Misplaced Pages

#996003

47-519: Ethnologue lists alternate names and dialect names for Horpa as Stau/Daofuhua, Bawang, Bopa, Danba, Dawu, Geshitsa/Geshiza/Geshizahua, Hor, Huo’er, Hórsók, Nyagrong-Minyag, Pawang, Rgu, Western Gyarong/Western Jiarong, Xinlong-Muya, and rTa’u. Horpa is a type of Gyalrongic language , a branch of the Qiangic languages of the Sino-Tibetan family. Gyalrong (proper), Khroskyabs, and Horpa are in

94-751: A Khams dialect in Kachin , Myanmar . Tournadre (2005) classifies the Tibetic languages as follows. The other languages ( Thewo-Chone , Zhongu , Khalong , Dongwang , Gserpa , Zitsadegu , Drugchu , Baima ) are not mutually intelligible , but are not known well enough to classify. mDungnag , a Tibetan language spoken in Gansu , is also divergent and is not mutually intelligible with either Khams or Amdo . Tournadre (2013) adds Tseku and Khamba to Khams , and groups Thewo-Chone , Zhongu , and Baima as an Eastern branch of Tibetic. According to Bradley,

141-606: A "western dialect" of Gyalrong, along with Eastern Gyalrong and the "northwestern dialect" (Japhug, Tshobdun, and Zbu). Otherwise, the scholarly consensus deems the distance between Khroskyabs, Horpa, and the Gyalrong cluster is greater than that between the Gyalrong languages. For example, Ethnologue reports 75% lexical similarity between Situ and Japhug, 60% between Japhug and Tshobdun, but only 13% between Situ and Horpa. Huang (2007:180) found that Horpa (Rta’u) and Gyalrong (Cogrtse) share only 15.2% cognacy, with 242 cognates out of

188-460: A Qiangic language, Horpa has unique verb inflection and morphology such as the strategy of inverting the aspiration feature in the formation of the past and progressive stem(s) (Sun 2000). Verb agreement The Horpa verb agrees with its subject. For example, zbəcʰa-i [zbəcʰe], means ‘you beat’, and zbəcʰa-u [zbəcʰo], means, 'I beat’. Rgyalrongic languages The Gyalrongic languages (also known as Rgyalrongic or Jiarongic ) constitute

235-769: A Tibetic language originally spoken in the western region. Although non-Tibetic languages ( Tshangla , East Bodish ) are dominant in many parts of the country, Dzongkha is also widely used there as a second-language. Other Tibetic varieties of Bhutan include Choča-ngača, Brokpa and Lakha . Within areas administrated by Pakistan , Balti is spoken in Gilgit-Baltistan . Within areas administrated by India , some Tibetic varieties are spoken in Ladakh , Sikkim , Himachal Pradesh ( Kinnaur , Lahul and Spiti ), West Bengal ( Darjeeling and Kalimpong ), as well as Uttarakhand . As with Bhutan and Nepal , there reside

282-455: A West Himalayish superstratum, but its substratum is derived from a different Sino-Tibetan branch. Only a few language clusters in the world are derived from a common language which is identical to or closely related to an old literary language. This small group includes the Tibetic languages, as descendants from Old Tibetan (7th–9th centuries), but also the Romance languages with Latin ,

329-402: A branch of the Qiangic languages of Sino-Tibetan , but some propose that it may be part of a larger Rung languages group and do not consider it to be particularly closely related to Qiangic but suggest that similarities between Gyalrongic and Qiangic may be from areal influence. However, other work suggests that Qiangic as a whole may in fact be paraphyletic , with the only commonalities of

376-592: A brief overview of Tibetic varieties in the country. He estimates there are about 300 Khams Tibetan speakers inhabiting at least four villages in Dazundam Village Tract, Pannandin Sub-township, Nogmong Township , Putao District , Kachin State. The four villages he mentions are Tahaundam , "Shidudan" ( Japanese : シドゥダン ) , Sandam, Madin, the second of which he provides no romanization because

423-505: A hybrid system involving a more intricate interplay of functional and syntactic factors (Sun 2013). The verbs in the rGylarongic family are marked for person and agreement, and Horpa language also has subtype of hierarchical agreement. Stau is often used as an alternative name for Horpa, but in fact Stau is one of several Horpa languages (Jacques et al. 2014). The Stau language is primarily spoken in Daofu County of Ganzi Prefecture, but

470-684: A number of Tibetan refugees across the country, notably in Dharamshala where the headquarters of the Central Tibetan Administration is located. In Myanmar , a variant of Khams Tibetan is spoken near the Hkakabo Razi , Kachin State which is adjacent to Nujiang Lisu Autonomous Prefecture , Yunnan and Tibet Autonomous Region . Suzuki (2012) describes the phonology of the Sangdam dialect, as well as giving

517-403: A substitute for the term "Tibetan languages/dialects" used in the previous literature; the distinction between "language" and "dialect" is not straightforward, and labeling varieties of Tibetic as "Tibetan dialects" could be misleading not only because those "dialects" are often mutually-unintelligible , but also the speakers of Tibetic do not necessarily consider themselves as ethnic Tibetan , as

SECTION 10

#1732772437997

564-667: A total of 1,592 words. The Khalong Tibetan language has a Gyalrongic substratum . The Chamdo languages (consisting of Lamo , Larong , and Drag-yab , a group of three closely related Sino-Tibetan languages spoken in Chamdo , eastern Tibet ) may or may not be Qiangic. Gyalrongic languages are surrounded by Tibetic languages and have thus been in intense contact with them. However, there many major lexical and morphological differences between them. Gyalrongic tend to use prefixes such as *kə-, *tə-, etc., while Tibetic languages use suffixes such as -pa/-ba, -ma, -po/-bo, -mo, etc. Below

611-444: A trill [r] is heard word-medially when after a vowel and before a consonant, but is for the most part less predictable in that it overlaps in distribution with [ʂ] and especially [ʐ]. When words with /r/ are heard in isolation, the sound is heard as [ʐ], but then it becomes a trill [r] when in word context or within compounds. [r] also alternates with [ʂ] when it is in context word-final position. The rhotacization of vowels [V˞] occurs on

658-505: Is Baima , which retains an apparent Qiangic substratum , and has multiple layers of borrowing from Amdo , Khams , and Zhongu , but does not correspond to any established branch of Tibetic. The two major Tibetic languages used for broadcasting within China are Standard Tibetan and Amdo Tibetan . Tournadre & Suzuki (2023) recognize 8 geographical sections , each with about 7-14 groups of Tibetic dialects. This classification

705-567: Is a revision of Tournadre (2014). Tournadre (2014) classifies the Tibetic languages as eight geolinguistic continua , consisting of 50 languages and over 200 dialects. This is an updated version of his work in 2008. The Eastern and Southeastern branches have lower internal mutual intelligibility , but it is more limited in the Northwestern branch and between certain southern and northern Khams dialects. These continua are spread across five countries with one exception, this being Sangdam,

752-610: Is a table of comparing words in bTshanlha and Japhug that do not have cognates in Classical Tibetan . Tibetic languages The Tibetic languages form a well-defined group of languages descending from Old Tibetan (7th to 9th centuries, or to the 11th/12th centuries). According to Nicolas Tournadre, there are 50 Tibetic languages, which branch into more than 200 dialects, which could be grouped into eight dialect continua . These Tibetic languages are spoken in Tibet ,

799-532: Is also spoken in diaspora communities in Europe , North America (e.g. Little Tibet, Toronto ), Asia and Australia . Within China , the great majority of Tibetic speakers are officially classified into the " Tibetan nationality " (藏族), which however includes speakers of other Trans-Himalayan languages such as Rgyalrongnic . Aside from Tibet Autonomous Region , there are several autonomous prefectures for

846-497: Is also spoken in the southeastern corner of Luhuo County and in the village of Dangling of western Danba County. Currently Jesse P. Gates is writing a comprehensive grammar of the Stau language (Gates to appear). Other articles on aspects of Stau grammar include Gates (2017), Gates & Kim (2018), Gates et al. (2019), and Gates et al. (2022). Stau (Horpa) language follows some traits of the  Tibetan language  (Bradley 2012). As

893-658: Is mainly used for interethnic communication; those with primary education can speak and write Burmese as well, while they are illiterate in their own language. Most Tibetic languages are written in one of two Indic scripts . Standard Tibetan and most other Tibetic languages are written in the Tibetan script with a historically conservative orthography (see below) that helps unify the Tibetan-language area. Some other Tibetan languages (in India and Nepal) are written in

940-755: Is one of the Rgyalrongic languages . Cognates are highlighted in bold . Jacques et al. (2017) list the following words as lexical innovations shared by Stau and Khroskyabs (Lavrung), but not by the Core rGyalrong languages . Shangzhai Horpa (Puxi Shangzhai) is a dialect of the Horpa language noted by a single consistently non-syllabic causative prefix "s-", which exerts pressure on the already elaborate onset system and triggers multiple phonological adjustments (Sun 2007). Gexi Horpa language not only has split  verbal agreement  system like rGyalrong but also has

987-729: Is the case with Sherpas , Ladakhis , Baltis , Lahaulas , Sikkimese and Bhutanese . Marius Zemp (2018) hypothesizes that Tibetan originated as a pidgin with the West Himalayish language Zhangzhung as its superstratum , and Rgyalrongic as its substratum (both languages are part of the broader Sino-Tibetan family). However, there are many grammatical differences between the Rgyalrongic and Tibetic languages; Rgyalrongic tend to use prefixes such as *kə-, *tə-, etc., while Tibetic languages use suffixes such as -pa/-ba, -ma, -po/-bo, -mo, etc. Similarly, Tamangic also has

SECTION 20

#1732772437997

1034-560: The Arabic languages (or "dialects") with Classical Arabic , the Sinitic languages with Middle Chinese , the modern Indic languages with Vedic Sanskrit . The more divergent languages are spoken in the north and east, likely due to language contact with the Qiangic , Rgyalrongic languages . The divergence exhibited in Khalong may also be due to language shift . In addition, there

1081-701: The Qiang peoples of Kham are classified by China as ethnic Tibetans (see Gyalrongic languages ; Gyalrong people are identified as 'Tibetan' in China), the Qiangic languages are not Tibetan, but rather form their own branch of the Tibeto-Burman language family . Classical Tibetan was not a tonal language , but many varieties such as Central and Khams Tibetan have developed tone registers. Amdo and Ladakhi-Balti are without tone. Tibetan morphology can generally be described as agglutinative . Although

1128-513: The "nationality" in Sichuan , Qinghai , Gansu , and Yunnan . Lhasa Tibetan , or more technically, Standard Tibetan (natively called སྤྱི་སྐད spyi skad ) is used among post-1950s Tibetan emigrants to Nepal . Other Tibetic varieties such as Sherpa , Jirel and Yolmo are spoken in districts along the China-Nepal border . The national language of Bhutan is Dzongkha ,

1175-478: The 9th century the process of cluster simplification, devoicing and tonogenesis had begun in the central dialects, as can be shown by Tibetan words transliterated into other languages, particularly Middle Chinese but also Uyghur . The combination of the abovementioned evidence enables us to form the following outline of the evolution of Tibetan. In the 9th century, as shown by the bilingual Tibetan– Chinese treaty of 821–822 found in front of Lhasa 's Jokhang ,

1222-1066: The Dgebshes language (Geshizha 格什扎话) spoken in Rongbrag county (Danba 丹巴), and the Stodsde language (Shangzhai 上寨) in Ndzamthang. Gyalrongic languages are spoken predominantly in the four counties of Ma'erkang , Li , Xiaojin , and Jinchuan in Aba Prefecture , western Sichuan . Other Gyalrongic lects are spoken in neighboring Heishui, Rangtang, Baoxing, Danba, and Daofu counties. The Gyalrongic languages share several features, notably in verbal morphology. More recent classifications such as Lai et al. (2020) split Gyalrongic into West and East branches: The Gyalrong languages in turn constitute four mutually unintelligible varieties: Eastern Gyalrong or Situ , Japhug , Tshobdun , and Zbu . Khroskyabs and Horpa are classified by Lin (1993) as

1269-646: The Gyalrongic subgroup. From a genetic perspective, Horpa is a branch within West Gyalrongic, the other being Khroskyabs. Shangzhai is a sub-type of Horpa. To date, the Horpa languages are the closest attested ones to the medieval language Tangut . Horpa is spoken primarily in western Sichuan province, China, including in Dasang District, Danba County of Garzê Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture , Sichuan . There are about 50,000 Horpa speakers in

1316-634: The Tibetan language has also spread into the western world and can be found in many Buddhist publications and prayer materials, while western students also learn the language for the translation of Tibetan texts. Outside of Lhasa itself, Lhasa Tibetan is spoken by approximately 200,000 exiled Tibetans who have moved from Tibet to India , Nepal and other countries. Tibetan is also spoken by groups of ethnic minorities in Tibet who have lived in close proximity to Tibetans for centuries, but nevertheless retain their own languages and cultures. Although some of

1363-1364: The Tibetic languages, has been reconstructed by Tournadre (2014). Proto-Tibetic is similar to, but not identical to, written Classical Literary Tibetan . The following phonological features are characteristic of Proto-Tibetic (Tournadre 2014: 113). Reconstructed Proto-Tibetic forms from Tournadre (2014) include: Pre-Tibetic is a hypothetical pre-formation stage of Proto-Tibetic. *ty-, *ly-, *sy- were not palatalized in Pre-Tibetic, but underwent palatalization in Proto-Tibetic (Tournadre 2014: 113-114). Posited sound changes from Pre-Tibetic to Proto-Tibetic include *ty- > *tɕ-, *sy- > *ɕ-, *tsy- > *tɕ-, and *ly- > *ʑ-. However, Tournadre (2014: 114) notes that many Bodish languages such as Basum , Tamang , and Kurtöp ( East Bodish ) have not undergone these changes (e.g., Bake ( Basum ) ti 'what' vs. Proto-Tibetic *tɕ(h)i and Bake tɨ 'one' vs. Proto-Tibetic *g(ǝ)-tɕ(h)ik; Kurtöp la: 'iron' and Bumthap lak 'iron' vs. Proto-Tibetic *ltɕaks). Some Pre-Tibetic reconstructions, along with reconstructed Proto-Tibetic forms and orthographic Classical Literary Tibetan, from Tournadre (2014: 114-116) are listed below. The numerals in different Tibetan/Tibetic languages are: For

1410-536: The complex initial clusters had already been reduced, and the process of tonogenesis was likely well underway. The next change took place in Tsang (Gtsang) dialects: The ra -tags were altered into retroflex consonants, and the ya -tags became palatals. Later on the superscribed letters and finals d and s disappeared, except in the east and west. It was at this stage that the language spread in Lahul and Spiti, where

1457-442: The coronal sounds i , d , s , l and n . The same holds for Tsang with the exception of l , which merely lengthens the vowel. The medials have become aspirate tenues with a low intonation, which also marks words having a simple initial consonant; while the former aspirates and the complex initials simplified in speech are uttered with a high tone, shrill and rapidly. Proto-Tibetic, the hypothetical proto-language ancestral to

Horpa language - Misplaced Pages Continue

1504-532: The cultural aspects of their region which has shared a close history with neighbours like Kashmiris and Punjabis since the arrival of Islam in the region many centuries ago. Old Tibetan phonology is rather accurately rendered by the script. The finals were pronounced devoiced although they are written as voiced, the prefix letters assimilated their voicing to the root letters. The graphic combinations hr and lh represent voiceless and not necessarily aspirate correspondences to r and l respectively. The letter '

1551-692: The face of strong Punjabi cultural influence throughout Pakistan, has fostered renewed interest in reviving the Tibetan script and using it alongside the Perso-Arabic script . Many shops in Baltistan's capital Skardu in Pakistan's "Northern Areas" region have begun supplementing signs written in the Perso-Arabic script with signs written in the Tibetan script. Baltis see this initiative not as separatist but rather as part of an attempt to preserve

1598-418: The following five varieties of Horpa. /r/ has four allophones as either retroflex voiceless [ʂ] or voiced [ʐ] fricatives, as a trill [r], or as a result of vowel rhotacization [V˞]. It is heard as [ʂ] when preceding or following voiceless consonants or also as a word-final coda. It is heard as [ʐ] when in free variation in initial position or when preceding or following voiced consonants. The occurrence of it as

1645-558: The greater Tibetan Plateau , and in the Himalayas in Gilgit-Baltistan , Ladakh , Aksai Chin , Nepal , and in India at Himachal Pradesh , and Uttarakhand . Classical Tibetan is the major literary language, particularly for its use in Tibetan Buddhist scriptures and literature. Tibetan languages are spoken by some 6 million people, not all of whom are Tibetan people . With the worldwide spread of Tibetan Buddhism ,

1692-716: The languages cluster as follows (dialect information from the Tibetan Dialects Project at the University of Bern): Some classifications group Khams and Amdo together as Eastern Tibetan (not to be confused with East Bodish , whose speakers are not ethnically Tibetan). Some, like Tournadre, break up Central Tibetan. Phrases such as 'Central Tibetan' and 'Central Bodish' may or may not be synonymous: Southern (Central) Tibetan can be found as Southern Bodish, for example; 'Central Tibetan' may mean dBus or all tonal lects apart from Khams; 'Western Bodish' may be used for

1739-606: The literature are spoken over a large area from Ndzamthang county (in Chinese Rangtang 壤塘县) in Rngaba prefecture (Aba 阿坝州) to Rtau county (Dawu 道孚) in Dkarmdzes prefecture (Ganzi 甘孜州), in Sichuan province, China. At the moment of writing, it is still unclear how many unintelligible varieties belong to this group, but at least three must be distinguished: the language of Rtau county (referred as ‘Stau’ in this paper),

1786-483: The moment of writing, it is still unclear how many unintelligible varieties belong to this group, but at least three must be distinguished: the language of Rtau county (referred to as ‘Stau’ in this paper), the Dgebshes language (Geshizha 格什扎话) spoken in Rongbrag county (Danba 丹巴), and the Stodsde language (Shangzhai 上寨) in Ndzamthang. Ergong is a non-tonal language (Sun 2013). Varieties of Horpa include Shangzhai Horpa and Gexi Horpa (Sun 2013). Jackson Sun (2018) lists

1833-508: The non-tonal western lects while 'Western Tibetan' is used for the tonal lects, or 'Bodish' may even be used for other branches of the Tibeto-Kanauri languages . Amdo Tibetan has 70% lexical similarity with Central Tibetan and Khams Tibetan, while Khams Tibetan has 80% lexical similarity with Central Tibetan. The Tibetic-speaking area spans six countries: China (PRC), Nepal , Pakistan , India , Bhutan , and Myanmar . Tibetan

1880-422: The northwestern Sichuan. It is also spoken in nearby Dawu County , where it is called 'Stau', pronounced [stawuske]. The cluster of languages variously referred to as Stau, Ergong or Horpa in the literature are spoken over a large area from Ndzamthang county (in Chinese Rangtang 壤塘县) in Rngaba prefecture (Aba 阿坝州) to Rtau county (Dawu 道孚) in Dkarmdzes prefecture (Ganzi 甘孜州), in Sichuan province, China. At

1927-465: The placename is uncharted on the map available to him. According to Suzuki's consultant , they migrated from Zayu County , Tibet more than a century ago although they still have contact with relatives living there, and there are few differences between the dialects of the four villages . Since Rawang people are the ethnic majority of the area, the Tibetans also have a command of Rawang , which

Horpa language - Misplaced Pages Continue

1974-512: The preceding vowel before /r/ in word-final position, however it can also be heard word-medially when before a lateral approximant /l/. The rhotacization is attested on the vowels /ɛ/, /ə/, /u/ and /ɑ/. The following comparative table of Horpa diagnostic vocabulary items is from Sun (2018:4). The Central Horpa (Rta’u) data is from Niwan Village, Dgebshes Township, Rta’u County ( Daofu County ), Sichuan. The Rgyalrongic languages Khroskyabs and Rgyalrong are also provided for comparison, since Horpa

2021-641: The related Devanagari script, which is also used to write Hindi , Nepali and many other languages. However, some Ladakhi and Balti speakers write with the Urdu script ; this occurs almost exclusively in Pakistan . The Tibetan script fell out of use in Pakistani Baltistan hundreds of years ago upon the region's adoption of Islam . However, increased concern among Balti people for the preservation of their language and traditions, especially in

2068-424: The superscribed letters were silent, the d and g finals were hardly heard, and as , os , us were pronounced ai , oi , ui . The words introduced from Tibet into the border languages at that time differ greatly from those borrowed at an earlier period. Other changes are more recent and restricted to Ü and Tsang. In Ü, the vowel sounds a , o , u have now mostly umlauted to ä , ö , ü when followed by

2115-643: The supposed "branch" being shared archaisms and areal features that were encouraged by language contact . Jacques & Michaud (2011) propose that Qiangic including Gyalrongic may belong to a larger Burmo-Qiangic group based on some lexical innovations . The Gyalrongic languages are spoken in Sichuan in China , mainly in the autonomous Tibetan and Qiang prefectures of Karmdzes and Rngaba . These languages are distinguished by their conservative morphology and their phonological archaisms, which make them valuable for historical linguistics . The cluster of languages variously referred to as Stau, Ergong or Horpa in

2162-491: The term "Tibetic" had been applied in various ways within the Sino-Tibetan research tradition, Nicolas Tournadre defined it as a phylum derived from Old Tibetan . Following Nishi (1987) and Beyer (1992), he identified several lexical innovations that can be used as a diagnosis to distinguish Tibetic from the other languages of the family, such as བདུན bdun "seven". The "Tibetic languages" in this sense are

2209-490: Was pronounced as a voiced guttural fricative before vowels but as homorganic prenasalization before consonants. Whether the gigu verso had phonetic meaning or not remains controversial. For instance, Srongbtsan Sgampo would have been pronounced [sroŋpʦan zɡampo] (now pronounced [sɔ́ŋʦɛ̃ ɡʌ̀mpo] in Lhasa Tibetan) and ' babs would have been pronounced [mbaps] (pronounced [bapˤ] in Lhasa Tibetan). Already in

#996003