Home Chapter 7. The semantics of the verb give in Tibetan
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Chapter 7. The semantics of the verb give in Tibetan

The development of the transfer construction and the honorific domain
  • Mélac Eric and Nicolas Tournadre
View more publications by John Benjamins Publishing Company
Search
<i>Give</i> Constructions across Languages
This chapter is in the book <i>Give</i> Constructions across Languages

Abstract

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 systematisation in Lhasa Tibetan (Hajime, 1975; Rdorje et al., 1993; DeLancey, 1998; Tournadre & Sangda Dorje, 1998; Dorje & Lhazom, 2002). We will see that the humilific plane is not the symmetrical opposite of the honorific plane. We will also explore the productivity of GNANG and PHUL, which can be explained by the fact that giving is one of the most basic interpersonal actions of the human behavioural repertoire. It therefore establishes a link between two humans, which is essential in order for the honorific and humilific notions to emerge.

Abstract

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 systematisation in Lhasa Tibetan (Hajime, 1975; Rdorje et al., 1993; DeLancey, 1998; Tournadre & Sangda Dorje, 1998; Dorje & Lhazom, 2002). We will see that the humilific plane is not the symmetrical opposite of the honorific plane. We will also explore the productivity of GNANG and PHUL, which can be explained by the fact that giving is one of the most basic interpersonal actions of the human behavioural repertoire. It therefore establishes a link between two humans, which is essential in order for the honorific and humilific notions to emerge.

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Acknowledgments vii
  4. Introduction. Lexicalization, grammaticalization and constructionalization of the verb give across languages 1
  5. Part 1. Frames and extensions
  6. Chapter 1. Metaphor meets grammar in a radial network of give verbs in Romance 25
  7. Chapter 2. Talking about giving 55
  8. Part 2. The transfer constructions
  9. Chapter 3. The role of verb polysemy in constructional profiling 75
  10. Chapter 4. The French ditransitive transfer construction and the complementarity between the meta-predicates give, take, keep, leave 97
  11. Chapter 5. Transfer and applicative constructions in Gunwinyguan languages (non-Pama-Nyungan, Australia) 121
  12. Part 3. Grammaticalization, lexicalization and constructionalization issues
  13. Chapter 6. Aoj ‘give’ in Khmer 147
  14. Chapter 7. The semantics of the verb give in Tibetan 175
  15. Chapter 8. GEI 195
  16. Chapter 9. Grammar in usage and grammaticalization of dan ‘give’ constructions in Kurmanji Kurdish 223
  17. Subject index 245
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.29.07eri

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Acknowledgments vii
  4. Introduction. Lexicalization, grammaticalization and constructionalization of the verb give across languages 1
  5. Part 1. Frames and extensions
  6. Chapter 1. Metaphor meets grammar in a radial network of give verbs in Romance 25
  7. Chapter 2. Talking about giving 55
  8. Part 2. The transfer constructions
  9. Chapter 3. The role of verb polysemy in constructional profiling 75
  10. Chapter 4. The French ditransitive transfer construction and the complementarity between the meta-predicates give, take, keep, leave 97
  11. Chapter 5. Transfer and applicative constructions in Gunwinyguan languages (non-Pama-Nyungan, Australia) 121
  12. Part 3. Grammaticalization, lexicalization and constructionalization issues
  13. Chapter 6. Aoj ‘give’ in Khmer 147
  14. Chapter 7. The semantics of the verb give in Tibetan 175
  15. Chapter 8. GEI 195
  16. Chapter 9. Grammar in usage and grammaticalization of dan ‘give’ constructions in Kurmanji Kurdish 223
  17. Subject index 245
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 29.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/cal.29.07eri/html
Scroll to top button