000 04451nam a22006255i 4500
001 233034
003 IT-RoAPU
005 20230501182608.0
006 m|||||o||d||||||||
007 cr || ||||||||
008 230228t20082008gw fo d z eng d
019 _a(OCoLC)890620280
020 _a9783110195866
_qprint
020 _a9783110198614
_qPDF
024 7 _a10.1515/9783110198614
_2doi
035 _a(DE-B1597)9783110198614
035 _a(DE-B1597)33869
035 _a(OCoLC)320868200
040 _aDE-B1597
_beng
_cDE-B1597
_erda
050 4 _aPK6035.H35 2008
072 7 _aLAN009000
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a491.5
084 _aonline - DeGruyter
100 1 _aHaig, Geoffrey L.J.
_eautore
245 1 0 _aAlignment Change in Iranian Languages :
_bA Construction Grammar Approach /
_cGeoffrey L.J. Haig.
264 1 _aBerlin ;
_aBoston :
_bDe Gruyter Mouton,
_c[2008]
264 4 _c©2008
300 _a1 online resource (366 p.)
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
490 0 _aEmpirical Approaches to Language Typology [EALT] ,
_x0933-761X ;
_v37
505 0 0 _tFrontmatter --
_tContents --
_tAbbreviations --
_tChapter 1. Introduction --
_tChapter 2. Alignment in Old Iranian --
_tChapter 3. Western Middle Iranian --
_tChapter 4. Case systems in West Iranian --
_tChapter 5. Kurdish (Northern Group) --
_tChapter 6. The Central group --
_tChapter 7. Conclusions --
_tBackmatter
506 0 _arestricted access
_uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
_fonline access with authorization
_2star
520 _aThe Iranian languages, due to their exceptional time-depth of attestation, constitute one of the very few instances where a shift from accusative alignment to split-ergativity is actually documented. Yet remarkably, within historical syntax, the Iranian case has received only very superficial coverage. This book provides the first in-depth treatment of alignment change in Iranian, from Old Persian (5 C. BC) to the present. The first part of the book examines the claim that ergativity in Middle Iranian emerged from an Old Iranian agented passive construction. This view is rejected in favour of a theory which links the emergence of ergativity to External Possession. Thus the primary mechanisms involved is not reanalysis, but the extension of a pre-existing construction. The notion of Non-Canonical Subjecthood plays a pivotal role, which in the present account is linked to the semantics of what is termed Indirect Participation. In the second part of the book, a comparative look at contemporary West Iranian is undertaken. It can be shown that throughout the subsequent developments in the morphosyntax, distinct components such as agreement, nominal case marking, or the grammar of cliticisation, in fact developed remarkably independently of one another. It was this de-coupling of sub-systems of the morphosyntax that led to the notorious multiplicity of alignment types in Iranian, a fact that also characterises past-tense alignments in the sister branch of Indo-European, Indo-Aryan. Along with data from more than 20 Iranian languages, presented in a manner that renders them accessible to the non-specialist, there is extensive discussion of more general topics such as the adequacy of functional accounts of changes in case systems, discourse pressure and the role of animacy, the notion of drift, and the question of alignment in early Indo-European.
530 _aIssued also in print.
538 _aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546 _aIn English.
588 0 _aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 28. Feb 2023)
650 0 _aIranian languages
_xErgative constructions.
650 0 _aIranian languages
_xTense.
650 0 _aIranian languages
_xTransitivity.
650 0 _aIranian languages
_xVerb.
650 4 _aConstruction grammar.
650 4 _aIran /Sprache.
650 4 _aKurdisch.
650 7 _aLANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General.
_2bisacsh
653 _aConstruction grammar, Iranian, Kurdish.
850 _aIT-RoAPU
856 4 0 _uhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198614
856 4 0 _uhttps://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9783110198614
856 4 2 _3Cover
_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/cover/isbn/9783110198614/original
942 _cEB
999 _c233034
_d233034