Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the II generation IE languages

Full text

Strong adjectives, and similar
phenomena, in the II generation
IE languages
Artemij Keidan, Sapienza University of Rome
Pisa – Oxford, Joint Colloquia in Indo-European Linguistics:
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Problem setting
➡The conferences is about variation and contact
–Contact phenomena are often under our eyes
➡NP modi!er marking: no adjective class in PIE
–Di"erent strategies in the “II generation” IE
languages
–Common initial innovation: contact?
2

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
“Generations” of the IE family
➡Generation 0: PIE
➡I Generation: Vedic Sanskrit, Gathic Avestan, Old
Persian, Homeric Greek
➡II Generation: Prakrits, Middle Iranian varieties,
Common Slavic, Common Germanic
➡III Generation: Modern Slavic, Germanic and
Romance languages
3

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Basic assumptions
➡PIE and I Gen. languages
–no morphological/syntactic distinction between
adjectival modi!ers and nominal epithets
➡Qualities expressed by stative verbs or nominal
epithets
–no class of primary adjectives can be reconstructed
4

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Basic assumptions
➡Many nominals are either N or A
–RV devà- ‘god’ (N), but also ‘devine’ (A)
–OCS drugŭ ‘friend’ (N), but also ‘other’ (A)
➡Same endings for N and A
–Degree su#xes can add to bare roots: RV yájīyāṁs
‘sacri!cing better’
5

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Hypothesis
➡This system was unstable
–Nominal $ections underwent phonetic deletion
–Constituency and dependency needed a better
marking
➡Many II Gen. languages form new adjectives…
–…or equivalent means of marking the NP modi!ers
6

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Hypothesis
➡A common solution was:
NHEAD + NMOD → NHEAD + REL + NMOD
➡Grammaticalisation took di"erent paths
–but can be described uniformly with parameters
➡What parameters?
–Those describing the way dependency is marked
7

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Morphological parameters
➡Locus of marking:
•dependent-marking: special endings for adjectives
•head-marking: Persian ezāfe
•double marking: redundant article in Greek
•alternant marking: perhaps in Prakrit
8

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Morphological parameters
➡Position with respect to the stem:
–pre-posed (e.g. Greek article)
–post-posed (e.g. adjectival endings in Slavic, Persian
ezāfe)
➡Degree of morphologic autonomy:
–clitic morpheme (article, ezāfe)
–bound morpheme (adjectival endings)
9

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Morphological parameters
➡Source:
–relative pronoun
–demonstrative pronoun
–pronominal endings
…this distinction could be late
10

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Avestan
➡Relative pronoun ya- < IE *i̯o- is used as “quasi-
article”
–no verb
–no correlative
–case agreement with the antecedent N
11

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Avestan
➡Distribution
–more frequent and complex in Young Avestan
–some examples also in Vedic
…but the case attraction is scarcely attested
12

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Avestan
➡Usually located between head and modi!er:
stārəm yəm tištrīm ‘the star Tištriya’
hača zəmat̰ yat̰ paθanayā̊ ‘from the wide earth’
raocə̄bīš […] yāiš ahurahē mazdā̊ ‘with the light of AM’
yə̄ drəguuā̊ ‘the evil one’
13

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Vedic
➡Few examples with case agreement
aditir ya duhitar tava ‘Aditi, the daughter of yours’
pári ṇaḥ pāhi yád dhánam ‘protect of us what the wealth’
paúruṣeyaṃ vadháṃ yám ‘death caused by men’
14

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Old Persian
➡As in Avestan but relative pronoun haya is used
–perhaps from Indo-Iranian *sa- + *ya-
–case agreement with antecedent is well attested
15

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Old Persian
Gaumāta haya maguš ‘Gaumata the magian’
martiya haya draujana ‘the lying man’
Bardiya […] haya Kurauš puça ‘Bardiya, the son of Cyrus’
hayā amāxam taumā ‘our family’
Dārayavauš haya manā pitā ‘Darius, my father’
xšāyaθiya dahạyūnām tayaišām parūnām ‘king of many
lands’
16

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Middle Persian
➡OP haya- agglutinates to the head noun
–hence the ezāfe in (Manichaean) Middle Persian
MP, ManMP ʿy(g) (phonetically ī) → New Pers. -i
–head-marking, clitic, phrase morpheme
–can be nested
17

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Middle Persian
➡Middle Persian (on its way from REL to EZ):
sr ʿy wyspʾn wyhyhʾn ‘the head of all wisdoms’
nwhzʾdg ʿyg trkwmʾn ‘Nuhzadag the interpreter’
nwg ʿspsg ʿy nyw frzynd ʿy whmn ‘the new bishop, the
worthy son of Wahman’
18

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Middle (and New) Persian
➡In New Persian the ezāfe is fully grammaticalised
–no overt noun/adjectives distinction
lab-i laʾl ‘a ruby lip’
laʾl-i lab ‘the ruby of the lip’
19

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡New article is created: ὁ, ἡ, τό
–from IE demonstrative pronoun *so, *seH₂, *tod
–in Homer very often still demonstrative
–In homer partly overlapping with the relative
ὅς, ἥ, ὅ < IE *i̯os, *i̯eH₂, *i̯od
20

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡Three patterns of N, A and Art are attested:
1. ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἀνήρ (Art A N)
2. ὁ ἀνὴρ ὁ ἀγαθός (Art N Art A)
3. ἀνὴρ ὁ ἀγαθός (N Art A)
➡Pattern 3 resembles Iranian “quasi-article”
–Gaumāta haya maguš vs. Ζεύς ὁ κύριος
21

