1887
Volume 41, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0731-3500
  • E-ISSN: 2214-5907
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper focuses on the morphosyntax as well as the semantics of relativisation in Wobzi Khroskyabs, a Rgyalrongic language spoken in Sichuan, China. Different strategies of relativisation are presented, especially the nominalisation strategy. Wobzi Khroskyabs exhibits an innovative relativisation strategy with the genitive marker , which is rarely found in other Rgyalrongic languages. Several hypotheses are put forward to account for the evolutionary pathway from genitivisation to relativisation, showing that genitive probably followed an ergative pattern to enter the relativisation of core arguments.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.17015.lai
2019-02-01
2019-07-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrews, Avery D.
    2007 Relative clauses. InShopen, Timothy (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (2nd edition), Vol.2, 206–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619434.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619434.004 [Google Scholar]
  2. Auwera, J. van der and V. A. Plungian
    1998 Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology2(1): 79–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Basilico, David
    1996 Head position and internally headed relative clauses. Language72(3): 498–532. 10.2307/416277
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416277 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baxter, William H. and Laurent Sagart
    2014Old Chinese: a new reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945375.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199945375.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bickel, Balthasar
    1999 Nominalization and focus constructions in some Kiranti languages. InYadava, Yogendra P. and Warren G. Glover (eds.), Topics in Nepalese Linguistics, 271–296. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2004 Hidden syntax in Belhare. InSaxena, A. (ed.), Himalayan languages: past and present, 141–190. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110898873.141
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110898873.141 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chao, Yuen Ren
    1947A Cantonese Primer. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 10.4159/harvard.9780674732438
    https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674732438 [Google Scholar]
  8. Comrie, Bernard
    1998 Rethinking the typology of relative clauses. Language Design: journal of theoretical and experimental linguistics1: 59–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Comrie, Bernard and Tania Kuteva
    2005 Relativization Strategies. InHaspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, Hans-Jörg Bibiko, Hagen Jung, and Claudia Schmidt (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Coupe, Alexander R.
    2007A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110198522
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198522 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2017 Mongsen Ao. InThurgood, Graham and Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (2nd edition), 277–301. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. DeLancey, Scott
    1981 An interpretation of split ergativity. Language57(3): 626–57. 10.2307/414343
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414343 [Google Scholar]
  13. 1986 Nominalization as relativization in Tibetan and Newari. Paper presented at the19th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 1999 Relativization in Tibetan. InYadava, Yogendra P. and Warren G. Glover (eds.), Studies in Nepalese Linguistics, 231–249. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2002 Relativization and nominalization in Bodic. InChew, Patrick (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Parasection on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian Linguistics, 55–72. Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v28i2.1039
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v28i2.1039 [Google Scholar]
  16. Genetti, Carol, Alexander R. Coupe, Ellen Bartee, Kristine Hildebrandt, and You-Jing Lin
    2008 Syntactic aspects of nominalization in five Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area31(2): 97–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Givón, Talmy
    1990Syntax: A Functional-Typological IntroductionVol.2. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Grosu, Alexander and Fred Landman
    1998 Strange relatives of the third kind. Natural Language Semantics6(2): 125–170. 10.1023/A:1008268401837
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008268401837 [Google Scholar]
  19. Haller, Felix
    2004Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen, Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hendery, Rachel
    2012Relative Clauses in Time and Space: A case study in the methods of diachronic typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.101
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.101 [Google Scholar]
  21. Huang, Bufan
    2007 Lawurongyu yanjiu拉塢戎語研究 (Study on the Lavrung language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Jacques, Guillaume
    2008 Jiarongyu yanjiu嘉絨語研究 (Study on the Rgyalrong language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 2015Dictionnaire Japhug-Chinois-Françaisversion 1.0嘉绒-汉-法词 典1.0版. Paris: Projet Himal Co.himalco.huma-num.fr/
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2016a Complementation in Japhug Gyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area39(2): 222–281. 10.1075/ltba.39.2.02jac
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.39.2.02jac [Google Scholar]
  25. 2016b Subjects and objects in Japhug and relativization. Journal of Chinese Linguistics44(1): 1–28. 10.1353/jcl.2016.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2016.0005 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jacques, Guillaume, Anton Antonov, and Yunfan Lai
    . unpublished. Khang.gsar Sta’u Dictionnary.
