Replete with excerpts of conversational utterances, Amdo Lullaby invites readers to experience the reality of the language use of the farmers’ variety (yul skad in Literary Tibetan [LT], originally meaning ‘local speech’) of Amdo Tibetan by children from the rural and urban areas of Qinghai Province. The book offers insights into the language shift process and its sociolinguistic underpinnings as well as the contemporary linguistic characteristics of Amdo Tibetan through language documentation, which structural linguists frequently underestimate. The twenty-seven-page conversational texts, accompanied by annotation in the appendix, render them a captivating source of Amdo Tibetan spoken by young children that has hitherto not been documented in any relevant works.
The book’s primary body comprises five chapters, accompanied by an introduction and a conclusion. Each chapter meticulously delineates the linguistic utilisation observed in the designated Tibetosphere, which is vividly illustrated through a selection of dialogues in Amdo Tibetan. Chapter 1 introduces the target language and local history, focusing on recognition of locality in the target community. This text provides a detailed analysis of the relationship between language identity and the local linguistic sphere, offering a compelling case study of the reinterpretation of language identity among speakers residing in urban areas. Chapter 2 provides a detailed exposition of the utilisation of the system of demonstratives, which varies in Amdo Tibetan and Mandarin, and draws attention to the discrepancy between the linguistic practices of Tibetan children residing in rural and urban contexts. Moreover, the author demonstrates that the system is reinterpreted among the community children group and produces new functions. Chapter 3 examines the relationship between language use and Buddhist teaching concerning ‘compassion’ (LT snying rje). The formulation of linguistic expressions based on Buddhist norms is transmitted directly from parents to children in yul skad, resulting in the reproduction of ideology. It has been demonstrated that a linguistic environment characterised by a high degree of solitude can present significant challenges for native speakers of yul skad residing in urban areas. Chapter 4 focuses on the relationship between the standard language ideology and education. The aspiration for linguistic standardisation within Amdo Tibetan, wherein the pastoralist’s speech is regarded as a prestigious variety, hinders the preservation of diversity among the various yul skad. Furthermore, the author shows that children in urban areas consider Mandarin monolinguals ideal by virtue of their greater exposure to Mandarin. Chapter 5 explores the potential for education in multilingual environments. Drawing on the findings of a case study conducted in an English–Chinese bilingual preschool in Xining, the author observed Amdo Tibetan’s position as a private, non-inclusive language in school conversations. In this context, the standard language identity of yul skad speakers is oriented towards standard English as a counterpart to standard Mandarin.
The methodology employed in this book, which involves a contrast in language use between children in rural and urban areas, is effective in highlighting the aforementioned differences, which have been under-documented and would only have been understood as the empirical knowledge of linguistics field workers. However, the book reveals that the environment in which a language is used has a profound effect on language acquisition. The book’s results should also serve as a warning for dialectologists conducting descriptive linguistic research, especially regarding rural dialects in urban areas.
From a linguists’ perspective, the book’s linguistic characteristics merit attention. The book has, however, oversimplified certain details. For instance, Figure 2 and its corresponding description (pp. 8ff.) simplify the internal classification and geographical distribution, which may mislead readers to understandings of the book’s argument. For a more comprehensive description, refer to the maps provided by Tournadre & Suzuki (Reference Tournadre and Suzuki2023), which also facilitate a more profound comprehension of the book. The term yul skad, as employed by the author and defined by native speakers, also encompasses non-Tibetic languages (cf. Roche & Suzuki Reference Roche and Suzuki2018). In certain instances, yul skad faces a heightened degree of linguistic endangerment (Roche Reference Roche2024).
