The loss of infinitive in South Slavic control and restructuring complements
This paper analyzes the diachronic loss of infinitives in South Slavic languages within the Implicational Complementation Hierarchy framework, demonstrating that infinitives were replaced by finite *da*-subjunctives first in larger complement structures and later in smaller Event complements through a unique syntactic reanalysis driven by Balkan language contact pressures.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Language is not a static monument; it is a living current that shifts its course over centuries. In the study of linguistics, one of the most fascinating currents to track is how languages change the way they connect ideas. Specifically, researchers look at how a main action, like "wanting" or "beginning," connects to a second action, like "coming" or "studying." In many languages, this connection is made with a special, unchanging verb form called an infinitive, a word that exists outside of time and person, like "to go" or "to eat." However, in a specific region of Southeastern Europe known as the Balkans, languages have undergone a dramatic transformation. They have largely abandoned this unchanging form. Instead, they now use a complete, time-bound sentence to express the second action, often marked by a small word that functions like a mood indicator. This shift is not random; it follows a strict, predictable path that reveals how the human mind organizes complex thoughts.
The paper by Tomislav Socanac investigates this phenomenon within the South Slavic languages, focusing on Bulgarian and Serbian. The research asks a simple but profound question: when a language decides to stop using the infinitive, which types of sentences lose it first? Does the change happen everywhere at once, or does it creep in from the outside in? To answer this, the author uses a framework called the Implicational Complementation Hierarchy. This is a way of thinking about sentences as structures of different sizes. Imagine a sentence as a building. Some sentences are small, simple structures containing only the core action and its immediate details. Others are larger, more complex structures that include extra layers of information, such as a specific subject for the action or a clear sense of time and possibility. The theory suggests that these different "sizes" of sentences behave differently when a language undergoes a major change.
The study traces the history of these changes from Old Church Slavonic, the earliest recorded form of these languages, to the modern day. The findings reveal a clear, downward trajectory. The infinitive was not lost all at once. Instead, it disappeared first from the largest, most complex sentence structures. These are sentences where the speaker is expressing a desire, a preference, or a decision about a separate event, often involving a different person. For example, in the older language, a speaker might have said "I want to see," using the infinitive. Over time, this shifted to a construction meaning "I want that I see," using a finite verb form. This change happened relatively early in the history of these languages.
The infinitive held on the longest in the smallest, most tightly knit sentence structures. These are the sentences where the main verb and the second action are so closely linked that they feel like a single event. Verbs like "must," "can," "begin," or "continue" fall into this category. In these cases, the subject of the main verb is the same as the subject of the second verb, and the two actions happen almost simultaneously. The research shows that even as the larger structures switched to the new finite form, these small, event-based structures stubbornly kept the old infinitive for centuries. It was only much later, and only in specific dialects and languages like Bulgarian, that even these tight-knit structures finally gave up the infinitive in favor of the finite form.
The paper also explains how this happened by looking at the position of the small word that marks the new finite form, known as da. In the earliest stages, this word sat at the very top of the sentence structure, acting like a gatekeeper for the entire clause. As the language evolved, this word moved. In Bulgarian, it dropped down to sit right next to the main verb, effectively merging with it and making the two parts inseparable. This movement allowed the new form to invade the smallest, most resistant sentence structures. In Serbian, the change was less complete; the word da still sits in the high position for some sentences but has dropped down for the small, event-based ones. This explains why Serbian speakers today can still use the old infinitive in some contexts but not others, while Bulgarian speakers have lost the infinitive almost entirely.
The author concludes that this shift was likely driven by the intense language contact in the Balkans, where speakers of different tongues needed to communicate clearly. Using a full, finite sentence for every action might have made the subject and the action clearer to speakers of different languages, reducing confusion. However, the paper is careful to note that while this contact pressure is the likely driver, the exact trigger that caused the infinitive to vanish from the smallest structures remains a mystery. The study does not claim to have solved the entire puzzle of Balkan language history, but it has successfully mapped the route the change took. It proves that language change is not a chaotic flood but a structured process, moving from the complex outer edges of a sentence inward to its core, one structural layer at a time.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.