Talk:Proto-Sino-Tibetan language

Languages Low‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Source of reconstructions?

@Hch12907: In the tables under the Example of sound changes section, where are the Proto-Sino-Tibetan and Proto-Tibeto-Burman forms from? Please cite sources. The Proto-Tibeto-Burman reconstructions look like Matisoff's to me, so I added his 2003 book as a reference. He also has a 2015 revision that is on STEDT, so please mention which one it's from. Lingnanhua (talk) 14:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a translation from the Chinese wiki, and the section was uncited there too. I thought about removing the table. Hch12907 (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like someone added the reference to the Sound Changes section a few weeks ago - Gong Hwang-cherng. The PTB forms are from Benedict (1972) and the PST forms are from Gong himself.

本文根據李方桂先生 (1971) 所構擬的漢語㆖古音、白保羅 (1972)所構擬的原始藏緬語、以及龔煌城 (1995) 所構擬的原始漢藏語[...] (p. 33)

Nevertheless, I still think that the section can be simplified a lot. But I don't have the time to organise the examples. Hch12907 (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hill (2019)

I have added a draft in the Phonology section for Hill (2019), perhaps someone could take a look and un-draft it if things look alright to you. Hch12907 (talk) 19:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most Plausible Reconstruction

So far, there are three reconstructions of PST, but which one is most plausible? I'm willing to exclude the one by Peiros and Starostin as an option, because of Starostin's choices when reconstructing common ancestors. Kaden Bayne Vanciel (talk) 07:52, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would also be interested in hearing from an expert about this—I think I will also make a post at the Reference Desk about it. Remsense留 19:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]