On the origins of Tibetan

Abstract

In order to account for the diverging functions verb stems acquired in Written Tibetan on the one hand and the phonologically archaic modern dialect of Purik on the other, we need to reconstruct a Proto-Tibetan (PT) in which labial prefixed voiceless onsets (φ-K-) focused on the instigation of an event, nasal prefixed voiced onsets (N-G-) on its result, and voiceless aspirated onsets (Kh-) on the core of the event (§1). The present paper argues that the only way to explain how this threefold distinction developed from the binary distinction (voiceless onset (K-) → transitive : voiced onset (G-) → intransitive) found in most Trans- Himalayan (TH) languages (§2) is to assume that Tibetan derives from a pidgin which was lexified by a TH language and expanded by vast generalization of recognizable patterns when it became a first language and thus had to facilitate communication in all domains of life (§3). We will discuss evidence suggesting that the lexifier of the PT pidgin was the West Himalayish language of Zhangzhung, that its substrate was a Rgyalrongic language, and that Tamangic derives from the same pidgin with a different substrate (§4).