Author
Abstract
Since the antiquity, diathesis has been analyzed in linguistic theories as a morphological category of the verb. Consulting the earliest papers, there could be noticed that Greek tradition makes mention of active, passive and middle verbs, whereas in Latin papers we find active and passive verb forms. (There must be said that during this linguistic period the term diathesis could hardly be found. The above mentioned terms referred to the classification of verbs). During the Medieval Age linguists defined the same concept of diathesis. Most of the traditional grammars of many contemporary languages hold the same view, without any significant differences. In traditional Albanian papers diathesis or voice is defined as a morphological category that expresses relations between the verb (the traditional predicate) and the subject. There has been made a division between active and non-active voice. Non-active voice verbs are further divided into: passive, reflexive and middle voice. Empirical studies show that it is difficult to make a distinct and final classification of verbs in terms of the different patterns in which it can be found. This inference is made taking into consideration abundant examples from the Albanian corpus, showing that a verb can be used intransitively in some patterns and transitively in others. The voice division of verbs provided by the Albanian grammars reveals a gap in the examination of the formal and especially the semantic aspect. There are many semantic and formal arguments that lead us to the conclusion that the traditional definition of diathesis is problematic. In our view, this process should be treated as a wider phenomenon that includes more than the morphological aspect. The Valency Theory could be an alternative approach that provides a better solution to this problem.
Suggested Citation
Albana Deda & Leonora Lumezi, 2015.
"The Traditional Conception of Diathesis (Voice) and a Modern View to It,"
European Journal of Language and Literature Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 1, ejls_v1_i.
Handle:
RePEc:eur:ejlsjr:10
DOI: 10.26417/ejls.v1i1.p81-88
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eur:ejlsjr:10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Revistia Research and Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://revistia.org/index.php/ejls .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.