Homeric Evidences of an Inherently Actional Opposition: ἔξρνκαη vs ἦιζνλ

The paper aims at analyzing the paradigmatic relationship between the verbs ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ in Homeric Greek. Both verbs convey the idea of going within a Homeric suppletive paradigm. Although suppletivism between ἔξρνκαη, εἶκη, ἐιεύζνκαη (future), ἦιζνλ (aorist), εἰιήινπζα (perfect) is generally accepted, there is still uncertainty on both etymology and semantic features involving inherent actionality, with particular reference to ἔξρνκαη. Therefore, the actional status of ἔξρνκαη and its relationship with ἦιζνλ need further investigation. A textual analysis of the Homeric occurrences of both ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ, focusing on the semantic-syntactic discourse context, has shed light on their mutual suppletive relationship and proved that it is ultimately based on their inherently actional opposition within the paradigm.

to an extended form *er-g h -of the IE root *er-"to start to move; to excite; to put up", that he considers as telic (Note 3). Apart from the etymological doubts, textual examples do not provide strong evidence about the telic value of ἔξρνκαη (Chantraine 1968-80: 377). Although the actional value of ἔξρνκαη has been extensively investigated, there is still uncertainty about it. On the one hand, Lé toublon (1985: 72 ff.) considers ἔξρνκαη as atelic; on the other hand, Romagno (2002) has analysed ἔξρνκαη from a split intransitivity perspective and considered it as telic (i.e. ἔξρνκαη: unaccusative and telic vs εἶκη: unergative and atelic). At the same time she also underlines a frequent overlap, rather than an opposition, between ἔξρνκαη and εἶκη (for further details see Romagno 2002 and the references given therein). Furthermore, the disagreement on the semantics of this verb is also shown by the variation within lexicographic data (Note 4).
The present study aims at clarifying the semantic and actional value of ἔξρνκαη, also in reference to its relationship with ἦιζνλ and the other forms built on the aorist stem (i.e. ft. ἐιεύζνκαη, pf. εἰιήινπζα), by analyzing their occurrences within the Iliad and the Odyssey (Note 5). In particular, the analysis takes into account the motion events expressed by these Homeric verbs in the light of Talmy's cognitive-typological theory (Talmy 2000(Talmy , 2009. According to this framework, languages are distinguished into two types, i.e. V(erb)-and S(atellite)-Framed, depending on the pattern they tend to use to express the semantic components of a motion event, i.e. Figure (the moving object), Ground (the reference object/frame), Motion (the presence of motion), Path (the path followed by the object), Manner (the way of motion), Cause (the cause of motion), and, in particular, the Path component, which is the core element (Note 6). V-Framed languages tend to convey Path in the verb root (e.g. Sp. El perro [Figure] entró [Motion+Path] en [(Path)] el jardí n [Ground] corriendo [Manner] "The dog ran into the garden"). On the contrary, Homeric Greek is a S-Framed language (see Talmy 2000;Baldi 2006;Skopeteas 2008;Imbert 2010;Nikitina 2013;Verkerk 2014), as it tends to convey Path in a so-called satellite, i.e. particles functioning as both preverbs and prepositions (e.g. ἐπ-έδξακε "He ran against"; ζέσλ ἐπὶ λῆαο "Running to(wards) the ships"), adverb(ial)s (e.g. ζτεδὸν ἤιπζελ "He came close"), nominal case markers (e.g. ἔξρνληαη πεδί-οιο "They go through a plain"), while verbs convey [Motion+Manner], such as the manner-of-motion verbs ἔδξακνλ and ζέσ "to run", or only [Motion], such as the verbs ἦιζνλ and ἔξρνκαη "to go" (Note 7). The verbal class of self-propelled motion, to which the chosen verbs ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ belong, is involved in an encoding pattern (i.e. verb [Motion] + satellite [Path]) which is actually less prototypical in reference to S-Framed languages, as it is actually used by V-Framed languages as well. Among Path-encoding satellites, depending on their degree of semantic compatibility with the idea of reaching a goal, there are both those which are prototypically directional/goal-oriented (e.g. the particle ἐπί "to, towards", the adverb ἀληίνλ "against", the accusative case marker with allative value), and the prototypically non-directional/non-goal-oriented ones (e.g. the particle πεξί "around", the adverb ἐγγύζελ "near", the genitive case marker with perlative value).
It has been recently shown that verb-inherent telicity plays an important role on motion event encoding as far as morphosyntactic cohesion between verbs and spatial particles is concerned. ISSN 1948-5425 2020 In fact, Homeric data show a higher morphosyntactic cohesion between directional/goal oriented particles and telic, rather than atelic, manner-of-motion and self-propelled motion verbs, i.e. a higher frequency of agglutinated preverbal forms, rather than prepositions or tmetic preverbal constructions, are found between telic motion verbs and directional/goal oriented particles (for further details, see Bartolotta & Nigrelli 2017;Nigrelli 2019; see also below, Section 2.1) (Note 8).

International Journal of Linguistics
In the present study, the textual analysis on Homeric verbal uses concerns the semantic-actional features of ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ and takes into account those occurrences in which these verbs co-occur with a Path-encoding element, focusing on the actual arrival of the moving objects (i.e. Figure) to the endpoints. The results are presented and discussed in the next section through a selection of noteworthy examples.
A larger tendency of motion verbs to occur without Path-encoding elements (rather than with) may be a clue of an atelic actional value, as verbal semantics is more compatible with expressing bare motion without any information about the path followed by Figure (see Bartolotta & Nigrelli 2017). Taking into account the occurrences without Path-encoding elements, only slight differences between the self-propelled motion verbs ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ are actually shown by their distribution, whose percentages are quite overlapping.
Taking into account the occurrences with Path-encoding elements, Homeric data about telicity and its reflecting on a higher morphosyntactic cohesion between directional/goal-oriented particles and telic verbs due to their mutual semantic compatibility are quite similar: a higher tendency of telic ἦιζνλ to occur with directional agglutinated preverbs, rather than prepositions or tmetic preverbs, is actually limited to one directional/goal-oriented particle (i.e. θαηά "downwards"; see Nigrelli 2019).
However, from the textual analysis of ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ within their Homeric contexts of use, data show that inherent (a) telicity has strong reflections on the semantic value of Path-encoding spatial elements (Note 10). Given the higher semantic compatibility between telic verbs and directional/goal-oriented particles, same directional particles tend to maintain their directional semantic value when co-occurring with [+telic] ἦιζνλ, as in (1), whereas they can assume also a non-directional/non-goal-oriented semantic value when co-occurring with ἔξρνκαη, as in (2), fact that may lead to a hypothetic atelicity of this latter verb (see also below, Section 2.2.1).

Variation on Figure's Reaching the Endpoint Within ἔρχομαι and ἦλθον Homeric Uses
It is worthy of note that, focusing on the expression of the actual arrival of the moving Figure to the endpoint, data show further significant differences between ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ in reference to an actional concept of their mutual opposition, thus further corroborating the hypothesis of the inherently atelic nature of ἔξρνκαη. Table 1 shows the Homeric distribution of ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ with both directional and non-directional Path-encoding elements (i.e. spatial particles, adverbs, nominal case markers) as well as the information about the actual arrival (or no arrival) of the moving Figure to the endpoint (Note 13). International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020 κεηά "between" 3 8 18 6 δηά "through" 1 3 17 5 ὑπό "under" --13 2 παξά "beside" 1 3 2 7 ἀπό "from" 1 3 4 6 ἀκθί(ο) "on both sides"  Table 1 show a significant variation within the distribution of the arrivals (i.e. the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint), which seems to be ascribable to the role played by verb-inherent telicity. In fact, the motion events expressed by [+telic] ἦιζνλ tend to express the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint very frequently (about 75% of the occurrences) when co-occurring with directional/goal-oriented particles, as shown, besides in (1), in (3)-(4).
In both examples, the verbal compound εἰζῆιζε(λ) "(s)he went/came in(to), (s)he entered" refers to the Figure's (i.e. Penelope and Achilles, respectively) actual reaching the endpoint, that is to Figure's entering the Ground, which is implied (as in (3), i.e. the chief room) or encoded (as in (4), by the accusative θιηζίελ "tent").
Furthermore, it is worth of note that, due to verb-inherent telicity, the motion events expressed by [+telic] ἦιζνλ tend to express the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint frequently (about 71% of the occurrences) also when the co-occurring particle is prototypically non-directional/non-goal-oriented, as shown in (5). ISSN 1948-5425 2020 (5) ὣο νἳ κὲλ Δηὸο ἔλδνλ ἀγεγέξαη'· νὐδ' λνζίρζσλ λεθνύζηεζε ζεᾶο, ἀιι' ἐμ ἁιὸο ἦλθε μεη ' αὐηνύο,(Il. 20.134) "So they (scil. the gods) gathered together within the house of Zeus; and the Earth-Shaker did not disobey the goddess, but he came to the midst of them from the sea"

International Journal of Linguistics
Functioning as a preposition with the accusative, the prototypically non-directional/non-goal oriented particle κεη'(ά) "between" expresses in (5) a directional Path towards a multiple Ground (i.e. αὐηνύο "them(selves)", the gods gathered together), which is actually reached by the Earth-Shaker Poseidon (i.e. Figure), with reference to a telic movement (i.e. Motion) conveyed by the aorist ἦιζε (Note 14). The phrase ἐμ ἁιὸο "from the sea" gives further Path information expressing the Source of movement, which is a subcomponent of the Path component (see Talmy 2000).
On the contrary, several evidences lead to assign an atelic actional value to ἔξρνκαη. The motion events expressed by [-telic] ἔξρνκαη tend not to express any Figure's actual reaching the endpoint, when co-occurring with prototypically non-directional/non-goal-oriented particles (the occurrences with no arrival represent about 77%; cf. Table 1), as shown in (6), and, interestingly enough, also when co-occurring with prototypically directional/goal-oriented ones (the occurrences with no arrival represent about 88%; cf. Table  1), as shown in (7).
(6) ὄθξ' ἂλ κέλ θ' ἀγξνὺο ἴνκελ θαὶ ἔξγ' ἀλζξώπσλ, ηόθξα ζὺλ ἀκθηπόινηζη μεθ' ἡκηόλνπο θαὶ ἄκαμαλ θαξπαιίκσο ἔρτεζθαι· (Od. 6.259-61) "so long as we are going through the country and the tilled fields of men, keep on going (inf.) at a brisk pace behind the mules and the cart with the handmaids" In (6) Nausicaa warns Odysseus to be careful during the way to the palace of her father Alcinous. The infinitive (with imperative value) ἔξρεζζαη refers to a generic and atelic movement (i.e. Motion) with reference to Odysseus (i.e. Figure). Unlike in (5), although it co-occurs with the accusative ἡκηόλνπο θαὶ ἄκαμαλ "(the) mules and (the) cart", which refers to a double Ground, the prototypically non-directional/non-goal-oriented particle κεζ'(ά) "between" maintains its own non-directional semantic value, giving information about a stative-locative Path with reference to the backward position Odysseus himself has to maintain during the way. Furthermore, the contextual presence of the [-telic] verb εἶκη "to go" (cf. the subjunctive ἴνκελ) is noteworthy, as well as that of the durative adverbial ὄθξ'(α) [...] ηόθξα "until", this latter representing one of the diagnostic tests for verbal atelicity (cf. Bartolotta 2017a and the references given therein). In (7) the verb ἔξρνκαη co-occurs, instead, with the directional particle ἀλά "upwards": and as he goes through the city, they gaze upon him as upon a god." With reference to the atelic movement of the implied Figure (i.e. an admirable man), the participle ἐξρόκελνλ co-occurs with the prototypically directional/goal-oriented particle ἀλά "upwards" functioning as a preposition with the accusative. As clarified by the context, it is worth of note that the semantic value of ἀλά, albeit prototypically directional/goal oriented, is non-directional, as it refers to a generic going through the city (i.e. Ground), that is focusing on the intermediate segment of the Path followed by the Figure (i.e. the traversal subcomponent of the Path component; see Talmy 2000) (Note 15).

Variation Within Occurrences With Path-Encoding Adverbs
Evidences of the actional opposition between ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ emerge also from the analysis of both the occurrences with Path-encoding spatial adverbs and, albeit to a lesser extent, that with Path-encoding case markers. As far as the first ones are concerned, data show (cf. Table 1) that the motion events expressed by [+telic] ἦιζνλ tend to involve the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint quite frequently (about 72% of the occurrences) when co-occurring with a directional/goal-oriented adverb, as shown in (8), and frequently enough (about 57% of the occurrences) also with a non-directional/non-goal-oriented one, as shown in (9). In (8) the aorist participle ἐιζόληα expresses a telic movement (i.e. Motion) with reference to Odysseus (i.e. the implied Figure), while the directional adverb Παξλεζόλδ'(ε) "to Parnassus", with its allative value, conveys the directional/goal-oriented Path in reference to Ground (i.e. Parnassus), depicting an endpoint which is actually reached by the Figure ( In (9) the aorist ἦιζε refers to the telic movement (i.e. Motion) of Hector (i.e. Figure), while the adverb ἀγρίκνινλ "near, close at hand" (i.e. adverbial neuter form of the adjective ἀγρίκνινο "coming near") expresses Path in reference to Ground (i.e. Patroclus), which is expressed by the dative νἱ (enclitic form of the third person pronoun; cf. LSJ 2011); the prepositional phrase θαηὰ ζηίραο "through the ranks" represents a further Path-encoding International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020 element. It is worthy of note that, despite the semantic value of the Path-encoding adverb ἀγρίκνιόλ is prototypically non-directional/non-goal-oriented, the motion event in (9) depicts the actual arrival of the Figure (i.e. Hector) to the endpoint (i.e. Patroclus), due to the inherent telicity of ἦιζε. This is confirmed by the physical contact between both heroes (cf. νὖηα δὲ δνπξί λείαηνλ ἐο θελεῶλα "and wounded him in the lowest part of the flank with a spear") (Note 17).
On the contrary, data show (cf. Table 1) that the motion events expressed by ἔξρνκαη never involve the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint when co-occurring with a non-directional/non-goal oriented spatial adverb, as shown in (10). Interestingly enough, this happens even when the verb co-occurs with a directional/goal-oriented one (except for one occurrence only), as shown in (11). The context refers to Odysseus and his swineherd Eumaeus that are slowly moving forwards toward Odysseus's house (cf. v. 249, ἦθα θηόληαο "going gently") and, suddenly, take a break near the place, in order to think of how to act (cf. v. 274). In the motion event in (10), the dual present participle ἐξρνκέλσ refers to the atelic moving forward (i.e. Motion) of Odysseus and Eumaeus (i.e. Figure), while the adverb ἀγρίκνινλ conveys a non-directional/non-goal-oriented (rather stative-locative) Path in reference to an implied Ground (i.e. Odysseus's house). As confirmed by the aorist ζηήηελ "they stopped" (ἵζηεκη), the motion event in (10) does not depict any Figure's reaching an endpoint (Note 18).

Variation Within Occurrences With Path-Encoding Case Markers
As far as the occurrences with Path-encoding nominal case markers are concerned, data show a high tendency (about 80% of the occurrences) to involve the Figure's actual reaching the endpoint in reference to the motion events expressed by [+telic] ἦιζνλ when co-occurring with a directional/goal oriented case marker (i.e. accusative or dative; cf. Tab. 1), as shown in International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2020. On the other hand, the occurrences of [+telic] ἦιζνλ with a non-directional/non-goal-oriented case marker, in which no Figure's actual reaching the endpoint is involved, are that (5×; cf. Tab. 1) with the accusative of the internal object, i.e. ὁδόλ "way, road", θέιεπζα (pl.) "road, path, journey", as shown in (13).
(14) ἔρτεζθον κλιζίην Πειετάδεσ Ἀρηιῆνο· (Il. 1.322) "Go you both (scil. Talthybius and Eurybates) to(wards) the tent of Achilles, Peleus's son" In the motion event described in (14) by the dual present imperative ἔξρεζζνλ (i.e. Motion), Talthybius and Eurybates are the implied Figure, while the accusative θιηζίελ "tent" refers to the directional Path in relation to the Ground, i.e. "to(wards) the tent". Although the co-occurring directional/goal-oriented accusative θιηζίελ could telicize the event, it is significant that Talthybius and Eurybates do not reach the tent, as they meet Achilles sitting outside, near the ships (cf. vv. 329-30).

Conclusion
The textual analysis of the Homeric contexts of use of ἔξρνκαη and ἦιζνλ has allowed to shed light on the uncertain and debated actional value of ἔξρνκαη, and to clarify its relationship with ἦιζνλ within the Homeric suppletive paradigm for going. In fact, Homeric data have provided evidence relating to the inherent atelicity of [-telic] ἔξρνκαη, in opposition to the inherent telicity of [+telic] ἦιζνλ. As a result, the Homeric suppletive paradigm for going would ultimately be as follows: on the one hand [-telic] ἔξρνκαη (present), εἶκη (futuristic present), on the other hand [+telic] ἐιεύζνκαη (future), ἦιζνλ (aorist), εἰιήινπζα (perfect). Verb-inherent (a)telicity has proved to be an important feature with reference to Homeric motion events, as it strongly affects the semantic value of the co-occurring elements, namely Path-encoding particles, and thus of the whole motion events too. In particular, due to the higher semantic compatibility between directional/goal-oriented Path-encoding elements and telic verbs, the prototypically directional particles tend to maintain their own directional value when co-occurring with [+telic] ἦιζνλ, unlike with [-telic] ἔξρνκαη, with which they can also show a different (i.e. non-directional/non-goal-oriented) semantic value. Furthermore, extending the analysis to the other kind of Path-encoding elements (i.e. spatial adverbs and nominal case markers, besides spatial particles) and focusing on the Figure's actual reaching an endpoint within the motion events expressed by both chosen verbs, data have shown further significant evidences with reference to the mutual actional opposition of these verbs, based on inherent (a)telicity. In fact, the motion events expressed by [+telic] ἦιζνλ tend to involve the Figure's actual arrival to the endpoint, not only with directional/goal-oriented Path-encoding elements, but also with non-directional/non-goal-oriented ones; on the contrary, the motion event expressed by [telic] ἔξρνκαη never involves the Figure's actual arrival to the endpoint, not only with non-directional/non-goal-oriented Path-encoding elements, but also with directional/goal-oriented ones.
By clarifying the atelic actional status of ἔξρνκαη, this study ultimately contributes to a better understanding of the suppletive relationship between the forms within the Homeric paradigm for going, also confirming that verb-inherent (a) telicity represents a crucial feature with reference to both Homeric motion events and verbal suppletivism.