scholarly journals Dative subjects in Germanic

2016 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jóhanna Barðdal ◽  
Carlee Arnett ◽  
Stephen Mark Carey ◽  
Thórhallur Eythórsson ◽  
Gard B. Jenset ◽  
...  

AbstractOne of the functions of the dative is to mark non-prototypical subjects, i. e. subjects that somehow deviate from the agentive prototype. The Germanic languages, as all subbranches of Indo-European (cf. Barðdal et al. 2012. Reconstructing constructional semantics: The dative subject construction in Old Norse‐Icelandic, Latin, Ancient Greek, Old Russian and Old Lithuanian.

Ethics ◽  
1938 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sveinbjorn Johnson
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-63
Author(s):  
Vladimir I. Maksimov ◽  

The essay analyses the name of a pagan God of the Ancient Rus Stribog, who was mentioned in “The Russian Primary Chronicle” and “The Tale of the Igor’s Campaign” and its connection with the ancient Greek mythology. The article suggests that an old-Russian god Stribog is similar to the ancient Greek god Astray, the father of the famous gods of winds, Boreas — the god of cold northern wind, Zephyr — the god of warm western wind, Anemoi — the god of hot southern wind and Eurus — the god of unstable eastern or south-eastern wind, who are often associated with the winds they symbolize in Russian poetry. The similarity of Stribog and Astray lays not only in their origins, but in the common root str-. The article concludes that because god Astray is not only the farther of the gods of the winds, but also the father of Venus and other stars, it is arguable that Stribog is both the grandfather of the winds and the Slavic god of the night sky.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gjertrud Flermoen Stenbrenden

AbstractThis article argues against the claim by Emonds and Faarlund (2014,English: The language of the vikings. Palacký University: Olomouc) that English died out after the Norman Conquest, and was replaced by a North Germanic variety referred to as “Anglicised Norse”, which had been formed in the Danelaw area in a concerted effort by the Norse and Anglo-Saxon populations, presumably to overthrow the ruling French elite. Emonds and Faarlund base their claim on the existence of some 20–25 linguistic features which are said to have been absent from Old English, but which are present in Present-Day English and in Scandinavian languages. This article argues that genetic affiliation cannot be inferred from shared syntactic, morphological or lexical features, which may easily result from independent convergence in historically related languages. The main counter-argument, however, is chronological: the majority of the features adduced are indeed attested in Old English and often in other West Germanic languages also, and hence may not be attributed to Old Norse; nor can features which are not attested in English until late Middle English or early Modern English come from Old Norse. The continuity of English in the written record likewise renders the suggested scenario highly unlikely.


2019 ◽  
pp. 177-205
Author(s):  
Derek Attridge

This chapter is concerned with the vernacular poetry of Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Side-by-side with the monastic production and preservation of poetry, the castles and courts of the nobility became centres of culture. France, in particular, saw extensive poetic activity, notably in the genres of the chanson de geste and the troubadour lyric. Other French genres of the time include saints’ lives, romances, lais, and fabliaux; the use of the octosyllabic line for these poems is examined. Poetry in the Germanic languages, notably the Middle High German courtly epics and Minnesänger lyrics and the Old Norse eddic and skaldic poetry of Iceland, is discussed, as is the lyric poetry of Italy. The evidence for the experience of poetry in Dante’s Vita nuova is considered. The rhythmic variety of Middle English verse, it is argued, suggests some uncertainty in the adoption of French metres.


2017 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Serena Danesi ◽  
Cynthia A. Johnson ◽  
Jóhanna Barðdal

Abstract The “dative of agent” construction in the Indo-European languages is most likely inherited from Proto-Indo-European (Hettrich 1990). Two recent proposals (Danesi 2013; Luraghi 2016), however, claim that the construction contains no agent at all. Luraghi argues that it is a secondary development from an original beneficiary function, while Danesi maintains that the construction is indeed reconstructable. Following Danesi, we analyze the relevant data in six different Indo-European languages: Sanskrit, Avestan, Ancient Greek, Latin, Tocharian, and Lithuanian, revealing similarities at a morphosyntactic level, a semantic level, and to some extent at an etymological level. An analysis involving a modal reading of the predicate, with a dative subject and a nominative object, is better equipped to account for the particulars of the construction than the traditional agentive/passive analysis. The proposal is couched within Construction Grammar, where the basic unit of language is the construction, i. e. a form-function correspondence. As constructions are by definition units of comparanda, they can be successfully utilized in the reconstruction of a proto-construction for Proto-Indo-European.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 555-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan G. Vázquez-González ◽  
Jóhanna Barðdal

Abstract The semantic range of ditransitive verbs in Modern English has been at the center of linguistic attention ever since the pioneering work of Pinker (1989. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press). At the same time, historical research on how the semantics of the ditransitive construction has changed over time has seriously lagged behind. In order to address this issue for the Germanic languages, the Indo-European subbranch to which Modern English belongs, we systematically investigate the narrowly defined semantic verb classes occurring in the ditransitive construction in Gothic, Old English and Old Norse-Icelandic. On the basis of data handed down from Proto-Germanic and documented in the oldest layers of the three Germanic subbranches, East, West and North Germanic, respectively, we show that the constructional range of the ditransitive construction was considerably broader in the earlier historical stages than now; several subclasses of verbs that could instantiate the ditransitive in early Germanic are infelicitous in the ditransitive construction in, for instance, Modern English. Taking the oldest surviving evidence from Germanic as point of departure, we reconstruct the ditransitive construction for an earlier proto-stage, using the formalism of Construction Grammar and incorporating narrowly defined semantic verb classes and higher level conceptual domains. We thus reconstruct the internal structure of the ditransitive construction in Proto-Germanic, including different levels of schematicity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-357
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Agee

Historical Glottometry, introduced by Kalyan & François (2018), is a wave-based quantitative approach to language subgrouping used to calculate the overall strength of a linguistic subgroup using metrics that capture the contributions of linguistic innovations of various scopes to language diversification, in consideration of the reality of their distributions. This approach primarily achieves this by acknowledging the contribution of postsplit areal diffusion to language diversification, which has traditionally been overlooked in cladistic (tree-based) models. In this paper, the development of the Germanic language family, from the breakup of Proto-Germanic to the latest period of the early attested daughter languages (namely, Old English, Old Frisian, Gothic, Old High German, Old Low Franconian, Old Norse, and Old Saxon) is accounted for using Historical Glottometry. It is shown that this approach succeeds in accounting for several smaller, nontraditional subgroups of Germanic by accommodating the linguistic evidence unproblematically where a cladistic approach would fail.


Author(s):  
Robert McColl Millar

Perhaps the central chapter of Contact, we focus here on the rapid and radical changes English passed through in relation to inflectional morphology (in particular but not exclusively in the noun phrase) in the later Old English and early Middle English periods. Comparison is made to other Germanic languages; the concept of drift is introduced. Theories for why these changes occurred and why the changes took place where, when and how they did are considered, with particular focus on earlier contact explanations. Recent proposals that bilingualism with Celtic languages was the primary impetus for the changes are critiqued. It is suggested that, while Celtic influence should not be dismissed, it is contact between Old English and Old Norse in the North of England which acted as catalyst. This contact is seen as a koine whose origin is markedly similar to that postulated for modern new dialects.


2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-291
Author(s):  
Людмила В. Братухина ◽  
Александр Ю. Братухин

The paper is devoted to analyzing examples of the use of constructions “O + locative”, which have the meaning of “basis of activity, instrument”. Our interest in these examples is due, firstly, to the fact that this meaning of the preposition O is completely absent in modern Russian. Secondly, in some cases, this construction found in Old Slavonic texts is replaced in Church Slavonic by the construction “ВЪ + locative”, which is a calque from the ancient Greek construction “έν + dative” (often having the meaning of “a tool”) but this substitution is inconsistent. Thirdly, the constructions “O + locative” and “BЪ + locative” appear in the Old Slavonic manuscripts in parallel. The main aim of the study is to identify the shades of meaning that the creators of Old Slavonic texts distinguished in the ancient Greek construction “έν + dative”, choosing “O + locative” as a variant of translation; and to determine whether the indicated meaning of the preposition O was original in the Slavic languages or this preposition was acquired in the process of translating Biblical texts.The research is based on the Sinai Psalter, the Zographic and Ostromir Gospels, the Ostroh and Elizabethan Bibles as well as the examples (contained in the dictionaries of the Old Slavic, Old Russian, and Church Slavonic languages) from the Mariinsky Four Gospels, Assemaniev’s Gospel, Savin’s book, Euchology of Sinai, and Supralsky manuscript.The construction “έν + dative” is translated not only by “O + locative”. The former is also regularly translated by constructions of the instrumental case without a preposition (in Old Slavonic and Church Slavonic texts). The possibility of forming of the meaning of the action source under the influence of the construction “OTЪ + genitive” is also considered. In general, the dynamics of evolution of the meaning of “O + locative” is traced in the paper. It is concluded that the analyzed “O + locative” construction acquired the meaning of “basis of activity, instrument” at the time of the creation of Old Slavonic Bible translations. This is due to the process of reflection on the text, which became possible with the appearance of the written Slavonic language and the comparison of this construction with a simple instrumental case, combinations of “OTЪ + genitive” and “BЪ + locative”, which in some cases acted as synonymous and could be chosen by translators either spontaneously or with the aim to express nuances of meaning. This is demonstrated with the elimination of ancient Greek tracing, as well as the reverse replacement of “O + locative” by “BЪ + locative”. The instrumental case without a preposition was similar to “O + locative” in the expression of the causal meaning as well as in indicating the source of the action; the con- struction of “OTЪ + genitive”, in addition to the similarity of meaning, in terms of spelling and phonetics also resembled “O + locative”. The construction “O + locative” turned out to be more stable in the cases of indicating an animate source or basis of activity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document