Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T11:47:03.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Middle-passive voice in Albanian and Greek1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2015

M. RITA MANZINI ,
ANNA ROUSSOU  and
LEONARDO M. SAVOIA
M. RITA MANZINI*
Affiliation:
University of Florence
ANNA ROUSSOU*
Affiliation:
University of Patras
LEONARDO M. SAVOIA*
Affiliation:
University of Florence
*
Author’s address: Departimento di Lingue, Letterature e Studi Interculturali – Linguistica, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Via Cesare Battisti 4, 50122 Firenze, Italymariarita.manzini@unifi.it
Author’s address: Department of Philology, University of Patras, 26504 Rion, Greecearoussou@upatras.gr
Author’s address: Departimento di Lingue, Letterature e Studi Interculturali – Linguistica, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Via Cesare Battisti 4, 50122 Firenze, Italyleonardomaria.savoia@unifi.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we consider middle-passive voice in Greek and Albanian, which shows a many-to-many mapping between LF and PF. Different morphosyntactic shapes (conditioned by tense or aspect) are compatible with the same set of interpretations, which include the passive, the reflexive, the anticausative, and the impersonal (in Albanian only). Conversely, each of these interpretations can be encoded by any of the available morphosyntactic structures. Specialized person inflections (in Greek and Albanian), the clitic $u$ (Albanian) and the affix -th- (Greek) lexicalize the internal argument (or the sole argument of intransitive in Albanian) either as a variable, which is LF-interpreted as bound by the EPP position (passives, anticausatives, reflexives) or as generically closed (impersonals, in Albanian only). The ambiguity between passives, anticausatives and reflexives depends on the interpretation assigned to the external argument (generic closure, suppression or unification with the internal argument respectively). In perfect tenses, auxiliary jam ‘be’ in Albanian derives the expression of middle-passive voice due to its selectional requirement for a participle with an open position. Crucially, no hidden features/abstract heads encoding interpretation are postulated, nor any Distributed Morphology-style realizational component.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , 01 March 2016 , pp. 111 - 150
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adger, David & Ramchand, Gillian. 2005. Merge and Move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 161–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement, and EPP-checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16, 491–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2004. Voice morphology in the causative–inchoative alternation: Evidence for a non-unified structural analysis of unaccusatives. In Alexiadou et al. (eds.), 114–136.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Everaert, Martin (eds.). 2004. The unaccusativity puzzle: Explorations of the syntax–lexicon interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically. In Frascarelli, Mara (ed.), Phases of interpretation, 187–212. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Doron, Edit. 2012. The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics 48, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 2003. Participles and voice. In Alexiadou, Artemis, Rathert, Monika & von Stechow, Arnim (eds.), Perfect explorations, 1–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark C. 1998. The polysynthesis parameter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Mark, Johnson, Kyle & Roberts, Ian. 1989. Passive arguments raised. Linguistic Inquiry 20, 219–252.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 1990. Generalized verb movement. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Blevins, James P. 2003. Passives and impersonals. Journal of Linguistics 39, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1986. I-subjects. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 375–416.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring sense, vol. I: In name only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Jonny. 2004. On having arguments and agreeing: Semantic EPP. York Papers in Linguistics Series 2.1, 1–27.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1995. The variability of impersonal subjects. In Bach, Emmon, Jellinek, Eloise, Kratzer, Angelika & Partee, Barbara H. (eds.), Quantification in natural languages, 107–143. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2004. A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. In Alexiadou et al. (eds.), 22–59. [Ms., Cornell University, circulated in 1989.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, Michael (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi. 2008. The cartography of syntactic structures. Studies in Linguistics: CISCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2, 42–58.Google Scholar
Collins, Chris. 2005. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8, 81–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1977. In defense of spontaneous demotion: The impersonal passive. In Cole, Peter & Sadock, Jerry M. (eds.), Grammatical relations (Syntax & Semantics 8), 47–58. New York: Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culicover, Peter W. & Jackendoff, Ray. 2005. Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 1998. Impersonal seconstructions in Romance and the passivization of unergatives. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 399–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Embick, David. 2000. Features, syntax and categories in the Latin perfect. Linguistic Inquiry 3, 185–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1982. On the lexical representation of Romance reflexive clitics. In Bresnan, Joan (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations, 87–148. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 2010. The syntax of German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 547–593.Google Scholar
