Cover not available

In:Proto-Indo-European Syntax and its Development
Edited by Leonid Kulikov and Nikolaos Lavidas
[Benjamins Current Topics 75] 2015
► pp. 29–49

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

The rise of ‘subordination features’ in the history of Greek and their decline

The ‘Indirect Speech Traits Cycle’

 | University of Salzburg
Published online: 16 July 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.75.03fyk
This study is a contribution based on Greek material to a field of inquiry that deals with the diachronic development of formal syntactic devices and their interrelationship with the dichotomy between main and subordinate clauses in Indo-European (Kiparsky 1995, Lühr 2008). First, we focus on some devices signaling indirect speech that emerged in Pre-Classical and Classical Greek, such as the development of a system of complementizers (hóti ‘that.COMP’, hōs ‘that.COMP’) and some characteristic usages of moods (the optative of indirect speech). In Post-Classical Greek, this system of traits that had been employed to code indirect speech collapsed, as evidenced by the disappearance of hōs ‘that.COMP’ and the optative of indirect speech as well as the high frequency of pleonastic hóti ‘that.COMP’. Later in the history of Greek a new subordination system arises. We interpret these developments in the light of contemporary syntactic theory (Emonds 2004, 2012), and try to formulate a hypothesis regarding the cycle-like regularities and recurrent patterns that are followed by (clusters of) traits, that is, the “Indirect Speech Traits Cycle”.
References (31)
Blass, Friedrich & Albert Debrunner. 1961. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature: A Translation and Revision of the Ninth–Tenth German Edition Incorporating Supplementary Notes of A. Debrunner (translated by Robert W. Funk). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on Transformations. A Festschrift for Morris Halle ed. by Stephen R. Anderson & Paul Kiparsky, 232–286. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christidis, A.F., ed. 2007. A History of Ancient Greek: From the Beginnings to Late Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph. 1970. Root and Structure-Preserving Transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Unspecified Categories as the Key to Root Constructions. Peripheries: Syntactic Edges and their Effects ed. by David Adger, Cécile de Cat & George Tsoulas, 75–120. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Augmented Structure Preservation and the Tensed S Constraint. Main Clause Phenomena: New Horizons ed. by Loebke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye, 23–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. 2011. Language Change as Cyclical: A Window on the Language Faculty. Studies in Modern English 27.1–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gippert, Jost. 2004. Indo-European Word Order in Main and Subordinate Clauses in a Diachronic Perspective. Analecta homini universali dedicata: Arbeiten zur Indogermanistik, Linguistik, Philologie, Politik, Musik und Dichtung. Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65. Geburtstag, Vol. I ed. by Thomas Krisch, Thomas Lindner & Ulrich Müller, 48–68. Stuttgart: Heinz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hermann, Eduard. 1894. Gab es im Indogermanischen nebensätze? Jena: University of Jena PhD dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1895. Gab es im Indogermanischen nebensätze? Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 33.481–535.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich. 1982. The Sanskrit Quotative: A Historical and Comparative Study. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 12.39–85.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan & Sandra Thompson. 1973. On the Applicability of Root Transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4.465–491.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2007. Syntax: From Classical Greek to the Koine. In A.F. Christidis, ed., 618–631.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jannaris, Anthony N. 1897. An Historical Greek Grammar Chiefly of the Attic Dialect. Hildesheim: Georg Olms. (Reprinted 1968.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian. 1983. The Synchrony and Diachrony of the Balkan Infinitive: A Study in Areal, General and Historical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1995. The Indo-European Origins of Germanic Syntax. Clause Structure and Language Change ed. by Adrian Battye & Ian Roberts, 140–170. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1980. The Reconstruction of Non-Simple Sentences in Proto-Indo-European. Linguistic Reconstruction and Indo-European Syntax: Proceedings of the Colloquium of the ‘Indogermanische Gesellschaft’, University of Pavia, 6–7 September 1979 ed. by Paolo Ramat, 113–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lühr, Rosemarie. 2008. Competitive Indo-European Syntax. Principles of Syntactic Reconstruction ed. by Gisella Ferraresi & Maria Goldbach, 121–159. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markopoulos, Theodore. 2009. The Future in Greek: From Ancient to Medieval. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Gary. 2002. Nonfinite Structures in Theory and Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Monro, David B. 1891. A Grammar of Homeric Greek. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 2007. The Syntax of Classical Greek. In A.F. Christidis, ed., 590–598.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. Elements of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2007. Diachronic Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Anna Roussou. 2003. Syntactic Change: A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwyzer, Eduard. 1988. Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik. München: Beck´sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sevdali, Christina. 2007. Infinitival Clauses in Ancient Greek: Overt and Full Subjects, the Role of Case and Focus. Cambridge: Cambridge University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smyth, Herbert Weir. 1918. Greek Grammar. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue