DOCSLIB.ORG

East Uvean a Condensed Grammar Andrew Livingston a Thesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
East Uvean a Condensed Grammar Andrew Livingston a Thesis East Uvean A condensed grammar Andrew Livingston A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts University of Washington 2016 Committee: Sharon Hargus Edith Aldridge Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Linguistics ©Copyright 2016 Andrew Livingston University of Washington Abstract East Uvean A condensed grammar Andrew Livingston Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Sharon Hargus Linguistics East Uvean (EUV), also called Faka’Uvea or le wallisien, is a Polynesian language of the Austronesian family, spoken on Wallis Island (‘Uvea) in the French collectivity of Wallis and Futuna, as well as by populations in New Caledonia and metropolitan France. It is a verb-initial language, with basic transitive clauses alternating between VPA and VAP basic word order. Though generally low in inflectional affixation and tending to be analytic, East Uvean features pronominal and possessive systems of considerable morphological complexity with singular, dual, and plural number, clusivity contrasts throughout the first person, and (typical of a Polynesian language) two genitives contrasting in alienability and agentivity. EUV is morphologically ergative in basic clauses, but first- and second-person pronouns have pre-verbal pro-clitic forms in a nominative/accusative alignment. Within clausal nominalizations, the genitive contrast can be used to yield a split-S alignment of arguments. This work is a condensed grammar of the language, with focus on theory-neutral description of morphosyntax. Preface I first came into contact with East Uvean in 2008, when I was nineteen and living in the French territory of New Caledonia. My East Uvean-speaking friends there, particularly members of the Selui family of Calvaire, were patient with my unending questions and hypotheses and very encouraging. When I returned to the United States in 2010, I pursued studies in linguistics and in 2013 had the opportunity to continue studying linguistics at the University of Washington, where I prepared to research East Uvean in the field. That opportunity came from July to September of 2014, when the Tui family of Utufua generously took me in and gave me their time, attention, and patience as I sought to learn the grammar and test its limits. I subsequently spent considerable time with the Hanisi family of Ahoa as well, who were no less generous in the many ways they aided my research and my quality of life. To these families and many other individuals, I owe a tremendous debt of gratitude. Mā lo si’i ‘ofa ‘i takotou tokoni mai. ‘Ofa lahi atu kī a koutou. I also met with the French Prefect of the collectivity, representatives of the customary monarchy of ‘Uvea, and then the Lavelua (king) himself, to be presented and formally permitted to conduct my research in the Kingdom of ‘Uvea. Though the king was deposed only a few weeks later, I maintained a good relationship with the kingdom. At the end of my stay, I was invited to attend a colloquium on language policy in Wallis and Futuna. It dealt with first, the challenges faced by minority language speakers in an education system dominated by a colonial language, and second, with the long-standing (and as-yet unfulfilled) desire of the people of Wallis and Futuna to have their own language academy for the preservation and promulgation of East Uvean and East Futunan. It was truly an eye-opening experience. After I returned to Seattle, the writing of this grammar was delayed many times, some beyond my control. I am particularly grateful to Professor Sharon Hargus and Professor Edith Aldridge for their constant encouragement, counsel, and patience. This work would never have come about without them. Describing just a part of the incredible intricacy of a human language is a daunting task, and has consistently made me aware of how little I actually know; regardless of the progress I make, there is always more to be understood and described. In some ways, writing a descriptive grammar is a bit like composing a woefully incomplete (and very technical) love letter to the i language and its people. It is my hope that, whatever else my work may lack, my love of language and speakers does come across. Andrew Livingston June 2016 ii Table of Contents Preface .............................................................................................................................................. i Symbols and abbreviations used .................................................................................................. viii Glossing and transcription ..................................................................................................................... viii Data source abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ xi Numbering conventions ........................................................................................................................... xi 1. Introduction and metalinguistic data ....................................................................................... 1 Geographical distribution .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Demographic information ............................................................................................................. 4 1.2. Genetic classification .................................................................................................................... 5 1.3. Previous research and available data............................................................................................. 5 1.4. Typological summary ................................................................................................................... 8 1.4.1. Basic word order ................................................................................................................... 8 1.4.2. Headedness ........................................................................................................................... 8 1.4.3. Questions ............................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.4. Grammatical relations ........................................................................................................... 9 1.4.5. Other features of interest ..................................................................................................... 10 2. Phonetics and phonology ....................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Consonant phoneme inventory and phonetic realizations ........................................................... 11 2.2. Vowel phoneme inventory and phonetic realizations ................................................................. 11 2.3. Suprasegmental features ............................................................................................................. 13 2.3.1. Phonotactics ........................................................................................................................ 13 2.3.2. Prosody ............................................................................................................................... 13 2.3.3. Loanword adaptation ........................................................................................................... 14 2.3.4. Definitive accent ................................................................................................................. 18 2.4. Orthography ................................................................................................................................ 20 3. Lexical and grammatical categories ...................................................................................... 22 3.1. Lexical and grammatical categorization in the Polynesian languages ........................................ 22 3.2. Nouns and noun-like words ........................................................................................................ 23 3.2.1. Distribution with nominal morphology ............................................................................... 24 3.2.2. Distribution with predication .............................................................................................. 24 3.2.3. Distribution with arguments ................................................................................................ 25 3.2.4. Lexical and semantic support .............................................................................................. 25 3.2.5. Less prototypical nouns ...................................................................................................... 27 iii 3.3. Verbs and verb-like words .......................................................................................................... 28 3.3.1. Distribution with verbal morphology .................................................................................. 28 3.3.2. Distribution with predication and arguments ...................................................................... 29 3.3.3. Lexical and semantic evidence............................................................................................ 29 3.3.4. Less prototypical verbs ....................................................................................................... 30 3.4. Adjectives ..................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Long and Short Adjunct Fronting in HPSG
    Long and Short Adjunct Fronting in HPSG Takafumi Maekawa Department of Language and Linguistics University of Essex Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar Linguistic Modelling Laboratory, Institute for Parallel Processing, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Held in Varna Stefan Muller¨ (Editor) 2006 CSLI Publications pages 212–227 http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2006 Maekawa, Takafumi. 2006. Long and Short Adjunct Fronting in HPSG. In Muller,¨ Stefan (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Varna, 212–227. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Abstract The purpose of this paper is to consider the proper treatment of short- and long-fronted adjuncts within HPSG. In the earlier HPSG analyses, a rigid link between linear order and constituent structure determines the linear position of such adjuncts in the sentence-initial position. This paper argues that there is a body of data which suggests that ad- junct fronting does not work as these approaches predict. It is then shown that linearisation-based HPSG can provide a fairly straightfor- ward account of the facts. 1 Introduction The purpose of this paper is to consider the proper treatment of short- and long-fronted adjuncts within HPSG. ∗ The following sentences are typical examples. (1) a. On Saturday , will Dana go to Spain? (Short-fronted adjunct) b. Yesterday I believe Kim left. (Long-fronted adjunct) In earlier HPSG analyses, a rigid link between linear order and constituent structure determines the linear position of such adverbials in the sen- tence-initial position. I will argue that there is a body of data which sug- gests that adjunct fronting does not work as these approaches predict.
    [Show full text]
  • Sign Language Typology Series
    SIGN LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY SERIES The Sign Language Typology Series is dedicated to the comparative study of sign languages around the world. Individual or collective works that systematically explore typological variation across sign languages are the focus of this series, with particular emphasis on undocumented, underdescribed and endangered sign languages. The scope of the series primarily includes cross-linguistic studies of grammatical domains across a larger or smaller sample of sign languages, but also encompasses the study of individual sign languages from a typological perspective and comparison between signed and spoken languages in terms of language modality, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to sign language typology. Interrogative and Negative Constructions in Sign Languages Edited by Ulrike Zeshan Sign Language Typology Series No. 1 / Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages / Ulrike Zeshan (ed.) / Nijmegen: Ishara Press 2006. ISBN-10: 90-8656-001-6 ISBN-13: 978-90-8656-001-1 © Ishara Press Stichting DEF Wundtlaan 1 6525XD Nijmegen The Netherlands Fax: +31-24-3521213 email: [email protected] http://ishara.def-intl.org Cover design: Sibaji Panda Printed in the Netherlands First published 2006 Catalogue copy of this book available at Depot van Nederlandse Publicaties, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag (www.kb.nl/depot) To the deaf pioneers in developing countries who have inspired all my work Contents Preface........................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Representation of Inflected Nouns in the Internal Lexicon
    Memory & Cognition 1980, Vol. 8 (5), 415423 Represeritation of inflected nouns in the internal lexicon G. LUKATELA, B. GLIGORIJEVIC, and A. KOSTIC University ofBelgrade, Belgrade, Yugoslavia and M.T.TURVEY University ofConnecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06268 and Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, Connecticut 06510 The lexical representation of Serbo-Croatian nouns was investigated in a lexical decision task. Because Serbo-Croatian nouns are declined, a noun may appear in one of several gram­ matical cases distinguished by the inflectional morpheme affixed to the base form. The gram­ matical cases occur with different frequencies, although some are visually and phonetically identical. When the frequencies of identical forms are compounded, the ordering of frequencies is not the same for masculine and feminine genders. These two genders are distinguished further by the fact that the base form for masculine nouns is an actual grammatical case, the nominative singular, whereas the base form for feminine nouns is an abstraction in that it cannot stand alone as an independent word. Exploiting these characteristics of the Serbo­ Croatian language, we contrasted three views of how a noun is represented: (1) the independent­ entries hypothesis, which assumes an independent representation for each grammatical case, reflecting its frequency of occurrence; (2) the derivational hypothesis, which assumes that only the base morpheme is stored, with the individual cases derived from separately stored inflec­ tional morphemes and rules for combination; and (3) the satellite-entries hypothesis, which assumes that all cases are individually represented, with the nominative singular functioning as the nucleus and the embodiment of the noun's frequency and around which the other cases cluster uniformly.
    [Show full text]
  • Animacy and Alienability: a Reconsideration of English
    Running head: ANIMACY AND ALIENABILITY 1 Animacy and Alienability A Reconsideration of English Possession Jaimee Jones A Senior Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in the Honors Program Liberty University Spring 2016 ANIMACY AND ALIENABILITY 2 Acceptance of Senior Honors Thesis This Senior Honors Thesis is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation from the Honors Program of Liberty University. ______________________________ Jaeshil Kim, Ph.D. Thesis Chair ______________________________ Paul Müller, Ph.D. Committee Member ______________________________ Jeffrey Ritchey, Ph.D. Committee Member ______________________________ Brenda Ayres, Ph.D. Honors Director ______________________________ Date ANIMACY AND ALIENABILITY 3 Abstract Current scholarship on English possessive constructions, the s-genitive and the of- construction, largely ignores the possessive relationships inherent in certain English compound nouns. Scholars agree that, in general, an animate possessor predicts the s- genitive while an inanimate possessor predicts the of-construction. However, the current literature rarely discusses noun compounds, such as the table leg, which also express possessive relationships. However, pragmatically and syntactically, a compound cannot be considered as a true possessive construction. Thus, this paper will examine why some compounds still display possessive semantics epiphenomenally. The noun compounds that imply possession seem to exhibit relationships prototypical of inalienable possession such as body part, part whole, and spatial relationships. Additionally, the juxtaposition of the possessor and possessum in the compound construction is reminiscent of inalienable possession in other languages. Therefore, this paper proposes that inalienability, a phenomenon not thought to be relevant in English, actually imbues noun compounds whose components exhibit an inalienable relationship with possessive semantics.
