Morphological Causative Formation in Shangzhai Horpa

Abstract

In the Shangzhai dialect of Horpa, an under-studied Tibeto-Burman language of northwestern Sichuan, pervasive phonological alternations occur in the morphological causative formation. This paper applies the study of this phenomenon to the analysis of the historical development of alternative modes of encoding causativity in Horpa and two related rGyalrongic languages: rGyalrong (proper) and Lavrung. Despite bewildering surface variations, Shangzhai Horpa can be analyzed as having a single consistently non-syllabic causative prefix s- which exerts pressure on the already elaborate onset system and triggers multiple phonological adjustments. The excessive allomorphy and constraints exhaust the morphological means of causation coding, leading to the rise of the periphrastic causative construction as the primary causativizing strategy in the language. By contrast, the dominant mode of expressing causativity still rests in the realm of derivational morphology in the other rGyalrongic languages where the old causative prefix *s˙- remains syllabic.

Complementation in Japhug Gyalrong

“…s-exhibits rich morphophonological phenomena, including voicing assimilation, lateral dissimilation, three types of metathesis, affrication and cluster reduction. These processes are similar to those of the Shangzhai causative, described by J. T.-S. Sun (2007) [5]. However, Wobzi does not possess a syllabic causative prefix sə-, fully productive in other Khroskyabs dialects, such as Guanyinqiao, 'Brongrdzong, and Njorogs.…”

Causativisation in Wobzi and other Khroskyabs dialects

“…The former exhibits rich morphophonological alternations, including voicing assimilation, lateral assimilation, lateral dissimilation, two types of metathesis, affrication and cluster reduction. These processes are similar to those of the Stodsde causative, described by Sun (2007). However, Wobzi does not possess a syllabic causative prefix sə-which is fully productive in other Khroskyabs dialects, such as Guanyinqiao, 'Brongrdzong, and Njorogs.…”

The history of the polyfunctional 𗗙jij1 in Tangut

“…The yod postposition did not develop into a dative in any modern Rgyalrongic languages; on the contrary we observe that datives developed independently in different branches: (i) Khroskyabs and most Horpa languages have velar datives (Honkasalo 2019;Gates 2021;Lai 2017;Sun & Tian 2013); (ii) the Horpa of Stodste and Rtsangkhog have a dental dative =do (Sun 2007;Lai 2021) cognate with the Tangut allative/dative 𘋩 5447 do 2 ; (iii) Situ has less grammaticalized dative relator nouns (cf. Section 4.2.2).…”