Cover not available
Part of
Language Variation - European Perspectives VII: Selected papers from the Ninth International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 9), Malaga, June 2017
Edited by Juan-Andrés Villena-Ponsoda, Francisco Díaz Montesinos, Antonio Manuel Ávila-Muñoz and Matilde Vida-Castro
[Studies in Language Variation 22] 2019
► pp. 231–244

Chapter 15
The past perfect in Cypriot Greek

Innovation because – or irrespective – of contact?

| Open University of Cyprus
| European University Cyprus
| National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
| Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
| National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
The Cypriot Greek koine displays structural innovations, arguably as a result of prolonged contact with Standard Greek (SG), the ‘H’ variety in the diglossic context of the Greek Cypriot speech community. Periphrastic perfect forms are among such innovations. As regards the Past Perfect, in Standard Greek it has the principal reading of past in the past, as well as a remote past use; in contrast, the Cypriot Greek Past Perfect is largely interchangeable with the Aorist (Simple Perfective Past) and it may be deployed for pragmatic purposes, e.g. to mark an important point in a narrative, possibly due to its relative formality. In recent work it was claimed that this innovation is specific to Cypriot Greek. This paper revisits this hypothesis on the basis of the observation that Standard Greek also seems to display partly similar patterns. Using naturalistic data and data from a grammaticality judgement task, we explore (a) whether such variation is sociolinguistically conditioned and (b) what the semantics and pragmatics of the innovative Past Perfect are in each variety.
Keywords: Cypriot Greek, contact, diglossia, Past Perfect, Standard Greek
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Periphrastic Perfect tenses
    • 2.1Periphrastic Perfect tenses in Standard Greek
    • 2.2The history of the Perfect paradigm in Greek
    • 2.3Semantic innovation
  • 3.Periphrastic Perfect tenses in Cypriot Greek
  • 4.The study
    • 4.1Results and discussion
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.22.15tsi
References (36)
References
Arvaniti, A. 2010. Linguistic practices in Cyprus and the emergence of Cypriot Standard Greek. Mediterranean Language Review 17. 15–45.Google Scholar
Bella, S. 2003. Ο αφηγηματικός τάσεις στην ελληνική γλωσσολογία: πραγματολογική–γνωστική προσέγγιση. [The narrative Present Perfect in Modern Greek: A pragmatic-cognitive approach]. In D. Theophanopoulou-Kontou, C. Lascaratou, M. Sifianou, M. Georgiafentis and V. Spyropoulos (eds.), Σύγχρονες τάσεις στην Ελληνική γλωσσολογία: Μελέτες αφιερωμένες στην Ειρήνη Φιλιππάκη–Warburton. [Contemporary trends in Greek linguistics: Studies in honor of Irene Philippaki-Warburton], 357–374. Athens: Patakis.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P.M. 2014. Non conventional uses of the Pluperfect in Italian (and German) literary prose. In E. Labeau and J. Bres (eds.), Evolution in Romance verbal systems, 145–170. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Chantraine, P. 1927. Histoire du parfait grec. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. 1985. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Contosopoulos, N. 1969. Συμβολή εις την μελέτην της κυπριακής διαλέκτου. [A contribution to the study of the Cypriot dialect]. Επετηρίς του Κέντρου Επιστημονικών Ερευνών [Yearbook of the Scientific Research Center] 3. 87–109.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. (ed..) 2000. Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Berlin-New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannaris, T. 2011. Pluperfect periphrases in Medieval Greek: A perspective on the collaboration between linguistics and philology. Transactions of the Philological Society 109 (3). 232–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guy, G.R. 2013. The cognitive coherence of sociolects: How do speakers handle multiple sociolinguistic variables? Journal of Pragmatics 52. 63–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hadjioannou, X., S. Tsiplakou and M. Kappler. 2011. Language policy and language planning in Cyprus. Current Issues in Language Planning 12. 503–569. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hatzidakis, G. N. 1905. Μεσαιωνικά και Νέα Ελληνικά. [Medieval and Modern Greek]. Volume I. Athens: Sakellariou.Google Scholar
