Morphosyntax


Summary

Declension patterns; Conjugation patterns; Simplification mechanisms in inflectional morphology (loss of the dual number, gender vs. inflectional ending, time vs. tense); Word order; Selected syntactic forms (the absolute dative, accusative with the infinitive, etc.)


Printout of this page


Homework

Homework # 8 (due end of week 8): Use the following table. Explain the changes in inflectional endings in each of the languages; Homework # 9 (due end of week 9): Use the following table. (The tables are from Towsend & Janda, 1996.) Explain the changes in inflectional endings in each of the languages.


Quiz - in class

Multiple choice on morphosyntactic development (first half hour of week 10)


General

1.     Isolation, Aglutination, Inflection

Aglutinative (Hungarian)

case/meaning

watch/clock

watches/clocks

my watch/clock

your watch/clock

his/her watch/clock

our watch/clock

Nom (subject)

óra

órá-k

órá-m

órá-d

órá-ja

órá-nk

Acc (object)

órá-t

órá-k-at

órá-m-at

órá-d-at

órá-já-t

órá-nk-at

 

Hun. órá-k-at (k = Plural, at = Accusative) vs. Rus. часы (ы = Plural&Accusative)

 

2.     Markers of morphological categories

Marker

CSL

S-Cr

Affix:   

 koń-ь, koń-a

konj-0, konj-a

Alternations - Ablaut

bъr-ati, ber-ešь

b0rati, bereš

Alternations - Morphonemic

junak-ъ, junač-e

junak-0, junač-e

Alterrnations - Suprasegmental

vodà, vòdu

vòda, vȍdu

Suppletive stems

čьlovѣkъ, ljudьјe

čov(j)ek, ljudi

Slavic languages: rich suffixal affixation, numerous alternations

3.     Analogy

nuclear vs. nucelar

4.     Systemic vs. textual frequency

textual frequency (e.g., CSL non-thematic verbs, small group, i.e. low systemic frequency but very high textual frequency: jesmь,dadmь,imamь,věmь,jemь) vs.

systemic frequency (non-thematic verbs all others, i.e., very high systemic frequency: pletǫ)

S-Cr: 1st person non-thematic wins: dam, pletem

Rus. 1st person thematic wins: даду, плету

 


Alternations

Found both in lexical and inflectional morphology

Ablaut (vowel gradation within the same root): Inherited from PIE, e.g.:

bĕr/bǒr/bǐr: berǫ, vyborъ, bьrati

Consonantal alternations (Slavic development), e.g.:

g:dz: bogъ: bog+i > bodzi

Other: see palatalizations and jotations in the previous secition.

Vowel alternations in the endings:

o:e: selo: pol'e

other:

hard

y

y

ъ

ѣ

ѣ

soft

I

ѣ

ь

i

a

 


Declension

Major tendencies:

a.     Loss of the Dual

b.     Simplification

c.     Linking Declension Type to Gender

PIE Nominal Declensions

Possible classes, e.g. in present day Swahili:

Class 1 and 2 – singular and plural of living beings: mgeni:wageni ‘guest:guests’

Class 3 and 4 – singular and plural of vegetation, objects, body parts: mti:miti

See this page for more examples of the classes in Swahili

PIE

-t(e)r kinship terms: mater-, dukter-, ses(t)r-, bhratr-

-ent – small living things: telent-, osilent-, agnent-

-ū – fruit: tuku, mirku, plody

-ǐ – wild fauna: eleni, losi, golombi

Thematic vowel in all cases, e.g. ā declension:

N. gen-ā, G. gen-ās, D gen-āi

Declension types:

o          dhūmos

jo         konjos

u          sūnus

ā          genā

         douxja

i           pontis

ū          krū

[CONS]          māter

PIE to CSL

The following three tables from Towsend and Janda (1996) nicely summarize the origins of the CSL endings and resolution of the declensions into genders



CSL to Modern Slavic

Singular, Plural, Dual > Singular, Plural

-u merges with –o, -jo

masculine -i merges with –o,-jo

-ū merges with –ā, -jā

[CONS] merge with either –ā, -jā or –o, -jo

S-Cr examples of the process

              Masculine

        NOM

GEN

typeCSL

TypeS-Cr

NOM

GEN

   rodъ

-a

-(j)o

1

rod-0

-a

   syn-ъ

-u

-u

1

sin-0

-a

   gost-6

-i

-i

1

gost -0

-a

   kam y

-ene

-C

1

kamen-0

-a

   slug-a

-y

-(j)ā

3

slug–a

-e

 

