Grammaticalization in Japhug and Gyalrongic languages

Grammaticalization in Japhug* Guillaume Jacques March 31, 2016 1 Introduction Japhug and other Gyalrong languages are among the languages with the richest morphology of all the Sino-Tibetan family. While the ultimate lexical origin of most grammatical markers in Japhug is unknown and probably unrecoverable, many affixes are nevertheless analyzable as being derived from other independent words or other grammatical markers (for instance, denominal prefixes to voice markers). Although the latter are not cases of grammaticalization stricto sensu, they are nevertheless highly relevant to grammaticalization theory, as they potentially provide examples of ‘missing links’ in pathways of grammaticalization. Therefore, they are systematically included in this survey. All grammatical elements whose origin can be traced without overdue speculation are treated in this paper. First, I discuss the noun phrase, in particular nominal morphology, pronouns, case markers are discourse markers. Second, I analyze the verbal template. Third, I present the historical origin of a selection of complex constructions. Fourth, I study two cases of degrammaticalization in Japhug. 2 Nominal categories The inflection of Japhug nouns is quite limited in comparison with that of the verbs. There are no genders or noun classes, number (section 2.1) and case (sections 2.3 to 2.7) are marked by clitics, and the only inflectional category is that of possession (see section 2.2). The only productive nominal derivation not involving compounding is that of comitative adverbs (section 2.5). * Acknowledgements to be added after editorial decision. The examples are taken from a corpus that is progressively being made available on the Pangloss archive (Michailovsky et al. 2014). This research was funded by the HimalCo project (ANR-12-CORP-0006) and is related to the research strand LR-4.11 ‘‘Automatic Paradigm Generation and Language Description’’ of the Labex EFL (funded by the ANR/CGI). 1 Topic and focus markers are also discussed in this section (2.8), as their scope is nearly always on a noun phrase rather than a verb phrase. 2.1 Number Japhug has two number markers, dual ni and plural ra. These clitics are not obligatory for non-singular arguments (even in the case of human referents), and do not necessary trigger plural or dual agreement on the verb. The dual ni is obviously related to the numeral ʁnɯz < *q-nis ‘two’, exemplifying the well-attested pathway two → dual. The etymology of the plural marker ra is unknown; a potential cognate exists in Pumi (=ɹə, cf Daudey 2014: 135; Japhug -a regularly corresponds to Pumi -ə). The plural marker ra can express plurality or collective meaning, as in example 1; it is not incompatible with numerals, as shown in 2. (1) ɯ-kʰa ra nɯ-mɤ-kɤ-sɯz nɤ ɯʑo kɯ qɤjɣi 3sg.poss-house pl 3pl.poss-neg-inf-know lnk 3sg erg bread χsɯm lo-βzu three ifr-make She made three pieces of bread without her relatives knowing. (the raven, 108) (2) rɟɤlpu nɯ kɯ kɯki tɯrme kɯtʂɤɣ ra nɯ-ɕki to-ti king dem erg this people six pl 3pl-dat ifr-say The king told these six men. (Liuhaohan zoubian tianxia, 200) In addition, the marker ra can indicate approximative time or location (see section 2.7). 2.2 Possession and pronouns Japhug nouns can be divided into two main categories, inalienably possessed nouns and alienably possessed nouns. The former must take a possessive prefix, even when the possessor is non-specific. In that case, the indefinite possessor tɯ-/tɤ- or generic possessor tɯ- prefixes are used. Pronouns and possessive prefixes are very similar (see Table 1), but it appears that in Japhug pronouns are derived from possessive prefixes rather than the opposite: pronouns other than 3du and 3pl are build by combining the possessive prefix with the root -ʑo meaning originally ‘self’ (a common source for pronouns, see Heine & Song 2011). Japhug thus exemplifies a pathway pronominal affix → pronoun. It is not however a case of degrammaticalization in the strict sense, since the bound pronominal prefixes have not become free morphemes by themselves. The 3du and 3pl are formed differently from the rest of the pronouns, by combining the status constructus form ʑɤ- of the pronominal root /ʑo/ 2 with the dual and plural markers ni and ra, with regular vowel harmony ɤ → a / _Ca in the case of ʑara ‘they’. Table 1: Pronouns and possessive prefixes Free pronoun Prefix Person a-ʑo, ɤj nɤ-ʑo, nɤj ɯ-ʑo anɤɯ- 1sg 2sg 3sg tɕi-ʑo ndʑi-ʑo ʑɤ-ni tɕindʑindʑi- 1du 2du 3du i-ʑo nɯ-ʑo ʑa-ra inɯnɯ- 1pl 2pl 3pl tɯ-ʑo tɯ-, tɤtɯ- indefinite generic 2.3 Beneficiary The genitive ɣɯ (borrowed from Amdo Tibetan), in addition to marking the possessor, is the normal way to mark beneficiaries and can be used to mark recipient of some ditransitive verbs such as kʰo ‘give, pass over’, as in 3. (3) ki kɯra ɲɯ-kʰam-a tɕe ki nɤki nɯ aʑɯɣ this dem:pl ipfv-give[III]-1sg lnk this dem dem 1sg:gen nɯ-kʰɤm. imp-give[III] I will give you this, and you will give me that. (slobdpon, 130) Alternatively, when the predicate is a transitive verb with an overt object, the beneficiary can be marked as a possessive prefix on the object, as a-tɯ-ci 1sg-indef.poss-water ‘water for me’ in 4. (4) χsɤr khɯtsa ɯ-ŋgɯ nɯ tɕu a-tɯ-ci ci gold bowl 3sg-inside dem loc 1sg-indef.poss-water indef tɤ-rke ma wuma ɲɯ-ɕpaʁ-a imp-put.in[III] because really sens-be.thirsty-1sg Pour some water for me in the golden bowl, I am very thirsty. 3 2.4 Dative The dative ɯ-ɕki, used to mark the recipient of indirective ditransitive verbs as in (5), derives from a relator noun meaning ‘side’, a meaning still marginally present in Japhug in examples like (6). (5) tɤ-pɤtso ra kɯ nɯ-sloχpɯn ɯ-ɕki to-tʰu-nɯ indef.poss-child pl erg 3pl.poss-teacher 3sg-dat ifr-ask-pl The children asked their teacher. (Looking at the snow, 11) (6) ɯ-rte nɯ ɯ-rna ɯ-ɕki 3sg.poss-hat dem 3sg.poss-ear 3sg-dat pɯ-kɯ-ɴqoʁ nɯnɯ pjɤ-mɟa pfv:down-nmlz:S/A-hang dem ɯ-ku ɯ-taʁ to-ta tɕe ifr:down-take lnk 3sg.poss-head 3sg-on ifr-put He took the hard that was hanging on his ear and put it on his head. (140505 liuhaohan zoubian tianxia, 164) Japhug thus attests a grammaticalization pathway side ⇒ locative ⇒ dative. 2.5 Comitative adverbs Japhug and other Gyalrong languages have a productive derivation whereby a comitative adverb can be derived from a noun by removing all possessive prefixes, adding the prefix kɤɣɯ- and partially reduplication the last syllable of the noun stem, as in tɤ-rte ‘hat’ ⇒ kɤɣɯ-rtɯ~rte ‘together with (his) hat’, as illustrated by (7). (7) kɤɣɯ-rtɯ~rte ʑo kha ɯ-ŋgɯ lɤ-tɯ-ɣe comit-hat emph house 3sg-inside pfv-2-come[II] You came inside the house with your hat. (You were expected to take it off before coming in) As shown in Jacques (under review(a)), these adverbs originate from the combination of the S/A-participle kɯ- with the denominal derivation prefix aɣɯ-, which derives proprietive stative verbs from nouns, as shown in Table (2). Comitative adverbs are actually homophonous with the S/A-participle of such verbs, as shown by examples 8 and 9, which present a minimal pair contrasting the comitative adverb ‘with his/her children’ on the one hand and the participle ‘having many children’ on the other hand (both derived from the possessed noun tɤ-rɟit ‘child’), both pronounced kɤɣɯrɟɯrɟit. 4 Table 2: The denominal prefix aɣɯ- Base noun Meaning tɯ-ɣli tɤ-lu tɯ-mɲaʁ tɯ-ɕnaβ ɯ-mdoʁ excrement, manure milk eye snot colour Denominal verb Meaning aɣɯ-ɣli aɣɯ-lu aɣɯ-mɲaʁ aɣɯ-ɕnɯ~ɕnaβ aɣɯ-mdoʁ producing a lot of manure (of pigs) producing a lot of milk (of cows) having a lot of holes be slimy having the same colour (8) iɕqha tɕʰeme nɯ kɯ-ɤɣɯrɟɯrɟit the.aforementioned woman dem nmlz:S/A-have.many.children ci pɯ-ŋu indef pst.ipfv-be This woman had a lot of children. (9) kɤɣɯ-rɟɯ~rɟit ʑo jo-nɯ-ɕe-nɯ comit-children emph ifr-vert-go-pl She/They went back with their children. Ambiguous sentences like 10 actually constitute the pivot constructions which allow reanalysis in contexts where both proprietive (‘having X’) and a comitative (‘with X’) interpretations were possible. (10) si kɤɣɯrtɯrtaʁ tree nmlz:S/A-have.many.branches//comit-branch ɲɯ-ɕar-nɯ ipfv-search-pl ‘They search for a tree having a lot of branches’ ⇒ ‘They search for a tree and/with its branches’ This is thus a particular instance of a pathway proprietive ⇒ comitative, which may be attested in other language families (Stassen 2000, Stolz et al. 2006, Arkhipov 2009). 2.6 Comparee and standard In the comparative construction, both the comparee and the standard are marked, respectively by the postpositions kɯ and sɤz (example 11). The marker kɯ on the comparee is obligatory only if the standard is not overt, otherwise it is optional. (11) sɤz [ɯ-pi [ɯ-ʁi]standard 3sg.poss-younger.sibling comparative 3sg.poss-elder.sibling nɯ]comparee kɯ mpɕɤr dem erg be.beautiful:fact ‘The elder one is more beautiful than the young one.’ (elicited) 5 The mark kɯ on the comparee is etymologically related to the ergative kɯ (borrowed from Amdo Tibetan). The complex grammaticalization pathway leading from ergative to comparee marker is presented in Jacques (2016a). This unusual pathway ergative ⇒ comparee rather than the more common ergative ⇒ standard is all the more surprising as the ergative kə/ɣə in Amdo Tibetan from which the Japhug ergative kɯ was borrowed is used for the standard in the comparative construction. The marker sɤz contains the locative suffix -z (which also appears as a tautosyllabic postposition zɯ), but the etymology of the first element sɤ- is unknown. 2.7 Location In Japhug, there are four distinct (non mutually exclusive) ways of marking locative adjuncts. First, locative and temporal adjunct are commonly left unmarked. Second, they can take the locative postpositions zɯ or tɕu. Third, relator (possessed) nouns such as ɯ-ŋgɯ ‘inside’, ɯ-taʁ ‘on’, ɯ-pa ‘under’, ɯ-rkɯ ‘side’ can be used for more specific locations. They can be followed by the locative zɯ or tɕu as in (12). (12) kha ɯ-rkɯ zɯ nɯnɯ qajɯ pɯ-nnɯ-ŋu, house 3sg.poss-side loc dem kɯ-fse, tɤ-rɤku kɯ-fse nɯra tɯrdoʁ worm pst.ipfv-auto-be grain pɯ-kɯ-ʁndɤr nmlz:S/A-be.like indef.poss-cereals pfv-nmlz:S/A-be.spilled ɣɯ-tu-ndze ɲɯ-ŋu nmlz:S/A-be.like cisloc-ipfv-eat[III] sens-be (During winter,) it comes near the house to eat worms or grains that have been spilled (on the ground). (23-pGAYaR, 94) These postpositions are however optional, as shown by the following example from the same story as (12). (13) kha ɯ-rkɯ kɤ-ɣi wuma ʑo rga house 3sg.poss-side inf-come really emph like:fact It likes to come near the house. (23-pGAYaR, 95) Fourth, the plural marker ra can indicate approximate location, as in 14. This use of ra is reminiscent of plural markers in Kirghiz and Old Japanese, which combine collective, hypocoristic and approximate locative meanings see Antonov 2007: 195). (14) tɯ-zda nɯ ma kɯmaʁ tɯrme indef.poss-companion dem apart.from other a-pɯ-me tɕe, kha people ra aʁɤndɯndɤt ɲɯ-ɤnɯɣro ɲɯ-ŋu irr-ipfv-not.exist lnk house pl everywhere sens-play 6 sens-be ɲɯ-ti. sens-say He says that (the young monkey) would play everywhere in the house whenever there are no other people (apart from members of the family). (19 GZW2, 10) 2.8 Topic and focus Topic and focus markers do not strictly belong to nominal markers, since they can have scope over verb phrases or even entire sentences, but since they are mainly used with noun phrases, they are nevertheless included in this section. Three of the discourse markers in Japhug have clear etymologies: the delimitative topic pɯpɯŋunɤ ‘as for ...’, the aforementioned topic iɕqha and the unexpected focus rcanɯ. 2.8.1 Delimitative topic The delimitative topic marker pɯpɯŋunɤ ‘as for ...’ is transparently derived from the conditional past imperfective form be the verb ‘be’ (as in 15), meaning originally ‘if it/he/she is ...’. (15) pɯ~pɯ-ŋu nɤ cond~-pst.ipfv-be if If it is ... However, the grammaticalized status of this marker is obvious when the element marked with pɯpɯŋunɤ ‘as for ...’ is a first or second person pronoun, as in example (16). (16) nɤʑo pɯpɯŋunɤ, ɬɤndʐi ra ɣɯ nɯ-kɯ-βʁa, 2sg as.for nɯ-rɟɤlpu demon pl gen 3pl.poss-nmlz:S/A-be.victorious tɯ-ŋu 3pl.poss-king 2-be:fact You, you are the king of the demons. (hist140512 fushang he yaomo, 61) Here, the form of the topic markers remains pɯpɯŋunɤ, without agreement: if this still were a conjugated verb, the second person singular form shown in (17) would have been expected instead. (17) a-slama pɯ~pɯ-tɯ-ŋu nɤ 1sg.poss-student cond~-pst.ipfv-2-be if If you were my student... This shows that pɯpɯŋunɤ is not a proper verb form anymore, and has been fully grammaticalized. 7 2.8.2 Aforementioned topic The temporal adverb jiɕqha ‘just before’ has become grammaticalized as a pre-nominal determiner ‘the aforementioned’ expressing that the nominal in question has been referred to previously in the discourse, though not in the last few sentences. In example 18, for instance, the leaf is mentioned four sentences before. (18) tɯmɯ ci rain jiɕqha tɕhɤrnaʁ ci indef rain tɕhɯmtɕhɯm ko-lɤt. tɕendɤre indef idph.II:little.rain ifr-throw lnk tɤ-jwaʁ nɯ pjɤ-nɯndzom the.aforementioned indef.poss-leaf dem ifr:down-flow.along tɕe, ɯ-ʁi ɯ-kɯr ɯ-ŋgɯ nɯ lnk 3sg.poss-younger.sibling 3sg.poss-mouth 3sg-inside dem tɕu tɯ-ci χsɯ-ntɕhaʁ jamar pjɤ-ɕe. loc indef.poss-water three-drop about ifr:down-go There was a little rain, and (the water) flowed along the leaf (that the elder brother had placed) and three drops of water flowed into his younger brother’s mouth. (Smanmi 11, 61) 2.8.3 Unexpectedness The marker rcanɯ topicalizes the preceding noun phrase and emphasizes the unexpectedness of the situation or event described by the phrase that follows, as in 19, where the blackening of the sparrows surprised (and amused) the person telling the story. (19) tɕendɤre thɯ-kɤ-βlɯ lnk ɯ-ŋgɯ nɯ ɲɯ-ɕti tɕe, <yancong> pfv-nmlz:P-burn dem sens-be:assert lnk chimney ɲɯ-ɲaʁ rcanɯ kumpɣɤtɕɯ ra 3sg-inside sens-be.black unexpected sparrow ɲɤ́-wɣ-sɯɣ-ɲaʁ-nɯ ʑo pl ifr-inv-caus-be.black-pl emph Because there has been burning going on, the inside of the chimney is black, and it made the sparrows (who had build a nest inside it) become (completely) black! (22 kWmpGAtCW, 72) When it occurs before an adjectival verb, whether in finite or non-finite form as kɯ-dɯ~dɤn ‘numerous’ in 20, or before an ideophone (21), rcanɯ indicates high degree. Adjectival verbs in this case often have emphatic reduplication. (20) tɕe nɯ ɕoŋtɕa rcanɯ kɯ-dɯ~dɤn ʑo lnk dem wood unexpected nmlz:S/A-emph~-be.a.lot emph pjɤ-sɯ-phɯt-nɯ. ifr-caus-chop-pl 8 And they had (people) chop quite lot of wood (for them) (28 qAjdo, 103) (21) ɯ-phoŋbu nɯ rcanɯ ʁɲɟliʁɲɟli ʑo 3sg.poss-body dem unexpected idph:II:huge;massive emph ɲɯ-pa sens-aux Its body is huge. (20 sWNgi, 16) This marker is derived from the possessed noun ɯ-rca ‘following, together with’ (see example 22) together with the distal demonstrative nɯ ‘that’. (22) aʑo a-rca kɤ-ɣi mɤ-tɯ-cha 1sg 1sg-following inf-come neg-2-can:fact You cannot come with me. The evolution from ‘following, together with’ to ‘unexpectedness’ is not completely straightforward. The pathway together with ⇒ also (nonscalar additive) ⇒ even (scalar additive) ⇒ unexpectedness can be proposed.1 It involves intermediate stages that are all attested: in particular, many languages have the same morpheme for scalar and non-scalar additives (for instance Karbi, see Konnerth 2014), and the directionality is clearly from non-scalar to scalar additives. However, this hypothesis can only be confirmed if traces of the proposed intermediate stages are discovered in other Gyalrong languages. 3 Verbal categories 3.1 Person indexation Japhug and other Rgyalrongic languages have a polypersonal indexation system that includes several morphemes with cognates in Kiranti languages (for instance, the second person *tə- prefix, the inverse *wə- and the direct third person object *-w), and appears to be at least in part of proto-Sino-Tibetan origin, though this issue is controversial (see DeLancey 2011, Jacques 2012a), and thus cannot be included in this paper. I focus here on generic person markers and portmanteau prefixes for local scenario 1→2 and 2→1, which have relatively transparent etymologies, and briefly discuss possible origins for the inverse prefix. 3.1.1 Generic person prefixes Japhug has a system of generic person marking with ergative alignment (Jacques 2012b), in which generic S/P are marked by the prefix kɯ- (ex1 This pathway was suggested by Nat Krause and Linda Konnerth. 9 amples 23 and 24), while generic A is marked by the prefix wɣ- (example 25). (23) tɕeri tɤ-pɤtso pɯ-kɯ-ŋu tɕe, nɯ kɤ-ndza but indef.poss-child pst.ipfv-genr:S/P-be lnk dem inf-eat wuma ʑo pɯ-kɯ-rga. really emph pst.ipfv-genr:S/P-like When (we) were children, (we) liked it a lot. (12: ndZiNgri, 135) (24) tɕe ʁja nɯnɯ tɯ-qʰoχpa lnk rust top a-mɤ-tʰɯ-ɕe genr.poss-inner.organ ra ma irr-neg-pfv:downstream-go have.to:fact lnk tu-kɯ-ɕɯ-ngo ɲɯ-ɕti ipfv-genr:S/P-caus-be.sick testim-be:assert Rust should not go into one’s organs, otherwise it would cause one to get sick. (30: Com, 86) (25) tɯrme kɯ tú-wɣ-ndza mɤ-sna. people erg ipfv-inv-eat neg-be.good:fact It is not edible. (11: paRzwamWntoR, 39) The generic human S/P prefix kɯ- is homophonous with the S/A participle prefix, illustrated by examples (26) and (27). (26) spjaŋkɯ kɤ-kɯ-nɯʑɯβ (27) ɯ-kɯ-ndza wolf pfv-nmlz:S/A-sleep The wolf which had fallen asleep. 