Verbal Arguments

The following system of verbal arguments has been borrowed from the Manual of Standard Tibetan (MST) by Nicolas Tournadre and Sangda Dorje (2003). Though we have endeavoured to accurately describe and apply this verbal framework, any mistakes in the implementation here must be our own. Take note that we do not offer an analysis of verbal auxiliaries per se, i.e., པ་ཡིན་ པ་རེད་ བྱུང་ འདུག ཤག སོང་ ཡོད་ རེད་, although a speaker’s choice of possible auxiliaries is clearly linked to verbal argument. Helpful studies of these auxiliaries have been written by others (see both MST and also Colloquial Tibetan by Tsetan Chonjore). The strength of this lexicon derives from the concurrent classification of each verb or verbalised compound in terms of transitivity and volition. Though linguistic scholars have remarked on these separate aspects of spoken Tibetan for at least two decades, we believe that this book is among the first to apply such categories systematically. Given the novelty of this exercise, we readily anticipate differences of opinion to surround the classification of certain verbs. The revisions and clarification resulting from a discussion of verb types will clearly aid the student of spoken Tibetan in the years to come.

Volition and Transitivity

In the early 1980s, Kesang Gyurme in བོད་ཀྱི་བརྡ་སྤྲོད་རིག་པའི་ཁྲིད་རྒྱུན་རབ་གསལ་མེ་ལོང༌། and Chönpel Dorje in བོད་ཡིག་གི་རྨང་གཞིའི་ཤེས་བྱ། argued that the concept of volition should be added to the traditional categories of Tibetan grammar. Basing our approach on their earlier research, we have classified verbs as either "volitional" (རང་དབང་ཅན་གྱི་བྱ་ཚིག) or "non-volitional" (གཞན་དབང་ཅན་གྱི་བྱ་ཚིག). Furthermore, verbs have also been classified along the traditional division of "transitive" (ཐ་དད་པ་) and "intransitive" (ཐ་མི་དད་པ་). Nicolas Tournadre, Sangda Dorje, and Edward Garrett have helped us make finer distinctions between transitive and intransitive verbs by providing us with a chart on verbal arguments. Insofar as this chart with Tibetan translations was still unpublished as this book went to press, we gratefully acknowledge their generosity in allowing us to include it here. We defer readers to Tournadre’s Manual of Standard Tibetan for a better discussion of verbal arguments and linguistic concepts than is offered in this brief guide.

In a simple sense, a transitive verb implies a subject and some sort of object. Typically, the subject has some agency upon the object. This is certainly the case for the first three verbal arguments for transitive verbs: direct, indirect and ditransitive. These three categories of verb types usually take volitional auxiliaries, though certain contexts can make them non-volitional. For the other two transitive verbal arguments, affective and benefactive, there is still a subject and an object, but the subject doesn't have any clear agency over the object. That is, the subject does not act upon the object per se, but functions more as a recipient to the object. Intransitive verbs do not have an object and are usually non-volitional. Such verbs usually lack an imperative form. However, some intransitive verbs, especially those of motion, are volitional and have an imperative form. See the following table and example sentences for further clarification.

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Go to Verb Chart

Pronunciation Changes

Below is a list of frequent changes in pronunciation which occur in Lhasa dialect. In general, we have chosen to maintain literary spellings in this lexicon. However, when the divergence between the written pronunciation and the spoken pronunciation is wide enough, we have sometimes spelled words in conformity with actual speech. The divergence between written and spoken forms can vary significantly, and we have aspired to strike a balance, however imperfect, between orthodox spellings and colloquial transcriptions. In this delicate process, we have been guided by our Tibetan mentors, who themselves acknowledge the considerable disagreement over the proper transcription of Lhasa dialect. This guide should help explain some of the common pronunciation shifts away from literary equivalents.

1. The verbaliser རྒྱག is pronounced རྒྱབ་ for all tenses in Lhasa dialect. This verbaliser has been written རྒྱག in the book, but the Tibetan voice recorders have typically pronounced རྒྱབ་ in the audio recordings. The imperative form of རྒྱག is technically རྒྱོབ་, but we decided to write the imperative as བརྒྱབ་ in accordance with actual pronunciation.
2. The verbaliser གཏོང་ is pronounced བཏང་ for the present, past, and future tenses. The actual written imperative form of གཏོང་ is ཐོང་. However, we have written the imperative as གཏོང་ in accordance with actual pronunciation. (Note that གཏོང་ is also very commonly pronounced བཏང་ for the imperative.) Likewise, the imperative of the བྱེད་ is technically བྱོས་, but we have written བྱེད་ to move the transcription closer to the way the imperative is pronounced. (In Lhasa dialect, the imperative form of བྱེད་ is typically pronounced བྱིད་.)
3. When རེད་ is used as the last word in a question, we have often written རེད་ as རས་ to reflect the common shift in pronunciation. As a noun, the word རས་ means "cloth," but students should not be confused when རས་ appears at the end of a question. For example, ཀ འདི་སུའི་རས། ཁ འདི་ཁོང་གི་རེད། "A. Whose is this? B. It is hers."
4. A noun can be often paired with several different verbalisers. In such a case, both verbalisers have been listed in the main entry with a space between them. For example, ཁ་པར་རྒྱག can also be verbalised with གཏོང་, and the main entry of the verb is listed "ཁ་པར་རྒྱག གཏོང༌།"

List of normative pronunciation changes

The "written" column below lists the normal, literary spellings of many terms which appear in the example sentences of this book. The "pronounced" column represents the general pronunciation of such terms in the audio recordings and in Lhasa overall. Please note that the degree to which speakers actually veer away from written pronunciation can vary considerably.

General Notes and Helpful Hints

• A verb can be followed by both པ་རེད། and བ་རེད། depending on the suffix of the preceding verb, but in Lhasa dialect, both auxiliaries are pronounced པ་རེད། (that is, pronounced [verb]+‘ba rey’ and rarely [verb]+‘wa rey’). We have written བ་རེད་ when this is required.
• Following Tournadre and Sangda Dorje in MST, we have transcribed the interverbal connective particle གར་ to underscore a historical relationship with the written equivalent, བར. For example, ང་ཅ་ལག་ཅིག་ཉོ་གར་འགྲོ་གི་ཡིན། ("I will go to buy something"). Other authors of Lhasa dialect textbooks have transcribed this particle གག་ ཀག་ or ཀ་ to better reflect actual pronunciation.
• When ཨང་ indicates the imperative, this particle has been transcribed ཨཱ་ to better reflect actual pronunciation in Lhasa. For example, ཁ་ལག་ཡག་པོ་ཟོ་ཨཱ། ("Eat well!").
• The inferential auxiliary ཤག, which can be added to the end of a declarative statements, has been written in a way to distinguish this auxiliary from བཞག, the past tense of འཇོག. For example, ཁོང་ན་ཤག ("He is sick"). Though some authors have transcribed this particle as བཞག to suggest a semantic relationship with the verb འཇོག, we have maintained local tradition in writing ཤག to minimise reader confusion.
• The inferential auxiliary ཤག, which can be added to the end of a declarative statements, has been written in a way to distinguish this auxiliary from བཞག, the past tense of འཇོག. For example, ཁོང་ན་ཤག ("He is sick"). Though some authors have transcribed this particle as བཞག to suggest a semantic relationship with the verb འཇོག, we have maintained local tradition in writing ཤག to minimise reader confusion.
• We have written དེ་འདྲ་ as དེ་འདྲས་ to better represent actual pronunciation. Readers should not deduce that the ergative particle as been added to དེ་འདྲ་.
• Note that the indefinite particles ཤིག ཞིག ཅིག are all pronounced ཅིག in Lhasa dialect. The data in Lhasa Verbs is not entirely consistent in the spelling of this particle. Sometimes the word has been spelled according to grammatical rules, other times the grammar rules have been ignored.
• The use of རེད་པཱ་ is very common in Lhasa dialect. A literal translation of the phrase would be "is it?", but could also be translated "right?" or "you know?"
• When not preceded by a subject, the Tibetan phrase ཟེར་གྱིས་ can be literally translated in English as "It is said that....". In order to preserve natural English, however, we have generally translated ཟེར་གྱིས་ as "I have heard that...".
• The use of དཱ་ at the end of a declarative sentence is used to indicate clarification, certainty or urgency on the part of the speaker.
• Note that we have spelled the honorific form of the verbaliser རྒྱག as བསྐྱོན་. Other authors have written it བཀྱོན་.
• In Lhasa dialect, most words with a post suffix ར་ are pronounced by extending the vowel and dropping the ར་ sound. This is also true even when the ལ་དོན་ is contracted to a ར་.
• Lhasa speakers commonly add ཡཱ་ after the ལ་དོན་ particle. For example, ང་ཁྲོམ་ལ་ཡཱ་འགྲོ་གི་ཡིན། ང་ལྷ་སར་ཡཱ་འགྲོ་གི་ཡིན། This ཡཱ་ sound has no meaning in itself but is a feature of Lhasa speech. We have not written ཡཱ་ in the body of the example sentences, but students should be aware of the ubiquitous nature of this sound in Lhasa dialect.