Cover not available
Part of
Non-Canonically Case-Marked Subjects: The Reykjavík-Eyjafjallajökull papers
Edited by Jóhanna Barðdal, Na'ama Pat-El and Stephen Mark Carey
[Studies in Language Companion Series 200] 2018
► pp. 155–180

Chapter 7
The diachrony of non-canonical subjects in Northwest Semitic

| University of Texas, Austin
A syntactic pattern involving non-canonical subject marking in some Northwest-Semitic languages is fascinating for two reasons: (1) it cannot be reconstructed to the proto-language and it must have developed relatively late in the history of the family, which affords us an opportunity to observe its development through textual attestations (cf. Barðdal & Eythórsson 2009); (2) the predication is by and large non-verbal, which seems to counter explanations based on passive derivations and agentivity as a possible origin (Haspelmath 2001). I suggest instead that non-canonical subjects originated from free datives in clauses where the typical agreement cannot be applied. In such cases, the dative, which is animate, definite and associated with the subject, eventually outranked the original subject, which is typically a nominalization and never animate or definite. I further discuss the special features of the non-canonical subject and argue that it is quite stable.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
  • 3.Subjecthood
    • 3.1Word order
    • 3.2Definiteness
    • 3.3Non-deletability of the preposition
    • 3.4Control
  • 4.Historical scenario
    • 4.1Biblical Hebrew
    • 4.2Rabbinic Hebrew
    • 4.3Modern Hebrew
  • 5.Theoretical implications
  • 6.Summary and conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 2 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.200.07pat
References (43)
References
Arnold, Bill T. & Choi, John H. 2003. A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Azar, Moshe. 1995. The Syntax of Mishnaic Hebrew (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: The Academy of the Hebrew Language and University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2009. The origin of the oblique subject construction: An Indo-European comparison. In Grammatical Change in Indo-European Languages [Current Issue in Linguistic Theory 305], Vit Bubenik, John Hewson & Sarah Rose (eds), 179–193. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. ‘Hungering and lusting for women and fleshly delicacies’: Reconstructing grammatical relations for Proto-Germanic. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(3): 363–393.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Smitherman, Thomas, Bjarnadóttir, Valgerður, Jenset, Gard B. & McGillivray, Barbara. 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.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna & Smitherman, Thomas. 2013. The quest for cognates: A reconstruction of oblique subject constructions in Proto-Indo-European. Language Dynamics and Change 3(1): 28–67.Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Arnett, Carlee, Carey, Stephen Mark, Eythórsson, Thórhallur, Jenset, Gard B., Kroonen, Guus & Oberlin, Adam. 2016. Dative subjects in Germanic. STUF-Language Typology and Universals 69(1): 49–84.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, Ruth. 1978. Modern Hebrew Structure. Tel-Aviv: University Publishing Projects.Google Scholar
. 1980. The case of an (S)VO language, subjectless constructions in Modern Hebrew. Language 56: 759–776.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blau, Joshua. 2010. Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew: An Introduction. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Brustad, Kristen. 2000. The Syntax of Spoken Arabic. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Coghill, Eleanor. 2016. The Rise and Fall of Ergativity in Aramaic: Cycles of Alignment Change. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubnov, Keren. 2008. Adjectives as predicates in non-canonical structures in early Modern Hebrew (in Hebrew). Iggud 3: 31–40.Google Scholar
Dyk, Janet W. & Talstra, Eep. 1999. Paradigmatic and syntagmatic features in identifying subject and predicate in nominal clauses. In The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, Cynthia L. Miller (ed.), 133–185. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur & Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2005. Oblique subjects: A common Germanic inheritance. Language 81(4): 824–881.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldenberg, Gideon. 2006. On grammatical agreement and verb-initial sentences. In Loquented linguis. Studi linguistici e orientali in onore di Fabrizio A. Pennaccietti, Pier Giorgio Borbone, Alessandro Mengozzi & Mauro Tosco (eds), 329–335. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. 2007. Actants and diathesis, directions of transitivity &c.: Some Satzgestaltungen and their background in Semitic and elsewhere. In From Beyond the Mediterranean, Rainer M. Voigt (ed.), 283–295. Aachen: Shaker.Google Scholar
. 2013. Semitic Languages: Features, Structures, Relations, Processes. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. Non-canonical marking of core arguments in European languages. In Non-Canonical Marking of Subjects and Objects [Typological Studies in Language 46], Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, Robert M. W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds), 53–83. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasselbach, Rebecca. 2013. Case in Semitic: Roles, Relations, and Reconstruction. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Izre’el, Shlomo. 2012. Canaano-Akkadian: Linguistics and sociolinguistics. In Language and Nature: Papers Presented to John Huehnergard on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Rebecca Hasselbach & Na’ama Pat-El (eds), 171–218. Chicago IL: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Jenni, Ernst. 2000. Die hebräischen Präpositionen, Band 3: Die Präposition Lamed. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
Joosten, Jan. 1989. The function of the so-called dativus ethicus in classical Syriac. Orientalia 58: 473–492.Google Scholar
Joüon, Paul & Muraoka, Takamitsu. 2000. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico.Google Scholar
Kidron, Yael & Kuzar, Ron. 2002. My face is paling against my will: Emotion and control in English and Hebrew. Pragmatics & Cognition 10(1): 129–157.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kouwenberg, N. J. C. (Bert). 2002. Ventive, dative and allative in Old Babylonian. ZA 92(2): 200–240.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuzar, Ron. 1993. The impersonal predicate: A part of speech or a syntactic position? (in Hebrew). Leshonenu 56(3): 241–248.Google Scholar
. 2012. Sentence Patterns in English and Hebrew [Constructional Approaches to Language 12]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Loesov, Sergey. 2006. Marginalia on the Akkadian ventive. Babel und Bibel 3: 101–132.Google Scholar
Miller, Cynthia. 1999. Pivotal issues in analyzing the verbless clause. In The Verbless Clause in Biblical Hebrew, Cynthia Miller (ed.), 3–17. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Terence Frederick & El-Hassan, Shahir. 1992. Modality, Mood and Aspect in Spoken Arabic. London: Routledge/Kegal Paul.Google Scholar
Mohammad, Mohammad A. 2000. Word Order, Agreement and Pronominalization in Standard and Palestinian Arabic [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 181]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mor, Uri & Pat-El, Na’ama. 2016) The development of predicates with prepositional subjects in Hebrew. Journal of Semitic Studies 61(2): 327–346.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moshavi, Adina. 2010. Word order in the Biblical Hebrew Finite Clause: A Syntactic and Pragmatic Analysis of Preposing. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Rainey, Anson F. 1996. Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets: A Linguistic Analysis of the Mixed Dialect used by Scribes from Canaan, Vol. 4. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Rosén, Haim B. 1977. Contemporary Hebrew. The Hague: Mouton.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubin, Aaron D. 2010. The Mehri Language of Oman. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, Eliezer. 1969. The Nominal Sentence (in Hebrew). Ha-Kibbutz Ha-Meuxad.Google Scholar
Seržant, Ilja A. 2013. The diachronic typology of non-canonical subjects and subject-like obliques. In The Diachronic Typology of Non-prototypical Subjects [Studies in Language Companion Series 140], Ilja A. Seržant & Leonid Kulikov (eds), 317–364. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ullendorff, Edward. 1992. Some observations on the dativus ethicus in Semitics and elsewhere. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 15: 1–9.Google Scholar
Zewi, Tamar. 2012. Prepositional phrases as subjects in several Semitic languages. In Language and Nature: Papers Presented to John Huehnergard on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, Rebecca Hasselbach & Na’ama Pat-El (eds), 465–476. Chicago IL: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Becker, Israela
2023. It’s all about the sentential construction. Studies in Language 47:2 ► pp. 463 ff. DOI logo
Halevy, Rivka
2022. What makes the dative-experiencer construction in Modern Hebrew different from its counterparts in European languages?. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 75:3 ► pp. 379 ff. DOI logo
Notarius, Tania
2022. Passive, Stative, and Impersonal in Ugaritic: The G-stem Internal Passive Reconsidered. Journal for Semitics 31:1 DOI logo
Notarius, Tania
2022. Impersonal Verbal Constructions in Biblical Hebrew: Active, Stative, and Passive. Journal for Semitics 30:2 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic [Semitic Languages and Cultures, 5], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.