On Shared Structural Innovations: the Diachrony of Adverbial Subordination in Semitic (original) (raw)
Related papers
The present article argues that Serial Verb Constructions (SVCs) in NorthWest Semitic (NWS) languages have emerged from clause fusion. The analysis of the synchronic profiles of SVCs in four of the oldest attested languages of this branch, i.e., Canaano-Akkadian, Ugaritic, Biblical Hebrew, and Biblical Aramaic, reveals an evolutionary path from less cohesive noncanonical serializing patterns of a pseudo-coordinated character to increasingly more cohesive and canonical serializing patterns. The ultimate source of this path and verbal serialization is reconstructed as conjunctive coordination with two clauses being linked by the predecessor of a coordinator that surfaces as u/w in the four analyzed languages.
The Origin of the Semitic Relative Marker
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2018
All Semitic languages use a relative marker as at least one strategy of relativization, and all branches show reflexes or relics of reflexes of an interdental relative marker. The wide consensus that the relative pronoun was originally identical to the proximal demonstrative is based on the formal identity between the bases of the two in West Semitic, and on the wide attestation of the process Demonstrative > Relative in world languages. In this paper, we will show that there are a number of significant problems with the reconstruction of the relative pronoun, which, when taken together, make tracing its origin to the demonstrative highly unlikely. Instead we will argue that the opposite is true: the demonstrative in West Semitic is a secondary formation on the basis of the relative marker.
Grammatical Changes in Semitic: A Diachronic Grammar of Amharic.
2017
""Non-Semitic features are visible in every aspect of the grammar and lexicon of Ethio-Semitic languages (ES). Some scholars attribute this to pidginazation, a hypothesis which posits that ES originated from a Cushitic substratum and a Semitic suprastratum. The latter is assumed to have been brought by a Semitic group (or a wave of groups) who migrated from South Arabia into Ethiopia around 500 BCE. However, since the Ethio-Semitic group contains the most diversified languages of the Semitic family and has preserved core Semitic features, a counter-proposal which considers ES to be an autochthonous group has become standard these days. The short period of Amharic history does not prove the hypothesis that ES originated from a mixture of Semitic and Cushitic. Most of the non-Semitic features that contemporary Amharic exhibits are recent innovations. Current Amharic lacks pharyngeal sounds as do the other South Ethio-Semitic languages with the exception of Shonke-Tollaha Argobba. The glottal sounds have also limited distribution in modern Amharic (MA). Old Amharic (OA) has these typical Semitic sounds. Current Amharic seems to be developing postpositions and is characterized by circumpositions. In OA the postpositional elements as relational items did not exist. Neither did circumpositions exist. OA is characterized by a mixed word order. A transitive clause in MA has unmarked SOV order. Relative clauses and adjectives must also follow their head noun. OA was not rigid in this regard. Although structures like those in modern Amharic are attested, we find a VSO order in OA. Relative clauses and adjectives may also follow the noun that they modify. Because Amharic has been serving as a language of administration for over a millennium, it has developed unique polite forms for second and third persons. These polite forms underwent a number of fascinating changes throughout history. Except for third person, Amharic has preserved the Semitic personal pronouns. This book describes the historical grammar of Amharic which furthers our understanding of the changes that Ethio-Semitic languages underwent. The research is based on ancient manuscripts and grammatical works of different periods. ""
2018 The Origin of the Semitic Relative Marker
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2018
All Semitic languages use a relative marker as at least one strategy of rela-tivization, and all branches show reflexes or relics of reflexes of an inter-dental relative marker. The wide consensus that the relative pronoun was originally identical to the proximal demonstrative is based on the formal identity between the bases of the two in West Semitic, and on the wide attestation of the process Demonstrative > Relative in world languages. In this paper, we will show that there are a number of significant problems with the reconstruction of the relative pronoun, which, when taken together, make tracing its origin to the demonstrative highly unlikely. Instead we will argue that the opposite is true: the demonstrative in West Semitic is a secondary formation on the basis of the relative marker.