A Phonological Comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang – Three Kham Varieties

Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society JSEALS Vol. 10.1 (2017): 67-90 ISSN: 1836-6821, DOI: http://hdl.handle.net/10524/52398 University of Hawaiʼi Press A PHONOLOGICAL COMPARISON OF GAMALE, SHERAM AND GHUSBANG – THREE KHAM VARIETIES 1 Christopher P. WILDE Payap University Abstract This paper compares the phonologies of Gamāle, Sheram and Ghusbāng, three closely related southern varieties of Khām. The vowel and consonant inventories, suprasegmentals and phonotactics of each variety is described in turn, after which the phonologies are compared. The comparison identifies the front rounded vowels /y/ and /ø/ in Sheram and Ghusbāng as being linked to the Gamāle labial-palatal approximants, and also suggests that the loss of the syllablefinal glottal in breathy voiced verbs is the origin of the pitch contour present in Takāle breathy voiced lengthened verbs. Keywords: Tibeto-Burman, Kham languages, phonology, comparative linguistics ISO 639-3 codes: kgj; kjl 1. Introduction This article compares the phonology of Gamāle, Sheram and Ghusbāng, three closely related varieties of the Central Himalayan Khām languages which are spoken in the Rukum, Rolpā and Bāglung districts of MidWestern Nepal. The findings are discussed in relation to the labial-palatal approximants in Gamāle Khām (ISO code kgj) and tone in Takāle Khām (ISO code kjl). Gamāle is traditionally spoken in a group of villages along the Gām and Bhittri-Gām rivers, roughly in an area stretching from Guwākholagāũ in the east to Kuipadhārā and Tamāli in the west which is shaded in grey in Figure 1. Close to the west of this region are Khām speaking villages which Gamāle speakers regard as ‘significantly different’ or ‘periphery’. Two of these are Sheram and Ghusbāng which are also shown in Figure 1. Speakers of Sheram have also migrated to the village of Phuliban located adjacent to Sheram on the western bank of the Lungri river. Takāle, the only Khām variety to have been studied in any depth to date (Watters 2002; 2004), is spoken in the district of Rukum, a good three days walking towards the north. The following section analyses the vowels, consonants, suprasegmentals and phonotactics of each of the three Khām varieties in turn. The three phonologies are compared in Section 3. The study concludes with a discussion of how the front rounded vowels found in Sheram and Ghusbāng relate to the labial-palatal approximants in Gamāle, and how the syllable-final plosives in Sheram may shed light on the origin of one of the prosodic elements in Takāle. 1 The field research for this study was conducted in 2011 under the auspices of the Central Department of Linguistics at Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu. I am grateful to Professor Dr. Dan Raj Regmi for his support during this period. I would also like to extend thanks to Mr. Indra Pun Magar, Mr. Prem Bahādur Gharti Magar and Mrs. Pir Māyā Pun Magar (Ghusbāng, Rolpā), and Mrs. Khirmā Gharti Magar, Mrs. Dansāri Budhā Magar, Mrs. Minā Gharti Magar and Mrs. Samsārā Gharti Magar (Sheram, Rolpā), Mr. Sat Bahādur Gharti Magar (Maulāban, Rolpā), Mr. Purnā Lāl Gharti (Gām, Rolpā), Mr. Rām Dās Budhā Magar and Mrs. Sapanā Pun (Taka/Bāchigāũ, Rukum) and Mr. Jagesar Gharti Magar (Gumilbāng, Rukum) for their kind assistance during the elicitation of the data. Thanks are also due to Dr. Nathan Hill, Dr. René van den Berg and Dr. Sigrid Lew and to two