Cover not available
Part of
Proto-Indo-European Syntax and its Development
Edited by Leonid Kulikov and Nikolaos Lavidas
[Benjamins Current Topics 75] 2015
► pp. 101–124

Reconstructing passive and voice in Proto-Indo-European

| Ghent University & Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

This article examines various aspects of the reconstruction of the passive in Proto-Indo-European (PIE), foremost on the basis of evidence from the Indo-Aryan (Early Vedic) and Greek branches. In Proto-Indo-European the fundamental distinction within the verbal system is between the active and middle, while specialized markers of the passive are lacking and the passive syntactic pattern is encoded with middle inflection. Apart from the suffix *-i̯(e/o)- (for which we cannot reconstruct a passive function in the proto-language) and several nominal derivatives, we do not find sufficient evidence for specialized passive morphology. The role of the middle (and stative) in the expression of the passive in ancient IE languages raises important theoretical questions and is a testing ground for the methods of syntactic reconstruction. We will examine the contrast between non-specialized and specialized markers of the passive in Early Vedic and Greek. Most Indo-European languages have abandoned the use of middle forms in passive patterns, while Greek is quite conservative and regularly uses middle forms as passives. In contrast, Indo-Aryan has chosen a different, anti-syncretic, strategy of encoding detransitivizing derivational morphology, though with the middle inflection consistently preserved in passive ya-presents. These two branches, Indo-Aryan and Greek, arguably instantiate two basic types of development: a syncretic type found in many Western branches, including Greek, and an anti-syncretic type attested in some Eastern branches, in particular in Indo-Aryan.

Published online: 16 July 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.75.06kul
References
Allan, Rutger
2003 The Middle Voice in Ancient Greek: A Study of Polysemy. Amsterdam: J. Gieben.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna
2013 Construction-Based Historical-Comparative Reconstruction. Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar ed. by Graeme Trousdale & Thomas Hoffmann, 438–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Thórhallur Eythórsson
2012 Reconstructing Syntax: Construction Grammar and the Comparative Method. Sign-Based Construction Grammar ed. by Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag, 257–308. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Valéria Molnár
2003 The Passive in Icelandic — Compared to Mainland Scandinavian. Structures of Focus and Grammatical Relations ed. by Jorunn Hetland & Valéria Molnár, 231–260. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benedetti, Marina
2006 Mehr als Passiv: Über einige Verbalmorpheme in altindogermanischen Sprachen. International Journal of Diachronic Linguistics and Linguistic Reconstruction 3:2.91–110.Google Scholar
Cennamo, Michela
1993 The Reanalysis of Reflexives: A Diachronic Perspective. Napoli: Liguori.Google Scholar
1998 The Loss of the Voice Dimension between Late Latin and Early Romance. Historical Linguistics 1997: Selected Papers from the 13th International Conference on Historical Linguistics ed. by Monika Schmid, Jennifer Austin & Dieter Stein, 77–100. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold
1888 Altindische Syntax. Halle a. S.: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses.Google Scholar
1897 Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen. Zweiter Teil. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Di Giovine, Paolo
1990–1996 Studio sul perfetto indoeuropeo, Vol. I–III. Roma: Il Calamo.Google Scholar
Dowty, David
1990 Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language 67:3.547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ernout, Alfred
1908–1909 Recherches sur l’emploi du passif latin à l’époque républicaine. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique 15.273–333.Google Scholar
Flobert, Pierre
1975 Les verbes déponents latins des origines à Charlemagne. Paris: Les belles lettres.Google Scholar
Friedrich, Johannes
1967 Hethitisches Elementarbuch, 3rd edition, Vol. I–II. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
2011 Valency Changes in the History of English. Journal of Historical Linguistics 1:1.106–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma
1987 The Typology of Reflexives. (= Empirical Approaches to Language Typology, 2.) Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
George, Coulter H
2005 Expressions of Agency in Ancient Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gildersleeve, Basil L
1900 Syntax of Classical Greek from Homer to Demosthenes. New York: American Book Company.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1981 Typology and Functional Domains. Studies in Language 5:2.163–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonda, Jan
1979 The Medium in the R̥gveda. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Goodwin, William W
1978 [1894] A Greek Grammar. London: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Gotō, Toshifumi
1997 Überlegungen zum urindogermanischen “Stativ”. Berthold Delbrück y la sintaxis indoeuropea hoy. Actas del Coloquio de la Indogermanische Gesellschaft ed. by Emilio Crespo & José Luís, 165–192. Madrid: UAM; Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Grosse, Hermann
1889 Beiträge zur Syntax des griechischen Mediums und Passivums. Dramburg: Druck von Th. Kämpf.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Thomas Müller-Bardey
2004 Valency Change. Morphology: A Handbook on Inflection and Word Formation, Vol. 2 ed. by Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann & Joachim Mugdan, 1130–1145. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Heidinger, Steffen
2010 French Anticausatives: A Diachronic Perspective. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Karl
1976 Die Aoristbildungen von ved. vr̥t. In K. Hoffmann, Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik. Bd. 2 ed. 562–569. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A. & Craig H. Melchert
2008 A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Hooker, James T
1980 Linear B: An Introduction. Bristol: Classical Press.Google Scholar
Humbert, Jean
1945 Syntaxe Grecque. Paris: Librairie Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Jamison, Stephanie W
1983 Function and Form in the -áya-formations of the Rig Veda and Atharva Veda. (= KZ, Ergänzungsheft 31.) Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Jankuhn, Harald
1969 Die passive Bedeutung medialer Formen untersucht an der Sprache Homers. (= KZ, Ergänzungsheft 21.) Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Jannaris, Antonius
1968 [1897] An Historical Greek Grammar, Chiefly of the Attic Dialect, as Written and Spoken from Classical Antiquity down to the Present Time, Founded upon the Ancient Texts, Inscriptions, Papyri, and Present Popular Greek. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, Jay
1978 Stative and Middle in Indo-European. (= Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Sprachwissenschaft, 23.) Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck.Google Scholar
2003 Hittite and the Indo-European Verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne
1993 The Middle Voice. (= Typological Studies in Language, 23.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kortlandt, Frederik H.H
1979 Toward a Reconstruction of the Balto-Slavic Verbal System. Lingua 49.51–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981 1st sg. middle *-H2. Indogermanische Forschungen 86.123–136.Google Scholar
1999 The Armenian Causative. Annual of Armenian Linguistics 20.47–49.Google Scholar
2009 Baltica & Balto-Slavica. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
2010 An Outline of Proto-Indo-European. In: F.H.H. Kortlandt, Studies in Germanic, Indo-European and Indo-Uralic, 37–45. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Krause, Wolfgang
1968 Handbuch des Gotischen. 3rd ed. München: C.H. Beck‘sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Kühner, Raphael & Bernhard Gerth
1963 [1898–1904] Ausführliche Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache. Zweiter Teil: Satzlehre. Hannover: Hannsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid
1999 Split Causativity: Remarks on Correlations between Transitivity, Aspect, and Tense. Tense-Aspect, Transitivity and Causativity: Essays in Honour of Vladimir Nedjalkov (= Studies in Language Companion Series, 50) ed. by Werner Abraham & Leonid Kulikov, 21–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006a Passive and Middle in Indo-European: Reconstructing the Early Vedic Passive Paradigm. Passivization and Typology: Form and Function (= Typological Studies in Language, 68) ed. by Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö, 62–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006b The Vedic Mediopassive Aorists, Statives and their Participles: Reconsidering the Paradigm. Themes and Tasks in Old and Middle Indo-Aryan Linguistics ed. by Bertil Tikkanen & Heinrich Hettrich, 45–63. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
2007a Reciprocal Constructions in Vedic. Reciprocal Constructions, Vol. 2 (= Typological Studies in Language, 71) ed. by Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, 709–738. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007b The Reflexive Pronouns in Vedic: A Diachronic and Typological Perspective. Lingua 117:8.1412–1433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Valency-Changing Categories in Indo-Aryan and Indo-European: A Diachronic Typological Portrait of Vedic Sanskrit. Multilingualism: Proceedings of the 23rd Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics (= Studia Linguistica Upsaliensis, 8) ed. by Anju Saxena & Åke Viberg, 75–92. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.Google Scholar
2011a Voice Typology. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology ed. by Jae-Jung Song, 368–398. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2011b Passive to Anticausative through Impersonalization: The Case of Vedic and Indo-European. Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective (= Studies in Language Companion Series, 124) ed. by Anna Siewierska & Andrej Malchukov, 229–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 The Vedic -ya-presents: Passives and Intransitivity in Old Indo-Aryan. (= Leiden Studies in Indo-European, 19.) Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
2014a The decline of labile syntax in Old Indo-Aryan: A diachronic typological perspective. Linguistics 52:4 (special issue: Typology of labile verbs: Focus on diachrony).1139–1165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014b Grammaticalization of reciprocal pronouns in Indo-Aryan: Evidence from Sanskrit and Indo-European for a diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions. Journal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics 1:2.117–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kümmel, Martin
1996 Stativ und Passivaorist im Indoiranischen. (= HS, Ergänzungsheft 39.) Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
2000 Das Perfekt im Indoiranischen. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
1932 Les désinences moyennes de l’indo-européen et du hittite. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 30:1.1–4.Google Scholar
1935 Études indoeuropéennes I. Krakow: Gebethner & Wolff.Google Scholar
1964 The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Lavidas, Nikolaos
2009 Transitivity Alternations in Diachrony: Changes in Argument Structure and Voice Morphology. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Leumann, Manu & Johann B. Hofmann
1928 Lateinische Grammatik, Bd. 2, Syntax. München: Beck.Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia
2010a The Extension of the Transitive Construction in Ancient Greek. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia. 42:1.60–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010b Transitivity, Intransitivity and Diathesis in Hittite. Indo-evropejskoe jazykoznanie i klassičeskaja filologija 14.133–154.Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia, Anna Pompei & Stavros Skopeteas
2005 Ancient Greek. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Macdonell, Arthur Anthony
1910 Vedic Grammar. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
McMillion, Alan
2006 Labile Verbs in English: Their Meaning, Behavior and Structure. Stockholm: Stockholm University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine
1964 [1903] Introduction à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Alabama: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine & Joseph Vendryes
1924 Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, Igor
1993 The Inflectional Category of Voice: Towards a more Rigorous Definition. Causativity and Transitivity (= Studies in Language Companion Series, 23) ed. by Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky, 1–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neu, Erich
1968a Das hethitische Mediopassiv und seine indogermanischen Grundlagen. (= Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten, 6.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
1968b Interpretation der hethitischen mediopassiven Verbalformen. (= StBoT, 5.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Renou, Louis
1925 La valeur du parfait dans les hymnes védiques. (= Collection linguistique, 18.) Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Schaefer, Christiane
1994 Das Intensivum im Vedischen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Karl Horst
1963a Präteritum und Medio-Passiv. Sprache 9.14–20.Google Scholar
1963b Zum altirischen Passiv. Indogermanische Forschungen 68.257–275.Google Scholar
Schwyzer, Eduard
1943 Zum persönlichen Agens beim Passiv, besonders im Griechischen. (= Abhandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophische-historische Klasse, Jahrgang 1942: Nr 10.) Berlin: Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Schwyzer, Eduard & Albert Debrunner
1950 Griechische Grammatik. Zweiter Band: Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik. (= Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 2. Abt., 1. Teil, 2. Bd.) München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi
2006 On the Conceptual Framework for Voice Phenomena. Linguistics 44.217–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sihler, Andrew L
1995 New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna
1984 The Passive: A Comparative Linguistic Analysis. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Smyth, Herbert W
1984 [1920] Greek Grammar, 13th ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (rev. ed. by Gordon M. Messing.)Google Scholar
Stahl, Johann M
1907 Kritisch-historische Syntax des griechischen Verbums der klassischen Zeit. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Stang, Christian S
1932 Perfektum und Medium. Norsk tidsskrift for sprogvidenskap 6.29–39.Google Scholar
Szemerényi, Oswald
1990 Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. (4., durchgesehene Auflage.)Google Scholar
Šackov, Аndrej В
2008 Xettskie glagoly s suffiksom -nu- [Hittite Verbs with the Suffix -nu-]. Indoevropejskoe jazykoznahie i klassičeskaja filologija 12.471–474.Google Scholar
Wackernagel, Jacob
1904 Studien zum griechischen Perfectum. Programm zur akademischen Preisverteilung, 3–24. Göttingen. [Reprinted in: Jacob Wackernagel. 1953. Kleine Schriften, 1000–1021. Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht.]Google Scholar
Watkins, Calvert
1969 Indogermanische Grammatik, III: Formenlehre. 1. Teil. Geschichte der indogermanischen Verbalflexion. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Whitney, William Dwight
1885 The Roots, Verb-Forms, and Primary Derivatives of the Sanskrit Language. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

de Santis, Leonardo & Luigi Battezzato
2020. Aoristo e perfetto nel greco tardo-antico. Glotta 96:1 ► pp. 246 ff. DOI logo
Guérois, Rozenn & Koen Bostoen
2018. On the origins of passive allomorphy in Cuwabo (Bantu P34). Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 36:3 ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo
Rozwadowska, Bożena, Arkadiusz Nowak & Anna Bondaruk
2020. Chapter 1. Psych verbs. In Beyond Emotions in Language [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 263], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 march 2024. 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.