Cover not available

In:Perspectives on Historical Syntax
Edited by Carlotta Viti
[Studies in Language Companion Series 169] 2015
► pp. 95–116

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

Reconstructing non-canonical argument structure for Proto-Indo-European

Methodological questions and progress

 | University of Bergen
Published online: 29 April 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.169.04smi
This paper considers certain methodological issues that have arisen over the course of an investigation into the likelihood that oblique subject constructions in the Indo-European languages are inherited from Proto-Indo-European. In the process, we desire to elicit productive criticism of the methods employed in this research toward the end of creating a useful methodological process for comparing syntactic forms. The paper also discusses what appear to be legitimate problems in forming a method for diachronic comparative syntax versus criticisms of comparative work that should not be considered especially problematic for syntactic studies.
References (31)
References
Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2011. The rise of dative substitution in the history of Icelandic: A diachronic construction grammar account. Lingua 121: 60-79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2009. The origin of the oblique subject construction: An Indo-European comparison. In Grammatical Change in Indo- European Languages [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 305], Vit Bubenik, John Hewson & Sarah Rose (eds), 179–193. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Reconstructing syntax: Construction Grammar and the Comparative Method. In Sign-Based Construction Grammar, Hans Boas & Ivan Sag (eds), 257-308. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Smitherman, Thomas. 2013. The quest for cognates: A reconstruction of oblique subject constructions in Proto-Indo-European. Language Dynamics & Change 3(1):28-67.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boeder, Winfried. 2005. The South Caucasian languages. Lingua 115: 5-89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle & Harris, Alice. 2002. Syntactic reconstruction and demythologizing ‘Myths and the prehistory of grammars’. Journal of Linguistics 38(3): 599–618. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cherchi, Mario.1997. Modern Georgian Morphosyntax: A Grammatico-Categorial Hierarchy-based Analysis with Special Reference to Indirect Verbs and Passives of State. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold. 1893-1900. Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen, 3 Vols. Straßburg: Trübner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2000. Dative vs. nominative: Changes in quirky subjects in Icelandic. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 27–44.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falk, Cecilia. 1997. Fornsvenska upplevarverb (Old Swedish Experiencer Verbs). Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falk, Yehuda N. 2009. Subjects and Universal Grammar: An Explanatory Theory. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew. 1990. The origins of NP split ergativity. Language 66: 261-96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Universals of Language, Joseph Greenberg (ed.), 73-113. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halldórsson, Halldór. 1982. Um méranir: Drög að samtímalegri og sögulegri athugun (About dativisings: Preliminaries of a synchronic and diachronic investigation). Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði 4: 159–189.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hewson, John & Bubenik, Vít. 2006. From Case to Adposition: The Development of Configurational Syntax in Indo-European Languages [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 280]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry & Melchert, Craig. 2008. A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jebb, Sir Richard. 1889. The Oedipus at Colonus of Sophocles. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klimov, Georgij Andreevic. 1977. Tipologija aktivnogo stroja (The Typology of the Active System). Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroonen, Guus. 2013. Hugi- In Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic [Indo-European Etymological Dictionaries Online], Alexander Lubotsky (ed.). Leiden: Brill. <[URL]> (20 September 2013).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 2002a. Myths and the prehistory of grammars. Journal of Linguistics 38(1): 113–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002b. More myths. Journal of Linguistics 38(3): 619–626. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melchert, Craig. 2011. The problem of the ergative case in Hittite. In Grammatical Case in the Languages of the Middle East and Europe: Acts of the International Colloquium variations, concurrence et evolution des cas dans divers domaines linguistiques Paris 2–4 April 2007, Michèle Fruyt, Michel Mazoyer & Dennis Pardee (eds), 161-167. Chicago IL: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neu, Erich. 1989. Zum Alter der personifizierden –ant-Bildung des Hethistischen: Ein Beitragzur Geschichte der indogermanischen Genuskategorie. Historische Sprachforschung 102: 1-15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patri, Sylvain. 2007. L’alignement syntaxique dans les langues indo-européennes d’Anatolie. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pokorny, Julius. 1959. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rix, Helmut, et al. 2001. Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben, 2nd edn. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Seefranz-Montag, Ariane. 1983. Syntaktische Funktionen und Wortstellungsveränderung: Die Entwicklung ‘subjektloser’ Konstruktionen in einigen Sprachen. Munich: Fink.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smyth, Herbert Weir. 1926. Aeschylus, with an English translation, Vol. 2: Libation Bearers. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Svavarsdóttir, Ásta. 1982. Þágufallssýki (Dative sickness). Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði 4: 19–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watkins, Calvert. 1976. Towards Proto-Indo-European syntax: Problems and pseudo problems. In Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax, Sanford B. Steever, Carol A. Walker & Salikoko S. Mufwene (eds), 306-26. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yakubovich, Ilya. 2011. Privative ergativity in Hittite. Handout for the presentation at the conference Historical-Comparative Linguistics in the 21st Century, Pavia, Italy, 22-25 September.
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue