Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 43:1 (2020) ► pp.37–54

The copula system of Tawang Monpa

| SIL International
This paper is a description of the copula system of Tawang Monpa [Dakpa], an East-Bodish language, spoken in Arunachal Pradesh in India and by small groups of speakers in Bhutan and Tibet. There are two equative copulas in Tawang Monpa: personal jin and neutral jim, and three existential copulas: testimonial ni, neutral num and personal nou. In addition, there are separate negative copulas; equative: personal men and neutral menum, and existential: testimonial mon, neutral munum and personal monou. There is also one example of a past positive copula ne and a past negative copula monelu.
Keywords: Tawang Monpa [Dakpa, Cuona], East-Bodish, copula
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1About Tawang Monpa
    • 1.2Some issues with copulas in Bodish languages
    • 1.3Evidentiality, egophoricity and mirativity
  • 2.Copulas in Tawang Monpa
    • 2.1Existential copulas
      • 2.1.1Personal
      • 2.1.2Testimonial
      • 2.1.3Neutral
    • 2.2Equative copula
      • 2.2.1Personal
      • 2.2.2Neutral
  • 3.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 28 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.17013.tom
References (20)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2018. The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bosch, André. 2016. Language contact in Upper Mangdep: a comparative grammar of verbal constructions. Sydney: University of Sydney BA thesis.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2001. The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 371–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology 161. 529–564.Google Scholar
van Driem. 2007. Dakpa and Dzala form a related subgroup within East Bodish, and some related thoughts. In Ronald Bielmeier & Felix Haller (eds.), Linguistics of the Himalayas and beyond, 71–84. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Hann, Ferdinand. 1999. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: setting boundaries. South-west Journal of Linguistics. 181. 83–102.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2010. Basic linguistic theory, Volume 2: grammatical topics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gawne, Lauren, & Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2017. Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2012. Mirativity does not exist. Linguistic Typology 161. 389–433.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Brian H. 1853. Sifan and Horsok vocabularies. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 221. 117–151.Google Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendolyn. 2017. A Grammar of Kurtöp. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyslop, Gwendolyn, & Karma Tshering. 2010. Preliminary notes on Dakpa (Tawang Monpa). In Stephen Morey & Mark W. Post (eds.), North East Indian Linguistics 21, 3–21 New Delhi: Cambridge University Press/Foundation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, & Charles D. Fennig (eds.). 2017. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Twentieth edition. Dallas, TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E. 1997. Describing Morphosyntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1954. The linguistic position of Dwags. Oriens, Zeitschrift der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Orientforschung 71. 348–356.Google Scholar
. 1955. Classification of the Sino-Tibetan languages. Word 21. 94–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2008. Arguments against the concept of ‘Conjunct’ / ‘Disjunct’ in Tibetan. In B. Huber, M. Volkart, P. Widmer, & P. Schwieger (eds), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek. Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 281–308. Halle (Saale): International Institue for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.Google 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
Yliniemi, Juha. 2018. Copulas in Denjongkhe or Sikkimese Bhutia. In Lauren Gawne and Nathan W. Hill (eds.), Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages, 297–350. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar