PROJECT OVERVIEW AND OUTCOMES

Deixis (or ‘pointing’) can be understood as a procedure that focuses the joint attention of speech participants on an entity which is present in either the speech setting, memory or conversational or written discourse. Leaving gestural deixis such as literal pointing, nodding or gaze aside, this property is shared by accented pronouns and demonstratives, with the latter often providing the source for the development of accented pronouns. When the attention is already focused on an entity, accented pronouns often indicate Contrastive Topic or Focus.

In order to describe and explain the functioning of the Hittite demonstratives and accented pronouns, I have constructed a model that combines cognitive-functional and typological approaches regarding (a) referent tracking on discourse level, (b) the anaphoric (= textual) and deictic (= situational) use of demonstratives, and (c) the use of accented pronouns in Topic and Focus on sentence level. The application of this model has not only led to an improved description of the demonstratives kā- “this” and apā- “that” and the accented pronoun apā- (which is the same as the demonstrative but with completely different semantics and use), but also to a reclassification of several function words in Hittite and Luwian:

(1) The Hittite pronoun aši is a distal demonstrative, with Jener-Deixis with sometimes negative connotations (like Du-deictic Latin iste), not an anaphoric pronoun. This ‘new’ distal demonstrative required a reappraisal of the hitherto accepted distal semantics of apā-.

(2) A thorough assessment of all attestations of apā- that were assuredly demonstrative led to the conclusion that the demonstrative apā- is a medial demonstrative, with Du-Deixis. In short, instead of a two-way distance-based demonstrative system Hittite had a three-way person-based system.

(3) The meaning of the Hittite pronoun šia- was always rather opaque: suggestions ranged from proximal demonstrative to distal demonstrative to emphatic pronoun. By applying the model I developed I could show that šia- was not a pronoun or demonstrative at all but the long sought after numeral “one”.

(4) The ablative-instrumental forms of the Luwian demonstratives za- “this” and apa- “that” are zin and apin, respectively, previously misunderstood as adverbs “here” and “there”.

(5) With the reanalysis of zin and apin (see 4) as a point of departure, I studied the remaining demonstrative adverbs of place. Based on the complementary distribution of a phonological phenomenon (presence or absence of rhotacism) and by applying both internal reconstruction and the comparative method I could distinguish between adverbial demonstrative ablatives ending in /-adi/ and pronominal demonstrative datives ending in ­/-ati/ (-d- and -t- are not distinguished in Hieroglyphic Luwian script). Using regular sound laws, I was then able to reconstruct the Proto-Anatolian forms based on Hittite, Luwian, and Lycian.

(6) The comparative method also was crucial for removing Cuneiform Luwian zanta from the paradigm of za- “this”. This form was always understood as an instrumental of za- meaning “with this”, but I found it to be the direct cognate of Hittite katta “down”, without any connection with the demonstratives.

OUTPUT

Monograph

The Hittite Demonstratives. Studies in Deixis, Topics and Focus. (Studien zu den Boghazköy-Texten 55). Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden 2014, 610 pp.

Articles

  1. The Hittite 3rd person/distal demonstrative aši (uni, eni etc.).Die Sprache. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 43/1 (2002/2003) [2004], 1-32
  2. A New Proposal for the Reading of the Hittite numeral ‘1’: šia.’  In Theo van den Hout (ed.), The Life and Times of Hattusili III and Tudhaliya IV. (Festschrift Han de Roos). Publications de l’Institut Historique-Archéologique Néerlandais de Stamboul: Leiden 2006, 165-188
  3. The Hieroglyphic Luwian demonstrative ablative-instrumentals zin and apin.’ In Alfonso Archi & Rita Francia (eds.), VI Congresso Internazionale di Ittitologia, Roma, 5-9 settembre 2005 (SMEA 49). Roma 2007, 319-334
  4. Deictic-emphatic -i and the Anatolian demonstratives’. In Ronald Kim, Norbert Oettinger, Elisabeth Rieken & Michael Weiss (eds.), Ex Anatolia Lux. Anatolian and Indo-European studies in honor of H. Craig Melchert on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday. Ann Arbor – New York: Beech Stave Press 2010, 55-67
  5. The Luwian Demonstratives of Place and Manner’. In Itamar Singer (ed.), ipatami kistamati pari tumatimis. Luwian and Hittite Studies Presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday. (Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology). Tel Aviv: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University 2010, 76-94
  6. The Luwian adverbs zanta “down” and *ānni “with, for, against”’. In: Acts of the VIIth International Congress of Hittitology, Çorum, 25-31 August, 2008, Ankara 2010, 299-318

Talks

  1. The Demonstrative Functions of the Pronoun asi (uni, eni etc.), September 10, 2002, Vth International Congress of Hittitology, Çorum, Turkey
  2. The use of demonstratives in Hittite. February 20, 2004, Amsterdam Center of Language and Communication, Amsterdam
  3. The Hieroglyphic Luwian pronominal demonstrative ‘ablatives’ zin ‘from this’ and apin ‘from that’. September 6, 2005, VIth International Congress of Hittitology, Rome
  4. The Cuneiform Luwian adverb zanda “down, (along) with, together, jointly”. August 28, 2008, VIIth International Conference of Hittitology in Çorum, Turkey
  5. The Hittite demonstratives: subjective construal of speech participants’ spaces. July 26, 2014, Workshop Perspectivization in language. Source–goal asymmetry in motion events, deixis, and frames of reference, Excellence cluster Topoi. July 25-26, 2014, Berlin, Germany (45 min.)
  6. Language that points, images that talk. How language and art interact. Volunteer Day, June 15th, 2021, Oriental Institute, Chicago (45 min.)
  7. The fate of the Proto-Anatolian demonstrative *ési. June 19, 2021. Virtual East Coast Indo-European Conference XL, June 17-19, 2021
Print Friendly, PDF & Email