Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

42 results

Page 1 of 3

North East Indian Linguistics
  • Volume 5
  • Edited by Gwendolyn Hyslop, Stephen Morey, Mark W. Post
  • Published by:
    Foundation Books
    Published online:
    05 September 2013
    Print publication:
    01 March 2013
  • North East Indian Linguistics Volume 5 presents the latest research on the languages of North East India. This present volume both builds on earlier contributions made by established NEILS participants and introduces new work by scholars making their first mark in regional scholarship.

    Providing a rich database in the form of two appendices, Alexander Kondakov’s paper represents a solid sociolinguistic background against which future grammatical investigation of Koch dialects can be conducted. Mark W. Post’s paper continues Kondakov’s focus on the social and cultural dimensions of dialectology, in an attempt to resolve the vexing question of Galo’s genetic position in the Tani languages. Gwendolyn Hyslop presents the most comprehensive statement yet of the internal structure of this little-studied subgroup spanning Arunachal Pradesh and neighbouring Bhutan. Continuing investigation into nominalization and relational marking in North East Indian languages, Stephen Morey demonstrates that Latin-style grammatical ‘case’ labels are often inappropriate for the languages of North East India. The volume closes with an analysis of Wihu song poetry by Stephen Morey and Meenaxi Bhattacharjya – the latest of several ground-breaking contributions to ethno-musico-linguistic studies in North East India emerging from the Volkswagenstiftung-funded project led by Stephen Morey.

North East Indian Linguistics
  • Volume 4
  • Edited by Gwendolyn Hyslop, Stephen Morey, Mark W. Post
  • Published by:
    Foundation Books
    Published online:
    05 May 2013
    Print publication:
    01 January 2012
  • North East India is one of the most linguistically diverse regions of the world, with over 100, and perhaps as many as 200, different languages spoken. This book aims to produce a volume reflective of both the linguistic diversity of the region as well as the high quality of current research on North East Indian Linguistics. The articles in this volume cover four of the language families represented in North East India: Tai-Kadai, Indo-Aryan, Tibeto-Burman, and Austroasiatic. Divided into seven sections, the book presents the description and analysis of a wide variety of phonological, syntactic, morphological, socio-linguistic and historical topics in the study of several languages of the region – origin of the Boro-Garo language family, Boro-Garo grammar, serial verbs in a hitherto undescribed variety of Boro, information about Dimasa dialects, phonology of Hajong, a language of Assam and Meghalaya, and analysis of copula constructions in Assam Sadri. The volume also contains an analysis of pronouns in Madhav Kandali’s Ramayana, a version of the Ramayana written in colloquial Assamese of the fourteenth century. The final section in this volume discusses serial verb constructions in the Austroasiatic language war, the most detailed discussion of war syntax and semantics to date.Contributions in this volume range from renowned scholars of Tibeto-Burman linguistics to students from the North East making their first impact in the field of Linguistics. The book will be of interest to linguists, anthropologists, social scientists and general readers with an interest in the study, preservation and appreciation of North East Indian cultural and linguistic diversity.

  • 2 - The Siyom River Valley: An essay on intra-subgroup convergence in Tibeto-Burman

  • from Contact and genetic linguistics
  • Edited by Gwendolyn Hyslop, Research Fellow, Linguistics, Australian National University, Stephen Morey, Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Centre for Research on Language Diversity, La Trobe University, Mark W. Post, Oberassistent, Historical Linguistics, Universität Bern
  • Book:
    North East Indian Linguistics
    Published by:
    Foundation Books
    Published online:
    05 September 2013
    Print publication:
    01 March 2013, pp 60-90

  • Summary

    Introduction

    This paper has a fairly modest primary goal: to remove a question mark ‘?’ which appears to the right of Galo (i.e., ‘Gallong’) in Sun's (1993; Sun 2003) provisional family tree of the Tani branch of Tibeto-Burman languages (Figure 1).

    The question mark appears in Sun's tree for a good reason: as he was compiling his masterful comparative-historical study of the Tani languages in the years leading up to 1993, most of the evidence available to Sun suggested aligning Galo genetically with Western Tani languages such as Hills Miri, Nyishi and Tagin. At the same time, though, Galo exhibited several features which were more characteristic of Eastern Tani languages such as Bori, Padam and Mising. At the time of Sun's writing, there was no obvious means of understanding why this should have been the case. The paper's second goal, then, will be to attempt to explain this situation on the basis of data and observations from the Western/Eastern Tani border areas obtained during 2008–2009.

    Specifically, I will argue that while Sun was correct to align Galo genetically with Western Tani, a long history of population contacts and mutual influence among Galo and the neighboring Eastern Tani group Minyong (Adi) has led to cultural-linguistic convergence, and to a tendency for some Galo dialects to acquire certain Eastern Tani traits. In the process, my hope is that something will be learned about how intrasubgroup cultural-linguistic contact and convergence can operate in the Tibeto-Burman region, and can considerably complicate (though, I will argue, not fatally weaken) an overall picture of genetic descent.

Page 1 of 3