Article published In: The Functions of Evidentiality
Edited by Eric Mélac and Pascale Leclercq
[Functions of Language 31:1] 2024
► pp. 34–62
The discourse functions of simple copulas in Dzongkha
Published online: 9 July 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22056.wat
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22056.wat
Abstract
The marking on copular verbs in Tibetic languages is regarded as an exemplar of egophoricity, although the extent
to which it has been grammaticalized varies between languages. Dzongkha, a southern Tibetic language, is somewhat atypical of the
egophoric pattern in the sense that the basic opposition in copulas exhibits a mirative pattern, wherein the non-mirative
(egophoric) copula occurs with all grammatical persons in declaratives and interrogatives, and the mirative (non-egophoric) occurs
with the 3rd person and rarely with 1st and 2nd persons. The conversational data studied for this paper also show that the speaker
need not take knowledge stances that bifurcate the world between objectively ‘old’ and ‘new’ knowledge and the attendant
associations of knowledge with a particular grammatical person. Rather, the speaker’s representation of events is subjective, and
dependent, in part, on the knowledge stances between speaker and respondent. What is in view in conversational interaction are the
social goals of the conversation — assertions, face-saving strategies, and arriving at mutually shared knowledge — and the
Dzongkha copulas are a manipulable linguistic resource in achieving these.
Keywords: Tibetic, mirativity, egophoricity, evidentiality, copula, conversational interaction
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.An overview
- 2.1Background information on Dzongkha
- 2.2Typological overview
- 3.A basic egophoric vs. mirative opposition?
- 4.Linguistic categories as an interactional resource
- 5.A subjective system of representation
- 5.1Subjective representation with equative copulas
- 5.2Subjective representation with existential copulas
- 6.Questions that seek specific information and their responses
- 6.1The equative ′ing in Q-word questions
- 6.2The equative ′îmme in Q-word questions
- 6.3The auxiliary me in polar questions
- 6.4The interrogative ′mo in Q-word questions
- 6.5Summary of equative copulas in Q-word questions
- 7.Questions seeking confirmation and their responses
- 7.1Confirmation questions with yö ′mo
- 7.2Confirmation questions with dû ′mo
- 7.3Confirmation questions with ong ′mo
- 8.Conclusion
- Notes
- Abbreviations
References
References (31)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Robert M. W. Dixon. 2016. The
grammar of knowledge: A cross-linguistic view of evidentials and the expression of information
source. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M. W. Dixon (eds.), The
grammar of knowledge: A cross-linguistic
typology, 1–51. Oxford: OUP.
Bradley, David. 1997. Tibeto-Burman
languages and classification. In David Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman
languages of the
Himalayas, 1–71. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Margret Selting. 2001. Introducing
interactional linguistics. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Margret Selting (eds.), Studies
in interactional
linguistics, 1–22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 2000. Why “first/non-first person”
is not grammaticalized mirativity. In Keith Allan & John Henderson (eds.), Proceedings
of ALS2k, the 2000 Conference of the Australian Linguistic
Society, 203–300. Available at [URL]
Denwood, Philip. 1999. Tibetan. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
DeLancey, Scott. 1997. Mirativity:
the grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic
Typology 11. 33–52.
. 2003. Lhasa
Tibetan. In Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds.), The
Sino-Tibetan languages, 235–256. New York, NY: Routledge.
van Driem, George. 1991. Guide
to official Dzongkha romanization. Gaylegphug, Bhutan: Sherab Lham Press.
van Driem, George & Karma Tshering. 1998. A
grammar of Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School CNWS, School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies.
Floyd, Simeon, Elizabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.). 2018. Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hyslop, Gwendolyn & Karma Tshering. 2017. An
overview of some epistemic categories in Dzongkha. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential
systems of Tibetan
languages, 351–365. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Hyslop, Gwendolyn. 2018. Mirativity
and egophoricity in Kurtöp. In Simeon Floyd, Elizabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), 109–137.
Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics
in Action: action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social
Interaction 451. 1–29.
Kirby, James & Gwendolyn Hyslop. 2019. Phonetic
structures of Dzongkha obstruents. In Sasha Calhoun, Paola Escudero, Marija Tabain & Paul Warren (eds.), Proceedings
of the 19th International Congress of Phonetic
Sciences, 3607–3611. Canberra: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association.
Labov, William & David Fanshel. 1977. Therapeutic
discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Mélac, Eric. 2014. L’évidentialité
en anglais. Approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus
anglais-tibétain. Paris: Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3 PhD thesis.
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. Agreeing
and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn
shapes. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures
of social
action, 57–101. Cambridge: CUP.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence organization in interaction: A
primer in conversation analysis, vol.
1. Cambridge: CUP.
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elizabeth Norcliffe. 2018. Egophoricity:
an introduction. In Simeon Floyd, Elizabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), 1–78.
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje. 2005. Manual
of Standard Tibetan: Language and civilization. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion.
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2013. The
Tibetic languages and their classification. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan
linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan
area, 105–130. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla. 2014. Towards
a new approach to evidentiality. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman
area 371. 240–262.
Watters, Stephen. 1996. A
preliminary study of prosody in Dzongkha. Arlington, TX: University of Texas at Arlington Master’s thesis.
. 2018. A
grammar of Dzongkha (dzo): Phonology, words, and simple clauses. Houston, TX: Rice University PhD thesis.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 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.
