Cover not available
Article published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 39:2 (2022) ► pp.268–309

Evidentiality in Selibu

A contact-induced emergence

ORCID logo | Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
ORCID logo | Fudan University
Selibu is a Mandarin-Khams Tibetan mixed language with about 900 native speakers in northwest Yunnan, People’s Republic of China. As a Form-Semantics mixed language, it derives most of its lexicon and grammatical morphemes from Southwest Mandarin and borrows its morphosyntactic and semantic structure from Alangu Tibetan. This article examines the contact-induced emergence of a five-category complex evidential system in Selibu with a detailed comparison with its source system in the model language, Alangu Tibetan. Our discussion focuses on the hybrid features of Selibu evidentiality in both forms and functions and also on its structural formation, which does not represent a Form-Semantics mixed type in this particular domain.
Keywords: Selibu, Alangu Tibetan, evidentiality, language contact, borrowing, Form-Semantics mixed language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Evidentiality in Sino-Tibetan
    • 1.2Selibu and its contact situation
    • 1.3Theoretical framework and methodology
  • 2.Egophoric evidential
  • 3.Statemental evidential
  • 4.Sensory evidential
  • 5.Inferential evidential
  • 6.Reported evidential
  • 7.Discussion: Selibu evidentiality as a hybrid system
    • 7.1Formal hybridity
    • 7.2Expansion and loss
    • 7.3Hybridity in aspecto-evidential marking
    • 7.4Typological implications
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 10 November 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.19055.zho
References (65)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2002. Language contact in Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & R. M. W. Dixon. 1998. Evidentials and areal typology: A case study from Amazonia. Language Sciences 20(3). 241–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Randy J. LaPolla. 2007. New perspectives on evidentials: A view from Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(2). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo. 2003. Analogy: The warp and woof of cognition. In Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 425–440. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atshogs, Yeshes Vodgsal (意西微薩·阿錯). 2004. Daohua yanjiu (倒話研究) [A study of the Daohua language]. Beijing: The Ethnic Publishing House.Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter. 2003. Mixed languages as autonomous systems. In Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds.), The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances, 107–150. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blench, Roger & Mark W. Post. 2014. Rethinking Sino-Tibetan phylogeny from the perspective of North East Indian languages. In Thomas Owen-Smith & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 71–104. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary. 2001a. Synchrony and diachrony of Sinitic languages: A brief history of Chinese dialects. In Hilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives, 3–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2001b. A typology of evidential markers in Sinitic languages. In Hilary Chappell (ed.), Sinitic grammar: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives, 56–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
The Compiling Committee of the Annals of Zhongdian County in Yunnan Province (雲南省中甸縣地方志編纂委員會). 1997. Zhongdian xianzhi (中甸縣志) [The Annals of Zhongdian County]. Kunming: Yunnan Nationalities Publishing House.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2009. Sino-Tibetan languages. In Bernard Comrie (ed.), The world’s major languages (2nd edn), 693–702. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The historical dynamics of morphological complexity in Trans-Himalayan. Linguistic Discovery 13(2). 37–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ding, Mingjun (丁明俊). 2006. Zhongguo bianyuan Musilin zuqun de renleixue kaocha (中國邊緣穆斯林族群的人類學考察) [An anthropological investigation into the marginal Muslim groups in China]. Yinchuan: Ningxia People’s Publishing House. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epps, Patience. 2005. Areal diffusion and the development of evidentiality. Studies in Language 29(3). 617–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque. 2018. Egophoricity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Victor A. 1978. On the semantic and morphological influence of Turkish on Balkan Slavic. In Donka Farkas, Wesley M. Jacobsen & Karol W. Todrys (eds.), Papers from the Fourteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 108–118. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Garrett, Edward John. 2001. Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
Jacques, Guillaume. 2019. Egophoric marking and person indexation in Japhug. Language and Linguistics 20(4). 515–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janhunen, Juha, Marja Peltomaa, Erika Sandman & Xiawu Dongzhou. 2008. Wutun (Languages of the World/Materials 466). München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2017. Grammaire du khroskyabs de Wobzi. PhD dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3. ([URL]) [accessed on 18 October 2020].
