Article published In:
Studies in Language: Online-First Articles

Postnominal flagging and OV in Sinitic

Areal and typological perspectives

ORCID logo | University of Potsdam
Sinitic languages are known for their SVO order and mostly isolating morphology. This study addresses eleven languages of four different areas in Hunan, Yunnan, Sichuan, and Qinghai/Gansu provinces in China that possess SOV order and developed a postnominal flagging system. This study presents a synchronic description as well as a diachronic analysis of the flagging systems in these languages, focusing on typological properties (ergative or secundative alignment) and the role of language contact. The existence of four separate areas with limited mutual contact allows a contrastive approach and inferences on the role of different contact languages (Tibetic, Mongolic, Tujia) or different types of language contact (borrowing of flags, shared grammaticalization). The study argues against OV order and postnominal flagging as defining features of the “Amdo Sprachbund”, showing that these are universally present in all four areas and are better understood as the result of contact between two Eurasian macro areas.
Keywords: Sinitic languages, Baic, Amdo Sprachbund, Tibetic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tujia, word order change, case marking, flagging, alignment, language contact
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Flagging: Methodological and theoretical issues
  • 3.Postnominal flagging in Sinitic OV languages
    • 3.1Qinghai/Gansu
      • 3.1.1Dative/accusative
      • 3.1.2Comitative/instrumental
    • 3.2Sichuan
    • 3.3Yunnan
      • 3.3.1Shangri-la Chinese
      • 3.3.2Southern Bai
      • 3.3.3Hunan
  • 4.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 30 September 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23055.hol
References (110)
References
Acuo, Yixiweisa. 2004. Daohua yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Acuo, Yixiweise. 2001. Zang han hunheyu “daohua” shulüe. Yuyan yanjiu 44(3). 109–126.Google Scholar
An, Liqing. 2015. Lun xininghua he linxiahua zhong de SOV jushi. Liaodong xueyuan xuebao (shehui kexue ban) 17(2). 86–89.Google Scholar
Balogh, Mátyás. 2017. Henan Oirat: A shrinking pool of unique linguistic features. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2451. 37–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartee, Ellen Lynn. 2007. A grammar of Dongwang Tibetan. Santa Barbara: University of California at Santa Barbara PhD dissertation.
Bell, Daniel. 2019. Chinese possesses Japanese style scrambling: The case of Xining Mandarin. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 281. 143–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2011. Grammatical relations typology. In Song Jae Jung (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology, 399–444. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 2004. Case. 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Brassett, Cecilia, Brassett, Philip, and Lu, Meiyan. 2006. The Tujia language. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary. 2013. Pan-Sinitic object markers: Morphology and syntax. In Cao, Guangshun et al. (eds.), Breaking down the barriers, 785–816. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Chen, Litong. 2017. Development of Daohua: Social contexts of a Chinese-Tibetan creole. Asian Highland Perspectives 441. 122–140.Google Scholar
Chen, Naixiong. 1982. Wutunhua chutan. Minzu yuwen 11. 10–18.Google Scholar
Christie, Simon. 2022. A grammar of Southern Bai. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne, Asia Institute PhD dissertation.
Croft, William. 2022. Morphosyntax. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dai, Qingxia & Zhao Yanzhen. 2009. Zhaozhuang baiyu gaikuang. Yuyan yanjiu 29(3). 109–126.Google Scholar
Dede, Keith. 1999. An ablative postposition in the Xining dialect. Language Variation and Change 111. 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The origins of the anti-ergative [xa] in Huangshui Chinese. Language and Linguistics 81. 863–881.Google Scholar
Djamouri, Redouane. 2015. Object positioning in Tangwang. In Cao Guangshun et al. (eds.), Languages in contact in north China, 251–275. Paris: EHESS-CRLAO.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. & Orin D. Gensler. 2013. Order of object, oblique, and verb. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
Dryer, Matthew S. 2008. Word order in Tibeto-Burman languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 311. 1–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013a. Position of case affixes. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
2013b. Order of object and verb. Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
2017. Word order in Sino-Tibetan languages from a typological and geographical perspective. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages. 2nd edn., 70–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dwyer, Arienne M. 1992. Altaic elements in Linxia dialects: Contact induced change on the Yellow River Plateau. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 11. 160–179.Google Scholar
1995. From the Northwest China Sprachbund: Xúnhuà Chinese dialect data. Yuen Ren Society Treasury of Chinese Dialect Data 11. 143–182.Google Scholar
Ebihara, Shiho. 2009. Morphophonological alternation of suffixes, clitics and stems in Amdo Tibetan. Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 33(4). 639–660.Google Scholar
. 2011. Amdo Tibetan. In Yasuhiro Yamakoshi (ed.), Grammatical sketches from the field, 41–78. Tōkyō: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
Faehndrich, Burgel R. M. 2007. Sketch grammar of the Karlong variety of Mongghul. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i PhD dissertation.
Field, Kenneth L. 1997. A grammatical overview of Santa Mongolian. Oakland: University of California PhD dissertation.
Fried, Robert Wayne. 2010. A grammar of Bao’an Tu. Buffalo: University of Buffalo PhD dissertation.
Fu, Jingqi & Xu Dan. 2009. SVO yuyan li de binyu qianzhi. Minzu yuwen 31. 3–15.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of language, 58–90. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haller, Felix. 2004. Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung 14). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language, vol. 21, 211–242. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2013. Ditransitive constructions: The verb ‘give’. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3) Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
. 2015. Ditransitive constructions. Annual Review of Linguistics 11. 19–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking. Te Reo 621, 93–115.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Christa König. 2010. On the linear order of ditransitive objects. Language Sciences 32(1). 87–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 2009. Grammaticalization of cases. In Malchukov, Andrej & Spencer, Andrew (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 458–469. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hölzl, Andreas. 2023. Diachronic changes in constructional networks: Evidence from Manchuric nominal morphology. Constructions and Frames 15(2). 160–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hongladarom, Krisadawan. 2007. Grammatical peculiarities of two dialects of southern Kham Tibetan. In Roland Bielmeier & Felix Haller (eds.), Linguistics of the Himalayas and beyond, 119–152. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Bufan & Renzeng, Wangmu. 1990. Lüsuyu. In Dai Qingxia et al. (eds.), Zangmianyu shiwu zhong, 132–152. Beijing: Beijing yanshan chubanshe.Google Scholar
Iggesen, Oliver A. 2013. Number of cases. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
Janhunen, Juha, Marja Peltomaa, Erika Sandman & Xiawu Dongzhou. 2008. Wutun. München: Lincom.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 2009. Case and contact linguistics. In Andrej L. Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 494–501. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kerbs, Richard. 2021. The phonology of Gangou from a comparative perspective. Himalayan Lingusitics 20(3). 8–27.Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Long Haiping, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J. 2015. Sino-Tibetan syntax. In Wang, William S-Y. & Sun Chaofen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 45–57. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Lee, Man Hei. 2023. Phonological features of Caijia that are notable from a diachronic perspective. Journal of Historical Linguistics 13(1). 82–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee-Smith, Mei W. & Stephen A. Wurm. 1996. The Wutun language. In Stephen A. Wurm et al. (eds.), Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas, 883–897. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee-Smith, Mei W. 1996a. The Hezhou language. In Stephen A. Wurm et al. (eds.), Atlas of Languages of Intercultural Communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas, 865–873. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996b. The Tangwang language. In Stephen A. Wurm et al. (eds.), Atlas of languages of intercultural communication in the Pacific, Asia, and the Americas, 875–882. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Charles N. 1984. From verb-medial analytic language to verb-final synthetic language: A case of typological change. Berkeley Linguistics Society 101. 307–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Chunmei. 2010. Yajiangxian hekou tezheng chutan. Sichuan minzu xueyuan xuebao 19(6). 19–26.Google Scholar
Li, Hao. 2022. Grammaire descriptive de la langue bao’an: perspectives comparatives dans l’aire linguistique du Gansu-Qinghai. Paris: Centre de recherche sur les langues de l’Asie orientale PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Li, Qiqun & Lu Meiyan. 2011. Hunan longshan tasha hanyu de teshu yuxu. Yuwen yanjiu 1181. 63–65.Google Scholar
Lin, Xin, Wang Yunjia & Li Daqin. 2020. Gemanyu, ganzi zangyu, taoping qiangyu “ge” fanchou de duibi fenxi. Baise xueyuan xuebao 33(2). 22–31.Google Scholar
Loggins, Nathan. 2022. Ethnic history and language typology in Western China. Seattle: University of Washington PhD dissertation.
Ma, Mengling. 2009. Xining fangyan SOV jushi yu aertai zhu yuyan yufa bi. Qinghai shifan daxue yubao 21. 107–112.Google Scholar
. 2019. Qinghai guide liutun jilüe. Fangyan 41(2). 244–256.Google Scholar
Ma, Shujun. 1984. Hanyu hezhouhua yu aertai yuyan. Minzu yuwen 21. 50–55.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej, Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie. 2010. Ditransitive constructions: A typological overview. In Andrej Malchukov et al. (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions, 1–64. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2020. Language contact. 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Narrog, Heiko & Ito Shinya. 2007. Re-constructing semantic maps: the comitative-instrumental area. STUF – Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 601. 273–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peyraube, Alain. 2015. A comparative analysis of the case system in some Northwestern Sinitic languages. In Cao Guangshun et al. (eds.), Languages in contact in north China, 191–215. Paris: EHESS-CRLAO.Google Scholar
. 2017. The case system in three Sinitic languages of the Qinghai-Gansu linguistic area. In Dan Xu & Hui Li (eds.), Languages and genes in Northwestern China and adjacent regions, 123–139. Singapore: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ren, Bisheng. 2004. Xining fangyan de qianzhi binyuju. Fangyan 2004(4). 338–346.Google Scholar
Sandman, Erika. 2016. A grammar of Wutun. Helsinki: University of Helsinki PhD dissertation.
. 2018. Egophoricity in Wutun. In Simeon Floyd et al. (eds.), Egophoricity, 173–196. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. Differential argument marking and the multifunctional case marker -ha in Wutun: Between the argument structure and information structure. Himalayan Linguistics 20(3). 28–48.Google Scholar
Schulze, Wolfgang. 2000. Towards a typology of the Accusative Ergative Continuum. General Linguistics 371. 171–155.Google Scholar
Shcherbakova, Olena, Damián E. Blasi, Volker Gast, Hedvig Skirgård, Russell D. Gray & Simon J. Greenhill. 2024. The evolutionary dynamics of how languages signal who does what to whom. Scientific Reports 141. 7259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna & Dik Bakker. 2009. Case and alternative strategies. In Andrej L. Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, 290–303. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Simon, Camille. 2016. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique grammaticale du salar et du tibétain de l’Amdo. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle PhD dissertation.
Siqinchaoketu. 2002. Kangjiayu gaikuang. Minzu yuwen 61. 66–77.Google Scholar
Skirgård, Hedvig et al. 2023. Grambank reveals the importance of genealogical constraints on linguistic diversity and highlights the impact of language loss. Science Advances 9(16). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slater, Keith W. 2003. A grammar of Mangghuer. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon. 2013. Noun phrase conjunction. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
Stolz, Thomas, Cornelia Stroh & Aina Urdze. 2013. Comitatives and instrumentals. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS Online (v2020.3). Available at [URL] (last access 21 May 2024).
Sun, Chao-Fen & Talmy Givón. 1985. On the so-called SOV word order in Mandarin Chinese: A quantified text study and its implications. Language 611. 329–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szeto, Pui Yiu. 2021. Revisiting the Amdo Sprachbund: Genes, languages, and beyond. Himalayan Linguistics 20(3). 123–145.Google Scholar
Wang, Feng. 2006. Comparison of languages in contact. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2008 [2004]. Shilun baiyu sanzhong jiben yuxu. In Xu Lin (ed.), Dali congshu: baiyu pian, vol. 11, 472–477. Kunming: Yunnan minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
. 2012. Kunming xishan shalang baiyu yanjiu. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
. 2016. Baiyu yufa biaozhu wenben. Beijing: Shehui kexue wenxian chubanshe.Google Scholar
Wang, Sen. 1993. Gansu linxia fangyan de liangzhong yuxu. Fangyan 31 191–194.Google Scholar
Wang, Shuangcheng. 2011. Qinghai xining fangyan de geiyu lei shuangjiwu jiegou. Fangyan 2011(1). 14–19.Google Scholar
Wang, Yan. 2018. Lun yajiang daohua de ge biaoji. Minzu yuwen 61. 73–82.Google Scholar
Xi, Zhi. 2008 [1988]. Baiyu jianchuan fangyan yu dali fangyan yuxu bijiao. In Xu Lin (ed.), Dali congshu: baiyu pian, vol. 11, 444–447. Kunming: Yunnan minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Xiong, Zhenhui & Zhang Zhenxing (eds.) 2012. Zhongguo yuyan dituji: hanyu fangyan juan, 2nd edn. Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan.Google Scholar
Xu, Dan. 2014. Tangwanghua yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
. 2015. Sinitic languages of Northwest China: Where did their case marking come from? In Cao Guangshun et al. (eds.), Languages in contact in Northwestern China, 217–244. Paris: EHESS-CRLAO.Google Scholar
. 2017. The Tangwang language. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. From topic marker to case marker: A case of case formation in Gansu-Qinghai linguistic area. Asian Languages and Linguistics 1(2). 278–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, Lin & Zhao Yansun. 1984. Baiyu jianzhi. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Yang, Yonglong & Zhang Jingting. 2016. Qinghai minhe gan’gouhua de ge biaoji xitong. Minzu Yuwen 51. 25–38.Google Scholar
Yang, Yonglong. 2014. Qinghai minhe gan’gouhua de duo gongneng ge biaoji “ha”. Fangyan 31. 230–241.Google Scholar
. 2015. Qinghai minhe gan’gouhua de yuxu leixing. Minzu yuwen 61. 15–30.Google Scholar
Yibulaheimai, A. 1985. Gansu jingnei tangwanghua jilüe. Minzu yuwen 61. 33–47.Google Scholar
Zhang, Ansheng. 2013. Ganqing hehuang fangyan mingci de gefanchou. Zhongguo yuwen. 3551. 291–307.Google Scholar
Zhang, Qiang. 2021. Linxia fangyan ge biaoji “xa43” tanjiu. Huainan shifan xueyuan xuebao 126(23(2)). 64–73.Google Scholar
Zhao, Yanzhen & Dai Qingxia. 2012. Zhaozhuang baiyu cankao yufa. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhou, Chenlei. 2019a. A special case marking system in the Sinitic languages of Northwest China. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 47(2). 425–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019b. Ganqing fangyan ge biaoji ‘xa’ de laiyuan. Language and Linguistics 20(3). 493–513.Google Scholar
. 2020. Case markers and language contact in the Gansu-Qinghai linguistic area. Asian Languages and Linguistics 1(1). 168–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022a. From ‘two’ to a comitative-instrumental case marker: A regional innovation in the Gansu-Qinghai linguistic area. Language and Linguistics 23(2). 349–369.Google Scholar
. 2022b. Zhoutun. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Maocao. 2003. Maqu zangyu yanjiu. Beijing: Renmin chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhou, Yang. 2016. Xianggelilahua de ge biaoji “shang”. Jianlun cong fangweici dao ge biaoji de yufahualian. Yuyan yanjiu 36(2). 76–84.Google Scholar
Zhu, Yongzhong, Chaolu Wu, Keith W. Slater & Kevin Stuart. 1997. Gangou Chinese dialect. A comparative study of a strongly Altaicized Chinese dialect and its Mongolic neighbor. Anthropos 92(4/6). 433–450.Google Scholar