blind reviewers for their valuable comments on earlier versions of this paper. Copyright vested in the author; Creative Commons Attribution Licence Christopher WILDE | A Phonological Comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang | JSEALS 10.1 (2017) Figure 1: Map of Gām, Sheram and Ghusbāng in Northeastern Rolpā 2. Phonemic analysis This section provides a description of the vowels, consonants, suprasegmentals and syllable structure of each of the three Khām varieties. For more detail of the phonology of Gamāle, and more extensive lexical evidence, cf. Wilde (2011; 2016). The Sheram and Ghusbāng data for this study was collected in the villages of Sulichaur and Runibāng, Rolpā. Based on a corpus of 1,400 lexical items for Gamāle, 363 lexical items for Ghusbāng and 487 lexical items for Sheram were selected for elicitation. The words were chosen specifically for comparison with various phonological features found in Gamāle, including the syllable-initial voiceless nasals and lateral approximant, and, relevant for this paper, the labial-palatal approximants and the syllable-final glottal. The phonemic analysis is mostly based on monosyllabic Tibeto-Burman cognates. Khām languages in general have borrowed heavily from Nepali. Though in most cases loan words have been modified to correspond to the Khām sound system, some differences in the syllable structure can still occur, particularly in multisyllabic words. These have not been accounted for in this paper. 2.1 Phonology of Gamāle Khām 2.1.1 Vowels The following eight contrastive vowels have been identified: Table 1: Contrastive vowels in Gamāle Khām Close Close-mid Open-mid Open Front i e ɛ Central ə ɐ 68 Back u o Christopher WILDE | A Phonological Comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang | JSEALS 10.1 (2017) Evidence for these vowel contrasts are shown in (1a-g). (1a) (1b) (1c) (1d) (1e) (1f) (1g) /i/ /e/ /ɛ/ /ə/ /ɐ/ /u/ /o/ /kiʔ-/ ‘plough’ /keʔ-/ ‘put in a slit, crack’ /pɛʔ-/ ‘throw’ /kəʔ-/ ‘cover (with a lid)’ /kɐʔ-/ ‘hit dried inner fibre of a nettle or hemp plant in order to soften them’ /ku-/ ‘steal’ /koʔ-/ ‘peel’ Likewise, contrastive nasalisation has been identified on all vowels (2a-g). (2a) (2b) (2c) (2d) (2e) (2f) (2g) /ĩ/ /e/̃ /ɛ/̃ /ə̃/ /ɐ̃/ /ũ/ /õ/ /kʰĩ-/ ‘obey’ /kʰẽ-/ ‘finish’ /kɛ̃ʔ-/ ‘put vermilion on (someone else)’ /pəj̃ -/ ‘tell’ /gɐ̃dɐ/ ‘baby of a [pɐhɐ]-frog’ /gũ-/ ‘guard’ /krõ-/ ‘join together’ Conditioned nasalisation is found on vowels which precede a nasal syllable-coda (3a), or follow voiceless nasals (3b-c). (3a) (3b) (3c) /muŋ/ [mũŋ] ‘property of a deceased person’ /m̥o-/ [m̥õ] ‘suck up; lap up’ /m̥we/ [m̥wẽ] ‘shadow; reflection’ In words of Tibeto-Burman origin in Gamāle Khām [u]-offglides are cases of the nominalising/adjectivising suffix <-w(o)>, and thus the offglide has been interpreted as a /w/-coda (4a-e). The [i]-offglides in Tibeto-Burman cognates have been interpreted as /j/-codas in accordance with the rest of the phonotactics (5a-c). (For further discussion on the interpretation of diphthongs in Tibeto-Burman cognates versus Nepali loan words, cf. Wilde 2016:133.) (4a) (4b) (4c) (4d) (4e) /iw/ /ew/ /ɐw/ /əw/ /ow/ /tĩw/ ‘short’ /ɥe̤w(o)/ ‘sweet’ /zjɐw/ ‘fodder; food’ /də̤w/ ‘difficult’ /gjo̤w/ ‘big’ (5a) (5b) (5c) /ɐj/ /əj/ /oj/ /mwɐ̤j/ ‘wound’ /səj/ ‘fruit’ /roj/ ‘thing’ 2.1.2 Consonants The following consonant phonemes have been identified: 69 Christopher WILDE | A Phonological Comparison of Gamale, Sheram and Ghusbang | JSEALS 10.1 ( (...truncated)