Criteria for subjecthood and non-canonical subjects in Classical Greek

Benedetti, Marina; Gianollo, Chiara

doi:10.1075/cilt.350.02ben

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Benedetti & Gianollo (2020: 36f. ) present examples of conjunction reduction in Ancient Greek involving conjoined clauses where the subject of the first conjunct is in the dative case, coreferential with an elliptic nominative in the second conjunct: We agree with Benedetti & Gianollo (2020) that such examples indeed speak for a subject analysis of the dative.…”

Section: Latinsupporting

confidence: 64%

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Barðdal,

Cattafi,

Danesi

et al. 2023

Indogermanische Forschungen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article responds to a call for research, made by Hock (1990) more than 30 years ago, on the subject behavior of potential non-nominative subjects in the early Indo-European languages. Hock's call was made in the wake of research into behavioral properties of non-nominative subjects in several modern languages. Since then, comprehensive studies have been carried out on the subject behavior of non-nominative subjects in the early Germanic languages, including Gothic, Old English, Old Saxon, Old High German, Old Norse-Icelandic, etc. Some preliminary work has been undertaken on Latin, while work on Ancient Greek is almost non-existent. We gather the Latin data provided so far, adding complementary evidence; we also present a complete dataset from Ancient Greek not figuring in the earlier literature. These data, pertaining to six established subject tests, show that potential non-nominative subjects behave syntactically as nominative subjects in both Latin and Ancient Greek, while an analysis in terms of object is excluded.

show abstract

Section: Latinsupporting

confidence: 64%

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Barðdal,

Cattafi,

Danesi

et al. 2023

Indogermanische Forschungen

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…31 Yet 'a number of verbs that have an experiencer subject and a stimulus object never occur in the passive' (Luraghi 2010: 69). Non-canonical subjects are observed with dοjέx dokeō 'to seem' (Benedetti & Gianollo 2020) but do not appear in support-verb constructions (Benedetti 2013b: 126). 32 Distinguishing between suppletive and categorial periphrasis is often difficult (e.g.…”

Section: A Mixed Bagmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support‐Verb Constructions with Objects: Greek‐Coptic Interference in the Documentary Papyri?¹

Fendel

2023

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Support‐verb constructions are combinations of a verb and a noun that fill the predicate slot, for example, to make a suggestion in I made the suggestion yesterday. The article examines direct‐object structures with support‐verb constructions in Greek documentary papyri from fourth‐ to mid‐seventh‐century Egypt. By the fourth century, Greek and Egyptian (at this stage called Coptic) had co‐existed in Egypt for about a millennium and the latter was gaining ground. The article focusses on the support‐verb‐construction families surrounding ἐξουσίαν exousian ‘power’ and ἐγγύην egguēn ‘surety’ as well as on a selection of structures with ποιέομαι poieomai ‘to do’. The article finds that direct‐object structures in the data sample have differing explanations. Direct‐object patterns are a marginal pattern in classical Greek already, such that some patterns can be explained by inheritance or the extension of a pattern to new contexts. However, some writers either idiolectally or sociolectally applied object patterns more widely based on the Coptic parallel. The syntax of support‐verb constructions in Greek does not run counter to the verbal syntax otherwise, which may aid the fact that they do not introduce systemic changes.

show abstract

“…The subject of adverbial adjunct participles can be fully referential, hence can act as a proper antecedent for a reflexive within the participial clause (cf. discussion in Benedetti & Gianollo 2020: 39–44).…”

Section: íDios In the Greek New Testamentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphosyntactic Contact in Translation: Greek ídios and Latin proprius in the Bible

Benedetti,

Gianollo

2023

Trans of the Philol Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the possibility that contact with Greek through the translation of biblical texts may have played a role in the development of Latin proprius ‘personal’, ‘peculiar’ into a reflexive possessive adjective. A few centuries earlier, post‐Classical Greek witnesses a similar development with the adjective ídios ‘private’, ‘personal’: we determine that in the New Testament this adjective has innovative uses as a reflexive possessive, and we argue that this is a system‐internal development triggered by the loss of the reflexive possessive forms of Classical Greek. The comparison between the Greek original and the Latin Vulgata translation of the New Testament furthermore shows that Latin proprius was used, with just one exception, as a translation equivalent of Greek ídios. We conclude that contact through translation acts as a catalyst for a change that, also in Latin, responds to the system‐internal pressure created by the loss of an unambiguous 3rd person reflexive possessive.

show abstract

Criteria for subjecthood and non-canonical subjects in Classical Greek

Cited by 3 publications

References 31 publications

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Support‐Verb Constructions with Objects: Greek‐Coptic Interference in the Documentary Papyri?¹

Morphosyntactic Contact in Translation: Greek ídios and Latin proprius in the Bible

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Criteria for subjecthood and non-canonical subjects in Classical Greek

Cited by 3 publications

References 31 publications

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Non-nominative subjects in Latin and Ancient Greek

Support‐Verb Constructions with Objects: Greek‐Coptic Interference in the Documentary Papyri?1

Morphosyntactic Contact in Translation: Greek ídios and Latin proprius in the Bible

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Support‐Verb Constructions with Objects: Greek‐Coptic Interference in the Documentary Papyri?¹