1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language and Linguistics
  4. Volume 25, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 25, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1606-822X
  • E-ISSN: 2309-5067
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

This is a typological study of the -interrogative expressions in Tibeto-Burman languages, or the non-Chinese Sino-Tibetan languages, in Sichuan, southwest China. After examining 22 languages/dialects, the interrogative category of reason is grouped into three types, viz. the distinct type, the type, and the -type, according to the interrogative categories from which they are derived. It is discovered that the -type is the dominant strategy for languages in Sichuan to derive the reason category. It is also common for Tibeto-Burman languages to use verbal interrogatives, namely interrogative verb phrases and interrogative words with verbal origins, dominantly in the sense of ‘to do what’ and ‘to become what’, to ask for reason. After a focused investigation of the verbal interrogatives, it is found that Tibeto-Burman languages in Sichuan distinguish purpose from cause via word/phrase distinction, sentential positions and semantic differences. A path of grammaticalization of the verbal interrogatives is thus proposed and analyzed. Finally, the derivation maps of interrogatives in Cysouw (2005) and Hölzl (2018) are complemented with a refined distinction between purpose and cause.

© 2024 ILAS
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don
2024-04-02
2025-07-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lali.00153.don.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2011 Multi-verb constructions: Setting the scene. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Muysken, Pieter C. (eds.), Multi-verb constructions: A view from the Americas, 1–26. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004194526.i‑313.8
     https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004194526.i-313.8 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andvik, Erik E.
    2010 A grammar of Tshangla. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004178274.i‑490
     https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004178274.i-490 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2017 Tshangla. InThurgood, Graham & LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 418–435. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Atshogs, Yeshes Vodgsal
    2004 Daohua yanjiu. Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Axelsen, Jacob Bock & Manrubia, Susanna
    2014 River density and landscape roughness are universal determinants of linguistic diversity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences281(1784). (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2013.3029) (Accessed2023-10-17.) (Article ID: 20133029.) 10.1098/rspb.2013.3029
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.3029 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bai, Junwei
    2019 A grammar of Munya. Townsville: James Cook University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bradley, David
    1997 Tibeto-Burman languages and classification. InBradley, David (ed.), Papers in Southeast Asian linguistics no. 14: Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, 1–71. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 2002 The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. InBeckwith, Christopher I. (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman languages: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the IATS, 2000, 73–112. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789047401308_010
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047401308_010 [Google Scholar]
  9. Institute of Linguistics, CASS & Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, CASS & Language Information Sciences Research Centre (LISRC), City University of Hong Kong
    Institute of Linguistics, CASS & Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, CASS & Language Information Sciences Research Centre (LISRC), City University of Hong Kong 2012 Language atlas of China: Chinese dialects. 2nd edn.Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Chirkova, Katia
    2008 On the position of Báimă within Tibetan: A look from basic vocabulary. InLubotsky, Alexander & Schaeken, Jos & Wiedenhof, Jeroen (eds.), Evidence and counter-evidence: Essays in honour of Frederik Kortlandt, volume 2: General linguistics, 69–91. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789401206365_007
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401206365_007 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2009 Shǐxīng, a Sino-Tibetan language of South-West China: A grammatical sketch with two appended texts. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area32(1). 1–89.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 2012 The Qiangic subgroup from an areal perspective: A case study of languages of Muli. Language and Linguistics13(1). 133–170.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2014 Akhu Tomba. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001459#S8) (Accessed2021-11-22.) (Shixing.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0001459#S8
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001459#S8 [Google Scholar]
  14. Chirkova, Katia & Wang, Dehe
    2014 History of the Wang clan. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0000890) (Accessed2021-11-23.) (Ersu.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0000890
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0000890 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2015a Eggplant child. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001254) (Accessed2021-11-20.) (Lizu.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0001254
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001254 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015b Two sisters and a human-eating creature11. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001270) (Accessed2020-7-20.) (Lizu.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0001270
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0001270 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chirkova, Katia & Han, Zhengkang
    2016 Shiyong Duoxuyu yufa. Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Cui, Rongchang
    1985 The making of the Sichuan dialects. Fangyan 1985(1). 6–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 1996 Sichuan jingnei de Xiang fangyan. Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 2011 Sichuan jingnei de Ke fangyan. Chengdu: Bashu Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Cysouw, Michael
    2005 The typology of content interrogatives. (Paper presented at the6th Meeting of Association for Linguistic Typology, Padang, 21–25 July 2005.)
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Cysouw, Michael & Hackstein, Olav
    2011 The (in)stability of interrogatives: The case of Indo-European. (cysouw.de/home/presentations_files/cysouw_hacksteinICHL.pdf) (Accessed2020-09-25.)
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Daudey, Henriëtte
    2014 A grammar of Wadu Pumi. Melbourne: La Trobe University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Daudey, Henriëtte & Gerong Pincuo
    2011 The sheep and the shaman. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0000661) (Accessed2021-11-22.) (Pumi.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0000661
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0000661 [Google Scholar]
  25. Diessel, Holger
    2008 Iconicity of sequence: A corpus-based analysis of the positioning of temporal adverbial clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics19(3). 465–490. 10.1515/COGL.2008.018
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COGL.2008.018 [Google Scholar]
  26. Ding, Sizhi
    1998 Fundamentals of Prinmi (Pumi): A Tibeto-Burman language of Northwestern Yunnan, China. Canberra: The Australian National University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 2014 A grammar of Prinmi: Based on the central dialect of Northwest Yunnan, China. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004279773
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004279773 [Google Scholar]
  28. Dixon, Robert M. W.
    2012a Basic linguistic theory, volume 1: Grammatical topics. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. 2012b Basic linguistic theory, volume 3: Further grammatical topics. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Dryer, Matthew S.
    2013 Order of subject, object and verb. InDryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (wals.info/chapter/81) (Accessed2023-08-11.)
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Duanmu, San
    1998 Wordhood in Chinese. InPackard, Jerome L. (ed.), New approaches to Chinese word formation: Morphology, phonology and the lexicon in modern and ancient Chinese, 135–196. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110809084.135
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809084.135 [Google Scholar]
  32. Ebihara, Shiho
    2011 Amdo Tibetan. InYamakoshi, Yasuhiro (ed.), Grammatical sketches from the field, 41–78. Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa (ILCAA), Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Feng, Chuntian
    2003 On fused interrogative pronouns za and sha. Zhongguo Yuwen 2003(3). 234–241.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Gerner, Matthias
    2013 A grammar of Nuosu. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110308679
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110308679 [Google Scholar]
  35. Givón, Talmy
    2001 Syntax: An introduction, vol.II1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.syn2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.syn2 [Google Scholar]
  36. Givón, Thomas
    1985 Iconicity, isomorphism, and non-arbitrary coding in syntax. InHaiman, John (ed.), Iconicity in syntax: Proceedings of a symposium on iconicity in syntax, Stanford, June 24–26, 1983, 187–219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.6.10giv
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.10giv [Google Scholar]
  37. Hackstein, Olav
    2004 From discourse to syntax: The case of compound interrogatives in Indo-European and beyond. InJones-Bley, Karlene & Huld, Martin E. & Della Volpe, Angela & Dexter, Miriam Robbins (eds.), Proceedings of the fifteenth annual UCLA Indo-European conference (Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph Series 49), 257–298. Washington: Institute for the Study of Man.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Hagège, Claude
    2008 Towards a typology of interrogative verbs. Linguistic Typology12(1). 1–44. 10.1515/LITY.2008.031
     https://doi.org/10.1515/LITY.2008.031 [Google Scholar]
  39. Haiman, John
    1980 The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and motivation. Language56(3). 515–540. 10.2307/414448
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414448 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hammarström, Harald & Forkel, Robert & Haspelmath, Martin & Bank, Sebastian
    2021 Glottolog database 4.4. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (https://zenodo.org/records/4761960) (Accessed2021-11-15.) 10.5281/zenodo.4761960
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4761960 [Google Scholar]
  41. Haspelmath, Martin & The APiCS Consortium
    2013 Position of interrogative phrases in content questions. InMichaelis, Susanne Maria & Maurer, Philippe & Haspelmath, Martin & Huber, Magnus (eds.), The atlas of pidgin and creole language structures, 44–47. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Heine, Bernd & Claudi, Ulrike & Hünnemeyer, Friederike
    1991 Grammaticalization: A conceptual framework. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Heine, Bernd
    1993 Auxiliaries: Cognitive forces and grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195083873.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195083873.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  44. Hildebrandt, Kristine A.
    n.d.How do you ‘Do’ in Manange? (https://www.siue.edu/~khildeb/do.pdf) (Accessed2021-01-11.)
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Hildebrandt, Kristine A. & Bond, Oliver
    2017 Manange. InThurgood, Graham & LaPolla, Randy L. (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 516–533. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Hölzl, Andreas
    2015 A typology of negation in Tungusic. Studies in Language39(1).118–159. 10.1075/sl.39.1.05hoe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.39.1.05hoe [Google Scholar]
  47. 2018 A typology of questions in Northeast Asia and beyond: An ecological perspective. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Huang, Lillian M. & Zeitoun, Elizabeth & Yeh, Marie M. & Chang, Anna H. & Wu, Joy J.
    1999 Interrogative constructions in some Formosan languages. InYin, Yuen-mei & Yang, I-li & Chan, Hui-chen (eds.), Chinese languages and linguistics, volume V: Interactions in language, 639–680. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Huang, Chenglong
    2004 A reference grammar of the Puxi variety of Qiang. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Idiatov, Dmitry
    2007 A typology of non-selective interrogative pronominals. Antwerp: Universiteit Antwerpen. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Jacques, Guillaume
    2015 On the cluster *sr- in Sino-Tibetan. Journal of Chinese Linguistics43(1A). 215–223. 10.1353/jcl.2015.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2015.0001 [Google Scholar]
  52. 2019 Hanzang yuxi de puxi he fayuandi. (Talk presented at theSouthwest University, Chongqing, 17 May 2019.)
     [Google Scholar]
  53. 2021 A grammar of Japhug. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Jacques, Guillaume & Michaud, Alexis
    2011 Approaching the historical phonology of three highly eroded Sino-Tibetan languages: Naxi, Na and Laze. Diachronica28(4). 468–498. 10.1075/dia.28.4.02jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.28.4.02jac [Google Scholar]
  55. Jiang, Li
    2015 A grammar of Guìqióng: A language of Sichuan. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004293045
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004293045 [Google Scholar]
  56. Kangassalo, Raija
    1995 Mastering the question: The acquisition of interrogative clauses by Finnish-speaking children. Umeå: Umeå University. (Distributed bySwedish Science Press.)
     [Google Scholar]
  57. König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter
    2007 Speech act distinctions in grammar. InShopen, Timothy (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, volume 1: Clause structure, 276–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619427.005
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619427.005 [Google Scholar]
  58. Kuteva, Tania & Heine, Bernd & Hong, Bo & Long, Haiping & Narrog, Heiko & Rhee, Seongha
    2019 World lexicon of grammaticalization. 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316479704
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316479704 [Google Scholar]
  59. Lai, Yunfan
    2017 Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi. Paris: Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  60. LaPolla, Randy J. & Huang, Chenglong
    2003 A grammar of Qiang: With annotated texts and glossary. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197273
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197273 [Google Scholar]
  61. Li, Xiang
    2019 How can zenme questions have multiple interpretations: A study from both synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Zhongguo Yuwen 2019(5). 548–561, 639.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Lidz, Liberty A.
    2010 A descriptive grammar of Yongning Na (Mosuo). Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Liu, Guangkun
    1998 Mawo Qiangyu yanjiu. Chengdu: Sichuan Nationalities Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Lü, Shuxiang
    1980 Xiandai Hanyu babai ci. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Luo, Tianhua
    2016 Interrogative strategies: An areal typology of the languages of China. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scld.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scld.5 [Google Scholar]
  66. Luraghi, Silvia
    2003 On the meaning of prepositions and cases: The expression of semantic roles in Ancient Greek. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.67
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.67 [Google Scholar]
  67. Mackenzie, J. Lachlan
    2009 Content interrogatives in a sample of 50 languages. Lingua119(8). 1131–1163. 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  68. Matisoff, James A.
    2015 The Sino-Tibetan etymological dictionary and thesaurus. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Matthews, Stephen & Yip, Virginia
    2011 Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Michaud, Alexis
    2011 Dog: How dog and man exchanged their lifespan. ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0004443#S7) (Accessed2021-11-24.) (Yongning Na.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0004443#S7
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0004443#S7 [Google Scholar]
  71. 2012 Yongning Mosuohua (Nayu) changpian yuliao de jilu zhengli yu yanjiu gongzuo. Lijiang Minzu Yanjiu 2012(5). 36–54.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. 2013 Housebuilding: The process of building a house (version 1). ( doi:https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0004449#S198) (Accessed2021-11-24.) (Yongning Na.) 10.24397/pangloss‑0004449#S198
     https://doi.org/10.24397/pangloss-0004449#S198 [Google Scholar]
  73. 2017 Tone in Yongning Na: Lexical tones and morphotonology. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. 2018 Na (Mosuo)-English-Chinese dictionary. (https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01204638v3/document) (Accessed2020-09-22.)
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Mushin, Ilana
    1995 Epistememes in Australian languages. Australian Journal of Linguistics15(1). 1–31. 10.1080/07268609508599514
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268609508599514 [Google Scholar]
  76. Muysken, Pieter & Smith, Norval
    1990 Question words in pidgin and creole languages. Linguistics28(4). 883–904. 10.1515/ling.1990.28.4.883
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1990.28.4.883 [Google Scholar]
  77. Noonan, Michael & Hildebrandt, Kristine A.
    2017 Chantyal. InThurgood, Graham & LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 494–515. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Partridge, Eric
    2006 Origins: A short etymological dictionary of modern English. Oxon: Taylor & Francis. (https://www.google.com.hk/books/edition/Origins/9fbpc7iyL2UC?hl=zh-TW&gbpv=0) (Accessed2023-09-30.)
