Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 47:1 (2024) ► pp.140–159

The multiple functions of the reflexive pronoun in Tujia

 | Hunan University
 | Shenzhen University
This paper investigates the functions of the reflexive pronoun ko 53 to 21/to 21 in Tujia, a Tibeto-Burman (TB) language. Apart from being used as a verb object, the reflexive pronoun in Tujia can be used as an intensifier, indicating “self, non-other”, but it can also be used to create “passive” or “causative” meaning. It is argued that both meanings created by the reflexive pronoun can be accounted for under a decomposition approach. Verbal reflexives isomorphic with anti-causative or passive morphemes have been reported for European languages, while a reflexive pronoun with causative meaning is quite rare. The present paper therefore contributes not only to the typology in this area but also to the expression of causative and passive in Tibeto-Burman languages.
Keywords: reflexive pronoun, passive, causative, Tujia, Tibeto-Burman
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Reflexive pronoun used as a verb object and nominal modifier
  • 3.Reflexive pronoun as an intensifier
    • 3.1Self, non-others
    • 3.2On one’s own, without outside aid
  • 4.Self-caused action
  • 5.Reflexive pronouns and passive meaning
  • 6.Reflexive pronoun and causative meaning
  • 7.The reflexive pronoun: Both a passive and a causative strategy
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Glossing conventions follow Leipzig glossing rules, with the following additions:
  • References
Published online: 17 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.00020.man
References (32)
References
Bradley, David. 1995. Reflexives in Burmese. In David Bradley (ed.), Studies in Burmese languages (Pacific Linguistics A-83), 139–43. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Brassett, Cecilia, Philip R. Brassett & Meiyan Lu. 2006. The Tujia language. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi. 1991. The morphological basis of anaphora. Journal of Linguistics 27(1). 81–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1996a. Anaphora and soft constraints. In Pilar Barbosa et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Optimality in Syntax “Is the Best Good Enough?” (Special Issue, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics), 93–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1996b. The role of the antecedent in anaphoric relations. In Robert Freidin (ed.), Current issues in comparative grammar, 1–45. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1985. Causative verb formation and other verb-deriving morphology. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. v.3 Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 309–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Everaert, Martin. 1986. The syntax of reflexivization. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faltz, Leonard M. 1985. Reflexivization: A study in universal syntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma Š. 1987. The typology of reflexives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1990. The grammaticization of passive morphology. Studies in Language 14(1). 25–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Matthew S. Dryer. 2007. Passive in the world’s languages. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. v.1 Clause structure, 2nd edn., 325–361. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
König, Ekkehard. 1991. The meaning of focus particles: A comparative perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2001. Intensifiers and reflexive pronouns. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals, 747–760. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Volker Gast. 2002. Reflexive pronouns and other uses of self-forms in English. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 50(3). 1–14.Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Long Haiping, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1971. Passive resistance. Chicago Linguistic Society 71. 149–163.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1982. Thoughts on grammaticalization. A programmatic sketch. Vol. 1. AKUP: Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts 481. 1–186.Google Scholar
Lu, Man, Yu Ma & Jeroen van de Weijer. 2023. The serial verb construction in Tujia. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 46(1). 72–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu, Man, Jeroen van de Weijer, Chris Sinha & Liu Zhengguang. 2019. Optional ergative marking in Tujia. Lingua 2231. 46–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu Man 鲁曼, Yi Zhen 易振 & Ma Yu 马瑜. 2024. 土家语被动句标记再认识–兼论藏缅语被动义策略 Tujiayu beidongju biaoji zai renshi, jian lun Zangmianyu beidong yi celue [A discussion of passive markers in Tujia: with an eye on passive in Tibeto-Burman languages], 当代语言学 Dandai Yuyanxue [Contemporary Linguistics] 26(2).Google Scholar
Lu Meiyan 鲁美艳. 2016. 土家语的被动句及其语胡化过程 Tujiayude beidongju jiqi yufahua guocheng [Passive voice sentence and its grammaticalization process in Tujia language]. 中央民族大学学报 (哲学社会科学版) Zhongyang Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexueban) [Journal of Minzu University of China (Philosophy and Social Sciences)] 43(3). 129–134.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1976. Lahu causative constructions: Case hierarchies and the morphology/syntax cycle in a Tibeto-Burman perspective. In Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causative constructions (Syntax and Semantics 6), 413–442. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peng Xiumo 彭秀模 & Ye Deshu 叶德书. 1981. 语言概况 Yuyan gaikuang [Language sketch]. 吉首大学学报 Jishou Daxue Xuebao [Bulletin of Jishou University] 21. 29–60.Google Scholar
Pica, Pierre. 1991. On the interaction between antecedent-government and binding: the case of long-distance reflexivization. In Jan Koster & Eric Reuland (eds.), Long-distance anaphora, 119–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24(4). 657–720.Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1985. Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis. Language 61.4. 821–848. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun Hongkai 孙宏开. 1993. 试伦藏缅语中的反射代词 Shilun Zang-Mianyuzhongde beidong daici [An elementary view of reflexive pronouns of Tibeto-Burman languages]. 民族语文 Minzu Yuwen [Minority languages of China] 61, 19–28.Google Scholar
Tian Desheng 田德生, He Tianzhen 何天贞, Chen Kang 陈康, Li Jingzhong 李敬忠, Xie Zhimin 谢志民 & Peng Xiumo 彭秀模. 1986. 土家语简直 Tujiayu gaikuang [Outline of the Tujia language]. Beijing: Nationalities Press.Google Scholar
Xu, Shixuan, Lu Meiyan & Hu Hongyan. 2017. Tujia. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 974–992. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zhang Weichuan 张伟权. 2011. 土家语与汉语被动句之比较 Tujiayu yu Hanyu beidongju zhibijiao [A comparative study of the passive sentences in Tujia language and Chinese]. 湖北民族大学学(哲学社会科学版) Hubei Minzu Daxue Xuebao (Zhexue Shehui Kexueban) [Journal of Hubei Minzu University (Philosophy and Social Sciences)] 29(2). 6–8.Google Scholar