- Home
- e-Journals
- Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
- Previous Issues
- Volume 41, Issue, 2018
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area - Volume 41, Issue 1, 2018
Volume 41, Issue 1, 2018
-
Kinship in three Tamangic varieties
Author(s): Kristine A. Hildebrandt, Oliver Bond and Dubi Nanda Dhakalpp.: 1–21 (21)More LessWe examine kinship terms in three closely related Tamangic varieties: Manange, Nar, and Phu. Using Proto-Tamangic and Proto Tibeto-Burman reconstructions, we track cognate forms as well as structural innovations. Our account allows a first examination of lexico-semantic aspects of Phu, an under-documented representative of the Nar-Phu complex. While Nar-Phu is usually treated as a single language, considerable differences exist in the organization of all three kinship term systems. Kinship terms are considered to be conservative, basic vocabulary and thus indicative of close within-family relationships, but our study shows that even closely related varieties can show considerable differences in kin nomenclature.
-
Vowels and tones in Poula
Author(s): Sahiinii Lemaina Veikho and Priyankoo Sarmahpp.: 22–44 (23)More LessThis paper presents a sketch of the vowels and tones in the Poula language as spoken in the Naamai (Koide) village of Manipur. Acoustic studies on the vowels and tones are conducted in this work, and it is concluded that Poula has a six vowel inventory like many of the languages in the vicinity; however the distribution of vowels in Poula is quite peculiar, with the absence of high back vowels and presence of two high front vowels. In case of tones, this study reports four tones in Poula, namely, High-falling, Rising-falling, Mid and Low. The paper concludes with a short discussion on tones in Poula underived words.
-
A cross-dialectal analysis of Nuosu adjectival comparative constructions
Author(s): Hongdi Dingpp.: 45–74 (30)More LessCurrent analyses ( Hu 2005 ; Gerner 2013 ; Liu et al. 2013 ) of Nuosu adjectival comparative constructions are not observationally adequate because they are only based on the semantic distinction between dimensional adjectives and other adjectives. A better analysis should make a further morphological consideration by dividing the Nuosu adjectives into root-sharing prefixed adjectives, non-root-sharing prefixed adjectives and simplex adjectives.
Moreover, the existing analyses are not consistent. Some unacceptable comparative sentences in Hu (2005) are acceptable in Gerner (2013) and Liu et al. (2013) . I have found out that the inconsistency results from different rigorousness to adjectival morphosyntactic restrictions among different varieties or dialects of Nuosu.
After a cross-dialectal investigation with three major dialects of Nuosu, i.e. Shynra, Yynuo and Suondi, it is concluded that Nuosu comparative constructions have a restricted form and a general form for superiority, inferiority and equality respectively. Different dialects or varieties have varying rigorousness to Nuosu adjectival morphosyntax, thus resulting in different choices of the forms for comparison. Accordingly, the available Nuosu varieties are classified into three types: varieties with more morphosyntactic rigorousness, transitional varieties and varieties with less morphosyntactic rigorousness. It is found that Shynra Nuosu is morphosyntactically less rigorous than Yynuo and Suondi Nuosu. I will also address the relationship between the two structural forms of comparative constructions. To conclude, a prediction is made on the development of Nuosu adjectival comparatives.
-
Transitivity markers in West Himalayish
Author(s): Manuel Widmerpp.: 75–105 (31)More LessThe present paper describes a transitivity distinction that is attested in some Tibeto-Burman (TB) languages of the West Himalayish (WH) subgroup. The relevant distinction is encoded by a set of dedicated markers that occur between verb stems and inflectional endings and group verbs into transitivity classes. The paper first offers a synchronic description of transitivity classes in the WH language Bunan, discussing their formal realization and functional motivation. Subsequently, the relevant transitivity classes are discussed from a historical-comparative perspective. It is argued that the transitivity distinction developed when an object agreement marker was reanalyzed as a marker of transitive verbs. The paper thus offers new perspectives on transitivity in TB from both a synchronic and a diacronic point of view, and adduces evidence for a hitherto underscribed reanalysis from “object agreement marker” > “marker of transitive verbs”.
-
Linguistic history and historical linguistics
Author(s): George van Driempp.: 106–127 (22)More LessThis invited response to a piece by LaPolla, published in issue 39/2 of LTBA, addresses both LaPolla’s misrepresentations of the history of linguistics and his flawed understanding of historical linguistics. The history of linguistic thought with regard to the Tibeto-Burman or Trans-Himalayan language family vs. the Indo-Chinese or “Sino-Tibetan” family tree model is elucidated and juxtaposed against the remarkable robustness of certain ahistorical myths and the persistence of unscientific argumentation by vocal proponents of the Sino-Tibetanist paradigm, such as LaPolla.
Most Read This Month

-
-
Clause linking in Japhug
Author(s): Guillaume Jacques
-
-
-
Reflexive derivations in Thulung
Author(s): Aimée Lahaussois
-
- More Less