{"title":"藏汉化石名词性前缀","authors":"Guillaume Jacques","doi":"10.1163/2405478x-01201002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper shows that both Tibetan and Old Chinese preserve lexicalized traces of several nominalization prefixes which are still productive in morphologically more conservative languages of the Trans-Himalayan family such as Rgyalrongic, which can thus serve as a model for analyzing other languages.","PeriodicalId":132217,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Chinese linguistics","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fossil Nominalization Prefixes in Tibetan and Chinese\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume Jacques\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/2405478x-01201002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper shows that both Tibetan and Old Chinese preserve lexicalized traces of several nominalization prefixes which are still productive in morphologically more conservative languages of the Trans-Himalayan family such as Rgyalrongic, which can thus serve as a model for analyzing other languages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":132217,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of Chinese linguistics\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of Chinese linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478x-01201002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Chinese linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2405478x-01201002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Fossil Nominalization Prefixes in Tibetan and Chinese
This paper shows that both Tibetan and Old Chinese preserve lexicalized traces of several nominalization prefixes which are still productive in morphologically more conservative languages of the Trans-Himalayan family such as Rgyalrongic, which can thus serve as a model for analyzing other languages.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
