Accented Clitics in Hittite?

Abstract

Hittite attests two distinct second positions, occupied by: (a) Wackernagel enclitics; (b) non‐Wackernagel enclitics ‐(m)a, ‐(y)a as well as stressed indefinite and correlative pronouns. I argue that Hittite provides novel data on the syntax‐prosody interface as reflected in the operation of the second position constraint: the words belonging to group (b) combine properties which are typically ascribed to stressed and unstressed second position constituents. These findings show that the boundary between the stressed, syntactically conditioned second position exemplified by Germanic verb‐second and the unstressed, phonologically conditioned second position of Wackernagel enclitics is much more blurred than is commonly acknowledged.

On the Syntax of Argument Clitics in Hittite

“…On the other hand, the placement of the clitic cluster is prosodically motivated (e.g. in Hittite it appears after the first phonological word of its CP, see Sideltsev 2017a); their positioning within the cluster is often templatic, and the template can be based on morphological or prosodic characteristics. We do not take any definitive position regarding the exact derivation of the Wackernagel position of argument clitics, and our proposal does not force us to do so.…”

Hittite word order and branching direction

“…Например, превербы могут располагаться или контактно с глаголом, после отрицания и наречий (10a-b), или левее, пропуская отрицание и наречия (10c-d) (Salisbury 2005). Подчинительные союзы обнаруживаются как на левой периферии клаузы (11a), так и существенно ближе к глаголу, непосредственно перед превербами, отрицанием и низкими наречиями (11b) (Sideltsev 2015;2017). Важно помнить, что в случае подчинительных союзов их положение в клаузе до определенной степени коррелирует с их классом.…”

“…Так, например, союзы mān 'если', takku 'если' относятся к классу начальных союзов (С IN ), а союзы kuit 'потому что' (Huggard 2013), kuwapi 'когда, где' (Hoffner, Melchert 2008: 417) -к классу предглагольных союзов (C PREV )). При этом имеет место и вариативность позиции одного и того же союза, например maḫḫan 'когда, как' (Sideltsev 2017 (MH/NS (CTH 404.1.III.A) KBo 9.106+ obv. ii 5-6).…”

Deriving preverbal position in a verb-final language: the case of Hittite

“…5 See for the difference between the complementizer mān and the irrealis particle man/mān. For the syntax of the irrealis particle see also Sideltsev (2017b). Here it will suffice to say that the difference between the marker of irrealis as a Wackernagel particle and as a stressed particle is best shown by its placement vis-à-vis prototypical unambiguous enclitics.…”

“…For instance, preverbs can be positioned either adjacent to the verb, following the negation marker and adverbs (8a-b), or further leftward in front of the negation marker and adverbs (8c-d) (Salisbury 2005). Complementizers appear both in the left periphery of the clause (9) and considerably closer to the verb, in front of the negation marker, preverbs and low adverbs (10) (Sideltsev 2015;2017b). In the case of complementizers their position in the clause largely correlates with their class.…”