Abstract
The author replies to (I) S. Izumi's comment in the book review section of the present journal, Vol.14, No.3, on his "Clan-Exogamy in Eastern Asia" in Problems of Contemporary Sociology : Studies Presented to Dr. Teizo Toda on His 60th Birthday and (II) Y. Shiratori's comment in his paper, "On the Tribes of Nan-chao and Ta-li and the Language of their Descendants, the Minkia" (The Japanese Journal of Ethnology, Vol.15, Nos.3-4), on the author's "The Languages of the Nan-chao, Ta-li, and Min-kia" (JJE, Vol.14, No.2). I : (1) Izumi doubts the possibility that clan-exogamy should have been called into being through the influence of scholarship as, for example, Chu-tzu. The author replies that such a change can be demonstrated historically in Korea and Annam. (2) Izumi doubts the utility of old Chinese documents as ethnological materials. The author replies that they must, indeed, be treated with abundant discretion, but that their positive, systematic use is indispensable and can contribute much to ethnographies of Eastern Asia. (3) Izumi comments that the clan-exogamy and the bifurcation (distinction between paternal and maternal relatives) in kinship terminology are not always correlative. The author accepts this comment with thanks, but he also points out the fact that in Korea the bifurcation in kinship terminology came into existence together with the establishment of clan-exogamy as an important example for ethnologists. II : (1) Shiratori objects to the author's view that the Minkia language is the modern survival of the language of the people who constituted the core of the kingdoms of Nan-chao and Ta-li, and asserts that, since Nan-chao was a kingdom of the Lolo and the Minkia are the descendants of a Tai people conquered by the Lolo, the Minkia language is intimately related to the Tai language. The author examines the evidential data as presented by Shiratori, and argues against their acceptability. (2) The author modifies, in the present paper, his former argument that Minkia constitutes an independent language close to Lolo. The author feels that, until research has progressed further, Minkia should be treated as an independent group, and its affiliation to Lolo, Mon-Khmer or Chinese is still uncertain.
