Cover not available
Article published In:
Language and Linguistics
Vol. 23:2 (2022) ► pp.212–239

From transitive to intransitive and voiceless to voiced in Proto-Sino-Tibetan

New evidence from Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs

| Nankai University
| Nazarbayev University
| Trinity College Dublin

This paper offers new evidence from Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs to address the question of directionality in valency-changing derivations in Sino-Tibetan. Examining Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs causative and anticausative verb stem pairs adds to the evidence that in Proto-Sino-Tibetan, a number of intransitive stems are derived from transitive stems, in some cases as the result of *N‑ prefixation, and in other cases from voicing alternation independent of *N‑ prefixation. In addition, the proto-sigmatic prefix (*s-) does not cause devoicing in Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs, but rather often undergoes voicing assimilation, and has more than just a causativization function. Furthermore, by looking at Gyalrong, Minyag, Tangut, Middle Chinese, and Old Chinese we emphasize that there is no synchronic evidence to support devoicing induced by *s‑, nor is there historical evidence to support the claim that *s‑ caused devoicing in Proto-Gyalrongic, or even at genetically deeper stages.

Keywords: transitive and intransitive verb stems, sigmatic causative, anticausative, voicing assimilation, West Gyalrongic
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Goal and structure of the paper
    • 1.2A brief introduction to Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs
      • 1.2.1Introduction to Stau
      • 1.2.2Introduction to Geshiza
      • 1.2.3Introduction to Khroskyabs
  • 2.Anticausativization derived by voicing alternation
    • 2.1Anticausativization in Stau
    • 2.2Anticausativization in Geshiza
    • 2.3Anticausativization in Khroskyabs
  • 3.The s‑ prefix in Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs
    • 3.1 s‑ prefix: Stau and Geshiza
    • 3.2 s‑ prefix: Khroskyabs
  • 4.Non-causative functions of the *s‑ prefix
  • 5.Diachronic implications
    • 5.1Introduction to the question of directionality of valency-changing derivations in Sino-Tibetan studies
    • 5.2Evidence in favor of transitive to intransitive derivation from Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs
      • 5.2.1Aspiration contrast neutralization by voicing
      • 5.2.2The sigmatic prefix does not cause devoicing
      • 5.2.3Preinitial *N‑ probably existed in Khroskyabs
    • 5.3Corraborating evidence from other languages
      • 5.3.1Japhug Gyalrong
      • 5.3.2Minyag
      • 5.3.3Middle and Old Chinese
      • 5.3.4Tangut
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 29 April 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00104.gat
References (34)
Comrie, Bernard
1974 Causatives and universal grammar. Transactions of the Philological Society 73(1). 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.
2000 A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. In Dixon, R. M. W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity, 30–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Basic linguistic theory, vol. 1: Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duo’erji
1998 Daofuyu Geshizahua yanjiu [A study of Geshiza Stau]. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House.Google Scholar
Gao, Yang
2015 Description de la langue Menya: Phonologie et syntaxe [Description of the Menya language: Phonology and syntax]. Paris: École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Gates, Jesse P.
2017 Verbal triplication morphology in Stau (Mazi dialect). Transactions of the Philological Society 115(1). 14–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021 A grammar of Mazur Stau. Paris: École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Gates, Jesse P. & Kim, Won Ho
2018 Vowel harmony in Stau. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 41(2). 263–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gates, Jesse P. & Nyi.ma, Thub.bstan & Rgyal.mtsan, Tshe.ring
2019 Tibetan dining etiquette: A sociolinguistic analysis of a normative discourse text in Stau. Himalayan Linguistics 18(2). 73–81.Google Scholar
Genxia, Wengmu & Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2008 Dàofúyǔ de shǐyòng qíngkuàng hé yǔyán huólì: Xiānshuǐzhèn de gè’àn yánjiū [Actual situation of the language use of sTau and its language vitality: A case study of sTau spoken in Xianshui town]. Kyoto University Linguistic Research 271. 223–240.Google Scholar
