Cover not available
Part of
Historical Linguistics 2015: Selected papers from the 22nd International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Naples, 27-31 July 2015
Edited by Michela Cennamo and Claudia Fabrizio
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 348] 2019
► pp. 245–270

Chapter 12
Enclitic -(m)a ‘but’ / -(y)a ‘and’ in Hittite

Losing extraordinary syntactic behavior

The paper deals with the syntax of two enclitic conjunctions in Hittite, -(m)a ‘but’ and -(y)a ‘and’. Their clause distribution is different in Old/Middle Hittite vs New Hittite. In Old/Middle Hittite they cliticize in the Wackernagel position, but they are delayed to the next word by nu, mān, kāš(m)a, našma, namma, kui-. In New Hittite they start cliticising to most of the words from this group, with the exception of nu. For Old/Middle Hittite I posit that nu, mān, etc. are in the Speech Act layer, whereas -(m)a and -(y)a target Force0. The New Hittite system is due to a change in the structure of the left periphery: most of the original Speech Act layer constituents save nu started targeting Spec,ForceP.
Keywords: Hittite, syntax, left periphery, enclitics, Speech Act layer
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Stressed or unstressed?
    • 1.2Structurally conditioned placement of -(m)a and -(y)a
  • 2.Diachronic development of the syntax of -(m)a and -(y)a
    • 2.1Did -(m)a and -(y)a become Wackernagel enclitics?
    • 2.2An alternative account: Clause structure change?
  • 3.Interim conclusions
  • 4.Other second position constituents vis-à-vis the delaying set
  • 5.An analogical solution?
    • 5.1The syntax and semantics of anda=ma and parā=ma ‘further’
    • 5.2Analogy after anda=ma and parā=ma
    • 5.3Analogy of the syntax of mān ‘if/when’ and discourse adverbials
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Abbreviations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.348.12sid
References (49)
References
Becker, Kristina. 2014. Zur Semantik der hethitischen Relativsätze (Studien zur historisch-vergleichenden Sprachwissenschaft 5). Hamburg: Baar.Google Scholar
Beckman, Gary. 1996. Hittite diplomatic texts. Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
Beckman, Gary. Trevor Bryce and Eric Cline. 2011. The Ahhiyawa Texts, Atlanta, 2011.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa. 2015. Preserving germanic syntax via exotic means: V2 in Modern Afrikaans. Handout of the lecture presented at ICHL, Naples 26–31 July 2015.Google Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2001. On the nature of the syntax-phonology interface: Cliticization and related phenomena. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
CHD – Hans Güterbock†, Harry Hoffner†, and Theo van den Hout (eds), The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1980–.Google Scholar
del Monte, Giuseppe F. 1986. Il trattato fra Muršili Il di Ḫattuša e Niqmepa’ di Ugarit (OAC 18), Roma.Google Scholar
de Roos, Johan. 2007. Hittite votive texts (PIHANS CIX). Leiden.Google Scholar
Eichner, Heiner. 1981. Indogermanische Chronik 24a. Die Sprache 27:1. 57–68.Google Scholar
Friedrich, Iohannes. 1926. Staatsverträge des Hatti-Reiches in hethitischer Sprache. 1. Teil (MVAeG 31/1), Leipzig.Google Scholar
. 1930. Staatsverträge des Hatti-Reiches in hethitischer Sprache. 2. Teil (MVAeG 34/1), Leipzig.Google Scholar
Garrett, Andrew. 1994. Relative Clause Syntax in Lycian and Hittite. Die Sprache 36. 29–69.Google Scholar
Goedegebuure, Petra. 2014. The use of demonstratives in Hittite: deixis, reference and focus (StBoT 55), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Goetze, Albrecht. 1967. Die Annalen des Mursilis. Darmstadt.Google Scholar
González Salazar, Juan M. 1994. Tiliura, un ejemplo de la política fronteriza durante el imperio hitita (CTH 89), Aula Orientalis 12. 159–176.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2014. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. Studia linguistica 68:1. 116–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Virginia Hill. 2014. Vocatives and speech act projections: A Case study in Flemish. In Anna Cartinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds.), 209-236. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo PublishingGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1997. Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Haug, Dag. 2016. PIE *kwi-/kwo-: Interrogative, Indefinite or Both?. In Andrew Miles Byrd, Jessica DeLisi & Mark Wenthe (eds.), Tavet Tat Satyam. Beech Stave Press. Kapittel. 86–100.Google Scholar
Hill, Virginia. 2007. Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua 117. 2077–2105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A., Jr. 2009. Letters from the Hittite Kingdom (SBL Writings from the Ancient World 15). Atlanta.Google Scholar
Hoffner, Harry A. Jr. & H. Craig Melchert. 2008. A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Part 1, Winona Lake, Indiana.Google Scholar
Huggard, Mattyas. 2011. On Wh-(Non)-Movement and Internal Structures of the Hittite Preposed Relative Clause. In Stephanie W. Jamison, H. Craig Melchert & Brent Vine (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, 83–104. Bremen: Hempen.Google Scholar
. 2014. On Semantics, Syntax and Prosody. In East Coast Indo-European Conference (ECIEC) 33. 2014.Google Scholar
. 2015. Wh-words in Hittite. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Kloekhorst, Alwin. 2014. Accent in Hittite: A Study in Plene Spelling, Consonant Gradation, Clitics, and Metrics (StBoT 56). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Kühne, Cord & Heinrich Otten. (1971) Der Šaušgamuwa-Vertrag (StBiT 16).Google Scholar
Meacham, Micheal David. 2000. A Synchronic and Diacronic Functional Analysis of Hittite -ma. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Melchert, H. Craig. 2009. Discourse Conditioned Use of Hittite -ma. In Elisabeth Rieken & Paul Widmer (eds.), Pragmatische Kategorien. Form, Funktion und Diachronie, 187–195. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Miller, Jared. 2013. Royal Hittite Instructions (SBL Writings from the Ancient World 31), Atlanta. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munshi, Sadaf & Rajesh Bhatt. 2009. Two locations for negation. Evidence from Kashmiri. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9. 205–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Otten, Heinrich. 1981. Die Apologie Hattusilis III. (StBoT 24). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
1988, Die Bronzetafel aus Boǧazköy (StBoT Bh 1). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia. 2002. The left-periphery of V2-Rhaetoromance dialects: a new view on V2 and V3. In Sjef Barbiers, Leonie Cornips & Susan van der Kleij (eds), Syntactic Microvariation. Electronic publications of Meertens Instituut.Google Scholar
Rieken, Elisabeth. 2000. Die Partikeln -a, -ja, -ma im Althehtitischen und das Akkadogramm Ù. In Michaela Ofitsch & Christian Zinko (eds.), 125 Jahre Indogermanistik in Graz, 411–419. Graz: Leykam.Google Scholar
Samuels, Bridget. 2005. On the Left Periphery in Anatolian. Linguistic Analysis 35:1. 275–297.Google Scholar
Schuol, Monika. 1994. Die Terminologie des hethitischen SU-Orakels. Eine Untersuchung auf der Grundlage des mittelhethitischen Textes KBo XVI 97 unter vergleichender Berücksichtigung akkadischer Orakeltexte unde Lebermodele, I. Altorientalische Foschungen 21:1. 73–124.Google Scholar
Sideltsev, Andrei. 2014. Clause internal and clause leftmost verbs in Hittite. Altorientalische Foschungen 41:1, 2014. 80–111.Google Scholar
. 2015a. Syntax of Hittite mān ‘if/when’. Aula orientalis: revista de estudios del Próximo Oriente Antiguo 33:1, 2015. 127–140.Google Scholar
. 2015b. Hittite Clause Architecture. Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale 109. 79–112.Google Scholar
. 2015c. The Riddles of Hittite Indefinite Pronouns. Altorientalische Foschungen 42:2. 199–275.Google Scholar
Sideltsev, Andrei & Maria Molina. 2015. Enclitic -(m)a ‘but’, clause architecture and the prosody of focus in Hittite. Indogermanische Foschungen 120. 209–254.Google Scholar
Sideltsev, Andrei, Maria Molina & Alexius Belov. 2015, Syntax or phonology? Proclitics, enclitics, and stress in Hittite. Journal of Language Relationship 13:2. 139–168.Google Scholar
Ünal, Ahmet. 1974. Hattušili III., Teil I, Hattušili bis zu seiner Thronbesteigung, Bd. 2 Quellen und Indices (THeth 4). Heidelberg.Google Scholar
van den Hout, Theo. 1998. The Purity of Kingship. An Edition of CTH 569 and Related Oracle Inquiries of Tudhaliya IV. Leiden, Boston, Köln.Google Scholar
. 2003. Apology of Hattusili III. In William W. Hallo & K. Lawson Younger (eds.), The Context of Scripture, Vol. 1, 199–204. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Widmer, Paul. 2009. Hethitisch nu als Mittel der informationsstrukturellen und syntaktischen Verknüpfung. In Elisabeth Rieken & Paul Widmer (eds.), Pragmatische Kategorien. Form, Funktionund Diachronie, 323–335. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, G. 1998. Zwei mittelhethitische Briefe aus dem Gebäude C in Kuşaklı. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin 130. 175–87.Google Scholar
Yates Anthony. 2014. Anatolian “Indeterminate” Relative Clauses Revisited: Syntax, Semantics, and the “Held-Garrett rule”. Österreichische Linguistiktagung (ÖLT) 41, 6 December 2014 (handout).Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Sideltsev, Andrei Vladimirovich
2024. Clitic Third in Hittite: Variation and Development. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 77:2 ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 september 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.