In:Give Constructions across Languages
Edited by Myriam Bouveret
[Constructional Approaches to Language 29] 2021
► pp. 175–193
Chapter 7
The semantics of the verb give in
Tibetan
The development of the transfer construction and the honorific domain
Published online: 10 March 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.29.07eri
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.29.07eri
Abstract
This paper aims to examine the behaviour of
the equivalents of ‘give’ in Lhasa Tibetan in order to confirm,
qualify or invalidate the universal tendencies that previous
cross-linguistic research has unveiled (Newman 1996, Ed., 1997). We will first explore the semantic
relations between the various forms that can express ‘give’ in
Tibetan: SPRAD, BTANG,
GNANG and PHUL, on the basis
of previous lexicographic and descriptive research on Lhasa Tibetan,
as well as a corpus of spoken Lhasa Tibetan (TSC). We will see that
the most basic term (SPRAD) has not developed much
beyond its literal meaning, whereas the hypernymic
BTANG is used as a light verb whose
constructions can be divided into several categories of meaning.
GNANG is the honorific form of
SPRAD, and PHUL is its
humilific form. While SPRAD is not used as a light
verb, its honorific and humilific counterparts are very productive
light verbs. To explain this phenomenon, we will explore the
honorific domain, and its systematisation in Lhasa Tibetan (Hajime, 1975; Rdorje et al.,
1993; DeLancey,
1998; Tournadre
& Sangda Dorje, 1998; Dorje & Lhazom, 2002). We will see that
the humilific plane is not the symmetrical opposite of the honorific
plane. We will also explore the productivity of
GNANG and PHUL, which can be
explained by the fact that giving is one of the most basic
interpersonal actions of the human behavioural repertoire. It
therefore establishes a link between two humans, which is essential
in order for the honorific and humilific notions to emerge.
Keywords: give, Tibetan, light verbs, honorific, humilific
Article outline
- 1.The polyfunctionality of give
- 2.The various lexical items corresponding to give
in Tibetan
- 2.1 The polysemy of give
- 2.2‘Tibetan’ and the tibetic language family
- 2.3 Give in Old and Classical Tibetan
- 2.4 Give in standard spoken Tibetan
- 2.5 Give as a light verb
- 3.The distribution of
sprad
,
gnang
and
phul
in standard spoken Tibetan
- 3.1The Tibetan verb sprad
- 3.2The Tibetan verb gnang
- 3.3The Tibetan verb phul
- 4.Give and the honorific domain
- 4.1The honorific domain in Tibetan
- 4.2The functioning of give in the Tibetan honorific system
- 4.3The emergence of gnang and phul as light verbs of the honorific domain
- 5.Conclusion
List of abbreviations Notes References
References (49)
Dictionaries
Das, S. C. (1902). A Tibetan-English dictionary with Sanskrit
synonyms. Bengal Calcutta. Secretariat Book Depôt.
Goldstein, M. C., & Kashi, T. D. (1978). Tibetan English Dictionary of Modern
Tibetan. Ratna Pustak Bhandar.
Mélac, E., Robin, F. and Simon, C. (2014). Vocabulaire thématique de langue parlée
français-tibétain. Paris: L’ Asiathèque.
The Tibetan and Himalayan Library
(2007)
Corpora
Davies, Mark
coca:
Davies, Mark. (2008) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA):
520 million words, 1990-present. Available online at [URL].
Mélac, Eric
tsc:
Mélac, Eric (2010–2011) The Tibet Student Corpus (TSC): 4 hours 9 min.
Books and articles
Bartee, E. (2011). The role of animacy in the verbal morphology
of Dongwang Tibetan. In Himalayan Languages and Linguistics (pp. 131–182). Brill.
Butt, M., & Lahiri, A. (2003). Historical stability vs. historical
change. Unpublished Ms. [URL].
Chirkova, K. (2017). Evidentials in Pingwu Baima. In Gawne, L. & Hill, N. W. (Eds., 2017). Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages (Vol. 302). Walter de Gruyter, GmbH & Co KG.
DeLancey, S. (1990). Ergativity and the cognitive model of event
structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic
Bibliography), 1(3), 289–322.
DeLancey, S. (1998). Semantic categorization in Tibetan honorific
nouns. Anthropological Linguistics, 109–123.
De Lancey, S. (2017). Evidentiality in Tibetic. file:///C:/Users/Kladpa/Downloads/Ch20_Evidentiality%20in%20Tibetic%20(3).pdf
Denwood, P. (1999). Tibetan (Vol. 3). John Benjamins Publishing.
Gawne, L., & Hill, N. W. (Eds.). (2017). Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages (Vol. 302). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Gilquin, G. (2008). What you think ain’t what you get: Highly
polysemous verbs in mind and language. Du fait grammatical au fait cognitif. From Gram to
Mind: Grammar as Cognition, 2, 235–255.
Hyslop, G. & Tsering, K. (2017). An overview of some epistemic categories in
Dzongkha. In Gawne, L., & Hill, N. W. (Eds., 2017). Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages (Vol. 302). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected
aspects of universals of linguistic
politeness. Multilingual journal of cross-cultural and
interlanguage communication, 8(2–3), 223–248.
Kopp, T. K. (1998). Verbalizers in Lhasa Tibetan. MA thesis. The University of Texas at Arlington.
Loveday, L. (1986). Explorations in Japanese sociolinguistics. John Benjamins Publishing.
Mohanan, T. (2006). Grammatical verbs (with special reference to
light verbs). The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, 459–492.
Montaut, A. (1991). Aspects, voix et diathèses en hindi moderne :
syntaxe, sémantique, énonciation. Préf. de Claude Hagège. Louvain; Paris: Ed. Peeters.
Okamoto, S. (1999). Situated politeness: manipulating honorific
and non-honorific expressions in Japanese
conversations. Pragmatics, 9(1), 51–74.
Randall, M. G. G. (2016). The Properties of Lhasa Tibetan Verbalizers. MA Thesis. Payap University.
Simon, C. (2011). Dérivation causative en tibétain (Lhasa). MA Thesis. Université de Provence.
Sun, J. T. S. (Ed.). (2014). Phonological Profiles of Little-studied Tibetic
Varieties. Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Suzuki, H. (2017). The evidential system of Zhollam
Tibetan. In Gawne, L., & Hill, N. W. (Eds., 2017). Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages (Vol. 302). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Tournadre, N. & Dorje, S. (2003, re-ed. 2009). Manual of Standard Tibetan: language and
civilization. Snow Lion Publications, Incorporated.
Tournadre, N. & Lessan-Pezechki, H. (forthcoming). Les verbes supports et leur typologie : A la croisée
du lexique et de la grammaire.
Tournadre, N. & Shao, M. (forthcoming). Intentionality, Evidentiality and Epistemicity in
Amdo Tibetan.
Tournadre, N. & Suzuki, H. (forthcoming). The Tibetic languages. An introduction to the family
of languages derived from Old Tibetan.
Tournadre, N. (2014). The Tibetic languages and their
classification. Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and
descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129.
Tournadre, N., & Jiatso, K. (2001). Final auxiliary verbs in literary Tibetan and
in the dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 24(1), 49–111.
Tournadre, N., Sherpa, N. S., Chodrak, G. & Oisel, G. (2009). Sherpa-english and English-sherpa Dictionary with
Literary Tibetan and Nepali Equivalents. Vajra Publications. [URL]
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
