{"title":"吕西亚关系从句","authors":"H. C. Melcher","doi":"10.52093/hara-202101-00013-000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lycian relative clause syntax generally matches that of Hittite and other Anatolian IndoEuropean languages, with some minor differences due to Lycian SVO word order. One putative major contrast is that Lycian seems to have at least one example showing “overt wh-movement”. Arguments are made that opening formulas with enclitic =ti in funerary inscriptions contain a reflexive particle, not “cleft” structures with the relative pronoun.","PeriodicalId":224972,"journal":{"name":"Hungarian Assyriological Review","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lycian relative clauses\",\"authors\":\"H. C. Melcher\",\"doi\":\"10.52093/hara-202101-00013-000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Lycian relative clause syntax generally matches that of Hittite and other Anatolian IndoEuropean languages, with some minor differences due to Lycian SVO word order. One putative major contrast is that Lycian seems to have at least one example showing “overt wh-movement”. Arguments are made that opening formulas with enclitic =ti in funerary inscriptions contain a reflexive particle, not “cleft” structures with the relative pronoun.\",\"PeriodicalId\":224972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hungarian Assyriological Review\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hungarian Assyriological Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52093/hara-202101-00013-000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hungarian Assyriological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52093/hara-202101-00013-000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Lycian relative clause syntax generally matches that of Hittite and other Anatolian IndoEuropean languages, with some minor differences due to Lycian SVO word order. One putative major contrast is that Lycian seems to have at least one example showing “overt wh-movement”. Arguments are made that opening formulas with enclitic =ti in funerary inscriptions contain a reflexive particle, not “cleft” structures with the relative pronoun.