Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:10.

Brill’s
Tibetan Studies
Library
Edited by

Henk Blezer
Alex McKay
Charles Ramble

Languages of the Greater
Himalayan Region
Edited by

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

George L. Van Driem

VOLUME 5/12

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:10.

Himalayan Languages
and Linguistics
Studies in Phonology, Semantics,
Morphology and Syntax

Edited by

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

Mark Turin and Bettina Zeisler

LEIDEN • BOSTON
2011
Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:10.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISSN 1568-6183
ISBN 978 90 04 19448 9

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

Copyright 2011 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission
from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by
Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to
The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910,
Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:10.

CONTENTS
Notes on contributors .........................................................................vii
Introduction ..........................................................................................1
Mark Turin and Bettina Zeisler
PART ONE: The Himalayas in history
Lost in the sands of time somewhere north of the Bay of Bengal ......13
George van Driem
PART TWO: Phonology and script
A key to four transcription systems of Lepcha...................................41
Heleen Plaisier
Dialectal particularities of Sogpho Tibetan – an introduction to
the “Twenty-four villages’ patois” .....................................................55
Hiroyuki Suzuki
PART THREE: Semantics (words and word classes)
On the Old Tibetan Term Khrin in the legal and ritual lexicons ........77
Brandon Dotson
A functional analysis of adjectives in Newar .....................................99
Kazuyuki Kiryu

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

PART FOUR: Morphology and syntax
The role of animacy in the verbal morphology of Dongwang
Tibetan..............................................................................................133
Ellen Bartee
The Sampang verbal agreement system ...........................................183
René Huysmans
Ergativity in Kundal Shahi, Kashmiri and Hindko...........................219
Khawaja A. Rehman
Kenhat, the dialects of Upper Ladakh and Zanskar..........................235
Bettina Zeisler

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:21.

vi

CONTENTS

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

Index................................................................................................. 303

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:21.

INTRODUCTION

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

MARK TURIN AND BETTINA ZEISLER
The greater Himalayan region is the principal meeting point for thetwo largest language families of the world, Indo-European and TibetoBurman. The same massifs have also been home to two smaller language families (Austroasiatic and Dravidian), and to two language isolates (Burushaski and Kusunda). Despite their physical prominence,
the Himalayas constitute not so much an insurmountable barrier but
rather a region of interaction between these various language families.
Indo-Iranian languages, and perhaps also Burushaski, were in all probability spoken along the northern slopes of the western Himalayas before the spread of Tibetan to this area in the second half of the firstmillennium CE. Much earlier still, Tibeto-Burman languages established themselves on the southern slopes, while the speakers of IndoAryan and Iranian languages entered these mountainous regions along
the river valleys from the south and, then again, from the northwest.
Whether such incursions were motivated by conquest or were rather
of a more peaceful nature, the resulting linguistic situation was usuallycharacterised by coexistence, with specific niches supporting the survival of specific languages. In those instances where speech forms
were abandoned, and where a shift to a dominant language occurred,as in the case of Balti and Shamskat Ladakhi (from Eastern Iranian
and/or Dardic languages to Tibetan), the transition took much longer
than allowed for by the standard three-generation model for languages
under extreme pressure. Multilingualism was surely the norm rather
than the exception in many parts of the Himalayas, and this linguistic
pluralism left traces in the languages involved. For example, a significant proportion of the lexicon of Newar, a Tibeto-Burman language
spoken in Nepal, derives from Indo-Aryan; while Ladakhi, spoken in
Jammu & Kashmir (India), and Balti spoken in Pakistan, have not
only acquired and retained certain traits from Dardic languages, buthave even influenced the latter.
The geopolitical shifts brought about by the British colonisation of
the Indian subcontinent, and the subsequent introduction of Englishmedium education together with the spread of modern mass communi-

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

2

MARK TURIN & BETTINA ZEISLER

cation, helped Indo-European (whether in the form of Hindi, Urdu or
English) to gain ground, furthering the decline of many regional andlocal languages.
While the diversity of the sub-groupings within Tibeto-Burman ison a par with that of the Germanic or Romance languages of Europe,(even if their speaker numbers are relatively low), this richness in variation and the opportunity for original, fundamental research has not yet
translated into a profusion of linguists working in Himalayan areas.
Furthermore, while the Himalayan region is the nucleus for languagesof the Tibeto-Burman family, and also the area of their greatest diversity, this mountainous territory remains somewhat peripheral for scholars working on other language families. This is reflected in the interests of the participants of the Himalayan Languages Symposia held todate, with the majority of researchers focussing on Tibeto-Burman
languages. This collection, too, originating at the 11th Himalayan Languages Symposium, held at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok,
Thailand, in December, 2005, brings together a number of papers on
the sub-groupings of Tibeto-Burman, such as Kiranti, Lepcha, Newarand Tibetan, one paper on Indo-Aryan, and another which addresses
data from Austroasiatic. The present volume contains a selection of sixof the best papers first presented at the Bangkok meeting, albeit fundamentally revised and significantly updated with more recent field data,
and all situated in a wider conceptual and comparative context. Three
additional papers were invited on the basis of topical interest and new
research findings coming to light (van Driem, Huysmans and Plaisier).
Each of these nine contributions highlight the results of primary research, whether from the field or based on comparative material.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

THE HIMALAYAS IN HISTORY
Focussing on the eastern Himalayas, George van Driem provides ahelpful introduction to the background context and macro-history of
two Himalayan language families, Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman.
In so doing, he draws on archaeology, population genetics, and linguistic reconstruction, and what may be termed linguistic paleaontology (the attempt to understand the material culture of a language family on the basis of its inherited lexicon). According to van Driem, these
two language families hold the key to understanding the populationprehistory of northeastern India and the Indo-Burmese borderlands.

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

INTRODUCTION

3

The original Tibeto-Burman homeland nominates itself on accountof the density of its speakers in the northeastern segment of the Indian
subcontinent. The location of the ancestral Austroasiatic homeland,
however, lying somewhere between South Asia and Southeast Asia, in
the area around the northern coast of the Bay of Bengal, may be posited on the basis of linguistic palaeontology, the distribution of modern Austroasiatic language communities and the deep phylogenetic divisions in the family tree. Linguistic palaeontology further identifies
the ancient speakers of Austroasiatic as likely being the earliest cultivators of rice, since a rich repertoire of reconstructible roots representing ancient rice agriculture is robustly reflected in all branches of thislanguage family.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

PHONOLOGY AND SCRIPT
Closer to the ground, the second section opens with a discussion of how
spoken and written languages are best transcribed and transliterated.
Due to India’s colonial heritage and the wide reach of English medium education, many speakers of languages indigenous to the subcontinent rely on conventions of English orthography when giving their
tongues written form in Roman script. On occasion, this can result in
arbitrary transcriptions signalling contrasts where there are none. A
standardised system of transcription, then, based on linguistic criteria
and understanding, would be beneficial for both native speakers andconcerned fieldworkers. Heleen Plaisier discusses these issues in detail for the case of Lepcha (spoken in Sikkim and Kalimpong), carefully evaluating three established orthographic systems (two introducedby Western authors, the other by a native scholar), each of which havedifferent shortcomings, and contrasts them with her own more systematic approach.
Tibetan languages and dialects vary considerably in the degree towhich they preserve the original phonological complexity documented
in Old or Classical Tibetan orthography. Initial clusters, for example,
are best preserved in West Tibetan (Balti and Ladakhi), followed by
the Eastern Tibetan Amdo dialects spoken in nomadic regions. The
non-nomadic Amdo dialects, as well as the Khams Tibetan dialects,
typically occupy an intermediate position between the phonologicallyconservative dialects and the phonologically most innovative Central
Tibetan dialects, where practically all clusters are reduced to a single

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

4

MARK TURIN & BETTINA ZEISLER

consonant in word-initial position. Such rough classifications will needfurther qualification and nuancing, however, as more hitherto undescribed Tibetan dialects are documented and analysed.
While Sogpho Tibetan, as described by Hiroyuki Suzuki in this volume, is classified as a Khams Tibetan dialect by virtue of its location (itis spoken in Danba County in western Sichuan), it nevertheless shows
several conservative features which are otherwise only recorded among
the phonologically conservative Amdo dialects. Examples include preaspiration resulting from former clusters with dental and velar preinitials, the retention of clusters with labial stop initials as prelabialised
consonants and the partial retention of clusters with a labial initial followed by a palatal glide or alveolar trill. In most Tibetan dialects, theseclusters have developed into palatal or alveopalatal affricates and retroflex stops or affricates. Sogpho and the nomadic Amdo dialects areexamples of an intermediate stage: while the initial remains unaffected
or simply weakened, the post-initial glide or trill undergoes the majorchange, and the final stage is reached only by dropping the initial labial. Such findings are extremely important for our understanding of
the mechanics and history of sound changes in Tibetan, and this paper
is therefore an original and important contribution to this end.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

SEMANTICS (WORDS AND WORD CLASSES)
Following a more traditional philological approach, Brandon Dotson
offers a precise study of an item of the Old Tibetan legal and rituallexicon: khrin. Philology and linguistics diverged from one anotherlong ago, and while pertinent linguistic issues are almost entirely neglected in Tibetan studies, most modern linguists lack the experienceand skills to make sense of Tibetan texts, which are often opaque evento the specialist. The rare vocabulary and lack of lexical resources in
Old Tibetan add to the difficulties of decoding the syntax of a languagethat is as yet imperfectly understood.
Dotson’s contribution is an important step in the re-integration of
linguistics with philology, in that he demonstrates the context-sensitivity of lexical items, particularly when used in a technical context.
As a legal term, khrin should be translated as ‘judicial punishment’,even though the most basic meaning of the word khrin is ‘lead’ or‘tether’, an instrument for leading (sacrificial) animals along as wellas the recipients of legal punishment. The noun khrin ‘tether’ can be

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

INTRODUCTION

5

analysed as a derivation of the verb 'khrid in Dotson’s transliteration‘lead along’, with an archaic, unproductive derivational suffix (-d/ -n)added to the root *khri. Beyond the ideological reshaping of concepts
and meanings, Dotson’s paper also offers insights into the daily practice of ancient Tibetan bureaucrats, who, under certain circumstances
at least, decided legal cases by rolling dice.
The definition of parts of speech has long been the awkward stepchild of Tibeto-Burman studies. Word classes are typically establishedrather loosely according to the intuition of mostly non-native scholars,
following in broad strokes the classifications found in dominant European languages of which they are native speakers.
Adjectivals, namely words describing qualia, constitute a particularly intricate class, oscillating between their more state-like properties,
which are linked with nominals, and their more dynamic properties,
which are linked with verbs. In some languages, such as Tibetan, adjectivals are split between basic verbal forms used as predicates andderived nominal forms used attributively. Newar, spoken in the Kathmandu valley of Nepal, exhibits an even more complex picture. Whilesome researchers of Newar have denied the existence of a separate
class of adjectives altogether, Kazuyuki Kiryu argues for the existenceof a distinct word class and, based on morphosyntactic criteria, proposes that Newar adjectives be divided into three subclasses. Discussing thirteen conceptual domains usually associated with adjectivals,
Kiryu identifies nine concepts that are realised as adjectives. He further distinguishes between verb-like adjectives, non-verb-like adjectives, and non-predicative adjectives.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

MORPHOLOGY AND SYNTAXIn many Tibeto-Burman languages, and among the Tibetan languages
in particular, the distinction between conjunct information related toan (intentionally acting or controlling) ‘informant’ (that is, speaker inassertions, addressee in questions) and disjunct information not related
to such an informant has become grammaticalised along with the concept of evidentiality, namely the distinction between varying sourcesof knowledge. Ellen Bartee reports on the Southern Khams Tibetan dialect of Dongwang, spoken in Shangri-la County in north-west Yunnan,
which, like most other modern Tibetan varieties, shows a conjunct/disjunct system besides evidential marking. Unlike all other Tibetan dia-

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

6

MARK TURIN & BETTINA ZEISLER

lects, however, Dongwang, and possibly other Southern Khams dialects also, displays an animacy distinction in existential linking verbs
and auxiliaries based on these very verbs. This distinction operates on
S and O (more precisely possessed) arguments and interacts with the
conjunct/disjunct system.
Having discussed all possible combinations of conjunct/disjunct andanimacy marking and their uses in various non-existential clauses,
Bartee investigates the possible origins of the animacy distinction. A
similar animacy distinction is found in Lolo-Burmese languages, suchas Naxi, and since the speakers of Dongwang Tibetan have been incontact with the Naxi people for several centuries, the innovation in
Dongwang most likely results from intensive linguistic contact. Bartee
briefly outlines the history of interaction between the two communities, and also provides a short description of the animacy distinction in
Naxi. According to her analysis, the combination of the Dongwang
conjunct/disjunct opposition with the animacy distinction has resulted
in something akin to a cross-referencing agreement system, thus distinguishing itself from other evidential systems in modern Tibetan.
Nepal’s Kiranti languages are known for their intricate verbal agreement systems, perhaps the most complex in Tibeto-Burman. In his paper, René Huysmans provides the first published analysis of the verbal
agreement system of Sampang, a Kiranti language spoken in eastern
Nepal. While Sampang intransitive verbs agree with their only argument, transitive verbs show agreement both with the agent, i.e. transitive subject, and the non-agent, i.e. the undergoer, recipient, patient, or
beneficiary. Singular, dual, and plural number is marked on all actants,
and non-singular first person actants are further distinguished for inclusion or non-inclusion of the addressee. The Sampang verbal stringis home to eleven affixal slots (one prefixal, the rest suffixal) forcross-referencing, tense marking, negation, and for additional copy
morphemes. Many of the morphemes in question have several allomorphs, including zero-allomorphs, and, to complicate the picture further, several morphemes have fused into portmanteau morphemes. Asa side effect, there is even more complex marking for combinations offirst person patient with third person agents in past tense, reflecting ahigher level of semantic transitivity.
After laying bare the elaborate verbal morphology of Sampang,
and having discussed several analytical alternatives, Huysmans demonstrates that a large portion of its morphemic inventory can be re-Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

7

lated in a straightforward manner to the Proto-Kiranti verbal agreement model. Sampang verbal morphology is particularly reminiscent of
the verbal agreement system of Kulung, but also shows similarities tothe verbal morphology of Limbu and Lohorung. In short, Kiranti morphological change can be seen to be primarily semantically driven:
while the formal systems are indices of meaning, their re-analysis andre-modelling are propelled by ever re-interpreted shades of meaning.
While the agreement patterns of Indo-Aryan languages are certainly less complicated than those of their Tibeto-Burman counterparts, there are variations in whether a verb agrees only with the least
agent-like argument (always in the absolutive/nominative) or also withfurther arguments. In his contribution, Khawaja A. Rehman discusses
three different languages spoken in the Neelam Valley in Pakistanadministered Kashmir: his own native language Kashmiri, the dominant language Hindko and the highly endangered Kundal Shahi. All
three languages show full agreement with the least agent-like argument, while Kashmiri, as spoken in the Neelam valley, displays additional agreement in person and number with third person plural andsecond person agent-like arguments. In contrast to other Indo-Aryan
languages, where intransitive verbs may display alternations between absolutive and ergative marking, Neelam Kashmiri further shows obligatory ergative marking for a set of more agentive or volitional one-place
verbs, including reflexives such as ‘bathe’, sound production verbs
such as ‘laugh’, and motion verbs such as ‘dance’. Interestingly, mostof these verbs do not display gender-based agreement, that is, they
only exhibit masculine agreement markers.
Dialect classifications are often based on the most evident differences in phonology and lexicon. With respect to the Tibetan varieties,
Bettina Zeisler shows that such an approach may be misleading. In thecase of the two dialect groups spoken in Upper and Lower Ladakh(Jammu & Kashmir, India), Kenhat and Shamskat, the essential difference is not between the dialects that preserve a conservative phonology with initial clusters, close to 9th century Old Tibetan, and thosethat have lost all clusters, but rather between the dialects that distinguish morphologically between agents and possessors, and those that
do not. Other differences at the level of syntax include various waysof marking tense and evidentiality.
In terms of phonology, the Kenhat dialects are particularly intriguing as their minor differences provide a model for the progressive stages

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

8

MARK TURIN & BETTINA ZEISLERof the loss of initial consonant clusters, in the vocalisation of the final
sibilant and in the trans-phonologisation from voice to register tone
distinctions. More importantly, even though their phonology is lessconservative than that of the Shamskat dialects, Kenhat dialects show
more lexical and grammatical archaisms, allowing us to trace the morphological developments that both dialect groups, along with other
Tibetan varieties, must have undergone.
This is an important lesson in itself, since historical reconstruction in
general, and that of the Tibeto-Burman languages in particular, tends
to be based on somewhat superficial aspects of phonology and neglects
the development of grammatical systems. The phonologically innovative Central Tibetan varieties, to date largely disregarded in attempts
at reconstruction, may be as rich in lexical and syntactic archaisms as
the Kenhat dialects of Upper Ladakh, while the phonologically mostconservative dialects might not necessarily represent the oldest layersof the language.
Where van Driem focuses on the most southeasterly section of theHimalayas and their prolongation into the Bay of Bengal, Rehman andZeisler focus on the extreme north-west and its extension into the Hindu
Kush. Towards the center of these geographical extremes, Suzuki andBartee lead us to the northern and southern regions of Tibet, Plaisierto Sikkim, and Huysmans and Kiryu to eastern and central Nepal respectively. Between the two poles of macro-history, as represented by
van Driem’s overview of tens of thousands of years of language development and population migration, and micro-history, as embodied in
Dotson’s careful reconstruction of the semantics of a specific lexical
item used in the bureaucratic jargon of the Tibetan Empire around one
thousand years ago, we find Bartee’s description of the last one thousand years of interaction between two communities speaking TibetoBurman languages, and Zeisler’s analysis of the Upper Ladakhi varieties, offering us a glimpse into the prehistory of Tibetan speech forms.
This volume has been a long time in the making. Five years haveelapsed since the initial conference that brought many of the contributors together and the final publication of this edited book. While thedelays are regrettable, and remain our responsibility alone, we believethat the collection has matured in the oak and is the better for the wait.
In our capacity as editors, we wish to thank Dr Krisadawan Hongladarom, a linguist at Chulalongkorn University and founder of the impressive Thousand Stars Foundation that promotes understanding of

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.

INTRODUCTION

9

Copyright © 2011. BRILL. All rights reserved.

Tibetan religion and culture, both for convening the conference andfor her support in the early stages of this volume’s production. In addition, we are very grateful to the students and staff of Chulalongkorn
University for helping to make the conference a success; to the former
Collaborative Research Centre 441 at the University of Tübingen fororganisational and financial assistance; to the anonymous reviewer ofthe manuscript for such careful reading and helpful comments; toPatricia Radder and the team at Brill for their responsiveness and interest; to Eleanor Wilkinson for her assistance with preparing the index and to all of our contributors for their considerable patience andgood cheer.

Himalayan Languages and Linguistics : Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, BRILL, 2011. ProQuest Ebook
Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=737786.
Created from ubc on 2018-10-08 17:34:38.