Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 43:1 (2020) ► pp.124–146

Expressing negative meaning in Liangmai

| Assam University
| Assam University
The paper presents an overview of negative expression in Liangmai, an under-described Tibeto-Burman language, primarily spoken in the Northeast Indian states of Manipur and Nagaland. There are two ways of negative formation in the language: (i) by suffixing negative markers to the main verb, and (ii) by the use of negative particles. The main negative suffixes in Liangmai are -mak, mainly used with realis constructions; -lak, used mainly with irrealis constructions; and -tu/-du with imperative, giving a prohibitive meaning. Negative particles used in the language include ha, which is a negative existential and raó, used to express ‘undesirability’. Additionally, a negative interjection hái is used frequently in the language as a negative answer to a question or to contradict a statement perceived to be incorrect. Negative polarity items are form by suffixing -dí to nominal stems and numerals. The present paper offers a descriptive account of negation in Liangmai, providing an overview of various constructions, namely, declarative, interrogative, imperative, relative and hortative, with negative polarity in the language.
Keywords: Liangmai, Tibeto-Burman, negation, declarative, imperative, relative
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Liangmai word classes
  • 3.Mood and negation in Liangmai
  • 4.Liangmai negative markers
  • 5.Clausal negation: -mak and -lak
    • 5.1Declarative clauses
    • 5.2Interrogative clauses
      • 5.2.1Yes-no question
      • 5.2.2Wh- question
    • 5.3Relative clauses
    • 5.4Hortative clauses
    • 5.5Imperative clauses
  • 6.Prohibitive -tu~-du
    • 6.1Inhibitive -niù
  • 7.Other negative particles
    • 7.1Negative existential copula ha
    • 7.2Negative interjection há
    • 7.3Particle raó
  • 8.Negation in conditional statements: Unless…not
  • 9.Negative polarity item
  • 10.Double negation
    • 10.1Declarative clauses: -mak and -mak
    • 10.2Declarative clauses: -lak and -mak
    • 10.3Imperative clausse: -mak and -tu
  • 11.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 28 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.19008.dai
References (20)
References
Bradley, David. 1997. Tibeto-Burman languages and classification. In David Bradley (ed.), Papers in Southeast Asian Linguistics 14: Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, 1–72. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Burling, Robbins. 2003. The Tibeto-Burman Languages of Northeastern India. In Randy J. LaPolla & Graham Thurgood (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 169–192. London/ New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chelliah, Shobhana L. 1997. A grammar of Meithei. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David. 2008. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Sixth edition. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deb, Debajit & Kh. Dhiren Singha. 2014. Negation in Rongmei Naga. In Gwendolyn Hyslop, Linda Konnerth & Stephen Morey (eds.), North East Indian Linguistics 61, 95–104. Canberra, Australian National University: Asia-Pacific Linguistics Open Access.Google Scholar
Dey, Moumita. 2017. Negation in Nyishi. The NEHU Journal XV(2).79–100.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2005. Negative morphemes. In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds.), The Word Atlas of Language Structures, 454–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [available online in the WALS Online 2011 edition at [URL]]
2011a. Order of negative morpheme and verb. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The Word Atlas of Language Structures Online, chapter 143. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library. [available online at [URL]]
Grierson, George A. 1903. Linguistic Survey of India, Tibeto Burman family, Bodo-Naga and Kachin Groups. Vol. III1, Part II1. (reprint: 2005. Delhi: Low Price Publications).Google Scholar
Haokip, Pauthang. 2012. Negation in Thadou. Himalayan Linguistics 13(1).58–82.Google Scholar
Konnerth, Linda. 2011. Functions of nominalization in Karbi. In Gwendolyn Hyslop, Stephen Morey, & Mark W. Post (eds.), North East Indian Linguistics 31, 120–134. New Delhi: Foundation/Cambridge University Press, India. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. A Grammar of Karbi. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2003. Lahu. In G. Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), Sino-Tibetan Languages, 208–221. London/ New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti. 2005a. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Post, Mark W. 2015. Sino-Tibetan and the case of Galo: Explaining a distributional oddity in diachronic terms. Language and Linguistics 16(3).431–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Post, Mark W. & Robbins Burling. 2017. The Tibeto-Burman Languages of Northeast India. In Randy J. LaPolla and Graham Thurgood (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan Languages Second edition, 213–242. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rongmei, Kamei Sanjit & Satwanti Kapoor. 2005. Zeliangrong today: A Naga tribe of Manipur. Studies of Tribes and Tribals 3(2).105-116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singh, C. Yashawanta. 2000. Manipuri Grammar. New Delhi. Rajesh Publications.Google Scholar
Wichamdinbo. 2015. A Descriptive Grammar of Liangmai. (Unpublished). Delhi: JNU PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Widinibou. 2011. Negation in Liangmai. Language in India 111.337–351.Google Scholar