Cover not available
Part of
Language Contact, Continuity and Change in the Genesis of Modern Hebrew
Edited by Edit Doron, Malka Rappaport Hovav, Yael Reshef and Moshe Taube
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 256] 2019
► pp. 55–94

Existential possessive modality in the emergence of Modern Hebrew

| Department of Hebrew Language and Department of Linguistics | The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
This paper documents the evolution of existential possessive modals in a literary corpus of Emergent Modern Hebrew (EMH). Modal uses of the existential element yeš are shown to have changed their form and their meaning during this period. Morphosyntactically, the possessive variant declined, and it became impossible to inflect modal yeš. Semantically, a special meaning of ability that was available in the classical Hebrew variants of the construction was lost, and modal yeš turned into an expression that exclusively conveys impersonal deontic necessity. Language contact, primarily with Russian, is suggested to have shaped the morphosyntax of existential possessive modals in EMH, whereas internally-motivated processes based on the inherited semantics may explain the meaning modal yeš ultimately developed. On this view, the grammar of Modern Hebrew exhibits recombination of features from languages in contact at the time of language revival.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Existential possessive modality in EMH: A construction in flux
    • 2.1Research questions
    • 2.2Procedure
    • 2.3Corpus findings
      • 2.3.1Frequencies of the constructions
      • 2.3.2Modal force
      • 2.3.3Modality type
  • 3.Continuity and forces of change
    • 3.1Existential possessive modality in classical Hebrew
    • 3.2The role of contact
    • 3.3The exceptionality of modern Hebrew
  • 4.Theoretical implications
    • 4.1Theoretical implications: Meaning
    • 4.2Theoretical implications: Form
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.256.03rub
References (97)
References
Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne & Wallis, Sean. 2010. Recent changes in the use of the progressive construction in English. In Distinctions in English Grammar. Offered to Renaat Declerck, Bert Cappelle & Naoaki Wada (eds), 148–167. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Aboh, Enoch Oladé. 2015. The Emergence of Hybrid Grammars. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ariel, Chanan. 2015. Deviations from the Mishnaic Hebrew syntax in Mishneh Torah due to the influence of Arabic: Subordination or intentional usage? Ms, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Azar, Moshe. 1995. The Syntax of Mishnaic Hebrew. Jerusalem: The Academy of the Hebrew Language and the University of Haifa. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Bachi, Roberto. 1956. A statistical analysis of the revival of Hebrew in Israel. Scripta Hierosolymitana 3:179–247.Google Scholar
Bar-Asher, Moshe. 2012. Studies in Modern Hebrew. Jerusalem: The Academy of Hebrew Language. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 2016. Jewish languages and the Hebrew language. Journal of Jewish Languages 4:125–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. 2011. From typology to diachrony: Synchronic and diachronic aspects of predicative possessive constructions in Akkadian. Folia Linguistica Historica 45:43–88.Google Scholar
. 2016. Introduction to the Grammar of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic, 2nd edn. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Ben-Ḥayyim, Ze’ev. 1953. On the use of the phrase yeš l-. Leshonenu La‘am 4. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 1992. The Struggle for a Language. Jerusalem: The Academy of the Hebrew Language. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Ben-Yehuda, Eliezer. 1908[1980]. Milon ha-lashon ha-‘ivrit ha-yeshanah ve-ha-h. adashah. Jerusalem: Makor Publishing. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Berman, Ruth A. 1980. The case of an (S)VO language: Subjectless constructions in Modern Hebrew. Language 56:759–776. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, Ruth A. 2011. Revisiting impersonal constructions in Modern Hebrew: Discourse based perspectives. In Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124], Andrej L. Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds), 323–355. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhatt, Rajesh. 1998. Obligation and possession. In Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on Argument Structure and Aspect, Heidi Harley (ed.) [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32], 21–40. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
. 1999. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
. 2006. Covert Modality in Non-finite Contexts [Interface Explorations 8]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bjorkman, Bronwyn & Cowper, Elizabeth. 2016. Possession and necessity: From individuals to worlds. Lingua 182: 30–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanc, Haim. 1954. The growth of Israeli Hebrew. Middle Eastern Affairs 5: 385–392.Google Scholar
. 1965. Some Yiddish influences in Israeli Hebrew. In The Field of Yiddish: Studies in Language, Folklore, and Literature, 2nd edn, Uriel Weinreich (ed.), 185–201. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Boneh, Nora. 2013. Mood and modality: Modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Vol. 2, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 693–703. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Boneh, Nora & Doron, Edit. 2010. Modal and temporal aspects of habituality. In Syntax, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure, Malka Rappaport Hovav, Edit Doron & Ivy Sichel (eds), 338–363. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boneh, Nora & Sichel, Ivy. 2010. Deconstructing possession. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28: 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 1991. The origin and development of quasimodal have to in English. Ms, The University of British Columbia.
Bybee, Joan L., Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1978. Locationals: Existential, locative, and possessive constructions. In Universals of Human Language, Vol. 4, Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds), 85–126. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Deal, Amy Rose. 2011. Modals without scales. Language 87: 559–585. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doron, Edit. 2015. Introduction: Language contact and the development of Modern Hebrew. Journal of Jewish Languages 3: 5–26. Reprinted in Doron, Edit (ed.). 2016. Language Contact and the Development of Modern Hebrew, 1–22. Leiden: Brill.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubnov, Keren. 2005. Structural Loan Translations in Early Modern Hebrew. PhD dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (in Hebrew)
. 2008. Adjectives functioning as impersonals (ḥagam) in Early Modern Hebrew. Iggud: Selected Essays in Jewish Studies 3: 31–40. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 2013. Slavic influence on Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 576–578. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 1994. The development of quasi-auxiliaries in English and changes in word order. Neophilologus 78: 137–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne. 1982. The Future in Thought and Language. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Francez, Itamar. 2007. Existential Propositions. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Freeze, Ray. 1992. Existentials and other locatives. Language 68: 553–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goossens, Louis. 2000. Patterns of meaning extension, ‘parallel chaining’, subjectification, and modal shifts. In Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective, Antonio Barcelona (ed.), 149–169. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Goshen-Gottstein, Moshe H. 2006. Syntax and Vocabulary of Mediaeval Hebrew: As Influenced by Arabic. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute. Revised version of the author’s dissertation, published in 1951. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
de Haan, Ferdinand. 2002. Strong modality and negation in Russian. In Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 9], Randi Reppen, Susan M. Fitzmaurice & Douglas Biber (eds), 91–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hackl, Martin. 1998. On the semantics of “ability attributions”. Ms, MIT.Google Scholar
Hacquard, Valentine & Cournane, Ailís. 2016. Themes and variations in the expression of modality. In NELS 46: Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, Vol. 2, Christopher Hammerly & Brandon Prickett (eds), 21–42. Amherst MA: GSLA.Google Scholar
Hansen, Björn. 2014. Yiddish modals, with special reference to their polyfunctionality and constructional properties. In Yiddish Language Structures, Marion Aptroot and Björn Hansen (eds), 145–183. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2: 31–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harshav, Benjamin. 1990. Essay on the revival of the Hebrew language. Alpayim 2: 9–54.Google Scholar
. 1993. Language in Time of Revolution. Berkeley CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Henkin-Roitfarb, Roni. 2013. Possession, Modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 191–195. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Hofmann, T. Ronald. 1976. Past tense replacement and the modal system. In Notes from the Linguistic Underground [Syntax and Semantics 7], James D. McCawley (ed.), 85–100. New York NY: Academic Press. First version appeared in 1966, Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Translation Report NSF-17, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Isačenko, Alexander V. 1974. On ‘have’ and ‘be’ languages (a typological sketch). In Slavic Forum: Essays in Linguistics and Literature, Michael S. Flier (ed.), 43–77. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jung, Hakyung. 2011. The Syntax of the Be-Possessive: Parametric Variation and Surface Diversities [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 172]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 1993. Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection. Studia Linguistica 47: 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1981. The notional category of modality. In Words, Worlds, and Contexts, Hans-Jürgen Eikmeyer & Hannes Rieser (eds), 38–74. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Reprinted in Porter, Paul & Partee, Barbara H. (eds). 2002. Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings, 289–323. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 1991. Modality. In Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung, Arnim von Stechow & Dieter Wunderlich (eds), 639–650. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2012. Modals and Conditionals. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Krug, Manfred G. 2000. Emerging English Modals: A Corpus-based Study of Grammaticalization [Topics in English Linguistics 32]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuzar, Ron. 1992. Ha-xg”m – xelek dibur ‘o ‘emda taxbirit? Leshonenu 56: 241–248. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 2012. Sentence Patterns in English and Hebrew [Constructional Approaches to Language 12]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McAnallen, Julia. 2011. The History of Predicative Possession in Slavic: Internal Development vs. Language Contact. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Mor, Uri. 2017. Prepositional predicates with nominalized complements in Classical Hebrew. Hebrew Studies 58: 25–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mor, Uri & Pat-El, Na’ama. 2016. The development of predicates with prepositional subjects in Hebrew. Journal of Semitic Studies 61: 327–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myler, Neil. 2016. Building and Interpreting Possession Sentences. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Narrog, Heiko. 2012. Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nauze, Fabrice Dominique. 2008. Modality in Typological Perspective. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Palmer, Frank Robert. 2001. Mood and Modality, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pat-El, Na’ama. 2013. Possession: Pre-modern Hebrew. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 190–191. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David. 1970. The two verbs begin. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, Roderick A. Jacobs & Peter S. Rosenbaum (eds), 107–119. Waltham MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
. 1971. Deep and Surface Structure Constraints in Syntax. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Peterson, Tyler. 2010. Epistemic Modality and Evidentiality in Gitksan at the Semantics-pragmatics Interface. PhD dissertation, The University of British Columbia.
Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Rabin, Chaim. 1985. Biblical and Mishnaic elements in contemporary Hebrew. In Language Studies, Vol. 1, Moshe Bar-Asher (ed.), 273–285. Jerusalem: The Institute of Jewish Studies.Google Scholar
Reshef, Yael. 2009. Continuity versus change in the emergence of standard Modern Hebrew: The verbal system in the early Mandate period. In Modern Hebrew: Two Hundred and Fifty Years [Studies in Language VIII], Chaim E. Cohen (ed.), 143–176. Jerusalem: Academy of the Hebrew Language (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 2013a. Revival of Hebrew: Grammatical structure and lexicon. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 397–405. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
. 2013b. Revival of Hebrew: Sociolinguistic dimension. In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Geoffrey Khan (ed.), 408–415. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Reshef, Yael & Helman, Anat. 2009. Instructing or recruiting? Language and style in 1920s and 1930s Tel Aviv municipal posters. Jewish Studies Quarterly 16: 306–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosén, Haiim B. 1956. Our Hebrew. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Rosén, Haiim B. 1977a. Contemporary Hebrew. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1977b. ‘Ivrit tovah: ‘iyunim be-taḥbir. Kiryat Sepher, 3rd edn. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Ross, John. 1969. Auxiliaries as main verbs. In Studies in Philosophical Linguistics, William Todd (ed.). Evanston, IL: Great Expectations Press.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, Eliezer. 1967. The Nominal Sentence in Modern Hebrew. PhD dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (in Hebrew)
Rullmann, Hotze, Matthewson, Lisa & Davis, Henry. 2008. Modals as distributive indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 16: 317–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Daniel R. 1992. What should he have said? “and live by them”. In Sanctity of Life and Martyrdom: Studies in Memory of Amir Yekutiel, Isaiah M. Gafni & Aviezer Ravitzky (eds), 69–83. Jerusalem: The Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History. (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
Sharvit, Shimon. 1993. Modal infinitive sentences in Mishnaic Hebrew. In Studies in Bible and Exegesis, Vol. 3, Moshe Bar-Asher, Devorah Dimant, Moshe Garsiel & Yehoshua, Maori (eds), 413–437. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
. 2008. Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew. Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute. (in Hebrew).Google Scholar
Shehadeh, H. 1991. Gilguley ha-bituy ‘yesh (lo) lilmod’/‘haya (lo) lilmod’. In Studies on Hebrew and Other Semitic Languages Presented to Professor Chaim Rabin on the Occassion of his Seventy-fifth Birthday, Moshe H. Goshen-Gottstein, Shelomo Morag & Simcha Kogut (eds), 415–442. Jerusalem: Academon Press. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
Smith, Nicholas. 2005. A Corpus-based Investigation of Recent Change in the Use of the Progressive in British English. PhD dissertation, Lancaster University.
Stern, Naphtali 1983. Impersonals (ḥ.g.m.) and verboids + infinitive in Israeli Hebrew. Leshonenu 47: 248–263.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 2004. Have to, gotta, must: Grammaticalisation, variation and specialization in English deontic modality. In Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 13], Hans Lindquist & Christian Mair (eds), 33–55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taube, Moshe. 2015. The usual suspects: Slavic, Yiddish, and the accusative existentials and possessives in Modern Hebrew. Journal of Jewish Languages 3: 27–37. Reprinted in Doron, Edit (ed.). 2016. Language Contact and the Development of Modern Hebrew, 25–35. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timberlake, Alan. 2004. A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65: 31–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Dasher, Richard B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Visser, Frederikus Theodorus. 1969–1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Wigoder, Geoffrey. 1969. The Meditation of the Sad Soul: Abraham Bar Ḥayya. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 1999. Modal verbs must be raising verbs. In Proceedings of WCCFL 18, ed. Sonya Bird, Andrew Carnie, Jason D. Haugen & Peter Norquest (eds), 599–612. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Yanovich, Igor. 2016. Old English *motan, variable force modality, and the presupposition of inevitable actualization. Language 92: 489–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Izre'el, Shlomo
2022. The syntax of existential constructions. Journal of Speech Sciences 11 ► pp. e022001 ff. DOI logo
Taube, Moshe
2019. The limits of multiple-source contact influence. In Language Contact, Continuity and Change in the Genesis of Modern Hebrew [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 256], ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.