On the relation between labilizations and neuter gender: Evidence from the Greek diachrony (2014) (original) (raw)
Related papers
On the relation between labilizations and neuter gender: Evidence from the Greek diachrony
Linguistics, 2014
This paper considers labile verbs, i.e., verbs that use the same morphology for the causative and the anticausative reading, and how this lability pattern has evolved and spread in relation to case alignment and, specifically, to the lack of case distinctions between the nominative and the accusative with neuter DPs. In the first part of the study, we examine the voice distinctions in the history of the Greek language, showing that the use of the same voice morphology (i.e., active) for causative and anticausative readings increases in Hellenistic Greek and spreads progressively until Early Modern Greek, as indicated by empirical evidence in dialectal texts. The second part of the study attributes this pattern to the lack of the nominative-accusative case distinction in neuter nouns that in turn can be interpreted as either objects of a transitive (causative) verb or subjects of an intransitive verb (anticausative). In this aspect, neuter nouns demonstrate a type of split ergativity in the Greek labile alternations which thus require a split ergativity analysis based on DP features.
«Voice morphology and ergativity in Modern Greek»
Proceedings of the 8 th International Conference on …, 2008
The aim of this paper is to discuss voice morphology in Modern Greek. It is argued that the specialized mediopassive inflection (agreement) of the imperfective tenses (present, past) picks up the variable corresponding to the internal argument and promotes it to the subject (EPP) slot word-internally; in this respect, it resembles nominal agreement in Romance participles. In perfective tenses (present, past), on the other hand, mediopassive is realized through the θ-morpheme attached to the verb base, while agreement is that of the active voice. It is argued that in this case θ-picks up the internal argument, while agreement independentely lexicalizes the EPP slot, again word-internally. The variable status of θensures that it is necessarily bound by the EPP morphology; in this respect, θ-behaves like the affixal counterpart of the Romance clitic si/se. This split in the morphosyntactic realization of mediopassive voice is conditioned by aspect (imperfective -perfective), and is partly similar to the ergative split attested in (some) ergative languages in relation to the case of argument DPs (from 'ergative-absolutive' to 'nominative-accusative').
This paper presents and discusses evidence that genitive and dative objects regularly become nominative in Ancient Greek passives of monotransitives and ditransitives. This is a typologically and theoretically significant state of affairs for two reasons: (i) As is well-known, non-accusative objects are, in many languages, not allowed to enter into Case alternations, a fact which has been accounted for in the GB/ Principles & Parameters literature on the basis of the assumption that non-accusative objectsproto-typically datives -bear inherent, lexical or quirky Case. By the same reasoning, Ancient Greek genitives and datives must be concluded to have structural Case. (ii) Even in languages where Dat-Nom alternations do obtain, they are often limited to ditransitives, a fact which can been taken to suggest that dative qualifies as structural Case only in ditransitives. A language like Ancient Greek which allows genitive and dative objects to become nominative in all passives (monotransitives and ditransitives) shows that it is, in principle, possible to have a linguistic system where genitive and dative qualify as structural Cases in both monotransitives and ditransitives. Case-theories must be designed in such a way as to allow for this option.
Case alternations in Ancient Greek passives and the typology of Case
Language, 2015
This article presents and discusses evidence that genitive and dative objects regularly become nominative in Ancient Greek passives of monotransitives and ditransitives. This is a typologically and theoretically significant state of affairs for two reasons. (i) As is well known, nonaccusative objects are, in many languages, not allowed to enter into Case alternations, a fact that has been accounted for in the government-binding/principles-and-parameters literature on the basis of the assumption that nonaccusative objects-prototypically datives-bear inherent, lexical, or quirky Case. By this reasoning, Ancient Greek genitives and datives must be concluded to have structural Case. (ii) Even in languages where dative-nominative (DAT-NOM) alternations do obtain, they are often limited to ditransitives, a fact that can been taken to suggest that dative qualifies as structural Case only in ditransitives. A language like Ancient Greek, which allows genitive and dative objects to become nominative in all passives (monotransitives and ditransitives), shows that it is, in principle, possible to have a linguistic system where genitive and dative qualify as structural Cases in both monotransitives and ditransitives. Case theories must be designed in such a way as to allow for this option. We argue for an analysis of Case alternations that combines the view that alternating datives and genitives enter the formal operation Agree with a morphological case approach to the distribution of overt case morphology. We furthermore compare Ancient Greek DAT-NOM and genitive-nominative (GEN-NOM) alternations in passives to Icelandic DAT-NOM and GEN-NOM alternations in middles, pointing to a number of interesting differences in the two types of alternations that depend on (i) the types of nonaccusative arguments entering Agree, (ii) the verbal head (Voice or v) entering Agree with nonaccusative objects, and (iii) the rules of dependent case assignment in connection to the role of nominative in the two languages.*
Case alterations in Ancient Greek passives and the typology of Case.