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡Examples of post-nominal ὁ, ἡ, τό
πρὸς Κροῖσον τὸν Λυδῶν βασιλέα ‘to Croesus, the
king of Lydians’ (Cyropaedia 1.5.3)
Βίας ὁ Πριηνεύς ‘Bias from Priene’
➡Example of verbless ὅς, ἥ, ὅ
Τεῦκρός θ᾽ὃς ἄριστος Ἀχαιῶν τοξοσύνῃ ‘Teucer,
the best of Achaeans in bowmanship’ (Il. 13.313)
22

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡Demonstrative vs. relative:
–the two pronouns are almost homophonous
both were called ἄρθρον ‘joint’ by the Greeks
–functionally overlapping
in general and in Homer (plus some dialects)
23

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡Demonstrative as relative
εἴπω τά με θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι κελεύει
‘I say what the mind in the breast bids me’
➡Relative as demonstrative:
ὃς γὰρ δεύτατος ἦλθεν Ἀχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
‘for he was the last to reach home of the brazen-coated
Achaeans’
24

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
➡Distribution varies diachronically
–verbless relatives only in Homer
–post-nominal article disappears gradually from
Homer onwards
virtually no examples in the Attic oratory
25

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Greek
26
ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἀνήρ
ὁ ἀνὴρ ὁ ἀγαθός
ἀνὴρ ὁ ἀγαθός
Homer
common
any
common
Herodotus
common
rare
some
Thucydides
common
rare
some
Tragedy
prevalent
some
some
Aristophanes
prevalent
some
rare
Xenophon
prevalent
some
rare
Attic oratory
prevalent
common
any

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Slavic
➡Long adjectives by agglutination of jĭ, ja, je < IE *i̯os,
*i̯eH₂, *i̯od
–dependent marking
–bound rather than clitic (but hiatus and internal
in$ection are allowed)
–conjunction reduction is allowed
–today short adjectives are rare
27

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Slavic
➡Examples:
mǫžŭ dobrŭjĭ ‘the good man’
mǫža dobrajego ‘of the good man’
vŭpadŭšajego i prězĭrěna ‘of the fallen and despised
one’ (Suprasliensis)
28

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Lithuanian
➡Similar to Slavic, but di"erent distribution
gẽrą jį šùnį ‘good dog’ (Acc.)
–short adjectives are normal, long are rare
mostly in idioms
29

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Germanic
➡Creation of the so-called strong adjectives
–strong endings are of pronominal origin
–perhaps, originally agglutinated pronouns
–the de!niteness is reversed with respect to Slavic
30

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Prakrit
➡Locative (often absolute) has two variant endings
–the longer -ammi from Skt pronominal ending -asmin
–the shorter -e/-i, from Skt nominal ending
➡Distribution: alternant
–in Hala’s Sattasaï every long ending agrees with a
short one
31

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Prakrit
➡Pischel
–free, or metri causa, alternation
➡Woolner
–The two often come together
➡ My proposal
–phrasal marker of dependency?
32

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Prakrit
➡Loc -ammi either on head or on modi!er
diṭṭhe sarisammi guṇe ‘viewing similar quality’
putte samāruhattammi ‘[when] the son [has] climbed up’
vāsuikaṃkaṇammi osārie ‘[being] the snake-bracelet
removed’
33

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Pāli
➡Similarly in Pāli, in Ablative and Locative (often
absolute):
setamhi chatte anudhāriyamāne ‘[with a] white umbrella
held above’
kassapamhi bhagavati ‘[while] Lord Kassapa’
34

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Khotanese
➡Two sets of endings in Late Khotanese:
–shorter ones for nouns (usually just one vowel)
–longer ones, of pronominal origin, for adjectives
–adjectival endings are in the oblique cases
–origin is debatable: agglutination is not to be excluded
35

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Khotanese
➡Oblique endings with nasal element
–perhaps from a pronominal stem *ana- as in Slavic
onŭ ‘he’, Lithuanian anàs ‘that’
LocSg m: -aña, -äña; f: -iña
Inst/AblSg m: -ana, -äna; f: -äñe, -äñi
36

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Khotanese
➡Examples:
ysäṣṭäye hvąʾndä ‘of/to hated man’
hastamäna śīlna ‘by best e"ort’
natäña rahāśśa ‘in deep secret’
37

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Conclusions
➡A contact-induced innovation can be suggested
–Center of the innovation: Avestan, Persian, Slavic
–Later attestation: Germanic, Khotanese and Prakrit
–Early contact, eventually diverging: Greek, Lithuanian
38

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Conclusions
➡Common innovation, not IE inheritance
–di"erent pronominal sources are used
➡Distinguishes unrelated languages of II generation
–isogloss or just a natural development?
➡Di"erent outcomes in modern languages
–same initial innovation
39

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Evolution types
40
Prototype
Head REL Modi!er
Persian
Head EZ Modi!er
Slavic, Germanic,
Prakrits, Khotanese
Head Modi!er-ADJ
Greek
Head ART Modi!er

A. Keidan – Strong adjectives, and similar phenomena, in the second generation IE languages
Variation and Contact in the Ancient Indo-European languages
Parameters
41
source
locus
autonomy
position
Greek
demonstrative
or relative
double
clitic
pre-
Persian
relative
head
(increasingly)
bound
-post
Slavic
modi!er
Germanic
pronominal
endings
(pronouns?)
Khotanese
Middle Indic
alternant?