The rise and fall of ergativity in Aramaic. Cycles of alignment change

Cover
The Rise and Fall of Ergativity in Aramaic: Cycles of Alignment Change
Copyright
Dedication
Contents
Series preface
Acknowledgements
List of maps and tables
	Maps
	Tables
Abbreviations and glosses
	Transcription of Semitic languages
	Symbols
	Signs used in texts
1: Introduction
2: Alignment
	2.1 Alignment of verbal arguments
		2.1.1 Syntactic alignment
		2.1.2 Semantic/Split-S alignment
		2.1.3 Manifestation of alignment
	2.2 Pathways of alignment change
		2.2.1 Introduction
		2.2.2 Accusative > ergative
			i. Via a passive construction
			ii. Via a possessive predication construction
			iii. Pathways involving a passive/P-oriented participle
			iv. Via an inverse construction
			v. Via the reanalysis of an instrumental as ergative in a clause with zero-marked subject
		vi. Via a nominalization as part of a periphrastic verb form
		2.2.3 Ergative > accusative
			i. Via an antipassive
			ii. Via an analytical verb form involving an intransitive auxiliary
			iii. Via the reanalysis of topic copy pronouns as person indexing on the verb
		2.2.4 Tense-conditioned alignment arising via new constructions
		2.2.5 Shift from tense-conditioned to consistent alignment
		2.2.6 Accusative > semantic alignment via demotion/suppression of agent
		2.2.7 Accusative > semantic alignment via extension
		2.2.8 Ergative > semantic alignment via demotion/suppression of object
		2.2.9 Similarities and differences between the pathways from syntactic to semantic alignment
		2.2.10 Semantic > syntactic (accusative or ergative) alignment
			i. (Ergative > ) semantic > accusative through extension
			ii. (Accusative > ) semantic > ergative through extension
			iii. Process of extension
		2.2.11 Reconstructing alignment change on the basis of markedness
		2.2.12 Processes involved in alignment change
		2.2.13 The role of language contact
	2.3 The development of tense-conditioned ergativity in Aramaic, Iranian, and Indic
	2.4 A full cycle of alignment change
3: Aramaic
	3.1 Historical stages of Aramaic
	3.2 Morphosyntactic typology of Aramaic
		3.2.1 Root-and-pattern system
		3.2.2 Argument marking
		3.2.3 Word order
		3.2.4 Nominal morphology
4: Alignment in Eastern Neo-Aramaic dialects
	4.1 Overview
	4.2 Dialects with only accusative alignment
		4.2.1 Definition
		4.2.2 Dialects with full inversion of subject/object indexes
		4.2.3 Dialects which only allow S-suffix objects in the third person or not at all
		4.2.4 Summary
	4.3 Jewish South-Eastern Trans-Zab dialects
		4.3.1 Definition
		4.3.2 Alignment in argument indexes
		4.3.3 Semantic/Split-S alignment
	4.4 Excursus: Is there syntactic ergativity in NENA?
		4.4.1 Indexation
		4.4.2 Coreferentiality
		4.4.3 Word order
		4.4.4 Control of reflexives
		4.4.5 Relativization
		4.4.6 Summary
	4.5 Dialects with non-accusative alignment in the perfect
		4.5.1 Definition
		4.5.2 Jewish SE Trans-Zab dialects with non-accusative perfect
		4.5.3 Non-SE Trans-Zab dialects with a transitive/intransitive distinction in the perfect
		4.5.4 Summary
	4.6 uroyo Neo-Aramaic
		4.6.1 Alignment in argument indexes
		4.6.2 Alignment in argument marking on noun phrases
		4.6.3 Absence of ergative alignment elsewhere in the uroyo Group
	4.7 Split-S/semantic alignment in NENA, uroyo, and beyond
	4.8 Alignment patterns in NENA and uroyo argument indexes
5: The verbal system and alignment in earlier Eastern Aramaic
	5.1 Predication and tense-aspect-mood (TAM) categories
	5.2 Alignment
	5.3 The morphosyntax of the Qil li construction in Late Eastern Aramaic
		5.3.1 Patient marking
		5.3.2 Agent marking
		5.3.3 The role of information structure in agent expression
		5.3.4 Other syntactic behaviour of Qil li
		5.3.5 Tense-aspect-mood (TAM) values of Qil li
6: The origin and development of the Qil li construction
	6.1 Introduction
	6.2 Influence of Iranian languages
	6.3 Qil li: From a possessive construction?
	6.4 Link to perfect aspect
	6.5 Possessive versus Passive Theory
	6.6 Passive + Experiencer Dative Theory
	6.7 Experiencer Dative versus Possessive Theory
	6.8 l- marking another semantic role with non-experiential verbs
	6.9 Qil li and passivity
		6.9.1 Claims as to the passive nature of the construction at various diachronic stages
		6.9.2 Is NENA Qlli passive?
		6.9.3 Is Late Aramaic Qil li passive?
		6.9.4 Does Qil li result from the reanalysis of a passive plus agent?
	6.10 Origin of Qil li: Summary
	6.11 Reconstructing the development of Qil li
		6.11.1 Reanalysis of l- as agent marker
		6.11.2 Qil li takes over as the general past perfective
		6.11.3 Development of person indexes on the Present and Past Bases
		6.11.4 The disappearance in most dialects of ergative flagging of noun phrases
	6.12 l- as marker of focused agent in NENA
	6.13 The fate of Qil li in Neo-Mandaic
	6.14 Role of language contact and the linguistic area
		a. Non-accusative alignment
		b. Manifested only in morphology
		c. Tense-conditioned alignment
		d. Split-S alignment
		e. SA class which includes verbs of noise production and bodily functions
	6.15 Summary of the development of tense-conditioned ergativity in Eastern Aramaic
7: The decline of ergative alignment and new developments
	7.1 Introduction
	7.2 Ergative to Accusative via Split-S/semantic alignment
	7.3 Some observations on typological tendencies in SplitS systems
	7.4 Alternative strategies developed for P
	7.5 Why was the ergative not generalized in any Aramaic dialect?
	7.6 Later development of PAST-S and the emergence of new perfects
		7.6.1 PAST-S used for passive
		7.6.2 PAST-S used actively, with implied, usually 3pl., agent
		7.6.3 PAST-S specialized for perfect with intransitives only, creating gap for transitives
		7.6.4 Asymmetry resolved in various ways
			i. Gap for transitives filled by extension of PAST-S to transitives
			ii. Gap for transitives filled by introduction of a new construction
			iii. PAST-S dropped and a new construction used for both transitive and intransitive perfects
			iv. A mixed system develops
		7.6.5 Summary of the development of PAST(intr)-S and competing forms
		7.6.6 Parallels in Aramaic and Semitic to the extension of an intransitive perfect construction to transitives
8: Conclusions
	8.1 The renewal of the Eastern Aramaic verbal system and resultant change in alignment
	8.2 The development of new perfects as a potential trigger for alignment change
	8.3 Implications for theory and future research
Appendices
	Appendix A: All cases of Qil li from the Syriac Corpus (see §6.6)
		New Testament Peshitta (earliest manuscripts fifth century ad, but much of the text possibly very early)
		Book of the Laws of Countries (before fourth century ad)
		Doctrine of Addai (fifth century ad)
		Martyrdom of Barsamya (probably fifth century ad)
		Kalila and Dimna: Chapterof the Ox and the Lion (probably sixth century ad)
	Appendix B: Examples of Qil li gathered from Syriac secondary sources and other miscellaneous examples
		Payne Smith 1879-1901: 1865-6 (selection)
		Nöldeke 1904: 219-20
		Nöldeke 1875: 382-3
		Duval 1881: 316
		Brockelmann 1913: 127
		Gluskina 1965: 21
		Kutscher 1969: 76-8
		Muraoka 1987: 44-5 (also 2005: 67)
		Goldenberg 1992: 117-18
		Van Rompay 1999: 123
		Bar-Asher 2007: 370-1
		Bar-Asher Siegal 2011: 122
		Loesov 2013: 100-1
		Miscellaneous Sources
		Inscriptions
	Appendix C: Examples of Qil li from Jewish Babylonian Aramaic
		Rosenberg 1888: 27
		Margolis 1910: 82
		Schlesinger 1928: 45
		Bar-Asher 2007: 372-3, 378
		Bar-Asher Siegal 2011: 123-4
		Miscellaneous Sources
		Examples from Jewish Babylonian Magic Bowls
	Appendix D: Examples of Qil li from Classical Mandaic
		Nöldeke 1875: 382-4; Macuch 1965: 418, 434 (with addition of neighbouring lines containing further examples)
		Book of John (Lidzbarski 1915)
	Appendix E: Verb lexemes found in Prefix Conjugation forms in the Syriac Corpus
		Intransitive verbs
		Transitive verbs of perception and cognition
		Other transitive verbs
References
	Manuscripts and Databases
Index of languages
Index of subjects