Cover not available

Article published In: Studies in Language
Vol. 41:4 (2017) ► pp.956–1006

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

A synchronic and diachronic typology of Hittite reciprocal constructions

 | Università degli Studi di Pavia | Università degli Studi di Bergamo
Published online: 30 March 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17019.ing
Abstract
This paper discusses reciprocal constructions in Hittite, framed within the typology of reciprocals laid out by Nedjalkov (2007), König, Ekkehard & Volker Gast. 2008. Reciprocity and reflexivity – description, typology and theory. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 1–32. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, and Evans, Nicholas, Stephen C. Levinson, Alice Gaby & Asifa Majid. 2011. Introduction: Reciprocals and semantic typology. In Nicholas Evans, Stephen C. Levinson, Alice Gaby & Asifa Majid (eds.), Reciprocals and semantic typology [Typological Studies in Language 98], 1–28. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar. Hittite attests to at least three reciprocal markers, that is, the middle voice, the particle =za, and three different polyptotic constructions, based on the iteration of the numeral šia- ‘one’, the demonstrative ka- ‘this’, and the noun ara- ‘fellow, comrade’ respectively. Synchronically, these three strategies cover different sub-domains of reciprocity, as they encode different kinds of reciprocal situations and display different syntactic properties. These differences can be accounted for by taking into account the processes out of which these constructions developed, which can be described in terms of grammaticalization (Heine & Miyashita 2008). In this respect, beside enriching our knowledge of reciprocals in Indo-European languages, this paper also contributes to our general understanding of the diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Typology of reciprocal constructions: function and encoding
    • 2.1Semantics of reciprocal situations
    • 2.2Classification of reciprocals constructions
  • 3.Reciprocal constructions in Hittite: A survey
    • 3.1Lexical reciprocals
    • 3.2Morphological reciprocals: the middle voice
    • 3.3Reciprocal lability
    • 3.4The clitic particle =za
    • 3.5Syntactic reciprocals: polyptotic constructions
    • 3.6Marginal reciprocal constructions and related domains: Adverbs, adpositions, and sentence particles
  • 4.Discussion of the data: A synchronic typology of Hittite reciprocal constructions
  • 5.The diachrony of Hittite reciprocal constructions
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (106)
References
Archi, Alfonso. 1977. I poteri della dea Ištar hurrito-ittita. Oriens Antiquus 161. 297–311.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 2008. Pragmatics and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. 2011. Notes on reciprocal constructions in Akkadian in light of typological and historical considerations. Semitica et Classica 41. 23–42. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur. A. 2014. NP-strategies in Semitic languages in a typological perspective. Diachronica 31(3). 337–378. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beekes, Robert. 2010. Etymological dictionary of Greek. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boley, Jacqueline. 1989. The sentence particles and the place words in Old and Middle Hittite [Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft 60]. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boley, Jacqueline. 1993. The Hittite particle -z/-za [Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft]. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brosch, Cyril. 2014. Untersuchungen zur hethitischen Raumgrammatik [TOPOI: Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 20]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cambi, Valentina. 2007. Tempo e Aspetto in ittito. Con particolare riferimento al suffisso -ske/a. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Güterbock, Hans Gustav, Harry A. Jr. Hoffner & Theo P. J. van den Hout CHD  = Güterbock, Hans Gustav, Harry A. Jr. Hoffner & Theo P. J. van den Hout. 1989-. The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cotticelli-Kurras, Paola & Alfredo Rizza. 2011. Die hethitische Partikel -z(a) im Licht neuer theoretischer Ansätze. In Thomas Krisch & Thomas Lindner (eds.), Indogermanistik und Linguistik im Dialog: Akten der XIII. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, 120–130. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis. 2006. Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique. Paris: Hermès.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuzzolin, Perluigi, Ignazio Putzu & Paolo Ramat. 2006. The Indo-European adverb in diachronic and typological perspective. Indogermanische Forschungen 1111. 1–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Darlymple, Mary, Makoto Kanazawa, Yookyung Kim, Sam Mchombo & Stanley Peters. 1998. Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics and Philosophy 211. 159–210. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dimitriadis, Alexis. 2008. Irreducible symmetry in reciprocal constructions. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 375–410. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang. 1968. Studien zur verbalen Pluralität. Iterativum, Distributivum, Durativum, Intensivum in der allgemeinen Grammatik, im Lateinischen und Hethitischen. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse: Sitzungsberichte, 259/11. Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunkel, George E. 2014. Lexikon der indogermanischen Partikeln und Pronominal-stämme. Band 2: Lexikon. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eichner, Heiner. 1992. Anatolian. In Jadranka Gvozdanović (ed.), Indo-European Numerals, 29–96. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 2008. Reciprocal constructions: Towards a structural typology. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 33–103. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas, Stephen C. Levinson, Alice Gaby & Asifa Majid. 2011. Introduction: Reciprocals and semantic typology. In Nicholas Evans, Stephen C. Levinson, Alice Gaby & Asifa Majid (eds.), Reciprocals and semantic typology [Typological Studies in Language 98], 1–28. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fanelli, Valentina. 2009. Le costruzioni reciproche nella lingua latina. Roma: Universitaria editrice.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fortson, Benjamin W. 2004. Indo-European language and culture: An introduction. Chichester: Blackwell Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt & Traci S. Curl (eds.). 2000. Reciprocals: Forms and functions [Typological Studies in Language 41]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Francia, Rita. 1995. Costruzione e valore del pronome possessivo enclitico di prima plurale in Hittito. Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici 351. 93–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Francia, Rita. 2002. Le funzioni sintattiche degli elementi avverbiali di luogo ittiti: anda(n), āppa(n), katta(n), katti-, peran, šer, šar, šarā [Studia Asiana 1]. Roma: Herder.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedrich, Johannes. 1950. Churritische Märchen und Sagen in hethitischer Sprache. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 491. 213–255. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedrich, Johannes. 1960. Hethitisches Elementarbuch, 1. Teil: Kurzgefaßte Grammatik (2nd ed.) [Indogermanische Bibliothek, 1. Reihe: Lehr- und Handbücher]. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew J. 1996. Wackernagel’s Law and Unaccusativity in Hittite. In A. L. Halpern & A. M. Zwicky (eds.), Approaching second: Second position clitics and related phenomena, 83–133. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gast, Volver & Florian Haas. 2008. Anaphors in German and other European languages. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 307–346. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goedegebuure, Petra. 2003. The Hittite distal demonstrative ASI (UNI, ENI, etc.). Die Sprache 431. 1–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goedegebuure, Petra. 2006. A new proposal for the reading of the Hittite numeral ‘1’: šia- . In Theo P. J. van den Hout & C. H. van Zoest (eds.), The life and times of Ḫattušili III and Tutḫaliya IV: Proceedings of a symposium held in honour of J. de Roos, 12–13 December 2003, Leiden, 65–88. Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archeologisch Instituut te Instanbul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goedegebuure, Petra. 2014. The Hittite demonstratives. Studies in deixis, topics, and focus [Studien zu den Bogazköy-Texten 55]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goetze, Albrecht. 1933. Über die Partikeln -za, -kan und -šan der hethitischen Satzverbindung. Archiv Orientální 51. 1–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grestenberger, Laura. 2016. Reconstructing Proto-Indo-European deponents. Journal of Indo-European Linguistics 41. 98–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Güterbock, Hans G. 1983. A Hurro-Hittite hymn to Ishtar. Journal of the American Oriental Society 1031. 155–164. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haas, Florian. 2007. The development of English each other: grammaticalization, lexicalization, or both?. English Language and Linguistics 11(1). 31–50. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haas, Florian. 2010. Reciprocity in English: Historical development and synchronic structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Susanne Maria Michaelis. 2017. Analytic and synthetic: typological change in varieties of European languages. In Isabelle Buchstaller & Beat Siebenhaar (eds.), Language variation – European perspectives VI: Selected papers from the 8th International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 8), Leipzig 2015: 3–22. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1987. Transitivity alternations of the anticausative type [Arbeitspapiere, N. F. 5]. Cologne: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. More on the typology of the inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds.), Causatives and transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. A frequentist explanation of some universals of reflexive marking. Linguistic Discovery 6(1). 40–63. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Puhvel, Jaan HED  = Puhvel, Jaan. 1984 – Hittite Etymological Dictionary. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tischler, Johann HEG  = Tischler, Johann. 1983–2010. Hethitisches Etymologisches Glossar. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1982. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts PhD Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Hiroyuki Miyashita. 2008. The intersection between reflexives and reciprocals: A grammaticalization perspective. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 169–224. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 2002. On the role of context in grammaticalization. In Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 49], 83–101. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A. Jr. & Craig H. Melchert. 2008. A grammar of the Hittite language. Part I: reference grammar. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A. Jr. 1969. On the use of Hittite -za in nominal sentences. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 281. 225–230. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedrich, Johannes, Annelies Kammenhuber & Inge Hoffmann HW2  = Friedrich, Johannes, Annelies Kammenhuber & Inge Hoffmann. 1975-. Hethitisches Worterbuch [Indogermanische Bibliothek. 2. Reihe: Wörterbücher]. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Inglese, Guglielmo. 2015. Towards a Hittite treebank. Basic challenges and methodological remarks. In Marco Passarotti, Francesco Mambrini & Caroline Sporleder, (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Corpus-Based Research in the Humanities (CRH), 10 December 2015, Warsaw, Poland, 59–68. <[URL]>.
