[Lingtyp] derivational sources of participles and sources of passive

Randy John LaPolla (Prof) RandyLaPolla at ntu.edu.sg
Sat Jul 2 22:15:09 EDT 2016


Hi Sergey,
Related to the development of middle marking and deponents, as well as the extension (what I assume you mean by “refine” and “abstractivize”) of morphological marking, I have the following paper:

LaPolla, Randy J. 1995. On the utility of the concepts of markedness and prototypes in understanding the development of morphological systems. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology  66.4:1149-1185.
http://randylapolla.net/papers/LaPolla_1995_On_the_Utility_of_the_Concepts_of_Markedness_and_Prototypes_in_Understanding_the_Development_of_Morphological_Systems.pdf

And for more on the development of reflexive to middle to stativization, the following paper gives more details on one of the issues discussed in the 1995 paper:

LaPolla, Randy J. & Yang, Jiangling. 2005. Reflexive and middle marking in Dulong-Rawang. Himalayan Linguistics 2: 1-13
 http://randylapolla.net/Papers/LaPolla_and_Yang_2005_Reflexive_and_Middle_Marking_in_Dulong-Rawang.pdf

All the best,
Randy
-----
Prof. Randy J. LaPolla, PhD FAHA (羅仁地)| Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies | Nanyang Technological University
HSS-03-45, 14 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 637332 | Tel: (65) 6592-1825 GMT+8h | Fax: (65) 6795-6525 | http://randylapolla.net/


On 2 Jul 2016, at 8:39 PM, Sergey Lyosov <sergelyosov at inbox.ru<mailto:sergelyosov at inbox.ru>> wrote:




Dear colleagues,
 Please permit me a philosophical question. We all know that today’s affixes are yesterday’s lexical words. And what about today’s grammatical patterns? I think first of all about “participles”, both active and passive.  An example is Latin, with its passive participle used to form analytical tense forms. Intuitively, I would guess no passive participle pattern is ever born as “a passive participle.” It is rather born as a pattern (or derivation rule) for adjectives with more concrete pattern sense, not with the highly abstract and refined meaning of passive nominalization. The same applies to active participles.
Synthetic finite forms of passive raise the same question. Say, inner passive patterns of Arabic and   -or, -ris, -tur, -mur, -minī -ntur of Latin. In both Arabic and Latin there are “deponent verbs”.  Their existence is an additional hint to the effect that the passive meaning of these markers is not a pristine one, that they used to be the grammatical markers of something else than Passive.
Who has worked on how grammatical markers and patterns “refine” and “abstractivize”  their meanings? And, in particular, on derivational sources of participles?

Thank you very much,

Sergey

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose its contents.
Towards a sustainable earth: Print only when necessary. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20160703/4d980638/attachment.html>


More information about the Lingtyp mailing list