Reconstructions

Note

Wilkinson (1959) apparently regards Malay perahu as a Dravidian loan. There are, however, two problems with this interpretation. First, if Malay perahu is a borrowing of padao or parao there is no explanation for its medial -h-, nor for the corresponding segment in the Sundanese and Old Javanese cognates. Rather, these glottal fricatives agree in pointing to *q. Second, apparent cognates of Malay perahu are found not only in island Southeast Asia, but also in western Melanesia, a situation that is virtually unknown for established loan distributions. Finally, because it is also necessary to reconstruct *padaw ‘kind of sailboat’ (q.v.), many Philippine forms are difficult to classify. Tagalog paráw ‘large passenger and cargo sailboat’ must reflect *padaw, and Ilokano paráw (if not a Tagalog loan) must reflect *paraqu, but similar forms in other languages, as Bikol paráw ‘boat’ or Maranao parao ‘dhow’ are ambiguous for *paraqu or *padaw. Dempwolff's (1934-38) attempt to include Polynesian forms such as Tongan folau ‘to voyage, travel, or journey by sea’ in the present comparison conflicts with the evidence for reconstruction of *-q-, and is best abandoned.