Neophilologus

, Volume 91, Issue 1, pp 51–61 | Cite as

The Spanish Progressive Construction and its Latin Source

OriginalPaper
  • 71 Downloads

Abstract

This article analyzes the origins of the progressive construction: estar + -ndo. Traditional accounts suggest that this verbal structure, which is found in Spanish and other Romance languages, evolved directly from the Latin Ablative gerund. Data from historical texts, however, indicate that the Latin gerundive – an adjectival form phonologically and morphologically similar to the gerund – is the correct source of the progressive construction. Using a generative framework, this article argues that the gerundive was reanalyzed as a non-finite verb. Furthermore, this syntactic reanalysis was facilitated by the identical position of subjects and predicates in constructions containing a raising verb or an auxiliary verb.

References

  1. ADMYTE II. Archivo digital de manucritos y textos españoles. CDs 1, 2. Madrid: Micronet, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer B. (1993). The Coalescence of the Participle and the Gerund/Gerundive: An Integrated Change. in Aertsen H., Jeffers R. (Eds), Historical Linguistics 1989. John Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam, pp. 59–71Google Scholar
  3. Briscoe T. (2000). Grammatical Acquisition: Inductive Bias and Coevolution of Language and the Language Acquisition Device. Language 76.2:245–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buckingham H. (1989). On Triggers. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12.2:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CLCLT-5. The Library of Latin Texts. CDs 1, 2, 3. P. Tombeur Ed., Louvain: Brepols, 2002.Google Scholar
  6. Campbell L. (1999). Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Chomsky N., Lasnik H. (1993). The Theory of Principles and Parameters. in Jacobs J., von Stechow A., Sternefeld W., Vennemann T. (Eds), Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 506–569Google Scholar
  8. Clark R., Roberts I. (1993). A Computational Approach to Language Learnability and Language Change. Linguistic Inquiry 24.3:299–345Google Scholar
  9. Emonds J. (1978). The Verbal Complex V’ – V in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9.2:151–175Google Scholar
  10. Ernout A. (1953). Morphologie historique du latin. Klincksieck, ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. Faarlund J. (1990). Syntactic Change: Towards a Theory of Historical Syntax. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. Hale W., Buck C. (1966). A Latin Grammar. University Press of Alabama, BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  13. Jackendoff R. (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. The Electronic Texts and Concordances of the Prose Works of Alfonso X, el Sabio. CD 1. Kasten, L., J. Nitti et al., Eds. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1997.Google Scholar
  15. Langacker R. (1977). Syntactic Reanalysis. in Li C. (Eds), Mechanisms of Syntactic Change. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 57–139Google Scholar
  16. Lausberg, H. Lingüística Románica. 2 vols. Madrid: Gredos, 1966Google Scholar
  17. Lightfoot D. (1979). Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Lightfoot D. (1991). How to Set Parameters. MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Live D. (1973). The Take-Have Phrasal in English. Linguistics 95:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lloyd P. (1987). From Latin to Spanish. APS, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  21. Palmer L. (1988). The Latin Language. University of Oklahoma Press, TulsaGoogle Scholar
  22. Pedersen, H. Linguistic Science in the Nineteenth Century. J. Webster Spargo (trans.) Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931.Google Scholar
  23. Penny R. (1991). A History of the Spanish Language. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Pollock J.-Y. (1989). Verb Movement, Universal Grammar, and the Structure of IP. Linguistic inquiry 20.3:365–424Google Scholar
  25. Vester E. (1991). Reflections on the Gerund and Gerundive. In: Coleman R. (Eds), New studies in Latin linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 295–309Google Scholar
  26. Woodcock E. (1959). A New Latin Syntax. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Zagona K. (2002). The Syntax of Spanish. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Washington CollegeChestertownUSA

Personalised recommendations