    [Show full text]
  • Ditransitive Verbs in Language Use
    Chapter 3 Aspects of description: ditransitive verbs in language use This chapter provides a corpus-based description of individual ditransitive verbs in actual language use. First, the two verbs that are typical of ditransitivity in ICE-GB will be analysed: give and tell (see section 3.1). Second, the four habitual ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB (i.e. ask, show, send and offer) will be scrutinised (see section 3.2). Particular emphasis in all the analyses will be placed on the different kinds of routines that are involved in the use of ditransitive verbs. The description of peripheral ditransitive verbs, on the other hand, will centre on the concepts of grammatical institutionalisation and conventionalisation (see section 3.3). At the end of this chapter, the two aspects will be discussed in a wider setting in the assessment of the role of linguistic routine and creativity in the use of ditransitive verbs (see section 3.4). 3.1 Typical ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB In the present study, typical ditransitive verbs are verbs which are frequently attested in ICE-GB in general (i.e. > 700 occurrences) and which are associated with an explicit ditransitive syntax in some 50% of all occurrences or more (cf. Figure 2.4, p. 84). These standards are met by give (see section 3.1.1) and tell (see section 3.1.2). 3.1.1 GIVE In light of recent psycholinguistic and cognitive-linguistic evidence, it is not sur- prising that the most frequent ditransitive verb in ICE-GB is GIVE.1 Experiment- al data have led Ninio (1999), for example, to put forward the hypothesis that children initially acquire constructions through one (or very few) ‘pathbreaking verbs(s)’.
    [Show full text]
  • Classifiers: a Typology of Noun Categorization Edward J
    Western Washington University Western CEDAR Modern & Classical Languages Humanities 3-2002 Review of: Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization Edward J. Vajda Western Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs Part of the Modern Languages Commons Recommended Citation Vajda, Edward J., "Review of: Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization" (2002). Modern & Classical Languages. 35. https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs/35 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Humanities at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Modern & Classical Languages by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. J. Linguistics38 (2002), I37-172. ? 2002 CambridgeUniversity Press Printedin the United Kingdom REVIEWS J. Linguistics 38 (2002). DOI: Io.IOI7/So022226702211378 ? 2002 Cambridge University Press Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, Classifiers: a typology of noun categorization devices.Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2000. Pp. xxvi+ 535. Reviewedby EDWARDJ. VAJDA,Western Washington University This book offers a multifaceted,cross-linguistic survey of all types of grammaticaldevices used to categorizenouns. It representsan ambitious expansion beyond earlier studies dealing with individual aspects of this phenomenon, notably Corbett's (I99I) landmark monograph on noun classes(genders), Dixon's importantessay (I982) distinguishingnoun classes fromclassifiers, and Greenberg's(I972) seminalpaper on numeralclassifiers. Aikhenvald'sClassifiers exceeds them all in the number of languages it examines and in its breadth of typological inquiry. The full gamut of morphologicalpatterns used to classify nouns (or, more accurately,the referentsof nouns)is consideredholistically, with an eye towardcategorizing the categorizationdevices themselvesin terms of a comprehensiveframe- work.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Ii the Types of Phrasal Verbs in Movie Snow White and the Huntsman by Rupert Sanders
    33 CHAPTER II THE TYPES OF PHRASAL VERBS IN MOVIE SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN BY RUPERT SANDERS In this chapter, the researcher will analyzed the types of phrasal verbs. It is to complete the first question in this research. The researcher had been categorizing the types of phrasal verbs and form that divided into verb and adverb, also sometimes prepositions. 2.1. Types of Phrasal Verbs in movie Snow White and the Huntsman According to Heaton (1985:103) considers that phrasal verbs are compound verbs that result from combining a verb with an adverb or a preposition, the resulting compound verb being idiomatic. Phrasal verb is one of important part of grammar that almost found in English language. Based on Andrea Rosalia in her book “A Holistic Approach to Phrasal Verb”, Phrasal verbs are considered to be a very important and frequently occurring feature of the English language. First of all, they are so common in every day conversation, and non-native speakers who wish to sound natural when speaking this language need to learn their grammar in order to know how to produce them correctly. Secondly, the habit of inventing phrasal verbs has been the source of great enrichment of the language (Andrea Rosalia, 2012:16). A grammarian such as Eduard, Vlad (1998:93) describes phrasal verbs as "combinations of a lexical verb and adverbial particle". It means that the verb if wants to be a phrasal verb always followed by particle. It can be one particle or two particles in one verb. If the case is like that, it called as multi word verbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Ling 130 Notes: Predicate Logic and English Syntax
    Ling 130 Notes: Predicate Logic and English Syntax Sophia A. Malamud February 15, 2011 1 Characteristic functions The characteristic function of a set: (1) Let A be a set. The, charA, the characteristic function of A, is the function F such that, for any x∈ A, F(x)=1, and for any x ∉ A, F(x)=0. Schönfinkelization: (2) U = {a,b,c} (3) The relation "fond of": Rfond-of = {<a,b>, <b,c>, <c,c>} (4) The characteristic function of Rfond-of (takes all combinations of two elements, gives 0/1): <a,a> →0 <a,b> →1 <a,c> →0 <b,a> →0 CharRfond-of = <b,b> →0 <b,c> →1 <c,a> →0 <c,b> →0 <c,c> →1 (5) Turning n-ary functions into multiple embedded 1-ary functions: Schönfinkelization. a → 0 left-to-right schönfinkelization a →b → 1 c → 0 a → 0 b →b → 0 c → 1 a → 0 c →b → 0 c → 1 EXERCISE 1: Given the following Universe, spell out the characteristic function of the set in (6) and schönfinkelize it left-to-right. 1 (6) U = {d, e} (7) R = { <d,d,d>, <d,e,d>, <e,d,d>, <e,e,e>, <e,e,d> } 2 Syntactic composition A formal language is a set of strings - finite sequences of minimal units (words/morphemes, for natural languages) - with meaning. The "machine" that generates those strings and their corresponding meanings is its grammar. A grammar must specify the following three components: • A lexicon which contains every minimal unit with meaning (= every word, for this course) and its grammatical category; • a syntax, that is, a set of rules that tells you how the minimal units combine to form longer units, how this longer units combine to form yet longer units, and so forth until we form full complex sentences; and • a semantics, which determines what semantic operation or function corresponds to each syntactic rule and combines the “atomic” word meanings to build the meaning of the complete sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • Systemic Polyfunctionality and Morphology-Syntax Interdependencies
    Systemic polyfunctionality and morphology-syntax interdependencies Farrell Ackerman1 Olivier Bonami2 Irina Nikolaeva3 1University of California, San Diego 2Université Paris-Sorbonne 3SOAS Defaults in Morphological Theory Lexington, May 2012 The basic problem: Systemic Polyfunctionality Cross-linguistically person/number markers (PNMs) in verbal paradigms often exhibit similarities (up to identity) with person/number markers in nominal possessive constructions (Allen 1964, Radics 1980, Siewierska 1998, 2004, among others): When a language has distinct PNM paradigms for verbal subject (S/A) and object (O) indexing, a question arises: Which paradigm does the possessive paradigm align with? (1) Retuarã (Tucanoan) S/A alignment b˜ıre yi-ha¯a-a¯ Psi yi-behoa-pi 2SG 1SG-kill-NEG.IMP 1SG-spear-INSTR ‘(Be careful), lest I kill you with my spear’ (Strom 1992:63) (2) Kilivila (Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian) O alignment lube-gu ku-sake-gu buva friend-1SG 2SG-give-1SG betel_nut ‘My friend, do you give me betel nuts?’ (Senft 1986:53) The basic problem: Systemic Polyfunctionality Among the 130 relevant languages in Sierwieska’s (1998) sample she observes that, We see that [...], among the languages in the sample the affinities in form between the possessor affixes and the verbal person markers of the O (41%) are just marginally more common than those with the S/A (39%). (Siewierska 1998:2) There are, by hypothesis, systemic properties of specific grammars, rather than language independent universals, that explain the alignments observed. The languages compared by Siewierska appear to have distinct markers for S/A and O, and the question asked is which paradigm appears in possessive marking.
