Subtractive Imperative Forms in Bithynian Greek
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
chapter 8 Subtractive Imperative Forms in Bithynian Greek Nikos Koutsoukos and Nikolaos Pantelidis 1 Introduction Pursuing the goals of this volume, in this chapter we deal with Bithynian Greek. Bithynian Greek is not one of the well-studied varieties of Modern Greek, un- like Cappadocian or Pontic. However, it offers a number of interesting phe- nomena at the level of morphology. This variety was spoken in the area of Bithynia and later on was preserved by immigrants who moved to various places in the mainland of Greece, such as Nea Kios (Νέα Κίος, Peloponnese) and Nea Triglia (Νέα Τρίγλια, Chalkidiki), after the exodus of the Greek population in 1922–1923. There are three ques- tions regarding the linguistic context of this area: (a) the relationship between the Bithynian sub-varieties and the hypothesis of a well-defined distinct Bithynian dialect group, (b) the relationship between the Bithynian varieties (or the possible dialect group) and other Modern Greek varieties, and (c) the relationship between Greek and other languages spoken in this region, espe- cially Turkish (see also Manolessou, this volume). These questions show that the study of Bithynian Greek is intriguing and deserves a closer look. Within this context, we describe the verbal system of this variety. In gen- eral, the variety follows the same patterns as most of the Modern Greek va- rieties with respect to the structure of the verbal system. In our description, we focus on the formation of the imperative. Imperatives in Bithynian Greek are characterized by subtraction in the perfective of the active voice in verbs with the formatives -ών(ω) [ono] and -άζ(ω) [azo]. Since subtraction has not been discussed with respect to Modern Greek varieties, we analyze the cases of subtraction in Bithynian Greek and we compare it with two other varieties, namely Standard Modern Greek (SMG) and the Peloponnesian variety. Subtraction as a morphological process per se also raises a number of the- oretical questions. For instance, an interesting question is what the limits of subtraction are and how it is differentiated from other processes which share an abbreviatory mechanism. Subtraction is also connected with the question of the relationship between form and meaning in morphological processes, since ‒ contrary to most of the common processes ‒ subtraction consists in the shortening of the shape of a word form and not in the addition of some © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004394506_010 256 Koutsoukos and Pantelidis material (e.g. affix) which signals the process and the new meaning. The analy- sis of subtractive forms in Bithynian Greek revolves around two basic issues: first, the examination of the morphological context of this change, namely why subtraction appears only in verbs which show these two formatives (-ών(ω) [ono] and -άζ(ω) [azo]); and second, the motives behind this process. To cover these issues, the structure of this chapter is as follows: after this in- troduction, we explore the linguistic context of the Bithynian dialect (section 2) and we describe the relevant data (section 3). In this section, we start with some preliminary notes on the verbal system of the dialect (section 3.1) and we focus on the subtracted verbal forms in comparison to similar data from other varieties (section 3.2). After that, we explore the notion of subtraction (section 4.1) and we analyze the subtracted forms in Bithynian (section 4.2). Conclusions are presented in the last part of this chapter (section 5). 2 Linguistic Context of Bithynia 2.1 Sociohistorical Notes on the Variety Geographically, Bithynia occupies the northwest of Asia Minor, on the south- ern shores of the Propontis (see map in Annex). In antiquity, it bordered on Mysia (to the west-southwest), Paphlagonia (to the northeast along the Black Sea coast), and Phrygia (to the south-southeast towards the interior of Asia Minor). However, the borders of this region have not been very rigid (Sakellariou, 1990–1991). Modern Bithynia comprises ancient Mysia and the western part of the ancient region and Roman province of Bithynia.1 Several important cities were (re-)founded there in various epochs from the begin- ning of the Greek colonization (around 700 BC), among others: Kios (Κίος or Gemlik), Chryssoupolis (Χρυσούπολις or Üsküdar), Nicomedea (Νικομήδεια), Nicaea (Νίκαια or İznik), Bursa (Προύσα), Chalcedon (Χαλκηδών or Kadiköy). Bithynia was one of the linguistically most complex areas of Asia Minor. A process of Hellenization, which started with the conquest of the region by Alexander the Great in the late 4th century BC, led to the gradual extinction of the indigenous languages, among others, Phrygian and Mysian, and their replacement by Koine Greek. It is estimated that this process lasted several centuries, since some languages, such as Phrygian, seem to have survived in enclaves as late as the 7th century AD (Brixhe, 2008, p. 72; Brixhe, 2010; Hawkins, 2010, p. 215). Greek was the dominant language of western, central, and northern Anatolia until at least the end of the 11th century AD (Vryonis, 1971, pp. 42–55). It has 1 See map in Brixhe (2010, p. 229 Fig. 16.1) and Manolessou (in this volume)..