Korean in the Paekche toponym *kʊ̀má *nʌ̀rʌ ̀ ‘Bear Ford’, the name of the Paekche capital Ungjin near modern-day Kongju (Gongju). See LMK kʊˇm ‘bear’ for etymological notes. 3. HP (SS) *kuti ‘gold ( )’ : LMK kùrí ‘copper’ > MSK kuri ‘copper’. 4. HP (SS) *miti ~ 旀 (SS) *meti ‘city ( )’ < CKor *mati (perhaps */mat-i/ with *-i ‘nominative case suffix’) ‘plot of land’ > LMK màtʰ ~ màt ‘plot of land’ > MSK madang ‘plot of land, yard’, a blend of LMK màt + Chosŏn Sino-Korean ( ) tyang ‘plot of land’ (cf. Jpn miti ‘street’, mati ‘town’ ← ? early Koreanic). 5. HP (SS) *mʊra ~ ~ ~ ~ (NS) *mʊrɪ ‘tall, high ( ); mountain ( )’ : HS *mʊr ‘mountain’ : HK *pʊ ‘mountain’ : LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h ‘mountain’ > MSK moe [mwe] ~ me [me] ‘mountain’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 98-101, pace Kōno, 1987, pp. 76- 77). 6. HP (NS) *nari ~ (NS) *narɪ ‘river’ : HK *ta ~ *tay ‘river’ : LMK nǎyh > MSK /nɛ/ ‘river, stream’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 101). 7. HP (SS) *pʊri ‘soil mountain ( ); walled city, fortification ( ); high ground ( )’ : HS *pʊri ~ *pʊr ‘mound, fortress, city’ (cf. Kōno, 1987, p. 83). 8. HP *sɨp ‘forest’ (SS, attested in the genitive case form *sɨp-ɨy ‘[of the] forest ( )’ = *sɨp ‘forest’ + *-ɨy ‘genitive-attributive case suffix’) : LMK súp ‘marsh overgrown with wild plants’ ~ sùpʰɨ́r ‘forest’ > MSK /supʰ/ [sup̯ ~ supʰ-] ‘forest’. 9. HP (SS) *zirɨ/*zɨrɨ ‘iron ( )’ < ? CKor *zɨ́rɨ/*zʊ́rɨ > EMK *sʊy ‘iron’ > LMK sʊ́y ‘iron, metal’. 10. HP (SS) *ti ‘north ( )’ : HS dial. *tɨra/*tʊra ‘west’ ~ HS dial. *tɨy ‘north’ : LMK tǔyh ‘back, behind; north’ > MSK twi ‘back, behind’. 6.1.1.3 Han-Kara (HK) Han-Kara is the Koreanic language spoken in the southern kingdom of Kara (Kaya) before it was absorbed by Silla in the early years of its territorial expansion. 1. HK (SS) *kir ‘long time ( )’ : LMK kǐr- ‘to be long’ : MSK /kir-/ [kiɭ- ~ kiɾ- ~ ki-] ‘long’ (cf. Common Nivkh *gəl- ‘long’, CND). The word ‘long time’ has previously been treated as a word from Silla territory (Lee & Ramsey, 2011, p. 52). Toh (1987) correctly identifies Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 101 this as a word from former Kara territory. It is thus a Han-Kara word. 2. HK (SS) *mʊk ‘child, son’ : HS *pʊk ‘child, youth, boy’; no cognates in medieval or modern Koreanic (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 92-94). 3. HK (SS) *pʊ ‘mountain ( )’ : HS *mʊr ~ HP *mʊra ~ *mʊrɪ : LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h > MSK moe [mwe] ~ me [me] ‘mountain’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 98-101). 4. HK (SS) *mur ‘water ( )’ : EMK *mur/*mɨr : LMK mɨ́r > MSK /mur/ [muɭ ~ mbuɭ] ‘water’ (cf. Late Kitan *mur ‘river’ < CSM *murə ‘large river’, LASM 354). 5. HK (SS) *na- ‘outstanding ( )’ : MSK 나- na- ‘to excel, be outstanding’ as in MSK - challa- ‘to be excellent, extraordinary, remarkable’ (literally: ‘to emerge well’) < CKor *na- ‘emerge; excel, be outstanding, remarkable’. 6. HK (SS) *-s : HK/HP *-(t)s : HS *-tś ~ *-ts > LMK -s ‘genitive- attributive’ < CKor *-tś ~ *-ts (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97-98). 7. HK (SS) *śa ‘east ( )’ (~ dialectal ‘south’) : HS *sɛyra ~ *sʌyr ‘east’ : LMK sʌ́y ‘east’ > MSK /sɛ-/ ‘east’ (e.g. MSK sailor’s jargon saebaram [sɛbaram] ‘east wind’) (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 90-91, 100- 101). 8. HK (SS) *ta ~ (SS) *tay ‘river ( ); brook ( )’ : HP *nari ~ *narɪ ‘id.’ : LMK nǎyh > MSK /nɛ/ ‘river, stream’ (Shimunek, 2023) 9. HK (SS) *tay ‘bamboo ( )’ : HS *...r ~ *...i ~ *…ri : LMK táy > MSK /tɛ/ ‘bamboo’. 10. HK = * (KLJ 15) *ts(ʷ)əy(h) ‘three’: EMK *səy(h) > LMK səˇyh > MSK set ~ se- ~ sək- ‘three’. 11. HK (SS) *tʊra (MChi ☆ḍiawla) ‘yellow ( )’ : EMK Kaesŏng dial. *narʊ- : LMK Hanyang dial. nʊ́rá- ‘yellow’ < CKor *ndʊra- ~ *nʊra- ‘yellow’. 6.1.1.4 Han-Kara or Han-Paekche (HK/HP) Some of the early Koreanic words transcribed in kana in the Nihon shoki are difficult to identify as Kara or as Paekche (cf. Kōno, 1987, p. 77). The words are certainly from one of these two kingdoms, but in instances when the exact provenance between these two is unknown, I have indicated them as ‘Han-Kara or Han-Paekche’ to remain faithful to the source material. 1. HK/HP *arɨ- (NS - OJpn *aru- ~ - OJpn *aro- ~ - OJpn *aru-) ‘below, lower ( )’ : LMK àrà ‘below’ : MSK /arɛ/ ‘below’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97, 100, pace Kōno, 1987, p. 77). 102 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 2. HK/HP *arp- (NS - ~ - OJpn *aripi-) ‘south ( )’ : LMK àrpʰ ‘front, south’ > MSK /apʰ/ [ap̯ - ~ apʰ-] ‘front’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97, 100, pace Kōno, 1987, p. 77). 3. HK/HP *nirim (☆nìrím) (NS OJpn *nirimu) ‘lord’ (cf. Kōno, 1987, p. 76): LMK nǐm : MSK -nim ‘respectful person suffix’ (see etymology in entry for LMK nǐm below). 4. HK/HP *-(t)s (NS - OJpn *tsi/*si) : HS *-tś ~ *-ts > LMK -s < CKor *- tś ~ *-ts ‘genitive-attributive suffix’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97-98). 5. HK/HP *(t)sas (NS OJpn *tsatsi/*sasi) ‘walled city, fortification’ : HS *…tśʰ ‘walled city, fortification’ : LMK tsás (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 95-96n72, 101, with revision). 6. HK/HP *ʊk-/*uk- ‘upper, above part’ (NS - ~ - ~ - OJpn *oko- ~ *woko- ~ *uwoko-, glossed ‘upper; highest, head, foremost; thriving’) : HS *ukʊk/*uyʊk/*urʊk ‘north’ : LMK ùh > MSK wi ‘above’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97, 101). 6.1.2 Middle Korean Middle Korean is solidly attested in two different periods: Koryŏ Early Middle Korean (EMK) and Chosŏn Late Middle Korean (LMK) (see Lee & Ramsey, 2011 for this periodization). Modern Standard Korean (MSK) forms are only cited when particularly progressive or otherwise informative. 6.1.2.1 Koryŏ Early Middle Korean (EMK) This data is primarily attested from the early part of the Koryŏ Kingdom before it became a vassal state of the Mongol Empire. The primary sources of EMK data in this paper are sourced in the 12th-century Jilin Leishi (Kyerim Yusa), the Nichūreki (NCR), the Sezokujiruishō (SZR), the 1120 Toijangga (TJ), the mid-13th century Hyang’yak Kugŭppang (HYKP), and kugyŏl readings in the 13th century Kuyŏk Inwanggyŏng (Lee, 2011). Some of the differences between attested EMK and attested LMK which cannot be explained as regular changes from one period of the language to the next may be due to geographical dialectal differences: In Koryŏ when EMK was spoken, the capital was in Kaesŏng, whereas LMK data is mostly attested from the Chosŏn capital of Hanyang (Seoul). 1. EMK *ahʊrp (SZR ~ KYS ) : LMK àhʊ́p > MSK /ahʊp/ [aɦʊp] ‘nine’. No word for ‘nine’ is attested in earlier Han (Koreanic) sources. If the final glyph in the Middle Japanese transcription (MJpn *aɸuru) is faithful to the original, taken together with the Chinese transcription (KPEMC ☆aχʊ ~ MChi Pul. 354, 121 Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 103 ☆ʔaɨχaw) it suggests EMK *ahʊrp ‘nine’. (Cf. Attested Middle Chinese hau ~ hou Cob./Tak. 0428). 2. EMK *han/*hʌn *sʊy (KYS ) ‘silver ( )’ (literally: ‘white metal’) : LMK hʌ́y-n ‘white’ – based on the KYS form, Nam reconstructs LMK *hʌy-n *sʊy ‘silver’ (Nam, 2024, p. 1470; I have added the asterisks to indicate that this LMK form is not attested in LMK sources – the source Nam cites is KYS, so the LMK form is thus Nam’s reconstruction). 3. EMK *hatʌn ~ *harʌn (KYS , NCR , SZR ) : LMK hʌ̀nàh : MSK hana ~ han- ‘one’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145-146). Considering the limitations of Middle Japanese phonotactics, the kana transcriptions (NCR) MJpn *katana and (SZR) MJpn *karana transcribe EMK *hatʌn ~ *harʌn ‘one’, as Middle Japanese does not have /h/, /ʌ/, nor does it have coda /n/ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145-146). 4. EMK *ɦʊn (KYS ) : LMK ɦʊ́n ‘hundred’. 5. EMK *irkip ~ *nirkup ~ *nirkʊp (KYS, NCR, SZR) : LMK nìrkúp > Early Modern Korean nirkʊp > MSK /irkʊp/ [iɭgʊp̯ ] ‘seven’. As Tsuji Seiji (2000a, 2000b) has correctly demonstrated, the EMK numeral ‘seven’ is misglossed as ‘eight’ in the Middle Japanese sources. The Middle Japanese phonetic transcriptions in NCR are the most problematic and clearly involve several layers of copyist errors. I propose that is an error for * , and that is an error for * . The original transcription should thus be reconstructed as * (MJpn *nirikuɸu), rendering EMK *nirkup ‘seven’ (though erroneously glossed as ‘eight’). The transcription is an error for * in which the glyph is an error for * , rendering the same transcription as above, i.e., * (MJpn *nirikuɸu). These necessary revisions, though complicated, are clearly correct, as the SZR transcription (MJpn *nirikoɸu) for EMK *nirkʊp precisely matches the KYS transcription *irkip ‘seven’ and LMK nirkup ~ nirkʊp ‘seven’. 6. EMK *itś-/*its- (Kuyŏk Inwanggyŏng ) ‘to exist’ (see entry for HS *ɨtś- ‘to exist’ above). 7. EMK *kipʰ- ‘deep’, attested in EMK *kipʰ-ɨn (KYS ) ‘deep ( )’ : LMK kìpʰ- > MSK /kipʰ-/ ‘deep’. 8. EMK *kɨr (KYS ) ‘letter, glyph ( ); writing ( )’ > LMK kɨ̀r ~ kɨ́r > MSK /kɨr/ [kɨɭ] ‘writing’ (see OKog *kɨr ‘writing’ for etymology). 9. EMK *kʊr/*kʊ(s?)/*kʊ(ts?) (KYS ) ‘flower ( )’ : LMK kʊ̀ts ~ kʊ̀s > MSK /k̯ ʊʨʰ/ [k̯ ʊt̯ ~ k̯ ʊʨʰ-] ‘flower, blossoms’. 104 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 10. EMK *mar/*mʌr ‘horse’ ← non-distinctive areal word. See LMK mʌ̀r > MSK /mar/ [maɭ] ‘horse’ below. 11. EMK (KYS ) *mati ‘head ( )’ : LMK mə̀rí ‘head’ > MSK ‘head; hair on one’s head’. The EMK word is also the etymon of the LMK sortal unit classifier màrí used for counting certain animals, and its MSK reflex mari, e.g., MSK /mar han-mari/ ‘one horse’. (On phoronyms, including classifiers, see Beckwith, 2007b) 12. EMK *mur/*mɨr (KYS ) ‘water ( )’ : LMK mɨ́r ‘water’ (see HK *mur ‘water’ above). 13. EMK *mʊy(h?) (KYS ) ‘mountain ( )’ : LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h > MSK moe [mwe] ~ me [me] ‘mountain’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 99). 14. EMK */namk-i/ (KYS ) ‘tree ( )’ = */namk/ ‘tree’ with /-i/ ‘nominative case suffix’ > LMK nàmk ~ nàmʊ̀ > MSK namu ‘tree, wood’. 15. EMK *namur (HYKP ) ‘lead (metal)’ ← OKog *namur ‘lead (metal)’ (KLJ 175; Lee, 1964, p. 17). Replaced in LMK with the unrelated word náp (see below). 16. EMK *narʊ-n (KYS ) ‘yellow ( )’ (see entry for HK *tʊra- ‘yellow’ above). 17. EMK *narʊnɨy (KYS ) ‘gold ( )’. The root is EMK *narʊ- ‘yellow’ (see HK *tʊra- ‘yellow’ above). 18. EMK (TJ ) *(nək?)ś-i, inflected form of */(nək?)s/ ‘soul’ with */-i/ ‘nominative case suffix’ : LMK nə̀ks > MSK /nəks/ [nək̯ ]# ~ [nəks-] ~ [nəkɕ-] ‘soul, spirit, ghost’. 19. EMK *nəyh ~ *ndəyh (KYS ~ NCR MJpn *towi ~ MJpn *toɸi ~ SZR MJpn *toi) : LMK nəˇyh ‘four’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 142-143). See HS *…ri ‘four’ above for etymology. As with EMK *səyh ‘three’ below, Middle Japanese *ɸ in the NCR and SZR transcriptions of Early Middle Korean are attempts to render EMK coda h# positionally limited by Middle Japanese phonotactics. 20. EMK *ni (KYS 你) ‘tooth ( )’ > LMK ní > MSK /i/ ‘tooth’ (see HS *nitśkɨm above). 21. EMK *par (KYS ) ‘foot ( )’ : LMK pár ‘foot’. 22. EMK *pʊ- (KYS ) ‘look’ (attested in the sense of ‘read’) < HS *pʊ ‘look’ above. 23. EMK *puk (KYS ) ‘drum ( )’ : LMK púp ~ púpʰ ~ pùpʰ > MSK puk ‘drum’. 24. EMK *səyh (KYS ) > LMK səˇyh > MSK set ~ se- ~ sək- ‘three’. Middle Japanese transcriptions of EMK: NCR MJpn *sawi ~ MJpn *soɸi and SZR MJpn *soi ‘three’. Tsuji Seiji (2000a, 2000b) Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 105 correctly demonstrates that the semantic glosses for ‘three’ and ‘four’ were flipped in NCR. The Middle Japanese (MJpn) segment *ɸ is an attempt to render the final *h of the Korean form. Thus, in my analysis, (MJpn *saɸi) and (MJpn *soɸi) are both attempts to render EMK *səyh ‘three’. Middle Japanese phonotactics do not allow coda h#. Likewise, MJpn *o could render Korean o, ʊ, or ə. 25. EMK *sʊy (KYS ) ‘iron ( )’ (see HP *zirɨ/*zɨrɨ ‘iron’). 26. EMK *śʊ (KYS ) ‘ox, cow, cattle ( )’ (see HS *śu ‘ox’ above). 27. EMK *tasɨs ~ *tasʌs : LMK tàsʌ́s ‘five’. The EMK forms are attested as follows: (KYS), ~ ~ (NCR), and ~ (SZR). In my analysis, (MJpn *ɸa) is a scribal error for the premodern kana (MJpn *ta). Thus, the transcription should be revised to * (MJpn *tasusu) and should be revised to * (MJpn *tasoso). The form is a copyist’s error for * (MJpn *tasoso). The form is likewise an error. As Tsuji Seiji (2000a, 2000b) has correctly demonstrated, the NCR semantic glosses are flipped: The numeral for five is labeled as ‘six’, and the numeral for six is glossed as ‘five’. 28. EMK *tay (KYS ) ‘bamboo ( )’ : LMK táy > MSK /tɛ/ ‘bamboo’. See EMK *tay above and HS *…r ‘bamboo’ above for etymology. 