Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T05:27:48.072Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Voicing alternation and sigmatic causative prefixation in Tibetan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2020

Guillaume Jacques
Guillaume Jacques*
Affiliation:
Southwest University, Chongqing, China / CNRS-CRLAO, Paris
*
rgyalrongskad@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present paper discusses the hypothesis according to which a devoicing sound shift *sb- > sp-, *sd- > st-, *sg- > sk- took place in pre-Tibetan. I show that all examples supporting this putative sound shift have better explanations, and that this hypothesis creates more problems than it solves. In addition, I discuss data from modern Tibetic varieties, showing that no typological parallel for such a sound shift is attested.

Keywords

TibetanOld ChineseDevoicingCausativeAlternationsHistorical phonology
Type
Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 83 , Issue 2 , June 2020 , pp. 283 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © SOAS University of London, 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Tibetan transliteration follows Jacques (2012a), and Middle Chinese is based on the system of Baxter (1992), with the onset consonants converted to IPA symbols.

References

Baxter, William H. III. 1992. A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology. (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 64.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110857085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialek, Joanna. 2018. Compounds and Compounding in Old Tibetan. Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1979. Proto-Loloish. (Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies Monograph Series no. 39.) London: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
Chou, Fa-kao. 1962. 中国古代语法-构词编 Zhongguo gudai yufa goucibian. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Coblin, Weldon South. 1976. “Notes on Tibetan verbal morphology”, T'oung Pao 62, 45–70.10.1163/156853276X00034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrady, August. 1896. Eine Indo-Chinesische Causative-Denominativ-Bildung und ihr Zusammenhang mit den Tonaccenten. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Dempsey, Jacob. 2005. “Tonogenesis in Yipo-Burmic syllables with final stops”, Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 35/2, 405–34.Google Scholar
Downer, G. 1973. “Strata of Chinese loanwords in the Mien dialect of Yao”, Asia Major 18/1, 1–33.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1992. The Grammar of Dzongkha. Thimphu: Royal Government of Bhutan.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1993. “The Proto-Tibeto-Burman verbal agreement system”, BSOAS 56/2, 292–334.10.1017/S0041977X00005528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, August Hermann. 1905. Lower Ladakhi Version of the Kesar Saga. Calcutta: Asian Education Services.Google Scholar
Gerner, Matthias. 2007. “The lexicalization of causative verbs in the Yi group”, Folia Linguistica Historica 28/1–2, 145–85.Google Scholar
Gesang, Jumian and Gesang, Yangjing. 2002. Zangyu fangyan gailun 藏语方言概论. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Melvyn C., Shelling, T.N., Surkhang, J.T. and Robillard, Pierre. 2001. The New Tibetan–English Dictionary of Modern Tibetan. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Haller, Felix. 2004. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Handel, Zev. 2012. “Valence-changing prefixes and voicing alternation in Old Chinese and Proto-Sino-Tibetan: reconstructing *s- and *N- prefixes”, Language and Linguistics 13/1, 61–81.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2007. “Aspirate and non-aspirate voiceless consonants in Old Tibetan”, Language and Linguistics 8/2, 471–93.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2014a. “A note on voicing alternation in the Tibetan verbal system”, Transactions of the Philological Society 112/1, 1–4.10.1111/1467-968X.12006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2014b. “Tibeto-Burman *dz- > Tibetan z- and related proposals”, in Simmons, Richard VanNess and Van Auken, Newell Ann (eds), Studies in Chinese and Sino-Tibetan Linguistics, 167–78. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2003. “Un cas de dissimilation labiale en chinois archaïque: la racine ‘couvrir, renverser’ et son équivalent en tibétain”, Cahiers de Linguistique – Asie Orientale 32/1, 123–30.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2012a. “A new transcription system for Old and Classical Tibetan”, Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 35/2, 89–96.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2012b. “An internal reconstruction of Tibetan stem alternations”, Transactions of the Philological Society 110/2, 212–24.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2012.01293.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2014. “Cone”, in Sun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological Profiles of Little-Studied Tibetic Varieties, 269–375. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2015a. “The origin of the causative prefix in Rgyalrong languages and its implication for proto-Sino-Tibetan reconstruction”, Folia Linguistica Historica 36/1, 165–98.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2015b. “The spontaneous-autobenefactive prefix in Japhug Rgyalrong”, Linguistics of the Tibeto Burman Area 38/2, 271–91.10.1075/ltba.38.2.08jacCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2016. “How many *-s suffixes in Old Chinese?”, Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 9/2, 205–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2018. “Fossil nominalization prefixes in Tibetan and Chinese”, LFK Society Young Scholars Symposium. Taipei.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Lahaussois, Aimée and Rai, Dhan Bahadur. 2016. “Reflexive paradigms in Khaling”, Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39/1, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurabe, Keita. 2016. “A grammar of Jinghpaw, from northern Burma”, Kyoto University dissertation.Google Scholar
Kümmel, Martin J. 2007. Konsonantenwandel: Bausteine zu einer Typologie des Lautwandels und ihre Konsequenzen für die vergleichende Rekonstruktion. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy and Yang, Jiangling. 2004. “Reflexive and middle marking in Dulong/Rawang”, Himalayan Linguistics 2, 1–13.Google Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1933. “Certain phonetic influences of the Tibetan prefixes upon the root initials”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 6/2, 135–57.Google Scholar
Lin, You-Jing. 2014. “Thebo”, in Sun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological Profiles of Little-Studied Tibetic Varieties, 215–67. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Mei, Tsulin. 2012. “The causative *s- and nominalizing *-s in Old Chinese and related matters in Proto-Sino-Tibetan”, Language and Linguistics 13/1, 1–28.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent. 2003. “Sources of Middle Chinese manner types: Old Chinese prenasalized initials in Hmong-Mien and Sino-Tibetan perspective”, Language and Linguistics 4, 757–68.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent and Baxter, William H.. 2012. “Reconstructing the s- prefix in Old Chinese”, Language and Linguistics 13/1, 29–59.Google Scholar
Shefts-Chang, Betty. 1971. “The Tibetan causative: phonology”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 42/4, 623–765.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1986. Aspects of the Phonology of Amdo Tibetan: Ndzorge Shæme Xra Dialect. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2003a. “Phonological profile of Zhongu: a new Tibetan dialect of northern Sichuan”, Language and Linguistics 4/4, 769–836.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2003b. 求吉藏语的语音特征. Minzu yuwen 6, 1–6.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas and Rigzin, Karma. 2015. “Outline of Chocha-Ngacha”, Himalayan Linguistics 14/2, 49–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uray, Géza. 1953. “Some problems of the ancient Tibetan verbal morphology: methodological observations on recent studies”, Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 3, 37–62.Google Scholar
Zeisler, Bettina. 2004. Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages: A Comparative Study. (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs, 150.) Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeisler, Bettina. 2011. “Kenhat, the dialects of Upper Ladakh and Zanskar”, in Turin, Mark and Zeisler, Bettina (eds), Himalayan Languages and Linguistics. Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, 235–301. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Zemp, Marius. 2016. “A functional reconstruction of the Proto-Tibetan verbal system”, Himalayan Linguistics 15/2, 88–135.Google Scholar
Zhang, Jichuan. 2009. Zàngyŭ cízú yánjiū 藏语词族研究 (A study of word families in Tibetan). Beijing: Shèhuì kēxué wénxiàn chūbǎnshè.Google Scholar