In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Agents in Early Welsh and Early Irish by Nicole Müller
  • Joseph F. Eska
Agents in Early Welsh and Early Irish. By Nicole Müller. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Pp. xii, 262. $95.00.

This data-rich volume focuses on textual evidence for constructions in which agents are expressed other than as the subject of finite clauses in Middle Welsh and in Old and Middle Irish (i.e. in passive and impersonal clauses) with the goal of attempting to determine usage patterns across different types of texts and the functions of the various constructions. This kind of detailed study has not previously been conducted with Celtic-language data and represents a valuable first step for both textual and linguistic scholars interested in these languages.

In Ch. 1 (1–33), Müller sets out her method of analysis and the range of constructions attested—mostly PPs with a host of different Ps and nouns inflected for the genitive case—and discusses the potential for ambiguity which arises in their interpretation since they are also employed with other functions. She then discusses the individual narrative, legal, and annalistic texts from which her data have been drawn.

Chs. 2 (34–82) and 3 (83–178) address evidence from Welsh (W) and Irish (Ir.) respectively, especially with regard to how the various constructions are distributed across different kinds of texts. It is no surprise that there are a number of similarities across the two languages, for example, that the genitive case can mark the agent only with intransitive verbs whereas it can mark only the patient with transitive verbs. An interesting discovery is that while, as one might expect, narrative and legal texts are constructed rather differently, annalistic texts are different from both and are the only type in which agentive passive constructions are found. M makes the interesting proposal that Latin may have provided a model for such constructions though she admits that it may also be possible that the discourse structure of such texts demanded their use. Throughout these chapters, she makes a number of suggestions that particular constructions tend to be employed to indicate given or new information, textual continuity, and so on. These are only tendencies, however, and sometimes are proposed on the basis of very few tokens.

Ch. 4 (179–200) discusses aspects of semantics underlying the choice of construction, especially the distinction between Ps in PPs. Drawing on previous scholarship, and with attention to diachronic concerns, M comes to the interesting conclusion that W o, Ir. ó ‘from’ conveys point of origin of an action, W i, Ir. do ‘to’ an affected entity, Ir. la ‘by’ the person in charge, and W (y) gan ‘by, because’ the point of departure of an action, in addition to the person in charge. The nominal syntax of the verbal noun of these languages is made clear in this chapter. Ch. 5 (201–3) provides a summary of the volume and some concluding remarks.

A very valuable part of M’s volume is the thirteen appendices (205–48) in which one can find references to her examples which will allow those interested to check her interpretations for themselves. They conclude a useful study of the interaction between syntax and semantics and will be of interest to typologists and general linguists as well as Celticists. My only complaint is that forms and their glosses are not aligned vertically as is common practice; instead, sequences of forms and glosses, respectively, are presented in run-on fashion. This is not a big problem with short examples, but it is very time consuming to match up forms and glosses in long ones (e.g. on pp. 54 and 66).

Joseph F. Eska
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
...

pdf

Share