29. EMK *tuβur ~ *tuβu(r) ~ *tuβʊr (KYS , NCR, SZR) : LMK tǔr(h) > MSK tur ~ tu- ‘two’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145-147). Middle Japanese kana transcriptions of EMK: ~ (NCR) and ~ (SZR) (cited from Tsuji 2000a, 2000b), which I read as MJpn *tuɸuri ~ *toɸu ~ tuɸoru ~ tuɸuru. 30. EMK *tʊr (KYS ) ‘stone ( )’ : LMK tʊˇrh ‘stone’ > MSK tor [tʊɭ] ‘stone’. 31. EMK *tʊr/*tʊ(t?) (KYS ) ‘pig ( )’. See LMK tʊ̀t ~ tʊ̀tʰ ‘pig’ below. 32. EMK *umur (KYS ) ‘well ( )’ > LMK ùmɨ́r (cf. LMK úmh ‘cellar, hole’ + mɨ́r ‘water’) > MSK umur [umuɭ] ‘well’. 33. EMK *yər(h?) (KYS ~ SZR ) : LMK yə́rh ‘ten’. It is generally agreed that the NCR transcriptions of EMK ‘ten’ are erroneous; as such, I have not cited them here. 34. EMK *yəsɨs ~ *yəsʌs : LMK yə̀sɨ́s ‘six’. The EMK forms are attested as follows: (KYS), MJpn *yesusu ~ MJpn *yesoso (NCR), and MJpn *yesusu ~ MJpn *yesuso (SZR). The Japanese glyph is pronounced e in Modern Standard Japanese, but in Middle Japanese it was pronounced *ye (IPA */je/), and could thus transcribe Middle Korean *yə or *ə. Given the Late Middle Korean and Modern Korean forms, the Japanese glyph (MJpn *ye) here is clearly a transcription of EMK */yə/. 106 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 35. EMK *yətʌrp (NCR MJpn *yetari ~ SZR MJpn *yetoroɸu ~ KYS ) : LMK yə̀tɨ́rp ‘eight’. The KYS transcription , read *yərtVp, is undoubtedly an attempted phonetic transcription of EMK *yətVrp limited by the phonotactic constraints of Chinese, which at this point in time did not (and even today still does not) allow consonant clusters. 6.1.2.2 Chosŏn Late Middle Korean (LMK) Late Middle Korean is the language of the earliest Hangŭl texts of the 15th to early 16th centuries. It is important to distinguish these earlier Hangŭl texts from the later, Early Modern Korean texts. Note that the Late Middle Korean and Modern Standard Korean vowel (rendered as “o” in most conventional romanization systems) is phonemically treated as /ʊ/ in this paper. Likewise, Late Middle Korean and Modern Standard Korean Hangŭl represents the phonemic /r/. Unless otherwise indicated, the Late Middle Korean words below are my phonemic representations of early Hangul orthographic forms in Nam, Koŏ sajŏn (2024) and Hangŭl Hakhoe, Uri mal k’ŭn sajŏn (1992). 1. LMK àhʊ́p > MSK /aɦʊp/ ‘nine’ (see EMK *ahʊrp ‘nine’ above). 2. LMK àrà ‘below’ < CKor > HS *ara : HK/HP *arɨ- ‘below’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 97). 3. LMK àrpʰ (see entry for HK/HP *arp above). 4. LMK ə̀skə́y ‘shoulder’ > MSK /ək̯ ɛ/ ‘shoulder’. 5. LMK əˇt- > MSK /ət-/ ‘get, have, obtain, acquire, etc.’ 6. LMK hʌ̀nàh ~ hʌ ̀n- : MSK hana ~ han- ‘one’ (See EMK *hatʌn ~ *harʌn ‘one’ above). 7. LMK ɦʊ́n ‘hundred’ (replaced in MSK with Sino-Korean paek [pɛk̯ ] ‘hundred’). 8. LMK ìs- ‘to exist’ (see HS *itś- ~ *ɨtś- above for etymology). 9. LMK kàβʌ́ntʌ́y > MSK /kaunte/ [kaunde] ‘center, central’. 10. LMK kàtsí- ‘to take, bring’. Superficially similar to Manchu gaǰ i- ‘bring’, but perhaps unrelated, cf. Manchu gai- ‘take’ and Manchu ǰ i- ‘come’. 11. LMK kʰòŋ ‘soybean’ > MSK ‘bean’ (in general). 12. LMK kìpʰ- > MSK /kipʰ-/ ‘deep’. 13. LMK kǐr- ‘to be long’ : MSK kir- [kiɭ- ~ kiɾ- ~ ki-] ‘long’. See HK *kir ‘long time’ above for etymology. 14. LMK kìs- ‘to rejoice, to be happy’ < HS *ki- ‘to praise, commend, be good’ + *itś- ‘exist’ (see HS *ki-r and HS *itś- above). Cf. MSK - Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 107 kippŭ- /kip̯ ɨ-/ ‘to be happy’ < LMK kìs-pɨ̀- < LMK kìs- ‘to be happy, rejoice’. 15. LMK kɨ̀r ~ kɨ́r > MSK /kɨr/ [kɨɭ] ‘writing’ as in /han kɨr/ [haŋgɨɭ] ‘Hangŭl’ (see EMK *kɨr ‘writing’ above for etymology). 16. LMK kʌ̀rʌ́m > MSK karam ‘river’. (See HS *kur ‘river’ above.) 17. LMK kʊˇm ‘bear’ ← widespread areal word with comparanda in Chinese, Tibeto-Burman, Koreanic, and Japanese- Koguryoic (KLJ 152-153). See HP *kʊma (*kʊ ̀má) ‘bear’ above. 18. LMK kʊˇr ‘valley’ > MSK ‘valley, vale, canyon, ravine, gorge’. 19. LMK kʊ̀ts ~ kʊ̀s > MSK /k̯ ʊʨʰ/ [k̯ ʊt̯ - ~ k̯ ʊʨʰ-i] ‘flower, blossoms’ (see EMK *kʊr/*kʊ(s?)/*kʊ(ts?) above). 20. LMK màh ‘south’ (see HP *mak ‘south’ above). Replaced in MSK with Sino-Korean nam ‘south’ but retained in sailor’s jargon as [mapʰaɾam] ‘south wind’ from */mah-param/ ‘south-wind’. 21. LMK mǎ n hʌ́ - ~ màn hʌ ́ - ‘to be abundant, plentiful, many’ (← Ch. ‘ten thousand; plentiful’ + LMK hʌ-) > MSK - manh- ‘to be plentiful, abundant’. 22. LMK mànʌ́r ‘garlic’ (compare HS *...r ‘garlic’). 23. LMK màrí sortal unit classifier for counting certain animals (see EMK *mati ‘head’ above). 24. LMK màts- ‘meet, receive, greet, encounter, etc.’, the root of MSK - /maʨ-/ ‘match, correct, agree’ etc. and MSK - /manna-/ ‘to meet, encounter’ etc. 25. LMK mə̀rí ‘head’ (see EMK *mati ‘head’ above). 26. LMK mʌ̀r > MSK /mar/ [maɭ] ‘horse’ (see EMK *mar/*mʌr ‘horse’ above for this non-distinctive areal word). 27. LMK màtʰ ~ màt < CKor *mati (perhaps */mat-i/ with *-i ‘nominative case suffix’) > HP *meti ~ *miti (SS) : HS *miti (SS) (cf. Jpn miti ‘street’, mati ‘town’ ← ? early Koreanic). 28. LMK mɨ́r ‘water’ (see HK *mur ‘water’ above). 29. LMK mʊ̀t- > MSK /mʊi-/ ‘gather’. 30. LMK mʊˇyh ~ mʊ̀rʊ́ ~ mʊ̀h ‘mountain’ > MSK mwe ~ me- ‘mountain’. 31. LMK mʌ̀zʌ̀m ‘heart’ (> MSK maɨm ‘heart’) < CKor (see HS *…m ‘heart’ above). 32. LMK nàmk ~ nàmʊ̀ ‘tree, wood’ (see EMK *namk above) > MSK namu ‘tree, wood’. 33. LMK náp ‘lead (metal)’ > MSK nap ‘lead’. The LMK and MSK words are unrelated to EMK *namur (see above). 34. LMK nə̀k nə̀k > MSK /nək nək/ [nəŋnək] ‘plenty, wealthy, well-off, sufficient, rich, abundant’. 108 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 35. LMK nə̀ks > MSK /nəks/ [nək̯ ]# ~ [nəks-] ~ [nəkɕ-] ‘soul, spirit, ghost’. 36. LMK nə̀p- > MSK /nərp-/ ‘wide, broad, vast’. 37. LMK nə̀tsʰúr ‘vine’ > MSK /nənʨʰur/ [nənʨʰuɭ] ‘vine’. 38. LMK nəˇyh ~ nə̀- ~ nəˇk- > MSK net ~ ne- ~ nək- ‘four’. See HS *…ri ‘four’ above for etymology. 39. LMK ní > MSK i ‘tooth’ (cf. HS *niskɨm ‘tooth’ above). 40. LMK nǐm ‘lord, monarch, ruler’ < CKor *nirim (☆nìrím) ‘lord’ > HK/HP *nirim (☆nìrím?) ‘lord’ (NS). The Modern Standard Korean reflex - nim is a suffix added to titles and personal names to express respect. The older meaning of ‘lord’ is retained in MSK /imkɨm/ [imgɨm] ‘lord, monarch, ruler’ < LMK nǐm-kɨ́m ~ nǐm-kúm < LMK nǐm ‘lord’. 41. LMK nìrkúp > Early Modern Korean nirkʊp > MSK /irkʊp/ [iɭgʊp] ‘seven’. 42. LMK nʌ̀mʌ̀rh ‘herbs, wild vegetables, sprouts, greens’ > MSK /namur/ [namuɭ] ‘id.’ 43. LMK nʌ̀rʌ̀ ‘ford’ > MSK naru and its bound post-lateral variant -laru ‘ford’ (e.g., Jamsillaru Station on the Seoul Metropolitan Subway). 44. LMK nʊ́m ‘person, human’ > MSK /nʊm/ ‘guy, blighter, bloke, bastard, jerk’ (the modern word is mostly pejorative). Perhaps related to LMK nʌ́m ~ nʌ ̀m > MSK nam ‘other person, stranger’. 45. LMK nʊ́rá- ‘yellow’ (see entry for HK *tʊra- ‘yellow’ above). 46. LMK nyə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ (see LMK ryə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ below). 47. LMK nyə̀tʰ- > MSK /yətʰ-/ ~ /yatʰ-/ ‘shallow’. 48. LMK pʰá ‘onion, green onion, scallion, spring onion, leek’. 49. LMK pàhʊ́y > MSK pawi ‘rock; crag; reef’ (see OKog and HS *paɦɨy above for etymology). 50. LMK pǎ m ‘chestnut’. 51. LMK pár ‘foot’ < EMK *par ‘foot’. 52. MSK - /p̯ arka-/ [p̯ aɭga-] ‘to be red’ < - /parkah-/ ‘red’ < LMK pʌ̀rk-ʌ hʌ- ~ LMK pʌ̀rk- > /park-/ ‘to be bright, brilliant’ (cf. Common Nivkh *baɣla- ‘red’ CND 189, pace Kang, 1983, p. 123). 53. LMK pàrʌ́r ~ pàtáh > MSK pada ‘ocean, sea’. 54. LMK pàt- > MSK /pat-/ ‘get, have, receive, take, obtain, be given, etc.’ 55. LMK pə̀s ~ pə̀t ‘cherry (blossom)’ > MSK (orthographically pec, phonemically /pət/), e.g., MSK ‘cherry blossom’. 56. LMK pə̀tɨ́r ‘willow’. 57. LMK pʰɨ́y- > MSK pʰi- ‘to bloom, blossom’. 58. LMK pʊˇ- ~ pʊ́- ~ pʊ̀- ‘to look’ (see HS *pʊ- above for etymology). 59. LMK pʌ̀rh ‘arm’ > MSK /pʰar/ [pʰaɭ] ‘arm’. 60. LMK púhə̀ŋ > MSK /puəŋi/ ‘tufted owl’. Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 109 61. LMK púp ~ púpʰ ~ pùpʰ ‘drum’ (see EMK *puk ‘drum’ above). 62. LMK ryə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ ~ nyə̀mtʰʊ̀ŋ ‘heart (bodily organ)’. This word has no currently identified etymology. It may be an onomatopoetic word, imitating the sound of a beating heart. 63. LMK sǎrʌ́m ~ sǎrʌ̀m ~ sàrʌ̀m ‘person, human’ > MSK saram ‘human, person’. 64. LMK sǎ y ‘bird, fowl’ > MSK /sɛ/ ‘bird’. 65. LMK səˇyh ~ sə̀- ~ səˇk- > MSK set ~ se- ~ sək- ‘three’. 66. LMK sʌ́y ‘east’ < CKor > HS *sɛyra ~ HS dial. *sey ‘south’ : HK *śa ‘east’ (Shimunek, 2023). Though retained in sailor’s jargon, this word has been largely replaced in MSK with Sino-Korean tong ‘east’. 67. LMK skwə̀ŋ ‘pheasant’ (onomatopoeic in origin) > MSK [k̯ wəŋ] ‘pheasant’. 68. LMK stáh ~ stàh ‘land’ > MSK [t̯ aŋ] ‘land’. 69. LMK sʊ́r ‘pine’ > MSK /sʊr/ [sʊɭ ~ sʊ-] ‘pine’. 70. LMK sùrí ‘vulture, eagle’ > MSK /tʊksuri/ ‘vulture, eagle’ with the added Sino-Korean element 秃 /tʊk/ ‘bald’. 71. LMK sʊ́y ‘iron, metal’ (see HP *zirɨ/*zɨrɨ ‘iron’ above). 72. LMK syəˇβɨ̀r ~ syəˇɦùr ~ syəˇɦúr ~ syəˇɦùrh ~ syəˇɦùrh ‘capital city’ < HS *sɨra ~ *sira ~ *sɨrʊ ‘Silla’ (← PS *sɨra ~ *sira ~ *sɨrʊ ‘gold; Silla’) + HS *pʊr ‘city’. 73. LMK syʊ́ (see HS *śu ‘ox’ above). 74. LMK tàsʌ́s ~ tày- > MSK tasət ‘five’. 75. LMK táy > MSK tae [tɛ] ‘bamboo’. See EMK *tay above and HS *…r ‘bamboo’ above for etymology. 76. LMK tɨ́r- > MSK /tɨr-/ [tɨɭ- ~ tɨɾ- ~ tɨ-] ‘enter’. 77. LMK tsás < CKor ☆tśátś > HS *…tśʰ : HK/HP *(t)sas ‘walled city, fortification’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 95-96n72, 101, with revision). 78. LMK tsáy ‘ridge, mountain pass’ > MSK S. [ʨɛ] ~ N. [tsɛ] ‘ridge, mountain pass’ (see HS *tsɛyra above for etymology). 79. LMK tsɨ́mɨ̀n ‘thousand’ (replaced in MSK with Sino-Korean ch’ŏn [ʨʰən] ‘thousand’). 80. LMK tsʰíp- ~ tsʰíβ- > MSK /ʨʰup- ~ ʨʰuw-/ ‘cold’ (cf. Common Nivkh *tiv- ‘cold’ CND 183, pace Kang, 1983, p. 110). 81. LMK tǔr(h) ~ tǔ- > MSK tur ~ tu- ‘two’ (Shimunek, 2021b, pp. 145- 147). 82. LMK tǔyh ‘behind; north’ < CKor > HP *ti ‘north’ : HS dial. *tɨra/*tʊra ‘west’ ~ HS dial. *tɨy ‘north’. 83. LMK tʊˇrh ‘stone’ > MSK /tʊr/ [tʊɭ] ‘stone’ (see EMK *tʊr ‘stone’ above). 110 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 84. LMK tʊ̀t ~ tʊ̀tʰ ← LOC dial. (Shimunek, 2021b, p. 138). MSK twɛʥi < tʊyaʥi < tʊdaʥi < LMK tʊ̀t ‘pig’ + - atsi ‘diminutive suffix denoting the young of certain domesticated animals’. Cf. EMK *tʊr/*tʊ(t?) ‘pig’. 85. LMK tʌ̀rk ‘chicken, hen’ is an areal word with comparanda in Serbi- Mongolic, Turkic, Manchu-Tungusic, Hungarian, and other languages (LASM 372). 86. LMK ùh ‘above’ < CKor > HS *ukʊk/*uyʊk/*urʊk ‘north’ : HK/HP *ʊk- /*uk- ‘above, top’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 97, 101). 87. LMK ʊ́k ‘jade’ ← Ch. ‘jade’. 88. LMK ùmɨ́r ‘well’ (cf. LMK úmh ‘cellar, hole’ + mɨ́r ‘water’ < EMK *umur ‘well’, KYS) > MSK /umur/ [umuɭ] ‘well’. 89. LMK ʊ̀ráy ‘door, gate’, replaced in MSK by Sino-Korean Replaced in MSK by Sino-Korean mun ‘door, gate’. 90. LMK ʊ́tpámí > MSK /ʊrp̯ ɛmi/ [ʊɭp̯ ɛmi] ‘owl (without tufts)’. 91. LMK yəˇr- > MSK /yər-/ [jəɭ- ~ jəɾ- ~ jə-] ‘to open’. 92. LMK yə́rh > MSK /yər/ [jəɭ] ‘ten’. 93. LMK yə̀sɨ́s ~ yə̀y- ~ yə̀s- > MSK /yəsət/ ‘six’. 94. LMK yə̀tɨ́rp > MSK /yətər/ [jədəɭ] ‘eight’. The final /p/ of the LMK form was lost in MSK at the phonemic level, though it is retained in the orthography. According to Lee and Ramsey, 2011, p. 160, the /p/ phoneme is retained in Cheju [jʌdʌp] ‘eight’. 6.1.2.3 Old Cheju (T’amna) Old Cheju or Han-T’amna is minimally attested in the 17th century T’amnaji (TNJ). The data in that source indicate a language belonging to the Koreanic language family. 1. Old Cheju (T’amna) (TNJ) *ʊrɨm ‘mountain ( )’ : HS (SY) *…ɨm ‘mountain’ < CKor *ʊrɨ- ‘to move up, ascend, rise’. 6.2 Puyŏ (Puyo-Koguryoic) The Puyŏ (Puyo-Koguryoic) languages are distantly related to Japanese, forming a distinct branch of the Japanese-Koguryoic language family (KLJ). These languages were spoken by the Puyŏ people of Manchuria, who invaded the Three Han states of the early Korean Peninsula and formed the powerful kingdoms of Koguryŏ and Paekche. Puyŏ people also seem to have been instrumental in the early politics of Silla (KLJ). Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 111 Comparative reconstructions based on more than one Puyŏ dialect are ‘Common Puyo-Koguryoic’ (CPK). Reconstructions based on Puyŏ and Japanese data are termed ‘Common Japanese-Koguryoic’ (CJK). 6.2.1 Koguryŏ Koguryŏ is the language of Koguryŏ, the largest kingdom in Korea’s history, which included all of today’s Korean Peninsula, extending north into Manchuria and including parts of modern China and Russia. Unless otherwise noted, all Archaic Koguryŏ (AKog), Old Koguryŏ (OKog), Archaic Japanese (AJpn), and Old Japanese (OJpn) cognates cited below are from KLJ. As the Koguryŏ lexica in §6.2.1.1 and §6.2.1.2 below have been studied in detail by Beckwith (KLJ), I have not reproduced the original Chinese character transcriptions. 6.2.1.1 Archaic Koguryŏ (AKog) Archaic Koguryŏ is the earliest attested stage of the Koguryŏ language, documented in Late Old Chinese transcriptions of the ca. 3rd century CE (KLJ; Shimunek, 2021b, p. 153). 1. AKog *ɣapma > OKog *ɦaɨp : MSJ yama < CJK *ɣapma ‘mountain’ (KLJ). 2. AKog *kor ‘front’ ~ AKog *kör ‘right (side)’ : ? MSJ ko ‘this, previous’ < OJpn *kö < PJpn *koi (KLJ). See entry for PP *kʊrʊ ‘south’ below for cognate and CPK etymology. 3. AKog *kuru > OKog *kuər ‘walled city, fort’ : ? OJpn *kura ‘storehouse’ < CJK *kuru ‘walled city, fort, embankment’ (KLJ), and probably also denoting ‘moat’. Additional reflexes of the CJK form include PK *kʊr (NS, Shimunek, 2023, p. 95 n72) and PS *kɨr ~ *kʊr (SS, see below). See additional comparanda in the entry for PP *ki ~ *kɨ ‘walled city, fortification’ below. 4. AKog *kweru > OKog *kuər ‘yellow’ : OJpn *ki ~ *ku (> MSJ ki- ‘yellow’ in kiiro) < CJK *kuer(u) ‘yellow’ (KLJ). 5. AKog *mey ‘good’ (see OKog *mey ‘excellent, good’ below for etymology and cognates). 6. AKog *na : AJpn *nâ > OJpn *nö < CJK *na ‘genitive-attributive’ (KLJ 118-119, 238, 250, 251). 7. AKog *tsɨar ~ *tswiar ‘back, behind’ > OKog *tśɨri ‘north’ : OJpn *tsiri ~ *siri ‘back, behind; rump, buttocks’ < CJK *tsɨri ‘back, behind’ (KLJ). 112 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 6.2.1.2 Old Koguryŏ (OKog) Old Koguryŏ is the language of the Samguk sagi Koguryŏ toponym corpus (KLJ; Shimunek, 2021b). 1. OKog *ɦa ‘overlook’ (KLJ) : PP *ɦa ‘riverbank, shore’ < CPK *ɦa ‘overlook’. No identified Japanese cognates. 2. OKog *ɦa : OJpn *a- ‘foot’ < CJK (KLJ). 3. OKog *ɦaɨp ‘mountain’ (see AKog *ɣapma ‘mountain’ above for etymology). 4. OKog *ɦaɨp ‘west’ : OJpn *yami ‘darkness, evening’ (KLJ). 5. OKog *i ~ *yi- ‘enter’ : OJpn *ir ~ *yir- ‘enter’ < CJK *i ‘enter’ (KLJ). 6. OKog *ɨr ‘spring, source; well’ : OJpn *wi ‘well’ < CJK *wir ‘spring, well’ (KLJ 142 and Beckwith, 2006, p. 225). Also cognate to PS *ɨr ‘well’ (see below). 7. OKog *kakey ‘leek blossom’ : OJpn *ka ‘scent’ + OJpn *ki ‘onion’ (KLJ). 8. OKog *kami ‘vulture’ (KLJ). 9. OKog *kan : OJpn *ka- > OJpn *kabu ‘head’ ~ *kapo ‘face’ (KLJ). 10. OKog *kati ‘east’ : OJpn *kəti ~ *koti ‘east wind’ ~ *pimukatśi ‘east’ > MSJ higashi ‘east’ < CJK *kati ‘east’ (KLJ and Beckwith, 2006, pp. 207- 208). 11. OKog *kay ~ *key ‘king’ : PP *key ‘king’ : OJpn *kimi ‘ruler, lord’ < CJK *kay ~ *key ‘ruler, monarch’ (KLJ) ← East Scythian *kay ~ *key < χšayă ‘king’ (Christopher I. Beckwith, p.c., 2024). 12. OKog *keyr ‘tooth’ : OJpn *ki ~ *gi ‘canine tooth’ > MSJ ki- as in kiba ‘animal tooth’ (< OJpn *ki ‘canine tooth’ + *pa ‘tooth’) (KLJ). 13. OKog *kɨr ‘center’ : < CJK *kɨrɨ ‘heart; center’ > OJpn ‘heart’ > MSJ kokoro ‘heart’ (KLJ). Also cognate to PS *kɨr ‘center, central’ (q.v. infra). 14. OKog *kɨr ‘mound; ruins of a city’ (KLJ) : OKog *kuər ‘walled city, fort’ below. 15. OKog *kɨr ‘tree, wood’ : OJpn *kɨ ~ *ki ‘tree’ < CJK *kɨr ‘tree, wood’ (KLJ). 16. OKog *kɨr ‘writing’ → EMK *kɨr (KLJ 174) > LMK kɨ̀r ~ kɨ́r > MSK /kɨr/ [kɨɭ] ‘writing, glyph’. 17. OKog *ku ‘child’ : OJpn *kʊ (> MSJ ko) < CJK *ku ‘child’ (KLJ) ← Serbi- Mongolic > MKit *ku (LASM). 18. OKog *kʊ ‘jade’ ← Ch. (KLJ). 19. OKog *kuər < AKog *kweru ‘yellow’ : OJpn *ki ~ *ku > MSJ ki- ‘yellow’ in kiiro (KLJ). 20. OKog *kuər ‘walled city, fort’ (see AKog *kuru for etymology). Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 113 21. OKog *kum ‘bear’ : OJpn *kuma < CJK *kuma ← widespread areal word with comparanda in Chinese, Tibeto-Burman, Korean, and Japanese- Koguryoic (KLJ 152-153). 22. OKog *kur ~ *ku ‘pine’ < CJK *kɨr ‘tree, wood’ (KLJ). 23. OKog *ku̯ ~ *kɨ ‘poplar, willow’ < CJK *kɨr ‘tree, wood’ (KLJ). 24. OKog *maɨ ‘arm, shoulder’ (KLJ). 25. OKog *merʊ ‘colt’ ← areal word, cf. English mare (KLJ 1 45-146). 26. OKog *mey ‘water, river’ : OJpn *mi ‘water’ > MSJ mizu ‘water’ (KLJ). 27. OKog *mey ‘excellent, good’ < AKog *mey ‘good’ : OJpn *mi ‘exalted, honored’ < ‘excellent’ < CJK *mey ‘excellent, good’ (KLJ). Also cognate to PP *mey ‘peaceful, pacified’. 28. OKog *meyr ‘garlic’ : OJpn *mira ‘leek, Chinese chives, fragrant- flowered garlic’ < CJK *meyra ‘allium’ (KLJ). 29. OKog *mir ‘three’ : OJpn *mi ‘three’ < CJK *mir ‘three’ (KLJ). 30. OKog *na ‘bamboo’ : OJpn *nö > MSJ -no in compounds (KLJ). 31. OKog *na ‘land, province, prefecture’ : pre-OJpn *na- ‘earth’ > OJpn *nawi ‘earthquake’ (KLJ) : PS *na ‘area in the vicinity of the capital’. Superficially an exact match to Manchu-Tungusic na ‘land’, possibly suggesting a Puyo-Koguryoic loanword in Manchu-Tungusic. For other identified Puyo-Koguryoic loanwords in Manchu-Tungusic, specifically in Jurchen-Manchu, see Shimunek, (2021a); Beckwith (2014); and Beckwith (2017). 32. OKog *namey ‘long’ : OJpn *naga ~ *naŋga < CJK *na- ‘long’ (KLJ). 33. OKog *namur : OJpn *namari (KLJ 133) < CJK *namVr- ‘lead (metal)’. OKog *namur → EMK *namur ‘lead (metal)’ (KLJ 175; Lee, 1964, p. 17; pace Lee and Ramsey, 2011, p. 96, who read “namol”). Unrelated to LMK náp ‘lead (metal)’. 34. OKog *nan ‘seven’ : OJpn *nana ‘seven’ < CJK *nan ‘seven’ (KLJ). Superficially similar but probably unrelated to Manchu-Tungusic nadan ‘seven’ (KLJ 180-181). 35. OKog *pa ‘sea’ : OJpn *pa- < CJK *pa ‘sea’ (KLJ 134, 178-179). Superficially resembles the first syllable of LMK pàrʌ́r ~ pàtáh ‘ocean, sea’, but a connection, if any, remains to be demonstrated or disproven. 36. OKog *paɦɨy ‘cliff, mountain, crag, precipice’ (KLJ) ⇄ ? pre-Nivkh > Common Nivkh *baʀ ‘stone’. (See HS *paɦɨy above). 37. OKog *paɨ ‘man’ (KLJ) : PS *paɨ ‘boy, youth’ (SY) (Shimunek, 2023, p. 93n55, 102) < CPK *paɨ ‘male human’. 38. OKog *paɨk ‘to encounter, meet’ (KLJ 134, 182). 39. OKog *pen ‘human, person’ : OJpn *pi- ‘human, person’ (KLJ xii; Kiyose, 2004, p. 237). 114 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 40. OKog *pirar ~ *piriar ‘shallow’ ~ OKog *piar ‘level, flat’ : OJpn *pira- ‘level, flat’ ~ *pirö ‘wide, broad, vast’ (KLJ). 41. OKog *pɨy ‘soybean’ (KLJ). Previously unidentified cognate in OJpn *pi (*pɨ?) ‘soybean’, via internal reconstruction methods applied to MSJ hishio ‘fermented soybean paste’ < OJpn *pi(t)sipo < *pi ‘soy’ + *(t)sipo ‘salt’. 42. OKog *puk ‘deep’ : OJpn *pʊka- ‘deep’ < CJK *puk ‘deep’ (KLJ). 43. OKog *śa ‘abundant, flourishing, luxuriant, rich’ : OJpn *sa- in OJpn *sati ‘fortune, fortunate’, *sapa ‘much, abundant’, *saki ‘fortune, fortunate, properous, prosperity’, and *sakay- ‘flourishing, glory, splendor, abundant, prosperous’ (KLJ). 44. OKog *śamiar ‘cool’ : OJpn *samu- ~ *tsamu- ‘cool, cold’ < CJK *sam- ‘cool’ (KLJ). 45. OKog *śapɨy ‘red’ : OJpn *(t)sapi ~ *(t)sabi ‘rust, to rust; red’ < CJK *sapɨy ‘red’ (KLJ). 46. OKog *śayk ‘orchid’ : OJpn *sakura ~ *tsakura ‘cherry (blossom)’ < CJK *sak- ‘bloom’. 47. OKog *si ~ *śi ‘adjective-attributive suffix’ : OJpn *-si- < CJK *si ~ *śi ‘adjective-attributive’ (KLJ 119, 251; Shimunek, 2023, p. 98 n. 88). 48. OKog *tan ‘valley’ : OJpn *tani ‘valley’ (KLJ). 49. OKog *tar ‘mountain, high’ < CJK *tar ‘high, tall; mountain’ > OJpn *take- ‘high mountain, mountain peak’ ~ OJpn *taka- ‘high’ (KLJ) : PK *ta ‘mountain; high’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 102). 50. OKog *taw ‘iron’← ? Ch. dial. (KLJ). 51. OKog *taw ‘take’ : OJpn *təwr- ~ *təwri- ‘take’ < CJK *taw- ‘to take’ (KLJ). 52. OKog *taw ‘chestnut’ : OJpn *tʊti ‘horse-chestnut’ < CJK *taw ‘chestnut, horse-chestnut’ (KLJ). 53. OKog *taw ‘drum’ : OJpn *tʊtʊmi ‘drum’ < CJK *taw ‘drum’ (KLJ). 54. OKog *taw ‘mountain pass’ : OJpn *təwpu- ~ *təpu- ~ *təpaw- > MSJ tō- ‘to pass through’ < CJK *taw- ‘pass’ (KLJ) : PP *taw ‘highland’ (q.v. infra). 55. OKog *tawpi : OJpn *təwpu- ~ *təpu- ~ *təpaw- ‘to pass through, open’ < CJK *tawpu- ‘to open’ (KLJ). 56. OKog *tawr ‘pheasant’ : OJpn *təwri ‘fowl, bird’ < CJK *tawr ‘fowl’ ← OChi *təwr ‘fowl, bird’ (KLJ 138). 57. OKog *tək : OJpn *tə ~ *təwo < CJK *təkwo (KLJ). 58. OKog *tśiar ‘silver’ : PS *sɨra ‘gold’ : OJpn *tśira- ~ *śirö- > MSJ shiro ~ shira- ‘white, silver’ (KLJ). 59. OKog *tśɨəm ‘root, base’, OJpn *tśɨməw ‘below’ > MSJ shimo ‘below’ (KLJ). Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 115 60. OKog *tśɨri ‘north’ (see AKog *tsɨar for etymology). 61. OKog *tsʊ ‘owlet’ : Ojpn *tʊku ‘owl’ (KLJ). 62. OKog *ʊ ~ *ʊy ~ *wəy ‘ford’ : PJpn *u ‘crossing’ < CJK *u ‘crossing; ford’ (KLJ). 63. OKog *ʊ ‘ox, cow, cattle’ : OJpn *usi/*utśi/*utsi < *u ‘ox’ + *si ‘animal’ < CJK *u ‘ox, cow, cattle’ ← Old Chinese *ŋû ‘cow, ox, cattle’ (KLJ). 64. OKog *ʊ ‘pig’ : OJpn *wi ‘boar, pig’ < CJK *wi ‘pig, boar’ (KLJ). Middle Kitan *uy/*wi ‘pig, boar’ may be a borrowing from Japanese- Koguryoic (LASM 410). 65. OKog *ütsi ‘five’ : OJpn *itu ‘five’ < CJK *itu- ~ *ütu- ‘five’ (KLJ). 66. OKog *ya ‘willow’ : OJpn *ya- ‘willow’ < CJK *ya ‘willow’ (KLJ). 6.2.2 Puyŏ-Paekche (PP) Puyŏ-Paekche is the Puyŏ language of the bilingual kingdom of Paekche, founded by Puyŏ people who had invaded the early Koreanic state or confederation of Ma Han. 1. PP (SS) *ɦa ‘river bank ( )’, shore ( )’ : OKog *ɦa ‘overlook’ < CPK *ɦa ‘overlook’. 2. PP (ZS) ~ *key ‘king ( )’ (see OKog *key ‘king’ above for cognates and etymology). 3. PP (SS) *ker ‘ox, cow, cattle ( )’ ← ? Serbi-Mongolic (cf. MMgl hüker ~ üker). 4. PP (SS) *ki ‘forest ( )’ : OKog *kɨr ‘tree, wood’ (see OKog entry above for etymology). 5. PP ~ ~ ~ (for * ) (SS) *ki ~ *kɨ ‘walled city, fortification ( ), embankment, ditch ( )’ ~ *kɨr ‘city ( )’ < earlier PP *kur ~ *kuər ~ *χuər ‘walled city, fortification ( ), dike, ditch, embankment ( )’ : PK *kʊr ‘fortress, walled city’ : PS *kɨr ‘mound’ ~ *kʊr ‘walled city, fortress’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 95 n. 72, revised. cf. Kōno, 1987, p. 82). See AKog *kuru ‘walled city’ above for cognates and etymology. 6. PP (SS) *kʊrʊ ‘south ( )’ : PS *kʊr ‘south’ : AKog *kor ‘south, front’ < CPK *kʊrʊ ‘south, front’ (see AKog *kor ~ *kör above for JK comparanda). 7. PP (SS) *mey ‘peaceful, pacified ( )’ : OKog *mey ‘excellent, good’ (see OKog *mey ‘good’ above for etymology). 8. PP (SS) *mey ‘river ( )’ < ‘water’ < CJK *mi ‘water’ (for detailed etymology and OJpn cognates, see OKog *mey ‘water, river’ above). 116 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 9. PP (SS) *na ‘land, place’ > ‘walled city, fortification ( )’ ~ ‘unit of area ( )’ attested in the Puyŏ-Paekche phrase *kati *na and its variant *kar *na ‘market’ (literally, ‘selling place’, with PP *kati ~ *kar ‘selling’ perhaps cognate to Japanese - kari- ‘to borrow, rent, owe’ or perhaps a borrowing from MChi ☆kaɨ ‘sell’). This word is cognate to OKog *na ‘land, province, prefecture’ (q.v. above for etymology). 10. PP (SS) *-si ‘adjective-attributive morpheme’ (see entry for OKog *si ~ *śi above). 11. PP (SS) *taw ‘highland (臯)’ < CPK *taw- ‘mountain pass; highland’. The CPK form *taw- ‘mountain pass’ is superficially similar in form to Middle Mongol daba- ‘to cross a mountain, pass over, overcome an obstacle’, but a connection, if any, remains to be demonstrated. 12. PP (SS) *tir/☆ʦir ‘ample, abundant ( )’ ~ (SS) *tɨ ‘ten thousand ( )’ : OJpn *ti ‘thousand, thousands, large in number’ < CJK *tir/*tɨr ‘thousands, large in number’. Alternatively: EMC dial. *tsʰer̃ → PP → OJpn *ti ‘thousand(s), large in number’. 13. PP (SS) *tɨ (KPEMC ☆tʊ rendering foreign *tɨ) ‘gather, meet ( )’ ← Serbi-Mongolic, cf. Middle Kitan *tiw- ‘to gather, meet’, cognate to Written Mongol tegü- and Middle Mongol temgü- ~ tüü- ‘collect, gather up’ < Common Serbi-Mongolic *tʰəɣu- ‘to gather (transitive or intransitive)’ (LASM). 14. PP (SS) *tɨr (KPEMC ☆tʊr rendering foreign *tɨr) ‘spirit, ghost ( )’ : OJpn *ti ‘spirit, spiritual power ( )’ (JDB 452) (> MSJ chi ( ) ‘id.’) < CJK *tɨr ‘spirit, ghost, spiritual power’. 15. PP (SS) *tɨr/*tʊr ‘nine ( )’. No identified cognates. Distinct from MSJ kokono- < OJpn *kökönö ‘nine’, which is ultimately a loanword from Chinese as demonstrated by KLJ 161. 16. PP (SS) *tśirak ‘stone ( )’ ← ? early Mongolic dialect *čʰɪlaɣ < *čʰɪla-ɣU < Common Serbi-Mongolic *čʰɪla ‘stone, rock’ > Kitan *čala ‘stone, rock’. My reconstruction *tśirak is based on a straightforward KPEMC phonetic reading of the characters. This reading solves a major problem with traditional readings which attempt to force the Paekche form to match Modern Standard Korean /tʊr/ [tʊɭ] or its LMK etymon tʊˇrh ‘rock, stone’. Given the otherwise attested ethnolinguistic contact between early Japanese-Koguryoic peoples and Serbi-Mongolic peoples, and the lack of identifiable early Koreanic lexical contact with Serbi- Mongolic, this is undoubtedly a Puyŏ-Paekche reflex of an early loan from Serbi-Mongolic. Other words for certain geological Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 117 formations are known to be borrowings from neighboring languages, e.g. OKog *paɦɨy ‘cliff, crag, mountain, precipice’, borrowed from Nivkh (q.v. KLJ). 17. PP (SS) *źiar ‘west ( )’, cognate to AKog *źör ~ *dźir ‘left, east’. Note that dialectal differences in direction orientation are common in languages of Central Eurasia, see Shimunek, 2023, p. 87. 6.2.3 Puyŏ-Silla (PS) Although the bulk of linguistic data from Silla consists of the Koreanic language Han-Silla, the Samguk sagi provides evidence of an intrusive Puyŏ dialect as well, especially among the ruling elite of early Silla. On Puyŏ political influence in early Silla, see KLJ. Strikingly, the national progenitor of Silla was born in a place with an obvious Puyŏ etymology: *na *ɨr (SS), glossed as ‘Vine Well’, composed of PS *na ‘vine’ and PS *ɨr, both with unique cognates in Japanese and no cognates in Korean (see below). The early name of the Silla state is also a Puyŏ word, PS *sɨra ‘gold; Silla’, borrowed into Han-Silla (see HS *sɨra ‘Silla’ above), and other recently identified Puyŏ elements exist among the Silla linguistic data in the Samguk sagi and the Samguk yusa. The language of later Silla, however, and certainly the language of the hyangga is irrefutably uniquely Koreanic (i.e., Han-Silla). Nevertheless, the intrusive, distinctively Puyŏ linguistic data in early Silla must be acknowledged as such. I term this Puyŏ linguistic data from Silla territory as ‘Puyŏ-Silla’. 1. PS (SS) *ɨr ‘well ( )’ (see OKog *ɨr ‘well’ above for OJpn cognate and CJK etymology). 2. PS (SS) *kɨr ‘center, central ( )’ : OKog *kɨr (q.v. for etymology). 3. PS (SS) *kɨr ‘mound ( )’ ~ (Tang AMC ŋgʷar, Cob./Tak. 0734) ~ (SS) *kʊr (SS) ‘walled city, fortress ( )’ : PK *kʊr (SS) : PP *ki ~ *kɨ ‘walled city, fortification’ ~ PP *kɨr ‘city’ < earlier PP *kur ~ *kuər ~ *χuər ‘walled city, fortification, dike; ditch; embankment’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 95 n. 72; see AKog *kuru above for Puyo- Koguryoic etymology). 4. PS (SS) *kʊr ‘south ( )’ : PP *kʊrʊ ‘south’ : AKog *kor ‘south, front’ < CPK *kʊrʊ ‘south, front’ (see AKog *kor ~ *kör above for JK comparanda). 5. PS (SS) *na ‘area in the vicinity of the capital’ : OKog *na ‘land, province, prefecture’ (q.v. for etymology). 6. PS (SS) *na ‘creeping plants, vines ( )’ : OJpn *na ‘vegetable’ < CJK *na ‘vines, vegetation, vegetables’. 118 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK 7. PS (SY) *paɨ ‘boy, youth’ : OKog *paɨ ‘man’ < CPK *paɨ ‘male human; boy, man’ (pace Lee, 1970, pp. 201-210). 8. PS (SS, KPEMC *sɨʎa) ~ (SS, KPEMC *sɨla) ~ (SS, KPEMC *sirla) *sɨra ~ (SS, KPEMC *sɨlʊ) *sɨrʊ ‘gold ( ); Silla’ : OKog *tśiar ‘silver’ (q.v. etymology). On the KPEMC readings of the Chinese transcriptions and on KPEMC *ʎ, which is capable of phonetically transcribing foreign *r and *y, see Shimunek, 2023, p. 86 n. 12. See HS *sɨra ‘Silla’ above. 6.2.4 Puyŏ-Kara (PK) The Kara (Kaya) state was absorbed by Silla early in its history. Nevertheless, important linguistic data from Kara can be recovered by analyzing the toponym corpus in the Samguk sagi (see Toh, 1987; and Shimunek, 2023). 1. PK ~ (NS) *kʊr ~ PK (SS) *key ‘fortress, walled city’ : PS *kɨr ~ *kʊr ‘mound; walled city, fortress’ (Shimunek, 2023, p. 95 n. 72, p. 102; see AKog *kuru above for Puyo-Koguryoic etymology). 2. PK (SS) *ta ‘high mountain ( )’ (Shimunek, 2023, pp. 87, 98, 102; see OKog *tar above for detailed etymology). 3. PK ~ *tʊk ~ *tʊ ‘door, gate ( )’ : OJpn *tö ‘door, gate’ < CJK *tʊk > CPK *tʊk → Jurchen-Manchu /duka/ [duqa] ‘door, gate’ → ? Late Kitan *tʊqay ‘door, gate ( )’ (Shimunek, 2021a, pp. 71-76; Shimunek, 2023, p. 102). Symbols : cognates between languages ≠ not cognate ? uncertain segment or etymology # word boundary > language-internal change → borrowing or loanword across languages ⇄ borrowing or loanword of uncertain directionality * reconstruction according to mainstream historical-comparative linguistic methods ☆ speculative reconstruction or traditional reading using rhymes, 反 切 fanqie, or other traditional methods [abc] phonetic transcription /abc/ phonemic transcription Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 119 - morpheme boundary *a/*b competing reconstructions a ~ b variant forms (free or conditioned variation) V vowel Sigla and Abbreviations AJpn Archaic Japanese AKog Archaic Koguryŏ AMC Attested Middle Chinese anat. anatomy CJK Common Japanese-Koguryoic CKor Common Koreanic CN Common Nivkh (Fortescue’s “Proto-Nivkh”, cited from CND) CND Comparative Nivkh Dictionary (Fortescue, 2016) Cob. Coblin (1994) CPK Common Puyo-Koguryoic CSM Common Serbi-Mongolic (LASM) dial. dialect, dialectal EMC Early Middle Chinese EMK Early Middle Korean HK Han-Kara HP Han-Paekche HS Han-Silla HW Ham’an wooden tablets, from Lee (2017) with revision HYKP Hyang’yak Kugŭppang JDB Omodaka (1967) JK Japanese-Koguryoic JNAH Journal of Northeast Asian Studies (NAHF) KLJ Beckwith (2007a) KPEMC Korean Peninsular Early Middle Chinese KYS Jilin Leishi (Kyerim Yusa), 12th century LASM Shimunek (2017) LMK Late Middle Korean MChi Middle Chinese 120 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK MJpn Middle Japanese MSJ Modern Standard Japanese MSK Modern Standard Korean N. northern NAHF Northeast Asian History Foundation NCR Nichūreki (based on 12th c. Japanese sources). OChi Old Chinese OJpn Old Japanese OKog Old Koguryŏ onom. onomatopoetic p.c. personal communication PJpn Proto-Japanese PK Puyŏ-Kara PP Puyŏ-Paekche PS Puyŏ-Silla Pul. Pulleyblank (1991) S. southern SM Serbi-Mongolic SS Samguk sagi SY Samguk yusa SZR Sezokujiruishō (12th c.) Tak. Takata (1988) TJ Toijangga (1120) TNJ T’amnaji (1653) ZS Zhou shu References Primary Sources Anonymous (12th c.). Nichūreki . Anonymous (12th c.). Sezokujiruishō . Anonymous (13th c.). Kuyŏk Inwanggyŏng . Anonymous. (13th c.). Hyang’yak Kugŭppang . Iryŏn (13th c. original, cited from 1512 ed.). Samguk yusa . Kim Pusik (12th c. original, cited from 1512 ed.). Samguk sagi . Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 121 Linghu Defen (636 original, cited from 1971 ed.). Zhou shu . Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Sun Mu (12th c.). Jilin Leishi (Kyerim Yusa ) (see Sasse, 1976). Yejong , King of Koryŏ (1120). Toijangga . Yi Wŏnjin (1653). T’amnaji . Secondary Sources Beckwith, C. I. (2005). The ethnolinguistic history of the early Korean Peninsula region: Japanese-Koguryoic and other languages in the Koguryo, Paekche, and Silla kingdoms. Journal of Inner and East Asian Studies, 2(2), 34-64. Beckwith, C. I. (2006). Methodological Observations on Some Recent Studies of the Early Ethnolinguistic History of Korea and Vicinity. Altai Hakpo, 16, 199-234. Beckwith, C. I. (2007a). Koguryo, the Language of Japan’s Continental Relatives. Second Edition. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004160255.i-274 Beckwith, C. I. (2007b). Phoronyms: Classifiers, Class Nouns, and the Pseudopartitive Construction. New York: Peter Lang. Beckwith, C. I. (2008). An introduction to theoretical and methodological problems in the comparative-historical linguistics of Eastern Eurasian languages. In C. I. Beckwith (Ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages III (pp. 10-48). Halle: IITBS GmbH. Beckwith, C. I. (2010). Could There Be a Korean–Japanese Linguistic Relationship Theory? Science, the Data, and the Alternatives. A State-of-the-Field Article. International Journal of Asian Studies, 7(2), 201-219. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1479591410000070 Beckwith, C. I. (2014). The Aramaic source of the East Asian word for ‘Buddhist monastery’: On the spread of Central Asian monasticism in the Kushan period. Journal Asiatique, 302(1), 111-138. https://doi.org/10.2143/JA.302.1.3030680 Beckwith, C. I. (2017). Once again on the Aramaic word for ‘monastery’ in East Asia: data and science versus doctrine and belief. Journal Asiatique, 305(2), 211-224. https://doi.org/10.2143/JA.305.2.3262804 Coblin, W. S. (1994). A Compendium of Phonetics in Northwest Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series, 7, 1-504. Dpal-ldan-bkra-shis, Slater, K., et al. (1996). Language Materials of China’s Monguor Minority: Huzhu Mongghul and Minhe Mangghuer. Sino-Platonic Papers, 69. https://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp069_monguor_language.pdf Fortescue, M. (2016). Comparative Nivkh Dictionary. Munchen: Lincom. Hangŭl Hakhoe (1992). Uri mal k’ŭn sajŏn . Volume 4: Yennalgwa idu . Seoul: Ŏmunhak. Kang, K. (1983). Hangugŏ-wa kiryagŏ-nŭn tonggye ida . Hangŭl , 182, 103-144. 122 Andrew E. SHIMUNEK Kara, G. (2021). Two rhyming Mongolic words in Kitan Assembled Script. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 74(4), 673-684. https://doi.org/10.1556/062.2021.00198 King, R. (1991). Russian Sources on Korean Dialects (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Harvard University. Kiyose, G. N. (2004). Nippon no naka no Koria-go no chimei . In K. Yoshida and M. Itoi (Eds.), Nippon chimeigaku wo Manabu hito no tame ni (pp. 234-456). Kyōto: Seikai shisosha. Kōno, R. (1987). The Bilingualism of the Paekche Language. Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, 45, 75-86. Kumar, B. (2025). Grammaticalization in the Korean Aspectual System. Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 15(1), 47-62. https://doi.org/10.4312/ala.15.1.47-62 Lee, K.-M. (1964). Materials of the Koguryo language. Bulletin of the Korean Research Center: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 20, 11-20. Lee, K.-M. = Yi Kimun (1970). Sillaŏ ŭi ‘pok’ tong e taehayŏ . Kugŏ kungmunhak 49-50, 201-210. Lee, K.-M. = Yi Kimun (1972). Kugŏsa kaesŏl 國語史 槪說. Seoul: Minjung Sŏgwan. Lee, K.-M., & Ramsey, S. R. (2011). A History of the Korean Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lee, S. = Yi Sŭngjae (2017). Mokkan-e kiroktoen kodae hangugŏ . Seoul: Iljogak. Lee, Y. (2011). Morphology and syntax in holes and scratches. Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 1 (1), 53-69. https://doi.org/10.4312/ala.1.1.53-70 Nam, K. (2024). Koŏ sajŏn . Seoul: Kyohaksa. Omodaka, H. (1967). Jidaibetsu kokugo daijiten: Jōdaihen . Tokyo: Sanseido. Pulleyblank, E. G. (1991). Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Sasse, W. (1976). Das Glossar Koryǒ-pangǒn im Kyerim-yusa. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Shimunek, A. (2017). Languages of Ancient Southern Mongolia and North China: A Historical-Comparative Study of the Serbi or Xianbei Branch of the Serbi-Mongolic Language Family, with an Analysis of Northeastern Frontier Chinese and Old Tibetan Phonology. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Shimunek, A. (2021a). Loanwords from the Puyo-Koguryoic languages of early Korea and Manchuria in Jurchen-Manchu. Altai Hakpo, 31, 65-84. https://doi.org/10.15816/ask.2021..31.004 Puyŏ and Han: Morphological and Lexical Analysis of Two … 123 Shimunek, A. (2021b). On Korean Peninsular Historical Linguistics: A Review of Recent Studies on the Languages of Early Korea. The Journal of Northeast Asian History, 18(1), 129-167. Shimunek, A. (2023). The earliest Koreanic words for ‘child’, ‘east’, ‘mountain’, ‘river’, and ‘shore’: a comparative-historical linguistic study of several Kara (Kaya) toponyms in the Samguk sagi. Acta Koreana, 26(1), 83-108. https://doi.org/10.18399/acta.2023.26.1.004 Sin, C. (2002). Hyangga ŭi haesŏk [Deciphering hyangga]. Seoul: Chimmundang. Svantesson, J.-O. et al. (2005). The Phonology of Mongolian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Takata, T. (1988). Tonkō shiryō ni yoru Chūgokugo shi no kenkyū . Tokyo: Sōbunsha. Toh, S.-H. = To Suhŭi (1987). Paekcheŏ ŏhwi yŏn’gu 1: Chŏngiŏrŭl chungsimŭro . Sŏul: Paekche Munhwa Kaebal Yŏn’guwŏn. Toh, S.-H. = To Suhŭi (2005). Paekcheŏ ŏhwi yŏn’gu . Seoul: Cheiaenssi. Tsuji, S. (2000a). Nichūreki Sezokujiruishō shoin no chōsengo sūsi ni tsuite . Okayama Daigaku Gengo Gakkai Ronsō , 8, 1-18. Tsuji, S. (2000b). Nichūreki Sezokujiruishō-ŭi hangugŏ susa-e taehayŏ 壢 . In 21 segi kugŏhak-ŭi kwaje (pp. 527-544). Seoul: Wŏrin. Acknowledgments This research was funded by Woosong University Academic Research in 2025. This article developed from a paper the author presented at the Seoul International Altaistic Conference (SIAC), July 16-17, 2021, and subsequent research. The author wishes to thank the following people and institutions for helpful advice, resources which the author used in writing this paper, and for supporting the author's research in various ways leading up to the writing of this paper: Christopher I. BECKWITH, György KARA†, Juwon KIM, Ross KING, Dongho KO, the Kyujanggak Institute, Joseph Jeong-il LEE, Yong LEE, Maurizio RIOTTO, Seiji TSUJI, Eva VUČKOVIČ, and two anonymous peer reviewers. Any errors in this paper are entirely my own.