Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-vmclg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-19T20:16:14.137Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New origins to vowel tensing in Tangut: internal and comparative evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2025

Shuya Zhang Open the ORCID record for Shuya Zhang [Opens in a new window]  and
Yunfan Lai Open the ORCID record for Yunfan Lai [Opens in a new window]
Shuya Zhang
Affiliation:
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Yunfan Lai*
Affiliation:
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
*
Corresponding author: Lai Yunfan; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper proposes new origins for tense vowels in Tangut by integrating textual analysis of Tangut texts with comparative data from both Gyalrongic and other Sino-Tibetan languages. It uncovers two previously unreported sources of vowel tensing in compounding: the collective prefix (*S-) and the compound linker (*-S-). Both morphemes left only a few traces, indicating their antiquity and productivity in earlier stages. The collective *S- could be an inherited morpheme which finds parallels in Tibetan, whereas the compound linker *-S- emerged as a stage of morphological merging in West Gyalrongic with (an) obscure origin(s). These findings not only advance our understanding of the origins of Tangut tense vowels but also offer insights into Sino-Tibetan nominal morphology.

Keywords

TangutGyalrongicTense vowelCollectiveCompoundingHistorical linguistics
Type
Article
Information
Bulletin of SOAS , First View , pp. 1 - 20
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London

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.)

Footnotes

1We would like to thank Nathan Hill for his constructive comments and Zhang Yongfu for generously sharing the annotated version of The Twelve Kingdoms. We also extend our gratitude to the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions.

References

Arakawa, Shintaro. 2012. “Re-analysis of ‘Tangut-Tibetan’ phonological materials”, in Hill, Nathan W. (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages IV, 171–89. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Arakawa, Shintaro. 2014. Seikabun kongōkyō no kenkyū 西夏文金剛経の研究 (Studies on the Tangut version of Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā). Kyoto: Shōkadō Shoten.Google Scholar
Baxter, William H. and Sagart, Laurent. 2014. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedict, Paul K. 1942. “Tibetan and Chinese kinship terms”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 6/3–4, 313–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialek, Joanna. 2018. Compounds and Compounding in Old Tibetan. A Corpus Based Approach. Vol 1. Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Haspelmath, Martin and Bickel, Balthasar. 2008. “The Leipzig glossing rules: conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses”, Department of Linguistics of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and the Department of Linguistics of the University of Leipzig. https://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/pdf/Glossing-Rules.pdf. Retrieved 3 December 2024.Google Scholar
Downer, G.B. 1959. “Derivation by tone-change in Classical Chinese”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 22/2, 258–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, Yang. 2016. “Description de la langue menya: Phonologie et syntaxe”, Doctoral dissertation, École des hautes études en sciences sociales, Paris.Google Scholar
Gong, Hwang-cherng. 1993. “Xīxiàyǔ de yīnyùn zhuǎnhuàn yǔ gòucífǎ 西夏語的音韻轉換與構詞法 (Phonological alternations and word formation in Tangut)”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 64/4, 952–4.Google Scholar
Gong, Hwang-cherng. 1999. “Xīxià yǔ de jǐn yuányīn jí qí qǐyuán 西夏語的緊元音及其起源 (the tense vowels in Tangut and their origins)”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 70/2, 531–58.Google Scholar
Gong, Hwang-cherng. 2003. “Tangut”, in LaPolla, Randy and Thurgood, Graham (eds), The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 602–20. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2011. “An inventory of Tibetan sound laws”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21/4, 441–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2014. “Tibetan”, in Lieber, Rochelle and Štekauer, Pavol (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, 620–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2019. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honkasalo, Sami. 2019. “A grammar of Eastern Geshiza”, Doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2007. Textes tangoutes I, Nouveau recueil sur l'amour parental et la piété filiale. (Languages of the World/Text Collections 25.) Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2012. “The Tangut kinship system”, in Hill, Nathan W. (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages IV, 211–58. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2014. Esquisse de phonologie et de morphologie historique du tangoute. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume (ed.). 2015. Dictionnaire japhug–chinois–français. Paris: Projet HimalCo.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2016. “Subjects and objects in Japhug and relativization”, Journal of Chinese Linguistics 44/1, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2021. A Grammar of Japhug. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Kepping, Ksenija Borisovna. 1991. “Tangut (Xixia) degrees of mourning”, Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 14/2, 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kychanov, Evgenij Ivanovich and Sofronov, Mikhail Viktorovich. 1963. Issledovanija po fonetike tangutskogo jazyka (predvaritel'nye rezul'taty) Исследования по фонетике тангутского языка (предварительные результаты) [Studies on the Phonetics of the Tangut Language (Preliminary Results)]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo vostochnoi literatury.Google Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2016. “Causativisation in Wobzi and other Khroskyabs dialects”, Cahiers de Linguistique – Asie Orientale 45/22, 148–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2017. “Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi”, Doctoral dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle (Paris 3).Google Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2023. “Lenition alternation in West Gyalrongic and its implication for Southeast Asian panchronic phonology”, Diachronica 40/3, 341–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2024. “Mutual predictiveness of sound correspondences hints at reconstruction and language subgrouping: The case of Gyalrongic preinitials”, Diachronica (online first).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan, Gong, Xun, Gates, Jesse P. and Jacques, Guillaume. 2020. “Tangut as a West Gyalrongic language”, Folia Linguistica Historica 41/1, 171–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1933. “Certain phonetic influences of the Tibetan prefixes upon the root initials”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 6/2, 135–57.Google Scholar
Li, Fanwen. 1997. Xià-Hàn zìdiǎn 夏漢字典 (Tangut–Chinese Dictionary). Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.Google Scholar
Li, Fanwen. 2012. Jiǎnmíng Xià-Hàn zìdiǎn 简 明 夏 汉 字 典 (Tangut–Chinese Dictionary). Second edition. Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Lin, You-Jing. 2016. Jiāróngyǔ Zhuókèjī huà yǔfǎ biāozhù wénběn 嘉戎语卓克基话语法标注文本 (Fully analysed texts of Cogtse Rgyalrong with a sketch grammar of the language). Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1925. La méthode comparative en linguistique historique. Oslo: H. Aschehoug & Co.Google Scholar
Nagano, Sadako. 1994. “A note on the Tibetan kin terms khu and zhang”, Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 17/2, 103–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishida, Tatsuo. 1964. Seika-go no kenkyū: Seika-go no saikōsei to seika moji no kaidoku 西夏語の研究 : 西夏語の再構成と西夏文字の解読 (A study of the Tangut language: Reconstruction of the Tangut language and decipherment of Tangut script). Tokyo: Zauhō kankōkai.Google Scholar
Nishida, Tatsuo. 1986. “Seika-go ‘Getsu gestu raku shi’ no kenkyū 西夏語『月々樂詩』の研究 (Research on the Tangut Ode on Monthly Pleasures)”. 京都大學文學部研究紀要 (Memoirs of the Department of Literature, Kyoto University) 25, 1–116.Google Scholar
Peng, Xiangqian. 2012. Xīxiàwén “Mèngzǐ” zhěnglǐ yánjiū 西夏文《孟子》整理研究 (Research and Compilation of the Book of Mencius in Tangut Script). Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1950/51. “Studies in the morphology of the Bodic verbs”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 13/3, 13/4. 702–24, 1017–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, Jinbo. 2020. Tangut Language and Manuscripts: An introduction. Leiden and Boston: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, Jinbo, Huang, Zhenhua and Nie, Hongyin. 1993. 類林研究 Lèi lín yánjiū (A study on “the Grove of Classification”). Yinchuan: Ningxia Renmin Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Solonin, Kirill J. 1995. Dvenadcat’ carstv: Perevod s tangustkogo, predislovie i kommentarii Двенадцать царств: Перевод с тангусткого, предисловие и комментарии (The Twelve Kingdoms: Translated from Tangut, Preface, and Comments). Saint Petersburg: Centr Peterburgskogo Vostokovedeni.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1997. “Caodeng” (unpublished manuscript contributed to Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus as electronic text documents). Accessed via STEDT database <http://stedt.berkeley.edu/search/> on 15 March 2024.+on+15+March+2024.>Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2006. “Jiāróngyǔ dòngcí de pàishēng xíngtài 嘉戎语动词的派生形态 (Derivational morphology in the Rgyalrong verb)”. 民族语文 (Minority Languages of China) 3/4, 3–14.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. and Lin, You-Jing. 2007. “Constructional variation in Rgyalrong relativization: how to make a choice?”, in Pre-Conference Proceedings of the International Workshop on Relative Clauses, 205–26. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Wang, Jingru. 1982. “Xīxiàyǔ yīnxì dǎoyán 西夏语音系导言 (Introduction to Tangut phonology)”. 民族语文 (Minority Languages of China) 2, 1–13.Google Scholar
Wei, Hao. 2022. “Xīxiàyǔ dòngcí chóngdié yánjiū 西夏语动词重叠研究 (Research on verb reduplication of the Tangut language)”. 西夏研究 (Tangut Research) 2, 17–21.Google Scholar
Yang, Chih-Fan. 2021. “Bāwàng Huò'ěr yŭ shí, tǐ, shìzhèng, qíngtài fànchóu de xíngtài jùfǎ 巴旺霍爾語時、體、示證、情態範疇的形態句法” (The morpho-syntax of tense, aspect, evidentiality and modality in Bawang Horpa). Doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.Google Scholar
Yin, Weibin. 2007. Yèlóng Lāwūróngyǔ Yánjiū 业 隆 拉 坞 戎 语 研 究 (Study on the ’Jorogs Lavrung language). Beijing: Nationalities Press.Google Scholar
Biānxiězǔ, Zàngmiǎnyǔ Yǔyīn hé Cíhuì (ed.). 1992. Zàngmiǎnyǔ yǔyīn hé cíhuì 藏缅语语音和词汇 (Phonology and vocabulary of Tibeto-Burman languages). Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya. 2020. “Le rgyalrong situ de Brag-bar et sa contribution à la typologie de l'expression des relations spatiales: l'orientation et le mouvement associé”, Doctoral dissertation, Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya. 2023. “Sìtǔ Jiāróngyǔ Báiwān huà héxīn lùn yuán guānxì huà 四土嘉绒语白湾话核心论元关系化” (Core argument relativisation in the Brag-bar dialect of Situ Rgyalrong). 语言科学 (Linguistic Sciences) 22/1, 76–89.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya and Fan, Jingming. 2020. “Brag-bar kinship system in synchronic and diachronic perspectives”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 83/3, 479–503.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya, Jacques, Guillaume and Lai, Yunfan. 2019. “A study of cognates between Gyalrong languages and Old Chinese”, Journal of Language Relationship 17/1, 73–92.Google Scholar
Zhang, Yisun et al. (eds). 2010. Zàng-Hàn dàcídiǎn 藏汉大辞典 (Tibetan–Chinese Comprehensive Dictionary). 11th edition. Beijing: 民族出版社 (Publishing House of Minority Nationalities).Google Scholar