Search Results

Chapter 1 examines which items are functionally equivalent to prepositions, crosslinguistically and at different stages in the history of one language. It then considers the main syntactic forms that prepositions can take.

Chapter 4 begins the history of Greek prepositions, looking at Homeric and Classical Greek. We see prepositions competing with one another. The new “improper” prepositions ousting old “proper” synonyms, while the semantic contribution and the extent of use of cases was diminishing. Above all, new prepositions were mainly or exclusively spatial.

With the briefest nod at terms ancient and modern for ‘verb’, indeclinable words are introduced, beginning with ten lectures on prepositions [here divided into two parts]. After notes on terminology and recent bibliography, the chapter sketches (Lectures 17–18) a summary inventory of ‘true prepositions’ and ‘improper prepositions’ (or ‘prepositional adverbs’) in Greek and Latin, distinguishing inherited and secondary forms of various types (with an excursus on words for ‘about’). Turning to the use of the true prepositions, the chapter comments briefly on their original use as adverbs (Lecture 18), before giving a detailed account of their use as preverbs in compound verbs. This includes discussion of tmesis (formal separation from/union with the verb, Lecture 19), semantic effects of fusion of preverb and verb (Lecture 20), verbs which occur only with — or never with — preverbs, and other sources of apparent instances of preverb + verb (Lecture 21).

With the briefest nod at terms ancient and modern for ‘verb’,indeclinable words are introduced, beginning with ten lectures on prepositions [here divided into two parts]. After notes on terminology and recent bibliography, the chapter sketches (Lectures 17–18) a summary inventory of ‘true prepositions’ and ‘improper prepositions’ (or ‘prepositional adverbs’) in Greek and Latin, distinguishing inherited and secondary forms of various types (with an excursus on words for ‘about’). Turning to the use of the true prepositions, the chapter comments briefly on their original use as adverbs (Lecture 18), before giving a detailed account of their use as preverbs in compound verbs. This includes discussion of tmesis (formal separation from/union with the verb, Lecture 19), semantic effects of fusion of preverb and verb (Lecture 20), verbs which occur only with — or never with — preverbs, and other sources of apparent instances of preverb + verb (Lecture 21).

With the briefest nod at terms ancient and modern for ‘verb’, indeclinable words are introduced,beginning with ten lectures on prepositions [here divided into two parts]. After notes on terminology and recent bibliography, the chapter sketches (Lectures 17–18) a summary inventory of ‘true prepositions’ and ‘improper prepositions’ (or ‘prepositional adverbs’) in Greek and Latin, distinguishing inherited and secondary forms of various types (with an excursus on words for ‘about’). Turning to the use of the true prepositions, the chapter comments briefly on their original use as adverbs (Lecture 18), before giving a detailed account of their use as preverbs in compound verbs. This includes discussion of tmesis (formal separation from/union with the verb, Lecture 19), semantic effects of fusion of preverb and verb (Lecture 20), verbs which occur only with — or never with — preverbs, and other sources of apparent instances of preverb + verb (Lecture 21).

With the briefest nod at terms ancient and modern for ‘verb’, indeclinable words are introduced, beginning with ten lectures on prepositions [here divided into two parts]. After notes on terminology and recent bibliography,the chapter sketches (Lectures 17–18) a summary inventory of ‘true prepositions’ and ‘improper prepositions’ (or ‘prepositional adverbs’) in Greek and Latin, distinguishing inherited and secondary forms of various types (with an excursus on words for ‘about’). Turning to the use of the true prepositions, the chapter comments briefly on their original use as adverbs (Lecture 18), before giving a detailed account of their use as preverbs in compound verbs. This includes discussion of tmesis (formal separation from/union with the verb, Lecture 19), semantic effects of fusion of preverb and verb (Lecture 20), verbs which occur only with — or never with — preverbs, and other sources of apparent instances of preverb + verb (Lecture 21).

