Internally Headed Relative Clauses in Akkadian - Cuneiform Digital ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Construct state and the definiteness effect (10) The construct state in Biblical Hebrew be¢t ham-melek house.Const Def-king (11) The construct state in Akkadian b®t ßarr-im house.Const king-Gen ‘the house of the king’ (12) ßa genitive in Akkadian b®t-um ßa ßarr-im house-Nom Det/Rel king-Gen ‘a/the house of the king’ (13) DP-ßu ßa genitive in Akkadian (Huehnergard 1989, 227) b®s-su ßa ßarr-im house-his Det/Rel king-Gen ‘the house of the king’
Hypothesis • The head of a construct relative clause is non-specific and weakly quantified • Construct relative clauses are internally headed relative clauses (whereas those using the determinative-relative pronoun are, at least in the Old Babylonian period, externally headed) • The construct state indicates the head of the internally headed relative clause just as the indefinite article does in Lakhota Syntactic Tests • The head of a construct relative should only be able to refer to cardinal amounts (cf. the absolute state) and should not be able to pick a subset out of a larger, contextually salient group since it is weakly quantified • Anaphoric demonstratives (aw®lum ßu¢) should not be able to refer to the head of a construct relative since it is non-specific
Page 1 and 2: Internally Headed Relative Clauses
Page 3 and 4: What is an IHRC? (2) (2) Externally
Page 5 and 6: The definiteness effect in English
Page 7: Lakhota IHRCs: The definiteness eff
Page 11 and 12: (16) CH §232, rev., xix 82-92 CH
Page 13 and 14: Conclusions • The construct state

Internally Headed Relative Clauses in Akkadian - Cuneiform Digital ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?