Tangut Language and Manuscripts: An Introduction
... For a detailed description of the history of the discovery of Tangut texts and their current state, seeShi (2013/2020 andSolonin (2015a, pp. 844-845). ...
... For a detailed description of the history of the discovery of Tangut texts and their current state, seeShi (2013/2020 andSolonin (2015a, pp. 844-845). ...
This paper studies the Tangut translation of Dharmakīrti’s Nyāyabindu. The Tangut translation of the treatise from the Tibetan text provides opportunities for us to pursue two objectives: it is a source that allows us to probe into the history of the rise of Tibetan Buddhist scholasticism in the Tangut State; it also enables us to make sense of the Tangut Buddhist language used to translate Tibetan Buddhist doctrinal and philosophical texts. The paper argues that the Tangut translation was based on the Tibetan version, either translated or revised in the late eleventh century by Rngog lo tsā ba Blo ldan shes rab (ca. 1059–1109). The translation embodies an effort by the Tibetans to introduce a monastic curriculum of presumably Gsang phu ne’u thog monastery in the Tangut State around the twelfth century. A part of the paper is a textual-critical study of the Tangut translation and the Tibetan original, which reveals certain connections between the Tangut and Tibetan Buddhist scholastic languages.
... The case postposition 1139 jij 1 is particularly frequent in Tangut auxiliary causatives. While previous studies (Arakawa 2019: 141-142;Kotaka 2000: 73;Shi 2020: 304) mention the optional presence of 1139 jij 1 after the causee, case marking for non-subject arguments in causative compounds is more complicated. I distinguish three such situations below. ...
... The case postposition 1139 jij 1 is particularly frequent in Tangut auxiliary causatives. While previous studies (Arakawa 2019: 141-142;Kotaka 2000: 73;Shi 2020: 304) mention the optional presence of 1139 jij 1 after the causee, case marking for non-subject arguments in causative compounds is more complicated. I distinguish three such situations below. ...
This paper focuses on the history of a polyfunctional case marker 𗗙 jij ¹ in Tangut, an extinct Rgyalrongic language (Sino-Tibetan). This versatile case morpheme is a typological rarity of maximum syncretism among several abstract case functions, including differential object marking, the genitive, and the oblique (which overlaps with the dative). For one thing, accusatives originating from datives or spatial sources are rarely found with additional genitive functions; for another, reported instances of accusative/genitive syncretism seldom include other functions. The principal hypothesis of this paper is that the Tangut 𗗙 jij ¹ may be the result of multiple grammaticalization processes stemming from a proto-locative source. These processes can be subsumed under two pathways, one leading from an allative to an accusative, with an intermediate oblique stage, and the other from a locative to a genitive. Although both of these development pathways are frequently attested, the Tangut 𗗙 jij ¹ remains a typological rarity due to their superposition.
This paper proposes new origins for tense vowels in Tangut by integrating textual analysis of Tangut texts with comparative data from both Gyalrongic and other Sino-Tibetan languages. It uncovers two previously unreported sources of vowel tensing in compounding: the collective prefix (*S-) and the compound linker (*-S-). Both morphemes left only a few traces, indicating their antiquity and productivity in earlier stages. The collective *S-could be an inherited morpheme which finds parallels in Tibetan, whereas the compound linker *-S-emerged as a stage of morphological merging in West Gyalrongic with (an) obscure origin(s). These findings not only advance our understanding of the origins of Tangut tense vowels but also offer insights into Sino-Tibetan nominal morphology.
In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Chinggis Khan and his progeny ruled over two-thirds of Eurasia. Connecting East, West, North and South, the Mongols integrated most of the Old World, promoting unprecedented cross-cultural contacts and triggering the reshuffle of religious, ethnic, and geopolitical identities. The Cambridge History of the Mongol Empire studies the Empire holistically in its full Eurasian context, putting the Mongols and their nomadic culture at the center. Written by an international team of more than forty leading scholars, this two-volume set provides an authoritative and multifaceted history of 'the Mongol Moment' (1206–1368) in world history and includes an unprecedented survey of the various sources for its study, textual (written in sisteen languages), archaeological, and visual. This groundbreaking Cambridge History sets a new standard for future study of the Empire. It will serve as the fundamental reference work for those interested in Mongol, Eurasian, and world history.
This paper is a study of a Tangut Buddhist text translated from a Tibetan treatise on Buddhist epistemology and logic (Skt. pramāṇa, Tib. tshad ma), titled Sew2 ˑjij1 ˑo2 śjij1 dźju1 sji2 lju̱2 tshjịj2 [The Ornament that Clarifies the Introduction to Speculative Thinking] (Tib. *rTog ge la ’jug pa gsal bar byed pa’i rgyan). The paper identifies the author of the text, ‘Master Bodhi Diligence of Central Tibet’ (Tang. Lji2 phə1 gu2 lhjịj2 Po1 tjɨj1 ˑjɨr2 dzji̱j2), with Maja Jangchup Tsöndrü (d. 1185, Tib. rMa bya Byang chub brtson ’grus). Based on an appraisal of the content of the work, this paper observes that the treatise belongs to the genre of summary (Tib. bsdus pa) in the Sangpu Neutok (Tib. gSang phu ne’u thog) scholastic tradition of Buddhist epistemology. In addition to the text’s content, this paper also discusses some features of Tangut manuscripts themselves and attempts to peer into the classroom of Tangut monks. The paper further explores the connection between Maja and the Tangut Empire, especially Maja’s ties to Mt. Mati (Chin. Mati shan 馬蹄山). It concludes that he might have been the same person as ‘Grand Master Diligence’ (Tang. Khu1 dźjij1 mər2 dzji̱j2), who transmitted certain teachings of the Great Seal (Skt. mahāmudrā, Tib. phyag rgya chen po) to the Tanguts.
This paper reexamines previous hypotheses claiming the primacy of a perfect(ive) value in certain qusheng (*-s) derivations (in particular nominalization) in Old Chinese. First, it revisits examples previously cited as having been derived from the perfect(ive), and proposes to reclassify them as resulting from three different derivational processes, nominalization, verb argument demotion, and adverbialization. Second, it focuses on Sino-Tibetan comparative data, in particular from Situ Rgyalrong, a language with severe isomorphism across four-s suffixes. Then, on the basis of morphological (especially stem changes) and syntactic criteria, it sorts out the relationship between the different-s suffixes in Situ, while suggesting multiple sources to account for the diverse functions of qusheng (*-s) in Old Chinese.
Three parallel editions of dhāraṇī-sūtras in Tangut, Chinese and Tibetan languages were published in the Tangut state in 1149. The Tibetan edition is of particular importance, because until recently specimens of printing in Tibetan, that could belong to an earlier date, have not been found anywhere. All the editions are equal in terms of their contents and contain the postscript written by the Emperor Renzong. The main goal of the article is to introduce the previously unpublished Tibetan text of the postscript in correspondence with the Tangut and Chinese versions. Besides, the article provides information about the study, preservation state, and codicology of all the three editions.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.