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: 1^st person non-thematic wins: dam, pletem

Rus. 1^st 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/ę	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. g^u̯en-ā, G. g^u̯en-ās, D g^u̯en-āi

Declension types:

o dhūmos

jo konjos

u sūnus

ā g^u̯enā

jā 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
rod–ъ	-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
tel0–ę	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

Morphosyntax

Summary

Homework

Quiz - in class

General

1. Isolation, Aglutination, Inflection

Aglutinative (Hungarian)

2. Markers of morphological categories

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.:

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:

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. gu̯en-ā, G. gu̯en-ās, D gu̯en-āi

Declension types:

o dhūmos

jo konjos

u sūnus

ā gu̯enā

jā 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

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)

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

Rus. 1^st person thematic wins: даду, плету

N. g^u̯en-ā, G. g^u̯en-ās, D g^u̯en-āi

ā g^u̯enā