537 research outputs found
Dative
No full textLa voce ‘Dative’ dell’'Encyclopedia of Greek Language and Linguistics Online' (EGLL) descrive le funzioni e i valori del caso dativo nella storia della lingua greca, dalla fase più antica sino al greco moderno, prendendo in esame anche i processi di sincretismo che hanno interessato questo caso nella sua diacronia. La voce è divisa in due parti: la prima, dedicata la greco antico, è stata scritta da Flavia Pompeo; la seconda, relativa agli sviluppi successivi, ha come autrice Joanne Stolk
Quale morfosintassi per le lingue indoeuropee antiche a corpus ridotto?
No full textNel caso delle iscrizioni achemenidi, il compito dei moderni ermeneuti non è dei più semplici, per una serie di motivi differenti. Da dove nascono le difficoltà che ci si trova da affrontare quando si indaghi un fenomeno della lingua persiana antica e, in particolare, un fenomeno morfosintattico? Per esemplificare il tipo di analisi che si può condurre e il metodo che si è rivelato più proficuo, nel presente contributo si prende come esempio una costruzione “problematica” del persiano antico, che offre numerosissimi spunti di riflessione e, soprattutto, si presta a differenti prospettive di analisi, sulla quale sto lavorando da parecchio tempo. Si tratta della costruzione nota come mām kāma, della quale sono stati studiat vari aspetti in differenti lavori, alcuni pubblicati, altri di prossima pubblicazione (Pompeo 2018; in stampa a; in stampa b)
The two faces of Old Persian duruj-: remarks on the coexistence of the constructions of the verb ‘to lie’
No full textThe two faces of Old Persian duruj-: remarks on the coexistence of the constructions of the verb ‘to lie’ Flavia Pompeo – University of Rome “La Sapienza” This study focuses on two Old Persian constructions of the verbal root drau̯g- (Indo-Iranian *d(h)rau̯gh- ‘(be)lügen’), which in Old Persian only occurs in the present stem duruj-, and is usually translated as ‘to lie, to deceive’ (cf. Kent 1953: 191; Schmitt 2014: 170, ‘(be)lügen, trügen’). In the entire Old Persian corpus, only in the Bīsotūn inscription we find 25 occurrences of the verb duruj-. Interestingly, despite the relatively small number of occurrences, three different constructions are documented for this verb: a) Nominative (18 occurrences; example 1); b) Nominative-Genitive (2 occurrences; example 2), where the genitive, which in Old Persian is a syncretic case, has a dative function; c) Nominative-Accusative (2 occurrences; examples 3a and 3b). (1) hau̯ adurujiya avaθā aθanha ‘he lied; thus he said’ (Schmitt 1991: DB 4.8); (2) hau̯ kārahyāGEN avaθā adurujiya ‘He lied to the people thus’ (Schmitt 1991: DB 3.80); (3a) kāramACC avaθā adurujiya ‘To the people thus he lied’ (Schmitt 1991: DB 1.78), cf. Kent (1953: 120), ‘thus he deceived the people’; (3b) taya imai̯ kāramACC adurujiyaša ‘because these (men) lied to the people’ (Schmitt 1991: DB 4.34-35), cf. Kent (1953: 131), ‘so that these (men) deceive the people’. Both the genitive(dative) and the accusative express the entity to whom one lies or who is deceived. The three remaining occurrences are forms of the participle in -ta- (example 4), which are not strictly relevant for the purposes of the present study. (4) nai̯šim ima vr̥navātai̯, duruxtam maniyātai̯ ‘(and) this should not convince him, (but) he regard it as false’ (Schmitt 1991: DB 4.49-50). Thus, from a semantic perspective, we can initially classify the verb duruj- as a verb of communication or, more generally, of ‘interaction’ (see Blume 1998) that usually involves two animate entities and is characterized by a low degree of semantic transitivity. While the absolute use of the verb drau̯g- has not attracted the attention of scholars, the coexistence of the construction with the accusative and with the genitive(dative) has been of greater interest, even though a convincing explanation for this data has not yet been provided. Indeed, the various scholars who have considered this issue have either limited themselves to labelling the different constructions as ‘transitive’ or ‘intransitive’, without giving a detailed account for the phenomenon, or interpreted this alternation as a case of stylistic variation, without considering either the morphosyntactic level proper, or the semantic one, whether in synchrony or diachrony (Schmitt 2016: 106). This latter reading has been mainly based on information provided by the Elamite and Babylonian versions. The aim of this paper is to propose that the alternation between Nominative-Genitive(Dative) and Nominative-Accusative constructions is not a mere stylistic variation, but has a valid linguistic basis, and that the two expressions need to be considered as two different argument structure patterns. Various elements seem to lead to this interpretation, although the scarcity of Old Persian documentation in this case does not allow us to formulate a robust hypothesis – or even posit that there is just one plausible hypothesis. Nonetheless, it seems quite reasonable to start from the assumption that the verb semantics and the low degree of transitivity may have played a role in the production of the alternation between the genitive(dative) and the accusative as second argument. This has often been recognised, both at a synchronic and a diachronic level, by typological studies and research on transitivity (see, among others, Tsunoda 1981 and 1985; Næss 2007). Interestingly, on the genealogical side, comparable constructions in Young Avestan and Vedic evidence a second argument encoded by the accusative (example 5) and the dative (example 6) respectively, suggesting the possibility that the alternation of genitive(dative) and accusative for this verb developed in the Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European languages, but was preserved only in Old Persian. (5) yōi [pauruua] miθrəmACC [družiṇti] (Yt. 10.45) ‘who [betrayed] Miθra [before]’ (cf. Skjærvø 2009: 127); (6) tā́bhyaḥ sá nír r̥cchād, yāḥ ||1|| naḥ prathamò ’nyò ’nyásmai DAT drúhyāt (TS 6.2.2.1-2) ‘He who first among us will be deceitful to another will suffer loss of these [bodies]’ (cf. Kulikov 2012: 565). Finally, internal diachronic data, especially from Pahlavi sources, also seem to confirm this interpretation
The syncretism of genitive and dative in Old Iranian
No full textAs is well known, case syncretism is a phenomenon that has taken place in many Indo-European languages, and involves a reduction in the number of cases compared to the system usually reconstructed for Proto-Indo-European (Luraghi 2000). This paper will focus on the syncretism of the Indo-European dative and genitive in Old Iranian languages, devoting particular attention to the changes which occurred from Old Avestan to Young Avestan. Old Persian does not have separate forms for genitive and dative as these previously distinct grammatical categories merged into the genitive (Meillet & Benveniste 1931). Indeed, a detailed examination of Old Persian textual data reveals that the genitive expresses a variety of syntactic functions and semantic roles, cross-linguistically typical not only of the genitive, but also of the dative (Pompeo & Benvenuto 2011; Benvenuto & Pompeo 2012). As far as Avestan is concerned, the dative dies out in Young Avestan while the genitive spreads to an increasing number of fields beyond its original sphere of meaning, replacing the dative in many contexts. Regarding this, Reichelt (1909), in the section entitled ‘Der dativische Genitiv’, suggests that the high frequency of the adnominal genitive determined the progressive extension of this case at the expense of the original functions of the dative. In Young Avestan, this phenomenon evolved and eventually comprised the syntactic function of Indirect Object and the role of Recipient. The study of the Old Iranian material makes it possible to demonstrate that the decay of the dative is not due to phonological changes or to the progressive silencing of post-tonal syllables. On the contrary, it suggests that the main cause of this syncretic process is to be found in both the semantic and syntactic overlapping of genitive and dative cases. In particular, as far as the syntactic level is concerned, it is well-known that languages have a tendency to eliminate synonymous grammatical forms over time (Barðdal & Kulikov 2009). In both Old Persian and Young Avestan, the result of the syncretism is a ‘new’ genitive case, structured as a polysemic radial category, with the expression of the Possessor as its core function, while the other attested functions constitute metaphorical extensions of the Possessor. The direction of the syncretism in question is confirmed by the general drift in the evolution of both languages
Contributo della linguistica alla formazione degli insegnanti di scuola secondaria:fonetica e fonologia della lingua inglese
No full textIl presente contributo contiene alcune riflessioni scaturite dall'esperienza didattica nell'ambito della S.S.I.S. del Lazio, indirizzo di "Lingue straniere", concernenti il contributo che lo studio della fonetica e della fonologia apporta alla formazione dei futuri docenti della Scuola secondaria.This paper is based on observations made during the teaching experience of the author within the SSIS Lazio, ‘Foreign Languages’ programme. It concerns the contribution that the study of phonetics and phonology may provide in the training of future secondary school teachers
Sintagmi preposizionali nei poemi omerici
No full textLo scopo di questo contributo, che approfondisce una riflessione già avviata in occasione di un precedente lavoro, è di individuare i parametri metodologicamente più adatti allo studio dei sintagmi preposizionali nel greco omerico, tenendo opportunamente conto della natura diacronicamente eterogenea del materiale documentario esaminato. Ad una prima sezione del saggio, dedicata a passare brevemente in rassegna lo stato degli studi concernenti il fenomeno considerato, fanno seguito l’illustrazione dei parametri elaborati dall’autrice e alcune esemplificazioni riguardo alla loro validità applicativa
Ὡς ὁ βασιλεὺς ἄγει. Considerazioni sulle formule di datazione doppia delle iscrizioni greche della Babilonia partica
No full textThis paper examines two Greek inscriptions written in Babylon during the Parthian period with specific focus on the sections containing double dating formulas. Unfortunately, both inscriptions – particularly the first – are damaged. This paper shows that strong evidence in favor of one of the text reconstructions proposed by scholars can be obtained by means of an analysis combiningthe methods and tools of philology and historical (socio)linguistics. Evidence from other languages is also considered
Ricerche sulla morfosintassi del persiano antico
No full textIn occasione di questa giornata di studi ho pensato di presentare le mie riflessioni in merito ad una delle ultime ricerche cui mi sono dedicata a proposito del persiano antico, lingua che, come è noto, ha un corpus testuale limitato sia dal punto di vista quantitativo che qualitativo. L’ambito che ho scelto è quello cui mi ha introdotta la mia maestra Palmira Cipriano e al quale ho continuato a dedicarmi, vale a dire la morfosintassi. In particolare, torno a prendere in esame le attestazioni di un verbo del persiano antico su cui sto lavorando già da un po’ e che, per alcuni aspetti, ancora richiede di essere studiato per poter giungere ad una conclusione relativamente plausibile: il verbo duruj- che significa ‘ingannare’, ‘mentire’, che occorre 25 volte nelle iscrizioni achemenidi. Sul totale delle occorrenze, ben ventuno sono costituite dalla forma di imperfetto singolare adurujiya, cui si aggiunge come unica altra forma finita il plurale adurujiyaša. Gli imperfetti sono formati su un tema di presente caratterizzato dalla radice di grado zero, dal suffisso -ya- (indoeuropeo *-i̯e/o-), per il quale generalmente si teorizza un valore intransitivizzante, e da desinenze esclusivamente attive. Le tre attestazioni restanti sono forme del participio in -ta-. È interessante notare che, nonostante il numero relativamente esiguo di occorrenze, per duruj- sono documentate tre differenti costruzioni. Date tali caratteristiche, oggetto fondamentale della relazione qui presentata è se sia possibile individuare una ratio nella distribuzione dei diversi tipi di costruzione delle forme di duruj-, soffermandomi, in modo particolare proprio le attestazioni con l’uso assoluto di questo verbo, ovviamente sempre nei limiti che la scarsa varietà quantitativa e qualitativa del materiale documentario impone. Delle altre due costruzioni mi limiterò a riprendere solo quegli aspetti che sono rilevanti per il contributo di oggi
New meanings and old constructions: the conceptualization of ‘fearing’ and ‘protecting’ in Old Persian in comparison with other Indo-Iranian languages
No full textIn the ancient Indo-Iranian languages, the argument structures of verbs meaning ‘to fear’ and ‘to
protect’ respectively show interesting similarities. In this regard, Old Persian data, despite the scarcity
of the evidence, are particularly interesting.
This paper focuses on the Old Persian verb tars- ‘to fear, to respect’, drawing on the tools of both
comparative-historical and cognitive linguistics. In particular, two issues will be taken into account: 1.
the meaning and the etymology of the verb tars-; 2. its argument structure. Both aspects can be
adequately explained by adopting the perspective of cognitive linguistics and, in particular, by
considering metaphorical and metonymic processes.
As far as the first point is concerned, the verb tars- is the only emotion verb attested in Old Persian
where it means ‘to fear, to respect’ with a strong political connotation. This meaning is the end point
of a semantic change that originates from the Indo-European root *tres- ‘to tremble (with fear)’(cf.
LIV2 650-651). This “composite” meaning has been reconstructed on the basis of the plurality of
meanings attested in Indo-European languages, among which ‘to be afraid’/’to fear’ is the most
frequent meaning, followed by ‘to tremble, to shake’ and, more rarely, ‘to flee (in fear)’.
In particular, the relationship between the meaning ‘to tremble, to shake’ and that of ‘to be afraid, to
fear’ will be considered. The conceptualization underlying the semantic shift from ‘to tremble (with
fear)’ to ‘to fear/to be afraid’ – that is, from the more concrete source domain to the abstract target
domain – will be explained as an essentially metonymic process, according to Kövecses (1998: 148-149
and further works) and Radden (e.g. Radden 1998, in Athanasiadou and Tabakowska). Furthermore,
the analysis will confirm the need to study human emotions according to an “integrated” perspective
that takes into account both the biological-cognitive and the socio-cultural aspects.
The second aspect worthy of attention is the construction of tars-. Here again, drawing on one of the
fundamentals of cognitive linguistics, it will be assumed that the choice of a specific linguistic
expression reflects a particular conceptualization of a given event, in other words it is motivated by
cognitive factors. In particular, it will be shown that, despite the intervening semantic change, the Old
Persian verb tars- has retained the original construction with the ablative (and the preposition hacā
‘from’), which was common to ancient Indo-Iranian languages (Vedic, Avestan, and Old Persian).
Interestingly, in this linguistic group, the construction with the ablative (with or without a preposition)
is shared by verba timendi and verbs meaning ‘to protect’. In Old Persian the construction is exactly
the same for both verbs (see example 1 for Old Persian tars- and example 2 for Old Persian pā-).
(1) iyam dahyāu̯š Pārsa (...) hacā aniyanā nai ̯ tr̥sati
‘This country Persia (...) does not fear anybody else’ (DPd 6-7, 11-12).
(2) utā imām dahyāu̯m Auramazdā pātu hacā haināyā
‘And may Auramazdā protect this country from the (enemy) army’ (DPd 15-17)
Finally, for the construction shared by verba timendi and verbs meaning ‘to protect’, a common
meaning will be proposed that includes both the semantic component “cause” (a metaphorical
12
extension from “origin/source”) and the component “distance”, both typical of the Indo-European
ablative. The shared meaning can be formulated as follows: “X trembles with fear/fears in relation to
an entity that is a potential source of danger and that must be kept at a distance”
Review a Rougemont, Georges: Inscriptions grecques dʼIran et dʼAsie centrale. Avec des contributions de Paul Bernard.
No full text- …
