[automatically translated] This work is part of a broader attempt to reconstruct, with a method that can be characterized as 'scientific', the picture of the derivational morphology of ancient greek. The theoretical morphology, and one in particular lexical, make use of the native speaker intuitions in order to explain the consistency of morphological processes and their productivity; in the event of a 'dead' language analyst is not the whole wealth of data that can be elicited by the native speakers of specific expertise on facts relating to their own language. For this reason I decided to 'interrogate', albeit in a quite unorthodox, Apollonius urchin which native speaker took the greek and, as often happens in these cases, the results of this inquiry have led me to explore the streets that I had not expected to have to go. It appears that in an area derivational ahead of Apollonius urchin in for sunt £ xewj warned the same concerns that inform contemporary morphological studies: it is possible a separation between morphology and syntax? You can the finding of objective criteria that distinguish between compounds by phrases? It is known that the composition is the most sensitive region of the morphology 'contamination' as part of the syntax (see. Benveniste 1967: 15), that has been, and still constitutes a problem in identifying strictly separated for the two areas of relevance areas (see. Scalise 1994: 139). The need to find a theoretical tool that allows communication between the two domains is the basis of the studies of much of the current theoretical morphology (see. Scalise-Lieber 2006). The fact that Apollonius in the II century. C. felt, albeit in his own way, the same problem in my opinion gives a 'current' aspect of historical-critical considerations. In particular, it will attempt to show how in Book IV of the perished suntàxeo: s Apollonius draws up a real theory about the formation mechanisms of the words in their own language. It deals in particular to find criteria that the definition of syntax and morphology in areas differentiation between compounds / derivatives on the one hand and on the other phrases. The principles that Apollonius comes from the observation of the behavior of complex words enshrine the actual ability to differentiate Synthesis (in-position) and paráthesis (juxtaposition). Unlike the latter, in fact, the first exhibits the following characteristics: 1. accentual unification 2. ability to be preceded by Article 3. 4. exocentricity just bending on the second constituent 5. possibility of undergoing dulling semantics.
|Title of host publication||La morfologia del greco tra tipologia e diacronia. Atti del VII Incontro internazionale di Linguistica greca (Cagliari, 13-15 settembre 2007)|
|Number of pages||12|
|Publication status||Published - 2010|