Article

From Demonstratives to Copulas: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective and the Case of Polish

Paweł Rutkowski 1
Author Information & Copyright
1Warsaw University and Yale University

Copyright ⓒ 2016, Sejong University Language Research Institue. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Published Online: Jan 01, 2017

Abstract

This paper aims to clarify the syntactic status of the element to which appears in Polish copular expressions. The word to has recently been analyzed as a verb, see Linde-Usiekniewicz (2006); however, from the historical point of view, it clearly derives from a demonstrative pronoun. In the present article, I attempt to set the discussion of Polish to-constructions against a broader, cross- linguistic perspective. I provide an overview of a number of syntactic properties that characterize copulas derived from pronouns in other languages. I follow Li & Thompson (1977) in assuming that a demonstrative may be (diachronically) reanalyzed as a copula if the nominal structure that precedes it changes its status from a left- dislocated topic to the subject of the whole copular expression. I conclude that this reanalysis has not yet taken place in Polish; therefore, I argue that the element to should not be interpreted as a copula.

Keywords: demonstrative pronouns; copulas; topicalization; left- dislocation; syntactic reanalysis

References

1.

Bańko, M. 2002. Wykłady z Polskiej Fleksji. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

2.

Bowern, C. 2006. Syntactic Change and Syntactic Borrowing in Generative Grammar. Manuscript, Houston, TX: Rice University.

3.

Citko, B. 2006. Small Clauses Reconsidered: Not So Small and not All Alike. Manuscript, Seattle, WA: University of Washington.

4.

Diessel, H. 1999. The Morphosyntax of Demonstratives in Synchrony and Diachrony. Linguistic Typology 3, 1-49.

5.

Franks, S. 1995. Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

6.

Gildea, S. 1993. The Development of Tense Markers from Demonstrative Pronouns in Panare (Cariban). Studies in Language 17, 53-73.

7.

Glinert, L. 1989. The Grammar of Modern Hebrew. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

8.

Li, C. & S. Thompson. 1977. A Mechanism for the Development of Copula Morphemes. In C. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of Syntactic Change 419-444. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

9.

Linde-Usiekniewicz, J. 2006. Small Clauses Reconsidered. Manuscript, Warsaw: Warsaw University.

10.

McWhorter, J. 1997. Towards a New Model of Creole Genesis. New York: Peter Lang.

11.

Peyraube, A. & T. Wiesbusch. 1994. Problems Relating to the History of Different Copulas in Ancient Chinese. In M. Chen & O. Tzeng (eds.), In Honor of William S-Y. Wang: Interdisciplinary Studies on Language and Language Change 383-404. Taipei: Pyramid Press.

12.

Saloni, Z. 1974. Klasyfikacja Gramatyczna Leksemów Polskich. Język Polski 54.1, 3-13 & 54.2, 93-101.

13.

Schuh, R. 1983. Kilba Equational Sentences. Studies in African Linguistics 14, 311-326.

14.

Whitman, J. 2001. Relabelling. In S. Pintzuk, G. Tsoulas, & A. Warner (eds.), Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanisms 220-238. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The Journal of Universal Language, published by Sejong University Language Research Institute, has again been selected as a certified academic journal by the Korean Citation Index in 2021.

Our sincere gratitude goes to the editorial committee and researchers for their dedicated support.

We at the JUL remain committed to delivering a journal of the highest quality to our worldwide readership.


I don't want to open this window for a day.