Nathan W. Hill
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
Some Tibetan first person plural inclusive pronouns
From Bhakti to Bon
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
AI
AI
This paper examines the artistic and semantic dimensions of first-person plural inclusive pronouns in Tibetan texts, with particular focus on the Old Tibetan pronouns 'u-bu-eag and 'o-skol. Building on previous studies, this work identifies the contexts in which these pronouns are utilized and explores their distinctions in various texts, contributing to a more nuanced understanding of Tibetan linguistic features.
Related papers
Personal Pronouns in Old Tibetan
2010
The pronominal systems of early forms of Tibetan remain virtually unexplored. Old Tibetan has three first person singular pronouns ṅa, bdag, and kho-bo, as well as three first person plural pronouns ṅed, bdag-cag, and ḥo-skol. The second person pronouns include two singulars khyod and khyo(n)-ḥdaḥ and a plural khyed. The current study uncovers three third person pronouns kho-na, mo-na, and khoṅ-ta. Old Tibetan also has a reflexive pronoun raṅ. Through the examination of attested examples of each of these pronouns in Old Tibetan literature, this article attempts to distinguish the meanings among these diverse forms.
Tibetan First Person Singular Pronouns
Rocznik Orientalistyczny, 2017
In a series of papers I have explored the development of the personal pronoun system in different periods of Tibetan linguistics history (Hill 2007, 2010, 2013, 2015). In this paper, I focus on first person singular pronouns, surveying my own previous findings and filling in the picture with further gleanings from version A and (where the passage in question is missing in A) version E of the Old Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa (de Jong 1989). When the evidence of the Rāmāyaṇa is insufficient, I further consult other Dunhuang texts, the Mdzaṅs-blun, and the Vinayakṣudrakavastu (Ḥdul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi, D.6). Apart from a few Dunhuang texts, these sources are all translations or adaptations of foreign literature into Tibetan. In a series of papers I have explored the development of the personal pronoun system in different periods of Tibetan linguistics history (Hill 2007, 2010, 2013, 2015). 1 In this paper, I focus on first person singular pronouns, surveying my own previous findings and filling in the picture with further gleanings from version A and (where the passage in question is missing in A) version E of the Old Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa (de Jong 1989). When the evidence of the Rāmāyaṇa is insufficient, I further consult other Dunhuang texts, the Mdzaṅs-blun, and the Vinayakṣudrakavastu (Ḥdul ba phran tshegs kyi gźi.
Non-singular pronouns in Tibeto-Burman (Trans-Himalayan)
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 42.1, 2019
This paper surveys the forms of dual and plural pronouns across Tibeto-Burman (Trans-Himalayan), and offers a reconstruction of the non-singular pronouns, and a general account of how various branches and languages have diverged from this original system. We can certainly reconstruct two, perhaps three, person-number portmanteaus: #i 1PL, or perhaps 1PL.INC, #ni 2PL, and, less certainly, #ka 1PL.EXC. We also reconstruct #tsi DUAL which combined with singular pronouns to make dual forms. This construction was the model on which most daughter languages have innovated a analytic system of person and number marking, with distinct person and dual and/or plural morphemes combining to make the morphologically complex but semantically transparent compositional forms found in the majority of languages. Abstract: This paper surveys the forms of dual and plural pronouns across Tibeto-Burman (Trans-Himalayan), and offers a reconstruction of the non-singular pronouns, and a general account of how various branches and languages have diverged from this original system. We can certainly reconstruct two, perhaps three, person-number portmanteaus: #i 1PL, or perhaps 1PL.INC, #ni 2PL, and, less certainly, #ka 1PL.EXC. We also reconstruct #tsi DUAL which combined with singular pronouns to make dual forms. This construction was the model on which most daughter languages have innovated a analytic system of person and number marking, with distinct person and dual and/or plural morphemes combining to make the morphologically complex but semantically transparent compositional forms found in the majority of languages.
Second Person Verb Forms in Tibeto-Burman
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 37.1: 3-33. (2014)
Since the beginning of research on the PTB verb agreement, 2nd person marking has posed a persistent problem. Every scholar who has dealt with the problem reconstructs a set of person/number suffixes including 2sg #-n(a). But there is also strong evidence for a #t-prefix which also indexes 2nd person. My purpose in this paper is to summarize the results of a number of descriptions and analyses which have appeared over the last decade or so, which provide new evidence concerning the #t-prefix, and resolve some of the problems which had previously impeded our understanding of this form. I will show that there were two distinct verb forms used for 2nd person reference in PTB. In the final section of the paper I will speculate about the implications of this fact.
Open Linguistics 2017; 3: 613–637 The origin and evolution of the opposition between testimonial and factual evidentials in Purik and other varieties of Tibetan
The main purpose of this paper is to elucidate a special type of egophoric markers found in Purik and other varieties of Tibetan. These factual evidential markers, deriving from the Written Tibetan existential copula yod, are regularly used in Purik to profile not only events in which the informant participates, but also events which the informant is in the position to describe as facts even if she does not directly participate in them. The factual function of yod is argued here to reflect the indicative function yod served when it was the only existential copula at a stage of the language in which no evidential functions had grammaticalized yet. A comparison of the evidential inventory of Purik with those of other well documented Tibetan varieties reveals that it was in resultative constructions that yod first became contrasted by 'dug *'was there', facilitating the reanalysis of two evidentially opposed existential copulas. Hence, the factual meaning of yod formed in contrast to testimonial 'dug. The evolution of the factual yod is traced from its first emergence up to its restriction to egophoric contexts in Central Tibetan, and compared with that of egophoric markers in West Himalayish Bunan.
Related topics
Related papers
The allative, locative, and terminative cases (la-don) in the Old Tibetan Annals
Imaeda Yoshiro and Mathew Kapstein, eds.. New Studies in the Old Tibetan Documents: Philology, History and Religion. Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, pp. 3-38, 2011
Plural marking in Dolpo Tibetan: A preliminary investigation
Himalayan Linguistics, 2011
Social Roots of Grammar: Old Tibetan Perspective on Grammaticalization of Kinterms
Crossing Boundaries. Tibetan Studies Unlimited, 2021
Traces of Clause-Final Demonstratives in Old Tibetan
Revue d'Etudes Tibétaines 60, Août 2021 – New Research on Old Tibetan Studies – Proceedings of the Panel Old Tibetan Studies VI – IATS 2019, 2021
The Purik member of the Tibetic language family is spoken in the western periphery of the Tibetic linguistic area. In Purik, two demonstratives, de ‘that’ and e ‘the other’, occur not only pre- and pronominally, but also post- and proverbally, in which case they take scope over the sentence they terminate. The proverbal de, occurring instead of an existential predicate, locates an entity or property in the topical situation (which typically corresponds to the interlocutors’ current one). The postverbal de, occurring after a full-fledged sentence, has the effect of laying out the information conveyed by this sentence, inviting the addressee to retrace it, and implying that it should be clear. By contrast, pro- and postverbal e points to information that requires a shift of attention. The present paper demonstrates that Old Tibetan (OT) ga re ‘where is (X)?’, clause-linking (s)te ~ de, and V-ta re ‘lest (it) will V’, and other phenomena found in written and spoken Tibetic varieties, are best understood if analysed as traces of the mentioned clause-final demonstratives. The comparative study of spoken Tibetic varieties thus not only contributes to our understanding of particular OT texts, but also sheds light on the development and dispersion of Tibetic during the Imperial Period (7th–9th centuries CE).
The Semantics of the Verb ‘Give’ in Tibetan The development of the transfer construction and the honorific domain In: Bouveret, M. From Lexicalization to Grammaticalization: Give verbs and constructions. CAL collection, Johns Benjamins. PREPUPLICATION
2018
This paper aims to examine the behaviour of the equivalents of ‘give’ in Lhasa Tibetan in order to confirm, qualify or invalidate the universal tendencies that previous cross-linguistic research has unveiled (Newman 1996, Ed., 1997). We will first explore the semantic relations between the various forms that can express ‘give’ in Tibetan: SPRAD, BTANG, GNANG and PHUL, on the basis of previous lexicographic and descriptive research on Lhasa Tibetan, as well as a corpus of spoken Lhasa Tibetan (TSC). We will see that the most basic term (SPRAD) has not developed much beyond its literal meaning, whereas the hypernymic BTANG is used as a light verb whose constructions can be divided into several categories of meaning. GNANG is the honorific form of SPRAD, and PHUL is its humilific form. While SPRAD is not used as a light verb, its honorific and humilific counterparts are very productive light verbs. To explain this phenomenon, we will explore the honorific domain, and its systematisatio...
SOME TIBETAN FIRST-PERSON
PLURAL INCLUSIVE PRONOUNS
NATHAN W.
HILL
INTRODUCTION
In three previous papers I have explored the development of the personal pronoun system in different periods of Tibetan literature (Hill 2007;
2010; 2013). I offer a further contribution in this direction to Per K vrerne
with deep regard and admiration. Abel Zadoks may be the first to have
noticed an inclusive-exclusive dist.inction in the personal pronouns of
Tibetan texts (2004). In Old Tibetan he notes two inclusive first person
plural pronouns 'u-bu-eag ,..., yu-bu-eag, which he refers to as "plain
diction", and' o-skol, which he sees as "elegant/honorific" (2004: 2).
These two inclusive pronouns he regards as cOlTesponding respectively
to the exclusive first person plurals nged and bdag-eag (2004: 2). In the
Mi La ras pa 'i rnam thar Zadoks notes three inclusive first person plural
pronouns' o-skoL "hapax, not honorific", 'u-eag,..., 'o-eag "mostly used
within the nuclear family", and rang-re, used with "equals or inferiors"
(2004: 2). Unfortunately, Zadoks' observations on Tibetan pronouns
have not reached publication and the observations on his conference
handout are not exemplified with specific textual passages.
Independently of Zadoks, I also studied the behavior of personal pronouns in both Old Tibetan (Hill 2010) and the Mi la ras pa' i rnam thar
(Hill 2007). In Old Tibetan I identified 'o-skol as the only first person
plural inclusive pronoun (Hill 2010: 559). In the Mi La ras pa 'i rnam
thar I observed rang-re and 'u -eag as two first person plural inclusive
pronouns, but failed to distinguish their function, and did not notice
that this text also uses 'o-skol (Hill 2007: 278-81). Here I attempt
to augment these findings with gleanings from version A and (where
the passage in question is missing in A) version E of the Old Tibetan
RamayaIJa (de long 1989) , the Mdzang-blun, and sections of the Mi fa
ras pa'i rnam thar (de long 1959) not considered in Hill (2007).
242
' ATHAN W. HILL
OLD TIBETAN
Old Tibetan texts display at least the two inclusive plural pronouns yubu-cag and 'o-skol. The pronoun yu-bu-cag occurs twice in the story of
Rama, both in the same episode of version E .
. (l).By1-snu 'i zhal-nas II « khyed yi-bll-cag gnYls kyang gzhan-las 'phagspa yin-bas II khYl phrad-du 'thab-par myi rigs -pas II
Vi$l)u said, "we two are superior to others and it is not proper to fight like
dogs that meet each other.. ." (Rama E 73-75)
(2) Mda ' -sha-grl-ba khros-nas II tshur shog ! Yll-bll-cag gnyis 'thab-mo
'gyed » ces zer-ba-dang I
Dasagrlva became angry and said: "Come here! We two will fight."
(Rama E 77)
Ｎ ｬｕ＠ 's (ironic) use of the honorific plural khyed (cf. Hill
In example 1, ｖｩｾｉ
2013: 249-51, 254-59) conflicts with Zadoks' interpretation of yu-bucag as non-honorific.
Both examples 1 and 2 have dual antecedents . Other evidence supports the interpretation of yu-bu-cag as an inclusive first person dual. In
the story of Dbyig-pa-can in the Mdzangs -blun, known to generations
of first year Tibetan studies from Michael Hahn (1994) , the pronoun
'u-bu-cag occurs five times as a first person inclusive dual; it appears in
nearly identical passages (cf. example 3), when the hapless Dbyig-pacan harms someone and that person insists that the two of them appear
before the king to adjudicate their dispute.
(3) tshur shog rgyal-po'i drung-du 'dong-dangl des
che gcod-du 'ong-ngo zhes smras-nas
ｾｬＭ｢｣｡ｧｩ＠
zhal-
Come here! We shall go before the king and he shall decide our dispute.
(Mdzangs blun , Derge Kanjur, vol. 74, p . 272a)
The Old Tibetan funerary ritual PT 1070 provides further support for
interpreting 'u-bu-cag as a dual form, by placing the numeral gnyis
"two" after the word on the three occasions it occurs in the text (11. 6673). I am aware of no Old Tibetan examples of 'u-bu-cag '" yu-bu-:- cag
with explicitly non-dual antecedents, so one may tentatively conclude
that this pronoun is specifically a dual form.
The inclusive first person pronoun ('0- )skol occurs four times in version A of the story of Rama, three times as skol and once in the more
familiar form 'o-skot. Three of the attestations occur in the speech of
MarlcI to hIs or Dasagrlva examp es
SOME TIBETAN FIRST-PERSON PLURAL INCLUSIVE PRONOUNS 243
(4) 'o-skol-gyis kho-'i chung-rna I prog-du Ita ga-la thob-kyi I brkur yang
myz thob-pa-'i steng-du II brgya' -la thob-na yang I slad rjesu skol-kyi
srid nz brlag-par mchi-bas myz rung. » zhes bgyis-na I
How would we be able to steal his wife? Not only are we not able to steal
her, but in the very rare case that we could do it, then afterward our realm
would be destroyed. (Rama A 136-38)
(5) Ma-ru-tse na-re I « de ltar do-gal ched-po-dang bsdos-te I myz thobdu myz rung-na I re shig nz thob-par 'gyur-te I skol-kyi srid de kho-nar
myed-pa lta » zhes zer-nas II
nz
MarlcI said, "If thus the importance is great and it is not possible not to
get hold of her, then sometime we shall get her, and our realm in that will
cease." (Rama A 139-40)
The fourth example occurs when Hanumanta defends SUa's honor before Rama (example 6).
(6) Lo brgya' prag-gi bar-du II srin-po-dang nyal-du lta ga-la bthub-kyi I
bltar yang ma bthub-las I skol-kyis slar khugs-pa lag-ste II
How during a hundred years would it be possible to sleep with the demon? He could not even look at her. We have brought her back. (Rama
A 428-29)
The four examples of ('0- )skol in the story of Rama occur in the mouths
of inferiors addressing superiors, so Zadoks' interpretation of ('0- )skol
as an honorific appears to be valid for this text. However, in The Envoys from Phywa to Dmu (11. 165-168) the use of ' o-skol is explicitly non-honorific. The lord of Dmu uses nged to refer to himself and
his kinsmen while addressing the messengers of Phywa (example 7),
whereas the messengers refer to themselves with the humble bdag-cag
(example 8). When the lord of Dmu uses an inclusive pronoun to address the envoys, he chooses 'o-skol (example 9), thus, at least in this
text, 'o-skol is the inclusive equivalent of nged, and not as Zadoks posits, the inclusive equivalent of bdag-cag. 1
(7) « nged-kyi Dmu yul 'di dag-na ...
In this our land of Dmu ... (1. 105, also cf.ll. 126, 132, 140)
(8) « bdag-cag l1i 'Phywa-'i 'bangs /
We are the subjects of 'Phywa. (11. 1 10-1 1, also cf.I1. 11 4, 120, 129, 131,
1 Example 9 also shows that 'a-skat is not always dual , although the examples from
the story of Rama (examples 4-6) are compatib le with analysis as a dual.
244
NATHAN W. HILL
135,152,159,161,163,168)
(9) « de-lags khyed 'o-skol mchis-pa yang /
phu ni stong sde / mda' ni rgya-sde /
rje gcig-gi 'bangs -fa
yul dg -gi ni myi /
sa cig-gi 'bras /
ri cig-gi rda /
khyed 'o-skol-la dbyar myed-pas /
« You are us.
Above a chiliarchy, below, a hecatontarchy
As subjects of a ruler,
men of the land,
rice of the earth,
stone of the mountain ,
you are not distinguished from us. » (11.165- 67)
With example 9 in mind, Shiho Ebihara suggests that although both
"Zadoks (2004) and Hill (2010) state that '0 skol is an INCL pronoun ...
it is doubtful that it can be used as an INCL pronoun on its own , without
the second-person singular [sic] pronoun khyed" (Ebihara 2013: 94).2
Nonetheless, examples 4-6 show that there is no cause for this doubt;
the inclusive pronoun 'o-skol can and does occur without an accompanying khyed. 3
Although much remains to learn about 'u-bu-cag ,.....yu-bu-cag and
'o-skal, it appears that' o-skol is the generic Old Tibetan first personal
inclusive pronoun, whereas 'u-bu-cag ,.....yu-bu-cag has a more specificall y dual meaning.
THE
LA RAS PA' J RNAM THAR
In a study of personal pronouns in chapter three of the Mi la ras pa' i
rnam thar, I was unable to distinguish the use of the inclusive first person plural pronouns 'u-cag (a clear descendant of Old Tibetan 'u-bu.,cag) and rang-re (Hill 2007). Because my earlier study was restricted
to chapter three, I failed to notice that 'o-skol occurs as a third first
personal plural inclusive in this text.
I
I
ｾＮ＠
MI
2
The pronoun khyed is a second person plural, not a second person singular (cf. Hill
Ｍｾ
2007: 284- 86 , 2013: 249-5 1).
Ｓ ｌ ｅｶ･
ｮ Ｍ ｩｮ＠
･ｾ｡
ｭｰｬ＠
own undeIstandino ' of the syntax is that khyed and 'o-skol
are treated as distinct noun phrases; their juxtaposition is fortuitous.
£) l1l-y
SOME TIBETAN FIRST-PERSON PLURAL INCLUSIVE PRONOUNS 245
In light of the evidence that 'u-bu-cag '" yu-bu-cag is a dual in Old
Tibetan , the hypothesis presents itself that 'u-cag is also a dual form.
Three instances of 'u-cag occur when Mila's mother takes him aside
to advise him before he departs for Central Tibet; these occurrences of
'u-cag have explicitly dual antecedents (examples 10-12). His mother
also addresses Mi-Ia with rang-re (examples 20-22).
(10) bu 'll-cag ma-smad-kyi las-skos-la ltos-lal
"Son , attending to our fate mother and children . .. " (Mi la, p. 38, 1. 6)
(11) khong-tsho'i mthu-dang 'll-cag-gi mthu mi 'dra'o
"Their magic and our magic are not the same." (Mi la, p. 38,1. 8)
(12) 'll-cag ma-smad sdug thug-pa'i mthu yin-pas
"Since our magic is on account of we mother and children having met
misfortune ." (Mi la, p. 38, 1. 9)
Later in the text a passage of dialogue occurs between Mar-pa and his
wife Bdag-med-pa, in which the pronoun 'u-cag appears in the spelling
'o-cag (example 13); here also the antecedent is dual.
(13) yum-gyis « Mthu-chen-gyis 'o-cag bIos ma thongs-par log byung I
phyag 'bul-du yang-bas chog lags-sam? » zhus-pas I « 'o-cag bIos ma
thongs-pa min I kho-rang bIos ma thongs-pa yin I phyag 'tshal-du thong
na' ang thong » gsung I
The lady said, "Great magician has not abandoned us, but has returned.
Will you allow him to come and prostrate himself?" "It is not that he
hasn't abandoned us, it is that he has not abandoned himself. If you (want
to) send him to prostrate, then send him," [Marpa] said (Mi la, p. 69,11.
22-24).
There are two cases in the text in which the context does not specify a
dual meaning for 'u-cag. First, near the end of chapter three some hunters hankering to do Mi-Ia harm use the pronoun (example 14).
(14) gzhon-pa mams na-re I« thos-pa-dga' kho yin thag chod I khos
'u-cag mthong-ba Ined-pas ...
I
»
The youngsters said, "Certainly he is Thos-pa-dga'. He has not seen
us ... " (Mi la , p. 481. 21).
The context gives no indication as to the number of youths. In light of
the mounting evidence that 'u-cag is a dual form, one might suspect
that only two hunters are present. Nonetheless, much later in the Mi fa
ras pa' i rnam thar is an example of 'll-cag that cannot be interpreted
246
NATHAN W. HILL
as dual. A group of hungry hunters happen upon Mi-Ia meditating in
a cave and are ilTitated that he has no provisions to offer them. When
some of the hunters lift him up to see whether he is sitting on any provisions another hunter objects in the words of example 15.
(15)« ' u-cag !togs-pa kh ong-gis lan-pa ni min de 'dra ma byed !» zer /
He is not responsible for our hunger. Do not do that! (Mf la, p. 128, II.
9- 10).
After desisting from their harassment of the yogin the others (i .e., not
the one who objected) ask for Mi-Ia's blessing (example 16).
(16) gzhan rnams na-re
yang chug-cig ! » zer /
«
nged-kyis kyang khyed bteg yod-pas nged-tsho
The others said, "Because we have lifted you up, protect us! " (Mi la, p.
128,11.12-13) .
Because there is a disagreement among one hunter and others (gzhan
rnams) , the total number of hunters must be more than two , so the antecedent of 'u-cag in example 15 cannot be dual.
If 'u-cag is not specifically a dual, it is necessary to find some other
explanation for its use. Ebihara suspects that 'u-cag "might be a dialectal feature" (2013: 94), but this explanation is not very satisfactory, because some characters use 'u-cag in contexts where they also use other
pronouns. For example, of the three times that the first person plural
inclusive 'a-skaL occurs in the Mi La ras pa'i rnam thar,4 the first is in a
speech of Mar-pa to his wife Bdag-med-ma (example 17) , but Mar-pa
also refers to himself and his wife with ' a-cag (example 13).
(17) bdag-med-ma 'o-skol-la g-yu 'di ga-nas byung gsung-ba
He said, "Bdag-med-ma, this turquoise of ours, where did we get it
from?" (Mi la, p. 66, 28-29).
The other examples of ' a-skal occur in a song that Mi-Ia addresses to
his sister (example 18) and in an address of Mi-Ia to his disciples shortly before his death (example 19).
(18) chos brgyad spongs-La La-phyi Gangs-la gshegs II 'o-skol Lcamsring bsdebs-La La-phyi Gangs-La gshegs II ... 'o-skoILcam-sring bsdebsLa La-phyi Gangs-La gshegs II Lcam-sring skaL-ldan gnyis bsdebs-la Laphyi Gangs-kyi ra-ba-La gshegs II
- - _4_ The_o_CCJlU'ence of 'a-skat in the Mi La ras pa'i m am thar three times shows that
Zadoks is mistaken to call it a hapax in this text _004: 2).
I'
SOME TIBETAN FIRST-PERSON PLURAL INCLUSIVE PRONOUNS 247
Give up the eight worldly dharmas and come to La-phyi Gangs. We
brother and sister together, shall go to La-Phyi Gangs .... We , brother
and sister together, shall go to La-phyi Gangs. Brother and sister, both
fortunate, shall go together to the court of La-Phyi Gangs (Mi la, p. 14648,11.25-29) .
(19) 'dir tshogs-pa'i grwa-pa bu-slob lha mir bcas-pa rnams I 'o-skol
tshe sngon smon-lam bzang-pos mtshams sbyar-bas I da Lan phrad-nas
dkar-po 'i chos-kyis 'brel-ba yin-no II
Monks and students assembled here as gods and men, it is by virtue of
the excellent prayers we made in precious lives that we meet today and
are connected through the pure dharma (Mi la, 169,11. 11-14).
Example 18 is in verse and example 19 is nearly in verse . Perhaps these
are passages that Gtsang smyon He-ru-ka incorporated directly from
his source material and the use of 'o-skol will be more convincingly
accounted for within the context of this source material .
Whereas the pronouns 'o-skol and 'u-cag « 'u-bu-cag) have antecedents in Old Tibetan, the inclusive first person pronoun rang -re,
found in the Mi la ras pa'i rnam thar, appears to lack an Old Tibetan
ancestor. This pronoun occurs in the speech of his mother to Mi-Ia (example 20, 21, and 22), Mi-Ia to his friends (23), his. friends to Mi-Ia
(24), elders to a crowd (25), and townspeople to Mi-Ia's uncle (26).
(20) mi khyim-mtshes rang-re ma-smad-la sdug-po gtong-mkhan
"The neighbors who do evil to us mother and children" (Mi la, p. 37,1. 12).
(21) bu rang-re ma-smad-pas sdug-pa sa thog-na med-pa-la khyod glLl
len-pa dran-pa rang 'dug gam I
"Son, since we mother and children have nothing but suffering, how do
you even think of singing". (Mi la, p. 37,1. 3).
(22) rang-re ma-bu gnyis-ka'i phyir-du srog zon dam-par gyis ! I
"For both our sakes, mother and son, watch out for our lives!" (Mi la ,
p. 46. 11. 3).
(23) nga yang mthu slob-tu 'gro-bas rang-re rnams bsdebs 'gro » byas-
pa
"J said, 'because I am also going to study curses, let us go together'" (Mi
la, p. 37,1. 24).
(24) khong rnams na-re « rang-res bsnyen-pa skyel nus-na gdams-ngag
de kun zab-mo rang dug ...
They said, "if we are able to use these teachings, they are all rather profound instructions ... "
248
NATHAN W. HILL
(25) rgan-pa rnmns nG-rel « 1110 bsad-PGs ci-la phanl yang rang-re tshoLa mo'i bus 'di 'dra-ba zhig 'ong-ba de-ka yin modi»
The elders said, "what good is it to kill the woman? her son will bring us
destruction similar to this" (Mi la, p. 43, 11 . 23-25).
(26) da yang mo'i bu ma sod-par las 'di byed-nal rang-re tsho 'tl1ab »
byas pas
"If you do this without kill ing the woman 's son, then we [i.e. , the group
of we villagers and you] shall fight" (Mi la, p. 43,11.30-3 1, cf. Hill 2007:
281).
All of the examples of rang-re in the text occur in the speech of characters from Mi-Ia's home region of Gung-thang. Perhaps this distribution
indicates that this pronoun is a dialect feature of Gung-thang. In contrast , both 'u-cag and 'o -skol are used by speakers both from Gungthang and from Lho-brag.
UnfOliunately, the occurrences of rang-re, 'u-cag, and 'o-skol in the
Mi la ras pa 'i rnam thar are insufficient to make the difference in usage
among these words clear. One can, however, hope that examination of
other narratives will help to further elucidate the picture .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ebihara, Shiho 2013. "The inclusive-exclusive distinction in spoken and written Tibetan." In Tsuguhito Takeuchi et al. (eds), Current Issues and Progress in Tibetan
Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Seminar of Young TibetoLogists,
Kobe 2012, pp. 85-102. Kobe: Research Institute of Foreign Studies Kobe City
University of Foreign Studies .
Hahn , Michael 1994. Lehrbuch del' klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. SwisttalOdendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
Hill, Nathan W. 2007. "Personalpronomina in der Lebensbeschreibung des Mi la ras pa,
Kapitel IlL" Zentralasiatische Studien 36: 277-87.
- - 20 10. "Personal Pronouns in Old Tibetan." JournaL asiatique 298(2): 549- 71.
- - 2013 . "The Emergence of the Pluralis Majestatis and the Relative Chronology
of Old Tibetan Texts ." In Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer (eds) ; NepaLica-Tibetica: Festgabefor Christoph Ciippers, pp. 249-62. Andiast: International
Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.
de Jong,Jan Willem 1959. Mi La ras pa 'i rnam thar: texte tibetain de La vie de Milarepa .
'S-Gravenhage: Mouton .
- - 1989. The Story of Rama in Tib et: Text and Translation of the Tun -huang Manu scripts. Stuttgmt: F. Steiner.
Zadoks , Abel 2004. "Evidentials in Middle Tibetan Texts." Unpublished manuscript
read at the 37th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and linguistics , Lund , September 2004 .
References (12)
- rgan-pa rnmns nG-rel « 1110 bsad-PGs ci-la phanl yang rang-re tsho- La mo'i bus 'di 'dra-ba zhig 'ong-ba de-ka yin modi» The elders said, "what good is it to kill the woman? her son will bring us destruction similar to this" (Mi la, p. 43, 11 . 23-25).
- da yang mo'i bu ma sod-par las 'di byed-nal rang-re tsho 'tl1ab » byas pas "If you do this without kill ing the woman 's son, then we [i.e. , the group of we villagers and you] shall fight" (Mi la, p. 43,11.30-3 1, cf. Hill 2007:
- All of the examples of rang-re in the text occur in the speech of charac- ters from Mi-Ia's home region of Gung-thang. Perhaps this distribution indicates that this pronoun is a dialect feature of Gung-thang. In con- trast , both 'u-cag and 'o -skol are used by speakers both from Gung- thang and from Lho-brag.
- UnfOliunately, the occurrences of rang-re, 'u-cag, and 'o-skol in the Mi la ras pa 'i rnam thar are insufficient to make the difference in usage among these words clear. One can, however, hope that examination of other narratives will help to further elucidate the picture . BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Ebihara, Shiho 2013. "The inclusive-exclusive distinction in spoken and written Tibet- an." In Tsuguhito Takeuchi et al. (eds), Current Issues and Progress in Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Seminar of Young TibetoLogists, Kobe 2012, pp. 85-102. Kobe: Research Institute of Foreign Studies Kobe City University of Foreign Studies .
- Hahn , Michael 1994. Lehrbuch del' klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. Swisttal- Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
- Hill, Nathan W. 2007. "Personalpronomina in der Lebensbeschreibung des Mi la ras pa, Kapitel IlL" Zentralasiatische Studien 36: 277-87.
- --20 10. "Personal Pronouns in Old Tibetan." JournaL asiatique 298(2): 549-71.
- --2013 . "The Emergence of the Pluralis Majestatis and the Relative Chronology of Old Tibetan Texts ." In Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer (eds) ; NepaLi- ca-Tibetica: Festgabefor Christoph Ciippers, pp. 249-62. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.
- de Jong,Jan Willem 1959. Mi La ras pa 'i rnam thar: texte tibetain de La vie de Milarepa . 'S-Gravenhage: Mouton .
- --1989. The Story of Rama in Tib et: Text and Translation of the Tun -huang Manu - scripts. Stuttgmt: F. Steiner.
- Zadoks , Abel 2004. "Evidentials in Middle Tibetan Texts." Unpublished manuscript read at the 37th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and linguis- tics , Lund , September 2004.