Past Participles From Latin To Romance

From Latin through the Romance languages, which types of past participle survived? Which older, "irregular" types disappeared and which older, "regular" types proliferated? Which new types of past participles emerged, which proved popular in standard Romance languages, and which exist in a wide range of dialects? The author explores reasons for the expansion or contraction of each type, in each area.

This book explores grammatical gender in the Romance languages and dialects and its evolution from Latin. Michele Loporcaro investigates the significant diversity found in the Romance varieties in this regard; he draws on data from the Middle Ages to the present from all the Romance languages and dialects, discussing examples from Romanian to Portuguese and crucially also focusing on less widely-studied varieties such as Sursilvan, Neapolitan, and Asturian. The investigation first reveals that several varieties display more complex systems than the binary masculine/feminine contrast familiar from modern French or Italian. Moreover, it emerges that traditional accounts, whereby neuter gender was lost in the spoken Latin of the late Empire, cannot be correct: instead, the neuter gender underwent a range of different transformations from Late Latin onwards, which are responsible for the different systems that can be observed today across the Romance languages. The volume provides a detailed description of many of these systems, which in turns reveals a wealth of fascinating data, such as varieties where 'husbands' are feminine and others where 'wives' are masculine; dialects in which nouns overtly mark gender, but only in certain syntactic contexts; and one Romance variety (Asturian) in which it appears that grammatical gender has split into two concurrent systems. The volume will appeal to linguists from a range of backgrounds, including Romance linguistics, historical linguistics, typology, and morphosyntax, and is also of relevance to those working in sociology, gender studies, and psychology.

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.

This book describes the changes which led from colloquial Latin to the five major Romance languages: Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and Romanian.

In Latin Alive, Joseph Solodow tells the story of how Latin developed into modern French, Spanish, and Italian, and deeply affected English as well. Offering a gripping narrative of language change, Solodow charts Latin's course from classical times to the modern era, with focus on the first millennium of the Common Era. Though the Romance languages evolved directly from Latin, Solodow shows how every important feature of Latin's evolution is also reflected in English. His story includes scores of intriguing etymologies, along with many concrete examples of texts, studies, scholars, anecdotes, and historical events; observations on language; and more. Written with crystalline clarity, this book tells the story of the Romance languages for the general reader and to illustrate so amply Latin's many-sided survival in English as well.

Are the past participial forms that occur in passive and perfect periphrases substantially identical or should they rather be distinguished into accidentally homophonous passive and perfect(ive) participles? This book discusses the long-standing mystery of past participial (non-)identity on the basis of a broad range of synchronic data from Germanic and Romance, eventually focussing on German and English as these draw the most relevant distinctions (e.g. auxiliary alternation, a passive auxiliary that is not BE). Together with some contrastive insights from Slavic as well as the diachrony of passive and perfect periphrases, this clearly points to an identity-view. The novel approach that is laid out suggests that past participles conflate diathetic and aspectual properties. The former cause the suppression of an external argument, whereas the latter impose event-structure sensitive perfectivity, which only induces the completion of a situation if the underlying eventuality denotes a simple change of state. An approach along these lines sheds light on the intricate properties of past participles and the auxiliaries they occur with, the determinants of auxiliary selection as well as the interplay of argument and event structure.