Journal of Historical Linguistics - Volume 11, Issue 2, 2021

Abstract

Even though it has been noted quite early that the conjunction UND may also serve as a relative/equative particle or even a subjunction in Middle High German and Early New High German, corpus-based empirical studies are lacking so far. Based on new empirical data, I show that non-coordinating UND originated in the Upper German dialect area during the 12th century, subsequently spreading to the Central German dialect area and reaching the peak of its use in the 14th century. In contrast to recent literature, I argue that the non-coordinating use of the conjunction originated from semantically and syntactically ambiguous constructions of the form UND-XP-VFIN. I also propose that the earliest instances of the phenomenon are (adverbial) relative constructions and that the temporal and the equative function developed via reanalysis of adverbial relative clauses with a temporal/modal head element.

Abstract

This paper develops the proposal put forth by Aldridge (2015, 2016) for the emergence of ergative alignment in a first-order subgroup of the Austronesian family. I first provide new evidence for reconstructing Proto-Austronesian (PAn) as accusative rather than ergative. I then propose a significantly revised approach to Aldridge’s proposed reanalysis. On the basis of evidence from Tsou, I propose that the reanalysis took place in biclausal constructions embedded under motion or locative verbs. Since such biclausal constructions are contexts for restructuring, no accusative case is available for an object. This forced objects which needed structural licensing to value nominative case with T. I additionally show that subjects were assigned inherent non-nominative case in PAn when objects needed to enter into Agree with T, as when valuing nominative case. These conditions yielded a new ergative clause type in a daughter of PAn, which Aldridge (2015, 2016) calls “Proto-Ergative Austronesian”. No change took place in clauses lacking an object needing structural licensing. Consequently, subjects in intransitive clauses and transitive clauses with indefinite objects continued to surface with nominative case, yielding the type of ergative alignment prevalent in Formosan and Philippine languages today.

Abstract

Alignment patterns in the Eastern varieties of modern Aramaic varieties are generally said to originate in an ergative source construction based on the so-called ‘passive’ participle qṭīl- ‘killed’ and the preposition l- where ergative person markers gradually extended to all intransitive predicates. While various source constructions have been suggested, this article demonstrates that most explanatory power and scope for the complex historical background of the alignment microvariation in Neo-Aramaic is offered by the typology of resultatives. There was instability from the beginning due to the versatile nature of resultatives and the increasing polyfunctionality of the preposition l-. This, in turn, indicates that the suggested source constructions for ergative alignment need not be mutually exclusive. Moreover, this also points to ergativity as merely one among several outcomes rather than the original source.

Abstract

In this paper, we propose treating alignment shift as a process of functional markedness reversal in the domain of semantically transitive constructions. We illustrate how this approach allows us to capture similarities between the alignment shifts in Eskimo-Aleut and Western Austronesian languages, despite morphosyntactic differences in their voice systems. Using three diagnostics of functional markedness (semantic transitivity, topic continuity of P, and discourse frequency), we compare antipassive and ergative constructions in Eskimo-Aleut varieties and actor voice (av) and undergoer voice (uv) constructions in Western Austronesian varieties. We argue that ergative alignment is equivalent to a functionally unmarked P-prominent construction (e.g., ergative, uv), whilst accusative alignment is equivalent to a functionally unmarked A-prominent construction (e.g., antipassive, av). On this basis, we claim that both language groups are undergoing a parallel shift from ergative to accusative, since A-prominent constructions are functionally marked in more conservative varieties, but lose their functionally marked character and begin to function as unmarked transitive constructions in more innovative varieties.

This article reviews Language Contact, Continuity and Change in the Genesis of Modern Hebrew

This article reviews Linguistica, filologia e storia culturale. In ricordo di Palmira Cipriano

This article reviews The Carthaginian North: Semitic Influence on Early Germanic: A Linguistic and Cultural Study