DOCSLIB.ORG

Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs Lauren Gawne, Nathan W. Hill (Eds.) Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs Editor Volker Gast Editorial Board Walter Bisang Jan Terje Faarlund Hans Henrich Hock Natalia Levshina Heiko Narrog Matthias Schlesewsky Amir Zeldes Niina Ning Zhang Editor responsible for this volume Walter Bisang and Volker Gast Volume 302 Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages Edited by Lauren Gawne Nathan W. Hill ISBN 978-3-11-046018-6 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-047374-2 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-047187-8 ISSN 1861-4302 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: Compuscript Ltd., Shannon, Ireland Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com Contents Nathan W. Hill and Lauren Gawne 1 The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality 1 Typology and history Shiho Ebihara 2 Evidentiality of the Tibetan verb snang 41 Lauren Gawne 3 Egophoric evidentiality in Bodish languages 61 Nicolas Tournadre 4 A typological sketch of evidential/epistemic categories in the Tibetic languages 95 Nathan W. Hill 5 Perfect experiential constructions: the inferential semantics of direct evidence 131 Guillaume Oisel 6 On the origin of the Lhasa Tibetan evidentials song and byung 161 Lhasa and Diasporic Tibetan Yasutoshi Yukawa 7 Lhasa Tibetan predicates 187 Nancy J. Caplow 8 Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan 225 Other Tibetan languages Marius Zemp 9 Evidentiality in Purik Tibetan 261 Juha Yliniemi 10 Copulas in Denjongke or Sikkimese Bhutia 297 vi Contents Gwendolyn Hyslop and Karma Tshering 11 An overview of some epistemic categories in Dzongkha 351 Zoe Tribur 12 Observations on factors affecting the distributional properties of evidential markers in Amdo Tibetan 367 Hiroyuki Suzuki 13 The evidential system of Zhollam Tibetan 423 Katia Chirkova 14 Evidentials in Pingwu Baima 445 Index 461 Nathan W. Hill and Lauren Gawne 1 The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality In his Aṣṭādhyāyī the great Sanskrit grammarian Pāṇini cryptically notes the grammatical encoding of information source with the words parokṣe liṭ ‘one uses the perfect tense in reference to past action not linked to the present day and not witnessed’ (Hock 2012: 93–101); so began the study of evidentiality.1 Although Tibetan grammatical studies, like all domains of traditional Tibetan high culture, build upon Indian models, the Tibetan grammarians did not inherit an explicit awareness of evidentiality. Alexandra Aikhenvald’s 2004 monograph Evidentiality is the most thorough typological treatment of evidentiality to date, drawing on grammatical descriptions of over 500 languages (Aikhenvald 2004: xii). While Aikhenvald concedes that “evi- dentiality in Tibetan varieties was hardly mentioned” (Aikhenvald 2012: 467, Note 20) in her study, she does make reference to four Tibetan varieties, viz. Ladhaki, Amdo, Sherpa, and Lhasa. The World Atlas of Language Structures’ (WALS) survey of evidentiality2 draws on three of the same four Tibetan languages, omitting Lhasa, on the basis of the same secondary literature as Aikhenvald. There is scope both for increased documentation of Tibetan evidential systems and for typological work on evidentiality to make more ample use of the Tibetan data already available. Such work will deepen the understanding of specific Tibetan varieties and improve typo- logical theorizing on evidentiality (cf. Hill 2013a: 51–52; Tournadre, this volume). By making the results of research on Tibetan evidential systems more conveniently accessible, the work in the reader’s hands aids in filling these lacunae. The title of this work and this introduction refer to the varieties of Tibetan spoken today as Tibetan languages (we discuss this terminology in §5 below). We follow Tournadre in drawing together this “well-defined family of languages derived from Old Tibetan” (Tournadre 2014: 107). As all families do, these lan- guages demonstrate phonetically regular reflexes of historic forms, share a core vocabulary, and retain many elements of inherited grammar. As this volume 1 Boas (1911: 43) often mistakenly receives credit for the earliest discussion of grammatical mar- king of information souce (e.g. Aikhenvald 2004: 12–13, 2014: 4). 2 http://wals.info/feature/77A#2/16.6/148.7 Note: A list of abbreviations appears at the end of this chapter. Where possible, glosses in citations from other authors have been regularized to the Leipzig Glossing Rules. DOI 10.1515/9783110473742-001 2 Nathan W. Hill and Lauren Gawne demonstrates, despite their common features, these languages encode evidentia- lity in different ways, demonstrating the outcome of historical developments (see §4). Just as there is variation in how Tibetan languages have grammaticalised evi- dentiality, the speakers of these languages do not necessarily consider themselves as belonging to a single unified group. Tibetan language speakers reside in Tibet, other parts of China, India, Nepal, Bhutan, and Pakistan. Many Tibetan language speakers will not refer to themselves as Tibetan, but consider themselves to be a member of a specific cultural group, such as Sherpa, or Bhutia. In addition, not all Tibetan language speakers share the same Buddhist culture, e.g. the Purik and the Balti are predominantly Muslim (Zemp, this volume), and many Buddhist groups like the Yolmo have a synchronous indigenous tradition (Desjarlais 1992). This volume attempts to give some illustration of the diversity of Tibetan languages, with contributions on varieties from China, Nepal, India and Bhutan. Lhasa Tibetan is far and away the best described Tibetan variety. Con- sequently, to the extent typologists make reference to Tibetan at all, they rely primarily on Lhasa Tibetan and traditions of its analysis, in particular ‘conjunct-disjunct’ and ‘egophoric’. The three evidential categories of Lhasa Tibetan (called ‘personal’, ‘experiential’, and ‘factual’ in this introduction) serve as the point of departure in the exploration of other Tibetan varieties and in the study of the development of evidentials throughout Tibet’s long literary history. This introduction describes in turn, the history of the study of Lhasa Tibetan evi- dentiality (§1), the use of Lhasa Tibetan in typological discussions (§2), the study of other Tibetan varieties (§3), and research on the historical development of Tibetan evidentials (§4). The contributions to this volume correspondingly present research on Lhasa Tibetan, typology, other Tibetan varieties, and the historical emergence of Tibetan evidentiality and we refer to these contributions throug- hout this introduction. In §5 we discuss the conventions and nomenclature of the volume overall. Throughout this introduction we offer a standardized terminology (personal, factual, and experiential) as equivalences to the terminology of specific authors, in order to facilitate comparison among authors and Tibetan varieties. While we have given a definition of Tibetan, we have not given a defini- tion of evidentiality. Aikhenvald’s definition of evidentiality as “a grammatical expression of information source” (2015: 239) has a simplicity, and certainly has popularity. This rather narrow definition has perhaps led her to miss the nature of evidentiality in languages like Tibetan, which we discuss below. Tournadre and LaPolla (2014) also believe that Aikhenvald’s definition is too narrow. After a survey of some Tibetan varieties, and beyond, they give a definition of “the repre- sentation of source and access to information according to the speaker’s perspec- tive and strategy” (Tournadre and LaPolla 2014: 240). The inclusion of ‘access to information’ and ‘speaker’s perspective’ is intended to tease out some of the subtleties of personal evidentiality, which we discuss below. Attempting to find 1 The contribution of Tibetan languages to the study of evidentiality 3 one definition of evidentiality that applies to all languages may prove elusive. As can be seen in this volume, even closely related languages may use cognate forms in very different ways. Similarly, linguists from different theoretical back- grounds may approach the question of evidentiality in different ways. We have not constrained our authors by asking them to employ a particular definition of evidentiality in their analyses. As a related issue, attempting to articulate the relationship between evidenti- ality and other grammatical features, particularly those contextually-dependent features related to speaker stance, is unlikely to be a successful endeavor at the cross-linguistic level. Our authors expand on the interaction of evidentiality with other grammatical features as they see fit for a particular language. For many of our authors an understanding of modality, speaker perspective, and interro- gativity within a particular language are vital to an understanding of evidentia- lity. For example, for Hyslop and Tshering (this volume) evidentiality is entirely subsumed within the epistemic system. In order to keep this introduction to a containable size, we focus on the grammatical categories of evidentiality speci- fically, but we also acknowledge
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On Bhutanese and Tibetan Dzongs **
