Double Object and Morphological Triggers for Syntactic Case

Abstract

Abstract A question that has always fascinated historical grammatical concerns is the interplay between alterations in morphological systems and syntactic change. It has long been observed that the shift from an inflectional to a mainly isolating morphological type which affected several Indo-European languages took place at the same time as extensive syntactic restructuring, reflected in restrictions on constituent order and in the widespread use of analytic constructions. The apparent simultaneity of these two phenomena accounts for the general agreement found in traditional literature on the existence of a functionalist relation between case morphology and syntactic structures. The natural implication of this traditional position is that historical changes in syntactic structures are straightforward, functionally related effects of changes in inflectional systems. This chapter shows that theories based on a purely functionalist approach are not completely satisfactory as they stand, since important aspects of the phenomenon under discussion go unexplained: empirical data belonging to the sub-domain of the double-object construction in the crucial transition phase from Old to Middle English seem to call for a different explanation. The chapter is organized as follows. Section 7.2 surveys Weerman's analysis of syntactic change in the double-object construction. Section 7.3 presents qualitative and quantitative data derived from the investigation of OE and (Early) Middle English (EME) text material. Section 7.4 addresses the question of how to deal with the documented word orders in light of an expanded empirical base, and proposes an explanatory theory which supplements Weerman's proposal, finally presenting an overall discussion of the conclusions achieved.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.