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

PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM: 79
This practice was (and is now) so common that it is quite understandable
that Machairas also did it, when the object at the beginning of the sentence
was not a noun or a pers. or demonstr. pronoun, but the relat. pronoun
Ó noloç. There are three reasons to believe that this supposition is correct:
1. There are more reasons to believe that Ó noloç had a strongly
anaphoric sense (see above).
2. The resumpt. pronoun never follows the nominative of Ó noioç.
This does not happen either, when a noun or a pers. or demonstr. pronoun
begins the sentence. Only the object is repeated by a resumpt. pronoun.
3. The same applies to prepositional phrases.
Finally there may have been still another cause of Machairas' custom
to use a resumpt. pronoun af ter ó noioç; the influence of ónov! It also was
arelat. pronoun and, although it was quite different from ó noioç in
character, it was also followed by a resumpt. pronoun in nonessential
clauses, including the cases of relat. connection 255.
Mter the 15th century, it seems, ó noioç has lost ground. It sooms
that it has never again reached the frequency it had in the Chronicle of
Machairas. In a long work as the Erotocritos it appears only 5 times,
and all the instances occur in nonessential clauses! It seems to have been
pushed back into the atmosphere where it originally belonged.
4.3. Further History
Although the further history of ó noioç may be interesting, it is not
of any importance to this study. Having been picked up by the Ka()aeevovC1a,
it is intruding now into the LJ'YJfl0itx'fJ. That this causes new
problems is shown by the many remarks the modern grammarians feel
obliged to make as to how and when it should be used 256.
There is one more interesting thing. In one of his books Pernot 257
mentions the following example of the use of the modern Ó ónoioç: elvat
flta hateta TfjÇ ónotaç Tà xecpá).atá T'YJÇ elvat fleyáï..a. He adds that this is
not exceptional. If this is really true, then the same thing is happening
again as in the Chronicle of Machairas. The development has gone even
further: now ó ónoioç is followed by a resumpt. pronoun even in an essential
phrase! This time we can be sure that ó ónoioç is undergoing the influence
of nov.
255 See Mach. 354,28,402,3-4,520,15-7,560,20,572,35-574,1, 642,4-5, 664,21-2.
Cases of parenthesis : 82,15-6, 254,6-7, 254,19-21, 326,31- 3, 380,29-30, 456,19-21,
490,2 and 530,1-2.
256 See Triandafyllidis, § 768, Tzartzanos, § 114, Householder C.S., pp. 92- 3
and Tzermias, § 362. See especially E. Yannidis, r;.waa,~à IJá(!e(!ya (Athens 1932),
pp_ 31-2, P. Vlastos, 'H o.Ä1JV'~", ~al ,jf:(!,~èç äHeç ö'yÄwaaieç (Athens 1935),
pp. 209-13 (including A_ Pallis' study IJ ov - önov - ó óno ioç on pp. 229- 44)
and the review of it by Yannidis in NÉa 'Ecnia 17 (1935), pp. 593-5.
257 Pernot, p_ 152_