3sg-nmlz:S/A-eat The one who eats it. The generic human kɯ- arose most probably due to the reanalysis of participles as finite verbs. The exact scenario for this grammatical change is too complex to be presented here in detail (see Jacques to appear for a complete account), but the general lines are as follows. There is evidence that the ancestor of kɯ- in proto-Gyalrong could be used to mark generic human for all S, A and P. First, there are two irregular verbs in Japhug, ti ‘say’ and sɯz ‘know’ which form their generic A with kɯrather than wɣ-. Second, other Gyalrong languages (Tshobdun and Situ, see Sun 2014b) use the cognates of kɯ- for all generic human core arguments. The ancestor of Japhug kɯ-, proto-Gyalrong *kə-, was a general nominalizer that could be used for S-, A- and P-participles, and which was reanalyzed as a generic human marker for these three syntactic roles already 10 in proto-Gyalrong. In Japhug kɯ- became replaced by the inverse wɣ- to mark generic human in A function.2 Japhug thus attests the following two paths of grammatical change: (28) nominalization > generic (29) inverse > generic A 3.1.2 Portmanteau prefixes The Japhug transitive conjugation includes two portmanteau prefixes for local scenarios ta- 1→2 and kɯ- 2→1. The non-local forms taking these prefixes in Gyalrong languages have suffixes coreferent with the P, as illustrated by examples (30) and (31). (30) pɯ-kɯ-nɤjo-a imp-2→1-wait-1sg Wait for me (heard in context). (31) maka ʑo mɤ-ta-βde-ndʑi at.all emph neg-1→2-leave-du I will never abandon you two. (140507 tangguowu, 166) The portmanteau prefixes for 1→2 and 2→1 are nearly identical in Situ, Tshobdun and Zbu, as presented in Table 3 (data from Lín 1993: 218, Sun & Shidanluo 2002, Jacques 2012a, Gong 2014). Table 3: Local scenario prefixes in Rgyalrong languages 1→2 2→1 Japhug Tshobdun Zbu Situ tatɐtɐta- kɯkə-o-, tə-okə-w-, tə-wkə-w- Other Gyalrong languages only differ from Japhug in two regards: Japhug does not have the inverse wɣ- prefix in the 2→1 form, and Zbu and 2 The generic human A prefix wɣ- in Japhug is homophonous with the inverse marker wɣ-, and presents exactly the same morphological alternations (in particular, it is one of the very few prefixes to attract stress and to be infixable with the progressive asɯ-). It is possible to synchronically analyze it as a particular instance of the use of the inverse, supposing an Empathy Hierarchy where generic human are lower than inanimates (see Jacques 2010a, 2012b for more details on the use of the inverse in Japhug). (1) 1/2 > 3 animate > 3 inanimate > 3 generic human 11 Tshobdun allow an alternative form with the second person prefix tə- and the inverse prefix. In all four languages, the verb receives suffixes coreferent with the patient (second person in 1→2 and first person in 2→1).3 A possible explanation for the 1→2 prefix is a combination between the second person prefix tɯ- and the agentless passive a-, which yields the expected form in all four languages. In this view, a form such as ta-no-n 1→2-chase-2sg ‘I will chase yousg ’ (Lín 1993: 219) would have developped through the following stages:4 • *tə-ŋa-naŋ-nə 2-pass-chase-2sg ‘you will be chased’ (Passive form) • *ta-naŋ-nə 2:pass-chase-2sg (Regular phonological fusion between the person marker and the passive prefix, attested in all four Rgyalrong languages) • *ta-naŋ-nə 1→2-chase-2sg ‘I will chase you’ (reanalysis of the fused form as a portmanteau prefix; the unspecified agent of the passive construction is construed as being first person) • ta-no-n 1→2-chase-2sg ‘I will chase yousg ’ (regular sound changes) In the case of 2→1, the phonetic identity of this prefix with the nominalizer / generic in all four languages is striking. If, as suggested above, the grammaticalization of the nominalizer kə- as a generic person marker goes back to the common ancestor of all four Rgyalrong languages and not simply that of Japhug and Tshobdun, we may interpret the origin of a form such as kə-w-no-ŋ ‘you will chase me’ in the following way: • *kə-wə-naŋ-ŋa genr-inv-chase-1sg ‘someone will chase me’ (generic form, with inverse since the SAP argument is patient) • *kə-wə-naŋ-ŋa 2→1-inv-chase-1sg ‘You will chase me’ (reanalysis of the fused form as a portmanteau prefix; the unspecified agent of the passive construction is construed as being second person, ie, the SAP participant not otherwise indexed in the verb form) • kə-w-no-ŋ 2→1-chase-1sg ‘You will chase me’ (regular sound changes) Note that in the Situ Gyalrong language, unlike Japhug and Tshobdun, nominalized forms in kə- (the cognate of Japhug kɯ-) are compatible with person affixes in particular conditions (see Sun & Lin 2007: 11-12), as in 32, where the verb come’ bears the dual suffix -ntʃ. It is impossible to nominalize a verb in this way in the other Gyalrong languages. 3 All languages apart from Situ allow double suffixation in 2→1sg, with the dual or plural suffixes stacked after the first person, as in Japhug ɲɯ-kɯ-mbi-a-nɯ ipfv-2→1give-1sg-pl ‘youpl (will have to) give (her) to me.’ 4 Proto-Rgyalrong follows the preliminary sound laws presented in Jacques (2004). 12 (32) tərmi ̂ to-kə́-pə-ntʃ=tə tʂaʃi ̄ nɐrə ɬamō person pfv-nmlz-come:pst-du=det Trashi and Lhamo na-ŋôs-ntʃ pst.ipfv-be:pst-du The people who came were Trashi and Lhamo. In this view, the absence of inverse marker in the 2→1 form in Japhug is an innovation, which can be explained by the fact that the inverse is redundant in this form. This redundancy is solved in a different way in Zbu and Tshobdun, where at least speaker accept forms replacing the portmanteau kə- by the second person tə- (see Sun & Shidanluo 2002 and Gong 2014). 3.1.3 Inverse prefix The inverse prefix wɣ- (proto-Gyalrong *wə) has cognates in many other languages of the family (Jacques 2012a), in particular Kiranti (Bantawa ɨ-), and is not a Gyalrong-specific innovation. Given its antiquity, attempts at etymologizing this marker are necessarily speculative. There are two possibilities to account for the origin of this prefix, if it is indeed etymologizable. First, it could derive from the verb ‘to come’ (Japhug ɣi < *wi, a verb widely attested in the Sino-Tibetan family), through the well-established pathway come > venitive > cislocative > inverse (Jacques & Antonov 2014; see also Konnerth 2015 for a potential counterexample). Second, it could originate from the third person possessive marker – although in Japhug the two prefixes are dissimilar (wɣ- vs ɯ-), they are homophonous in all other languages (for instance, in Bantawa and Zbu). Such grammaticalization could have taken place through a nominalized form without nominalization prefix taking a third person possessive prefix, used in subordinate clauses that are later reinterpreted as main clauses. Japhug indeed has a non-finite verb form of this type, the bare infinitive (a form discussed in particular in Jacques 2014b), which could be analogous to the hypothesized construction from which the inverse could have been developed. These hypotheses must be considered to be preliminary until full reconstructions of proto-Gyalrongic and proto-Kiranti become available. 3.2 Associated motion Japhug has a simple associated motion system, with one translocative / andative prefix ɕɯ- and a cislocative / venitive prefix ɣɯ- transparently grammaticalized from the verbs ɕe ‘go’ and ɣi ‘come’ respectively. These prefixes are morphologically fully integrated, as illustrated by example 33, where the translocative (in the allomorph ɕ-) appears closer to the root than the negation marker, and cannot bear any TAM or person marker. 13 (33) ma-ɕ-tʰɯ-tɯ-ʑɣɤ-βde ma nɤ-wa neg-transloc-imp-2-refl-throw because 2sg.poss-father ɲɯ-ɤkʰu sens-call ‘Don’t throw yourself (in the river), your father is calling you’ In Situ, Lín (2003) notices that the cislocative has been further grammaticalized as marking prospective aspect. Grammaticalization of motion verbs as prefixes is unexpected in a strict verb-final language like Japhug, especially since purposive complements of motion verbs are always preverbal. These prefixes therefore originate from a construction where the motion verbs appeared before the main verb, either in a serial verb construction or simple parataxis (Jacques 2013b). 3.3 Voice The main sources for voice markers in Japhug are denominal prefixes. Five of the voice derivation prefixes, namely the Antipassive, the Applicative, the Causative, the Passive and the Deexperiencer, are homophonous with denominal derivations with similar meanings, as shown in Table 4. Table 4: Voice markers and corresponding denominal derivations Form Voice Corresponding denominal prefix rɤnɯ(ɣ)sɯ(ɣ)- Antipassive Applicative Causative asɤ- Agentless Passive Deexperiencer rɤ- (intransitive dynamic verbs) nɯ(ɣ)- (transitive dynamic verbs) sɯ(ɣ)- (verb meaning ‘use X’ or ‘cause to have X’) a- (stative verb) sɤ- (stative verb expressing a property) These five voice derivations and their corresponding denominal origin are discussed in the following. In addition, voice derivations originating from markers other than denominal prefixes (in particular, the reflexive ʑɣɤ-) are briefly analyzed. 3.3.1 Antipassive The relationship between voice and derivation prefixes was first explained in the case of the Antipassive prefix rɤ- (Jacques 2014b), a prefix attested only in Gyalrong languages and not even found in Khroskyabs, their closest relative (Lai 2013). The Antipassive derives from the intransitive denominal prefix rɯ-/rɤthrough a two stage pathway. 14 First, an action (or patient) nominal is derived from a transitive verb. This action nominal has the same form as the bare root of the verb, but is a possessed noun requiring a possessive prefix. For instance, from ɕphɤt ‘patch’ one derives the possessed noun -ɕphɤt ‘a patch’, which, in the absence of a definite possessor, must occur with the indefinite possessor prefix tɤ(tɤ-ɕphɤt). Second, intransitive derivation in rɯ-/rɤ- is applied to this possessed noun, yielding the form rɤ-ɕphɤt ‘to do patching’. Following the regular pattern, possessive prefixes are lost during denominal derivations, so that a form such as *rɤ-tɤ-ɕphɤt with the indefinite possessor prefix would not be expected. The end form rɤ-ɕphɤt ‘to do patching’ can then be reanalyzed as being directly derived from the base transitive verb ɕphɤt ‘patch’, and since the S of this intransitive verb corresponds to the A of the transitive verb ɕphɤt, and the P is lost, this originally denominal prefix is reinterpreted as being an Antipassive marker. Then, this prefix is overgeneralized to most transitive verbs. This reanalysis probably occurred recently in Japhug, as forms such as rɤ-ɕphɤt are still synchronically ambiguous between an Antipassive and a Denominal verb. Further evidence for this pathway can be found in irregular nominal forms, as there are several verb for which a semantic or morphological irregularity is shared between the Antipassive verb and the corresponding action/patient noun, but not the base transitive verbs, showing that the Antipassive form derives from the patient. For example, the intransitive verb rɤ-nŋa ‘owe money’ is an irregular Antipassive form of ŋa ‘owe X’; the additional -n- is also found in the noun -nŋa ‘debt’, showing that this irregular Antipassive historically derives from the noun -nŋa ‘debt’ rather than directly from the transitive verb ŋa ‘owe X’.5 The pathway presented here can be summarized as (34): (34) action nominalization of transitive verb + intransitive denominal derivation ⇒ antipassive The general mechanism is that the action nominalization neutralizes the transitivity of the base verb, and that a new transitivity and argument structure is allocated by the denominal prefix. The same two-step pathway of grammaticalization proposed to account for the origin of the antipassive prefix can also be applied to four other voice derivation prefixes: the causative sɯ-, the deexperiencer sɤ–, the passive a- and the applicative nɯ-. Although for these derivations, unlike the antipassive case, we lack common (semantic or morphological) irregularities between action nouns and derived verbs, the semantics of the voicing 5 See Jacques (2014b) for additional examples of common idiosyncrasies between action noun and antipassive verb. 15 markers and corresponding denominal derivations is very close. 3.3.2 Causative The causative prefix sɯ(ɣ)- is one of the most productive derivation prefixes in Japhug, and can be applied to nearly all transitive and intransitive verbs (the detailed meaning of this prefix and the constructions in which it can be used in are described in Jacques 2015b). The homophonous denominal prefix sɯ(ɣ)- derives verbs meaning ‘use X’ or ‘cause to have X’, such as sɯ-ɕtʂi ‘cause to sweat’ (from the possessed noun -ɕtʂi ‘sweat’), or sɯɣ-tshaʁ ‘to sieve (=to use a sieve)’ from tshaʁ ‘sieve’. The causative sɯ(ɣ)- can thus be explained as the result of reanalysis from the denominal derivation ‘cause to X’ from a possessed action nominal deriving from the base verb: (35) action nominalization of verb + causative denominal derivation ⇒ causative 3.3.3 Deexperiencer The deexperiencer prefix sɤ- derives stative verbs from intransitive verbs whose S is an experiencer or any non-agentive semantic role. The S of the deexperiencer verb corresponds to the stimulus. Examples include rga ‘like’ → sɤ-rga ‘be lovable’ or ŋgio ‘slip (of a human)’ → sɤ-ŋgio ‘be slippery (of the ground)’(Jacques 2012b). There are a few examples of a denominal prefix sɤ- expressing a property related to the base noun, such as -ndɤɣ ‘poison’ → sɤ-ndɤɣ ‘be poisonous’ or -mbrɯ ‘anger’ → sɤ-mbrɯ ‘be angry’. The semantics of the deexperiencer derivation is closely related to that of the verb sɤ-ndɤɣ ‘be poisonous’: the property of an object that has effects on surrounding people. Here again, the deexperiencer can be hypothesized to derive from the denominal derivation in sɤ- a possessed action nominal deriving from the base verb, as in (36). (36) action nominalization of verb + property denominal derivation ⇒ deexperiencer 3.3.4 Passive The passive a- is an agentless passive, which derives intransitive verbs whose S corresponds to the P of the base verb, as ata ‘be put on/in’ from ta ‘put’. The corresponding denominal prefix a- is used to derive a stative verb describing a shape related to the noun, or a visible / perceptible concrete 16 property, as in -ci ‘water’ → aci ‘be wet’, ʑɤwu ‘lame’ → aʑɤwu ‘be lame’ or scaʁa ‘magpie’ → ascaʁa ‘be white and black (like a magpie)’.6 The passive is mainly used in the text corpus with concrete action verbs (a-ta ‘be put on’, a-rku ‘be (put) in’, a-mphɯr ‘be wrapped’ etc), which are generally used (though not exclusively) with a resultative meaning, thus basically stative like the denominal in a-. Hence, as in the case of all preceding derivations, it is possible to hypothesize taht the passive originates from the reanalysis of the denominal derivation in a- of the action nominalization of a transitive verb, following the pathway indicated in 37. (37) action nominalization of transitive verb + stative denominal derivation ⇒ agentless resultative passive 3.3.5 Applicative The applicative nɯ(ɣ)– derives a transitive verb from an intransitive one; unlike in the causative derivation, the A of the applicative verb corresponds to the S of the intransitive one, and a P argument is added (Jacques 2013a). The P of applicative verbs refers to either the stimulus in the case of cognition verbs (mu ‘be afraid (intr)’ → nɯɣ-mu ‘fear (tr)’) or the the addressee (akhu ‘shout (intr)’ → nɯ-ɤkhu ‘shout at (tr)’). The corresponding denominal derivation nɯ(ɣ)- has many different meaning, but its most productive one is to create a transitive verb from a noun, especially when one has a pair with an intransitive verb in rɯ–. For instance, from a noun such as ftɕaka ‘manner’ one can derive the intransitive rɯftɕaka ‘make preparations’ and the transitive verb nɯftɕaka ‘prepare (vt)’. Supposing an action noun such as ‘fear’ from the verb mu ‘be afraid’, applying this nɯ(ɣ)- derivation would predictably yield a transitive verb with the meaning ‘be afraid of, fear’ of the applicative verb nɯɣmu. It is thus possible here again to suppose that the applicative derivation in Japhug came into being through the pathway in (38). (38) action nominalization of intransitive verb + transitive denominal derivation ⇒ applicative Although for the causative, applicative, passive and deexperiencer derivations, no common irregularities between action noun and derived verb have been brought to light up to now, the case for reanalysis of the denominal marker as a voice marker is strong, as they not only have compatible semantics and phonological shape, they also share identical allomorphs (nɯ-/nɯɣ-/nɤ-, sɯ-/sɯɣ-/sɤ- and a-/ɤ-, see Jacques 2013a, 2015b, Jacques & Chen 2007 for more details). 6 The last two examples are nouns borrowed from Tibetan, showing that this derivation is fully productive. 17 3.3.6 Reflexive The reflexive ʑɣɤ- (and its cognates in other Gyalrong languages) differs from all other derivations in that it does not derive from a denominal prefix. Two hypotheses have been proposed to account for its origin. Jacques (2010b) proposed that ʑɣɤ- from proto-Gyalrong *wjɐ- results from the incorporation of the third person full pronoun *wəjaŋ, (Japhug ɯʑo) with phonological reduction. Sun (2014a) argued that it originates from the fusion of the pronominal root *-jaŋ with the verb stem, to which the inverse prefix *wə- is added. These two hypotheses agree in any case that this prefix is partly derived from the bound pronominal root *-jaŋ ‘oneself’, and that its shape in protoGyalrong was *wəjaŋ, disagreement between the two hypotheses concerns the interpretation of the nature of the element *wə- in this form, since both the inverse marker and the third person singular possessive prefix have the same shape. 3.4 Incorporation Japhug has an incorporation-like construction in which noun-verb nominal compounds are turned into verbs by means of a denominal prefix (Jacques 2012c). For instance, from the noun cɯ ‘stone’ and the verb pʰɯt ‘pluck, take out’ one can derive an action nominal cɯpʰɯt ‘clearing the stones (from a field, before ploughing)’, which can in turn be made into an incorporating verb by denominal derivation ɣɯ-cɯpʰɯt ‘take out stones (out of the field)’. (39) (i) cɯ nɯ-pʰɯt-a stone pfv-take.out-1sg (ii) cɯ-pʰɯt nɯ-βzu-t-a stone-clearing pfv-do-pst-1sg (iii) nɯ-ɣɯ-cɯ-pʰɯt-a pfv-denominal-stone-take.out-1sg I cleared the stones (from the field). The construction (iii) has further become a full incorporating construction in the closely related Khroskyabs language, where the denominal prefix has in some cases disappeared due to phonological attrition (Lai 2013). Gyalrongic languages thus offer a third possible origin for incorporating constructions, after coalescence of noun and verb and backformation (Mithun 1984): reanalysis of denominal verbs derived from noun-verb nominal compounds. 18 3.5 TAME Tense-Aspect-Modality-Evidentiality in the Japhug verb is mainly marked by orientation prefixes and stem alternations. The diachronic origin of stem alternations is completely opaque, so that the present section focus on orientation prefixes. In addition, I discuss the progressive prefix asɯ-, for which a Japhuginternal etymology can be proposed. 3.5.1 Orientation prefixes With one exception (the non-past factual), all finite verbs forms in Japhug obligatorily take one and only one orientation prefix. As shown by Table (5) orientation prefixes encode seven different directions, and come in four distinct sets, here marked as A to D. Table 5: Orientation prefixes in Japhug Rgyalrong up down upstream downstream east west no direction perfective (A) imperfective (B) perfective 3→3’ (C) inferential (D) tɤpɯlɤtʰɯkɤnɯjɤ- tupjɯlucʰɯkuɲɯju- tapalatʰakanaja- topjɤlocʰɤkoɲɤjo- Finite verb forms are built by combining a specific orientation prefix with the appropriate verb stem, as indicated in Table 6. With the exception of motion verbs and concrete action verbs, which are compatible with all directions, most verbs have only one or two lexically determined orientation, which appears in the Imperfective, Past Perfective, Past Inferential, Irrealis and Imperative. Thus for instance the verb ndza ‘eat’ appears with the ‘upwards” orientation prefixes, as shown by the 3sg→3 Imperfective tu-ndze ‘He eats it’ (series B prefix, ndza → stem 3 ndze) or the imperative 2sg→3 tɤ-ndze ‘Drink it!’ (series A prefix). However, three TAM categories, namely Egophoric, Sensory and Past Imperfective require always the same orientation prefix (respectively ‘towards east’ (B) ku-, ‘towards west’ (B) ɲɯ- and ‘downwards’ (A, D) pɯ-/pjɤ-), regardless of the orientation lexically selected by the verb in question. For instance, the sensory form of ‘eat’ is ɲɯ-ndze sens-eat[III] ‘he/it eats it’ with the ‘towards west’ series B orientation prefix ɲɯ- instead of an ‘upward’ orientation prefix. 19 Table 6: Finite verb categories in Japhug Rgyalrong stem prefixes Non-past Factual Non-Past Imperfective Past Perfective Past Imperfective Past Inferential Perfective Past Inferential Imperfective Sensory Imperfective Egophoric Present Imperfective Irrealis Imperative fact ipfv pfv pst.ipfv ifr ifr.ipfv sens pres irr imp 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 or 3 or 3 no prefix B A or C pɯ- D or or or or 3 3 3 3 pjɤɲɯkua- + A A The pathway of grammaticalization downwards → past imperfective is relatively straightforward and has been the topic of a specific study which does not need to be repeated here (Lin 2011). Given he fact that the ‘downwards’ orientation prefix is used to build the past imperfective category in all Gyalrong languages, grammaticalization most probably took place at the proto-Gyalrong stage. 3.5.2 Egophoric and Sensory evidential prefixes For the remaining two categories, Sensory and Egophoric, note that in other Gyalrong languages, including Situ, the ‘towards east’ ko-, ‘towards west’ nəprefixes are etymologically related to Japhug ku- and ɲɯ- respectively, and that they also have the Egophoric and Sensory Evidential functions attested in Japhug (Lin 2002). These data data could seem to provide evidence for the pathways indicated in (40). (40) east → sensory evidential west → egophoric evidential Yet, the functional link between evidentiality and solar orientation system is not obvious, and it is by no means certain that the orientation system of proto-Gyalrong, when the Sensory and Egophoric markers were grammaticalized, indeed included an East/West solar-based dimension, or whether the prefixes ancestral to Japhug ɲɯ- and ku- expressed something different. It should be noted that the prefixes ɲɯ- and ku- in Japhug and their cognates in other Gyalrong languages have additional meanings than ‘towards west’ and ‘towards east’. In particular, Lín (1993: 228-9) argues that in Situ, the ‘towards west’ prefix nə- expresses in some cases ‘centrifuge’ or ‘towards outside’ directions (离心、向外扩散), while the ‘towards east’ prefix ko- expresses ‘centripete’ direction (向心). 20 There is some evidence that the same is true in Japhug too; for instance, in example (41) we see that the imperfective of the verb ‘to separate’ (in this particular context, ‘spread wings’) takes the prefix ɲɯ- ‘toward east’ (expressing thus motion away from oneself) while that of the verb ‘to put together, to gather’ (here ‘to fold wing’) takes ku- towards west’ (motion towards oneself). (41) ji-kɯ-nɯqambɯmbjom tɤ-kɯ-rɤŋgat nɯ conat-nmlz:S/A-fly pfv-nmlz:S/A-prepare dem kɯ-fse, ɯ-ʁar nɯ ɲɯ-qɤt nɤ inf:stat-be.like 3sg.poss-wing dem ipfv:west-separate lnk ku-wum, ɲɯ-qɤt nɤ ipfv:east-put.together ipfv:west-separate lnk ku-wum ŋu ipfv:east-put.together be:fact (When it tweets), it does as if it were about to fly, it spreads its wings and then folds them, spreads its wings and then folds them. (24-ZmbrWpGa, 121) It makes more sense that centripetal orientation, rather than ‘towards east’ direction, would be grammaticalized as an egophoric marker. In Japhug, the egophoric indicates that the speaker has an intimate knowledge of a state of affair due to his direct participation in the event, as in example (42). It is mainly restricted to first person forms in assertive sentences, though it it also compatible with third persons in the case of third person referents possessed by the first person (‘my son’, ‘my work’ etc). (42) <kuabao> ɯ-spa ci ku-taʁ-a bag 3sg.poss-material indef prs:egoph-weave-1sg ‘I am weaving (cloth to make) a bag.’ (conversation, 14.10) In interrogative sentences, due to the rule of anticipation (using the TAM category one expects the addressee with employ in his answer, see Tournadre & LaPolla 2014), Egophoric marking appears in second person forms, or in third person forms in case of referents possessed by a second person (see example 43 below). While no direct pathway of grammaticalization cislocative → egophoric has ever been reported, there are clear cases of cislocatives becoming 2/3→1 portmanteau person markers, in particular in hierarchical indexation systems (see Jacques & Antonov 2014). While the exact pivot construction which could allow reanalysis from centripetal/cislocative to egophoric is still unclear, it is valuable to explore in more detail this hypothesis. Accounting for the pathway centripete → sensory might be more difficult at first glance. However, it should be noted that the Sensory evidential is used in direct opposition to the Egophoric in most contexts. 21 In assertive sentences, it is very rarely used with a first person verb form (only if the speaker forgot something or lost consciousness at a certain stage) and is mainly restricted to second and third person forms. In interrogative sentences, it appears with first or third persons, very rarely in second). There is almost complete complementary distribution with the Egophoric. Sentences (43) and (44) illustrate the difference of use of the Egophoric and Sensory forms in present third person forms, the only context where the two TAM categories are commonly in contrast to each other. These questions expect answers in the Egophoric and Sensory forms respectively. Question (44) was asked when I phoned from my parents’ home (when I came for the holidays). The Sensory is used because I only seldom meet with my parents, and the expectation is that I had just realized whether or not they were well after having arrived at their place. Question (43) on the other hand, asked about my son, expects an answer in the Egophoric because since I live with him in the same house, I always know whether he is fine or not (I did not ‘discover’ whether he was fine at a certain point). No other TAM category could be appropriate in this context.7 (43) nɤ-tɕɯ ɯ-kú-pe? 2sg.poss-son qu-egoph-be.good ‘Is your son well?’ (conversation 2014.02) (44) nɤ-mu nɤ-wa ni ɯ-ɲɯ́ -pe-ndʑi? 2sg.poss-mother 2sg.poss-father du qu-sens-be.good-du ‘Are your parents well?’ (conversation 2014.12) The Egophoric and the Sensory are thus in near-complementary distribution, and in the few cases where both are possible with a verb in the same person form, the contrast is nearly always binary. The opposition between Egophoric (personally experienced knowledge) and Sensory (knowledge mediated through observation or second hand report) thus appears to have been grammaticalized as a metaphorical extension of that between motion towards vs away from the speaker. 3.5.3 Progressive The progressive asɯ- / ɤsɯ- / az- / ɤz- differs from most TAM markers in being disyllabic (at least some of its allomorphs) and by the fact that two verb prefixes (the inverse and the autobenefactive, see example 45 and Jacques 2015c) can be infixed within it, suggesting that this prefix should be etymologically analyzed as a combination of two elements. 7 For instance, the factual could only be used for state of affairs that are part of commonly accepted knowledge. 22 (45) tɕe pjɤ-ɣi tɕe qala kɯ lnk ifr:down-come lnk rabbit erg pjɤ-k-ɤ́<wɣ>z-nɤjo-ci tɕe, ifr.ipfv-evd<inv>-wait-evd lnk (The leopard) came down, and the rabbit was waiting for him there. (The smart rabbit.2014, 60) It can only be used with transitive verbs, and removes all markers of morphological transitivity (stem three alternation, past 1/3→3 -t suffix) on the verb forms, as in (46), where in the factual stem 3 ndɤm instead of stem 1 ndo would be expected. The verb remains however syntactically transitive, and the A still takes the ergative marker (as in example 45). (46) sɯjno ɯ-mdoʁ ʑo asɯ-ndo. grass 3sg.poss-colour emph prog-hold:fact It has the colour of grass. (25 rtchWRjW, 69) Jacques (under review(b)) proposes to account for these two features by assuming that asɯ- originates from the combination of the agentless passive a- (on which see section 3.3.4) with the causative sɯ- (section 3.3.2). First, the causative derivation was applied (the sɯ- element is closer to the verb stem). The causative turned the transitive base verb into a ditransitive one. Then, the passive turned it back to two-argument valency, suppressing the causer, and removing all morphological transitivity marking. In addition, as mentioned in section 3.3.4, the passive in Japhug has a stative overtone, which, applied to a dynamic transitive verb, became a progressive reading. The combination of passive and causative became common enough to change from a combination of derivations into an inflexional marker. This hypothesis does not account for all the data; in particular, it does not explain the presence of the ergative on the A: according to the model proposed here, the A of the base transitive verb, turned into a causee by the causative derivation, should be changed to an S by the passive one and would not be expected to take the ergative: the resulting verb form should have a zero-marked S corresponding to the A of the base verb, and a zeromarked adjunct, not indexable in the verb morphology, corresponding to the P of the base verb. It is possible that sentences such as (46) with zero-marked 3→3 form and non-overt A were the pivot allowing reinterpretation from a stative intransitive construction into a syntactically transitive construction. Suppose that we accept the historical hypothesis proposed above. At an earlier stage,8 in the progressive construction, the referent corresponding to the A of the 8 Cognates of the asɯ- prefix are only found in Tshobdun and Zbu, not in Situ; this is probably a Northern Gyalrong innovation; this earlier stage would correspond to the exclusive common ancestor of Japhug, Tshobdun and Zbu. 23 basic transitive construction was not marked with the ergative, and the one corresponding to the P of the basic transitive construction could not be indexed on the verb. A sentence such as (46), where the first referent is not overt (and thus the presence or absence of ergative not explicitely manifested), and the second referent is third person (zero-marked), could be reinterpreted as a syntactically transitive one by analogy with other transitive constructions, keeping the surface form but modifying the underlying analysis. 4 Complex constructions The present section focuses on a selection of complex constructions involving linking elements for which a straightforward etymology can be proposed. Very few constructions are discussed in this section; those borrowed from Tibetan (such as conditional in nɤ ‘if’), subordinate clauses with finite main verb and no overt subordinator (most complement clauses, some relative clauses, see Jacques 2016b) and subordinate clauses with a main verb in participial form are not treated here. 4.1 Alternative Japhug has a conjunction me ‘whether ... or’ repeated after each noun or phrase in the alternative correlative construction, as in example 47. (47) saɕɯ nɯnɯ ɯ-qa larch dem ɯ-jwaʁ me, ɯ-ru me, 3sg.poss-root whether 3sg.poss-trunk whether me nɯra tɯrgi cho naχtɕɯɣ 3sg.poss-leave whether dem:pl fir comit be.similar:fact Whether its root, its trunk or its leaves, the larch is identical to the fir. (08 saCW, 5) This conjunction is obviously grammaticalized from the negative existential copula me ‘not exist’ through an alternative concessive conditional ‘whether ... exists or’ involving originally the affirmative and negative existential verbs tu vs me as in 48 (48) tɤ-ʁa me tɕe, nɯ indef.poss-free.time not.exist:fact lnk dem pɯ-nɯ-tu pɯ-nɯ-me pst.ipfv-auto-not.exist pst.ipfv-auto-exist kɯ-khɯ nɯ kɯ-rga me. nmlz:S/A-be.possible dem nmlz:S/A-like not.exist:fact (Nobody gathers wild strawberries), because (we) don’t have time, it is fine whether or not (we) have it, nobody likes it. (11 paRzwamWntoR, 92) 24 In its grammaticalized form, me has lost all person and TAME marking. In 49, we see that the conjunction me does not take first or second person singular indexation when used with a pronoun, as would be expected if it still were a verb and the construction an alternative concessive conditional. (49) aʑo me, nɤʑo me, ɯʑo me, kɤsɯfse ɕe-j 1sg whether 2sg whether 3sg whether all go:fact-1pl ra have.to:fact Whether I, you or he, we all have to go. (elicited) 4.2 Adversative There are four different adversative constructions in Japhug whose meaning can all be translated as English ‘not only/ not just ... but also’, and appear to be semantically very close and interchangeable. All four constructions are recently grammaticalized and etymologically transparent. First, mɤra ma ‘not just, ...’ occurs after either noun phrases (example 50) or clauses. It is grammaticalized from the negative form of the verb ra ‘need, have to’ followed by the linker ma, a construction that still exists in the language, as in example (51). (50) nɤʑo mɤrama rɟɤlpu ɕɯŋarɯra 2sg not.just king ta-thu-nɯ ɕti kɯ each.better.than.the.other erg ri, mɯ-tɤ-nɤla-j pfv:3→3’-ask-pl be.assert:fact lnk neg-pfv-agree-1pl ɕti tɕe mɤ-jɤɣ be.assert:fact lnk neg-be.possible:fact ‘Not just you, many kings, each better than the other (came) to ask (for our daughter in marriage), but we did not agree, so it is not possible.’ (The fox, 72-73) (51) tɯ-nɯzdɯɣ-nɯ mɤ-ra ma a-βlu tu 2-worry.about:fact-pl neg-have.to lnk 1sg.poss-idea exist:fact ‘You don’t need to worry about that, I have an idea.’ (hist140505 liuhaohan zoubian tianxia, 217) Second, the linker ɯtɤjɯ ‘not only ...’, mainly used after finite verbs, as in (52), is originally a relator noun meaning ‘something added’, ‘some more ...’, as in (53). It can be compared to constructions such as English ‘in addition to being X, it is also Y’. (52) ɕɯ-mŋɤm ɯtɤjɯ ɲɯ-sɤzoŋzoŋ ʑo caus-avoir.mal:fact not.only sens-tingle 25 ŋu emph be:fact Not only does it (nettle) hurt, it also causes a tingling sensation. (hist140428 mtshalu, 6) (53) ki nɤ-ŋga ɯ-tɤjɯ a-pɯ-ŋu ma this 2sg.poss-clothes 3sg.poss-added irr-ipfv-be lnk tɯ-nɤndʐo 2-feel.cold:fact Have some more clothes, otherwise you will be cold. (Jacques 2015a) Third, the form mɤkɯjɤɣ kɯ ‘not only’ used after finite verbs (example 54) is the negative form S/A participle of the verb jɤɣ ‘be possible, be allowed’ followed by the ergative kɯ. Example (55) illustrate the same verb form in its non-grammaticalized use. (54) tɤ-mthɯm nɯra tu-ndze mɤkɯjɤɣ kɯ, indef.poss-meat dem:pl ipfv:eat[III] not.only ɯ-di ɲɯ-ɕɯmnɤm 3sg.poss-smell sens-cause.to.have.a.smell (The mouse) does not only eat meat, it also makes it stinky. (27spjaNkW, 198) (55) <baohu> kɯ-ra tɕe pjɯ́ -wɣ-sat protect nmlz:S/A-have.to lnk ipfv-inv-kill mɤ-kɯ-jɤɣ ŋu neg-nmlz:S/A-be.allowed be:fact It has to be protected and is not to be killed. (27-kikakCi, 88) Fourth, the linker ʁo alala ri ‘not only’, used after noun phrases as in 56, is the combination of the adversative marker ʁo (倒 dào), the adverb alala ‘of course’ and the locative ri. (56) tɕe nɯnɯra ʁo alala ri ɯʑo sɤz lnk dem:pl not.only nɯra kɯnɤ ku-ndɤm kɯ-xtɕi pɣa 3sg comp nmlz:S/A-be.small bird qhe tu-ndze dem:pl also ipfv-catch[III] lnk ipfv-eat[III] In addition to these, it also eats birds that are smaller than itself. (19-qandZGi, 58) 4.3 Purposive clauses There are three purposive constructions in Japhug, and their origin is transparent. First, purposive clauses can be build with a verb in participial form followed by the linker ɯ-spa as in (ex:Wspa). The form ɯ-spa is etymologically a noun meaning ‘matter’ (at an earlier stage the irregular oblique 26 participle of the verb pa ‘do’). This construction is one more example of the well-attested pathway matter → purposive (Heine & Kuteva 2002: 212). (57) paʁ nɯra ʁo lɯski, ɕa kɤ-ndza ɯ-spa pig dem:pl adv of.course meat nmlz:P-eat 3sg.poss-purposive ku-χsu-nɯ pjɤ-ŋu ipfv-raise-pl ifr.ipfv-be Second, the verb nɯmga ‘do (on purpose), (to have)’, either in a finite or infinitive form (as kɤ-nɯmga in example 58) can mark a purposive clause. (58) tɕe kɯpɤz nɯ mɯ-ɲɯ-kɤ-βzu ɯ-ŋgɯ ri pjɯ-nɯ-rku-j kɤ-nɯmga, iʑɤra, lnk type.of.bug dem neg-ipfv-inf-grow inf-do.on.purpose 1sg ji-mthɯm nɯra <binggui> tu-χtɯ-j nɯ 1sg.poss-meat dem:pl fridge ipfv-buy-1pl dem ɕti ma 3sg.poss-inside loc ipfv-auto-put.in-1pl be.assert:fact lnk maka ɯ-pɕi tú-wɣ-ɕɯɴqoʁ qhe, ŋotɕu at.all 3sg.poss-outside ipfv-inv-hang lnk where nɯ́ -wɣ-tɯ~ta ʑo kɯpɤz ɲɯ-βze ɲɯ-ɕti ipfv-inv-indefinite~put emph emph ipfv-grow sens-be.assert In order not to have kɯpɤz bugs, our meat, we bought a fridge and put it in there, as if one hangs it outside, bugs will grow wherever you put it. (28-kWpAz) Third, Core Gyalrong languages, including Japhug (Jacques 2014a) and Tshobdun (Sun 2012) have purposive converbs in sɤ-, mainly used in the negative form as in (59), which appear to be derived from the oblique participle sɤ- (on which see Jacques 2016b). (59) acɤβ nɯ kɯ ɯ-mɤ-sɤ-jmɯ~jmɯt,] [kɯ-lɤɣ nmlz:S/A-herd Askyabs dem erg 3sg-neg-purp:conv-forget ɯ-pʰɯŋgɯ nɯ tɕu rdɤstaʁ-pɯpɯ tɕʰɯrdu ci 3sg.poss-inside.clothes dem loc stone-little ɲɤ-rku, pebble indef evd-put.in The cowboy Askyabs put a little pebble inside his clothes so that he would not forget it. (The frog, 166) 4.4 Causal clauses Among the causal clauses in Japhug (Jacques 2014a), one presents a clear grammaticalization pathway: clausal clauses in núndʐa ‘for this reason’ as in (60). This linker is the fusion of the demontrative nɯ ‘that’ with the possessed noun ɯ-ndʐa ‘reason’, a word borrowed from Tibetan ɴdra. 27 (60) [tɕe ɯ-mtɯ ɣɤʑu] tɕe, tɕe núndʐa lnk 3sg.poss-crest sensory:exist lnk lnk for.this.reason qapɣɤmtɯmtɯ tu-ti-nɯ ɲɯ-ŋu hoopoe ipfv-say-pl testim-be It has a crest, and this is the reason why it is called ‘hoopoe’. (Hoopoe, 20) 4.5 Other constructions The verb me ‘not exist’ is used in addition in a construction expressing that an action is futile – that the result will be the same whether or not it takes place. As shown by example (61), in this construction the verb me ‘not exist’ follows two bare infinitives of the same verb, in affirmative and in negative forms, and me agrees with the P if the verb is transitive.9 (61) ndza mɤ-ndza me-a eat:bare.inf neg-eat:bare.inf not.exist-1sg (I am so lean that) whether you eat me or not, the result will be the same. 5 Degrammaticalization This overview of grammaticalziation would not be compelete without an account of attested cases of degrammaticalization in Japhug, which include a suffix becoming an independent word, and a relator noun of location (equivalent to a a postposition) becoming a common noun. 5.1 Suffix to clitic The locative postposition zɯ in Japhug is related to the allative suffix -s found in Situ (Lín 1993: 330). Yet, the phonetic correspondence of Japhug z to Situ s is anomalous: in word-initial position without cluster, Situ s- always corresponds to Japhug s- (Jacques 2004: 317-8). However, a sound change common to Japhug, Tshobdun and Zbu is the voicing of final *-s → -z.10 The Japhug form zɯ can be accounted for in the following way. After the regular sound change *-s → -z, the locative suffix -z was degrammaticalized 9 This construction is very rare and is not attested with intransitive verbs; according to some consultants, in the case of intransitive complement verbs there is not agreement on me. 10 Final -z is realized as voiced in these three languages except utterance-finally and when preceding a word beginning with an unvoiced obstruent, as was first recognized by Sun (2005) about Tshobdun. 28 as a an enclitic, and a postthetic vowel ɯ was added to it as in all case marking clitics (Ergative kɯ, Genitive ɣɯ). The opposite possibility, namely that the allative marker was an independent word or clitic in proto-Gyalrong and that it became phonologically fused with the preceding noun in Situ, cannot account for the presence of voicing in the Japhug form zɯ. Moreover, there is evidence that the protoGyalrong allative suffix reconstructed here as *-s is cognate to the -s element found in several case markers in Tibetan (on which see Hill 2012). 5.2 Relator noun of location to common noun The Japhug noun ɯ-thoʁ ‘the ground’ is highly anomalous in having an obligatory third person singular possessive suffix ɯ-. In addition, this word has no known cognates in other Gyalrongic languages, while it is a perfect match for a being a borrowing from a TIbetan word with the shape tʰog (compare the other borrowed noun thoʁ ‘thunder’ from Tibetan tʰog). To account for the etymology of this word, I propose the following scenario in four stages. First, Japhug borrowed the Tibetan relator noun tʰog(tu) ‘on’ as ɯ-tʰoʁ *‘on’ (not attested), adding a third person possessive prefix like all relator nouns (see section 2.7). This relator noun was in competition with the existing native equivalent ɯ-taʁ ‘on’.11 Second, it became restricted to the collocation *sɤtɕha ɯ-thoʁ zɯ ‘on the ground’ (not attested), with the native locative zɯ and the noun of Tibetan origin sɤtɕha ‘earth, ground, place’. Third, the collocation *sɤtɕha ɯ-thoʁ zɯ ‘on the ground’ became reduced as ɯ-thoʁ zɯ ‘on the ground’ (attested). Fourth, the noun ɯ-thoʁ ‘ground’ was created by backformation from the locative phrase ɯ-thoʁ zɯ ‘on the ground’. The fact that the locative postposition zɯ is always optional (section 2.7) undoubtedly made this step easier. Thus, Japhug attests an example of degrammaticalization from a relator noun meaning ‘on’ (with or without motion) to a common noun meaning ‘ground’. 6 Discussion 6.1 The verbal template Japhug and other Gyalrong languages have elaborate verbal templates, with more than ten prefixal slots (Jacques 2013b). It is possible to find complex 11 It is not surprising in Japhug to have several competing relator noun for the same functional slot. The dative ɯ-ɕki discussed in section 2.4 is itself in competition with another form ɯ-phe, probably borrowed from another Gyalrong variety. 29 verb forms with eight prefixes and an incorporated noun, such as 62. (62) a-mɤ-ɕ-tɤ-tɯ́ -wɣ-z-nɯ-snɯ-ɲaʁ irr-neg-transloc-pfv-2-inv-caus-denom-heart-black ra have.to:fact Don’t let them go to harm you! Some of these prefixes are of proto-Sino-Tibetan provenance (see DeLancey 2011, 2014, Jacques 2012a), but others are Gyalrong innovations, grammaticalized from either denominal prefixes (see section 6.2), nouns, pronouns, adverbs or verbs that can still be identified. The only verbal prefixes coming from verbs in Japhug are the associated motion prefixes (3.2). This grammaticalization is shared by all core Gyalrong languages (Japhug, Tshobdun, Zbu and Situ), but not shared by Khroskyabs and Stau, which have apparently never developped these prefixes (Lai 2013). The reflexive ʑɣɤ- is the only prefix of pronominal origin (3.3.6). Here again the grammaticalization is a common innovation of Core Gyalrong, while Khroskyabs has innvoted a slightly different reflexive prefix (Lai 2013: 156-7). While Japhug and all other Gyalrongic languages have incorporation, there are very few prefixes whose origin can be unambiguously traced to nouns. The orientation prefixes (section 3.5.1) can be either from locative nouns or locative adverbs. The date of the grammaticalization of these prefixes is a vexed matter, as similar systems are found in the region. Sun (1983) proposed the existence of a ‘Qiangic’ subgroup of Sino-Tibetan on the basis of the presence of these prefixes, but the fact that some varieties of Tibetan have developed orientation prefixes too (Sun 2007) shows that this typological feature is of little value for establishing the phylogeny. The orientation systems of Core Gyalrong languages show too many commonalities to be the result of independent grammaticalization, and which cannot be due to language contact. In particular, all Core Gyalrong languages except Zbu (which has a simplified orientation system, and probably lost many features) have developed a present egophoric marker from the orientation prefix meaning ‘toward east’, probably through grammaticalization of its use as a centripete motion marker (section 3.5.2). 6.2 Denominal derivations Denominal verbalizing derivations are involved in the pathways of grammaticalization of many nominal and verbal affixes in Japhug, in particular valency-changing prefixes (antipassive, causative etc, see section 3.3), incorporation (section 3.4) and also comitative adverbs (section 2.5). Grammaticalization pathways based on denominal derivation are in many ways comparable to pathways based on light verbs (as in the case of the An30 tipassive, cf Creissels 2012). The only real difference is in fact that the historical origin of denominal verbalizing prefixes in Japhug is unknown. It is conceivable that they originate from verbs too, but the grammaticalization took place in a past so remote that it may not be recoverable, as cognates of these prefixes exist in other branches of the Sino-Tibetan family. If they indeed originate from verbs, it is interesting that they are prefixes and not suffixes, in a language with strict verb-final word order (on which see Jacques 2013b). 7 Conclusion The study of grammaticalization in Gyalrong languages and Japhug in particular is a very rich topic, and the present paper is but a mere sketch of the most obvious phenomena observed in this language. While some of the grammaticalization pathways found in Japhug are quite common crosslinguistically (matter ⇒ purposive, go ⇒ cislocative/andative), other appear to be unique to Japhug or Gyalrong languages, for instance east ⇒ centripete ⇒ egophoric or together with ⇒ unexpectedness. References Antonov, Anton. 2007. Le rôle des suffixes en /+rV/ dans l’expression du lieu et de la direction en japonais et l’hypothèse de leur origine altaïque: INALCO dissertation. Arkhipov, Alexandre. 2009. Comitative as a cross-linguistically valid category. In Patience Epps & Alexandre Arkhipov (eds.), New Challenges in Typology: Transcending the Borders and Refining the Distinctions, 223– 246. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Creissels, Denis. 2012. The origin of antipassive markers in West Mande languages. In 45th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Stockholm. Daudey, Henriëtte. 2014. A grammar of Wadu Pumi: LaTrobe University dissertation. DeLancey, Scott. 2011. Notes on verb agreement prefixes in Tibeto-Burman. Himalayan Linguistics Journal 10.1. 1–29. DeLancey, Scott. 2014. Second person verb forms in Tibeto-Burman. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37:1. 3 – 33. Gong, Xun. 2014. Personal agreement system of Zbu rGyalrong (Ngyaltsu variety). Transactions of the Philological Society 112.1. 44–60. 31 Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heine, Bernd & Kyung-An Song. 2011. On the grammaticalization of personal pronouns. Journal of Linguistics 47.3. 587–630. Hill, Nathan W. 2012. Tibetan -las, -nas, and -bas. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale 41.1. 3–38. Jacques, Guillaume. 2004. Phonologie et morphologie du japhug (Rgyalrong): Université Paris VII - Denis Diderot dissertation. Jacques, Guillaume. 2010a. The inverse in Japhug Rgyalrong. Language and Linguistics 11.1. 127–157. Jacques, Guillaume. 2010b. The origin of the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African studies 73.2. 261–268. Jacques, Guillaume. 2012a. Agreement morphology: the case of Rgyalrongic and Kiranti. Language and Linguistics 13.1. 83–116. Jacques, Guillaume. 2012b. Argument demotion in Japhug Rgyalrong. In Katharina Haude & Gilles Authier (eds.), Ergativity, Valency and Voice, 199–226. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Jacques, Guillaume. 2012c. From denominal derivation to incorporation. Lingua 122.11. 1207–1231. Jacques, Guillaume. 2013a. Applicative and tropative derivations in Japhug Rgyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 36.2. 1–13. Jacques, Guillaume. 2013b. Harmonization and disharmonization of affix ordering and basic word order. Linguistic Typology 17.2. 187–217. Jacques, Guillaume. 2014a. Clause linking in Japhug Rgyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37.2. 263–327. Jacques, Guillaume. 2014b. Denominal affixes as sources of antipassive markers in Japhug Rgyalrong. Lingua 138. 1–22. Jacques, Guillaume. 2015a. Dictionnaire Japhug-Chinois-Français, version 1.0. Paris: Projet HimalCo. http://himalco.huma-num.fr/. Jacques, Guillaume. 2015b. The origin of the causative prefix in Rgyalrong languages and its implication for proto-Sino-Tibetan reconstruction. Folia Linguistica Historica 36(1). 165–198. Jacques, Guillaume. 2015c. The spontaneous-autobenefactive prefix in Japhug Rgyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto Burman Area 38(2). 271–291. 32 Jacques, Guillaume. 2016a. From ergative to comparee marker: multiple reanalyses and polyfunctionality. Diachronica 33(1). 1–30. Jacques, Guillaume. 2016b. Subjects, objects and relativization in Japhug. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 44(1). 1–28. Jacques, Guillaume. to appear. Generic person marking in Japhug and other Rgyalrong languages. In Joana Jansen & Spike Gildea (eds.), Diachrony of hierarchical systems, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Jacques, Guillaume. under review(a). The origin of comitative adverbs in Japhug, . Jacques, Guillaume. under review(b). The progressive prefix Japhug . Jacques, Guillaume & Anton Antonov. 2014. Direct / inverse systems. Language and Linguistics Compass 8/7. 301–318. Jacques, Guillaume & Zhen Chen. 2007. 茶堡话的不及物前缀及相关问题. Language and Linguistics 8.4. 883–912. Konnerth, Linda. 2014. Additive focus and additional functions in Karbi (Tibeto-Burman) =tā. In Florian Lionnet Christine Sheil Tammy Stark Vivian Wauters Kayla Carpenter, Oana David (ed.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 206–222. Konnerth, Linda. 2015. A new type of convergence at the deictic center: Second person and cislocative in Karbi (Tibeto-Burman). Studies in Language 39(1). 24–45. Lai, Yunfan. 2013. La morphologie affixale du lavrung wobzi. Université Paris III MA thesis. Lin, Youjing. 2002. A Dimension Missed: East and West in Situ rGyalrong Orientation Marking. Language and Linguistics 3.1. 27–42. Lin, Youjing. 2011. Perfective and imperfective from the same source: directional “down” in rGyalrong. Diachronica 28.1. 54–81. Lín, Xiàngróng. 1993. 嘉戎語研究 Jiāróngyǔ yánjiū (A study on the Rgyalrong language). 成都：四川民族出版社 Chéngdū: Sìchuān mínzú chūbǎnshè. (林向榮). Lín, Yòujīng. 2003. Tense and Aspect Morphology in the Zhuokeji rGyalrong Verb. Cahiers de Linguistique - Asie Orientale 32.2. 245–286. Michailovsky, Boyd, Martine Mazaudon, Alexis Michaud, Séverine Guillaume, Alexandre François & Evangelia Adamou. 2014. Documenting and researching endangered languages: the Pangloss Collection. Language Documentation and Conservation 8. 119–135. 33 Mithun, Marianne. 1984. The Evolution of Noun Incorporation. Language 60.4. 847–894. Stassen, Leon. 2000. AND-languages and WITH-languages. Linguistic Typology 4(1). 1–54. Stolz, Thomas, Cornelia Stroh & Aina Urdze. 2006. On Comitatives and Related Categories: A Typological Study With Special Focus on the Languages of Europe. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Sun, Hongkai. 1983. Liujiangliuyu de minzu yuyan jiqi xishu fenlei 六江流域的民族语言及其系属分类 (Minority languages of the Six River Valley and their genetic classification). 民族学报 Minzu xuebao 3. 99–273. Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2005. Jiarongyuzu yuyan de yin’gao: liangge ge’an yanjiu 嘉戎語組語言的音高：兩個個案研究 (On Pitch in the rGyalrongic Languages: Two Case Studies). Yuyan yanjiu 語言研究 25.1. 50–59. Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2007. Perfective stem renovation in Khalong Tibetan. In Roland Bielmeier & Felix Haller (eds.), Linguistics of the Himalayas and Beyond, 323–340. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2012. Complementation in Caodeng rGyalrong. Language and Linguistics 13.3. 471–498. Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2014a. Sino-Tibetan: Rgyalrong. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, 630–650. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2014b. Typology of Generic-Person Marking in Tshobdun Rgyalrong. In Richard VanNess Simmons & Newell Ann Van Auken (eds.), Studies in Chinese and Sino-Tibetan Linguistics: Dialect, Phonology, Transcription and Text, 225–248. Taipei, Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica. Sun, Jackson T.-S. & Youjing Lin. 2007. Constructional Variation in rGyalrong Relativization: How To Make a Choice? In Pre-Conference Proceedings of the International Workshop on Relative Clauses, 205–226. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica. Sun, Jackson T.-S. & Shidanluo. 2002. Caodeng Jiarongyu yu rentong dengdi xiangguan de yufa xianxiang 草登嘉戎語與「認同等第」相關的語法現象 (Empathy Hierarchy in Caodeng rGyalrong grammar). Language and Linguistics 3.1. 79–99. Tournadre, Nicolas & Randy LaPolla. 2014. Towards a new approach to evidentiality. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37.2. 240–262. 34