Morphology

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 1–40

The intra-paradigmatic distribution of the infix -I/ESC- from Latin to Modern Romance: morphomic patterning and beyond

Original Paper
  • 112 Downloads

Abstract

The present study deals with the spectrum of intra-paradigmatic configurations that the Latin verbal infix -I/ESC- acquired in modern Romance standard and dialectal varieties. It proposes an in-depth analysis, both of the so-called ‘patterned’ and ‘non-patterned’ Romance infix-distributions: patterned Romance infix-distributions find response in parallel and recurrent stem-allomorphic conjugational alternations; non-patterned infix-distributions are morphologically unique and do not have allomorphic distributional counterparts in other, non-infixed, verbs. While patterned infix-distributions benefit from the ‘morphomic’ approach (cf. Aronoff 1994, Maiden 2003), it will be shown that ‘non-patterned’ infix-distributions can be predicted only by taking into account several (co-)conditioning forces, e.g. stress, thematicity and modality.

Keywords

Romance contrastive linguistics Dialectology Verbal morphology Infix -I/ESC- Inflectional versus lexical infix Allomorphy Conjugation-patterns 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, A. S. (1980). The development of the inchoative suffix in Latin and Romance (Ph.D. Thesis, University of California). Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International.Google Scholar
  2. Allen A.S. (1995) Regrammaticalization and degrammaticalization of the inchoative suffix. In: Andersen H. (eds) Historical Linguistics 1993. Benjamins, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson S. (2008) Phonologically conditioned allomorphy in the morphology of Surmiran (Rumantsch). Word Structure 1: 109–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anglade J. (1921) Grammaire de l’ancien provençal. Klincksieck, ParisGoogle Scholar
  5. Aronoff M. (1994) Morphology by Itself. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Aski J. (1995) Verbal suppletion: an analysis of Italian, French and Spanish to go. Linguistics 33: 403–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berrettoni P. (1971) Considerazioni sui verbi latini in -scō. Studi e saggi linguistici 11: 89–169Google Scholar
  8. Blaylock C. (1975) The Romance development of the Latin verbal augment -sk-. Romance Philology 28: 434–44Google Scholar
  9. Bottiglioni G. (1933–1942) Atlante linguistic etnografico italiano della Corsica. L’Italia dialettale, PisaGoogle Scholar
  10. Brero C., Bertodatti R. (1988) Grammatica piemontese. Piemont/Europa, TurinGoogle Scholar
  11. Cancider L., Menardi E., Menardi R. (2003) Grammatica ampezzana. Regole d’Ampezzo, Cortina d’AmpezzoGoogle Scholar
  12. Chabaneau C. (1876) Grammaire limousine. Maisonneuve et Cie, ParisGoogle Scholar
  13. Delatte L., Evrard E., Govaerts S. (1981) Dictionnaire fréquentiel et index inverse de la langue latine. Université de Liège, L.A.S.L.A., LiègeGoogle Scholar
  14. Diez, F. (1973). Grammaire des langues romanes (reissue of the original version of 1874–1876). Genève: Slatkine Reprints/Marseille Laffitte.Google Scholar
  15. Di Fabio E.G. (1990) The morphology of the verbal infix /-isk-/ in Italian and in Romance (Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University). University Microfilms International, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  16. Dressler W.U., Thornton A.M. (1991) Doppie basi e binarismo nella morfologia italiana. Rivista di linguistica 3(1): 3–17Google Scholar
  17. Duarte i Montserrat C., Alsina i Keith, A. (1986). Gramàtica històrica del català. Barcelona: Curial.Google Scholar
  18. Duraffour, A. (1932). Description morphologique avec note syntaxique du parler franco-provençal de Vaux (Ain) en 1919–1931. Grenoble: (chez l’auteur).Google Scholar
  19. Dworkin S.N. (1985) From -ir to -ecer in Spanish: the loss of OSp. de-adjectival -ir verbs. Hispanic Review 53(3): 295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fouché P. (1967) Le verbe français. Etude morphologique. Klincksieck, ParisGoogle Scholar
  21. Frei H. (1929) La grammaire des fautes. Geuthner, ParisGoogle Scholar
  22. Gilliéron J. (1880) Le patois de la commune de Vionnaz (Bas-Valais). F. Vieweg, ParisGoogle Scholar
  23. Grandgent, C. H. (1962)3 An Introduction to vulgar Latin. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
  24. Gregory, S. (1994). La traduction en prose française du 12 e siècle des Sermones in Cantica de Saint Bernard. Rodopi, Amsterdam/AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  25. Haiman J., Benincà P. (1992) The Rhaeto-Romance languages. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Hall R.A. (1983) Proto-Romance morphology. Benjamins, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  27. Haverling G. (2000) On scō-verbs, prefixes and semantic functions. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, GothenburgGoogle Scholar
  28. Iliescu M. (1972) Le frioulan à partir des dialectes parlés en Roumanie. Mouton, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  29. Iliescu M. (1990) Les suffixes d’élargissement verbaux. In: Calboli G. (eds) Latin vulgaire – latin tardif II. Niemeyer, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  30. Iliescu M., Mourin L. (1991) Typologie de la morphologie verbale romane. Amoe, InnsbruckGoogle Scholar
  31. Jaberg K. (1906) Über die assoziativen Erscheinungen in der Verbalflexion einer südostfranzösischen Dialektgruppe. Sauerländer, AarauGoogle Scholar
  32. Jaquenod F. (1931) Essai sur le verbe dans le patois de Sottens. Lausanne, PayotGoogle Scholar
  33. Jaubert H.F. (1856–1858) Glossaire du Centre de la France. Chaix et Cie., ParisGoogle Scholar
  34. Keller M. (1992) Les verbes latins à infectum en -sc-. Étude morphologique à partir des formations attestées dès l’époque préclassique. Latomus, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  35. Lanly A. (1977) Morphologie historique des verbes français. Bordas, ParisGoogle Scholar
  36. Leumann, M. (1963)5. Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre. München: C.H. Beck’sche.Google Scholar
  37. Lloyd P.M. (1987) From Latin to Spanish. American Philosophical Society, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  38. Maiden M. (1992) Irregularity as a determinant of morphological change. Journal of Linguistics 28: 285–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maiden M. (2001) A strange affinity: perfecto y tiempos afines. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 58: 441–64Google Scholar
  40. Maiden M. (2003) Verb augments and meaninglessness in Early Romance morphology. Studi di Grammatica Italiana 22: 1–61Google Scholar
  41. Maiden M. (2004a) When lexemes become allomorphs. On the genesis of suppetion. Folia Linguistica 38(3–4): 227–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maiden M. (2004b) Into the past. Morphological change in the dying years of Dalmatian. Diachronica 21: 85–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maiden, M. (2005a). La ridistribuzione paradigmatica degli “aumenti” verbali nelle lingue romanze. In: S. Kiss, L. Mondin, G. Salvi, Latin et langues romanes. Etudes de linguistique offertes à József Herman à l’occasion de son 80 ème anniversaire. Tübingen, NiemeyerGoogle Scholar
  44. Maiden M. (2005b) Morphological autonomy and diachrony. In: Booji G., Marle J. (eds) Yearbook of Morphology 2004. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 137–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Malkiel Y. (1958) Los interfijos hispánicos: problema de lingüística histórica y estrutural. In: Catalan D. (eds) Homenaje a André Martinet: Estructuralismo e Historia (Vol. II). Universidad de La Laguna, TenerifeGoogle Scholar
  46. Malkiel Y. (1973–1974) New problems in Romance interfixation. Romance Philology 27: 204–255Google Scholar
  47. Masarei, S. (2005). Dizionar fodom—talián—todësch. Colle Santa Lucia: Istitut Cultural Ladin “Cesa de Jan”—SPELL.Google Scholar
  48. Mascaró J. (1987) Morfologia. Enciclopèdia Catalana, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  49. Matthews, P. (1981). Present stem alternations in Italian. In Logos Semantikos, studia linguistica in honorem Eugeniu Coseriu (Vol. IV). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  50. Maurer Th. H. Jr. (1951) The Romance conjugation in -ēsco (-Īsco) -Īre: Its origin in Vulgar Latin. Language 27(2): 136–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Menéndez Pidal R. (1944) Cantar de Mio Cid: texto, gramática y vocabulario. Espasa-Calpe, MadridGoogle Scholar
  52. Meul C. (2009) L’evoluzione dell’infisso latino -idi- nella morfologia verbale romanza: status quaestionis e approfondimenti in base ad una ricerca condotta sul ladino della Val Badia. Rivista di linguistica 20(2): 34Google Scholar
  53. Meyer-Lübke, W. (1974). Grammaire des langues romanes (translation and reissue of the German version of 1890–1902). Genève: Slatkine Reprints/Marseille: Laffitte.Google Scholar
  54. Mussafia, A. (1883). Zur Präsensbildung im Romanischen. Wien: Kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  55. Nelson D. (1972) The domain of Old Spanish -er and -ir verbs: a clue to the provenience of the Alexandre. Romance Philology 26(2): 265–305Google Scholar
  56. Nicoli F. (1983) Grammatica milanese. Busto Arsizio, BramanteGoogle Scholar
  57. Nisard C. (1872) Etude sur le langage populaire ou patois de Paris et de sa banlieue. Librairie A. Franck, ParisGoogle Scholar
  58. Pellegrini A. (1974) Grammatica ladino—fodoma con un’appendice sull’idioma. Ferrari-Auer, BolzanoGoogle Scholar
  59. Pirrelli, V. (2000). Paradigmi in morfologia. Un approccio interdisciplinare alla flessione verbale dell’italiano. Pisa-Rome: Istituti editoriali e poligrafici internazionali.Google Scholar
  60. Pirrelli V., Battista M. (2000) The paradigmatic dimension of stem allomorphy in Italian verb inflection. Rivista di linguistica 12(2): 307–380Google Scholar
  61. Pope M.K. (1973)5 From Latin to Modern French with especial consideration of Anglo-Norman. Manchester University Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  62. Risop, A. (1891). Studien zur Geschichte der Französischen Konjugation auf -ir. Halle a.S.: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  63. Ronjat J. (1937) Grammaire istorique des parlers provençaux modernes. Société des langues romanes, MontpellierGoogle Scholar
  64. Rohlfs G. (1966–1969) Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Einaudi, TorinoGoogle Scholar
  65. Rohlfs G. (1970) Le gascon: études de philologie pyrénéenne (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 85). Niemeyer, Tübingen Google Scholar
  66. Rosén H. (2000) Preclassical and Classical Latin precursors of verb-stem suppletion. Indogermanische Forschungen 105: 270–283Google Scholar
  67. Rossini G. (1975) Capitoli di morfologia e sintassi del dialetto cremonese. La Nuova Italia, FirenzeGoogle Scholar
  68. Rudes B. (1980) The functional development of the verbal suffix +esc+ in Romance. In: Fisiak J. (eds) Historical morphology. Mouton, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  69. Tekavčić P. (1972) Grammatica storica dell’italiano. il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  70. Thornton A.M. (2005) Morfologia. Carocci, RomaGoogle Scholar
  71. Thornton A.M. (2007) Is there a partition in the present indicative of Italian regular verbs? Annali Online di Ferrara – Lettere 2: 43–61Google Scholar
  72. Väänänen V. (1967)2 Introduction au latin vulgaire. Klincksieck, ParisGoogle Scholar
  73. Veselinova L.N. (2007) Suppletion in verb paradigms. Benjamins, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  74. Wagner M.L. (1952) Historische Wortbildungslehre des Sardischen (Romanica Helvetica 39). Francke, BernGoogle Scholar
  75. Wilkinson H.E. (1967) The Latinity of Ibero-Romance. Ronshu 8: 1–34Google Scholar
  76. Wolf H.J. (1998) Du latin aux langues romanes, le sort de l’infixe inchoatif -sc- et la conjugaison des verbes en -scere. Travaux de linguistique et de philologie 36: 441–54Google Scholar
  77. Zahner G. (1989) Il dialetto della Val San Giacomo (Valle Spluga). Università Catolica, MilanGoogle Scholar
  78. Zamboni A. (1980) Un problema di morfologia romanza: l’ampliamento verbale in -idio, -izo. Quaderni Patavini di Linguistica 2: 171–187Google Scholar
  79. Zamboni A. (1982) La morfologia verbale latina in -sc- e la sua evoluzione romanza: appunti per una nuova via esplicativa. Quaderni Patavini di Linguistica 3: 87–138Google Scholar
  80. Zamboni A. (1983) Note aggiuntive alla questione dei verbi in -isco. Studi di grammatica italiana 12: 231–237Google Scholar
  81. Zerdin J. (2002) The iterative-intensives in -σkov. In: Hartmann J., Willi A. (eds) Oxford University working papers in linguistics, philology and phonetics (Vol. 7). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FWO-VlaanderenKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations