Cover not available

In:Perspectives on Historical Syntax
Edited by Carlotta Viti
[Studies in Language Companion Series 169] 2015
► pp. 155–184

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

Anatolian morphosyntax

Inheritance and innovation

 | Concordia University of Montreal
Published online: 29 April 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.169.06tef
This paper addresses three interrelated topics in Anatolian syntax: the syntactic typology of the Anatolian languages, specifically the issue of argument structure, and the two most striking innovations in Anatolian morphosyntax, the putative split-ergativity, seen most clearly in Hittite, and the development, unique within the early Indo-European languages, of subject clitic pronouns. Revisiting earlier studies, especially those of Garrett in 1990 and subsequently, as well as others carried out in the meantime, the paper offers a reassessment of the status and function of these innovations against the background of a discussion of Indo-European syntactic structure, and suggests a motivation rooted in a context of language contact.
References (123)
References
Alexiadou, Artemis & Schäfer, Florian. 2006. Instrument subjects are agents or causers. In Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Donald Baumer, David Montero & Michael Scanlon (eds), 40-48. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barđdal, Jóhanna & Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2009. The origin of the oblique-subject construction: An Indo-European comparison. In Grammatical Change in Indo-European Languages [Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Series IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 305], Vit Bubenik, John Hewson & Sarah Rose (eds), 179-194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, Brigitte. 2000. Archaic Syntax in Indo-European: The Spread of Transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1962. Les substantifs en –ant- du Hittite. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 57: 44-51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boas, Franz (ed.). 1911. Handbook of American Indian Languages, I [Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 40;1]. Washingdon DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bomhard, Allan R. 1988. The prehistoric development of the athematic verbal endings in Proto- Indo-European. In A Linguistic Happening in Memory of Ben Schwartz, Yoël L. Arbeitman (ed.), 475- 488. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1878. Zur Geschichte der Personalendungen. Morphologische Untersuchungen 1: 133-186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1886-92. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1897-1916. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen, 2nd edn. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1904. Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg: Trübner. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1921. Zur Frage der Personalendungen des indogermanischen Verbums. Indogermanische Forschungen 39: 131-139.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Dennis R.M. 2011. Agent, subject, patient, and beneficiary: grammatical roles in Hurrian. 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, Michele Fruyt & Michel Mazoyer (eds), 21-46. Chicago IL: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carruba, Onofrio. 1992. Le notazioni dell’agente animato nelle lingue anatoliche (e l’ergativo). In Per una grammatica ittita, Onofrio Carruba (ed.), 61-98. Pavia: Iuculano.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 1979. The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15: 203-224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dardano, Paola. 2010. Zur anatolischen Morphosyntax: das Suffix –(a)nt- und seine Bildungen. In Acts of the VIIth International Congress of Hittitology, Çorum, August 25-31, 2008. Aygül Süel (ed.), 173-188. Ankara: T. C. Çorum Valiliği.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2005. The blue bird of ergativity. In Ergativity in Amazonia, III: Proceedings of the Workshop on "Ergatividade na Amazônia", Francesc Queixalos (ed.), 1-15. Paris: Centre d'Études des Langues Indigènes d'Amérique, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold. 1877. Altindische Tempuslehre [Syntaktische Forschungen 2]. Halle: Buchhandlung des Weisenhauses.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1878. Die altindische Wortfolge aus dem Śatapathabrāhmaṇa dargestellt [Syntaktische Forschungen 3]. Halle: Buchhandlung des Weisenhauses.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1879. Die Grundlagen der griechischen Syntax [Syntaktische Forschungen 4]. Halle: Buchhandlung des Weisenhauses.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1888. Altindische Syntax [Syntaktische Forschungen 5]. Halle: Buchhandlung des Weisenhauses.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1893-1900. Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Devine, Andrew M. & Stephens, Lawrence D. 2000. Discontinuous Syntax: Hyperbaton in Greek. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Latin Word Order. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M.W. 1979. Ergativity. Language 55: 59-138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Ergativity [Cambridge Studies in Linguistis 69]. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donohue, Mark & Wichmann, Søren (eds). 2008. The Typology of Semantic Alignment. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dover, Kenneth J. 1960. Greek Word Order. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Durie, Mark 1985. A Grammar of Acehnese. On the Basis of a Dialect of North Aceh. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Stefanie. 2011. Differential agent marking and animacy. Lingua 121: 533-547. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fortson, Benjamin W.IV. 2004. Indo-European Language and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gamkrelidze, Thomas V. & Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. 1995. Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: A Reconstruction and Historical Analysis of a Proto-Language and a Proto-Culture, Part I: The Text. With a preface by Roman Jakobson; English version by Johanna Nichols; edited by Werner Winter. Berlin: de Gruyter. Original Russian edition published in 1984.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew. 1990a. The Syntax of Anatolian Pronominal Clitics. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
. 1990b. Hittite enclitic subjects and transitive verbs. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 42: 227-242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990c. The origin of NP split ergativity. Language 66: 261-296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Wackernagel’s Law and unaccusativity in Hittite. In Approaching Second: Second Position Clitics and Related Phenomena, Aaron L. Halpern & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds), 85-133. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goedegebuure, Petra. 2013. Split-ergativity in Hittite. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 102(2): 270-303. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gonda, Jan. 1952. Remarques sur la place du verbe dans la phrase active et moyenne en langue sanscrite. Utrecht: A. Oosthoek.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1959. On amplified sentences and similar structures in the Veda. In Four Studies in the Language of the Veda, 7-70. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 2003. On the significance of Eloise Jelinek’s Pronominal Argument Hypothesis. In Formal Approaches to Function in Grammar, In Honor of Eloise Jelinek [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 62], Andrew Carnie, Heidi Harley & Mary Willie (eds), 11-44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. Argument indexing: A conceptual framework for the syntax of bound person forms. In Languages Across Boundaries: Studies in Memory of Anna Siewierska, Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A.Jr. 1998. From the disciplines of a dictionary editor. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 50: 35-44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A.Jr., & Melchert, H. Craig. 2008. A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Householder, Fred W. 1981. The Syntax of Apollonius Dyscolus, translated and with commentary [Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jelinek, Eloise. 1984. Empty categories, case, and configurationality. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2: 39-76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987. Auxiliaries and ergative splits: A typological parameter. In Historical Development of Auxiliaries, Martin Harris & Paolo Ramat (eds), 85-108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Definiteness and second position clitics in Straits Salish. In Approaching Second: Second Position Clitics and Related Phenomena, Aaron L. Halpern & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds). Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. The Pronominal Argument Parameter. In Arguments and Agreement, Peter Ackema, Patrick Brandt, Maaike Schoorlemmer & Fred Weerman (eds), 261-288. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jelinek, Eloise & Demers, Richard. 1994. Predicates and pronominal arguments in Straits Salish. Language 70: 697-736. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. 1994. On weak subjects and pro-drop in Greek. In Themes in Greek Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 117], Irene Philippaki-Warburton, Katerina Nicolaidis & Maria Sifanou (eds), 21-32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Josephson, Folke. 2004a. Semantics and typology of Hittite -ant-. In Indo-European Word Formation, James Clackson & Birgit Anette Olsen (eds), 91-118. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004b Singulative and agentive in Hittite and Germanic. In Per aspera ad asteriscos. Studia Indogermanica in honorem Jens Elmegård Rasmussen sexagenarii Idibus Martiis anno MMIV, Adam Hyllested (ed.), 257-262. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Dislocation. In Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol. 2: An International Handbook, Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds), 1050-1078. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud & Lemoine, Kevin. 2005. Definite null objects in (spoken) French: A Construction-Grammar account. In Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots [Constructional Approaches to Language 6], Mirjam Fried & Hans C. Boas (eds), 13-56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laroche, Emmanuel. 1962. Un «ergatif» en indo-européen d’Asie Mineure. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 57: 23-43.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1994. Person marking in Indo-European. Historische Sprachforschung 107: 1-11.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Pre-Indo-European [Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph Series No. 41]. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 1990. Old Hittite Sentence Structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Definite referential null objects in Ancient Greek. Indogermanische Forschungen 108: 167-194.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010a. Experiencer predicates in Hittite. In Ex Anatolia Lux: Anatolian and Indo-European Studies in Honor of H. Craig Melchert on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, Ronald I. Kim, Norbert Oettinger, Elisabeth Riecken & Michael J. Weiss (eds), 249-264. Ann Arbor MI: Beach Stave Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010b. The rise (and possible downfall) of configurationality. In The Continuum Companion to Historical Linguistics, Silvia Luraghi & Vit Bubenik (eds), 212-229. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Anatolian syntax. In Comparative Indo-European Linguistics. An International Handbook of Language Comparison and the Reconstruction of Indo-European, Matthias Fritz, Jared Klein & Brian D. Joseph (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
McCone, Kim R. 1979. The diachronic possibilities of the IE ‘amplified’ sentence: A case history from Anatolian. In Studies in Diachronic, Synchronic, and Typological Linguistics, Part 1 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 11], Bela Brogyanyi (ed.), 467-487. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGregor, William B. 2009. Typology of ergativity. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 480-508. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeill, Ian. 1963. The metre of the Hittite epic. Anatolian Studies 13: 237-242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1903[1937]. Introduction à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes, 8th edn. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1913. Aperçu d’une histoire de la langue grecque. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine & Vendryes, Joseph. 1924. Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques, 5th edn. 1979. Paris: Librarie ancienne Edouard Champion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melchert, H. Craig. 2007. Hittite morphology. In Morphologies of Asia and Africa, Vol. 2, Alan S. Kaye (ed.), 755-773. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Middle Hittite revisited. In Atti del 6° Congresso Internazionale di Ittitologia II, Alfonso Archi & Rita Francia (eds), 525-531. Rome: Istituto di studi sulle civiltà dell’egeo e del vicino Oriente.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Syntax and prosody in Hittite word order. Handout at Language Variation and Change Workshop , The University of Chicago , January 15.
. 2011a. Enclitic subject pronouns in Hieroglyphic Luvian. Aramazd: Armenian Journal of Near Eastern Studies 6(2): 73-86.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011b. 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 (eds), 161-167. Chicago IL: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1991. Active/agentive case marking and its motivations. Language 67(3): 510-546. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Typology and deep genetic relations in North America. In Reconstructing Languages and Cultures [Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 58], Edgar C. Polomé & Werner Winter (eds), 91-110. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Pronouns and agreement: The information status of pronominal affixes. Transactions of the Philological Society 101: 235-278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. The emergence of agentive systems in core argument marking. In The Typology of Semantic Alignment, Mark Donohue & Søren Wichman (eds), 297-333. Oxford: OUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne & Chafe, Wallace. 1999. What are S, A, and O? Studies in Language 23(3): 569-596. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Monro, David Binning. 1882[1891]. A Grammar of the Homeric Dialect, 2nd edn. revised and enlarged. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, Anna. 1986. Karl Brugmann and late nineteenth-century linguistics. In Studies in the History of Western Linguistics in Honour of R. H. Robins, Theodora Bynon & Frank R. Palmer (eds), 150-171. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. History of Linguistics, Vol. IV: Nineteenth-Century Linguistics, Giulio Lepschy (ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mouton, Alice, Rutherford, Ian & Yakubovich, Ilya. 2013. Introduction. In Luwian Identities: Culture, Language and Religion Between Anatolia and the Aegean, Alice Mouton, Ian Rutherford & Ilya Yakubovich (eds), 1-21. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neu, Erich. 1989. Zum Alter der personifizierenden -ant- Bildung des Hethitischen. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der indogermanischen Genuskategorie. Historische Sprachforschung 102: 1-15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62: 56-119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990. Linguistic diversity and the first settlement of the New World. Language 66: 475-521. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oettinger, Norbert. 2001. Neue Gedanken uber das nt-Suffix. Anatolisch und Indogermanisch, Onofrio Carruba & Wolfgang Meid (eds), 301-316. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patri, Sylvain. 2007. L’alignement syntaxique dans les langues indo-européennes d’Anatolie [Studien zu den Boğazköy Texten 49]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria & Comrie, Bernard. 1999. Agreement in Tsez. Folia Linguistica 33(2): 109-130. Special issue Agreement, Greville G. Corbett (ed.). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Puhvel, Jaan. 1991. Whence the Hittite, whither the Jonesian vision? In Sprung from Some Common Source: Investigations into the Prehistory of Languages, Sydney M. Lamb & E. Douglas Mitchell (eds), 51-66. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Queneau, Raymond. 1950. Connaissez-vous le Chinook? In Bâtons, chiffres et lettres, 45-50. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald. 2009. The linguistic diversity of aboriginal Europe. Language Log, January 6, 2009. <[URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald, Warnow, Tandy & Taylor, Ann. 2002. Indo-European and computational cladistics. Transactions of the Philological Society 100(1): 59-129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosén, Haiim B. 1987. Some more noteworthy features of ‘primitive’ Indo-European syntax. Journal of Indo-European Studies 15: 61-75.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwyzer, Eduard. 1947. Zur Apposition. Abhandlungen der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin [Jahrgang 1945/46, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 3]. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth. 1997. On the pronominal origin of the Indo-European athematic verbal suffixes. Journal of Indo-European Studies 25: 105-117.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sideltsev, Andrey V. 2011a. Two systems of clitic doubling in Hittite. Abstract. In Eighth International Congress of Hittitology Abstracts, 30-31, Warsaw.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011b. Two systems of clitic doubling in Hittite. Handout at Eighth International Congress of Hittitology , Warsaw, 5-9 September.
. 2011c. Clitic doubling: A new syntactic category in Hittite. Altorientalische Forschungen 38(1): 81-91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. The origin of Hittite right dislocations. In Acts of the 8th International Congress of Hittitology, Piotr Taracha (ed.). Warsaw: Agade.
Siewierska, Anna. 1999. From anaphoric pronoun to grammatical agreement marker: Why objects don’t make it. Folia Linguistica 33(2): 225-251. Special issue Agreement, Greville G. Corbett (ed.). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sihler, Andrew L. 1995. New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, Robert M.W. Dixon (ed.), 112-171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soysal, Oğuz. 2010. Philological contributions to Hattian-Hittite religion (II): 3. On the origin and the name of the ḫazkarai-women. In Pax Hethitica: Studies on the Hittites and their Neighbours in Honour of Itamar Singer [Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten 51], Yoram Cohen & Amir Gilan (eds), 340-350. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szemerényi, Oswald J.L. 1996. Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tchékoff, Claude. 1978. Le double cas-sujet des inanimées: Un archaïsme de la syntaxe Hittite? Bullein de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 73: 225-242.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teffeteller, Annette. 2001. Greek syntax: Theoretical approaches from Meillet to Devine and Stephens. Mouseion 3(1): 251-279.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Object clitics in the Modern Greek dialects of Asia Minor: Diachronic and dialectal variation in the encoding of argument structure. In On-line Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory (MGDLT4). Chios, 11-14 June 2009. Research on Greek Dialects: Institutions and Projects , Angela Ralli, Brian D. Joseph, Mark Janse & Athanasios Karasimos (eds), 186-196. Patras: University of Patras. <[URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Argument structure and adjunction in Anatolian syntax. In Acts of the 8th International Congress of Hittitology , Piotr Taracha (ed.), 964-977. Warsaw: Agade.
. Forthcoming. Epic Choices: Action and Agency in the Homeric Poems. Oxford: OUP.
Vendryes, Joseph. 1921. Le Langage. Introduction linguistique à l’histoire. Paris: Renaissance du livre.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watkins, Calvert. 1962. Indo-European Origins of the Celtic Verb. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1963. Preliminaries to a historical and comparative analysis of the syntax of the Old Irish verb. Celtica 6: 1-49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1964. Preliminaries to the reconstruction of Indo-European sentence structure. In Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists, Cambridge, MA, Horace Gray Lunt (ed.), 1035-1045. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1968-69. The Celtic masculine and neuter enclitic pronouns. Études Celtiques 12: 92-95.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1969. Indogermanische Grammatik , Jerzy Kuryłowicz (ed.), Vol. III.1: Formenlehre: Geschichte der indogermanischen Verbalflexion. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1976. Towards Proto-Indo-European syntax: Problems and pseudo-problems. In Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax, Sanford Steever, Carol Walker & Salikoko S. Mufwene (eds), 305-326. Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, University of Chicago.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. An Indo-European linguistic area and its characteristics: Ancient Anatolia. Areal diffusion as a challenge to the Comparative Method? In Areal Diffusion and Genetic Inheritance, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M.W. Dixon (eds), 44-63. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yakubovich, Ilya. 2010. Sociolinguistics of the Luwian Language. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Ergativity in Hittite. Paper presented at Die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft im 21. Jahrhundert/Historical-Comparative Linguistics in the 21st Century , Pavia, 22-25 September.
Zeilfelder, Susanne. 2001. Archaismus und Ausgliederung. Studien zur sprachlichen Stellung des Hethitischen. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Probleme des hethitischen Nominativs: split-ergativity und Casus commemorativus. In Na-wa/i-VIR.ZI/A MAGNUS. SCRIBA. Festschrift für Helmut Nowicki zum 70. Geburtstag [Dresdner Beiträge zur Hethitologie 45], Cyril Brosch & Annick Payne (eds), 199-210. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Cennamo, Michela & Claudia Fabrizio
2022. Non-nominative arguments, active impersonals, and control in Latin. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 188 ff. DOI logo
Cotticelli, Paola & Eystein Dahl
2022. Split alignment, mixed alignment, and the spread of accusative morphosyntax in some archaic Indo-European languages. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 64 ff. DOI logo
Eystein Dahl
2022. Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, DOI logo
Dahl, Eystein
2022. Alignment in Proto-Indo-European. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 24 ff. DOI logo
Dahl, Eystein
2022. Alignment and alignment change in the Indo-European family and beyond. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Fabrizio, Claudia
2022. Infinitives and subjecthood between Latin and Old Italian. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 221 ff. DOI logo
Hock, Hans Henrich
2022. Passives and anticausatives in Vedic Sanskrit. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 166 ff. DOI logo
Luraghi, Silvia & Guglielmo Inglese
2022. The origin of ergative case markers. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Melis, Chantal
2022. Alignment changes with Spanish experiential verbs. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 246 ff. DOI logo
Meyer, Robin
2022. Armenian morphosyntactic alignment in diachrony. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo
Seržant, Ilja A., Björn Wiemer, Eleni Bužarovska, Martina Ivanová, Maxim Makartsev, Stefan Savić, Dmitri Sitchinava, Karolína Skwarska & Mladen Uhlik
2022. Areal and diachronic trends in argument flagging across Slavic. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. 300 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. List of abbreviations. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. xi ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Series preface. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. vii ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Copyright Page. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. iv ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. List of tables. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. ix ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. List of figures. In Alignment and Alignment Change in the Indo-European Family, ► pp. viii ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 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