582
views
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    22
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reconstructing Syntactic Variation in Proto-Indo-European

      research-article
      Indo-European Linguistics
      Brill
      comparative method, internal reconstruction, syntax, Indo-European

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper discusses the problem of linguistic reconstruction in the Indo-European languages with particular attention to syntax. While many scholars consider syntactic reconstruction as being in principle impossible, other scholars simply apply to syntax the same tenets of the Comparative Method and of Internal Reconstruction, which were originally used in Indo-European studies for reconstructing phonology and morphology. Accordingly, it is assumed that synchronically anomalous syntactic structures are more ancient than productive syntactic constructions; the former are considered as being residues of an early stage of Proto-Indo-European, where they were also more regular and took part in a consistent syntactic system. Various hypotheses of Proto-Indo-European as a syntactically consistent language, which in the last years have witnessed resurgence, are here discussed and criticized. We argue that syntactic consistency is nowhere attested in the Indo-European languages, which in their earliest records rather document an amazing structural variation. Accordingly, we reconstruct Proto-Indo-European as an inconsistent syntactic system in the domains of word order, agreement, configurationality, and alignment, and we consider inconsistency and structural variation to be an original condition of languages. Moreover, we make some proposals for the appropriate use of typology in linguistic reconstruction, with some examples of what can or cannot be reconstructed in syntax.

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Object-verb order and adjective-noun order: Dispelling a myth

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The correspondence problem in syntactic reconstruction

              While considerable swathes of the phonology and morphology of proto-languages have been reconstructed using the comparative method, syntax has lagged behind. Jeffers (1976) and Lightfoot (2002a), among others, have questioned whether syntax can be reconstructed at all, claiming that a fundamental problem exists in applying the techniques of phonological reconstruction to syntax. Others, such as Harris & Campbell (1995) and, following them, Barðdal & Eythórsson (2012), have claimed that the problem does not arise in their frameworks. This paper critically examines the isomorphism between phonological and syntactic reconstruction, made possible by an ‘item-based’ view of syntactic variation as assumed within Minimalist theories of syntax as well as Construction Grammar and others. A case study dealing with the ‘middle voice’ suffix - sk in early North Germanic is presented in support of the approach. While the conclusion drawn is not as pessimistic as that of Lightfoot (2002a), it is argued that the ‘correspondence problem’ is real and that reconstruction of syntax is therefore necessarily more difficult, and speculative, than that of phonology. Resume Si des pans entiers de la phonologie et de la morphologie des proto-langues ont pu etre reconstruits grace a la methode comparative, la syntaxe est restee, elle, peu touchee. Jeffers (1976) et Lightfoot (2002a), entre autres, ont emis des doutes sur la possibilite de reconstruire veritablement toute syntaxe, avancant un probleme fondamental dans l’application a la syntaxe des techniques de la reconstruction phonologique. D’autres, tels que Harris & Campbell (1995), et, par la suite, Barddal & Eythorsson (2012), ont fait valoir que ce probleme ne survenait pas dans leur systeme. Nous faisons ici un examen critique de l’isomorphisme entre les reconstructions phonologique et syntaxique, en nous appuyant sur la vision ‘par item’ de la variation syntaxique telle qu’elle est concue dans le cadre des theories de la syntaxe du programme minimaliste, des grammaires de construction et de bien d’autres encore. Afin d’etayer cette demarche, nous presentons une etude de cas portant sur le suffixe - sk en vieux scandinave. Si nous n’en tirons pas une conclusion aussi pessimiste que celle de Lightfoot (2002a), nous n’en pensons pas moins que ‘le probleme de la correspondance’ est bel et bien reel, et que, necessairement, la reconstruction de la syntaxe est plus difficile et plus conjecturale que celle de la phonologie. Zusammenfassung Wahrend die Phonologie und Morphologie von Proto-Sprachen zu einem bemerkenswert grosen Teil unter Anwendung der komparativen Methode rekonstruiert worden sind, hinkt die Syntax hinterher. Nicht nur Jeffers (1976) und Lightfoot (2002a) haben Bedenken daruber geausert, ob Syntax uberhaupt rekonstruiert werden kann, da es problematisch sei, Techniken, die fur die phonologische Rekonstruktion entwickelt wurden, auf die Syntax anzuwenden. Andere Forscher wie Harris & Campbell (1995) sowie Barddal & Eythorsson (2012) haben behauptet, dass dieses Problem in ihrem Framework nicht auftauche. Im vorliegenden Aufsatz wird die Isomorphie zwischen phonologischer und syntaktischer Rekonstruktion einer kritischen Prufung unterzogen. Ermoglicht wird dies durch eine ‘Item-basierte’ Sicht auf die syntaktische Variation, wie sie beispielsweise innerhalb minimalistischer und konstruktionsgrammatischer Syntaxtheorien und vergleichbaren Ansatzen vertreten wird. Eine Fallstudie zum Suffix - sk im fruhen Nordgermanischen wird zugunsten dieser Herangehensweise angefuhrt. Obwohl die Schlussfolgerung nicht so pessimistisch ausfallt wie diejenige von Lightfoot (2002a), ergibt sich doch, dass das ‘Korrespondenzproblem’ tatsachlich existiert und dass die Rekonstruktion der Syntax daher notwendigerweise schwieriger und spekulativer ist als die der Phonologie.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                22125892
                Indo-European Linguistics
                IEUL
                Brill (The Netherlands )
                2212-5884
                2212-5892
                2014
                : 2
                : 1
                : 73-111
                Affiliations
                University of Zurich, Switzerland carlotta.viti@ 123456klphs.uzh.ch
                Article
                10.1163/22125892-00201004
                95a1ef9e-75d1-4d67-b8a5-c703381a080d
                Copyright 2014 by Carlotta Viti

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0) License.

                History

                Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law
                comparative method,internal reconstruction,syntax,Indo-European
                Social & Behavioral Sciences, Law
                comparative method, internal reconstruction, syntax, Indo-European

                Comments

                Comment on this article