Evidentiality in Middle Classical Tibetan
L’évidentialité en tibétain classique moyen
CNRS-LACITO Villejuif France
Search for other papers by Guillaume OISEL in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
This study presents the first comprehensive analysis of Evidentiality in Middle Classical Tibetan. This is of great importance since Middle Classical Tibetan is the oldest system in typological studies yet identified that uses evidentiality beginning in at least the 15th century. This article also highlights the distinction between the notions of information source and information access in an evidential system. By using a morphosyntactic approach, the usage of evidentiality can be properly described in that language. Specifically, certain types of highly complex copula and auxiliary verb constructions, which had not been previously analyzed, can be used to demonstrate how evidentiality is grammaticalized in Middle Classical Tibetan. This approach avoids the pitfalls of lexical-only analyses, which have previously not been able to support a comprehensive and accurate description of evidentiality. Further, the intricate interaction between evidentiality, aspect, and epistemic modality reveals the subtlety and complexity of the system. Finally, the interaction between evidentiality and politeness register, reveals discursive complex social relationships which have not been previously described and the importance of social deixis in the study of evidentiality.
Résumé
Cette étude présente la première analyse complète de l’évidentialité en tibétain classique moyen. Elle est d’une grande importance car il s’agit du système le plus ancien dans les études typologiques qui utilise l’évidentialité depuis au moins le XVe siècle. Cet article met également en exergue la distinction entre les notions de source d’information et d’accès à l’information dans un système évidentiel. En utilisant une approche morphosyntaxique, l’emploi de l’évidentialité peut être correctement décrit dans cette langue. Plus précisément, certains types de constructions de copules et de verbes auxiliaires très complexes, qui n’avaient pas été décrits auparavant, peuvent être utilisés pour démontrer comment l’évidentialité est grammaticalisée en tibétain classique moyen. Cette approche évite les pièges des analyses uniquement lexicales, qui n’étaient auparavant pas en mesure de fournir une description complète et précise de l’évidentialité. De plus, l’interaction complexe entre l’évidentialité, l’aspect et la modalité épistémique révèle la subtilité et la complexité du système. Enfin, l’interaction entre l’évidentialité et le registre de politesse révèle des relations sociales discursives complexes qui n’ont pas été décrites auparavant et l’importance de la déixis sociale dans l’étude de l’évidentialité.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Ad Foolen, Helen de Hoop & Gijs Mulder (eds.). 2018. Evidence for evidentiality. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
-
Aikhenvald, Alexandra, Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Aikhenvald, Alexandra, Y. 2018. The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Anderson, Gregory D.S. 2006. Auxiliary verb constructions. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Bergqvist, Henrik, 2017. “The role of ‘perspective’ in epistemic marking”, Lingua 186–187, pp. 5–20.
-
Bergqvist, Henrik. & Kittilä, Seppo (eds.), 2020. Evidentiality, egophoricity and engagement. Berlin: Language Science Press.
-
Beyer, Stephan V. 1992. The classical Tibetan language. Albany: State University of New York Press.
-
Bialek, Joanna. 2023. Emergence of the honorific register in Tibetic languages.” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 290–327.
-
Bornkessel, Ina, Schlesewsky, Matthias, Comrie, Bernard & Friederici, Angela D. 2009. Introduction—Semantic Roles as a core linguistic concept, pp. 1–2, in I. Bornkessel et al. (Eds), Semantic Role Universals and Argument Linking (pp. 1–14). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
-
Bybee, Joan L., Pagliuca, William & Perkins, Revere. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-
Comrie Bernard. 1976a. Aspect, An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Comrie, Bernard. 1976b. Linguistic politeness axes: Speaker–addressee, speaker–referent, speaker–bystander. Pragmatics microfiche, vol. 1.7:A3. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Department of Linguistics.
-
Cornillie, Bert. 2009. “Evidentiality and epistemic modality: On the close relationship between two different categories”. Functions of Language, Volume 16, Number 1, 44–62. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
-
Creissels, Denis. 2006. Syntaxe Générale, une introduction typologique, vol. 1. Paris: Lavoisier, chapter 20.
-
Das, Sarat Chandra. 1902. A Tibetan-English dictionary, with Sanskrit synonyms. Bengal Secretariat Book Depot.
-
de Jong, Jan Willem. (Ed.). 1959. Mi la ras pa’i rnam thar: Texte tibétain de la vie de Milarepa (Tibetan text of the life of Milaraspa). ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton.
-
DeLancey, Scott. 2018. Evidentiality in Tibetic. In Aikhenvald, A. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Diessel, Holger. 2012. Deixis and demonstratives. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, Paul Portner (eds.), An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 3, 2407–2431. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
-
Fillmore, Charles J. 1997. Coming and going. In Lectures on Deixis, 77–102. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
-
Fleck, David W. 2003. A grammar of Matses. PhD thesis. Rice University.
-
Forker, Diana. 2018. Evidentiality and its relations with other verbal categories. In Aikhenvald, A. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Gyurmé, Kesang (Gesang Jumian). 1981. Bod kyi brda sprod rig pa’i khrid rgyun rab gsal me long. [The very clear mirror, a guide to the understanding of Tibetan grammar]. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
-
Gyurmée, Kesang. 1994. Le clair miroir. Enseignement de la grammaire tibétaine, (traduction et adaptation et commentaires de Heather Stoddard et Nicolas Tournadre, avec une préface de Claude Hagege). Editions Prajna.
-
Hahn, Michael. 1996. Lehrbuch der klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
-
Haller, Felix. 2009. Die weltlichen Taten des Milarepa: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung, kritische Edition und Übersetzung der ersten drei Kapitel der Biographie des Milarepa [The worldly deeds of Milarepa: linguistic description, critical edition and translation of the first three chapters of the Biography of Milarepa]. Bern: University of Bern, Institute of Linguistics, habilitation thesis.
-
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Helman-Ważny, Agnieszka. 2014. “Tibetan Woodblock Printing Culture”. In: The Archaeology of Tibetan Books. Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, Volume: 36. 116–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004275058_006
-
Hill, Nathan W. 2013. ‘ḥdug as a testimonial marker in Classical and Old Tibetan.’ Himalayan Linguistics, 12 (1). pp. 1–16.
-
Hill, Nathan W. 2023. ‘Origin of the r- allomorph of the Tibetan causative s-.’ In: Schaeffer, Kurtis, McGrath, William and Liang, Jue, (eds.), Histories of Tibet: Essays in honor of Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp. New York: Wisdom Publications, pp. 106–114.
-
Jakobson, Roman [1957] 1971. Shifter, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. In: R. Jakobson. Selected Writings, vol. 2, 130–147. The Hague: Mouton.
-
Jendraschek, Gerd. 2011. Subordinate, Embedded, and Dependent Clauses. A Terminological Confusion that Iatmul Can Help Disentangle. Handout for a public lecture given on 17 July 2007 at the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
-
Lehmann, Christian. 2004. Nexion—Complex sentences. Erfurt: Universität Erfurt. Linn.
-
Levinson, Stephen C. 1979. Pragmatics and social deixis: Reclaiming the notion of conventional implicature. In C. Chiarello (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 206–223).
-
Lyons, John 1977. Semantics. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Mélac, Eric and Bialek, Joanna. 2024. “Evidentiality as a grammaticalization passenger. An investigation of evidential developments in Tibetic languages and beyond”. In Studies in Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
-
Mélac, Eric, and Nicolas Tournadre, 2021. The Semantics of the Verb ‘Give’in Tibetan.” Give Constructions across Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 175–193.
-
Mélac, Eric. 2023. “The pragmatic differences between grammatical and lexical evidentiality: A corpus-based study of Tibetan and English”. In Journal of Pragmatics 210: 143–156.
-
Nuyts, Jan. 2001. Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: A cognitive pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
-
Oisel, Guillaume, Félix Julca-Guerrero and Nicolas Tournadre. Forthcoming. Evidentiality in Ancash Quechua. A contrastive approach with common Tibetan.
-
Oisel, Guillaume. 2005. Etude des suffixes médiatifs du tibétain littéraire journalistique. Thesis of Maîtrise de Sciences du langage, University of Paris 8.
-
Oisel, Guillaume. 2006. Emplois particuliers des suffixes mediatifs non-egophoriques dans le tibetain parlé de Lhassa. Thesis of Master de linguistique théorique et déscriptive, University of Paris 8.
-
Oisel, Guillaume. 2013. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique des auxiliaires et des connecteurs du tibétain littéraire: étude diachronique et synchronique, Doctoral dissertation in linguistics, Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle-Paris 3.
-
Oisel, Guillaume. 2017a. On the origin of the Lhasa Tibetan evidentials song and byung. In Lauren Gawne and Nathan W. Hill (eds.) Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 161–183. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
-
Oisel, Guillaume. 2017b. Re-evaluation of the evidential system of Lhasa Tibetan and its atypical functions. In Himalayan linguistics 16.2, 90–128.
-
Palmer, Frank R. 2001. Mood and modality (seconde edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Quintman, Andrew. 2010. The Life of Milarepa. New York: Penguin classics.
-
Robin, Françoise. 2005. Les Contes facétieux du Cadavre. L’Asiathèque. Paris.
-
Rijkhoff, Jan N.M. 1995. ‘Bystander and social deixis: some programmatic remarks on the grammar/pragmatics interface’. Working Papers in Functional Grammar 58.
-
Rus pa’i rgyan can, gTsang smyon he ru ka. 1990 (1994). rNal ‘byor gyi dbang phrug chen po mi la ras pa’i rnam thar (The biography of Milarepa. The great disciple of Neljor). Tibetan Cultural Printing Press. Dharamsala: India.
-
Samdrup, Tsering & Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2019. Humilifics in Mabzhi pastoralist speech of Amdo Tibetan. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 42(2).222–259.
-
Samdrup, Tsering (Cairangsanzhou). 2022. Pragmatics in Old Tibetan: Investigations based on several Dunhuang texts. London: Department of East Asian Languages and Culture, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London PhD thesis.
-
Schwieger, Peter. 2006. Handbuch zur Grammatik der klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.
-
Shao Mingyuan (邵明園) 2016.” 藏语系动词 red 的语法化 “The Grammticalizition of the Copula Verb red in Tibetic Languages. Language & Linguistics 17(5): 679–715.
-
Simon, Camille. 2021. La catégorie égophorique dans les langues de l’Amdo (Tibet). Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, pp. 281–326. ⟨hal-03610593⟩
-
bSod nams ’od zer, 1997 (ed.) Grub chen u rgyan pa’i rnam thar (The biography of Urgyenpa). bod ljongs bod yig rnying dpe skrun khang (Old Tibetan Publishing House of the Tibet Autonomous Region). Lhasa: Tibet [289 pages]
-
Tournadre, N., Lhakpa Norbu Sherpa, Gyurme Chodrak & Guillaume Oisel, 2009. Sherpa-English and English-Sherpa Dictionary, with Literary Tibetan and Nepali equivalents, Kathmandu: Vajra Bookstore.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje, 2003. Manual of Standard Tibetan. Ithaca, New York: Snow Lion.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas & Sangda Dorje, S. 1998. Manuel de tibétain standard. Paris: L’Asiathèque.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas and Hiroyuki Suzuki. 2023. The Tibetic languages: An introduction to the family of languages derived from Old Tibetan. Lacito, CNRS, Linguistic diversity Series.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas and LaPolla, Randy. 2014. Towards a new approach to evidentiality: issues and directions for research. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37(2). 240–263.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1996. L’ergativité en tibétain, approche morphosyntaxique de la langue parlée, Editions Peeters, Louvain, Bilbliotheque de l’Information Grammaticale. Peeters.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2004. Typologie des aspects et theorie du T.A.M, Bulletin de la Societe de linguistique de Paris, t.XCIX (2004), fasc. I, 7–68.
-
Tournadre, Nicolas. 2017. A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic Languages. In Lauren Gawne and Nathan W. Hill (eds.) Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 161–183. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 62–95.
-
Trinlé, Dungkar Lobzang and Gonkatsang, Tsering Dhundup. 2016. Tibetan Woodblock Printing: An Ancient Art and Craft. HIMALAYA 36(1).
-
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2008. Epistemic modalities in spoken Standard Tibetan. Ph.D. dissertation, Filozoficka Fakulta Univerzity Karlovy—Universite Paris 8.
-
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2011. “Epistemic modalities and evidentiality in spoken Standard Tibetan.” In: Tanja Mortelmans and Jesse Mortelmans (Eds.) The Mood for Mood, 117–139. Amsterdam and New York.
-
Vokurková, Zuzana. 2018. “Epistemic modalities in spoken Tibetan.” In: Epistemic Modalities and Evidentiality in Cross-Linguistic Perspective (ed. Guentchéva, Zlatka). Vol. 59: 296–318. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
-
Zadoks, Abel. 2004. Evidentials in Middle Tibetan texts. [Paper presented at the 37th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, Lund, October 1–3.]
-
Zariquiey, Roberto, Guillaume Oisel, Amelia Torres Zambrano, Jorge Eduardo Sato Ruiz, Carlos Gonzalo González Pinedo, Víctor Raúl Paredes Estela, Nazario Aguirre Baique, and Edwin Julio Palomino Cadenas. 2020. How to commentate a soccer match in Shipibo-Konibo (Pano)? LIAMES, Campinas, SP, v. 20, 1–17.
-
Zariquiey, Roberto. 2011. A grammar of Kashibo-Kakataibo. PhD thesis. La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
-
Zeisler Bettina. 2004. Relative tense and aspectual verbs in Tibetan Languages, Berlin; New York: Mouton Gruyter.
-
Zeisler, Bettina. 2017. The emergence of the Ladakhi inferential and experiential markers from a marker for admirativity (non-commitment): The case of ḥdug and snaŋ. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 4(2). 259–307.
-
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. Amsterdam: Benjamins: Chapter 9.
-
Zeisler, Bettina. 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.
-
Zeisler, Bettina. 2022. To be or not to be: On the Modern Tibetan auxiliary verb red in classical texts. Himalayan Linguistics, 21(3).
-
Zhou Wei (周炜), 2000,《米拉日巴传》的语法特征及比较 Mi la ri ba zhuan de yu fa te zheng ji bi jiao (A Comparative Study on the Grammatical Features of “Biography of Mi-la ras-pa”), China Tibetology Publishing House.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 284 | 284 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 15 | 15 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 48 | 48 | 2 |
Evidentiality in Middle Classical Tibetan
L’évidentialité en tibétain classique moyen
CNRS-LACITO Villejuif France
Search for other papers by Guillaume OISEL in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
This study presents the first comprehensive analysis of Evidentiality in Middle Classical Tibetan. This is of great importance since Middle Classical Tibetan is the oldest system in typological studies yet identified that uses evidentiality beginning in at least the 15th century. This article also highlights the distinction between the notions of information source and information access in an evidential system. By using a morphosyntactic approach, the usage of evidentiality can be properly described in that language. Specifically, certain types of highly complex copula and auxiliary verb constructions, which had not been previously analyzed, can be used to demonstrate how evidentiality is grammaticalized in Middle Classical Tibetan. This approach avoids the pitfalls of lexical-only analyses, which have previously not been able to support a comprehensive and accurate description of evidentiality. Further, the intricate interaction between evidentiality, aspect, and epistemic modality reveals the subtlety and complexity of the system. Finally, the interaction between evidentiality and politeness register, reveals discursive complex social relationships which have not been previously described and the importance of social deixis in the study of evidentiality.
Résumé
Cette étude présente la première analyse complète de l’évidentialité en tibétain classique moyen. Elle est d’une grande importance car il s’agit du système le plus ancien dans les études typologiques qui utilise l’évidentialité depuis au moins le XVe siècle. Cet article met également en exergue la distinction entre les notions de source d’information et d’accès à l’information dans un système évidentiel. En utilisant une approche morphosyntaxique, l’emploi de l’évidentialité peut être correctement décrit dans cette langue. Plus précisément, certains types de constructions de copules et de verbes auxiliaires très complexes, qui n’avaient pas été décrits auparavant, peuvent être utilisés pour démontrer comment l’évidentialité est grammaticalisée en tibétain classique moyen. Cette approche évite les pièges des analyses uniquement lexicales, qui n’étaient auparavant pas en mesure de fournir une description complète et précise de l’évidentialité. De plus, l’interaction complexe entre l’évidentialité, l’aspect et la modalité épistémique révèle la subtilité et la complexité du système. Enfin, l’interaction entre l’évidentialité et le registre de politesse révèle des relations sociales discursives complexes qui n’ont pas été décrites auparavant et l’importance de la déixis sociale dans l’étude de l’évidentialité.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 284 | 284 | 16 |
| Full Text Views | 15 | 15 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 48 | 48 | 2 |