Cover not available
Article published In:
Evidentiality, Modality and Grammaticalization
Edited by Eric Mélac
[Studies in Language 48:3] 2024
► pp. 723–752

The paradigmaticity of evidentials in the Tibetic languages of Khams

ORCID logo | Minzu University of China
ORCID logo | Kyoto University

This article argues that the evidential system of Khams Tibetan, a cluster of Tibetic languages spoken in the south-eastern Tibetosphere, should be considered a verb paradigm. We propose a paradigm with six evidential categories (egophoric, statemental, visual sensory, nonvisual sensory, sensory inferential, and logical inferential) for all the verb classes. We focus on two varieties – rGyalthang and Lhagang – and examine how these evidential categories are encoded with distinct morphemes. We then discuss the main evidential forms of the copulative and existential verbs available in Khams Tibetan varieties as a whole, as well as their morphological relationship. Our analyses lead us to argue against a differential treatment of evidentiality depending on verb categories. The article concludes that describing the evidential paradigm may be the first essential task in writing a grammar of a Tibetic language.

Keywords: Tibetic, Khams, evidential, copulative, existential, paradigm
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical frameworks and definition of the paradigm
    • 2.1Inconsistencies in previous descriptions
    • 2.2Current approach to the paradigm and framework
  • 3.Shaping a ‘paradigm’: The cases of rGyalthang and Lhagang
    • 3.1rGyalthang Tibetan
    • 3.2Lhagang Tibetan
  • 4.Discussions
    • 4.1Morphemic contrast of the main evidential forms in Khams Tibetan
    • 4.2A critique of a differential model of evidential categories depending on verb types
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 28 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23006.dro
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2018a The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018b Evidentiality: The framework. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality, 1–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel-Tober, Katrin & Kalle Müller
2017 Evidential adverbs in German: Diachronic development and present-day meaning. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7(1). 9–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartee, Ellen Lynn
2007 A grammar of Dongwang Tibetan. Santa Barbara: University of California at Santa Barbara PhD dissertation.
2011 The role of animacy in the verbal morphology of Dongwang Tibetan. In Mark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 131–182. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caplow, Nancy J.
2017 Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 225–257. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Causemann, Margret
1989 Dialekt und Erzählungen der Nangchenpas. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Chang, Betty Shefts & Kun Chang
1984 The certainty hierarchy among spoken Tibetan verbs of being. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 55(4). 603–634.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott
1992 Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics 1(3). 289–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Mirativity: the grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 11. 33–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George
1998 Dzongkha. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies.Google Scholar
Ebihara, Shiho
2017 Evidentiality of the Tibetan verb snang . In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 41–60. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019  Amudo-Tibettogo bunpoo [Grammar of Amdo Tibetan]. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque
(eds.) 2018 Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gawne, Lauren
2016 A sketch grammar of Lamjung Yolmo. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University. URI: [URL]
2017 Egophoric evidentiality in Bodish languages. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 61–94. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021 Reported evidentiality in Tibeto-Burman languages. Himalayan Linguistics 20(1). 80–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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
Gawne, Lauren & Nathan W. Hill
(eds.) 2017 Evidential systems in Tibetan languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, Ferdinand
2008 Typological approaches to modality. In William Frawley (ed.), The expression of modality, 27–70. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haller, Felix
2004 Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Häsler, Katrin Louise
1999 A grammar of the Tibetan Dege (Sde dge) dialect. Zürich: Selbstverlag.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
2013 ḥdug as a testimonial marker in Classical and Old Tibetan. Himalayan Linguistics 12(1). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. & Lauren Gawne
2017 The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 1–38. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hongladarom, Krisadawan
1993 Evidentials in Tibetan: A dialogic study of the interplay between form and meaning. Bloomington: Indiana University PhD dissertation.
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016  Koten Tibettogo bunpoo: Ootoomeikyooki (14 seiki) ni motoduite [A grammar of Classical Tibetan based on the Clear Mirror of Royal Genealogies (the 14th century)]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Chenglong
2013 Zangmianyu cunzailei dongci de gainian jiegou [Conceptual structure of existential verbs in Tibeto-Burman]. Minzu Yuwen 21. 31–48.Google Scholar
Huber, Brigitte
2005 The Tibetan dialect of Lende (Kyirong): A grammatical description with historical annotations. Bonn: Vereinigung für Geschichtswissenschaft Hochasiens Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2019 Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics 20(4). 515–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalsang, Jay Garfield, Margaret Speas & Jill de Villiers
2013 Direct evidentials, case, tense and aspect in Tibetan: evidence for a general theory of the semantics of evidential. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 31(2). 517–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med & sKal-bzang dByangs-can
2002 Zangyu fangyan gailun [An introduction to Tibetan dialects]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe.Google Scholar
Matsubara, Julie
2017 The semantics and pragmatics of the Japanese evidentials -rashii, -sooda, and -yooda: An experimental investigation. Evanston: Northwestern University doctoral dissertation.
Mélac, Éric
2014 L’évidentialité en anglais – approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus anglais-tibétain. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
2023 The pragmatic differences between grammatical and lexical evidentiality: A corpus-based study of Tibetan and English. Journal of Pragmatics 2101. 143–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mélac, Éric & Joanna Bialek
Forthcoming. Evidentiality as a grammaticalization passenger: An investigation of evidential developments in Tibetic languages and beyond. Studies in Language.
de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, René
1956 Oracles and demons of Tibet: The cult and iconography of the Tibetan protective deities. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton.Google Scholar
Oisel, Guillaume
2013 Morphosyntaxe et sémantique des auxiliaires et des connecteurs du tibétain littéraire : étude diachronique et synchronique. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle – Paris 3 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
2017 Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. Himalayan Linguistics 16(2). 90–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roche, Gerald & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2018 Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies 52(4). 1227–1278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Somolinos, Amalia
2017 From visual perception to inference in the French evidential markers il m’est avis que, apparemment, and il paraît que. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7(1). 111–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shao, Mingyuan
2014 Anduo Zangyu Arouhua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential system of the Arig dialect of Amdo Tibetan]. Tianjin: Nankai University PhD dissertation.
2016a Cong quxiang dongci dao shizheng biaoji: Zangyuzu yuyan shizheng biaoji thal de yufahua [From a direction verb to an evidential marker: Grammaticalisation of thal, an evidential marker in Tibetic languages]. Zangxue Xuekan 141. 226–249.Google Scholar
2016b Zangyuzu xidongci red de yufahua [The grammaticalisation of the copula verb red in Tibetic languages]. Language and Linguistics 17(5). 679–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 Hexi Zoulang binwei Zangyu Dongnahua yanjiu [Study on the mDungnag dialect, an endangered Tibetan language in Hexi Corridor]. Guangzhou: Zhongshan Daxue Chubanshe.Google Scholar
2019 Guzangwen de xidongci [The copula verbs in Old Tibetan]. Language and Linguistics 20(3). 417–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S.
1993 Evidentials in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica 631. 944–1001.Google Scholar
Sun, Kai
2019 Yushu Zangyu fangyan (Labuhua) yanjiu [Study on Yulshul Tibetan (Lab variety)]. Tianjin: Nankai Daxue Doctoral dissertation.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2011 Dialectal particularities of Sogpho Tibetan: An introduction to the “Twenty-four villages’ patois”. In Mark Turin & Bettina Zeisler (eds.), Himalayan languages and linguistics: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax, 55–73. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Multiple usages of the verb snang in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics 11(1). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems in Tibetan languages, 423–444. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022 Geolinguistics in the eastern Tibetosphere: An introduction. Tokyo: Geolinguistic Society of Japan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
forthcoming. Functional transition from ‘hear’ to nonvisual sensory and hearsay evidential categories: A case study of rGyalthang Tibetan.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Lozong Lhamo
2021 /ka-/ negative prefix in Choswateng Tibetan (Shangri-La, Yunnan). Language and Linguistics 22(4). 593–629. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo
2017a 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
2017b 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
2018 Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozi sareru syookosei [Evidentiality marked in predicates of the Lhagang dialect of Khams Tibetan]. Journal of Kijutsuken 101. 13–42. URI: [URL]
2021 Hearsay evidential marking strategy in Lhagang Tibetan: A case study on folktales and legends. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 44(2). 141–167. DOI logoGoogle 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
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Tashi Nyima
2021 Evidential system of copulative and existential verbs in Lamo. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and their archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 259–287. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: [URL]
Takeuchi, Tsuguhito
2015 The function of auxiliary verbs in Tibetan predicates and their historical development. Revue d’études tibétaines 311. 401–415. Available at: [URL] (last access 27 October 2023)
2021 History of the Tibetan language. In Yasuhiko Nagano & Takumi Ikeda (eds.), Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 4: Link languages and archetypes in Tibeto-Burman, 303–323. Kyoto: Research Institute for Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: [URL]
Tournadre, Nicolas
2008 Arguments against the concept of ‘conjunct/disjunct’ in Tibetan. In Brigitte Huber, Marianne Volkart, & Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Bonn: 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: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso
2001 Final auxiliary verbs in Literary Tibetan and Tibetan dialects. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 24(1). 49–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy J. LaPolla
2014 Towards a new approach to evidentiality: Issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas, Françoise Robin, Camille Simon, Chabdra Lhamo Kyab, Nyima Dorjee, Bora Sherab, Sonam Gyaltsen & Thubten Rigzin
2018 EESTAC questionnaire (rGyab-ljongs-dang gnas-stangs-kyi brda-sprod/ Bho-Ti’i skad-rigs nang gnas-tshul-gyi khungs-dang go-ba len-thabs/ The-tshom bcas ston-pa’i tshig-grogs). Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje
2003 Manuel de tibétain standard: langue et civilisation. 2nd edn. Paris: L’Asiathèque.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2023 The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan. Villejuif: LACITO Publications. DOI logo
Tshe-ring gYang-sgron (Cilinyangzhen)
2021 Dongwang Zangyu cankao yufa [A reference grammar of gTorwarong Tibetan]. Beijing: Zhongyang Minzu Daxue PhD dissertation.
Tshe-skyid dBang-mo (Caijiwenmao)
2020 Zangyu Kangfangyan Chengduohua de shizheng fanchou [Evidential category in Chengduo variety of Khams Tibetan]. Minzu Yuwen 11. 27–37. Available at: [URL] (last access 27 October 2023)
Vokurková, Zuzana
2008 Epistemic modalities in Spoken Standard Tibetan. Praha / Paris: Filozofická Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy – Université Paris 8 PhD dissertation. URI: [URL]
Yliniemi, Juha
2019 A descriptive grammar of Denjongke (Sikkimese Bhutia). Helsinki: Helsingin Yliopisto PhD thesis. URI: [URL]
Zeisler, Bettina
2004 Relative tense and aspectual values in Tibetan languages: A comparative study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018a Don’t believe in a paradigm that you haven’t manipulated yourself! Evidentiality, speaker attitude, and admirativity in Ladakhi (extended version). Himalayan Linguistics 17(1). 67–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018b Evidence for the development of ‘evidentiality’ as a grammatical category in the Tibetic languages. In Ad Foolen, Helen de Hoop & Gijs Mulder (eds.). Evidence for evidentiality, 227–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zemp, Marius
2018 A grammar of Purik Tibetan. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Yang & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2022 Evidentiality in Selibu: A contact-induced emergence. Diachronica 39(2). 268–309. With an online appendix, 46 pp. DOI logoGoogle Scholar