Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:52:18.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some problems for a case grammar of Latin and early Romance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Martin Harris
Martin Harris
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Languages, University of Solford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The present paper will assume, for the purposes of argument at least, the essential validity of the claims made on behalf of Case Grammar, in particular that ‘the case notions comprise a set of universal … concepts which identify certain types of judgements human beings are capable of making about the events that are going on around them, judgements about such matters as who did it, who it happened to, and what got changed’ (Fillmore, 1968: 24). We shall investigate in some detail the practicability of Fillmore's statement that ‘we should take the “case uses” as basic and regard the observable “case forms” as derivable from them by the rules of the grammar’ (Fillmore, 1971: 36), by attempting to establish, informally, some of the rules that would be needed to generate certain correct surface forms in Classical and Vulgar Latin and, in so doing, we shall examine, taking into account both the traditional distinction between ‘grammatical’ and ‘concrete’ cases (in particular, as propounded by Kurylowicz, 1964) and aspects of the localist hypothesis, most recently fully discussed by Anderson (1971), the extent to which the changes attested in Latin and early Romance are merely surface re-structurings, and to what extent they are more profound. Finally, certain implications for the theory itself, as at present formulated, are presented and briefly discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , September 1975 , pp. 183 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. M. (1971). The grammar of case: towards a localistic theory. (Cambridge studies in linguistics, 4) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. & Jones, C. (eds.) (1974). Historical linguistics: proceedings of the first international conference on historical linguistics. (North Holland linguistics series, 12a–b) Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. T. (eds.), Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971). Some problems for case grammar. In O'Brien, R. J. (ed.), Report of the twenty-second annual round table meeting on linguistics and language study. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Gildersleeve, B. L. & Lodge, G. (1968). Gildersleeve's Latin grammar. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Grevisse, M. (1964). Le bon usage. Gembloux: Duculot.Google Scholar
Harris, M. B. (1972). Problems of deep and surface structure, as reflected in a diachronic analysis of the French verbal system. FL 8. 267–281.Google Scholar
Hofmann, T. R. (1968). Underlying vs. superficial grammatical relations. Recherche sur la traduction automatique: IIème rapport semestriel. 35–55. Montréal: Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1968). Tense and mood in Indo-European syntax. FL 4. 30–57.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, J. (1964). The inflectional categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Palmer, L. R. (1954). The Latin language. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, D. M. (1971). Deep and surface constraints in syntax. (Transatlantic series in linguistics.) New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Woodcock, E. C. (1971). A new Latin syntax. London: Methuen.Google Scholar