BUCH
The Romance reflexes of the Latin infixes –I/ESC- and -IDI-: restructuring and remodeling processes.
Romanistik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Beihefte, Bd. 20
2016
Zusätzliche Informationen
Bibliografische Daten
Abstract
Eines der hervorstechenden Merkmale der romanischen Verbalmorphologie ist der Fortbestand der zwei lateinischen Überbleibsel -I/ESC- und -IDI̯-, deren formaler und funktionaler Gebrauch sich innerhalb der romanischen Sprachen um zwei grundlegende Pole dreht: -I/ESC- und -IDI̯- können als Derivations- oder als Flexionsmorpheme (oder zumindest flexionsgebunden) stehen. Obwohl -I/ESC- und -IDI̯- eine sehr vergleichbare Entwicklung genommen haben, sind sie noch nie in einer gemeinsamen Studie untersucht worden. Während das Schicksal von -I/ESC- bei Romanisten auf großes Interesse stieß, wurde die Verbindung zu -IDI̯- bis dato nur fragmentarisch beschrieben. Die vorliegende Studie möchte diese Lücke durch eine ergänzende Analyse der "Metamorphosen", die beide Segmente in der Fortentwicklung vom Lateinischen zum Romanischen genommen haben, schließen. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf den Flexions- bzw. flexionsgebundenen Formen in den gegenwärtigen romanischen Sprachen. In methodischer Hinsicht kombiniert die Studie eine umfassende heuristische Analyse mit der Korpusanalyse neuer, empirisch erhobener Daten auf der Basis von (dialektologischer) Feldarbeit, elektronischen Befragungen, (neuesten) Wörterbüchern und Dialektatlanten. Die behandelten Themen verbinden Bereiche der theoretischen, historischen und Soziolinguistik.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
| Zwischenüberschrift | Seite | Aktion | Preis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cover | U1 | ||
| Table of contents | IX | ||
| Chapter 1 – Introduction | 1 | ||
| 1.0 Setting and main goals of the research | 1 | ||
| 1.1 Methodological design: data, methods and outline of the book | 5 | ||
| 1.2 Theoretical outline of the research | 6 | ||
| 1.2.1 Descriptive dimension: inflectional vs. derivational morphology, and the concepts of ‘(de)grammaticalization’ and ‘morphome’ | 6 | ||
| 1.2.2 Historical dimension: the role of analogy | 9 | ||
| 1.2.3 Comparative dimension: inter-morphological and cross-linguistic comparison from a historical perspective | 12 | ||
| 1.2.4 Sociolinguistic dimension | 15 | ||
| 1.3 Terminological note: the label ‘infix’ | 16 | ||
| Chapter 2 – Morphological structure of the verb in Latin and Late Latin / Proto-Romance transformations | 19 | ||
| 2.0 Introduction | 19 | ||
| 2.1 Synopsis of the morphological structure of the verb in Classical Latin | 20 | ||
| 2.1.1 Features of Latin verbal inflection | 20 | ||
| 2.1.1.1 Infectum vs. perfectum and the four-part distinction between conjugation classes | 20 | ||
| 2.1.1.2 Nasal infixation and its correlation with the infectum – perfectum opposition | 26 | ||
| 2.1.1.3 Some remarks on the ‘‘third stem’’ and related theoretical issues: the past participle, the future participle and the supine | 28 | ||
| 2.1.1.4 Summary and flaws of the traditional description of the Latin verb system | 30 | ||
| 2.1.2 Features of Latin verbal derivation | 32 | ||
| 2.1.2.1 Verbal prefixation | 32 | ||
| 2.1.2.2 Verbal suffixation | 33 | ||
| 2.1.2.3 Summary and connection with derivational -I/ESC- and -IDI.- | 38 | ||
| 2.2 Late Latin / Proto-Romance restructurings of verbal inflection | 38 | ||
| 2.2.1 Trans-paradigmatic (conjugational) shifts and the ‘merger’ of conjugations II and III | 38 | ||
| 2.2.2 Fundamental ‘systemic’ reorganizations | 40 | ||
| 2.2.2.1 Replacement of inflectional endings and ‘cross-conjugational syncretism’ | 40 | ||
| 2.2.2.2 Periphrastic verb forms: the future, the preterit, and the passive | 41 | ||
| 2.2.2.3 Elimination, reassignment, and creation of inflectional series | 46 | ||
| 2.2.3 Summary and reconsideration of -I/ESC- and -IDI.- | 48 | ||
| Chapter 3 – History of the infixes -I/ESC- and -IDI.- | 51 | ||
| 3.0 Introduction | 51 | ||
| 3.1 Historical origins of the infix -I/ESC- | 52 | ||
| 3.1.1. Formal and semantic properties of the infix -I/ESC- in Indo-European and Latin | 52 | ||
| 3.1.2 Proto-Romance developments of the infix -I/ESC- | 63 | ||
| 3.1.2.1 Trans-paradigmatic shift | 63 | ||
| 3.1.2.2 Intra-paradigmatic restructuring and concomitant semantic bleaching | 68 | ||
| 3.2 Historical origins of the infix -IDI.- | 70 | ||
| 3.2.1 Formal and semantic properties of the infix -IDI.- in Greek and Latin | 70 | ||
| 3.2.2 Proto-Romance developments of the infix -IDI.-: functional ‘split’ and intra-paradigmatic reorganization | 72 | ||
| 3.3 Conclusion | 76 | ||
| Chapter 4 – The evolution of the infix -I/ESC- in Romance: focus on morphological configurations | 79 | ||
| 4.0 Introduction | 79 | ||
| 4.1 ‘‘Patterned’’ distributions of the infix | 80 | ||
| 4.1.1 The ‘‘N-pattern’’ infix-configuration | 80 | ||
| 4.1.2 The distribution of the infix at the intersection between ‘‘N-’’ and ‘‘L-’’pattern | 95 | ||
| 4.1.3 Was there a patterned infix-distribution in Proto-Romance? | 100 | ||
| 4.2 ‘‘Non-patterned’’ distributions of the infix | 104 | ||
| 4.2.1 The distribution of the infix in Standard French | 104 | ||
| 4.2.2 The occurrence of the infix in the future and the conditional: Corsican, Friulian, Ticinese and Lombard | 112 | ||
| 4.2.3 Further expansion of the infix: the intra-paradigmatic distribution of the infix in two Francoprovençal varieties and in Southern Italian (Lucanian) | 118 | ||
| 4.3 A bridge towards the lexicon: the ‘instability’ of non-infixed fourth conjugation verbs | 126 | ||
| 4.4 Conclusion and synthesis of the results | 137 | ||
| Chapter 5 – First conjugation infixation in Romance: general findings | 141 | ||
| 5.0 Introduction | 141 | ||
| 5.1 Geo-linguistic spread and general lexical characteristics of Romance first conjugation infixation | 142 | ||
| 5.1.1 First conjugation infixation in Romanian | 142 | ||
| 5.1.1.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Romanian | 147 | ||
| 5.1.2 First conjugation infixation in Istrian and Vegliot | 147 | ||
| 5.1.2.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Istrian and Vegliot | 153 | ||
| 5.1.3 First conjugation infixation in Northern Italian and Rhaeto-Romance (Dolomitic Ladin, Friulian) varieties | 154 | ||
| 5.1.3.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Northern Italian and Rhaeto-Romance (Dolomitic Ladin, Friulian) varieties | 164 | ||
| 5.1.4 First conjugation infixation in Central and Southern Italian varieties | 165 | ||
| 5.1.4.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Central and Southern Italian varieties | 176 | ||
| 5.1.5 First conjugation infixation in Gallo-Romance varieties | 177 | ||
| 5.1.5.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Gallo-Romance varieties | 192 | ||
| 5.1.6 First conjugation infixation in Swiss Rhaeto-Romance (Romansh) | 193 | ||
| 5.1.6.1 Summary: general features of first conjugation infixation in Swiss Rhaeto-Romance (Romansh) | 199 | ||
| 5.2 Some considerations on the intra-paradigmatic constellation of the infix -IDI.- and comparison with the infix -I/ESC- | 199 | ||
| 5.3 Conclusion | 202 | ||
| Chapter 6 – The fate of -IDI.- in Dolomitic Ladin: quantitative analysis of the lexical spread of the infix | 203 | ||
| 6.0 General introduction | 203 | ||
| 6.1 Dictionary analysis of first conjugation infixation in Badiotto (Central Dolomitic Ladin) | 204 | ||
| 6.1.0 Introduction | 204 | ||
| 6.1.1 Results of the analysis | 205 | ||
| 6.1.1.1 Infixation vs. the morpho-prosodic structure of the verb root | 205 | ||
| 6.1.1.2 Tentative conclusions | 221 | ||
| 6.1.1.3 Infixation vs. etymology | 222 | ||
| 6.1.1.4. General conclusion: intra-linguistic ‘triggers’ of first conjugation infixation in Badiotto | 223 | ||
| 6.2 First conjugation infixation in Dolomitic Ladin: statistical analysis of fieldwork data | 224 | ||
| 6.2.0 Introduction | 224 | ||
| 6.2.1 Methodological aspects of the research | 225 | ||
| 6.2.2 The lexical distribution of the infix in Dolomitic Ladin: some general considerations | 229 | ||
| 6.2.3 Basic quantitative results of the research | 235 | ||
| 6.2.4 Some sociolinguistic variables and their impact on first conjugation infixation in Dolomitic Ladin | 239 | ||
| 6.2.4.1 The relation between the age group to which the informants belong and infixation | 239 | ||
| 6.2.4.2 The relation between the ‘Ladin competences’ of the informants and infixation | 253 | ||
| 6.2.4.3 The relation between gender of the informants and infixation | 259 | ||
| 6.2.5 Geo-linguistic variables and their impact on first conjugation infixation in Central Dolomitic Ladin | 261 | ||
| 6.2.5.1 The relation between macro-dialectal differentiation and infixation | 261 | ||
| 6.2.5.2 The relation between micro-dialectal differentiation and infixation | 271 | ||
| 6.2.6 Conclusion and comparison with the impact of intra-linguistic variables on first conjugation infixation in Dolomitic Ladin | 277 | ||
| Chapter 7 – Conclusions | 283 | ||
| 7.0 Organization of the chapter | 283 | ||
| 7.1 The fate of -I/ESC- and -IDI.- in Romance: balance | 283 | ||
| 7.1.1 Functional and evolutionary similarities between -I/ESCand -IDI.- | 283 | ||
| 7.1.1.1 Morphological ‘split’ in the diachronic evolution of the two infixes | 283 | ||
| 7.1.1.2 The productivity of the infixed conjugation sub-classes in Romance | 283 | ||
| 7.1.1.3 Reluctance of ‘base verbs’ to inflectional infixation in Romance | 284 | ||
| 7.1.1.4 The shortcomings of a semantic-aspectual delimitation of the infixed sub-classes in Romance | 284 | ||
| 7.1.1.5 The ‘appeal’ of the rhizotonic forms on the intra-paradigmatic restructuring of the infixes in Romance | 285 | ||
| 7.1.2 Functional and evolutionary divergences between -I/ESCand -IDI.- | 285 | ||
| 7.1.2.1 Derivational productivity of the infixes in Latin | 285 | ||
| 7.1.2.2 Intra-paradigmatic configuration of the infixes in Latin | 286 | ||
| 7.1.2.3 ‘Areal resonance’ of the inflectional and derivational application of the infixes in Romance | 286 | ||
| 7.1.2.4 Principles of lexical spread of the infixes in Romance | 287 | ||
| 7.1.2.5 ‘Patterning’ of the infixes in Romance | 287 | ||
| 7.2 Explanatory and predictive factors: towards an integrative frame | 288 | ||
| 7.2.1 ‘Triggers’ and ‘blockers’ of the lexical distribution of first conjugation infixation | 288 | ||
| 7.2.1.1 General profiles of the lexical spread of first conjugation infixation | 288 | ||
| 7.2.1.2 Detailed profile of the lexical spread of first conjugation infixation in Dolomitic Ladin | 291 | ||
| 7.2.2 ‘Predictors’ of intra-paradigmatic I/ESC-constellations | 294 | ||
| 7.3 Some theoretical perspectives | 297 | ||
| 7.3.1 Degrammaticalization vs. functionality of inflectional infixation | 297 | ||
| 7.3.2 The struggle between the presumed ‘unidirectionality’ of linguistic change and the ‘freedom’ of the speaker | 298 | ||
| 7.3.3 Macro-structural/patterned analogy: initiation vs. propagation of a change | 300 | ||
| 7.4 Some directions for further research | 301 | ||
| 7.4.1 Dialectological and sociolinguistic research | 301 | ||
| 7.4.2 The examination of synchronic stages between diachronic endpoints | 302 | ||
| 7.5 Concluding remark | 302 | ||
| References | 303 | ||
| List of tables | 319 | ||
| List of figures | 325 | ||
| List of maps | 327 |
Powered by CloudPublish