HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association for and Himalayan Studies

Volume 35 Number 1 24

July 2015

Review of 'Bod kyi yul skad rnam bshad [General Introduction to the Dialects]' by Sum-bha Don-grub Tshe-ring [Sumbha Dondrub Tshering]

Nicolas Tournadre Aix-Marseille University

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya

Recommended Citation Tournadre, Nicolas. 2015. Review of 'Bod kyi yul skad rnam bshad [General Introduction to the Tibetan Dialects]' by Sum-bha Don-grub Tshe-ring [Sumbha Dondrub Tshering]. HIMALAYA 35(1). Available at: https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya/vol35/iss1/24

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This Review is brought to you for free and open access by the DigitalCommons@Macalester College at DigitalCommons@Macalester College. It has been accepted for inclusion in HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Macalester College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Bod kyi yul skad rnam bshad comprehensive work on this topic grong-pa’i skad or grong skad (‘village [General Introduction to the Tibetan written in Tibetan (and translated dialect or variety’), logs skad (‘social Dialects] in Chinese), did not deal with dialects’) (pp. 2, 8-13). He also uses Tibetan dialects beyond the Chinese many technical neologisms related to Sum-bha Don-grub Tshe-ring borders. To illustrate phonetic and phonetics and phonology. This new [Sumbha Dondrub Tshering]. Krung phonological issues, the author uses terminology is very clear and well go’i bod rigs dpe skrun khang: International Phonetic Alphabet formed in literary Tibetan and will Beijing, 2011. 589 pages. ISBN and he also gives correspondences facilitate the research for Tibetan 9787802533318. with a transliteration system close scholars and students as well as for to Wylie. The author also provides a foreign scholars dealing with Tibetan Reviewed by Nicolas Tournadre number of charts and four maps. The linguistics. first one is a general map of Tibetan Sumbha Dondrub Tshering’s Bod The second chapter begins with dialects and the others are maps of kyi yul skad rnam bshad (General classification issues related to the main dialect groups Ü-Tsang, Introduction to the Tibetan Dialects) is Tibetan dialects. Of course one , and , together with a very impressive opus. The target may disagree with the expression related dialects (pp. 79, 175, 269, 342). audience of the book is the Tibetan Tibetan dialects, which seems to Generally speaking, this work meets readership of scholars and students indicate that the given languages international scientific standards and interested in languages and cultures allow mutual intelligibility, which it is thus a real pleasure to read in the of the and the is, of course, not the case. For Tibetan language such a compendium . example, a Sherpa speaker does not about the Tibetan dialects. understand a speaker. In This work is the largest ever written In the first chapter, the author the author’s terminology “Tibetan in Tibetan about the Tibetan dialects, provides a nice introduction to dialects” also includes some Tibeto- which are now more often referred Tibetan dialectology and proposes Burman languages that are not to as . The author is many Tibetan neologisms in directly derived from a linguist and a native Tibetan who the field of dialectology and such as rGyalrongic languages, comes from Thrika county (khri-ka sociolinguistics such as zhib bris yul such as Tau (rta’u rdzong) in Amdo ( Province). skad rig pa (‘descriptive linguistics’), skad) or Minyak as well as Bodic The author investigates not only lo rgyus yul skad rig pa (‘historical languages such as Bake (brag skad). Tibetan dialects from the dialectology’), and sa bab yul skad These languages, spoken by ethnic Autonomous Region in , such as rig pa (‘geolinguistics or geographic Tibetans, are very distinct from the Qinghai, , and , dialectology’). Tibetan/Tibetic languages and thus but also deals with the Tibetan the terminology and the underlying dialects (bod-kyi yul skad) spoken in The author also provides a series of classification raise a number of , Nepal, , and . definitions for a lot of terms used in problems. This contrasts with earlier reference Tibetan dialectology such as kha-skad works published in China by Tibetan (‘spoken language’), yig-skad (‘written Furthermore, having presented a authors. Even Gesang Jumian’s language’), spyi-skad (‘standard classification into five major groups, monograph (2002. Zangyu fanyan language’), phal-skad (‘common which is relatively close to Nishi’s gailun (skad bzang ‘gyur med, bod kyi yul language or ordinary language’), classification (1986. Gendai Chibettogo skad rnam bshad). Minzu Chubanshe: chos-skad (‘Dharma language or hōgen no bunrui [A classification of Beijing) on Tibetan dialects, which ’), yul-skad (‘dialect’), Tibetan dialects]). Bulletin of the was, until the present work, the most lung-skad (‘valley dialect or variety’) National Musuem of Ethnology 11 (4):

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 1 | 149 A great achievement and should be recommended to any scholar or student who is interested in Tibetic languages and cultures.

Nicolas Tournadre on Bod kyi yul skad rnam bshad [General Introduction to the Tibetan Dialects]

837-900; see also Nicholas Tournadre. The following sections of the second between Kham and the ethnic 2014. “The Tibetic languages and their chapter are devoted to the general groups of Sumpa, Azha, Minyak, classification,” inProceedings of the 16th introduction to the phonetic, lexical, and rGyalrong. These historical Himalayan Linguistics Symposium (N. and grammatical characteristics of links probably aim at justifying Hill, ed.). London, School of Oriental the Tibetan dialects. The information the author’s linguistic taxonomy and African Studies, Mouton de presented in the phonetic section is which classifies rGyalrong languages Gruyter), Dondrup Tshering collapses generally accurate with the exception together with the Kham dialects. the five groups into three major of Dzongkha, which, according to the Then in the subsequent section, he groups author, has no . All the scholarly presents the main phonological, (p. 51). In the first grouping, the works on Dzongkha show that this lexical, as well as grammatical author groups together Ü, Tsang, language does have tone (see e.g. van features of Kham dialects and and Ngari (as expected) as well as Driem, ibid.). rGyalrong dialects. brag gsum skad [or Bake, a non Tibetic In the third chapter, the author The fifth chapter deals with Amdo language], Sherpa, Dzongkha, Balti, introduces the reader to dbus gtsang dialects (a mdo’i yul skad). The Ladakhi, and Purik. The second phyogs kyi yul skad (‘dialects around author first makes a historical major grouping includes Eastern, the Central area’) in which he presentation of the region and then Southern Western [or Hor dialects], includes Ü, Tsang, mNgaris Sherpa, proposes three subgroups: ‘brog-skad and Northern Kham dialects as Dzongkha, Ladakhi, and Balti Purik, (‘pastoralists’) dialects, rong-skad well as Chone and Druchu dialects, as well as brag gsum [Bake], a non (‘cultivators’) dialects and rong-ma- rGyalrong, Minyak, and ‘Drapa (the Tibetic language spoken in Kongpo. ‘brog-gi skad (‘semi-pastoralists’) three latter are not Tibetic languages). After a brief historical presentation, dialects. The subsequent sections are The third major grouping includes he deals with the main features of organized in the same way as for the Amdo pastoralists, cultivator, and phonology, lexicon, and grammar. Ü-tsang and Kham groups. semi-pastoralists dialects. While this In many cases, Dondrub Tshering classification of all ‘Tibetan dialects’ The sixth chapter is entitled bod kyi provides comparative charts in (or Tibetic languages) might find yul skad kyi ‘phel ‘gyur (‘evolution which he also includes examples some political justifications from of the Tibetan dialects’). Dondrub from Amdo and Kham. a Tibetan point of view, it has no Tshering analyses in the first section linguistic ground. There is no reason The fourth chapter is dedicated to the syllabic structures on the basis related to phonology, lexicon, or phyogs kyi yul skad (‘dialects of the classical and grammar to lump together Ü-Tsang, around the Kham area’), but also provides a chart (pp. 353-354) of all Dzongkha, Sherpa, Balti, and Ladakhi includes Qiangic and rGyalrongic the possible syllabic initial clusters as (concerning Dzongkha and Sherpa see languages such as rGyalrong, Minyak, well as all the possible rimes e.g. . 1998. Dzongkha. and Drapa dialects. The section is (p. 356). He then provides Leiden: Research School of Asian, further divided into eastern (shar- comparison with the modern African and Amerindian Studies, skad), southern (lho phyogs-kyi skad), dialects. The author discusses the and also Nicolas Tournadre, Lhakpa western (nub phyogs-kyi skad) and phonotactics of Classical Tibetan and Norbu Sherpa, Gyurme Chodrak, and northern dialects (byang phyogs then Dondrub Tshering examines the Guillaume Oisel. 2009. Sherpa-English kyi skad). The Tibetan dialects of particular phonetic evolutions of the and English-Sherpa Dictionary, with Cone and Drugchu are also treated various modern systems and specific Literary Tibetan and Nepali Equivalents. in this chapter. In his historical phonetic innovations of the three Kathmandu: Vajra Publications). presentation of the region, the main dialect groups. The evolution author insists on the relationship of the lexicon is discussed in section

150 | HIMALAYA Spring 2015 two of this chapter and the evolution ‘Tibetan dialects’ / bod kyi yul skad, Nicolas Tournadre is Professor of of grammar in section three. as used by the author) and there Linguistics at Aix-Marseille University. are non-Tibetans, such as Ladakhi, He is a typologist and specialist of Tibetic The seventh chapter is devoted to Bhutanese, etc., who speak Tibetic languages. During the last thirty years he research methodology. If we consider languages (or ‘Tibetan dialects’). has conducted extensive fieldwork on the the linguistics literature written in Tibetan Plateau and in the Himalayas. Tibetan, this chapter is very original. One might express some reserves It provides not only an overview of concerning the lack of sources and the literature on Tibetan dialects but translations for many examples also useful guidelines for scholars throughout the book. Another weak who carry out fieldwork research in point of the book is the fact that in the field of Tibetan dialectology. many instances, the author does not indicate precisely the dialects and One of the strengths of the book is just mentions a general taxon such the abundance of examples, as well as as Kham or Amdo while there are the pedagogical and methodological many dialects and varieties spoken dimensions. The Tibetan terminology in Kham and Amdo. Additionally, used for the linguistic description a lot of data displayed in the book and the analysis is also very clear. Of is probably secondhand data course, a number of criticisms may and the author has not precisely be directed at some aspects of the explained in which areas he has author’s methodology and analysis. conducted fieldwork and what his The main one is the confusion specific contributions are. Finally, between ethnicity and linguistic Dondrub Tshering provides a useful characteristics, which leads Dondrub bibliography where he mentions Tshering to consider rGyalrongic and many references mainly in Tibetan Qiangic languages, such as rGyalong, and Chinese as well as some in Minyak, or Tau, as “Tibetan dialects.” Japanese and English. One can regret This is of course motivated by the the scarcity of references in English fact that these languages are spoken language with only four publications by ethnic Tibetans (concerning this dealing with Tibetan dialectology. A question see Tournadre 2014, ibid.; few authors mentioned in the book Gerald Roche. Forthcoming. ‘The such as H. Jäschke, R.A. Miller, R.K. Vitality of Tibet’s Minority Languages Sprigg or C.A. Bell are not listed in the in the Twenty–first Century’ in bibliography. Multiethnica; and, Nicholas Tournadre and Sangda Dorje. 2003. Manual of Despite this minor criticism, this Standard Tibetan (with 2 CDs). Preface book remains a great achievement by M. Kapstein. Snowlion: Ithaca, New and should be recommended to any York). However, from a linguistic scholar or student who is interested point of view, the two approaches in Tibetic languages and cultures. do not coincide: there are Tibetans who speak non-Tibetic languages (or

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 1 | 151