In terms of providing linguistic data, the book would have been more valuable if the author had sought assistance from linguists working in descriptive linguistics in the relevant field. For example, phonetic descriptions could have been further enhanced. While the author places particular emphasis on the non-plosive nature of the final stop consonant, employing the phonetic notation symbol ̚ to denote the target language’s phonetic realisation, other phonetic symbols undergo significant simplification: they use ɲ (voiced palatal nasal) for the expected sound [ȵ] (voiced prepalatal nasal; see Tournadre & Suzuki Reference Tournadre and Suzuki2023) and x (voiceless velar fricative) for expected sounds [ç, ɕ͡x, ɕ͡χ, ɧ] (voiceless palatal or prepalatal-velar double articulated fricative; see Suzuki, Tsering Samdrup, Nyingbo-Gyal, Chaksham Tsering, & Sonam Wangmo Reference Suzuki, Samdrup and Wangmo2019). Furthermore, she misidentifies segmental phonetic characteristics, including the omission of prenasalisation and the differentiation of aspiration (e.g. bətɕhok̚ma ‘ant’ [pp. 90ff.] > nbətɕok̚ma; htshe ‘play’ [pp. 62ff.] > htse; cf. Hua Reference Hua2002).
In addition, reading pronunciations are inattentively included with no indication of the distinction of ’brog skad ‘pastoralist’s speech’ (e.g. hkɛt, p.135, belonging to reading pronunciation, which should be ʂkal in a pastoralist variety). Notably, there is an absence of references to variations within Mandarin, particularly the Xining dialect (North-western Mandarin), and pinyin transcriptions are consistently employed for Chinese forms in excerpts from children’s utterances. From a linguistic documentation perspective, it is conceivable that children’s utterances may encompass the aforementioned phenomena, for which notes ought to have been provided somewhere in the book. Regarding the glossing of verb suffixes and auxiliaries, the author employs an etymologically analytical method, which could have been superseded by a synthetic method instead (Zeisler Reference Zeisler2004; Tournadre & Suzuki Reference Tournadre and Suzuki2023) to achieve explicitness and enhance readability.
Nevertheless, while the following are largely outside the scope of the book, it is anticipated that the linguistic features presented in the conversational excerpts will be of interest to linguists and will be the subject of further investigation. Four examples are particularly noteworthy. First, the pronoun kho (p. 62) is used to designate a third person female. However, in Amdo Tibetan, it is exclusively used for a third person male, with the female counterpart being mo. Second, the question arises as to whether the morphemes ze and zer ‘say’ (p. 62ff.), and go and rgo ‘need’ (p. 102ff.); if so, how is the difference between them characterised? Third, how is the evidential system formed in the target language? Lastly, the mixture of the pronunciation of yul skad and ’brog skad is attested (e.g. the preinitial m in mtshodʑu ‘boat’ [p. 120] reflects the latter). However, readers specialising in linguistics in particular are unable to avoid neglecting them. However, while the pursuit of a more precise linguistic description by linguists is driven by scientific interests, it is important to recognise the inherent complexities involved. The elucidation of specific linguistic features can lead to the identification and delineation of local dialects. Despite the book’s efforts to anonymises the local setting, the more detailed the description of linguistic features, the more the target variety is specified. In the context of an interdisciplinary study of descriptive linguistics and ethnography, it is imperative to conduct a meticulous examination of the research methodology.
Moreover, the book states that, in the context of language standardisation as recognised by local Tibetans, ’brog skad is considered to be more prestigious than yul skad (chapter 4, pp. 105ff.). However, conversely, the use of ’brog skad is sometimes treated as a language with the non-standard use of, for example, humilific expressions, as reported by Tsering Samdrup & Suzuki (Reference Tsering and Suzuki2019). It is evident that both cases provide precise descriptions of the current situation. In the context of ethnographic or ethnolinguistic research, a single study is inadequate to encompass the comprehensive facets of the target language. Conversely, the study was limited to a narrow range of participants. This phenomenon calls into mind the necessity for a plethora of approaches to linguistic topics in sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology.
This book posits that language choice is associated with the geographical locality of yul skad as a linguistic community. Notwithstanding its issues regarding its phonetic descriptions and its limitations in providing accurate descriptions regarding the grammatical phenomena, this book introduces novel knowledge that can inform further in-depth studies of language contact and linguistic change.