    ON BHUTANESE AND TIBETAN DZONGS ** Ingun Bruskeland Amundsen** “Seen from without, it´s a rocky escarpment! Seen from within, it´s all gold and treasure!”1 There used to be impressive dzong complexes in Tibet and areas of the Himalayas with Tibetan influence. Today most of them are lost or in ruins, a few are restored as museums, and it is only in Bhutan that we find the dzongs still alive today as administration centers and monasteries. This paper reviews some of what is known about the historical developments of the dzong type of buildings in Tibet and Bhutan, and I shall thus discuss towers, khars (mkhar) and dzongs (rdzong). The first two are included in this context as they are important in the broad picture of understanding the historical background and typological developments of the later dzongs. The etymological background for the term dzong is also to be elaborated. Backdrop What we call dzongs today have a long history of development through centuries of varying religious and socio-economic conditions. Bhutanese and Tibetan histories describe periods verging on civil and religious war while others were more peaceful. The living conditions were tough, even in peaceful times. Whatever wealth one possessed had to be very well protected, whether one was a layman or a lama, since warfare and strife appear to have been endemic. Security measures * Paper presented at the workshop "The Lhasa valley: History, Conservation and Modernisation of Tibetan Architecture" at CNRS in Paris Nov. 1997, and submitted for publication in 1999. ** Ingun B. Amundsen, architect MNAL, lived and worked in Bhutan from 1987 until 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • 7=SINO-INDIAN Phylosector
    7= SINO-INDIAN phylosector Observatoire Linguistique Linguasphere Observatory page 525 7=SINO-INDIAN phylosector édition princeps foundation edition DU RÉPERTOIRE DE LA LINGUASPHÈRE 1999-2000 THE LINGUASPHERE REGISTER 1999-2000 publiée en ligne et mise à jour dès novembre 2012 published online & updated from November 2012 This phylosector comprises 22 sets of languages spoken by communities in eastern Asia, from the Himalayas to Manchuria (Heilongjiang), constituting the Sino-Tibetan (or Sino-Indian) continental affinity. See note on nomenclature below. 70= TIBETIC phylozone 71= HIMALAYIC phylozone 72= GARIC phylozone 73= KUKIC phylozone 74= MIRIC phylozone 75= KACHINIC phylozone 76= RUNGIC phylozone 77= IRRAWADDIC phylozone 78= KARENIC phylozone 79= SINITIC phylozone This continental affinity is composed of two major parts: the disparate Tibeto-Burman affinity (zones 70= to 77=), spoken by relatively small communities (with the exception of 77=) in the Himalayas and adjacent regions; and the closely related Chinese languages of the Sinitic set and net (zone 79=), spoken in eastern Asia. The Karen languages of zone 78=, formerly considered part of the Tibeto-Burman grouping, are probably best regarded as a third component of Sino-Tibetan affinity. Zone 79=Sinitic includes the outer-language with the largest number of primary voices in the world, representing the most populous network of contiguous speech-communities at the end of the 20th century ("Mainstream Chinese" or so- called 'Mandarin', standardised under the name of Putonghua). This phylosector is named 7=Sino-Indian (rather than Sino-Tibetan) to maintain the broad geographic nomenclature of all ten sectors of the linguasphere, composed of the names of continental or sub-continental entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Vocabulary of Shingnyag Tibetan: a Dialect of Amdo Tibetan Spoken in Lhagang, Khams Minyag
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Prometheus-Academic Collections Asian and African Languages and Linguistics No.11, 2017 Vocabulary of Shingnyag Tibetan: A Dialect of Amdo Tibetan Spoken in Lhagang, Khams Minyag Suzuki, Hiroyuki IKOS, Universitetet i Oslo / National Museum of Ethnology Sonam Wangmo IKOS, Universitetet i Oslo Lhagang Town, located in Kangding Municipality, Ganzi Prefecture, Sichuan Province, China, is inhabited by many Tibetan pastoralists speaking varieties which are similar to Amdo Tibetan even though it is located at the Minyag Rabgang region of Khams, based on the Tibetan traditional geography. Among the multiple varieties spoken by inhabitants living in Lhagang Town, the Shingyag dialect is spoken in the south-western part of the town. It is somewhat different from other Amdo varieties spoken in Lhagang Town in the phonetic and phonological aspects. This article provides a word list with ca. 1500 words of Shingnyag Tibetan. Keywords: Amdo Tibetan, Minyag Rabgang, dialectology, migration pattern 1. Introduction 2. Phonological overview of Shingnyag Tibetan 3. Principal phonological features of Shingnyag Tibetan 1. Introduction This article aims to provide a word list (including ca. 1500 entries) with a phonological sketch of Shingnyag Tibetan, spoken in Xiya [Shing-nyag]1 Hamlet, located in the south-western part of Tagong [lHa-sgang] Town (henceforth Lhagang Town), Kangding [Dar-mdo] Municipality, Ganzi [dKar-mdzes] Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, China (see Figure 1). Lhagang Town is in the easternmost part of Khams based on the traditional Tibetan geography, however, it is inhabited by many Tibetans whose mother tongue is Amdo Tibetan.2 Referring to Qu and Jin (1981), we can see that it is already known that Amdo-speaking Tibetans live in Suzuki, Hiroyuki and Sonam Wangmo.
    [Show full text]
  • Tibetan Vwa 'Fox' and the Sound Change Tibeto
    Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area Volume 29.2 — October 2006 TIBETAN VWA ‘FOX’ AND THE SOUND CHANGE TIBETO-BURMAN *WA > TIBETAN O Nathan W. Hill Harvard University Paul Benedict (1972: 34) proposed that Tibeto-Burman medial *-wa- regularly leads to -o- in Old Tibetan, but that initial *wa did not undergo this change. Because Old Tibetan has no initial w-, and several genuine words have the rhyme -wa, this proposal cannot be accepted. In particular, the intial of the Old Tibetan word vwa ‘fox’ is v- and not w-. འ Keywords: Old Tibetan, Tibeto-Burman, phonology. 1. INTRODUCTION The Tibetan word vwa ‘fox’ has received a certain amount of attention for being an exception to the theory that Tibeto-Burman *wa yields o in Tibetan1. The first formulation of this sound law known to me is Laufer’s statement “Das Barmanische besitzt nämlich häufig die Verbindung w+a, der ein tibetisches [sic] o oder u entspricht [Burmese namely frequently has the combination w+a, which corresponds to a Tibetan o or u]” (Laufer 1898/1899: part III, 224; 1976: 120). Laufer’s generalization was based in turn upon cognate sets assembled by Bernard Houghton (1898). Concerning this sound change, in his 1972 monograph, Paul Benedict writes: “Tibetan has initial w- only in the words wa ‘gutter’, wa ‘fox’ and 1 Here I follow the Wylie system of Tibetan transliteration with the exception that the letter (erroneously called a-chung by some) is written in the Chinese fashion འ as <v> rather than the confusing <’>. On the value of Written Tibetan v as [ɣ] cf.
    [Show full text]
  • )53Lt- I'\.' -- the ENGLISH and FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD 500605, INDIA
    DZONGKHA SEGMENTS AND TONES: A PHONETIC AND PHONOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION KINLEY DORJEE . I Supervisor PROFESSOR K.G. VIJA Y AKRISHNAN Department of Linguistics and Contemporary English Hyderabad Co-supervisor Dr. T. Temsunungsang The English and Foreign Languages University Shillong Campus A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics SCHOOL OF LANGUAGE SCIENCES >. )53lt- I'\.' -- THE ENGLISH AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY HYDERABAD 500605, INDIA JULY 2011 To my mother ABSTRACT In this thesis, we make, for the first time, an acoustic investigation of supposedly unique phonemic contrasts: a four-way stop phonation contrast (voiceless, voiceless aspirated, voiced and devoiced), a three-way fricative contrast (voiceless, voiced and devoiced) and a two-way sonorant contrast (voiced and voiceless) in Dzongkha, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken in Western Bhutan. Paying special attention to the 'Devoiced' (as recorded in the literature) obstruent and the 'Voiceless' sonorants, we examine the durational and spectral characteristics, including the vowel quality (following the initial consonant types), in comparison with four other languages, viz .. Hindi. Korean (for obstruents), Mizo and Tenyidie (for sonorants). While the 'devoiced' phonation type in Dzongkha is not attested in any language in the region, we show that the devoiced type is very different from the 'breathy' phonation type, found in Hindi. However, when compared to the three-way voiceless stop phonation types (Tense, Lax and Aspirated) in Korean, we find striking similarities in the way the two stops CDevoiced' and 'Lax') employ their acoustic correlates. We extend our analysis of stops to fricatives, and analyse the three fricatives in Dzongkha as: Tense, Lax and Voiced.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Evidential Systems of Tibetan Languages
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2017 Review of Lauren Gawne Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2), 285–303 Widmer, Manuel DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.00002.wid Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-168681 Journal Article Accepted Version Originally published at: Widmer, Manuel (2017). Review of Lauren Gawne Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2), 285–303. Linguistics of the Tibeto- Burman Area, 40(2):285-303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.00002.wid Review of Evidential systems of Tibetan languages Gawne, Lauren & Nathan W. Hill (eds.). 2016. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. de Gruyter: Berlin. vi + 472 pp. ISBN 978-3-11-047374-2 Reviewed by Manuel Widmer 1 Tibetan evidentiality systems and their relevance for the typology of evidentiality The evidentiality1 systems of Tibetan languages rank among the most complex in the world. According to Tournadre & Dorje (2003: 110), the evidentiality systeM of Lhasa Tibetan (LT) distinguishes no less than four “evidential Moods”: (i) egophoric, (ii) testiMonial, (iii) inferential, and (iv) assertive. If one also takes into account the hearsay Marker, which is cOMMonly considered as an evidential category in typological survey studies (e.g. Aikhenvald 2004; Hengeveld & Dall’Aglio Hattnher 2015; inter alia), LT displays a five-fold evidential distinction. The LT systeM, however, is clearly not the Most cOMplex of its kind within the Tibetan linguistic area.
    [Show full text]
  • Day 1: Handouts (Tibet)
    Handout One: Introducing Tibet [With Country Names] First, let’s look at this world map. Find the United States. Now let’s find China! Tibet is a region within China. This is a map of Tibet’s six prefectures and its capital city, Lhasa. On the map of China below, find Tibet. What color is Tibet on this map? Did you find it? [Teacher’s Key] Handout One: Introducing Tibet [Without Country Names] First, let’s look at this world map. Find the United States. Now let’s find China! Hint: It’s light green! Tibet is a region within China. This is a map of Tibet’s six prefectures and its capital city, Lhasa. On the map of China below, find Tibet. What color is Tibet on this map? Did you find it? [Teacher’s Key] Handout Two: Quick Facts about Tibet and the Tibet Autonomous Region ★ Tibet is historically made up of three provinces of Amdo, Kham and U-Tsang. It was split up by the People’s Republic of China. The main Tibetan region now is the Tibet Autonomous Region. ★ The Tibet Autonomous Region, is a province within the People’s Republic of China. ★ Before 1950, Tibet was an independent country, but China invaded the country and took over. ★ The capital of the Tibet Autonomous Region is Lhasa. ★ The official language of the Tibet Autonomous Region is Lhasa Tibetan. ○ In schools, children are also taught Mandarin Chinese. ★ The main religion among the Tibetan people is Tibetan Buddhism. ★ In 1959, the Dalai Lama and 80,000 Tibetans fled to India for their safety.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Syuba (Kagate) Language Documentation Corpus
    Vol. 12 (2018), pp. 204–234 http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc http://hdl.handle.net/10125/24768 Revised Version Received: 17 Jan 2018 A Guide to the Syuba (Kagate) Language Documentation Corpus Lauren Gawne SOAS University of London La Trobe University This article provides an overview of the collection “Kagate (Syuba)”, archived with both the Pacific and Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures (PARADISEC) and the Endangered Language Archive (ELAR). It pro- vides an overview of the materials that have been archived, as well as details of the workflow, conventions used, and structure of the collection. It also provides context for the content of the collection, including an overview of the language context, and some of the motivations behind the documentation project. This article thus provides an entry point to the collection. The future plans for the collection – from the perspectives of both the researcher and Syuba speakers – are also outlined, but with the overwhelming majority of items in the collection available to others, it is hoped that this article will encourage use of the materials by other researchers. 1. Introduction Language documentation involves the development of corpora of materials from which descriptions of grammar and language use can be developed, alongside other uses of the materials by both speakers of the language and researchers. Himmelmann (1998) argues that language documentation and description are two distinct, but interrelated, activities. In reality, the majority of basic linguistic descrip- tion based on primary data is undertaken by the same person who collected the data. Very little of this descriptive work makes clear the nature of the data on which it is built; in a survey of 50 published grammars and 50 PhD dissertations, Gawne et al.
    [Show full text]
  • PPD Talk by Prof. Nicolas Tournadre
    -. '" ~~Q.l·~~·q~~·~~~·~,,·rq·~,,·qt4Q.l·~~·l~~l DZONGKHA DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ROYAL GOVERNMENT OF BHUTAN "'~=<~r\"~\"\~T"""""'" ..~ D. oN' qJ{, n..,~~V){"\ ..."."" ~ t ,. '" '" '" -.r '" 7::F. '" C\.. '" C\.. '" C\ '" '" '" ~.~~.~.u-yz:::..~z:::..(tI.~z:::..~t4QJ.~~.ct:l~~.~z:::~~·~·"~·~~z:::.·o-!sa·,,o-!·~z::r:Ir~~~·o-!~o-!·~r:;r·sa~·QJ~·.~~~.~.. ~".~QJ.~~~.QJ~.~r:;r.~. (University of Aix-Marseille, France) QJ~' ~~.~~.~~.t.lq.o-!(tI~.~~~.~~. C\..C\.. C\.. C\.. C\.. C\.. C\.. ",C\C\..C\.. ~~'~'~z:::.' ~~~~'r:;r~QJ'~' ~z:::.~·-o~·7·o-!·QJ·u-y~·~~·,,~~·(Tibeto-Bunnan) ~.~.~(tI~.~a:;~.-o~.~~.o-!. C\..-.r '" C\.. '" C\.. C\.. C\.. C\.. '" C\.. ~(tI~.~r:;rz:::..~."l.QJ.~".~~.~~.(Professor Nicolas 'J:oumadre) o-!a:;~'~~' ~~·u-y~·,,~·t.I~·~S·~~~·~· '" '" C\..'" C\..C\.. C\.. C\ '" '" sa~'QJ~' ~~.~.~~.~~.~. ~~z:::.·r:;r4~·~~z:::.·~·~~·o-!·~~·~z:::.·r~r~S~·~~z:::.·~·r:;r·o-!~~1r '" '" C\.. '" C\.. C\..-.r '" ~~z:::.·r:;r4~·~~·~~1 ~z:::..(tI.~z:::..a:;~.~~.~.~".~~.~~·o-!z:::.·o-!·u-y~·t.I~·~z:::.·~C4QJl ~'~~~1 ~z:::.'t.Iq·~'*r:;r·~~·t.lq·~r:;r·l~~·~·'1QJ·~i!~~·(tIz:::.l"l·'1:fz:::.'Sz:::.·~1a5.J·~~ ~l~l ~o-!'~l~' ~:~o QJ~' l{.:oo ~~l C\..~ a;~·:uz:::.~1 ~'a:l~' '.l...'.l...lo"I'.l...o'}~ ~l 4~·"r:;r·~QJ·o-!~~1 '" §z:::.·a:;~1 Phone: 322663/325226/325227/323721 Fax: 322992 P.O Box 122 Email: [email protected] Website: www.dzongkha.gov.bt Nicolas Tournadre's Curriculum Vitae Name: Nicolas Toumadre / '",?~.q~"'a:;~.~.q~~. Professor at the University of Aix-Marseille, linguistics department CN~~r~r"'- aI~:~llrmJ::r~ra5~'a,- ~l·~~II ""·qc:rc5~·~~ l~'ifl~"- 'a5~'aII E~ail : [email protected] Professional site: www.nicolas-tournadre.net Education 1984 MA in Russian Literature, Sorbonne University 1987 BA in Tibetan language and civilisation, Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilisation (INalco, Paris) 1989 Louis Forest prize-winning awarded by the "Chancellerie des Universites de Paris".