  27. Jacques, Guillaume, Yunfan Lai, Anton Antonov, and Lobsang Nima
    2017 Stau (Ergong, Horpa). InThurgood, Graham and Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (2nd edition), 597–613. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kayne, Richard S.
    2010 Why isn’t this a complementizer?InKayne, Richard S. (ed.), Comparisons and Contrasts, 190–227. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie
    1977 Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry8(1): 63–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Lahaussois, Aimée
    2002 Nominalization, relativization, and genitivization in Thulung Rai. InChew, Patrick (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Parasection on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian Linguistics, 87–98. Berkeley Linguistics Society. 10.3765/bls.v28i2.1036
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v28i2.1036 [Google Scholar]
  31. Lai, Yunfan
    2015 The Person Agreement System of Wobzi Lavrung (rGyalrongic, Tibetoburman). Transactions of the Philological Society113(3): 271–285. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12051
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12051 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2016 Causativisation in Wobzi and other Khroskyabs dialects. Cahiers de Linguistique – Asie Orientale45(2): 148–175. 10.1163/19606028‑00452p03
    https://doi.org/10.1163/19606028-00452p03 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2017 Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi. PhD thesis, Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle.
  34. LaPolla, Randy
    2008 Relative Clause Structures in the Rawang Language. Language and Linguisitics9(4): 797–812.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lipták, Anikó
    2009 The landscape of correlatives. InLipták, Anikó (ed.), Correlatives Cross-Linguistically, 1–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lfab.1.02lip
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.1.02lip [Google Scholar]
  36. Malchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath, and Bernard Comrie
    2010 Ditransitive constructions: a typological overview. InMalchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath, and Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative Handbook, 1–64. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Matisoff, James A.
    1972 Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genitivization. InKimball, J. (ed.), Syntax and Semantics I, 237–257. New York: Seminar Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mazaudon, Martine
    1978 La formation des propositions relatives en tibétain. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris73(1): 401–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Owen-Smith, Thomas and Nathan W. Hill
    (eds.) 2014Trans-Himalayan Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Romaine, Suzanne
    1980 The relative clause marker in Scots English: Diffusion, complexity and style as dimension of syntactic change. Language in Society9(2): 221–247. 10.1017/S004740450000806X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450000806X [Google Scholar]
  41. 1984 Towards a typology of relative-clause formation strategies in Germanic. InFisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical Syntax, 437–470. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110824032.437
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110824032.437 [Google Scholar]
  42. Shi, Yuzhi and Charles N. Li
    2002 The establishment of the classifier system and the grammaticalization of the morphosyntactic particle de in Chinese. Language Sciences24(1): 1–15. 10.1016/S0388‑0001(00)00048‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0388-0001(00)00048-6 [Google Scholar]
  43. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    2009 Elements of complex structures, where recursion isn’t it. InGivón, Talmy and Masayoshi Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic Complexity. Diachrony, Acquisition, Neuro-cognition, Evolution, 163–198. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.85.07ele
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.85.07ele [Google Scholar]
  44. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 Hierarchy of Features and Ergativity. InDixon, Robert M. W. (ed.), Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    2006 Caodeng Jiarongyu de guanxiju草登嘉戎語的關係句 (relative clauses in tshobdun rgyalrong). Language & Linguistics7(4): 905–933.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Sun, Jackson T.-S. and Youjing Lin
    2007 Constructional Variation in rGyalrong Relativization: How To Make a Choice?Paper presented at theInternational Workshop on Relative Clauses.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Valin, Robert and Randy LaPolla
    1997Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166799
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166799 [Google Scholar]
  48. Vries, Mark de
    2002 The Syntax of Relativization. PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
  49. Wagener, Terje
    2017The History of Nordic Relative Clauses. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 304. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110496536
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110496536 [Google Scholar]
  50. Williamson, Janis
    1987 An indefiniteness restriction for relative clauses in Lakhota. InReuland, E. J. and A. G. B. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, 168–190. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Yin, Weibin
    2007 Yelong Lawurongyu Yanjiu业隆拉坞戎语研究 (Study on the ’Jorogs Lavrung language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.17015.lai
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.17015.lai
Loading

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