Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:16:27.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The origin of the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2010

Guillaume Jacques
Guillaume Jacques
Affiliation:
CNRS, CRLAO, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the Sino-Tibetan family, reflexivity is either not expressed in the verb, as in Chinese or Tibetan, or expressed by means of a “middle” marker, as in Dulong or Kiranti languages. Among the morphologically rich languages of this family, only Rgyalrong languages have distinct and unambiguous reflexive and reciprocal markers on the verb. This paper shows that the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages has two possible origins. It could come from a fusion of the third person singular marker and the root meaning “self” or, alternatively, come from the free third person pronoun. Both hypotheses are compatible with our understanding of Rgyalrong historical phonology.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 73 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 261 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Martin, Haspelmath. 1993. “The diachronic externalization of inflection”, Linguistics 31/2, 279–309.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2004. Phonologie et morphologie du Japhug (rgyalrong). Doctoral Thesis. Université Paris VII-Denis Diderot. http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00138568/fr/Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2007. Textes tangoutes I, Nouveau recueil sur l'amour parental et la piété filiale. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume (向柏霖). 2008. Jiarongyu yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume and Zhen., Chen 2007. “Chabaohua de bujiwu qianzhui ji xiangguan wenti”, Language and Linguistics 8/4, 883–917.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 1996. “Middle marking in Tibeto-Burman”, in Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Languages and Linguistics: Pan-Asiatic Linguistics (January 8-10, 1996), Volume 5, 1940–54.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2000. “Valency-changing derivations in Dulong/Rawang”, in Dixon, R.W.M. and Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y., Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J. and Jiangling, Yang. 2004. “Reflexive and middle marking in Dulong-Rawang”, Himalayan Linguistics Journal 2/1–13.Google Scholar
Youjing, Lin and , Luoerwu. 2003. “Chabao jiarongyu dazanghua de quxiang qianzhui ji dongci cigan bianhua”, Minzu yuwen 4, 19–29.Google Scholar
Xiangrong, Lin. 1993. Jiarongyu yanjiu. Chengdu: Sichuan Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Elena, Maslova. 2007. “Reciprocals in Yukaghir languages”, in Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. (ed.), Reciprocal Constructions. Amsterdam: Benjamins 1835–64.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1998. “Nominal morphology in Caodeng rGyalrong”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 69/1, 103–49.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2000. “Parallelisms in the verb morphology of Sidaba rGyalrong and Guanyinqiao in rGyalrongic”, Language and Linguistics 1/1, 161–90.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2003. “Caodeng rGyalrong”, in Thurgood, Graham and LaPolla, Randy J. (eds), Sino-Tibetan Languages. London: Routledge, pp. 490–502.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2006. “Caodeng jiarongyu de guanxiju”, Language and Linguistics 7/4, 905–33.Google Scholar