1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
  4. Volume 46, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 46, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0731-3500
  • E-ISSN: 2214-5907
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive synchronic study of Stau kinship terms, offering a detailed analysis of their classifications and characteristics. Stau kinship terms are categorized into vocative and referential/possessive forms. Vocative kinship terms follow the intonation pattern of other vocative phrases, particularly barytonesis, which involves stress and intonation shifting from the second syllable to the first. The paper explores the distinctions within younger sibling relationships, dividing kinship terms into male Ego and female Ego categories based on the sex of the connecting relative. The kinship prefix , commonly found in Qiangic languages, is exclusively used in vocative and referential/possessive kinship terms referring to older kin (both male and female). The study also identifies specific vocative and referential kinship terms that describe dyads of kinship relationships, similar to Tibetic languages like the Amdo dialects spoken in Stau-speaking areas. Stau maintains a sex-based distinction for kinship terms across all generations. Referential/possessive kinship terms in Gen−1 and Gen−2 differentiate between lineal and collateral relationships, while in vocative terms, only Gen−1 distinguishes between lineal and collateral relatives. Gen+1 consanguineal vocative kinship terms exhibit distinctions for lineal/collateral and matrilateral/patrilateral relationships. However, the matrilateral/patrilateral distinction is neutralized in Gen+1 affinal vocative kinship terms. Gen+1 affinal referential/possessive kinship terms differentiate matrilateral and patrilateral relationships when using a possessive phrase, but not when using the simple base term. Age relative to Ego plays a distinct role in Gen0 kinship terms, both vocative and referential/possessive. Sibling terms are differentiated from cousin terms in Gen0 referential/possessive terms using the ‘is a relative’ copula phrase. Regarding cousin kinship typology, Stau aligns with the Hawaiian type in the vocative and the Eskimo type in the referential. The Hawaiian type serves as the foundational basis due to shared roots in both vocative and referential contexts. For Gen+1 terms, Stau follows the Sudanese system, each consanguineal kin with their own term. Gen−1 terms follow the Eskimo system.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
2023-11-09
2024-10-03

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barnard, Alan & Anthony Good
    1984 Research practices in the study of kinship. Research Methods in Social Anthropology. London: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bradley, David
    2001 Counting the family: Family group classifiers in Yi (Tibeto-Burman) languages. Anthropological Linguistics43(1).1–17. www.jstor.org/stable/30028581. 10.1353/anl.2019.0007
     https://doi.org/10.1353/anl.2019.0007 [Google Scholar]
  3. Donati, Margherita
    2013 Vocative. InGeorgios K. Giannakis, Vít Bubeník, Emilio Crespo, Chris Golston, Alexandra Lianeri, Silvia Luraghi & Stephanos Matthaios, (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek language and linguistics. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Edgar, J. H.
    1933 The ancient Yong and possible survivals in Szechwan. Journal of West China Research Society61.246–251.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Fox, Robin
    1983 Kinship and marriage: An anthropological perspective. 501. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Gates, Jesse P.
    2017 Verbal triplication morphology in Stau (Mazi dialect). Transactions of the Philological Society115(1).14–26. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12083
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12083 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2021 A grammar of Mazur Stau. Paris: École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales PhD dissertation.
  8. Gates, Jesse P., Sami Honkasalo & Yunfan Lai
    2022 From transitive to intransitive and voiceless to voiced in Proto-Sino-Tibetan: New evidence from Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs. Language and Linguistics23(2).212–239. 10.1075/lali.00104.gat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00104.gat [Google Scholar]
  9. Gates, Jesse P. & Won Ho Kim
    2018 Vowel harmony in Stau. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area41(2).263–293. 10.1075/ltba.17016.gat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.17016.gat [Google Scholar]
  10. Gates, Jesse P., Thub.bstan Nyi.ma & Tshe.ring Rgyal.mtsan
    2019 Tibetan dining etiquette: A sociolinguistic analysis of a normative discourse text in Stau. Himalayan Linguistics18(2).73–81. 10.5070/H918242739
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H918242739 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hodgson, Brian Houghton
    1853 Sifán and Hórsók vocabularies, with another special exposition in the wide range of Mongolidan affinities and remarks on the lingual and physical characteristics of the family. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal221.121–151.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 1874 Essays on the languages, literature, and religion of Nepāl and Tibet: Together with further papers on the geography, ethnology, and commerce of those countries. London: Trübner and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Honkasalo, Sami
    2017 Two traditional Stau stories. Asian Highlands Perspectives441.285–316.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2019 A grammar of Eastern Geshiza: A culturally anchored description. Helsinki: University of Helsinki dissertation.
  15. 2020 Verb classes in Horpa: A study of Balang Geshiza and Poxiu Stau. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area43(2).255–290. 10.1075/ltba.19013.hon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.19013.hon [Google Scholar]
  16. Huang, Bufan
    1990 Daofuyu yuyin he dongci bianhua道孚语语音和动词变化 [Phonology and verb conjugation in Daofu]. Minzu Yuwen民族语文51.23–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 1991 Daofuyu道孚语 (The Stau language). InQingxia Dai, Bu-fan Huang, Ailan Fu, Renzeng Wangmu & Ju Liu (eds.), Zangmianyu shiwuzhong藏缅语十五种 (Fifteen Tibeto-Burman languages), 1–45. Beijing: Yanshan chubanshe 北京：燕山出版社.，戴庆夏、黄布凡、傅爱兰、仁增旺姆、刘菊.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Huang, Bufan, Shouchun Xu, Jiaying Chen & Huiyin Wang
    1992 Zangmian yuzu yuyan cihui藏面语族语言词汇 [A Tibeto-Burman lexicon]. Beijing: Zhongyang minzu xueyuan chubanshe 中央民族学院出版社.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jacques, Guillaume
    2012 The Tangut kinship system in Qiangic perspective. InNathan W. Hill (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages IV, 211–258. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. 2021 A grammar of Japhug. Berlin: Language Science Press. CitetononCRdoi:10.5281/zenodo.4548232
     https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4548232 [Google Scholar]
  21. Jacques, Guillaume, Anton Antonov, Yunfan Lai, & Lobsang Nima
    2014 Person marking in Stau. Himalayan Linguistics13(1).82–92. 10.5070/H913224068
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H913224068 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jacques, Guillaume, Anton Antonov, Yunfan Lai & Lobsang Nima
    2017 Stau (Ergong, Horpa). InGraham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages (2nd edition), 597–613. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Jacques, Guillaume & Alexis Michaud
    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]
  24. Keesing, Roger M.
    1975 Kin groups and social structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Kroeber, A. L.
    1909 Classificatory systems of relationship. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland391.77–84. 10.2307/2843284
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2843284 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lai, Yunfan
    2017 Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi. Paris: Université Paris III dissertation.
  27. Lai, Yunfan, Xun Gong, Jesse P. Gates & Guillaume Jacques
    2021 Tangut as a West Gyalrongic language. Folia Linguistica54(s41–s1).171–203. 10.1515/flih‑2020‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2020-0006 [Google Scholar]
  28. Laufer, Berthold
    1916 The Si-hia language, a study in Indo-Chinese philology. T’oung Pao17(1).1–126. 10.1163/156853216X00012
     https://doi.org/10.1163/156853216X00012 [Google Scholar]
  29. Morgan, Lewis Henry
    1871 Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Murdock, George Peter
    1949 Social structure. New York: Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Prins, Marielle
    2016 A grammar of rGyalrong Jiaomuzu (Kyom-kyo) dialects: A web of relations. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004325630
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004325630 [Google Scholar]
  32. von Rosthorn, A.
    1897 Vocabularfragmente ost-tibetischer dialecte. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Mor-genländischen Gesellschaft511.524–531.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 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. PNAS116(21).10317–10322. 10.1073/pnas.1817972116
     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817972116 [Google Scholar]
  34. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    1998 Nominal morphology in Caodeng rGyalrong. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology69(1).103–149.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Sun, Jackson T.-S. & Qianzi Tian
    2013 Chuanxi Huoeryu Gexihua dongci duixie chutan川西霍爾語格西話動詞對協初探 (Verb agreement in Gexi Horpa). Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics7(2).221–241. 10.1163/2405478X‑90000120
     https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478X-90000120 [Google Scholar]
  36. Tian, Qianzi
    2019 Situation aspects and their transformation in Gexi Horpa. [格西霍爾語的情境體及轉换]. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics10(2).276–297. 10.1163/2405478X‑01002007
     https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478X-01002007 [Google Scholar]
  37. Tian, Qianzi & Jackson T.-S. Sun
    2016 Géxī Huòěryǔ dòngcí cígàn chóngdié xíngshìshù格西霍尔语动词词干重叠形式数 [Verbal argument-number marking via stem reduplication in Gexi Horpa]. The Journal of Yunnan Normal University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition)云南师范大学学报 (哲学社会科学版)4(48).15–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Tian, Qianzi & Jackson T-S. Sun
    2019 Géxī Huòěryǔ dòngcí de shíyǔtǐ格西霍爾語動詞的時與體 [On tense and aspect in the Gexi Horpa verb]. Language and Linguistics20(3).451–468. 10.1075/lali.00040.tia
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00040.tia [Google Scholar]
  39. Tunzhi
    Tunzhi 2017 Language vitality and glottonyms in the Ethnic Corridor: The rTa’u language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language2017(245).147–168. 10.1515/ijsl‑2017‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2017-0006 [Google Scholar]
  40. Tunzhi
    Tunzhi 2019 Outline of Bra’go variety of rTa’u (Horpa). Melbourne: La Trobe University dissertation.
  41. Vanderveen, Chantel
    2015 A phonology of Stau. Langley, BC: Trinity Western University MA thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang, Stephen S.
    1970–1971 Consonantal clusters of Tibetan loanwords in Stau. Monumenta Serica291.631–658. 10.1080/02549948.1970.11745006
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02549948.1970.11745006 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zhang, Shuya & Jingming Fan
    2020 Brag-bar kinship system in synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies83(3).479–503. 10.1017/S0041977X2000261X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X2000261X [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhang, Sihong
    2013 A reference grammar of Ersu: A Tibeto-Burman language of China. Brisbane: James Cook University Doctoral dissertation.
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
Loading
Kinship terms in Stau
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 46, 265 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
/content/journals/10.1075/ltba.23006.gat
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): kinship terms; Qiangic; referential; Stau; vocative

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