Article published in:Proto-Indo-European Syntax and its Development
Edited by Leonid Kulikov and Nikolaos Lavidas
[Benjamins Current Topics 75] 2015
► pp. 51–78
Reconstruction, typology, validation
Although the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European as verb-final is widely accepted, there continue to be dissenting opinions (e.g. Friedrich 1975). See e.g. Pires & Thomason (2008), who question the fruitfulness of Indo-European syntactic reconstruction. In this article I address two issues: First, the reconstructable subordination strategies, including relative-correlative structures, are perfectly in conformity with verb-final typology — pace Lehmann (1974) and Friedrich (1975) who considered relative clauses with finite verbs and relative pronouns incompatible with SOV. Second, verb-final reconstruction makes it possible to account for prosodic and segmental changes that single out finite verbs, such as the non-accentuation of Vedic finite verbs and i-apocope preferentially targeting finite verbs in Italic, Celtic, and Baltic-Slavic. Both developments find a natural, prosodically motivated explanation if we accept PIE as SOV, but not if we do not accept that reconstruction. These facts show that, pace Pires & Thomason (2008), the reconstruction of PIE as verb-final is a fruitful hypothesis.
Published online: 16 July 2015
Cited by 3 other publications
Hock, Hans Henrich
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 june 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
Andrews, Avery D.
Campbell, Lyle & Alice C. Harris
Cervin, Richard Stuart
Dewey, Tonya Kim
Downing, Bruce T.
Dressler, Wolfgang U.
Emeneau, Murray B.
Ferraresi, Gisella & Maria Goldbach
Fortson, Benjamin W.
Greenberg, Joseph H.
Harms, Robert T.
Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell
Hock, Hans Henrich
2006 The Insular Celtic Absolute: Conjunct Distinction Once Again: A Prosodic Proposal. Proceedings of the Sixteenth UCLA Indo-European Conference. Los Angeles, Nov. 5–6, 2005 ed. by Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela Della Volpe & Miriam Robbins Dexter, 153–172. (= The Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, 50.) Washington: Institute for the Study of Man.
2007 Morphology and i-apocope in Slavic and Baltic. Proceedings of the Eighteenth UCLA Indo-European Conference. Los Angeles, Nov. 3–4, 2006 ed. by Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela Della Volpe & Miriam Robbins Dexter, 65–76. (= The Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph, 53.) Washington: Institute for the Study of Man.
2010b Phrasal Prosody and the Indo-European Verb. Paper at the Arbeitstagung “The Indo-European Verb” of the Indogermanische Gesellschaft, UCLA, September 2010.
2014 Vedic Verb Accent Revisited. Vedic and Sanskrit Historical Linguistics. Papers from the 13th World Sanskrit Conference ed. by Jared Klein & Elizabeth Tucker, 153–178.Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
van den Hout, Theo
In Press. Indo-European Syntax. Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An International Handbook of Language Comparison and the Reconstruction of Indo-European ed. by Matthias A. Fritz & Jared S. Klein Berlin de Gruyter
Klein, Jared S.
Leumann, Manu, Johann B. Hofmann & Anton Szantyr
Mallory, James P. & D.Q. Adams
Pires, Acrisio & Sarah G. Thomason
Steever, Sanford B.
Thomason, Sarah G.
Thomason, Sarah G. & Terrence Kaufman