Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 46:1 (2023) ► pp.138–163

Suansu language from northeastern India

A field report

ORCID logo | University of Zurich
This contribution introduces Suansu, an endangered Tibeto-Burman language spoken in Manipur, northeastern India. Suansu is virtually undescribed in the linguistic literature, and no previous attestations are known to date. This field report provides a first sketch of Suansu sociolinguistic profile, phonology and phonotactics, as well as basic information on Suansu nominal and verbal morphology. A preliminary comparative look at the languages spoken in the area suggests that Suansu does not align neatly with the set of traits commonly attested in the region, confirming the high linguistic diversity of the area and setting up the stage for further research.
Keywords: Suansu, Tibeto-Burman, Manipur, language documentation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Sociolinguistic context
    • 2.1Location
    • 2.2Number of speakers, language use and level of endangerment
  • 3.Previous literature
  • 4.Fieldwork, data and limitations of this study
  • 5.Linguistic profile
    • 5.1Phonology
    • 5.2Phonotactics
      • 5.2.1Syllable structure
      • 5.2.2Rhyme patterns
      • 5.2.3Word structure
      • 5.2.4Tonemes
    • 5.3Pronominal paradigm
    • 5.4Nominal morphology
    • 5.5Verbal morphology
  • 6.Suansu and the languages of the Ukhrul district
  • 7.Summary and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 12 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.22005.iva
References (39)
References
Arokianathan, S. 1987. Tangkhul Naga grammar. Vol. 161 (CIIL Grammar series). Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: a conspectus. London: Cambrige University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard., Martin. Haspelmath & Balthasar Bickel. 2008. The Leipzig glossing rules: conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Google Scholar
Coupe, Alexander R. 2003. A phonetic and phonological description of Ao: a Tibeto-Burman language of Nagaland, north-east India. Vol. 5431. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
2007. A grammar of Mongsen Ao. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. xxiii+526. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Strategies for analyzing tone languages. Language Documentation & Conservation 81. 462–489.Google Scholar
2020. Northern Sangtam phonetics, phonology and word list. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 43(1). 147–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2015. The origins of postverbal negation in Kuki-Chin. North East Indian Linguistics 71. 203–212.Google Scholar
Devi, Thokchom Lakhipriya. 2011. The Tangkhul grammar of Shangshak village. Canchipur: Manipur University PhD dissertation.
Grierson, George A. 2006. Tangkhul. In Languages of North-Eastern India, 499–507. Gyan Publishing House.Google Scholar
Haokip, Pauthang. 2011. The languages of Manipur: a case study of the Kuki-Chin languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 34(1).85–118.Google Scholar
Ivani, Jessica K. 2019a. A first overview on Suansu, a Tibeto-Burman language from Northeastern India. Paper presented at the 29th Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (SEALS 29), Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Japan, 27–29 May 2019.
2019b. Suansu 250 concepts wordlist. Zenodo. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022a. Comparative constructions in Suansu and the languages of Northeastern India. Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads 2(1). 65–93.Google Scholar
Ivani, Jessica K. 2022b. Suansu language from northeastern India: a field report. Supplementary materials. Zenodo. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenny, Mathias & San San Hnin Tun. 2016. Burmese: a comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leisan, Apinao Reisangmi. 2017. Grammar and texts of Hunphun variety of Tangkhul Naga language. Pune: University of Pune PhD dissertation.
Marrison, Geoffrey E. 1967. The classification of the Naga languages of north-east India. London: School of Oriental & African Studies, PhD dissertation.
Matisoff, James A. 1989. The bulging monosyllable, or the mora the merrier: echo-vowel adverbialization in Lahu. In Jeremy H.C.S. Davidson (eds.), Southeast Asian Linguistics: Essays in honour of Eugénie J.A. Henderson, 163–197. London: School of Oriental & African Studies, University of London.Google Scholar
2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Vol. 1351. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David. 2003. Comparative Tangkhul. Berkeley: University of California, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David R. 2012. The emergence of obstruents after high vowels. Diachronica 29(4). 434–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mortensen, David & Jennifer Keogh. 2011. Sorbung, an undocumented language of Manipur: Its phonology and place in Tibeto-Burman. JSEALS 41. 64–114.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David R. & James A. Miller. 2013. A reconstruction of Proto-Tangkhulic rhymes. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 36(1). 1–32.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David R., Jordan Picone, Xinjian Li & Kathleen Siminyu. 2021. Tusom2021: A phonetically transcribed speech dataset from an endangered language for universal phone recognition experiments. CoRR abs/2104.00824. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mortensen, David & Jordan Picone. 2021. East Tusom: A phonetic and phonological sketch of a largely undocumented Tangkhulic language. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 44(2). 168–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikolaev, Dmitry. 2019. Burmese sound inventory (EA). In Steven Moran & Daniel McCloy (eds.), PHOIBLE 2.0. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.Google Scholar
Peterson, David A. 2019. Bangladesh Khumi. The Mainland Southeast Asia Linguistic Area 3141. 12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pettigrew, William. 1918. Tangkhul [Naga] grammar and dictionary. Shillong: Assam Secretariat Printing Office. 490.Google Scholar
Post, Mark W. 2015. Tones in Northeast Indian languages, with a focus on Tani: A field-worker’s guide. In Mark W. Post, Stephen Morey & Scott Delancey (eds.), Language and culture in Northeast India and beyond: In honour of Robbins Burling, 182–210. Canberra: Asia-Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Post, Mark W. & Robbins Burling. 2017. The Tibeto-Burman languages of northeast India. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 213–242. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ramaswami, N. 2019. East-Central Tangkhul Naga sound inventory (RA). In Steven Moran & Daniel McCloy (eds.), PHOIBLE 2.0. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent, Guillaume Jacques, Yunfan Lai, Robin Ryder, Valentin Thouzeau, Simon J. Greenhill & Johann-Mattis List. 2019. Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 1161. 10317–10322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1955. Classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages. Word 11(1). 94–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Takhellambam, Bijaya Devi. 2014. Descriptive grammar of Kabrang Tangkhul. Canchipur: Manipur University PhD dissertation.
Temsunungsang, T. 2009. Aspects of the prosodic phonology of Ao: an inter-dialectal study. Hyderabad: The English & Foreign Languages University PhD dissertation.
Teo, Amos Benjamin. 2009. Sumi tone: a phonological and phonetic description of a Tibeto-Burman language of Nagaland. Melbourne: University of Melbourne MA thesis.
Tohring, S. R. 2010. Violence and identity in North-East India: Naga-Kuki conflict. Delhi: Mittal Publications.Google Scholar
Watkins, Justin W. 2001. Burmese. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 31(2). 291–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar