1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Asian Languages and Linguistics
  4. Volume 5, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2665-9336
  • E-ISSN: 2665-9344
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Since the “conjunct vs. disjunct” distinction was employed to describe the interaction between person and other grammatical categories or functional factors in Kathmandu Newari, the linguistic phenomenon has been widely discussed and different terms such as “self person vs. other person” and “egophoric vs. non-egophoric” distinction have also been used. However, there are always widespread parameters of variations found in specific languages. Ersu, a language quite sensitive to person distinction, is a case in point. Firstly, it not only has two different sets of first person pronouns but also has two different sets of third person pronouns. Moreover, it has differentiated person-based marking strategies of prospective, prospective, imminent and perfect aspects. Ersu not only shares some similarities with those person distinction languages, but also boasts of its own uniqueness. Therefore, we proposed to use “person sensitivity” as a more general and suitable term to describe the linguistic phenomenon in cross-languages.

© 2024 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
2025-02-06
2026-03-09

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    (2014) The grammar of knowledge: a cross-linguistic view of evidentials and the expression of information source. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), The Grammar of Knowledge: A Cross-Linguistic Typology (pp.1–50). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. (2015) The art of grammar: A practical guide. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Åkerman, Vesa
    (2012) Inflection of finite verbs in Mongghol. SIL Electronic Working Papers 2012(003), 1–61.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bendix, Edward H.
    (1992) The grammaticalization of responsibility and evidence: Interactional manipulation of evidential categories in Newari. InJane H. Hill & Judith T. Irvine (Eds), Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse (pp.226–247). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bergqvist, Henrik
    (2018) The role of sentence type in Ika (Arwako) egophoric marking. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.347–376). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.11ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.11ber [Google Scholar]
  6. Bowen, Glenn A.
    (2008) Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137–152. 〈 10.1177/1468794107085301〉
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107085301 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chirkova, Katia
    (2008) baimayu shizheng fanchou ji qi yu Zangyu fangyan de bijiao [Evidentials in Baima and Tibetan dialects compared]. Minzu yuwen [Minority Languages], 31, 36–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. (2017) Lizu (Ersu). InRandy J. LaPolla and Graham Thurgood (Eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (2nd edition) (pp.823–839). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Chirkova, Katia, & Wang, Dehe
    (2017) Verbal Aspect in Ersu. Language and Linguistics, 18 (3), 355–382.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Clynes, Adrian
    (1995) Topics in the Phonology and Morphosyntax of Balinese: Based on the Dialect of Singaraja, North Bali. PhD dissertation, Australian National University.
  11. Comrie, Bernard
    (1976) Aspect. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Creissels, Denis
    (2008) Person variations in Akhvakh verb morphology: Functional motivation and origin of an uncommon pattern. STUF-Language Typology and Universals, 61(4), 309–325. 10.1524/stuf.2008.0027
     https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0027 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2009) Language documentation and verb inflection typology: The case of Northern Akhvakh (Nakh-Daghestanian). Chronos 9.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Curnow, Timothy J.
    (1997) A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of Southwestern Colombia. Phd dissertation, Australian National University.
  15. (2002) Conjunct/disjunct marking in Awa Pit. Linguistics, 40(3), 611–627. 10.1515/ling.2002.025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2002.025 [Google Scholar]
  16. DeLancey, Scott
    (1990) Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(3), 289–322. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289 [Google Scholar]
  17. (1992) The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensa, 251, 39–62. 10.1080/03740463.1992.10412277
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.1992.10412277 [Google Scholar]
  18. Delancey, Scott
    (1997) Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1(1), 33–52. 10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  19. DeLancey, Scott
    (2012) Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 529–564. 10.1515/lity‑2012‑0020
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0020 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2015) The historical dynamics of morphological complexity in Trans-Himalayan. Linguistic Discovery, 13(2), 60–79. 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.463
     https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.463 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dickinson, Connie
    (2000) Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language, 24(3), 379–422. 10.1075/sl.24.2.06dic
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.24.2.06dic [Google Scholar]
  22. Dixon, R. M. W.
    (2007) Roman Jakobson and the two-dollar bills. Historiographia Linguistica, 34(2–3), 435–440. 10.1075/hl.34.2.20dix
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.34.2.20dix [Google Scholar]
  23. (2012) Basic linguistic theory (Vol.31). Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Floyd, Simeon
    (2018) Egophoricity and argument structure in Cha’palaa. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.269–304). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.09flo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.09flo [Google Scholar]
  25. Fried, Robert W.
    (2010) A grammar of Bao’an Tu, a Mongolic language of Northwest China. PhD dissertation, The University of Buffalo, State University of New York.
  26. Garrett, Edward J.
    (2001) Evidentiality and Assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
  27. Gossner, Jan D.
    (1994) Aspects of Edolo Grammar. MA thesis, University of Texas at Arlington.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hale, Austin
    (1980) Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. InRonald L. Trail (Eds.), Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics 7 [Pacific Linguistics Series A, 53] (pp.95–106). Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hale, Austin, & Shrestha, Kedār P.
    (2006) Newār (Nepal Bhāsā). Lincom.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Hale, Austin, & Watters, David E.
    (1973) A survey of clause patterns. InAustin Hale & David E. Watters (Eds), Clause, Sentence, and Discourse Patterns in Selected Languages of Nepal, Part II (pp.175–249). SIL and Tribhuvan University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Hargreaves, David
    (2005) Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar. Himalayan Linguistics, 51, 1–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hill, Nathan W.
    (2012) ‘Mirativity’ does not exist: ḥdug in ‘Lhasa’ Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 389–433. 10.1515/lity‑2012‑0016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0016 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hyslop, Gwendolyn
    (2018) On egophoricity and mirativity in Kurtöp. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.109–137). John Benjamins. 〈 10.1075/tsl.118.03hys〉
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.03hys [Google Scholar]
  34. (2020) Grammaticalized sources of Kurtöp verbal morphology: On the development of mirativity vs. egophoricity in the Himalayas. Studies in Language, 44(1), 132–164. 10.1075/sl.17044.hys
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17044.hys [Google Scholar]
  35. Jiang, Di, & Yue Ming
    (2007) Tenses, aspects, and categories of evidentiality and egocentricity in spoken Lhasa Tibetan. Macrolinguistics, 1(1), 104–129. 10.26478/ja2007.1.1.7
     https://doi.org/10.26478/ja2007.1.1.7 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kelly, Bryan F.
    (2004) A grammar of Sherpa. Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal: Manange and Sherpa (pp.232–440). C. Genetti, Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Lidz, Liberty
    (2007) Evidentiality in Yongning Na (Mosuo). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 30(2), 45–87. 10.32655/LTBA.30.2.03
     https://doi.org/10.32655/LTBA.30.2.03 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2018) Egophoricity and differential access to knowledge in Yongning Na (Mosuo). InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.153–172). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.05lid
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.05lid [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu, Huiqiang
    (1983) The sketch of Ersu langauge. InShaoming Li and Junbo Liu (Eds.), Studies on the Ersu Tibetan (pp.1–16). The Ethnic Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Loughnane, Robyn
    (2009) A Grammar of Oksapmin. PhD dissertation, University of Melbourne. 〈repository.unimelb.edu.au/10187/4788〉
  41. Lum, Jonathon
    (2016) A conjunct-disjunct analysis of Dhivehi verbal morphology. The Symposium on Evidentiality, Egophoricity, and Engagement. University of Stockholm.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Miller, Amy
    (2001) A Grammar of Jamul Tipay. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110864823
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110864823 [Google Scholar]
  43. Mithun, Marianne
    (1999) The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Norcliffe, Elisabeth
    (2018) Egophoricity and evidentiality in Guambiano (Nam Trik). InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.305–346). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.10nor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.10nor [Google Scholar]
  45. Oswalt, Robert L.
    (1986) The evidential system of Kashaya. InWallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (Eds), Evidentiality: The Linguistic Encoding of Epistemology [Advances in Discourse Processes 20] (pp.29–45). Ablex.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Post, Mark W.
    (2007) A Grammar of Galo. PhD dissertation, La Trobe University.
  47. (2013) Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivations. InTim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop & Joana Jansen (Eds), Functional and Historical Approaches to Explanation: In Honor of Scott DeLancey [Typological Studies in Language 103] (pp.107–130). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.103.06pos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.103.06pos [Google Scholar]
  48. Rice, Keren
    (2006) Ethical issues in linguistic fieldwork: An overview. Journal of Academic Ethics, 4(1), 123–155. 10.1007/s10805‑006‑9016‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-006-9016-2 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rule, W. M.