Holton, David, Mackridge, Peter & Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1999. Greek grammar: A comprehensive grammar of the Greek language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1986. Passive. Linguistic Inquiry 17, 587–622.Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian & Smirniotopoulos, Jane. 1993. The morphosyntax of the Modern Greek verb as morphology and not syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 24, 388–398.Google Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina. 2006. A unified analysis of passives, anticausatives and reflexives. In Bonami, Olivier & Hofherr, Patricia Cabredo (eds.), Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics, vol. 6, 201–225.Google Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina. 2007. Rethinking the passive/anticausative distinction. Linguistic Inquiry 38, 770–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina & Trommer, Jochen. 2011. Closest c-command, Agree and Impoverishment: The morphosyntax of non-active voice in Albanian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 58, 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 1993. Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection. Studia Linguistica 47, 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 2010. Comparisons and contrasts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lekakou, Marika. 2005. In the middle, somewhat elevated: The semantics of middles and its crosslinguistic realization. Ph.D. dissertation, University College London.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax–lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Manney, Linda. 2000. Middle voice in Modern Greek: Meaning and function of an inflectional category. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita. 1986. On Italian si. In Borer, Hagit (ed.), The syntax of pronominal clitics (Syntax & Semantics 18), 241–262. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Roussou, Anna. 2000. A minimalist theory of A-movement and control. Lingua 110, 409–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Savoia, Leonardo M.. 2007. A unification of morphology and syntax: Studies in Romance and Albanian dialects. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Savoia, Leonardo M.. 2011a. Grammatical categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita & Savoia, Leonardo M.. 2011b. (Bio)linguistic variation: Have/be alternations in the present perfect. In di Sciullo, Anna Maria & Boeckx, Cedric (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, 222–265. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marantz, Alec P. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, Peter H. 1967. The main features of Modern Greek verb inflection. Foundations of Language 3, 262–283.Google Scholar
Moro, Andrea. 1997. The raising of predicates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papangeli, Dimitra. 2004. The morphosyntax of argument realization. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utrecht (LOT 86).Google Scholar
Papastathi, Maria. 2007. On the syntax and semantics of the middle in English and Greek. Ph.D. dissertation, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1973. Modern Greek verb conjugation: Inflectional morphology in a transformational grammar. Lingua 32, 193–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ralli, Angela. 1988. Eléments de la morphologie du Grec Moderne: La structure du verbe. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Montreal.Google Scholar
Ralli, Angela. 2005. $Mo{\it\rho}{\it\varphi}o{\it\lambda}o{\it\gamma}\acute{\imath }{\it\alpha}$ [Morphology]. Athens: Patakis.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1997. Syntactic effects of lexical operations: Reflexives and unaccusatives (OTS Working Papers in Linguistics). Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Siloni, Tali. 2005. The lexicon–syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 389–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivero, María-Luisa. 1990. The location of nonactive voice in Albanian and Modern Greek. Linguistic Inquiry 21, 135–146.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation and defective goals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roussou, Anna. 2009. Voice morphology and ergativity in Modern Greek. In Baltazani, Mary, Giannakis, George, Tasngalidis, Anastasios & Xydopoulos, George (eds.), 8th International Conference in Greek Linguistics (ICGL8), 406–418. University of Ioannina.Google Scholar
Roussou, Anna & Tsimpli, Ianthi M.. 2007. Argument structure: The clitic factor. In Picchi, M. Cecilia & Pona, Alan (eds.), XXXI Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, 151–165. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 2013. Presented at Can There be a Hilbert List of Syntax (yet)? IUSS, Pavia, November 2013.Google Scholar
Spyropoulos, Vassilios & Revithiadou, Anthi. 2009. The morphology of past in Greek. Studies in Greek Linguistics 29, 108–122.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi M. 1989. On the properties of the passive affix in Modern Greek. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 1, 235–260.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi M. 2005. The acquisition of voice and transitivity alternations in Greek as native and second language. In Unsworth, Susan, Parodi, Teresa, Sorace, Antonella & Young-Scholten, Martha (eds.), Paths of development in L1 and L2 acquisition: In honor of Bonnie D. Schwartz, 15–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, Marc. 2012. Stress as a proclitic in Modern Greek. Lingua 122, 1165–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zombolou, Katerina. 2004. Verbal alternations in Greek: A semantic analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Reading.Google Scholar