Inglese, Guglielmo. In preparation. The Hittite middle voice. Pavia: University of Pavia PhD Dissertation.
Josephson, Folke. 2003. The Hittite reflexive construction in a typological perspective. In Brigitte L. M. Bauer & Georges-Jean Pinault (eds.), Language in time and space: A Festschrift for Werner Winter on the occasion of his 80th birthday, 211–232. Berlin/ New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Josephson, Folke. 2008. Actionality and aspect in Hittite. In Folke Josephson & Ingmar Söhrman (eds.), Interdependence of diachronic and synchronic analyses, 131–147. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The middle voice [Typological Studies in Language 23]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kloekhorst, Alwin. 2008. Etymological dictionary of the Hittite inherited lexicon. Leiden/Boston: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knjazev, Jurij P. 2007. Lexical reciprocals as a means of expressing reciprocal situations. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 115–146. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Volker Gast. 2008. Reciprocity and reflexivity – description, typology and theory. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 1–32. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Shigehiro Kokutani. 2006. Towards a typology of reciprocal constructions: focus on German and Japanese. Linguistics 44(2). 271–302. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Peter Siemund. 2000. Intensifiers and reflexives: a typological perspective. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Traci S. Curl (eds.), Reflexives: Forms and functions [Typological Studies in Language 41], 41–74. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Letizia Vezzosi. 2004. The role of predicate meaning in the development of reflexivity. In Walter Bisang, Nikolaus Himmelmann & Björn Wiemer (eds.), What makes grammaticalization: A look from its fringes and its components, 213–244. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krisch, Thomas. 1999. Zur Reziprozität in altindogermanischen Sprachen. In Heiner Eichner & Hans-Christian Luschützky (eds.), Compositiones Indogermanicae in memoriam Jochem Schindler Gedenkschrift für Jochern Schindler, 275–297. Praha: enigma corporation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid. 2007. Reciprocal constructions in Vedic. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 709–738. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid. 2013. Middle and reflexive. In Silvia Luraghi & Claudia Parodi (eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Syntax, 261–280. London/New Delhi/New York/Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid. 2014. Grammaticalization of reciprocal pronouns in Indo-Arian: Evidence from Sanskrit and Indo-European for a diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 1(2). 117–156 doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Letuchiy, Alexander. 2009. Towards a typology of labile verbs: lability vs. derivation. In Patience Epps & Alexandre Arkhipov (eds.), New challenges in typology: Transcending the borders and refining the distinctions, 223–244. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1985. Multiple uses of reciprocal constructions. Australian Journal of Linguistics 51. 19–41. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 2000. Reciprocals without reflexives. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Traci S. Curl (eds.), Reciprocals: Forms and functions [Typological Studies in Language 41], 32–62. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 1990. Old Hittite sentence structure. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 2010. The rise (and possible fall) of configurationality. In Silvia Luraghi & Vit Bubenik (eds.), Continuum Companion to Historical Linguistics, 212–229. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 2016. Basic valency orientation in PIE. Paper presented at the 15th Fachtagung of the Indogermanische Gesellschaft “Back to the Root – The Structure, Function, and Semantics of the PIE Root” , Wien 12–16/09/2016.
Majid, Asifa, Nicholas Evans, Alice Gaby & Stephen C. Levinson. 2011. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages: an extensional approach. In Nicholas Evans, Stephen C. Levinson, Alice Gaby & Asifa Majid (eds.), Reciprocals and semantic typology [Typological Studies in Language 98], 29–60. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2015. Valency classes and alternation: parameters of variation. In Andrej Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages, vol. 1, 73–130. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maslova, Elena & Vladimir P. Nedjalkov. 2005. Reciprocal constructions. In Mattew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Accessed at <[URL]>.