              Feminine

        NOM

GEN

typeCSL

typeS-Cr

NOM GEN

 

  žen-a

-y

–(j) ā

3

žen-a

-e

 svek0r-y

krъv-e

ū

3

svekrv-a

-e

  mat0 i

er-e

C

X

mat0-i

er-e 

  sol-6

-i

i

4

sol-0

-i

 

             Neuter

        NOM

GEN

typeCSL

typeS-Cr

NOM

GEN

  sel-o

-a

-(j)o

1

sel-o

-a

  čud0–o

es-e

-C

1

čud-o

-a

  tel0ę

ęt-e      

-C

2

tel0-e

et-a

  sѣm0-ę

ęn-e

-C

2

s(j)em0-e

en-a

 

Development of the case endings

The dual has merged with plural living traces only in some lexical categories (e.g. S-Cr body part that go in pairs will have the Dual –u Gen. Pl. ending rather than the regular –a: očiju, ušiju, ruku, nogu)

Masculine:

  Nom.Sg. -ь/ъ > 0

Gen.Sg. a, -u, -i, -e > -a (S-Cr), -a/-u (Pol, Rus)

Dat. Sg. ovi, -i, -u > -u (Rus, S-Cr), -ovi/-u (Pol)

Acc. Sg. = Nom/Acc

Voc.Sg. = Nom (Rus.), -e/-u or = Nom (Pol., S-Cr)

Ins. Sg.-ъmь > -om/-em (Rus. S-Cr), -em (Pol.)

Loc. Sg. u, -ѣ, -i > -u (S-Cr), -e/-u (Rus, Pol.)

Feminine

Nom. Sg. –a > -a, –ь > 0, C > -a/-0

Gen. Sg. –y, -ę > -y (Rus, Pol.), -e (S-Cr), -i > -i

Dat./Loc. Sg –ѣ, -i > -i (S-Cr), -e (Rus, Pol)

Voc. Sg. = Nom. (Rus.), -o/-e or = Nom (S-Cr), -o/-u or = Nom (Pol)

Inst. –ojǫ/-ejǫ > -oj(u) (Rus), -ą (Pol), -om (S-Cr)

Neuter

Just like masculine + NAV o/-e + -et-, -en-, -es- extensions

Plural

Loss of the dual with influences on DIL and NAV in S-Cr

Preserved separate DIL endings in Rus. and Pol. vs. DIL syncretism in S-Cr

Nom. Pl. Masc. –ove, -i > -i, Fem. –ę, -y > -y (Rus, Pol), -e (S-Cr)

Gen. Pl. –ъ, -ovъ > masc. –ov, -fem/-neut (Pol., Rus.), -a (-S-Cr) voc:0 alternations

Acc. Pl. = Nom. or -e (S-Cr), = Nom/Gen – animate/inanimate (Rus), = Nom./Gen masc-pers (Pol.)

Other Lines of Development in Declension Paradigms

Definite vs. indefinite adjectives: mostly preserved (S-Cr), partially preserved (Rus), lost (Pol)

Gender endings in plural: retained (S-Cr), masculine-personal (Pol), neutralized (Rus)

Attrition of the numeral paradigm, esp. in S-Cr

Conservativism of the personal pronouns (PIE suppletivism retained)   

 


Conjugation

PIE to CSL

The following table from Towsend & Janda (1996) provides a review of the development:


CSL to Present Day Slavic

General Tendencies:

Loss of the dual with no significant impact on the plural

Simplification

Innovations in the South

Tenses better perserved in the South, participles in the North

 

Thematic vs. athematic stems:

e/o       neseši,

ne/no  staneši

e/o     pišeši

i           vidiši

 

Endings:

athematic

jes-m6

-i

-tъ(ь)

-mъ/mo

-te

- ǫtъ(ь)/-ą

tematyczne

plet-ǫ,

-eši/ešь

-etъ(ь)/-e

-mъ/mo

-te

- ǫtъ(ь)/-ą

 

Spread of one set of endings/variants or the other, cf. S-Cr govorim-govorimo vs. Rus. говорю-говорим

 


Syntax

Inconclusive evidence

SVO

Enclitics

The Absolute Dative, Accusative with the Infinitive