The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studi... more The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account
recent studi... more The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
The article aims to analyze Ancient Greek complex verbs in -é¯o from a
constructionist perspecti... more The article aims to analyze Ancient Greek complex verbs in -é¯o from a
constructionist perspective. These verbs are usually accounted for as the effect of a
conversion from adjectival and/or nominal compounds in -os (and, eventually, -on).
However, this account does not explain why in complex -é¯o verb formations there
seem to be two parallel morphological processes which ‘feed into’ each other: nominal/
adjectival compounds in -os can generate complex -é¯o verbs, but also complex
-é¯o verbs can generate compound nouns or adjectives ending in -os. Moreover, both
of these complex formations can give rise to new free simple words (both nouns and
verbs) by means of a process of reanalysis. Construction morphology allows us to
provide a single picture describing these processes, exploring and explaining all possible
interrelations.
Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata, 33/1, 31-48, Jan 1, 2004
Participles present a constitutional ambiguity, very evident on the morpho-syntactic level and ev... more Participles present a constitutional ambiguity, very evident on the morpho-syntactic level and even more interesting from a semantic and pragmatic point of view. Various parameters are involved in determining the nominal or verbal features of participles: government, sententiality, reference and predication, time-stability of phenomena in the real world, and grounding on the text level.
Studi italiani di linguistica teorica ed applicata, , 39/3, 439-456, Jan 1, 2010
This paper aims to analyze the semantics of relative clauses (RCs) in Latin. In this language the... more This paper aims to analyze the semantics of relative clauses (RCs) in Latin. In this language there are neither graphic, norsuprasegmental or morphosyntactic marks to distinguish between restrictive and non-restrictive RCs. Nevertheless, this opposition can be supposed for Latin external-headed RCs, on the basis of the information structure, the degree of the head noun identification, and the presence of the cataphoric pronoun is, which implies restrictiveness. On the other hand, both internal-headed RCs, i.e. correlative and circumnominal RCs, and free RCs have a maximilizing semantics. In maximalizing RCs the whole semantic content of the relative construction lies within the RC. This means that the RC-external material is reduced to a minimum and that its semantic contribution should be traced back to a RC-internal interpretation or to an interpretation which is predictable from the RC. The maximalizing semantics of internal-headed and free RCs in Latin is shown by tests such as the compatibility with universal quantifiers, the impossibility of stacking and the equivalence between qui quae quod (‘who/which/that’) relative pronoun, on the one hand, and quicumque quaecumque quodcumque or quisquis quicquid (‘whoever/whatever’’), on the other.
... | Ayuda. La categoría del participio: formas y función discursiva. Autores: Anna Pompei; Loca... more ... | Ayuda. La categoría del participio: formas y función discursiva. Autores: Anna Pompei; Localización: Actas del X Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos : (21-25 de septiembre de 1999) / coord. por Emilio Crespo, María José Barrios Castro, Vol. ...
Les phrases relatives du latin n’ont fait que très rarement l’objet d’une étude typologique. Cet ... more Les phrases relatives du latin n’ont fait que très rarement l’objet d’une étude typologique. Cet article applique les paramètres typologiques les plus importants – (a) hiérarchies d’accessibilité, (b) stratégies de relativisation, (c) position de la phrase relative par rapport à sa tête nominale et à la phrase matrice, (d) degré de nominalisation de la relative – à l’analyse des phrases relatives qu’il y a dans le de bello Gallico. Les données montrent que le sujet est la position syntaxique la plus relativisée, même si le pronom relatif peut relativiser n’importe quelle position. En dehors du pronom relatif, en latin classique il n’y a que la stratégie de relativisation nommée de non-réduction, tandis que toutes les positions possibles de la relative par rapport à sa tête nominale et à la phrase matrice apparaissent en montrant le degré de nominalisation prévu. En revanche, à la différence de ce qui serait attendu en générale en typologie, en latin classique la stratégie de non-réduction n’est pas bornée aux relatives préposées ou circumnominales, mais on peut la trouver même dans les postnominales et les postposées. Dans ces cas, cette stratégie a un comportement différent selon la nature restrictive ou appositive de la phrase relative.
Latin relative clauses have rarely been analyzed from a typological point of view. This paper applies the most relevant typological parameters – i.e. (a) accessibility hierarchies, (b) relativization strategies, (c) position of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause, (d) relative clauses nominalization degree – to the analysis of relative clauses in de bello Gallico. Data show that the most relativized syntactic position is the subject, even though all positions can be relativized by the relative pronoun. Relative pronoun and non-reduction are the only relativization strategies available in Classical Latin. On the other hand, all possible positions of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause are documented in the corpus, which have the nominalization degree identified by typologists. Differently from what is expected according to a general view of typology, in Classical Latin the non-reduction strategy is not restricted to preposed and circumnominal relative clauses, but it also occurs in postnominal and postposed ones, showing a different behavior according to the restrictiveness or non-restrictiveness of the relative clause.
Las oraciones de relativo en latín clásico se han analizado muy poco desde un punto de vista tipológico. Este artículo aplica los parámetros tipológicos más relevantes al análisis de las oraciones de relativo que se encuentran en el de bello Gallico: (a) jerarquía de accesibilidad, (b) estrategias de relativización, (c) posición de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz, (d) nivel de nominalización de la oración de relativo. Los datos muestran que el sujeto es la posición sintáctica más relativizada, aunque el pronombre relativo pueda relativizar cualquier posición. Los pronombres relativos son la única estrategia de relativización en latín clásico, junto con la denominada estrategia de no reducción. Por contra, todas las posibles posiciones de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz se encuentran en el corpus, con el nivel de nominalización que está previsto por los estudios tipológicos. De otro lado, en latín clásico la estrategia de non reducción no se limita a las oraciones antepuestas y circumnominales – como establecería la tipología – sino que atañe también a las oraciones pospuestas y postnominales. En este caso, esta estrategia desempeña una función diferente según la oración de relativo sea restrictiva o apositiva
Ce travail a pour but une analyse du passage de la codification de notions spatiales à la codific... more Ce travail a pour but une analyse du passage de la codification de notions spatiales à la codification de valeurs tempo-aspectuelles dans la formation des préverbes en latin (§ 4; 6.2). Cette analyse sera liée à la présence de « verbes à particule » aussi dans beaucoup de langues indo-européennes (§ 2 ; 5) que dans des phases cruciales de l’évolution du latin (§ 3; 6.1).
The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studi... more The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account
recent studi... more The aim of this paper is to analyse participles in Ancient Greek taking into account recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
The article aims to analyze Ancient Greek complex verbs in -é¯o from a
constructionist perspecti... more The article aims to analyze Ancient Greek complex verbs in -é¯o from a
constructionist perspective. These verbs are usually accounted for as the effect of a
conversion from adjectival and/or nominal compounds in -os (and, eventually, -on).
However, this account does not explain why in complex -é¯o verb formations there
seem to be two parallel morphological processes which ‘feed into’ each other: nominal/
adjectival compounds in -os can generate complex -é¯o verbs, but also complex
-é¯o verbs can generate compound nouns or adjectives ending in -os. Moreover, both
of these complex formations can give rise to new free simple words (both nouns and
verbs) by means of a process of reanalysis. Construction morphology allows us to
provide a single picture describing these processes, exploring and explaining all possible
interrelations.
Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata, 33/1, 31-48, Jan 1, 2004
Participles present a constitutional ambiguity, very evident on the morpho-syntactic level and ev... more Participles present a constitutional ambiguity, very evident on the morpho-syntactic level and even more interesting from a semantic and pragmatic point of view. Various parameters are involved in determining the nominal or verbal features of participles: government, sententiality, reference and predication, time-stability of phenomena in the real world, and grounding on the text level.
Studi italiani di linguistica teorica ed applicata, , 39/3, 439-456, Jan 1, 2010
This paper aims to analyze the semantics of relative clauses (RCs) in Latin. In this language the... more This paper aims to analyze the semantics of relative clauses (RCs) in Latin. In this language there are neither graphic, norsuprasegmental or morphosyntactic marks to distinguish between restrictive and non-restrictive RCs. Nevertheless, this opposition can be supposed for Latin external-headed RCs, on the basis of the information structure, the degree of the head noun identification, and the presence of the cataphoric pronoun is, which implies restrictiveness. On the other hand, both internal-headed RCs, i.e. correlative and circumnominal RCs, and free RCs have a maximilizing semantics. In maximalizing RCs the whole semantic content of the relative construction lies within the RC. This means that the RC-external material is reduced to a minimum and that its semantic contribution should be traced back to a RC-internal interpretation or to an interpretation which is predictable from the RC. The maximalizing semantics of internal-headed and free RCs in Latin is shown by tests such as the compatibility with universal quantifiers, the impossibility of stacking and the equivalence between qui quae quod (‘who/which/that’) relative pronoun, on the one hand, and quicumque quaecumque quodcumque or quisquis quicquid (‘whoever/whatever’’), on the other.
... | Ayuda. La categoría del participio: formas y función discursiva. Autores: Anna Pompei; Loca... more ... | Ayuda. La categoría del participio: formas y función discursiva. Autores: Anna Pompei; Localización: Actas del X Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos : (21-25 de septiembre de 1999) / coord. por Emilio Crespo, María José Barrios Castro, Vol. ...
Les phrases relatives du latin n’ont fait que très rarement l’objet d’une étude typologique. Cet ... more Les phrases relatives du latin n’ont fait que très rarement l’objet d’une étude typologique. Cet article applique les paramètres typologiques les plus importants – (a) hiérarchies d’accessibilité, (b) stratégies de relativisation, (c) position de la phrase relative par rapport à sa tête nominale et à la phrase matrice, (d) degré de nominalisation de la relative – à l’analyse des phrases relatives qu’il y a dans le de bello Gallico. Les données montrent que le sujet est la position syntaxique la plus relativisée, même si le pronom relatif peut relativiser n’importe quelle position. En dehors du pronom relatif, en latin classique il n’y a que la stratégie de relativisation nommée de non-réduction, tandis que toutes les positions possibles de la relative par rapport à sa tête nominale et à la phrase matrice apparaissent en montrant le degré de nominalisation prévu. En revanche, à la différence de ce qui serait attendu en générale en typologie, en latin classique la stratégie de non-réduction n’est pas bornée aux relatives préposées ou circumnominales, mais on peut la trouver même dans les postnominales et les postposées. Dans ces cas, cette stratégie a un comportement différent selon la nature restrictive ou appositive de la phrase relative.
Latin relative clauses have rarely been analyzed from a typological point of view. This paper applies the most relevant typological parameters – i.e. (a) accessibility hierarchies, (b) relativization strategies, (c) position of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause, (d) relative clauses nominalization degree – to the analysis of relative clauses in de bello Gallico. Data show that the most relativized syntactic position is the subject, even though all positions can be relativized by the relative pronoun. Relative pronoun and non-reduction are the only relativization strategies available in Classical Latin. On the other hand, all possible positions of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause are documented in the corpus, which have the nominalization degree identified by typologists. Differently from what is expected according to a general view of typology, in Classical Latin the non-reduction strategy is not restricted to preposed and circumnominal relative clauses, but it also occurs in postnominal and postposed ones, showing a different behavior according to the restrictiveness or non-restrictiveness of the relative clause.
Las oraciones de relativo en latín clásico se han analizado muy poco desde un punto de vista tipológico. Este artículo aplica los parámetros tipológicos más relevantes al análisis de las oraciones de relativo que se encuentran en el de bello Gallico: (a) jerarquía de accesibilidad, (b) estrategias de relativización, (c) posición de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz, (d) nivel de nominalización de la oración de relativo. Los datos muestran que el sujeto es la posición sintáctica más relativizada, aunque el pronombre relativo pueda relativizar cualquier posición. Los pronombres relativos son la única estrategia de relativización en latín clásico, junto con la denominada estrategia de no reducción. Por contra, todas las posibles posiciones de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz se encuentran en el corpus, con el nivel de nominalización que está previsto por los estudios tipológicos. De otro lado, en latín clásico la estrategia de non reducción no se limita a las oraciones antepuestas y circumnominales – como establecería la tipología – sino que atañe también a las oraciones pospuestas y postnominales. En este caso, esta estrategia desempeña una función diferente según la oración de relativo sea restrictiva o apositiva
Ce travail a pour but une analyse du passage de la codification de notions spatiales à la codific... more Ce travail a pour but une analyse du passage de la codification de notions spatiales à la codification de valeurs tempo-aspectuelles dans la formation des préverbes en latin (§ 4; 6.2). Cette analyse sera liée à la présence de « verbes à particule » aussi dans beaucoup de langues indo-européennes (§ 2 ; 5) que dans des phases cruciales de l’évolution du latin (§ 3; 6.1).
Uploads
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of
conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
constructionist perspective. These verbs are usually accounted for as the effect of a
conversion from adjectival and/or nominal compounds in -os (and, eventually, -on).
However, this account does not explain why in complex -é¯o verb formations there
seem to be two parallel morphological processes which ‘feed into’ each other: nominal/
adjectival compounds in -os can generate complex -é¯o verbs, but also complex
-é¯o verbs can generate compound nouns or adjectives ending in -os. Moreover, both
of these complex formations can give rise to new free simple words (both nouns and
verbs) by means of a process of reanalysis. Construction morphology allows us to
provide a single picture describing these processes, exploring and explaining all possible
interrelations.
Latin relative clauses have rarely been analyzed from a typological point of view. This paper applies the most relevant typological parameters – i.e. (a) accessibility hierarchies, (b) relativization strategies, (c) position of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause, (d) relative clauses nominalization degree – to the analysis of relative clauses in de bello Gallico. Data show that the most relativized syntactic position is the subject, even though all positions can be relativized by the relative pronoun. Relative pronoun and non-reduction are the only relativization strategies available in Classical Latin. On the other hand, all possible positions of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause are documented in the corpus, which have the nominalization degree identified by typologists. Differently from what is expected according to a general view of typology, in Classical Latin the non-reduction strategy is not restricted to preposed and circumnominal relative clauses, but it also occurs in postnominal and postposed ones, showing a different behavior according to the restrictiveness or non-restrictiveness of the relative clause.
Las oraciones de relativo en latín clásico se han analizado muy poco desde un punto de vista tipológico. Este artículo aplica los parámetros tipológicos más relevantes al análisis de las oraciones de relativo que se encuentran en el de bello Gallico: (a) jerarquía de accesibilidad, (b) estrategias de relativización, (c) posición de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz, (d) nivel de nominalización de la oración de relativo. Los datos muestran que el sujeto es la posición sintáctica más relativizada, aunque el pronombre relativo pueda relativizar cualquier posición. Los pronombres relativos son la única estrategia de relativización en latín clásico, junto con la denominada estrategia de no reducción. Por contra, todas las posibles posiciones de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz se encuentran en el corpus, con el nivel de nominalización que está previsto por los estudios tipológicos. De otro lado, en latín clásico la estrategia de non reducción no se limita a las oraciones antepuestas y circumnominales – como establecería la tipología – sino que atañe también a las oraciones pospuestas y postnominales. En este caso, esta estrategia desempeña una función diferente según la oración de relativo sea restrictiva o apositiva
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of
conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
recent studies on the so-called converbs. In particular, the paper will focus on conjunct participle constructions. The first section shows the importance of new criteria for classifying these constructions (§ 1) and also offers an overview of the notion of converbs and of their syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features (§ 2). The second section (§ 3) applies converb classification criteria to conjunct participles in Ancient Greek, with particular reference to present and aorist stems. This analysis leads to the identification of three different types of conjunct participles, i.e. coordinative, clause modifier and predicate modifier.
constructionist perspective. These verbs are usually accounted for as the effect of a
conversion from adjectival and/or nominal compounds in -os (and, eventually, -on).
However, this account does not explain why in complex -é¯o verb formations there
seem to be two parallel morphological processes which ‘feed into’ each other: nominal/
adjectival compounds in -os can generate complex -é¯o verbs, but also complex
-é¯o verbs can generate compound nouns or adjectives ending in -os. Moreover, both
of these complex formations can give rise to new free simple words (both nouns and
verbs) by means of a process of reanalysis. Construction morphology allows us to
provide a single picture describing these processes, exploring and explaining all possible
interrelations.
Latin relative clauses have rarely been analyzed from a typological point of view. This paper applies the most relevant typological parameters – i.e. (a) accessibility hierarchies, (b) relativization strategies, (c) position of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause, (d) relative clauses nominalization degree – to the analysis of relative clauses in de bello Gallico. Data show that the most relativized syntactic position is the subject, even though all positions can be relativized by the relative pronoun. Relative pronoun and non-reduction are the only relativization strategies available in Classical Latin. On the other hand, all possible positions of relative clauses in relation to the lexical head and the matrix clause are documented in the corpus, which have the nominalization degree identified by typologists. Differently from what is expected according to a general view of typology, in Classical Latin the non-reduction strategy is not restricted to preposed and circumnominal relative clauses, but it also occurs in postnominal and postposed ones, showing a different behavior according to the restrictiveness or non-restrictiveness of the relative clause.
Las oraciones de relativo en latín clásico se han analizado muy poco desde un punto de vista tipológico. Este artículo aplica los parámetros tipológicos más relevantes al análisis de las oraciones de relativo que se encuentran en el de bello Gallico: (a) jerarquía de accesibilidad, (b) estrategias de relativización, (c) posición de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz, (d) nivel de nominalización de la oración de relativo. Los datos muestran que el sujeto es la posición sintáctica más relativizada, aunque el pronombre relativo pueda relativizar cualquier posición. Los pronombres relativos son la única estrategia de relativización en latín clásico, junto con la denominada estrategia de no reducción. Por contra, todas las posibles posiciones de la oración de relativo con respecto al núcleo nominal y a la oración matriz se encuentran en el corpus, con el nivel de nominalización que está previsto por los estudios tipológicos. De otro lado, en latín clásico la estrategia de non reducción no se limita a las oraciones antepuestas y circumnominales – como establecería la tipología – sino que atañe también a las oraciones pospuestas y postnominales. En este caso, esta estrategia desempeña una función diferente según la oración de relativo sea restrictiva o apositiva