    [Show full text]
  • Herever Possible
    Published by Department of Information and International Relations (DIIR) Central Tibetan Administration Dharamshala-176215 H.P. India Email: [email protected] www.tibet.net Copyright © DIIR 2018 First edition: October 2018 1000 copies ISBN-978-93-82205-12-8 Design & Layout: Kunga Phuntsok / DIIR Printed at New Delhi: Norbu Graphics CONTENTS Foreword------------------------------------------------------------------1 Chapter One: Burning Tibet: Self-immolation Protests in Tibet---------------------5 Chapter Two: The Historical Status of Tibet-------------------------------------------37 Chapter Three: Human Rights Situation in Tibet--------------------------------------69 Chapter Four: Cultural Genocide in Tibet--------------------------------------------107 Chapter Five: The Tibetan Plateau and its Deteriorating Environment---------135 Chapter Six: The True Nature of Economic Development in Tibet-------------159 Chapter Seven: China’s Urbanization in Tibet-----------------------------------------183 Chapter Eight: China’s Master Plan for Tibet: Rule by Reincarnation-------------197 Chapter Nine: Middle Way Approach: The Way Forward--------------------------225 FOREWORD For Tibetans, information is a precious commodity. Severe restric- tions on expression accompanied by a relentless disinformation campaign engenders facts, knowledge and truth to become priceless. This has long been the case with Tibet. At the time of the publication of this report, Tibet has been fully oc- cupied by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for just five months shy of sixty years. As China has sought to develop Tibet in certain ways, largely economically and in Chinese regions, its obsessive re- strictions on the flow of information have only grown more intense. Meanwhile, the PRC has ready answers to fill the gaps created by its information constraints, whether on medieval history or current growth trends. These government versions of the facts are backed ever more fiercely as the nation’s economic and military power grows.
    [Show full text]
  • A Grammar of Bao'an Tu, a Mongolic Language Of
    A GRAMMAR OF BAO’AN TU, A MONGOLIC LANGUAGE OF NORTHWEST CHINA by Robert Wayne Fried June 1, 2010 A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Buffalo, State University of New York in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Linguistics UMI Number: 3407976 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3407976 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 Copyright by Robert Wayne Fried 2010 ii Acknowledgements I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Matthew Dryer for his guidance and for his detailed comments on numerous drafts of this dissertation. I would also like to thank my committee members, Karin Michelson and Robert VanValin, Jr., for their patience, flexibility, and helpful feedback. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to be a part of the linguistics department at the University at Buffalo. I have benefited in ways too numerous to recount from my interactions with the UB linguistics faculty and with my fellow graduate students. I am also grateful for the tireless help of Carole Orsolitz, Jodi Reiner, and Sharon Sell, without whose help I could not have successfully navigated a study program spanning nine years and multiple international locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Sino-Tibetan Languages 393
    Sino-Tibetan Languages 393 Gair J W (1998). Studies in South Asian linguistics: Sinhala Government Press. [Reprinted Sri Lanka Sahitya and other South Asian languages. Oxford: Oxford Uni- Mandalaya, Colombo: 1962.] versity Press. Karunatillake W S (1992). An introduction to spoken Sin- Gair J W & Karunatillake W S (1974). Literary Sinhala. hala. Colombo: Gunasena. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University South Asia Program. Karunatillake W S (2001). Historical phonology of Sinha- Gair J W & Karunatillake W S (1976). Literary Sinhala lese: from old Indo-Aryan to the 14th century AD. inflected forms: a synopsis with a transliteration guide to Colombo: S. Godage and Brothers. Sinhala script. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University South Asia Macdougall B G (1979). Sinhala: basic course. Program. Washington D.C.: Foreign Service Institute, Department Gair J W & Paolillo J C (1997). Sinhala (Languages of the of State. world/materials 34). Mu¨ nchen: Lincom. Matzel K & Jayawardena-Moser P (2001). Singhalesisch: Gair J W, Karunatillake W S & Paolillo J C (1987). Read- Eine Einfu¨ hrung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ings in colloquial Sinhala. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Reynolds C H B (ed.) (1970). An anthology of Sinhalese South Asia Program. literature up to 1815. London: George Allen and Unwin Geiger W (1938). A grammar of the Sinhalese language. (English translations). Colombo: Royal Asiatic Society. Reynolds C H B (ed.) (1987). An anthology of Sinhalese Godakumbura C E (1955). Sinhalese literature. Colombo: literature of the twentieth century. Woodchurch, Kent: Colombo Apothecaries Ltd. Paul Norbury/Unesco (English translations). Gunasekara A M (1891). A grammar of the Sinhalese Reynolds C H B (1995). Sinhalese: an introductory course language.
    [Show full text]