{"title":"Vlimenos是（《伊利亚特》4.211）：词汇还是短句？","authors":"Klaas Bentein, M. Janse","doi":"10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we consider whether the form Βλήμενος ἦν in Il. 4.211 should be considered lexical or periphrastic. Based on a discussion of the context, an analysis of the usage of the verb βάλλω elsewhere in the Iliad, and an application of some generally accepted criteria of periphrasticity, we conclude that both interpretations are in fact possible. We connect this to the diachronic development of periphrastic constructions, which, in an early stage of grammaticalization, are often ambiguous.","PeriodicalId":41733,"journal":{"name":"Symbolae Osloenses","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Βλήμενος ἦν (Iliad 4.211): Lexical or Periphrastic?\",\"authors\":\"Klaas Bentein, M. Janse\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, we consider whether the form Βλήμενος ἦν in Il. 4.211 should be considered lexical or periphrastic. Based on a discussion of the context, an analysis of the usage of the verb βάλλω elsewhere in the Iliad, and an application of some generally accepted criteria of periphrasticity, we conclude that both interpretations are in fact possible. We connect this to the diachronic development of periphrastic constructions, which, in an early stage of grammaticalization, are often ambiguous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41733,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Symbolae Osloenses\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Symbolae Osloenses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CLASSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Symbolae Osloenses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00397679.2017.1345526","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Βλήμενος ἦν (Iliad 4.211): Lexical or Periphrastic?
In this article, we consider whether the form Βλήμενος ἦν in Il. 4.211 should be considered lexical or periphrastic. Based on a discussion of the context, an analysis of the usage of the verb βάλλω elsewhere in the Iliad, and an application of some generally accepted criteria of periphrasticity, we conclude that both interpretations are in fact possible. We connect this to the diachronic development of periphrastic constructions, which, in an early stage of grammaticalization, are often ambiguous.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
