Volume 42, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0731-3500
  • E-ISSN: 2214-5907
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Guiqiong, like most Sino-Tibetan languages, presents a rich array of relativization constructions. Based on both natural oral texts and elicited material, the present paper describes all attested types of relatives in Guiqiong, including prenominal, head-internal, headless, and double-headed relative clauses, as well as nominalized and non-nominalized relative clauses. It provides a case by case account of the possible constructions for all syntactic roles including various types of obliques. This paper will also discuss different relativization strategies used in Guiqiong. To conclude, this paper will discuss the importance and the relevance of this study to Sino-Tibetan linguistics.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Bickel, Balthasar
    1999 Nominalization and focus constructions in some Kiranti languages. InYogendra P. Yadava & Warren G. Glover (eds.), Topics in Nepalese Linguistics, 271–296. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Comrie, Bernard
    1981 The formation of relative clauses. InB. Lloyd & J. Gay (eds.), Universals of human thought: some African evidence, 215–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 1989Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2002 Typology and language acquisition: The case of relative clauses. InAnna Ramat (ed.), Typology and second language acquisition, 19–37. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110891249.19
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110891249.19 [Google Scholar]
  5. Comrie, Bernard, & Edward L. Keenan
    1979 Noun phrase accessibility revisited. Language55(3): 649–664. 10.2307/413321
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413321 [Google Scholar]
  6. Creissels, Denis
    2006Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique, tome 2, la phrase. Paris: Hermes Science Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Delancey, Scott
    1999 Relativization in Tibetan. InYogendra P. Yadava & Warren W. Glover (eds.), Topics in Nepalese linguistics, 231–249. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dixon, R. M. W.
    1979 Ergativity. Language55(1): 59–138. 10.2307/412519
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412519 [Google Scholar]
  9. 1994Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611896
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611896 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dryer, Matthew S.
    2005 Order of relative clause and noun. InMartin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, & Bernard Comrie (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures, 366–367. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2007 Noun phrase structure. InTimothy Shopen (eds.), Language typology and syntactic description, Second Edition, VolumeII: Complex Constructions, 151–205. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619434.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619434.003 [Google Scholar]
  12. Farrell, Patrick
    2005Grammatical relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fox, Barbara A.
    1987 The noun phrase accessibility hierarchy reinterpreted: Subject primacy or the absolutive hypothesis?. Language63(4): 856–870. 10.2307/415720
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415720 [Google Scholar]
  14. Genetti, Carol, Ellen Bartee, Alec Coupe, Kristine Hildebrandt, & You jing Lin
    2008 Syntactic aspects of nominalization in five Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area31(2): 97–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Huang, Chenglong
    2008 Relativization in Qiang. Language and Linguistics9(4): 735–768.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jiang, Li
    2015A grammar of Guiqiong: a language of Sichuan. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers. 10.1163/9789004293045
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004293045 [Google Scholar]
  17. Jacques, Guillaume
    2016 Subjects, objects and relativization in Japhug. Journal of Chinese Linguistics44(1): 1–28. 10.1353/jcl.2016.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1353/jcl.2016.0005 [Google Scholar]
  18. Keenan, Edward L., & Bernard Comrie
    1977 Noun phrase accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry8(1): 63–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. LaPolla, Randy
    2008a Relative Clause Structures in the Rawang Language. Language and Linguistics9(4): 797–812.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 2008b Nominalization in Rawang. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area31.2: 45–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Maxwell, Daniel N.
    1979 Strategies of relativization and NP accessibility. Language55(2): 352–371. 10.2307/412589
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412589 [Google Scholar]
  22. Noonan, Michael
    1997 Versatile nominalizations. InJoan Bybee, John Haiman, & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type. Dedicated to T. Givon, 373–394. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.82.21noo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.82.21noo [Google Scholar]
  23. 2008 Nominalizations in Bodic languages. Typological Studies in Language76: 219. 10.1075/tsl.76.11noo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.76.11noo [Google Scholar]
  24. Song, Lingli
    2011贵琼语研究Guiqiongyu yanjiu. 北京:民族出版社Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sun, Hongkai
    1983 Liujiang liuyu de minzu yuyan ji qi xishu fenlei « 六江流域的民族语言及其系属分类 » [Languages in the six valleys and their language branches]. Yunnan Minzuxuebao, « 民族学报» 3: 99–274.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    2003 Caodeng rGyalrong. InGraham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 490–502. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Sun, Jackson T.-S. (孫天心)
    2006 Caodeng Jiarongyu de Guanxiju草登嘉戎語的關係句 [Relatives in Caodeng rGyalrong]. Yuyan ji Yuyanxue語言暨語言學 [Language and Linguistics] 7(4): 905–933.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Sun, Jackson T.-S. & Danluo Shi
    2002 Caodeng Jiarongyu yu rentong dengdi xiangguan de yufa xianxiang [Caodeng Rgyalrong and grammatical phenomena related to the Empathy Hierarchy]. Language and Linguistics3(1): 79–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Van Valin, Robert & Randy LaPolla
    1997Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166799
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166799 [Google Scholar]
  30. Vries, Mark de
    2001 Patterns of relative clauses. InTon van der Wouden & Hans Broekhuis (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2001, 231–243. Amsterdam & Philadephia: John Benjamin.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 2002The Syntax of relativization. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wu, Tong
    2011 The syntax of prenominal relative clauses: A typological study. Linguistic Typology15(3): 569–623. 10.1515/LITY.2011.036
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LITY.2011.036 [Google Scholar]
  33. Zúñiga, Fernando
    2006Deixis and alignment. Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas (Typological Studies in Language 70). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.70
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.70 [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