Talk:메주

Derivation

Apropos of the etymology note at 味噌#Japanese that Vovin traces the Japanese term to Korean 메주 (meju), I note that Middle Chinese 未 (mʉi^H) could presumably be borrowed as Korean 메 (me). While the second character in the purported Japanese etymon, 醬／酱 (jiàng), seems less likely to be borrowed as Korean 주 (ju), I note that modern Min Nan has the reading chiùⁿ.

Reading Vovin's explanation for why he thinks Koreanic must be the origin of this term (here, pages 77-78), his reasoning doesn't quite wash with me -- why would Old Korean ㅈ be borrowed into Japonic as /s/? Other borrowings into Japonic that include similar sounds are borrowed as those sounds, for the most part. If the original term were Chinese instead, would that not better explain its distribution?

Does anyone have any further information about the Middle Korean form of modern Korean 메주 (meju), or other authors discussing a likely derivation?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 22:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Some follow-on notes.

For the Korean:

• Vovin's paper notes the earliest Koreanic cite for 메주 (meju) was in the Jilin leishi, dated to roughly 1103.
• The term was recorded in Late Middle Chinese (LMC) orthography as 密祖 (mì zǔ).
• Vovin reconstructs the term as Early Middle Korean (EMK) *mico, as compared to our reconstructed LMC reading of 密祖 (MC mit tsuX).

For the Japanese:

• The earliest Japanese cite for miso was in Ritsuryō governmental tax records, dated 365 years earlier in 738.
• The term was recorded in Old Japanese kanji as 未醬 (later replaced with homophonous kanji 味噌).
• This likely had the Old Japanese pronunciation misau based on the goon kanji readings, as compared to our reconstructed LMC reading of 未醬 (MC mj+jH tsjangH).

Considerations:

• The dating alone could suggest a Japanese provenance, possibly derived from Chinese.
• If the oldest Late Middle Chinese reading mit tso were the original form, we would expect gemination in the Japanese, as we see in other terms cited to in or just after the Old Japanese period, such as 密奏 (missō, “secret imperial audience”, possibly read in Old Japanese as *mitusou; cited to 927) or 欠失 (kesshitsu, “negligence”, possibly read in Old Japanese as *ketusitu; cited to 721). We would also expect a final /o/ in the Old Japanese, rather than the recorded /au/.
• If the oldest reconstructed Early Middle Korean reading *mico (/mit͡so/) were the original form, we would again expect a final /o/ in the Old Japanese. Plus, I'm not sure how that medial /-t͡s-/ would be realized in Japanese.

→ I do see mention of the spelling 美蘇 in Old Japanese over at the ja:w:味噌 article, presumably read as misu based on the goon kanji readings, but it's unclear to me when that appears and where. If this spelling were w:man'yōgana, the reading would have been ⟨mi₂so₁⟩ → */mʷisʷo/.

Ideally, we should track down Old Japanese texts that include this term and see if we can definitively identify the Old Japanese phonetic realization. To that end, I've already searched the Man'yōshū, and found that that text doesn't mention this word anywhere. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 23:01, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Eirikr The dating is a red herring because the Jilin leishi is the earliest real source for basic Korean nouns. There is no Man'yoshu or Genji equivalent for Korean.

Old Korean /-t͡s-/ was realized as /-s-/ in clear-cut borrowings into Old Japanese: cf. Middle Korean 잣 (cas) vs. Old Japanese さし (sasi), Baekje 鞬吉支 (*k(j)ə-n kici) vs. Old Japanese コニキシ (ko2niki1si).

Ultimately, I don't think a Chinese source for the word is implausible, although it depends on when exactly Korean /-ŋ/ developed. Korean /-ŋ/ seems likely secondary; it's not common in native words, and there are cases like the same Silla queen being variably named 史省夫人 (MC sriX sjengX pju nyin) and 史肖夫人 (MC sriX sjewH pju nyin), although data is limited.--Tibidibi (talk) 05:05, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tibidibi, thank you for your perspective!

• Apologies for being fuzzy earlier -- I didn't intend so much to build a case that the Korean term only dates to 1103, but rather that the oldest known form of the word dates to then. Are there any accepted reconstructions of earlier Koreanic phonology? 365 years is a lot of time for sounds to shift.

Of potential interest, the article at ja:w:味噌 describes the Old Japanese term 未醤 (miso, "immature / unfinished + sauce"?) standing in apparent contrast to 主醤 (reading uncertain, "main + sauce"?) and 末醤 (reading uncertain, "finished + sauce"?) -- the former may have been pronounced as susau or suso? The latter perhaps as matusau, matuso, masau, or maso? If these were jukujikun-style spellings, the readings could have been anything... I don't suppose there are any Korean records mentioning any similar terms?

• Cheers on the /-t͡s-/ → /-s-/ equivalency, those are good examples. That said, do you have any where the /-t͡s-/ specifically precedes /-o/, and the Japonic realization is /-so/?
• The Silla variation between /siᴇŋ^X/ and /siᴇu^H/ is particularly interesting to me, as this seems to mirror what happened to final /-ŋ/ in borrowings from Middle Chinese into Old Japanese: Old Japanese had no coda consonants, so the /ŋ/ shifted to /u/ instead (perhaps because the close vowel was closest to the nasal?).

PS: I'm traveling for roughly the next week, with sporadic connectivity, so my replies might not be quick.  :)

Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 09:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Just saw the Manchu ᠮᡳᠰᡠᠨ (misun) entry. Would the final /-n/ there possibly suggest a Chinese derivation, considering that neither the Korean nor Japanese terms have any final consonant? I know nothing about Manchu, so that might instead be a native suffix, I have no real idea. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 09:17, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Eirikr It's not on Jidai Betsu Kokugo Daijiten Jodai-hen (Dictionary of Old Japanese), so I don't think this term exists in Old Japanese (is the man'yogana in japanese wikipedia some emj text? i don't think 蘇 could be used there; 曽 would probably be used in such text). Chuterix (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC)