Inverse Marking in Nyagrong Minyag

Victoria Chen, John VanWay

University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa

Abstract

This study explores the inverse marking system found in the Bangsmad dialect of Nyagrong Minyag, an under-documented language spoken in Xinlong County, Ganzi Prefecture, Sichuan. Typologically intriguing, while the rGyarwagshis dialect of Nyagrong Minyag does not employ an inverse pattern (Suzuki 2008), the Bangsmad dialect exhibits an inverse-marking mechanism which is rather different from that of other rGyalrogic and Qiangic languages (e.g. Japhug rGyalrong (Jacques 2010), Caodeng rGyalrong (Sun and Shi 2002) and Shixing (Chirkova 2008)). The inverse-marking mechanism of the Bangsmad dialect is typologically special in several aspects: i) it is sensitive to sentence type, and ii) the type of split on the Empathy Hierarchy is rather different from the areal majority.

In declarative constructions of Nyagrong Minyag, a sentence is treated as “direct” only when the agent is a first-person argument. Inverse marking occurs to the left of the verb stem whereever the agent is a non-first-person argument, including “3→2”, “3→1”, “2→1”, and also “2→3” and “3→3”, as illustrated in Examples (1)-(5) and Figure 1. In wh-questions and imperative sentences, however, this language exhibits a distinct “1 > 2 > 3” hierarchy, in which a “2→3” sentence does not carry an inverse marking, as in (6)-(7) and Figure 2. The inverse pattern appears to be sensitive to different sentence types.

We claim that the inverse pattern in declarative sentences presents the language's strong preference of “first-person prominence” (i.e. 1 > 2/3). This phenomenon is also observed in Nyagrong Minyag's person agreement system and copula forms, in which specific forms of aspect marking/verbal morphology are employed for sentences that involves a first-person argument. Descriptively, this type of “first person dominant” marking mechanism is similar to that of Rawang (LaPolla 2010).

While many rGyalrongic languages exhibit a “SAP > non-SAP” hierarchy and distinguish among the degree of animacy in third person, Nyagrong Minyag is clearly not a member of these types. The split on the EH in its declarative sentence falls between first and second person, and no distinction among third person human, animate and inanimate is attested.

(1) ədɛ ŋa-də ɸ-tɔ ŋə (3→1)

3SG 1SG-ACC INV-beat1 COP.1 

‘He is beating me (now).'

• nalə ŋa Lozom-də tu (1→3)

tomorrow 1SG PN-ACC beat1.1A 

‘Tomorrow I will beat Lozom.'

• ni ədɛ-də ɸ-si nəŋə (2→3)

2SG 3SG-ACC INV-kill COP

‘You will kill him (someday)'

(4) məgə ŋa-də də-β-zwa (3→1)

yesterday 1SG-ACC PFV-INV-push2.1O

‘Yesterday I was pushed (by somebody).'

(5) məgə ni Lozom-də də-v-li (2→3)

yesterday 2SG PN-ACC PFV-INV-release

‘You released Lozom yesterday. (You don't remember.)'

(6) na shə-də də-thɔ ŋə (2→3)

2SG who-ACC PFV-beat2 INT

‘Who did you beat?'

(7) Lozom-də gə tɔ! (2→3)

PN-ACC IMP beat1

‘(You) beat Lozom! (imperative)'

*In the examples above, stem1 indicates imperfective verb forms, and stem2 for perfective verb forms.

Figure 1: Inverse marking in declarative sentences Figure 2: Inserve marking in wh-questions/ 

imperative sentences

Direct   

Inverse

References

Chirkova, Katia. 2008. Essential characteristics of Lizu, a Qiangic language of Western Sichuan. 

Paper presented at the Tibeto-Burman Workshop, Academia Sinica, Taipei, November 21-22.

Jacques, Guillaume. 2010. The Inverse in Japhug Rgyalrong. Language and Linguistics 

11.1:127-157.

LaPolla, Randy J. 2010. Hierarchical person marking in Rawang. In Forty Years of Sino-Tibetan Language Studies: 

Proceedings of ICSTLL-40, ed. by Dai Zhaoming:107-113. Heilongjiang University Press.

Sun, Jackson T.-S., and Danluo Shi. 2002. Empathy hierarchy in Caodeng rGyalrong grammar (in 

Chinese). Language and Linguistics 3.1:79-99.

Suzuki, Hiroyuki. 2008. Ergative Marking in Nyagrong-Minyag (Xinlong, Sichuan). In Linguistics 

of the Tibeto-Burman Area 31.1: La Trobe University.