Download Estonian - a language in European periphery

Estonian - a language
in European periphery
Helle Metslang
Firenze, April 2010
1
Euroversals, Europemes, SAE (Standard
Average European), etc.
Two approaches:
 linguistic properties found in most or all the
European languages (and uncommon
elsewhere)
 linguistic properties found in most or all the
European languages (but may be found in
other languages too)
2
Standard Average European

B.L. Whorf (the concept of SAE developed by
comparing Native American languages with
the well-known European languages)
3
Standard Average European: specific
features of European languages

M. Haspelmath 1998, 2001: list of typical
structural features (they occur in most
European languages but are usually missing
elsewhere)
4
Nucleus. core, and periphery of SAE
(Haspelmath 1998)
5
SAE features (Haspelmath 2001)

12 major SAE features from different parts of
language structure, e.g.




Definite and indefinite articles
Relative clauses with relative pronouns
‘have’-perfect
Some further likely SAE features, e.g.


Verb fronting in polar interrogatives
Comitative-instructive syncretism
6
SAE-Sprachbund(Haspelmath 2001)

Degree of membership in SAE is a matter of degree.
Number of features of nine SAE features present in
a language:







9 – German, French (core of SAE)
8 – Dutch, Spanish, Italian, Albanian...
7 – English
6 – Swedish, Norwegian, Czech…
5 – Hungarian, Bulgarian, Latvian, Lithuanian…
SAE languages with 5–9 features: Romance,
Germanic, Baltic, and Slavic languages, Albanian,
Greek, Hungarian
The remainig languages have 2 or less features
(Basque, Welsh, Estonian, Finnish…)
7
Problems




The approach is based on the static
description of standard / written languages
Alternative constructions are ignored
Discrete categorization (the language has or
has not the property)
Cross-linguistic structural equivalences are
not always clear-cut
(Heine & Kuteva 2006)
8
Dynamic typology


“… cross-linguistic classification of
grammatical categories according to salient
structural properties, which can be related in
a principled way to the evolution of these
categories.” (Heine & Kuteva 2006)
Ongoing grammaticalization processes,
replication of structures, etc.
9
Developments towards SAE in Europe’s
periphery (Heine & Kuteva 2006)


Basque: contacts with Romance languages,
contact-induced grammaticalizations, incl.
SAE-features, not mentioned in Haspelmath
2001: indefinite article, ‘have’-perfect, relative
clauses with pronoun
Slavic minorities in central Europe (Sorbian,
Slovincian, Kashubian): contacts with
German, developments of articles, ‘have’perfect, passive construction
10
Developments towards SAE : Estonian and
Finnish (Metslang 2009)


Both languages have 3 (not 2) SAE-features of 12
Developments in the direction of SAE-like features
(Estonian 5, Finnish 4)
Main contact languages in the course of history:
 Estonian: German varieties, Russian, Finnish,
Latvian, English
 Finnish: Swedish, Estonian, English
11
SAE features (Haspelmath 2001)
1) Definite and indefinite article (-),
cf. article-like use of E see ‘this’, üks ‘one’; in
Finnish, too, se functions as an article
Ma ei jaksa täna seda ajalugu őppida
‘Today I have no energy to study the history’
Üks tüdruk tõi sulle ühe raamatu
‘A girl brought you a book’
12
SAE features 2
2) Relative clauses follow the noun; the clause
opens with a declinable relative pronoun (e.g.
(der/die/das/welcher/welche/welches; who,
whose, whom) (+)
E raamat, mida (P) ma lugesin
F kirja, jota (P) luin
‘the book that I read’
13
WALS map 123: relativization of
obliques
14
SAE features 3
3) have-perfect (-)
Estonian and Finnish have the olema-perfect (‘beperfect’). Nevertheless, possessive syntactic
structures with the impersonal / passive perfect are
spreading in Estonian
E Mul on
õpitud
I-AD
is
learn:IMPS:PTCP
‘I’m done with my homework’
Cf. possessive: Mul on õpik ‘I have a textbook’
F Olen
lukenut
läksyni
be:1SG
read:PTCP
homework:1SG
15
SAE features 4
4) Nominative experiencer prevails (-).
Use of syntactic patterns with the nominative
experiencer is becoming more frequent in Estonian
Peeter (NOM) armastab teatrit
Peetrile (ALLAT) meeldib teater
‘Peeter likes the theatre’
Peeter (NOM) vajab puhkust
Peetril (ADESS) on vaja puhkust
‘Peeter needs some rest’
16
SAE features 5
5) Participial passive (-)
is spreading in Estonian.
E Te olete külla kutsutud
‘You have been invited to visit us’
F puukirkoista,jotka ovat sisältä leikkauksin
koristellut (ISK)
'from wooden churches that are decorated
inside with woodcuts'
17
SAE features 6
6) Prevalence of anti-causative (intransitive) verb
derivation over causative derivation (-) It’s true that
causative derivation is more common in Estonian and
also in Finnish
intransitive
E loobuma ‘to give up’
sööma ‘to eat’
jätkuma ‘to continue’
F luopua
peseytyä ‘to wash oneself’
transitive
>
>
<
loovutama ‘to surrender sth’
söötma ‘to feed’
jätkama ‘to continue sth’
>
<
luovuttaa
pestä ‘to wash’
18
SAE features 7
7) Dative external possessors (Die Mutter wäscht dem Kind die
Haare ‘Mother is washing the hair of her child’) (-)
Three ways to express the possessor: 1) dative (Die Mutter
wäscht dem Kind die Haare), 2) locative, 3) NP-internal
(English).
Estonian: locative, NP
Ema peseb lapsel (AD) juukseid / lapse (G) juukseid
‘Mother is washing the hair of her child’)
Tüdrukul (AD) suri vanaisa
‘The girl’s grandpa died’
Finnish: NP, ablative
Äiti pesee lapsen (G) hiuksia
Tytöltä (ABL) kuoli isoäiti
19
SAE features 8
8) Negative indefinite pronouns and lack of
verbal negation (Niemand kommt, nobody
comes) (-)
Two form types: 1) V + NI (Niemand kommt),
2) NV + NI
Estonian, Finnish NV + NI
E (Mitte) keegi
ei
F Kukaan
ei
nobody
NEG
tule
tule
come
20
SAE features 9
9) Comparative constructions with a particle (+)
Types of the comparative construction: 1) locative (‘bigger from / to /
at X‘), 2) the exceed comparative (‘Y is bigger exceeding X‘), 3)
the conjoining comparative (‘Y is big, Y is little‘), 4) the particle
comparative (bigger than X).
Estonian: particle, locative
Ema on noorem kui isa
Ema on isast (EL) noorem
‘Mother is younger than father‘
Finnish: particle, partitive (<locative)
Äiti on nuorempi kuin isä.
Äiti on isää (P) nuorempi
21
SAE features 10
10) relative-based equative constructions (-): so
groβ wie ein Elefant
nii suur kui elevant
‘as big as an elephant’
niin iso kuin norsu
22
SAE features 11
11) Subject person affixes as strict agreement
markers (-). The verb has personal forms and
the subject is obligatory: du kommst, wir
kommen
It does not occur in Estonian and Finnish:
E tuled, ei tule
F tulet, et tule
‘you come, you don’t come’
23
SAE features 12
12) Intensifier-reflexive differentiation (-): different pronouns
used as intensifiers (G selbst, R sam) and reflexives (G sich,
R sebja)
E intensifier ise; enda (declinable, G enda, P ennast etc.)
Minister ise (N) tuleb
‘The minister himself will come’
Oodatakse ministrit ennast (P)
‘The minister himself is expected to come’
reflexive enda, iseenda
Minister kiitis ennast / iseennast (P)
‘The minister praised himself’
24
SAE features 13
F intensifier itse, itse+PSx (declinable)
Ministeri itse tulee
Odotetaan ministeria itseään
reflexive itse+PSx
Ministeri kehui itseään
25
Some further likely SAE features 1
Because of insufficient data Haspelmath did not
include on his list, for example,

AND-coordination (vs WITH-coordination)
E isa ja ema, F isä ja äiti
‘father and mother’
also WITH-coordination: E isa emaga, F
isä äidin kanssa ‘father with mother’
26
Some further likely SAE features 2

Verb fronting in polar interrogatives
(inversion)
E Tuled sa koju? ‘Will you come home?’
interrogative particle: Kas sa tuled koju?
F particle: Tuletko kotiin?
Spoken language reveals also inversion: Tulet sä
kotiin?

Comparative marking of adjectives
(E suure-m, F suure-mpi ‘bigger’)
27
Some further likely SAE features 3

Comitative-instrumental syncretism
Comitative: E jalutab lapsega (COM) ’is walking
with the child’, kirjutab pliiatsiga (COM) ‘writes
in pencil’
Syncretism is absent in Finnish: kävelee lapsen
kanssa (POSTP), kirjoittaa kynällä (AD)

Suppletive second ordinal numeral: E kaks –
teine, F kaksi – toinen‚ zwei – zweite‘ (vgl. two –
second)
28
Some typical European developments
(Heine & Kuteva 2006)




Development of articles
Development of possessive perfects
From comitative to instrumental
Grammaticalization of the verbs threaten and
promise to modals
29
Estonian: ähvardama ‘threaten’
All four stages of the development into modal verbs
stage 3:
G Das Hochwasser droht die Altstadt zu
überschwemmen
E Suurvesi ähvardab vanalinna üle ujutada
‘The flood threatens to flood the old city’
stage 4:
G Mein Mann droht krank zu werden
E Mu mees ähvardab haigeks jääda
‘My husband is likely to fall ill’
30
Estonian: tõotama ‘promise’, stage 3
Järjekordseks katsumuseks tõotab kujuneda
tänavu detsembris toimuv WTO ministrite
kohtumine Singapuris (NEWS)
‘The meeting of WTO ministers in Singapur in
December this year promises to become
another ordeal’
31
Estonian: tõotama ‘promise’, stage 4
Kui koera esikäpa kõrgus on vähemalt pool turja
kõrgusest ning käpad ja rind 1-2 kuu vanuselt on hästi
tugevad, tõotab sellisest kutsikast keskmisest suurem
koer kasvada (NEWS)
‘If the height of the front paw of a dog is at least half of
the height of the withers and the chest is very strong at
the age of 1-2 months, this kind of puppy promises to
grow into a larger than average dog’
32
Finnish: uhata ‘threaten’
stage 3
F USA:n ja E-Korean vapaakauppasopimus
uhkaa kariutua (HS)
‘The treaty of free commerce between the
USA and South-Korea threatens to fall
through’
No evidence of the auxiliarization of ‘promise’
33
An interim conclusion concerning European-like features
and developments in Estonian and Finnish: noun

Nominal categories




Development of articles
Comparative marking of adjectives
Comitative-instructive syncretism (E)
Nominal syntax




Comparative constructions with a particle
Equative constructions
Intensifier-reflexive differentiation (partially)
And-coordination
34
European-like features in Estonian and
Finnish: the verb

Verbal categories


Auxiliarization of ‘threaten’ and ‘promise’
Verbal syntax


Development of the possessive perfect (E)
Spread of the participial passive
35
European-like features in Estonian and
Finnish: syntax, lexicon

Syntax




Spread of the nominative experiencer
Verb-initial interrogatives
Relative clauses
Lexicon

Suppletive ordinals
36
Changeable periphery
The main characteristics of SAE are
represented modestly in both Estonian and
Finnish; at the same time both languages,
especially Estonian, reveal some shifts
towards European features.
37
Estonian in comparison with other
European languages



WALS features about which there is Estonian
data: to what extent are the same values
represented in other languages?
Following Ö. Dahl (2008) who measured
typological distance from the perspective of
Finnish (142 maps, comparisons with 222
languages)
The study is not confined to specifically
European values
38
Languages that are typologically close to
Finnish (Ö. Dahl)
Typological distance between two languages:
how many of the 142 WALS features are
represented in these languages?
Close languages include:
 Slavic and Baltic languages spoken in the
Circum-Baltic area
 Genetically related languages
 Probably some accidentally close languages
(e.g. Armenian)
39
Comparison of Estonian with other European
languages on the basis of WALS




Mini-study: 40 maps, comparisons with 10
languages
The languages represent more or less central SAE
languages and non-SAE languages; Indo-European
and Finno-Ugric languages
SAE status – the figure that shows how many
features out of nine of SAE are represented in the
language (less than 5 means outside SAE)
Distance from Estonian – the figure that shows how
many out of 40 features of WALS reveal values that
are different from Estonian
40
Estonian in comparison with other European
languages on the basis of WALS
Language
SAE status
Distance
2 or less
Language
group
Finno-Ugric
Finnish
Russian
5
Slavic
16
Hungarian
5
Finno-Ugric
16
Spanish
8
Romance
20
English
7
Germanic
21
8
41
Estonian in comparison with other European
languages on the basis of WALS
Language
SAE status
Distance
9
Language
group
Romance
French
Gaelic
2 or less
Celtic
23
Greek
7
24
German
9
IE separate
branch
Germanic
Dutch
8
Germanic
27
22
27
42
Estonian in comparison with other European
languages on the basis of WALS 5




Genetically related and geographically close
languages share some common features
All over Europe languages have rather similar
structures
Nuclear SAE languages are more distant;
less central and peripheral languages are
closer to Estonian
Although Estonian has a lot of German
influences, the basics of their structures are
relatively distant
43
Some common features between Estonian and other
European languages on the basis of WALS: phonetics and
grammar





Trochaic rhythm (7 languages of 10)
Strongly suffixing (and not prefixing)
morphology (9)
Encoding of nominal plurality with suffix (8)
Tense-aspect suffixes (8)
Negative particle (9)
44
Some common features between Estonian and other
European languages on the basis of WALS: word order
and lexis







SV (7)
Demonstrative-noun (9)
Numeral-noun (10)
Noun – relative clause (9)
Initial adverbial subordinator in clause (10)
Ordinal numerals: first, second, three-rd (8)
‘tea’ derived from Min Nan Chinese te
45
WALS map 138: tea
46
Typological profile of West-European languages
(Dahl 2008)

Values of WALS parameters that are
overwhelmingly represented in Western
Europe in comparison with the rest of the
world. Ranking of languages according to
conformity to the typological profile of
Western Europe:
German, French, Spanish, Greek, Russian,
Latvian, Irish, Finnish, Georgian
47
Typological profile of West-European
languages and Estonian 1
Some features of the profile:

The perfect is based on the possessive
construction (Estonian reveals some
development in that direction)

Polar questions with special word order
(they exist in Estonian)

Both negative and affirmative verbs forms
are used with negative indefinite pronouns
48
Typological profile of West-European
languages and Estonian 2




Overlap between situational and epistemical
modal marking (occurs in Finnish and
Estonian, e.g. Sa võid koju minna ‘you may
go home’, Ma võin eksida ‘I may be wrong’)
Few first ordinals are suppletive (F, E)
Object relativization with pronoun (F, E)
Subject relativization with pronoun (F, E)
49
Changeable periphery 2

The selection of features is always limited
in comparison with the richness of the
language system – 12 SAE features, 47
Estonian features in WALS, as well as all
142 WALS features constitute a selection;
the picture could be different when the
selection is expanded.
50
Changeable periphery 3

The basic structure of Estonian (parts of
speech, syntax, categories) is similar to
other European languages.

The main typological peculiarity of
Estonian, as well as Finnish and
Hungarian, is the large number of cases.
51
WALS map 49: number of cases
52
Changeable periphery 3
Estonian, similarly to Finnish, belongs to the
periphery with regard to the European
languages; both those features that are
unique in Europe and other features of the
European languages are less represented in
those languages. At the same time they
share some features and developments with
the other European languages.
53
Changeable periphery 4
During the co-existence that spans over several
millennia the Uralic and Indo-European
languages around the Baltic Sea have
converged while there has been divergence
from their genetically related eastern
languages. (Dahl 2008)
54
References 1
Dahl, Östen 2008, Kuinka eksoottinen suomen kieli on? Virittäjä 4: 545–559.
Erelt, Mati 1996, Relative words in Estonian relative
clauses - Erelt, Mati (ed.), Estonian: Typological Studies
I. (Publications of the Department of Estonian of the
University of Tartu 4.) Tartu: Tartu University Press, 9–23.
Erelt, Mati & Helle Metslang 2006, Estonian clause
patterns — from Finno-Ugric to SAE. – Linguistica
Uralica 2006, nr. 4, 254–266
Haspelmath, Martin 1998, How young is standard average
European? in: Linguistic Sciences, 20.3: 272287.
55
References 2
Haspelmath, Martin 2001, The European linguistic area:
Standard Average European, in: Haspelmath, Martin;
König, Ekkehard; Oesterreicher, König & Raible,
Wolfgang (eds.), Language typology and language
universals: An international handbook. Vol. 2.
(Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 20.2.) New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1492–
1510
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania 2006, The changing
languages of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lindström, Liina & Tragel, Ilona 2007, Eesti keele
impersonaali ja seisundipassiivi vahekorrast
adessiivargumendi kasutuse põhjal. – Keel ja Kirjandus
7.
56
References 3
Metslang, Helle 2009, Estonian grammar between Finnic
and SAE: some comparisons. – Linguistic Typology and
Universals (STUF) 1/2, 2009: 49−71.
Märtson, Hellemari 2009, Verbi tõotama abiverbistumisest
eesti kirjakeeles viimase sajandi jooksul. Bachelor
thesis. University of Tartu
Pajusalu, Renate 1997, Is there an article in (spoken)
Estonian? – Estonian: typological studies II. Ed. by Mati
Erelt. (Tartu Ülikooli eesti keele õppetooli toimetised 8.)
Tartu: 146-177.
57
References 4
WALS = Haspelmath, Martin; Dryer, Matthew, Gil, David;
Comrie, Bernhard (eds.) 2005, The World atlas of
language structures. Oxford: Oxford University press.
[http//www.wals.info]
58