Proto-Hmongic or Proto-Miao () is the reconstructed ancestor of the Hmongic languages.
In China, the first comprehensive reconstruction of Proto-Hmongic (Proto-Miao) was undertaken by Wang Fushi (1979). Wang's 1979 manuscript was subsequently revised and published as Wang (1994).
Ratliff (2010) includes reconstructions of Proto-HmongâÂÂMien, Proto-Hmongic, and Proto-Mienic.
Below are some rime mergers in Proto-Hmongic, in which the first part of the Proto-Hmong-Mien rime is preserved.
On the other hand, Proto-Hmongic retains some Proto-Hmong-Mien rime distinctions, whereas Proto-Mienic has merged the rimes.
The Proto-Hmongic tonal category C is derived from Proto-HmongâÂÂMien final *-k, while tonal category D in Proto-Hmongic is derived from Proto-HmongâÂÂMien finals *-p and *-t. Below are some examples of Proto-Hmongic tone C corresponding to Proto-Mienic tone D and Proto-Hmong-Mien final *-k.
Although Proto-Hmongic does not have explicitly reconstructed final stops (i.e., *-p, *-t, *-k), Pa-Hng and Qo Xiong have vowel quality distinctions that correspond to whether the Proto-Hmong-Mien rime was open or closed. For example:
Qo Xiong has -u for words developed from Proto-Hmong-Mien forms with closed rimes, while Qo Xiong words developed from Proto-Hmong-Mien forms with open rimes have -ÃÂ.
Ratliff (2010) reconstructions only one final nasal for Proto-Hmongic. *-n/*-Ã Â are in complementary distribution with each other, with *-n occurring after front vowels. Other than as *-Ã Â, the Proto-Hmongic final nasal can alternatively be reconstructed as a single *-N.
Taguchi (2022) proposes that nasal codas in open rimes in Proto-Hmongic are historically derived from nasal initial consonants.
Ostapirat (2016) proposes velarized initials in Proto-Hmongic, which are not reconstructed by Ratliff (2010) and others. Qo Xiong retains distinct initial reflexes for forms developed from Proto-Hmongic *m.l- (> Qo Xiong n-) versus *m.lÃÂ - (> Qo Xiong mj-).
Taguchi (2023) also suggests that Ratliff's (2010) Proto-Hmongic *k- and *q- are in fact secondary developments from Proto-HmongâÂÂMien *kr- and *k-, respectively. Ostapirat (2016) also revises Ratliff's uvulars (*q-, etc.) as velars (*k-, etc.).
Some Proto-Hmongic and Proto-Mienic forms are cognate with each other, but a precise Proto-Hmong-Mien form cannot be easily reconstructed due to mismatches between the tonal categories, rimes, or onsets. Some examples of irregular correspondences between Proto-Hmongic and Proto-Mienic: