Book Reviews: The Modern Language
Book Reviews: The Modern Language
Book Reviews: The Modern Language
<SECTION
<LINK "the-r18">
"the-r14">
"the-r5">
"the-r21">
"rev"
"rrt">TITLE "Book Reviews">
<@TARGET"the"
<TARGET "rev"DOCINFO
DOCINFO
AUTHOR ""
"Dimitra Theophanopoulou-Kontou"
TITLE "Review
"Book Reviews"
of “Greek: A comprehensive grammar of the modern language” by Holton, D., Mackridge, P. & Philippaki-Warburton, I."
KEYWORDS ""
WIDTH "150"
VOFFSET "4">
Book Reviews
description of the Greek language. She was one of the pioneers of the syn-
chronic and diachronic analysis of Greek on different levels of description,
mainly within the transformational paradigm. Her contribution to the identifi-
cation and the analysis of specific syntactic Greek phenomena is significant as
is her ability to challenge the theory through the descriptive demands of Greek.
The cooperation of these three scholars who combine different orientations and
personalities results in a grammar which is scientifically valid and objective and
shows no fanaticism in the treatment of controversial issues. It also avoids, as
far as possible, the one-sidedness which often derives from a sterile attachment
to theoretical and/or ideological principles.
The Grammar is a long work (aprox. 500 pages) which, in addition to the
prefaces, consists of three large sections corresponding to the three levels of
description: The phonological, including the writing system (Part A), the
morphological (Part B), and the syntactic (Part C). There are also three indexes
and a glossary of grammatical terms.
Part A contains two subsections: The phonological system and the writing
system. The first section presents the phonemes and allophones, the consonant
clusters and their distribution in word initial, medial and final position, the
alternations between the initial clusters of cases like φθηνς – φτηνς/fθinos –
ftinos ‘cheap’, χθες – χτες/xθes – xtes ‘yesterday’,
σχηµος –
σκηµος/asximos
– askimos ‘ugly’, πεσθηκε – πεστηκε/pisθike – pistike ‘was persuaded’, as well
as the suprasegmental features of length and stress. These phenomena are
examined in a systematic and scientific way. Special attention is given to
morphophonology and to the phonological phenomena which affect the
position of stress. Finally, the patterns of intonation are examined in a separate
subsection in a detailed and well argued way. The section on phonology follows
the principles of structural and generative phonological theory, in its more
classical version, as applied also by Setatos (1974) in his very interesting
monograph on MG phonology. As is expected in a grammar book it is not
possible to present and discuss alternative analyses of specific phenomena such
as the different interpretations of the voiced stops [b, d, g] or to raise issues
concerning the analyses of the syllable, stress and rhythm in the theoretical
framework of a non-linear, autosegmental theory (for these see Malikouti-
Drachman 1997; Malikouti-Drachman & Drachman 1989, 1990).
Within the framework adopted for the grammar under review the following
issues are of special significance: (a) The treatment of vowel deletion on the
basis of the sonority hierarchy a > o > u > e > i as exemplified by cases like µου
αρσει > µ’αρσει/mu aresi > maresi ‘I like’, τα επα > τ
’πα/ta ipa > tapa ‘I said
ending -ες/-es in the plural of the 2nd declension feminine nouns (e.g. µθοδες/
meθoδes ‘methods’), which is undoubtedly of very restricted use (p. 59), has
began to appear with increased frequency encouraged by adjectives (βρειες/
vories ‘north’, κατατακτριες/katataktiries ‘entrance exams’). A similar tenden-
cy is also observed in the language of children at various stages of acquisition
(Theophanopoulou-Kontou 1973). In relation to some forms which are
characterized as ‘learned’, i.e. learned in origin and also found in “formal
discourse of an official designation”, one could have mentioned examples such
as Υπουργεο Αµ νης/ipurjio aminis ‘Ministry of Defence’, Συµβο λιο
Επικρατεας/simvulio epikratias ‘Council of State’, αναλογο ν ποσν/analoγun
poson ‘respective amount’, etc., because these forms are acceptable only in such
fossilized contexts at least for the majority of speakers.
The verb system of MG (derivation and morphological analysis) has been
the object of extensive research from a variety of theoretical perspectives (Seiler
1952; Koutsoudas 1962; Warburton 1970; Daltas 1979; Stephany 1985; Ralli
1988; Klairis & Babiniotis 1996–9). It is also examined within many grammars.
This reflects the significance of this category but also its complexity. The
morphological analysis of the verb contains a complete presentation of the verb
forms in all systems of declension and conjugation with completely clear
subdivisions. The examination of the morphology of the various verb forms is
preceded by information concerning the basic categories of the verb system
(stem, endings, tense, aspect, perfect, the auxiliary χω/exo ‘have’, voice, gerund
and participles) and of the ways they are used.
An innovation in the analysis of the verbal system is found here in the use
of some non-traditional terms which are arrived at on the basis of current
functional criteria and which, according to the authors, make the description
more complete and semantically more transparent. An example of this is the
term ‘dependent’ (in Greek εξαρτηµνος/eksartimenos), which replaces the
traditional term ‘aorist subjunctive’. This term is applied to forms such as
γρ
ψω/γrapso ‘write’, αγαπσω/aγapiso ‘love’, and reflects accurately its
function within the system (it has the characteristics of perfective aspect and
non-past tense); another new term is ‘simple past’ (in Greek απλς παρελ-
θοντικς) to replace the traditional ‘aorist’. The term ‘clitics’ (κλιτικ
) is also
used as an alternative to the term ‘weak pronouns’ (ασθενες αντωνυµες), and
the term ‘non-finite’ (µη-παρεµφατικς) is applied to the form referred to until
now as απαρµφατο, ‘infinitive’.
The authors’ attempt to use terms which make the description ‘more
complete’ and semantically ‘more transparent’ finds me in agreement. However,
grammars of Greek. The authors utilize in a most effective way the results of the
available linguistic research into Greek. However, they never lose sight of their
ultimate purpose, to describe, in a theory-neutral and accessible way, the
syntactic structure of Greek. The descriptions are scientifically valid, clear and
complete.
(ii) The well-chosen examples, which reflect current linguistic reality for both
the spoken and written forms of the language. It must be noted that, in general,
the method of selecting data for the analysis of a specific phenomenon or for a
full grammatical description varies depending on the theoretical framework
adopted and the specific aims of the description. Thus, it is possible to choose
the examples from a corpus established on the basis of a sociolinguistic descrip-
tion along with the corresponding statistical analysis. Such an approach
however is, in most cases, not possible for practical reasons. Alternatively, the
data must be based on the linguistic intuitions of the authors, as long as these
intuitions reflect the internalized knowledge on the basis of which they, as
native or native-like speakers, produce and understand sentences. This view,
which has developed in the context of generative-transformational grammar,
based on the principles of Chomsky’s theory, has been questioned by a number
of linguists. The authors of the grammar under review follow a middle road.
The linguistic variety presented in the book reflects the wider language idiom
which has prevailed in Greece in the last decades, while the examples used are
clearly representative of present day linguistic reality.
(iii) The above points together with the accessible organization of its different
parts should make it easy to use in teaching.
It is not possible in a short review to cover all the subjects included in the book
or to evaluate the proposed analyses properly. Nevertheless, I would like to
consider certain areas which constitute new approaches consistent with more
up-to-date theoretical tendencies in the area of syntax. These are as follows:
a. Mood-Modality. The Grammar contains a clear identification and charac-
terization of these two concepts and of the relation between them, as well as
the definition of the basic/prototypical character of each mood (indicative,
subjunctive, imperative) in relation to the concept of modality. In addition,
there is a discussion of the more specialized, less prototypical uses and
meanings expressed by the moods (hypothesis, possibility, obligation,
probability, etc.). The treatment of these issues is clearly original and
constitutes an interesting contribution to an important subject which is
absent from other extended syntactic descriptions.
b. Aspect. The identification of the role that the category of aspect (perfective-
nonperfective) plays in the differentiation of the monolectic verb forms,
along with the factors which regulate the uses of each aspect, constitutes a
significant contribution of this grammar. It must be noted here that the
subjects of mood-modality and aspect have been extensively studied in the
last years both from a theoretical point of view and in terms of the role they
play in the analysis of Greek sentences. (See Philippaki-Warburton &
Veloudis 1984; Veloudis & Philippaki-Warburton 1983; Mozer 1994;
Iakovou 1999; and others.)
c. I also consider the description of adverbials expressed with prepositional
phrases as well as the analysis of prepositional phrases a very important one.
d. The issue of the order of the main constituents of the sentence together
with the pro-drop character of the language is a central subject in the
syntactic analysis of Greek. The contribution of I. Philippaki-Warburton in
this area has been pioneering. Important has also been the contribution of
other outstanding linguists working on Greek such as Drachman (1994),
Joseph (1994), Horrocks (1994), Rivero & Terzi (1995) and younger ones
such as Tsimpli (1990), Alexiadou (1997), Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou
(1998). Philippaki-Warburton, in a series of articles (1982, 1985, 1987,
1990, 1998) was among the first Greek linguists (compare Drachman 1970)
to establish clear syntactic criteria within the generative theory, as well as
the pragmatic factors which influence the word order variations.
e. The role of the clitics, i.e. the weak forms of the personal pronouns in
syntax (clitic doubling) is examined at length. It is worth pointing out,
though, that the term ‘clitics’ and their functions were also mentioned in
Joseph & Philippaki-Warburton (1987).
f. I would also like to mention the chapter on anaphora which, as far as I
know, has not been included in any other grammar of Greek. Without
resorting to theoretical matters and technical terms, the authors succeed in
achieving a systematic description of the details of this phenomenon with
interesting comments on issues which have provoked lively discussions
among theoreticians (Anagnostopoulou & Everaert 1999).
Finally the three appendices (1–3) which appear at the end of the book, as well
as the glossary, where more technical theoretical terms are explained in a clear
way, are very useful.
is simple, the idiom of everyday discourse, but capable of rendering the English
version in a direct and faithful manner.
It is true that it is not always possible or scientifically acceptable to compare
grammars of a language, especially when their aims are different and the
methodology along with the theoretical frameworks are not the same. Every
grammar, assuming that it is scientifically supported, succeeds or fails according
to the degree to which it manages to fulfill its aims to describe and to explain its
data to some extent objectively. The Holton, Mackridge & Philippaki-War-
burton grammar fulfils the above requirements completely. It is a general
descriptive and explanatory analysis of present day Greek. It is characterized by
scientific validity, exemplary methodology and a high degree of usability. One
may agree or disagree with some of the solutions or classifications offered but
no one will doubt that the authors, well established scholars and teachers, have
offered to the Greek and international public a thorough scientific grammar of
MG, an invaluable tool for the research and the teaching of this language.
Notes
1. Besides the pioneering works by Manolis Triantafyllidis and his collaborators Νεοελληνικ
Γραµµατικ (της ∆ηµοτικς). [Modern Greek Grammar (of Demotic), Athens 1941], and
Achillefs Tzartzanos, Νεοελληνικ Σ νταξις (της Κοινς ∆ηµοτικς) [Modern Greek Syntax
(of Common Demotic), 2nd edn. 2 vols Athens 1946–1953], the following grammars
appearing during the last forty years must be mentioned:
Mirambel, André. 1959. La Langue Grecque Moderne. Description et Analyse. Paris:
Klincksieck [Gr. transl. Σταµ
της Καρατζ
ς. 1978: Η Nα Eλληνικ Γλσσα. Περι-
γραφ και Aν
λυση. Αριστοτλειο Πανεπιστµιο Θεσσαλον κης, Ινστιτο"το
Νεοελληνικν Σπουδν, $δρυµα Μαν&λη Τριανταφυλλ δη, Θεσσαλον κη].
Householder, Fred W., Kostas Kazazis & Andreas Koutsoudas. 1964. Reference Grammar of
Literary Dhimotiki. Bloomington, Indiana University.
Babiniotis, Georgios & Panayotis Kontos. 1967. Συγχρονικ Γραµµατικ της Κοινς Νας
Ελληνικς [Synchronic Grammar of Modern Greek Koine]. Αθνα.
Mackridge, Peter. 1985. The Modern Greek Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press, [Gr. transl.
Κστας Πετρ&πουλος. 1990. Η Nεοελληνικ Γλσσα, Αθνα: Πατ
κης.
Joseph, Brian & Irene Philippaki-Warburton. 1987. Modern Greek. London: Croom Helm.
Tsopanakis, Agapitos. 1994. Νεοελληνικ Γραµµατικ [Modern Greek Grammar]. Εστ α,
Αθνα & Θεσσαλον κη: Αφο Κυριακ δη.
Klairis, Christos & Georgios, Babiniotis. 1996–1999. Γραµµατικ της Νας Ελληνικς:
∆οµολειτουργικ-Επικοινωνιακ. [Grammar of Modern Greek: structural-functional-
communicative] Vol. I (Noun), vol. II (Verb). Athens: Ellinika Grammata.
References
</TARGET "men"
<TARGET "the"> DOCINFO
TITLE "Review of “Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers” by Horrocks, Geoffrey"
KEYWORDS ""
WIDTH "150"
VOFFSET "4">
Geoffrey Horrocks stands out as one of today’s leading linguists in the field of
Greek. While most of his colleagues specialize either in Ancient or in Modern
Greek, H’s research, focusing mainly on syntactic issues, covers an impressively
wide temporal range from the earliest manifestations of Greek, the Mycenaean
tablets and Homer’s dialect, to the present-day language. The reviewer must
confess a weakness for Horrocks (1985), a little gem dealing with the interaction
of aspect and modality in the history of Greek. Greek: A History of the Language
and its Speakers (henceforth Greek) comes up to the reader’s expectations.