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Payne, Thomas Edward
    1997 Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805066
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805066 [Google Scholar]
  80. Prins, Marielle
    2016 A grammar of rGyalrong, Jiǎomùzú (Kyom-kyo) dialects: A web of relations. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004325630
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004325630 [Google Scholar]
  81. Sagart, Laurent & Jacques, Guillaume & Lai, Yunfan & Ryder, Robin J. & Thouzeau, Valentin & Greenhill, Simon J. & List, Johann-Mattis
    2019 Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS)116(21). 10317–10322. 10.1073/pnas.1817972116
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817972116 [Google Scholar]
  82. Schmidtke-Bode, Karsten
    2009 A typology of purpose clauses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.88
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.88 [Google Scholar]
  83. Sheng, Yimin
    2020 The lexicalization and typological characteristics of Chinese interrogative pronouns. Zhongguo Yuwen 2020(6). 714–730.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Shi, Shuo
    2018 Ethnic flows in the Tibetan-Yi corridor throughout history. International Journal of Anthropology and Ethnology21. 1–22. (Article no. 2.) 10.1186/s41257‑018‑0009‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s41257-018-0009-z [Google Scholar]
  85. Siemund, Peter
    2001 Interrogative constructions. InHaspelmath, Martin & König, Ekkehard & Oesterreicher, Wulf & Wolfgang, Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, vol.21, 1010–1028. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Sun, Hongkai
    1980 The historical tribe Dizu and the Baima of Sichuan and Gansu Area – A preliminary study of the origin of the Baima. Minzu Yanjiu 1980(3). 33–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 2001 On language of the Qiangic branch in Tibeto-Burman. Language and Linguistics2(1). 157–181.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Sun, Hongkai & Chirkova, Katia & Liu, Guangkun
    2007 Baimayu yanjiu. Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    2018 Identifying Tibetic subgroups: A case in Khrochu (Sichuan). (Paper presented at the51st International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (ICSTLL51), Kyoto, 26–28 September 2018.)
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Sun, Jackson T.-S. & Bstan’dzin Blogros
    2019 Tshobdun Rgyalrong spoken texts: With a grammatical introduction. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Thompson, Sandra A. & Longacre, Robert E. & Hwang, Shin Ja J.
    2007 Adverbial clauses. InShopen, Timothy (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, volume II: Complex constructions, 2nd edn., 237–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619434.005
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619434.005 [Google Scholar]
  92. Thurgood, Graham
    2017 Sino-Tibetan: Genetic and areal subgroups. InThurgood, Graham & LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 3–39. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan
    2007 Chongwen weishenme wen zenmeyang, zenmeyang wen weishenme. Zhongguo Yuwen 2007(3). 195–207.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. van Driem, George
    2007 The diversity of the Tibeto-Burman language family and the linguistic ancestry of Chinese. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics1(2). 211–270. 10.1163/2405478X‑90000023
     https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478X-90000023 [Google Scholar]
  95. Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
    2008 The status of purpose, reason, and intended endpoint in the typology of complex sentences: Implications for layered models of clause structure. Linguistics46(4). 757–788. 10.1515/LING.2008.025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2008.025 [Google Scholar]
  96. Wang, Shiwen
    2013 Zangyu Kangfanyan yufa yanjiu (Degehua yufa). Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Wode, Henning
    1971 Some stages in the acquisition of questions by monolingual children. WORD27(1–3). 261–310. 10.1080/00437956.1971.11435628
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1971.11435628 [Google Scholar]
  98. Yin, Weibin
    2016 Namuziyu yufa biaozhu wenben. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Yip, Virginia & Matthews, Stephen
    2007 The bilingual child: Early development and language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620744
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620744 [Google Scholar]
  100. Yu, Dominic
    2012 Proto-Ersuic. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Zhang, Menghan & Yan, Shi & Pan, Wuyun & Jin, Li
    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]
  102. Zhang, Shuya
    2020 Le rgyalrong situ de Brag-bar et sa contribution à la typologie de l’expression des relations spatiales: L’orientation et le mouvement associé. Paris: Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales (INALCO). (Doctoral dissertation.) (https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-03176380) (Accessed2020-08-22.)
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Zhang, Sihong
    2013 A reference grammar of Ersu: A Tibeto-Burman language of China. Townsville: James Cook University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don
Loading
Interrogatives of reason in Tibeto-Burman languages of Sichuan
Language and Linguistics 25, 187 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00153.don
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00153.don
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): interrogatives of reason; purpose & cause; Tibeto-Burman languages; typology; verbal interrogatives

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