Article published in:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 43:1 (2020) ► pp. 5586
References

References

Andvik, Erik
2010A grammar of Tshangla. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 10). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, James John
1974Pronominal verb morphology in Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 11. 108–155.Google Scholar
1975Pronouns and pronominal morphology in Tibeto-Burman. Berkeley: University of California Ph.D. Thesis.Google Scholar
[ p. 80 ]
Baxter, William H. & Laurent Sagart
2014Old Chinese. A new reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bodt, Timotheus A.
2012The new lamp clarifying the history, peoples, languages and traditions of Eastern Bhutan and Eastern Mon. Wageningen: Monpasang Publications.Google Scholar
2014Tshangla phonology and a standard Tshangla orthography. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics. Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 393–435. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. (Trends in Linguistics, vol. 266).Google Scholar
Bodt, Timotheus A. & Ismael Lieberherr
2015First notes on the phonology and classification of the Bangru language of India. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 38.1. 66–123. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borchers, Dörte
2008A grammar of Sunwar. Descriptive grammar, paradigms, texts and glossary. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 7).Google Scholar
Burling, Robbins
1959Proto-Bodo. Language 35.3.433–453. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Caughley, Ross
2000Dictionary of Chepang. A Tibeto-Burman language of Nepal. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. (Pacific Linguistics, vol. 502).Google Scholar
Chelliah, Shobhana L.
1997A grammar of Meithei. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 17). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R.
2007A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 39). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Das Gupta, Kamalesh
1968An introduction to Central Monpa. Itanagar: Directorate of Research, Department of Cultural Affairs, Government of Arunachal Pradesh.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1989Verb agreement in Proto-Tibeto-Burman. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 52.2. 315–333. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Towards a history of verb agreement in Tibeto-Burman. Himalayan Linguistics 9.1. 1–39.Google Scholar
2011Notes on verb agreement prefixes in Tibeto-Burman. Himalayan Linguistics 10.1. 1–29.Google Scholar
2013Verb agreement suffixes in Mizo-Kuki-Chin. In: Gwendolyn Hyslop, Stephen Morey & Mark W. Post (eds.), North East Indian Linguistics 5, 138–150. Delhi et al.: Cambridge University Press India. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Morphological evidence for a Central branch of Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan). Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 44.2.122–149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ebert, Karen
1997A grammar of Athpare. München/Newcastle: Lincom Europa. (Lincom Studies in Asian Linguistics, vol. 1).Google Scholar
Egli-Roduner, Susanna
1987Handbook of the Sharchhokpa-lo/Tsangla (language of the people of Eastern Bhutan). Thimpu: Helvetas. Swiss Association for Development and Cooperation.Google Scholar
Funk, Damian, Pascal Gerber, Selin Grollmann, Corinne Mittaz, Simon Plachtzik, Nicolai Rawyler, Sara Rüfenacht & Sereina Waldis
2017Aspekte der Brokpa-Phonologie. Talk held at the 61. Studentische Tagung Sprachwissenschaft, 25 May 2017, Universität Zürich, Zürich.
Genetti, Carol
2007A grammar of Dolakha Newar. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Pascal
2015The phylogenetic position of Gongduk. A first inspection. Bern: University of Bern Master Thesis.Google Scholar
[ p. 81 ]
forthcoming). The sound change *s > t in Gongduk.
Gerber, Pascal, Tanja Gerber & Selin Grollmann
2016Links between Lhokpu and Kiranti. Some observations. Talk held at the Kiranti Workshop, 1 December 2016, Université Paris Diderot, Paris.
Grollmann, Selin
2013A sketch grammar of Bjokapakha. Bern: University of Bern Master Thesis.Google Scholar
2020Diachronic aspects of Bjokapakha epistemic verbal morphology. The role of nominalisers and copulas. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 43.1. 87-123.Google Scholar
(in press) A Grammar of Bjokapakha. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 24). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grollmann, Selin & Pascal Gerber
2018 Lingustic evidence for a closer relationship between Lhokpu and Dhimal. Including some notes on the Dhimalish subgroup. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 47. 1–96. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
forthcoming). Some innovations of the Tshangla subgroup of Trans-Himalayan.
Hill, Nathan W.
2011An inventory of Tibetan sound laws. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland. 3rd ser. 21.4.441–457. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012The Six Vowel Hypothesis of Old Chinese in comparative context. Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 6.2.1–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2019The historical phonology of Tibetan, Burmese, and Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoshi, Michiyo
1987A Sharchok vocabulary. A language spoken in Eastern Bhutan. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages/Cultures of Asia/Africa (ILCAA).Google Scholar
Huang, Liangrong & Sun Hongkai
2002汉嘉戎语词典 [A Chinese-rGyalrong dictionary]. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M.
1975Phonology. Theory and analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendolyn
2009Kurtöp tone. A tonogenetic case study. Lingua 112. 827–845. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010aKurtöp case. The pragmatic ergative and beyond. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 33.1.1–40.Google Scholar
2010bOn the placement of East Bodish in Tibeto-Burman. Talk given at the 16th Himalayan Languages Symposium, 4 September 2010, School of Oriental and African Studies, London.
2011Mirativity in Kurtöp. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 4. 43–60.Google Scholar
2014A preliminary reconstruction of East Bodish. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans Himalayan linguistics. Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 155–179. (Trends in Linguistics, vol. 266). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2016aEmergent insights into Proto East Bodish agricultural economy. In Mark W. Post, Stephen Morey & Scott DeLancey (eds.), Language and culture in Northeast India and beyond. In honor of Robbins Burling, 276–288. Canberra: Asia-Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
2016bWorlds of knowledge in Central Bhutan. Documentation of ’Olekha. Language Documentation and Conservation 10. 77–106.Google Scholar
[ p. 82 ]
2017A grammar of Kurtöp. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 18). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendolyn & Karma Tshering
2010Preliminary notes on Dakpa (Tawang Monpa). In Stephen Morey & Mark W. Post (eds.), North East Indian Linguistics 2, 3–21. New Delhi: Foundation Books. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2007A shared suppletive pattern in the pronominal systems of Chang Naga and Southern Qiang. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 36.1. 61–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010A possible trace of verbal agreement in Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 91. 41–49.Google Scholar
2012Agreement morphology. The case of Rgyalrongic and Kiranti. Language and Linguistics 131. 83–116.Google Scholar
2015–2016Dictionnaire Japhug-Chinois-Français, version 1.1. Unpublished manuscript. Projet HimalCo, Paris.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Aimee Lahaussois, Boyd Michailovsky & Dhan Bahadur Rai
2012An overview of Khaling verbal morphology. Language and Linguistics 13.6.1095–1170.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Aimée Lahaussois, Dhan Bahadur Rai & Yadav Kumar
2015Khaling-Nepali-English verb dictionary. Verison 1.0.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman, C. Gunnar, M. Fant & Morris Halle
1952Preliminaries to speech analysis. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jäschke, Heinrich August
1881A Tibetan-English dictionary. with special reference to the prevailing dialects to which is added an English-Tibetan vocabulary. London: Unger Brothers.Google Scholar
Karma Tshering of Gaselô & George van Driem
2019The grammar of Dzongkha, revised and expanded, with a guide to Roman Dzongkha and to phonological Dzongkha. Santa Barbara: Himalayan Linguistics.Google Scholar
King, John T.
2009A grammar of Dhimal. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 8).Google Scholar
Konnerth, Linda Anna
2014A grammar of Karbi. Eugene: University of Oregon Ph.D. Thesis.Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimee
2002Aspects of the grammar of Thulung Rai. An endangered Himalayan language. Berkeley: University of California Ph.D. Thesis.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J.
1989Verb agreement, head-marking vs. dependent-marking, and the “deconstruction” of Tibeto-Burman morpho-syntax. In Kira Hall (ed.), Proceedings of the fifteenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 356–367. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
1992On the dating and nature of verb agreement in Tibeto-Burman. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 55.2.298–315. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994Parallel grammaticalizations in Tibeto-Burman languages. Evidence of Sapir’s “Drift”. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 17.1. 61–80.Google Scholar
2001The role of migration and language contact in the development of the Sino-Tibetan language family. In Alexandra Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, 225–254. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2003aA grammar of Qiang. With annotated texts and glossary. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 31). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 83 ]
2003bOverview of Sino-Tibetan morphosyntax. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 22–42. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2012Comments on methodology and evidence in Sino-Tibetan Comparative Linguistcs. Language and Linguistics 13.1.117–132.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A.
1975Rhinoglottophilia. The mysterious connection between nasality and glottality. In Charles A. Ferguson, Larry M. Hyman & John J. Ohala (eds.), Nasálfest. Papers from a symposium on nasals and nasalization, 265–287. Stanford: Language Universals Project, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University.Google Scholar
2003Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press. (University of California Publications in Linguistics, vol. 135).Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd
1975A case of Rhinoglottophilia in Hayu. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 2.2.293.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David
Comparative Tangkhul. Unpublished manuscript. University of California, Berkeley.
Nishi, Yoshio
1995A brief survey of the controversy in verb pronominalization in Tibeto-Burman. In Yoshio Nishi, James A. Matisoff & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds.), New horizons in Tibeto-Burman morphosyntax, 1–16. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology. (Senri Ethnological Studies, vol. 41).Google Scholar
Noonan, Michael
2011Aspects of the historical development of nominalizers in the Tamangic languages. In Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Harsta & Janick Wrona (eds.), Nom-inalization in Asian languages, 195–214. Hongkong/Oxford: John Benjamins. (Typological Studies in Language, vol. 96). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Opgenort, Jean Robert
2004A Grammar of Wambule. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 2).Google Scholar
2005A Grammar of Jero. With a historical comparative study of the Kiranti languages. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 3).Google Scholar
2014Initial grammatical sketch of Tilung. Field report on a moribund Kiranti language of Eastern Nepal. With some historical observations and a vocabulary. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan Linguistics. Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan Area, 329–392. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. (Trends in Linguistics, vol. 266).Google Scholar
Pema Wangdi
2004Sharchokpa-lo phonology and morphosyntax. Syndey: ANU’ Master Sub-thesis.Google Scholar
Plaisier, Heleen
2007A Grammar of Lepcha. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 5).Google Scholar
Post, Mark W.
2007A Grammar of Galo. Melbourne: La Trobe University Research Centre for Linguistic Typology.Google Scholar
Rāī, Noval Kiśora, Manoj Rāī, Netra Prasād Pauḍyāl, Roberṭ Śikovski, Bālthājār Bikal, Sabīne Sṭol, Mārṭin Gyānsle, Gomā Banjāḍe, Icchā Pūrṇa Rāī, Toyā Nātha Bhaṭṭa, Sebāsṭiyān Sāuppe, Rikhī Māyā Rāī, Janak Kumārī Rāī, Lās Kumārī Rāī, Durgā Bahādur Rāī, Gaṇeś Rāī, Dayārām Rāī, Durgā Kumārī Rāī, Atitā Rāī, Candra Kumārī Rāī, Śānti Māyā , Ravendra Kumār Rāī, Juḍī Peṭigru, Ṭiko Ḍirksamāyar
VS 2067 [2011]Chintāṅ śabdakoś tathā vyākaraṇ [Chintang dictionary and grammar]. Lalitpur: Chintang Language Research Program, Tribhuvan University Kathmandu/University of Leipzig.Google Scholar
[ p. 84 ]
Rutgers, Roland
1998Yamphu grammar, texts and lexicon. Leiden: Research School CNWS. School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 2).Google Scholar
Schackow, Diana
2015A grammar of Yakkha. Berlin: Language Science Press. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics, vol. 7). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert
1974Introduction to Sino-Tibetan. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
Sprigg, Richard Keith
1987“Rhinoglottophilia” revisited. Observations on “the mysterious connection between nasality and glottality”. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 10.1. 44–62.Google Scholar
Sun, Hongkai
1995A further discussion on verb agreement in Tibeto-Burman. In Yoshio Nishi, James A. Matisoff & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds.), New horizons in Tibeto-Burman morphosyntax, 17–29. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology. (Senri Ethnological Studies, vol. 41).Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham
1985Pronouns, verb agreement systems, and the subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. In Graham Thurgood, James A. Matisoff & David Bradley (eds.), Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan area. The state of the art, 376–400. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Australian National University. (Pacific Linguistics Series, vol. 87).Google Scholar
2003A Subgrouping of the Sino-Tibetan Languages. The Interaction between language contact, change and inheritance. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 3–21. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tolsma, Gerard Jacobus
2006A grammar of Kulung. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 4).Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nicolai
1930Proposition 16. Actes du premier congrès international de linguistes à La Haye, du 10–15 avril 1928, 17–18.Google Scholar
Turin, Mark
2012A grammar of the Thangmi language. With an ethnolinguistic introduction to the speakers and their culture. 2 vols. Leiden/Boston: Brill. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 6).Google Scholar
van Coetsem, Frans
1988Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000A general and unified theory of the transmission process in language contact. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
van Driem, George
A grammar of Lohorung. Unpublished manuscript a.
Black Mountain Mönpa. Unpublished manuscript b.
The Toto language of the Bhutanese duars. being first impressions of the Toto language and reflections on the Western Tibeto-Burman hypothesis. Unpublished manuscript c.
1987A grammar of Limbu. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 4). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993aA grammar of Dumi. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 10). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993bThe Proto-Tibeto-Burman verbal agreement system. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 56.2.292–334. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994aEast Bodish and Proto-Tibeto-Burman morphosyntax. In Hajime Kitamura, Tatsuo Nishida & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds.), Current Issues in Sino-Tibetan Linguistics, 608–617. Osaka: The Organizing Committee of the 26th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics.Google Scholar
[ p. 85 ]
1994bLanguage policy in Bhutan. In Michael Aris & Michael Hutt (eds.), Bhutan. Aspects of culture and development, 87–105. Gartmore: Kiscadale Publications.Google Scholar
1995aBlack Mountain Conjugational Morphology, Proto-Tibeto-Burman Morphosyntax, and the Linguistic Position of Chinese. In: Yoshio Nishi, James A. Matisoff & Yasuhiko Nagano (eds.), New horizons in Tibeto-Burman morphosyn-tax, 229–259. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology. (Senri Ethnological Studies, vol. 41).Google Scholar
1995bEen eerste grammaticale verkenning van het Bumthang, een taal van Midden-Bhutan. met een overzicht van de talen en volkeren van Bhutan. Leiden: Centrum voor Niet-Westerse Studiёn.Google Scholar
1998Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School CNWS. School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies. (Languages of the Greater Himalayan Region, vol. 1).Google Scholar
2001Languages of the Himalayas. An ethnolinguistic handbook of the Greater Himalayan Region. 2 vols. Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill.Google Scholar
2004Bhutan’s endangered languages programme under the Dzongkha Development Authority. Three rare gems. In Karma Ura & Sonam Kinga (eds.), The Spider and the Piglet. Proceedings of the First International Seminar on Bhutan Studies, 294–326. Thimphu: Centre for Bhutan Studies.Google Scholar
2007Dzala and Dakpa form a coherent subgroup within East Bodish, and some related thoughts. In Roland Bielmeier & Felix Haller (eds.), Linguistics of the Himalayas and beyond, 71–95. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Trends in Linguistics, vol. 196). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011Tibeto-Burman subgroups and historical grammar. Himalayan Linguistics 10.1.31–39.Google Scholar
2013Biactantial agreement in the Gongduk transitive verb in the broader Tibeto-Burman context. In Timothy J. Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop & Joana Jansen (eds.), Functional-historical approaches to explanation. In honor of Scott DeLancey, 69–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (Typological Studies in Language, vol. 103). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015aSynoptic grammar of the Bumthang language, a language of the central Bhutan highlands. Himalayan Linguistics Archive 6. 1–77.Google Scholar
2015bTibeto-Burman. In William S.-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Chinese Linguistics, 135–148. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
VanBik, Kenneth
2009Proto-Kuki-Chin. A reconstructed ancestor of the Kuki-Chin languages. Berkeley: University of California. (STEDT Monograph Series, vol. 8).Google Scholar
Widmer, Manuel
2017A grammar of Bunan. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. (Mouton Grammar Library, vol. 71.)Google Scholar
Winford, Donald
2005Contact-induced changes. Classification and processes. Dia-chronica 22.2.373–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, Turrell
1959A standard system of Tibetan transcription. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 22. 261–267. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 86 ]
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

DeLancey, Scott
2021. Differential innovation in 2nd person pronouns and agreement indexation in Trans-Himalayan languages. Folia Linguistica 55:s42-s1  pp. 155 ff. Crossref logo
Grollmann, Selin
2020. Diachronic aspects of Bjokapakha epistemic verbal morphology. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 43:1  pp. 87 ff. Crossref logo
Ozerov, Pavel & Linda Konnerth
2021. Multiple functions of the inclusive: examining synchronic variation in light of diachronic shift in South-Central Trans-Himalayan. Folia Linguistica 55:s42-s1  pp. 175 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 january 2022. 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.