Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, Katarzyna

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.205

CiteScore 2016: 0.28

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.190
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.505

Online
ISSN
1897-7499
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 44, Issue 4 (Dec 2008)

Issues

Proto-Indo-European Ergativity… Still to be Discussed

Marc Bavant
Published Online: 2009-01-23 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-008-0022-y

Proto-Indo-European Ergativity… Still to be Discussed

Since Uhlenbeck's seminal article ("Agens und Patiens im Kasussystem der indogermanischen Sprachen", 1901) many scholars have accepted the hypothesis of an ergative case in Proto-Indo-European (PIE) given the light it could shed on obscure facts discovered by the comparatist school inside the IE family. The Soviet linguistic school has been particularly active on ergativity in relation with their interests for living languages of the Caucasus and for ancient languages of the Middle East. More recent works on ergativity have shifted the focus to Australian languages. When the theory of language universals took ergativity into consideration, scholars began to seek an explanation of the so-called "split ergativity" in relation with Silverstein's animacy hierarchy. A sequel of this was that the kind of split ergativity demonstrated by PIE seemed contrary to the accepted universals and, consequently, discarded. This paper challenges the way language universals have been used to refute the PIE ergativity hypothesis. Indeed, the influence of the animacy hierarchy is known to be effective in many languages, but more as a tendency than as an absolute universal. Also, PIE is not a fully-fledged language, but rather a field of experimentation. I also present the viewpoint that PIE could have had no split at all, but solely a semantic impossibility to use inanimate noun phrases in an agent role, which seemed backed up by similar "embarrassments" in modern languages and by the so-called "Hittite ergative".

Keywords: Proto-Indo-European; ergativity; typology; Silverstein's hierarchy

  • Bauer, B. 2000. Archaic syntax in Indo-European. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Bossong, G. 1998. "Le marquage différentiel de l'objet dans les langues d'Europe". In: Feuillet J. (ed.), Actance et valence. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 193-258.Google Scholar

  • Comrie, B. 1989. Language universals and typology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Dixon, R. 2002. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Filimonova, E. 2005. "The noun phrase hierarchy and relational marking: Problems and counterevidence". Linguistic Typology 9(1). 77-113.Google Scholar

  • Hjelmslev, L. 1971. Essais linguistiques. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar

  • Katznelson, S. D. 1947a. "K proizxoždeniju èrgativnoj konstrukcii". In: Žirmunskij V. M. (ed.), Èrgativnaja konstrukcija i èrgativnoje predloženije v jazykax različnyx tipov. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka". 33-41.Google Scholar

  • Katznelson, S. D. 1947b. "Èrgativnaja konstrukcija i èrgativnoe predloženie". Izvestija AN SSSR VI(1). 43-49.Google Scholar

  • Kilarski, M. 2007. "Algonquian and Indo-European gender in a historiographic perspective". Historiographia Linguistica 34(2). 333-349.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kortlandt, F. 1983. "Proto-Indo-European verbal syntax". Journal of Indo-European Studies 11. 307-324.Google Scholar

  • Kuryłowicz, J. 1946. "Èrgativnost' i stadial'nost' v jazyke". Izvestija AN SSSR V(5). 387-393.Google Scholar

  • Laroche, E. 1962. "Un ‘ergatif’ en indo-européen d'Asie Mineure". Bulletin de la Societé de Linguistique de Paris 57. 23-43.Google Scholar

  • Ledo-Lemos, F. 2003. Femininum Genus: A study on the origins of the Indo-European feminine grammatical gender. Munich: Lincom-Europa.Google Scholar

  • Lehmann, W. 1995. Theoretical bases of Indo-European linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Lehmann, W. "Proto-Indo-European syntax" http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/books/pies05.html

  • Meillet, A. 1931. "Essai de chronologie des langues indo-européennes - La théorie du féminin". Bulletin de la Societé de Linguistique de Paris 32. 1-28.Google Scholar

  • Meillet, A. 1937. Introduction à l'étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar

  • Meščaninov, I. I. 1967. Èrgativnaja konstrukcija v jazykax različnyx tipov. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka".Google Scholar

  • Rumsey, A. 1987. "The chimera of Proto-Indo-European ergativity". Lingua 71. 297-318.Google Scholar

  • Sánchez-Lafuente André, Á. 2006. "El género gramatical en latí: teorís ergativistas". In: Valverde Sánchez, M., E. A. Calderó Dorda and A. Morales Ortiz (eds.), Koinós lógos: Homenaje al profesor José García López. Murcia: Unniversidad de Murcia. 945-952.Google Scholar

  • Savčenko, A. N. 1967. "Èrgativnaja konstrukcija predloženija v praindoevropejskom jazyke". In: Žirmunskij V. M. (ed.), Èrgativnaja konstrukcija i èrgativnoje predloženije v jazykax različnyx tipov. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka". 74-90.Google Scholar

  • Seriot, P. Cours de linguistique russe: Verbes pronominaux. (Université de Lausanne.) http://www2.unil.ch/slav/ling/cours/a06-07/B2/SERIOT/Vbpron.pdf

  • Szemerényi, O. 1999. Introduction to Indo-European linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Tchekhoff, C. 1978. "Le double cas sujet des inanimés: Un archaïsme de la syntaxe hittite?". Bulletin de la Societé de Linguistique de Paris 77. 225-241.Google Scholar

  • The Universals Archive. http://typo.uni-konstanz.de/archive/intro/index.php

  • Tronskij, I. M. 1967. "O donominativnom prošlom indoevropejskix jakykov". In: Žirmunskij V. M. (ed.), Èrgativnaja konstrukcija i èrgativnoje predloženije v jazykax različnyx tipov. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo "Nauka". 91-94.Google Scholar

  • Uhlenbeck, C. 1901. "Agens und Patiens im Kasussystem der indogermanischen Sprachen". Indogermanische Forschungen 12. 170-172.Google Scholar

  • Vaillant, A. 1936. "L'ergatif indo-européen". Bulletin de la Societé de Linguistique de Paris 37. 93-108.Google Scholar

  • Villar, F 1984. "Ergativity and animate/inanimate gender in Indo-European". Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 97. 167-196.Google Scholar

About the article


Published Online: 2009-01-23

Published in Print: 2008-12-01


Citation Information: Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, ISSN (Online) 1897-7499, ISSN (Print) 0137-2459, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-008-0022-y.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in