Proto-Austronesian (commonly abbreviated as PAN or PAn) is a proto-language. It is the reconstructed ancestor of the Austronesian languages, one of the world's major language families. Proto-Austronesian is assumed to have begun to diversify in Taiwan.
Lower-level reconstructions have also been made, and include Proto-Malayo-Polynesian, Proto-Oceanic, and Proto-Polynesian. In the last three decades, linguists Malcolm Ross and Andrew Pawley have built a large lexicon for Proto-Oceanic.The lexicon is available online as a set of Pdf files, and as a digital database. Other comparative lexicons include the Micronesian comparative dictionary (by Bender et al.), and the Polynesian lexicon or Pollex (by Biggs et al.).
Phonology Proto-Austronesian is reconstructed by constructing sets of correspondences among consonants in the various Austronesian languages, according to the comparative method. Although in theory the result should be unambiguous, in practice, given the large number of languages, there are numerous disagreements, with various scholars differing significantly on the number and nature of the phonemes in Proto-Austronesian. In the past, some disagreements concerned whether certain correspondence sets were real or represent sporadic developments in particular languages. For the currently remaining disagreements, however, scholars generally accept the validity of the correspondence sets but disagree on the extent to which the distinctions in these sets can be projected back to proto-Austronesian or represent innovations in particular sets of daughter languages.
Blust's reconstruction Below are Proto-Austronesian phonemes reconstructed by Robert Blust, a professor of linguistics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. A total of 25 Proto-Austronesian consonants, 4 vowels, and 4 diphthongs were reconstructed. However, Blust acknowledges that some of the reconstructed consonants are still controversial and debated.
The symbols below are frequently used in reconstructed Proto-Austronesian words.
*C: voiceless alveolar affricate *c: voiceless palatal affricate *q: uvular stop *z: voiced palatal affricate *D: voiced retroflex stop *j: palatalized voiced velar stop *S: voiceless alveolar sibilant fricative *s: voiceless palatal sibilant fricative *N: palatalized alveolar lateral or palatal lateral *r: alveolar flap *R: alveolar trill
Proto-Austronesian Consonants (Blust) Labial Alveolar Retroflex Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal Stop voiceless p t k q voiced b d D j g Affricate voiceless C c voiced z Nasal m n ñ ŋ Fricative S s h Lateral l N Tap r Trill R Approximant w y
*D appears only in final position, *z/*c/*ñ only in initial and medial position, while *j is restricted to medial and final position.
Proto-Austronesian Vowels (Blust) Height Front Central Back Close i u Mid e Open a
The diphthongs are not distinct phonemes, but vowel-glide sequences. They deserve special mention due to their subsequent monophthongization in many daughter languages. The diphthongs include: *ay *aw *uy *iw
Wolff's reconstruction In 2010, John Wolff published his Proto-Austronesian reconstruction in Proto-Austronesian phonology with glossary. Wolff reconstructs a total of 19 consonants, 4 vowels (*i, *u, *a, *e, where *e = ), 4 diphthongs (*ay, *aw, *iw, *uy), and syllabic stress.
Proto-Austronesian Consonants (Wolff) Labial Alveolar Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal Unvoiced stop p t c k q Voiced stop/fricative b d j g ɣ Nasal m n ŋ Voiceless fricative s h Lateral l ɬ Wolff uses (which in IPA stands for a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative) to represent the proto-sound which he assumes to have been a palatal lateral . Approximant w y
The following table shows how Wolff's Proto-Austronesian phonemic system differs from Blust's system. +Blust's and Wolff's PAn phonemes Blust *p *t *C *c *k *q *b *‑D *d‑ *‑d‑ *‑d *z‑ *‑z‑ *‑j- *‑j *g‑ *‑g- *‑g *R *m *n *N *ñ *ŋ *l *r *s *S *h *w *y Wolff *p *t rejected *k *q *b *‑d *d‑ *‑d‑ *‑j *j‑ *‑j‑ *g rejected *ɣ *m *n *ɬ *ŋ *l rejected *c *s *h *w *y
However, Blust was critical of Wolff's attempts to merge *t and *C, as it depends on the reconstruction of phonemic stress in the proto-language, and he believed such a reconstruction is questionable.
Shibata's reconstruction In 2025, Kye Shibata made several changes to reconstructed Proto-Austronesian phonology based on an examination of Formosan reflexes, recasting the reconstruction of Proto-Austronesian in terms of a contrast between dental and retroflex phonemes.
Proto-Austronesian Consonants (Shibata) Labial Dental Retroflex Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal Voiceless stop p t C k q () Voiced stop b z d (g ) Nasal m n ŋ Voiceless fricative s S (S ) h Voiced fricative j Lateral N l Trill R Approximant w y
Shibata eliminates *D, *c, and *ñ as distinct phonemes, due to their rarity in the lexicon and their distinction mostly being confined to Malayo-Polynesian. However, Shibata suggests the possibility of splitting *S into two phonemes following Ross, and further suggests that support for *g is limited as it only appears in a limited number of words.
Historical overview of reconstructions for Proto-Austronesian
According to Malcolm Ross, the following aspects of Blust's system are uncontroversial: the labials (p b m w); the velars k ŋ; y; R; the vowels; and the above four diphthongs. There is some disagreement about the postvelars (q ʔ h) and the velars g j, and about whether there are any more diphthongs; however, in these respects, Ross and Blust are in agreement. The major disagreement concerns the system of coronal consonants. The following discussion is based on Ross (1992).
Otto Dempwolff's reconstruction of Proto-Malayo-Polynesian from the 1930s included: Dental t d n l Retroflex ṭ ḍ ḷ Palatal t' d' n' Palatal k' g'
Dyen (1963), including data from the Formosan languages, expanded Dempwolff's set of coronal consonants: t split into t and C n split into n and L/N d' split and renotated as z and Z t' split into s1 and s2 ḷ ṭ ḍ n' k' g' h renotated as r T D ñ c j q
Tsuchida (1976),Tsuchida, Shigeru 1976. Reconstruction of proto-Tsouic phonology. Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Monograph Series, no. 5. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa building on Dyen's system: Further split d into D1 D2 D3 D4. He also believed that Dyen's c (Dempwolff's k') could not be reconstructed for Proto-Austronesian (he also split Dyen's w into w W and q into q Q, which were not accepted by later scholars.)
Dahl reduced Tsuchida's consonants into: D1 D2 D3 D4 into d3 d2 d1 d3 (with the new d3 reflecting the combination of the old D1 and D4) and combined Dyen's S X x into a single phoneme S. He did accept Dyen's c but did not accept his T D. (He also renotated a number of phonemes in ways that were not generally accepted by later scholars.)
Blust based his system on a combination of Dyen, Tsuchida and Dahl, and attempted to reduce the total number of phonemes. He accepted Dahl's reduction of Dyen's S X x into S but did not accept either Tsuchida's or Dahl's split of Dyen's d; in addition, he reduced Dyen's s1 s2 to a single phoneme s. While accepting Dyen's c, he was hesitant about T and D (more recently, Blust appears to have accepted D but rejected T, and also rejected Z).
