The origins of the Romance analytic passive: Evidence from word order

Danckaert, Lieven

doi:10.1093/oso/9780198747840.003.0014

Cited by 28 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 130 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note also that the Late Latin word order data discussed here have nothing to do with the putative cases of second position cliticisation of esse discussed in Adams (1994) (on which, see Danckaert 2017a). 20 For a series of arguments that Latin E-periphrases are not the historical source of Romance analytic present tense passives of the type sono amato 'I am (being) loved', see Danckaert (2016Danckaert ( , 2017b. 21 This proposal predicts that copular esse should not display the type of (word order) behavior reviewed in sections 2 and 3: for example, we predict the word order pattern 'subject -esse -predicate' to be fully productive in Late Latin.…”

Section: A Lexical Split: Strong and Weak Bementioning

confidence: 92%

Assessing phonological correlates of syntactic change

Danckaert¹

2021

Syntactic Features and the Limits of Syntactic Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter analyzes the puzzling word order behavior of be-auxiliaries in the history of Latin. Corpus data show that in Late Latin, periphrastic verb forms consisting of a past participle and a form of esse ‘be’ strongly prefer the head-final order ‘PaPa - be’, which – as is well known – does not survive in Romance. This generalization does not however hold in all syntactic environments: most notably, negated be-periphrases with a monosyllabic form of esse actually prefer the order ‘be - PaPa’. An account is developed which evaluates the status of Late Latin be-auxiliaries at the syntax-prosody interface. The core proposal is that Late Latin has two distinct lexical items esse, viz. ‘strong be’ and ‘weak be’. The lexical entry of the latter variant (which is the one most commonly used in verbal periphrases) specifies that weak be is phonologically deficient, in the sense that it can fail to project a prosodic word, in which case it has to occur in an extrametrical position at the right edge of a phonological phrase. The effect of negation on word order is explained in prosodic terms too: being proclitic, the Late Latin negator non forms a complex head together with weak be, and this whole complex is automatically mapped onto an independent prosodic word. At a general level, the chapter argues that at least in some cases, it is necessary to take into account prosodic considerations to correctly understand word order change.

show abstract

Section: A Lexical Split: Strong and Weak Bementioning

confidence: 92%

Assessing phonological correlates of syntactic change

Danckaert¹

2021

Syntactic Features and the Limits of Syntactic Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence for this claim comes from word order in negated clauses with a head-final be-periphrasis (which as we have seen are the minority pattern in Late Latin, the statistically predominant order being 'Neg-be-PaPa'). Danckaert (2017b) observes that in VPAux-clauses, the order 'V-Neg-be' persists, and concomitantly, that the order 'Neg-V-be' is (which would be compatible with a V-incorporation account) is relatively poorly attested. However, in Danckaert (2017b) no material from the Vulgate was taken into account, which is the only body of texts in which the orders 'VAuxSO' and 'VAuxOS' are really productive (and where in negated clauses with a be-periphrasis we almost exclusively find 'Neg-be-PaPa' orders).…”

Section: Vauxos and Vauxso In Grammar Bmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Danckaert (2017b) observes that in VPAux-clauses, the order 'V-Neg-be' persists, and concomitantly, that the order 'Neg-V-be' is (which would be compatible with a V-incorporation account) is relatively poorly attested. However, in Danckaert (2017b) no material from the Vulgate was taken into account, which is the only body of texts in which the orders 'VAuxSO' and 'VAuxOS' are really productive (and where in negated clauses with a be-periphrasis we almost exclusively find 'Neg-be-PaPa' orders). What I would like to propose is that V-incorporation was in fact available, but not for every speaker, and therefore that there are no traces of it in all Late Latin texts.…”

Section: Vauxos and Vauxso In Grammar Bmentioning

confidence: 93%

Subject Placement in the History of Latin

Danckaert

2017

catjl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to provide further support for one aspect of the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure proposed in Danckaert (2017a), namely the diachrony of subject placement. According to the relevant proposal, one needs to distinguish an earlier grammar ('Grammar A', whose heyday is the period from ca. 200 BC until 200 AD), in which there is no A-movement for subjects, and a later grammar ('Grammar B', which is on the rise from ca. 50-100 AD, and fully productive from ca. 200 AD onwards), where subjects optionally move to the inflectional layer. Assuming the variationist acquisition model of language change developed in Yang (2000, 2002a,b), I present corpus evidence which confirms that it is only in the Late Latin period that TP-internal subjects fully establish themselves as a grammatical option.Keywords: Latin; language change; word order; subject placement; grammar competition Resum. La posició del subjecte en la historia del llatí L'objectiu d'aquest article és proporcionar un suport addicional a un aspecte de l'anàlisi de l'estructura oracional del llatí clàssic i llatí tardà proposada a Danckaert (2017a), a saber, la diacronia de la posició del subjecte. D'acord amb la proposta rellevant, cal distingir una gramàtica anterior ('Gramàtica A', l'apogeu de la qual és aproximadament el període comprès entre el 200aC i el 200dC), en què no hi ha moviment-A per als subjectes, i una gramàtica posterior ('Gramàtica B', que sorgeix aproximadament el 50-100dC, i esdevé totalment productiva a partir del 200dC en endavant), on els subjectes es mouen opcionalment a la capa flexional. Assumint el model variacionista d'adquisició del canvi lingüístic desenvolupat a Yang (2000, 2002a,b), presento evidència de corpus que confirma que és només en el període del llatí tardà que els subjectes interns a l'ST s'estableixen plenament com una opció gramatical. Paraules clau:

show abstract

The actualization of new voice patterns in Romance

Cennamo

2020

Current Issues in Linguistic Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses some aspects of the reorganization of voice distinctions in the transition from Latin to Romance, namely the grammaticalization of activity (do / make) and change of state (become) verbs as markers of the passive voice, and the reanalysis of the reflexive morpheme se as a voice modulator, focussing on patterns of invariance (i.e., persistence) of Latin inheritance and principled differences (i.e., divergence) in the type and extent of variation and further developments in this area of Romance morphosyntax.

show abstract

The origins of the Romance analytic passive: Evidence from word order

Cited by 28 publications

References 130 publications

Assessing phonological correlates of syntactic change

Assessing phonological correlates of syntactic change

Subject Placement in the History of Latin

The actualization of new voice patterns in Romance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About