122. The morphology of Proto-Indo-European

Lundquist, Jesse; Yates, Anthony D.

doi:10.1515/9783110542431-043

Cited by 47 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Germanic and Balto‐Slavic exponents, with the ‘Northern IE’ (Jasanoff 2009: 138) substitution of */‐m‐/ for */‐b ɦ ‐/, are considered innovations (see further Hill 2012: 178–92). */‐b ɦ is/ is thought to have developed after the departure of Anatolian (Jasanoff 2009: 139; Lundquist & Yates 2018: 2088), since the instrumental plural markers in Anatolian (e.g., Hittite ‐ it , ‐ d/ta ) are not cognate with the exponents in Table 10 33…”

Section: Diachronymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Homeric ‐phi(n)is an oblique case marker1

Goldstein

2020

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The synchronic distribution and diachronic trajectory of Homeric-phi(n) have been the source of long-standing debate, with the result that scholarly opinion has yet to settle on a consensus regarding the morphosyntax of forms realized by this marker. Some maintain that forms in-phi(n) are adverbs, while others contend that they are nominals (i.e., nouns or adjectives). Evidence from agreement and prepositional phrases shows that the latter analysis is correct. Homeric-phi(n) is therefore a case exponent. More specifically, it is an oblique case marker that realizes genitive or dative case in the singular, dual, or plural across all three grammatical genders. Since other case markers exist in the language for realizing genitive and dative case, forms in-phi(n) are an example of morphological OVERABUNDANCE, the realization of a paradigm cell by more than one word form. This synchronic analysis has diachronic consequences, in as much as it now becomes clearer that-phi(n) continues the instrumental plural case marker */-b ɦ is/ and not the adverbial suffix */-b ɦ i/.

show abstract

Section: Diachronymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From these examples it appears that this suffix encoded spatial semantics, more specifically direction and location. Given the existence of adverbs that continue */‐b ɦ i/ both within and outside of Anatolian, this suffix is typically reconstructed to Proto‐Indo‐European (Lundquist and Yates 2018: 2087–8).…”

Section: Diachronymentioning

confidence: 99%

Homeric ‐phi(n)is an oblique case marker1

Goldstein

2020

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reconstruction of a simple past category for the proto-language might seem problematic in light of the fact that PIE is generally considered to have been "tenseless" (Napoli 2006:45-47, with references in n. 19). But consider Bartolotta 2009:514-515 (similarly Willi 2018Lundquist andYates 2018:2140;Napoli 2006:212;quite differently Kloekhorst 2017):…”

Section: Reconstructing Tense-aspect In Pniementioning

confidence: 99%

“…in both languages are best understood as having originated in Proto-Nuclear-Indo-European (PNIE) (i.e., excluding Anatolian: cf. n. (b) to Table 12 below; on the term, see Lundquist andYates 2018:2080) as a perfect and a simple past category respectively.…”

Section: Introduction and Proposalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aspects of the Indo-European Aorist and Imperfect

Hollenbaugh

2018

Indo-Eur. Linguist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Proto-Indo-European (PIE) tense-aspect system has been reconstructed since the time of Delbrück (1897) as containing a fundamental opposition between two aspectdenoting stems: An Aorist stem, denoting perfective aspect, and a Present stem, denoting imperfective aspect. This reconstruction is, for practical reasons, based almost entirely on Greek and Vedic. Re-examining the Homeric and R̥ gvedic data, I argue on semantic grounds against this century-old understanding of the tense-aspect system of PIE. In its place, I reconstruct the "Aorist" indicative as denoting perfect aspect (not perfective), and the "Imperfect" indicative as a simple past tense (not imperfective). Evidence for this reconstruction is based on the consistent usage in the R̥ gveda of the Aorist in the meaning 'have done X' (with present reference) and the Imperfect in the meaning 'did X' (especially in narrative contexts)-a distribution which frequently has a precise match in Homer.

show abstract

Inflectional Endings: Conjugation

Press

2024

The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

122. The morphology of Proto-Indo-European

Cited by 47 publications

References 0 publications

Homeric ‐phi(n)is an oblique case marker1

Homeric ‐phi(n)is an oblique case marker1

Aspects of the Indo-European Aorist and Imperfect

Inflectional Endings: Conjugation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About