Tibeto-Burman Languages

September 3, 2015 5 pm pre-final

e-Content Submission to INFLIBNET Subject name: Linguistics Paper number 14 Language Universals and Language & name: Typology Paper Dr Karumuri V Subbarao Coordinator Formerly: Professor, Department of Linguistics name & contact: University of Delhi, Delhi 110007

Postal address: 13/704 East End Apartments, Mayur Vihar Phase I Extension Delhi 110096 Module number Lings_P14_M20 & name Tibeto-Burman: A Syntactic Typology- I Content Writer Karumuri V Subbarao (CW) Name Email id [email protected] Phone +91-11-4309-4675 (land line),+91-98-688- 69904 (mobile) E-Text Self Self Learn Story Learn Assessment More Board  1 

Contents 20.1 Introduction 20.2 Word Order Universals in Tibeto-Burman languages 20.3 Evidence in support of the notion ‘India as a Linguistic Area’ 20.4 Parametric Variation in Tibeto-Burman languages 20.5 Specific Features of Tibeto-Burman languages: Agreement in Adjectives 20.6 Summary

Module 20: Tibeto-Burman Languages: A Syntactic Typology

20.1 Introduction The purpose of this Unit is to discuss the structure of the languages of the Tibeto-Burman language family. Tibeto-Burman languages are spoken in the north-eastern part of India, in Nepal and Myanmar and a few in Bangladesh. There are about 80 languages spoken in India and an equal number spoken in Nepal. This Unit is organized as follows: In Section 2 we discuss the various word order Universals that Tibeto-Burman languages manifest. In Section 3 we present evidence in support of the notion of ‘India as Linguistic Area’ with suitable examples from Tibeto-Burman

languages. In Section 4 we show the parametric variation that is found in Tibeto-Burman languages. Sections 5 begins the discussion of some of the syntactic phenomena that Tibeto-Burman languages have which are either different from the other language families of the subcontinent or unique to Tibeto-Burman languages. One feature discussed in this module is Agreement in Adjectives.

20.2 Word Order Universals in Tibeto-Burman languages In this section we discuss some features of the Tibeto-Burman languages which they share with the other verb-final languages such as Japanese, Korean and the Quechua group of languages .

The Kokborok (Subject-Object-Verb) 1. akung laisi pai- kha Akung(Subject) book(Direct buy past object) (Verb)- (Auxiliary) ‘Akung bought a book.’ (Subbarao, Malhotra & Barua 2010:2-3) Word order is relatively free, and hence, the constituents of a clause can be scrambled. However, it is not as free as it is in Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages. Mizo (Kuki-Chin) 2a. rini- n tsɔ a- ei

Rini- Erg food 3sg- eat “Rini eats food.”

2b. tsɔ rini- n a ei food Rini Erg 3sg eat “Rini eats food.” (Khiangte 2015)

2.2 All Tibeto-Burman languages are postpositional. i.e., NP + Postposition. Mizo 3. lali- hnēnah Lali to (dat) 2.3 The genitive is not overtly present in many Kuki-Chin languages as (4) shows. 4. lala hliam a thi Lala wound 3sg bleed “Lala’s wound is bleeding.” (Khiangte 2015) In those Tibeto-Burman languages that have the genitive, it precedes the head noun, as all are postpositional. Rabha 5. parmai -ni nok

Parmai of house ‘Parmai’s house.’ (Subbarao, Rabha & Gogoi-Dutta, ms, to appear)

2.4 The marker of comparison follows the standard of comparison. In (6) below, the marker of comparison is nekin ‘than’ in Hmar. Some languages such as Mizo, Hmar, Paite, Boro, Koborok, Sema have bound comparative and superlative morphemes (comparable to the suffixes –er and -est in English). Hmar 6. lali lala nekin a- in- sāŋ- lem Lali Lala than 3sg- vr- tall- -er ‘Lali is taller than Lala.’

Head Direction parameter: The order of Complement and Head in Tibeto-Burman languages is: Complement-Head. The Direction of case assignment is from left to right. The verb assigns accusative case to its complement (object) as in (1), and so does the postposition from right to left as in (3). 2.5 Indirect Object precedes Direct Object in the unmarked word order in all Tibeto-Burman languages. Hmar (Kuki-Chin) 7. lali- n bɔ:ŋ bu a- pek

Lali erg cow food 3sg gave IO DO ‘Lali gave food to the cow.’

Angami (Tenyidie) and some other Tibeto-Burman languages exhibit two distinct patterns in which the Indirect Object (IO) precedes the Direct Object (DO) like in all other verb-final languages as in (8). 8. abunɔ- e a- ki leša puo ketse šə Abuno nom I (IO) dat letter (DO) one send oben ‘Abuno sent a letter to me.’ However, the Direct Object may precede the Indirect Object as (9) illustrates. Direct Object (DO)- Indirect Object (IO) 9. abunɔ- -e lešǝda puo kha- pie mhase tsǝ- šə Abuno - book one give- give(light Mhase give- oben erg verb) ‘Abuno gave a book to Mhase.’ (cf. Kevichüsa 2007 for further details). 2.6 The Auxiliary verb follows the main verb (MV). Thus, the order of occurrence is: MV-Aux in verb-final languages. Mizo (Kuki-Chin) 10. lali sikul- ah a- kal- aŋ Lali school to 3sg- go-Verb future AUX

‘Lali will go to school.’

2.6 TIM

TIME ADVERBS (T) precede PLACE ADVERBS (P). Thus, the order is TP in all Tibeto-Burman languages.

LIANGMAI 11. i a ga ei my brother Christmas time PP house come FUT ‘My brother will come home during the Christmas.’ (Mataina 2015) 2.7 Another interesting feature of the word order universals is that time and place adverbs occur in the descending order in contrast to the ascending order found in non-verb-final languages. By descending order, we mean, the superordinate chunk of Place (P) or Time (T) occurs first, then a subordinate chunk and then, a chunk that is subordinate to it follows. (Subbarao 2012). Tenyidie (Angami) 12. ticie 2000 došɨ khrɨ tarik kerepeŋu

year 2000 January month date fifteen

theva keba thetha ki

night time eight time ‘At eight o’clock at night on the fifteenth of January in the year 2000.’

(Kevichüsa, ibid, D. Kuolie, p.c.)

Place adverbs – Descending Order Liangmai (13) pro peren kɔnambǝ ki ga riukʰai- jei pro Peren Konambou house at stay - pst ‘(We) stayed at Konambou’s house in Peren,’ (Wicham Mataina 2015)

20.3 Evidence in support of ‘India as a Linguistic Area’ In this section we present evidence from Tibeto-Burman languages that shows Tibeto-Burman languages exhibits many features that contribute to the notion of ‘India as linguistic area’. The evidence includes: compound verbs, conjunct verbs, reduplication, echo words, conjunctive participles and the quotative as a complementizer. 3.1 Compound verbs Compound verbs are a verb 1 and verb 2 combination. Verb 1 is the main verb, and it is called a polar verb, and verb 2 is called the vector verb which adds a shade of aspectual meaning to the main verb. It “contributes to the meaning in terms of perfectivity (Hook

1991), directionality toward/away from the speaker, suddenness,

(Masica 1974: 143–144), inception/completion (Butt 1995) or the attitude/feeling of the speaker towards the event.” (Subbarao

2012:23).

Mizo (Kuki-Chin)

14. tu emɔ tan- a hna- thɔh sak tsu a trha person some for- Adv job work Oben Def 3sg good “Doing work for somebody is good”. (Khiange 2015)

3.2 Conjunct verbs

All Tibeto-Burman languages have conjunct verbs. In (14) above hna ‘work’ is a noun and hɔh ‘work’ is a verb. The noun + verb combination h a hɔ together imparts the interpretation of the verb ‘work’, which is similar to the verb ar ‘to work’ in

Hindi-Urdu.

20.3.3 Reduplication

Reduplication of adjectives, verbs and participles is found in all

Tibeto-Burman languages .

In Sema (Tibeto-Burman) the verb stem is reduplicated.

Adjectival Reduplication In Mizo” the reduplicated word ɔi ‘nice/beautiful’ , when reduplicated becomes ɔi- ɔi, and thus it intensifies the meaning and it also gives the plurality of the number which shows Lali is buying the nicest ones among the dresses.” (Khiangte 2015). Mizo 15. rini- n kɔr mɔi mɔi a- lei- trhin Rini Erg dress nice nice 3sg- buy- used to “Lali used to buy the nicest dresses.”

In Tenyidie (Angami), Naga in compound adjectives which are disyllabic , the second part of the adjective is repeated. Tenyidie 16a v i zivi good ‘beau iful’

16b. zivi-vi ‘beau iful’

17a. me.ti ‘hard’

17b. me-ti-ti ‘hard’

An adverb can be reduplicated in the Kuki-Chin languages . When zi –ah ‘morning-in’ is reduplicated as shown below, it gave the meaning that Lali came very early in the morning and the speaker is not very happy about it. Note further that when zi - ah‘morning-in’ is reduplicated, the fist occurrence of the postposition is be dropped, as it is a free form1. Mizo 18. ziŋ ziŋ ah lali a- lo- kal morning morning in Lali 3sg towards go “Lali comes early in the morning.”

