1887
image of Diachronic bottlenecks of the Uralic (ablative-)partitive
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article discusses the emergence of the partitive case in the three western-most branches of the Uralic language family, which are Saamic and Finnic in North Europe, and Mordvinic in Central Russia. The Finnic languages represent the outer edge of development in the partitive from an earlier ablative case, which used to manifest ‘source’, a specific property of spatial relations. In Finnic the partitive case is a multifunctional and conceptually distinct case, an inflectional category which has developed highly specific functions in object marking, negative phrase and as a case of non-canonical subject. Traces of this development are found in Saamic and Mordvinic as well, whereas other Uralic languages don’t share this kind of secondary development and functional extension. The development of this particular affix consists of several stages, special bottlenecks, enhancing functional properties and triggering the reanalysis of an inherited affix *-ta/-tä. This article focuses on the diachrony of this particular affix with special emphasis on western Uralic.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.21003.gru
2022-01-27
2022-05-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikio, Ante & Jussi Ylikoski
    2007 Suopmelaš gielaid l-kásusiid álgovuođđu sáme- ja eará fuolkegielaid čuovggas. [The origin of l-cases in Finnic in the light of Saamic and other Uralic languages.] InJussi Ylikoski & Ante Aikio (eds.), Sámit, sánit, sátnehámit. Riepmočála Pekka miessemánu 21. beaivve 2007, 11–71. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aikio, Ante
    2015 The Finnic ‘secondary e-stems’ and Proto-Uralic vocalism. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne95. 25–66. 10.33340/susa.82642
    https://doi.org/10.33340/susa.82642 [Google Scholar]
  3. Alhoniemi, Alho
    1989 Suomen ja mordvan vanhat erosijat omilla teillään. [Finnish and Mordvin inherited ablative cases on their own paths.] Sananjalka31. 21–30. 10.30673/sja.86511
    https://doi.org/10.30673/sja.86511 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2001 Über die alten und neuen Lokalkasussuffixe im Tscheremissischen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen56. 95–115.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ariztimuño López, Borja
    2014 The origin of the Basque partitive. InSilvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.) Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 323–344. 10.1515/9783110346060.323
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346060.323 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baerman, Matthew and Greville Corbett
    2007 Linguistic typology: Morphology. Linguistic Typology11. 115–117. 10.1515/LINGTY.2007.010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY.2007.010 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartens, Raija
    1996 Über die Deklinationen im Mordwinischen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen53. 1–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 1999Mordvalaiskielten rakenne ja kehitys. [The structure and development of the Mordvinic languages.] Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 232. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2000Permiläisten kielten rakenne ja kehitys. [The structure and development of the Permic languages.] Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 238. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Budenz, József
    1877Moksa- és erza-mordvin nyelvtan. Budapest.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dryer, Matthew S.
    2013 Order of Adposition and Noun Phrase. InMatthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online atwals.info/chapter/85, Accessed on2021-01-05.)
    [Google Scholar]
  12. ÈKM = D. V. Cygankin
    (ed.) N. A. Agafonova, M. D. Imajkina, M. V. Mosin, V. P. Cypkajkina, E. A. Abramova. Èryan’ kel’: Morfemika, valon’ tejevema dy morfologija. [Erzya language: Morphemes, word derivation and morphology.] Saransk 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ÈKS = D. V. Cygankin
    (ed.) N. A. Agafonova, R. A. Aleškina, G. F. Bespalova, L. P. Vodjasova, E. F. Klement’eva, N. I. Ryabov, G. V. Ryabova, A. M. Xaritonova, V. P. Cypkajkina. Èryan’ kel’: Sintaksis. [Erzya language: Syntax.] Saransk: Izdatel’stvo mordovskogo universiteta 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Erkkilä, Riku
    2019 Ersän illatiivin ja latiivin merkitykset. [The meanings of Erzya illative and lative.] M.A.Thesis. University of Helsinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/305364. Accessed2021-07-02.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. EVS
    EVS = Eesti-võru sõnaraamat. [Estonian-Võro dictionary.] Koostanud Mariko Faster, Laivi Org, Urmas Kalla, Sulev Iva & Triin Iva. Võru: Võro instituut 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. GMJa
    GMJa = Grammatika mordovskix jazykov. [Grammar of Mordvinic languages] Edited by D. V. Cygankina. Saransk: Ministerstvo vyščego i srednego special’nogo obrazovanija RSFSR 1980.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Grünthal, Riho
    2003Finnic adpositions and cases in change. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2005 Miksi itämerensuomessa on prepositioita? [Why are there prepositions in Finnic?] Virittäjä109. 28–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2007 Morphological change and the influence of language contacts in Estonian. InHans Fix (ed.), Beiträge zur Morphologie. Germanisch, baltisch, ostseefinnisch. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. 403–432. 10.1075/nss.23.16gru
    https://doi.org/10.1075/nss.23.16gru [Google Scholar]
  20. 2010 Sijasynkretismi morfologian koetinkivenä [The morphological impact of case syncretism.] – ESUKA / JEFUL2. 91–113. 10.12697/jeful.2010.1.2.06
    https://doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2010.1.2.06 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2015Vepsän kielioppi. [Veps grammar.] Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2019 Canonical and non-canonical patterns in the adposition phrase of Western Uralic: Constraints of borrowing. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne97. 11–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hajdú, Péter
    1966Bevezetés az uráli nyelvtudományba. [Introduction to Uralic linguistics.] Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Häkkinen, Jaakko
    2012 After the protolanguage: Invisible convergence, false divergence and boundary shift. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen61. 7–28. 10.33339/fuf.85674
    https://doi.org/10.33339/fuf.85674 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen & Irja Alho
    2004Iso suomen kielioppi. [A big Finnish grammar.] Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Haspelmath, Martin
    2007 Pre-established categories don’t exist. Linguistic Typology11. 119–132. 10.1515/LINGTY.2007.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY.2007.011 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2018 How comparative concepts and descriptive linguistic categories are different. InDaniel van Olmen, Tanja Mortelmans & Frank Brisard (eds.), Aspects of linguistic variation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 83–114. 10.1515/9783110607963‑004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110607963-004 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2019 Differential place marking and differential object marking. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung72. 313–334.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Holopainen, Sampsa
    2019 Indo-Iranian borrowings in Uralic: Critical overview of the sound substitutions and distribution criterion. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki.
  30. Huumo, Tuomas
    2003 Incremental existence: The world according to the Finnish existential sentence. Linguistics41(3). 461–493. 10.1515/ling.2003.016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2003.016 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2018 The partitive A: On uses of the Finnish partitive subject in transitive clauses. InIlja A. Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking. Berlin: Language Science Press. 423–453.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Huumo, Tuomas & Liina Lindström
    2014 Partitives across constructions: on the range of uses of the Finnish and Estonian “partitive subjects”. InSilvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 153–176. 10.1515/9783110346060.153
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346060.153 [Google Scholar]
  33. Itkonen, Erkki
    1971–1972 Über das Objekt in den finnisch-wolgaischen Sprachen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschunen39. 153–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 1973 Zur Geschichte des Partitivs. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen40. 279-339.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Jalava, Lotta & Riho Grünthal
    2020 Vanhimmat uralilaiset postpositiot kielen muutoksen ilmentäjinä. [The oldest Uralic postpositions evidencing language change.] In: Sampsa Holopainen, Janne Saarikivi & Susanna Virtanen (eds.), Ëmac сымыӈ нэкве вōртур этпост самын патум: Scripta miscellanea in honorem Ulla-Maija Forsberg. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. 112–128. 10.33341/sus.11.8
    https://doi.org/10.33341/sus.11.8 [Google Scholar]
  36. Janhunen, Juha
    1982 On the structure of Proto-Uralic. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen44. 23–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 1998 Samoyedic. InDaniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages. London: Routledge. 457–479.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 2009 Proto-Uralic – what, where, and when?InJussi Ylikoski (ed.), The Quasquicentennial of the Finno-Ugrian Society. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. 57–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Junttila, Santeri
    2012 The prehistoric context of the oldest contacts between Baltic and Finnic languages. InRiho Grünthal & Petri Kallio (eds.), A Linguistic Map of Prehistoric Northern Europe. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. 261–296.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 2015 Tiedon kumuloituminen ja trendit lainasanatutkimuksessa. Kantasuomen balttilaislainojen tutkimushistoria 1869–2009. [Cumulative knowledge and trends in loanword research: The research history of Baltic loanwords in Proto-Finnic 1869–2009.] PhD thesis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kilby, David
    1983 Universal and particular properties of the Ewenki case system. Papers in Linguistics16(3/4). 45–74. 10.1080/08351818309370595
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818309370595 [Google Scholar]
  42. Kittilä, Seppo and Jussi Ylikoski
    2018 Some like it transitive: Remarks on verbs liking and the like in the Saami languages. InIlja A. Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking. Berlin: Language Science Press. 455–480.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. KKS
    KKS = Karjalan kielen sanakirja 1–6. [Dictionary of Karelian language.] Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 1968–2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kont, Karl
    1963Käändsõnaline objekt läänemeresoome keeltes. [Nominal objects in the Finnic languages.] Tallinn: Eesti NSV Teaduste Akadeemia.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Korhonen, Mikko
    1981Johdatus lapin kielen historiaan. [An introduction to the history of Lappish language.] Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 1991 Remarks on the structure and history of the Uralic case system. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne83. 163–180.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Larjavaara, Matti
    2019Partitiivin valinta. [The choice of the partitive.] Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Larsson, Lars-Gunnar
    1981Studier i de östersjöfinska språkens partitivbruk. [Studies in the Finnic partitive.] Uppsala: University of Uppsala.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 2001 Baltic influence on Finnic languages. InÖsten Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), Circum-Baltic Languages 1: Past and present. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 237–253. 10.1075/slcs.54.12lar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.54.12lar [Google Scholar]
  50. LL = Pertti Virtaranta
    1967Lähisukukielten lukemisto. [A Finnic reader.] Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Luraghi, Silvia & Tuomas Huumo
    (eds.) 2014Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110346060
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346060 [Google Scholar]
  52. Luraghi, Silvia & Seppo Kittilä
    2014 Typology and diachrony of partitive case markers. InSilvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 17–62. 10.1515/9783110346060.17
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346060.17 [Google Scholar]
  53. Luraghi, Silvia, Merlijn de Smit & Iván Igartua
    2020 Contact-induced change in the languages of Europe: The rise and development of partitive cases and determiners in Finnic and Basque. Linguistics58(3). 869–903. 10.1515/ling‑2020‑0083
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0083 [Google Scholar]
  54. Majtinskaja, Klára
    1979Istoriko-sopostavitel’naja morfologija finno-ugorskix jazykov. [Historical-comparative morphology of Finno-Ugric languages.] Moskva: Nauka.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Metslang, Helle
    2017 Sihitis. InMati Erelt & Helle Metslang (eds.), Eesti keele süntaks. [Estonian syntax.] Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus. 258–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Miestamo, Matti
    2014 Partitives and negation: A cross-linguistic survey. InSilvia Luraghi and Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 63–86. 10.1515/9783110346060.63
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346060.63 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mikola, Tibor
    2004Studien zur Geschichte der samojedischen Sprachen. Studia uralo-altaica 45. Szeged: SzTE Finnisch-Ugrisches Institut.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. MKM = N. S. Aljamkin
    . Mokšen’ käl’: Morfologija. [Moksha language: Morphology.] Saransk 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. MSFOu 63
    MSFOu 63 = Näytteitä vatjan kielestä. [Sample of the Votic language.] Julkaisseet Lauri Kettunen & Lauri Posti. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 53. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 1932.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. MSFOu 86
    MSFOu 86 = Lauri Kettunen: Vepsän murteiden lauseopillinen tutkimus. [A syntactic analysis of Veps dialects.] Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 86. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 1943.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. MSFOu 100
    MSFOu 100 = Näytteitä äänis- ja keskivepsän murteista. [Sample of North and Central Veps dialects.] Collected byE. N. Setälä & J. H. Kala Translated into Finnish by E. A. Tunkeloapunaan Reino Peltola. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 1951.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. MSFOu 106
    MSFOu 106 = Näytteitä liivin kielestä. [Sample of Livonian language] Collected by E. N. Setälä Translated into Finnish by Väinö Kyrölä. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 106. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 1953.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. MSFOu 250
    MSFOu 250 = Muistoja Liivinrannasta: Liivin kieltä Ruotsista. [Memories from the Livonian coast: Livonian language in Sweden] Collected by Julius Mägiste Translated into Finnish by Anneli Honko. Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 250. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Nikolaeva, Irina
    2014A Grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110320640
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110320640 [Google Scholar]
  65. Parpola, Asko
    2012 Formation of the Indo-European and Uralic (Finno-Ugric) language families in the light of archaeology: Revised and integrated ‘total’ correlations. InRiho Grünthal & Petri Kallio (eds.), A Linguistic Map of Prehistoric Northern Europe. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society. 119–184.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Raun, Alo
    1988 Proto-Uralic comparative-historical morphosyntax. InDenis Sinor (ed.), The Uralic languages. Leiden: Brill. 555–571.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Rijk, Rudolf P. G. de
    1996 On the origin of the partitive determiner. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca “Julio de Urquijo”30:1. 145–158.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Sammallahti, Pekka
    1988 Historical phonology of the Uralic languages. InDenis Sinor, (ed.), The Uralic languages: Description, history scription, history, and foreign influences. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 478–554.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 1998The Saami languages: An introduction. Ocejohka: Davvi Girji.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Sammallahti, Pekka & Jouni Mosnikoff
    1991Suomi-koltansaame sanakirja. [Finnish – Skolt Saami dictionary.] Ohcejohka: Girjegiisá.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Sammallahti, Pekka & Matti Morottaja
    1993Säämi-suomâ sänikirje. Inarinsaamelais-suomalainen sanakirja. [Inari Saami – Finnish dictionary.] Ohcejohka: Girjegiisá.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Seržant, Ilja
    2015 The independent partitive as an Eastern Circum-Baltic isogloss. Journal of Language Contact8. 341–418. 10.1163/19552629‑00802006
    https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-00802006 [Google Scholar]
  73. Stassen, Leon
    1985Comparison and universal grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Suhonen, Seppo
    1975Liivin kielen näytteitä. [Sample of Livonian language.] Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Trask, R. L.
    1997The History of Basque. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Tveite, Tor
    2004The case of the object in Livonian. Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  77. VKS = Elna Adler, Merle Leppik & Silja Grünberg
    (eds.) Vadja keele sõnaraamat 1–7. [Dictionary of Votic language.] Tallinn: Eesti Keele Instituut 1990–2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Wiedemann, Ferdinand Johann
    1865Grammatik der ersa-mordwinischen Sprache. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Ylikoski, Jussi
    2016 The origins of the western Uralic s-cases revisited: historiographical, functional-typological and Samoyedic perspectives. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen63. 6–78. 10.33339/fuf.86120
    https://doi.org/10.33339/fuf.86120 [Google Scholar]
  80. Yurayong, Chingduang
    2020 Postposed demonstratives in Finnic and North Russian dialects. PhD thesis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. [https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/320513]
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Zaicz, Gábor
    1998 Mordva. InDaniel Abondolo (ed.), The Uralic languages. London: Routledge. 184–218.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lv.21003.gru
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.21003.gru
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: case ; partitive ; Uralic ; ablative ; morphology ; grammaticalization
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error