=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1347/paper18
|storemode=property
|title=Suffixation and the expression of space and time in modern Greek
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1347/paper18.pdf
|volume=Vol-1347
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/networds/Anastassiadis-Symeonidis15
}}
==Suffixation and the expression of space and time in modern Greek==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1347/paper18.pdf
Suffixation and the expression of time and space in Modern Greek
Anna Anastassiadis-Symeonidis
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
ansym@lit.auth.gr
e.g., proinos ‘of early morning’, vradinos ‘of the
Abstract evening’, kalokairinos ‘of the summer’, pasha-
linos ‘of Easter’, aprilianos ‘of April’, simerinos
This paper draws a comparison, through
‘today’s/of today’, pantotinos ‘of ever - everlast-
semasiological and onomasiological
ing’ - vorinos ‘north’, antikrynos ‘of the opposite
methods, of three Modern Greek (MG)
side’, brostinos ‘of the front’, makrinos ‘distant’.
suffixes -in(os), -iatik(os) and -isi(os),
The temporal sense base-nouns can label
which construct denominal adjectives of
one of the denominations of the internal structure
time and/or space. Following D. Corbin’s
of the time unit YEAR, e.g., kalokairi ‘summer’,
model (1987; 1991 and forthcoming) of
theros ‘summer’, fthinoporo ‘autumn’, or DAY,
Construction Morphology, an in depth
e.g., proi ‘morning’, vradi ‘evening’, or desig-
analysis of these suffixes’ semantics will
nate one of their special denominations, e.g.,
be presented. The results suggest that, in
Aprilios ‘April’. Aside from these base-nouns,
order to construct a denominal adjective
we observe that the base can be selected from the
following the relational Lexeme Con-
names of important celebrations e.g., Pasha
struction Rule (LCRREL), a categorical,
‘Easter’, and that the specific deictic (NOW) de-
semantic and pragmatic compatibility are
nominations construct denominal adjectives ex-
necessary between the base-noun and the
clusively with the suffix -in(os), e.g., simerinos
suffix, as well as between the suffixed
‘of today’, apopsinos ‘of this evening’, htesinos
adjective and the noun of the noun phrase
‘of yesterday’, torinos ‘of now’, fetinos ‘of this
(NP); there are no synonyms even if the
year’, persinos ‘of last year’, pantotinos ‘of ever
same noun is used as a base-noun. The
- everlasting’.
three suffixes differ with respect to their
Following our observation of spatial sense
semantic and pragmatic features; as a
base-nouns we operate a distinction between: (i)
consequence, they are used in different
a group of nouns referring to geographical terms,
genres. The data has been drawn from
e.g., vorras ‘north’, oros ‘mountain’, thalassa
many dictionaries and especially from the
‘sea’; (ii) toponyms, e.g., Alexandria ‘Alexan-
Reverse Dictionary of Modern Greek
dria’; and (iii) adverbs constructing denomina-
(Anastassiadis-Symeonidis, 2002) as well
tions within the deictic system (HERE), e.g., an-
as the Corpus of Greek Texts (Goutsos
tikry ‘across’, konta ‘near’, makria ‘far’, piso
2003).
‘behind’.
1 The suffixes Finally, based on the context, the remaining
nouns in the corpus (13%) can be categorized as
1.1 The -in(os) suffix conveying spatial meaning (provenance), e.g.,
agheladhino ghala ‘cow’s milk’, vodhi-
This suffix is applied to a nominal base, or
no/hoirino kreas ‘bovine (beef)/pig (pork) meat’,
an adverbial one which could, however, be con-
kreatini/tyrini evdhomadha ‘Meatfare/Cheesefare
sidered as a nominal one, given that these ad-
week’, anthropini symperifora ‘human behav-
verbs function also as nouns (Berthonneau 1989:
iour’. The same principles hold for the adjectives
493). Consequently, we suggest a unified nomi-
foteinos ‘bright’, faeinos ‘brilliant’, skoteinos
nal base. In our corpus’ base-nouns (87%) be-
‘dark’, alithinos ‘real’, that originate in ancient
long to the category of temporal or spatial nouns,
Greek, where the base-noun functioned as a spa-
Copyright © by the paper’s authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes.
In Vito Pirrelli, Claudia Marzi, Marcello Ferro (eds.): Word Structure and Word Usage. Proceedings of the NetWordS Final
Conference, Pisa, March 30-April 1, 2015, published at http://ceur-ws.org
85
tial noun; relevant passages are preserved where païdakia ‘lamb cutlets’, ghidhisio ghala ‘goat
the nouns fos ‘light’ and skotos ‘darkness’ refer milk’, katsikisio tyri ‘goat cheese’, to a plant,
to the source that transmits light and darkness e.g., kalampokisio alevri ‘corn flour’, thymarisio
respectively (Giannakis, 2001). Similarly, alithi- meli ‘thyme honey’, to an artefact, e.g., varelisia
nos ‘real’ refers to location, since –according to bira ‘draught’, to a human or human-like being
Plato– truth originates from the real world. (human entity) or to parts of the human body,
through extension, e.g., flevisio aima ‘veins’
1.2 The -iatik(os) suffix blood’ or through an intension reading, related to
From a semantic point of view, we notice a stereotypical meaning, e.g., gherontisia foni
that approximately 85% of the corpus consists in ‘elderly’s voice’.
bases which are temporal nouns referring to The availability of the suffix -isi(os) in con-
time-measure units, e.g., hronos ‘year’ minas temporary language use is rather restricted, as it
‘month’ (e)vdhomadha ‘week’ as well as their is not encountered in cases where it is possible to
reanalyses, including two subsets: (i) denomina- construct non-attested lexemes which constitute
tions of special units, e.g., Dheftera ‘Monday’, nothing more than coincidental gaps (Corbin,
Triti ‘Tuesday’, Ianouarios ‘January’, Fe- 1987: 177).
vrouarios ‘February’; and (ii) denominations
related to the internal structure of the above 2 Is there synonymy?
units, e.g., proï ‘morning’, mesimeri ‘midday’, We argued that the -in(os) suffix constructs
anoiksi ‘spring’ (Berthonneau, 1989). denominal adjectives related to space and time,
In addition, the base can be selected among that the -iatik(os) suffix constructs denominal
important days of public holidays or religious adjectives related to time and that the -isi(os)
celebrations with which people mark time, and suffix constructs denominal adjectives of prove-
which are therefore categorized as temporal nance, related to the notion of space. The ques-
nouns, e.g., Protomaghia ‘First of May’, Prota- tion will thus be the following: can we talk about
prilia ‘First of April’, Protochronia ‘New Year’s synonymy between the temporal and spatial de-
Day’, Pasha ‘Easter’, Hristoughenna ‘Christ- nominal adjectives constructed with the afore-
mas’, Aghio-Vasilis ‘the feast day of Saint Vasil- mentioned suffixes and the same base-noun?
ios’, Aï-Dhimitris ‘the feast day of Saint Deme- If we take into account the pragmatic feature
trios’, Kathari Dheftera ‘Clean/Ash Monday’, [learned], a feature with a non-binary value (An-
apokria ‘Carnival festivities’, paramoni ‘Eve’. astassiadis-Symeonidis and Fliatouras, 2004), we
Finally, the suffix -iatik(os) is attached to the notice that for the base-nouns with a [+learned]
base form of 7 nouns, seemingly not associated value, only the -in(os) suffix is applied, that for
with a temporal sense: paidh(i) ‘child’, ghiort(i) the base-nouns with a [-learned] value only the
‘celebration’, skol(i) ‘leisure’, feggar(i) ‘moon’, suffixes -iatik(os) and -isi(os) are applied, and,
ghampr(os) ‘groom’, nyf(i) ‘bride’, kefal(i) that for the base-nouns with a [+/-learned] value
‘head’. However, these nouns can be encoun- all three suffixes -in(os), -iatik(os) and -isi(os)
tered in contexts that associated to important are applied. The reason is that the suffix -in(os)
moments of people’s lives, e.g., ghampriatiko constructs denominal adjectives localizing in
kostoumi ‘bridegroom’s suit’, nyfiatiko traghoudi space and time objectively, i.e., free of prototyp-
‘wedding song’, paidhiatika kamomata ‘childish ical or stereotypical perceptions (Geeraerts,
antics’. 1985), contrary to the suffixes -iatik(os) and
1.3 The -isi(os) suffix -isi(os), that are associated with the individual’s
everyday life. Consequently, the derived adjec-
The suffix -isi(os) is associated with the no- tives are not synonymous, even if the aforemen-
tion of ‘provenance’ (Tsopanakis, 1994), which tioned suffixes are attached to the same base,
is diachronic in nature, particularly since the suf- e.g., vradino/*vradhiatiko dheltio eidhiseon ‘the
fix -isi(os) is derived from the latin suffix -ēnsis evening news report’, or to a synonymous base,
which is associated with this notion (Meyer, e.g., arnisia/*provatisia païdhakia ‘lamb cut-
1895). This is a spatial provenance (where the lets’. This is the reason for which only adjectives
base is a proper or common noun referring to the in -in(os) are encountered in scientific and reli-
natural landscape or to man-made places (Le Pe- gious discourse, in greater percentages in pre-
sant, 2011), e.g., vounisios aeras ‘mountain air’, meditated speech on television and the radio, as
limnisio psari ‘fish of the lake’); even if the well as in newspapers. This means, seman-
base-noun refers to an animal, e.g., arnisia
86
tic/pragmatic factors determine the genre of text cow/cow’s (milk/meat)’: the suffix -in(os) selects
where a lexeme may be encountered. It is not by certain properties from the anaphoric/descriptive
chance that the pragmatic feature [learned] is meaning of the base-noun, whereas the suffixes
attributed to a suffix found in ancient Greek and -iatik(os) and -isi(os) select from the base-nouns
the feature [-learned] to suffixes that appeared those properties that correspond to an experien-
later, during the Hellenistic era. tial meaning associated with everyday life. We
can thus explain why the adjectives in -in(os)
3 Compatibility and -iatik(os), or those in -in(os) and -isi(os) are
not synonyms.
A categorical as well as semantic and prag-
b) The reason why certain suffixes cannot be
matic compatibility are therefore necessary be-
attached to certain base-nouns: compatibility is
tween the base-noun and the suffix as well as
required between the two. The adjectives in
between the derived noun and the modified noun.
-in(os) are likely derived from the [+learned] or
For instance, there would be an issue of categori-
[+/-learned] allomorph of the base-noun, whereas
cal compatibility if the suffix -in(os) or the suffix
the adjectives in -iatik(os) and -isi(os) are de-
-iatik(os) were attached to a verb-base. There
rived from the [-learned] or [+/-learned] allo-
would be an issue of semantic compatibility if
morph of the base-noun, e.g., mesimvrinos and
the suffix -in(os) were attached to a non-
mesimeriatikos but *mesimvriatikos ‘midday’,
temporal/spatial base-noun or if the suffix
pedhinos and kampisios but
-iatik(os) were attached to a non-temporal base-
*pedhisios/*kampinos ‘of/in a plain’, therinos
noun. Lastly, there would be an issue of pragmat-
but *theriatikos ‘of the summer’, heimerinos but
ic compatibility if the suffix -in(os) were at-
*heimeriatikos ‘of the winter’, omfalios and
tached to a [-learned] base-noun or if the suffix
afalisios but *omfalisios, *afalios ‘umbilical’.
-iatik(os) were attached to a [+learned] base-
c) The reason why both the adjectives kalo-
noun, e.g., if the adjective aniksiatikos ‘of
kairinos and kalokairiatikos ‘of the summer’ are
spring’ modified the noun isimeria ‘equinox’.
grammatical without being synonymous: they
Therefore, each of the aforementioned suf-
both share the [+/-learned] feature.
fixes is characterized by their categorical, seman-
d) The reason why it is grammatical to say
tic, and pragmatic/stylistic specifications and,
praghmatika anoiksiatikos kairos ‘real spring
according to this “genetic inheritance”, it partici-
weather’, praghmatika vounisios aeras ‘real
pates in the LCRREL. Subsequently, within the
mountain air’, but we do not say *praghmatika
framework of Construction Morphology, the no-
earini isimeria ‘real vernal equinox,
tion of compatibility constitutes the key to
*praghmatika oreinos oghkos ‘real mountain
grammaticality judgements.
massif’: the adverb praghmatika ‘real/proper’
4 Predictions modifies qualifying adjectives but not taxonom-
ic/relational ones.
Starting from the semantic function of each e) The reason why the suffix -in(os) is se-
suffix at the word-construction level of words lected in utterances that refer to the speaker’s
that belong to the same onomasiological field, on “HERE and NOW”, within the deictic system:
one hand, similarities as well as differences at adjectives in -in(os) merely denote a location in
both the semantic and pragmatic level can be space and time; that is, within the NP, they create
explained. For example, terms such as: kalokair- a temporal or spatial relationship between the
iatikos – kalokairinos ‘of the summer’, kampisi- modified noun and the time period or the loca-
os – pedhinos ‘of/in a plain’; on the other hand, tion signified by the base-noun. Conversely, the
predictions can be formulated, in the sense that suffix -iatik(os) is associated with a subjective,
restrictions are imposed, e.g., avrianos - experiential and/or stereotypical temporal mean-
*avriatikos ‘of tomorrow’, kontinos - *kontaios ing, while the suffix -isi(os) is experientially as-
‘near’ (similarly: mesaios ‘middle’), ghenarisios sociated with the notion of provenance, e.g.,
- *ianouarisios ‘of January’. brostinos - *brostisios ‘of the front’, simerinos –
According to this model we are able to ex- *simeriatikos, *simerisios ‘of today’.
plain: f) The reason why the adjectives tritiatikos
a) The reason why it is possible to derive ad- ‘of Tuesday’, tetartiatikos ‘of Wednesday’,
jectives with different suffixes from the same pemptiatikos ‘of Thursday’ (and the correspond-
base-noun e.g., vradhinos – vradhiatikos ‘of the ing adverbs) are not encountered in written texts:
evening’, agheladhisios – agheladhinos ‘of a are they potential or non-grammatical words?
87
According to the theoretical framework followed This study examines the abstract system – in
throughout this article, the aforementioned words the form of LCRs and the suffixes’ semantic in-
are constructed according to the LCRREL and are, struction, which, according to several theories, is
therefore, potential words. However, they are not homogeneous. However, the present study is
encountered in written texts due to pragmatic based on actual language use, since it takes into
factors, as individuals – marking time and de- consideration rich authentic language data within
marcating their life according to a sum – in our context, linguistic production of native speakers,
case, a sum of days –, are inclined to pay atten- as well as metalinguistic texts. In particular, the
tion only to the beginning and the end, that is, for study of concordances in the Corpus of Greek
people, the days that mark the beginning and the Texts illustrated the breadth of use of derivatives
end of the week are of particular importance. that carry the suffixes in question.
Based on what I have stated above, I suggest The homogeneity of the abstract system is
the following categorization of the three suffixes contrasted to the linguistic variety characterizing
according to semantic criteria: the use of the system, and simultaneously, it con-
stitutes an essential linguistic attribute.
experiential objective In our case, variety is associated with the
space -isi(os) varying degrees of availability of the suffixes in
-in(os)
time -iatik(os) question, as well as with the [+/- learned] feature.
This simultaneous examination is beneficial to
Table 1: Semantic distribution of the suffixes both, as it bridges the gap between theory and
-iatik(os), -in(os), -isi(os) practice to the extent that one fuels the other.
This is a dynamic, dialectical relationship that
5 Impact on the theory of derivation explains language change, which has been a top-
Every suffix is characterized by their cate- ic of interest either in the form of borrowing,
gorical, semantic, and pragmatic/stylistic specifi- during earlier times, or through the non-frequent
cations and, according to this “genetic inher- occurrence of the -isi(os) suffix in contemporary
itance”, they participate in the LCRs. Conse- language.
quently, within the field of Construction Mor- Furthermore, an association has been at-
phology, the notion of compatibility is key no- tempted between the onomasiological method –
tion for grammaticality judgements. Thus, it which, in our case, originates from the notion of
seems to me that it is a bit far-fetched to attribute time and space – and the semasiological method.
anomalies/exceptions, or even a lack of produc- The latter, starting from the form of the suffixes
tivity, to lexicon merely because the study of -iatik(os), -in(os) and -isi(os), focused on the ex-
lexicon constitutes unmapped territory (see also tensive analysis of their semantic instruction,
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, 2003). unlike other studies that are limited to a basic
Similarly, as there is no synonymy between presentation of semantic features.
lexemes, there is neither synonymy between suf- Within D. Corbin’s theoretical framework of
fixes nor between their derivatives, even if the Construction Morphology, meaning occupies a
related suffixes are attached to the same base or central role, since the units that contribute to it
if the same suffix is attached to a synonymous are meaning-bearing units. The constructed lex-
base. emes demand a more complex analysis at the
Lastly, semantic/pragmatic reasons deter- semantic level in comparison to simple ones. The
mine the genre of text wherein a derived lexeme reasons are multiple: (i) because two elements
will appear, due to semantic/pragmatic features participate – the base and the suffix; (ii) because
of both the base as well as the suffix. the suffix is encountered in many other con-
structed lexemes; (iii) because the base is part of
6 Conclusion other constructed lexemes with a different suffix;
and, (iv) because the meaning and the behavior
Since the lexicon does not constitute a sepa- at the level of anaphora of constructed lexemes
rate level of linguistic analysis, but horizontaly are associated with their morphological structure.
cuts through all levels, the properties of those Through implementing this theoretical frame-
levels are to be taken into consideration, that is, work, it was possible to compare the semantic
phonological, morphological, syntactic, semantic instruction of the suffixes -iatik(os), -in(os) and
and pragmatic. -isi(os), the interpretation of semantic similarities
and differences between derived words that carry
88
those suffixes, as well as the interpretation of Corbin, D. 1987. Morphologie dérivationnelle et
grammaticality through the notion of compatibil- structuration du lexique. Villeneuve d’Ascq:
ity between the base-noun and the suffix with Presses Universitaires de Lille 19912.
regard to grammatical category, meaning, and Corbin, D. 1991. Introduction – La formation des
pragmatic level. mots: structures et interprétations. Lexique 10, 7-
30.
Corbin, D. forthcoming. Le lexique construit.
Méthodologie d’analyse.
References
Dictionary of Modern Greek 1933. Athens, newspa-
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A. 1996. A propos de per Proïa, St. Dimitrakos.
l’emprunt suffixal en grec moderne. Cahiers de
Lexicologie 68/1, 79-106. Dictionary of Standard Modern Greek 1998. Thessa-
loniki, Institute of Modern Greek Studies, Aristotle
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, Α. 2002. Reverse Diction- University of Thessaloniki.
ary of Modern Greek. Institute of Modern Greek
Studies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Filos, P. 2008. Studies in the Morphology of Latin
www.komvos.edu.gr, www. greek-language.gr Loanwords into Greek: Evidence from the Papyri.
PhD, University of Oxford.
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A. 2003. Inflexion and
derivation: myths and truths. Studies on Greek Lin- Geeraerts, D. 1985. Les données stéréotypiques, pro-
guistics – Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting totypiques et encyclopédiques dans les diction-
of the Department of Linguistics, School of Philol- naires. Cahiers de Lexicologie 46/1, 27-43.
ogy, Faculty of Philosophy, Aristotle University of Giannakis, G. 2001. Light is Life, Dark is Death: An
Thessaloniki, 43-54. Ancient Greek and Indo-european Metaphor, Do-
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A. 2008. Les adjectifs doni-Philologia 30, 127-153.
temporels suffixés en -in(os) et -iatik(os) en grec Goutsos, D. 2003. Corpus of Greek Texts (CGT).
moderne. In Bernard Fradin (éd.) La raison mor- Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of
phologique - Hommage à la mémoire de Danielle Greek Linguistics, University of Crete, 930-939.
Corbin, Amsterdam, Benjamins, 17-27.
Gross, G. 1994. Classes d’objets et description des
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A. 2009. Suffix -isi(os) in verbes, Langages 115, Paris, Larousse, 15-31.
Modern Greek. Studies in Greek Linguistics – Pro-
ceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the De- Haspelmath, M. & Sims, A. 20102. Understanding
partment of Linguistics, School of Philology, Fac- Morphology. London, Hodder Education.
ulty of Philosophy, Aristotle University of Thessa-
Klairis, Chr. & Babiniotis, G. 2005. Grammar of
loniki, 58-73.
Modern Greek. Structural/functional – communi-
Anastassiadis-Syméonidis, A. 2010. Pourquoi une cative. Athens, Ellinika Grammata.
langue emprunte-t-elle des suffixes ? L’exemple du
Kleiber, G. 1990. La sémantique du prototype. Caté-
grec et du latin. META 55, 1. Mélanges en hom-
gories et sens lexical, Paris, P.U.F.
mage à André Clas, 147-157.
Le Pesant, D. 2001. Les noms locatifs. HDR, Paris
Anastassiadis-Symeonidis, Α. & Fliatouras, Α. 2004.
XIII.
The distinction between learned and non learned in
Modern Greek. Proceedings of the 6th International Liddell, H. G. & Scott, R. 1996. A Greek-English Lex-
Conference of Greek Linguistics, University of icon, Oxford University Press.
Crete, 110-120.
Meyer, G. 1895. Neugriechische Studien ΙΙΙ. Die
Babiniotis, G. 1998, 2002. Dictionary of Modern lateinischen Lehnworte im Neugriechischen.
Greek, Athens, Centre of Lexicology. Sitzungsberichte, usw., Band 132, Vienna.
Baldinger, K. 1964. Sémasiologie et onomasiologie, Modern Greek Grammar (of Demotic Greek) 1941.
Revue de linguistique romane 28, 249-272. Thessaloniki, Institute of Modern Greek Studies,
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 19782.
Berthonneau, A.-M. 1989. Composantes linguistiques
de la référence temporelle. Les compléments de Palmer, L.R. 1946. A Grammar of the Post-Ptolemaic
temps. Du lexique à l’énoncé. Thèse d’Etat, Paris Papyri. London, Oxford University Press.
VII.
Petrounias, Ε. 1998. Dictionary of Standard Modern
Buck, C. 1933. Comparative Grammar of Greek and Greek [Etymological Part], Thessaloniki, Institute
Latin, Σικάγο, University of Chicago. of Modern Greek Studies, Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki.
89
Psaltes, St. 1913. Grammatik der Byzantinischen
Chroniken. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Rey, A. 1992. Dictionnaire historique de la langue
française. Paris, Dictionnaires Le Robert, 2 vol.
Taylor, J.R. 1989. Linguistic Categorization –
Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. New York, Ox-
ford University Press.
Temple, M. 1993. Le sens des mots construits : pour
un traitement dérivationnel associatif, PhD, Uni-
versity of Lille III.
90