Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area
Vol. 39:1 (2016) ► pp.3–32

The Proto-Tibeto-Burman *gV- nominalizing prefix

| University of Oregon
Matisoff (2003) reconstructs an “adjectival prefix” *gV-, based on work by Wolfenden (1929). As a result of surveying grammatical descriptions of more than 90 Tibeto-Burman languages, the present study provides evidence to reconstruct Matisoff’s adjectival prefix as a nominalizer whose functional range includes (but is not limited to) the adjectival marking. Evidence for the prefix is found in three major genetic subdivisions. Within Bradley’s (2002) Western branch, Baram (Newaric) has a particularly versatile nominalizer ki-~gi-, and Eastern Kiranti languages have *gV-…-pa nominalizing circumfixes. In Bradley’s Eastern branch, rGyalrongic languages have velar prefixes that function as the main nominalizers. Further, in DeLancey’s (2015) Central branch of Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan), we find reflexes of *gV- in many languages, most notably the versatile nominalizer kV- in Lamkang (Northwest Kuki-Chin). Other languages of the India-Myanmar border with unresolved phylogenetic status within Tibeto-Burman also have reflexes of *gV-, most prominently Karbi and Tangkhul (Konnerth 2012).
Keywords: diachronic nominalization, Proto-Tibeto-Burman, nominalization, Historical linguistics, morphological reconstruction
Published online: 8 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.39.1.01kon
References (68)
Arokianathan, S. 1987. Tangkhul Naga Grammar. Mysore, India: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Baxter, William H. & Sagart, Laurent. 2014. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benedict, Paul K. 1972. Sino-Tibetan: A Conspectus. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1999. Nominalization and focus constructions in some Kiranti languages. In Topics in Nepalese Linguistics, Yogendra P. Yadava & Warren W. Glover (eds), 271–96. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.Google Scholar
. 2003. Belhare. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), 546–570. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 2002. The subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman. In Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages, Vol.11, Christian I. Beckwith (ed.), 73–112. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Burling, Robbins. 1983. The Sal languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 7(2): 1–32.Google Scholar
. 2004. The Language of the Modhupur Mandi (Garo), Vol. 11. New Delhi: Bibliophile South Asia.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 1970. Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chang, Imlong. 1956. Chang Naga Dialect and English Equivalents. Mokokchung: Sri Imlong Chang.Google Scholar
Das Gupta, Kamalesh. 1971. An Introduction to the Nocte Language. Shillong: North-East Frontier Agency.Google Scholar
. 1977. A Phrase Book in Miju. Shillong: The Director of Information and Public Relations, NEFA.Google Scholar
. 1980. The Tangsa Language: A Synopsis. Shillong: North-East Frontier Agency.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2015. Adjectival constructions in Bodo and Tibeto-Burman. In Language and Culture in Northeast India and beyond: In Honour of Robbins Burling, Mark Post, Stephen Morey & Scott DeLancey (eds), 41–56. Canberra, Australian National University: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 1994. Grammaticalization and linguistic theory. In Proceedings of the 1993 Mid-America Linguistics Conference and Conference on Siouan/Caddoan Languages , 1–22. Boulder CO: Department of Linguistics, University of Colorado.
. 2002. Relativization and nominalization in Bodic. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 281, 55–72. Berkeley CA: BLS.
. 2011. Finite structures from clausal nominalization in Tibeto-Burman. In Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 96], Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona (eds), 343–59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Morphological evidence for a central branch of Trans-Himalayan (Sino-Tibetan). Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 44(2): 122–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 1987. A Grammar of Limbu [Mouton Grammar Library 4]. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. A Grammar of Dumi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebert, Karen H. 1997a. A Grammar of Athpare. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
. 1997b. Camling (Chamling). Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
. 2003. Kiranti languages: An overview. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), 505–17. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2007. Insubordination and its uses. In Finiteness: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 366–431. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2011. Nominalization in Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. In Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 96], Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona (eds), 163–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genetti, Carol, Bartee, Ellen, Coupe, Alec, Hildebrandt, Kristine & Lin, You-Jing. 2008. Syntactic aspects of nominalization in five Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31(2): 97–143.Google Scholar
Hanson, Ola. 1917. A Hand-Book of the Kachin or Jinghpaw Language. Rangoon: American Baptist Mission Press.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Helga. 2001a. Function of Naak/na in Daai Chin with examples from other Chin languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 24(2): 143–56.Google Scholar
. 2001b. Prenasalization and preglottalization in Daai Chin, with parallel examples from Mro and Mara. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 24(2): 123–142.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C. 1991. Nominalization, relativization, and attribution in Lotha, Angami, and Burmese. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 14(1): 55–72.Google Scholar
Hutton, John Henry. 1987. Chang Language: Grammar and Vocabulary of the Language of the Chang Naga Tribe, Satkari Mukhopadhyay (ed.). New Delhi: Gian Publishing House.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. Under review. Generic person marking in Japhug and other Rgyalrong languages. <[URL]>
. 2014a. Clause linking in Japhug. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2): 264–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014b. Denominal affixes as sources of antipassive markers in Japhug Rgyalrong. Lingua 1381: 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014c. On Coblin’s law. In Studies in Chinese and Sino-Tibetan Linguistics, Richard VanNess Simmons & Newell Ann Van Auken (eds), 155–65. Taipei, Taiwan: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Lai, Yunfan, Antonov, Anton & Nima, Lobsang. 2015. Stau (Ergong, Horpa). Ms (Version of October 21, 2015). <[URL]>
Jacquesson, François. 2005. Le Deuri, Langue Tibéto-Birmane d’Assam. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
. 2008. A Dimasa Grammar . Ms. <[URL]>
Joseph, U.V. & Robbins, Burling. 2006. The Comparative Phonology of the Boro-Garo Languages. Manasagangotri, Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Kansakar, Tej R., Yadava, Yogendra P., Prasad Chalise, Krishna, Prasain, Balaram, Dhakal, Dubi Nanda & Paudel, . Krishna. 2011. A Grammar of Baram. Linguistic and Ethnographic Documentatation of the Baram Language, Central Department of Linguistics, Tribhuvan University.Google Scholar
Konnerth, Linda. 2009. The nominalizing prefix *gV- in Tibeto-Burman. MA thesis, Eugene, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
. 2012. The nominalizing velar prefix *gV- in Tibeto-Burman languages of Northeast India. In North East Indian Linguistics, Vol. 41, Gwendolyn Hyslop, Stephen Morey & Mark W. Post (eds). New Delhi: Foundation / Cambridge University Press India.Google Scholar
. 2014. A Grammar of Karbi. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon at Eugene.
Konow, Sten. 1902. Zur Kenntnis der Kuki-Chinsprachen. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 561: 486–517.Google Scholar
Kuolie, D. 2006. Structural Description of Tenyidie: A Tibeto-Burman Language of Nagaland. Kohima, Nagaland: Ura Academy Publication Division.Google Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J. 2003. Dulong. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), 674–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2008. Nominalization in Rawang. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31(2): 45–65.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1972. Lahu nominalization, relativization, and genitivization. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol.11, John Kimball (ed.), 237–257. New York NY: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
.2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and Philosophy of Sino-Tibetan Reconstruction. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Mortensen, David. 2003. Comparative Tangkhul. Ms, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
Nagano, Yasuhiko. 1984. A Historical Study of the rGyarong Verb System. Tokyo: Seishido.Google Scholar
. 2003. Cogtse Gyarong. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), 469–89. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ngemu, T. 1977. Moklum Language Guide. Jorhat: Janambhumi Press.Google Scholar
Noonan, Michael. 1997. Versatile nominalizations. In Essays on Language Function and Language Type. In Honor of T. Givón, Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 373–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pai, Pushpa. 1976. Kokborok Grammar. Mysore, India: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Post, Mark W. 2011. Nominalization and nominalization-based constructions in Galo. In Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 96], Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Hårsta & Janick Wrona (eds), 255–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sagart, Laurent. 1999. The Roots of Old Chinese [Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science 184]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Robert. 1966. Introduction to Sino-Tibetan. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Singh, Chunghkham Yashawanta. 2002. Tarao Grammar. New Delhi: Akansha Publishing House.Google Scholar
So-Hartmann, Helga. 2008. Nominalization and relativization in Mro. Paper presented at the ICSTLL 41 , London.
. 2009. A Descriptive Grammar of Daai Chin [STEDT Monograph Series 7]. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Stack, Edward & Lyall, Sir Charles. 1908. The Mikirs. London: David Nutt.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2003. Caodeng rGyalrong. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds), 490–502. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2012. Complementation in Caodeng rGyalrong. Language and Linguistics 13(3): 471–498.Google Scholar
. 2014. Typology of generic-person marking in Tshobdun Rgyalrong. In Studies in Chinese and Sino-Tibetan Linguistics: Dialect, Phonology, Transcription and Text [Language and Linguistics Monograph Series 53]. Richard VanNess Simmons & Newell Ann Van Auken (eds), 225–48. Taipei, Taiwan: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Thounaojam, Harimohon & Chelliah, Shobhana L. 2007. The Lamkang language: Grammatical sketch, texts and lexicon. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 30(1): 1–212.Google Scholar
Wolfenden, Stuart Norris. 1929. Outlines of Tibeto-Burman Linguistic Morphology. London: Royal Asiatic Society.Google Scholar
Yap, Foong Ha, Grunow-Hårsta, Karen & Wrona, Janick. 2011. Introduction: Nominalization strategies in Asian languages. In Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 96], 1–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Ding, Hongdi & Sicong Dong
2023. Elevation and fog-cloud similarity in Tibeto-Burman languages. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 10:1 DOI logo
Honkasalo, Sami
2020. Verb classes in Horpa. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 43:2 ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 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.