This paper discusses reciprocal constructions in Hittite, framed within the typology of reciprocals laid out by Nedjalkov (2007), König & Gast (2008), and Evans et al. (2011). Hittite attests to at least three reciprocal markers, that is, the middle voice, the particle =za, and three different polyptotic constructions, based on the iteration of the numeral šia- ‘one’, the demonstrative ka- ‘this’, and the noun ara- ‘fellow, comrade’ respectively. Synchronically, these three strategies cover different sub-domains of reciprocity, as they encode different kinds of reciprocal situations and display different syntactic properties. These differences can be accounted for by taking into account the processes out of which these constructions developed, which can be described in terms of grammaticalization (Heine & Miyashita 2008). In this respect, beside enriching our knowledge of reciprocals in Indo-European languages, this paper also contributes to our general understanding of the diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions.

A synchronic and diachronic typology of Hittite reciprocal constructions

Inglese G
2017-01-01

Abstract

This paper discusses reciprocal constructions in Hittite, framed within the typology of reciprocals laid out by Nedjalkov (2007), König & Gast (2008), and Evans et al. (2011). Hittite attests to at least three reciprocal markers, that is, the middle voice, the particle =za, and three different polyptotic constructions, based on the iteration of the numeral šia- ‘one’, the demonstrative ka- ‘this’, and the noun ara- ‘fellow, comrade’ respectively. Synchronically, these three strategies cover different sub-domains of reciprocity, as they encode different kinds of reciprocal situations and display different syntactic properties. These differences can be accounted for by taking into account the processes out of which these constructions developed, which can be described in terms of grammaticalization (Heine & Miyashita 2008). In this respect, beside enriching our knowledge of reciprocals in Indo-European languages, this paper also contributes to our general understanding of the diachronic typology of reciprocal constructions.
2017
41
4
956
1006
http://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.17019.ing
Inglese G
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1856164
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact