1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language and Linguistics
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Applying popular arguments for and against an independent egophoric grammatical category to Thewo Tibetan
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Thewo Tibetan’s egophoric markers are restricted to volitional acts the speaker has done, is doing, and will do. This is unique amongst the reported Tibetan speech varieties given that usually first, second, and third person speech act participants (SAPs) can all use egophoric markers assuming they appear in the right communicative situation. As such, Thewo Tibetan provides a unique dataset to explore the relationship between egophoricity and evidentiality. To explore this relationship, I chose six influential scholars who have been active in discussing the question of whether egophoricity constitutes an independent grammatical category. Aikhenvald (2004; 2015; 2018; 2021) and DeLancey (2018) argue that because of different semantic functions and distribution, egophoric markers and evidential markers each belong to their own independent grammatical category. Tournadre & LaPolla (2014) and Gawne & Hill (2017) argue that given shared semantic motivations and a simpler analysis, egophorics and evidentials should belong to the same category. Next, I describe Thewo Tibetan’s evidential and egophoric markers. Thewo Tibetan is also unique in having a large inventory of egophoric markers which includes three types of past markers, two present markers, and two future markers. I apply the arguments for and against an independent egophoric category to Thewo Tibetan. Given (1) common semantic motivations underlying both the evidential and egophoric systems, and (2), the simplicity of an evidential analysis of the egophoric markers, I find it best to analyze Thewo Tibetan’s egophoric markers as part of the evidential system.

© ILAS
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
2026-01-27
2026-02-17

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/lali.00257.pow/lali.00257.pow.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199263882.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. 2015 Evidentials: Their links with other grammatical categories. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/lingty‑2015‑0008
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2015-0008 [Google Scholar]
  3. (ed.) 2018 The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2021 The web of knowledge: Evidentiality at the cross-roads. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004466425
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004466425 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bendix, Edward H.
    1974 Indo-Aryan and Tibeto-Burman contact as seen through Nepali and Newari verb tenses. International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics (). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Carlin, Eithne B.
    2018 Evidentiality and the Cariban languages. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, –. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.16
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.16 [Google Scholar]
  7. Caughley, Ross Charles
    1982 The syntax and morphology of the verb in Chepang. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Creissels, Denis
    2008 Remarks on so-called “conjunct/disjunct” systems. (Paper presented at theSyntax of the World’s Languages III, Berlin, 25–28 September 2008.)
     [Google Scholar]
  9. DeLancey, Scott
    1986 Evidentiality and volitionality in Tibetan. InChafe, Wallace L. & Nicholas, Johanna (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, –. Norwood: Ablex.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. 1990 Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289 [Google Scholar]
  11. 1992 The historical status of the conjunct/disjunct pattern in Tibeto-Burman. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia(). –. 10.1080/03740463.1992.10412277
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.1992.10412277 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2018 Evidentiality in Tibetic. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, –. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.27
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.27 [Google Scholar]
  13. Faller, Martina T.
    2002 Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Stanford: Stanford University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Floyd, Simeon & Norcliffe, Elisabeth & San Roque, Lila
    (eds.) 2018 Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118 [Google Scholar]
  15. Forker, Diana
    2018 Evidentiality in Nakh-Daghestanian languages. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.23
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.23 [Google Scholar]
  16. Garrett, Edward John
    2001 Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. Los Angeles: University of California at Los Angeles. (Doctoral dissertation).
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Garrett, Edward & Bateman, Leah
    2007 Symbiosis between documentary linguistics and linguistic pragmatics. InAustin, Peter K. & Bond, Oliver & Nathan, David (eds.), Proceedings of Conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory, –. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gawne, Lauren
    2017 Egophoric evidentiality in Bodish languages. InGawne, Lauren & Hill, Nathan W. (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-003 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gawne, Lauren & Hill, Nathan W.
    (eds.) 2017 Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hale, Austin
    1971 Person markers: Conjunct and disjunct forms (Topics in Newari Grammar I). –. (Manuscript.)
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 1980 Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. InWurm, S. A. (ed.), Papers in South-East Asian Linguistics, vol., –. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Haller, Felix
    2000 Verbal categories of Shigatse Tibetan and Themchen Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area(). –. 10.32655/LTBA.23.2.07
     https://doi.org/10.32655/LTBA.23.2.07 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hargreaves, David
    2005 Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar. Himalayan Linguistics. –. 10.5070/H95022977
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H95022977 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hill, Nathan W.
    2020 Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe, and Lila San Roque: Egophoricity. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/lingty‑2020‑2035
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2020-2035 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hyslop, Gwendolyn
    2018 Evidentiality in Bodic languages. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.28
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.28 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jacques, Guillaume
    2019 Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/lali.00047.jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00047.jac [Google Scholar]
  27. Lin, You-Jing
    2014 Thebo. InSun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological profiles of little-studied Tibetic varieties, –. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Loughnane, Robyn
    2009 A grammar of Oksapmin. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne. (Doctoral dissertation.)
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Oswalt, Robert L.
    1986 The evidential system of Kashaya. InChafe, L. Wallace & Nichols, Johanna (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, –. Norwood: Ablex Publication Cooperation.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Post, Mark W.
    2013 Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivation. InThornes, Tim & Andvik, Erik & Hyslop, Gwendolyn & Jansen, Joana (eds.), Functional-historical approaches to explanation: In honor of Scott Delancey, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.103.06pos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.103.06pos [Google Scholar]
  31. Powell, Abe
    2016 Diebu Zangzu de yuyan renzhi he yuyan baohu. InLuo, Ji & Yu, Jinzhi (eds.), Zhongguo shaoshu minzu yuyan baohu diaocha yanjiu, –. Beijing: Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 2022a 185 Thewo Tibetan lexical items from 37 Thewo villages. (Data set.) (https://zenodo.org/records/6376466) (Accessed2025-09-08.) 10.5281/zenodo.6376466
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6376466
  33. 2022b Mapping the spatial relationship between sub-basins and language variation in Thewo Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics(). –. 10.5070/H921151342
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H921151342 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2024 Thewo Tibetan’s /ta³³/ and /nə³³/: A narrative exploration of how temporal space and verbal semantics interact with evidentiality. Language and Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/lali.00172.pow
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00172.pow [Google Scholar]
  35. Renzeng Wangmu
    Renzeng Wangmu 2010 On syllable assimilation of Diebu Tibetan language and its linkage effects — On similar phonological changes of surrounding dialects. Xibei Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexue Ban)(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Renzeng Wangmu
    Renzeng Wangmu 2013 Diebu Zangyu yanjiu. Beijing: China Minzu University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Sandman, Erika & Grzech, Karolina
    2022 Egophoricity and evidentiality: Different categories, similar discourse functions. Insights on conversational data from the Tibetan Plateau and the Amazonian Foothills. Interactional Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/il.21014.san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/il.21014.san [Google Scholar]
  38. Sangsrgyas Tshering
    Sangsrgyas Tshering 2020 The voicing of unvoiced obstruents in Thebo Tibetan. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale(). –. 10.1163/19606028‑bja10001
     https://doi.org/10.1163/19606028-bja10001 [Google Scholar]
  39. Sangsrgyas Tshering
    Sangsrgyas Tshering 2023 Egophoricity and evidentiality in Thebo Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics(). –. 10.5070/H922358997
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H922358997 [Google Scholar]
  40. San Roque, Lila & Loughnane, Robyn
    2012 The New Guinea Highlands evidentiality area. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/lity‑2012‑0003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0003 [Google Scholar]
  41. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    1993 Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 2018 Evidentials and person. InAikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.2
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.2 [Google Scholar]
  43. Tournadre, Nicolas
    1991 The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area(). –. 10.32655/LTBA.14.1.04
     https://doi.org/10.32655/LTBA.14.1.04 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2008 Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct’/‘disjunct’ in Tibetan. InHuber, Brigitte & Volkart, Marianne & Widmer, Paul (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65 Geburtstag, vol., –. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Tournadre, Nicolas & LaPolla, Randy J.
    2014 Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area(). –. 10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou [Google Scholar]
  46. Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje
    2003 Manual of standard Tibetan: Language and civilization. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Widmer, Manuel
    2020 Same same but different: On the relationship between egophoricity and evidentiality. InBergqvist, Henrik & Kittilä, Seppo (eds.), Evidentiality, egophoricity, and engagement, –. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.3975811
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3975811 [Google Scholar]
  48. Yang, Daxue & Sangsrgyas Tshering & Gates, Jesse P.
    2024 A voicing rule for non-continuant obstruents in Thebo Tibetan. Language and Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/lali.00169.san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00169.san [Google Scholar]
  49. Yukawa, Yasutoshi
    1966 The meaning of Tibetan duu. Gengo Kenkyu. –. 10.11435/gengo1939.1966.77
     https://doi.org/10.11435/gengo1939.1966.77 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
Loading
Applying popular arguments for and against an independent egophoric grammatical category to Thewo Tibetan
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
/content/journals/10.1075/lali.00257.pow
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: volition ; inner processes ; observability ; evidentiality ; egophoric

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