{"title":"Marking of quality modifiers in 2nd-generation IE languages","authors":"Artemij Keidan","doi":"10.1515/psicl-2020-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In PIE, quality modifiers were expressed by stative verbs and nominal epithets, rather than by special adjectival lexemes. Adjectives did not form a separate lexical class. This made the encoding of the NP constituency less explicit. If we consider what I suggest calling “second-generation IE languages” we can observe a general tendency to create new, more explicit morphological means of dependency marking within a NP. The exact outcomes of this diachronic process vary from one language to another. However, if we parametrise the variation, a common pattern becomes clearly observable. In all the languages analysed in the present paper, there is a pronoun undergoing grammaticalisation as a dependency marker. What varies is (1) the position of this element with respect to the nominal base (pre- vs. postposed); (2) the degree of agglutination (bound morpheme vs. clitic vs. free morpheme); and (3) the locus of marking (head vs. modifier vs. double or alternant marking); (4) the source morpheme that undergoes grammaticalisation (relative vs. demonstrative pronoun).","PeriodicalId":43804,"journal":{"name":"Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics","volume":"70 1","pages":"477 - 527"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2020-0014","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract In PIE, quality modifiers were expressed by stative verbs and nominal epithets, rather than by special adjectival lexemes. Adjectives did not form a separate lexical class. This made the encoding of the NP constituency less explicit. If we consider what I suggest calling “second-generation IE languages” we can observe a general tendency to create new, more explicit morphological means of dependency marking within a NP. The exact outcomes of this diachronic process vary from one language to another. However, if we parametrise the variation, a common pattern becomes clearly observable. In all the languages analysed in the present paper, there is a pronoun undergoing grammaticalisation as a dependency marker. What varies is (1) the position of this element with respect to the nominal base (pre- vs. postposed); (2) the degree of agglutination (bound morpheme vs. clitic vs. free morpheme); and (3) the locus of marking (head vs. modifier vs. double or alternant marking); (4) the source morpheme that undergoes grammaticalisation (relative vs. demonstrative pronoun).
在PIE中,质量修饰语是用静态动词和名称修饰语来表达的,而不是用特殊的形容词词汇来表达。形容词没有形成一个单独的词汇类别。这使得国民党选区的编码不那么明确。如果我们考虑我所说的“第二代IE语言”,我们可以观察到一种普遍趋势,即在NP中创建新的、更明确的依赖标记的形态学手段。这种历时过程的确切结果因语言而异。然而,如果我们将变化参数化,就可以清楚地观察到一个共同的模式。在本文分析的所有语言中,都有一个代词作为依存标记进行语法化。变化的是(1)这个元素相对于词根的位置(pre- vs. postposed);(2)凝集程度(结合语素、附语素、自由语素);(3)标记的位置(头标记、修饰语标记、双标记或交替标记);(4)发生语法化的源语素(关系代词与指示代词)。