Latin Case System: Towards a Motivated Paradigmatic Structure

Authors

  • Elena V. Zheltova St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9585-7952
  • Alexander Ju. Zheltov St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation; Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera), 3, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2020.203

Abstract

The article attempts, firstly, to critically analyze the traditional order of cases in Latin, secondly, to discover an internal mechanism that brings the elements of a paradigm together, and thirdly, to present a new model of the nominal and pronominal case paradigms in Latin. The authors develop the idea that the crucial role in structuring a case paradigm belongs to morphemic syncretism. The syncretism is treated as a systemic phenomenon of morpheme neutralization rather than a result of phonetic reduction. In the paradigm built on this principle, the cases marked with the same endings necessarily take adjacent positions. There is a certain correlation between the morphemic syncretism and the semantics of cases extensively exemplified in the Latin literature. Taking this as reference point, the authors establish a formally motivated paradigmatic order of cases and single out a set of semantic features that shape the case paradigm. This method enables authors to find the non-contradictory paradigmatic positions for both the core and the “marginal” cases (vocative and locative). Applied to the pronominal cases, however, it reveals the significant discrepancy between the nominal and pronominal paradigms concerning two cases — nominative and genitive. The pronominal nominative’s special status is determined by its pragmatic rather than syntactic functions, which is typical for pro-drop languages. The genitive case appears in three different forms that originate from the possessive pronouns and correspond to the three basic functions of the genitive — possessive, objective, and partitive ones. Such transparadigmatic syncretism brings together the paradigms of personal and possessive pronouns, which are related by nature. The approach suggested in this study makes it possible to present in a new way the nominal and pronominal case paradigms, to demonstrate in what points they differ from each other, and to highlight some functional and semantic features of the particular cases.

Keywords:

Latin, case paradigm, nominal and pronominal cases, syncretism, morphemic neutralizations, paradigmatic oppositions

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Arkadiev P. M. Cases in the World Languages, in: E. V. Muravchenko, A. Ch. Piperski, O. Ju. Shemanaeva (eds). Linguistics for Everybody. Summer Linguistic Schools of 2007 and 2008. Moscow, 2009, 59–71. (In Russian)

Arnold T. K. et al. “Bradley’s Arnold” Latin Prose Composition. New York, Aristide D. Caratzas, 1997.

Baldi Ph. The Foundations of Latin. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1999.

Baerman M. Case Syncretism, in: A. L. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Case. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, 219–230.

Barðdal J., Kulikov L. Case in Decline, in: A. L. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Case. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, 470–478.

Barwick K. Rec. E. Sittig, Das Alter der Anordnung unserer Kasus und der Ursprung ihrer Bezeichnung als ‘Fälle’. Stuttgart, Kohlhammer, 1931. Gnomon 1933, 9 (11), 587–594.

Blake B. J. Case. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 22001.

Blake B. J. History of the Research on Case, in: A. L. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Case. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, 13–26.

Calboli G. The Development of Latin (Cases and Infinitive), in: H. Pinkster (ed.) Latin Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 1983, 41–58.

Carvalho P. Le système des cas latins, in: H. Pinkster (ed.) Latin linguistics and linguistic theory. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 1983, 59–71.

Cennamo M. Impersonal Constructions and Accusative Subjects in Late Latin, in: A. Malchukov, A. Siewerska (eds). Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 2011, 169–189.

Coleman R. The assessment of paradigm stability: Some Indo-European case studies, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 197–210.

Comrie B. Form and function in identifying cases, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 41–56.

McCreight K., Chvany C. V. Geometric representation of paradigms in a modular theory of grammar, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 91–112.

Daniel M., Spencer, A. The Vocative — An Outlier Case, in: A. L. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Case. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008, 626–634.

Gamkrelidze T. V., Ivanov Vyach. Vs. Indoeuropean Language and People. Vol. 1. Tbilisi, Izdatel’stvo Tbilisskogo Universiteta, 1984. (In Russian)

Gvozdanovic J. Syncretism and the paradigmatic patterning of grammatical meaning, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 135–160.

Hofmann J. B., Szantyr A. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Teil 2. Bd. 2. München, C. H. Beck Verlag, 1972.

Ivanov V’ach. Vs. The Linguistic Path of Roman Jakobson, in: Roman Jakobson. Selected works. Mosсow, 1985, 5–29. (In Russian)

Jakobson R. O. To the General Case Study, in: Roman Jakobson. Selected works. Moscow, 1985a, 176–197. (In Russian)

Jakobson R. O. Morphological Observations on Slavic Declension, in: Roman Jakobson. Selected works. Moscow, 1985b, 176–197. (In Russian)

Kazansky N. N. On the Reconstruction of the PIE Category of Case, in: A. V. Desnitskaia (ed.) Current Issues of Comparative Linguistics . Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1989, 115–130. (In Russian)

Kazansky N. N. Rec. Willi 2018. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 2019, 4, 137–154. (In Russian)

Kennedy B. H. The Shorter Latin Primer. Revised by J. Mountford. London, Longman, 71972.

Luraghi S. Patterns of Case Syncretism in Indo-European Languages, in: A. G. Ramat, O. Carruba, G. Bernini (eds). Papers from the 7th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam — Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1987, 355–372.

Luraghi S. Paradigm size, possible syncretism, and the use of adpositions with cases in flective languages, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 57–74.

Luraghi S. Syncretism and Classification of Semantic Roles. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 2001, 54 (1), 35–51.

Pertsov N. V. Invariants in Russian Inflection. Moscow, Iazyki russkoi kul’tury Publ., 2001. (In Russian)

Plank F. Rasmus Rask‘s dilemma, in: F. Plank (ed.) Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection. Berlin — New York, Mouton de Gruyter, 1991, 161–196.

Pinkster H. Oxford Latin Syntax. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015.

Pozdniakov K. I. Micro-Morphology or Morphology of a Paradigm? Iazyk i rechevaia deiatel’nost’ 2003, 5, 22–58. (In Russian)

Pozdniakov K. I. About Nature and Functions of Non-Morphemic Signs. Voprosy Iazykoznaniia 2009, 6, 35–64. (In Russian)

Rovai F. Between Feminine Singular and Neuter Plural: Re-analysis Patterns. Transactions of the Philological Society 2012, 110 (1), 94–121.

Royal W. A. Treatise on Latin Cases and Analysis. New York, Sheldon and Company; Wake Forest, North Carolina, J. S. Purifoy, 1860.

de Saussure F. Works on Linguistics, Moscow, Progress Publ., 1977. (In Russian)

Serbat G. Cas et fonctions. Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1981a.

Serbat G. Le système des cas est-il systèmatique? Revue des Etudes Latines 1981b, 59, 298–317.

Serbat G. Le syncrétisme des cas: Quelques réflexions, in: G. Calboli (ed.) Subordination and Other Topics in Latin. Proceedings of the Third Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Bologna, 1–5 April 1985. Amsterdam — Philadelphia, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1989, 273–288.

Sihler A. L. New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. New York, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995.

van Schooneveld C. H. Jakobson’s Case System and Syntax, in: R. D. Brecht, J. S. Levine (eds). Case in Slavic. Columbus, OH, Slavica Publishers, 1986, 373–85.

Sobolevsky S. I. Latin Grammar. St. Petersburg, Aleteia Publ., 1998. (In Russian)

Tronsky I. M. Historical Latin Grammar. Сommon Indoeuropean Language State. Moscow, Indrik Publ., 22001. (In Russian)

Uhlig G. (ed.) Grammatici Graeci. Vol. 1. Leipzig, Teubner, 1883 (repr. 1965).

Vairel H. The Position of the Vocative in the Latin Case System. The American Journal of Philology 1981, 102 (4), 438–447.

Wheelock’s Latin. s. a. Revised by R. A. LaFleur. 6th ed. Harper Resource.

Willi A. Origins of the Greek verb. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018.

Woodcock E. C. A New Latin Syntax. Bristol Classical Press, 1959.

Zheltov A. Ju., Zheltova E. V. Why the language saves on the case forms, or about the order of cases in Latin. Indoeuropean Linguistics and Classical Philology 2020, 24, 1040–1069. (In Russian)

Downloads

Published

2021-02-21

How to Cite

Zheltova, E. V. ., & Zheltov, A. J. . (2021). Latin Case System: Towards a Motivated Paradigmatic Structure. Philologia Classica, 15(2), 208–229. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2020.203

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2020)

Section

Orbis Romanus

License

Articles of "Philologia Classica" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.