LaPolla, Randy J. 2003. Overview of Sino-Tibetan morphosyntax. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 22–42. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Liu, Danqing (劉丹青). 2017. Yufa diaocha yanjiu shouce (語法調查研究手冊) [A handbook of grammatical investigation and research]. Shanghai: Shanghai Educational Press.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 2015. The Sino-Tibetan etymological dictionary and thesaurus (STEDT). Berkeley: Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project. ([URL]) [accessed on 18 October 2020]
Matthews, Stephen. 1998. Evidentiality and mirativity in Cantonese: wo3, wo4, wo5!. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Chinese Languages and Linguistics, 325–334. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1986. The bottom line: Chinese Pidgin Russian. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 239–257. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Oisel, Guillaume. 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
Sagart, Laurent, Guillaume Jacques, Yunfan Lai, Robin J. Ryder, Valentin Thouzeau, Simon J. Greenhill & Johann-Mattis List. 2019. Dated language phylogenies shed light on the ancestry of Sino-Tibetan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(21). 10317–10322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe. 2018. Egophoricity: An introduction. In Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity, 1–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandman, Erika. 2016. A grammar of Wutun. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki.
Sandman, Erika & Camille Simon. 2016. Tibetan as a “model language” in the Amdo Sprachbund: Evidence from Salar and Wutun. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 3(1). 85–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1955. Classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages. Word 11(1). 94–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, Shuo (石碩), Jin Li (李錦) & Libo Zou (鄒立波). 2014. Jiaorong yu Hudong: Zangyi Zoulang de Minzu, Lishi yu Wenhua (交融與互動：藏彝走廊的民族、歷史與文化) [Integration and interaction: The ethnic groups, history and culture along the Tibeto-Lolo Corridor]. Chengdu: Sichuan People’s Publishing House.Google Scholar
Simon, Camille. 2016. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique grammaticale du salar et du tibétain de l’Amdo: analyse d’un contact de langues. PhD dissertation, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3. ([URL]) [accessed on 18 October 2020]
. 2018. Evidential modalities in Salar: The development of a Tibetan-like egophoric category. Turkic Languages 22(1). 3–35.Google Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki. 2012. Multiple usages of the verb ‘snang’ in Gagatang Tibetan (Weixi, Yunnan). Himalayan Linguistics 11(1). 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. In defense of prepalatal non-fricative sounds and symbols: Towards the Tibetan dialectology. Researches in Asian Languages 101. 99–125.Google Scholar
. 2017. The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 423–444. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Hiroyuki & Sonam Wangmo. 2018. Kamutibettogo Tagong [Lhagang] hoogen no zyutubu ni hyoozi sareru syookosei カムチベット語塔公[Lhagang]方言の述部に標示される証拠性 [Evidential system of verb predicates in Lhagang Tibetan]. Gengo Kijutsu Ronshu 言語記述論集 [Journal of Kijutsuken, Descriptive Linguistic Circle] 101. 13–42. (URI: [URL]) [accessed on 18 October 2020].
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 言語研究 [Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan] 1591. 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thurgood, Graham. 2003. A subgrouping of the Sino-Tibetan languages: The interaction between language contact, change, and inheritance. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 3–21. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thurgood, Graham & Randy J. LaPolla. 2003/2017. The Sino-Tibetan languages (2nd edn). London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1992. La déixis en tibétain: Quelques faits remarquables. In Mary-Annick Morel & Laurent Danon-Boileau (eds.), La deixis: Colloque en Sorbonne, 197–208. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
. 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. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.Google Scholar
. 2017. A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 95–129. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas & Konchok Jiatso. 2001. Final auxiliary verbs in literary Tibetan and in the 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). 240–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsering Samdrup & Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2018. Evidential system in Mabzhi Tibetan of Amdo. Proceedings of the 51st International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics (Kyoto University, Kyoto, 25–28 September). (URL: [URL]) [accessed on 18 October 2020]
Tshe-brten Don-grub (次旦頓珠) & Ye-shes Chos-sgron (益西曲珍). 2010. “Zangmu zhi lu” de huizang guanxi: Yunnan Sheng Xianggelila Sanba Xiang Annan Cun tianye diaocha (“藏穆之路”的回藏關係:雲南省香格里拉三壩鄉安南村田野調查) [The relationship between Tibetan and Hui Peoples: A field study at Annan Village of Sanba Town, Shangri-La, Yunnan Province]. Xizang Daxue Xuebao (Shehui Kexue Ban) (西藏大學學報(社會科學版)) [Journal of Tibet University (Social Sciences Edition)] 25(4). 96–100.Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 2015. Tibeto-Burman. In William S-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 135–148. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2008. Epistemic modalities in spoken standard Tibetan. PhD dissertation, Charles University, Prague, and University of Paris 8.
Wang, Feng. 2015. Language contact between Tibeto-Burman languages and Chinese. In William S-Y. Wang & Chaofen Sun (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Chinese linguistics, 248–259. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xue, Caide (薛才德). 2006. Annan Shuimofang Hanyu yufa de jiechu bianyi (安南水磨房漢語語法的接觸變異) [On the contact-induced grammatical changes of the Shuimofang Chinese dialect in Annan Village]. Yunnan Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehuikexue Ban) (雲南民族大學(哲學社會科學版)) [Journal of Yunnan Nationalities University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)] 23(5). 224–228.Google Scholar
Zeisler, Bettina. 2018a. 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/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018b. 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
Zhang, Hanzhi, Ting Ji, Mark Pagel & Ruth Mace. 2020. Dated phylogeny suggests early Neolithic origin of Sino-Tibetan languages. Scientific Reports 10(20792). 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Menghan, Shi Yan, Wuyun Pan & Li Jin. 2019. Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the Late Neolithic. Nature 569(7754). 112–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Zhongyun (章忠雲) & Yimin Ding (丁益民). 1995. Annan Mofang Cun shuangyu xianxiang chutan (安南磨房村雙語現象初探) [A preliminary study on the bilingualism of Mofang Village of Annan]. Xinan Minzu Xueyuan Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexue Ban) (西南民族學院學報(哲學社會科學版)) [Journal of Southwestern College of Nationalities (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)] (3). 100–105.Google Scholar
Zhou, Yang (周洋). 2018. Yunnan Shuimofanghua de gebiaoji jiqi laiyuan (雲南水磨房話的格標記及其來源) [The case marking system and its development in Selibu]. Fangyan (方言) [Dialect] 40(3). 357–369.Google Scholar
. 2021. Shuimofanghua de zhishi jiegou (水磨房話的致使結構) [The causative constructions in Selibu]. Yuyan Yanjiu Jikan (語言研究集刊) [Bulletin of Linguistic Studies] 271. 323–349.Google Scholar
Zhou, Yang (周洋) & Hiroyuki Suzuki (鈴木博之). 2020. Shuimofanghua ti fanchou de hunhe tezhen (水磨房話體範疇的混合特征) [The hybrid features of the aspect system in Selibu]. Minzu Yuwen 民族語文 [Minority Languages of China] (4). 43–56.Google Scholar
Zhu, Xiaonong (朱曉農). 2010. Yuyinxue (語音學) [Phonetics]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Drolma, Dawa & Hiroyuki Suzuki
2024. The paradigmaticity of evidentials in the Tibetic languages of Khams. Studies in Language 48:3 ► pp. 723 ff. DOI logo
Suzuki, Hiroyuki
2023. Geolinguistic approach to migration history in the south-eastern edge of the Tibetosphere. Asian Languages and Linguistics 4:2 ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. 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.