Abstract
This paper examines comparability of descriptive grammars across typologically different languages. Focusing on the Nepal Himalayas, which has high language diversity that extends beyond areal, genetic, and historical categorization, the paper examines similarities across grammars and the influences motivating these. It reports on the construction and use of a database comprising materials from 18 descriptive grammars of Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal written over a 30-year period. This includes a small sub-database of metadata noting grammarian linguistic training, career affiliations, and dissertation supervisors and a larger sub-database of fully tagged tables of contents for each of the grammars. The overarching relational database links sections containing similar content, enabling search functions to explore the locations of similar information and feature labels across grammars in the database. While some grammar-features in the corpus reflect broader structural properties across grammars, findings indicate strong local influences. We find evidence of three foundational linguistic “schools” connecting the structural organization of the grammars across multiple generations of linguists, correspondences across chapter titles, sections, as well as school-influenced organization of verbal paradigms, treatment of marginal topics, and terminological choices.
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the following scholars for their comments and insights: Olivier Bonami, Lauren Gawne, Carol Genetti, John Mansfield, Didier Samain, Otto Zwartjes, as well as an anonymous reviewer. We are also grateful to a CNRS-University of Melbourne joint funding scheme which allowed us to initiate this collaborative research.
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2015. The art of grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2018. The Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford handbooks in linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198759515.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Akita, Kimi & Prashant Pardeshi (eds.). 2019. Ideophones, mimetics and expressives (Iconicity in language and literature 16). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/ill.16Search in Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix. 1992. Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 18. 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-g.Search in Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 2015. Dimensions of morphological complexity. In Matthew Baerman, Dunstan Brown & Greville Corbett (eds.), Understanding and measuring morphological complexity, 11–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723769.003.0002Search in Google Scholar
Aussant, Emilie. 2017. La grammaire sanskrite étendue: Etat des Lieux. Histoire Epistémologie Langage 39(2). 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1051/hel/2017390201.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1997. Spatial operations in deixis, cognition, and culture: Where to orient oneself in Belhare. In Jan Nuyts & Eric Pederson (eds.), Language and conceptualization, 46–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139086677.003Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 1999. Nominalization and focus in some Kiranti languages. In Yogendra Yadava & Warren Glover (eds.), Topics in Nepalese linguistics, 271–296. Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar. 2003. Referential density in discourse and syntactic typology. Language 79(4). 708–736. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0205.Search in Google Scholar
Bickel, Balthasar & Martin Gaenszle (eds.). 1999. Himalayan space: Cultural horizons and practices. Zürich: Völkerkundemuseum der Universität Zürich.Search in Google Scholar
Bowern, Claire. 2008. Linguistic fieldwork: A practical guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230590168Search in Google Scholar
Bradley, David. 1997. Tibeto-Burman languages and classification. In David Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, 1–72. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Caplow, Nancy. 2017. Inference and deferred evidence in Tibetan. In Lauren Gawne & Nathan Hill (eds.), Evidential systems of Tibetan languages, 225–253. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110473742-008Search in Google Scholar
Caughley, Ross C. 2002. Ideophones in Chepang: Their nature and sub-categorisation. Gipan: Tribhuvan University Papers in Linguistics 2(May). 16–24.Search in Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols. 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Colombat, Bernard. 2019a. Accidens. In Bernard Colombat & Aimée Lahaussois (eds.), Histoire des parties du discours (Orbis Supplementa 46), 49–54. Leuven: Peeters.10.2307/j.ctv1q26rqjSearch in Google Scholar
Colombat, Bernard. 2019b. Accident. In Bernard Colombat & Aimée Lahaussois (eds.), Histoire des parties du discours (Orbis Supplementa 46), 54–56. Leuven: Peeters.10.2307/j.ctv1q26rqjSearch in Google Scholar
Colombat, Bernard & Aimée Lahaussois (eds.). 2019a. Histoire des parties du discours (Orbis Supplementa 46). Leuven: Peeters.10.2307/j.ctv1q26rqjSearch in Google Scholar
Colombat, Bernard & Aimée Lahaussois. 2019b. Les parties du discours ou classes de mots. In Bernard Colombat & Aimée Lahaussois (eds.), Histoire des parties du discours (Orbis Supplementa 46), 24–45. Leuven: Peeters.10.2307/j.ctv1q26rqjSearch in Google Scholar
Colombat, Bernard, Jean-Marie Fournier & Christian Puech. 2010. Histoire des idées sur le langage et les langues. Paris: Klincksiek.Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard & Norval Smith. 1977. Lingua descriptive studies: questionnaire. Lingua 42(1). 11–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(77)90063-8.Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2016. Thoughts on language: Specific and crosslinguistic entities. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0016.Search in Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1. 33–52.10.1515/lity.1997.1.1.33Search in Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2002. Relativization and nominalization in Bodic. In Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: Special session on Tibeto-Burman and Southeast Asian linguistics, 55–72. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.10.3765/bls.v28i2.1039Search in Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2012. Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology 16(3). 529–564. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0020.Search in Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark. 2011. The meaning and use of ideophones in Siwu. Nijmegen: Radboud University Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark. 2018. Redrawing the margins of language: Lessons from research on ideophones. Glossa 3(1). 4. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.444.Search in Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 2010. Basic linguistic theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Doornenbal, Marius. 2009. A grammar of Bantawa: Grammar, paradigm tables, glossary and texts of a Rai language of Eastern Nepal. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 2006. Descriptive theories, explanatory theories, and basic linguistic theory. In Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching language: Issues in grammar writing, 207–234. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. & Martin Haspelmath (eds.). 2013. The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://Wals.Info (accessed on 16 February 2018).Search in Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen. 1997a. Camling (Chamling). (Languages of the world/materials 103). Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen. 1997b. A grammar of Athpare. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen. 2000. Camling texts and glossary. Languages of the world/text collections 11. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Alan Dench. 2006. Introduction: Catching language. In Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, 1–40. Berlin & New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.). 2016. Egophoricity. John Benjamins: Amsterdam.Search in Google Scholar
François, Jacques. 2013. Deux pionniers de la formalisation en morphologie linguistique au XIXe siècle: August Schleicher et Hugo Schuchardt. Histoire Epistémologie Langage 35(1). 111–142.Search in Google Scholar
Garrett, Edward J. 2001. Evidentiality and assertion in Tibetan. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Gawne, Lauren. 2013. Lamjung Yolmo copulas in use: Evidentiality, reported speech and questions. Melbourne: University of Melbourne Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Gawne, Lauren. 2016. A sketch grammar of Lamjung Yolmo. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Gawne, Lauren & Nathan Hill (eds.). 2017. Evidential systems of Tibetan languages. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110473742Search in Google Scholar
Gawne, Lauren, Barbara Kelly, Andrea Berez-Kroeker & Tyler, Heston. 2017. Putting practice into words: The state of data and methods transparency in grammatical descriptions. Language Documentation & Conservation 11. 157–189.Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 1990. A descriptive and historical account of the Dolakha Newari dialect. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 1994. A descriptive and historical account of the Dolakha Newari dialect. Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2007. A grammar of Dolakha Newar. (Mouton grammar library 40). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110198812Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2011. Basic linguistic theory review. Language 87(4). 899–904. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0089.Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol. 2014. Walking the line: Balancing description, argumentation and theory in academic grammar writing. In Toshihide Nakayama & Keren Rice (eds.), The art and practice of grammar writing (Language documentation and conservation special publication 8), 121–134. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Search in Google Scholar
Genetti, Carol, Alexander Coupe, Ellen Bartee, Kristine Hildebrandt & You-Jing Lin. 2008. Syntactic aspects of nominalization in five Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31(2). 97–143.Search in Google Scholar
Grimes, Barbara (ed.), Joseph Grimes & Richard Pittman (consulting eds.). 1988. Ethnologue: Languages of the world, 11th edn. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 2018. Ideophones and the evolution of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781107706897Search in Google Scholar
