Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g7rbq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T10:29:11.984Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Gothic Genitive Plural in -ē Revisited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Kenneth Shields Jr
Kenneth Shields Jr
Affiliation:
Department of EnglishMillersville UniversityMillersville, PA 17551 [kshields@marauder.millersv.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this brief paper it is proposed that the problematic Gothic genitive plural suffix in -ē may derive from a grammaticalized deictic particle. Typological and specifically Indo-European evidence for the derivation of genitive markers from deictic particles is presented in support of this hypothesis.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , Fall 1997 , pp. 239 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adrados, Francisco R. 1985. Der Ursprung der grammatischen Kategorien des Indoeuropäischen. Grammatische Kategorien: Funktion und Geschichte, ed. by Schlerath, B. and Rittner, V., 1–46. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert.Google Scholar
Anttila, Raimo. 1989. Historical and comparative linguistics. 2nd edn.Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldi, Philip. 1983. An introduction to the Indo-European languages. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Richard C. 1975. Final long vowels in Gothic. Studia Linguistica 29. 16–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1911. Grundriß der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Vol. 2.2. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner.Google Scholar
Burrow, T. 1973. The Sanskrit language. Rev. edn. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere, and Pagliuca, William. 1995. The evolution of grammar: Tenseaspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1978. Locationals: Existential, locative, and possessive constructions. Universals of human language, ed. by Greenberg, J., 4. 85–126. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Eska, Joseph. 1988. The origin of the Gothic genitive plural in -ē. Indogermanische Forschungen 93. 186–96.Google Scholar
Friedrich, Johannes. 1974. Hethitisches Elementarbuch I. 2nd edn.Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Friedrich, Paul. 1987. The Proto-Indo-European adpreps (spatio-temporal auxiliaries). Festschrift for Henry Hoenigswald, ed. by Cardona, G. and Zide, N., 131–42. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Gray, Louis. 1932. On Indo-European noun-declension, especially of -o- and ā stems. Language 8. 183–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirt, Hermann. 1927. Indogermanische Grammatik. Vol. 3. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Hollifield, Patrick H. 1980a. The phonological development of final syllables in Germanic (part 1). Die Sprache 26. 19–53.Google Scholar
Hollifield, Patrick H. 1980b. The phonological development of final syllables in Germanic (part 2). Die Sprache 26. 145–78Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Houwink ten Gate, Philo. 1967. The ending -d of the Hittite possessive pronouns. Revue hittite et asianique 24. 123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Asbury Wesley. 1979. Gothic final syllables: A new look at the phonological and morphological developments from Germanic. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Josephson, Folke. 1967. Pronominal adverbs of Anatolian: Formation and function. Revue hittite et asianique 24. 133–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kortlandt, Frederik. 1978. On the history of the genitive plural in Slavic, Baltic, Germanic, and Indo-European. Lingua 45. 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, Wolfgang, and Thomas, Werner. 1960. Tocharisches Elementarbuch. Vol. 1. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1964. The inflectional categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1968. Indogermanische Grammatik. Vol. 2. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1958. On earlier stages of the Indo-European nominal inflection. Language 34. 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1967. The Gothic genitive plural -ē: Focus of exercises in theory. Papers in honor of Leon Dostert, ed. by Austin, W., 108–11. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1974. Proto-Indo-European syntax. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1992. Theoretical bases of Indo-European linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Levin, Saul. 1992. Studies in comparative grammar ii: The prehistory of the Indo-European thematic declension, in view of the Semitic cognates. General Linguistics 32. 112–44.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1968. Existence, location, possession, and transitivity. Logic, methodology, and philosophy of science, ed. by Rootselaar, B. van and Staal, T., 3. 495–509. Amsterdam: North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John. 1971. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Markey, T. L. 1970. A note on Germanic directional and place adverbs. Studia Linguistica 24. 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markey, T. L. 1979. Deixis and the u−perfect. Journal of Indo-European Studies 7. 65–75.Google Scholar
Mažiulis, V. 1970. Baltų ir kitų indoeuropiečių kalbų santykiai. Vilnius: Mintis.Google Scholar
Schmalstieg, William. 1980. Indo-European linguistics: A new synthesis. University Park, PA and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Gernot. 1962. Studien zum germanischen Adverb. Berlin: Ernst Reuter Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1979. The Gothic genitive plural ending -ē. Leuvense Bijdragen 68. 257–68.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1982a. Indo-European noun inflection: A developmental history. University Park, PA and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1982b. The origin of the Tocharian locative suffixes. Journal of the American Oriental Society 102. 129–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1983. Hittite pronominal suffixes in -l. Indogermanische Forschungen 88. 191–201.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1991. The emergence of the non-singular category in Indo-European. Lingua Posnaniensis 34. 75–82.Google Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1992. A history of Indo-European verb morphology. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shields, Kenneth Jr. 1995. The Indo-European genitive marker *-r. Evidence from Germanic and other dialects. NOWELE 25. 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sihler, Andrew. 1995. New comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Specht, Franz. 1947. Der Ursprung der indogermanischen Deklination. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, Edgar. 1933. A comparative grammar of the Hittite language. Philadelphia: Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
van Helten, W. L. 1893. Die got. Endung -ē des Genit. Plur. PBB 17. 570–73.Google Scholar
Voyles, Joseph B. 1992. Early Germanic grammar: Pre-, proto-, and post-Germanic languages. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar