Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 41:1 (2018) ► pp.75–105

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Transitivity markers in West Himalayish

Synchronic and diachronic considerations

 | University of Zurich
Published online: 20 July 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.17011.wid
Abstract
The present paper describes a transitivity distinction that is attested in some Tibeto-Burman (TB) languages of the West Himalayish (WH) subgroup. The relevant distinction is encoded by a set of dedicated markers that occur between verb stems and inflectional endings and group verbs into transitivity classes. The paper first offers a synchronic description of transitivity classes in the WH language Bunan, discussing their formal realization and functional motivation. Subsequently, the relevant transitivity classes are discussed from a historical-comparative perspective. It is argued that the transitivity distinction developed when an object agreement marker was reanalyzed as a marker of transitive verbs. The paper thus offers new perspectives on transitivity in TB from both a synchronic and a diacronic point of view, and adduces evidence for a hitherto underscribed reanalysis from “object agreement marker” > “marker of transitive verbs”.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Preliminaries
    • 2.1Transitivity as a verbal category
    • 2.2The WH languages
  • 3.Transitivity classes in Bunan
    • 3.1The morphological structure of the Bunan verb
    • 3.2The three transitivity classes of Bunan
      • 3.2.1The morphological alternations
      • 3.2.2Functional motivation
  • 4.Diachronic perspective
    • 4.1Transitivity classes in eastern WH languages
      • 4.1.1The intransitive and transitive classes
      • 4.1.2The middle class
      • 4.1.3The pervasiveness of the transitivity distinctions
      • 4.1.4The diachronic origins of the transitivity classes
    • 4.2Transitivity classes beyond eastern WH
      • 4.2.1Evidence for transitivity classes in western WH
      • 4.2.2Evidence for transitivity classes outside of WH
    • 4.3A possible source of the transitivity markers
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (43)
References
Bailey, Thomas G. 1909. A brief grammar of the Kanauri language. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 631, 661–687.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus (Princeton-Cambridge Studies in Chinese Linguistics 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1997. Tibeto-Burman languages and classification. In David Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas (Papers in South East Asian linguistics, 14), 1–71. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beyer, Stephan V. 1992. The classical Tibetan language. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining language change: an evolutionary approach (Longman Linguistics Library). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Verbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2011. Finite structures from clausal nominalization in Tibeto-Burman. In Foong, Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona (eds.), Nominalization in Asian languages: diachronic and typological perspectives (Typological Studies in Language 96), 343–360. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1979. Ergativity. Language 55(1): 59–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. Basic linguistic theory, volume II: grammatical topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Francke, August H. 1909. Tabellen der Pronomina und Verba in den drei Sprachen Lahoul’s: Bunan, Manchad und Tinan. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 631. 65–97.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2007. A grammar of Dolakha Newar (Mouton Grammar Library 40). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 2001. Syntax: an introduction, 21 vols., rev. edn. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grierson, George A. (ed.). 1909. Tibeto-Burman family, part I: general introduction, specimens of the Tibetan dialects, the Himalayan dialects, and the North Assam group (Linguistic Survey of India 3). Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2): 251–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huber, Christian. 2011. Some notes on gender and number marking in Shumcho. In: Gerda Lechleitner & Christian Liebl (eds.), Jahrbuch des Phonogrammarchivs der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 21, 52–90. Göttingen: Cuvillier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Subject and object agreement in Shumcho. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 266), 221–274. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2004. Phonologie et morphologie du Japhug (rGyalrong). Paris: University of Paris VII – Denis Diderot dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The middle voice. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kittilä, Seppo. 2010. Transitivity typology. In Jae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, 346–367. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krishan, Shree. 2001. A sketch of Chaudangsi grammar. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), New research on Zhangzhung and related Himalayan languages (Bon Studies 3 = Senri Ethnological Reports 19), 401–448. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J. 2011. On transitivity in two Tibeto-Burman languages. Studies in Language 35(3): 636–649. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2016. The Sino-Tibetan etymological dictionary and thesaurus. Berkeley: The Regents of the University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Næss, Åshild. 2007. Prototypical transitivity (Typological Studies in Language 72). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. How transitive are EAT and DRINK verbs? In John Newman (ed.), The linguistics of eating and drinking (Typological Studies in Language 84), 27–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nishi, Yoshio. 1991. Himarayashogo no bunpu to bunrui (II) [The distribution and classification of the Himalayan languages (II)], Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 16(1): 31–158.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pons, Marie-Caroline. 2017. Morphological evidence for “Raji-Raute” and its genetic position within Trans-Himalayan. Paper presented at the Berner Zirkel für Sprachwissen-schaft, University of Bern, December 13.
Shafer, Robert. 1967. Introduction to Sino-Tibetan. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharma, Devidatta. 1989a. Studies in Tibeto-Himalayan linguistics: a descriptive analysis of Paṭṭani (a dialect of Lahaul) (Panjab University Indological Series 28). Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvaranand Vishva Bandhu Institute of Sanskrit and Indological Studies, Panjab University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989b. Tribal languages of Himachal Pradesh, part I (Studies in Tibeto-Himalayan Languages 2). Delhi: Mittal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharma, Suhnu Ram. 2007. Byangsi grammar and vocabulary (People of India, National Series, 2). Pune: Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. forthcoming. A grammar of Manchad.
Takahashi, Yoshiharu. 2001. A descriptive study of Kinnauri (Pangi dialect): a preliminary report. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), New research on Zhangzhung and related Himalayan languages (Bon Studies 3 = Senri Ethnological Reports 19), 97–119. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2003. A subgrouping of the Sino-Tibetan languages: the interaction between language contact, change, and inheritances. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages (Routledge Language Family Series), 3–21. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1987. A grammar of Limbu (Mouton Grammar Library 4). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Languages of the Himalayas: an ethnolinguistic handbook of the greater Himalayan region: containing an introduction to the symbiotic theory of language, 21 vols. (Handbuch der Orientalistik, Abt. 2, Indien, 10). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. & Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: structure, meaning, and function (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watters, David E. 2002. A grammar of Kham (Cambridge Grammatical Descriptions). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel & Marius Zemp. 2017. The epistemization of person marking in reported speech. Studies in Language 41(1): 33–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel. 2015. The transformation of verb agreement into epistemic marking: evidence from Tibeto-Burman. In Jürg Fleischer, Elisabeth Rieken & Paul Widmer (eds.), Agreement from a diachronic perspective (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 287), 53–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017a. A grammar of Bunan (Mouton Grammar Library 71). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willis, Christina M. 2007. A descriptive grammar of Darma: an endangered Tibeto-Burman language. Austin: University of Texas dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zoller, Claus P. 1983. Die Sprache der Rang pas von Garhwal (Raṅ pɔ Bhāsa). Grammatik, Sprache, Wörterbuch (Neuindische Studien 8). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Martinez, Philippe Antoine
2023. A quaternary epistemic code. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 46:1 ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue