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. 287–300

Chapter 14
Effecting a change

Perfect and middle in some Indo-European languages

The so-called “stative” endings correspond to the archaic middle endings, as they belong to the perfect and the middle voice. The contrast between perfect and middle conveys the contrast between the representation of a state resulting from a process and the representation of a process that causes a change of state. Both the perfect and the middle occur in unaccusative constructions, in which the subject, corresponding to the transitive object, is represented as an inactive participant, which represents the locus of the process. At this stage, the perfect and the middle are opposed to the active = [active] vs. [middle: perfect]. The morphological marking of tense applied first to the process representation, leaving the state representation unmarked. Therefore, it applied first to the active and middle forms, and affected the perfect only later. Consequently, the middle passed from the perfect system to the present/aorist system = [active: middle] vs. [perfect]. The idea that the middle is ancient in the perfect system but recent in the present/aorist system also accounts for the well-known fact that the ancient middle endings (the “stative” ones) have been mixed with the active endings: the ancient endings survive in the injunctive, in the past tenses and in the optative mood, following Andersen’s (2001) markedness hierarchy.
Keywords: stative endings, middle voice, perfect, Indo-European, language change
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The “stative” diathesis and its relationship with the middle and the perfect
  • 3.Middle and perfect
  • 4.Process vs. state: An archaic architecture
  • 5.From active vs. middle/perfect to active/middle vs. perfect
  • 6.External evidence
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 10 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.348.14laz
References (51)
References
Andersen, Henning. 1987. The structure of drift. In Henning Andersen & Konrad Koerner (eds.) Historical Linguistics 1987, 1–20. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2001. Actualization. Linguistic change in progress. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Avery, John. 1880. Contributions to the history of verb-inflection in Sanskrit. Journal of the American Oriental Society 10. 219–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barton, Charles R. 1989. PIE. *mer-, arm. mēranim. Indogermanische Forschungen 94. 135–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berrettoni, Pierangiolo. 1972. L’uso del perfetto nel greco omerico. Studi e Saggi Linguistici 12. 25–170.Google Scholar
Chantraine, Pierre. 1927. Histoire du parfait grec. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold. 1897. Vergleichende Syntax der Indogermanischen Sprachen, vol. II. Strassburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Di Giovine, Paolo. 1990. Studio sul perfetto indoeuropeo, vol. I (vol. II, 1996; vol. III, 1996). Roma: Il Calamo.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonda, Jan. 1951. Remarks on the Sanskrit passive. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
. 1979. The Medium in the Ṛgveda. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Gotō, Toshifumi. 1987. Die “I. Präsensklasse” im Vedischen. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Kl., Sitzb., 489.Google Scholar
Griffith, Ralph, T. H. 1896. The Rig Veda, Book 1. Benares: E.J. Lazarus and Co.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1987. Transitivity alternations of the anticausative type, Arbeitspapiere 5. Cologne: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.Google Scholar
Haspelmath. Martin. 1990. The grammaticalization of passive morphology. Studies in Language 14. 25–72.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Bernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds.), Causatives and Transitivity, 87–120. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Karl. 1967. Der Injunktiv im Veda. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
. 1976: Das Kategoriensystem des indogermanischen Verbums. In Karl Hoffmann (ed.), Aufsätze zur Indoiranistik (J. Narten ed.), Wiesbaden: L. Reichert Verlag, 523–540Google Scholar
Insler, Stanley. 1968. The Origin of the Sanskrit Passive Aorist. Indogermanische Forschungen 73. 312–346.Google Scholar
Jamison, Stephanie W. 1979. Voice fluctuation in the Rig Veda. Medial -anta in active paradigms. Indo- Iranian Journal 21. 149–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jamison Stephanie W. & Brereton, Joel P. 2014. The Rigveda. The earliest religious poetry of India. Translated by S. W. Jamison and J. P. Brereton. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kellens, Jean. 1984. Le verbe avestique. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Kronasser, Heinz. 1956. Vergleichende Laut-und Formenlehre des Hethitischen. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Kuiper, Franciscus Bernardus Jacobus. 1937. Die indogermanischen Nasalpräsentia. Amsterdam: Hollandsche Uitgeversmaatschappij.Google Scholar
Kulikov, Leonid. 2012. The Vedic -ya- presents. Passives and Intransitivity in Old Indo-Arian (Leiden Studies in Indo-European, 19). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Kümmel, Martin. 1996. Stativ und Passiv Aorist im Indoiranischen. 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 33. 1–4.Google Scholar
Lazzeroni, Romano. 1996. Statività e modalità. Il caso del sanscrito. Studi e Saggi Linguistici 36. 127–140.Google Scholar
. 1997a. Fra glottogonia e storia: ingiuntivo, aumento e lingua poetica indoeuropea. In Tristano Bolelli & Saverio Sani (eds.), Scritti scelti di Romano Lazzeroni. 3–24, Pisa: Pacini.Google Scholar
. 1997b. La diatesi come categoria linguistica: studio sul medio indoeuropeo. In Tristano Bolelli & Saverio Sani (eds.), Scritti scelti di Romano Lazzeroni. 53–72 Pisa: Pacini.Google Scholar
. 2000: Congiuntivo e indicativo. Una vicenda sanscrita e (forse) indoeuropea. Studi e Saggi Linguistici 38. 89–100.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: at the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Macdonell, Arthur A. 1910. Vedic Grammar. Strasbourg: Trübner.Google Scholar
1916: A Vedic grammar for students. Bombay: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Magni, Elisabetta. 2008. Contiguità e continuità nelle categorie verbali: le forme in -θ- del greco. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 93. 171–225.Google Scholar
. 2010. L’evoluzione semantico-funzionale dell’elemento -θ- nella morfologia verbale del greco. In Ignazio Putzu, Giulio Gian Franco Nieddu & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds.), La morfologia del greco fra tipologia e diacronia, 266-285. Milan: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
Neu, Erich. 1968. Das hethitische Mediopassiv und seine indogermanischen Grundlagen, (= Studien zu den Boǧazköy–Texten, 6). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Renou, Louis. 1925. La valeur du parfait dans les hymnes védiques. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Rix, Helmut. 1976. Historische Grammatik des Griechischen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
. 1988. The Proto-Indo-European Middle: Content, Forms and Origin. Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 49. 101–120.Google Scholar
Romagno, Domenica. 2005. Il perfetto omerico. Diatesi, azionalità e ruoli tematici. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
. 2010. Anticausativi, passivi, riflessivi: considerazioni sul medio oppositivo, in La morfologia del greco fra tipologia e diacronia. In Ignazio Putzu, Giulio Paulis, Gian Franco Nieddu & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds.), La morfologia del greco fra tipologia e diacronia, 430-441. Milan: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
. 2014. The aorist in -ην- in Homeric Greek: at the morphosyntax/semantics interface A thorough analysis of Iliad and Odyssey. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 99. 155–186.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor. 1973. Natural Categories. Cognitive Psychology 4. 328–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, Christiane. 1994. Das Intensivum im Vedischen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Stang, Christian. 1932. Perfektum und Medium. Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 6. 29–39.Google Scholar
Tichy, Eva. 1995. Die Nomina Agentis auf -tar im Vedischen. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. jr. & Randy J. La Polla. 1997. Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wackernagel, Jakob. 1953. Studien zum griechischen Perfektum. Kleine Schriften, II, 1000–1021. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Watkins, Carlvert. 1969. Indogermanische Grammatik, III/1. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar