Some notes on split ergativity in Hittite

Open access


The Hittite grammar is characterized by a morphosyntactic split that affects the behaviour of the inflectional classes of Noun phrases (DPs). While a singular neuter transitive subject is marked by /-anza/suffix, commons DPs end with an /-š/mark. In addition, intransitive neuter subjects and neuter objects pattern in the same way, marked by /-ø/, while in commons the object role is marked by an /-n/ ending, which distinguishes it from the subjects. The aim of this paper is to investigate over a possible definition of split ergativity in the Hittite grammar.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] R. Francia Lineamenti di grammatica ittita. Edizioni Scripta Manent 2012.

  • [2] H. A. Hoffner and H. C. Melchert A grammar of the hittite language vol. 1 & 2. Eisenbrauns 2008.

  • [3] C. Boeckx “List of abbreviations and symbols” in The oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism C. Boeckx Ed. Oxford University Press 2012 pp. xv–xx.

  • [4] B. Comrie M. Haspelmath and B. Bickel “The leipzig glossing rules: Conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses” 2008.

  • [5] A. Rizza “Ipotesi su problemi di genere numero ed ergatività in eteo” Atti del sodalizio glottologico milanese vol. 2012 no. 7 ns 2013.

  • [6] R. M. Dixon and S. R. Anderson Ergativity. Cambridge University Press 1994.

  • [7] A. Garrett “Wackernagel’s law and unaccusativity in hittite” Stanford: CSLI Publications 1997 pp. 85–103.

  • [8] S. Luraghi “Transitivity intransitivity and diathesis in hittite” Индоевропейское языкознание и классическая филология nos. 14-2 pp. 133–154 2010.

  • [9] M. Silverstein “Hierarchy of features and ergativity” Grammatical categories in Australian languages pp. 112–171 1976.

  • [10] H. C. Melchert “The problem of the ergative case in hittite” Grammatical case in the languages of the Middle East and Europe p. 161 2011.

  • [11] L. Rizzi “The fine structure of the left periphery” in Elements of grammar Springer 1997 pp. 281–337.

  • [12] M. G. C. Huggard “Wh-words in hittite: A study in syntax-semantics and syntax-phonology interfaces.” PhD thesis UCLA 2015.

  • [13] J. Bobaljik “On ergativity and ergative unergatives” MIT Working papers in Linguistics vol. 19 no. 4588 p. 334385 1993.

  • [14] K. G. Murasugi “Crossing and nested paths–np movement in accusative and ergative languages” PhD thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1992.

  • [15] A. Assmann D. Georgi F. Heck G. Müller and P. Weisser “Ergatives move too early: On an instance of opacity in syntax” Syntax vol. 18 no. 4 pp. 343–387 2015.

  • [16] É. Benveniste Hittite et indo-européen: études comparatives vol. 5. Adrien Maisonneuve 1962.

  • [17] S. Patri L’alignement syntaxique dans les langues indo-européennes d’Anatolie. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag 2007.

  • [18] A. Garrett “The origin of np split ergativity” Language vol. 66 no. 2 pp. 261–96 1990.

  • [19] E. Laroche Un” ergatif” en indo-européen d’Asie mineure. Klincksieck 1962.

  • [20] P. Dardano “L’allineamento sintattico delle lingue indoeuropee dell’Anatolia: Vecchi problemi e nuove proposte alla luce di una recente pubblicazione.” JSTOR 2013.

  • [21] P. Goedegebuure “Split-ergativity in hittite” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie vol. 102 no. 2 pp. 270–303 2013.

  • [22] N. Chomsky The minimalist program. MIT Press 1995.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 5 5 5
PDF Downloads 4 4 4