Cover not available
Article published In:
Language and Linguistics
Vol. 25:4 (2024) ► pp.710–746

A voicing rule for non-continuant obstruents in Thebo Tibetan

| Lacito-CNRS-Paris 3
| Nankai University
| Nankai University
Voicing alternation and the function of Tibetan verbal prefixes are two problems that have attracted scholars of Tibetan and Sino-Tibetan linguistics for over a century. This article presents a voicing rule in Thebo Tibetan and systematically analyzes the verb paradigm to explain the constraints for this rule and its apparent exceptions. The latter part of this article analyzes the evolution of the verbal paradigm from Old Tibetan to Thebo, using a model based on exceptions, sound laws, and analogy, and proposes the derived direction of the irregular verbal alternations in Thebo. The main contribution of this study is to provide additional evidence in solving the enigma of directionality for voicing alternation in Tibetan.
Keywords: Tibetan, Thebo, G-yi.ba, verbal morphology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Thebo phonology
    • 2.1Syllable canon
    • 2.2Initials
    • 2.3Rhymes
    • 2.4A partial tone system: High versus low
    • 2.5Conjunct forms
  • 3.The voicing rule for obstruents in Thebo
    • 3.1Thebo verbal stems
    • 3.2The voicing rule
  • 4.Constraints on the voicing rule
  • 5.Irregularities and exceptions
  • 6.The irregular correspondence of the verbal alternation
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • List of 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: 6 September 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00169.san
References (46)
References
Balk, Michael. 2005. On letters, words, and syllables: Transliteration and romanization of the Tibetan script. (Talk given at the Eighth International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Seminar, Bloomington, 25–31 July 1998.)
Bialek, Joanna. 2021. Comment on Jacques’ “The directionality of the voicing alternation in Tibetan”. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 14(1). xii–xxiii.Google Scholar
Bickford, Anita C. & Floyd, Rick. 2006. Articulatory phonetics: Tools for analyzing the world’s languages. 4th edn. Dallas: SIL International.Google Scholar
Bielmeier, Roland. 2004. Shafer’s proto-West Bodish hypothesis and the formation of the Tibetan verb paradigms. In Saxena, Anju (ed.), Himalayan languages: Past and present, 395–412. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Lyle & Mixco, Mauricio J. 2007. A glossary of historical linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chirkova, Katia. 2014. Kami. In Sun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological profiles of little-studied Tibetic varieties, 1–75. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Cilin Yangzhen. 2021. Dongwang Zangyu jishuci yanjiu. Baise Xueyuan Xuebao 2021(1). 63–70.Google Scholar
Coblin, W. South. 1976. Notes on Tibetan verbal morphology. T’oung Pao: International Journal of Chinese Studies 62(1). 45–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1879. Mémoire sur le système primitif des voyelles dans les langues indo-européennes. Leipzig: B. G. Treubner.Google Scholar
Gates, Jesse P. & Sami Honkasalo & Lai, Yunfan. 2022. From transitive to intransitive and voiceless to voiced in Proto-Sino-Tibetan: New evidence from Stau, Geshiza, and Khroskyabs. Language and Linguistics 23(2). 212–239.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos & Jacobs, Haike. 2017. Understanding phonology. 4th edn. New York: Routledge. (An imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group.) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2005a. Once more on the letter འ. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 28(2). 107–137.Google Scholar
2005b. The verb ‘bri ‘to write’ in Old Tibetan. Journal of Asian and African Studies 691. 177–181.Google Scholar
2009. Tibetan <h> as a plain initial and its place in Old Tibetan phonology. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 32(1). 115–140.Google Scholar
2010a. A lexicon of Tibetan verb stems as reported by the grammatical tradition. München: Kommission für Zentral- und Ostasiatische Studien, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
2010b. An overview of Old Tibetan synchronic phonology. Transactions of the Philological Society 108(2). 110–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. An inventory of Tibetan sound laws. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21(4). 441–457. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. A note on voicing alternation in the Tibetan verbal system. Transactions of the Philological Society 112(1). 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. Further exceptions to Dempsey’s law. (Paper presented at the 14th International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Seminar, Bergen, 19–24 June 2016.)
2019. The historical phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hua, kan & Long, Bojia (eds.). 1993. Anduo Zangyu kouyu cidian. Lanzhou: Gansu People’s Publishing House.Google Scholar
Huang, Bufan. 2012. Uvulars in Tibeto-Burman languages. Yuyanxue Luncong 451. 157–174.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2012a. A new transcription system for Old and Classical Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 35(2). 89–96.Google Scholar
. 2012b. An internal reconstruction of Tibetan stem alternations. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(2). 212–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Cone. In Sun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological profiles of little-studied Tibetic varieties, 269–375. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2021. The directionality of the voicing alternation in Tibetan. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 14(1). 32–38.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1927. Symbolæ grammaticæ in honorem Ioannis Rozwadowski. In Rozwadowski, Jan Michał (ed.), Symbolae grammaticae in honorem Ioannis Rozwadowski, vol. 11, 95–104. Cracow: Jagiellonian University.Google Scholar
Li, Fang-Kuei. 1933. Certain phonetic influences of the Tibetan prefixes upon the root initials. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 4(2). 135–157.Google Scholar
Lin, You-Jing. 2014. Thebo. In Sun, Jackson T.-S. (ed.), Phonological profiles of lttle-studied Tibetic varieties, 215–267. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Ma, Xueliang. 1980. The numerals ‘20 and 70’ of Yi language. Minzu Yuwen 1980(1). 12–21.Google Scholar
Renzeng Wangmu. 2010. On syllable assimilation of Diebu Tibetan language and its linkage effects — On similar phonological changes of surrounding dialects. Xibei Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexue Ban) 2010(6). 83–89.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Khal” and the numeral system changes in Diebu Tibetan dialects. Zhongyang Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexue Ban) 2011(2). 141–144.Google Scholar
. 2013. Diebu Zangyu yanjiu. Beijing: China Minzu University Press.Google Scholar
Sangsrgyas Tshering. 2020. The voicing of unvoiced obstruents in Thebo Tibetan. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 49(1). 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Egophoricity and evidentiality in Thebo Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 22(3). 34–56.Google Scholar
Shefts-Chang, Betty. 1971. The Tibetan causative: Phonology. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 42(4). 623–765.Google Scholar
Stevens, Kenneth N. 1998. Acoustic phonetics (Current Studies in Linguistics Series 30). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1986. Aspects of the phonology of Amdo Tibetan: Ndzorge Śæme Xɤra dialect. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
2003. Phonological profile of Zhongu: A new Tibetan dialect of Northern Sichuan. Language and Linguistics 4(4). 769–836.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2014. The Tibetic languages and their classification. In Owen-Smith, Thomas & Hill, Nathan W. (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Suzuki, Hiroyuki. 2023. The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan. Paris: LACITO Publications.Google Scholar
Uray, Géza. 1953. Some problems of the ancient Tibetan verbal morphology: Methodological observations on recent studies. Acta Linguistica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 3(1–2). 37–62.Google Scholar
Wylie, Turrell V. 1959. A standard system of Tibetan transcription. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 221. 261–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Daxue. 2019. A phonological and morphosyntactical profile of Ridwags. Beijing: Capital Normal University. (Master’s thesis.)
Zemp, Marius. 2016. A functional reconstruction of the Proto-Tibetan verbal system. Himalayan Linguistics 15(2). 88–135.Google Scholar
Zhang, Jichuan. 2009. Zangyu cizu yanjiu: Gudai Zangzu ruhe fengfu fazhan tamen de cihui. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press.Google Scholar