Cover not available
Part of
Antipassive: Typology, diachrony, and related constructions
Edited by Katarzyna Janic and Alena Witzlack-Makarevich
[Typological Studies in Language 130] 2021
► pp. 427–446

Chapter 13
Antipassive derivations in Sino-Tibetan/Trans-Himalayan and their sources

 | CNRS-CRLAO-INALCO
This paper presents an overview of antipassive constructions in the Sino-Tibetan/Trans-Himalayan family. It shows that all of these constructions are relatively recent developments, and originate from three distinct historical sources, including the incorporation of generic nouns, the verbalization of action nominalizations and reflexive/middle markers. All productive antipassive constructions in the family are found in languages with polypersonal indexation and ergative case marking.
Keywords: antipassive, denominal verbs, nominalization, grammaticalization, middle voice, incorporation, Gyalrongic, Kiranti, West-Himalayish, Old Chinese, Dulong-Rawang
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Antipassive and indefinite objects
    • 1.1Agent-preserving lability
    • 1.2Indefinite/generic objects
    • 1.3Light verb construction
    • 1.4Noun incorporation
  • 2.Incorporation of generic noun / indefinite element
  • 3.Action nominalization + denominal verbalization
  • 4.Reflexive/Middle
    • 4.1Kiranti
    • 4.2Dulong-Rawang
    • 4.3Kuki-Chin
    • 4.4West Himalayish
    • 4.5Old Chinese
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 23 March 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.130.13jac
References (59)
References
Bauman, James John. 1975. Pronouns and Pronominal Morphology in Tibeto-Burman. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Baxter, William H. & Sagart, Laurent. 2014. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baxter, William H. 1992. A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology [Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 64]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2004. Hidden syntax in Belhare. In Himalayan Languages: Past and Present, Anju Saxena (ed.), 141–190. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Multivariate typology and field linguistics: A case study on detransitivization in Kiranti (Sino-Tibetan). In Proceedings of Conference on Language Documentation and Linguistic Theory 3, Peter K. Austin, Oliver Bond, David Nathan & Lutz Marten (eds), 3–13. London: SOAS.Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Gaenszle, Martin. 2015. First person objects, antipassives, and the political history of the Southern Kirant. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 2(1): 63–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar, Gaenzle, Martin, Rai, Arjun, Shoj Rai, Prem, Kumar Rai, Shree, Rai, Vishnu & Sharma, Narayan P. 2007. Two ways of suspending object agreement in Puma: Between incorporation, antipassivization, and optional agreement. Himalayan Linguistics Journal 7: 1–19.Google Scholar
Cooreman, Ann. 1994. A functional typology of antipassives. In Voice: Form and Function [Typological Studies in Language 27], Barbara A. Fox & Paul Hopper (eds), 49–87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis. 2012. The origin of antipassive markers in West Mande languages. Presented at 45th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Stockholm, 29 August-1 September. <[URL]> (10 August 2020).
Creissels, Denis & Nouguier-Voisin, Sylvie. 2008. Valency-changing operations in Wolof and the notion of co-participation. In Reciprocal and Reflexives, Theoretical and Typological Explanations, Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds), 289–305. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2013. The origins of Sinitic. In Increased Empricism: Recent Advances in Chinese Linguistics [Studies in Chinese Language and Discourse 2], Zhou Jing-Schmidt (ed.), 73–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. W. M. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doornenbal, Marius. 2009. A Grammar of Bantawa: Grammar, Paradigm Tables, Glossary and Texts of a Rai Language of Eastern Nepal. PhD dissertation, Leiden University.Google Scholar
Downer, Gordon B. 1959. Derivation by tone-change in Classical Chinese. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 22(1–3): 258–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Driem, George. 1987. A Grammar of Limbu. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. Tangut verbal agreement and the patient category in Tibeto-Burman. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 54(3): 520–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993a. A Grammar of Dumi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993b. The Proto-Tibeto-Burman verbal agreement system. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 61(2): 292–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2007. A Grammar of Dolakha Newar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haudricourt, André-Georges. 1954. Comment reconstruire le chinois archaïque. Word 10: 351–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huber, Christian. 2013. Subject and object agreement in Shumcho. In Trans-Himalayan Linguistics, Nathan W. Hill & Thomas Owen-Smith (eds), 221–274. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume. 2012a. Argument demotion in Japhug Rgyalrong. In Ergativity, Valency and Voice, Katharina Haude & Gilles Authier (eds), 199–226. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. From denominal derivation to incorporation. Lingua 122(11): 1207–1231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Denominal affixes as sources of antipassive markers in Japhug Rgyalrong. Lingua 138: 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The origin of the causative prefix in Rgyalrong languages and its implication for proto-Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Folia Linguistica Historica 36(1): 165–198.Google Scholar
. 2016. How many *-s suffixes in Old Chinese? Bulletin of Chinese Linguistics 9(2): 205–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017a. A reconstruction of Proto-Kiranti verb roots. Folia Linguistica Historica 38: 177–215.Google Scholar
. 2017b. Japhug. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 2nd edn, Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds), 614–634. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Antonov, Anton, Lai, Yunfan & Nima, Lobsang. 2017. Stau (Ergong, Horpa In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, 2nd edn, Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds), 597–613. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume & Chen, Zhen. 2007. 茶堡话的不及物前缀及相关问题. Language and Linguistics 8(4): 883–912.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume, Lahaussois, Aimée & Bahadur Rai, Dhan. 2016. Reflexive paradigms in Khaling. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39(1): 33–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janic, Katarzyna. 2013. L’antipassif dans les langues accusatives. PhD dissertation, Lumière University Lyon 2.Google Scholar
. 2016. L’antipassif dans les langues accusatives. Brussels: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kathol, Andreas & VanBik, Kenneth. 2001. The syntax of verbal alternations in Lai. Presented at the Linguistic Society of America Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2016. Reflexive derivations in Thulung. Linguistics of the Tibeto Burman Area 39(1): 49–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lai, Yunfan. 2013. La morphologie affixale du lavrung wobzi. MA thesis, Université Paris III.Google Scholar
. To appear. The denominal origin of causative and passive derivations in Rgyalrongic languages. In Voice Systems in Diachrony: A Comparative Perspective, Michela Cennamo (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
LaPolla, Randy. 2000. Valency-changing derivations in Dulong/Rawang. In Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity, R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds), 282–311. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaPolla, Randy & Yang, Jiangling. 2004. Reflexive and middle marking in Dulong/Rawang. Himalayan Linguistics 2: 1–13.Google Scholar
Mang, Kee Shein. 2006. A Syntactic and Pragmatic Description of Verb Stem Alternation in K’cho, a Chin Language. MA thesis, Payap University.Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd, Mazaudon, Martine, Michaud, Alexis, Guillaume, Séverine, François, Alexandre & Adamou, Evangelia. 2014. Documenting and researching endangered languages: the Pangloss Collection. Language Documentation and Conservation 8: 119–135.Google Scholar
Opgenort, Jean-Robert. 2004. A Grammar of Wambule. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Peterson, David. 2003. Hakha Lai. In The Sino-Tibetan Languages, Graham Thurgood & Randy LaPolla (eds), 409–426. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Peterson, David A. 2007. Applicative Constructions. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Sansò, Andrea. 2017. Where do antipassive constructions come from? A study in diachronic typology. Diachronica 34(2): 172–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Say, Sergey S. 2008. K tipologii antipassivnyx konstrukcij: Semantika, pragmatika, sintaksis. PhD dissertation, Rossijskaja akademija nauk, Institut lingvisticheskix issledovanij, St-Petersburg.
Schackow, Diana. 2015. A Grammar of Yakkha [Studies in Diversity Linguistics 7]. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schikowski, Robert, Bickel, Balthasar & Paudyal, Netra P. 2015. Flexible valency in Chintang. In Valency Classes in the World’s Languages, Andrej Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds), 669–708. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
So-Hartmann, Helga. 2009. A Descriptive Grammar of Daai Chin. Berkeley CA: Sino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project.Google Scholar
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2006. Jiāróngyǔ dòngcí de pàishēng xíngtài 嘉戎語動詞的派生形態 (Derivational morphology in the Rgyalrong verb). Minzu yuwen 民族語文 4(3): 3–14.Google Scholar
2014. Sino-Tibetan: Rgyalrong. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 630–650. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Takashima, Ken-ichi. 2013. A few morphological functions of the suffix *-s in Shang Chinese. In Eastward Flows the Great River: Festschrift in Honor of Professor William S. Wang, Gang Peng & Feng Shi (eds), 355–373. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.Google Scholar
Tolsma, Gerard Jacobus. 2006. A Grammar of Kulung. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1996. L’ergativité en tibétain. Louvain: Peeters.Google Scholar
Turin, Mark. 2012. A Grammar of the Thangmi Language. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Watters, David E. 2002. A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widmer, Manuel. 2014. A Descriptive Grammar of Bunan. PhD dissertation, University of Bern.Google Scholar
Willis, Christina Marie. 2007. A Descriptive Grammar of Darma: An Endangered Tibeto-Burman Language. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Zhang, Shuya. 2016. La phonologie et la morphologie du dialecte de Bragdbardu rgyalrong situ. MA thesis, Université Paris III.Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Inglese, Guglielmo
2023. The rise of middle voice systems. Diachronica 40:2 ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo
Post, Mark W. & Yankee Modi
2022. Subject autonomy marking in Macro-Tani and the typology of middle voice. Linguistics 60:1 ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo
Janic, Katarzyna
2021. Chapter 8. Variation in the verbal marking of antipassive constructions. In Antipassive [Typological Studies in Language, 130], ► pp. 249 ff. DOI logo
Janic, Katarzyna & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich
2021. Chapter 1. The multifaceted nature of the antipassive construction. In Antipassive [Typological Studies in Language, 130], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Say, Sergey
2021. Chapter 6. Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. In Antipassive [Typological Studies in Language, 130], ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Seržant, Ilja A., Katarzyna Maria Janic, Darja Dermaku & Oneg Ben Dror
2021. Typology of coding patterns and frequency effects of antipassives. Studies in Language 45:4 ► pp. 968 ff. DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2018. Bipartite verbs in Japhug and other Trans-Himalayan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 41:2 ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2022. On the nature of morphological alternations in Archaic Chinese and their relevance to morphosyntax. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 85:3 ► pp. 475 ff. DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2023. Estimative constructions in cross-linguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 27:1 ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 november 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.