With the briefest nod at terms ancient and modern for ‘verb’, indeclinable words are introduced, beginning with ten lectures on prepositions [here divided into two parts]. After notes on terminology and recent bibliography, the chapter sketches (Lectures 17–18) a summary inventory of ‘true prepositions’ and ‘improper prepositions’ (or ‘prepositional adverbs’) in Greek and Latin,distinguishing inherited and secondary forms of various types (with an excursus on words for ‘about’). Turning to the use of the true prepositions, the chapter comments briefly on their original use as adverbs (Lecture 18), before giving a detailed account of their use as preverbs in compound verbs. This includes discussion of tmesis (formal separation from/union with the verb, Lecture 19), semantic effects of fusion of preverb and verb (Lecture 20), verbs which occur only with — or never with — preverbs, and other sources of apparent instances of preverb + verb (Lecture 21).

This chapter explores the relation between prepositions and movement, arguing that in at least some cases — in particular, in causatives — what is considered as the argument of a preposition comes together with it as the result of movement (or internal Merge), not as the result of external Merge. The prepositions in question are introduced above verb phrase (VP), and are paired with a K(ase) head that is also introduced above VP, in a way that may be parallel to recent work by Dominique Sportiche on determiners. The main thesis here is that some prepositions (and, by extension, some postpositions) are probes, in the sense of Chomsky's recent work. The particular case considered here is that of dative prepositions preceding subjects in French (and Italian) causatives.

This introductory chapter discusses some of the main threads of the analyses proposed in the remaining chapters and one of their general implications: that phrases composed of spatial prepositions, adverbs, particles, and DPs do not instantiate different structures but merely spell out different portions of one and the same articulated configuration.

Chapter 2 looks at the meanings of prepositions, their polysemy, the possible relationships between various meanings, and at the “localistic hypothesis” that spatial meanings might be in some sense (chronological, psychological, etc.) primary.

Chapter 3 considers the historical development of adpositions. It traces the origin of cases in postpositions, and of adpositions, from nouns, verbs, adjectives, or more complex phrases. The development of an abstract meaning from a spatial one is well‐attested but not on a systematic scale.

Chapter 5 examines prepositional usage in Hellenistic (“Koiné”) Greek, i.e. Biblical Greek. We see an increase in the use of adpositions, the “improper” ones in particular. The tendencies observed in Ancient Greek are even clearer: new prepositions are mainly or only spatial, the older ones being increasingly confined to non‐spatial meanings.

Chapter 6 analyses Medieval Greek usage, the least known and most decisive period in the history of the language, through a close study of a selected corpus of texts. Many old prepositions dropped out of use, ousted also by the newer “improper” ones, often compounded. The newest ones are purely spatial, the old prepositions losing their spatial sense according to whether a new replacement might take that sense over.

Chapter 7 examines the prepositional system of Modern Greek, taking into account the impact of purism and of the Balkan Sprachbund. The development has come full circle: the younger (previously only spatial) prepositions now have various non‐spatial meanings, even losing their spatial meaning altogether, thus repeating the semantic cycle of the previous generation of prepositions.

The standard doctrine that basic grammatical classes (parts of speech) are not semantically definable rests on erroneous assumptions about the nature of linguistic meaning. With a proper view of meaning, basic categories—notably noun and verb—have plausible conceptual characterizations at both the prototype level (for typical examples) and the schema level (valid for all instances). The prototypes are based on conceptual archetypes: objects for nouns, and actions for verbs. The schemas are independent of any particular conceptual content, residing instead in basic cognitive abilities immanent in the archetypes: for nouns, grouping and reification; in the case of verbs, the ability to apprend relationships and to track their evolution through time. An expression's grammatical category specifically depends on the nature of its profile (not its overall content). Thus a noun profiles a thing (defined abstractly as any product of grouping and reification), while a verb profiles a process (a relationship tracked through time). Expressions that profile non-processual relationships include adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, infinitives, and participles. Relational expressions can be categorized in different ways, depending on factors like the number and type of focused participants, whether the profiled relation is simplex or complex, and whether it is apprehended holistically or sequentially. These characterizations prove efficacious in describing how relational expressions function as noun modifiers and in clausal organization.