Volume 39, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Selibu is a Mandarin-Khams Tibetan mixed language with about 900 native speakers in northwest Yunnan, People’s Republic of China. As a Form-Semantics mixed language, it derives most of its lexicon and grammatical morphemes from Southwest Mandarin and borrows its morphosyntactic and semantic structure from Alangu Tibetan. This article examines the contact-induced emergence of a five-category complex evidential system in Selibu with a detailed comparison with its source system in the model language, Alangu Tibetan. Our discussion focuses on the hybrid features of Selibu evidentiality in both forms and functions and also on its structural formation, which does not represent a Form-Semantics mixed type in this particular domain.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2002Language contact in Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2004Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & R. M. W. Dixon
    1998 Evidentials and areal typology: A case study from Amazonia. Language Sciences20(3). 241–257. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(98)00002‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(98)00002-3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Randy J. LaPolla
    2007 New perspectives on evidentials: A view from Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area30(2). 1–16. CitetononCRdoi:10.15144/LTBA‑30.2.1
    https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.15144/LTBA-30.2.1 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anttila, Raimo
    2003 Analogy: The warp and woof of cognition. InBrian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 425–440. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch10
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch10 [Google Scholar]
  6. Atshogs, Yeshes Vodgsal (意西微薩·阿錯)
    2004 Daohua yanjiu (倒話研究) [A study of the Daohua language]. Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bakker, Peter
    2003 Mixed languages as autonomous systems. InYaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 107–150. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197242.107
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197242.107 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blench, Roger & Mark W. Post
    2014 Rethinking Sino-Tibetan phylogeny from the perspective of North East Indian languages. InThomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 71–104. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110310832.71
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110310832.71 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chao, Yuen Ren
    1968A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chappell, Hilary
    2001a Synchrony and diachrony of Sinitic languages: A brief history of Chinese dialects. InHilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives, 3–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2001b A typology of evidential markers in Sinitic languages. InHilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives, 56–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. The Compiling Committee of the Annals of Zhongdian County in Yunnan Province (雲南省中甸縣地方志編纂委員會) 1997 Zhongdian xianzhi (中甸縣志) [The Annals of Zhongdian County]. Kunming: Yunnan Nationalities Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. DeLancey, Scott
    2009 Sino-Tibetan languages. InBernard Comrie (ed.), The world’s major languages (2nd edn), 693–702. London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203301524
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203301524 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2015 The historical dynamics of morphological complexity in Trans-Himalayan. Linguistic Discovery13(2). 37–56. 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.463
    https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.463 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ding, Mingjun (丁明俊)
    2006 Zhongguo bianyuan Musilin zuqun de renleixue kaocha (中國邊緣穆斯林族群的人類學考察) [An anthropological investigation into the marginal Muslim groups in China]. Yinchuan: Ningxia People’s Publishing House. 10.4324/9780203301524
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203301524 [Google Scholar]
  16. Epps, Patience
    2005 Areal diffusion and the development of evidentiality. Studies in Language29(3). 617–650. 10.1075/sl.29.3.04epp
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.29.3.04epp [Google Scholar]
  17. Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque
    2018Egophoricity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118 [Google Scholar]
  18. Friedman, Victor A.
    1978 On the semantic and morphological influence of Turkish on Balkan Slavic. InDonka Farkas, Wesley M. Jacobsen & Karol W. Todrys (eds.), Papers from the Fourteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 108–118. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Garrett, Edward John
    2001 Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
  20. Jacques, Guillaume
    2019 Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics20(4). 515–534. 10.1075/lali.00047.jac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00047.jac [Google Scholar]
  21. Janhunen, Juha, Marja Peltomaa, Erika Sandman & Xiawu Dongzhou
    2008Wutun (Languages of the World/Materials 466). München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lai, Yunfan
    2017 Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi. PhD dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3. (https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01571916v4) [accessed on18 October 2020].
  23. LaPolla, Randy J.
    2003 Overview of Sino-Tibetan morphosyntax. InGraham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 22–42. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Li, Charles N. & Sandra A. Thompson
    1981Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Liu, Danqing (劉丹青)
    2017 Yufa diaocha yanjiu shouce (語法調查研究手冊) [A handbook of grammatical investigation and research]. Shanghai: Shanghai Educational Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Matisoff, James A.
    2015The Sino-Tibetan etymological dictionary and thesaurus (STEDT). Berkeley: Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project. (stedt.berkeley.edu/dissemination/STEDT.pdf) [accessed on18 October 2020]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Matthews, Stephen
    1998 Evidentiality and mirativity in Cantonese: wo3, wo4, wo5!. InProceedings of the International Symposium on Chinese Languages and Linguistics, 325–334. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nichols, Johanna
    1986 The bottom line: Chinese Pidgin Russian. InWallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 239–257. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Oisel, Guillaume
    2017 Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. Himalayan Linguistics16(2). 90–128. 10.5070/H916229119
    https://doi.org/10.5070/H916229119 [Google Scholar]
  30. Roche, Gerald & Hiroyuki Suzuki
    2018 Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies52(4). 1227–1278. 10.1017/S0026749X1600072X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X1600072X [Google Scholar]
  31. Sagart, Laurent, Guillaume Jacques, Yunfan Lai, Robin J. Ryder, Valentin Thouzeau, Simon J. Greenhill & Johann-Mattis List
    2019 Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences116(21). 10317–10322. 10.1073/pnas.1817972116
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817972116 [Google Scholar]
  32. San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe
    2018 Egophoricity: An introduction. InSimeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity, 1–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118.01san
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118.01san [Google Scholar]
  33. Sandman, Erika
    2016 A grammar of Wutun. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki.
  34. Sandman, Erika & Camille Simon
    2016 Tibetan as a “model language” in the Amdo Sprachbund: Evidence from Salar and Wutun. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics3(1). 85–122. 10.1515/jsall‑2016‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jsall-2016-0003 [Google Scholar]
  35. Shafer, Robert
    1955 Classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages. Word11(1). 94–111. 10.1080/00437956.1955.11659552
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1955.11659552 [Google Scholar]
  36. Shi, Shuo (石碩), Jin Li (李錦) & Libo Zou (鄒立波)
    2014 Jiaorong yu Hudong: Zangyi Zoulang de Minzu, Lishi yu Wenhua (交融與互動:藏彝走廊的民族、歷史與文化) [Integration and interaction: The ethnic groups, history and culture along the Tibeto-Lolo Corridor]. Chengdu: Sichuan People’s Publishing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Simon, Camille
    2016 Morphosyntaxe et sémantique grammaticale du salar et du tibétain de l’Amdo: analyse d’un contact de langues. PhD dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3. (https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01542960) [accessed on18 October 2020]
  38. 2018 Evidential modalities in Salar: The development of a Tibetan-like egophoric category. Turkic Languages22(1). 3–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Suzuki, Hiroyuki
    2012 Multiple usages of the verb ‘snang’ in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics11(1). 1–16. 10.5070/H911123711
    https://doi.org/10.5070/H911123711 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2016 In defense of prepalatal non-fricative sounds and symbols: Towards the Tibetan dialectology. Researches in Asian Languages10. 99–125.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 2017 The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 423–444. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110473742‑013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-013 [Google Scholar]
  42. Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo
    2018 Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozi sareru syookoseiカムチベット語塔公[Lhagang]方言の述部に標示される証拠性 [Evidential system of verb predicates in Lhagang Tibetan]. Gengo Kijutsu Ronshu言語記述論集 [Journal of Kijutsuken, Descriptive Linguistic Circle] 10. 13–42. (URI: id.nii.ac.jp/1422/00002000/) [accessed on18 October 2020].
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Sonam Wangmo & Tsering Samdrup
    2021 A contrastive approach to the evidential system in Tibetic languages: Examining five varieties from Khams and Amdo. Gengo Kenkyu言語研究 [Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan] 159. 69–101. CitetononCRdoi:10.11435/GENGO.159.0_69
    https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.11435/GENGO.159.0_69 [Google Scholar]
  44. Thurgood, Graham
    2003 A subgrouping of the Sino-Tibetan languages: The interaction between language contact, change, and inheritance. InGraham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 3–21. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Thurgood, Graham & Randy J. LaPolla
    2003/2017The Sino-Tibetan languages (2nd edn). London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315399508
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315399508 [Google Scholar]
  46. Tournadre, Nicolas
    1992 La déixis en tibétain: Quelques faits remarquables. InMary-Annick Morel & Laurent Danon-Boileau (eds.), La deixis: Colloque en Sorbonne, 197–208. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 2008 Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct’/‘disjunct’ in Tibetan. InBrigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart & Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2017 A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 95–129. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110473742‑004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-004 [Google Scholar]
  49. Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso
    2001 Final auxiliary verbs in literary Tibetan and in the dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman area24(1). 49–111. CitetononCRdoi:10.15144/LTBA‑24.1.49
    https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.15144/LTBA-24.1.49 [Google Scholar]
  50. Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla
    2014 Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman area37(2). 240–262. 10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou [Google Scholar]
  51. Tsering Samdrup & Hiroyuki Suzuki
    2018 Evidential system in Mabzhi Tibetan of Amdo. Proceedings of the 51st International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (Kyoto University, Kyoto, 25–28September). (URL: hdl.handle.net/2433/235311) [accessed on18 October 2020]
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Tshe-brten Don-grub (次旦頓珠) & Ye-shes Chos-sgron (益西曲珍)
    2010 “Zangmu zhi lu” de huizang guanxi: Yunnan Sheng Xianggelila Sanba Xiang Annan Cun tianye diaocha (“藏穆之路”的回藏關係:雲南省香格里拉三壩鄉安南村田野調查) [The relationship between Tibetan and Hui Peoples: A field study at Annan Village of Sanba Town, Shangri-La, Yunnan Province]. Xizang Daxue Xuebao (Shehui Kexue Ban) (西藏大學學報(社會科學版)) [Journal of Tibet University (Social Sciences Edition)] 25(4). 96–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. van Driem, George
    2015 Tibeto-Burman. InWilliam S-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 135–148. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199856336.013.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199856336.013.0007 [Google Scholar]
  54. Vokurková, Zuzana
    2008 Epistemic modalities in spoken standard Tibetan. PhD dissertation, Charles University, Prague, and University of Paris 8.
  55. Wang, Feng
    2015 Language contact between Tibeto-Burman languages and Chinese. InWilliam S-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 248–259. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199856336.013.0067
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199856336.013.0067 [Google Scholar]
  56. Xue, Caide (薛才德)
    2006 Annan Shuimofang Hanyu yufa de jiechu bianyi (安南水磨房漢語語法的接觸變異) [On the contact-induced grammatical changes of the Shuimofang Chinese dialect in Annan Village]. Yunnan Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehuikexue Ban) (雲南民族大學(哲學社會科學版)) [Journal of Yunnan Nationalities University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)] 23(5). 224–228.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Zeisler, Bettina
    2018a Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages. InAd Foolen, Helen de Hoop & Gijs Mulder (eds.), Evidence for evidentiality, 227–256. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.61.10zei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.61.10zei [Google Scholar]
  58. 2018b Don’t believe in a paradigm that you haven’t manipulated yourself!--- Evidentiality, speaker attitude, and admirativity in Ladakhi (extended version). Himalayan Linguistics17(1). 67–130. 10.5070/H917136797
    https://doi.org/10.5070/H917136797 [Google Scholar]
  59. Zhang, Hanzhi, Ting Ji, Mark Pagel & Ruth Mace
    2020 Dated phylogeny suggests early Neolithic origin of Sino-Tibetan languages. Scientific Reports10(20792). 1–8. 10.1038/s41598‑020‑77404‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77404-4 [Google Scholar]
  60. Zhang, Menghan, Shi Yan, Wuyun Pan & Li Jin
    2019 Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the Late Neolithic. Nature569(7754). 112–115. 10.1038/s41586‑019‑1153‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1153-z [Google Scholar]
  61. Zhang, Zhongyun (章忠雲) & Yimin Ding (丁益民)
    1995 Annan Mofang Cun shuangyu xianxiang chutan (安南磨房村雙語現象初探) [A preliminary study on the bilingualism of Mofang Village of Annan]. Xinan Minzu Xueyuan Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexue Ban) (西南民族學院學報(哲學社會科學版)) [Journal of Southwestern College of Nationalities (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)] (3). 100–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Zhou, Yang (周洋)
    2018 Yunnan Shuimofanghua de gebiaoji jiqi laiyuan (雲南水磨房話的格標記及其來源) [The case marking system and its development in Selibu]. Fangyan (方言) [Dialect] 40(3). 357–369.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 2021 Shuimofanghua de zhishi jiegou (水磨房話的致使結構) [The causative constructions in Selibu]. Yuyan Yanjiu Jikan (語言研究集刊) [Bulletin of Linguistic Studies] 27. 323–349.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Zhou, Yang (周洋) & Hiroyuki Suzuki (鈴木博之)
    2020 Shuimofanghua ti fanchou de hunhe tezhen (水磨房話體範疇的混合特征) [The hybrid features of the aspect system in Selibu]. Minzu Yuwen民族語文 [Minority Languages of China] (4). 43–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhu, Xiaonong (朱曉農)
    2010 Yuyinxue (語音學) [Phonetics]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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