Hinskens, F., P. Auer and P. Kerswill. 2005. The study of dialect convergence and divergence: Conceptual and methodological considerations. In P. Auer, F. Hinskens and P. Kerswill (eds.), Dialect change. Convergence and divergence in European languages, 1–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hinskens, F. 2014. Despite or because of intensive contact? Internal, external and extralinguistic aspects of divergence in modern dialects and ethnolects of Dutch. In K. Braunmüller, S. Höder and K. Kühl (eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact: Factors and mechanisms, 109–140. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Klairis, C., G. Babiniotis, A. Moser and C. Skopeteas. 2005. Γραμματική της Νέας Ελληνικής. [A grammar of Modern Greek]. Athens: Ellinika Grammata.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 2001. Principles of linguistic change. Volume 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Melissaropoulou, D., C. Themistocleous, S. Tsiplakou, S. and S. Tsolakidis. 2013. The present perfect in Cypriot Greek revisited. In P. Auer, J. Caro Reina and G. Kaufmann (eds.), Studies in language variation – European perspectives IV. Selected papers from the 6tʰ International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 6), University of Freiburg, 27 June – 1 July 2011, 159–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Menardos, S. 1969 [1925]. Κυπριακή Γραμματική. Γ΄. Ρήματα [Cypriot grammar. C: Verbs]. Athena 37. 35–79. Reprinted in Menardos, S. 1969. Γλωσσικαί Mελέται. [Language studies]. Nicosia: Cyprus Centre for Scientific Research.Google Scholar
Moser, A. 1988. The history of perfect periphrases in Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. Tense, aspect and the Greek perfect. In A. Alexiadou, M. Rathert and A. von Stechow (eds.), Perfect explorations, 235–252. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newton, B. 1972. Cypriot Greek: Its phonology and inflections. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedin, E. 1987. On the use of the perfect and the pluperfect in Modern Greek. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Newton, B. 1983. Stylistic levels in Cypriot Greek. Mediterranean Language Review 1. 55–63.Google Scholar
Papapavlou, A. and A. Sophocleous. 2009. Language attitudes and folk perceptions towards linguistic variation. In S. Tsiplakou, M. Karyolemou and P. Pavlou (eds.), Studies in language variation – European perspectives II, 179–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ralli, A., D. Melissaropoulou and S. Tsolakidis. 2007. Ο παρακείμενος στη νέα ελληνική και στις διαλέκτους: παρατηρήσεις για τη μορφή και την εξέλιξή του. [The present perfect in Standard Modern Greek and its dialects: Remarks on its form and evolution]. Studies in Greek Linguistics 27. 361–372.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. 1947. Elements of symbolic logic. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rickford, J.R. and C. Théberge Rafal. 1996. Preterite had + V-ed in the narratives of African-American preadolescents. American Speech 71. 227–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rowe, C. and K.K. Grohmann. 2013. Discrete bilectalism: Towards co-overt prestige and diglossic shift in Cyprus. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 224. 119–142.Google Scholar
Tsiplakou, S., A. Papapavlou, P. Pavlou and M. Katsoyannou. 2006. Levelling, koineisation and their implications for bidialectalism. In F. Hinskens (ed.), Languge variation - European perspectives. Selected papers from the 3rd International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 3) University of Amsterdam, 23–25 June 2005: 265–276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsiplakou, S. 2009a. Code-switching or code-mixing between related varieties: Establishing the blueprint. The International Journal of Humanities 6. 49–66.Google Scholar
. 2009b. Γλωσσική εναλλαγή, ανταγωνιστικές γραμματικές και διαγλώσσα: ακόμα μια διάσταση του «κυπριακού». [Language alternation, competing grammars and interlanguage: Another facet of the Cyprus problem]. In G.K. Giannakis, M. Baltazani, G. J. Xydopoulos and A. Tsangalidis (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Greek Linguistics (Ioannina, 30/8–2/9/2007), 1195–1209. Ioannina: University of Ioannina.Google Scholar
Tsiplakou, S. 2010. Εναλλαγή και μείξη κωδίκων σε συνθήκες γλωσσικής επαφής: η περίπτωση της σύγχρονης κυπριακής διαλέκτου. [Code-switching and code-mixing in situations of language contact: The case of contemporary Cypriot Greek]. In A. Voskos, D. Goutsos and A. Moser (eds.), Η ελληνική γλώσσα στην Κύπρο από την αρχαιότητα ως σήμερα. [The Greek Language in Cyprus from antiquity to the present], 228–241. Athens: National and Capodistrian University of Athens.Google Scholar
Tsiplakou, S. 2014a. How mixed is a mixed system? The case of the Cypriot Greek koiné. Linguistic variation. Special Issue: Three Factors and Beyond, vol. I: Socio-Syntax and Language Acquisition. 161–179.Google Scholar
. 2014b. Does convergence generate stability? The case of the Cypriot Greek koiné. In K. Braunmüller, S. Höder and K. Kühl (eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact: Factors and mechanisms, 163–178. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Tsiplakou, S., S. Armostis and D. Evripidou. 2016. Coherence ‘in the mix’? Coherence in the face of language shift in Cypriot Greek. Lingua 172–173. 10–25.Google Scholar
Vasiliou, E. 2014. The pluperfect in standard and Cypriot Greek. M. A. Dissertation, Open University of Cyprus.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Rowe, Charley
2024. Di(a)glossia and Political Ideology in Grecophone Cyprus Moribundity Resistance, Diglossic Nostalgia, and a Sociolinguistic ‘Buffer Zone’ . In Heritage Languages and Variation , DOI logo
Tsiplakou, Stavroula & Spyros Armostis
2020. Chapter 9. Survival of the ‘oddest’?. In Intermediate Language Varieties [Studies in Language Variation, 24], ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.