Review published in:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 40:2 (2017) ► pp. 285303
References

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2004Evidentiality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bartee, Ellen
2011The role of animacy in the verbal morphology of Dongwang Tibetan. In Mark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds), Himalayan Languages and Linguistics: Studies in Phonology, Semantics, Morphology and Syntax, 133–182. Leiden: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Caplow, Nancy J.
2016Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds), Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages, 225–257. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1976Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1985Lhasa Tibetan evidentials and the semantics of causation. Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 65–72.Google Scholar
1990Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics 1(3): 289–321. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Lhasa Tibetan. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 270–288. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Denwood, Philip
1999Tibetan [London Oriental and African Language Library 3]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Edward J.
2001Evidentiality and Assertion in Tibetan. Los Angeles, CA: University of California at Los Angeles dissertation.Google Scholar
Gonzales, Geny & Martine Bruil
2016On the existence of egophoricity in Nam Trik. Paper presented at the Symposium on Evidentiality, Egophoricity, and Engagement: Descriptive and Typological Perspectives, Stockholm, 17–18 March.
Hale, Austin
1980Person markers: Finite egophoric and allophoric verb forms in Newari. In Stephen A. Wurm (ed.), Papers in South East Asian Linguistics 7 [Pacific Linguistics A 53], 95–106. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Hargreaves, David J.
2005Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newari. Himalayan Linguistics Journal 5: 1–48.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Andrea D. Sims
2010Morphology, 2nd edn. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2010Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language 86(3): 663–687. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hein, Veronika
2001The role of the speaker in the verbal system of the Tibetan dialect of Tabo/Spiti. LTBA 24(1): 35–48.Google Scholar
[ p. 303 ]
Hengeveld, Kees & Marize Mattos Dall’Aglio Hattnher
2015Four types of evidentiality in the native languages of Brazil. Linguistics 53(3): 479–524. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Post, Mark W.
2013Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivation. In Tim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop & Joana Jansen (eds), Functional-historical Approaches to Explanation: In honor of Scott DeLancey [Typological Studies in Language 103], 107–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rule, William. M.
1977A Comparative Study of the Foe, Huli and Pole Languages of Papua New Guinea. Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
San Roque, Lila & Robyn Loughnane
2012The New Guinea Highlands evidentiality area. Linguistic Typology 16: 111–167. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe
2017Evidentiality and interrogativity. Lingua, 120–143.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicholas & Sange Dorje
2003Manual of Standard Tibetan: Language and Civilization. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas
1991The rhetorical use of the Tibetan ergative. LTBA 14(1): 93–107.Google Scholar
1996L’ergativité en Tibétain. Approche morphosyntaxique de la langue parlée [Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale 33]. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
2008Arguments against the concept of “egophoric” / “allophoric” in Tibetan. In Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart & Paul Widmer (eds), Chomolongma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Halle: International Insitute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
van Driem, George
1998Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies.Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel & Fernando Zúñiga
2017Egophoricity, involvement, and semantic roles in Tibeto-Burman languages. Person and knowledge: From participant-role to epistemic marking, special section of Open Linguistics.Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel
2017A Grammar of Bunan [Mouton Grammar Library 71]. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Yukawa, Yasutoshi (湯川恭敏)
1975チベット語の述部 Chibettogo no jutsugo (The predicates of Tibetan). アジア・アフリカ文法研究 Ajia Afurika bunpō kenkyū / Asian & African Linguistics 4: 1–14. Tokyo: ILCAA.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Chen, Hao, Yonghao Liu, Hong Li & Suonan Jiancuo
2020. Research on Tibetan Language Resource Construction Based on Tibetan Natural Language Processing. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1648  pp. 022079 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 april 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.