Linguistic Studies and Essays

Vol. 64 No. 1 (2026)
Articles

Ancient Greek Cognate object constructions as an instance of complex predication

Requires Subscription or Fee PDF (EUR 6)
  • Elena Squeri
Elena Squeri
Sapienza - Università di Roma
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4454/ssl.v64i1.424

Published 2026-07-07

Keywords

  • cognate objects,
  • transitivity,
  • event structure,
  • argument structure,
  • complex predicates,
  • verbal multi-word expressions
    • ...More
    Less
Copyright Notice

Abstract

This paper aims to provide an integrated interpretation of Ancient Greek cognate
object constructions (COCs, e.g. λόγον λέγω, “to give a speech”) by considering
them as complex predicates, lexically represented by verbal multi-word expressions.
COCs force a reinterpretation of the action expressed by the verb as one involving
the creation of the event distinctively characterising its lexical meaning. The nominalised
event surfaces in syntax as an argument. Semantically, this restructuring of
the predicate gives the opportunity of further specifying the meaning of the verb,
thanks to the possibility of modifying and hyponymically restricting the CO.
Pragmatically, it allows the treatment of the CO as a discourse referent, which may
be focalised. Two further theoretical issues are discussed: 1. the criteria for distinguishing
between unergative verbs with minor transitive uses, triggered by COs,
and transitive verbs with minor intransitive uses, triggered by object omission; 2.
the criteria for distinguishing transitive complex predicates, especially COCs (e.g.
“to sing hymns”) and transitive activities (e.g. “to drink wine”), from one another
and from other transitive structures.

Requires Subscription or Fee PDF (EUR 6)

References

  1. ARONOFF, M. (1976), Word Formation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
  2. ASRAF, N. (2021), The Mechanism of Noun Incorporation in Ancient Greek, in «Glotta: Zeitschrift Für Griechische Und Lateinische Sprache», 97, pp. 36-72.
  3. BARY, C. and DE SWART, P. (2005), Additional Accusatives in Latin and Ancient Greek: Arguments against Arguments, in JERVAIN, J. (2005, ed.), Proceedings of the Tenth ESSLLI Student Session, pp. 12-22.
  4. BORER, H. (1994), The Projection of Arguments, in «University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics», 17(20), pp. 19-48.
  5. BORER, H. (2005), The Normal Course of Events, Oxford University Press, Oxford–New York.
  6. BOWERN, C. (2008), The Diachrony of Complex Predicates, in «Diachronica: International Journal for Historical Linguistics», 25, pp. 161-185.
  7. BRISSON, C. (1994), The Licensing of Unexpressed Objects in English Verbs’, IN BEALS, K., DENTON, J., KNIPPEN, R., MELNAR, L., SUZUKI, H. AND ZEINFELD, E. (1994, eds), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 1: The main session, Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, pp, 90-102.
  8. BRUNO, C. (2011), When Stylistics Is a Matter of Syntax: Cognate Accusatives in Ancient Greek, in KRISCH, T. and LINDNER, T. (2011, eds), Indogermanistik Und Linguistik Im Dialog. Akten Der XIII Fachtagung Der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft Vom 21. Bis 27. September 2008 in Salzburg, Wiesbaden, Reichert Verlag, pp. 100-109.
  9. CENNAMO, M. (2003), (In)Transitivity and Object Marking: Some Current Issues, in FIORENTINO, G. (2003, ed.), Romance Objects: Transitivity in Romance Languages, De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin–Boston, pp. 49-104.
  10. CENNAMO, M. (2017), Object Omission and the Semantics of Predicates in Italian in a Comparative Perspective, in HELLAN, L., MALCHUKOV, A. L. and CENNAMO, M. (2017, eds), Contrastive Studies in Verbal Valency, John Benjamins, Amsterdam–Philadelphia, pp. 251–73.
  11. CIVILLERI, G. O. (2012), Nomi Deverbali Nel Continuum Nome/Verbo: Il Caso Del Greco Antico, LINCOM, München.
  12. CLARK, E. V., and CLARK, H. H. (1979), When Nouns Surface as Verbs, «Language», 55 (4), pp. 767-811.
  13. COOPER, G. L. and KRÜGER, K. W. (1998), Attic Greek Prose Syntax. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
  14. CRESPO, E. (1988), The Semantic and Syntactic Functions of the Accusative’, in RIJKSBARON, A., MULDER, H. and WAKKER, G. C. (1988, eds.), In the Footsteps of Raphael Kühner. Proceedings of the International Colloquium in Commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the Publication of Raphael Kühner’s Ausführliche Grammatik Der Griechischen Sprache, 2: Syntaxe, Gieben, Amsterdam, pp. 99-120.
  15. CROFT, W. (2022), Morphosyntax: Constructions of the World’s Languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  16. CRUSE, D. A. (1986), Lexical Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  17. DAVIDSON, D. (1967), The Logical Form of Action Sentences’, in RESCHER, N. (1967, ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.
  18. DE LA VILLA, J. 2017, Verbal Alternations in Ancient Greek as an Interface between Lexicon and Syntax’, in LOGOZZO, F. and POCCETTI, P. (2017, eds), Ancient Greek Linguistics: New Approaches, Insights, Perspectives, De Gruyter, Berlin– Boston, pp. 535-550.
  19. DOWTY, D. (1979), Word Meaning and Montague Grammar: The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht–Boston–London.
  20. DOWTY, D. (1991), Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection, in «Language», 67 (3), pp. 547-619.
  21. FILIP, H. (2012), Lexical Aspect, in BINNICK, R. I. (2012, ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, Oxford–New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 721-751.
  22. GEORGE, C. H. (2014), Expressions of Time in Ancient Greek, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  23. GIANOLLO, C. and LAVIDAS, N. (2013), Cognate Adverbials and Case in the History of Greek, in «Studies in Greek Linguistics», 33, pp. 61-75.
  24. GIVÓN, T. (1978), Definiteness and referentiality, in GREENBERG, J. E., FERGUSON, C. A. and MORAVCSIK E. A. (1978, eds), Universals of human language, 4: Syntax, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 291- 330.
  25. GRIMSHAW, J. (1990), Argument Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
  26. GRIMSHAW, J. (2005), Words and Structure, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
  27. GROSS, G. and KIEFER, F. (1995), La Structure Événementielle Des Substantifs, in «Folia Linguistica», 29 (1–2), pp. 43-66.
  28. HALE, K. L., and KEYSER, S. J. (1988), Explaining and Constraining the English Middle, in TENNY, C. (1988, ed.), Studies in Generative Approaches to Aspect, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Cambridge (MA), pp. 41-57.
  29. HALE, K. L. and KEYSER, S. J. (1993), On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations’, in HALE, K. L. and KEYSER, S. J. (1993, eds), The View from Building 20 : Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 53-109.
  30. HALE, K. L. and KEYSER, S. J. (1997), On the Complex Nature of Simple Predicators, in ALSINA, A., BRESNAN, J. and SELLS, P. (1997, eds), Complex Predicates: Structure and Theory, CSLI Publications: Stanford, pp. 29-65.
  31. HASPELMATH, M. (1997), From Space to Time: Temporal Adverbials in the World’s Languages, LINCOM, München.
  32. HAUDRY, J. (1980), L’instrumental et la structure de la phrase simple en Indo-Européen, in «Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris», 65, pp. 44-84.
  33. HORITA, Y. (1996), English Cognate Object Constructions and Their Transitivity, in «English Linguistics: Journal of the English Linguistic Society of Japan», 13, pp. 221-247.
  34. HORROCKS, G. and STAVROU, M. (2010), Morphological Aspect and the Function and Distribution of Cognate Objects Across Languages, in RAPPAPORT HOVAV, M., DORON, E. and SICHEL, I. (2010, eds), Lexical Semantics, Syntax, and Event Structure, Oxford University Press, Oxford–New York, pp. 284-308.
  35. IBRAHIM, A. H. (2011), La zone objectale et l’objet prototypique de Lazard dans la perspective du traitement de l’objet interne dans les matrices analytiques définitoires, in «Faits de Langues», 38 (1), pp. 60-72.
  36. JACQUINOD, B. (1989), Le double accusatif en grec, Peeters, Louvain-la-Neuve.
  37. JEŽEK, E. (2016), The Lexicon. An Introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford–New York.
  38. JIMÉNEZ LÓPEZ, M. D. (2016), On Support Verb Constructions in Ancient Greek, in «Archivio Glottologico Italiano», 101 (2), pp. 180-204.
  39. JONES, M. A. (1988), Cognate Objects and the Case-Filter, in «Journal of Linguistics», 24 (1), pp. 89-110.
  40. LAKOFF, G., and JOHNSON, M. E. (1999), Philosophy in the Flesh. The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought, Basic Books, New York.
  41. LAMBRECHT, K. P. (1994), Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  42. LANGER, S. (2005), A Formal Specification of Support Verb Constructions’, in LANGER, S. and SCHNORBUSCH, D. (2005, eds), Semantik Im Lexikon, GunterNarr: Tübingen, pp. 179-202.
  43. LAVIDAS, N. (2013a), Accusative, in Giannakis, G. K. (2013, ed.), Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Language and Linguistics Online, Brill, Leiden–Boston.
  44. LAVIDAS, N. (2013b), Null and Cognate Objects and Changes in (in)Transitivity: Evidence from the History of English, in «Acta Linguistica Hungarica», 60 (1), pp. 69-106.
  45. LAVIDAS, N. (2013c), Unaccusativity and the Diachrony of Null and Cognate Objects in Greek, in VAN GELDEREN, E., BARÐDAL, J. and CENNAMO, M. (2013, eds), Argument Structure in Flux: The Naples-Capri Papers, John Benjamins, Amsterdam–Philadelphia, pp. 307-342.
  46. LEVIN, B. (1993), English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  47. LEVIN, B. and RAPPAPORT HOVAV, M. (1995), Unaccusativity. At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface, The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
  48. LURAGHI, S. (2003), On the Meaning of Prepositions and Cases. The Expression of Semantic Roles in Ancient Greek, John Benjamins, Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
  49. MACFARLAND, T. (1995), Cognate Objects and the Argument/Adjunct Distinction in English, PhD diss. (Northwestern University).
  50. MARTINET, A. (1955), Économie des changements phonétiques. Traité de phonologie diachronique, Francke, Bern.
  51. MASSAM, D. (1990), Cognate Objects as Thematic Objects, in «Canadian Journal of Linguistics / Revue Canadienne de Linguistique», 35 (2), pp. 161-190.
  52. MATSUMOTO, M. (1996), The Syntax and Semantics of the Cognate Object Construction, in «English Linguistics: Journal of the English Linguistic Society of Japan», 13, pp. 199-220.
  53. MIRTO, I. M. (2007), Dream a Little Dream of Me, in CAMUGLI, C., CONSTANT, M. and DISTER, A. (2007, eds), Actes du 26e Colloque international Lexique Grammaire, pp. 121-128.
  54. MIRTO, I. M. (2011), Cognate and reaction objects as predicative nouns of support verb constructions, in «Écho des études romanes», 7 (1), pp. 21-47.
  55. MITHUN, M. (1984), The Evolution of Noun Incorporation, in «Language», 60 (4), pp. 847-94.
  56. MITTWOCH, A. (1998), Cognate Objects as Reflections of Davidsonian Event Arguments’, in Rothstein, S. (1998, ed), Events and Grammar, Springer, Dodrecht, pp. 309-332.
  57. MOLTMANN, F. (1990), Nominal and Clausal Event Predicates, in WILTSHIRE, C., GRACZYK, R. and MUSIC, M. (1990, eds), Papers from the 25th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, pp. 300-314.
  58. MOSER, A. (2017), Aktionsart, Aspect and Category Change in the History of Greek, in BENTEIN, K., JANSE, M. and SOLTIC, J. (2017, eds), Variation and Change in Ancient Greek Tense, Aspect and Modality, Brill, Leiden–Boston, pp. 131-157.
  59. NAKAJIMA, H. (2006), Adverbial Cognate Objects, in «Linguistic Inquiry», 37 (4), pp. 674-684.
  60. PERLMUTTER, D. M. (1978), Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis, in JAEGER, J. J., WOODBURY, A. C., ACKERMAN, F., CHIARELLO, C., GENSLER, O. D., KINGSTON, J., SWEETSER, E. E., THOMPSON, H. and WHISTLER, K. W. (1978, eds), Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Linguistic Society of America, New York, pp. 157-190.
  61. POMPEI, A. (2006), Tracce di incorporazione in greco antico, in CUZZOLIN, P. and NAPOLI, M. (2006, eds), Fonologia e Tipologia Lessicale Nella Storia Della Lingua Greca: Atti Del VI Incontro Internazionale Di Linguistica Greca (Bergamo, Settembre 2005), Franco Angeli, Milano, pp. 216-237.
  62. PUSTEJOVSKY, J. (1995), The Generative Lexicon, The MIT Press, Cambridge (MA).
  63. PUSTEJOVSKY, J. (2008), From Concepts to Meaning: The Role of Lexical Knowledge, in VAN STERKENBURG, P. (2008, ed.), Unity and Diversity of Languages, John Benjamins, Amsterdam–Philadelphia, pp. 73-84.
  64. RADIMSKÝ, J. (2011), Noms prédicatifs, noms de résultat et noms concrets dans les constructions à verbe support, in «Lingvisticæ Investigationes», 34 (2), pp. 204-227.
  65. RAPPAPORT HOVAV, M. and LEVIN, B. (1998), Building Verb Meanings, in BUTT, M. and GEUDER, W. (1998, eds), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors, CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 97-134.
  66. RAPPAPORT HOVAV, M. and LEVIN, B. (2005), Change of State Verbs : Implications for Theories of Argument Projection, in ERTESCHIK-SHIR, N. and RAPOPORT, T. (2005, eds), The Syntax of Aspect : Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation, Oxford University Press, Oxford–New York, pp. 274-286.
  67. REAL PUIGDOLLERS, C. (2008), The Nature of Cognate Objects. A Syntactic Approach, in «Proceedings ConSOLE» 15, pp. 157–178.
  68. RIAÑO RUFILANCHAS, D. (2006), El complemento directo en griego antiguo: un estudio sobre los argumentos verbales de objeto en la prosa del griego antiguo, CSIC Press, Madrid.
  69. RICE, S. (1988), Unlikely lexical entries, in AXMAKER, S., JAISSER, A. and SINGMASTER, H. (1988, eds), Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Linguistic Society of America, New York, pp. 202-212.
  70. ROMAGNO, D. (2020), The Case of the Accusative of Respect in Ancient Greek. Strategies for Aligning Syntactic Roles and Case Marking with Semantic Properties, in DRINKA. B. (2020, eds), Historical Linguistics 2017: Selected Papers from the 23rd International Conference on Historical Linguistics, San Antonio, Texas, 31st July-4th August 2017, John Benjamins, Amsterdam–Philadelphia, pp. 9-28.
  71. SCHWYZER, E. and DEBRUNNER, A. (1950), Griechische Grammatik. Vol. 2: Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik, Beck, München.
  72. SMYTH, H. W, (1956), Greek Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).
  73. SNYDER, W. (2001), On the Nature of Syntactic Variation: Evidence from Complex Predicates and Complex Word-Formation, in «Language», 77 (2), pp. 324-342.
  74. SQUERI, E. (2024), Χράομαι khraomai as a Support Verb in the Medical Jargon of the Hippocratic Corpus’, in FENDEL, V. B. (2024, ed.), Support-Verb Constructions in the Corpora of Greek: Between Lexicon and Grammar?, Language Science Press, Berlin, pp. 133-164.
  75. TENNY, C. (1992), The Aspectual Interface Hypothesis, in SAG, I. A. and SZABOLCSI, A. (1992, eds), Lexical Matters, CSLI Publications, Stanford, pp. 1-27.
  76. TENNY, C. (1994), Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface, Springer, Dordrecht.
  77. VAN VALIN, R. D. (JR) and LAPOLLA, R. (1997), Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and Function, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  78. VAN EMDE BOAS, E., RIJKSBARON, A., HUITINK, L. and DE BAKKER, M. (2019), Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge–New York.
  79. VENDLER, Z. (1957), Verbs and Times, in «The Philosophical Review», 66, pp. 143-160.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.