Criteria for subjecthood and non-canonical subjects in Classical
Greek
The dative-marked argument of the verb
dokéō ‘seem’ in Classical Greek displays
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties that qualify it as a
non-canonical subject. To substantiate this claim, three phenomena
are analyzed, all involving coreference resolution across clause
boundaries: long-distance reflexivization, interclausal coreference,
and case mismatch in participial constructions. For the latter
phenomenon, the observed mismatch between case marking and
referential properties is captured by positing the same coreference
mechanism for finite clauses and for a class of participial
constructions that qualify as a full clausal domain.
Article outline
- 1.Non-canonical subjects in Classical Greek
- 2.A case study: The dative argument of dokéō
- 3.Reflexivization
- 4.Interclausal coreference with finite clauses
- 5.Interclausal coreference with participial clauses
- 6.Conclusions
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
Abbreviations
-
References
References (56)
References
Andrews, A. (1976). The
VP complement analysis in Modern
Icelandic. Proceedings of the
North Eastern Linguistic
Society, 6, 1–21.
Ariel, M. (1988). Referring
and accessibility. Journal of
Linguistics 24(1), 65–87.
Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility
theory. An
overview. In T. J. M. Sanders, J. Schilperoord, W. Spooren (Eds.), Text
Representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic
aspects (pp. 29–87). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Barðdal, J. & Smitherman, Th. (2013). The
Quest for Cognates: A Reconstruction of Oblique Subject
Constructions in
Proto-Indo-European. Language
Dynamics and
Change, 3(1), 28–67..
Barðdal, J., Smitherman, Th., Bjarnadóttir, V., Danesi, S., Jenset, G. B., McGillivray & B. (2012). Reconstructing
constructional semantics. The dative subject construction in
Old Norse-Icelandic, Latin, Ancient Greek, Old Russian and
Old Lithuanian. Studies in
Language, 36(3), 511–547.
Bary, C. & Haug, D. T. T. (2011). Temporal
anaphora across and inside sentences: The function of
participles. Semantics and
Pragmatics, 4, 1–56.
Buijs, M. (2013). Participle. In G. K. Giannakis (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of Ancient Greek Language and
Linguistics, Leiden: Brill.
Conti, L. (2008). Synchronie
und Diachronie des altgriechischen Genitivs als
Semisubjekt. Historische
Sprachforschung, 121, 94–113.
Conti, L. (2009). Weiteres
zum Genitiv als Semisubjekt im Altgriechischen: Analyse des
Kasus bei impersonalen
Konstruktionen. Historische
Sprachforschung, 122, 182–207.
Cooper, G. L. (1988). Attic
Greek Prose
Syntax. 2 Volumes. After K. W. Krüger. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Crespo, E., Conti, L., Maquieira, H. (2003). Sintaxis
del Griego
Clásico. Madrid: Gredos.
Croft, W. (1990). Typology
and
Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dahl, E. & Fedriani, C. (2012). The
argument structure of experience: experiential constructions
in Early Vedic, Homeric Greek and Early
Latin. Transactions of the
Philological
Society, 110(3), 342–362.
Danesi, D., Johnson, C. A. & Barðdal, J. (2018). Where
Does the Modality of Ancient Greek Modal Verbs Come From?
The Relation between Modality and Oblique Case
Marking. Journal of Greek
Linguistics 18, 45–92.
Dimitriadis, A. (1996). When
Pro-Drop Languages Don’t. Overt Pronominal Subjects and
Pragmatic
Inference. In L. Dobrin, K. Singer & L. McNair (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 32nd Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics
Society (pp. 33–47).
Dryer, M. S. (1997). Are
grammatical relations
universal? In J. L. Bybee, J. Haiman, S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays
on Language Function and Language Type: Dedicated to T.
Givón (pp. 115–143). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Eythórsson, Th. & Barðdal, J. (2005). Oblique
subjects: a common Germanic
inheritance. Language 81, 824–881.
Fedriani, C. (2009). The
“Behaviour-Before-Coding” Principle: Further Evidence from
Latin. Archivio Glottologico
Italiano 94(2), 156–184.
Fedriani, C. (2014). Experiential
Constructions in
Latin. Leiden: Brill.
Frascarelli, M. (2007). Subjects,
topics and the interpretation of referential
pro: An interface approach to the
linking of (null)
pronouns. Natural Language
and Linguistic
Theory 25(4), 691–734.
Goldstein, D. (2016). Classical
Greek Syntax. Wackernagel’s Law in
Herodotus. Leiden: Brill.
Haug, D. T. T. (2010). PROIEL
Guidelines for
Annotation. Ms., University of Oslo, [URL]
Haug, D. T. T. (2017). Backward
control in Ancient Greek and Latin participial
adjuncts. Natural Language
and Linguistic
Theory 35(1), 99–159.
Hock, H. H. (1990). Oblique
subjects in
Sanskrit? In M. K. Verma & K. P. Mohanan (Eds.), Experiencer
Subjects in South Asian
Languages (pp. 119–139). Stanford: CSLI Publication.
Humbert, J. (1960). Syntaxe
grecque. 3rd.
ed. Paris: Klincksieck.
Jøhndal, M. L. (2012). Non-finiteness
in Latin. PhD
Dissertation, Cambridge University.
Keenan, E. L. (1976). Towards
a universal definition of “Subject
of”. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject
and
Topic (pp. 303–333). New York: Academic Press.
Keydana, G. (1997). Absolute
Konstruktionen in altindogermanischen
Sprachen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Kiparsky, P. (2012). Greek
Anaphora in Cross-Linguistic
Perspective. Journal of Greek
Linguistics, 12, 84–117.
Klaiman, M. H. (1980). Bengali
Dative
Subjects. Lingua 51(4), 275–295.
Kühner, R. & Gerth, B. (1898;
1904). Ausführliche Grammatik der
Griechischen
Sprache3
, II-1; II–2. Hannover/Leipzig: Hannsche Buchhandlung.
Le Mair, E., Johnson, C. A., Frotscher, M., Eythórsson, Th. & Barðdal, J. (2017). Position
as a behavioral property of subjects. The case of Old
Irish. Indogermanische
Forschungen 122(1), 111–142.
Lühr, R. (2011). Zur
Validität linguistischer Theorien in der
Indogermanistik. In Th. Krisch, Th. Lindner (Eds.), Indogermanistik
und Linguistik im Dialog. Akten der XIII. Fachtagung der
Indogermanischen
Gesellschaft (pp. 321–330). Wiesbaden: Reichert.
Luraghi, S. (2010). Experiencer
predicates in
Hittite. In R. I. Kim, E. Riecken, N. Oettinger & M. J. Weiss (Eds.), Ex
Anatolia
lux (pp. 249–264). Ann Arbor: Beech Stave Press.
Masica, C. P. (1976). Defining
a Linguistic Area. South
Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nikolaeva, I. (2007) (Ed.). Finiteness.
Theoretical and Empirical
Foundations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peels, S. (2007). ἑωυτόν
as a long-distance anaphor in Herodotus’
histories. Master
Thesis, Leiden University.
Petit, D. (1999). *Su̯e-
en grec ancien : la famille du pronom réfléchi. Linguistique
grecque et comparaison
indo-européenne. Louvain: Peeters.
Pieroni, S. (2007). Soggetto
e
riflessivo. In N. La Fauci & S. Pieroni (Eds.), Morfosintassi
latina. Punti di
vista (pp. 27–39). Pisa: ETS.
Powell, J. E. (1933). Studies
on the Greek reflexive –
Herodotus. The Classical
Quarterly 27, 208–221.
Powell, J. E. (1934). Studies
on the Greek Reflexive –
Thucydides. The Classical
Quarterly 28, 159–174.
Sevdali, Ch. (2013). Case
transmission beyond control and the role of
Person. Journal of Historical
Syntax, 24, 1–52.
Siewierska, A. (2004). Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Torregrossa, J., Bongartz, C. & Tsimpli, I. (2015). Testing
accessibility: A cross-linguistic comparison of the syntax
of referring
expressions. Extended
abstract for
the
Proceedings of
the 89th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of
America
, [URL]
Tronci, L. (2012). Sur
le réfléchi en grec ancien: notes
préliminaires. In Dupraz, E. (Ed.), Anaphore
et anaphoriques: variété des langues, variété des
emplois (pp. 151–166). Mont-Saint-Aignan: Publications des Universités de Rouen et du Havre.
Tsimpli, I. M., Sorace, A., Heycock, C. & Filiaci, F. (2004). First
language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek
and Italian near-native speakers of
English. International
Journal of
Bilingualism, 8, 257–277.
Verbeke, S., Kulikov, L. & Willems, K. (2015). Oblique
case-marking in Indo-Aryan experiencer constructions:
historical roots and synchronic
variation. Lingua 163, 23–39.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Benedetti, Marina & Chiara Gianollo
2023.
Morphosyntactic Contact in Translation: Greek ídios and Latin proprius in the Bible.
Transactions of the Philological Society 121:3
► pp. 404 ff.
Fendel, Victoria Beatrix
2023.
Support‐Verb Constructions with Objects: Greek‐Coptic Interference in the Documentary Papyri?1.
Transactions of the Philological Society 121:3
► pp. 382 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 july 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.