A quantitative and typological study of Early Slavic participle clauses and their competition
Keywords: when-clauses
Old Church Slavonic
Early Slavic
language typology
temporal subordinates
Ancient Greek
probabilistic semantic maps
conjunct participles
absolute constructions
token-based typology
participle clauses

This thesis investigates the semantic and pragmatic properties of Early Slavic participle constructions (conjunct participles and dative absolutes) to understand the principles motivating their selection over one another and over their main finite competitor (jegda-clauses). The issue is tackled by adopting two broadly different approaches, which inform the division of the thesis into two parts.
The first part of the thesis uses detailed linguistic annotation on Early Slavic corpora at the morphosyntactic, dependency, information-structural, and lexical levels to obtain indirect evidence for different potential functions of participle clauses and their main finite competitor. The goal of this part of the thesis is to understand the roles of compositionality and default discourse reasoning as explanations for the distribution of participle constructions and jegda-clauses in the Early Slavic corpus. The investigation shows that the competition between conjunct participles, absolute constructions, and jegda-clauses occurs at the level of discourse organization, where the main determining factor in their distribution is the distinction between background and foreground content of an (elementary or complex) discourse unit. The analysis also shows that the major common denominator between the three constructions is that all of them can function as frame-setting devices (i.e. background clauses), albeit to very different extents. In fact, conjunct participles are more typically associated with the foreground constituent of a discourse unit, whereas dative absolutes and jegda-clauses are typically associated with the background content.
The second part of the thesis uses massively parallel data, including Old Church Slavonic and Ancient Greek, and analyses typological variation in how languages express the semantic space of English when, whose scope encompasses that of Early Slavic participle constructions and jegda-clauses. To do so, probabilistic semantic maps are generated and statistical methods (including Kriging, Gaussian Mixture Modelling, precision and recall analysis) are used to induce cross-linguistically salient dimensions from the parallel corpus and to study conceptual variation within the semantic space of the hypothetical concept when. Clear typological correspondences and differences with Early Slavic from linguistic phenomena in other languages are then exploited to corroborate and refine observations made on the core semantic-pragmatic properties of participle constructions and jegda-clauses on the basis of annotated Early Slavic data.
The analysis shows that 'null’ constructions (juxtaposed clauses such as participles and converbs, or independent clauses) consistently cluster in particular regions of the semantic map cross-linguistically, which clearly indicates that participle clauses are not equally viable as alternatives to any use of when, but carry particular meanings that make them less suitable for some of its functions. The investigation helped identify genealogically and areally unrelated languages that seem typologically very similar to Old Church Slavonic in the way they divide the semantic space of when between overtly subordinated and 'null’ constructions. Comparison with these languages reveals great similarities between the functions of Early Slavic participle constructions and of linguistic phenomena in some of these languages (particularly clause chaining, bridging, insubordination, and switch reference). Crucially, new clear correspondences are found between these phenomena and 'non-canonical’ usages of participle constructions (i.e. coreferential dative absolutes, syntactically independent absolutes and conjunct participles, and participle constructions with no apparent matrix clause), which had often been written off as ‘aberrations’ by previous literature on Early Slavic.