Tibeto-burman Language Negation Areas Of Research

This dissertation studies the category of negation in Tibeto-Burman languages. The category of negation in every branch of Tibeto-Burman languages is systematically and comprehensively described, covering the synchronic features of the category in phonology, semantics and grammar; the generality and particularity of the category are summed up through comparison both within a language branch and across language branches; the origin of the category and the impact of language contact upon the functions and constructions of negation markers are explored; the characteristics of the category are further investigated through comparison with the corresponding category in non-Tibeto-Burman languages applying the theory of linguistic typology.The significance of the dissertation lies in the following points: firstly, it will promote the research of grammar of Tibeto-Burman languages; secondly, it will provide rich linguistic data for linguistic theories concerning the studies of Tibeto-Burman languages; finally, it is of value for the research of applied linguistics.The methods used in the dissertation include the comparative method, the systematic method and the statistical method.The dissertation consists of five chapters.Chapter one introduces the coverage and object of the study, reviews the past research of the category of negation in Tibeto-Burman languages and present the methodology and data relevant to the present study.Chapter two describes the basic characteristics of the category of negation in Tibeto-Burman languages. The negation markers in these languages is classified into three types: general negation marker, prohibition negation marker, and past negation marker. The basic synchronic features of the category is summarized as: 1 .phonologically, the negation markers have a common source , which can be attested by the m- initial in the majority of these languages and the t- initial in most of these languages. Besides, the negation markers tend to show strong agglutinativeness . 2.Semantically, the negation markers in most of these languages are classified into general negation marker and prohibitionnegation marker while for Qiang another type—past negation marker—is added. 3.Grammatically, the negation markers can only modify verbs and adjectives with the marker placed before verbs as the priority order. Some of the markers tend to be lexicalized.Chapter three investigates the origin of the negation markers in Tibeto-Burman languages. The study tentatively concludes that the after-verb negation marker originates from sound liaison of early negation marker and auxiliary verb, that the prohibition negation marker in most Tibeto-Burman languages comes from adverbs expressing prohibition with a few languages developing their prohibition negation marker from the structure of 'negation marker plus auxiliary verb ', and that the past negation marker in Qiang has a close relation in origin to the affixes indicating perfect aspect and direction.Chapter four approaches the category of negation in Tibeto-Burman languages in the perspective of linguistic typology. Compared with non-Tibeto-Burman languages, agglutinativeness and prepositiveness in word order characterize most languages. As for the individual differences, the study holds that if a language employs two negation markers to achieve the purpose of negation, they possess different grammatical status, that the mechanism leading to the emergence of negation auxiliary verb includes the operation of internal structure of a particular language, language contact and human cognition, and that the after-verb negation marker is triggered by historical evolution.Chapter five offers a conclusion and several points for further study.Appendices are questionnaires designed by the author.In sum, the innovations of the present study find expressions in four points: 1.the synchronic features of the category of negation in Tibeto-Burman languages are comprehensively described; 2.the origin of the negation marker are tentatively explored; 3.the impact of language contact upon the category of negation are analyzed; 4.the differences within the category of negation are explained.