Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC

114 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM
cases it appears only in a nonessential clause needs an explanation. This
explanation may be given by the fa ct that at the time when the traditional
relat. pronouns were still in use in the living language, the pronomen
abundans appeared only in the relat. connection, i.e. in nonessential clauses.
7.2.5.1. Probable development
The development may have been as follows. At the time when onov came
into use as a substitute for the relat. pronoun there existed a tendency
to use incidentally a resumpt. pronoun af ter the relat. pronoun. This
was done only in nonessential clauses, or rather in cases of relat. connection.
When önov started being used in more complicated clauses and the
need was feIt to clarify it, this did not create any problems. The ancient
tendency had to develop into a system, because the new connective was
not a pronoun and needed a resumpt. pronoun in order to be clear. We do
not know when and how this development has begun. Our only certainty
is the result of the development, as we find it in early Modern Greek.
It is most safe to assume that originally önov was followed by a resumpt.
pronoun only in cases of relat. connection and that from that moment on
onov has followed its own course: the use of a resumpt. pronoun was not
a tendency any longer; it was growing into a system of clarification.
Thus its use af ter a nominative was discarded, as it was feIt that a
nominative in itself was clear enough; its use spread from cases of relat.
connection to all nonessential clauses; at a certain moment it spread
even to essential clauses, as it was realized that the casus obliqui caused
misunderstanding and always needed a resumpt. pronoun. Only the
accusative did not go along: it was followed by a resumpt. pronoun only
in nonessential clauses, as of old. People may have feIt that the syntactical
relations within an essential clause were clear enough. In early Modern
Greek the system is complete.
7.2.5.2. The traditional relat. pronouns in early Modern Greek
The system of clarification of önov does not seem to have affected the
traditional relat. pronouns: in the Assizes, the Kallimachos, the Digenis
Akritas-epic and the Chronicle ot Morea (and in many other works) one
can find instances of oç( nç) and öanee, used in nonessential clauses 429
but not followed by a resumpt. pronoun. This means that there has
never existed a general system of necessary clarification af ter every accusative
in nonessential clauses. The system concerned exclusively onov.
This becomes understandable, when one considers the fa ct that these
traditional pronouns did not any longer form part of the living language,
but had actually become extinct a long time ago. A dead part may stay
within a living organism, but it will not be affected by it. So the traditional
pronouns were not affected by the new system particularly in the language
429 Or in essential clauses, for that matter, when the relat. pronoun is standing
in another case than the accusative.