Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:24:15.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The French Imperfect Subjunctive and Present Conditional in the Sixteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Newton S. Bement
Newton S. Bement*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. In order to place our subject in a proper setting, let us note what moods were distinguished by representative grammarians of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. The table below reproduces their terminology:

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , December 1932 , pp. 992 - 1011
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1932

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

1 The works referred to are the following:

  1. Palsg.: John Palsgrave, Lesclarcissement de la Langue Francoyse (London, 1530), reprinted by F. Génin, Collection des documents inédits sur l'histoire de France (Paris, 1852).

  2. Dub.: Jacques Dubois, In lingvam Gallicani Isagwge (Paris, 1531).

  3. DuG.: Giles Du Guez, An Introductorie for to lerne to rede, to pronounce and to speke French trewly (London, 1532, undated). Reprinted by Génin, op. cit.

  4. R. Est.: Robert Estienne, De Gallica verborum declinatione (Paris, 1540); Traicte de la Gramaire Francoise (Paris, 1569, completed 1558).

  5. Meig.: Louis Meigret, Le tretté de la Grammęre françoęze (Paris, 1550).

  6. Garn.: Jean Garnier, Institutio gallicae linguae (Geneva, 1558).

  7. Pil.: Jean Pillot, Gallicae linguae institutio (Paris, 1561, first edition, 1550).

  8. Ram.: Pierre de la Ramée, Gramere (Paris, 1562, unsigned); Grammaire (Paris, 1572).

  9. Mad.: Antonio Madio, Grammatica Italica et Gallica (translation from Scipio Lentulus of Naples), (Frankfort, 1590).

  10. Maup.: Charles Maupas, Grammaire et syntaxe françoise (Paris, 1625, 1st ed. Blois, 1607).

  11. Oud.: Antoine Oudin, Grammaire française rapportée au langage du temps (Paris, 1640, first edition, 1632).

2 The term potential appears but once, under the heading The Subjunctive or Conjunctive: The sayd conjunctyve hath two futures, the tone … The tother is borowed of the potenciall mode, and hath for his termynation, roy, rois, … (p. 935). The term potential was apparently well known.

3 Parisiis, apud Andream Wechelum, sub Pegaso, in vico Bellovaco; Anno Salutis, 1559, Cum privilegio Regis. (Unsigned) 45 pp. in-80.

4 Parisiis, Apud Andream Wechelum … 1559. 342 pp. in-80.

5 Accurately quoted, according to the edition Martini Hertzii, Lipsiae, A. mdccclv; i, 421.—The definition originates in Appollonius' Treatise on Syntax, Book, iii, chap. 13.

6 We have given a more complete account, in “Petrus Ramus and the Beginnings of Formal French Grammar,” The Romanic Review, xix, 4 (Oct.-Dec., 1928).

7 Dubois offers also, as the perfect and pluperfect optative, G'heusse hsu (habuissem), apparently having in mind: (1) that habuissem had a pluperfect sense, and became eusse in French; (2) that in Old French eusse had likewise been employed with pluperfect sense; and (3) that a compound form had supplanted the simple form in this latter function, the simple form being then used to express the imperfect sense.

8 Jules-César Scaliger, De Causis linguae Latinae libri tredecim. In Bibliopolio Commeliniano. (… pridie Nonas Februarias 1540). Reprint by the house of Commelin, 1609. p. 301.

9 Francisci Sanctii Brocencis in inclyta Salmaticensi Academia Primarij Rhetorices Graecque linguae Doctoris Minerva: seu de causis linguae Lalinae … Salmanticae, Apud Ioannem, & Andream Renaut, fratres, 1587. Lib. i, Cap. xiii.

10 Charles-Louis Livet, La Grammaire Française et les Grammairiens du XVIe Siècle (Paris, 1859), p. 235.

11 Before his time, syntax signified merely word ordering.

12 Methodis grammatices, Donato authore. Argentinae, apud J. Knoblouchium, 1522. 41 pp. in-80.

13 Our statements in this portion of this article, result largely from a study of frequency tables of mood usage, based on the works of representative authors.

Sources of examples cited:

  1. Gaut.: Gautier d'Arras, Erade; E. Löseth (Paris, 1890).

  2. Chr.: Chrétien de Troyes, Cligés; W. Foerster (Halle, 1921).

  3. Froiss.: Jean Froissart, Chroniques; K. de Lettenhove (Bruxelles, 1867).

  4. Comm.: Philippe de Commynes, Mémoires; J. Calmette (Paris, 1924).

  5. Marg.: Marguerite d'Angoulême, L'Heptaméren des Nouvelles; F. Dillaye, Alphonse Lemerre (Paris, 1879).

  6. Rab.: François Rabelais, Gargantua, Pantagruel; A. Lefranc (Paris, 1912, 1922).

  7. Desp.: Bonaventure Des Periers, Contes ou Nouvelles Récréations et joyeux devis, suivis du Cymbalum Mundi; P. L. Jacob, Garnier Frères (Paris, 1872).

  8. Calv.: Jean Calvin, Oeuvres Françoises; P. L. Jacob (Paris, 1842); Institution de la Religion Chrestienne; A. Lefranc (Paris, 1911).

  9. Fail.: Noël du Fail, Propos Rustiques; J. Boulenger (Paris, 1921); Contes et Discours d'Eutrapel; J. Assézat, Bib. Elzevirienne (Paris, 1874).

  10. Rons.: Pierre de Ronsard, Les Amours; P. Laumonier, S.T.F.M. (Paris, 1925); La Franciade; P. Blanchemain, Bib. Elz. (Paris, 1858).

  11. Paliss.: Bernard Palissy, Oeuvres Complètes; Paul-Antoine Cap (Paris, 1844).

  12. Amy.: Jacques Amyot, Pericles et Fabius Maximus; L. Clément, S.T.F.M. (Paris, 1906).

  13. Est.: Henri Estienne, La Précellence du langage François; E. Huguet (Paris, 1896).

  14. Mont.: Michel de Montaigne, Essais; P. Villey (Paris, 1922).

  15. Vair.: Guillaume du Vair, Actions et traictez oratoires; R. Radouant, S.T.F.M. (Paris, 1911).

  16. Malh.: François de Malherbe, Lettres à Peiresc, Oeuvres; M. L. Lalanne (Paris, 1862).

14 We have shown incidentally the extent to which the imperfect subjunctive is supplanted by the present conditional in the conditional sentence, in The Conditional Sentence from Commynes to Malherbe, Supplement to the Romanic Review (1931).

15 We refer to those in which we know, from our frequency tables, that the subjunctive is the rule.

16 Ferdinand Brunot, Précis de Grammaire Historique de la Langue Française, 3e éd., (Paris, 1894), p. 511. In this example there are three points to consider. (1) The “formula” of the conditional sentence would here require a future in the apodosis. (2) After interrogative sembler à quelqu'un, the subjunctive is the rule. (3) The present subjunctive, except with optative force, is not employed in the apodosis. A balanced conflict is evident.

17 We have taken up this point, together with some possible reasons for the displacement, in “The Subjunctive in Relative Clauses from Commynes to Malherbe,” PQ, x, 3 (July, 1931).

18 Concerning il est bon: In construction in which the subordinate clause appears as a predicate stating a fact, there are numerous introductory expressions which are employed to state opinions about that fact, that is, merely as an element of a declarative sentence. E.g., C'est fraude et trahison, que sans cause elle est notée de sedition et malefice. (and not soit) (Calv., R.C., VII). Otherwise: Il seroyt bon, dist Oisille, que ie vous disse ce que … (Marg., iii, 61).