Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 41:2 (2018) ► pp.219–262

Relativisation in Wobzi Khroskyabs and the integration of genitivisation

| Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
This paper focuses on the morphosyntax as well as the semantics of relativisation in Wobzi Khroskyabs, a Rgyalrongic language spoken in Sichuan, China. Different strategies of relativisation are presented, especially the nominalisation strategy. Wobzi Khroskyabs exhibits an innovative relativisation strategy with the genitive marker =ji, which is rarely found in other Rgyalrongic languages. Several hypotheses are put forward to account for the evolutionary pathway from genitivisation to relativisation, showing that genitive =ji probably followed an ergative pattern to enter the relativisation of core arguments.
Keywords: relativisation, genitive, complementation, Khroskyabs, Wobzi, Tibeto-Burman, Trans-Himalayan languages, Sino-Tibetan, morphosyntax, grammaticalisation
Article outline
  • 1.Background information
  • 2.Typological features
    • 2.1The noun phrase
      • 2.1.1Noun phrase structure
      • 2.1.2Argument flagging
    • 2.2The verb
      • 2.2.1Argument indexation
      • 2.2.2Stem alternation and TAM categories
      • 2.2.3Finiteness
    • 2.3Nominalisation
  • 3.Overview of Wobzi relativisation
    • 3.1Which arguments to relativise
    • 3.2Relativising strategies
    • 3.3Place of the head noun
      • 3.3.1Externally-headed relative
      • 3.3.2Headless relative
      • 3.3.3Internally-headed relative
    • 3.4Indexation in relative clauses
  • 4.Nominalised relative clause
    • 4.1S, A and possessor
    • 4.2P
    • 4.3Instrument and place
    • 4.4Time
    • 4.5Ditransitive constructions
  • 5.Interim summary
    • 5.1Syntactic pivots
    • 5.2Comparative remarks
      • 5.2.1Overview of the nominalisers
      • 5.2.2Modal distinction of the P
      • 5.2.3Prefixing relativisation/nominalisation in Khroskyabs
  • 6.Correlative-like constructions
  • 7.Genitive as relative marker
    • 7.1Overview of genitive relativisers in Trans-Himalayan
    • 7.2Genitive relativiser in Wobzi Khroskyabs
  • 8.From genitive to relative marker: The evolutionary pathway
    • 8.1Hypothesis 1: Calque of Chinese relatives
    • 8.2Hypothesis 2: Spread from lower-ranking arguments
    • 8.3Hypothesis 3: The ergative pathway through analogy of noun complementation
      • 8.3.1Ergative pivots
      • 8.3.2Analogy of noun complementation
      • 8.3.3Comparative remarks
  • 9.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 1 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.17015.lai
References (51)
References
Andrews, Avery D. 2007. Relative clauses. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (2nd edition), Vol. 21, 206–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auwera, J. van der and V. A. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1): 79–124.Google Scholar
Basilico, David. 1996. Head position and internally headed relative clauses. Language 72(3): 498–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baxter, William H. and Laurent Sagart. 2014. Old Chinese: a new reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1999. Nominalization and focus constructions in some Kiranti languages. In Yadava, Yogendra P. and Warren G. Glover (eds.), Topics in Nepalese Linguistics, 271–296. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.Google Scholar
. 2004. Hidden syntax in Belhare. In Saxena, A. (ed.), Himalayan languages: past and present, 141–190. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1947. A Cantonese Primer. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1998. Rethinking the typology of relative clauses. Language Design: journal of theoretical and experimental linguistics 11: 59–86.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard and Tania Kuteva. 2005. Relativization Strategies. In Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, Hans-Jörg Bibiko, Hagen Jung, and Claudia Schmidt (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2007. A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Mongsen Ao. In Thurgood, Graham and Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (2nd edition), 277–301. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1981. An interpretation of split ergativity. Language 57(3): 626–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Nominalization as relativization in Tibetan and Newari. Paper presented at the 19th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics.
. 1999. Relativization in Tibetan. In Yadava, Yogendra P. and Warren G. Glover (eds.), Studies in Nepalese Linguistics, 231–249. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.Google Scholar
. 2002. Relativization and nominalization in Bodic. In Chew, Patrick (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Parasection on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian Linguistics, 55–72. Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genetti, Carol, Alexander R. Coupe, Ellen Bartee, Kristine Hildebrandt, and You-Jing Lin. 2008. Syntactic aspects of nominalization in five Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31(2): 97–143.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1990. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction Vol. 21. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grosu, Alexander and Fred Landman. 1998. Strange relatives of the third kind. Natural Language Semantics 6(2): 125–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, Felix. 2004. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen, Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag GmbH.Google Scholar
Huang, Bufan. 2007. Lawurongyu yanjiu 拉塢戎語研究 (Study on the Lavrung language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2008. Jiarongyu yanjiu 嘉絨語研究 (Study on the Rgyalrong language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
. 2015. Dictionnaire Japhug-Chinois-Français version 1.0 嘉绒－汉－法词 典1.0版. Paris: Projet Himal Co. [URL]
. 2016a. Complementation in Japhug Gyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39(2): 222–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016b. Subjects and objects in Japhug and relativization. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 44(1): 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Anton Antonov, and Yunfan Lai. unpublished. Khang.gsar Sta’u Dictionnary.
Jacques, Guillaume, Yunfan Lai, Anton Antonov, and Lobsang Nima. 2017. Stau (Ergong, Horpa). In Thurgood, Graham and Randy LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages (2nd edition), 597–613. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 2010. Why isn’t this a complementizer? In Kayne, Richard S. (ed.), Comparisons and Contrasts, 190–227. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie. 1977. Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8(1): 63–99.Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2002. Nominalization, relativization, and genitivization in Thulung Rai. In Chew, Patrick (ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Parasection on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian Linguistics, 87–98. Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2015. The Person Agreement System of Wobzi Lavrung (rGyalrongic, Tibetoburman). Transactions of the Philological Society 113(3): 271–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 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. PhD thesis, Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy. 2008. Relative Clause Structures in the Rawang Language. Language and Linguisitics 9(4): 797–812.Google Scholar
Lipták, Anikó 2009. The landscape of correlatives. In Lipták, Anikó (ed.), Correlatives Cross-Linguistically, 1–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath, and Bernard Comrie. 2010. Ditransitive constructions: a typological overview. In Malchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath, and Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative Handbook, 1–64. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1972. Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genitivization. In Kimball, J. (ed.), Syntax and Semantics I, 237–257. New York: Seminar Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mazaudon, Martine. 1978. La formation des propositions relatives en tibétain. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 73(1): 401–414.Google Scholar
Owen-Smith, Thomas and Nathan W. Hill (eds.) 2014. Trans-Himalayan Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne. 1980. The relative clause marker in Scots English: Diffusion, complexity and style as dimension of syntactic change. Language in Society 9(2): 221–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984. Towards a typology of relative-clause formation strategies in Germanic. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical Syntax, 437–470. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, Yuzhi and Charles N. Li. 2002. The establishment of the classifier system and the grammaticalization of the morphosyntactic particle de in Chinese. Language Sciences 24(1): 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 2009. Elements of complex structures, where recursion isn’t it. In Givón, Talmy and Masayoshi Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic Complexity. Diachrony, Acquisition, Neuro-cognition, Evolution, 163–198. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of Features and Ergativity. In Dixon, Robert M. W. (ed.), Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2006. Caodeng Jiarongyu de guanxiju 草登嘉戎語的關係句 (relative clauses in tshobdun rgyalrong). Language & Linguistics 7(4): 905–933.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. and Youjing Lin. 2007. Constructional Variation in rGyalrong Relativization: How To Make a Choice? Paper presented at the International Workshop on Relative Clauses.
Van Valin, Robert and Randy LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vries, Mark de. 2002. The Syntax of Relativization. PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Wagener, Terje. 2017. The History of Nordic Relative Clauses. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 304. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Janis. 1987. An indefiniteness restriction for relative clauses in Lakhota. In Reuland, E. J. and A. G. B. ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, 168–190. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Yin, Weibin. 2007. Yelong Lawurongyu Yanjiu 业隆拉坞戎语研究 (Study on the ’Jorogs Lavrung language). Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Zhang, Shuya
2023. The history of the polyfunctional 𗗙jij1 in Tangut. Studies in Language 47:3 ► pp. 643 ff. DOI logo
Lai, Yunfan
2020. The historical development of inverse marking in Khroskyabs: evidence from two modern varieties – Siyuewu and Wobzi. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 83:2 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Lai, Yunfan
2021. The complexity and history of verb-stem ablauting patterns in Siyuewu Khroskyabs. Folia Linguistica 55:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Lai, Yunfan
2021. The complexity and history of verb-stem ablauting patterns in Siyuewu Khroskyabs. Folia Linguistica 55:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Lai, Yunfan
2022. When internal reconstruction goes further: proposing the vowel system of Pre-Khroskyabs through examining bound state apophony. Folia Linguistica 56:s43-s1 ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 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.