Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for 'tomorrow' in Yunnan Tibetan

『地理言語学研究』 | Studies in Geolinguistics 5, 2025 66 Research article Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan SUZUKI, Hiroyuki Kyoto University Abstract: This article examines the word forms for ‘tomorrow’ in Khams Tibetan varieties of Yunnan, China, identifying three types: Type A, corresponding to Literary Tibetan (LT) sang nyin; Type B, corresponding to LT nangs par; and Type C, of unclear origin. Type A is the most widespread, Type B was geographically restricted, and Type C was isolated from the Melung dialect. This discussion focuses on the sound forms of Types A and B. The mBalhag dialect and Melung subgroup indicate a distinctive lexical distribution that separates the Type A areas. Furthermore, Type A shared irregular sound change in the nasal initial. Keywords: Tibetic; Khams Tibetan; lexical distribution; expansion; syllabic restructure 1. Introduction This article describes word forms for ‘tomorrow’ in Khams Tibetan varieties in the Tibetosphere of Yunnan Province (henceforth, Yunnan Tibetan), and then examines how they are distributed from a geolinguistic viewpoint. According to Tournadre and Suzuki (2023:823), five word forms for ‘tomorrow’ are mainly utilised in Tibetic languages: sang nyin ‘tomorrow’, nangs par ‘tomorrow’ (originally meaning ‘in the moring’, nangs kha ‘tomorrow’ (originally meaning ‘early moring time’), nangs dkar ‘tomorrow’ (originally meaning ‘daybreaking time’), and tho rengs ‘tomorrow’ (originally meaning ‘dawn’) in Literary Tibetan (LT). Notably, a lexical relationship between ‘tomorrow’ and ‘morning’ is cross-linguistically attested, as in Japanese (asita ‘tomorrow’; Classical Japanese meaning ‘morning’), Chinese (mingzhao ‘next morning, tomorrow’; see Iwata 2009), German (morgen ‘tomorrow’; Morgen ‘morning’), SUZUKI, Hiroyuki. 2025. Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan. Studies in Geolinguistics 5: 66–75. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17479518  An earlier version of the article was presented at the fifth annual meeting of Geolinguistic Society of Japan (Osaka University, 2024). I should thank Ray Iwata, Mitsuaki Endo, and Satoko Shirai for their insightful comments. The work was supported by the ILCAA Joint Research Project ‘Studies in Asian and African Geolinguistics’ and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Nos. JP17H04774, JP24H23937, JP25K00454, and JP25K04040. SUZUKI, H.: Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan 67 Norwegian (i morgen ‘tomorrow’; morgen ‘morning’), and Burmese (manakphyan ‘tomorrow’; manak ‘morning’). In Yunnan Tibetan, sang nyin is widely used, with some phonetic modifications or derivational changes. However, etymological information on the form sang nyin is unknown. A syllable-by-syllable analysis is yet to be conducted. However, based on derivational morphology, the first syllable sang is also used in words, such as sang nub ‘tomorrow evening’ and sang lo ‘next year’, and can therefore be considered to be a core semantic part of ‘the next time unit after the reference point’. Prior to discussing the forms of ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan, Figure 1 presents the most recent dialectal classification of these varieties (Suzuki forthcoming; based on Suzuki 2022b, 2024a). Yunnan Tibetan is comprised of four groups: Sems-kyi-nyila, sDerong-nJol, Chaphreng, and Southern Route. This region is in the south-eastern corner of the Tibetosphere, where other ethnic languages are spoken in contact with Tibetic (see Roche and Suzuki 2018). 『地理言語学研究』 | Studies in Geolinguistics 5 68 Legend: Sems-kyi-nyila: black symbols; sDerong-nJol: orange symbols; Chaphreng: skyblue symbols; Southern Route: green symbols. Fig. 1 Classification of Yunnan Tibetan. SUZUKI, H.: Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan 69 2. Word forms Three types of word forms for ‘tomorrow’ are distinguished in the target varieties: Type A, sang nyin and its derivational forms; Type B, nangs par; and Type C, /´nɑw nɛː/. These three forms are classified as follows: Type A: equivalents to LT sang nyin A1: /ȵ/ as the second syllable’s initial (e.g., /´shɔ ȵĩ/, /´shɔ ȵә/, and /´ɬhɔ ȵĩ/). A2: /n/ as the second syllable’s initial (e.g., /´shɔ nә/). A3: /m/ as the second syllable’s initial (e.g., /^shɔ mo/). Type B: equivalents to LT nangs par B1: /n/ as the first syllable’s initial (e.g., /^nɔŋ mbeː/). B2: /l/ as the first syllable’s initial (e.g., /´lõ ´mbjeː/). Type C /´nɑw nɛː/ only. Within each type, word forms are further classified according to the initial of the second syllable. Type A1 indicates a direct sound correspondence with the LT form, featuring a prepalatal nasal. Even with an initial /ɬh/ in the first syllable, it is a regular sound correspondence (cf. Suzuki 2013, 2025). Type A2 contains a denti-alveolar nasal, which is a remarkable sound correspondence; in Yunnan Tibetan, some other words (e.g., LT gnang nyin ‘day after tomorrow’; gnyis ‘two’) exhibit a similar phenomenon. Type A3 includes a labial nasal and does not have a straightforward sound correspondence with the LT form. However, it is noteworthy that the word for ‘two’ (LT gnyis) exhibits a /m/-initial in a limited varieties of Yunnan Tibetan (Suzuki 2018, 2022a). The difference between Types B1 and B2 lies in the initial of the first syllable. According to the LT form, B1 is an ordinary form, and B2 is an irregular form formed by the interchangeability of sounds [n] and [l]. This phonetic phenomenon has been observed in spoken varities along the Jinshajiang River in the Tibetosphere of Yunnan (cf. Suzuki 2021). However, the single variety with Type B2, Zhollam, does not exhibit this sound interchange in its phonology. Type C is apparently related to LT gnam nas, which does not exist in lexical form but can be interpreted as ‘from the sky’. Similar forms are not used in surrounding languages, such as Lisu and Naxi, where the word form for ‘tomorrow’ is /ʃɑ55 gɯ33/ (Weixi dialect; Mu and Sun 2012:158) and /so21ȵi33/ (Sanba dialect; He 2015:407), respectively. 『地理言語学研究』 | Studies in Geolinguistics 5 70 3. Geographical distribution and its analyses Figure 2 illustrates the geographical distribution of types A, B, and C of the word forms described in Section 2. Type A is the most widespread type, whereas Types B and C are geographically characterised. Fig. 2 Word forms for ‘tomorrow’, classified by types. Types B and C are found to the south of the map in Weixi County. They are used in varieties of the Melung group (in a narrow sense, except for Phongpa) of Sems-kyi- SUZUKI, H.: Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan 71 nyila Tibetan. The varieties spoken in Tacheng Town, where the circle and square symbols are in contact, use different types of word forms for ‘tomorrow’ depending on the dialectal group (Figure 1): Type A is used by varieties belonging to the mBrugpalung subgroup, while Type B, by varieties belonging to the Melung group. Word forms do not have any mutual influence beyond the subdialectal groups. Another variety of the Melung group, Phongpa, employs Type A, forming a geographical continuum of the area of Type A. Given the position of the Phongpa dialect, its use of Type A has replaced Type B, a form common to the Melung group, through a borrowing process from a neighbouring variety. In summary, Types B and C appear on the fringes of the Tibetic-speaking area. Type B is also present in isolation in mBalhag. Based on Figure 2 this is inexplicable. However, the lexical specificity of mBalhag has been reported for other word forms, such as ‘yesterday’ (Suzuki 2024c) and ‘two’ (Suzuki 2018). Of these, Figure 2 and the example of ‘two’ exhibits the lexical commonality with the Melung group. Despite the ambiguity of the migration history of mBalhag Tibetans (see Suzuki 2013), it is possible that mBalhag and Melung are related, although their affiliations differ at the group level: sDerong-nJol and Sems-kyi-nyila (see Figure 1). Considering that the distribution of Type B is peripheral, the use of LT nangs par can be analysed in an archaic form. Type C occurs only in Melung, which is located at the southernmost point of Weixi County (Yongchun Township). As noted in Section 2, the form is neither equivalent to LT nor borrowed. However, an alternative hypothesis is posited herewith. Based on its geographical location, language affiliation, and the locals’ migration history that they are descendants of migrants from the western half of Tacheng Town (the area of Type B), the form of Type C /´nɑw nɛː/ can be analysed as a variant of Type B: nɑw nɛː < *nɑm neː < *nɑŋ meː < *nɑŋ mbeː < nɔŋ mbeː (Type B1), equivalent to LT nangs par. In this hypothesised process, the assimilation of the prenasal part mb > m is often observed in several varieties of Yunnan Tibetan (e.g., Suzuki 2009, 2016). Another key sound change m > n is less attested, and here the process is combined with an intersyllabic change, the labialisation of the final of the preceding syllable (ŋ > m) with a dissimilation of the following initial (m > n). Although this hypothesis is not sufficiently supported, the distribution of Type C suggests this possibility. Figure 3 shows the sub-classification of Types A and B. Distribution of each subtype is discussed below. 『地理言語学研究』 | Studies in Geolinguistics 5 72 Fig. 3 Word forms for ‘tomorrow’, classified by subtypes. Type A is further subdivided into three types based on the initial of the second syllable. Among these, Type A1 is the most widespread, whereas Types A2 and A3 are minorities. Type A2 is distributed in parts of the Jinshajiang River water system, including the main stream and its tributaries, the mBrugpalung (Zhubalong) River and the Laphu (Lapu) River. As discussed above, the Type A2 varieties in Tacheng Town belong to a different dialect group than those with Type B1, and this boundary is reflected in other lexical items. Therefore, the question arises regarding its northern part, which is in contact with the Type A1 area. Type A3 is isolated (Phongpa dialect, belonging to the same subgroup as Types B and C), as shown in Figure 3. SUZUKI, H.: Lexical forms and their distribution of the word for ‘tomorrow’ in Yunnan Tibetan 73 Type B is further divided into two types based on the initial of the first syllable. Type B1 includes two areas: mThachu and mBalhag. According to the geographical distribution, the two are not closely related. Type B2 (Zhollam dialect) is isolated between Type B1 (Gongnong dialect) and Type C (Melung dialect). Each language community is not directly connected to the others and retains some degree of independence. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Type B2 developed independently from the varieties of Type B1 owing to its remote location. We examine the basis for subclassifying Type A. The central subtype appears to be a recently developed form with an ABA (concentric) distribution, though this pattern is not confirmed in this present study. Some examples exhibit a distribution similar to Type A2. For example, the distribution of the initial form of the word for ‘two’ (LT gnyis) is closely related to (but not identical to) that of Types A2 and A3 (Suzuki 2018:39-40). This LT word form includes an initial ny, which usually corresponds to a prepalatal nasal /ȵ/ in most Tibetic languages. However, most varieties with Type A2 exhibit a denti-alveolar nasal /n/ for ‘two’. The same applies to Type A3, as Phongpa uses a bilabial nasal /m/ for ‘two’. However, the reverse is not true. Not all varieties with /n/ or /m/ for the word for ‘two’ exhibit Types A2 and A3, respectively. Recognising the relationship between ‘two’ and ‘tomorrow’ in the initial consonant would mean that Type A has expanded and replaced Types A2 and A3. Varieties belonging to the Nyishe and mBrugpalung subgroups would possess Type A2, whereas varieties belonging to the Lancangjiang subgroup would possess Type A3. Type A2 is concentrated in the Jinshajiang River water system. This pattern of distribution is also attested in other words, such as ‘yesterday’ (Suzuki 2024c) and ‘nineteen’ (Suzuki forthcoming). Type A2 varieties are part of the rGyalthangic subgroup of Sems-kyi-nyila Tibetan (Suzuki 2024a, b) and are the only varieties that display characteristic lexical features. This suggests the existence of another stratum in addition to Sems-kyi-nyila Tibetan. 4. Conclusion This article examined the lexical forms of ‘tomorrow’ in Tibetic languages in the Tibetosphere of Yunnan. All the varieties employ a word equivalent to LT sang nyin ‘tomorrow’ (Type A) and nangs par ‘tomorrow; in the morning’ (Type B), except for a single variety (Melung) using /´nɑw nɛː/ (Type C). Types A and B were further classified into subgroups based on their phonological features. The article argues that variation within Type A relates to the phonological form of the word for ‘two’. It proposes that Type A1 has expanded and replaced Types A2 and A3, based on 『地理言語学研究』 | Studies in Geolinguistics 5 74 comparison with the form for ‘two’. Additionally, the form for ‘tomorrow’ suggests the presence of a substratum in varieties spoken along the Jinshajiang River. References He, Jiquan (2015) Baidi Bowancun Naxi Dongbawen diaocha yanjiu 白地波湾村纳西东巴文调查研究 [Research and study on the Dongba script of Naxi in Bowan Hamlet, Baidi]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe. Iwata, Ray (2009) Ditu 7 Mingtian: zonghe ditu, ditu 8 Zaoshang yiyu ci de suozhi 地图7 早上：综合 地图、地图8 早上义语词的所指 [Map 7 Tomorrow: Overall sketch, Map 8 Referents of the forms meaning “morning”]. In Ray Iwata (ed.) Hanyu fangyan jieshi ditu, 88–91. Tokyo: Hakuteisya. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15151564 Mu, Yuzhang and Hongkai Sun (2012) Lisuyu fangyan yanjiu 傈僳语方言研究 [Study on Lisu dialects]. Beijing: Minzu Chubanshe. Roche, Gerald and Hiroyuki Suzuki (2018) Tibet’s minority languages: Diversity and endangerment. Modern Asian Studies 52(4): 1227–1278. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X1600072X Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2009) Kamutibettogo Benzilan [sPomtserag] hoogen no onsei bunseki カムチベット 語奔子欄[sPomtserag]方言の音声分析 [Phonetic analysis of the sPomtserag dialect of Khams Tibetan]. Asian and African Languages and Lingusitics (AALL) 4: 219–258. doi: https://doi.org/10.15026/61392 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2013) Extraordinary sound development of *s and *z in mBalhag Tibetan (Shangri-La, Yunnan). Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 36(1): 101–110. doi: https://doi.org/10.15144/LTBA-36.1.101 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2016) Xianggelila Zangyu Yalanghua de biyin xitong 香格里拉藏语亚浪话的鼻音系 统 [Nasal system of the gYaglam dialect of Sems-kyi-nyila Tibetan]. Dongfang Yuyanxue 16: 114– 122. Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2018) 100 linguistic maps of the Swadesh word list of Tibetic languages from Yunnan. Fuchu: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa. URI: https://publication.aaken.jp/sag_mono3_tibet_yunnan_2018.pdf Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2021) Cong diliyuyanxue de jiaodu lai kan Yunnan Zangyu /l/ ji /j/ de lishi fazhan 从 地理语言学的角度来看云南藏语的/l/及/j/的历史发展 [Historical development of /l/ and /j/ in Yunnan Tibetan from the perspective of geolinguistics]. In Hiroyuki Suzuki, Keita Kurabe, and Mitsuaki Endo (eds.) Zhongguo yuyan dili yanjiu lunwenji, 21–38. Fuchu: ILCAA. doi: https://doi.org/10.15026/116769 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2022a) Geolinguistics in the eastern Tibetosphere: An introduction. Tokyo: Geolinguistic Society of Japan. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5989176 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2022b) Dialectal affiliation of Tibetic varieties in gYagrwa within Yunnan Tibetan. Kyoto University Linguistic Research 41: 43–68. doi: https://doi.org/10.14989/281541 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2023) Geolinguistic analysis of word forms for ‘today’ in Tibetic languages in Yunnan. Studies in Geolinguistics 3: 92–98. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8437061 Suzuki, Hiroyuki (2024a) Shaping rGyalthangic: A historical account of Yunnan Khams. In Masaki Nohara and Takumi Ikeda (ed.) Grammatical phenomena of Sino-Tibetan languages 6: Typology and historical change, 87–108. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/289968