This article presents and discusses evidence that genitive and dative objects regularly become nominative in Ancient Greek passives of monotransitives and ditransitives. This is a typologically and theoretically significant state of affairs for two reasons. (i) As is well known, nonaccusative objects are, in many languages, not allowed to enter into Case alternations, a fact that has been ac- counted for in the government-binding/principles-and-parameters literature on the basis of the as- sumption that nonaccusative objects—prototypically datives—bear inherent, lexical, or quirky Case. By this reasoning, Ancient Greek genitives and datives must be concluded to have structural Case. (ii) Even in languages where dative-nominative (DAT-NOM) alternations do obtain, they are often limited to ditransitives, a fact that can been taken to suggest that dative qual- ifies as structural Case only in ditransitives. A language like Ancient Greek, which allows genitive and dative objects to become nominative in all passives (monotransitives and ditransitives), shows that it is, in principle, possible to have a linguistic system where genitive and dative qualify as structural Cases in both monotransitives and ditransitives. Case theories must be designed in such a way as to allow for this option. We argue for an analysis of Case alternations that combines the view that alternating datives and genitives enter the formal operation Agree with a morphological case approach to the distribution of overt case morphology. We furthermore compare Ancient Greek DAT-NOM and genitive-nominative (GEN-NOM) alternations in passives to Icelandic DAT-NOM and GEN-NOM alternations in middles, pointing to a number of interesting differ- ences in the two types of alternations that depend on (i) the types of nonaccusative arguments en- tering Agree, (ii) the verbal head (Voice or v) entering Agree with nonaccusative objects, and (iii) the rules of dependent case assignment in connection to the role of nominative in the two languages.
Case mismatches in Greek: Evidence for the autonomy of morphology
Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 2000
This paper investigates the Case properties of Clitic Left Dislocated(CLLD) constructions in Modern Greek. In particular, CLLD constructions involvingCase mismatches. It is argued that specification for a +/- Genitive featureis involed in the morphological Case marking of Greek Nominatives [-Genitive].Accusatives [-Genitive], and Genitives [+Genitive], and that the syntacticoperation of feature checking makes use of the [+/- Genitive] feature, insteadof more fine-grained features for Case. This analysis leads to the conclusionthat Case checking may involve partial (morphological) feature descriptions,and supports the view of morphology as a well-differentiated component ofgrammar.
1. Main claims We describe two systems of dative and genitive case in two different stages of Greek: (i) Classical Greek (CG): two cases (dative and genitive) in two environments (transitives and ditransitives). (ii) Standard Modern Greek (SMG): one case (genitive) in one environment (ditransitives). The standard approach to genitive/dative as inherent/lexical case can neither express the difference between the two systems nor the transition from the one to the other in a principled manner. The proposal that there are two modes of dative and genitive case assignment in the verbal domain (Baker & Vinokurova 2010; Baker 2015) can:-CG: lexical/prepositional dative and genitive.-SMG: dependent genitive in the sense of Marantz (1991). Sensitive to the presence of a lower argument in the VP.-The transition from CG to SMG is a transition from a lexical/prepositional system to a dependent case system. We discuss a consequence of our proposal concerning the (un-)availability of dative/ genitive passivization in the two patterns. We describe how the transition from CG to SMG happened. We address the issues of (i) parametric variation regarding the case of IOs, (ii) the relationship between morphological case and Agree and (iii) the domain for dependent accusative in SMG-type languages lacking differential object marking.
The Development, Preservation and Loss of Differential Case Marking in Inner Asia Minor Greek
Journal of Language Contact, 2020
In Cappadocian and Pharasiot, the two main members of the inner Asia Minor Greek dialect group, the head nouns of NPs found in certain syntactic positions are marked with the accusative if the relevant NPs are definite and with the nominative if the NPs are indefinite. This differential case marking (dcm) pattern contrasts with all other Modern Greek dialects, in which the accusative is uniformly used in the relevant syntactic positions. After revisiting recent proposals regarding the synchronic status of dcm in Cappadocian and Pharasiot, I show how the two dialects developed this 'un-Greek' feature in the model of Turkish, which marks the head nouns of direct object NPs with an accusative suffix only if they take a specific reading leaving non-specific direct object NPs unmarked. I subsequently trace the diachronic trajectory of this contact-induced innovation within the two dialectal systems, seeking to explain why dcm was gradually lost in Cappadocian but preserved in Pharasiot.
Special issue: typology of labile verbs: focus on diachrony introduction
Linguistics, 2014
The ancient Indo-European languages, such as early Vedic or (Homeric) Greek, are usually considered to be characterized by a high degree of lability. According to the communis opinio, they had a considerable number of labile verbs or verbal forms that could be labile, cf. rudra� r̥tásya sádaneṣu vāvr̥dhuḥ ‘Rudras have grown [intransitive] in the residences of the truth’ ~ índram uktha� ni vāvr̥dhuḥ ‘The hymns have increased [transitive] Indra’. This paper offers a general overview of the Vedic verbal forms for which labile patterning is attested. I will argue that, for most of these forms, the secondary character of lability can be demonstrated. Thus, for many labile forms with middle inflection (in particular, forms belonging to the present system), labile patterning results from the polyfunctionality of the middle diathesis (self-beneficent / anticausative). The secondary transitive usages of some fundamentally intransitive verbs such as puṣyati ‘prospers; makes prosper’ originate...
Neuter heteroclisis in Asia Minor Greek: origin and development
2011
This study examines the historical origin and the diachronic evolution of heteroclisis, that is, the spread of the use of the inflectional endings -iu and -ion for the formation of genitive singular and plural from neuter nouns ending in -i to nouns of other inflectional classes. The phenomenon is attested in the Asia Minor Greek dialects (Pontic, Cappadocian, Pharasiot, Silliot) but also in the northern Greek dialects of Lesbos, Kydonies and Samos, which suggests that the development should be placed chronologically at a time before the split of the two dialect groups. The analysis of a wealth of dialectal data shows that heteroclisis first emerged as an alternative solution to the problem of stress placement in the genitive singular and plural of proparoxytone masculine nouns in -os and neuters in -o as well as in parisyllabic feminine nouns in -a. From these loci, the innovation later spread to other noun categories that displayed different structural difficulties. The main result of these developments was the morphological association of numbers of nouns with the neuter gender class.