1887
image of « Articles contractés » ou « preposizioni articolate » ?
  • ISSN 0035-3906
  • E-ISSN 1600-0811
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The morphemes such as the French or the Italien are designed by different terms in grammars of Romance languages, which shows that it is difficult to identify the lexical category of this type of fusional morpheme. The aim of this paper is to propose a detailed analysis of these contracted forms. I suggest that the fusion occurs during a secondary grammaticalization. This process involves, on the one hand, the definite article, i.e. a grammatical element, and, on the other hand, some prepositions which, semantically, can be functional or lexical but which function syntactically as grammatical elements. The analysis shows that case inflection of nominals has been transferred to the preposition while the other categories appear in the article which merged with prepositions. Therefore, the fusional forms can be considered as prepositions marked by the grammatical categories of gender, number and definiteness.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rro.15012.sor
2018-04-12
2019-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alibert, L.
    (19762) : Grammatica Occitana. CEO, Montpellier.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anward, J., E. Moravcsik & L. Stassen
    (1997) : Parts of speech : A challenge for typology. Linguistic typology, 1(2), pp.167–184.10.1515/lity.1997.1.2.167
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.2.167 [Google Scholar]
  3. Badia i Margarit, A.
    (1962) : Gramática catalana. Gredos, Madrid.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (1995) : Gramàtica de la llengua catalana. Edicions Proa, Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Battaglia, S. & V. Pernicone
    (1968) : La grammatica italiana (2.). Loescher Editore, Torino.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bauer, L.
    (2004) : The function of word-formation and the inflection-derivation distinction, in : Words and their Places. A Festschrift for J. Lachlan Mackenzie. Amsterdam : Vrije Universiteit. pp.283–292.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Begioni, L. & A. Rocchetti
    (2010) : La déflexivité, du latin aux langues romanes : quels mécanismes systémiques sous-tendent cette évolution ?Langages, 178, pp.67–87.10.3917/lang.178.0067
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.178.0067 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bisang, W.
    (2015) : Problems with primary vs. secondary grammaticalization: the case of East and mainland Southeast Asian languages. Language Sciences, 47, pp.32–147.10.1016/j.langsci.2014.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  9. Booij, G.
    (1996) : Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. Yearbook of morphology, pp.1–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bosque, I. & V. Demonte
    (éds.) (1999) : Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Espanola, I–II. Espasa Calp, Madrid.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bottineau, D.
    (2010) : Typologie de la déflexivité, Langages, 178, pp.89–113.10.3917/lang.178.0089
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.178.0089 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bourciez, É.
    (1967) : Éléments de linguistique romane. Klincksieck, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Breban, T.
    (2014) : What is secondary grammaticalization? Trying to see the wood for the trees in a confusion of interpretations. Folia Linguistica, 48(2), 469–502.10.1515/flin.2014.016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2014.016 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brunot, F.
    (18943) : Grammaire historique de la langue française. G. Masson, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Buridant, C.
    (2000) : Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. SEDES, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bybee, J., R. Perkins & W. Pagliuca
    (1994) : The evolution of grammar. Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago-London.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cabredo Hofherr, P.
    (2013) : Les contractions préposition+ déterminant en allemand et en français: inJ. Tseng. (ed.) Prépositions et postpositions. Approches typologiques et formelles. Lavoisier, Paris, pp.57–86.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Camara Junior, J. M.
    (1985) : Historia e estrutura da lingua portuguesa, 4ème éd. Padrão, Rio de Janeiro.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Candinas, T.
    (19862) : Romontsch sursilvan. Ligia Romontscha, Cuera.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Cervoni, J.
    (1990) : Sémantique prépositionnelle, essai critique sur les théories de la préposition. L’Information Grammaticale, 45(1), 43–44.10.3406/igram.1990.1956
    https://doi.org/10.3406/igram.1990.1956 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cieschinger, M.
    (2006) Constraints on the contraction of preposition and definite article in German. Bachelorthesis. Available online at : www.cogsci.uni‐osnabrueck.de/~CL/theses/index.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Coseriu, E.
    (1987) : Le latin vulgaire et le type linguistique roman, in : Herman, J. (éd.) Latin vulgaire, latin tardifI., Niemeyer, Tübingen, pp.53–64.10.1515/9783111652313.53
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111652313.53 [Google Scholar]
  23. Creissels, D.
    (2006) : Syntaxe générale. Une introduction typologique, 2. Hermes Lavoisier, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Cuesta, P. V., & M. A. M. Da Luz
    (19712) : Gramática da língua portuguesa. Edições 70, Lisboa.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Cunha, C. & L. F. Cintra
    (19874) : Nova Gramática do Português Contemporâneo. Ed.Joao Sa da Costa, Lisboa.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. De Mulder, W., & A. Carlier
    (2006) : Du démonstratif à l’article défini : le cas de ce en français moderne. Langue française, (4), 96–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Di Mauro, T.
    (1986) : Storia linguistica dell’Italia unita. Editori Laterza, Roma-Bari.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Ernout, A., F. Thomas
    (19532) : Syntaxe latine. Klincksieck, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Fabra, P.
    (198612) : Gramàtica catalana. Editorial Teide, Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Fagard, B., & A. Mardale
    (2007) : Systèmes prépositionnels des langues romanes : la notion de partie du discours en diachronie, in : XXIVème Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes, vol.1, Niemeyer, Tübingen, pp.91–105.10.1515/9783110923599.91
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110923599.91 [Google Scholar]
  31. Givón, T.
    (1991) : The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew, in : Traugott, E. C. & B. Heine (eds.) Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 2 : Types of Grammatical Markers. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp.257–310.10.1075/tsl.19.2.14giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.14giv [Google Scholar]
  32. Greenberg, J. H.
    (1978) : Universals of human languages, 4vol.Stanford U. P., Stanford.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Guillaume, G.
    (1973) : Principes de linguistique théorique de Gustave Guillaume : Les Presses de l’Université Laval et Klincksieck. Québec et Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Haberland, H.
    (1985) : Zum Problem der Verschmelzung von Präposition und bestimmtem Artikel. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie 30. Osnabrück, pp.82–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Haspelmath, M.
    (1996) Word-class-changing inflection and morphological theory. Yearbook of Morphology 1995). Springer Netherlands, pp.43–66.10.1007/978‑94‑017‑3716‑6_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3716-6_3 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2012): How to compare major word-classes across the world’s languages, UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Theories of Everything, vol.17, article 16, pp.109–130.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Heine, B. & M. Reh
    (1984): Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages. Helmut Buske Verlag, Hamburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Heine, B., U. Claudi & F. Hünnemeyer
    (1991) : Grammaticalization. A conceptual framework. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago-London.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Heine, B. & T. Kuteva
    (2002) : World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511613463
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463 [Google Scholar]
  40. Helbig, G. & J. Buscha
    (2001) : Deutsche Grammatik. Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. Langenscheidt, Berlin und München.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Hopper, P. & E. C. Traugott
    (2003) [1993] : Grammaticalization. 2nd ed.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  42. Iliescu, M.
    (2005) : Phénomènes de convergence et de divergence dans la Romania : morphosyntaxe et syntaxe, in : Ernst, G. et al. (éds.), Romanische Sprachgeschichte. t. 3. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp.3266–3281.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2006) : La grammaticalisation de l’expression du déterminant d’appartenance en ancien français et en roumain. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 2, pp.211–222.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kabak, B. & R. Schiering
    (2006) : The Phonology and Morphology of Function Word Contractions in German. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics9, pp.53–99.10.1007/s10828‑005‑4533‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-005-4533-8 [Google Scholar]
  45. Klausenburger, J.
    (2000) : Grammaticalization. Studies in Latin and Romance morphosyntax. University of Washington (Current Issues in LT 193).10.1075/cilt.193
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.193 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kuryłowicz, J.
    (1965) : The Evolution of Grammatical Categories. Diogenes, 13, 51, pp.55–71.10.1177/039219216501305105
    https://doi.org/10.1177/039219216501305105 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lamiroy, B.
    (2003) : Grammaticalisation et comparaison de langues. Verbum, 25(3), 411–431.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lleal, C.
    (1990) : La formación de las lenguas romances peninculares. Barcelona, Barcanova.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Lehmann, Ch.
    (1985/1995) : Thoughts on Grammaticalization, LINCOM Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 01. München.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Ledgeway, A.
    (2012) : From Latin to Romance. Morphosyntactic Typology & Change. Oxford University Press, Oxford.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584376.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199584376.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  51. Marchello-Nizia, Ch.
    (1992) : Histoire de la langue française aux XIVe et XVe siècles. Dunod, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. (2006) : Grammaticalisation et changement linguistique. De Boeck – Duculot, Bruxelles.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Mardale, A.
    (2008) : Sur la distinction entre prépositions lexicales et prépositions fonctionnelles. HAL Archives Ouvertes : Halshs-00556181.
  54. Martin, J-B.
    (2005) : Le Francoprovençal de poche. Assimil, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Meillet, A.
    (1912/1948) : Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Mira Mateus, M. et al.
    (19892) : Gramática da Língua Portuguesa. Caminho SA, Lisboa.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Napoli, D. J. & J. Nevis
    (1987) : Inflected prepositions in Italian. Phonology Yearbook4, pp.195–209.10.1017/S0952675700000828
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675700000828 [Google Scholar]
  58. Neveu, F.
    (2004) : Dictionnaire des sciences du langage. Armand Colin, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Nocentini, A.
    (2005) : Du latin aux langues romanes : la contribution de la typologie, in : Kiss, S. et al. (éds). Études de linguistique romane offertes à József Herman. De Gruyter, Tübingen, pp.411–419.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Nübling, D.
    (2005) : Von in die über in’n und ins bis im: Die Klitisierung von Präposition und Artikel als "Grammatikalisierungsbaustelle", in : Leuschner, T., T. Mortelmans & S. De Groodt, (eds.), Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen. Berlin/New York, pp.105–131.10.1515/9783110925364.105
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110925364.105 [Google Scholar]
  61. Picoche, J. & C. Marchello-Nizia
    (1989) : Histoire de la langue française. Nathan, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Plank, F.
    (1994) : Inflection and derivation, in : R. E. Asher (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Pergamon, vol.3, Oxford, pp.1671–1678.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Renzi, L.
    (1988) Italiano antico e moderno: aspetti pragmatici a confronto. Structure thème-rhème dans les langues romanes et slaves, 123–138.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Renzi, L. (avec Salvi, G.
    ) (19892) : Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione. I–II., Il Mulino, Bologna.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Riegel, M., Pellat, J-C. & Rioul, R.
    (20094) : Grammaire méthodique du français. PUF, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. von Schlegel, A.
    (1818) : Observations sur la langue et la littérature provençales. Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Schleicher, A.
    (1850) : Linguistische Untersuchungen 2. Die Sprachen Europas. H.B. König, Bonn.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Serianni, L.
    (1989) : Grammatica italiana. UTET Libreria, Torino.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Schwegler, A.
    (1990) : Analyticity and syntheticity: A diachronic perspective with special reference to Romance languages. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin – New York.10.1515/9783110872927
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110872927 [Google Scholar]
  70. Selkirk, Elisabeth O.
    (1996): The Prosodic Structure of Function Words, in : Morgan, J. L. & K. Demuth (eds.), From Signal to syntax : bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Brown University, New York – London, pp.187–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Solà, J., M-R. Lloret, J. Mascaro & M. P. Saldanya
    (2002) : Gramàtica del català contemporani, I-II-III. Editorial Empùries, Barcelona.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Sőrés, A. & C. Marchello-Nizia
    (2005) : Typologie diachronique : une nouvelle hypothèse pour le changement de type ‘OV’>’VO’, in : Gilbert Lazard & Claire Moyse-Faurie, Linguistique typologique. Editions du Septentrion, Lille, 261–287.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Sőrés, A.
    (2008) : Typologie et linguistique contrastive. Théories et applications dans la comparaison des langues. Peter Lang, Bern.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Stolz, T.
    (1990) : Flexion und Adpositionen, flektierte Adpositionen, adpositionelle Flexion. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, 43–3, 334–354.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Teyssier, P.
    (19922) : Manuel de langue portugaise. Klincksieck. Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Tollis, F.
    (2010) : La déflexivité romane et la personne dans les écrits publiés de Gustave Guillaume (domaine nominal). Langages, 2, 21–42.10.3917/lang.178.0021
    https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.178.0021 [Google Scholar]
  77. Tseng, J.
    (2013) (éd.) : Prépositions et postpositions. Approches typologiques et formelles. Lavoisier, Paris.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Wescoat, M. C.
    (2007) : Preposition-determiner contractions : an analysis in optimality-theoretic lexical-functional grammar with lexical sharing, in : Butt, M. & T. Holloway King (ed.) Proceedings of the LFG07 Conference ; csli-publications.stanford.edu/
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Wheeler, M., A. Yates & N. Dols
    (1999) : Catalan : A comprehensive grammar. Routledge, London and New York.10.4324/9780203300275
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203300275 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/rro.15012.sor
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/rro.15012.sor
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