Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 5:2 (2015) ► pp.267–296

On the mechanisms of the grammaticalization of comitative and instrumental categories in Slavic

| Pace University
This article critically assesses probabilistic predictions on the theory of contact-induced grammaticalization of the comitative-instrumental polysemy in those Slavic languages which have had a history of long and intense interaction with either German or Italian. Having provided extensive dialectal data, I argue instead that there are no grounds for positing a direct correlation between the introduction of the comitative preposition to instrumental in “high-contact” Slavic languages and the history of language contact with German or Italian. I propose to distinguish between the grammaticalization of the comitative-instrumental polysemy due to analytic simplification and the grammaticalization of the instrumental-comitative polysemy due to synthetic simplification. The comitative marking for instrumentals in Slavic is likely to develop in places of prolonged multilingual contacts, not necessarily with German or Italian. Under these conditions one can predict the development of convergent analytic features in closely related or even areally contingent languages (dialects), as is the case of the Circum-Baltic area.
Keywords: analytic simplification, grammaticalization, instrumental-comitative polysemy, synthetic simplification, comitative-instrumental polysemy
Published online: 11 February 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.5.2.03dan
References (75)
Ambrazas, Vitautas, ed. 1997. Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Baltos Lankos.Google Scholar
Andersen, Henning. 2009. Reduplication in Slavic and Baltic: Loss and Renewal. Morphology 19:2.113–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arkušyn, Hryhorij L’vovyč. 2012. Zaxidnopolis’ka dialektolohija. Luc’k: Volyns’kyj nacional’nyj universytet imeni Lesi UkrajinskyGoogle Scholar
Bąk, Stanisław, ed. 1939. Teksty gwarowe z polskiego Śląska 1. Kraków: Polska Akademija Umieje¸tności.Google Scholar
Berger, Tilman. 2008. Studien zur historischen Grammatik des Tschechischen. Bohemistische Beiträge zur Kontaktlinguistik. Munich: LINCOM EUROPA.Google Scholar
Bernštejn, Samuil Borisovič. 1958. Tvoritel’nyj padež v slavjanskix jazykax. Moscow: Akademija nauk SSSR.Google Scholar
Bevzenko, Stepan Pylypovyč. 1980. Ukrajins’ka dialektolohija. Kyiv: Vyšča škola.Google Scholar
Bidnošyja, Jurij. 2007. Analityčni tendenciji v pivničnoukrajins’kyx hovirkax (zamina bezpryjmennykovoho daval’noho pryjmennykovymy konstrukcijamy v hovirkax Pidljaššja ta kyjivs’koho Polissja). Volyn’ filolohična: tekst i kontekst 41.32–45.Google Scholar
Buffa, Ferdinand. 1953. Nárečie Dlnej Lúky v Bardejovskom okrese. Bratislava: Vydavatel’stvo Slovenskej Akadémie Vied.Google Scholar
Čekmonas, Valery. 2001. Russian Varieties in the Southeastern Baltic Area: Rural Dialects. The Circum-Baltic Languages: Typology and Contact. Volume I: Past and Present ed. by Östen Dahl & Marija Koptjevskaja Tamm, 101–136. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danylenko, Andrii. 2000 [1997]. The Genitive of Agent and the Instrumental of Means in Old Ukrainian. General Linguistics 371.41–70.Google Scholar
. 2003. Predykaty, vidminky i diatezy v ukrajins’kij movi: istoryčnyj i typolohičnyj aspekty. Xarkiv: Oko.Google Scholar
. 2005. Is There Any Possessive Perfect in North Russian? WORD 56:3.347–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Slavica et Islamica: Ukrainian in Context. Munich: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
. 2008. Polemics without Polemics: Myxajlo Andrella in Ruthenian (Ukrainian) Literary Space. Studia Slavica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 53:1.123–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Between the Vernacular and Slaveno-Rusyn: The Huklyvyj Chronicle and the Eighteenth-Century Rusyn Literary Language. Slavia Orientalis 59:1.53–75.Google Scholar
. 2011. Linguistic and Cultural Border Crossings in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania or, Can the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Be Defined as a Sprachareal? Langues baltiques, langues slaves ed. by Daniel Petit, 141–173. Paris: CNRS Editions.Google Scholar
. 2012. Auxiliary Clitics in Southwest Ukrainian: Questions of Chronology, Areal Distribution, and Grammaticalization. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 20:1.3–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Ukrainian in the Language Map of Central Europe: Questions of Areal-Typological Profiling. Journal of Language Contact 6:1.134–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delbrück, Berthold. 1893. Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen. Part 1. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, Ernst. 1929. Syntax der litauischen Postpositionen und Präpositionen. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Gardzińska, Janina. 2001. Z zagadnień składni dialektalnej. Siedlice: Instytut Historii AP.Google Scholar
Gawroński, Andrzej. 1922. O przyimku dla w dzisiejszej polszczyźnie. Je¸zyk Polski 7:1.1–12.Google Scholar
Haudry, Jean. 1970. L’instrumental et la structure de la phrase simple en indo-européan. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique 651.44–84.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2006. The Changing Languages of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hošek, Ignác. 1905. Nářečí Českomoravské 2: Podřečí polnické, 1: Mluvnický nástin podřečí polnického. Prague: Nákladem České Akademie Císaře Františka Josefa pro Vĕdy, Slovesnost a Umĕní.Google Scholar
Hujer, Oldřich. 1961. Příspĕvky k historii a dialektologii českého jazyka. Prague: Nakl. Československé vĕd.Google Scholar
Ivić, Milka. 1954. Značenja srpskohrvatskog instrumental i njihov razvoj. Belgrade: Institut za srpski jezik SANU.Google Scholar
Ivić, Pavle. 1957. O govoru galipoljskih srba ( Srpski dijalektološki zbornik 12). Belgrade: Naučna knj.Google Scholar
Jašinskaitė, Irena. 1957. Kirtis, priegaidė ir jų poveikis vokalizmui Biržų tarmėje. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 11.189–195.Google Scholar
Klemensiewicz-Bajerowa, Irena. 1952. O podwajaniu polskich przyimkow. Je¸zyk Polski 32:4.156–163.Google Scholar
Koneski, Blaže. 1982. Istorija na makedonskiot jazik. Skopje: Kultura.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 2002. New Prospects for the Study of Dialect Syntax: Impetus from Syntactic Theory and Language Typology. Syntactic Microvariation ed. by Sjef Barbiers, Leonie Cornips & Susanne van der Kleij, 185–213. Amsterdam: SAND.Google Scholar
Kurzová, Helena. 1997. Morphosyntactic Processes in Europe. Proceedings of LP’96 ed. by Bohumil Palek, 279–294. Prague: Charles University Press.Google Scholar
Kurzowa, Zofia. 2006. Je¸zyk polski Wileńszczyzny i kresów północno-wschodnich XVI-XX w. Kraków: Universitas.Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania & Bernd Heine. 2012. An Integrative Model of Grammaticalization. Grammatical Replication and Borrowability in Language Contact ed. by Björn Wiemer, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen, 159–190. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuz’mina, Irina Borisovna. 1985 [1982]. O nekotoryx sintaksičeskix javlenijax vostočnoslavjanskix jazykov. Obščeslavjanskij atlas. Materialy i islledovanija 16, 23–29. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Logar, Tine. 1958. O izgubi nominalnih končnic v nekaterih slovenskih primorskih govorih. Slavistična revija 1:11.109–112.Google Scholar
. 1996. Dialektološke in jezikovnozgodovinske razprave. Ljubljana: Znanstvenoraziskovalni center SAZU; Inštitut za slovenski jezik Frana Ramovša.Google Scholar
Łoś, Jan. 1904. Funkcje narze¸dnika w je¸zyku polskim. Rozprawy Akademii umieje¸tności. Wydzaił filologiczny (Serya II) 251.94–154.Google Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 2001a. Syncretism and the Classification of Semantic Roles. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 54:4.35–51.Google Scholar
. 2001b. Some Remarks on Instrument, Comitative, and Agent in Indo-European. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 54:4.385–401.Google Scholar
Markoviḱ, Marjan. 2013. Formalna i funkcionalna analiza na predlogot vo makedonskite dijalekti. Rocznik slawistyczny 621.77–91.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron & Jeanette Sakel. 2007. Investigating the Mechanisms of Pattern Replication in Language Convergence. Studies in Language 31:1.829–865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mel’nikov, Gennadij Prokop’evič. 1971. Determinanta – veduščaja grammatičeskaja tendencija jazyka. Fonetika, fonologija, grammatika: K semidesjatiletiju A.A. Reformatskogo, 359–367. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
. 2003. Sistemnaja tipologija jazykov. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Mrazek, Roman. 1964. Sintaksis russkogo tvoritel’nogo. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.Google Scholar
Nepokupnyj, Anatolij Pavlovič. 1964. Areal’nye aspekty balto-slavjanskix otnošenij. Kiev: Naukova dumka.Google Scholar
Nitsch, Kazimierz. 1957. Dialekty je¸zyka polskiego z 3 mapami. Wrocław–Kraków: Zakład narodowy im. Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
. 1960. Wybór polskich tekstów gwarowych. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
Nomachi, Motoki & Bernd Heine. 2011. On Predicting Contact-Induced Grammatical Change: Evidence from Slavic languages. Journal of Historical Linguistics 1:1.48–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pan’kevyč, Ivan. 1938. Ukrajins’ki hovory Pidkarpats’koji Rusy i sumežnyx oblastej I: Zvučnja i morfolohija. Praha: Orbis.Google Scholar
Peco, Asim. 1957. Socijativ bez predloga s . Naš jezik 8:5–6.175–183.Google Scholar
Požarickaja, Sof’ja Konstantinovna. 2004. Bespredložnyj tvoritel’nyj padež v severnorusskix govorax na obščeslavjanskom fone (semantika i sintaksis). Issledovanija po slavjanskoj dialektologii 9: Metody izučenija territorial’nyx i social’nyx dialektov. K itogam opyta slavjanskoj dialektologii XX v1.,131–158. Moscow: Istitut slavjanovedenija RAN.Google Scholar
Proxorova, Svetlana Mixajlovna. 1991. Sintaksis perexodnoj russko-belorusskoj zony: Areal’no-tipologičeskoe issledovanie. Minsk: Universitetskoe.Google Scholar
Reindl, Donald F. 2008. Language Contact: German and Slovenian. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Schmalstieg, William R. 1966. The Preposition s + the Instrumental. Slavic and East European Journal 10:2.178–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shevelov, George Y. 1979. A Historical Phonology of the Ukrainian Language. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Sławski, Franciszek. 1961. Ze składni staropolskiego narze¸dnika. Je¸zyk Polski 41.4. 302–308.Google Scholar
Sobolev, Andrej N. 2009. From synthetic to analytic case. Variation in South Slavic dialects. The Oxford Handbook of Case ed. by Andrej [N.] Malchukov & Andrew Spencer, 716–729. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steenwijk, Han. 1992. The Slovene Dialect of Resia: San Giorgio. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas. 2001. On Circum-Baltic Instrumentals and Comitatives: To and Fro Coherence. The Circum-Baltic Languages: Typology and Contact, Volume II: Grammar and Typology ed. by Östen Dahl & Marija Koptjevskaja Tamm, 591–612. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomaszewski, Adam. 1927. Błe¸dy je¸zykowe uczniów szkół poznańskich. Je¸zyk Polski 12:2.45–52, 3.81–85.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2011. Sociolinguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tymčenko, Jevhen. 1926. Vokatyv i instrumental’ v ukrajins’kij movi. Kyiv: Ukrajins’ka Akademija Nauk.Google Scholar
Utĕšený, Slavomír. 1962. O jazyce českých osad na jihu rumunského Banátu. Český lid 49:5.201–209.Google Scholar
Vaillant, André. 1977. Grammaire comparé dea langues slaves 5: La syntax. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Verxrats’kyj, Ivan. 1899. Znadoby do piznanja uhorsko-rus’kyx hovoriv. Slovarec’. L’viv: Naukove Tovarystvo im. Ševčenka.Google Scholar
. 1901. Znadoby do piznanja uhorsko-rus’kyx hovoriv. Hovory z naholosom stalym. Zapysky Naukovoho Tovarystva im. Ševčenka 401.1–113, 441.114–224; 1902: 451.225–280.Google Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard. 2012. Grammaticalization Clines in Space: Zooming in on Synchronic Traces of Diffusion Processes. In Björn Wiemer, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen, eds., 233–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiemer, Björn & Bernhard Wälchli. 2012. Contact-Induced Grammatical Change: Diverse Phenomena, Diverse Perspectives. In Björn Wiemer, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen, eds., 3–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiemer, Björn, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen, eds. 2012. Grammatical Replication and Borrowability in Language Contact. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wirth, Paul. 1940. Zur Reduplikation von Präpositionen im Sorbischen. Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie 171.69–70.Google Scholar
Witaszek-Samborska, Małgorzata. 2006. Odrębnošci w polszczyźnie Poznania. Horyzonty Polonistyki 81.20–25.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Wandl, Florian & Rafał Szeptyński
2024.  Egda žena otročęmь xoditъ. On the 5th prescription in the Old Church Slavic Folia medicinalia . Zeitschrift für Slawistik 69:2 ► pp. 362 ff. DOI logo
Bakhtikireeva, Uldanai M. & Olga I. Valentinova
2022. “Language thinking” from the perspective of systemic linguistics. Russian Journal of Linguistics 26:1 ► pp. 224 ff. DOI logo
Danylenko, Andrii
2017. A missing chain? On the sociolinguistics of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Acta Baltico-Slavica 41 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Danylenko, Andrii
2018. The Arabs, the Slavs, and United Europe or, the vagaries of the development of Indo-European perfect. Lingua 203 ► pp. 16 ff. DOI logo
Danylenko, Andrii
2019. Do the parallels meet?. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 33 ► pp. 150 ff. DOI logo
Danylenko, Andrii
2021. “Mountain of Tongues” The Languages of the Caucasus in Arabic-Islamic Sources . In Armenia, Caucaso e Asia Centrale. Ricerche 2021 [Eurasiatica , 18], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.