In Mizo the intensifier which occurs as a verbal particle can be reduplicated which adds to the intensification of the activity. 2.2.3.2 Intensifier reduplication Reduplication of the intensifier increases the intensifier itself. 19. lali tsu a kal tsak em em Lali Def 3sg walk fast Int Int

1 In Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages too this is found. Hindi-Urdu: kar-ke „having done‟. kar kar-ke „having done‟. *kar ke kar ke. 11

“Lali walks very fast.”

The word em em used in the above sentence indicates the fast movement of Lali whereas te te of the sentence below indicates the slow movement of Lali.

20. lali tsu muang te te- in a- kal Lali Def slow Int Int Adv 3sg walk “Lali walks very slowly.”

Sema (TB)

21. pa- ye cu- cu- ce- ni

he- nom eat- eat- imperf- pres

‘He eats and eats.’

(Achumi 2000)

Mizo presents a very interesting phenomenon, when the verb stem is reduplicated.

When the verb stem is reduplicated with the subject agreement

marker occurring only on the first occurrence of the verb, the reduplicated for imparts indefiniteness, according to Khiangte

(2015). This is a feature not found in any other language family to the best of our knowledge.

22 lali- n a- duh duh a- la Lali Erg 3sg- want want 3sg- take “Lali takes whatever she wants.”

When both the occurrences of the verb stem carry the agreement marker, the repeated phrase carries the interpretation of insistence.

23. rini- n hɔn a- duh a- duh hnu- in an- hɔ Rini Erg go 3sg want 3sg want after Adv 3pl go home home “They go home after Rini insists on going home.” This phenomenon in Mizo, and possibly in other Kuki-Chin languages needs to be further studied.

In view of limitations of space, several other phenomena related to reduplication are not presented here.

20.3.4 Conjunctive Participles

All Tibeto-Burman languages have the conjunctive participial construction like all the South Asian languages. The conjunctive participial marker (cpm) in Mizo is –in.

Mizo 24. nilēŋ- a a- thoh- hnu- in tluaŋga cu a- hā tak- zet a- ni all adv 3sg- work- after cpm Tlunga def 3 tired very much 3sg- be sg- day- [- fin] ‘Having worked all day, Tluanga got tired.’ (Subbarao & Lalitha Murthy, ms) 3,5 The quotative The quotative is a participial or infinitival or stem form of the verb say in South Asian languages and it performs the function of a complementizer in addition to several other functions such as a reason marker, purpose marker in course of time . (See Subbarao 2012). The quotative invariably occurs to the right of the embedded verb, which is consistent with The position of occurrence of the quotative to the right of the embedded clause which is “ ‘consistent’ and ‘harmonic’ in terms of unmarked sentence structure of verb- final languages.” (Subbarao 2012:27).

Hmar 25. pro ‘a si’n ‘a- zo’u ti a’- hril a (he) his work 3sg- finish quot 3sg- tell- sm ‘He told that he did his duty.’ ( Dutta Baruah & Bapui 1996:147) In the following section we discuss briefly the parametric variation found in Tibeto-Burman languages.

20.4 Parametric Variation in Tibeto-Burman languages 20.4.1 pro-drop is found in Tibeto-Burman languages. In the Kuki- Chin languages pro-drop plays a dominant role, as the verb carries subject agreement and object agreement markers of 1 and 2 person Hmar (Kuki-Chin)

26. Lalii- n proj ai- mij- hmu

Lali- erg (me) 3g- 1sg- saw/met

‘Lali met me.’

(Subbarao 2012: 122) Note that the direct object kei ‘I’ is not overtly present in (X) and the pronominal clitic mi ‘me’ is incorporated in the verb. 4.2 Absence of Expletive Expressions

In languages such as English, French there are expressions that occupy the subject position, and they are semantically null. No South Asian language including Tibeto-Burman languages have any expression that corresponds to the pronoun it in English or il ‘it’ in French. English (27) It is raining. French 28. il pleut it is raining ‘It is reaining.’

Mizo 29. ruah a- sur rain 3sg to shower ‘It is raining.’

20. 5 Specific Features of Tibeto-Burman lgs

In this section we discuss some specific features of Tibeto-Burman languages. In most of the Tibeto-Burman languages tone is phonemic. Tibeto- Burman languages agglutinating.

We shall discuss some select aspects of the syntax of Tibeto-Burman languages. These include: adjectives as verbs, agreement in the Kuki-Chin languages, the formation of relative clauses and incorporation in Tibeto-Burman languages. Adjectives behave like verbs in Tibeto-Burman languages. Just like verbs, they can take agreement markers, they can take a nominalizer, a postposition can be incorporated in an adjective, just as it can be incorporated in a verb. An adjective in some Kuki-Chin languages such as Hmar, Monsang can take the verbal reflexive.

Further, the incorporated postposition increases the valence of the adjective by one argument. Just as verbs can be causativized, so can be adjectives.

Agreement in adjectives

The subject in ® is in 3 person singular, and hence, the adjective takes 3 p sg agreement marker a-. In Hmar, and Monsang adjectives take a verbal reflexive.

Hmar (Kuki-Chin)

30. lali- cu a- in- sāŋ Lali- def 3sg- vr- tall ‘Lali is tall.’

Just like verbs, adjectives can take a nominalizer.

31. tum ‘righteous’ tum- na ‘righteousness’ in- ‘ all’ in- - na ‘ all e ’

Causatives

Monsang

32. a- siti -iŋ buŋ te kar ke a- manᵚu a- mim- poŋ ka 3sg- child - hill all climb sm 3sg- mother 3sg- caus- proud sm/pst (mother) erg (child) „The child made her mother proud by climbing the hill.‟ The adjective in (32) above is poŋ „proud‟. The causative marker is mim, and it occurs to the right of the agreement marker and to the left of the verb stem, just as in the other Kuki-Chin languages.

Agreement: Languages such as Mizo, Hmar, Aimol, Thadou, Zou and

Paite of the Tibeto-Burman language family are split ergative in person.

Only 1 and 2 person object clitics occur with the verb, and 3 person objects are not coded in the verb. Subjects of all transitive verbs are case-marked ergative.

In Kuki-Chin languages subject, direct object and indirect object occur as pronominal clitics. In Hmar (Kuki-Chin) the verb exhibits agreement with the Possessor of a noun phrase too. The occurrence of the clitics is governed by the Principle of Pronominal Strength Hierarchy. That is, 1 Person clitics are ‘stronger than’ 2 Person clitics, and 2 Person clitics are stronger than 3 Person clitics. 1 and 2 Person non-subject clitics occur as object clitics, 3 Person non- subject clitics do not manifest themselves as pronominal clitics. Schematically: 1 P > 2 P > 3 P where P stands for Person and the symbol > stands for ‘stronger than’. The Kuki-Chin languages are ‘heavy pro-drop’ languages (Subbarao2012: ). In Mizo (Kuki-Chin) for example, 33. pro pro ka- hmu- ce (I) (you) 1p sg (Subject)- met/saw- 2p sg (DO) ‘I met/saw you.’

1P DO is stronger than 2 P Subject, and hence, 1 P subject clitic does not show up in Mizo (34), while in Hmar (35), a sister language of Mizo, it does. Hmar (Kuki-Chin) 35. pro pro i- min- hmu (you) (me) 2 P (Subject) 1 P (DO)- met/saw ‘You saw me.’

We shall now provide evidence in support of the Principle of Pronominal Strength Hierarchy.

“In sentences with a conjoined subject in Mizo and Hmar, the 1st person subject that has precedence in occurrence as a pronominal clitic over 2nd and 3nd person subjects; and 2 person over 3 person.”

(Subbarao 2012:122). Thus, when there is a conjoined subject with 3 person subject and 1 person subject, it is the 1 P plural clitic that occurs as an agreement clitic. Since it is a plural subject, the 1 person singular null subject kei „pro‟ triggers agreement in the plural as kan „1 p pl‟ in

(36). The pro in (36) can be recovered from the verbal agreement clitic kan- in plural. The comitative object is naŋ-cou-le ‘you-only-with‟.

The postposition le „with‟ is incorporated, and the incorporated form of le „with‟ in the verb is pui „with‟.

Hmar Kuki-Chin

36. lalii le proj naŋk- cou in- ṭšuŋ- pui- kanj+plural- ti- cek

Lali and (I) you- only vr sit- with- 1p- fut- 2s

„Lali and I will sit only with you.‟

(Subbarao 2001: 467)

In (37), the conjuncts are in 3 and 2 person. 2nd P is stronger than 3 P.

Hence, it is the 2 person agreement marker in plural that occurs with the verb. The 2 person subject as a conjunct does not occur at all, and in its place there occurs a null pro.

37. lalii le proj in- in- ṭšuŋ

Lali and 2p- vr- sat

„Lali and you will sit‟

Thus, we have the hierarchies in sentences (36)–(37) as follows:

38. 1p>2p>3p where > indicates „stronger than‟ and pindicates

person.

20.6 Conclusion

In this Unit we’ve briefly discussed some salient features of the languages of the Tibeto-Burman language family. We ended with a discussion of one of the specific features of the family- Adjective Agreement. We continue with the discussion of the other specific features of the Tibeto-Burman language family in Module 21.