Language Change And Linguistic Theory: The Case Of Archaic Indo‐European Conjunction

Goldstein, David

doi:10.1111/1467-968x.12139

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recent work (e.g. Goldstein 2019) considers additive conjunction to be adverbial in nature ('and also'), I prefer to separate the traditional term 'additive' into at least three subcategories. In a sentence like John and Ann drove to the store, and Bill (also) came along for the ride, there appear to be two different types of 'and'relationships at work.…”

Section: Earlier Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*

Klein

2022

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The system of adversative conjunction in the Old Church Slavic Gospels is characterized by two pure adversatives, nŭ and the much less frequent obače, together with two other forms, a and že, which are employed with equal or greater frequency in non‐adversative conjunctive roles. The relationship between nŭ and a is complex. The role of the former is primarily corrective following a negated constituent, while the latter signals a change of topic. The relationship of a and že is primarily one of scope, with the latter serving as the outermost discourse articulator of the language. The purpose of this article is to determine explicitly and in detail the relationships among nŭ, a, and že and to state the syntactic and discourse conditions under which each occurs. However, because the last two appear in non‐adversative value, they infringe upon the domain of i, the basic ‘and’‐word of Old Church Slavic, necessitating also, an analysis of this latter item, which signals a neighbouring discourse category. The final adversative is tŭk(ŭ) mo, which stands on the borderline between an adverb and a conjunction and is best considered a polarity item with both delimitative and liminal semantics.

show abstract

Section: Earlier Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*

Klein

2022

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Clitic Third in Hittite: Variation and Development

Sideltsev

2024

AOrient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper deals with one of clitic third orders in Hittite that involves later than the expected second position of the clitic -(m)a, a contrastive conjunction and discourse marker, otherwise a standard second position clitic. -(m)a is delayed beyond its common second position by clause connectives, subordinators and conjunctions with varying obligatoriness: it is obligatory with clause connectives and optional with subordinators and conjunctions. This study explores in detail the variation with subordinators and conjunctions and it argues that clitic third order in this context is an innovation. In explaining how clitic third order was triggered in this context the etymological hypothesis of Eichner (1971, 1981) is combined with the prosodic explanation of clitic third of Kloekhorst (2014) against an alternative account of Sideltsev (2019).

show abstract

Language Change And Linguistic Theory: The Case Of Archaic Indo‐European Conjunction

Abstract: Many archaic Indo-European languages exhibit a system of dual conjunction in which they possess both a head-initial exponent (e.g., Latin et) and an enclitic exponent (e.g., Latin -que).

Cited by 2 publications

References 50 publications

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*

Clitic Third in Hittite: Variation and Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Language Change And Linguistic Theory: The Case Of Archaic Indo‐European Conjunction

Abstract: Many archaic Indo-European languages exhibit a system of dual conjunction in which they possess both a head-initial exponent (e.g., Latin et) and an enclitic exponent (e.g., Latin -que).

Cited by 2 publications

References 50 publications

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian*

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian*

Clitic Third in Hittite: Variation and Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*

Adversative Conjunction and Neighboring Discourse Features in Old Church Slavic (Codex Marianus), with Comparative Notes on the Same Phenomena in Greek, Gothic and Classical Armenian^*