Proto-Indo-European Syntax

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Lehmann, Winfred Philipp, 1916-
Proto-Indo-European syntax.
1. Proto-Aryan language—Syntax. I. Title. P671.L4 417'.7 74-10526 ISBN 0-292-76419-7
Copyright © 1974 by Winfred P. Lehmann All Rights Reserved
Printed in the United States of America


CONTENTS

  • Preface ix
  • Abbreviations Used xi
  • 1. The Syntactic Framework 3
    • 1.1. Earlier Syntactic Treatments of PIE 3
    • 1.2. The Bases of an Explanatory Syntax 6
    • 1.3. The Phrase-Structure and Transformational Rules 11
    • 1.4. A Syntactic Framework Based on Typological Study 14
    • 1.5. Marked versus Unmarked Patterns in Language 21
    • 1.6. Consistent and Inconsistent Languages 22
    • 1.7. Aims of a Syntactic Treatment of PIE 24
    • 1.8. Bases of Our Data 26
    • 1.9. Outline of the Book 28
  • 2. The Syntax of Simple Sentences 30
    • 2.1. The OV Structure of PIE as Demonstrated by Vedic 30
    • 2.2. Evidence from Hittite for OV Structure of PIE 34
    • 2.3. Evidence from Other Dialects for OV Structure of PIE 35
    • 2.4. The Structure of the Simple Sentence in PIE 39
    • 2.5. Simple Sentences Accompanied by Two or More Substantives 44
    • 2.6. Some Consequences of the Use of Additional Substantives in Simple Sentences 48
    • 2.7. Intonation Patterns of the Sentence 49
    • 2.8. The Role of Modification as a Syntactic Marker 52
    • 2.9. Sentence-Delimiting Particles 53
  • 3. Nominal Modifiers 57
    • 3.1. Attributive Modifiers 57
    • 3.2. Relative Constructions in the Early Dialects 61
    • 3.3. Attributive-Adjective Constructions 68
    • 3.4. Agreement Rules in Attributive-Adjective Constructions 69
    • 3.5. Attributive Genitives 73
    • 3.6. On the Derivation of the Genitive 74
    • 3.7. Compounds 75
    • 3.8. Determiners in Nominal Phrases 82
    • 3.9. Apposition 86
    • 3.10. Conclusion 89
  • 4. Verbal Modifiers 91
    • 4.1. On Elements Introduced through the Q Component 91
    • 4.2. The Subjective Quality of the Verb in IE 110
    • 4.3. Modified Forms of the PIE Simple Sentence 113
    • 4.4. Tense, Aspect, and Related Categories 139
    • 4.5. Transportation Processes 152
    • 4.6. Topicalization 156
    • 4.7. Coordination 158
    • 4.8. Complementation 163
    • 4.9. Subordinate Clauses 167
  • 5. Syntactic Categories of PIE 175
    • 5.1. Means of Expression for Syntactic Categories 175
    • 5.2. Syntactic Categories Expressed in Conjunction with Verbs 177
    • 5.3. Syntactic Categories Expressed in Conjunction with Substantives 190
    • 5.4. Surface Classes in Which These Categories Are Marked 203
    • 5.5. The Use of Particles and Other Uninflected Words as Syntactic Means of Expression 211
    • 5.6. On the Generation of Sentences 216
    • 5.7. On the Analysis of Sentences 218
    • 5.8. Marked Order in Sentences 219
    • 5.9. Topicalization, with Reference to Emphasis 220
  • 6. Lexical Entries 222
    • 6.1. Comprehensive Treatments of the PIE Lexicon 222
    • 6.2. Lexical Analysis of a Selected PIE Root: γer- ‘move’ 223
    • 6.3. Lexical Items Consisting of Verbal Roots and Preverbs 228
    • 6.4. Nominal Lexical Units 229
    • 6.5. Pronominal Lexical Units 230
    • 6.6. Adjectival Lexical Units 231
    • 6.7. Adverbial Lexical Units 232
    • 6.8. Preverbs, Postpositions, and Particles 233
    • 6.9. Extended Forms of Verbal and Nominal Roots; Further Development of the Lexicon 235
  • 7. Syntactic Developments from PIE to the Dialects 238
    • 7.1. Changes in the Sentence Pattern 238
    • 7.2. Reasons for the Shift to VO Structure, Illustrated by Complements 242
    • 7.3. The Postposing of Relative Clauses 243
    • 7.4. Change in the Position of Attributive Adjectives and Genitives 245
    • 7.5. Change in Verblike Elements and Verbal Modifiers 246
    • 7.6. Change in Selectional Categories 247
    • 7.7. Changes in Modification 248
    • 7.8. Changes in Intonation 249
    • 7.9. The Syntactic Changes, with Reference to the Community of PIE Speakers 250
  • Bibliography 253
  • Index 267

FIGURES

  • 1. Sentence Generation in Generative Syntax and Generative Semantics 8
  • 2. Modifier Agreement Rule 72
  • 3. Verb Agreement Rule 73

PREFACE

Syntax, the study of sentences, is generally held to be the heart of grammar. Whether or not, with students of language like Rudolf Carnap and Noam Chomsky, one takes semantics to be interpretive, phonology must be so viewed; and morphology deals with a subcomponent of syntax. Morphological and phonological studies must therefore be provisional unless carried out on the basis of a syntactic description. Yet most investigations dealing with the early Indo-European dialects and the reconstructed parent language are concerned with these subsidiary components of grammar. Proto-Indo-European Syntax has been written to remedy this shortcoming of Indo-European linguistics and to provide a syntax of the parent language.

Yet Proto-Indo-European Syntax is itself only a preliminary work. In spite of Berthold Delbrück's excellent monographs and his syntax in the first edition of the Brugmann-Delbrück Grundriss, and in spite of excellent discussions of syntactic problems, such as those in Jacob Wackernagel's Vorlesungen, no syntactic description of Proto-Indo-European has yet been written. In this situation a large-scale treatment did not seem desirable, but rather one which can lead to examination of major problems and individual syntactic constructions.

In attempting to understand and describe Indo-European grammar a linguist must rely on scholars in many disciplines besides linguistics. One of his chief debts is to the editors and interpreters of texts and to the producers of dictionaries. It would be impossible to give individual credit to even the most important such scholars. Moreover, even basic scholarly materials, like the transcribed Hittite texts, cannot be cited. If an Indo-Europeanist wishes to contribute to a field which attracted some of the best minds of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, he must draw not on such detailed, fundamental philological accomplishments but rather on the widely available editions of texts in the various dialects. Moreover, in order to provide accessibility for judgments of his linguistic interpretations, he must refer to standard, readily available editions. Nonetheless Indo-Europeanists are greatly indebted to the dedicated philologists who are making accessible the materials in the Anatolian, Tocharian, and other dialects that have been made known recently, such as Mycenaean Greek; they are also greatly in debt to their painstaking predecessors who produced the basic texts, grammars, and dictionaries for the various Indo-European dialects.

The debt this book owes to other scholars is evident on every page. I would like especially to thank R. P. Lehmann and Ladislav Zgusta, and students who investigated particular problems, H. S. Ananthanarayana, Eugene Grace, Solveig Pflueger, Carol Raman among others. I also acknowledge research support, in large part for such investigations. A grant from the American Council of Learned Societies provided the initial support for a computerized concordance of the Rigveda and other materials. Grants RO-5120-72-128 from the National Endowment for Humanities and GS-3081 from the National Science Foundation supported numerous individual studies in Indo-European linguistics and related fields. I owe special thanks to the Guggenheim Foundation for the grant which provided the opportunity to complete Proto-Indo-European Syntax.

W. P. Lehmann


ABBREVIATIONS USED

  • AB: Aitareya Braḥmāna
  • Ab.: ablative
  • Acc.: accusative
  • Act.: active
  • Adj.: adjective
  • Adv.: adverb
  • Aor.: aorist
  • Aux.: auxiliary
  • C: consonant
  • Caus.: causative
  • Comp.: complement
  • Conj.: conjunction
  • Cont.: continuative
  • Dat.: dative
  • Dec.: declarative
  • Det.: determiner
  • Enc.: enclitic
  • esp.: especially
  • F: first consonant
  • f.: feminine
  • Gen.: genitive
  • Gk.: Greek
  • Goth.: Gothic
  • Hitt.: Hittite
  • IE: Indo-European
  • Imper.: imperative
  • Imperf.: imperfective
  • Inj.: injunctive
  • Int.: interrogative
  • Iter.: iterative
  • K: kāraka, case category
  • k: case indicators; terminations or pre/postpositions
  • KBo: Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi (Leipzig)
  • KUB: Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi (Berlin)
  • L: last consonant
  • Lat.: Latin
  • Lith.: Lithuanian
  • Loc.: locative
  • M: middle consonant
  • m.: masculine
  • ME: Middle English
  • MHG: Middle High German
  • Mid.: middle voice
  • Mod.: modifier
  • Mom.: momentary
  • N: noun
  • n.: neuter
  • NE: New English, Modern English
  • Nec.: necessitative
  • Neg.: negative
  • NMod.: nominal modifier
  • NObj.: noun obj.
  • Nom.: nominative
  • NP: noun phrase
  • O: object
  • Obj.: object
  • Obl.: obligative
  • OCS: Old Church Slavic
  • OE: Old English
  • OHG: Old High German
  • ON: Old Norse
  • Opt.: optative
  • OSV: object-subject-verb order
  • OV: object-verb order
  • P rules: phrase-structure rules
  • Pass.: passive
  • Perf.: perfective
  • PIE: Proto-Indo-European
  • Pl.: plural
  • Pred.: predicate
  • Pres.: present
  • Pron.: pronoun
  • Prop.: proposition
  • Ptc.: particle
  • Q: qualifier
  • Recip.: reciprocal
  • Refl.: reflexive
  • Rel.: relative
  • RV: Rigveda. References are to book, poem, and stanza; e.g., 5.1.3. = Book 5, Poem or Hymn 1, Stanza 3.
  • S: subject
  • ŚB: Śatapathabrāhmaṇa
  • S.C.: structural change
  • S.D.: structural description
  • sg.: singular
  • Skt.: Sanskrit
  • Slav.: Slavic
  • SOV: subject-object-verb order
  • Subj.: subjunctive
  • SVO: subject-verb-object order
  • TB: Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa
  • TS: Taittirīya Saṁhitā
  • V: verb
  • Vb.: verbal
  • VO: verb-object order
  • Voc.: vocative
  • Vol.: volitional
  • VP: verb phrase
  • VSO: verb-subject-object order
  • Σ: initial node for sentence
  • 1: first person
  • 2: second person
  • 3: third person
  • : rewrite as
  • : transform to

  •   Map
  • Linguistics Research Center

    University of Texas at Austin
    PCL 5.556
    Mailcode S5490
    Austin, Texas 78712
    512-471-4566