1887
Volume 33, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the potential influence of Latin syntax on the development of analytic verb forms in a well-defined and concrete instance of language contact, the Old French translation of a Latin Gospel. The data show that the formation of verb forms in the Old French was remarkably independent from the Latin original. While the Old French text closely follows the narrative of the Latin Gospel, its usage of compound verb forms is not dictated by the source text, as reflected e.g. in the quasi-omnipresence of the relative sequence + , which – with a few exceptions – all trace back to a different structure in the Latin text. Engels (VerenigdeStaten) Another important innovative difference in the Old French is the widespread use of ‘have’ as an auxiliary, unknown in Latin. The article examines in detail the relation between the verbal forms in the two texts, showing that the translation is in line with grammar. The usage of compound verb forms in the Old French Gospel is therefore autonomous rather than contact stimulated, let alone contact induced. The results challenge Blatt’s (1957) assumption identifying compound verb forms as a shared feature in European languages that should be ascribed to Latin influence.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00028.bau
2020-03-30
2020-05-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adams, James N.
    1977 “A typological approach to Latin word order.” Indogermanische Forschungen81: 70–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2013Social variation and the Latin language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511843433
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511843433 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bardy, Gustave
    1938La latinisation de l’église de l’Occident. Amay: Prieuré bénédictin.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bauer, Brigitte L. M.
    1995The development of SVO patterning in Latin and French. Diachronic and psycholinguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2000Archaic syntax in Indo-European. The spread of transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110825992
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110825992 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2003 “The adverbial formation in mente in Vulgar and Late Latin. A problem in grammaticalization.” InLatin tardif-latin vulgaire VI, ed. byLeiwo Solin, and Hilla Halla-aho, 439–457. Hildesheim: Olms.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2006 ‘“Synthetic” vs. “analytic” in Romance: the importance of varieties.” InHistorical Romance linguistics. Retrospective and perspective, ed. byRandy Gess, and Deborah Arteaga, 287–304. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.274.18bau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.274.18bau [Google Scholar]
  8. 2009 “Word Order.” InNew perspectives on historical Latin syntax, ed. byPhilip Baldi, and Pierluigi Cuzzolin, 241–316. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2010 “Forerunners of Romance -mente Adverbs in Latin Prose and Poetry.” InColloquial and literary Latin, ed. byEleanor Dickey, and Anna Chahoud, 339–353. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511763267.022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511763267.022 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2016 Review article of James Adams’s Social variation and the Latin language. Folia linguistica historica37: 315–326. 10.1515/flih‑2016‑0010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2016-0010 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2017Nominal apposition in Indo-European. Its forms and functions, and its evolution in Latin-Romance. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110461756
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110461756 [Google Scholar]
  12. Forthcoming. “Finite Verb + Infinitive + Object in non-Standard Latin.” Latin vulgaire – latin tardifXII.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. In preparation a. “Brace constructions in the history of Latin-Romance.”
    [Google Scholar]
  14. In preparation b. “Language sources and reconstructing dead languages: discrepancies and evolution in Old French grammar.”
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Blatt, Franz
    1957 “Latin influence on European syntax.” Travaux du Cercle de Linguistique de Copenhague11: 330–369.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Buridant, Claude
    2000Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Drinka, Bridget
    2017Language contact in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139027694
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139027694 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ernout, Afred, and François Thomas
    1964 (1951)Syntaxe latine. 2nd edition. Paris: Klincksieck.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Harris, Martin
    1982 “The “past simple” and the “present perfect” in Romance.” InStudies in the Romance verb, ed. byMartin Harris, and Nigel Vincent, 42–70. London: Croom.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Herman, Jószef
    1990 (1954) “Recherches sur l’ordre des mots dans les plus anciens textes français en prose.” InDu latin aux langues romanes. Etudes de linguistique historique, ed. bySandor Kiss, 234–288. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1970Le latin vulgaire. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hewson, John, and Vit Bubenik
    2006Tense and aspect in Indo-European languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Higgleton, Elaine P.
    1992 “Latin gospel exegesis and the gospel glosses in the thirteenth century Old French translation of the Bible.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of St. Andrews.
  24. Kabatek, Johannes
    2005Die Bolognesische Renaissance und der Ausbau romanischer Sprachen. Juristische Diskurstraditionen und Sprachentwicklung in Sūdfrankreich und Spanien im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert. Tūbingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783110933864
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110933864 [Google Scholar]
  25. Klein, Jared
    1992 “On the independence of Gothic syntax, I. Interrogativity, Complex sentence types, tense, mood, and diathesis.” Journal of Indo-European Studies20: 339–379.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Liechtenhan, Eduard
    (ed.) 1928Anthimi De observatione ciborum. Leipzig: Teubner.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Marchello-Nizia, Christiane
    1979Histoire de la langue française aux XIVe et XVe siècles. Paris: Dunod.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 1999Le français en diachronie: douze siècles d’évolution. Paris: Ophrys.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Meillet, Antoine, and Joseph Vendryes
    1924Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques. Paris: Champion.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Mohrmann, Christine
    1949 “Les origines de la latinité chrétienne à Rome.” Vigiliae christianae3: 163–183. 10.1163/157007249X00131
    https://doi.org/10.1163/157007249X00131 [Google Scholar]
  31. 1957 “Linguistic problems in the early Christian church.” Vigiliae christianae11: 11–36. 10.1163/157007257X00024
    https://doi.org/10.1163/157007257X00024 [Google Scholar]
  32. Musurillo, Herbert
    (ed.) 1972The acts of the christian martyrs. Oxford: Clarendon.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Nestle, Erwin, Kurt Aland, and Barbara Aland
    (eds.) 1979 (1878)Novum testamentum graece et latine. 7th edition. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Panayotakis, Stelios
    2016 “Expressions of time in Early and Late Latin.” InEarly and Late Latin, ed. byJames Adams, and Nigel Vincent, 202–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781316450826.010
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316450826.010 [Google Scholar]
  35. Pétré, Hélène
    (ed.) 1948Ethérie, journal de voyage (Peregrinatio). Paris: Cerf.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Pountain, Chris
    2011 “Latin and the structure of written Romance.” InThe Cambridge History of the Romance Languages. Vol 1. Structures, ed. byMartin Maiden, John- Charles Smith, and Adam Ledgeway, 606–659. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Sneddon, Clive
    1978 “A critical edition of the four gospels in the thirteenth-century Old French translation of the Bible.” DPhil dissertation, University of Oxford.
  38. 2002 “On the creation of the Old French Bible.” Nottingham Medieval Studies46: 25–44. 10.1484/J.NMS.3.334
    https://doi.org/10.1484/J.NMS.3.334 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2011 “The Old French Bible. The first complete vernacular Bible in Western Europe.” InThe practice of the Bible in the Middle Ages. Production, reception, and performance in Western Christianity, ed. bySusan Boynton, and Diane J. Reilly, 296–314. New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tara, George
    2014Les périphrases verbales avec habeo en latin tardif. Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Thielmann, Philipp
    1885 “Habere mit dem Part. Perf. Pass.” Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik2: 372–423, 509–549.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Thomason, Sarah, and Terrence Kaufman
    1991Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Väänäänen, Veikko
    1963Introduction au latin vulgaire. Paris: Klincksieck.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00028.bau
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00028.bau
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error