Gerner, Matthias
2007 The lexicalization of causative verbs in the Yi group. Folia Linguistica Historica 28(1–2). 145–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Handel, Zev
2012 Valence-changing prefixes and voicing alternation in Old Chinese and Proto-Sino-Tibetan: Reconstructing *s‑ and *N‑ prefixes. Language and Linguistics 13(1). 61–82.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2016 Universals of causative and anticausative verb formation and the spontaneity scale. Lingua Posnaniensis 58(2). 33–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Honkasalo, Sami
2017 Two traditional Stau stories. Asian Highlands Perspectives 441. 285–316.Google Scholar
2019 A grammar of Eastern Geshiza: A culturally anchored description. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Huang, Bufan
2007 Lawurongyu yanjiu [Studies on the Lavrung language]. Beijing: Nationalities Press.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2004 Phonologie et morphologie du Japhug (rGyalrong). Paris: Université Paris VII – Denis Diderot. (Doctoral dissertation.)
2012a An internal reconstruction of Tibetan stem alternations. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(2). 212–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012b Argument demotion in Japhug Rgyalrong. In Authier, Gilles & Haude, Katharina (eds.), Ergativity, valency and voice (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 48), 199–225. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Esquisse de phonologie et de morphologie historique du tangoute [Sketch of Tangut historical phonology and morphology] (The Languages of Asia Series 12). Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 The origin of the causative prefix in Rgyalrong languages and its implication for proto-Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Folia Linguistica Historica 361. 165–198.Google Scholar
2021 A grammar of Japhug (Comprehensive Grammar Library 1). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume & Lai, Yunfan & Antonov, Anton & Nima, Lobsang
2017 Stau (Ergong, Horpa). In Thurgood, Graham & LaPolla, Randy J. (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 597–613. 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittilä, Seppo
2013 Causative morphemes as a de-transitivizing device: What do non-canonical instances reveal about causation and causativization? Folia Linguistica 47(1). 113–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan
2016 Causativisation in Wobzi and other Khroskyabs dialects. Cahiers de Linguistique – Asie Orientale 45(2). 148–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi [A grammar of Wobzi Khroskyabs]. Paris: Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Lai, Yunfan & Gong, Xun & Gates, Jesse P. & Jacques, Guillaume
2020 Tangut as a West Gyalrongic language. Folia Linguistica 54(s41–s1). 171–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, You-Jing
2016 Jiāróngyǔ Zhuókèjīhuà yǔfǎ biāozhù wénběn [Cogtse Rgyalrong texts: Fully analyzed spontaeous narratives with an updated grammar sketch of the language]. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press (China).Google Scholar
Mei, Tsu-Lin
2012 The causative *s‑ and nominalizing *-s in Old Chinese and related matters in Proto-Sino-Tibetan. Language and Linguistics 13(1). 1–28.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent & Baxter, William H.
2012 Reconstructing the *s‑ prefix in Old Chinese. Language and Linguistics 13(1). 29–59.Google Scholar
Song, Jae Jung
2013 Nonperiphrastic causative constructions. In Dryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. ([URL]) (Accessed 2021-10-07.)
Tunzhi
2017 Language vitality and glottonyms in the Ethnic Corridor: The rTa’u language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2017(245). 147–168.Google Scholar
Tunzhi & Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Roche, Gerald
2019 Language contact and the politics of recognition amongst Tibetans in the People’s Republic of China: The rTa’u-speaking ‘Horpa’ of Khams. In Sonntag, Selma K. & Turin, Mark (eds.), The politics of language contact in the Himalaya, 17–48. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.Google Scholar
Vanderveen, Chantel A.
2015 A phonology of Stau. Langley, BC: Trinity Western University. (Master’s thesis.)
Cited by (1)

Cited by 1 other publications

Gates, Jesse P.
2023. Kinship terms in Stau. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 46:2 ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.