Editing Sino-Tibetan languages (section)

====Person indexation====
Many Sino–Tibetan languages exhibit a system of person indexation.{{sfnp|Jacques|Pellard|2021|p=2}} Notably, [[Gyalrongic languages|Gyalrongic]] and [[Kiranti languages|Kiranti]] have an [[Direct–inverse alignment|inverse]] marker prefixed to a transitive verb when the agent is lower than the patient in a certain person hierarchy.{{sfnp|Jacques|Pellard|2021|pp=3–4}}

Hodgson had in 1849 noted a dichotomy between "pronominalized" ([[Synthetic language|inflecting]]) languages, stretching across the [[Himalaya]]s from [[Himachal Pradesh]] to eastern [[Nepal]], and "non-pronominalized" ([[isolating language|isolating]]) languages. Konow (1909) explained the pronominalized languages as due to a [[Munda languages|Munda]] [[Substrata (linguistics)|substratum]], with the idea that Indo–Chinese languages were essentially isolating as well as tonal. Maspero later attributed the putative substratum to [[Indo-Aryan languages|Indo–Aryan]]. It was not until Benedict that the inflectional systems of these languages were recognized as (partially) native to the family. Scholars disagree over the extent to which the agreement system in the various languages can be reconstructed for the [[proto-language|proto–language]].{{sfnp|Handel|2008|p=430}}{{sfnp|LaPolla|2003|pp=29–32}}