Maslova, Elena. 2008. Reflexive encoding of reciprocity: Cross-linguistic and language-internal variation. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 225–258. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattiola, Simone. 2017. The conceptual space of pluractional constructions. Lingue e Linguaggio 16(1). 119–146.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauri, Caterina. 2008. Coordination relations in the languages of Europe and beyond. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGregor, William. 2000. Reflexive and reciprocal constructions in Nyulnyulan languages. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Traci S. Curl (eds.), Reciprocals: Forms and functions [Typological Studies in Language 41], 85–122. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melchert, Craig H. 2005. Latin insolēscō, Hittite šulle(šš)- and PIE Statives in -ē- . In Nikolak N. Kazansky (ed.), Hṛdā́ mánasā. Studies presented to Professor Leonard G. Herzenberg on his 70th birthday, 90–98. St. Petersburg: Nauka.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melchert, Craig H. 2009. Local adverbs in Hittite: Synchrony and diachrony. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(2). 607–602. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melchert, Craig H. Forthcoming. Semantics and etymology of Hittite takš- . To appear in Indo-Iranian and Its Indo-European Origin. Studies in honor of Alexander Lubotsky.
Miller, Jared L. 2013. Royal Hittite instructions and related administrative texts [Writings from the Ancient World 31]. Society of Biblical Literature: Atlanta. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. & Emma Genušiene. 2007. Questionnaire on reciprocals. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 379–434. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. 2007a. Overview of the research. Definitions of terms, framework, and related issues. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 3–114. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. 2007b. Encoding of the reciprocal meaning. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 147–208. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. 2007c. Polysemy of reciprocal markers. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 231–334. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newmann, Paul. 1990. Nominal and verbal plurality in Chadic. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neu, Erich. 1968a. Interpretationen der hethitischen mediopassiven Verbalformen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neu, Erich. 1968b. Das hethitische Mediopassiv und seine indogermanischen Grundlagen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikolaev, Alexander. 2010. Hittite menaḫḫanda . Journal of the American Oriental Society 130(1). 36–71.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nowicki, Helmut. 2000. Zum Einleitungsparagraphen des Anitta-Textes (CTH 1, 1–4). In Christian Zinko & Michaela Ofitsch (eds.), 125 Jahre Indogermanistik in Graz, 411–419. Graz: Leykam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 2008. Thoughts on the origin, progress, and pronominal status of reciprocal forms in Germanic, occasioned by those of Bavarian. In Ekkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives: Theoretical and cross-linguistic explorations, 347–374. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sankho, Sergueï & Nicole Tersis. 2008. Is a “friend” an “enemy”? Between “proximity” and “opposition”. In Martine Vanhove (ed.), From polysemy to semantic change [Studies in Language Companion 106], 314–340. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starke, Frank. 1977. Die Funktionen der dimensionalen Kasus und Ortsadverbien im Hethitischen [Studien zu den Bogazköy-Texten 22]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Graeme Trousdale. 2014. Constructionalization and constructional changes [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 6]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vezzosi, Letizia. 2010. Micro-processes of grammaticalization. The case of Italian l’un l’altro . In Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler & Ekkehard König (eds.), Grammaticalization. Current views and issues, 343–372. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wali, Kashi. 2000. Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Marathi. In Barbara C. Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair & K. V. Subbarao (eds.), Lexical anaphors and pronouns in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 22], 513–574. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yakubovich, Ilya & Elisabeth Rieken. 2016. The derivational history of the PIE root *al- ‘other’. Paper presented at the 15th Fachtagung of the Indogermanische Gesellschaft “Back to the Root – The Structure, Function, and Semantics of the PIE Root” , Wien 12–16/09/2016.
Yakubovich, Ilya. 2006. Prehistoric contacts between Hittite and Luwian: The case of reflexive pronouns. In Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela Della Volpe & Miriam Dexter Robbins (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference [Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph Series 52], 77–106. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yoshida, Kazuhiko. 1990. The Hittite mediopassive endings in -ri. Berlin/New York: Mouton de GruyterGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zaliznjak, Anna A. & Aleksej D. Shmelev. 2007. Sociativity, conjoining, reciprocity, and the Latin prefix com- . In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Geniušene & Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.), Reciprocal constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], 209–230. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi:  Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Inglese, Guglielmo
2025. The Diachrony of Voice. In Reference Module in Social Sciences, DOI logo
Inglese, Guglielmo & Jean-Christophe Verstraete
2023. Evidence against unidirectionality in the emergence of middle voice systems. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 76:2 ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo
Inglese, Guglielmo & Simone Mattiola
2020. Pluractionality in Hittite. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 73:2 ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Inglese, Guglielmo & Chiara Zanchi
2020. Reciprocal constructions in Homeric Greek: A typological and corpus-based approach. Folia Linguistica 54:s41-s1 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee
2019. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization, DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. The NP-Strategy for Expressing Reciprocity [Typological Studies in Language, 127], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2025. La riflessività nelle lingue anatoliche [Studia Asiana, 15], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue