Tibetan
| SOAS, University of London
The Tibetan language comprises a wide range of spoken and written varieties whose known history dates from the 7th century AD to the present day. Its speakers inhabit a vast area in Central Asia and the Himalayas extending into seven modern nation states, while its abundant literature includes much of vital importance to the study of Buddhism. After surveying all the known varieties of Tibetan, including their geographical and historical background, this book concentrates on a phonological and grammatical description of the modern spoken Lhasa dialect, the standard spoken variety. The grammatical framework which has been specially devised to describe this variety is then applied to the written varieties of Preclassical and Classical Tibetan, demonstrating the fundamental unity of the language. The writing system is outlined, though all examples and texts are given in roman script and where appropriate, the International Phonetic Alphabet. The volume includes a comprehensive bibliography.
[London Oriental and African Language Library, 3] 1999. xix, 372 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Table of Contents
|
Map
|
v
|
|
Preface
|
xi
|
|
Acknowledgements
|
xv
|
|
Abbreviations
|
xvii
|
|
Transcription of Tibetan
|
xix
|
|
1. Geography
|
1
|
|
2. History
|
13
|
|
3. Varieties of Tibetan
|
21
|
|
4. Levels of Analysis
|
47
|
|
5. Graphology
|
55
|
|
6. Phonology
|
69
|
|
7. Nouns and Noun Phrases
|
87
|
|
8. Verbs
|
105
|
|
9. Verb Phrases
|
115
|
|
10. Serial Verbs
|
171
|
|
11. Adjectives and Adjective Phrases
|
179
|
|
12. Clauses
|
191
|
|
13. Subordinate and Nominalised Clauses
|
219
|
|
14. Preclassical and Classical Tibetan
|
243
|
|
15. Texts
|
275
|
|
Appendices
|
289
|
|
Bibliography
|
307
|
|
Particle Index
|
357
|
|
General Index
|
365
|
“[...] this book offers an excellent overview of Lhasa Tibetan as well as some insights on PT and CT. This focus on a modern dialect makes the book especially valuable for linguists.”
Gonzalo Rubio, Ohio State University, USA
“Whether one teaches Tibetan or uses Tibetan language sources in one's work, there is much to learn from Philip Denwood's book, and in some respects it is unrivalled.”
Per Kværne, University of Oslo, in Acta Orientalia 53
Cited by
Cited by 31 other publications
No author info given
2015.
In Pidgins, Creoles and Mixed Languages [Creole Language Library, 48],
Balgopal, Meena M., Nicole M. Gerardo, Jampa Topden & Kalden Gyatso
2021. Moving past postcolonial hybrid spaces: How Buddhist monks make meaning of biology.
Science Education 105:3 ► pp. 473 ff.
Caplow, Nancy J.
2016. Reconstructing stress in Proto-Tibetan.
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39:2 ► pp. 180 ff.
de Villiers, Jill G., Jay Garfield, Harper Gernet-Girard, Tom Roeper & Margaret Speas
2009. Evidentials in Tibetan: Acquisition, semantics, and cognitive development.
New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 2009:125 ► pp. 29 ff.
Dobrov, Alexei, Anastasia Dobrova, Pavel Grokhovskiy, Nikolay Soms & Victor Zakharov
2016.
In Text, Speech, and Dialogue [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9924],
► pp. 215 ff.
Eric, Mélac & Nicolas Tournadre
2021.
In GiveConstructions across Languages [Constructional Approaches to Language, 29],
► pp. 175 ff.
Feng, Anwei & Bob Adamson
2015.
In Trilingualism in Education in China: Models and Challenges [Multilingual Education, 12],
► pp. 1 ff.
Gong, Xun
2020. How many vowels are there in Lhasa Tibetan?.
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 43:2 ► pp. 225 ff.
Hill, Nathan
2019.
In The Historical Phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese,
Hill, Nathan W.
2010. An overview of Old Tibetan synchronic phonology.
Transactions of the Philological Society 108:2 ► pp. 110 ff.
Hill, Nathan W.
2010. The converb -las in Old Tibetan.
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 73:2 ► pp. 245 ff.
Hyslop, Gwendolyn
2014. Waves Across the Himalayas: On the Typological Characteristics and History of the Bodic Subfamily of Tibeto-Burman.
Language and Linguistics Compass 8:6 ► pp. 243 ff.
Kalsang, Jay Garfield, Margaret Speas & Jill de Villiers
2013. Direct evidentials, case, tense and aspect in Tibetan: evidence for a general theory of the semantics of evidential.
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 31:2 ► pp. 517 ff.
LEMPERT, MICHAEL
2008. The poetics of stance: Text-metricality, epistemicity, interaction.
Language in Society 37:4 ► pp. 569 ff.
Miller, Roy Andrew
2001. Review of Janhunen & Rybatzki (1999): Writing in the Altaic world.
Written Language & Literacy 4:2 ► pp. 234 ff.
Miller, Roy Andrew
2002. The Middle Mongolian Vocalic Hiatus.
Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 55:1-3 ► pp. 179 ff.
Nikolaev, Dmitry & Eitan Grossman
2018. Areal sound change and the distributional typology of affricate richness in Eurasia.
Studies in Language 42:3 ► pp. 562 ff.
Pereltsvaig, Asya
2020.
In Languages of the World,
Post, Mark W.
2019. Topographical Deixis in Trans‐Himalayan (Sino‐Tibetan) Languages.
Transactions of the Philological Society 117:2 ► pp. 234 ff.
Post, Mark W.
2020. The distribution, reconstruction and varied fates of topographical deixis in Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan).
Diachronica 37:3 ► pp. 368 ff.
Rice, Keren
2008. Paul de Lacy (2006). Markedness: reduction and preservation in phonology. (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 112.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. xviii+447..
Phonology 25:2 ► pp. 361 ff.
Roseano, Paolo, Montserrat González, Joan Borràs-Comes & Pilar Prieto
2016. Communicating Epistemic Stance: How Speech and Gesture Patterns Reflect Epistemicity and Evidentiality.
Discourse Processes 53:3 ► pp. 135 ff.
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe
2018.
In Egophoricity [Typological Studies in Language, 118],
► pp. 1 ff.
SCHIERING, RENÉ, BALTHASAR BICKEL & KRISTINE A. HILDEBRANDT
2010. The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent.
Journal of Linguistics 46:3 ► pp. 657 ff.
Shao, Mingyuan
2019. 古藏文的系動詞.
Language and Linguistics. 語言暨語言學 20:3 ► pp. 417 ff.
Song, Zhanfeng
2021. Realis converbs and irrealis converbs in Hwari Tibetan.
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 44:1 ► pp. 113 ff.
Stolz, Thomas, Cornelia Stroh & Aina Urdze
2007. WITH(OUT): On the markedness relation between comitatives/instrumentals and abessives.
<i>WORD</i> 58:1-3 ► pp. 63 ff.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Lozong Lhamo
2021. /ka-/ negative prefix of Choswateng Tibetan of Khams (Shangri-La, Yunnan).
Language and Linguistics. 語言暨語言學 22:4 ► pp. 593 ff.
Wee, Lian-Hee
2019.
In Phonological Tone,
Widmer, Manuel
2017. Review of Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill. (eds). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages
.
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40:2 ► pp. 285 ff.
Yliniemi, Juha
2016. Attention marker =ɕo in Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia).
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39:1 ► pp. 105 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 october 2021. 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.
Subjects & Metadata
Linguistics
BIC Subject: CF – Linguistics
BISAC Subject: LAN009000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General