On the evolution of the Kham agreement paradigm
Recent studies of the agreement systems of the "prono-minalizing" Tibeto-Burman languages (Bauman 1974, 1975, 1979, DeLancey 1980, 1981a, 1983, Caughley 1982, Thurgood 1985) have established that the suffixed "pronominal" verb agreement paradigm, once considered to be a late seco...
محفوظ في:
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
|---|---|
| مؤلفون آخرون: | |
| التنسيق: | مقال |
| اللغة: | English |
| منشور في: |
2024
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/179168 |
| الوسوم: |
إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
|
| الملخص: | Recent studies of the agreement systems of the "prono-minalizing" Tibeto-Burman languages (Bauman 1974, 1975, 1979, DeLancey 1980, 1981a, 1983, Caughley 1982, Thurgood 1985) have established that the suffixed "pronominal" verb agreement paradigm, once considered to be a late secondary development in a few western branches of the family, is in fact widespread throughout the TB languages, and traceable to the Proto-Tibeto-Burman level.2 There is no reasonable doubt that most of the agreement paradigms found in the family represent com¬mon inheritance -- often, to be sure, with considerable reana¬lysis and secondary alteration -- of an original paradigm in which the ST pronominal roots *na '1st person' and *na(n) '2nd person' were suffixed to the verb in a split ergative pattern. (See DeLancey 1981b for a discussion of the notion of split ergativity and its relevance to some of the data discussed here). |
|---|