Ross likewise attempted to reduce the number of phonemes, but in a different way: He accepts Dahl's d1 d2 d3 and also Z (eventually rejected by Blust). He notes that the distinction between d1 and d2 d3 is only reconstructable for the Formosan language groups Amis, Proto-Puyuma and Proto-Paiwan, and only Proto-Paiwan has a three-way distinction among d1 d2 d3; contrarily the distinction between Z and d1 is reconstructable only for Proto-Rukai and Proto-Malayo-Polynesian, but not any of the previous three groups. However, he still believes (contra Blust) that the distinction among these phonemes is an inheritance from Proto-Austronesian rather than an innovation in the respective groups. He notes that d1 occurs only morpheme-initially, while r occurs only morpheme-non-initially, and as a result combines the two. He does not accept the phonemes c z ñ in Proto-Austronesian, and asserts that none of them are "readily reconstructable" outside of Proto-Malayo-Polynesian. Furthermore, while he believes that ñ was a general innovation in Proto-Malayo-Polynesian, c and z "are reflected differently from PMP [Proto-Malayo-Polynesian] *s and *d only in a fairly limited area of western Indo-Malaysia and appear to be the results of local developments". He also reconstructs the coronals somewhat differently. He believes that C S l d3 were all retroflex (respectively, ), and s and L (Blust's N) were dental /s/ and /l/, as opposed to Blust's reconstruction as dental and palatal, respectively. According to Ross, this is based on their outcomes in the Formosan languages and Javanese; although their outcomes as dental/palatal is geographically more distributed, it occurs only in Malayo-Polynesian, which represent a single clade with respect to the Formosan languages.
Sound changes
As Proto-Austronesian transitioned to Proto-Malayo-Polynesian, Proto-Oceanic, and Proto-Polynesian, the phonemic inventories were continually reduced by merging formerly distinct sounds into one sound. Three mergers were observed in the Proto-Austronesian to Proto-Malayo-Polynesian transition, while nine were observed for the Proto-Oceanic to Proto-Polynesian transition. Thus, Proto-Austronesian has the most elaborate sound system, while Proto-Polynesian has the fewest phonemes. For instance, the Hawaiian language is famous for having only eight consonants, while Māori has only ten consonants. This is a sharp reduction from the 19–25 consonants of the Proto-Austronesian language that was originally spoken on Taiwan.
Blust also observed the following mergers and sound changes between Proto-Austronesian and Proto-Malayo-Polynesian. +Proto-Austronesian andProto-Malayo-Polynesian Sound Changes Proto-Austronesian Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *C/t *t *N/n *n *S/h *h *eSTechnically this is still part of the *S > *h sound change. The difference is that the preceding vowel changes as well. *ah
However, according to Wolff (2010:241), Proto-Malayo-Polynesian's development from Proto-Austronesian only included the following three sound changes.
PAn *ɬ > PMP *ñ, l, n PAn *s > PMP *h PAn *h > PMP *Ø
Proto-Oceanic merged even more phonemes. This is why modern-day Polynesian languages have some of the most restricted consonant inventories in the world.
+Proto-Malayo-Polynesian andProto-Oceanic Sound Changes Proto-Malayo-Polynesian Proto-Oceanic *b/p *p *mb/mp *b *c/s/z/j *s *nc/nd/nz/nj *j *g/k *k *ŋg/ŋk *g *d/r *r *e/-aw *o *i/-uy/-iw *i
Unusual sound changes that occurred within the Austronesian language family include: Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *w or *b > Sundanese c- or -nc- Proto-Oceanic *w or *y > p in Levei Khehek Proto-Oceanic *r or *R > g͡ʟ in Hiw Proto-Polynesian *l or *r > ŋg (via *ɣ or *ʁ) in Rennellese Proto-Polynesian *t > k in Hawaiian, Samoan, and Ontong Java (after *k > ʔ)
Syntax
Word order Proto-Austronesian is a verb-initial language (including VSO and VOS word orders), as most Formosan languages, all Philippine languages, some Bornean languages, all Austronesian dialects of Madagascar, and all Polynesian languages are verb-initial. However, most Austronesian (many of which are Oceanic) languages of Indonesia, New Guinea, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, and Micronesia are SVO, or verb-medial, languages. SOV, or verb-final, word order is considered to be typologically unusual for Austronesian languages, and is only found in various Austronesian languages of New Guinea and to a more limited extent, the Solomon Islands. This is because SOV word order is very common in the non-Austronesian Papuan languages.
Voice system