Berthold Delbrück, Historical and Comparative Indo-European Syntax 1922–2022

Contents Introduction.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Delbrück’s heritage in syntactic reconstruction and history of linguistics Paola Cotticelli-Kurras. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Verbal aspect in Anatolian. The function of the Luwian suffix -s(s)a-, with remarks on the suffix -zza- and verbal reduplication Valerio Pisaniello.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 New thoughts on Delbrück’s Hülfsverben in Vedic Beatrice Grieco.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Wackernagel enclitics in all the wrong places. A study of naḥ in the family books of the Rigveda Götz Keydana.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Syntactical stylistics of Old Indic and Iranian poetical texts. A brief historical outline of the subject and two case-studies Velizar Sadovski.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 On Predicative Possessive Constructions in Avestan Harald Bichlmeier/Maria Carmela Benvenuto. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Berthold Delbrück and Homeric Verbal Morphosyntax Filip De Decker.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Berthold Delbrück and the syntax of cases. An analysis of the case ending -φι in Homer. Filip De Decker/Anna Dentella. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Mycenaean Syntax. Between Indo-European and first millennium Greek: The cases José Luis García Ramón .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 Universal Homeric Dependencies. Annotating Double Accusative Constructions in Homeric Greek and beyond Erica Biagetti/Francesco Mambrini/Chiara Zanchi.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Notes on the morphosyntax of subjecthood in Latin. A comparative-historical approach Eystein Dahl.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 Berthold Delbrück. The making of linguistic thought, the comparative syntax, the enigma of Celtic Diego Poli.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 The Syntax of Negation in Tocharian Olav Hackstein.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 6 Contents Complex predicates and light verb constructions in Classical Armenian Daniel Kölligan.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Reconstructing Old Prussian Syntax Daniel Petit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 Albanian Brian D. Joseph.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395 Verb movement in Albanian and syntactic change (from Delbrück to Balkan linguistics) Đorđe Božović. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 Redehintergründe in Modalitätskontexten altindogermanischer Sprachen Rosemarie Lühr.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 The historical development of the phrase Carlotta Viti.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441 Contributors and their affiliations.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 Introduction 2022 marked the centenary of Berthold Delbrück’s death. The great Indo-Europeanist is considered the father of historical and comparative Indo-European syntax. In his honour a colloquium was held in Verona from November 9th until 12th 2022 as part of the Project Particles in Greek and Hittite as Expression of Mood and Modality (PaGHeMMo), which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Grant Agreement Number 101018097. As that project focused particularly on moods, modality and particles, three elements profoundly studied by Berthold Delbrück (as can be especially seen in his 1871 Syntaktische Forschungen I. Der Gebrauch des Conjunctivs und Optativs im Sanskrit und Griechischen, but also in later publications of the Grundbedeutungen of the Indo-European moods), the conveners considered it highly appropriate to organise the honorary conference as the main outreach event of that European project. An alternative scenario was to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Syntaktische Forschungen I in 2021 but that idea was quickly abandoned because of the start date of the project in May 2021 and because of the ongoing restrictive measures and health emergency caused by the corona-pandemic. This conference was not the first celebratory event for the founding father of historical Indo-European syntax. Already in 1993 a conference was organised to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the publication of the first volume of the Vergleichende Syntax der indogermanischen Sprachen. As this coincided with the celebration of Holger Pedersen, the acts of that conference were only published in 1997 (edited by Emilio Crespo and José-Luís García-Ramón and published with the same editing company as the current volume). As was the case in 1993, keynote speakers for all language families and for the mother tongue, Proto-Indo-European (PIE), were invited to discuss the current research of the syntax of the specific language and compare this with Delbrück’s findings at the time. This approach was also applied to languages that had not yet been discovered, deciphered or had not been sufficiently investigated. Besides the invited speakers, also many other researchers presented their work on historical syntax on one or more Indo-European languages. Although it was not intended this way, the conference turned out to be a mirror of Delbrück’s own (initial) language interests with a predominance of presentations on Greek and Sanskrit, with the other language (familie) s such as Iranian, Latin, Germanic, Celtic and Balto-Slavic being much less represented.