1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”
  4. Volume 48, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 48, Issue 3
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article argues that the evidential system of Khams Tibetan, a cluster of Tibetic languages spoken in the south-eastern Tibetosphere, should be considered a verb paradigm. We propose a paradigm with six evidential categories (egophoric, statemental, visual sensory, nonvisual sensory, sensory inferential, and logical inferential) for all the verb classes. We focus on two varieties – rGyalthang and Lhagang – and examine how these evidential categories are encoded with distinct morphemes. We then discuss the main evidential forms of the copulative and existential verbs available in Khams Tibetan varieties as a whole, as well as their morphological relationship. Our analyses lead us to argue against a differential treatment of evidentiality depending on verb categories. The article concludes that describing the evidential paradigm may be the first essential task in writing a grammar of a Tibetic language.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
2023-11-28
2024-12-05

  • From This Site

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

Full text loading...

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. (ed.) 2018a 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]
  3. 2018b Evidentiality: The framework. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, 1–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.1
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.013.1 [Google Scholar]
  4. Axel-Tober, Katrin & Kalle Müller
    2017 Evidential adverbs in German: Diachronic development and present-day meaning. Journal of Historical Linguistics7(1). 9–47. 10.1075/jhl.7.1‑2.02axe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.02axe [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartee, Ellen Lynn
    2007 A grammar of Dongwang Tibetan. Santa Barbara: University of California at Santa Barbara PhD dissertation.
  6. 2011 The role of animacy in the verbal morphology of Dongwang Tibetan. InMark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 131–182. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004194489.i‑322
     https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004194489.i-322 [Google Scholar]
  7. Caplow, Nancy J.
    2017 Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 225–257. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑008
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-008 [Google Scholar]
  8. Causemann, Margret
    1989 Dialekt und Erzählungen der Nangchenpas. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, Betty Shefts & Kun Chang
    1984 The certainty hierarchy among spoken Tibetan verbs of being. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica55(4). 603–634.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. DeLancey, Scott
    1992 Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics1(3). 289–321. 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.3.289 [Google Scholar]
  11. 1997 Mirativity: the grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology11. 33–52. 10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  12. van Driem, George
    1998 Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Ebihara, Shiho
    2017 Evidentiality of the Tibetan verb snang. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 41–60. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-002 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2019 Amudo-Tibettogo bunpoo [Grammar of Amdo Tibetan]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
  15. Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque
    (eds.) 2018 Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.118
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.118 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gawne, Lauren
    2016 A sketch grammar of Lamjung Yolmo. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University. URI: hdl.handle.net/1885/110258
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 2017 Egophoric evidentiality in Bodish languages. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 61–94. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-003 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2021 Reported evidentiality in Tibeto-Burman languages. Himalayan Linguistics20(1). 80–115. 10.5070/H920152301
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H920152301 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gawne, Lauren & Kristine A. Hildebrandt
    2020 Reported speech in earthquake narratives from six Tibeto-Burman languages. Studies in Language44(2). 461–499. 10.1075/sl.18028.gaw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18028.gaw [Google Scholar]
  20. Gawne, Lauren & Nathan W. Hill
    (eds.) 2017 Evidential systems in Tibetan languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742 [Google Scholar]
  21. de Haan, Ferdinand
    2008 Typological approaches to modality. InWilliam Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality, 27–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197570.27
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197570.27 [Google Scholar]
  22. Haller, Felix
    2004 Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Häsler, Katrin Louise
    1999 A grammar of the Tibetan Dege (Sde dge) dialect. Zürich: Selbstverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hill, Nathan W.
    2012 “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology161. 389–433. 10.1515/lity‑2012‑0016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0016 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2013 ḥdug as a testimonial marker in Classical and Old Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics12(1). 1–16. 10.5070/H912123714
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H912123714 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hill, Nathan W. & Lauren Gawne
    2017 The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 1–38. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hongladarom, Krisadawan
    1993 Evidentials in Tibetan: A dialogic study of the interplay between form and meaning. Bloomington: Indiana University PhD dissertation.
  28. Hoshi, Izumi
    2003 Gendai Tibettogo doosi ziten (Rasa hoogen) [Verb dictionary of Modern Tibetan (Lhasa dialect)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. 10.15026/94481
     https://doi.org/10.15026/94481
  29. 2016 Koten Tibettogo bunpoo: Ootoomeikyooki (14 seiki) ni motoduite [A grammar of Classical Tibetan based on the Clear Mirror of Royal Genealogies (the 14th century)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. 10.15026/94480
     https://doi.org/10.15026/94480
  30. Huang, Chenglong
    2013 Zangmianyu cunzailei dongci de gainian jiegou [Conceptual structure of existential verbs in Tibeto-Burman]. Minzu Yuwen21. 31–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Huber, Brigitte
    2005 The Tibetan dialect of Lende (Kyirong): A grammatical description with historical annotations. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Jacques, Guillaume
    2019 Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics20(4). 515–534. 10.1075/lali.00047.jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00047.jac [Google Scholar]
  33. Kalsang, Jay Garfield, Margaret Speas & Jill de Villiers
    2013 Direct evidentials, case, tense and aspect in Tibetan: evidence for a general theory of the semantics of evidential. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory31(2). 517–561. 10.1007/s11049‑013‑9193‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-013-9193-9 [Google Scholar]
  34. sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med & sKal-bzang dByangs-can
    sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med & sKal-bzang dByangs-can 2002 Zangyu fangyan gailun [An introduction to Tibetan dialects]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Matsubara, Julie
    2017 The semantics and pragmatics of the Japanese evidentials -rashii, -sooda, and -yooda: An experimental investigation. Evanston: Northwestern University doctoral dissertation.
  36. Mélac, Éric
    2014 L’évidentialité en anglais – approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus anglais-tibétain. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3PhD dissertation. URI: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01230545
  37. 2023 The pragmatic differences between grammatical and lexical evidentiality: A corpus-based study of Tibetan and English. Journal of Pragmatics2101. 143–156. 10.1016/j.pragma.2023.03.017
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.03.017 [Google Scholar]
  38. Mélac, Éric & Joanna Bialek
    . Forthcoming. Evidentiality as a grammaticalization passenger: An investigation of evidential developments in Tibetic languages and beyond. Studies in Language.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, René
    1956 Oracles and demons of Tibet: The cult and iconography of the Tibetan protective deities. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Oisel, Guillaume
    2013 Morphosyntaxe et sémantique des auxiliaires et des connecteurs du tibétain littéraire : étude diachronique et synchronique. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3PhD dissertation. URI: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00914393
  41. 2017 Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. Himalayan Linguistics16(2). 90–128. 10.5070/H916229119
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H916229119 [Google Scholar]
  42. Roche, Gerald & Hiroyuki Suzuki
    2018 Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies52(4). 1227–1278. 10.1017/S0026749X1600072X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X1600072X [Google Scholar]
  43. Rodríguez-Somolinos, Amalia
    2017 From visual perception to inference in the French evidential markers il m’est avis que, apparemment, and il paraît que. Journal of Historical Linguistics7(1). 111–133. 10.1075/jhl.7.1‑2.05rod
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.05rod [Google Scholar]
  44. Shao, Mingyuan
    2014 Anduo Zangyu Arouhua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential system of the Arig dialect of Amdo Tibetan]. Tianjin: Nankai University PhD dissertation.
  45. 2016a Cong quxiang dongci dao shizheng biaoji: Zangyuzu yuyan shizheng biaoji thal de yufahua [From a direction verb to an evidential marker: Grammaticalisation of thal, an evidential marker in Tibetic languages]. Zangxue Xuekan141. 226–249.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 2016b Zangyuzu xidongci red de yufahua [The grammaticalisation of the copula verb red in Tibetic languages]. Language and Linguistics17(5). 679–715. 10.1177/1606822X16645742
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1606822X16645742 [Google Scholar]
  47. 2018 Hexi Zoulang binwei Zangyu Dongnahua yanjiu [Study on the mDungnag dialect, an endangered Tibetan language in Hexi Corridor]. Guangzhou: Zhongshan Daxue Chubanshe.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. 2019 Guzangwen de xidongci [The copula verbs in Old Tibetan]. Language and Linguistics20(3). 417–450. 10.1075/lali.00039.sha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00039.sha [Google Scholar]
  49. Sun, Jackson T.-S.
    1993 Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica631. 944–1001.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sun, Kai
    2019 Yushu Zangyu fangyan (Labuhua) yanjiu [Study on Yulshul Tibetan (Lab variety)]. Tianjin: Nankai Daxue Doctoral dissertation.
  51. Suzuki, Hiroyuki
    2011 Dialectal particularities of Sogpho Tibetan: An introduction to the “Twenty-four villages’ patois”. InMark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 55–73. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004194489.i‑322.25
     https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004194489.i-322.25 [Google Scholar]
  52. 2012 Multiple usages of the verb snang in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics11(1). 1–16. 10.5070/H911123711
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H911123711 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2017 The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 423–444. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑013
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-013 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2022 Geolinguistics in the eastern Tibetosphere: An introduction. Tokyo: Geolinguistic Society of Japan. 10.5281/zenodo.5989176
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5989176 [Google Scholar]
  55. . forthcoming. Functional transition from ‘hear’ to nonvisual sensory and hearsay evidential categories: A case study of rGyalthang Tibetan.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Lozong Lhamo
    2021 /ka-/ negative prefix in Choswateng Tibetan (Shangri-La, Yunnan). Language and Linguistics22(4). 593–629. 10.1075/lali.00092.suz
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00092.suz [Google Scholar]
  57. Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo
    2017a Language evolution and vitality of Lhagang Tibetan: A Tibetic language as a minority in Minyag Rabgang. International Journal of the Sociology of Language2451. 63–90. 10.1515/ijsl‑2017‑0003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2017-0003 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2017b King’s pig: A story in Lhagang Tibetan with a grammatical analysis in a narrative mode. Himalayan Linguistics16(2). 129–163. 10.5070/H916233598
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H916233598 [Google Scholar]
  59. 2018 Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozi sareru syookosei [Evidentiality marked in predicates of the Lhagang dialect of Khams Tibetan]. Journal of Kijutsuken101. 13–42. URI: id.nii.ac.jp/1422/00002000/
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 2021 Hearsay evidential marking strategy in Lhagang Tibetan: A case study on folktales and legends. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area44(2). 141–167. 10.1075/ltba.21001.suz
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.21001.suz [Google Scholar]
  61. Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Sonam Wangmo & Tsering Samdrup
    2021 A contrastive approach to the evidential system in Tibetic languages: Examining five varieties from Khams and Amdo. Gengo Kenkyu1591. 69–101. 10.11435/gengo.159.0_69
     https://doi.org/10.11435/gengo.159.0_69 [Google Scholar]
  62. Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Tashi Nyima
    2021 Evidential system of copulative and existential verbs in Lamo. InYasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and their archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 259–287. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: hdl.handle.net/2433/263981
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Takeuchi, Tsuguhito
    2015 The function of auxiliary verbs in Tibetan predicates and their historical development. Revue d’études tibétaines311. 401–415. Available at: himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/ret/pdf/ret_31_25.pdf (last access27 October 2023)
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 2021 History of the Tibetan language. InYasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 303–323. Kyoto: Research Institute for Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: hdl.handle.net/2433/263983
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Tournadre, Nicolas
    2008 Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct/disjunct’ in Tibetan. InBrigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart, & Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Bonn: Wissenschaftsverlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 2014 The Tibetic languages and their classification. InThomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110310832
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110310832 [Google Scholar]
  67. 2017 A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages. InLauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 95–129. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110473742‑004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110473742-004 [Google Scholar]
  68. Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso
    2001 Final auxiliary verbs in Literary Tibetan and Tibetan dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area24(1). 49–111. 10.15144/LTBA‑24.1.49
     https://doi.org/10.15144/LTBA-24.1.49 [Google Scholar]
  69. Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla
    2014 Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area37(2). 240–263. 10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.37.2.04tou [Google Scholar]
  70. Tournadre, Nicolas, Françoise Robin, Camille Simon, Chabdra Lhamo Kyab, Nyima Dorjee, Bora Sherab, Sonam Gyaltsen & Thubten Rigzin
    2018 EESTAC questionnaire (rGyab-ljongs-dang gnas-stangs-kyi brda-sprod/ Bho-Ti’i skad-rigs nang gnas-tshul-gyi khungs-dang go-ba len-thabs/ The-tshom bcas ston-pa’i tshig-grogs). Unpublished manuscript.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje
    2003 Manuel de tibétain standard: langue et civilisation. 2nd edn.Paris: L’Asiathèque.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Tournadre, Nicolas & Hiroyuki Suzuki
    2023 The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan. Villejuif: LACITO Publications. 10.5281/zenodo.10026628
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10026628 [Google Scholar]
  73. Tshe-ring gYang-sgron (Cilinyangzhen)
    Tshe-ring gYang-sgron (Cilinyangzhen) 2021 Dongwang Zangyu cankao yufa [A reference grammar of gTorwarong Tibetan]. Beijing: Zhongyang Minzu Daxue PhD dissertation.
  74. Tshe-skyid dBang-mo (Caijiwenmao)
    Tshe-skyid dBang-mo (Caijiwenmao) 2020 Zangyu Kangfangyan Chengduohua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential category in Chengduo variety of Khams Tibetan]. Minzu Yuwen11. 27–37. Available at: www.mzyw.net.cn/Magazine/Show?id=74812 (last access27 October 2023)
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Vokurková, Zuzana
    2008 Epistemic modalities in Spoken Standard Tibetan. Praha / Paris: Filozofická Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy – Université Paris 8PhD dissertation. URI: hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/18016
  76. Yliniemi, Juha
    2019 A descriptive grammar of Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia). Helsinki: Helsingin YliopistoPhD thesis. URI: hdl.handle.net/10138/300475
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Zeisler, Bettina
    2004 Relative tense and aspectual values in Tibetan languages: A comparative study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110908183
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110908183 [Google Scholar]
  78. 2018a Don’t believe in a paradigm that you haven’t manipulated yourself! Evidentiality, speaker attitude, and admirativity in Ladakhi (extended version). Himalayan Linguistics17(1). 67–130. 10.5070/H917136797
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H917136797 [Google Scholar]
  79. 2018b Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages. InAd Foolen, Helen de Hoop & Gijs Mulder (eds.). Evidence for evidentiality, 227–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.61.10zei
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.61.10zei [Google Scholar]
  80. Zemp, Marius
    2018 A grammar of Purik Tibetan. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004366312
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004366312 [Google Scholar]
  81. Zhou, Yang & Hiroyuki Suzuki
    2022 Evidentiality in Selibu: A contact-induced emergence. Diachronica39(2). 268–309. With an online appendix, 46pp. 10.1075/dia.19055.zho
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.19055.zho [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
Loading
The paradigmaticity of evidentials in the Tibetic languages of Khams
Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language” 48, 723 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): copulative; evidential; existential; Khams; paradigm; Tibetic

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