1 Οn loan verb accommodation: evidence from Greek dialectal variation 1 Dimitra Melissaropoulou University of Patras dmelissa@upatras.gr Abstract The present paper investigates loan verb accommodation in the light of the evidence provided by Greek dialectal variation. The mechanisms and paths via which verbs can be borrowed and adapted in Greek dialectal systems are examined following Wichmann & Wohlgemuth’s (2008) and Wohlgemuth’s (2009) typological classification of loan verbs’ adaptation strategies. The main issues addressed here focus on whether there is divergence in the loan verb adaptation strategies across dialectal varieties from the same language source (i.e. Turkish) and how it could be accounted for. Our data argue in favour of the prevailing influence of structural factors (i.e. productivity of the selected pattern, base specifications and phonological equivalences) on the selection of a specific accommodation mechanism across dialectal varieties. Keywords: loan verbs, adaptation, direct vs. indirect insertion, structural factors, productivity. 1. Introduction Lexical borrowing as well as adaptation of loans is a favorite topic in linguistic studies, both for theoretical and applied reasons i.e. understanding the nature of language change via the identification of the constraints language is subject to, and using the constraints for the reconstruction of unattested language changes and language situations (cf. Haspelmath 2008). A respectable number of publications have been produced trying to account both for the notion of loans, their taxonomy and their characteristics, as well as for their integration into the recipient language(s) (among others, Haugen 1950, Haspelmath 2008, 2009, Field 2002, MacMachon 1994, Myers-Scotton 2002, Moravcsik 1978, Poplack et al. 1988, Thomason 2001, Wichmann & Wohlgemuth 2008, Wohlgemuth 2009). Several claims regarding borrowability have been made the most important of which, for the purposes of the present paper are the following: a) lexical items are more likely to be borrowed than grammatical items and words are more likely to be borrowed than bound morphemes (cf. Moravcsik 1978, Field 2002) and b) some spheres of the vocabulary are borrowed more easily, while others significantly less easily (cf. Swadesh 1952 . According to Hock & Joseph (1996:257) basic vocabulary, referring to essential human activities, e.g., eat, sleep, do, is the most resistant sphere. Moreover, it is a general assumption that nouns are borrowed more easily and thus preferentially than 1 he author wishes to thank the Greek State Scholarships’ Foundation for funding part of the present work. An earlier draft was presented at the 4th International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory (11-14 June 2009, Chios, Greece). Special thanks go to Metin Baǧrıacık for proofreading the article.