Title: ESSE v konstrukcích s infinitivem ve staré češtině, předtím a potom
Source document: Graeco-Latina Brunensia. 2009, vol. 14, iss. 1-2, pp. [113]-123
Extent
[113]-123
-
ISSN1803-7402 (print)2336-4424 (online)
Stable URL (handle): https://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/114972
Type: Article
Language
Summary language
License: Not specified license
Notice: These citations are automatically created and might not follow citation rules properly.
Abstract(s)
The article offers an analysis of the Czech ESSE in infinitive constructions from the diachronic perspective. It has been shown that the development of ESSE was interconnected with that of grammatical categories required by ESSE as a verb, particularly with the categories of tense and aspect. The paper has tried to grasp this well-known fact in well-known circumstances by using notions from the theories of restructuring and grammaticalisation. Thus, it offers a derivation of the futural interpretation of the construction ESSEbudu InfP 'ESSEI-will-be InfP' and the way it is differentiated from other ESSE InfP constructions; moreover, various morphophonological and morphosyntactic features of both ESSE constructions have been demonstrated.
L'articolo presenta l'analisi diacronica del corrispondente ceco del verbo ESSE nelle costruzioni infinitive. È noto che l'evoluzione di ESSE si è svolta parallelamente a quella delle categorie grammaticali che il verbo ESSE esprime, in particolare tempo e aspetto. L'articolo conferma la veridicità di questo assunto, peraltro già evidenziato dagli studi precedenti, utilizzando gli stimolanti concetti delle teorie della ristrutturalizzazione e della grammaticalizzazione. Giunge dunque a postulare una possibile derivazione dell'interpretazione futurale della costruzione ESSEbudu InfP e una serie di tratti che distinguono questa costruzione dalle altre costruzioni di ESSE InfP, evidenziando diverse caratteristiche morfonologiche e morfosintattiche di entrambi gli ESSE.
References
[1] Blaszczak, Joanna. 2008. "What HAS to BE used? Existential, Locative, and Possessive Sentences in Polish." In Antonenko, A. – Bailyn, J. F. aj. [eds.]. Formal Approaches to Slavic Languages, 16. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publ., 31–47.
[2] Cinque, Guglielmo. 2006. Restructuring and Functional Heads. Oxford: OUP.
[3] Corver, Norbert – Riemsdijk, Henk van [eds.]. 2001. Semi-lexical categories. On the function of content words and the content of function words. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
[4] Dostál, Antonín. 1954. Studie o vidovém systému v staroslověnštině. Praha: SPN.
[5] Dostál, Antonín. 1967. Historická mluvnice česká. 2. Tvarosloví II. Praha: SPN.
[6] Dotlačil, Jakub. 2007. "Why Clitic Cannot Climb out of CP: a Discourse Approach." In Compton, R. et al. [eds.]. Formal Approaches to Slavic Languages, 15. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publ., 76–93.
[7] Emonds, Joseph E. 2004. "Organizace lexikonu." In Hladká, Z. – Karlík, P. [eds.]. Čestina – univerzália a specifika, 5. Praha: Nakl. Lidové noviny, 9–32.
[8] Halle, Morris – Matushansky, Ora. 2006. "The Morphophonology of Russian Adjectival Inflection." Linguistics Inquiry, 37, 351–404. | DOI 10.1162/ling.2006.37.3.351
[9] Junghanns, Uwe. 1997. "On byt' (and byti)." In Junghanns, U. – Zybatow, G. [eds.]. Formale Slavistik (= Leipziger Schriften zur Kultur-, Literatur-, Sprach- und Übersetzungswissenschaft; 7). Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Verlag, 251–265.
[10] Karlík, Petr. [V tisku.] "Diachrone Analyse der Konstruktion des Typs Je vidět Sněžku / Sněžka." In Loudová, K. [ed.]. Early European Languages in the Eyes of Modern Linguistics.
[11] Křížková, Helena. 1960. Vývoj opisného futura v jazycích slovanských, zvláště v ruštině. Praha: SPN.
[12] Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on grammaticalization. München – Newcastle: Lincom.
[13] Medová, Lucie. 2000. Transparency Phenomena in Czech Syntax. MA Diss. University Tromsoe.
[14] Migdalski, Krzysztof. 2006. The Syntax of Compound Tenses in Slavic. Utrecht: LOT.
[15] Muysken, Pieter. 2008. Functional Categories. Cambridge: CUP.
[16] Porák, Jaroslav. 1967. Vývoj infinitivních vět v češtině. Praha: Univerzita Karlova.
[17] Pustet, Regina. 2003. Copulas: Universals in the Categorization on the Lexicon. Oxford: OUP.
[18] Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. "A restructuring rule in Italian syntax." In Keyser S. J. [ed.]. Recent Transformational Studies in European Languages, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 113–158.
[19] Růžička, Rudolf. 1963. Das syntaktische System der altslavischen Partizipien und sein Verhältnis zum Griechischen. Berlin: Deutsche Akademie der Wiss. zu Berlin, 202n.
[20] Večerka, Radoslav. 1993. Altkirchenslavische (Altbulgarische) Syntax II. Die innere Satzstruktur. Freiburg i. Br.: U. W. Weiher.
[21] Whaley, Marika. 2000. The Evolution of the Slavic 'Be(come)'-type Compound Future. PhD. Diss. The Ohio State University.
[22] Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
[2] Cinque, Guglielmo. 2006. Restructuring and Functional Heads. Oxford: OUP.
[3] Corver, Norbert – Riemsdijk, Henk van [eds.]. 2001. Semi-lexical categories. On the function of content words and the content of function words. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
[4] Dostál, Antonín. 1954. Studie o vidovém systému v staroslověnštině. Praha: SPN.
[5] Dostál, Antonín. 1967. Historická mluvnice česká. 2. Tvarosloví II. Praha: SPN.
[6] Dotlačil, Jakub. 2007. "Why Clitic Cannot Climb out of CP: a Discourse Approach." In Compton, R. et al. [eds.]. Formal Approaches to Slavic Languages, 15. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publ., 76–93.
[7] Emonds, Joseph E. 2004. "Organizace lexikonu." In Hladká, Z. – Karlík, P. [eds.]. Čestina – univerzália a specifika, 5. Praha: Nakl. Lidové noviny, 9–32.
[8] Halle, Morris – Matushansky, Ora. 2006. "The Morphophonology of Russian Adjectival Inflection." Linguistics Inquiry, 37, 351–404. | DOI 10.1162/ling.2006.37.3.351
[9] Junghanns, Uwe. 1997. "On byt' (and byti)." In Junghanns, U. – Zybatow, G. [eds.]. Formale Slavistik (= Leipziger Schriften zur Kultur-, Literatur-, Sprach- und Übersetzungswissenschaft; 7). Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert Verlag, 251–265.
[10] Karlík, Petr. [V tisku.] "Diachrone Analyse der Konstruktion des Typs Je vidět Sněžku / Sněžka." In Loudová, K. [ed.]. Early European Languages in the Eyes of Modern Linguistics.
[11] Křížková, Helena. 1960. Vývoj opisného futura v jazycích slovanských, zvláště v ruštině. Praha: SPN.
[12] Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on grammaticalization. München – Newcastle: Lincom.
[13] Medová, Lucie. 2000. Transparency Phenomena in Czech Syntax. MA Diss. University Tromsoe.
[14] Migdalski, Krzysztof. 2006. The Syntax of Compound Tenses in Slavic. Utrecht: LOT.
[15] Muysken, Pieter. 2008. Functional Categories. Cambridge: CUP.
[16] Porák, Jaroslav. 1967. Vývoj infinitivních vět v češtině. Praha: Univerzita Karlova.
[17] Pustet, Regina. 2003. Copulas: Universals in the Categorization on the Lexicon. Oxford: OUP.
[18] Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. "A restructuring rule in Italian syntax." In Keyser S. J. [ed.]. Recent Transformational Studies in European Languages, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 113–158.
[19] Růžička, Rudolf. 1963. Das syntaktische System der altslavischen Partizipien und sein Verhältnis zum Griechischen. Berlin: Deutsche Akademie der Wiss. zu Berlin, 202n.
[20] Večerka, Radoslav. 1993. Altkirchenslavische (Altbulgarische) Syntax II. Die innere Satzstruktur. Freiburg i. Br.: U. W. Weiher.
[21] Whaley, Marika. 2000. The Evolution of the Slavic 'Be(come)'-type Compound Future. PhD. Diss. The Ohio State University.
[22] Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.