|Nepal, Tibet, and neighboring areas|
The Tibeto-Kanauri languages, also called Bodish–Himalayish and Western Tibeto-Burman, are a proposed intermediate level of classification of the Tibeto-Burman languages, centered on the Tibetan and Kanauri languages. The conception of the relationship, or if it is even a valid group, varies between researchers.
Conceptions of Tibeto-Kanauri 
Benedict (1972) originally posited the Tibeto-Kanauri aka Bodish–Himalayish relationship, but had a more expansive conception of Himalayish than generally found today, including Qiangic, Magaric, and Lepcha. Within Benedict's conception, Tibeto-Kanauri is one of seven linguistic nuclei, or centers of gravity along a spectrum, within Tibeto-Burman languages. The center-most nucleus identified by Benedict is Kachin (including perhaps Luish and Taman); other peripheral nuclei besides Tibeto-Kanauri include Kiranti (Bahing–Vayu and perhaps Newari); Mirish (Abor–Miri–Dafla); Barish (Bodo–Garo and perhaps Konyak); Kukish (Kuki–Naga plus perhaps Mikir, Meithei, and Mru); and Burmish (Burmese–Lolo, perhaps also Nung and Trung).
Matisoff (1978, 2003) largely follows Benedict's scheme, stressing the teleological value of identifying related characteristics over mapping detailed family trees in the study of Tibeto-Burman and Sino-Tibetan languages. Matisoff includes Bodish and West Himalayish with the Lepcha language as a third branch. He unites these at a higher level with Mahakiranti as Himalayish.
Bradley (1997) takes much the same approach but words things differently: he incorporates West Himalayish and Tamangic as branches within his "Bodish", which thus becomes close to Tibeto-Kanauri. This and his Himalayan family[same as Mahakiranti?] constitute his Bodic family.
- Thurgood, Graham; LaPolla, Randy J. (ed.s) (2003). Sino-Tibetan Languages. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-7007-1129-5.
- Benedict, Paul K. (1972). Sino-Tibetan: a Conspectus. Princeton-Cambridge Studies in Chinese Linguistics 2. CUP Archive. pp. 4–11.
- Matisoff, James A. (1978). Variational semantics in Tibeto-Burman: The "Organic" Approach to Linguistic Comparison. Occasional papers, Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics 6. Institute for the Study of Human Issues. ISBN 0-915980-85-1.
- Matisoff, James A. (2003). Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction. University of California Publications in Linguistics 135. University of California Press. pp. 1–9. ISBN 0-520-09843-9.
- van Driem, George (2001). Languages of the Himalayas: an Ethnolinguistic Handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region: Containing an Introduction to the Symbiotic Theory of Language. Handbuch der Orientalistik. Zweite Abteilung, Indien 10. Brill. ISBN 90-04-10390-2.
- Bradley, David (1997). Tibeto-Burman Languages of the Himalayas. Occasional Papers in South-East Asian linguistics (14). Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University. ISBN 0-85883-456-1.
Further reading 
- Bradley, David (2002). "The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman". In Christopher I. Beckwith. Medieval Tibeto-Burman languages: proceedings of a symposium held in Leiden, June 26, 2000, at the 9th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies. Brill's Tibetan studies library 1. BRILL. pp. 73–112. ISBN 978-90-04-12424-0.
- Hale, Austin (1982). "Review of Research". Research on Tibeto-Burman languages. Trends in Linguistics 14. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 30–49 passim. ISBN 978-90-279-3379-9.
- Singh, Rajendra (2009). Annual Review of South Asian Languages and Linguistics: 2009. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 222. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 154–161. ISBN 978-3-11-022559-4.