Author manuscript, published in "Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 73, 2 (2010) 261 -268"
The origin of the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages.i
Guillaume JACQUES, Université Paris Descartes, CRLAO
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
Abstract: In the Sino-Tibetan family, reflexivity is either not expressed on the
verb as in Chinese or Tibetan or expressed by means of a ‘middle’ marker as in
Dulong or Kiranti languages. Among the morphologically rich languages of this
family, only Rgyalrong languages have distinct and unambiguous reflexive and
reciprocal markers on the verb.
This paper shows that the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages has two
possible origins. It could come from a fusion of the third person singular marker and
the root meaning ‘self’ or alternatively come from the free third person pronoun. Both
hypotheses are compatible with our understanding of Rgyalrong historical phonology.
Keywords: Rgyalrong ; Japhug ; reflexive ; reciprocal ; Tangut ; Yukaghir ;
grammaticalization
1
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
In the Sino-Tibetan family, reflexive and reciprocal meanings are often not
expressed on the verb (Chinese, LB, Tibetan etc.). Some languages do have middle
markers which, alongside other functions, can express reflexivity (as in
Dulong/Rawang, see LaPolla 1996, 2000, LaPolla and Yang 2004), but among the
morphologically rich languages of this family, only Rgyalrongii languages have
distinct and unambiguous reflexive and reciprocal markers on the verb.
The aim of this paper is to examine the origin and the evolution of the reciprocal
and reflexive forms in Rgyalrong languages.
1. Reciprocal
Let us first examine the reciprocal form. As was described in Jacques and Chen
(2007:904), the Japhug reciprocal form is made by adding the intransitivizing prefix a(anti-causative) to the reduplicated stem of the transitive verb. Here are two pairs of
examples:
(1)
ndza
‘to eat’
a-ndzɯ-ndza
‘to eat each other’
(2)
nɯrɯt a
‘to be jealous of’
a-nɯrɯt ɯ-t a
‘to be jealous of one another’
It is a fully productive process, which can be applied to most transitive verbs. The
subject of a reciprocal verb must always be plural, and this form never has any
reflexive interpretation: a-ndzɯ-ndza cannot mean ‘to eat oneself’.
2. Reflexive
All known Rgyalrong languages have a cognate reflexive prefix: Japhug ɣɤ-, Situ
wjo- (Lin 1993:254-6) and Tshobdun (a.k.a. Caodeng) ɟɐ-iii. In these languages, it is
the last derivational prefix in the prefixal chain, and its isolation in the ST family, or
even Qiangic, betrays a late origin. In this section, we will first present the syntactic
functions of this prefix in Japhug, then investigate possible phonological
reconstructions for this prefix in proto-Rgyalrong, and finally propose an explanation
for the origin of this prefix and its grammaticalization process.
2.1 Syntactic functions
In Rgyalrong languages, the distinction between transitive and intransitive verbs is
a very rigorous one. In particular, transitive verbs have a special -a- prefix in the Aorist
when both argument are third person and no inverse prefix is presentiv. Therefore, it is
always straightforward to determine whether a verb is intransitive, transitive or labile.
Adding the reflexive prefix decreases the verb valency by one argument, and
transforms a transitive verb into an intransitive one. In the following example, the verb
‘to transform’ sɯ-ɤpa (itself the causative form of the verb ‘to become’) is transitive
so that its Aorist form takes the -a- transitive prefix, while the reflexive ɣɤ-sɯ-ɤpa
‘transform oneself into’ is intransitive, and bears no -a- prefix (*nɯ-a- ɣɤ-sɯ-ɤpa
would be ungrammatical).
(3)
ɯ-tɕɯ nɯ
ɕkɤrɯ
nɯ-a-sɯ-ɤpa
2
3SG-son DET
Muntjac
AOR-3>3-CAUS-become
ɯ o
xtɯt
nɯ- ɣɤ-sɯ-ɤpa
3SG
wild cat
AOR-REFL-CAUS-become
She changed her son into a muntjac, and herself into a wild cat (Lobzang 53)
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
When the original verb is the causative form of a transitive verb, and has therefore
three arguments, the reflexive indicates coreference between the agent of the causative
form and the patient of the original transitive verb:
(4)
mɯ-tu-kɤ- ɣɤ-sɯ-ndza
ftɕaka tu-βzu-nd i pjɤ-ŋu
NEG-IMPF-NMLZ:P-REFL-CAUS-eat
method IMPF-do-DU IMPFEVD-be
ma,
CONJ
They did their best not to be eaten (by the cat) (The mouse, the bird and the
cat 17)
This example litterally means ‘Theyi acted in such a way not to let (the cat) eat
themselvesi’.
When the original verb is a simple transitive, the result is a morphologically
intransitive verb. However, we find in some texts a few cases where the ergative
appears with the unique argument of a reflexive verb, which seems to indicate that the
verb preserves some degree of semantic transitivity:
(5)
tɕendɤre
lɯlu
nɯ
kɯ
ɯ-χcɤl
to- ɣɤ-rku
CONJ
cat
DET
ERG
3SG -middle EVD-REFL-pur_into
tɕe,
CONJ
Then the cat put himself in between (The mouse, the bird and the cat 62)
No affix similar to Japhug ɣɤ- in both form and meaning is to be found in any
other ST language, even within the Qiangic group. The rest of the paper will
investigate the origin of this prefix.
2.2 Phonological reconstruction
In Jacques (2004, 2008), no reconstruction in proto-Japhug was provided for the
initial cluster ɣ- found in the reflexive prefix ɣɤ-. The correspondence ɣ- :: wj- :: ɟis unknown elsewhere in the reconstructible Rgyalrongic vocabulary and we need to
posit a special reconstruction.
The Situ form wjo- could suggest to reconstruct here a group *wj- in protoRgyalrong, which would have simplified to ɟ- in Tshobdun and metathesized to *jw-,
then ɣ- in Japhug. However, we have already used a reconstruction *wj- in protoJaphug for the initial ɣ - in the word ɣ o ’bee’ (Jacques 2004:321). This
reconstruction was proposed to account for the Zbu cognate wujɐ. In order to be able
to explain both forms, we suggest two possibilities.
First, we could give two distinct reconstructions form Japhug ɣ - and ɣ-:
3
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
Proto-Japhug
Japhug
ɣ
*wə-jɣ*wjɣ*w
*j
Table 1: Origins of Japhug ɣ
Situ
Tshobdun
Zbu
wuj-
ɟwjwvvɟjj- and ɣ- in proto-Japhug.
According to this hypothesis, in Japhug, a metathesis *wj- → *jw- first occured.
Other examples of metatheses are found in Japhug, such as *kp- → βɣ- (Jacques 2008:
373). After this change, a new *wj- cluster was created by the fusion of a *upresyllable *u-j- → *wj-.
Alternatively, given the limited number of examples, one could argue that the
proto-Japhug cluster *wj- had a different evolution in affixes and in nouns.
In any case, reconstructing *wj- seems the best solution to account for this cluster.
Situ appears to have preserved the original pronunciation.
As for the rime of the prefix, we find the unusual correspondence ɤ :: o :: ɐ. It
could be interpreted in several ways. First, one could argue that the proto-Japhug form
had a central vowel *ɐ, as in Japhug and Tshobdun, and that it became o in Situ due to
the influence of the rounded preinitial -w-. Another possibility to consider is that the
central vowel appeared due to morphological vowel alternation, as attested in Japhug
(Jacques 2004: 196) and Tshobdun (Sun 1998: 109). Vowel alternations such as o → ɤ,
a → ɤ etc, are common in compound words, such as:
Basic form
ɣ o
Meaning
bee
Compound form
ɣ ɤ-ndza
‘bee food’
tɤmdzu
thorn
tɤmdzɤ-rgi
Meaning
Agastache
rugosusv
thistle
Alternation
o→ɤ
pea
o →a
‘thorn fir’
sto
broad bean
sta -pɯ
u→ɤ
‘little broad bean’
Table 2: Examples of vowel alternation in nominal morphology.
In Jacques (2004, 2008)’s reconstruction, it was shown that Situ o has two origins:
proto-Rgyalrong *aŋ and *o, which change to o and u respectively in Japhug. Given
the fact that both Japhug o and u change become ɤ through vowel alternation, two
reconstructions seem possible for the reflexive prefix in proto-Rgyalrong: either
*wjaŋ- or *wjo-.
2.3 Etymology
Of these two possible reconstructions, *wjaŋ- is the only one which allows us to
find an etymology for the reflexive prefix.
Two grammatical words can be reconstructed as *jaŋ in proto-Rgyalrong: one is
the reflexive pronoun (Japhug tɯ- o), the other is a sentence particle (Japhug o). The
reflexive *jaŋ is probably related to Tibetan rang; the correspondence j :: r is also
4
found in the word ‘bee’ considered above (proto-Rgyalrong *u-jaŋ , Tibetan sbrang).
Since no account of the function of the intensifier particle o has appeared in print
yet, it seems necessary to briefly describe how this particule is used. o appears mainly
in the following contexts:
A. In combination with an adverb of degree :
(6)
i o i- imkham tɕe,
pɣa wuma
o dɤn
We 1PL-country CONJ bird much INT NP:many
There are many birds in our country.
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
(7)
tɕe,
CONJ
a-wa
nɯ
pɯ-pɯ-ŋu
nɤ
phasɤ laŋ
1SG-father DET
RED-PASIMPF-be
CONJ Pha seng gling
zdɯɣthɯɣ
o a-pɯ-ŋu
nɤ
ɲɯ-sna
barely enough INT IRR-IMPF-be CONJ IMPF-good
As for my father, Phasengling is just acceptable (Gesar, 8)
B. in combination with a ideophone or a manner adverb
(8)
ɯ-rme
ɯ-pɕi
nɯ
taqaβ
ɯp ɯp o
3SG-hair
3SG-outside DET
needle straight INT
His hair was like straight needles. (Gesar 280)
(9)
nɯ
DET
to-nɯɬo ,
EVD:UP-go_out
C. An entire proposition expressing the manner:
ku-nɯmdar
nɤ
ɲɯ-nɯmdar
o kɤ-z-rɤtɕa
IMPF:EAST-leap CONJ IMPF:WEST-leap INT INF-CAUS-tread
mɯ-pjɤ-khɯ,
NEG-IMPFEVD-can
(The frog) was jumping left and right, and she could not tread him down (the
frog, 206)
D. A proposition expressing place or time:
(10)
a-rte
ci tu-βde-a
tɕe,
ŋotɕu
1SG-hat one IMPF:UP-throw-1SG CONJ where
pɯ-ari
nɯ
tɕu
o a-kɤ-tɯ-rɤ i
ŋu
AOR:DOWN-go[2]
DET
LOC
INT IRR-PERF-2-stay NP:be
(Padmasambhāva said) “I will throw this hat of mine upwards, and you will
live in the place where it fell down.” (Gesar, 30).
Although the particle o is very frequent, it is not compulsory in any of these
constructions. It is probably to be compared to the Tibetan conjunction yang / kyang,
usually translated as ‘also, even’. It is therefore unrelated to the reflexive, even though
they are homonymous in all Rgyalrong languages.
We will present here two hypotheses to explain the origin of the reflexive prefix.
2.3.1 Reflexive pronoun
The reflexive prefix could be derived from the reflexive pronoun, incorporated
5
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
into the verb and then grammaticalized as a reflexive marker. The *w- element in *wjaŋ- could be interpreted as the third person pronounvi. As we proposed above in 2.2,
the morpheme boundary between *w and *-jaŋ blocked the regular change *wj- →
*jw- in Japhug.
In other Qiangic languages such as Tangut, the cognate reflexive pronounvii is also
prefixed to the verb. It is already grammaticalized to a certain extent, as even if a
reflexive pronoun appears somewhere in the sentence, the pronoun 詮 jij1 must be
prefixed directly to the verb. It is therefore very common in texts for this character to
appear two times in the same sentence:
(11)
詮
頂
詮
砠
搜
計
jij
ljụ
jij
sja
kiẹj
kha
1.36
2.52
1.36
1.20
2.53
1.17
REFL body
REFL kill
want
in
As she wanted to kill herself (Jacques 2007:16, 4.2-4.3)
However, the exact grammaticalization path is not entirely clear, as the presence of
the third person pronominal element *w- has not received any explanation.
It is not uncommon for a pronominal marker to be generalized as a reflexive
marker. For instance, in Kolyma Yukaghir (Maslova to appear §5.4), the reflexive
prefix met- is derived from the first person singular pronoun, though it is used
whatever the person and number of the subject:
(12)
tudel met-juö-j
he
REFL-see-3SG:INTR
He is looking at himself.
A closely related language, Tundra Yukaghir, preserves the older pattern where the
reflexive verbs have a pronominal prefix coreferent with the subject. In Rgyalrong, the
third person singular, not the first person would have been generalized. However, it is
not obvious why both the third person pronoun and the reflexive pronoun would have
had to be incorporated. The reflexive pronoun alone could have fulfilled this function,
without any need for a second grammaticalization.
3.3.2 Full third person pronoun
This second hypothesis is not entirely different from the first one. Rather than
arguing that two subsequent grammaticalizations occurred (first the reflexive pronoun,
then the third person), we alternatively propose that the third person free pronoun
could have been incorporated.
In Rgyalrong, the free pronouns are generally composed of a pronominal prefix
and a root going back to *jaŋ (-jo in Situ, - o in Japhug, -ɟiʔ in Tshobdun). In Japhug
and Tshobdun (Sun 1998:113), all pronouns follow this structure except third person
dual and plural. In Situ only the third person pronoun wǝ-jo follows this structure, and
in Zbu the second person singular form nəjeʔ seems to be the only one with a reflex of
the *-jaŋ element.
6
Tshobdun
Situ
ɐ-ɟiʔ
ŋa
1Sg
nɐ-ɟiʔ
no
2Sg
o-ɟiʔ
wə-jo
3Sg
tsə-ɟə-niʔ
nd o
1Du Incl
tsə-ɟə
ŋə-nd e
1Du Excl
nd i- o
nd indzə-ɟə-niʔ
nd o
2Du
ɤ-ni
nd iɟɐ-niʔ
wə-jo-nd əs
3Du
ji- o
jijə-ɟə-rɐʔ
jo
1Pl Incl
jə-ɟə
ŋə-ɲe
1Pl Excl
nɯ- o
nɯnə-ɟə-rɐʔ
ɲo
2Pl
a-ra
nɯɟɐ-rɐʔ
wə-jo-ɲe
3Pl
Table 3: Personal pronouns in Rgyalrong languages.
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
Japhug
a- o
nɤ- o
ɯ- o
tɕi- o
anɤɯtɕi-
Zbu
ŋəʔ
nəjeʔ
apheʔ
tɕɐ-ɲi
nd ɐɲi
apheʔɲi
ŋgɐreʔ
ɲɐreʔ
aphereʔ
The third person dual and plural forms (Japhug ɤ-ni / a-ra, Tshobdun ɟɐ-niʔ and
ɟɐ-rɐʔ) are formed of the –ni and –ra dual and plural clitics suffixed to the same *jaŋ
stem. However, this stem underwent vowel alternation in both languages (see above,
Table 2).viii Besides, in Japhug, vowel harmony assimilated ɤ to a, due to the presence
of a in the second syllable in a-ra.
This pervasive *jaŋ element could well be the reflexive stem. In many languages,
including English, intensive pronouns are formed by combining personal pronouns
with reflexive (myself, himself etc). However, other languages form intensive
pronouns with an adverbial unrelated to the reflexive. In French, for instance, they are
formed by adding même ‘even, also, same’ to the strong pronoun (moi-même, luimême etc). Therefore, it would be equally possible to interpret the *jaŋ element in the
Rgyalrong pronouns as being cognate to the intensive particle o rather than to the
reflexive form.
Whatever the exact origin of the *jaŋ element, the alternative hypothesis we
propose to explain the origin of the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong would be the
following: the third person pronoun *wu-jaŋ would have been prefixed to the verb and
incorporated, becoming the reflexive marker in all Rgyalrongic languages, as the first
person pronoun in Kolyma Yukaghir.
A problem with this hypothesis is that it would imply that the grammaticalization
of the reflexive occured after the creation of the bimorphemic pronouns in Rgyalrong,
relatively late in the history of the Rgyalrong languages. In the prefixal chain, the
reflexive is the last derivational prefix, the furthest one from the verb root.
Nevertheless, it is still closer to the verb root than any flexionnal prefix. Unless an
externalization of inflection occurred (Haspelmath 1993), it is hard to explain how the
incorporated pronoun could have been inserted between the inflexional prefixes and
the verb stem.
4. Conclusion
In this paper, we have proposed two possible hypotheses to account for the origin
of the reflexive prefix in Rgyalrong languages. Its phonological reconstruction is
7
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
relatively straightforward, but its exact origin is ambiguous: it could be either the third
person pronoun singular or a reflexive pronoun. Further studies in the historical
morphology of other Qiangic languages may help to decide which hypothesis is most
probable.
The Rgyalrong reflexive prefix reconstructed in this article as *wjaŋ- perhaps
arose as a response to the loss of the Middle marker suffix found in Dulong/Rawang (ɕɯ/-ɕi), Kiranti and West Himalayish (discovered by LaPolla 1996).
Haspelmath Martin. 1993. The diachronic externalization of inflection. Linguistics
31.2: 279-309.
Jacques, Guillaume. 2004. Phonologie et morphologie du Japhug (rgyalrong), thèse
de doctorat, université Paris VII-Denis Diderot.
http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00138568/fr/
Jacques, Guillaume. 2007. Textes tangoutes I, Nouveau recueil sur l’amour parental et
la piété filiale, München: Lincom Europa.
Jacques, Guillaume. (向柏霖) 2008. Jiarongyu yanjiu. Beijing: Minzu chubanshe.
Jacques, Guillaume and Chen Zhen 2007. Chabaohua de bujiwu qianzhui ji xiangguan
wenti, Language and Linguistics 8.4, 883-917.
LaPolla, Randy 1996. Middle Marking in Tibeto-Burman. Proceedings of the Fourth
International Symposium on Languages and Linguistics: Pan-Asiatic Linguistics
(January 8-10, 1996), Volume 5: 1940-1954.
LaPolla, Randy 2000. Valency-changing derivations in Dulong/Rawang, in Changing
valency : Case studies in transitivity, ed. by R.W.M. Dixon and Alexandra Y.
Aikhenvald, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LaPolla, Randy J. and Yang Jiangling. 2004. Reflexive and Middle Marking in
Dulong-Rawang. Himalayan Linguistics Journal 2. 1-13.
Lin Youjing and Luoerwu 2003. Chabao jiarongyu dazanghua de quxiang qianzhui ji
dongci cigan bianhua, Minzu yuwen 4, 19-29.
Lin Xiangrong 1993. Jiarongyu yanjiu. Chengdu: Sichuan Minzu chubanshe.
Maslova Elena, Reciprocals in Yukaghir languages, To appear in Vladimir P.
Nedjalkov (Ed.), Typology of reciprocal constructions.
Nedjalkov Vladimir. 2004. Reciprocal constructions in Turkic languages, International
symposium on typology of the argument structure and grammatical relation in
languages spoken in Europe and Nord and Central Asia, LENCA-2, Kazan State
University, May 11-14.
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 1998. Nominal Morphology in Caodeng rGyalrong. Bulletin of the
Institute of History and Philology 69.1:103-149.
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2000. Parallelisms in the verb morphology of Sidaba rGyalrong and
Guanyinqiao in rGyalrongic. Language and Linguistics 1.1:161-190.
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2003. Caodeng rGyalrong. Sino-Tibetan Languages, ed. by Graham
Thurgood and Randy J. LaPolla. London:Routledge, pp. 490-502.
Sun, Jackson T.-S. 2006. Caodeng jiarongyu de guanxiju, Language and Linguistics,
7.4: 905-933.
Sun, Jackson T.-S. and Shidanluo 2002. Caodeng jiarongyu yu “rentong dengdi”
8
xiangguan de yufa xianxiang, Language and Linguistics, 3.1:79-99.
halshs-00531157, version 1 - 2 Nov 2010
i
I would like to thank Nathan Hill for his help correcting an earlier version of this paper, Randy
LaPolla for useful comments and Chen Zhen 陳珍 and her family for teaching me Japhug. The
following abbreviations are used: A (agent of transitive verb), AOR (aorist), CAUS (causative),
CONJ (conjunction), DEM (demonstrative), DET (determiner), DU (dual), ERG (ergative), EVD
(evidential), IMPF (imperfective), IMP (imperative), INF (infinitive), INT (intensifier), INTR
(intransitive), INV (inverse), IRR (irrealis), LB (Lolo-Burmese), LOC (locative), NEG
(negation), NMLZ (nominalization), NP (non past), P (patient of transitive verb),
PASIMMPF( past imperfective), PERF (perfective), PL (plural), RED (reduplication), REFL
(reflexive), S (only argument of intransitive verb), SG (singular), ST (Sino-Tibetan), 1 (first
person), 2 (second person),3 (third person), [2] stem 2.
ii There are four Rgyalrong languages: Japhug/Chabao 茶堡, Zbu/Ribu/Showu 日部/修梧,
Tshobdun/Caodeng 草登, Situ/Eastern Rgyalrong 四土, spoken in Rngaba (Aba 阿壩)
Autonomous County, Sichuan, China. For a general overview of Rgyalrong dialects, see Lin
(1993:411-625) and Sun (2000:162-169). Rgyalrong languages belong to the Qiangic branch of ST,
which also comprises the dead Tangut language (cited in example 11), Lavrung, Horpa/Shangzhai,
Pumi, Muya, Queyu, Qiang and perhaps a few other languages of western Sichuan such as Zhaba,
Guiqiong, Ersu, Namuyi and Shixing.
iii See for instance Sun 2006: tǝ-ko-ɟɐ-sǝ-rqɔ (Perf-Nmlz:A:Inv-Refl-Caus-hug2).
iv This prefix fuses with the Aorist directional prefix, see Lin and Luo (2003), Jacques and Chen
(2007).
v Better known under its Chinese name 藿香 huoxiang.
vi Cognate to the possessive prefix Japhug ɯ-, Situ wǝ-, Zbu vǝ-.
vii Tangut 詮 jij1 is a perfect cognate of Rgyalrong *jaŋ, as the -jij :: -aŋ correspondence is
regular.
viii The alternation was o → ɤ in Japhug and i → ɐ in Tshobdun.
9