Hale, Austin. 1980. Person markers: Finite conjunct and disjunct verb forms in Newari. Papers in South-East Asian Linguistics 7. 95–106.Search in Google Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel & Martin Haspelmath. 2019. Glottolog 3.4. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. http://glottolog.org (accessed 13 May 2019).Search in Google Scholar
Hargreaves, David. 2018. “Am I blue?”: Privileged access constraints in Kathmandu Newar. In Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity, 79–107. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.118.02harSearch in Google Scholar
Hari, Anna Maria. 2010. Yohlmo grammar sketch. SIL International.Search in Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Kristine. 2004. A grammar and glossary of the Manange language. In Carol Genetti (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal: Manange and Sherpa, 7–192. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Hill, Nathan W. 2012. “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 16(3). 389–433. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0016.Search in Google Scholar
Hinton, Leanne, Johanna Nichols & John Ohala (eds.). 1994. Sound symbolism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511751806Search in Google Scholar
Hodgson, Brian Houghton. 1857. Vayu vocabulary. Journal of The Asiatic Society of Bengal 26. 372–485.Search in Google Scholar
Kelly, Barbara. 2004. A grammar and glossary of the Sherpa language. In Carol Genetti (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of Nepal: Manange and Sherpa, 193–321. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Kelly, Barbara. 2018. Interaction of speaker knowledge and volitionality in Sherpa. In Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity, 139–152. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.118.04kelSearch in Google Scholar
King, John. 2009. A grammar of Dhimal. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2016. Where have all the interjections gone? A look into the place of interjections in contemporary grammars of endangered languages. In Carlos Assunção, Gonçalo Fernandes & Rolf Kemmler (eds.), Tradition and innovation in the history of linguistics: Contributions from the 13th international conference on the history of the language sciences (ICHoLS XIII), Vila Real, 25–29 August 2014. Münster: Nodus.Search in Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2017. Ideophones in Khaling. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 40(2). 179–201. https://doi.org/10.1075/ltba.17005.lah.Search in Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2019. Les parties du discours dans les manuels de description linguistique. In Jean-Marie Fournier, Aimée Lahaussois & Valérie Raby (eds.), Grammaticalia: Hommage à Bernard Colombat, 27–34. Lyon: ENS Editions.10.4000/books.enseditions.12189Search in Google Scholar
Lahaussois, Aimée. 2020. The shapes of verbal paradigms in Kiranti languages. Faits de Langues 50(2). 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1163/19589514-05002010.Search in Google Scholar
Lallot, Jean. 2019. Parapomenon. In Bernard Colombat & Aimée Lahaussois (eds.), Histoire des parties du discours (Orbis supplementa 46), 45–48. Leuven: Peeters.Search in Google Scholar
Lambert-Brétière, Renée. 2020. The Bloomfieldian heritage in Algonquian linguistics: The verbal complex in Innu. Faits de Langues 50(2). 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1163/19589514-05002012.Search in Google Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert. 1999. Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other? Linguistic Typology 3. 91–109. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1999.3.1.91.Search in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1999. Documentation of endangered languages: A priority task for linguistics. In Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität (ASSidUE, 1).Search in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian & Elena Maslova. 2004. Grammaticography. In Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, Joachim Mugdan & Stavros Skopeteas (eds.), Morphologie: Ein Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung, vol. 2, 1857–1882. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110172782.2.20.1857Search in Google Scholar
Matisoff, James. 1972. Lahu nominalization, relativization and genitivization. In John Kimball (ed.), Syntax and semantics, 237–257. New York: Seminar Press.10.1163/9789004372986_017Search in Google Scholar
Michailovsky, Boyd. 1988. La langue hayu. Paris: Editions du CNRS.Search in Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 2007. Grammars and community. In Thomas Payne & David Weber (eds.), Perspectives on grammar writing (Benjamins current topics 11), 45–70. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/bct.11.05mitSearch in Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Eve. 2016. On linguistic categories. Linguistic Typology 20(2). 417–426. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0015.Search in Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike. 2006a. Sketch grammar. In JostGippert, NikolausHimmelmann & UlrikeMosel (eds.), Essentials of language documentation, 301–310. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike. 2006b. Grammaticography: The art and craft of writing grammars. In Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans (eds.), Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, 41–68. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Moseley, Christopher (ed.). 2010. Atlas of the world’s languages in danger, 3rd edn. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Mushin, Ilana. 2013. Making knowledge visible in discourse: Implications for the study of linguistic evidentiality. Discourse Studies 15(5). 627–645. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613501447.Search in Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene. 1949. Morphology: The descriptive analysis of words. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar
Noonan, Michael. 1997. Versatile nominalizations. In Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type, 373–394. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/z.82.21nooSearch in Google Scholar
Noonan, M. 2007. Grammar writing for a grammar-reading audience. In Thomas Payne & David Weber (eds.), Perspectives on grammar writing (Benjamins current topics 11), 113–126. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/bct.11.07nooSearch in Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew. 2014. Grammar writing from a dissertation advisor’s perspective. In Toshihide Nakayama & Keren Rice (eds.), The art and practice of grammar writing (Language documentation and conservation special publication 8), 7–24. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Search in Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas. 2007. A grammar as a communicative act, or what does a grammatical description really describe? In Thomas Payne & David Weber (eds.), Perspectives on grammar writing (Benjamins current topics 11), 127–142. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/bct.11.08paySearch in Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E. 2014. Toward a balanced grammatical description. In Toshihide Nakayama & Keren Rice (eds.), The art and practice of grammar writing (Language documentation & conservation special publication no. 8), 91–108. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Search in Google Scholar
Poudel, Kedar Prasad. 2006. Dhankute Tamang grammar. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Rai, Novel Kishore & Werner Winter. 1997. Triplicated verbal adjuncts in Bantawa. In David Bradley (ed.), Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas, 119–134. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Rai, Novel Kishore, Balthasar Bickel, Martin Gaenszle, Elena Lieven, Netra P. Paudyal, Ichchha Purna Rai, Manoj Rai & Sabine Stoll. 2005. Triplication and ideophones in Chintang. In Yogendra P. Yadava (ed.), Current issues in Nepalese linguistics, 205–209. Kirtipur: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Search in Google Scholar
Regmi, Dan Raj. 2012. A grammar of Bhujel. Munich: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar
Rice, Keren. 2007. A typology of good grammars. In Thomas Payne & David Weber (eds.), Perspectives on grammar writing (Benjamins current topics 11), 143–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/bct.11.09ricSearch in Google Scholar
Rutgers, Roland. 1998. Yamphu: Grammar, text & lexicon. Leiden: Research School CNWS.Search in Google Scholar
Samarin, William J. 1967. Field linguistics: A guide to linguistic field work. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Search in Google Scholar
Schackow, Diana. 2015. A grammar of Yakkha (Studies in diversity linguistics 7). Berlin: Language Science Press.10.26530/OAPEN_603340Search in Google Scholar
Schleicher, August. 1861. Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Weimar: H. Böhlau.Search in Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas. 2009. La trilogía catequística: Artes, Vocabularios y Doctrinas en la Nueva España como instrumento de una política lingüística de normalización. In Rebeca Barriga Villanueva & Pedro Martín Butragueño (eds.), Historia sociolingüística de México: México prehispánico y colonial, vol. I, 451–482. México D.F.: El Colegio de México.Search in Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1992. La déixis en tibétain: Quelques faits remarquables. In Mary-Annick Morel & Laurent Danon-Boileau (eds.), La Deixis, 197–208. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Search in Google Scholar
Tournadre, Nicolas. 1994. Personne et médiatifs en tibétain. Faits de Langues 3. 149–158. https://doi.org/10.3406/flang.1994.918.Search in Google Scholar
Turin, Mark. 2012. A grammar of the Thangmi language: With an ethnographic introduction to the speakers and their culture. Leiden: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1987. A grammar of Limbu. (Mouton grammar library 4). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110846812Search in Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 1993. A grammar of Dumi. (Mouton grammar library 10). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110880915Search in Google Scholar
van Driem, George. 2007. A holistic approach to the fine art of grammar writing: The Dallas Manifesto. In Novel Kishore Rai, Yogendra Prasad Yadava, Bhim N. Regmi & Balaram Prasain (eds.), Recent studies in Nepalese linguistics, 93–184. Kathmandu: Linguistic Society of Nepal.Search in Google Scholar
Voeltz, Erhard & Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.). 2001. Ideophones. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.44Search in Google Scholar
Watters, David. 2002. A grammar of Kham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486883Search in Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony. 1986. Interactions of tense and evidentiality: A study of Sherpa and English. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 188–202. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
