Cover not available
Article published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 31:1 (2014) ► pp.23–73

The Romeyka infinitive

Continuity, contact and change in the Hellenic varieties of Pontus

| University of Cambridge, Queens’ College
One Pontic Greek variety, Romeyka of Of, Turkey, today preserves a robust infinitive usage. Comparing the current infinitival distribution in Romeyka with previous stages of Greek, I argue that: (a) the Romeyka infinitive has roots in Ancient Greek due to preservation of the construction prin “before” with infinitive, which remains extremely productive, but which did not survive in other varieties into early medieval times and is only found as a learned construction in ‘high’ registers of the Medieval Greek record; (b) neither the survival of the plain and personal infinitive, nor the emergence of the inflected one can be due to contact with Turkish; (c) the Romeyka infinitive, part of a conservative medieval variety with Hellenistic features, once cut off from other medieval varieties (as early as the 11th c. ce and as late as the 16th c. ce), was reanalyzed as a negative polarity item. Such reanalysis feeds into the discussion that NPIs belong to various syntactic categories, such as nominal NPIs, NPI adverbs, NPI verbs, NPI focus particles, minimizers and now an infinitive, too.
Keywords: Romeyka, Pontic Greek, Hellenistic Greek, infinitive, negative polarity item
Published online: 21 July 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.31.1.02sit
References (113)
Adrados, Francisco Rodríguez. 1999. Historia de la lengua griega: De los orígines a nuestros días. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.Google Scholar
Andriotis, Nikolaos Pantelis. 1995. Ιστορία της ελληνικής γλώσσας (τέσσερις μελέτες). Thessaloniki: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis — Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon [Idryma Manoli Triantafyllidi].Google Scholar
Arapopoulou, Maria. 2001. Διαλεκτικοί θύλακοι της ελληνικής. In Anastasios-Foivos Christidis (ed.), Εγκυκλοπαιδικός οδηγός για τη γλώσσα, 175-179. Thessaloniki: Centre for the Greek Language.Google Scholar
Beaton, Roderick. 1981. Was Digenes Akrites an oral poem? Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 71. 7-21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beck, Jana. 2011. Two changes in Greek infinitival syntax. Paper presented at the LSA (Linguistic Society of America) Annual Meeting 2011, Pittsburgh, 7 January. [URL]. (22 July, 2013.)
Boeder, Winfried. 2005. The South Caucasian languages. Lingua 1151. 5-89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Mood in Modern Georgian. In Björn Rothstein & Rolf Thieroff (eds.), Mood in the languages of Europe (Studies in Language Companion Series 120), 603-632. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bortone, Pietro. 2009. Greek with no models, history or standard: Muslim Pontic Greek. In Alexandra Georgakopoulou & Michael Silk (eds.), Standard languages and language standards: Greek, past and present, 67-89. Farnham, UK/Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Brendemoen, Bernt. 2002. The Turkish dialects of Trabzon: Their phonology and historical development, vol. I, Analysis; vol. II, Texts. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Brixhe, Claude. 1987. Essai sur le grec anatolien au début de notre ère. Nancy, France: Presses Universitaires de Nancy.Google Scholar
Browning, Robert. 1983. Medieval and Modern Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryer, Anthony. 1975. Greeks and Türkmens: The Pontic exception. Dumbarton Oaks Papers 291. 113-148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. The Pontic Greeks before the diaspora. Journal of Refugee Studies 4(4). 315-334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryer, Anthony & David Winfield. 1985. The Byzantine monuments and topography of the Pontos. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.Google Scholar
Bubenik, Vit. 1989. Hellenistic and Roman Greece as a sociolinguistic area. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burguière, Paul. 1960. Histoire de l’infinitif en grec: Études et commentaires. Paris: C. Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Chatzikyriakidis, Stergios. 2010. Clitics in four dialects of Modern Greek: A dynamic account. London: King’s College London dissertation.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack & Peter Trudgill. 1980. Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 2002. Functional structure in DP and IP. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clackson, James & Geoffrey Horrocks. 2007. The Blackwell history of the Latin language. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Dawkins, Richard M. 1916. Modern Greek in Asia Minor: A study of the dialects of Silli, Cappadocia and Pharasa with grammar, texts, translations and glossary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1931. Notes on the study of the Modern Greek of Pontos. Byzantion 61. 389-400.Google Scholar
. 1937. The Pontic dialect of Modern Greek in Asia Minor and Russia. Transactions of the Philological Society 361. 15–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1940. The dialects of Modern Greek. Transactions of the Philological Society 39(1). 1-38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deffner, Michael. 1877. Πέντε ἑβδομᾶδες παρὰ τοις αρνησιθρήσκοις εν Όφει. Hestia 41. 547-550.Google Scholar
. 1878. Die Infinitive in den pontischen Dialekten und die zusammengesetzten Zeiten im Neugriechischen. Monatsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Aus dem Jahre 1877, 191-230. NW: Berlin: Buchdruckerei der KGL. Academie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Drettas, George. 1997. Aspects pontiques. Paris: Association de recherches pluridisciplinaires.Google Scholar
Drettas, Georges. 1999. Το ελληνο-ποντιακό διαλεκτικό σύνολο. In Christidis, Anastasios-Foivos, Maria Arapopoulou & Giannoula Giannoulopoulou (eds.), Διαλεκτικοί θύλακοι της ελληνικής γλώσσας/Dialect enclaves of the Greek language, 15-24.Athens: Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs/Centre for the Greek Language.Google Scholar
Fallmerayer, Jakob Philipp. 1830. Geschichte der Halbinsel Morea während des Mittelalters, Teil 1, Untergang der peloponnesischen Hellenen und Wiederbevölkerung des leeren Bodens durch slavische Volksstämme. Stuttgart & Tübingen: J.G. Gotta’scher Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1845. Fragmente aus dem Orient. Stuttgart: J.G. Gotta’scher Verlag.Google Scholar
Frâncu, Constantin. 2009. Gramatica limbii române vechi (1521-1780). Iaşi, Romania: Demiurg.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2007. The landscape of EVEN. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 251. 39-81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Polarity sensitivity as (non)veridical dependency. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. The dynamics of change in Dutch enig: From nonveridicality to strong negative polarity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 281. 861-875. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hesseling, Dirk Christiaan. 1892. Essai historique sur l’infinitif grec. In Jean Psicharis (ed.), Études de philologie néo-grecque. Recherches sur le développement historique du grec. Paris: É. Bouillon, 1-44.Google Scholar
Hoeksema, Jack. 1994. On the grammaticalization of negative polarity items. In Susanne Gahl, Andy Dolbey & Christopher Johnson (eds.), Twentieth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 273-282. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Holton, David & Io Manolessou. 2010. Medieval and Early Modern Greek. In Egbert J. Bakker (ed.), A companion to the Ancient Greek language, 539-563.Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horrocks, Geoffrey. 1997 [2010]. Greek: A history of the language and its speakers. London & New York: Longman. [Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2010. Greek: A history of the language and its speakers. Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.]Google Scholar
Hovdhaugen, Even. 1976. Some aspects of language contact in Anatolia. Working Papers in Linguistics (Oslo) 71. 142-160.Google Scholar
Iakovou, Μaria. 2003. «Πρέπει» και «μπορεί». Η γραμματικοποίηση της απόστασης. Ιn Δήμητρα Θεοφανοπούλου-Κοντού, Χρυσούλα Λασκαράτου, Μαίρη Σηφιανού, Μιχάλης Γεωργιαφέντης & Βασίλειος Σπυρόπουλος (eds.), Σύγχρονες τάσεις στην ελληνική γλωσσολογία, 299-319. Athens: Πατάκης.Google Scholar
James, Patrick. 2008. Retention and retreat: Complementary participles and infinitives with verbs of perception and declaration in the Roman and Byzantine documentary papyri. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.Google Scholar
Jannaris, Antonius N. 1897 [1968]. 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, Germany: Georg Olms.Google Scholar
Janssen, Marjolijne. forthcoming. The infinitive. In David Holton (ed.), Cambridge reference grammar of Late Medieval and Early Modern Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Joseph, Brian. 1978 [1990]. Morphology and universals in syntactic change: Evidence from Medieval and Modern Greek. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University dissertation. [Expanded and updated version published by Garland Publishers, (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics Series, 1990)].Google Scholar
. 1980 [1982]. . A new convergence concerning the Balkan loss of the infinitive. Indogermanische Forschungen 851. 176-187.Google Scholar
. 1981a. On the synchrony and diachrony of Modern Greek na . Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 71. 139-154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981b. The Balkan infinitive loss — some methodological problems. In Howard Aronson & Bill Darden (eds.), Studies in Balkan linguistics to honor Eric P. Hamp on his sixtieth birthday, Folia Slavica 4(2-3). 300-308.Google Scholar
. 1983 [2009]. The synchrony and diachrony of the Balkan infinitive: A study in areal, general and historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1985. European Hellenism and Greek nationalism: Some effects of enthnocentrism on Greek linguistic scholarship. Journal of Modern Greek Studies 31. 87-96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Processes of spread for syntactic constructions in the Balkans. In Christos Tzitzilis & Charalambos Symeonidis (eds.), Balkan Linguistik: Synchronie und Diachronie, 139-150. Thessaloniki: University of Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
. 2002. On some control structures in Hellenistic Greek: A comparison with Classical and Modern Greek. Linguistic Discovery 11. 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kapsomenos, Stylianos G. 1985 [2003]. Ἀπὸ τὴν Ἱστορία τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς γλώσσας: Ἡ Ἑλληνικὴ γλώσσα απὸ τὰ Ἑλληνιστικὰ ὣς τὰ Νεότερα χρόνια. Ἡ Ἑλληνικὴ γλώσσα στὴν Αἴγυπτο. Thessaloniki: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis — Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon [Idryma Manoli Triantafyllidi].Google Scholar
Karatsareas, Petros. 2011. A study of Cappadocian Greek nominal morphology from a diachronic and dialectological perspective. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.Google Scholar
Katsoyannou, Marianna. 1995. Le parler greco de Galliciano (Italie): Description d’ une langue en voie de disparition. PhD thesis, University of ParisVII1.Google Scholar
Kavčič, Jerneja. 2005. The syntax of the infinitive and the participle in Early Byzantine Greek: An interpretation in terms of naturalness theory. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Philosophy.Google Scholar
Kobaidze, Manana & Karina Vamling. 1997. Case marking in infinitive (ad-form) clauses in Old Georgian. Lund University Department of Linguistics Working Papers 461. 167-183.Google Scholar
Kontossopoulos, Nikolaos. 1981. Διάλεκτοι καὶ ἰδιώματα τῆς Νέας Ἑλληνικῆς. Athens: Grigoris.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria. 2001. How exotic are non-finite verb forms? Paper presented at the Finiteness Conference. Universität Konstanz, Germany, 12 May.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2). 344-387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lamprogiorgou, Georgia. 2001. Grammatikē toy Hellenikoy idiōmatos tēs sternatias: Gkraitsia salentina-kato Italias Galatina. Lecce, Italy: Congedo.Google Scholar
Lavidas, Nikolaos. 2012. Null vs cognate objects and language contact: Evidence from Hellenistic Greek. In Special Issue on Null objects, Dag Haug & Silvia Luraghi (eds.), Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 44(2). 142-168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowry, Heath. 1977. The Ottoman tahrir defters as a source for urban demographic history: The case of Trabzon (ca. 1463-1583). Los Angeles: UCLA dissertation.Google Scholar
Mackridge, Peter. 1987. Greek-speaking moslems of North-East Turkey: Prolegomena to study of the Ophitic sub-dialect of Pontic. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 111. 115–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995. Τα Ποντιακά στη σημερινή Τουρκία: Αρχαία στοιχεία στο ιδίωμα του ΄Οφη. Αρχείον Πόντου 461. 153-161.Google Scholar
. 1996. The Medieval Greek infinitive in the light of modern dialectal evidence. In Costas N. Constantinides, Nikolaos M. Panagiotakis, Elizabeth Jeffreys & Athanasios D. Angelou (eds.), ΦΙΛΕΛΛΗΝ: Studies in honour of Robert Browning, 191-204. Venice: Istituto ellenico di studi bizantini e postbizantini di Venezia.Google Scholar
. 1999. Η ελληνοφωνία στην περιοχή του Όφη (Πόντος). In Anastasios Phoevos Christidis (ed.), Dialect enclaves of the Greek language, 25-30. Thessaloniki: Centre for the Greek Language.Google Scholar
Manolessou, Io. 2005. From participles to gerunds. In Melita Stavrou & Arhonto Trezi (eds.), Advances in Greek generative syntax1, 241-283. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manolessou, Io & Nikolaos Pantelidis. 2011. Το αρχαίο ελληνικό /ɛː/ στην Ποντιακή. Neoelliniki Dialektologia 61. 245-271.Google Scholar
Markopoulos, Theodore. 2009. The future in Modern Greek: From ancient to medieval. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2009. Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meeker, Michael. 2002. A nation of empire: The Ottoman legacy of Turkish modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Modesto, Marcello. 2010. What Brazilian Portuguese says about control: Remarks on Boeckx & Hornstein. Syntax 131. 78-96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moser, Amalia. 1988. The history of the perfect periphrasis in Greek. Cambridge: University of Cambridge dissertation.Google Scholar
Moulton, James M., Wilbert Francis Howard & Nigel Turner (eds.). 1963–2006. A grammar of New Testament Greek, 4 vols1. London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 2008. From linguistic areas to areal linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oikonomidis, Demosthenes Η. 1958. Γραμματική της ελληνικής διαλέκτου του Πόντου. Athens: Ακαδημία Αθηνών.Google Scholar
Papadopoulos, Anthimos A. 1955. Ιστορική γραμματική της ποντικής διαλέκτου. Athens: Επιτροπή Ποντιακών Μελετών.Google Scholar
Papanastassiou, George C. 2007. Morphology: From Classical Greek to the Koine. In Anastasios-Foivos Christidis, Maria Arapopoulou & Maria Chriti (eds.), A history of Ancient Greek: From the beginnings to late antiquity, 610-617. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. Variation and morphosyntactic change in Greek: From clitics to affixes. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Object clitic placement in the dialects of Medieval Greek. In Mark Janse, Brian D. Joseph & Angela Ralli (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory , 314-328. Mytilene, Greece: University of Patras.Google Scholar
Parcharidis, Ioannis. 1879. Στατιστική τῆς ἐπαρχίας Ὄφεως τoῦ νoμoύ Tραπεζoῦντoς. Παρνασσός 31. 224-232.Google Scholar
. 1880. Γραμματικὴ τῆς διαλέκτου Τραπεζοῦντος: Περὶ ἐπιθέτων, ἀντωνυμιῶν και βαρυτόνων ρημάτων. Χειρόγραφο 335, Κέντρο Ἐρεύνης τῶν Νεοελληνικῶν Διαλέκτων και Ἰδιωμάτων, Ἀκαδημία Αθηνών.
. 1888. Συλλoγὴ ζώντων μνημείων τῆς ἀρχαίας ἑλληνικῆς γλώσσης ἐν Ὄφει. Ὁ ἐν Kωνσταντινoυπόλει Ἐλληνικός Φιλoλoγικὸς Σύλλoγoς 18(1883-1884). 120-178.Google Scholar
Reis Meira, Édson. 2010. Η εξέλιξη του απαρεμφάτου από τις πρώτες γραπτές μαρτυρίες της Ελληνικής έως την Κοινή Νεοελληνική και τις νεοελληνικές διαλέκτους. Athens: National and Kapodistrian University of Athens dissertation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohlfs, Gerhard. 1950 [1977]. Grammatica storica dei dialetti italogreci (Calabria, Salento). Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
. 1969. Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti, vol. 3, Sintassi e formazione delle parole, transl. Salvatore Persichino. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Sandfeld, Kristian. 1930. Linguistique balkanique: Problèmes et résultats (Collection linguistique publiée de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 31). Paris: Librairie ancienne Honoré Champion. [First published in Copenhagen in 1926 as Balkanfilologien: en oversigt over dens resultater og problemer.]Google Scholar
Sitaridou, Ioanna. 2000. Non-finiteness in Old Neapolitan and Modern Greek. In Agathoklis Charalampopoulos & Maria Karali (eds.), The 21st Annual Meeting of the Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Philosophy, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki1, 700-712. Thessaloniki: Kyriakidis.Google Scholar
. 2002. The synchrony and diachrony of Romance infinitives with nominative subjects. Manchester: University of Manchester dissertation.Google Scholar
. 2006. The (dis)association of Tense, phi-features, EPP and nominative Case: Case studies from Romance and Greek. In João Costa & Maria Cristina Figueiredo Silva (eds.), Studies on agreement, 243-260. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007a. Romance infinitives with subjects, subjunctive obviation and control theory. In Luis Eguren & Olga Fernandez Soriano (eds.), Coreference, modality and focus: Studies on the syntax-semantics interface, 191-219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007b. Infinitives with subjects in Greek and Southern Italian dialects: A Sprachbund effect. In Delia Bentley & Adam Ledgeway (eds.), Sui Dialetti Italoromanzi. Saggi in Onore di Nigel B. Vincent (The Italianist 27, Special Supplement), 221-242. London: Maney.Google Scholar
. 2009a. On the emergence of personal infinitives in the history of Spanish. Diachronica 26(1). 36-64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. How can we tell? Investigating contact induced change in the historical record. Paper presented at the ‘Grammatical Development’ Symposium in honour of Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Jürgen Meisel, University of Hamburg, 13 March.
. 2011. Non-control in Greek and Ibero-Romance: Lessons to teach each other. Paper presented at the University of São Paulo, 24 October.
. 2012. The null objects in Romeyka and the Turkish dialects of Trebizond: A case of reciprocal contact-induced change or internal conditioning? The Second workshop on Romeyka and Asia Minor Greek , Queens’ College, Cambridge, 1 April.
. 2013. Greek-speaking enclaves in Pontus today: The documentation and revitalization of Romeyka. In Mari Jones & Sarah Ogilvie (eds.), Language endangerment: Documentation, pedagogy and revitalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. Forthcoming. Modality, antiveridicality, and complementation: The Romeyka infinitive as a negative polarity item. Lingua. DOI logo
Sitaridou, Ioanna & Stergios Chatzikyriakidis. 2012. Cultural survival shifts focus: The case of Pontic Greek. Paper presented at “When empires clash: Modern-day outcomes of historical Greek and Turkish language encounters”, MedWorlds 4, 29 Mayis University, Istanbul, 7 September.
Sitaridou, Ioanna & Marina Terkourafi. 2009. On the loss of the masculine genitive plural in Cypriot Greek: Language contact or internal evolution? In Monique Dufresne, Fernande Dupuis & Etleva Vocaj (eds.), Historical linguistics 2007: Selected papers from the 18th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Montréal, Québec, 6-11 August 2007, 161-173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina. 2005. Understanding the present through the past: Processes of koineization on Cyprus. Diachronica 22(2). 309-372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thumb, Albert. 1914. On the value of Modern Greek for the study of Ancient Greek. The Classical Quarterly 8(3). 181-205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tombaidis, Dimitrios E. 1977 [1996]. L’infinitif dans le dialecte grec du Pont Euxin. Balkan Studies 18(1). 155-174.Google Scholar
Tonnet, Henri. 1993. Histoire du grec modern: La formation d’unelangue. (Les Langues à l’INALCO). Paris: L’Asiathèque.Google Scholar
Triantafyllides, Manolis. 1938 [2002]. Νεοελληνικὴ γραμματική , vol. 1, Ἱστορικὴ εἰσαγωγή. Thessaloniki: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis — Institouto Neoellinikon Spoudon [Idryma Manoli Triantafyllidi].Google Scholar
Tsetskhladze, Gocha R. 2008. Greek colonization: An account of Greek colonies and other settlements overseas, 2 vols1. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi, Antonella Sorace, Caroline Heycock & Francesca Filiaci. 2004. First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism 8(3). 257-277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tuite, Kevin. 1999. The myth of the Caucasian Sprachbund: The case of ergativity. Lingua 1081. 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vryonis, Speros. 1986. The decline of medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor: And the process of Islamization from the eleventh through the fifteenth century (Publications of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Willis, David. 2011. A minimalist approach to Jespersen’s cycle in Welsh. In Dianne Jonas, John Whitman & Andrew Garrett (eds.), Grammatical change: Origins, natures, outcomes, 93–119. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wouden, Ton van der. 2001. Three modal verbs. In Sheila Watts, Jonathan West & Hans-Joachim Solms (eds.), Zur Verbmorphologie germanischer Sprachen, 189–210. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and clause structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cited by (18)

Cited by 18 other publications

Davranoglou, Leonidas-Romanos, Leonidas Embirikos & Dipima Buragohain
2023. Toad zoonyms mirror the linguistic and demographic history of Greece. PLOS ONE 18:3 ► pp. e0283136 ff. DOI logo
Saglam, Erol
2023. Ethnographies of the Psychosocial. In The Palgrave Handbook of Psychosocial Studies, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Saglam, Erol
2024. Ethnographies of the Psychosocial. In The Palgrave Handbook of Psychosocial Studies, ► pp. 967 ff. DOI logo
Sağlam, Erol
2021. Intimate and yet Alienated. Études arméniennes contemporaines :13 ► pp. 105 ff. DOI logo
Sitaridou, Ioanna & Jerneja Kavčič
2023. Petnajst let terenskih raziskav romejščine: ključne ugotovitve o jeziku ter o njegovem razvoju, vitalnosti in možnostih preživetja. Keria: Studia Latina et Graeca 25:2 ► pp. 9 ff. DOI logo
Armostis, Spyros, Louiza Voniati, Konstantinos Drosos & Dionysios Tafiadis
2022. Trapezountian Pontic Greek in Etoloakarnania. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 52:2 ► pp. 328 ff. DOI logo
BAGRIACIK, METIN & LIEVEN DANCKAERT
2022. Raising and matching in Pharasiot Greek relative clauses: A diachronic reconstruction. Journal of Linguistics 58:3 ► pp. 495 ff. DOI logo
Berikashvili, Svetlana
2022. Contact-Induced Change in the Domain of Grammatical Gender in Pontic Greek Spoken in Georgia. Languages 7:2 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Neocleous, Nicolaos & Ioanna Sitaridou
2022. Never just contact. Diachronica 39:3 ► pp. 369 ff. DOI logo
Gardner‐Chloros, Penelope
2020. Contact and Code‐Switching. In The Handbook of Language Contact, ► pp. 181 ff. DOI logo
Ralli, Angela
2020. Matter versus pattern borrowing in compounding: Evidence from the Asia Minor Greek dialectal variety. Morphology 30:4 ► pp. 423 ff. DOI logo
Joseph, Brian D.
2019. Can there be language continuity in language contact?. In Language Contact, Continuity and Change in the Genesis of Modern Hebrew [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 256], ► pp. 257 ff. DOI logo
Schreiber, Laurentia & Ioanna Sitaridou
2018. Assessing the sociolinguistic vitality of Istanbulite Romeyka: an attitudinal study. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 39:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Dragomirescu, Adina & Alexandru Nicolae
2016. Originea formelor verbale „nonfinite” cu flexiune: infinitiv vs supin. Diacronia :4 DOI logo
Dragomirescu, Adina & Alexandru Nicolae
2016. On the origin of inflected “non-finite” forms: the infinitive vs the supine. Diacronia :4 DOI logo
Lekakou, Marika & Josep Quer
2016. Subjunctive mood in Griko: A micro-comparative approach. Lingua 174 ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Sitaridou, Ioanna
2014. Modality, antiveridicality and complementation: The Romeyka infinitive as a negative polarity item. Lingua 148 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Sitaridou, Ioanna & Maria Kaltsa
2014. Contrastivity in Pontic Greek. Lingua 146 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 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.