Pronunciation of Tibetan Among Khalkha Mongols by Geza Bethlenfalvy
Journal name: Acta Orientalia
Original article title: Aussprache des Tibetischen bei den Khalkha-Mongolen
ACTA ORIENTALIA is a journal focused on the study of Oriental languages, history, archaeology, and religions from ancient times to the present. The journal includes articles reviewed by a senior scholar in the relevant field.
This page presents a generated summary with additional references; See source (below) for actual content.
Original source:
This page is merely a summary which is automatically generated hence you should visit the source to read the original article which includes the author, publication date, notes and references.
Géza Bethlenfalvy
Download the PDF file of the original publication
Acta Orientalia:
(Founded in 1922 and published annually)
Full text available for: Aussprache des Tibetischen bei den Khalkha-Mongolen
Year: 1970 | Doi: 10.5617/ao.5204
Copyright (license): CC BY 4.0
Summary of article contents:
Introduction
The pronunciation of Tibetan among the Khalkha-Mongols is a fascinating subject that highlights the intricate relationships between Tibeto-Mongolian languages. Despite recognizing the significance of these linguistic connections for many years, detailed studies remain sparse. Various researchers have attempted to address this gap, particularly through analyzing loanwords and Tibetan pronunciations in Mongolia. Géza Bethlenfalvy's work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the traditional pronunciation of Tibetan as practiced by the Khalkha-Mongols, drawing upon linguistic principles and historical contexts.
Traditional Pronunciation Variations
Bethlenfalvy introduces the concept of two distinct traditional pronunciation styles of Tibetan used by Khalkha-Mongols: the Khalkha-Mongolian pronunciation and the Southern Mongolian pronunciation. Within the Tibetan Buddhist community, these are termed Chürêê (Khalkha-Mongolian) and Lamyngêgêên (Southern Mongolian). The research focuses primarily on the Chürêê reading style, since the author's experience was primarily with Khalkha lamas during his visit to Ulan Bator. The significance of the Chürêê style is that it preserves an unaltered and historical tradition of Tibetan phonetics.
Phonetic Rules of Chürêê Pronunciation
In the Chürêê pronunciation, changes occur based on the position of sounds within Tibetan syllables. Bethlenfalvy outlines various phonetic rules regarding initial, root, and post-root consonants. For example, initial consonants may completely vanish, while root consonants adapt according to Mongolian phonetic principles. This section elaborates on the transformation of sounds such as 'k' and 'g,' which vary depending on their phonetic environment. Such systematic phonetic alterations showcase how Tibetan has been integrated into the Khalkha-Mongolian linguistic framework.
Influence of Loanwords on Pronunciation
Bethlenfalvy emphasizes the impact of loanwords within the context of Tibetan pronunciation among the Khalkha-Mongols. The study points out that loanwords must be compared with traditional pronunciation only when deviations from expected forms are identified. This relationship between loanwords and traditional pronunciation reveals crucial insights into the linguistic adaptation processes that occur when languages come into contact. Loanwords often retain elements of phonetic attributes specific to the Khalkha-Mongolian context, illustrating the interconnectivity of the languages.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the examination of Tibetan pronunciation among Khalkha-Mongols underscores the complexity of linguistic interaction and adaptation within a multilingual context. Bethlenfalvy's work highlights not only the systematic phonetic rules governing the Chürêê pronunciation but also the significant role of loanwords in shaping this phonetic landscape. The findings suggest that the Tibetan language, as understood by the Khalkha-Mongols, is a language with a rich historical backdrop that remains relevant despite its status as a "dead language" in this context—a testament to the cultural and linguistic intertwining that has occurred over centuries.
FAQ section (important questions/answers):
What are the traditional pronunciations of Tibetan among Khalkha Mongols?
There are two distinct traditional pronunciations: Khalkha-Mongolian ('Chürêê') and Southern Mongolian ('Lamyngêgêên'). This text focuses on the Chürêê reading style, which was studied among Khalkha Lamas in Ulaanbaatar.
What is lacking in the study of Tibetan-Mongolian linguistic relations?
A systematic compilation and analysis of Tibetan pronunciations in Mongolia is still needed. Current works primarily address loanwords but lack comprehensive descriptions of pronunciation traditions.
How do initial consonants behave in Khalkha Mongolian pronunciation of Tibetan?
In the Khalkha pronunciation, initial consonants (preradicals) typically disappear altogether, altering the way root consonants are pronounced according to Mongolian phonetic rules.
What are the main rules for root consonant changes?
Root consonants in Tibetan may change based on their position in the syllable, resulting in various outcomes that align with Mongolian phonetic patterns during pronunciation.
How does vowel harmony affect Tibetan loanwords in Mongolian?
Mongolian vowel harmony often influences the representation of vowels in Tibetan loanwords. Additionally, closed syllables can lead to vowel reduction, while open syllables tend to elongate vowels.
How is the status of Tibetan language among Khalkha Mongols described?
The Tibetan language is considered a 'dead language' in Mongolia, as Khalkha Lamas mix Mongolian words into their discourse due to a wide array of homophonic words created by the loss of initial consonants.
Glossary definitions and references:
Oriental and Historical glossary list for “Pronunciation of Tibetan Among Khalkha Mongols by Geza Bethlenfalvy”. This list explains important keywords that occur in this article and links it to the glossary for a better understanding of that concept in the context of History, Linguistics, Religion, Philosophy, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism etc.
1) Lama:
In the text, the term 'Lama' refers to Buddhist monks in Mongolia. The author mentions receiving assistance from Khalkha Lamas in Ulanbator during his research on the Mongolian pronunciation of Tibetan. Additionally, Lamas use a specific traditional reading style of Tibetan texts.
2) Tibetan:
The text focuses on the interaction between Tibetan and Mongolian languages, particularly how Tibetan words are pronounced and incorporated into Mongolian. The influence of Tibetan on Mongolian is historically significant and linguistically complex, involving study of dialects, phonetics, and grammar.
3) Car:
In the discussion of postradikalen (post-radical) letters in the traditional reading of Tibetan by Khalkha Mongols, 'char' (འཕང་ཟ) is a phonetic example illustrating a specific pronunciation change in the context of transliteration and adaptation processes.
4) Byams pa:
Byams pa is a Tibetan term likely encountered in the study of loanwords and pronunciation differences. The term illustrates the transformation seen when Tibetan words are adopted into Mongolian pronunciation regimes, reflecting phonetic adaptations.
5) sa bdag:
Sa bdag (ས་བདག) is an example of a Tibetan word loaned into Mongolian. It illustrates how pre-radical consonants in Tibetan words sometimes remain in Mongolian, highlighting the specific phonological changes and loanword integration criteria discussed in the text.
6) Language:
Language in the text refers to the study of Tibetan and Mongolian, focusing on aspects like loanwords, pronunciation, and historical interactions. The text emphasizes the complexity and relevance of linguistically analyzing language relations for broader historical and cultural insights.
7) Dialect:
Dialect in the text underscores different Tibetan dialects, one of which is the Lhasa dialect. The research compares pronunciations and adaptations of Tibetan dialects within Mongolian contexts, aiming to identify systematic phonological and lexical patterns.
8) grub pa:
Grub pa (གྲུབ་པ) is used to illustrate phonological rules in the traditional reading of Tibetan by Khalkha Mongols. It shows how specific consonants and vowels are transformed according to Mongolian phonetic principles, demonstrating adaptation mechanisms.
9) Indian:
Indian relates to Sino-Indian studies where early research on Tibetan loanwords in Mongolian was published. These studies, such as those by G. Roerich, contributed foundational insights into the linguistic connections between Tibetan and Mongolian languages.
10) Shera (Sera):
Shera (ཤེ་ར), likely referring to the Shera Yögur language in studies conducted by A. Róna-Tas, highlights the relevance of Tibetan loanwords in different Mongolic languages. The text references these broader linguistic investigations to contextualize specific phonological features.
11) Lhasa:
Lhasa relates to Eberhard Richter's phonetics study of the Lhasa dialect, used as a reference for evaluating Tibetan pronunciation by Mongolian Lamas. This specific dialect's phonetics are central to comparing traditional Mongolian readings of Tibetan texts.
12) Garma (Gar ma):
Garma is mentioned as a transformation example where 'sk-' in Tibetan becomes 'g-' in Mongolian pronunciation. This serves as an illustration of how consonantal shifts occur in the traditional reading styles analyzed in the text.
13) Dama:
Dama is another illustration of phonological transformation from Tibetan to Mongolian, demonstrating how certain Tibetan consonants and vowel combinations adapt to fit Mongolian phonetic rules, showcasing practical instances of the theoretical phonological patterns discussed.
14) Giti:
Giti is used in examples illustrating how final consonants in Tibetan are pronounced in Mongolian readings, showing the specific changes such as silence or transformation of these consonants, in accordance with Mongolian phonetic structures.
15) Dashi (Dasi, Dâshi):
Dasi (ད་སི) is likely an adaptation example where multiple phonological rules apply in sequence; the initial consonant may change or disappear, and vowels adjust to Mongolian harmonic rules. The text details these intricate changes.
16) Shan (San):
Shan is part of phonological examples where 'sn-' in Tibetan transforms to 'n-' in Mongolian. This points to specific consonantal changes in Mongolian's traditional reading of Tibetan texts, as explored within the document's broader analysis.
17) Chun:
Chun is a suffix-pronounced element, which is part of the detailed explanation on preserving specific Tibetan consonants or vowel endings within traditional Mongolian readings. It shows the adherence to particular pronunciation traditions.
18) Grub:
Grub is included in transformations and final endings in phonological rules. Its pronunciation shifts illustrate how post-vocalic consonants are handled in Mongolian adaptations of Tibetan texts, aligning with the specified phonological rules in the text.
19) Srog:
Srog is depicted in phonological examples where Tibetan '-g' or '-gs' becomes voiceless in Mongolian. The word demonstrates how specific consonants or compounds transition into adapted pronunciations fitting Mongolic phonetic constraints.
20) Tun:
Thun describes an example of adapting Tibetan consonant 'th-' with Mongolian ‘t-‘. This showcases some of the affricate transformations and aspirated stops included in the phonetic changes discussed in the Mongolian readings.
21) Naro:
Naro is highlighted in examples of nasal consonants transitioning from Tibetan to Mongolian. The text discusses the phonetic rules for handling such nasal consonants, including when they remain or disappear in adapted readings.
22) chos:
Chos is used in examples to discuss how the Tibetan affricate or aspirate 'ch-' sound transitions into clearly defined Mongolian phonetic clusters, reflecting linguistic adaptative processes analyzed in the document.