Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Dative sickness: Aphylogenetic analysis of argument structure evolution in Germanic
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Languages, Department of Linguistics and Philology.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5349-5252
Univ Nottingham, Nottingham, England.
University of California, Davis, USA.
Univ Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Language, ISSN 0097-8507, E-ISSN 1535-0665, Vol. 93, no 1, p. E1-E22Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A major argument against the feasibility of reconstructing syntax for proto-stages is the widely discussed lack of directionality of syntactic change. In a recent typology of changes in argument structure constructions based on Germanic (Barodal 2015), several different, yet opposing, changes are reported. These include, among others, processes sometimes called dative sickness, nominative sickness, and accusative sickness. In order to tease apart the roles of the different processes, we have carried out a phylogenetic trait analysis on a predefined data set of twelve predicates found across the Germanic phyla using the MULTISTATE method. This is, as far as we are aware, the first application of the MULTISTATE method (Pagel et al. 2004) in historical syntax. The results clearly favor one of the models, the dative sickness model, over any other model, as this model is the only one that can accurately account for both the observed diversity of case frames and the independently proposed philological reconstructions. Methods of evolutionary trait analysis can be used to model evolutionary paths of argument structure constructions, and they provide the perfect testing ground for hypotheses arrived at through philological reconstruction, based on classical historical-comparative methods.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 93, no 1, p. E1-E22
Keywords [en]
syntactic reconstruction, noncanonical case-marked subjects, argument structure, phylogenetic methods, historical syntax, Germanic
National Category
Specific Languages
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-376852DOI: 10.1353/lan.2017.0012ISI: 000445597700001OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-376852DiVA, id: diva2:1288483
Funder
EU, European Research Council, 313416Available from: 2019-02-13 Created: 2019-02-13 Last updated: 2019-02-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(266 kB)72 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 266 kBChecksum SHA-512
85d5a9021519017e62d77f8fe24522393be7b4292ce9ba80745fbcab11c41918045ce3a678c4bb9d7b17e2c704ea15bd096b896660e2bc6fcd2fe8f1f94b41cc
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Dunn, Michael
By organisation
Department of Linguistics and Philology
In the same journal
Language
Specific Languages

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 72 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 38 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf