Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 39:1 (2015) ► pp.118–159

A typology of negation in Tungusic

| University of Munich
Negation seems to be a universal linguistic category, yet languages differ vastly in how they express it. Tungusic languages show several interesting and typologically rare phenomena. The paper offers a typological description of negation within the whole language family from an onomasiological perspective. But some remarks on the etymology of certain negators are made as well. There are three main patterns of “standard negation”. The historically oldest type (A) employs a negative verb similar to the Uralic languages, the second pattern (B) is a grammaticalized version of the first (possibly influenced by Nivkh) and the third type (C) is an innovation influenced by Mongolian, in which the negative existential replaced the negative verb. Some preliminary proposals are made for the development of a “conceptual space”, which also includes non-standard negation such as negative copulas, negative existentials, and prohibitives. The discussion contains examples from more than 35 languages.
Keywords: Tungusic, conceptual space, typology, negation
Published online: 15 June 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.39.1.05hoe
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Robert M.W. Dixon
1998 Dependencies between grammatical systems. Language 74(1). 56–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alonso de la Fuente, José Andrés
2011 Venjukov’s [1858] 1862/1868 Nanai materials. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 931. 11–35.Google Scholar
2011a Tense, voice and Aktionsart in Tungusic: Another case of »analysis to synthesis«? Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
An Jun
1986 Hezheyu jianzhi. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Atknine, Victor
1997 The Evenki language from the Yenisei to Sakhalin. In Shōji Hiroshi & Juha Janhunen (eds.), Northern minority languages: Problems of survival (Senri Ethnological Studies 44), 109–121. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der
2009 The Jespersen Cycles. In Elly van Galderen (ed.), Cyclical Change, 35–71. Benjamins: Amsterdam, Philadelphia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 On the diachrony of negation. In Laurence R. Horn (ed.), The Expression of Negation, 73–109. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Auwera, Johan van der & Ludo Lejeune (with Valentin Goussev
) 2013 Feature 71A: The Prohibitive. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath, (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. München: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL] (31 October, 2014.)Google Scholar
Baek, Sungyup
2012 Tsungūsu shogo no WH sōkan kōbun no bunpu ni taisuru ruikei-teki kōsatsu. Hoppō gengo kenkyū 21. 163–181.Google Scholar
Bang, Willy
1890 Mandschurica. T’oung pao 11. 329–334.Google Scholar
Benzing, Johannes
1955 Die tungusischen Sprachen: Versuch einer vergleichenden Grammatik. Mainz: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur.Google Scholar
1958 I. A. Lopatin’s “Material on the Orochee Language, the Goldi (Nanai) Language and the Olchi (Nani) Language”. Anthropos 53(3–4). 597–603.Google Scholar
Bhat, D. N. Shankara
1999 The Prominence of tense, aspect and mood. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bulatova, Nadezhda & Grenoble Lenore
1999 Evenki: Language of the world/materials 141. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Bulatova, Nadezhda & Stefano Cotrozzi
2004 Ewenkische Erzählungen aus der Insel Sachalin. Bonn: Verlag für Kultur und Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
Castrén, M. Alexander
1856 Grundzüge einer tungusischen Sprachlehre nebst kurzem Wörterverzeichniss. St. Petersburg: Buchdruckerei der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Chao Ke
2006 Xiandai xiboyu kouyu yanjiu. Beijing: Renmin chubanshe.Google Scholar
2007 Nanmu elunchunyu yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
2009 Ewenkeyu cankao yufa. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
2014 Hezheyu 366 ju huihuaju. Beijing: Shehui kexue wenxian chubanshe.Google Scholar
Cincius, Vera I.. et al.
1975–77 Sravnitel’nyj slovar’ tunguso-man’čžurskich jazkov. Materialny etimologičeskomu slovarju, 2 vols1. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Clark, Larry V.
1979/80 Manchu suffix list. Manchu Studies Newsletter 31. 29–40.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1981 The Languages of the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William
1991 The Evolution of negation. Journal of Linguistics 27(1). 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Typology and universals, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen
2010 Typology of negation. In Laurence R. Horn (ed.), The expression of negation, 9–38. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Davis, Henry
2005 On the syntax and semantics of negation in Salish. International Journal of American Linguistics 71(1). 1–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W.
2012 Basic linguistic theory, Vol. 3: Further grammatical topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald
2000 Introduction. In Robert M.W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity, 1–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doerfer, Gerhard
1975 Ist Kur-Urmiisch ein nanaischer Dialekt? Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 471. 51–63.Google Scholar
1978 Classification Problems of Tungus. In Gerhard Doerfer & Michael Weiers (eds.), Tungusica, Band 1: Beiträge zur Nordasiatischen Kulturgeschichte, 1–26. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S.
2007 Clause Types. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Second edition. Volume I: Clause Structure, 224–275. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Mathew
2013a Feature 112A: Negative morphemes. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath, (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. München: Max Planck Digital Library. [URL] (22 February 2014)Google Scholar
2013b On the six-way word order typology, again. Studies in Language 37(2). 267–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enhebatu, Merden
1995 Manyu kouyu yanjiu. Hohot: Neimonggu daxue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Fu Yuguang, Guo Shuyun & Juha Janhunen
1990 The Kyakala in China: History and present situation. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 881. 248–252.Google Scholar
Gelderen, Elly van
2008 Negative cycles. Linguistic Typology 121. 195–243.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1971 Historical syntax and synchronic morphology. An archeologist’s field trip. Chicago Linguistic Society 71. 394–415.Google Scholar
Gorelova, Liliya M.
2002 Manchu grammar. Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill.Google Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore A. & Lindsay J. Whaley
2003 The case for dialect continua in Tungusic: Plural morphology. In Dee A. Holisky & Kevin Tuite (eds.), Current trends in Caucasian, East European and Inner Asian linguistics, 97–122. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gruzdeva, Ekaterina
1998 Nivkh (Languages of the World/Materials 111). München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, Jaakko
2012 Early contacts between Uralic and Yukaghir. Mémoires de la Societé Finno-Ougrienne 2641. 91–101.Google Scholar
Hauer, Erich
2007 Handwörterbuch der Mandschusprache, 2nd edn. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Helimski, Eugene
1998 Nganasan. In Daniel Abandolo (ed.), The Uralic Languages, 480–515. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hölzl, Andreas
2012 Negation und die Stellung des Mandschurischen innerhalb der tungusischen Sprachen. In Daniel Leese (ed.), Hou Han(s’) Shu: Festschrift zum 50. Geburtstag von Hans van Ess, 35–67. München: Institut für Sinologie.Google Scholar
Honti, László
1999 Über die Mittel der Negation im Uralischen, insbesondere den „türkischen Typ“ in einigen uralischen Sprachen. In Cornelius Hasselblatt & Paula Jääsalmi- Krüger (eds.), Europa et Sibiria, 191–198. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson
1980 Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Language 56(2). 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ikegami, Jirô
1973 On one verb ending in Proto-Tungus: About *-si- . Acta Asiatica 241. 45– 56.Google Scholar
1974 Versuch einer Klassifikation der tungusischen Sprachen. In Georg Hazai & Peter Zieme (eds.), Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur der altaischen Völker, 271–272. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
1983 Bemerkungen zu einigen sprachgeographischen und areallinguistischen Problemen in der Erforschung der tungusischen Sprachen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 31. 170–178.Google Scholar
1995 The element -n in the indicative forms of verbs in Tungus languages. Gengô Kenkyû 1071. 1–15.Google Scholar
1999 Manshûgo kenkyû. Tokyo: Kyûko Shoin.Google Scholar
2002 Uiruta kôtô bungei genbunshû. Revised and enlarged edition (Publications on Tungus languages and cultures 16; Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim, Publications Series A2–013) Kyoto: Nakanishi.Google Scholar
Janhunen, Juha
1991 Material on Manchurian Khamnigan Evenki. Castrenianiumin Toimitteia 401.Google Scholar
2003a Proto-Mongolic. In Juha Janhunen (ed.), The Mongolic languages, London, 1–29. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2003b Khamnigan Mongol. In Juha Janhunen (ed.), The Mongolic languages, 83–101. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2005 Khamnigan Mongol. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2009 Proto-Uralic: What, where, and when? Memoires de la Societe Finno- Ougrienne 2581. 57–78.Google Scholar
2012 The expansion of Tungusic as an ethnic and linguistic process. In Andrej Malchokov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent Advanced in Tungusic Linguistics, 5–16. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Jettmar, H.M.
1937 Der Stamm der oberen Golden (Die Sungari-Ussuri-Gruppe). Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 51. 245–276.Google Scholar
Kane, Daniel
1989 The Sino-Jurchen vocabulary of the Bureau of Interpreters. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Kazama Shinjiro
2002a Negidaarugo tekisuto to bunpôgaisetsu (Publications on Tungus languages and cultures 19; Endangered languages of the Pacific Rim, A2–021). Kyoto: Nakanishi.Google Scholar
2002b Urucha kôshô bungei genbun-shû. (Publications on Tungus languages and cultures 20; Endangered languages of the Pacific Rim, A2–022). Kyoto: Nakanishi.Google Scholar
2003 Basic Vocabulary (A) of Tungusic Languages. Kyoto: Nakanishi Printing.Google Scholar
2007 Rhetorical questions with interrogative markers in Nanai. In Kawaguchi Yuji, Takagaki Toshihiro, Tomimori Nobuo & Tsuruga Yoichiro (eds.), Corpus-based perspectives in linguistics, 319–335. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Designative case in Tungusic languages. In Andrej Malchokov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics, 123–152. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Khasanova, Marina & Alexander Pevnov
2003 Myths and tales of the Negidals. Kyoto: Nakanishi Printing, 1–22.Google Scholar
Kiyose, Gisaburo N.
1977 A study of the Jurchen language and script: Reconstruction and decipherment. Kyoto: Shōwado.Google Scholar
Klaproth, Julius von
1817 Mandshuisch. In Johann Christoph Adelung (ed.), Mithridates — oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde mit dem Vater Unser als Sprachprobe in bey nahe fünf hundert Sprachen und Mundarten, Vol. 41, 194–224. Berlin: In der Vossischen Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Ko Dongho & Yurn Gyudong
2011 A description of Najkhin Nanai. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Peter Siemund
2007 Speech act distinctions in grammar. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description. 2nd edn., Vol. 1: Clause Structure, 276–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li Fengxiang
2005 Contact, attrition, and structural shift: evidence from Oroqen. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1731. 55–74.Google Scholar
Li Fengxiang & Lindsay J. Whaley
2012 The grammaticalization cycle of causatives in Oroqen. In Andrej Malchokov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics, 165–180. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej L.
1995 Even (Languages of the world/materials 12). München, Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2001 Imperative constructions in Even. In Victor S. Xrakovskij (ed.), Typology of imperative constructions, 159–180. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Majewicz, Alfred F.
(ed.) 2011 The collected works of Bronisław Piłsudski, Vol. 4: Materials for the study of Tungusic languages and folklore (Trends in Linguistics: Documentation 15.4). Berlin, Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maslova, Elena
2003 Tundra Yukaghir (Languages of the World/Materials 372). München, Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Menges, Karl. H.
1964 Bemerkungen zum Bikin-Dialekt des Nanaj. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher 351. 198–203.Google Scholar
1968 Die tungusischen Sprachen. In Walter Fuchs, et al. (eds.), Handbuch der Orientalistik, Vol. 1.5(3): Tungusologie, 21–256. Leiden, Köln: Brill.Google Scholar
1987 On Tungus alba- “non posse, не мочь” and other negative auxiliary verbs. Central Asiatic Journal 311. 7–18.Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti
2005 Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2005a Symmetric and asymmetric standard negation (feature 113). In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds.), The world atlas of language structures, 458–461. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2011 A typological perspective on negation in Finnish dialects. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 341. 83–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mu Yejun
1987 Balayu. Manchu Studies 21. 2–31.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Igor
1994 Evenki. In Peter Kahrel & René van den Berg (eds.), Typological Studies in Negation, 1–34. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Evenki. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna, David A. Peterson & Jonathan Barnes
2004 Transitivizing and detransitivizing languages. Linguistic Typology 81. 149–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina & Maria Tolskaya
2001 A grammar of Udihe. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norman, Jerry
1974 A sketch of Sibe morphology. Central Asiatic Journal 181. 159–174.Google Scholar
1991 Review of Kane 1989. T’oung Pao . Second Series 77(1–3). 152–155.
Payne, John R.
1985 Negation. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 1: Clause Structure, 197–242. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pevnov, Alexander M.
2012 On some archaic features of the Jurchen language. Journal of the Center for Northern Humanities 51. 57–69.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, G.J.
1924 Die Verneinung in den altaischen Sprachen: Eine semasiologische Studie. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 521. 196–215.Google Scholar
Schaaik, Gerjan van
1994 Turkish. In Peter Kahrel & René van den Berg (eds.), Typological Studies in Negation, 35–50. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Peter
1923 The Language of the Olchas. Acta Universitatis Latviensis 81. 229–288.Google Scholar
Schulze, Wolfgang
2000 Towards a typology of the accusative ergative continuum. The case of East Caucasian. General Linguistics 371. 71–155.Google Scholar
Schulze, Wolfgang & Andreas Hölzl
2013 Review of Malchukov & Whaley 2012. Studies in Language 37(2). 454–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinor, Denis
1968 La langue Mandjoue. In Walter Fuchs, et al. (eds.), Handbuch der Orientalistik, Vol. 1.5(3): Tungusologie, 257–280. Leiden, Köln: Brill.Google Scholar
Svantesson, Jan-Olof
2003 Khalkha. In Juha Janhunen (ed.), The Mongolic languages, 154–176. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tsumagari, Toshiro
1997 Linguistic diversity and national borders of Tungusic. In Shōji Hiroshi & Juha Janhunen (eds.), Northern minority languages: Problems of survival (Senri Ethnological Studies 44), 175–186. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology.Google Scholar
Tsumagari Toshiro
2003 Dagur. In Juha Janhunen (ed.), The Mongolic languages, 129–153. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
2009 A sketch of Solon grammar. Journal of the Center for Northern Humanities 21. 1–21.Google Scholar
2009a Grammatical outline of Uilta (revised). Journal of the Graduate School of Letters 41. 1–21.Google Scholar
2012 A note on Udihe phonology from an areal-typological perspective. In Andrej Malchokov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advanced in Tungusic linguistics, 79–86. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Veselinova, Ljuba
2010 Standard and special negators in the Slavonic languages: Synchrony and diachrony. In Björn Hansen & Jasmina Grković-Major (eds.), Diachronic Slavonic syntax: Gradual changes in focus (Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, Sonderband 74), 195–208. München: Sagner.Google Scholar
Vovin, Alexander
2006 Why Manchu and Jurchen Look So Non-Tungusic? In Alessandra Pozzi, Juha Janhunen & Michael Weiers (eds.), Tumen jalafun jecen akū — Manchu Studies in Honour of Giovanni Stary, 255–266. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
2012 Did Wanyan Xiyin invent the Jurchen script? In Andrej Malchokov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics, 49–58. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Wagner-Nagy, Beáta
2011 On the typology of negation in Ob-Ugric and Samoyadic languages. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 2621.Google Scholar
Wang Qingfeng
2005 Manyu yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Whaley, Lindsay J., Lenore A. Grenoble & Li Fengxiang
1999 Revisiting Tungusic classification from the bottom up: A comparison of Evenki and Oroqen. Language 75(2). 286–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu Dan
2006 Typological change in Chinese syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang Paiyu
2013 The Kilen language of Manchuria. Grammar of a moribund Tungusic language. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong thesis.Google Scholar
Zhang Yanchang, Zhang Xi & Dai Shuyan
1989 The Hezhen Language. Jilin: Jilin daxue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhao Jie
1989 Xiandai manyu yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zhao Zhizhong
2003 Manyu yu hezheyu zhi bijiao Manchu Studies 371. 47–52.Google Scholar
Zikmundová, Veronika
2013 Spoken Sibe morphology of the inflected parts of speech. Prague: Karolinum.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Ding, Hongdi
2022. Interrogatives of Liangshan Yi. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 45:1 ► pp. 110 ff. DOI logo
Dolińska, Joanna
2022. Is it possible to prove the Altaic theory on the basis of negative forms in Mongolian, Manchu and Turkish?. Asian Languages and Linguistics 3:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gruzdeva, Ekaterina
2022. Possessive and Caritive in Nivkh. International Journal of Eurasian Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Hölzl, Andreas
2018. Constructionalization areas. In Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Language, 21], ► pp. 241 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 november 2023. 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.