# Tangut language

Tangut (Tangut: 𗼇𗟲; Chinese: 西夏語; pinyin: Xī Xiàyǔ; lit. 'Western Xia language') is an extinct language in the Sino-Tibetan language family.
Tangut was one of the official languages of the Western Xia dynasty, founded by the Tangut people in northwestern China. The Western Xia was annihilated by the Mongol Empire in 1227. The Tangut language has its own script, the Tangut script. The latest known text written in the Tangut language, the Tangut dharani pillars, dates to 1502, suggesting that the language was still in use nearly three hundred years after the collapse of Western Xia.

## Classification

Since the 2010s, Tangutologists have commonly classified Tangut as a Qiangic or Gyalrongic language. On the basis of both morphological and lexical evidence, Lai et al. (2020) classify Tangut as a West Gyalrongic language, and Beaudouin (2023) as a Horpa language.

## Rediscovery

Modern research into the Tangut languages began in the late 19th century and early 20th century when S. W. Bushell, Gabriel Devéria, and Georges Morisse separately published decipherments of a number of Tangut characters found on Western Xia coins, in a Chinese–Tangut bilingual inscription on a stele at Wuwei, Gansu, and in a copy of the Tangut translation of the Lotus Sutra.
The majority of extant Tangut texts were excavated at Khara-Khoto in 1909 by Pyotr Kozlov, and the script was identified as that of the Tangut state of Xixia. Such scholars as Aleksei Ivanovich Ivanov, Ishihama Juntaro (石濱純太郎), Berthold Laufer, Luo Fuchang (羅福萇), Luo Fucheng (羅福成), and Wang Jingru (王靜如) have contributed to research on the Tangut language. The most significant contribution was made by the Russian scholar Nikolai Aleksandrovich Nevsky (1892–1937), who compiled the first Tangut dictionary and reconstructed the meaning of a number of Tangut grammatical particles, thus making it possible to actually read and understand Tangut texts. His scholarly achievements were published posthumously in 1960 under the title Tangutskaya Filologiya (Tangut Philology), and the scholar was eventually (and posthumously) awarded the Soviet Lenin Prize for his work. The understanding of the Tangut language is far from perfect: although certain aspects of the morphology (Ksenia Kepping, The Morphology of the Tangut Language, Moscow: Nauka, 1985) and grammar (Tatsuo Nishida, Seika go no kenkyū, etc.) are understood, the syntactic structure of Tangut remains largely unexplored.
The Khara-Khoto documents are at present preserved in the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. These survived the Siege of Leningrad, but a number of manuscripts in the possession of Nevsky at the time of his arrest by the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD) in 1937 went missing, and were returned, under mysterious circumstances, to the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts only in October 1991. The collections amount to about 10,000 volumes, of mostly Buddhist texts, law codes and legal documents dating from mid-11th up to early 13th centuries. Among the Buddhist texts a number of unique compilations, not known either in Chinese or in Tibetan versions, were recently discovered. Furthermore, the Buddhist canon, the Chinese classics, and a great number of indigenous texts written in Tangut have been preserved. These other major Tangut collections, though much smaller, belong to the British Library, the French National Library ('Bibliothèque nationale de France'), the National Library in Beijing, the Library of Beijing University and other libraries.

## Reconstruction

The connection between the writing and the pronunciation of the Tangut language is even more tenuous than that between Chinese writing and the modern Chinese varieties. Thus although in Chinese more than 90% of the characters possess a phonetic element, this proportion is limited to about 10% in Tangut according to Sofronov. The reconstruction of Tangut pronunciation must resort to other sources.
The discovery of the Pearl in the Palm, a Tangut–Chinese bilingual glossary, permitted Ivanov (1909) and Laufer (1916) to propose initial reconstructions and to undertake the comparative study of Tangut. This glossary in effect indicates the pronunciation of each Tangut character with one or several Chinese characters, and inversely each Chinese character with one or more Tangut characters. The second source is the corpus of Tibetan transcriptions of Tangut. These data were studied for the first time by Nevsky (Nevskij) (1925).
Nonetheless, these two sources were not in themselves sufficient for a systematic reconstruction of Tangut. In effect, these transcriptions were not written with the intention of representing with precision the pronunciation of Tangut, but instead simply to help foreigners to pronounce and memorize the words of one language with the words of another which they could understand.
The third source, which constitutes the basis of the modern reconstructions, consists of monolingual Tangut dictionaries: the Wenhai (文海), two editions of the Tongyin (同音), the Wenhai zalei (文海雜類) and an untitled dictionary. The record of the pronunciation in these dictionaries is made using the principle of fǎnqiè, borrowed from the Chinese lexicographic tradition. Although these dictionaries may differ on small details (e.g. the Tongyin categorizes the characters according to syllable initial and rime without taking any account of tone), they all adopt the same system of 105 rimes. A certain number of rimes are in complementary distribution with respect to the place of articulation of the initials, e.g. rimes 10 and 11 or rimes 36 and 37, which shows that the scholars who composed these dictionaries had made a very precise phonetic analysis of their language.
In distinction to the transcription in foreign languages, the Tangut fanqie makes distinctions among the rhymes in a systematic and very precise manner. Due to the fǎnqiè, we now have a good understanding of the phonological categories of the language. Nonetheless, it is necessary to compare the phonological system of the dictionaries with the other sources in order to "fill in" the categories with a phonetic value.
N. A. Nevsky reconstructed Tangut grammar and provided the first Tangut–Chinese–English–Russian dictionary, which together with the collection of his papers was published posthumously in 1960 under the title Tangut Philology (Moscow: 1960). Later, substantial contribution to the research of Tangut language was done by Tatsuo Nishida (西田龍雄), Ksenia Kepping, Gong Hwang-cherng (龔煌城), M.V. Sofronov and Li Fanwen (李範文). Marc Miyake has published on Tangut phonology and diachronics. There are four Tangut dictionaries available: the one composed by N.A. Nevsky, one composed by Nishida (1966), one composed by Li Fanwen (1997, revised edition 2008) and one composed by Yevgeny Kychanov (2006).
There is growing a school of Tangut studies in China. Leading scholars include Shi Jinbo (史金波), Li Fanwen, Nie Hongyin (聶鴻音), Bai Bin (白濱) in mainland China, and Gong Hwang-cherng and Lin Ying-chin (林英津) in Taiwan. In other countries, leading scholars in the field include Yevgeny Kychanov and his student K. J. Solonin in Russia, Nishida Tatsuo and Shintarō Arakawa (荒川慎太郎) in Japan, and Ruth W. Dunnell in the United States.

## Phonology

The Tangut syllable has a CV structure and carries one of two distinctive tones, flat or rising. Following the tradition of Chinese phonological analysis the Tangut syllable is divided into initial (聲母) and rhyme (韻母) (i.e. the remaining syllable minus the initial).

### Consonants

The consonants are divided into the following categories:
| Chinese Term | Translation | Modern Term | Arakawa | Gong | Miyake |
| 重唇音類 | heavy lip | bilabials | p, ph, b, m | p, ph, b, m | p, ph, b, m |
| 輕唇音類 | light lip | labio-dentals | f, v, w | | v |
| 舌頭音類 | tongue tip | apicals (dentals) | t, th, d, n | t, th, d, n | t, th, d, n |
| 舌上音類 | tongue surface | laminals (alveolars) | ty', thy', dy', ny' | | tʂ tʂh dʐ ɳ |
| 牙音類 | molar | velars | k, kh, g, ng | k, kh, g, ŋ | k, kh, g, ŋ |
| 齒頭音類 | incisor tip | dental affricates and fricatives | ts, tsh, dz, s | ts, tsh, dz, s | ts, tsh, dz, s |
| 正齒音類 | incisor proper | palatal affricates and fricatives | c, ch, j, sh | tɕ, tɕh, dʑ, ɕ | |
| 喉音類 | throat | laryngeals | ', h | ., x, ɣ | ʔ, x, ɣ |
| 流風音類 | flowing air | resonants | l, lh, ld, z, r, zz | l, lh, z, r, ʑ | ɫ, ɬ, z, ɽr, r |
The rhyme books distinguish 105 rhyme classes, which are, in turn, classified in several ways: division/grade (等), type (環), and class (攝).
Tangut rhymes occur in three types (環). They are seen in the tradition of Nishida, followed by both Arakawa and Gong as 'normal' (普通母音), 'tense' (緊喉母音), and 'retroflex' (捲舌母音). Gong leaves normal vowels unmarked and places a dot under tense vowels and an -r after retroflex vowels. Arakawa differs only by indicating tense vowels with a final -q.
The rhyme books distinguish four vowel grades (等). In early phonetic reconstructions, all four were separately accounted for, but it has since been realized that grades three and four are in complementary distribution, depending on the initial. Consequently, the reconstructions of Arakawa and Gong do not account for this distinction. Gong represents these three grades as V, iV, and jV. Arakawa accounts for them as V, iV, and V.
In general rhyme class (攝) corresponds to the set of all rhymes under the same rhyme type which have the same main vowel.
Gong further posits phonemic vowel length and points to evidence that indicates that Tangut had a distinction that Chinese lacked. There is no certainty that the distinction was vowel length and so other researchers have remained skeptical.

### Vowels

| | Normal (普通母音) | Tense (緊喉母音) | Retroflex (捲舌母音) |
| close | i I u | iq eq uq | ir Ir ur |
| mid | e o | eq2 oq | er or |
| open | a | aq | ar |
Miyake reconstructs the vowels differently. In his reconstruction, the 95 vowels of Tangut formed from a six-vowel system in Pre-Tangut because of preinitial loss. (The two vowels in parentheses appeared only in loanwords from Chinese, and many of the vowels in class III were in complementary distribution with their equivalents in class IV.)
| Pre-Tangut vowel | Class 1 | Class 2 | Class 3 | Class 4 |
| *u | əu | o | ɨu | iu |
| *u | əəu | oo | ɨuu | iuu |
| *u | (əũ) | | | |
| *u | əụ | | ɨụ | iụ |
| *u | əuʳ | | | iuʳ |
| *i | əi | ɪ | ɨi | i |
| *i | əəi | ɪɪ | ɨii | ii |
| *i | əĩ | | ɨĩ | ĩ |
| *i | əị | | ɨị | ị |
| *i | əiʳ | ɪʳ | ɨiʳ | iʳ |
| *i | əəiʳ | ɪɪʳ | ɨiiʳ | iiʳ |
| *a | a | æ | ɨa | ia |
| *a | aa | ææ | ɨaa | iaa |
| *a | ã | æ̃ | ɨã | iã |
| *a | ạ | | ɨạ | iạ |
| *a | aʳ | æʳ | ɨaʳ | iaʳ |
| *a | aaʳ | | ɨaaʳ | iaaʳ |
| *a | | | | (ya) |
| *ə | ə | ʌ | ɨə | iə |
| *ə | əə | | ɨəə | iəə |
| *ə | ə̣ | | ɨə̣ | iə̣ |
| *ə | əʳ | ʌʳ | ɨəʳ | iəʳ |
| *ə | | | ɨəəʳ | iəəʳ |
| *e | e | ɛ | ɨe | i.e. |
| *e | ee | ɛ | ɨee | iee |
| *e | ẽ | ɛ̃ | ɨẽ | iẽ |
| *e | | ɛ̣̃ | ɨẹ̃ | iẹ̃ |
| *e | | ɛ̣ | ɨẹ | iẹ |
| *e | eʳ | ɛʳ | ɨeʳ | ieʳ |
| *ik *ek *uk | ew | ɛw | ɨew | iew |
| *ik *ek *uk | | | ɨiw | iw |
| *ik *ek *uk | eʳw | | | i(e)ʳw |
| *o | o | ɔ | ɨo | io |
| *o | | | wɨo | |
| *o | oo | ɔɔ | ɨoo | ioo |
| *o | õ | ɔ̃ | ɨõ | iõ |
| *o | | ɔ̃ɔ̃ | ɨõõ | iõõ |
| *o | ọ | ɔ̣ | ɨọ | iọ |
| *o | oʳ | ɔʳ | ɨoʳ | ioʳ |
| *o | ooʳ | | | iooʳ |
| *o | õʳ | | | iõʳ |
The classes here are related to those of Chinese rime tables.

## Morphosyntax

Tangut clause syntax prefers Subject-Object-Verb order. Like Chinese, the Tangut NP places numeral and classifier before noun.

### Verbs

Like other Gyalrongic languages, Tangut verbs are highly synthetic with many different morphological slots. The general verb temple is shown in the table below:
Tangut verb template :
| +6 | +5 | +4 | +3 | +2 | +1 | core | core | -1 | -2 | -3 | -4 |
| ja- | TAM/ORIENT | mood | NEG | modal | valency | Incorporated noun | verb stem | person | -jij¹ (Other suffixes) | -sji² | -djij² |
𗥑𗭴
xu$^1$·jow$^1$
Fu.Rong
𗤄𘒣
·jɨr$^1$dạ$^2$
ask
𗍳
nji$^2$
2.HON
𘊐𗉘𘈞𘉞
kjij$^1$-tśhjɨ$^1$-mjịj$^1$-nja$^2$
Q.PFV:IN-EXP-dream-2SG
𘘣
·jɨ$^2$
QUOT
𗥑𗭴 𗤄𘒣 𗍳 𘊐𗉘𘈞𘉞 𘘣
xu1·jow1 ·jɨr1dạ2 nji2 kjij1-tśhjɨ1-mjịj1-nja2 ·jɨ2
Fu.Rong ask 2.HON Q.PFV:IN-EXP-dream-2SG QUOT
Fu Rong asked, "did you dream?" (Leilin, 06.16B.4)
In Tangut texts, only few instances of syntactic noun incorporation are attested: the head is final, since it doesn’t move, the directional marker serves as adverb; transitive verbs can absorb the object, but not the subject. In other Qiangic languages that possess high levels of pronominalization such as Japhug and Khroskyabs, NI is still a more syntactically productive process with widespread uses.
𘈷𗗙
gji$^2$=jij$^1$
son=ANTIERG
𘙌𗦳𗠔𘉞
kjɨ$^1$-dzju$^2$-phjo$^2$-nja$^2$
PFV.IN-lord-cause-2SG.P
𘈷𗗙 𘙌𗦳𗠔𘉞
gji2=jij1 kjɨ1-dzju2-phjo2-nja2
son=ANTIERG PFV.IN-lord-cause-2SG.P
You made your son lord (of Zhongshan). (Leilin, 03.10.B.4)
𗒯
khji$^1$
Ji
𘄽𘄽
ŋạ$^2$.ŋạ$^2$
very
𗞞𗤶𘅎
dja$^2$-njɨ̣j$^1$-ljɨ̣j$^2$
PFV-heart-be.happy
𗒯 𘄽𘄽 𗞞𗤶𘅎
khji1 ŋạ2.ŋạ2 dja2-njɨ̣j1-ljɨ̣j2
Ji very PFV-heart-be.happy
Ji rejoiced with all his heart. (Leilin, 07.12.B.4)

#### Agreement

Like other Gyalrongic languages, agreement in Tangut is sensitive to both the subject and object.
In Tangut, two parts of the verb are sensitive to agreement, the person suffix (slot -1) and the verb stem itself (verbal core). For intransitive verbs, only the person suffix is relevant where it agrees with the subject of the verb. As for transitive verbs, verbs generally agree with the absolutive argument except if the absolutive argument is 3rd person and the ergative is 1st or 2nd person. In these situations, the suffix instead agrees with the ergative argument.
| Subject or Agent | Patient | Patient | Patient | Patient | Patient | Patient | Patient | Intransitive |
| Subject or Agent | 1sg | 1du | 1pl | 2sg | 2du | 2pl | 3 | Intransitive |
| 1sg | | | | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ |
| 1du | | | | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ |
| 1pl | | | | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ |
| 2sg | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | | | | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ |
| 2du | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | | | | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ |
| 2pl | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | | | | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ |
| 3 | Σ-𗧓 Σ-ŋa$^2$ | Σ-𘙌 Σ-kjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ-𘉞 Σ-nja$^2$ | Σ-𘂆 Σ-tsjɨ$^1$ | Σ-𗐱 Σ-nji$^2$ | Σ | Σ |
Cells coloured in green not only involve the person suffix but also involve alternations of the stems from the basic stem 1 to stem 2. This stem alternation pattern originates from a 3rd person object suffix of the form *-w as is also found in other Sino-Tibetan languages. In general, stem alternation involves change the vowel of the stem in a pattern shown as below.
| Stem 1 | Stem 2 | Example |
| -i/e | -o | 𗡅 dzji$^1$ → 𗠈 dzjo$^1$ "eat" |
| -u | -o | 𗕼 lju$^2$ → 𗬘 ljo$^2$ "to throw" |
| -ej/ij | -o | 𗿷 dźjij$^2$ → 𗲉 dźjo$^2$ "to possess" |
| -ej/ij | -i/e | 𘟀 ljij$^2$ → 𗐵 lji$^2$ "to see" |
| -a | -ɨ/ə | 𗴒 kjạ$^1$ → 𗕐 kjɨ̣$^1$ "to fear" |