himalayan linguistics - UCSB Linguistics - University of California ...

Grunow-Hårsta: Adjectives and adjectivals in Magar
vational processes that native forms do; and they therefore form a separate (sub-)class of adjectives. 8
Distinct classes or sub-classes of adjectives need not depend on the presence of borrowings.
The presence of distinct lexical classes of adjectives as opposed to derived adjectivals is a
phenomenon which has been observed across Tibeto-Burman and is prevalent in the languages
of the Himalayan area. According to Genetti (2007: 207–12, 2008, in press) two distinct classes
are observed for Newar: lexical adjectives that are not related to verbs and adjectivals which are
derived from verbs. Manange likewise is described as having “true” and “verb-like adjectives” (Genetti
and Hildebrandt, 2004). Mongsen Ao (Coupe 2007: 208ff; Genetti et al. 2008; Genetti in
press) exhibits adjective and de-verbal-adjectival classes; this occurs also in Dongwang Tibetan
and Zhuokeji rGyalrong (Genetti et al. 2008; Genetti in press). Distinct underived and derived
adjective classes are also observed for Kham (Magaric), though as Watters observes: ““Adjective”
as a natural word class is almost non-existent in Kham. The entire class is comprised of three native
words – ‘big’, ‘small’ and ‘short’.” (Watters 2002: 111). 9 Aside from these three lexemes, other
words denoting property concepts in Kham are transparently nominalizations. Another Magaric
language, Chepang, also has only three non-verbal adjectives: ʔay ‘old’, raw ‘new’ and soh ‘empty’
(Caughley p.c., 2011); otherwise attributive terms are nominalized verbs, for example jok-ʔo manta
[quick-NMZ person] ‘quick person’. 10 Native Magar (i.e. borrowings excluded) is more extreme
than both Kham and Chepang. It entirely lacks a set of true, underived adjectives.
3 Adjectivals and adjectives in Magar
As stated, Magar has two distinct lexical classes that encode property concepts. The first comprises
native Magar lexical verbs which are nominalised to function as adnominal modifiers or as copular
complements; these are refered to here as adjectivals. The second class comprises underived adjectives,
all of which are borrowed from Nepali, the Indo-Aryan lingua franca.
In Magar, core semantic concepts (as identified by Dixon 1997, 2004), which cross-linguistically
are generally expressed as a distinct and independent category of adjectives, are either
derived de-verbal nominals or borrowings. For example, ‘dimension’ in (1), ‘age’ in (2), ‘value’ in (3)
and ‘colour’ in (4), are either de-verbal nominalizations, as in (1a, 2a, 3a and 4a), or borrowed from
Nepali, as in (1b, 2b, 3b and 4b). Virtually all nominalizations are formed with -cyo or -cʌ, which
are allomorphic dialectal variants. The nominalizing prefix mi- also occurs in a single term mi-nam
‘new’. The nominalizers, as well as their supporting copulas le and ale, which also differ across the
dialects, are discussed in §3.1.1 and §3.1.2. Both native adjectivals and borrowed adjectives are
open-classes and readily admit new members.
8 There are exceptions to this; for example the Tibeto-Burman language Mishing spoken in Assam, Northeast India.
In this language both native and borrowed terms are nominalized by -nə; for example lvv-nə ‘red-NMZ’, a native
term, and pisol-nə ‘slippery’ borrowed from Assamese.
9 Watters (2006: 3) notes that even these words gehppa ‘big’, zimza ‘small’ and twĩ:za ‘short’ occur with vestigial
nominalizers: ‘pa’ likely derived from PTB *pa meaning ‘father, male’ and PTB *za meaning ‘child, offspring’
(Benedict 1972). Thus, they are also in a sense nominalized, which suggests that even these “true” adjectives are, at
least historically, derived.
10 In Chepang, nouns express properties. According to Caughley (p.c., 2011) “For the English sentence ‘The path
is very steep.’ the most common equivalent would be ʔanə kraŋh munaʔ, literally ‘There is much upward slope.’
103