    [Show full text]
  • Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: a Case Study from Koro
    Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro By Jessica Cleary-Kemp A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair Assistant Professor Peter S. Jenks Professor William F. Hanks Summer 2015 © Copyright by Jessica Cleary-Kemp All Rights Reserved Abstract Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro by Jessica Cleary-Kemp Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics University of California, Berkeley Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair In this dissertation a methodology for identifying and analyzing serial verb constructions (SVCs) is developed, and its application is exemplified through an analysis of SVCs in Koro, an Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea. SVCs involve two main verbs that form a single predicate and share at least one of their arguments. In addition, they have shared values for tense, aspect, and mood, and they denote a single event. The unique syntactic and semantic properties of SVCs present a number of theoretical challenges, and thus they have invited great interest from syntacticians and typologists alike. But characterizing the nature of SVCs and making generalizations about the typology of serializing languages has proven difficult. There is still debate about both the surface properties of SVCs and their underlying syntactic structure. The current work addresses some of these issues by approaching serialization from two angles: the typological and the language-specific. On the typological front, it refines the definition of ‘SVC’ and develops a principled set of cross-linguistically applicable diagnostics.
    [Show full text]
  • The “Person” Category in the Zamuco Languages. a Diachronic Perspective
    On rare typological features of the Zamucoan languages, in the framework of the Chaco linguistic area Pier Marco Bertinetto Luca Ciucci Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa The Zamucoan family Ayoreo ca. 4500 speakers Old Zamuco (a.k.a. Ancient Zamuco) spoken in the XVIII century, extinct Chamacoco (Ɨbɨtoso, Tomarâho) ca. 1800 speakers The Zamucoan family The first stable contact with Zamucoan populations took place in the early 18th century in the reduction of San Ignacio de Samuco. The Jesuit Ignace Chomé wrote a grammar of Old Zamuco (Arte de la lengua zamuca). The Chamacoco established friendly relationships by the end of the 19th century. The Ayoreos surrended rather late (towards the middle of the last century); there are still a few nomadic small bands in Northern Paraguay. The Zamucoan family Main typological features -Fusional structure -Word order features: - SVO - Genitive+Noun - Noun + Adjective Zamucoan typologically rare features Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition All Zamucoan languages present a morphological tripartition in their nominals. The base-form (BF) is typically used for predication. The singular-BF is (Ayoreo & Old Zamuco) or used to be (Cham.) the basis for any morphological operation. The full-form (FF) occurs in argumental position.
    [Show full text]
  • Flexible Valency in Chintang.∗
    Flexible valency in Chintang.∗ Robert Schikowskia , Netra Paudyalb , and Balthasar Bickela a University of Zürich b University of Leipzig 1 e Chintang language Chintang [ˈts̻ ʰiɳʈaŋ]̻ (ISO639.3: ctn) is a Sino-Tibetan language of Nepal. It is named aer the village where it is mainly spoken. e village lies in the hills of Eastern Nepal, bigger cities within day’s reach being Dhankuṭā and Dharān. ere are no official data on the number of speakers, but we estimate there to be around 4,000 - 5,000 speakers. Most speakers are bi- or trilingual, with Nepali (the Indo-Aryan lingua franca of Nepal) as one and Bantawa (a related Sino-Tibetan language) as the other additional language. Monolingual speakers are still to be found mainly among elderly women, whereas a considerable portion of the younger generation is rapidly shiing to Nepali. Genealogically, Chintang belongs to the Kiranti group. e Kiranti languages are generally accepted to belong to the large Sino-Tibetan (or Tibeto-Burman) family, although their position within this family is controversial (cf. e.g. urgood 2003, Ebert 2003). Based on phonological evidence, Chintang belongs to the Eastern subgroup of Kiranti (Bickel et al. 2010). ere are two major dialects (Mulgaũ and Sambugaũ ) named aer the areas where they are spoken. e differences between them concern morphology and the lexicon but, as far as we know, not syntax, and so we will not distinguish between dialects in this chapter. For all examples the source has been marked behind the translation. Wherever possible, we take data from the Chintang Language Corpus (Bickel et al.
    [Show full text]