Cover not available
Article published In:
Latin influence on the syntax of the languages of Europe
Edited by Bert Cornillie and Bridget Drinka
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 33] 2019
► pp. 183–209

Latin influence on German word order?

| University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Behaghel’s claim that verb finality in German dependent clauses (DCs) reflects Latin influence (1892, 1932) has been revived by Chirita (1997, 2003). According to Chirita, DC word order remains variable up to Early New High German, while in Latin, verb-finality is more frequent in DCs than main clauses (MCs); hence, she claims, German verb finality reflects Latin influence. This papers shows that the arguments for Latin influence are problematic and that the Modern German word order difference between MCs and DCs can be explained as the ultimate outcome of developments that started in early North and West Germanic. In the conclusion I briefly discuss similar developments in Western Romance and their implications for European contact linguistics.
Keywords: German, syntax, verb finality, Latin, West Germanic, Romance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Critical examination of arguments for Latin influence
    • 2.1Early and not-so-early arguments for Latin influence
    • 2.2Chirita’s arguments for Latin influence
    • 2.3The evidence of early texts
    • 2.4Luther and Melanchthon
    • 2.5Early Modern German
    • 2.6Premodern ‘OV’ beside ‘VO’: Schallert and the issue of extraposition
  • 3.The broader Germanic context
  • 4.The historical development of German word order: A brief summary
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 March 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.00027.hoc
References (59)
References
Altmann, Hans. 1981. Formen der “Herausstellung” im Deutschen: Rechtsversetzung, Linksversetzung, Freies Thema und verwandte Konstruktionen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel, Katrin. 2007. Studies in Old High German syntax: Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb-second. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayer, Josef. 2005. “Displaced and misplaced genitives.” In Organizing grammar: Studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, ed. by Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Riny Huijbregts, Ursula Kleinhenz, and Jan Koster, 22–30. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1892. “Zur deutschen Wortstellung.” Zeitschrift für den deutschen Unterricht 61: 265–267.Google Scholar
. 1900. “Zur deutschen Wortstellung.” Wissenschaftliche Beihefte zur Zeitschrift des Allgemeinen Deutschen Sprachvereins 17/181: 233–251.Google Scholar
. 1932. Deutsche Syntax, 41. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Bies, Ann. 1996. Syntax and discourse functions in Early New High German: Evidence for verb-final word order. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, and William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chirita, Diana. 1997. “Latin influence on German word order: A discussion of Behaghel’s theory.” In Insights in Germanic linguistics II: Classic and contemporary, ed. by Gerald F. Carr, and Imengard Rauch, 9–27. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Did Latin influence German word order? Aspects of German-Latin bilingualism in the late Middle Ages.” In Aspects of multilingualism in European language history, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller, and Gisella Ferraresi, 173–200. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cichosz, Anna. 2010. The influence of text type on word order of Old Germanic languages: A corpus-based contrastive study of Old English and Old High German. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Dewey, Tonya Kim. 2006. The origins and development of Germanic V2: Evidence from alliterative verse. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar
Drinka, Bridget. 2017. Language contact in Europe: The periphrastic perfect through history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebert, Robert Peter. 1980. “Social and stylistic variation in Early New High German word order: The sentence frame (‘Satzrahmen’).” Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 1021: 357–398.Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þórhallur. 1995. Verbal syntax in the Early Germanic languages. Cornell University Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
Fuß, Eric, and Carola Trips. 2002. “Variation and change in Old and Middle English: On the validity of the Double Base Hypothesis.” Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 41: 171–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonda, Jan. 1959. “On amplified sentences and similar structures in the Veda.” In Four studies in the language of the Veda, Jan Gronda, 1–70. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 2010. The Syntax of German. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Alice C., and Lyle Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich. 1982a. “Aux-cliticization as a motivation for word order change.” Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 121: 91–101.Google Scholar
. 1982b. “Clitic verbs in PIE or discourse-based verb fronting? Sansksrit sá hovāca gā́rgyaḥ and congeners in Avestan and Homeric Greek.” Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 121: 1–38.Google Scholar
. 1985. “Pronoun fronting and the notion ‘verb-second’ position in Beowulf.” In Germanic Linguistics: Papers from a symposium at the University of Chicago, April 24, 1985, ed. by Jan Terje Faarlund, 70–86. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
. 1986/1991. Principles of historical linguistics, 1st and 2nd ed. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1988. “Rebracketing and relative clauses in Old English.” In Germanic Linguistics II: Papers from the Second Symposium on Germanic Linguistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3–4 October 1986, ed. by Elmer H. Antonsen, and Hans Hernich Hock, 35–54. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
. 1990. “V2 in early Germanic: A ‘heretical’ view.” Paper presented at the Ninth East Coast Indo-European Conference, 13–16 June 1990, University of Pennsylvania.
. 1991. “On the origin and development of relative clauses in early Germanic, with special emphasis on Beowulf.” In Stæfcræft: Studies in Germanic linguistics, ed. by Elmer H. Antonsen, and Hans Henrich Hock, 55–89. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2000. “Genre, discourse, and syntax in Sanskrit.” In Textual parameters in older languages, ed. by Susan C. Herring, Pieter van Reenen, and Lene Schøsler, 163–195. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Vedic verb accent revisited.” In Vedic and Sanskrit historical linguistics: Papers from the 13th World Sanskrit Conference, ed. by Jared Klein, and Elizabeth Tucker, 153–178. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Proto-Indo-European verb finality: Reconstruction, typology, validation.” In Proto-Indo-European syntax and its development, ed. by Leonid Kulikov, and Nikolaos Lavidas, 51–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “The history of Vedic prefix-verb compound accentuation revisited.” In Veda and Vedic literature: Select papers from the panel on “Veda and Vedic Literature” at the 16th World Sanskrit Conference, ed. by Hans Henrich Hock, 1–11. Bangkok/New Delhi: Sanskrit Studies Centre, Silpakorn University/DK Publishers.Google Scholar
Koll, H.-G. 1965. “Zur Stellung des Verbs im spätantiken und frühmittelalterlichen Latein.” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 21: 241–272.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. 2008. “Satisfying V2 in early Romance: Merge vs. Move.” Journal of Linguistics 441: 437–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linde, Paul. 1923. “Die Stellung des Verbs in der lateinischen Prosa.” Glotta 121: 153–187.Google Scholar
Luther, Dr. Martin. 1530. Ein sendbrieff D. M. Luthers: Von Dolmetzschen und Fürbit der heiligenn. (Available at [URL])
Marlow, Michael D. 2003. “An Open Letter on Translating. By Martin Luther, 1530.” Translated from “Ein sendbrief D. M. Luthers. Von Dolmetzschen und Fürbit der heiligenn.” In Dr. Martin Luthers Werke, (Weimar: Hermann Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1909), Band 301, Teil II1, pp. 632–646. Revised and annotated by Michael D. Marlowe, June 2003. [URL]
Melanchthon, Philipp. 1560. Explicatio sententiarum Theognidis, in schola Vuittenbergensi. Reprinted in Melanchthon 1854.Google Scholar
. 1854. Opera quae supersunt omnia. (Corpus reformatorum, 20.) Brunsvigae: Schwetschke et Filius. (Repr. 1963)Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan, and Anthony S. Kroch. 1985. “Reconciling an exceptional feature of Old English clause structure.” In Germanic Linguistics: Papers from a symposium at the University of Chicago, April 24, 1985, ed. by Jan Terje Faarlund, 87–111. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
. 1989. “The rightward movement of complements and adjuncts in the Old English of Beowulf.” Language Variation and Change 11: 115–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. 1999. Phrase Structures in competition: Variation and change in Old English word order. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Pollock, Sheldon Ivan. 1977. Aspects of versification in Sanskrit lyric poetry. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.Google Scholar
Raible, Wolfgang. 1992. “The pitfalls of subordination: Subject and object clauses between Latin and Romance.” In Historical Philology: Greek, Latin and Romance: Studies in honor of Oswald Szemerényi, ed. by Bela Brogyanyi, and Rainer Lipp, 199–337. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richter, Elise. 1903. Zur Entwicklung der romanischen Wortstellung aus der lateinischen. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Ries, John. 1907. Die Wortstellung im Beowulf. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1973. “The penthouse principle.” In You take the high node and I’ll take the low node: Papers from the Comparative Syntax Festival, ed. by C. Corum et al., 397–422. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Sapp, Christopher. 2016. “Word order patterns in the Old High German right periphery and their Indo-European origins.” Diachronica 31: 367–411. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schallert, Oliver. 2007a. “The word order in the right periphery: OV-, VO-, and ‘mixed’ OV/VO orders in Old High German.” Paper presented at the Workshop on Information Structure and Word Order Variation in Older Germanic, 9–10 November 2007. Humboldt Universität, Berlin. <[URL]>
. 2007b. “Die Stellung von Verben und Objekten in der rechten Peripherie: OV- und VO-Strukturen im Althochdeutschen.” Moderne Sprachen 511: 17–105.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Als Deutsch noch nicht OV war: Althochdeutsch im Spannungsfeld zwischen OV und VO.” In Historische Textgrammatik und historische Syntax des Deutschen. Traditionen, Innovationen, Perspektiven, vol 21, ed. by Arne Ziegler, 365–394. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlachter, Eva. 2010. Syntax und Informationsstruktur im Althochdeutschen: Untersuchungen am Beispiel der Isodor-Gruppe. Ph.D. dissertation, Humboldt Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
Schröder, Peter. 1971. “Einige Vorüberlegungen zur Behandlung der verbalen Klammer, der Gliedsatzklammer und postprädikativer Setzung von Satzelementen in Texten gesprochener Sprache”. In Forschungen zur gesprochenen Sprache und Möglichkeiten ihrer Didaktisierung, ed. by the Goethe-Institute, 84–95. München: Kemmler.Google Scholar
Shevchukova, Antonina. 2009. Ausklammerung und Relativsatzbildung als Rhematisierungsstrategie im Deutschen. Ph.D. dissertation, Universität Gießen.Google Scholar
Stockwell, Robert P., and Donka Minkova. 1991. “Subordination and word order change in the history of English.” In Historical English Syntax, ed. by Dieter Kastovsky, 367–408. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans. 1987. Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992–1993. “Verbal position in Old English: Evidential problems.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 25/261: 82–94.Google Scholar
Wackernagel, Jacob. 1892. “Über ein Gesetz der indogermanischen Wortstellung.” Indogermanische Forschungen 11: 333–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walkden, George. 2014. Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Calvert. 1963. “Preliminaries to a historical and comparative analysis of the Old Irish verb.” Celtica 61: 1–49.Google Scholar
. 1964. “Preliminaries to the reconstruction of Indo-European sentence structure.” In Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists, ed. by Horace G. Lunt, 1035–1045. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar