Tibetan numerals
In Tibetan (Tibeto-Burman; Tibet), numbers are formed by combining two numbers together. 11 through 19 are formed by placing the appropriate digit after the number 10. For instance, 19 is formed by suffixing the word for 9 to the word for 10. Multiples of 10 (like 90) are formed by placing the appropriate multiplier before the number 10. For instance, the word for 40 is made by prefixing 4 to the word for 10.
For this problem, determine the underlying form of each of the numerals, and the simplest set of rules needed to derive the correct surface representations. (Make sure you treat [d͡ʒ] as a single segment.)
Alone Suffixed Prefixed
d͡ʒu ‘10’ d͡ʒugd͡ʒig ‘11’ ʃibd͡ʒu ‘40’
d͡ʒig ‘1’ d͡ʒubʃi ‘14’ ŋabd͡ʒu ‘50’
ʃi ‘4’ d͡ʒuŋa ‘15’ gubd͡ʒu ‘90’
ŋa ‘5’ d͡ʒurgu ‘19’
gu ‘9’
1. For each of the following morphemes, list all of its surface form alternants. In other words, what are all the possible forms that morpheme can take?
The morpheme boundaries are not obvious, so it will not be clear yet whether some sounds belong to the root or an affix. For instance, in [d͡ʒubʃi], you can’t tell whether [b] is part of the root (e.g., [d͡ʒub]), the affix (e.g., [bʃi]), or is inserted via a rule (e.g., Ø → b / . . . ). So, entertain all the options: hypothesize that [d͡ʒub] is an alternant of ‘10’, and [bʃi] is an alternant of ‘4’, for instance. (If you get stuck, try thinking about this problem as a logic puzzle instead.)
• ‘10’:
• ‘4’:
• ‘9’:
• ‘5’:
• ‘1’:
2. Focus first on the cases where a numeral is suffixed to the morpheme for ‘10’. In some of these cases, there is an extra consonant that isn’t there when these morphemes are used in isolation.
Is the best analysis to analyze this consonant as the result of an insertion rule, or is it better to view it as part of the UR of one of the morphemes? If so, which morpheme: the root (aka the morpheme for ‘10’ in a word like [d͡ʒubʃi]) or the suffix (aka the piece that means ‘four’ in a word like [d͡ʒubʃi])?
3. Now, take a look at the cases where ‘10’ is prefixed with a numeral (like in ‘40’). In these examples, there is again a consonant that isn’t there when these are used in isolation. Can this additional consonant be the result of an insertion rule? Why not? If it’s not, what’s the better option for where it comes from?
4. Provide the UR for each of the following words in Tibetan. For the words with more than one morpheme, make sure to show where the morpheme boundary is by using a hyphen in the UR. (For instance, the UR for English unhappy would be /ʌn-hæpi/.)
• ‘10’:
• ‘4’:
• ‘9’:
• ‘5’:
• ‘1’:
• ‘14’:
• ‘19’:
• ‘15’:
• ‘11’:
• ‘40’:
• ‘90’:
• ‘50’:
5. Give a rule or set of rules that will derive the correct surface forms from the underlying forms. (It’s possible to do it in just one rule if you have the right URs.)
6. Show derivations for [ʃi], [d͡ʒubʃi], and [ʃibd͡ʒu]. Make sure to show morpheme boundaries in the UR by using a hyphen.
Tibetan numerals
In Tibetan (Tibeto-Burman; Tibet), numbers are formed by combining two numbers together. 11 through 19 are formed by placing the appropriate digit after the number 10. For instance, 19 is formed by suffixing the word for 9 to the word for 10. Multiples of 10 (like 90) are formed by placing the appropriate multiplier before the number 10. For instance, the word for 40 is made by prefixing 4 to the word for 10.
For this problem, determine the underlying form of each of the numerals, and the simplest set of rules needed to derive the correct surface representations. (Make sure you treat [d͡ʒ] as a single segment.)
Alone Suffixed Prefixed
d͡ʒu ‘10’ d͡ʒugd͡ʒig ‘11’ ʃibd͡ʒu ‘40’
d͡ʒig ‘1’ d͡ʒubʃi ‘14’ ŋabd͡ʒu ‘50’
ʃi ‘4’ d͡ʒuŋa ‘15’ gubd͡ʒu ‘90’
ŋa ‘5’ d͡ʒurgu ‘19’
gu ‘9’
1. For each of the following morphemes, list all of its surface form alternants. In other words, what are all the possible forms that morpheme can take?
The morpheme boundaries are not obvious, so it will not be clear yet whether some sounds belong to the root or an affix. For instance, in [d͡ʒubʃi], you can’t tell whether [b] is part of the root (e.g., [d͡ʒub]), the affix (e.g., [bʃi]), or is inserted via a rule (e.g., Ø → b / . . . ). So, entertain all the options: hypothesize that [d͡ʒub] is an alternant of ‘10’, and [bʃi] is an alternant of ‘4’, for instance. (If you get stuck, try thinking about this problem as a logic puzzle instead.)
• ‘10’:
• ‘4’:
• ‘9’:
• ‘5’:
• ‘1’:
2. Focus first on the cases where a numeral is suffixed to the morpheme for ‘10’. In some of these cases, there is an extra consonant that isn’t there when these morphemes are used in isolation.
Is the best analysis to analyze this consonant as the result of an insertion rule, or is it better to view it as part of the UR of one of the morphemes? If so, which morpheme: the root (aka the morpheme for ‘10’ in a word like [d͡ʒubʃi]) or the suffix (aka the piece that means ‘four’ in a word like [d͡ʒubʃi])?
3. Now, take a look at the cases where ‘10’ is prefixed with a numeral (like in ‘40’). In these examples, there is again a consonant that isn’t there when these are used in isolation. Can this additional consonant be the result of an insertion rule? Why not? If it’s not, what’s the better option for where it comes from?
4. Provide the UR for each of the following words in Tibetan. For the words with more than one morpheme, make sure to show where the morpheme boundary is by using a hyphen in the UR. (For instance, the UR for English unhappy would be /ʌn-hæpi/.)
• ‘10’:
• ‘4’:
• ‘9’:
• ‘5’:
• ‘1’:
• ‘14’:
• ‘19’:
• ‘15’:
• ‘11’:
• ‘40’:
• ‘90’:
• ‘50’:
5. Give a rule or set of rules that will derive the correct surface forms from the underlying forms. (It’s possible to do it in just one rule if you have the right URs.)
6. Show derivations for [ʃi], [d͡ʒubʃi], and [ʃibd͡ʒu]. Make sure to show morpheme boundaries in the UR by using a hyphen.
