Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:58:43.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What gives with es gibt? Typological and comparative perspectives on existentials in German, Germanic, and Indo-European

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Brian D. Joseph
Brian D. Joseph
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics222 Oxley HallThe Ohio State UniversityColumbus, OhioUSA43210–1298 [[email protected]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

To the memory of Edgar Polomé, who inspired with his keen interest in Germanic and Indo-European

Modern German existentials with impersonal es gibt are attested only rather late in the German tradition (from late Middle High German, in the fourteenth century), have few compelling cognate constructions (if any) elsewhere in Germanic, and thus are usually taken to be an extension of other senses (e.g., ‘give, produce, yield’) of the verb geben. It is noted here, though, that parallels with existentials based on verbs meaning ‘have, take’ cognate to geben can be found elsewhere in Indo-European, in particular in Old Irish and Latin. When viewed against the backdrop of there being several verbs in Indo-European meaning both ‘give’and ‘take’, these facts suggest an interpretation wherein the existential sense of geben is the archaism, and the meaning ‘give’is a Germanic innovation.*

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , Fall 2000 , pp. 187 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bauer, Brigitte L. M. 1999. Impersonal habet constructions in Latin: At the cross-roads of Indo-European innovation. Language change and typological variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of his 83rd birthday. Volume II: Grammatical universals and typology, ed. by Justus, Carol F. and Polomé, Edgar C., 590–612. (Journal of Indo-European Studies monograph, 31.) Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1969. Le vocabulaire des institutions indo-européennes. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
Bird, Norman. 1982. The distribution of Indo-European root morphemes (A checklist for philologists). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Brugmann, Karl. 1925. Die Syntax des einfachen Satzes im Indogermanischen. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Robert L. (ed.). 1986. New dictionary of American slang. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Dal, Ingerid. 1966. Kurze deutsche Syntax auf historischer Grundlage. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Drosdowski, Günther (ed.). 1993. Duden. Das große Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache in acht Bänden. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Ebert, Robert Peter. 1986. Historische Syntax des Deutschen II: 1350–1700. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gamkrelidze, Thomas V., and Ivanov, Vyacheslav V.. 1984/1995. Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans. (Translated from 1984 Russian original by Nichols, Johanna). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
García-Hernández, Benjamin. 1992. Nuevos verbos impersonales en latín tardío e influencia griega. Latin vulgaire—latin tardif III, ed. by Iliescu, Maria and Marxgut, Werner. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Grimm, Jacob. 1837. Deutsche Grammatik. Göttingen: Dieterichsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Hammer, A[lfred] E. 1971. German grammar and usage. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. Approaches to grammaticalization, volume I, ed. by Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Heine, Bernd, 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janda, Laura A. 1997. GIVE, HAVE, and TAKE in Slavic. The linguistics of giving, ed. by Newman, John, 249–265. (Typological studies in language, 36.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. 2001. Is there such a thing as ‘grammaticalization’? Language Sciences 23.1.163–186. [Special issue on Grammaticalization: A critical assessment, ed. by Lyle Campbell.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. 2001. Forthcoming. Morphologization from syntax. To appear in Handbook of historical linguistics, ed. by Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D.. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Justus, Carol F. 1999a. Indo-European ‘have’: A grammatical etymology. Language change and typological variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of his 83rd birthday. Volume II: Grammatical universals and typology, ed. by Justus, Carol F. and Polomé, Edgar C., 613–641. (Journal of Indo-European Studies monograph, 31.) Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Justus, Carol F. 1999b. The arrival of Italic and Germanic ‘have’in late Indo-European. Proceedings of the tenth annual UCLA Indo-European conference, Los Angeles May 21–23, 1998, ed. by Jones-Bley, Karlene, Huld, Martin E., Volpe, Angela Della, and Dexter, Miriam Robbins, 77–94. (Journal of Indo-European Studies monograph, 32.) Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Kehrein, Joseph. 1854. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache des fünfzehnten bis siebenzehnten Jahrhunderts. Leipzig: Otto Wigand.Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich. 1995. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Küpper, Heinz. 1963. Wörterbuch der deutschen Umgangssprache. Hamburg: ClaasseGoogle Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1968. Akzent-Ablaut. (Indogermanische Grammatik, II). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Mauss, Marcel. 1925. Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l'échange dans les sociétés archaïques. L'Année Sociologique 1.31–186.Google Scholar
Newman, John. 1996. Give: A cognitive linguistic study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, John. 1997. The origin of the German es gibt construction. The linguistics of giving, ed. by Newman, John, 307–325. (Typological studies in language, 36.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pokorny, Julius. 1959. Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern and Munich: Francke.Google Scholar
Thurneysen, Rudolf. 1946. A grammar of Old Irish. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Wentworth, Harold, and Flexner, Stuart B.. 1960. Dictionary of American slang. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co.Google Scholar