No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The sound change of oralization in Mewahang
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2022
Abstract
This paper discusses the sound change of oralization in the Mewahang language (Eastern Kiranti, Trans-Himalayan/Sino-Tibetan) spoken in eastern Nepal. The sound change of oralization turned syllable-final nasals into homorganic oral stops when followed by voiceless obstruents. This sound change constitutes a diagnostic innovation of Mewahang with regard to its closest relatives Lohorung and Yamphu. In this paper, the process of oralization in both compounding as well as derivational and inflectional morphology is described and illustrated with primary data collected in fieldwork. The explanatory potential of the sound change for synchronic peculiarities in the verbal morphology and morphophonology is discussed, and an overview of exceptions to the sound change is provided.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 85 , Issue 3 , October 2022 , pp. 445 - 473
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London
References
Banjade, Goma. 2009. “Mewahang language. An introduction”, Nepalese Linguistics 24, 11–20.Google Scholar
Bauman, James John. 1975. “Pronouns and pronominal morphology in Tibeto-Burman ”, PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan. A Conspectus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1879. “Zur Geschichte der Nominalsuffixe -as-, -jas- und -vas-”, Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen N. F. IV.1.Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1884. “Zur Frage nach den Verwandtschaftsverhältnissen der indogermanischen Sprachen”, Internationale Zeitschrift für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 1, 226–56.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle and Muntzel, Martha C.. 1989. “The structural consequences of language death”, in Dorian, Nancy C. (ed.), Investigating Obsolescence. Studies in Language Contraction and Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 181–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conrady, August. 1896. Eine indochinesische Causativ-Denominativ-Bildung und ihr Zusammenhang mit den Tonaccenten. Ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Grammatik der indochinesischen Sprachen, insonderheit des tibetischen, barmanischen, siamesischen und chinesischen. Leipzig: O. Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1989. “Verb agreement in Proto-Tibeto-Burman”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 52/2, 315–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold. 1880. Einleitung in das Sprachstudium. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und Methodik der vergleichenden Sprachforschung. (Bibliothek Indogermanischer Grammatiken, vol. IV.) Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel.Google Scholar
Doornenbal, Marius. 2009. A Grammar of Bantawa. Grammar, Paradigm Tables, Glossary and Texts of a Rai Language of Eastern Nepal. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1987. A Grammar of Limbu. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 4.) Berlin, New York and Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 1988. “Reflexes of the Tibeto-Burman *-t directive suffix in Dumi Rai”, in Bradley, David, Henderson, Eugénie J.A. and Mazaudon, Martine (eds), Prosodic Analysis and Asian Linguistics: to Honour R.K. Sprigg. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 157–67.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1990. “The fall and rise of the phoneme /r/ in Eastern Kiranti: sound change in Tibeto-Burman”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 53/1, 83–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 1992. “Le proto-kiranti revisité, morphologie verbale du lohorung”, Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 24, 33–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 1993. “The Proto-Tibeto-Burman verbal agreement system”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 56/2, 292–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 2001. Languages of the Himalayas. An Ethnolinguistic Handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region. 2 vols. Leiden, Boston and Cologne: Brill.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. 1997. A Grammar of Athpare. (Lincom Studies in Asian Linguistics, vol. 1.) Munich and Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Fellner, Hannes A. and Hill, Nathan W.. 2019. “Word families, allofams, and the comparative method”, Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 48, 91–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaenszle, Martin. 1991. Verwandtschaft und Mythologie bei den Mewahang Rai in Ostnepal. (Beiträge zur Südasienforschung, Südasien-Institut, Universität Heidelberg, vol. 136.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Gaenszle, Martin. 2000. Origins and Migrations. Kinship, Mythology and Ethnic Identity among the Mewahang Rai of East Nepal. (Translated and slightly updated version of Gaenszle 1991, with a new preface.) Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point.Google Scholar
Gaenszle, Martin. 2007. Ancestral Voices. Oral Ritual Texts and Their Social Contexts among the Mewahang Rai in East Nepal. 2nd ed. Münster: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
Gerber, Pascal. 2020. “1SG indexation in Mewahang (Kiranti)”, Talk held at the 53rd International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, University of North Texas, Denton, 6 October 2020.Google Scholar
Gerber, Pascal. 2022a. “A first account on Western Mewahang case morphology”, Nepalese Linguistics 35, 50–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Pascal. 2022b. “Non-past marking in Mewahang. With comparative notes on Upper Arun”, Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 8/1–2, 59–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Pascal. Forthcoming. “Shared Innovations of the Upper Arun branch of Eastern Kiranti”.Google Scholar
Gerber, Pascal and Grollmann, Selin. 2018. “What is Kiranti? A critical account”, Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 11, 99–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grollmann, Selin. 2018–19. “Rekonstruktion der Non-Past-Morphologie im Khambu (Tibetobirmanisch)”, Die Sprache 53, 33–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grollmann, Selin. Forthcoming. “On the homophony of negation and third person prefixes in Kiranti”.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2014. “Grammatically conditioned sound change”, Language and Linguistics Compass 8/6, 211–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2019. The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, Brian Houghton. 1857. “Comparative vocabulary of the languages of the broken tribes of Népál”, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 26, 317–522.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2017. “A reconstruction of Proto-Kiranti verb roots”, Folia Linguistica Historica 38, 177–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leskien, August. 1876. Die Declination im Slavisch-Litauischen und Germanischen. (Preisschriften gekrönt und herausgegeben von der Fürstlich Jablonowskischen Gesellschaft zu Leipzig, vol. 19.). Leipzig: Hirzel.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1978. Variational Semantics in Tibeto-Burman. The “Organic” Approach to Linguistic Comparison. (Occasional Papers of the Wolfenden Society on Tibeto-Burman Linguistics, vol. 6.) Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction. (University of California Publications in Linguistics, vol. 135.) Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mewāhāṅ Rāī, Gaṇeś. VS 2073. Mewāhāṅ pɨʔ līma pɨʔchen – mewāhāṅ bhāṣā prārambhik vyākaraṇ [Elementary grammar of the Mewahang language]. Saṃkhuvāsabhā: Mewāhāṅ prakāśan.Google Scholar
Mewāhāṅg Rāī, Yā-khommā (ed.). VS 2062. Mewāhāṅg rāī śabdakoś [Dictionary of Mewahang Rai]. Lalitpur: Adivāsī janjāti utthān rāṣṭriya pratiṣṭhān.Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd. 1985. “Tibeto-Burman dental suffixes. Evidence from Limbu (Nepal)”, in Thurgood, Graham, Matisoff, James A. and Bradley, David (eds), Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan Area: The State of the Art. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 363–75.Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd. 1994. “Manner versus place of articulation in the Kiranti initial stops”, in Kitamura, Hajime, Nishida, Tatsuo and Nagano, Yasuhiko (eds), Current Issues in Sino-Tibetan Linguistics. Osaka: The Organizing Committee of the 26th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, 766–81.Google Scholar
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1974. “Sino-Tibetan. Inspection of a conspectus”, Journal of the American Oriental Society 94/2, 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osthoff, Hermann and Brugmann, Karl. 1878. Morphologische Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der indogermanischen Sprachen. Erster Theil. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Rāī, Noval Kiśora, Rāī, Manoj, Pauḍyāl, Netra Prasād, Śikovski, Roberṭ, Bikal, Bālthājār, Sṭol, Sabīne, Gyānsle, Mārṭin, Banjāḍe, Gomā, Rāī, Icchā Pūrṇa, Bhaṭṭa, Toyā Nātha, Sāuppe, Sebāsṭiyān, Rāī, Rikhī Māyā, Rāī, Janak Kumārī, Rāī, Lās Kumārī, Rāī, Durgā Bahādur, Rāī, Gaṇeś, Rāī, Dayārām, Rāī, Durgā Kumārī, Rāī, Atitā, Rāī, Candra Kumārī, Rāī, Śānti Māyā, Rāī, Ravendra Kumār, Peṭigru, Juḍī, Ḍirksamāyar, Ṭīko. VS 2067. Chintāṅ śabdakoś tathā vyākaraṇ [Chintang dictionary and grammar]. Lalitpur: Chintang Language Research Program, Tribhuvan University Kathmandu/University of Leipzig.Google Scholar
Rutgers, Roland. 1998. Yamphu. Grammar, Texts and Lexicon. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 2). Leiden: Research School CNWS. School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies.Google Scholar
Schackow, Diana. 2015. A Grammar of Yakkha. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics, vol. 7.) Berlin: Language Science Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1953. “East Himalayish”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 15/2, 356–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolsma, Gerard Jacobus. 2006. A Grammar of Kulung. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 4.) Leiden and Boston: Brill.Google Scholar