HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies Volume 35 Number 1 Article 24 July 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] 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 Kham, and Amdo, 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 Tibetan Plateau and the is, of course, not the case. For Tibetan language such a compendium Himalayas. example, a Sherpa speaker does not about the Tibetan dialects. understand a Dzongkha 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 Tibetic languages. The author is many Tibetan neologisms in directly derived from Old Tibetan 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 Qiangic languages such as Tau (rta’u rdzong) in Amdo (Qinghai 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 Tibet dialectology’), and sa bab yul skad These languages, spoken by ethnic Autonomous Region in China, such as rig pa (‘geolinguistics or geographic Tibetans, are very distinct from the Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu and Yunnan, 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 India, Nepal, Bhutan, and Pakistan. 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 Classical Tibetan’), 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,” in Proceedings 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 tone. 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 Khams phyogs kyi yul skad (‘dialects of the classical literary language 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. George van Driem. 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