Article published in:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 39:1 (2016) ► pp. 105160
References

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra
2012The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology 16(3): 435–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aksu-Koç, Ayhan & Slobin, Dan I.
1986A psychological account of the development and use of evidentials in Turkish. In Evidentiality, the Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds), 159–167. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bhutia, Karma Lobsang
2013རྣ་གསུང་ དང་ གཏམ་བཤད་ (Sikkimese Bhutia oral stories and moral dialects). Gangtok: Bhutia Kayrab Yargay Tsogpo.Google Scholar
Bielmeier, Roland
2000Syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic-epistemic functions of auxiliaries in Western Tibetan. LTBA 23(2):79–125.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1989Language Universals and Linguistic Typology, 2nd edn. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, David
1997A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 4th edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Davis, Christopher M.
2011Constraining Interpretation: Sentence Final Particles in Japanese. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
DeLancey, Scott
1997Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1: 33–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012Still mirative after all these years. Linguistics Typology 16(3): 529–564.Google Scholar
Denwood, Philip
1999Tibetan. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Denzongpo, Tashi, Tsichudarpo, Bhaichung & Takchungdarpo, Pema Rinzing
2011ལྷོ་ཡིག་ སློབ་དེབ་ བདུན་པོ་ [Class 7 Denjongke Textbook]. Gangtok: Human Resource Development, Government of Sikkim.Google Scholar
Dickinson, Connie
2000Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language 24(2): 379–421. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dokhangba, Sonam Gyatso
2001སྦར་ཕུང་ ལིང་དམ་ འགྲོ་ལིས་ (Sikkimese marriage custom and rites). Siliguri: Amit Offset Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, Edward
2001Evidentiality and Assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Gundel Jeanette K. & Fretheim, Thorstein
2004Topic and focus. In Handbook of Pragmatics, Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Wardn (eds), 175–196. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2010Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3): 663–687. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Olbertz, Hella
2012Didn’t you know? Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology 16(3): 487–503. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Häsler, Katrin
1999A Grammar of Tibetan Sde.dge (སྡེ་དགེ) Dialect. PhD dissertation, University of Bern.
Hill, W. Nathan
2012“Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 16(3): 389–433. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hongladarom, Krisadawan
2007Evidentiality in Rgyalthang Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Birma Area 30(2):17–44.Google Scholar
Huber, Brigitte
2002The Lende subdialect of Kyirong Tibetan: A Grammatical Description with Historical Annotations. PhD dissertation, University of Bern.
Hyslop, Gwendylon
2011aA Grammar of Kurtöp. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon at Eugene.Google Scholar
2011bMirativity in Kurtöp. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 4(1): 43–60.Google Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendylon & Tshering, Karma
2010Preliminary notes on Dakpa (Tawang Monpa). In North East Indian Linguistics 2, Stephen Morey & Mark Post (eds). New Delhi: Foundation/Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
2000When subjects behave like objects: an analysis of the merging of S and O in sentence-focus constructions across languages. Studies in Language 24(3): 611–682. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert
1999Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other? Linguistic Typology 3: 91–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001On the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Journal of pragmatics 33: 359–367. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mazaudon, Martine
2003From discourse to grammar in Tamang: Topic, focus, intensifiers and subordination. In Language Variation: Papers on Variation and Change in the Sinosphere and in the Indosphere in Honour of James A. Matisoff [Pacific Linguistics], David Bradley, Randy Lapolla, Boyd Michailovsky & Graham Thurgood (eds), 145–158. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd
1996L’inférentiel du népali. In L’Énonciation médiatisée [Bibliothèque de l’Information Grammaticale], Zlatka Guentchéva (ed.), 109–123. Louvain: Éditions Peeters.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
2011Ingush Grammar [University of California Publications in Linguistics 143]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nishiguchi, Sumiyo
2014Mirative past in Japanese. Semantics-Syntax Interface 1(2): 118–132. semantics​-syntax​.ut​.ac​.ir​/downloads​/Nishiguchi​.SSI1(2)​.2014​.pdf (2 June 2015).Google Scholar
Nguyen, Tam Thi Minh
2013A Grammar of Bih. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon.
Peterson, John
2000Evidentials, inferentials and mirativity in Nepali. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Birma Area 23(2): 13–37.Google Scholar
Peterson, Tyler
2013Rethinking mirativity: The expression and implication of surprise. Ms.http://​semanticsarchive​.net​/Archive​/2FkYTg4O​/Rethinking​_Mirativity​.pdf} (6 May 2015)
Post, Mark William
2007A Grammar of Galo. PhD disseration, La Trobe University.Google Scholar
Shafer, Robert
1974Introduction to Sino-Tibetan. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Sprigg, R.K.
1991The spelling-style pronunciation of Written Tibetan, and the hazards of using citation forms in the phonological analysis of spoken Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Birma Area 14(2): 93–131.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
2007Attention phenomena. In The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Hubert Cuyckens & Dirk Geeraerts (eds), 264–293. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Tomlin, Russell S., Forrest, Linda, Ming Ming Pu & Myung Hee Kim
2011Discourse semantics. In Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, 2nd edn, Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), 37–63. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicholas
(2008) Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct’/‘disjunct’ in Tibetan. In Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek, Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag 1 (Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung 12), Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart & Paul Widmer (eds), 281–308. Saale: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
2010The Tibetic languages and their classification. In Trans-Himalayan Linguistics: Historical and Descriptive Linguistics of the Himalayan Area [Trends in Linguistics 266], Nathan W. Hill & Thomas Owen-Smith (eds), 105–130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tsichudarpo, Bhaichung
1996[2003]རེ་ཆེ་ (Hope). Gangtok: Kwality.Google Scholar
1997 [2003]རྣམ་རྟོག་ (Superstition). Gangtok: Kwality.Google Scholar
Watters, Stephen
2007The nature of narrative text in Dzongkha: Evidence from deixis, evidentiality, and mirativity. In Linguistics of the Himalayas and Beyond, Roland Bielmeier & Felix Haller (eds), 381–397. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zeisler, Bettina
2000Narrative conventions in Tibetan languages: The issue of mirativity. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Birma Area 23(2): 39–77.Google Scholar
Yliniemi, Juha
To appear. Copulas in Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia). In Evidentiality in Tibetic Languages, Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds) Berlin Mouton de Gruyter
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

EVANS, NICHOLAS, HENRIK BERGQVIST & LILA SAN ROQUE
2018. The grammar of engagement II: typology and diachrony. Language and Cognition 10:1  pp. 141 ff. Crossref logo
Ozerov, Pavel
2018. Tracing the sources of Information Structure: Towards the study of interactional management of information. Journal of Pragmatics 138  pp. 77 ff. Crossref logo
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Lozong Lhamo
2021. /ka-/ negative prefix of Choswateng Tibetan of Khams (Shangri-La, Yunnan). Language and Linguistics. 語言暨語言學 22:4  pp. 593 ff. Crossref logo
Yliniemi, Juha
2021. Similarity of mirative and contrastive focus: three parameters for describing attention markers. Linguistic Typology 0:0 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.