@book{45537,
  address               = {Wiesbaden},
  author                = {Pinnow, Heinz-Jürgen},
  note                  = {Bibliography: p. [459]-489.},
  pages                 = {xviii+514},
  publisher             = {Harrassowitz},
  title                 = {Versuch einer Historischen Lautlehre der Kharia-Sprache},
  year                  = {1959},
  citekeys              = {cldf1:Pinnow-1959},
  class_loc             = {PL4570},
  document_type         = {B},
  hhtype                = {grammar_sketch (computerized assignment from "sprache")},
  inlg                  = {German [deu]},
  iso_code              = {khr; unr},
  isreferencedby        = {cldf1},
  keywords              = {Kharia, Mundari},
  lgcode                = {[khar1287]; [mund1320]},
  macro_area            = {Eurasia},
  mpi_eva_library_shelf = {PL 4570 PIN 1959},
  olac_field            = {typology; phonology; phonetics; general_linguistics},
  refdb_id              = {http://wals.info/refdb/record/659},
  src                   = {cldf, mpieva, phoible, stampe},
  stampeann             = {##; abbrev #V[page]; |AAA},
  stampedesc            = {Literaturverzeichnis [ =Bibliography], 459-489},
  stampenote            = {[Reviewed: Shafer??; ??.] – Despite its modest title, and its emphasis on Kharia and the Munda languages, the most ambitious comparative study of the Austroasiatic languages as a whole, drawing on virtually every Austroasiatic source known in the fifties to establish proto-Munda and proto-Austroasiatic phonology and lexicon. It is a great misfortune that the data then available on Koraput Munda languages was so slight or misleading; relying on Ramamurti's erroneous presentation of Sora as having short vs long vowel systems, Pinnow projected this error from Sora to proto-Austroasiatic. Otherwise, his reconstructions seem in the main to stand up. The Introduction (1-26) lists the languages, briefly surveys the history of comparisons, and surveys their collective systems of word-formation and compounding. Part 1 (27-68) surveys the phonemic systems of the Munda languages (except Gta', which was not known then); Nahali; and the main Mon-Khmer languages (Mon, Khmer, Bahnar, Stieng, Chrau, Sre^); Palaung and Lawa; Khasi; Nicobarese; and the Malakka languages Semang and Sakai. Part 2, Vocalism (69-196), and part 3, Consonantism (197-428), survey the proto-phonemes, providing several hundred sets of cognates and semi-cognates which, thanks to full word-indexes (490-514), represent the fullest comparative Austroasiatic dictionary to date. To provide for the effects of occasional vowel harmony, the presentation of each proto-phoneme is divided up according to its positions in a (C)V(C) or (C)V(C)(C)V(C) word structure frame. Part 4 treats accent and intonation (429-448), and part 5, syllable and word structure. The Literaturverzeichnis (459-489), by far the most comprehensive single contribution to Munda bibliography, is lightly annotated},
  subject_headings      = {Kharia language–Phonology., Kharia language–Phonology.},
  title_english         = {Essay on a historical phonology of the Kharia language},
  wals_code             = {khr; mun},
  wals_ref_name         = {Pinnow 1959}
}