Bosnian to Tibetan: a numbered noun phrase is not just a list of equivalent words
A compound title differs from a freely modified noun
Bosnian noun phrases can identify people through titles and descriptions, with modifiers agreeing in their grammatical environment. A Tibetan translation should preserve whether the source names an office or merely praises a person occupying it. Similar component meanings do not make those two readings interchangeable.
Garrett and Hill contrast Written Tibetan blon-chen, prime minister, with blon-po chen-po, great minister. The first is a compound title; the second combines a noun and descriptive adjective. A Bosnian reference to a prime minister should not become a statement that a minister is great simply because both target expressions contain related lexical material.
This is especially useful in a source introducing a named official and then commenting on their qualities. The title identifies the office, while a description adds a judgement. Keeping the two separate avoids turning the writer’s evaluation into a different official position or losing the position within a flattering description.
Three items and a third item make different selections
The same study distinguishes cardinal gsum, three, from ordinal gsum-pa, third. A Bosnian source counting three documents differs from one selecting the third document in a sequence. The noun may be identical, but the instruction concerns a different set of objects.
A translator should therefore recover the numerical function before selecting the Tibetan form. If the source asks someone to bring the third item, a target quantity of three could cause the recipient to bring additional material. If the source requests three items, an ordinal could leave two missing.
Garrett and Hill also discuss rtse-lṅa-pa in a compound describing a five-pronged object. Its numeral-related component is not an instruction to read the expression as fifth. This shows why a familiar ordinal-looking suffix is insufficient evidence on its own. The compound’s meaning and noun-phrase syntax determine how the number contributes.
The source case relation belongs to the entire target phrase
The MULTEXT Bosnian specification records noun case distinctions, including dative, accusative and instrumental. A source number expression and its noun may participate together in such a relation. The Tibetan study places case markers toward the end of the noun phrase rather than treating every lexical item as an independently marked source word.
For a Bosnian request involving three documents belonging to an official, first distinguish the quantity, the owner and the documents’ role in the action. A target case marker may apply to the complete phrase, even if its printed position does not match each source ending. That difference is grammatical organisation rather than automatic omission.
The cited Tibetan research concerns constituent order in Written Tibetan noun phrases. It does not establish one universal conversational order for every Tibetic variety. Its practical value for this direction is narrower and concrete: retain the distinction between a title and description, interpret cardinal versus ordinal meaning, and construct the complete target noun phrase with its intended relation. Matching the title root, number and noun independently would leave each of those decisions unresolved.
Language references