DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction to Sumerian Grammar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction to Sumerian Grammar INTRODUCTION TO SUMERIAN GRAMMAR DANIEL A FOXVOG LECTURER IN ASSYRIOLOGY (RETIRED) UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY Revised September 2008 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 THE SUMERIAN WRITING SYSTEM 4 TABLE OF SYLLABIC SIGN VALUES 16 PHONOLOGY 18 NOUNS AND ADJECTIVES 23 THE NOMINAL CHAIN 28 PRONOUNS AND DEMONSTRATIVES 31 SUMMARY OF PERSONAL PRONOUN FORMS 38 THE ADNOMINAL CASES: GENITIVE AND EQUATIVE 39 THE COPULA 46 ADVERBS AND NUMERALS 51 THE ADVERBAL CASES 54 INTRODUCTION TO THE VERB 61 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 1: INTRODUCTION 69 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 2: DATIVE 73 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 3: COMITATIVE, ABLATIVE-INSTRUMENTAL, TERMINATIVE 78 CORE PREFIXES: ERGATIVE, LOCATIVE-TERMINATIVE, LOCATIVE 83 THE VENTIVE ELEMENT 90 RELATIVE CLAUSES: THE NOMINALIZING SUFFIX -a 95 PREFORMATIVES (MODAL PREFIXES) 102 THE IMPERATIVE 109 IMPERFECTIVE FINITE VERBS 117 PARTICIPLES AND THE INFINITIVE 127 APPENDIX: CHART OF VERBAL PREFIX CHAIN ELEMENTS 150 INDEX 151 EXERCISES 152 2 INTRODUCTION Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem William of Ockham This grammar is intended primarily for use in the first year of university study under the guidance of a teacher who can describe the classic problems in greater detail, add current alternative explanations for phenomena, help the student parse and understand the many textual illustrations found throughout, and provide supplementary information about the history of the language and the culture of early Mesopotamia. A few exercises have been provided to accompany study of the lessons, some artificial, others drawn from actual texts. Both require vocabulary lookup from the companion Elementary Sumerian Glossary or its equivalent. Upon completing this introduction, the student will be well prepared to progress to sign learning and reading of texts. Konrad Volk's A Sumerian Reader (Studia Pohl Series Maior 18, Rome, 1997-) is a good beginning. This introduction may also be of benefit to those who have already learned some Sumerian more or less inductively through the reading of simple royal inscriptions, and who would now like a more structured review of its grammar, with the help of abundant textual illustrations, from something a bit more practical and pedagogically oriented than the available reference grammars. Cross-references have often been provided throughout to sections in Marie-Louise Thom- sen's standard The Sumerian Langauge (Copenhagen, 19872), where additional information and further examples can often be found for individual topics. A more modern and concise restatement of the entire grammatical system is Dietz Otto Edzard's Sumerian Grammar (Leiden, 2003). The most sophisticated and up to date quick overview is now Gonzalo Rubio's "Sumerian Morphology," in Alan S. Kaye (ed.), Morphologies of Asia and Africa II (2007) 1327-1379. Pascal Attinger's encyclopedic Eléments de linguistique sumérienne (Fribourg, 1993) is a tremendously helpful reference but beyond the reach of the beginner. For standard Assyriological abbreviations used in this introduction see the lists in Thomsen and Edzard. Chronological abbreviations used here include: OS Old Sumerian period (2500-2350 BC) Sarg. Sargonic period (2350-2150 BC) Ur III Third Dynasty of Ur (2100-2000 BC) OB Old Babylonian period (1900-1600 BC) For those who may own a version of my less polished UC Berkeley teaching grammar from 1990 or earlier the present version will be seen to be finally comprehensive, greatly expanded, hopefully much improved, and perhaps worth a serious second look. My descrip- tion of the morphology and historical morphophonemics of the verbal prefix system remains an idiosyncratic, somewhat unconventional minority position, but even after nearly three decades of concentrated effort there is still no full concensus on the subject among other scholars specializing in Sumerian grammar. D.A.F. July 2008 3 THE SUMERIAN WRITING SYSTEM I. TRANSLITERATION CONVENTIONS A. Sign Diacritics and Index Numbers Sumerian features a large number of homonyms — words that were pronounced similarly but had different meanings and were written with different signs, for example: /du/ "to come, go" /du/ "to build" /du/ "to release" A system of numerical subscripts and diacritics over vowels representing subscripts serves to identify precisely which sign appears in the actual text. The standard reference for sign identification remains R. Labat's Manuel d'Epigraphie akkadienne (1948-), which has seen numerous editions and reprintings. New sign lists by L.-J. Bord (2002), also C. Mittermayer (2006) specifically for Sumerian literary texts, may be helpful. Y. Rosengarten's Répertoire commenté des signes présargoniques sumériens de Lagaš (1967) is indispensible for reading Old Sumerian texts. R. Borger's Assyrisch-babylonische Zeichenliste (AOAT 33/33a, 1978) is now the modern reference for sign readings and index numbers, although F. Ellermeier's Sumerisches Glossar I/1 (1979-80) is occasionally helpful for rare signs and values. Borger's index system which is used here is as follows: Single-syllable signs Multiple-syllable signs du (= du1) muru Note that the diacritic dú (= du2) múru always falls on the FIRST VOWEL of the word! dù (= du3) mùru du4 etc. muru4 etc. There is variation in the systems employed in older signlists for multiple- syllable signs, especially in Labat. In the earliest editions of his sign- list which may still be encountered in libraries, Labat carried the use of diacritics through index numbers 4-5 by shifting the acute and grave accents onto the first syllable of multiple-syllable signs: murú (= muru2) murù (= muru3) múru (= muru4) mùru (= muru5) 4 This would not be a problem except for a number of signs which have long and short values. For example, the sign túk can be read /tuk/ or /tuku/. Labat gives the latter reading as túku, which then does not represent tuku4, but rather tuku2, i.e. túk(u)! Borger's AbZ system, used here and in later editions of Labat, is more consistent, placing the diacritics on the first syllable of multi-syllable signs, but using them only for index numbers 2 and 3. New values of signs, pronunciations for which no generally accepted index numbers yet exist, are given an "x" subscript, e.g. dax "side." Note, finally, that more and more frequently the acute and grave accents are being totally abandoned in favor of numeric subscripts throughout. This, for example, is the current convention of the new Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary, e.g. du, du2, du3, du4, etc. Since the system of accents is still current in sumerological literature, however, it is vital that the beginner become familiar with it, and so it has been maintained here. B. Upper and Lower Case, Italics and Parentheses In unilingual Sumerian contexts, Sumerian words are written in lower case roman letters. Upper case letters (CAPS) are used: 1) When the exact meaning of a sign is unknown or unclear. Many signs are polyvalent, that is, they have more than one value or reading. When the particular reading of a sign is in doubt, one may indicate this doubt by choosing one of its common values and writing this in CAPS. For example, in the sentence KA-ĝu10 ma-gig "My KA hurts me" a body part is intended. But the KA sign can be read ka "mouth", kir4 "nose" or zú "tooth", and the exact part of the face might not be clear from the context. By writing KA, one clearly identifies the sign to the reader, with- out committing oneself to any of its specific readings. 2) When the exact pronunciation of a sign is unknown or unclear. For example, in the phrase a-ŠEŠ "brackish water", the pro- nunciation of the second sign is still not completely clear: šeš, ses, or sis? Rather than commit oneself to a possibly incorrect choice, CAPS are used to tell the reader that the choice is being left open. 3) When one wishes to identify a non-standard or "x"-value of a sign. In this case, the x-value is immediately followed by a known value of the sign in CAPS placed within parentheses, e.g. dax(Á). 4) When one wishes to spell out the components of a compound logo- gram, e.g., énsi(PA.TE.SI) or ugnim(KI.KUŠ.LU.ÚB.ĜAR). In bilingual or Akkadian contexts, a variety of conventions exist. Very commonly, Akkadian words are written in lower case roman letters with Sumerian logograms in CAPS: a-na É.GAL-šu "to his palace." In earlier literature one also sees Sumerian words written in s p a c e d r o m a n letters, with Akkadian in either lower case roman or italics. Determinatives, unpronounced indicators of meaning, are written with superscripts in Sumerological literature, or, often, in CAPS on the line 5 in Akkadian contexts: gišhašhur or ĜIŠ.HAŠHUR. They are also sometimes seen written lower case on the line separated by periods: ĝiš.hašhur. C. Conventions for Linking Signs and Words Hyphens and Periods In Akkadian contexts, hyphens are always used to transliterate Akkad- ian, while periods separate the elements of Sumerian words or logograms. In Sumerian contexts, periods link the parts of compound signs written in CAPS, and hyphens are used elsewhere, e.g.: énsi(PA.TE.SI) "governor" kušÉ.ÍB-ùr "shield" an-šè "towards heaven" Problems arise, however, when one attempts to formulate a rule for the linking of the elements in the agglutinative chains peculiar to Sumerian. No one has yet formally defined just what constitutes a Sumerian "word." Consequently, we only transliterate Sumerian sign by sign; we do not trans- scribe words. Verbal chains consist mainly of affixes which are always linked together into one unit. But nominal chains often consist of adjec- tives, appositions, and dependent genitive constructions besides head nouns and suffixes, and the linking or separation of various parts of nominal chains in unilingual Sumerian contexts is very much subject to the training and idiosyncrasies of individual scholars.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transparency in Language a Typological Study
    Transparency in language A typological study Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6111 Trans 10 3512 JK Utrecht e-mail: [email protected] The Netherlands http://www.lotschool.nl Cover illustration © 2011: Sanne Leufkens – image from the performance ‘Celebration’ ISBN: 978-94-6093-162-8 NUR 616 Copyright © 2015: Sterre Leufkens. All rights reserved. Transparency in language A typological study ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. D.C. van den Boom ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Agnietenkapel op vrijdag 23 januari 2015, te 10.00 uur door Sterre Cécile Leufkens geboren te Delft Promotiecommissie Promotor: Prof. dr. P.C. Hengeveld Copromotor: Dr. N.S.H. Smith Overige leden: Prof. dr. E.O. Aboh Dr. J. Audring Prof. dr. Ö. Dahl Prof. dr. M.E. Keizer Prof. dr. F.P. Weerman Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen i Acknowledgments When I speak about my PhD project, it appears to cover a time-span of four years, in which I performed a number of actions that resulted in this book. In fact, the limits of the project are not so clear. It started when I first heard about linguistics, and it will end when we all stop thinking about transparency, which hopefully will not be the case any time soon. Moreover, even though I might have spent most time and effort to ‘complete’ this project, it is definitely not just my work. Many people have contributed directly or indirectly, by thinking about transparency, or thinking about me.
    [Show full text]
  • Equative Constructions in World-Wide Perspective
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ZENODO 1 Equative constructions in world-wide perspective Martin Haspelmath & the Leipzig Equative Constructions Team1 Abstract: In this paper, we report on a world-wide study of equative constructions (‘A is as big as B’) in a convenience sample of 119 languages. From earlier work, it has been known that European languages often have equative constructions based on adverbial relative pronouns that otherwise express degree or manner (‘how’, ‘as’), but we find that this type is rare outside Europe. We divide the constructions that we found into six primary types, four of which have closely corresponding types of comparative constructions (‘A is bigger than B’). An equative construction often consists of five components: a comparee (‘A’), a degree-marker (‘as’), a parameter (‘is big’), a standard-marker (‘as’), and a standard (‘B’). Most frequently, the parameter is the main predicate and the equative sense is expressed by a special standard-marker. But many languages also have a degree-marker, so that we get a construction of the English and French type. Another possibility is for the equality sense to be expressed by a transitive ‘equal’ (or ‘reach’) verb, which may be the main predicate or a secondary predicate. And finally, since the equative construction is semantically symmetrical, it is also possible to “unify” the parameter and the standard in the subject position (‘A and B are equally tall’, or ‘A and B are equal in height’). But no language has only a degree-marker, leaving the standard unmarked.
    [Show full text]
  • Adpositions and Case: Alternative Realisation and Concord*
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repository of the Academy's Library Adpositions and Case: Alternative Realisation and Concord* Marcel den Dikken and Éva Dékány This paper presents an outlook on ‘inherent case’ that ties it consistently to the cat- egory P, in either of two ways: the inherent case particle is either an autonomous spell-out of P or, in Emonds’ (1985, 1987) term, an alternative realisation of a silent P (i.e., a case morpheme on P’s nominal complement that licenses the silence of P). The paper also unfolds a perspective on case concord that analyses it as the copying of morphological material rather than the matching of morphological features. These proposals are put to the test in a detailed analysis of the case facts of Estonian, with particular emphasis on the distinction, within its eleven ‘semantic’ cases, between the seven spatial cases (analysed as alternative realisations of a null P) and the last four cases (treated as autonomous realisations of postpositions). This analysis of the Estonian case system has repercussions for the status of genitive case (structural vs inherent), and for the analysis of (the distribution of ) case concord. It also prompts a novel, purely syntactic outlook on case distribution in pseudo-partitives, exploiting a key contrast between Agree and the Spec-Head relation: when agreement involves the Spec-Head relation, it is subject to a condition. Keywords: adposition, alternative realisation, case, concord, exponence, pseudo-partitive 1 Preliminaries 1.1 Semantic cases as autonomous or alternative realisations of P Semantic cases of case-rich languages, such as the inessive or the ablative, translate in case-poor languages such as English with the aid of a designated spatial adposition, such as locative in (for ) or directional om (for ).
    [Show full text]
  • Grammatical Case in Estonian
    Grammatical Case in Estonian Merilin Miljan A thesis submitted in fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh September 2008 Declaration I hereby declare that this thesis is of my own composition, and that it contains no material previously submitted for the award of any other degree. The work reported in this thesis has been executed by myself, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text. Merilin Miljan ii Abstract The aim of this thesis is to show that standard approaches to grammatical case fail to provide an explanatory account of such cases in Estonian. In Estonian, grammatical cases form a complex system of semantic contrasts, with the case-marking on nouns alternating with each other in certain constructions, even though the apparent grammatical functions of the noun phrases themselves are not changed. This thesis demonstrates that such alternations, and the differences in interpretation which they induce, are context dependent. This means that the semantic contrasts which the alternating grammatical cases express are available in some linguistic contexts and not in others, being dependent, among other factors, on the semantics of the case- marked noun and the semantics of the verb it occurs with. Hence, traditional approaches which treat grammatical case as markers of syntactic dependencies and account for associated semantic interpretations by matching cases directly to semantics not only fall short in predicting the distribution of cases in Estonian but also result in over-analysis due to the static nature of the theories which the standard approach to case marking comprises.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Cases
    This is the pre-final version of a paper published in Malchukov, A. & A. Spencer (eds.), 2008, The Oxford Handbook of Case, 609-625, Oxford University Press. Don’t quote without checking the published version before. Spatial Cases Denis Creissels Université Lumière (Lyon 2) [email protected] 1. Introductory remarks 1.1.Definitions In this chapter, the term case is taken in its traditional meaning of inflectional category-system (and the individual categories or values of that system) expressing dependency relations involving NPs.1 A spatial relation involves two percepts, a Figure (or Theme, or Trajector) and a Ground (or Location, or Landmark), the Figure being perceived as located or in motion relative to the Ground.2 A spatial case is an inflected form of nouns or NPs distinct from the absolute form available for the extra-syntactic function of pure designation, and apt to fulfill one of the following functions without the addition of an adposition:3 – non-verbal predicate, or predicative complement of a copula, specifying the location of an entity, – verb satellite specifying the location of an event, – argument of motion verbs specifying the source, path, or destination of the movement. It may happen that the same case form has some uses corresponding to this definition along with non-spatial uses (see sections 4 and 5). Some authors have advocated that all cases can be viewed as locative expressions (see in particular Hjelmslev 1935, Hjelmslev 1937, Anderson 1971, Cook 1989). Since we are concerned with cases that have concrete spatial meanings (and not with cases having only non-spatial uses derivable from abstract locative meanings) this question will not be further developed here.
    [Show full text]
  • Sumerian Grammar-Society of Biblical Literature
    HDO1-71-edzard.qxd 09/04/2003 10:03 Page i SUMERIAN GRAMMAR HDO1-71-edzard.qxd 09/04/2003 10:03 Page ii HANDBOOK OF ORIENTAL STUDIES HANDBUCH DER ORIENTALISTIK SECTION ONE THE NEAR AND MIDDLE EAST EDITED BY H. ALTENMÜLLER · B. HROUDA · B.A. LEVINE · R.S. O’FAHEY K.R. VEENHOF · C.H.M. VERSTEEGH VOLUME SEVENTY-ONE HDO1-71-edzard.qxd 09/04/2003 10:03 Page iii SUMERIAN GRAMMAR BY DIETZ OTTO EDZARD BRILL LEIDEN • BOSTON 2003 HDO1-71-edzard.qxd 09/04/2003 10:03 Page iv This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Edzard, Dietz Otto. Sumerian grammar / by Dietz Otto Edzard. p. cm. – (Handbook of Oriental studies. Section 1, Near and Middle East ; v. 71 = Handbuch der Orientalistik) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 90-04-12608-2 1. Sumerian language–Grammar. I. Title. II. Handbuch der Orientalistik. Erste Abteilung, Nahe und der Mittlere Osten ; 71. Bd. PJ4013.E38 2003 499'.955-dc21 2003049567 ISSN 0169-9423 ISBN 90 04 12608 2 © Copyright 2003 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers MA 01923, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Clitics in Modern Georgian
    Asian and African Languages and Linguistics, No.2, 2007 Clitics in Modern Georgian KOJIMA, Yasuhiro JSPS Research Fellow, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies The present paper aims at a detailed description of clitics in Modern Georgian, drawing particular attention to their relative order in clitic sequences, the distinction of clitics from suffixes, what a clitic may take as its host, and their semantic scope. Clitics are grouped into six groups basically according to their relative ordering: clitic postpositions and five groups of clitic particles. Generally, clitics are grammatical words that have no phonological independence and, in this point, they show some affinity to affixes. It is demonstrated in the paper that these six groups of clitics show a coherent gradation from those more affix-like to those less so in several aspects. Keywords: Georgian, clitic, particle, postposition, affix 1. Introduction 2. Modern Georgian 3. Clitics 4. Conclusion 1. Introduction* Clitics are generally characterized as a grammatical word which is not an independent phonological word on its own. A clitic attaches to another element and forms a phonological word together with it (cf. Dixon and Aikhenvald 2002: 25). It is often the case in languages that some elements may appear either as a clitic or as a full phonological word. In the present paper, only those grammatical words which never represent an independent phonological word are called clitics. In Modern Georgian, there are then a scant twenty such clitics, all of which are enclitic. The present paper aims at a detailed description of them, drawing particular attention to their relative order in clitic sequences, the distinction of clitics from suffixes, what a clitic may take as its host, and their semantic scope.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Sumerian Grammar”
    Cuneiform Digital Library Preprints <http://cdli.ucla.edu/?q=cuneiform-digital-library-preprints> Hosted by the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (<http://cdli.ucla.edu>) Editor: Bertrand Lafont (CNRS, Nanterre) Number 2 Title: “Introduction to Sumerian Grammar” Author: Daniel A. Foxvog Posted to web: 4 January 2016 INTRODUCTION TO SUMERIAN GRAMMAR DANIEL A FOXVOG LECTURER IN ASSYRIOLOGY (RETIRED) UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY Revised January 2016 CONTENTS PREFACE 4 THE SUMERIAN WRITING SYSTEM 5 PHONOLOGY 17 NOUNS AND ADJECTIVES 22 THE NOMINAL CHAIN 27 PRONOUNS AND DEMONSTRATIVES 30 SUMMARY OF PERSONAL PRONOUN FORMS 37 THE ADNOMINAL CASES: GENITIVE AND EQUATIVE 38 THE COPULA 44 ADVERBS AND NUMERALS 49 THE ADVERBAL CASES 53 INTRODUCTION TO THE VERB 60 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 1: INTRODUCTION 68 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 2: DATIVE 73 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 3: COMITATIVE, ABLATIVE-INSTRUMENTAL, TERMINATIVE 78 CORE PREFIXES: ERGATIVE, LOCATIVE-TERMINATIVE, LOCATIVE 84 THE VENTIVE ELEMENT 91 RELATIVE CLAUSES: THE NOMINALIZING SUFFIX -a 97 PREFORMATIVES (MODAL PREFIXES) 104 THE IMPERATIVE 111 IMPERFECTIVE FINITE VERBS 119 PARTICIPLES AND THE INFINITIVE 130 APPENDIX 1: CHART OF VERBAL PREFIX CHAIN ELEMENTS 155 TABLE OF SYLLABIC SIGN VALUES 156 APPENDIX 2: THE EMESAL DIALECT 158 INDEX 159 EXERCISES 161 3 PREFACE Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem William of Ockham This grammar is intended primarily for use in the first year of university study under the guidance of a teacher who can describe the classic problems in greater detail, add current alternative explanations for phenomena, help the student parse and understand the many textual illustrations found throughout, and provide supplementary information about the history of the language and the culture of early Mesopotamia.
    [Show full text]
  • Noun Cases of Hungarian Language in Romanian
    ACTA UNIVERSITATIS SAPIENTIAE, PHILOLOGICA, 6, 3 (2014) 295–315 Noun Cases of Hungarian Language in Romanian Csaba Attila BOTH Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania, Cluj-Napoca Faculty of Technical and Human Sciences, Târgu-Mureş bothcsabaattila@gmail .com Abstract. In the present-day discourse of bilingualism in Transylvania, the investigation of methods and possibilities for language teaching has an important role . In Romania, it is compulsory for the members of linguistic minorities to learn and to use the language of the state, but at the same time they face a number of problems in the process of learning it . To reconsider the methods of language teaching, there is need for studies which outline the particularities of language use of Romanian of Hungarian speakers . This paper is aimed at presenting a part of this image by analysing how the Hungarian language and the cognitive features entailed influence the translation of noun cases into the Romanian language . The paper presents the 18 noun cases and the prepositions they can be translated with into Romanian. Keywords: noun case, case suffix, preposition, translation, language use Introduction In Romanian, it is compulsory for the members of linguistic minorities to learn and to use the language of the state (the Romanian language) . In the process of language learning, the Hungarian learner faces a number of problems, which are caused by several factors, e .g . the very different language system of Hungarian from Romanian, cognitive issues (e .g ., different perceptions and divisions of the space) etc . It is a fact that the teaching of the Romanian language for the minorities does not have a well-structured framework, proper teaching materials and even proper methods .
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts
    1 BOOK OF ABSTRACTS Case in and across languages Helsinki (Finland), August 27-29, 2009 2 PLENARY PAPERS Janda, Laura: Meaning of Cases, Cases of Meaning, p. 6 SECTION PAPERS Ackerman, Farrell & John Moore: Proto-properties and Obliqueness, p. 7 Arkadiev, Peter: Towards a typology of case in head-marking languages, p. 9 Bartens, Angela & Enrique Lucena Torres : The Finnish translative and its equivalents in Spanish, French, and Italian – a case study of Kari Hotakainen’s Juoksuhaudantie and its translations, p. 11 Breed, Adri: Unmarkedness of case in Afrikaans, p. 12 Crombach, Michael: Zipf, Kandel and Case. Case, case-syncretism and fre- quencies, p. 13 Cysouw, Michael & Diana Forker: Reconstruction of morphosyntactic func- tion: Non-spatial usage of spatial case marking in Tsezic, p. 14 Daniel, Michael: Vocative: paradigmatization of address, p. 16 Edygarova, Svetlana: Cases and attributive possession in permic languages, p. 17 Fauconnier, Stefanie: Agent marking and animacy, p. 19 Fernández, Beatriz & Jon Ortiz de Urbina: Core and peripheral datives: Da- tive agreement drop in Basque, p. 21 Frick, Maria: Case usage in Finnish−Estonian code-switching, p. 23 Granvik, Anton: Spanish de and the genitive, p. 24 de Groot, Casper: Reconsidering the Hungarian Case System, p. 26 Gruzdeva, Ekaterina: Coding of the subject in dependent clauses, p. 28 Guntsetseg, Dolgor: The case of accusative embedded subjects in Mongolian, p. 31 Halmari, Helena: The case for the abstract case: Evidence from bilingual code- switching, p. 33 Hamari, Arja: The abessive case of the Uralic languages, p. 35 Handschuh, Corinna: Marked-S case systems, p. 36 3 de Hoop, Helena & Sander Lestrade: Case and Tense, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Argument Structure and Functional Projections in Old Hungarian Verbal Gerunds1
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Repository of the Academy's Library Argument structure and functional projections in Old Hungarian verbal gerunds1 Éva Dékány Abstract This paper seeks to give a syntactic analysis of Old Hungarian verbal gerunds. I take the "mixed projection" approach to nominalizations (Bresnan 1997, Borsley & Kornfilt 2000, Alexiadou 2001, a.o.), whereby the extended vP is embedded under nominal functional categories. I argue that in the verbal part of the gerund there is solid evidence for AspP/PredP dominating VoiceP, but there is no conclusive evi- dence for a TP being projected. I suggest that the object of the gerundival verb may undergo scrambling to a position above negation, while the subject becomes a derived possessor on the surface. I propose that these gerunds do not contain a nominalizer (see Alexiadou 2005, Alexiadou et al. 2010b; 2011 for this possibility); the extended vP is embedded directly under the nominal functional head Poss. Keywords: gerund, mixed projection, nominalization, possessor, Old Hungarian 1 Introduction Old Hungarian (896–1526 A.D.) features a wide variety of non-finite verb forms: in addition to an infinitive, it also has several types of adjectival and adverbial participles as well as two types of gerunds. This paper focuses on the syntactic structure of one of the Old Hungarian gerunds: that marked by the suffix -t (1).2 (1) harom´Zèr tagac-me´ g´ [èngem-èt eSmèr-t-ed-èt] three.time deny-PRT I-ACC know-t-2SG-ACC `you deny your knowing me three times’ (Munich C.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Case in Ossetic*
    Iran and the Caucasus 14 (2010) 287-322 Evolution of Case in Ossetic * Oleg Belyaev Moscow State University Abstract Ossetic sets itself apart from the other New Iranian languages by having a relatively elaborate system of nine cases. Since most of them are relatively late innovations, and only four cases (Nom., Gen, Abl., and Iness.) can be traced back to Proto-Iranian, many scholars tend to ascribe the development of the case system to Caucasian in- fluence. The exact nature of this influence, however, has never been demonstrated. The aim of this paper is, first, to not only reconstruct the etymologies of Ossetic cases, but also to provide a chronology of how the case system developed. The sec- ond aim pursued here is to give a systematic comparison of the case system of Os- setic with those of the neighbouring languages and to determine if there is any ex- ternal influence on the case system and, if so, what languages this influence came from. I conclude that Ossetic developed from a case system identical to those of Khotanese and Sogdian towards the present state under the influence of contact with Georgian and, later, with Turkic and Vaynakh languages. In the process of the discussion, I also argue that two new cases, the Directive and Regressive, are under- going grammaticalisation in contemporary Ossetic. Keywords Ossetic, North-East Iranian languages, Georgian, Vaynakh Languages, Case, Internal Reconstruction, Language Contact, Areal Linguistics §1. INTRODUCTION Compared to other modern Eastern Iranian languages, which usually have case inventories ranging from two to four cases, Ossetic has a strikingly elaborate system of nine cases (eight in Digor).
    [Show full text]