Generational Variation in Language Convergence: Lexical and Syntactic Change in Dai Lue Under Chinese Influence

Abstract

This study examines lexical and syntactic convergence between Dai Lue and Chinese in the multilingual environment of Sipsongpanna, employing an apparent-time approach across three generational cohorts (N = 90, balanced gender). Through mixed-methods analysis (structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews), significant diachronic variation was observed. Younger speakers exhibited pronounced convergence, adopting Chinese-derived syntactic patterns (e.g., prenominal quantifiers and preverbal adjunct phrases) and borrowing Chinese lexical elements (e.g., an adverb sɛn⁵⁵ ‘first’ ← Chinese 先 xiān, and a superlative marker tsui³⁵ ‘most/best’ ← Chinese 最 zuì). Middle-aged speakers use transitional hybrid structures, while older speakers more consistently maintain native Dai Lue features. The results conform with Labov’s age-grading model in contact linguistics and refine Thomason’s borrowing hierarchy by revealing two factors: First, the prestige of the Chinese language drives convergence among youth. Second, syntactic compatibility with Chinese is mediated not merely by language structure, but by discourse-pragmatic needs, functional load redistribution, and the social indexicality of borrowed structures. This underscores the interplay between sociolinguistic motivations and structural-adaptive constraints in language change. The findings provide critical insights into language contact mechanisms among ethnic minorities of China, with implications for sociolinguistic theory, language revitalization efforts, and bilingual education policy implementation in linguistically diverse communities.

1. Introduction

1.1. Mechanisms of Language Contact

Language contact refers to a sociolinguistic phenomenon that arises when two or more languages interact through bilingual individuals or adjacent communities, leading to mutual influence between languages (Thomason, 2001). Language contact is a fundamental phenomenon in language change that occurs when speakers of different languages engage in regular, sustained, and close interaction, resulting in mutual influence and often leading to changes in one or both languages. Language contact extends beyond mere lexical borrowing; transfers between languages can influence all aspects of language structure, provided that a suitable combination of social and linguistic conditions exists. Such contact may trigger changes across all levels of language, including phonology (sound systems), morphology (word structure), syntax (sentence structure), semantics (meaning), and lexicon (word inventory) (Weinreich, 1953/1979; Winford, 2003; Nisa, 2019). Among these structural domains, Thomason (2001) proposes a hierarchy, according to which lexicon is more prone while grammar is more resistant to borrowing. However, this generalization does not always hold, as will be argued in this study that structural compatibility between contact languages can also contribute to a comparable degree of contact-induced influence on grammar.

It is a well-established fact that language contact is a prevalent phenomenon. There is no empirical evidence to substantiate the formation of any language in total seclusion from other languages (Thomason, 2001, p. 8). It is typical for at least one language to exert a certain degree of linguistic influence on others at some point in language history. The introduction of foreign materials into the more complex realms of language results in interference, which in turn leads to the rearrangement of language patterns (Weinreich, 1953/1979). As language evolves over time, both geographically and socially, language change is influenced by differences in space and society. The emergence of a novel linguistic form and its subsequent utilization alongside an existing form represent pivotal moments in language change. Once the new form has become more widely disseminated, the alteration is underway. If the new form ultimately supplants the old form, the transition is deemed a “fait accompli” (Holmes, 2013).

The intensity, duration, and nature of contact—including trade, conquest, immigration, education—significantly determine the extent and type of language change. Such interaction may be driven by sociopolitical, economic, or cultural factors. Language contact is a primary driver of language change, leading to phenomena such as borrowing (lexical and structural), code-switching, language convergence, language shift, and, in extreme cases, language extinction or the emergence of new languages (Thomason, 2001). The surrounding environment often exerts a significant influence on the interplay between languages, which makes the existence of at least two languages a crucial factor in this framework. A large-scale contact scenario can ultimately lead to the formation of a “linguistic area” where multiple (more than two) languages exhibit a mutual sharing of structural traits due to extensive borrowings and multilayered contact situations (Campbell, 1998, p. 299).

In research intersecting language contact and language change, one of the most straightforward approaches to analyzing ongoing language change is to monitor changes over time. This entails investigating the dispersion of linguistic factors among various age cohorts. Labov’s (1994, 2001) “age grading → language change” model emphasizes the dynamic and social nature of language change. It points out that language change is a complex process involving language speakers of different ages. Age grading is an important mechanism for language change, as changes are usually first seen in younger generations, and over time these changes spread to older age groups and eventually to the whole language community (Heine & Kuteva, 2005). This model provides an important theoretical framework for understanding language change and an important perspective for the study of language contact and language change.

These theoretical frameworks provide a critical lens for analyzing contemporary language phenomena in Sipsongpanna, which are examined in the following section.

1.2. Language Contact in Sipsongpanna

Sipsongpanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture in the Yunnan Province of China is inhabited by multiple ethnic groups. The toponym Sipsongpanna derives from one of the indigenous Tai languages: Sipsong means ‘twelve’, and Panna means ‘one thousand fields’, essentially referring to a historical coalition of twelve Tai administrative districts that were obligated to pay tribute to the Han administration. This region features a long history of contact between Dai Lue (Tai, Kra-Dai) and Chinese (Sinitic, Sino-Tibetan) as well as the languages of other ethnic groups, such as Blang and Khmu (Austroasiatic), Akha and Lahu (Sino-Tibetan), and Yao (Hmong-Mien). The Chinese language functions as the official and national language, being the most spoken language and having a great influence on the languages of other ethnic minorities.

In today’s Sipsongpanna, there has been a discernible increase in the population of Han individuals, including lawmakers, government officials, merchants, and tourists. This has created opportunities for the Dai Lue people to interact with individuals from outside their community, too. Between 1911 and 1950, Sipsongpanna had already begun to involve central government officials in its management, forming a governance framework characterized by the shared exercise of state power. From 1950, Sipsongpanna underwent a political transition to implement the socialist system of the People’s Republic of China, and in 1953, Sipsongpanna was established as the Sipsongpanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture.

Sipsongpanna’s demographic structure has seen significant changes throughout history along with societal progress. A total of 1.411 billion people live in China as of the seventh national census in 2020. More than 91.11% of them, or 1.286 billion people, belong to the Han ethnicity. The population of Yunnan Province is 47,209,277, while the population of Sipsongpanna Prefecture is 1,301,407. Of the total population of Sipsongpanna, 328,300 individuals are members of the Dai Lue ethnic group, representing 25.23% of the population. Sipsongpanna’s Han population, in turn, grew dramatically from 6.16% in 1953 to 39.28% in 2020 (see Table 1).

Table 1. Han and Dai Lue populations in Sipsongpanna.

Census	1953	1964	1982	1990	2000	2010	2020
Dai Lue	123,427	149,069	225,488	270,531	296,930	316,151	328,300
Han	14,726	83,109	185,864	201,417	289,181	340,431	511,200

Sources: 《西双版纳傣族自治州统计年鉴2022》西双版纳傣族自治州统计局编印，《西双版纳傣族自治州志1994–2005》,中共西双版纳州委党史研究室编 [“Xīshuāngbǎnnà Dǎizú Zìzhìzhōu Tǒngjì Niánjiàn 2022”, Xīshuāngbǎnnà Dǎizú Zìzhìzhōu Tǒngjìjú biānyìn; “Xīshuāngbǎnnà Dǎizú Zìzhìzhōu Zhì 1994–2005”, Zhōnggòng Xīshuāngbǎnnà Zhōu Wěi Dǎngshǐ Yánjiūshì biān] https://www.xsbn.gov.cn/tjj/tjj.dhtml (accessed on 1 October 2025).

One distinguishing feature of modern society, particularly in Sipsongpanna, is its openness and tolerance towards external influences. The region is characterized by a continual influx of new influences as individuals from other regions relocate. The local population engages in active interaction with individuals from diverse geographical locations, fostering connections across linguistic and cultural boundaries. Consequently, some communities have opted to use Chinese as their primary language of interpersonal communication. This has facilitated interactions between Dai Lue individuals residing in such settings and Chinese speakers. The acquisition of proficiency in Chinese has become a crucial factor in facilitating efficient communication and engagement, leading to bilingual individuals who are proficient in Chinese, especially young populations. This language environment inevitably led to language contact between Dai Lue and Chinese. The connection between Han Chinese and minority languages in these places represents a form of natural language contact (Chen, 1996, p. 8).

Dai Lue in Sipsongpanna exhibits a stratified influence from Chinese, with distinct chronological and functional differentiations between the Yunnan dialect and Standard Mandarin. Historically, the Yunnan dialect constitutes the foundational and traditional source of Chinese loanwords. This influence, predating the nationwide promotion of Standard Mandarin, primarily occurred through localized socio-economic interactions. It introduced a lexicon deeply embedded in material culture and daily life. Now, these lexical items have phonologically assimilated into the indigenous Dai Lue phonological system, rendering these borrowings perceptually “nativized”. In the contemporary setting, Standard Mandarin now serves as the dominant source of linguistic influence, fundamentally shaping the Dai Lue language’s trajectory and modernization. This is evidenced by the direct incorporation of contemporary, abstract, and technical vocabulary, predominantly disseminated via national education, media, and digital platforms. The phonological representation of these neologisms closely aligns with Standard Mandarin, and speakers are often consciously aware of their exogenous origin. Thus, Dai Lue spoken in Sipsongpanna is subject to the dual influence of both the Yunnan dialect and Standard Mandarin in different historical layers.

The Yunnan dialect, belonging to the Southwestern Mandarin branch, shares a fundamental structure with Standard Chinese but possesses distinct phonological characteristics. As illustrated in previous typological studies (e.g., Szeto et al., 2018; Szeto & Yurayong, 2021), its consonant system is notably simpler, characterized by the merging of sounds that are distinct in Mandarin, such as the retroflex series /zh, ch, sh/ with the alveolar series /z, c, s/, and a frequent lack of distinction between the nasal /n/ and lateral /l/ sounds, also observed in other Far Southern Sinitic languages. Beyond consonants, another hallmark of the Yunnan dialect lies in its tone system. While it shares the same four tone categories as Standard Chinese, the actual pitch contours—the melody of the tones—are dramatically different. For instance, its Yang Ping tone is falling rather than rising, and its Qu tone has a dipping contour. Furthermore, the dialect follows a key rule of Southwestern Mandarin: all historical Ru (entering) tone characters have been neatly reassigned to the Yang Ping tone, unlike their irregular distribution in Standard Chinese. These combined phonetic features—the simplified initials and the distinctive, often flatter, tone patterns—create the characteristically straightforward and recognizable “Yunnan flavor” that sets it apart from the more melodious contours of Putonghua.

Under this dual influence, Chinese loanwords in Sipsongpanna Dai Lue have developed distinct phonetic characteristics. They are neither purely Yunnan dialect nor Standard Mandarin in pronunciation but rather undergo natural adaptation by Dai Lue speakers before being incorporated into the Dai Lue phonological system and phonotactic rules therein. In this study, both the Yunnan dialect and Mandarin are involved, with the grammatical structure of Mandarin serving as the comparative benchmark. Therefore, they are collectively referred to as Chinese.

A survey conducted in the area revealed that the Dai Lue community is susceptible to the influence of phonology, lexicon, and syntax, particularly among younger members. It is observed that Chinese vocabularies are frequently substituted for Dai Lue equivalents in the Dai Lue language and that Chinese sentence structures are commonly used. This phenomenon has resulted in the gradual disappearance of native Dai Lue words from the vocabularies related to daily life of the Dai Lue people. For example, the younger generation is unfamiliar with the word xɔn³⁵ ‘tax’ and, instead, uses the Chinese word 税 shuì ‘tax’. They have also ceased to use the term pɔ³³ naai⁴¹ ban¹³ ‘village head’ in its original form and have instead adopted the Chinese term 村长 cūn zhǎng ‘village head’. The term ‘teacher’ is likewise often expressed by lau⁴¹sɯ³³, which has been adopted from Chinese, although the compound Chinese-Dai Lue phrase lau⁴¹sɯ³³xu⁴¹sɔn⁵⁵ is still marginally used by some individuals. At the present time, it is uncommon to encounter words such as xu⁴¹sɔn⁵⁵ ‘educator’ or pɔ³³xu⁴¹ mɛ³³xu⁴¹, which have their origins in Dai Lue. Consequently, these terms have become obsolete over time. The same applies to syntax, where the Dai Lue people now tend to replicate the Chinese model. For example, in the superlative construction man⁴¹ lɛn³³ tsui³⁵ vai⁴¹ ‘He ran the fastest’, the superlative marker tsui³⁵ commonly used in spoken language is borrowed from Chinese 最 zuì ‘most/best’, co-existing with the native Dai Lue superlative marker lɤ⁵⁵ pɤn³³.

Previous research on language contact between the Tai communities and Chinese is guided by the individual research direction and methodology of each researcher. Chen (1996) concentrated on the contact situation between the Tai language and Chinese in the Dehong area, the historical development of Dehong Dai, and the use of core and non-core words in Southwest Mandarin. The impact of Chinese on Tai languages is such that the core vocabulary is less affected than the non-core vocabulary, which serves to emphasize the perspective of language alliance. Wu (2008) primarily examined the influence of Chinese on minority languages in southern China. Suraratdecha (2008) examined the impact of tourism on the Dai Lue in Sipsongpanna, emphasizing that language contact encompasses both written communication and social interaction between speakers. Dai (2010) constructed a corpus based on Sipsongpanna Dai newspapers and conducted a detailed analysis of the corpus. Dao (2012) primarily examined the Tai language of Hong He Jin Ping. Zou (2013) primarily addressed the consequences of language contact, which can be categorized into three main aspects: language borrowing, language coexistence, and language shift. Li (2013) primarily examined the borrowings of Chinese loanwords across historical periods, employing a historical linguistics perspective. Xie (2016) conducted research on the borrowing of words from Archaic Chinese into Tai languages. Yu and Chen (2023) conducted an analysis of the development of contact languages, employing the historical comparative method to examine pronunciation changes.

Significant historical and contemporary interactions between Dai Lue and the Chinese have also been particularly emphasized in numerous studies. Li (2013) and Xie (2016) have demonstrated the extensive borrowing of Chinese vocabulary into Tai languages, indicating early and ongoing lexical and syntactic influences. Chen’s studies emphasize the reciprocal nature of borrowing, whereby both languages are enhanced and converge. Zou (2013) and Wu (2008) demonstrate further how contact with Chinese has led to syntactic changes and variations in Tai languages, such as altered word orders and prepositional phrase positions. Yu and Chen (2023) emphasize the necessity of examining the diversity of language interaction and history, demonstrating the profound impact of Chinese on Tai languages and the necessity of comprehensive, nuanced analyses to understand the dynamics of language contact and its implications for language change.

Nevertheless, a notable research gap persists in the specific context of the influence of Chinese on Dai Lue in Chiang Rung, Sipsongpanna. Chiang Rung is the capital city of the Sipsongpanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture. Its name derives from two words: Chiang ‘city, town’, a common term for administrative centers or settlements in many Kra-Dai-speaking communities borrowed from Chinese 城 chéng ‘city wall; city, town’, and Rung ‘dawn, early morning’, together symbolizing ‘the land where the first light appears’. While previous studies have examined various aspects of language contact and its effects, there is a need for focused research on contact-induced changes in Dai Lue, particularly in the syntactic domains, driven by interactions with Chinese. Currently no research on the history of the Sipsongpanna Tai language has systematically incorporated age-graded comparative research methods. The research questions outlined above provide a clear direction for this study. The following sections detail the methodologies and approaches employed to address these questions, offering comprehensive explanations and analytical insights.

1.3. Research Objectives and Structure

Despite numerous publications on the topic, several research gaps and methodological discrepancies still exist. Most importantly, previous research has frequently been based on outdated information sourced from earlier cohorts of Chinese academics, and the data have been repeatedly used without a substantial quantity of novel and actual data from the current situation of the Dai Lue language in the 21st century. Consequently, it is of the utmost importance to conduct investigations and gather new data in a timely manner. Methodologically, this study advances the research of Dai Lue language contact by incorporating textual investigations from earlier research while emphasizing greater significance to on-site research. Concretely, this study examines contexts of use and common conversational practices in order to accurately portray the contemporary usage of language in real-world settings. The results will shed light on changes both in the lexical and syntactic domains of the Dai Lue language.

The study population covers different age groups, genders, and educational backgrounds to ensure that the data are representative and persuasive. A mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative analyses is used to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of language change. The innovative methodological design for this specific research context makes this study distinct from previous research. The main objective of this study is to gain insight into the distinctive dynamics of the Dai Lue speaking areas and the broader theoretical implications for the development of minority languages under the influence of dominant regional languages. The research questions (RQs), which lead to achieving the objectives, are listed below:

• RQ1. How do patterns of convergence vary across different generations of Dai Lue speakers, particularly in terms of degree and linguistic domain (lexicon vs. syntax)?
• RQ2. What do these intergenerational differences reveal about the developmental stage and trajectory of contact-induced change in Dai Lue?

This study has multiple aspects with academic and social significance: First, the study aims to investigate whether the high prestige of a donor language (Chinese) can lead to the borrowing of core grammatical structures, a phenomenon not fully accounted for in traditional borrowing-scale models. Second, it seeks to reveal the dynamic process of lexical and syntactic convergence in Dai Lue through intergenerational comparisons. Third, it provides new empirical cases for contact linguistics, especially for the study of lexical and syntactic convergence and intergenerational variation. Fourth, it deepens our theoretical understanding of Thomason’s borrowing hierarchies and highlights the importance of social factors. Fifth, it improves the understanding of the linguistic dynamics of multilingual societies in China and neighboring regions, illustrating the development of language education and policy in multiethnic areas.

This article is structured as follows: After introducing the research context of Dai Lue language contact and research objectives in Section 1, the materials and methods used in this study are described in Section 2. The research results are laid out in Section 3 and discussed in Section 4, and Section 5 is the conclusion.

2. Materials and Methods

To conduct a comprehensive investigation into the lexical and syntactic changes in the Dai Lue language in the context of its contact with Chinese, this study employs a hybrid research methodology that blends quantitative and qualitative methodologies. In order to ensure the comprehensiveness, representativeness, and accuracy of the data collected, we divided the respondents into two groups according to the data collection tools of the study: individual surveys and group interviews.

2.1. Informants

The research data were collected through surveys of Dai Lue people who have resided in Dai Lue villages and city areas in Chiang Rung for a considerable period of time, a minimum of 10 years. To ensure the sociolinguistic representativeness of the data obtained, we considered sociolinguistic factors such as age, gender, and educational background (see Table 2). A total of 90 individuals participated in the surveys, comprising 45 males and 45 females. To reflect the significant differences in language across age groups more accurately, we divided the participants into three distinct age groups, with a 10-year interval between each. The 90 individuals were also classified according to their different educational backgrounds into three groups: those with an elementary education, those with a secondary education, and those with a tertiary education.

Table 2. Demographic distribution of language informants (sample size and age).

90 Language Informants
45 Males		45 Females
aged 55+	15 persons	aged 55+	15 persons
aged 35–45	15 persons	aged 35–45	15 persons
aged 15–25	15 persons	aged 15–25	15 persons

To investigate contact-induced lexical and syntactic changes in the spoken forms of Dai Lue and Chinese, the study was carried out using a questionnaire that was split into two categories: one for vocabulary and another for sentence structure. The interviews were conducted one-on-one and face-to-face in the informants’ homes, with the interviewer speaking a mix of Dai Lue and Chinese dialects. The survey was conducted using a one-question, one-answer format, meaning that informants were given the vocabulary test questionnaires first, and then their responses were recorded. Subsequently, we provided the informants with a sentence test questionnaire and recorded their responses. Should the respondents be unfamiliar with the Chinese words or sentences, we would provide an explanation in Dai Lue or use visual aids to elaborate on their meaning. The division of the questionnaire into two categories was intended to facilitate the collection of more accurate data regarding the informants’ actual usage of Dai Lue. Each survey took about 20 min to complete.

This approach allowed for the collection of comprehensive, representative data while providing insights into the actual linguistic practices of Dai Lue speakers. By engaging with communities in their village settings, we encouraged informants to discuss various aspects of daily life, facilitating the production of spontaneous and authentic speech. Field data collection was carried out across 15 villages in Chiang Rung City, with each village represented by a group of 10 participants, resulting in a total of 150 informants. During these sessions, we documented the following linguistic phenomena provided in Table 3.

Table 3. Linguistic phenomena observed during the interviews.

Domains	Characteristics	Chinese Influence
Lexical borrowings	New words	Instances of Chinese loanwords integrated into Dai Lue speech
Divergent lexical forms	Words that deviate from native Dai Lue structures	Potentially due to Chinese influence
Syntactic variation	Sentence structures that differ from the native Dai Lue model	Influence from Chinese syntax

This methodological framework enabled systematic observation of contact-induced changes, shedding light on the interplay between the two languages in everyday-life communication.

2.2. Data Collection

Through field surveys, natural spoken language data of the Dai Lue people of different generations were collected. Two sets of questionnaires, one for vocabularies and another for sentence structures, were used as interview instruments.

2.2.1. Vocabulary Questionnaire

We used the Swadesh list as the vocabulary basis and combined it with commonly used vocabularies in modern everyday life of the Sipsongpanna Dai Lue people to construct a test set. In other words, we removed certain words from the Swadesh list not found in the Dai Lue society. For additional locally oriented vocabularies, we made reference to the vocabulary list of Naksuk and Burusphat (2018) with 144 semantic units, and another list by Liamprawat (2013) with 650 semantic units. These were then integrated with personal experience of one of the authors as a native Dai Lue speaker. Subsequently, the corpus was cross-referenced with Hanna’s (2012) Dai Lue dictionary in order to ascertain the veracity of the vocabulary. The lists include a variety of vocabulary, including body parts, family terms, clothing and accessories, names of plants and animals, time-related terms, numbers, names of food, tools and instruments, adjectives, nouns, pronouns, verbs, prepositions, and so forth. This data collection process yielded a corpus of 648 words, distributed across 16 categories, as described in Table 4. Table 5 and Table 6 provide examples of how the two questionnaires look like concretely.

Table 4. Composition of lexicons used in the vocabulary test questionnaire.

No.	Lexicons	Total
1	Names of parts of the human body	68
2	Appellations	42
3	Clothing	28
4	Fruits	23
5	Vegetables	50
6	Plants	21
7	Animals	60
8	Living and production tools	81
9	Time	46
10	Food names and cooking methods	24
11	Numbers	30
12	Volume	35
13	Adjectives	33
14	Pronouns and adverbs	20
15	Verbs	76
16	Prepositions	11
	Total	648

Table 5. Table for testing basic Dai Lue vocabulary knowledge.

Language Informant: _________ Gender: _____ Age: _____ Education: _______ Address: __________
	Chinese	Speak in Chinese	Speak in Dai Lue	Speak Differently from Standard Dai Lue	Not Familiar with the Vocabulary
1	头 tóu ‘head’
2	脑 nǎo ‘brain’
3	发 fā ‘hair’
4	前额 qián é ‘forehead’
5	耳朵 ěr duo ‘ear’
...	... ...

Table 6. Table for testing the use of Dai Lue sentences.

Language Informant: _________ Gender: _____ Age: _____ Education: _______ Address: __________
	Sentences	Test Results
1	爷爷有一把刀。 Yéye yǒu yī bǎ dāo ‘Grandpa has one knife.’ (Numeral–Classifier–Noun) (Chinese pattern) (Noun–Classifier–Numeral) (Dai Lue pattern) *
2	弟弟的四本书。 Dìdi de sì běn shū ‘My brother’s four books.’ (Numeral–Classifier–Noun) (Chinese pattern) (Noun–Numeral–Classifier) (Dai Lue pattern)
3	市场卖牛肉。 Shìchǎng mài niúròu ‘Beef is sold in the market.’ (Modifier–Head) (Chinese pattern) (Head–Modifier) (Dai Lue pattern)
4	这水杯是谁的？ Zhè shuǐbēi shì shéi de ‘Whose glass is this?’ (Demonstrative–Head) (Chinese pattern) (Head–Demonstrative) (Dai Lue pattern)
…	…

* In Kra-Dai languages, the numeral ‘one’ is often placed after the classifier, whereas the other numerals are placed before the classifier.

2.2.2. Sentence Structure Questionnaire

We compiled a test set of 30 test sentences based on the daily expressions in Dai Lue. The sentence types included in this study encompass declarative, interrogative, negative, selective, affirmative, verb-object, prepositional, noun, differential comparative, passive, quantitative, adjectival, and other sentences commonly used in daily life. This sentence test set compares typical sentence structures based on previous studies on Chinese and Kra-Dai word order structures, such as Huang (1996), Szeto and Yurayong (2022), Yurayong and Sandman (2023), Yurayong et al. (2025), and our own adjustments.

2.3. Data Analysis

2.3.1. Lexical and Syntactic Analysis

It is necessary to determine whether each lexical item in question is a Chinese loan word in order to ascertain the provenance of the lexical data. We employed two methods to verify the origin of the words. The first method validates native origins within the Kra-Dai language family. This involves consulting Dai Lue dictionaries, consulting Dai Lue language experts, consulting experts in the wider Kra-Dai language family, consulting Dai Lue speakers living abroad, and comparing with related Kra-Dai languages, most notably Thai. Second, the Chinese origins of specific words were validated by consulting Chinese dictionaries and Chinese language experts, and examining the phonology and semantics of the relevant words. Furthermore, one of the authors is a Dai Lue person and thus a member of the Dai Lue ethnic group, using Dai Lue as a native language and consistently using Dai Lue in all aspects of his life, including academic and professional activities. The core advantage of native speakers lies in their internalized linguistic intuition, enabling them to conduct a three-fold crucial validation of loanwords from a user perspective: (1) Assessing naturalness and intuitively distinguishing between fully nativized borrowings and false loans; (2) Understanding the usage and precisely identifying semantic shifts and pragmatic nuances of loanwords within specific contextual registers; and (3) Verifying phonological adaptation whether pronunciation of a specific loanword conforms to the phonotactic constraints of the recipient language. The native speaker’s status thus provides an internal, dynamic perspective from within the linguistic system, effectively verifying the genuine integration and vitality of a loanword within the living speech community.

The sentence parts collected consisted of phrases and sentences with structures similar to those of Chinese. The main method of validation was to check for any word order deviation in the sentences, the borrowing and functional extension of specific function words, and the emergence of new sentence structures. First, the data were verified by native speakers to ascertain whether they conform to the grammatical norms of the Kra-Dai language family and likewise the Chinese grammar. Comparative analyses were conducted using sentence patterns used by three age groups to illustrate the differences in preference for specific syntactic structures between generations, as well as to identify the phenomenon of convergence with the Chinese model.

Both Kra-Dai languages and Chinese possess a Subject–Verb–Object (SVO) basic sentence structure as well as several other similar constituent orders regarding modifiers, adverbials, and complement clauses. Nevertheless, there are notable differences in word order structures between the two languages. Major differences concern the order of modifiers and adverbials as well as indirect and direct objects. In Kra-Dai languages, modifiers generally follow head words, while Chinese nominal and verbal phrase structures beyond basic sentences are of a hybrid nature, as illustrated in Table 7 (see also Luo, 2008, p. 153; Yurayong & Sandman, 2023; Yurayong et al., 2025). For instance, Chinese adverbs precede verbs (Adverb–Verb), while in Dai Lue, adverbs follow verbs (Verb–Adverb). Our analysis follows the principle of contrasting Chinese and Kra-Dai word order patterns.

Table 7. Word order features of Sinitic languages (modified from Chappell et al., 2007, p. 189; Szeto & Yurayong, 2022, p. 28).

Head-Final Structures	Head-Initial Structures
Adjective–Noun	Verb–Object
Numeral–Classifier–Noun	Auxiliary–Verb
Demonstrative–Classifier–Noun	Verb–Modifying adverbial complements
Relative clause–Noun	Preposition–Noun phrase
Genitive–Noun	Complementizer–Sentence
Adverb–Verb
Intensifier–Adjective
Standard of comparison–Adjective
Prepositional phrase–Verb

When comparing word order features, we use parameters previously applied in the comparison of Sino-Tibetan and neighboring languages by Yurayong and Sandman (2023) and Yurayong et al. (2025). This analysis examines the relationship between the head and the dependent of constructions, including 16 constructions that involve various types of phrases and clauses, as shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Word order features under investigation (Yurayong & Sandman, 2023, p. 12).

Feature	Construction	Head–Dependent
1.	Noun compounding	Noun[head]–Noun[modifier]
2.	Adjectival modification	Noun–Adjective
3.	Adnominal possession	Possessee–Possessor
4.	Gender specification	Noun–Gender specifier
5.	Quantity modification	Noun–Numeral
6.	Deictic modification	Noun–Demonstrative
7.	Noun relativisation	Noun–Relative clause
8.	Degree adverb	Adjective–Degree adverb
9.	Comparative	Adjective–Standard of comparison
10.	Locational adverbial	Verb–Locational adverbial
11.	Direct object	Verb–Direct object
12.	Predicative possession	Verb–Possessee
13.	Modal auxiliation	Verb[modal]–Verb[content]
14.	Adposition	Adposition–Noun
15.	Reported speech	Speech verb–Complement clause
16.	Negation	Negator–Verb

Based on previous studies on characteristic word order features of modern Chinese and Dai Lue, we applied the criteria in Table 9 to distinguish native and Chinese models observed in the collected Dai Lue data.

Table 9. Word order patterns: Dai Lue vs. Chinese.

Dai Lue Patterns	Chinese Patterns
Classifier–Ordinal marker–Numeral	Ordinal marker–Numeral–Classifier
Noun–Classifier–Numeral (for ‘one’) Noun–Numeral–Classifier	Numeral–Classifier–Noun
Subject–Adjective–Comparative–Standard	Subject–Comparative–Standard–Adjective
Subject–Comparative1–Standard–Adjective–Comparative2	Subject–Comparative1–Standard–Comparative2–Adjective
Adjective–Degree adverb	Degree adverb–Adjective
Verb–Time adverb	Time adverb–Verb
Noun–Demonstrative	Demonstrative–Noun
Noun–Relative clause	Relative clause–Noun
Verb–Adjunct phrase	Adjunct phrase–Verb

2.3.2. Generational Analysis

In this study, we used a standardized linguistic assessment tool to systematically evaluate the lexical and syntactic competence of 90 native Dai Lue speakers. The assessment questionnaire comprised 678 test items (including 648 lexical items and 30 syntactic items), employing a dichotomous scoring system (1 point per answer, which aligns with traditional usage) with a maximum possible score of 678 points.

Data analysis followed a stratified statistical approach, which considers various types of informants and their performance, yielding observations on group-internal characteristics and ultimately sociolinguistic implications of the results, as summarized in Table 10.

Table 10. Stratified statistical approach.

Domains	Characteristics	Implications
Age Stratification	Younger cohort (15–25 yrs) vs. Older cohort (55+ yrs).	Generational differences in language retention.
Gender Segmentation	Female speakers vs. Male speakers.	Potential gender-based variation in language use.
High Scorers	Speakers maintaining traditional Dai Lue lexicon.	Preservation of native language structures.
Low Scorers	Speakers using Chinese loanwords frequently.	Accelerated language shift patterns.

3. Results

3.1. Lexical Convergence

During long-term language contact between Chinese and Dai Lue, Dai Lue has acquired a considerable number of Chinese loanwords, significantly enriching the Dai Lue lexicon. These borrowings primarily fall into three categories: (1) direct adoption of new terms across various semantic fields, (2) newly coined words based on original lexical structures, and (3) semantic extensions of existing vocabulary. Concurrently, many native Dai Lue words have gradually been replaced by Chinese equivalents, demonstrating a clear pattern of linguistic convergence. This contact-induced convergence is particularly evident when comparing language usage across different age groups.

The native lexical inventories of the Dai Lue language have undergone significant convergence with Chinese due to prolonged and intensive language contact. This dynamic process of lexical assimilation is stratigraphically visible across three distinct age cohorts, reflecting diachronic changes in borrowing patterns and degrees of structural adaptation. The lexical convergence between Dai Lue and Chinese extends beyond neologisms, exhibiting broad word class coverage, including nouns, verbs, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and classifiers, among others. This trend demonstrates systemic uniformity, with Dai Lue increasingly aligning with Chinese lexical structures through erstwhile compounding and eventually replacement by Chinese words, as shown in examples (1) and (2).

(1)

niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹ ‘lemon’ ← 柠檬 níng méng (noun)

maak³⁵naau⁴¹ > maak³⁵niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹ > niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹

(2)

sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹ ‘village head’ ← 村长 cūn zhǎng (noun)

pɔ³³naai⁴¹ban¹³ > pɔ³³naai⁴¹sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹ > sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹

The loanwords niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹ ‘lemon’ and sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹ ‘village head’ come from Chinese 柠檬 níng méng and 村长 cūn zhǎng, respectively. In the Dai Lue language community, these terms are used differently among different age groups. Elderly speakers use the original term maak³⁵naau⁴¹ and pɔ³³naai⁴¹ban¹³, whereas middle-aged individuals use compounds of Dai Lue and Chinese words, maak³⁵niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹ and pɔ³³naai⁴¹sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹. In these compounds, the Dai Lue components maak³⁵ ‘fruit’ and pɔ³naai⁴³ ‘leader’ function as classifying indices, while young people directly borrow the Chinese terms niŋ¹¹moŋ¹¹ sun³³ʦaaŋ⁴¹ without preserving the Dai Lue elements.

Beyond the convergence of native Dai Lue nouns with Chinese, verbal and adpositional constructions in the Dai Lue language are also undergoing systematic alignment with Chinese patterns. The change through compounding towards a complete replacement by Chinese words, as shown in (3), (4), and (5), follows exactly the same mechanisms as the two nouns described in (1) and (2).

(3)

juŋ³⁵ ‘to use’ ← 用 yòng (verb)

ʦai¹¹ > ʦai¹¹juŋ³⁵ > juŋ³⁵

(4)

fa¹³ ‘penalty’ ← 罚 fá (verb)

mai⁵⁵ > fa¹³mai⁵⁵ > fa¹³

(5)

ʦɔ¹³ ‘be, by’ ← 着 zhuó (preposition)

se⁵⁵ > se⁵⁵ ʦɔ¹³ > ʦɔ¹³

The comparative analysis of lexical usage across generations above reveals distinct patterns in the diachronic shift from Dai Lue to Chinese vocabulary. The elderly generation maintains predominant usage of native Dai Lue terms. The middle-aged generation exhibits a transitional lexicon characterized by hybrid Dai Lue—Chinese compounds. The young speaker generation demonstrates near-complete lexical replacement, with Chinese vocabulary supplanting native terms. This progression clearly illustrates the competitive dynamics between Dai Lue and Chinese lexicon, illustrating a continuum of language convergence. The following pattern can be used to summarize this procedure.

A		AB/BA		B
Dai Lue	>	Dai Lue + Chinese/ Chinese + Dai Lue	>	Chinese
Elderly speakers		Middle-aged speakers		Young speakers

When encountering lexical gaps in native Dai Lue vocabularies, Dai Lue speakers employ two distinct borrowing strategies with generational variation: elderly and middle-aged speakers exhibit hybrid neologization, combining Dai Lue lexical roots with Chinese elements through a “Dai Lue first” compounding pattern (i.e., Dai Lue noun + Chinese modifier). This reflects selective borrowing with native morphosyntactic constraints, preserving core Dai Lue semantics while accommodating new concepts from Chinese. Young speakers, meanwhile, predominantly adopt direct lexical transfer from Chinese, showing minimal structural adaptation. This aligns with whole-word borrowing patterns typical of high-contact bilingualism, where L2 (Chinese) lexical items are inserted wholesale into L1 (Dai Lue) discourse, as shown in (6), (7), and (8).

(6)

maak³⁵phiŋ¹¹ ko⁴¹ ‘apple’ ← 苹果 píng guǒ (noun)

(7)

phak⁵⁵ sɤn⁵⁵ saai³⁵ ‘lettuce’ ← 生菜 shēng cài (noun)

(8)

xau¹³ maan¹¹thɤu³³ ‘steamed bread’ ← 馒头 mán tou (noun)

These three terms in (6), (7), and (8) are phonetic loanwords borrowed from Chinese into Dai Lue. In Dai Lue, the terms are characterized by the formation “Dai + Chinese”. In these compounds, the Dai Lue components function as the classifying indices for ‘fruit’, ‘vegetable’, and ‘rice, food’, respectively. At the same time, the Chinese elements serve as transliterated loanwords that fit into designated semantic categories of the Dai Lue classifying indices. The fusion of the Dai Lue word roots with the Chinese transliterated loanwords leads to the formation of new lexical entries in Dai Lue. When Dai Lue speakers encounter fruits that are not native to the region, elderly and middle-aged people usually look for word roots or categories within their own language to name the newly learnt entities, while young people directly adopt vocabulary from Chinese. The following pattern can be used to summarize how new concepts are accommodated in the Dai Lue language across generations.

AB		B
Dai Lue + Chinese	>	Chinese
Elderly and middle-aged speakers		Young speakers

By examining the use of foreign words across different age groups, we can clearly trace the process of lexical convergence, which often proceeds through intermediate hybrid forms with compounds of Dai Lue and Chinese lexical items.

3.2. Syntactic Convergence

3.2.1. Quantifier Phrases

Dai Lue uses two distinct word order structures for quantifier phrases containing a verb, an object, and a quantifier: (1) Verb–Object–Quantifier as in (9a), and (2) Verb–Quantifier–Object as in (9b).

(9)	a.	ʦɛt35sɔn35	kun41nai41baan13	sam11	(Dai Lue pattern)
		count	villager	all
		Verb	Object	Quantifier
	b.	thuŋ41ʦi35	sam11	kun41nai41baan13	(Chinese pattern)
		count	all	villager
		Verb	Quantifier	Object
		‘Count all the villagers.’

In example (9), the Object–Quantifier pattern in (9a) represents a native Dai Lue syntactic construction predominantly used by elderly speakers, reflecting the heritage grammar. In contrast, the Quantifier–Object pattern in (9b) represents a calque from the Chinese syntactic model, frequently used by the younger speaker generation.

3.2.2. Coordination

In the native Dai Lue syntax, no coordinate conjunction is used in an alternative question, but two juxtapositional interrogative sentences with question particles are used without any linker between them. Following contact with the Han Chinese population and the influence of the Chinese language, Dai Lue has started using a coordinate conjunction haai⁴¹sɯ³⁵ borrowed from Chinese 还是 hái shì ‘or’ in the expression of a question of choice, with this usage being most prevalent in the modern form of Dai Lue, as shown in (10).

(10)	a.	xau55	pin55	tai41	ha33	pin55	hɔ13	ha33	(Dai Lue pattern)
		3sg	be	Dai	q	be	Han	q
	b.	xau55	pin55	tai41	haai41sɯ35		pin55	hɔ13	(Chinese pattern)
		3sg	be	Dai	or		be	Han
		‘Is he Dai or Han?’

In example (10), the native juxtapositional pattern in (10a) conforms to the sentence pattern that the elderly are accustomed to using, while the Chinese pattern with a coordinate linker in (10b) is often used by young people in their speech, and that has also become very common in modern spoken Dai Lue. Structurally, the borrowing from the Chinese model simplifies the construction as a whole, compressing the original two independent sentences into one complex sentence.

3.2.3. Adjunct Phrases

The Kra-Dai language family demonstrates an inherent word order pattern, where adjunct phrases as adverbials generally follow verbs. Conversely, Chinese possesses a different word order pattern characterized by the placement of adjunct phrases before the verb, although the Kra-Dai-like pattern also exists in Chinese dialects, especially in the far southern areas where Chinese was in turn influenced by Kra-Dai languages (Szeto & Yurayong, 2021, 2022). As a result of extended exposure to Chinese, the modern Dai Lue language allows both variants to occur, as shown in (11).

(11)	a.	xɔi13	hen41to55	ju35	pɤ11ʦin33	(Dai Lue pattern)
		1sg	study	in	Beijing
			Verb	Adjunct
	b.	xɔi13	ju35	pɤ11ʦin33	hen41 to55	(Chinese pattern)
		1sg	in	Beijing	study
			Adjunct		Verb
		‘I studied in Beijing.’

Similarly to other syntactic features discussed above, the native postverbal adjunct phrases, as in (11a), are preferred by elderly speakers, while the Chinese preverbal adjunct pattern, as in (11b), is more common among young Dai Lue speakers.

3.2.4. Adverbs

The lexical borrowing of Chinese adverbs has also resulted in the word order patterns of the Dai language. This can be exemplified by the adverb ‘first’ in (12) and the superlative marker in (13).

(12)	a.	ʦo41	kan55	pai55	ʔɔn55	dɔ41		(Dai Lue pattern)
		let’s	together	go	first	mod.part
	b.	ʦo41	kan55	sɛn55	pai55	ʔɔn5	dɔ41	(Hybrid pattern)
		let’s	together	first	go	first	mod.part
	c.	ʦo41	kan55	sɛn55	pai55	dɔ41		(Chinese pattern)
		let’s	together	first	go	mod.part
		‘Let’s go first.’

(13)	a.	ʔaai13	to55	ni11	xak55	lɤ55	pɤn33		(Dai Lue pattern)
		man	clf	this	diligent	surpass	other
	b.	ʔaai13	to55	ni11	tsui35	xak55	lɤ55	pɤn33	(Hybrid pattern)
		man	clf	this	most	diligent	surpass	other
	c.	ʔaai13	to55	ni11	tsui35	xak55			(Chinese pattern)
		man	clf	this	most	diligent
		‘This man is the most hardworking.’

In (12) and (13), ʔɔn⁵⁵ ‘first’ and lɤ⁵⁵pɤn³³ ‘most, best’ (literally ‘to surpass others’) are native Dai Lue adverbs, but after contact with Chinese, the hybrid patterns in (12b) and (13b) emerge, using both Dai Lue and Chinese elements in the same sentences. This intermediate stage has led to a full convergence with the Chinese model, in which the Chinese elements completely replace the Dai Lue adverbs.

In the modern Dai Lue community, the native Dai Lue patterns in (12a) and (13a) are common among elderly speakers, while the hybrid patterns are observed among middle-aged speakers, and the Chinese model is frequent among young speakers. From these syntactic changes, we can find the convergence phenomenon of Dai Lue correlating with age groups, with the hybrid patterns emerging in the transitional stage before a complete replacement by the Chinese pattern in the youngest speaker generation. This transition can be summarized in the following scheme.

A		AB		B
Dai Lue	>	Dai Lue + Chinese	>	Chinese
Elderly speakers		Middle-aged speakers		Young speakers

The convergence patterns summarized above exemplify the diachronic process of linguistic convergence between two contact languages. For language A to converge with language B, it undergoes a transitional phase of hybridity (AB), characterized by compounding of lexical resources and patterns from both languages. This transitional AB hybrid model constitutes a linguistic feature characteristic of the middle-aged speaker cohort. It represents the preferred linguistic model in daily communication among this demographic and has become conventionalized within the middle-aged speech community.

In this study, only several syntactic features of Dai Lue, as discussed above, have undergone a complete convergence, while other syntactic features from Table 9, not discussed here, still maintain native constructions. However, we do not rule out the possibility that convergence with the Chinese model will also extend to other syntactic constructions in the near future as the intensity of language contact and language shift to Chinese constantly increases in the Dai Lue community.

3.3. Statistical Analysis of Generational Differences

Statistical analysis was conducted on the data of different age groups. The results indicate that different age groups are influenced by Chinese to different degrees. These generational differences are illustrated by test scores across age groups, as presented in Table 11.

Table 11. Test scores according to age and gender.

45 Males				45 Females
Age	15–25	35–45	55+	15–25	35–45	55+
Number	15	15	15	15	15	15
1.	29	175	650	30	179	638
2.	48	246	651	242	345	646
3.	87	325	653	281	351	648
4.	88	373	653	295	358	651
5.	160	377	656	313	376	654
6.	258	467	656	314	377	654
7.	311	604	658	338	382	654
8.	358	610	658	343	383	655
9.	388	615	659	366	536	655
10.	394	615	661	384	642	656
11.	417	621	668	399	646	657
12.	564	623	676	412	652	658
13.	618	675	677	425	656	662
14.	623	676	678	430	673	678
15.	624	676	678	440	673	678
Average	331.13	511.86	662.13	334.13	481.93	656.26
	15–25 = 332.63		35–45 = 496.89		55+ = 659.19

The sociolinguistic analysis using age as a key variable reveals a clear gradation of Chinese influence across generations as well as distinct generational patterns in language use among Dai Lue speakers. The senior cohort (55+ years) demonstrates minimal Chinese linguistic interference, maintains the highest retention of Dai Lue language proficiency, and best preserves traditional linguistic patterns. In contrast, the middle-aged group (35–45 years) exhibits clear bilingual characteristics with frequent code-mixing phenomena, showing only partial maintenance of the Dai Lue lexical inventory while displaying typical transitional features of language contact. The youth demographic (15–25 years) displays high susceptibility to Chinese influence, reaching an advanced stage of language convergence with significant lexical replacement from Chinese. These findings illustrate a clear trajectory of language shift across generations within the Dai Lue speech community.

4. Discussion

4.1. Generational Trajectories of Lexical and Syntactic Convergence

As shown with empirical evidence in Section 3, language contact affects individuals of different ages to varying degrees, being more pronounced among young people than among older people, aligning with the general tendency discussed by Heine and Kuteva (2005). The intergenerational pattern of lexical and syntactic convergence illustrates a gradual change in the recent history of the Dai Lue community.

The language use of elderly speakers retains the native patterns better, likely because they have less exposure to Chinese education but spend their daily life more in traditional community activities where they mainly use the Dai Lue language with their peers or family members. The language of the middle-aged represents a transitional stage in the convergence process, and the syntactic features exhibit both traces of retention and signs of convergence with Chinese. They may use native structures in some contexts, but in other contexts, they are more inclined to follow the Chinese model. The interviews indicate that bilingual mixing is common among most middle-aged speakers, though not universal. Some align with conservative elderly speaker patterns, others with innovative younger-speaker patterns, reflecting individual differences in language exposure—consistent with contact-linguistic principles of heterogeneous speech communities and individual agency. The language use of young people, meanwhile, is representative of a complete or nearly complete convergence. From the analysis of language contact, in terms of language input, the younger generation is more exposed to Chinese, and in terms of social identity, the younger generation is more inclined to use language forms that are closer to mainstream Chinese society. This integration is accelerated through education, media, and interethnic social interaction, among others.

Lexical and syntactic convergence is gradual and intergenerational, and the generational differences show that lexical and syntactic integration is a gradual and dynamic process, rather than a one-time process of change. Longitudinal data reveal that language A’s (Dai Lue) convergence with B (Chinese) develops through a stable hybrid stage (AB), showing symmetrical feature exchange in core grammatical subsystems.

4.2. Social Prestige in Lexical and Syntactic Transfer

Thomason’s (2001) hierarchy usually considers grammar to be the most resistant to borrowing, and structural compatibility is the key. However, in this study, we have demonstrated that in the context of a dominant language with high social prestige and penetration like Chinese, even grammatical and incompatible structures can be transferred and directly borrowed, especially among the younger speaker generation. Our observation indicates that sociolinguistic factors can transcend pure structural limitations in specific situations where the contact ecology becomes favorable.

In terms of grammatical domains, Thomason’s hierarchical structure usually emphasizes a borrowing pattern of ‘noun priority’. However, we have found in this study that Chinese functional words, such as adverbs and conjunctions, are widely used and adapted among the younger speaker generation of the Dai Lue ethnic group, yielding new expressions and new syntactic structures in this contact situation. From our field data, borrowings include the following Chinese functional words, in particular: 先 xiān ‘first’; 着 zhuó ‘with’; 最 zuì ‘most’; 更 gèng ‘more’; 为了 wèi le ‘for’; 对 duì ‘to’; 所以 suǒ yǐ ‘so’; 虽然 suī rán ‘although’; 但是 dàn shì ‘but’; 还是 hái shì ‘still’; 或者 huò zhě ‘or’; 可能 kě néng ‘may’; and 经常 jīng cháng ‘often’. Additionally, numerous Chinese verbs are also adopted directly by young speakers, such as 开 kāi ‘to open’; 发 fā ‘to send’; 打 dǎ ‘to hit’; 请 qǐng ‘to invite’; 带 dài ‘carry’; and 照 zhào ‘to shine’.

4.3. Apparent-Time Methodology

As discussed in Section 1.1, Labov (2001) uses the “age grading → language change” model to explore the manifestation of language change among people of different age groups and its contribution to language change. This study confirms that by comparing different age groups, the dynamic changes in the convergence of Dai Lue with Chinese can be tracked and inferred. We have found that there were systematic differences in the use of language features by different age groups, reflecting ongoing changes in the Dai Lue community. The language of the younger generation reflects an evolving state of the language, while the language of the older generation captures the older state of the language. Through this horizontal comparison, the change in language over time can be indirectly observed.

However, this method also has its limitations. This follows because individual variations within age groups may lead to data complexity and cannot be completely equivalent to real diachronic changes. The social background itself is also constantly changing, which may affect the language competence of individuals in different generations.

5. Conclusions

5.1. Summary of Key Findings

Significant lexical and syntactic convergence has occurred in the Dai Lue language as a result of long-term contact with Chinese, reflecting notable differences across speaker generations. The older group continues to use the native Dai Lue lexical and syntactic patterns, serving as an important reference for understanding the historical phrase of the language. The middle-aged group, meanwhile, constitutes the transitional generation of language speakers. Their language use is characterized by the coexistence of retention and innovation, inheriting native patterns while also incorporating Chinese-influenced features into their repertoire. This phenomenon theoretically underlines the fact that language change is a dynamic and gradual process. Reaching the advanced stage of linguistic convergence, the younger group is most significantly affected by Chinese, and their language use reflects the changes at the forefront of current language contact, resulting in obvious convergence with Chinese across the lexical and syntactic domains.

The linguistic differences among these three age groups demonstrated in this study affirm the applicability of Labov’s (2001) “age grading → language change” model of language change to the contact scenario between Dai Lue and Chinese. The findings hold that social factors—especially the social prestige of the Chinese language perceived by Dai Lue speakers—play a key role in lexical and syntactic transfer in contact-induced language change. This crucially invites the existing theories on language contact, such as Thomason’s borrowing hierarchy of ‘structural compatibility’ and ‘noun preference’ borrowing, to be reconsidered against empirical data from actual language contact situations in the contemporary world.

5.2. Theoretical and Practical Implications

This case study of Dai Lue improves our understanding of lexical and syntactic borrowability, especially in a context in which a dominant language holds a high social prestige among speakers of indigenous minority languages. It provides empirical support for discussing language contact theory and invites us to rethink the applicability of borrowing hierarchy theory in specific social contexts.

In depicting the generational trajectory of language change using the apparent-time methodology, we reaffirm the validity of this method in tracking dynamic linguistic phenomena. This provides a positive example for future application of similar methods in other endangered languages and contact scenarios, particularly in the Chinese context. The findings reveal how the younger generation adapts and integrates lexical and syntactic resources from different languages in highly bilingual or multilingual communities of Sipsongpanna, which also has implications for understanding bilingual cognition and language processing mechanisms.

From a vitality perspective, the trend of rapid lexical and syntactic convergence examined in this study sends an alarming warning regarding the preservation of Dai Lue and other minority languages in China and beyond. It suggests that under the influence of a dominant language, even core grammatical structures may undergo profound changes, leading to reduced usage of native structures, which eventually get replaced by the model from a dominant language. Diachronically, this is also one of the processes involving language extinction by gradual lexical replacement.

In terms of revitalization, this study provides a reference for language educators and policy makers in Sipsongpanna, guiding how to design more targeted language teaching strategies and prompting the relevant authorities to consider how to better transmit the cultural identity of ethnic minorities in the midst of language and societal change. Given that the younger generation has already adopted Chinese syntactic structures to a significant extent, language revitalization efforts should focus not only on preserving inherent vocabularies by lexicography research and dictionary making, but also on developing pedagogical materials that recognize and explain these contact-induced grammatical changes to foster metalinguistic awareness among young speakers.

Ultimately, this study significantly advances our understanding of three critical dimensions of language contact dynamics: (1) the development trajectories of languages in asymmetrical contact (substrate) situations, (2) the mechanisms underlying the maintenance of linguistic diversity despite power imbalances, and (3) the complex processes driving language endangerment and extinction in minority communities. These findings provide crucial insights for both theoretical models of language change and applied efforts in language revitalization, especially in the case of Chinese and its neighboring languages in Southeast Asia.