I think the phrasing of the question suggests that there is no innovation, but in fact all that gets revealed in the discussion here is that innovations take decades to make it into the mainstream.
If you'd asked this question about 20 years ago when OO was one of the 'big new things' with C++ and Smalltalk and whatnot, people could just respond that that was just Simula (1967) repackaged. But in 1970, I don't think anyone would have considered objects to be 'a big innovation' rather they would have just been 'an interesting syntactic nicety' in that Simula language. Over time, OO evolved, people recognized how OO is natural for modeling/structing systems, design patterns were found, ... and now today a great many languages just take OO 'for granted'. But it's hard to find any moment in time where people would say 'OO was a great new innovation' because when it was new, no one appreciated its scope of influence on the software engineering field, and by the time its reach was apparent, it was no longer new.
20 years from now maybe all the new/popular languages will have a feature like 'type classes' from today's Haskell (it is a killer feature), but it's already 'too old' by this question's criteria to be an innovation, even though it may be 'the next big thing'.
So yes, I bet there are new things under the sun, probably hundreds, but they're all off in tiny experimental languages and we won't appreciate the novelty until decades later when the best of today's ideas are refined/proven and make their way into the mainstream.
