Author:
Anagnostopoulou Elena,Sevdali Christina
Abstract
AbstractIn this paper, we compare the properties of dative and genitive objects in Classical vs. Modern Greek. Based on the difference in behavior of dative/genitive objects of ditransitives and monadic transitives in the two periods of Greek which correlates with a range of systematic alternations in the case realization of Modern Greek IO arguments depending on the presence and category (DP vs. PP) of lower theme arguments, we argue that there are two distinct modes of dative and genitive objective case assignment: they are either prepositional or dependent (structural) cases, as also proposed by Baker and Vinokurova (2010), and Baker (2015) on the basis of cross-linguistic evidence. If we adopt this proposal a number of important implications follow both for the syntax of Modern Greek genitive indirect objects and for the understanding of the change from Classical to Standard Modern Greek which must be seen as a development from a grammatical system where dative and genitive were lexical/inherent/prepositional cases to a system where genitive is a dependent case assigned to DPs in the sense of Marantz (1991). Interestingly, the development from Classical Greek (CG) to Modern Greek (MG) affected the availability of dative/genitive-nominative alternations in passivization, in the opposite direction of what might be expected, i.e. such alternations were possible in CG and are no longer possible in MG. Our paper addresses this puzzle and argues that the availability of such alternations is not always a diagnostic tool for detecting whether an indirect object DP bears lexically specified or structural/dependent Case, contra standard practice in the literature.
Funder
Arts and Humanities Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference130 articles.
1. Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21(3): 435–483.
2. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2001. Functional structure in nominals. Nominalization and ergativity. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
3. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2014. Roots don’t take complements. Theoretical Linguistics 40(3/4): 287–297.
4. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2016. DP internal (clitic) doubling. In 7th Nereus international workshop: clitic Doubling and other issues of the syntax/semantic interface in Romance DPs, 128, eds. Susann Fischer and Mario Navarro Arbeitspapier, 1–10. Available at https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/35916/Fischer_0-372560.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y. Accessed 24 January 2020.
5. Alexiadou, Artemis. 2018. Able adjectives and the syntax of psych verbs. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1): 74. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.498.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献