ɧ/ in Amdo Tibetan: Descriptive and Historical Approaches

音声研究第 23 巻 76–82 頁 Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan 2019 年 Vol. 23, pp. 76–82, 2019

特集論文 /ɧ/ in Amdo Tibetan: Descriptive and Historical Approaches

, , Hiroyuki SUZUKI* **, Tsering Samdrup***, Niangwujia (Nyingbo-Gyal)* ****, Jixiancairang (Chaksham Tsering)* and Sonam Wangmo*

アムドチベット語における/ɧ/ ―記述言語学的・歴史言語学的アプローチ―

SUMMARY: ɧ is deﬁned as ‘simultaneous ʃ and x’ in IPA, and its existence in Swedish is widely attested. This article provides a detailed description of a [ɧ]-like sound attested in Amdo Tibetan (Tibetic, Tibeto-Burman) and deﬁnes the symbol ɧ in Amdo Tibetan as ‘simultaneous ɕ and x’. It then uses the synchronic and diachronic perspectives to present the necessity of using the symbol /ɧ/ in the phonology. The article further explores a sound correspondence between /ɧh/ and a Literary Tibetan sh simple initial and its typological aspect through a comparison with several Khams Tibetan dialects.

Key words: Tibeto-Burman, Amdo Tibetan, simultaneous articulation, fricative, prepalatal, velar

1. Introduction Malmberg (1969, p. 117) mentions that [ɧ] represents a ‘dorso-postpalatal fricative sound with strong lip- ɧ, defined as ‘simultaneous ʃ and x’, is an official rounding’, whereas Garlén (1988, pp. 71–72) describes phonetic symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet three groups of phonetic realisations of the sound [ɧ], (henceforth IPA). It is widely known that [ɧ] exists in and Elert (1970, p. 75) describes the existence of pho- Swedish phonology, as Lindblad (1980) and Ladefoged netic variants for [ɧ]. Hence, the IPA’s definition of [ɧ] and Maddieson (1996, pp. 171–172) have claimed, and is ambiguous, and it just covers a common phonetic has been used in Swedish phonetic alphabet prior to its realisation, namely, a voiceless fricative that is double- registration in the IPA (Malmberg 1969). Among the articulated around the postalveolar and velar positions. world’s languages, it has a typologically rare sound; This article will discuss the articulatory phonetic however, there have been several reports, such as those features of the sound that can be described with the of Suzuki (2004, 2008) and Janhunen (2016), that some symbol [ɧ] in two Amdo Tibetan dialects spoken in Tibetic languages (Tibeto-Burman; see Tournadre 2014 China’s Qinghai Province, namely Mabzhi (mGomang for the definition of ‘Tibetic’) have a similar sound to Town of Guinan County) and Rebgong (sMadpa Vil- the Swedish [ɧ], which occupies the independent posi- lage, Thorgya Town of Tongren County) and then use tion /ɧ/ within their consonant inventory. the synchronic and diachronic perspectives to present [ɧ] is described as a symbol that includes multiple ar- the necessity of using the symbol ɧ (principally used as ticulation approaches as mentioned in Lindblad (1980) a phoneme /ɧh/) in their phonology. The article shows and Ladefoged and Maddieson (1996, pp. 171–172). that a [ɧ] sound is pronounced as a single double- They mention that [ɧ] in Swedish varies phonetically articulated sound of the prepalatal and velar in principle and that it is sometimes described as a ‘highly rounded, and that it is distinct from the velar, uvular, and glottal labiodental, velar or velarized fricative’ and a ‘dorsove- fricative series. lar voiceless fricative’. As Lindblad (1980) and Lade- Using the viewpoint of the pandialectal phonetic foged and Maddieson (1996, p. 172) claim, the sound description suggested by Tournadre and Suzuki (forth- [ɧ] should be distinguished from a velar fricative [x]. coming)1), which is to be applied to all varieties of

* IKOS, University of Oslo（オスロ大学東方言語文化研究所） ** National Museum of Ethnology（国立民族学博物館） *** SOAS, University of London（ロンドン大学東洋アフリカ研究学院） ****Qinghai Nationalities University（青海民族大学）

— 76 — /ɧ/ in Amdo Tibetan

Tibetic languages, we also contrast the [ɧ] sound in ticulatory phonetic description of [ɧ] that is attested Amdo Tibetan with examples of [x], [ç], and the al- in Amdo Tibetan. Since the experimental approaches lophonic [x]-[ç] interchange attested in several dialects of articulatory phonetics, such as X-ray tracing and of Khams Tibetan, which have a close language contact palatography, are difficult to carry out in the techni- with Amdo Tibetan; thus, the use of the symbol [ɧ] in cal sense, we provide a description obtained from the a phonetic description is significant when we consider visual observations and reflections of native speakers. dialectological studies focusing on Tibetic languages. The other is a phonological description, with which we For instance, the differences across sound symbols claim that an aspirated [ɧh] is considered as a phoneme directly influence a dialectometrical analysis such as /ɧh/ that forms a contrast with a velar fricative /xh/ and the string edit distance calculation used in Gabmap glottal fricative /h/ and should indicate that /ɧh/ appears (Nerbonne et al. 2011; see also Powell and Suzuki 2017 before all the vowels. for an application to Tibetic languages). In this regard, dialectological, historical-comparative perspectives are 2.1 Articulatory Phonetic Description also crucial, as these enable us to principally consider From an articulatory phonetic point of view, [ɧ] the sound correspondence between an oral form and should be defined as a sound that is simultaneously Literary Tibetan (henceforth LT2)), as pointed out by multi-articulated. According to empirical observa- many descriptive works, such as those of Häsler (1999) tions of the multiple instances of pronunciation in and Haller (2004). It is noteworthy that almost all the several Amdo Tibetan dialects, a principal articulatory sounds regarding [ɧ] correspond to a LT simplex sh in feature that is represented as [ɧ] in Amdo Tibetan is a Amdo Tibetan. simultaneous articulation in the prepalatal and velar When we consider a LT form as a pivot, we can positions. We have also noticed that the main source of access information about how previous descriptive the friction tends to be located between the dorsal area linguistic works on Amdo Tibetan have dealt with the of the tongue and the velum (or pre-velum) and that [ɧ] sound. However, we find that there is no consensus it is accompanied by the turbulence of air flow at the regarding the proper way to describe the dorsal sound prepalatal position with the tongue tip kept downwards, corresponding to a LT simplex sh attested in Amdo i.e., producing a sound transcribed as [ɕ͡x]. This sound Tibetan when we refer to Haller (2004), Suzuki (2004), is always regarded as a single sound in the varieties that Geng et al. (2007), Ebihara (2010), Wang (2012), and we have examined. Janhunen (2016). They describe the various varieties of It should be noted that the exact articulatory posi- the Kokonor group (Tournadre and Suzuki forthcom- tions vary in different varieties of Amdo Tibetan; in ing) or the circum-Kokonor group (Geng et al. 2007). other words, there are dialectal differences. Additional- Only Suzuki (2004) and Janhunen (2016) use the sym- ly, we also observe that a speaker has conditional allo- bol [ɧ]; however, even the works employing it do not phones. We aim to examine these differences carefully, provide a detailed articulatory phonetic description that and we will provide the relevant details in 2.2. The one can use to determine any similarity to the sound symbol [ɧ] principally represents such sounds as [ɕ͡x], in Swedish. Therefore, we need to verify the phonetic [ɕç͡x]3), and [ɕ͡χ]. This fact means that [ɧ] includes vari- characteristics of this sound. ous articulatory manners like those attested in Swedish. This feature is also one of the reasons why we propose 2. Descriptive Approach the use of the symbol [ɧ] for the specific sound attested in Amdo Tibetan. However, unlike Swedish, Amdo Ti- In this section, we will describe two Amdo Tibetan betan lacks the feature of labialisation in any conditions dialects: Mabzhi and Rebgong (sMadpa Village). They of the vowels that follow the [ɧ] sound (see 2.2). represent the different dialect groups of Amdo: Mabzhi As far as our data are concerned, there are no excep- is a dialect that is classified as a pastoralist innovative tions to the rule that the [ɧ] sound in Amdo Tibetan is dialect (Cham-tshang Padma lHun-grub 2009) or as a articulated from a single position such as the uvular [χ], Kokonor group dialect (Tournadre and Suzuki forth- velar [x], palatal [ç], and prepalatal [ɕ]. Unlike Swed- coming); Rebgong is classified as an agro-pastoralist ish, [ɧ] in Amdo Tibetan does not include the postalve- dialect (Cham-tshang Padma lHun-grub 2009) or as a olar [ʃ], and it rarely appears in Amdo Tibetan or even Labrang-Rebgong group dialect (Tournadre and Suzuki in Tibetic languages. The difference between [ʃ] and [ɕ] forthcoming). can be produced by changing the position of the tongue We present two descriptions below. One is an ar- (tongue tip upwards or downwards) rather than the

— 77 — 特集「チベット・ビルマ系諸言語の音声と音韻」●●●●●論文種別（Type）●●●●● position of the passive articulator (postalveolar or pre- Table 1 Combinations of /ɧh/ and vowels in Mabzhi palatal). See Zhu (2010), Suzuki (2016, pp. 103–104) open syllables. and Zhang et al. (2018) for related discussions. Word forms LT Meaning To sum up, we interpret [ɧ] in Amdo Tibetan to be h a sound generated by a simultaneous pre-dorsal and /ɧ i/ shes ‘know’ h w 4 post-dorsal articulation; its exact articulatory position /ɧ e ʑa/ shes bya ‘ritualist’ /ɧha/ sha ‘meat’ and manner vary, as in Swedish. The sound [ɧ] in Amdo /ɧho/ sho ‘dice’, ‘(interjection to make a Tibetan can therefore be described as ‘simultaneous ɕ dog attack)’ and x’. /kha ɧhɷ/ kha sho ‘cheiloschisis’ Another crucial notice is that, in many Amdo Tibetan /ɧhʋ/ shul ‘trace’ dialects, [ɧ] is aspirated in many cases as [ɧh]. Unaspi- /ɧhə/ shi ‘die, be dead’ rated counterparts are rarely found in Amdo Tibetan but existent in Sharkhog Tibetan (see Suzuki 2008), and no voiced counterparts have been recorded so far. There- Table 2 Combinations of /ɧh/ and vowels in Mabzhi fore, it is sufficient to define a single symbol [ɧ] as well closed syllables. as its aspirated counterpart [ɧh]. Word forms LT Meaning 2.2 Phonological Description /ɧher/ — ‘specific oath’ The phonological position of the [ɧ] sound in Amdo /ɧhar/ shar ‘east’ h Tibetan should be examined through minimal pairs. We /ɧ or/ shor ‘release (noncontrollable)’ h frequently encounter an aspirated counterpart, [ɧh], in /ɧ ər/ shur ‘ravine’ Amdo Tibetan; hence, we will discuss the sound [ɧh], which will be treated as a phoneme /ɧh/, in two dialects, Mabzhi and Rebgong. We demonstrate below that the (2). We will further describe cases involving other sound [ɧh] forms a contrast with the mono-articulated vowels below. As Tables 1 and 2 show, [ɧh] can appear sounds of velars, uvulars, and glottals; in other words, before the seven contrastive vowels /i, e, a, o, ɷ, ʋ, ə/ [ɧh] can be analysed as an independent phoneme, /ɧh/. (see Tsering Samdrup and Suzuki [forthcoming] for the Following this description, combinations of /ɧh/ and sound system of Mabzhi Tibetan). vowels are provided. In order to clarify the multi-artic- Note that some kinds of compounds and morpholog- ulated situation for /ɧh/, a combination of approximate ical processes trigger a phonological alternation from / mono-articulated sounds, such as [ɕ͡xh] and [ɕç͡xh], is ɧh/ to /ɕh/. For example, when /ɧhi/ ‘know’ (see Table 1) provided in the square brackets. is prefixed with a negative marker /mə-/, some speakers 2.2.1 Mabzhi Tibetan pronounce it not as [mə ɧhi] but as [mə ɕhi]. In Mabzhi Tibetan, /ɧh/ can be distinctive from a 2.2.2 Rebgong Tibetan prepalatal (/ɕ/), velars (/xh/ and /x/), and the glottal /h/, In Rebgong Tibetan (sMadpa dialect), /ɧh/ can be e.g.: distinctive from the prepalatal (/ɕ/), velar ([ɣ]＜/k/), (1) uvular (/χh/), and the glottal /h/, e.g.: /ɧha ma/ [ɕ͡xha ma] ‘placenta’ (3) /ha ma/ ‘parents’ /ɧha/ [ɕç͡xha] ‘meat’ /ʔa xha ma/ ‘bad’ /ʔa χha ma/ ‘bad’ /wɕa ma/ ‘female bird’ /ha ma/ ‘parents’ /ɕa/ ‘bird, hat’ (2) /chə ka/ [chə ɣa] ‘Khrika (toponym)’ /ɧhəχ/ [ɕç͡xhəχ] ‘antiphonal singing’ /həχ/ ‘pig’ (4) /hɕəχ/ ‘tear up’ /ɧho/ [ɕ͡χho] ‘dice’ /ho/ ‘male’ As described above, /ɧh/ is pronounced using at least /ɕo/ ‘yoghurt’ two articulatory positions and forms a phonological contrast with the mono-articulated prepalatal, velar, and glottal fricatives before the vowels /a/ (1) and /ə/

— 78 — /ɧ/ in Amdo Tibetan

Table 3 Combinations of /ɧh/ and vowels in Rebgong 3. Historical Approach (sMadpa).

Word forms LT Meaning This section uses two points of view to discusses the position of /ɧh/ within the sound system of Tibetic /ɧhi/ shes ‘know’ languages. One approach involves a discussion regard- h /ɧ el/ shel ‘glass’ ing a systematic sound correspondence between the /ɧha/ sha ‘meat’ h LT sh-series and Amdo Tibetan, which can clarify the /ɧ o/ sho ‘dice’ h /ɧhu/ shul ‘trace’ positioning of /ɧ / in the historical phonology of Amdo /ɧhə/ shi ‘die, be dead’ Tibetan. The other is a dialectological approach in which we compare the Amdo /ɧh/ with relevant sounds in the Khams Tibetan varieties corresponding to the LT (5) sh-series. /ɧhər/ [ɕç͡xhər] ‘ravine’ /hər və/ ‘dagger’ 3.1 Systematic Sound Correspondence in Amdo /ɕər/ ‘cut, injure’ Tibetan All the words corresponding to the LT sh initial do As described above, /ɧh/ is pronounced using at least not have a /ɧh/ initial. We will describe the condition two articulatory positions and forms a phonological under which /ɧh/ appears in Mabzhi Tibetan, which contrast with the mono-articulated prepalatal, velar, demonstrates the most complicated phonology among uvular, and glottal fricatives before the vowels /a/ (3), the dialects mentioned in the article. /o/ (4), and /ə/ (5). We will further describe cases in- As mentioned earlier, the phoneme /ɧh/ in Amdo Ti- volving other vowels below. As Table 3 shows, [ɧh] can betan corresponds to the LT sh initial. However, strictly appear before the six contrastive vowels /i, e, a, o, u, ə/. speaking, /ɧh/ only appears in cases of the LT sh sim- Note that some kinds of compounds and morpho- plex initial, not complex initials such as gsh and bsh, as logical processes trigger a phonological alternation in (6), which shows examples of Mabzhi Tibetan: from /ɧh/ to /χh/. For example, when /ɧha/ ‘meat’ (see (6) Table 3) follows the word /χhəχ/ ‘pig (year)’ and forms /ɧha/ ‘meat’ sha a compound for ‘pork’, /ɧh/ is no longer pronounced /hɕaχ/ ‘pass away (honorific)’ gshegs as a multi-articulated [ɧh]; instead, it is pronounced as /wɕa/ ‘slaughter’ bsha’ a mono-articulated uvular [χh], and the word form is thus described as /χhəχ χha/. This phenomenon can be Parallel cases can be attested with examples of other described as a kind of simplification of phonetic conti- vowels. Hence, we can formulate that the sound corre- nuity, which is influenced by the first syllable’s uvular spondence between /ɧh/ and LT sh is restricted to cases final. However, since /ɧh/ and /χh/ are both contrastive, where LT does not have a preinitial. This implies that we cannot interpret that /ɧh/ has a conditional allophone the sound /ɧh/ is derived from *ɕ under the condition [χh]. that the initial is simplex. See sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med 2.2.3 Summary and sKal-bzang dByang-can (2004) for the sound Both Mabzhi and Rebgong possess a double or system represented in LT. Moreover, LT zh, the voiced multi-articulated fricative that can be described with counterpart of LT sh, always corresponds to /ɕ/ for sim- [ɧh], and this sound forms a phonological contrast with plexes and /ʑ/ for complexes and when it is in a word- the mono-articulated prepalatal, velar, uvular, and/or medial position. This fact is crucial to the discussion in glottal fricatives. Therefore, it is appropriate to analyse 3.2. This condition is almost true in Rebgong Tibetan. the sound [ɧh] as a phoneme /ɧh/. There are certainly exceptions; for example, /ɧhi/ ‘do Dialectal differences within Amdo Tibetan are at- (imperative)’ corresponds to LT byos, and /ɧhe/ ‘open tested in phonetic realisation as well as compounds. /ɧh/ (imperative)’ corresponds to LT phye. An LT initial by can be pronounced in a slightly different way, e.g. [ɕ͡xh] generally corresponds to /wɕ/ in Mabzhi Tibetan, as in and [ɕç͡xh]. As for compounds, each variety has its own /wɕa/ ‘bird’ bya and /wɕə rə/ ‘coral’ byu ru. In Rebgong sound change pattern. Tibetan (sMadpa), there are some exceptions where LT sh does not correspond to /ɧh/ but to other sounds, for example, /ɕut/ ‘speak (imperative)’ (LT shod) and /χhoχ/ ‘come (imperative)’ (LT shog). Such exceptions

— 79 — 特集「チベット・ビルマ系諸言語の音声と音韻」●●●●●論文種別（Type）●●●●● vary in terms of dialect even within Rebgong. /xo/ [xo] ‘yoghurt’ zho From a historical viewpoint, /ɧh/ is related to prepalatal sounds based on the relationship between LT As shown above, the Lithang dialect has a parallel sh and zh, which is attested in other Tibetic languages, sound correspondence between LT sh and zh. where both correspond to the same articulatory po- The case of the Chamdo dialect (Northern Route/ sition, as well as the sound correspondence of LT Zalmogang Khams) is slightly different from the preinitial＋sh with a prepalatal. However, as described Lithang dialect. The palatal series (/çh, ç/) corresponds in 2.1, the velar feature of /ɧh/ is more prominent in its to LT sh and zh initials as phonemes. The pronunciation articulatory gesture and production of friction than the of the palatal fricative series is articulated either at the prepalatal counterpart. The systematic approach to the palatal or at a broader area located between the pre- sound correspondence suggests that a sound change palatal and palatal areas. The range of the articulatory occurred from /ɕh/ to /ɧh/ through strong velarisation. position of the prepalatal-palatal area is continuous, and the gesture of the tongue does not always show a 3.2 Contrastive Perspective simultaneous articulation. In several dialects of Khams Tibetan, we can find (9) [çh, ç, ɕ͡çh, ç] various palatal and velar sounds such as [x], [xj], and /çha/ [çha] ‘meat’ sha [ç], and sometimes even [ɧ]. However, many cases of /çho/ [çho] ‘dice’ sho Khams Tibetan differ from Amdo regarding the exis- /çhɛː/ [ɕ͡çhɛː] ‘east’ shar tence of allophones. Khams and Amdo are in contact /çhə/ [çhə] ‘die, be dead’ shi in several places in the traditional Khams area, which /hçɛʔ/ [hçɛʔ] ‘talk’ bshad is located in Kandze Prefecture of Sichuan Province. /çĩ/ [çĩ] ‘field’ zhing Despite mutual contact, the sounds attested in Khams /ço/ [ɕ͡ço] ‘yoghurt’ zho and Amdo still maintain their original difference in phonetic and phonological aspects, respectively, as In the varieties of Khams Tibetan from areas neigh- demonstrated by Suzuki and Sonam Wangmo (2015) bouring the Amdo Tibetan-speaking area, another case and Suzuki (2018). is also attested: the prepalatal series (/ɕh, ɕ/) correspond We will first examine a case of Khams and Amdo to the LT sh initial as phonemes. This is the case in spoken in Lithang County. Speakers of each language the Lhagang dialect. However, the dialects from areas are in contact with each other in the central area of the surrounding the Lhagang dialect, i.e. those of Amdo county. In the Khams Tibetan spoken in the county seat Tibetan, do not have a [ɧh] sound and even a phoneme, of Lithang, on the one hand, the velar series (/xh, x/), in /ɧh/. Examples from Shingnyag Tibetan (see also Suzu- the form of phonemes, corresponds to the LT sh initial, ki and Sonam Wangmo 2016) are provided as follows. with conditional allophones of the palatal series ([çh, (10) ç]). On the other hand, Amdo Tibetan spoken by the /ɕha/ [ɕha] ‘meat’ sha pastoralists living around the county seat has only /ɧh/, /ɕho/ [ɕho] ‘dice’ sho which has a stable phonetic realisation in the form of a /ɕhĩ/ [ɕhĩ] ‘firewood’ shing sound that is ‘simultaneous ɕ and x’, as shown in Sec- /ɕhe/ [ɕhe] ‘know’ shes tion 2. We also display the conditional allophones of /xh, x/ in the Lithang dialect (Southern Route Khams; Compared with the cases (7)–(10), the phoneme /ɧh/ see Suzuki 2018). The tonal marking is removed from always has a nature of simultaneous multi-articulation, the data for the sake of simplicity. which is different from similar sounds that are de- (7) [çh, ç] before the vowels /i, e/, i.e. front narrow scribed as palatals [ç] or velars [x]. The use of the vowels symbol /ɧh/ as a phoneme will make a comparative, /xhĩ/ [çhĩ] ‘firewood’ shing contrastive analysis more significant than other sub- /xheː/ [çheː] ‘know’ shes stitutes such as /çh/ or /xh/. In addition, the emergence /xĩ/ [çĩ] ‘field’ zhing of /ɧh/ is independent from the language environment; rather, there is no interaction between the varieties with (8) [xh, x] before all the vowels but those above /ɧh/ and those without it. /xha/ [xha] ‘meat’ sha /xho/ [xho] ‘dice’ sho /xhə/ [xhə] ‘die, be dead’ shi

— 80 — /ɧ/ in Amdo Tibetan

4. Conclusion Author Contributions

This article discussed the [ɧ] sound attested in Amdo First author: Article planning and whole pho- Tibetan and defined it as ‘simultaneous ɕ and x’ as an netic transcription; Second author: Data contribution essential articulatory gesture. It further explored a pho- (Mabzhi Tibetan) and analysis for 2.1, 2.2.1, and 3.1 as nological function of /ɧh/, demonstrating phonological well as data collection for 3.2; Third and fourth authors: contrasts across /ɧh/, /xh/, and /h/. In addition, it used Data contribution (sMadpa Tibetan) and analysis for a historical viewpoint to discuss the difference in the 2.1, 2.2.2, and 3.1; Fifth author: Data collection and phonetic reality of the /x/ attested in Khams Tibetan analysis for 3.2. All authors participated in the writing and confirmed the phonetic discrepancy between /ɧh/ process and agreed on the final version. and /xh/. h The necessity of /ɧ / as a phonological description References for diachronic and dialectological study is examined under the ‘pandialectal phonetic description’ concept Cham-tshang Padma lHun-grub (2009) A mdo’i yul skad kyi sgra gdangs la dpyad pa [Study of the sound of Amdo proposed by Tournadre and Suzuki (forthcoming). dialect]. Zi ling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang. The pandialectal phonetic description is needed from a de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, René (1956) Oracles and demons of comparative linguistic perspective in order to keep the Tibet: the cult and iconography of the Tibetan protective differences among various varieties minimal. If we dis- deities. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton. cuss a case of sound change, phonetic symbols—even Ebihara, Shiho (2010) Amudotibettogo no hatuon to kaiwa in a given dialect’s phonology—should uniformly rep- (A mdo’i kha skad) [Pronunciation and conversa- resent a typical sound; for instance, /x/ should always tion of Amdo Tibetan]. Fuchu: Research Institute for Language and Cultures of Asia and Africa. Online: be velar or something close to velar voiceless fricative http://www.aa.tufs.ac.jp/documents/training/ilc/ in all the varieties and should not, instead, represent [ɧ] textbooks/2010amdo-tibetan1.pdf in some dialects. Therefore, scholars are encouraged to Elert, Claes-Christian (1970) Ljud och ord i svenskan. Stock- use [ɧ] for related sounds in Amdo Tibetan or Tibetic holm: Almqvist & Wiksell. languages. Garlén, Claes (1988) Svenskans fonologi. Lund: Studentlit- teratur. Geng, Xianzong, Junying Li and lHun-grub rDo-rje (2007) Acknowledgements Anduo Zangyu Kouyu Cidian (Zang-han-ying duizhao) [Dictionary of Amdo spoken Tibetan (Tibetan-Chinese- This study was funded by two Grants-in-Aid of the English)]. Lanzhou: Gansu Minzu Chubanshe. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science: ‘Interna- Haller, Felix (2004) Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen: tional Field Survey of Tibeto-Burman Link Languages’ Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomaden- (headed by Yasuhiko Nagano; No. 16H02722) and dialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: VGH Wissenschafts- ‘Investigation of Undescribed Languages in the Eastern verlag. Tibetosphere and their Geolinguistic Research’ (headed Häsler, Katrin Louise (1999) A Grammar of the Tibetan Dege by Hiroyuki Suzuki; No. 17H04774). (Sde dge) Dialect. Zürich: Selbstverlag. Janhunen, Juha (2016) “Describing and transcribing the pho- nologies of the Amdo Sprachbund.” In Gerald Roche, Notes Keith Dede, Fernanda Pirie and Benedict Copps (eds.) 1) Pandialectal phonetic description is an idea to em- Centering the local: A Festschrift for Dr. Charles Kevin Stuart on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, 122–137. ploy a single platform of the common phonetic symbols Xining: Plateau Publications. for any Tibetic languages. See also Suzuki (2016). Online: http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/ 2) We follow the Romanised transliteration of Tibetan journals/ahp/pdf/AHP_37.pdf provided by de Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1956). Ladefoged, Peter and Ian Maddieson (1996) The sounds of 3) In this article, the description [ɕç͡x] denotes a single the World’s languages. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. triple-articulated sound. Lindblad, Per (1980) Svenskans sje- och tje-ljud i ett allmän- 4) The word shes bya designates ‘knowledge’ in LT but fonetiskt perspektiv. Doktorgradavhandlung, Lunds Uni- ‘ritualist’ in Mabzhi Tibetan. versitet. Malmberg, Bertil (1969) Lärobok i fonetik. Lund: Gleerups. Nerbonne, John, Rinke Colen, Charlotte Gooskens, Peter Kleiweg and Therese Leinonen (2011) “Gabmap. A web application for dialectology.” Dialectologia Special Is-

— 81 — 特集「チベット・ビルマ系諸言語の音声と音韻」●●●●●論文種別（Type）●●●●●

sue II, 65–89. Languages and Linguistics (AALL) 11, 101–127. Powell, Abe and Hiroyuki Suzuki (2017) “Phonetic distance Online: http://hdl.handle.net/10108/89211 and dialect clustering on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.” Suzuki, Hiroyuki and Sonam Wangmo (2018) “Geolinguistic Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40.2, 161–178. approach to the route of Tibetic loanwords in Lhagang [DOI: 10.1075/ltba.17004.pow] Choyu.” In Hiroyuki Suzuki and Mitsuaki Endo (eds.) sKal-bzang ’Gyur-med and sKal-bzang dByang-can (2004) Papers from the Fourth International Conference of Zangwen Wenfa Jiaocheng (Xiudingben) [Course in the Asian Geolinguistics, 115–126, Fuchu: Research Insti- Tibetan grammar (revised edition)]. Chengdu: Sichuan tute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. Minzu Chubanshe. Online: https://publication.aa-ken.jp/papers_4IC_Asian_ Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2004) “Amudotibettogo Chabcha-Cherje geolinguistics_2018.pdf bokumin hoogen no onsei bunseki [Phonetic analysis of Tournadre, Nicolas (2014) “The Tibetic languages and their Amdo Tibetan Chabcha-Cherje dialect].” Kyoto Univer- classification.” In Thomas Owen-Smith and Nathan W. sity Linguistic Research 23, 145–165. Hill (eds.) Trans-Himalayan linguistics: Historical and Online: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/87841 descriptive linguistics of the Himalayan area, 105–129, Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2008) “Nouveau regard sur les dialectes Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. tibétains à l’est d’Aba : phonétique et classification du Tournadre, Nicolas and Hiroyuki Suzuki (forthcoming) The dialecte de Sharkhog [Songpan-Jiuzhaigou].” Linguistics Tibetic Languages: An introduction to the family of lan- of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31.1, 85–108. Online: https:// guages derived from Old Tibetan (with the collaboration doi.org/10.15144/LTBA-31.1.85 of Xavier Becker and Alain Brucelles for the cartogra- Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2016) “In defense of prepalatal non- phy). fricative sounds and symbols: towards the Tibetan dia- Tsering Samdrup and Hiroyuki Suzuki (forthcoming) “Hu- lectology.” Researches in Asian Languages 10, 99–125. milifics in Mabzhi pastoralist speech of Amdo Tibetan.” Online: http://id.nii.ac.jp/1085/00002195/ Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area. Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2018) “Litang xian ji qi zhoubian de Wang, Shuangcheng (2012) Zangyu Anduo Fangyan Yuyin Zangzu yuyan xianzhuang diaocha yu fenxi [Current Yanjiu [Study on the sounds of the Amdo dialect of Ti- language situation of Tibetans in Lithang County and its betan]. Shanghai: Zhongxi Shuju. surroundings: Research and analysis].” Minzu Xuekan 2, Zhang, Huili, Haifeng Duan, and Baoya Chen (2018) “Eyin 35–44＋106–109. yu ehuayin [Palatal sounds and palatalised sounds].” Suzuki, Hiroyuki and Sonam Wangmo (2015) “Lhagang Yuyan Yanjiu 1, 54–62. Tibetan of Minyag Rabgang Khams: Vocabulary of two Zhu, Xiaonong (2010) Yuyinxue [Phonetics]. Beijing: Shang- sociolinguistic varieties.” Asian and African Languages wu Yinshuguan. and Linguistics (AALL) 10, 245–286. Online: http://hdl.handle.net/10108/85072 (Received Aug. 6, 2018, Accepted Nov. 11, 2018, Suzuki, Hiroyuki and Sonam Wangmo (2016) “Vocabulary of Shingnyag Tibetan: A dialect of Amdo Tibetan spo- e-Published Apr. 30, 2019) ken in Lhagang, Khams Minyag.” Asian and African

— 82 —