Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 44:2 (2021) ► pp.157–182

Hearsay evidential marking strategy in Lhagang Tibetan

A case study on folktales and legends

ORCID logo | Fudan University
ORCID logo | Universität Bonn
This exploratory study focuses on the use of hearsay evidential marking in the course of storytelling in a Tibetic language, Lhagang Tibetan, combining a descriptive linguistic approach with a literary-theoretic analysis. Tibetic languages generally possess a morpho-syntactically encoded evidential-epistemic system, in which the hearsay evidential represents a non-first-hand information source. However, we find a random use of the hearsay evidential marker in the oral literature of Lhagang Tibetan, although it has been transmitted from one generation to another by storytellers. The article aims to provide a reasonable explanation for the use of the hearsay evidential in storytelling. It proposes that hearsay evidential marking reflects the speaker’s attitude towards the utterance to either avoid full responsibility for the utterance or enhance the utterance’s authenticity. The former objective principally appears in telling a story based on a weak memory of the story; the latter appears in telling a legend. This explanation is supported by oral literature theory, especially the arguments regarding the difference between folktales and legends.
Keywords: Tibetic, evidentiality, hearsay, discourse strategy, oral literature
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background and research question
    • 2.1Basic description of the hearsay marking of Lhagang Tibetan
    • 2.2Research question
  • 3.Description of the hearsay evidential in Lhagang Tibetan
    • 3.1The use of the hearsay evidential
    • 3.2The hearsay evidential in contexts
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Presence of hearsay evidential marking
    • 4.2Absence of hearsay evidential marking
    • 4.3Interpretation
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 23 November 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.21001.suz
References (63)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2015. The art of grammar: A practical guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2018. Evidentiality: The framework. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, Online version, 52pp. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bielmeier, Roland. 1985. Das Märchen vom Prinzen Čobzaṅ, eine tibetische Erzählung aus Baltistan : Text, Übersetzung, Grammatik und westtibetisch vergleichendes Glossar. Bonn: Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
’Brug-mo-mtsho. 2002. Maqu Zangyu yanjiu [Study on rMachu Tibetan]. Beijnig: Minzu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Causemann, Margret. 1989. Dialekt und Erzählungen der Nangchenpas. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1998. Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies.Google Scholar
Ebihara, Shiho. 2019. Amudo-Tibettogo bunpoo [Grammar of Amdo Tibetan] Tokyo: Hituzi Syoboo.Google Scholar
Garrett, Edward. 2001. Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. Los Angeles, University of California, Los Angeles PhD dissertation.
Gawne, Lauren & Kristine A. Hildebrandt. 2020. Reported speech in earthquake narratives from six Tibeto-Burman languages. Studies in Language 44(2). 461–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, Felix. 2000. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Shigatse. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
. 2004. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Herrmann, Silke. 1989. Erzählungen und Dialekt von Diṅri. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2012. “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 161. 389–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hongladarom, Krisadawan. 2007. Evidentiality in Rgyalthang Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(2). 17–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoshi, Izumi. 2003. Gendai Tibettogo doosi ziten (Rasa hoogen) [Verb dictionary of Modern Tibetan (Lhasa dialect)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. [URL]
Huber, Brigitte. 2005. The Tibetan dialect of Lende (Kyirong): a grammatical description with historical annotations. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Kittilä, Seppo. 2020. Folklore as an evidential category. Folia Linguistica 54(3). 697–721. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koshal, Sanyukta. 1979. Ladakhi grammar. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
. 1982. Conversational Ladakhi. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
Kretschmar, Monika. 1986. Erzählungen und Dialekt der Drokpas aus Südwest-Tibet. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
. 1995. Erzählungen und Dialekt aus Südmustang, I-IV Bände. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Lin, Jifu, ed. 2016. Zangzu minjian gushi [Tibetan folktales]. Chengdu: Sichuan Minzu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Lüthi, Max. 1947 [2005]. Das europäische Volksmärchen. Form und Wesen. Eine literaturwissenschaftliche Darstellung. Bern: Dalp-Taschenbücher.Google Scholar
Oisel, Guillaume. 2017. Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. Himalayan Linguistics 16(2). 90–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ozawa, Toshio. 1999. Mukasibanasi no gohoo [Grammar of folktales]. Tokyo: Hukuinkan Syoten.Google Scholar
. 2016. Mukasibanasi daigaku handobukku [Handbook of Folktale College]. Tokyo: Dokusyo Sapooto.Google Scholar
Roche, Gerald & Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2018. Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies 52(4). 1227–1278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwieger, Peter. 1989. Tibetisches Erzählgut aus Brag-g.yab: Texte mit Übersetzungen, grammatischem Abriß und Glossar. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
. 2006. Handbuch zur Grammatik der klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.Google Scholar
Shao, Mingyuan. 2018. Hexi Zoulang binwei Zangyu Dongnahua yanjiu [Study on an endangered Tibetan mDungnag dialect in Hexi Corridor]. Guangzhou: Zhongshan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Si khron zhing chen dmangs khrod rig rtsal brtag dpyad tshogs pa & Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang. 1980. A khu sTon pa’i gtam rgyud [Tales of Akhu Tonpa]. Khreng tu’u: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1993. Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. The Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 63(4). 945–1001.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo. 2015. Quelques remarques linguistiques sur le tibétain de Lhagang, «l’endroit préféré par le Bodhisattva». Revue d’études tibétaines 321. 153–175. [URL]
. 2016. Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no bunpoo suketti [A sketch grammar of Lhagang Tibetan, a dialect of Minyag Rabgang]. Journal of Kijutsuken 81. 21–90. [URL]
. 2017a. Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen ni yoru hon-an monogatari Hadakamugi no syusi no yurai: Yakutyuu to katari no tokutyoo [A translated story in Lhagang Tibetan of Khams Origin of seeds of barley: Annotation and characteristics of narration]. Journal of Kijutsuken 91: 23–42. [URL]
. 2017b. Language evolution and vitality of Lhagang Tibetan, a Tibetic language as a minority in Minyag Rabgang. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2451. 63–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017c. King’s pig: A story in Lhagang Tibetan with a grammatical analysis in a narrative mode. Himalayan Linguistics 16(2). 129–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017d. Prince’s wife become a lark in Lhagang Tibetan of Khams. Kyoto University Linguistic Research 361. 71–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018a. Kamu-Tibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozisareru syookosei [Evidential system of verb predicates in Lhagang Tibetan]. Journal of Kijutsuken 101. 13–42. [URL]
. 2018b. Aorist in Lhagang Tibetan. Proceedings of the 51st International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, Kyoto, September 25–28, 2018, 877–884. [URL]
. 2018c. Two folktales in Lhagang Tibetan (Minyag Rabgang Khams): Three Birds and Lark and Partridge. Asian and African Languages and Linguistics (AALL) 131. 131–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019a. Kamu-Tibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen ni okeru koosyoobungei no kiroku to gengo bunseki [Documentation and analysis of folktales: Case study in Lhagang Tibetan]. Journal of Kijutsuken 111. 17–38. [URL]
. 2019b. Migration history of Amdo-speaking pastoralists in Lhagang, Khams Minyag, based on narratives and linguistic evidence. In Bianca Horlemann, Ute Wallenböck, & Jarmila Ptáčková (eds.), Mapping Amdo: Dynamics of power, 203–222. Praha: Orientální ústav.Google Scholar
. 2021a. Two folktales in Lhagang Tibetan (Minyag Rabgang Khams): The Sheep and the Wolf and the Hare and the Tiger . Tokyo University Linguistic Papers (eTULIP) 431. 114–142.Google Scholar
. 2021b. White mDzomo, a folktale in Lhagang Tibetan of Minyag Rabgang Khams. Kyoto University Linguistic Research 401. In press.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Sonam Wangmo & Tsering Samdrup. 2021. A contrastive approach to the evidential system in Tibetic languages: Examining five varieties from Khams and Amdo. Gengo Kenkyu 1591. 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1992. La déixis en tibétain : quelques faits remarquables. La déixis, 197–208. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France.Google Scholar
. 2008. Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct/disjunct’ in Tibetan. In Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart & Paul Widmer (hrgb.) Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
. 2014. The Tibetic languages and their classification. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logo
. 2017. A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 95–129. Leiden: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje. 1998 [2013]. Manuel de tibétain standard: langue et civilisation. Paris: L’Asiathèque.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla. 2014. Towards a new approach to evidentiality. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2021. The Tibetic langauges: The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan (with the collaboration of Xavier Becker and Alain Brucelle for the cartography). Paris: LACITO Publications (CNRS).Google Scholar
Tsering Samdrup & Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2019. Humilifics in Mabzhi pastoralist speech of Amdo Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 42(2). 222–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tshe dbang rDo rje, Allie Thomas, Kevin Stuart, dPal ldan bKra shis & ’Gyur med rGya mtsho. 2006. Tibetan-English folktales. Online. [URL]
mTsho sngon mi dmangs dpe skrun khang gi bod yig rtsom sgrig pu’u (ed.) 1963 [1980]. Mi ro rtse sgrung [Stories by a corpse]. Zi ling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang.Google Scholar
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2008. Epistemic modalities in Spoken Standard Tibetan. PhD dissertation, Univerzita Karlova and Université Paris 8. [URL]
Yliniemi, Juha. 2019. A descriptive grammar of Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia). Helsinki: University of Helsinki PhD thesis. [URL]
Zeisler, Bettina. 2000. Narrative conventions in Tibetan languages: the issue of mirativity. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 23(2). 39–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Relative tense and aspectual values in Tibetan languages: A comparative study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Don’t believe in a paradigm that you haven’t manipulated yourself! – Evidentiality, speaker attitude, and admirativity in Ladakhi. Himalayan Linguistics 17(1). 67–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zemp, Marius. 2018. A grammar of Purik Tibetan. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Drolma, Dawa & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2024. The paradigmaticity of evidentials in the Tibetic languages of Khams. Studies in Language 48:3 ► pp. 723 ff. DOI logo
Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2023. Geolinguistic approach to migration history in the south-eastern edge of the Tibetosphere. Asian Languages and Linguistics 4:2 ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo
Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2024. Functional transition from hear to nonvisual sensory and hearsay evidential categories. Functions of Language 31:1 ► pp. 63 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 august 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.