«A STUDY OF CAPPADOCIAN GREEK NOMINAL MORPHOLOGY FROM A DIACHRONIC AND DIALECTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE Petros Karatsareas Wolfson College This ...»
A STUDY OF CAPPADOCIAN GREEK NOMINAL
MORPHOLOGY FROM A DIACHRONIC AND
This dissertation is submitted for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
This dissertation is my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work
done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text and the acknowledgements.
This dissertation does not exceed 80,000 words, including footnotes and references, but excluding bibliography.
Cambridge, 5 September 2011 Petros Karatsareas ii iii Abstract In this dissertation, I investigate a number of interrelated developments affecting the morphosyntax of nouns in Cappadocian Greek. I specifically focus on the development of differential object marking, the loss of grammatical gender distinctions, and the neuterisation of noun inflection. My aim is to provide a diachronic account of the innovations that Cappadocian has undergone in the three domains mentioned above.
Αll the innovations examined in this study have the effect of rendering the morphology and syntax of nouns in Cappadocian more like that of neuters. On account of the historical and sociolinguistic circumstances in which Cappadocian developed as well as of the superficial similarity of their outcomes to equivalent structures in Turkish, previous research has overwhelmingly treated the Cappadocian developments as instances of contact-induced change that resulted from the influence of Turkish. In this study, I examine the Cappadocian innovations from a language-internal point of view and in comparison with parallel developments attested in the other Modern Greek dialects of Asia Minor, namely Pontic, Rumeic, Pharasiot and Silliot. My comparative analysis of a wide range of dialect-internal, cross-dialectal and cross-linguistic typological evidence shows that language contact with Turkish can be identified as the main cause of change only in the case of differential object marking. On the other hand, with respect to the origins of the most pervasive innovations in gender and noun inflection, I argue that they go back to the common linguistic ancestor of the modern Asia Minor Greek dialects and do not owe their development to language contact with Turkish. I show in detail that the superficial similarity of these latter innovations’ outcomes to their Turkish equivalents in each case represents the final stage in a long series of typologically plausible, language-internal developments whose early manifestations predate the intensification of Cappadocian–Turkish linguistic and cultural exchange. These findings show that diachronic change in Cappadocian is best understood when examined within a larger Asia Minor Greek context. On the whole, they make a significant contribution to our knowledge of the history of Cappadocian and the Asia Minor Greek dialects as well as to Modern Greek dialectology more generally, and open a fresh round of discussion on the origin and development of other innovations attested in these dialects that are considered by historical linguists and Modern Greek dialectologists to be untypically Greek or contact-induced or both.
iv v Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Greek State Scholarships Foundation (Ίδρυμα Κρατικών Υποτροφιών), the Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation (Κοινωφελές Ίδρυμα Αλέξανδρος Σ. Ωνάσης) and the George and Marie Vergottis Fund of the Cambridge European Trust, which generously funded my doctoral studies. I also wish to express my appreciation to the Department of Linguistics and to Wolfson College for providing me with additional funding to attend various conferences both in the United Kingdom and abroad.
My work has benefited greatly from the insightful and constructive comments of my supervisor, Bert Vaux, whom I would like to thank for all his help and guidance during the past four years. Many thanks go to James Clackson, my PhD advisor (or is it adviser?), and to David Willis for the valuable feedback they gave me at my yearly assessment interviews; also, to Christoforos Charalampakis, my ΙΚΥ supervisor, for his contribution. I would like to extend my gratitude to Ioanna Sitaridou, who, apart from co-supervising my MPhil, was the one to light the spark of my interest in Cappadocian Greek.
I am particularly indebted to Christina Basea-Bezantakou, the Director of the Research Centre for Modern Greek Dialects — I.L.N.E. (Κέντρο Ερεύνης των Νεοελληνικών Διαλέκτων και Ιδιωμάτων — Ι.Λ.Ν.Ε.) of the Academy of Athens, for granting me access to the Centre’s Manuscript Archive from which I collected rare material on the Cappadocian varieties and to the researchers of the Centre, especially Stamatis Beis, Georgia Katsouda, Magdalini Konstantinidou and Maria Vrachionidou for the constructive discussions we had while I collected material from the Archive;
also, to the library staff of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies (Κέντρο Μικρασιατικών Σπουδών) at Athens for helping me get hold of a considerable number of publications on Cappadocian and the other Asia Minor Greek dialects that were hard to find in the United Kingdom.
I am grateful to all the people with whom I have exchanged ideas regarding my work and theirs that helped me advance and broaden my understanding of the issues I dealt with in my research. Special thanks go to the investigators and researchers of the Grammar of Medieval Greek Research Project at Cambridge, especially to Io Manolessou and Notis Toufexis; to the audiences of the various conferences at which I presented papers while my research was still in progress, especially to Giannoula Giannoulopoulou, Nikolaos Pantelidis and Eleni Valma at the 4th International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory at Chios; to Inés Fernández-Ordóñez, Brian Joseph and Peter Trudgill at the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics at Nijmegen; to Peter Mackridge at the Greek in Pontus: Romeyka in Contemporary Trebizond Workshop at Cambridge; to Andrew Garrett at the Language, Text and History: Linguistics and Philology in the 21st Century Symposium of the Philological Society at Cambridge; to the four (!) anonymous reviewers of the paper I published in the Transactions of the Philological Society (you—and I now—know who you are!); and to Thanasis Giannaris. I would also vi like to thank Elżbieta Adamczyk, Stergios Chatzikyriakidis, Vicky Chondrogianni, Inés Fernández-Ordóñez, Francesco Gardani, Cristina Guardiano, Chryso Hadjidemetriou, Mark Janse, Konstantinos Kakarikos, Magdalini Konstantinidou, Adam Ledgeway, Martin Maiden, Aggeliki Malikouti-Drachman, Io Manolessou, Dimitra Melissaropoulou, Ioanna Sitaridou, Vassilios Spyropoulos, Evangelia Thomadaki, Notis Toufexis and Hugh Everard Wilkinson for trusting me with copies of their published and/or unpublished work. I thank Makis Theofilopoulos of the Greek newspaper ΤΑ ΝΕΑ for sending me an electronic version of a published map of the Cappadocian villages. I also thank Chris Geissler for translating Hans Dernschwam’s text (§2.2) and Illan Gonen for typing the Perso-Arabic text in §2.3 for me.
Spyros Armosti, Mina Daniel and Aaron Ralby deserve special mention for proofreading parts of my dissertation. This task fell largely on Aaron, who proofread almost the whole of it. Spyros proofread the list of symbols and the reference list whereas Mina proofread Chapter 6. I owe the excellent design of Maps 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 as well as that of Figures 2.2 and 2.3 to Emmanouil Magkaris. I hereby thank all four of them for their invaluable help that came when I needed it the most. Of course, all errors remain my own.
On a personal level, I was fortunate to have the support and encouragement of very dear friends. My gratitude goes to Spyros Armosti, Eftychia Eftychiou, Evgenia Mesaritou, Karolina Moutsopoulou and Efstathia Pitsa, who have been constantly by my side since my early days in Cambridge; also, to my fellow ‘nesters’ Thomas Godard, Claudia ‘Mom’ Peverini-Benson, Thomas Rainsford, Erica Ross, Anna Tristram, Liv Walsh and Claire White—all of us were on the same boat under the adverse (weather) conditions of the Graduate Centre on the far off third floor of the MML Faculty. I am also ever so grateful to Emmanouil Magkaris for making possible my escapes from the bubble that is Cambridge out to the real world, and to my old friends from Greece, who made sure I felt as if I had never left home every time I went back.
Τέλος, θα ήθελα να εκφράσω την ευγνωμοσύνη μου στην οικογένειά μου και
ιδιαίτερα στους γονείς μου, Βασίλειο και Έλλη Καρατσαρέα, για την ανιδιοτελή αγάπηπου μου προσφέρουν απλόχερα από τότε που θυμάμαι τον εαυτό μου και για την αμέριστη συμπαράσταση και κάθε είδους υποστήριξη που δείχνουν έμπρακτα σε κάθε βήμα της ζωής μου. Μαμά και μπαμπά, nagyon hálás vagyok mindenért.
vii Table of Contents Declaration
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
List of Maps
List of Textual Abbreviations
List of Linguistic Abbreviations
List of Symbols
2 The Modern Greek dialect of Cappadocia
2.1 The language
2.2 The social, cultural and linguistic history of the Cappadocian speakers.......14 2.3 The linguistic record
2.4 The effects of early linguistic separation and intense language contact on Cappadocian
2.5 Cappadocian in the dialectological context of Asia Minor
2.5.1 The common linguistic ancestor of the modern Asia Minor Greek dialects
2.5.2 The dialectal differentiation of Asia Minor Greek
2.5.3 Investigating diachronic change in Cappadocian from a dialectological perspective: a methodological case-in-point............55 2.6 Conclusion
3 The development of differential object marking
3.1 (Non-)differential object marking in Turkish and Modern Greek
3.1.1 The typology of differential object marking
184.108.40.206 Determining differential object marking: animacy and definiteness
220.127.116.11 The motivation underlying differential object marking...........70 3.1.2 Turkish: a differential language
3.1.3 Modern Greek: a non-differential language
3.2 Cappadocian and Pharasiot: two differential Modern Greek dialects.............83 3.2.1 Differential object marking in Cappadocian
3.2.2 Differential object marking in Pharasiot
3.3 An ‘un-Greek’, contact-induced development
3.3.1 Previous accounts
3.3.2 The typological improbability of Cappadocian and Pharasiot differential object marking
3.3.3 Matching Modern Greek definiteness with Turkish specificity....... 98 18.104.22.168 Contact-induced innovation and change
22.214.171.124 Pattern replication in Cappadocian and Pharasiot.................. 100 3.3.4 Summary
3.4 The implications of the development of differential object marking in Cappadocian
3.4.1 Two old hypotheses
126.96.36.199 The reanalysis of final -ς as an indefiniteness marker............ 107 188.8.131.52 Definiteness split
3.4.2 A new connection
184.108.40.206 The introduction of neuter-like case syncretism in masculine nouns
220.127.116.11 DOM and noun inflection
4 The loss of grammatical gender
4.1 Gender in Modern Greek and Turkish
4.1.1 The typology of gender
18.104.22.168 Defining gender: agreement controllers, targets and domains
22.214.171.124 Gender assignment: semantic and formal systems................. 131 126.96.36.199 Gender agreement: syntactic versus semantic
4.1.2 Modern Greek: a gender language
188.8.131.52 Gender assignment
184.108.40.206 Gender agreement
220.127.116.11 Gender and prototypicality: Anastassiadis-Symeonidis and Chila-Markopoulou (2003)
4.1.3 Turkish: a genderless language
4.2 Gender in Cappadocian and other Asia Minor Greek dialects
4.2.1 Cappadocian: neuter agreement
4.2.2 Pharasiot: syntactic and neuter agreement
4.2.3 Pontic: syntactic and semantic agreement
4.2.4 Rumeic: semantic agreement
4.2.5 Two innovations in Asia Minor Greek
ix 4.3 Previous accounts of the Asia Minor Greek developments in agreement... 167 4.3.1 Cappadocian neuter agreement
4.3.2 Pontic semantic agreement
4.4 A fresh look
4.4.1 The typological and crosslinguistic context
4.4.2 The development of semantic agreement in Asia Minor Greek:
resemanticisation and restructuring
4.4.3 The development of neuter agreement in Cappadocian and Pharasiot
4.4.4 The relationships between the Asia Minor Greek dialects with respect to agreement
5 The neuterisation of noun inflection
5.1 Noun inflection in Modern Greek and Turkish
5.1.1 Modern Greek
18.104.22.168 General typological characteristics
22.214.171.124 The ι-neuter inflectional class
5.2 Noun inflection in Cappadocian
5.2.1 An inflectional system of the Modern Greek type
5.2.2 Some common dialectal variation
5.2.3 Inflectional innovations
5.3 The development of neuter heteroclisis
5.3.1 Morphological reanalysis of the ι-neuter inflectional endings...... 228 5.3.2 Genitive singular and plural heteroclisis
126.96.36.199 Stress uncertainty as the trigger for the early development of neuter heteroclisis