Article published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 45:4 (2021) ► pp. 887–920

The development of perfectivity in Khamti Shan

| Payap University
Khamti Shan features the marking of perfectivity comprised of three clause-final particles, one perfective and two imperfectives, each emerging from the basic verbs, yau¹ ‘finish’, u⁵ ‘live’, and nam⁵ ‘(be) extensive’. While the perfective category is straightforward, the imperfective category shows an unusual bifurcation, the first imperfective marker accommodating continuatives and habituals and the second imperfective marker working exclusively with the nominal predicate construction, clauses of potentiality (hortatives, futures), and the progressive construction. All three particles of perfectivity develop from lexical sources, with the pathways ‘finish’ > completive > perfective and ‘live’ > continuous/progressive > imperfective being well-documented across languages. The pathway ‘extensive’ > imperfective, on the other hand, appears unique to Khamti Shan. I motivate the usage of these perfectivity particles (primarily) with a semantic-cognitive analysis.
Keywords: Tai, Shan, Khamti, perfective, imperfective, aspect, grammaticalization
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background on Khamti Shan
    • 2.1The language and its speakers
    • 2.2Typological characteristics
    • 2.3Data
  • 3.Lexical underpinnings
  • 4.The perfectivity particles in context
    • 4.1Perfective (pfv)
    • 4.2First Imperfective (ipfv.i)
    • 4.3Second Imperfective (ipfv.ii)
  • 5.Grammaticalization of the perfectivity particles
    • 5.1The yau¹ pathway
    • 5.2The u⁵ pathway
    • 5.3The nam⁵ pathway
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 02 December 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.19001.ing
References
Borchers, Dörte
2016 Marking anteriority, perfect and perfectivity in languages of mainland Southeast Asia – concepts, linguistic area. In Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed.), Conceptualizations of time, 243–270. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
1998 “Irrealis” as a grammatical category. Anthropological Linguistics 40(2). 257–271.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. R.
1975 A new look at the history and classification of the Tai languages. In Jimmy G. Harris & James R. Chamberlain (eds.), Studies in Tai linguistics in honor of William J. Gedney, 49–66. Bangkok: Central Institute of English Language.Google Scholar
Chau Khouk Manpoong
1993 New Tai reader. Chongkham, Arunachal Pradesh: Tai Literature Committee. 21 Volumes. (in Khamti).Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1976 Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen & Viveka Velupillai
2013 The perfect. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (http://​wals​.info​/chapter​/68, Accessed on 2019-07-24.)
DeLancey, Scott
2002 Relativization and nominalization in Bodic. Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Parasession on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian Linguistics, 55–72. Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 Finite structures from clausal nominalization in Tibeto-Burman. In Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona (eds.), Nominalization in Asian languages: Diachronic and typological perspectives, 341–359. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, Holger
2006 Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 17(4). 463–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diller, Anthony V. N.
2006 Thai serial verbs: Cohesion and culture. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M. Dixon (eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology, 160–177. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Diller, Anthony V. N., Jerold A. Edmondson & Yongshian Luo
(eds.) 2008 The Tai-Kadai languages. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dockum, Rikker
2014 A tale of two Khamtis: Language classification in Southwestern Tai. SYNC 2014 Stony Brook University.Google Scholar
Eberhard, David M., Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig
(eds.) 2019a Ethnologue: Languages of the world, Twenty-second edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. http://​www​.ethnologue​.com​/language​/kht (Accessed on 2019-05-15).
(eds.) 2019b Ethnologue: Languages of the world, Twenty-second edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. http://​www​.ethnologue​.com​/language​/shn (Accessed on 2019-07-17).
Edmondson, Jerold A.
2008 Shan and other northern tier southwest Tai languages of Myanmar and China: Themes and variations. In Anthony V. N. Diller, Jerold A. Edmondson & Yongshian Luo (eds.), The Tai-Kadai languages, 184–206. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Edmondson, Jerold A. & David B. Solnit
1997a Introduction. In Jerold A. Edmondson & David B. Solnit (eds.), Comparative Kadai: The Tai branch, 1–27. Summer Institute of Linguistics and The University of Texas at Arlington. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997b Comparative Shan. In Jerold A. Edmondson & David B. Solnit (eds.), Comparative Kadai: The Tai branch, 337–360. Summer Institute of Linguistics and The University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick J.
2005 Areal linguistics and Mainland Southeast Asia. Annual Review of Anthropology 341. 181–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
1991 The de dicto domain in language. In Elizabeth Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization: Focus on theoretical and methodological issues, vol. 11, 219–251. Amsterdam /Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Jimmy G.
1976 Notes on Khamti Shan. In Thomas W. Gething, Jimmy G. Harris & Pranee Kullavanijaya (eds.), Tai linguistics in honor of Fang-Kuei Li, 113–141. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
2002 World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Inglis, Douglas
2014 This here thing: Specifying morphemes an³, nai¹, and mai² in Tai Khamti reference-point constructions. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta dissertation.Google Scholar
2017a Myanmar-based Khamti Shan orthography. Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 10(1). xlvii–lxi. https://​evols​.library​.manoa​.hawaii​.edu​/handle​/10524​/52404
2017b Khamti Shan anti-ergative construction: A Tibeto-Burman influence? Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2). 133–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, Shoichi & Preeya Ingkaphirom
2005 A reference grammar of Thai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jenny, Mathias
2001 The aspect system of Thai. In Karen H. Ebert & Fernando Zúñiga (eds.), Aktionsart and aspectotemporality in non-European languages, 97–140. Zürich: ASAS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Koenig, Jean-Pierre & Nuttanart Muansuwan
2005 The syntax of aspect in Thai. Natural Language & Linguistics Theory 231, 335–380. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kusalanda (Sao) & (Sao) Namnaeu
2013 Tai Khamti-Burmese dictionary. Khamti Shan Literature Committee and SIL International. Namti: Myanmar.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
1991 Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive applications. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
2000 Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011 Grammaticalization and cognitive grammar. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 79–91. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A.
1972 Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genitivization. In John P. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 11, 237–257. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Morey, Stephen D.
2002 The Tai languages of Assam – A grammar and texts. Clayton, VI: Monash University dissertation.Google Scholar
2005a The Tai languages of Assam: A grammar and texts. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
2005b Tonal change in the Tai languages of Northeast India. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 28(2). 166–169.Google Scholar
2008 The Tai languages of Assam. In Anthony V. N. Diller, Jerold A. Edmonson & Yongxian Luo (eds.), The Tai-Kadai languages, 207–253. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thiengburanathum, Prang
2013 Thai motion verbs paj and maa: Where tense and aspect meet. Studies in Language 37(4). 810–845. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thepkanjana, Kingkarn
1986 Serial verb constructions in Thai. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan dissertation.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
1989 On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 651. 31–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weidert, Alfons
1977 Tai Khamti phonology and vocabulary. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Wilaiwan Khanittanan
1986 Kamti Tai: From an SVO to an SOV language. In Bhadriraju H. Krishnamurti (ed.), South Asian linguistics: Structure, convergence, and diglossia, 174–178. Delhi: Motilal Barnarsidas.Google Scholar