Once Again on Word Order in the War Scroll (1QM)

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-106
Author(s):  
Kasper Siegismund

Abstract This contribution offers a critical evaluation of John Screnock’s hypothesis that the basic word order in 1QM is subject-verb, with inversion triggered by fronting of non-subject elements or by the use of intransitive verbs. After a detailed examination of the evidence, the opposite conclusion is reached. Basic word order is verb-subject, with inversion to subject-verb order with pragmatically marked subjects (focus fronting). There seems to be no causal relationship between transitivity and word order. Furthermore, it is argued that Screnock’s interpretation of 1QM 1:1–3 (which flows from his transitivity-based analysis) is highly unlikely, as it leads to a division of sentences that would produce a structure practically unattested in the rest of the text. In addition, the findings are applied to the general discussion of word order in Hebrew, in particular as an argument against recent attempts at describing Biblical Hebrew as a language with basic subject-verb order.

Author(s):  
Lyle Campbell ◽  
Vit Bubenik ◽  
Leslie Saxon

Studies of word-order universals have had great impact in modern linguistics, thanks to Greenberg’s (1963) work and to Hawkins’s (1983) refinements. Greenberg’s conclusions were based on a sample of 30 languages “for more detailed information” and 142 languages “for certain limited cooccurrences of basic word order” (Hawkins 1983:xi; cf. Greenberg 1963:74–75). Hawkins expanded the 142 “to some 350 languages”, and for “between one-third and one-half of these supplementary data have been collected of the type that Greenberg listed in his 30-language sample” (Hawkins 1983:xi-xii). Hawkins proposed extensive revisions in Greenberg’s universals based on this expanded sample.


Author(s):  
Jaklin Kornfilt

The Southwestern (Oghuz) branch of Turkic consists of languages that are largely mutually intelligible, and are similar with respect to their structural properties. Because Turkish is the most prominent member of this branch with respect to number of speakers, and because it is the best-studied language in this group, this chapter describes modern standard Turkish as the representative of that branch and limits itself to describing Turkish. The morphology of Oghuz languages is agglutinative and suffixing; their phonology has vowel harmony for the features of backness and rounding; their basic word order is SOV, but most are quite free in their word order and are wh-in-situ languages; their relative clauses exhibit gaps corresponding to the clause-external head, and most embedded clauses are nominalized. Fully verbal embedded clauses are found, too. The lexicon, while largely Turkic, also has borrowings from Arabic, Persian, French, English, and Modern Greek and Italian.


2000 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 234-236
Author(s):  
Kirk E. Lowery
Keyword(s):  

Lingua ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 65 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 107-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Khalid El-Yasin

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document