    (1977) A comparative study of the Foe, Huli, and Pole languages of Papua New Guinea. University of Sydney.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. San Roque, Lila
    (2018) Egophoric patterns in Duna verbal morphology. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.405–436). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.13san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.13san [Google Scholar]
  51. San Roque, Lila, Floyd, Simeon, & Norcliffe, Elisabeth
    (2018) Egophoricity: An introduction. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.1–78). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.01san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.01san [Google Scholar]
  52. Sandman, Erika
    (2018) Egophoricity in Wutun. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila S. Roque (Eds), Egophoricity (pp.173–196). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.06san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.06san [Google Scholar]
  53. Schöttelndreyer, Burkhard
    (1980) Persons markers in Sherpa. Pacific Linguistics A, 531, 125–130.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Seyoum, Mulugeta
    (2008) A Grammar of Dime. LOT.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Slater, Keith W.
    (2003) A Grammar of Mangghuer. Routledge Curzon.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Strahm, Ester
    (1975) Clause patterns in Jirel. Collected Papers on Sherpa Jirel [Nepal Studies in Linguistics 2]. SIL & Institute of Nepal and Asian Studies.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Sun, Hongkai
    (1982) A sketch of Ersu (Tosu). Linguistic Study, 2 (3), 241–264.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Sun, Jackson T.
    (1993) Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, 63(4), 945–1001.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Tournadre, Nicolas
    (1992) La déixis en tibétain: Quelques faits remarquables. InMary Annick Morel & Laurent Danon-Boileau (Eds), La Deixis: Colloque en Sorbonne, 8–9 juin 1990 (pp.197–208). Presses Universitaires de France.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. (1996) L’ergativité en tibétain: approche morphosyntaxique de la langue parlée. Peeters.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. (2008) Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct’/‘disjunct’ in Tibetan. InGeburtstag, B. Huber, Marianne Volkart, Paul Widmer & Peter Schwieger (Eds), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem651 (pp.281–308). VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Vesalainen, Olavi, & Vesalainen, Marja
    (1980) Clause Patterns in Lhomi. Pacific Linguistics, Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Wang, Dehe, Wang, Ke, Wang, Xuan, Chirkova, Katia & Gu, Tao
    (2020) A Collection of Ersu Vocabulary. Anhui University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Watters, David
    (2006) The conjunct-disjunct distinction in Kaike. Nepalese Linguistics, 221, 300–319.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Widmer, Manuel, & Zúñiga, Fernando
    (2017) Egophoricity, involvement, and semantic roles in Tibeto-Burman languages. Open Linguistics, 31, 419–441. 〈 10.1515/opli‑2017‑0021〉
     https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2017-0021 [Google Scholar]
  66. Woodbury, Anthony C.
    (1986) Interactions of tense and evidentiality: A study of Sherpa and English. InWallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (Eds), Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology (pp.188–202). Ablex.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Yu, Dominic
    (2012) Proto-Ersuic. PhD dissertation, University of California.
  68. Zhang, Sihong
    (2014a) Numeral classifiers in Ersu. Language and Linguistics, 15 (6), 883–915.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. (2014b) The expression of knowledge in Ersu. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), The Grammar of Knowledge: A Cross-linguistic Typology (pp.132–147). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0006
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
  70. (2016) A reference grammar of Ersu, a Tibetan-Burman language of China. Lincom Europa.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. (2022) Imbuing words with power in Ersu. InAnne Storch & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), The Art of Language (pp.188–203). Brill. 10.1163/9789004510395_012
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004510395_012 [Google Scholar]
  72. Zhang, Sihong, & Wang, Xuan
    (2017) A study of verb-based reduplication in Yuexi Ersu. Journal of Minzu University of China (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 44(2),163–169.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Zhang, Sihong, & Yu, Chenglin
    (2017) Existential and possessive verbs in Ersu and their typological significance. Minority Languages of China, 31, 54–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Zhang, Sihong, Sun, Hongkai & Wang, Dehe
    (2018) Adjectives as a separate word class in Ersu. Studies on Languages and Linguistics, 38 (1), 101–117.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
Loading
A typological study on person sensitivity in Ersu
Asian Languages and Linguistics 5, 337 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24009.zha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): disjunct vs. conjunct; egophoric vs. non-egophoric; Ersu; person distinction; person sensitivity; self person vs. other person

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error