1887
image of Language sources and the reconstruction of early languages
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article argues that with the original emphasis on dialectal variation, using primarily literary texts from various regions, analysis of Old French has routinely neglected social variation, providing an incomplete picture of its grammar. Accordingly, Old French has been identified as typically featuring e.g. “pro-drop”, brace constructions, and single negation. Yet examination of these features in informal texts, as opposed to the formal texts typically dealt with, demonstrates that these documents do not corroborate the picture of Old French that is commonly presented in the linguistic literature. Our reconstruction of Old French grammar therefore needs adjustment and further refinement, in particular by implementing sociolinguistic data. With a broader scope, the call for inclusion of sociolinguistic variation may resonate in the investigation of other early languages, resulting in the reassessment of the sources used, and reopening the debate about social variation in dead languages and its role in language evolution.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.18026.bau
2020-07-15
2020-08-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adams, James N.
    2007The regional diversification of Latin 200BC–AD 600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511482977
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511482977 [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. 2016An anthology of informal Latin, 200BC–AD 900. Fifty texts with translations and linguistic commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139626446
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139626446 [Google Scholar]
  4. Adams, Marianne
    1987 From Old French to the theory of Pro-Drop. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory5. 1–32. 10.1007/BF00161866
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00161866 [Google Scholar]
  5. Arteaga, Deborah
    1994 Impersonal constructions in Old French. InMichael Mazzola (ed.), Issues and theory in Romance linguistics: Selected papers from the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Linguistics XXIII, 141–157. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Balon, Laurent & Pierre Larrivée
    2016 L’ancien français n’est déjà plus une langue à sujet nul – nouveau témoignage des textes légaux. Journal of French Language Studies26. 221–237. 10.1017/S0959269514000222
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269514000222 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bauer, Brigitte L. M.
    2000Archaic syntax in Indo-European. The spread of transitivity in Latin and French. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110825992
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110825992 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2003 The adverbial formation in mente in Vulgar and Late Latin. A problem in grammaticalization. InHeiko Solin, M. Leiwo, & Hilla Halla-aho (eds.), Latin tardif – latin vulgaire VI, 439–457. Hildesheim: Olms.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2010 Fore-runners of Romance -mente adverbs in Latin prose and poetry. InEleanor Dickey & Anna Chahoud (eds.), Colloquial and literary Latin, 339–354. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511763267.022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511763267.022 [Google Scholar]
  10. Forthcoming a. Language contact & language borrowing? Compound verb forms in the Old French translation of the Gospel of St. Mark. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 1–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Forthcoming b. FINITE VERB + INFINITIVE + OBJECT in non- Standard Latin. Early brace constructions?Latin vulgaire – latin tardifXII.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. In prep. The status of brace constructions.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Braune, Wilhelm & A. Ebbinghaus
    1961 [1880]Gotische Grammatik. 16th edn. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Brunot, Ferdinant
    1924Histoire de la langue française des origines à 1990. Tome III. La formation de la langue classique. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Buridant, Claude
    2000Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Brugmann, Karl & Berthold Delbrück
    1886–1916Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg: Trübner.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Diefenbach, Lorenz
    1831Uber die jetzigen romanischen Schriftsprachen, die spanische, portugiesische, rhätoromanische (in der Schweiz), französische, italienische und dakoromanische. Leipzig: Ricker.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Diez, Friedrich
    1836Grammatik der romanischen Sprachen. Bonn: Weber.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dufresne, Monique & Fernande Dupuis
    1994 Modularity and the reanalysis of the French subject pronoun. Probus6. 103–123. 10.1515/prbs.1994.6.2‑3.103
    https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1994.6.2-3.103 [Google Scholar]
  20. Durham, Charles
    1913 Formal Latin and informal Latin. The Classical Weekly6. 97–101. 10.2307/4386677
    https://doi.org/10.2307/4386677 [Google Scholar]
  21. Faral, Edmond
    (ed.) 1973 [1872]La conquête de Constantinople – Villehardouin. Paris: Belles Lettres.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ferguson, Charles
    1959 Disglossia. Word15. 325–340. 10.1080/00437956.1959.11659702
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1959.11659702 [Google Scholar]
  23. Foulet, Lucien
    1930 [1919]Petite syntaxe de l’ancien français. 3rd edn.Paris: Champion.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Franzén, Torsten
    1939Etude sur la syntaxe des pronoms personnels sujets en ancien français. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Fuchs, August
    1849Die romanische Sprache in ihren Verhältnisse zum Lateinischen. Halle: Schmidt.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Gamkrelidze, Thomas & Vjacelsav Ivanov
    1994 [1984]Indo-European and the Indo- Europeans. A Reconstruction and historical analysis of a proto-language and a proto-culture. Part1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Glikman, Julie & Nicolas Mazziotta
    2013 Représentation de l’oral et syntaxe dans la prose du Queste del Saint Graal (1225–1230). InDominique Lagorgette & Pierre Larrivée (eds.), Représentations du sens linguistique5. 47–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Guillot, Céline, Serge Heiden, Alexei Lavrentiev & Bénédicte Pincemin
    2014 L’oral représenté dans un corpus français médiéval (9e-15e): Approche contrastive et outillée de la variation diasystématique. Halshs-00760647 (https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00760647v2. AccessedJune 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Haiman, John
    1974Targets and syntactic change. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110882889
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110882889 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hirschbūhler, Paul
    1992 L’omission du sujet dans les subordonnées V1: Les cent nouvelles nouvelles et Les cent nouvelles nouvelles anonymes. Travaux de Linguistique25. 25–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ingham, Richard
    2014 Old French negation, the Tobler/Mussafia law, and V2. Lingua17. 25–39. 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kaiser, Georg
    2009 Losing the null subject. A contrastive study of (Brazilian) Portuguese and (Medieval) French. InGeorg Kaiser & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds.), Proceedings of the workshop “Null subjects, expletives, and locatives in Romance”. Arbeitspapier123, 131–156. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz 2009.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Kibler, William W.
    1984An introduction to Old French. New York: Modern Language Association of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Koch, Peter & Wulf Oesterreicher
    1985 Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch36(85). 15–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Labelle, Marie
    2007 Clausal architecture in Early Old French. Lingua117. 289–316. 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.01.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.01.004 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lehmann, Winfred P.
    1993Theoretical bases of Indo-European linguistics. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Lemieux, Monique & Fernande Dupuis
    1995 The locus of verb movement in non- asymmetric verb second languages: The case of Middle French. InAdrian Battye & Ian Roberts (eds.), Principles of diachronic syntax, 80–109. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Marchello-Nizia, Christiane
    1979Histoire de la langue française aux XIVe et XVe siècles. Paris: Dunod.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 2012 L’oral représenté en français médiéval, un accès construit à une face cachée des langues mortes. InC. Guillot, Bernard Combettes, Alexei Laveniev, E. Oppermann-Marsaux & Sophie Prèvost (eds.), Le changement en français. Etudes de linguistique diachronique, 247–264. Bern: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 2018 De So à SV: vers le sujet obligatoire et antéposé en français, les dernières phases d’un changement. Journal of French Language Studies28. 1–19. 10.1017/S0959269517000023
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269517000023 [Google Scholar]
  41. Marchello-Nizia, Christiane & Jacqueline Picoche
    1998Histoire de la langue française. Paris: Nathan.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Meillet, Antoine & Jean Vendryes
    1924Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques. Paris: Champion.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Moignet, Gérard
    (ed.) 1969La chanson de Roland. Paris: Bordas.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 1973Grammaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Klincksieck.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Nestle, Eberhard, Kurt Aland, & Barbara Aland
    (eds.) 1979 [1878]Novum testamentum graece et latine. 7th edn.Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Roberts, Ian
    1993Verbs and diachronic syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Simonenko, Alexandra, Benoit Crabbé & Sophie Prévost
    2017 Agreement syncretism and the loss of null subjects: quantificational models for medieval French. Phonolist, November 2017 <https://blogs.umass.edu/phonolist/2017/11/21/simonenko-crabbe-prevost-2017-agreement-syncretisation-and-the-loss-of-null-subjects-quantificational-models-for-medieval-french/ (accessedMay 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Skårup, Paul
    1975Les premières zones de la proposition en ancien français. Essai de syntaxe de position. Copenhague: Akademisk Vorlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Sneddon, Clive
    1978 A critical edition of the four Gospels of the Old French translation of the Bible. University of Oxford, Doctoral dissertation.
  50. 2011 The Old French Bible. The first complete vernacular Bible in Western Europe. InSusan Boynton & Diane J. Reilly (eds.). The practice of the Bible in the Middle Ages. Production, reception, and performance in Western Christianity, 296–314. New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 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]
  52. Storey, Christopher
    (ed.) 1968La vie de Saint Alexis. Genève: Droz.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Studer, Paul & Joan Evans
    (eds.) 1924Anglo-Norman lapidaries. Paris: Champion.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Szemerényi, Oswald
    1970Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenhaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Väänänen, Veikko
    1983 Le problème de la diversification du Latin. InWolfgang Haase (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. 29.1, 480–506. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Vance, Barbara
    1997Syntactic change in medieval French. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑8843‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8843-0 [Google Scholar]
  57. Van Reenen, Pieter & Lene Schøsler
    1995 The thematic structure of the main clause in Old French: OR versus SI. InHenning Andersen (ed.), Historical linguistics 1993, 16–20. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.124.32ree
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.124.32ree [Google Scholar]
  58. Ventris, Michael & John Chadwick
    1956Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Winters, Margaret
    1987 Innovations in French negation: A cognitive grammar account. Diachronica4. 27–52. 10.1075/dia.4.1‑2.03win
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.4.1-2.03win [Google Scholar]
  60. Wirth-Jaillard, Aude
    2013 De Estienne Husson pour ce qu’il dit à Jannon Morelot: ‘Un filz de bastarde ne me puet valoir!’: Représentation de l’oral dans les documents comptables médiévaux. InDominique Lagorgette & Pierre Larrivée (eds.), Représentations du sens linguistique5. 65–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Zimmermann, Michael
    2009 On the evolution of expletive subject pronouns in Old French. InGeorg Kaiser & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds.), Proceedings of the workshop “Null subjects, expletives, and locatives in Romance”. Arbeitspapier123, 63–92. Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 2018 Changes in status and paradigms? On subject pronouns in medieval French. Transactions of the Philological Society116. 131–149. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12112
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12112 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.18026.bau
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