Search Results
The Bāṇāsurakathā is a sharada manuscript in Old Kashmiri composed by Avtar Bhatt, dated between the 14th and 16th centuries. It retells the love story of the demon Bāṇa’s daughter Uṣā with Krishna’s grandson Aniruddha, and the ensuing fight between Bāṇa and Krishna, as it is found in the Harivaṃśapurāṇa. This paper focuses on the linguistic features of the Old Kashmiri language in which this manuscript is composed. Old Kashmiri belongs to the Early New Indo-Aryan language stage, a stage crucial for a number of syntactic developments which determined the Indo-Aryan languages of today. First, the language found in the Bāṇāsurakathā is situated among the attestations of Old Kashmiri found in other manuscripts. The language is younger than that of the Mahānaya-Prakāśa, but older than the language used in the Lallā-Vākyāni. Second, a number of linguistic features of Old Kashmiri are presented, such as the case marking and the verb agreement. Third, the paper focuses on the phenomenon of pronominal suffixation, well known in Modern Kashmiri, but not present in Apabhraṃśa. It is shown that the first traces of pronominal suffixation already existed in the Bāṇāsurakathā, but their use was not yet grammatically fixed.
This paper deals with two ways of expressing possessive relationships, their morphological make-up and the possible circumstances of their emergence. One of these is the habitive construction (`X has Y'), whereas the other is the attributive possessive construction (`X's Y, the Y of X'). The former is a clause, whereas the latter is a phrase. It will be argued that both types of constructions may have emerged in the Uralic languages without the contribution of any foreign influence, but as far as the retention of the latter is concerned, foreign influence may have had a role in it in Uralic languages that were engaged in intensive Uralic--Turkic linguistic contacts.
Constraint preserved in Hungarian and in some Ob-Ugric dialects, the case-marking of 1st and 2nd person objects and verbal agreement with them are blocked. Versions of these constraints are attested not only in several Uralic languages, among them languages
Hayata (2011) proposed that accusative subject in Manchu arises when an embedded subject is not co-referential with the subject of the main clause in embedded clauses. However, co-referentiality cannot fully explain the distribution of accusative subjects in Manchu (Do 2018). In this paper, we argue that the overtness of the main clause subject is another factor that governs the distribution of case markings on embedded subjects; nominative marking (on the embedded subjects) mostly guarantees the covertness of the main class subjects. We further argue that the interplay between the two factors can explain the distribution of case marking in embedded subjects in Manchu.
Word order in English is relatively fixed and the meaning of a sentence depends on the position of words in that sentence (Biber et al. 1999:898). Arabic, on the other hand, is more flexible as far as word order is concerned, thanks to its elaborate case marking and verb inflection systems. Moving elements within a sentence are called ‘foregrounding’, ‘inversion’, ‘preposing and postposing’ etc., in English and al-Taqdīm wa al-Ta’khīr in Arabic. The Qur’ān, rather than only using unmarked word orders, employs this linguistic feature of altering the order of elements within a clause for certain discursive functions. Drawing on the Arabic balāghah (Arabic art of eloquence) literature, this paper attempts, first, to establish some of the functions that are realised through using marked word order in the Qur’ān and, second, emphasise that word order in the Qur’ān is used to realise specific discursive functions, which should be taken into consideration when translating it into other languages, including English.
. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21: Papers on phonology and morphology 1994 Heath, Jeffrey 2007. Bidirectional case-marking
-called “global case splits,” the phenomenon whereby the properties of more than one argument determine whether or not an argument exhibits case marking. Crucially, while Agree can determine Case and (morphological) case, Case can also determine agreement
): Local Case-marking in Kalasha . Copenhagen , University of Copenhagen (Doctoral Thesis in Linguistics). Radloff , C. F. ( 1992 ): The Dialects of Shina . In: Backstrom
Stroop-like interference of grammatical and visual number
Experimental evidence from Polish speakers
and Colin Phillips . 2009 . Agreement attraction in comprehension: Representations and processes . Journal of Memory and Language 61 . 206 – 237 . Wiese , Bernd . 2011 . Optimal specifications: On case marking in Polish . In A. Nolda
. Edygarova , Svetlana . 2017 . The Udmurt essive and its functional counterparts . In de Groot ( 2017 d, 309 – 323 ). Erelt , Mati and Helle Metslang . 2003 . Case
