Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 45:2 (2022) ► pp.230–261

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

Glottalic and pitch features in Chepang and Bhujel

Their relationship to Incipient Tone and to whistle speech

Published online: 4 November 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.22001.cau
Abstract
This paper looks at two closely related Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal, Chepang and Bhujel, in relation to certain supra-segmental features they possess which are involved in the distinction of minimal pairs. Since these features include pitch and glottalisation, the possible phonemic analyses of these in terms of either a supra-segmental solution (tone) or a segmental one (glottal plosive) are discussed. Given the latter, a non-tonal analysis for the present state of these languages, and the possibilities of one or both of these becoming tonal languages in the future, are considered. Also, Chepang is unusual in possessing a whistled form of speech and the relation of this to the spoken language is described. These features are exemplified in the Appendices by waveforms, fundamental frequency (F0) contours and spectrogram illustrations, and also by sound files.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Phoneme inventory
    • 2.1Phonotactics
  • 3.Non-segmental contrasting features
    • 3.1Chepang
      • 3.1.1Contextual variants
        • 3.1.1.1Isolation
        • 3.1.1.2Continuous speech
      • 3.1.2Syllable-initial glottalisation
      • 3.1.3Compound stems
      • 3.1.4Word categories with the contrast between type 1 and type 2
    • 3.2Bhujel
      • 3.2.1Phonetic contrasts
        • 3.2.1.1Nouns
        • 3.2.1.2Verbs
      • 3.2.2Contextual variation
      • 3.2.3Syllable-initial glottal features in Bhujel
  • 4.Interpretation
    • 4.1Chepang
      • 4.1.1A Chepang speaker’s description of minimal contrast
    • 4.2Bhujel
    • 4.3Summary of the above analyses for Chepang and Bhujel
  • 5.Semantic load
  • 6.Other considerations arising from this analysis
    • 6.1Initial glottal
    • 6.2Origin of the glottal plosive
    • 6.3Correspondence between Chepang and Bhujel
  • 7.Incipient tone
    • 7.1The prospect of Chepang becoming a tonal language
  • 8.Whistle speech
  • 9.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (15)
References
Caughley, Ross C. 1970a. Chepang segmental synopsis. In Austin Hale & Kenneth. L. Pike (eds.), Tone systems of Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal [Occasional papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman linguistics series, ed. by F. K. Lehman], Vol. III1, Part 1, 279–299. Urbana, IL: Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1970b. Chepang texts. In Austin Hale & Kenneth. L. Pike (eds.), Tone systems of Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal [Occasional papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman linguistics series, ed. by F. K. Lehman], Vol. III1, Part 3, 1–130. Urbana, IL: Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1976. Chepang whistle talk. In Thomas A. Sebeok & Donna Jean Umiker-Sebeok (eds.), Speech surrogates: Drum and whistle systems, Part 2, 997–1022. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1982. The syntax and morphology of the verb in Chepang [Pacific Linguistics Series B-84]. Canberraː Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1999. Bujheli and Chepang: Relationships and differences. In Warren Glover & Yogendra Yadava (eds.), Topics in Nepalese linguistics, 1–25. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. Dictionary of Chepang: A Tibeto-Burman language of Nepal [Pacific Linguistics Series 502]. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(forthcoming). The dialects of Chepang.
Haudricourt, André-Georges. 1961. Bipartition et tripartition des systèmes de tons dans quelques langues d’Extrême-Orient. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 56(1).163–180.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1973. Tonogenesis in South-East Asia. In L. M. Hyman (ed.), Consonant Types and Tone [Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics No. 1], 74–83. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, Julien. 2015. Whistled languages: A worldwide inquiry on human whistled speech. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Regmi, Dan Raj. 2007. The Bhujel language. Kathmandu: Tribhuvan University, Nepal, PhD thesis.
. 2012. Duration of consonants in Bhujel. Nepalese Linguistics 271.179–186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. A grammar of Bhujel. New York: Lincom Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent. 1999. The origin of Chinese tones. In Proceedings of the symposium: Cross-linguistic studies of tonal phenomena/tonogenesis, typology and related topics, 91–104. Tokyo, Japan. halshs-00096904Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watters, David. 2003. Some preliminary observations on the relationship between Kham, Magar (and Chepang). Paper presented at the 36th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, La Trobe University, Melbourne. 26–27 November, 2008.
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue