1887
image of The historical development of asymmetries
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The structuring and encoding of space through language, the shape of the linguistic inventories found in individual languages, as well as the symmetries and asymmetries manifested by such systems have received a great deal of attention during the last four decades. The vast majority of the relevant studies adopted a purely synchronic perspective and diachronic studies of the relevant phenomena are rare. The aim of this paper is to contribute to this discussion by analyzing the historical development of directional demonstratives in Germanic languages, the structure of the relevant systems at different stages, the reduction and loss of oppositions and the resultant creation of asymmetries. The results of the descriptions will be examined and evaluated from a comparative and typological perspective.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.21029.koe
2024-11-19
2024-12-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Altmann, Hans
    1998 Lokal- und Direktionaladverbien in einem mittelbairischen Dialekt. [Local and directional adverbials in a central Bavarian dialect]. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik(). –.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bayer, Josef
    1977 Zur Semantik direktionaler Postpositionen. [Towards a semantic analysis of directional prepositions]. Papiere zur Linguistik. –.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Berg, Thomas
    2020 Asymmetrical intercalation in Germanic complex verbs. Journal of Germanic Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S147054271900014X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S147054271900014X [Google Scholar]
  4. Bourdin, Philippe
    1997 On goal-bias across languages: Modal, configurational and orientation parameters. InBohumil Palek, Osama Fujimiúra & Jiři Václav Neustupný (eds.), Proceedings of LP’96. Typology, Item Orderings and Universals, –. Prague: Karolinum.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Campbell, Alistair
    1957Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chao, Yuen Ren
    1968A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Claridge, Claudia
    2000Multi-verb words in Early Modern English: A corpus-based approach. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004333840
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004333840 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cleasby, Richard & Gudbrand Vigfusson
    1874An Icelandic-English dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Coulmas, Florian
    1982 Some Remarks on Japanese Deictics. InJürgen Weissenborn & Wolfgang Klein (eds.), Here and there: Cross-linguistic studies on deixis and demonstration, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pb.iii.2‑3.11cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.iii.2-3.11cou [Google Scholar]
  10. Creissels, Denis
    2006 Encoding the distinction between location, source and destination: a typological study. InMaya Hickmann & Stéphane Robert (eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.66.03cre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.66.03cre [Google Scholar]
  11. Diessel, Holger
    1999Demonstratives. Form, functions and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.42 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2003 The relationship between demonstratives and interrogatives. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.27.3.06die
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.27.3.06die [Google Scholar]
  13. 2006 Demonstratives, joint attention and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/COG.2006.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.015 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dixon, R. M. W.
    2003 Demonstratives: A cross-linguistic typology. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.27.1.04dix
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.27.1.04dix [Google Scholar]
  15. Donaldson, Bruce
    1993A grammar of Afrikaans. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110863154
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863154 [Google Scholar]
  16. Einarsson, Stefán
    1945; 2001Icelandic grammar, texts, glossary. Baltimore, London: John Hopkins University.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fagard, Benjamin & Anetta Kopecka
    2021 Source/Goal (a)symmetry: A comparative study of German and Polish. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.00016.fag
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.00016.fag [Google Scholar]
  18. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1972 How do you know whether you are coming or going. InKarl Hyldgard-Jensen (ed.), Linguistik 1971, –. Frankfurt: Athenäum.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Finkbeiner, Rita
    2015 The grammar and pragmatics of N hin, N her (‘N thither’, ‘N hither’) in German. Pragmatics and Society. –. 10.1075/ps.6.1.05fin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.6.1.05fin [Google Scholar]
  20. Fries, Norbert
    1991 Prepositions and prepositional phrases: a contrastive analysis. InGisa Rauh (ed.). Approaches to prepositions, –. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Georgakopoulos, Thanasis
    2018 A frame-based approach to the source-goal asymmetry: Synchronic and diachronic evidence from Ancient Greek. Constructions and Frames(). –. 10.1075/cf.00011.geo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00011.geo [Google Scholar]
  22. Gerritsen, Johan. & N. E. Osselton
    1978 Wolters‘ Woordenboeken. Nederlands-Engels. Groningen/Leiden.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Girnth, Heiko & Sascha Michel
    2008 Hin vs. her — hier vs. dort/da. The neutralization of the speaker’s perspective. A case of semantic (inter-)subjectivization in German dialects. Dialectologia et Geolinguistica. . –.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Goschler, Juliana & Anatol Stefanowitsch
    2013 Beyond typology: The encoding of motion events across time and varieties. InJuliana Goschler & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Variation and change in the encoding of motion events, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.41.00gos
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.41.00gos [Google Scholar]
  25. Guérin, Valérie
    2015 Demonstrative verbs: A typology of verbal manner deixis. Linguistic Typology().–. 10.1515/lingty‑2015‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2015-0006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Haspelmath, Martin
    2015 Defining and diagnosing linguistic categories: A case study of clitic phenomena. InJohanna Błaszczak, Dorota Klimek-Jankowska & Krysztof Migdalski. (eds.), How categorical are categories?–. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781614514510‑009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614514510-009 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2021 Explaining grammatical coding asymmetries: Form-frequency correspondences and predictability. Journal of Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S0022226720000535
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000535 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2022 Is cliticization an intermediate stage between free lexeme and affix status. Paper presented at aconference, the University of Potsdam. Available at: https://www.uni-potsdam.de/fileadmin/projects/slavistik-slavische-sprachwissenschaft/migrated_contents/Haspelmath.pdf (last access20 August 2024).
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ikegami, Yoshihiko
    1987 Source vs. goal: A case of linguistic dissymmetry. InRené Dirven & Günter Radden (eds.), Concepts of case, –. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Ishibashi, Miyuki
    2012 The expression of ‘putting’ and ‘taking’ verbs in Japanese: The asymmetry of Source and Goal revisited. InAnetta Kopecka & Bhuvana Narasimhan (eds.), Put and Take events: A cross-linguistic perspective, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.100.17ish
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.100.17ish [Google Scholar]
  31. Iwasaki, Shoichi
    2013Japanese (revised edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamin. 10.1075/loall.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/loall.17 [Google Scholar]
  32. Jacobs, Neil G.
    2005Yiddish — A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Jackendoff, Ray
    1983Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Jawzal, Nechirvan Hassan & Razgar Yousif Omar
    2020 English directiona adverbs: An empirical study. Zanco Journal of Humanity Sciences(): –. 10.21271/zjhs.24.3.20
    https://doi.org/10.21271/zjhs.24.3.20 [Google Scholar]
  35. Kaiser, Elsi
    2013 Demonstrative adjectives in spoken Finnish: Informational sufficiency and the speaker-addressee dynamic. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, –.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Karatsareas, Petros & Thanasis Georgakopoulos
    2016 From syntagmatic to paradigmatic zeros: the loss of the preposition se in inner Asia Minor Greek. STUF — Language Typology and Universals(). –. 10.1515/stuf‑2016‑0014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2016-0014 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kittilä, Seppo
    2008 Animacy effects on differential goal marking. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/LITY.2008.038
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LITY.2008.038 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2014 The (proto)typicality of direction: the (allative and illative) case(s) of Finnish. InSivia Luraghi & Heiko Narrog (eds.), Perspectives on semantic roles, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.106.05kit
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.106.05kit [Google Scholar]
  39. Köbler, Gerhard
    2006Neuenglisch-althochdeutsches Wörterbuch. Available online atwww.koeblergerhard.de/ahd/5A/ahd_ne.html (last access20 August 2024).
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 2014Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch, online. Available online atwww.koeblergerhard.de/ahdwbhin.html (last access20 August 2024).
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Koenig, Ekkehard & Yoko Nishina
    2015 Deixis der Art und Weise, der Qualität und des Grades im Deutschen und Japanischen: eine kontrastiv vergleichende Analyse [Deictics of manner, of quality and of degree in German and Japanese: a contrastive analysis.]. Linguistische Berichte [Sonderheft) . –.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Koenig, Ekkehard & Letizia Vezzosi
    2022 On the development of OE swa to ModE so and related changes in an atypical group of demonstratives. InBettelou Los, Claire Cowie, Patrick Honeybone & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), English historical linguistics: Change in structure and meaning, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.358.13kon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.358.13kon [Google Scholar]
  43. 2024 The development and loss of directional deixis in the history of English. To appear inMedioeva europeo(): -.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kopecka, Anetta & Marine Vuillermet
    (eds.) 2021Source-Goal (A)symmetries across Languages. Special Issue of Studies in Language.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Lakusta, Laura & Barbara Landau
    2005 Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition(). –. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2012 Language and memory for motion events: Origins of the asymmetry between source and goal paths. Cognitive Science(). –. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2011.01220.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01220.x [Google Scholar]
  47. Laury, Ritva
    1997Demonstratives in interaction: The emergence of a definite article in Finnish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.7
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.7 [Google Scholar]
  48. Leonard, Stephen
    2007 Spatial references in Icelandic: The issue of identity. Proceedings from LingO 2. The Oxford Postgraduate Linguistics Conference, –.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Levinson, Stephen
    2018 Introduction. Demonstratives: Patterns in diversity. InStephen Levinson, Sarah Cutfield, Michael J. Dunn, Nick. J. Enfield & Sérgio Meira (eds.), Demonstratives in cross-linguistic perspective, –. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781108333818.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333818.002 [Google Scholar]
  50. Lewis, Geoffrey L.
    1967Turkish grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Lidén, Mitsuyo Kuwano
    2016 Deictic demonstratives in Japanese, Finnish and Swedish: First and third language perspectives. Stockholm: University of Stockholm Ph.D. dissertation.
  52. Los, Bettelou, Corrien Blom, Geert Booij, Marion Elenbaas & Ans van Kemenade
    2012Morpho-syntactic change: A comparative study of particles and prefixes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511998447
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998447 [Google Scholar]
  53. Luraghi, Silvia & Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi
    (eds.) 2017Space in diachrony. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.188
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.188 [Google Scholar]
  54. Nam, Seungho
    2004 Goal and source. Their syntactic and semantic asymmetry. Berkeley Linguistic Society 30: General Session and Parasession on Conceptual Structure and Cognition in Grammatical Theory, –. 10.3765/bls.v30i1.940
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v30i1.940 [Google Scholar]
  55. Nikitina, Tatiana
    2009 Subcategorization pattern and lexical meaning of motion verbs: A study of the source/goal ambiguity. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/LING.2009.039
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2009.039 [Google Scholar]
  56. Nintemann, Julia, Maja Robbers & Nicole Hober
    2020Here, hither, hence and related categories: A cross-linguistic study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110672640
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110672640 [Google Scholar]
  57. Paul, Herrmann
    1916–20Deutsche Grammatik. Halle.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Perkins, Revere
    1992Deixis, grammar and culture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.24 [Google Scholar]
  59. Regier, Thierry & Mingyu Zheng
    2007 Attention to endpoints. A cross-linguistic constraint on spatial meaning. Cognitive Science. –. 10.1080/15326900701399954
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15326900701399954 [Google Scholar]
  60. Rossdeutscher, Antje
    2009 German her, hin, hin und her und herum: Meaning and justification of direction and change of direction in perceptual space. InArndt Riester & Togrim Solstad. (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung. –. Stuttgart: Online Publikationsverbund Universität Stuttgart.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Rowley, Anthony
    1980 Richtungs- und Ortsangabe in der Mundart von Florutz (Fierozzo) im italienischen Tirol. [Directional and local expressions in the dialect of Florutz in Tirol.] InAnthony Rowley (ed.), Sprachliche Orientierung l. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie und Semantik der Richtungsadverbien in oberdeutschen Mundarten. Bayreuth: Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät (Jahrbuch der Johann-Andreas-Schmeller-Gesellschaft), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Rzepecki, Robert
    2008Verben mit her- und hin- besser verstehen. Übungen zu den mit her- hin- und hinter- präfigierten Verben. [For a better understanding of verbs with her- and hin-. Exercises with verbs prefixed by hin- and her-.] Norderstedt: Grin.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Adha Rohde
    2004 The goal basis in the encoding of motion events. InGünther Radden & Claus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Studies in Linguistic Motivation, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Stefanowitsch, Anatol
    2018 The goal bias revised. A collostructional approach. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association(). –. 10.1515/gcla‑2018‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2018-0007 [Google Scholar]
  65. Stolz, Thomas; Nataliya Levkovych & Aina Urdze
    2017a Spatial interrogatives: Typology and dynamics (with special focus on the development from Latin to Romance). InSylvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi (eds.), Space in Diachrony, –. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.188.08sto
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.188.08sto [Google Scholar]
  66. Stolz, Thomas; Nataliya Levkovych; Aina Urdze; Julia Nintemann & Maja Robbers
    2017bSpatial interrogatives in Europe and beyond. Where, whither, whence. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110539516
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110539516 [Google Scholar]
  67. Svenonius, Peter
    2006 Icelandic particles in -an. CASTL, University of Tromsø.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Talmy, Leonard
    1985 Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. InTimothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Thráinsson, Höskudur
    1994 Icelandic. InEkkehard Koenig & Johan van der Auwera (eds.) The Germanic languages. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Verkerk, Annemarie
    2017 The goal over source principle in European languages. InSilvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi (eds.), Space in diachrony, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.188.01ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.188.01ver [Google Scholar]
  71. Wright, Joseph
    1906An Old High German primer. Oxford Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Wunderlich, Dieter
    1983 On the compositionality of German prefix verbs. InRainer Bäuerle, Christoph Schwarze & Arnim von Stechow (eds.). Meaning, use, and interpretation of language, –. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110852820.452
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110852820.452 [Google Scholar]
  73. Zeller, Jochen
    2001 Lexical particles, semilexical postpositions. InNorber Corver & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), Semi-lexical categories, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110874006.505
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110874006.505 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.21029.koe
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.21029.koe
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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