Abstract
In this paper, I discuss the use of habere + perfect participle in Latin. Four different types of lexical habere + pp constructions are identified, what I call the adnominal construction, the resultative construction, the affectee type and the ‘consider’ type. In addition, we find examples that can only be analysed as the periphrastic perfect already in archaic Latin. The periphrastic perfect, I argue, originated through reanalysis of the resultative construction, but perception/cognition verbs cannot have been essential for this reanalysis, contrary to common belief.
References
Abney, S. P.1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. [Cambridge, MA]: Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Benveniste, É.1962. Hittite et indo-européen: études comparatives. Paris: Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve.Search in Google Scholar
Boley, J.1984. The Hittite hark-construction (Vol. 44). Innsbruck: Die Universität.Search in Google Scholar
Bourciez, É., & Bourciez, J.1967. Elements de linguistique romane. Paris: Klincksieck.Search in Google Scholar
Brunot, F., & Bruneau, C.1969. Précis de grammaire historique de la langue française. Paris: Masson.Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, J., Perkins, R., & Pagliuca, W.1994. The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cennamo, M.2008. The rise and development of analytic perfects in Italo-Romance. In E.Thórhallur (Ed.), Grammatical change and linguistic theory: the Rosendal papers (pp. 115–142). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.113.05cenSearch in Google Scholar
Chantraine, P.1927. Histoire du parfait grec (Vol. 21). Paris: Champion.Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, B.1976. Aspect: an introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö.1985. Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
de Acosta, D.2011. Rethinking the genesis of the Romance periphrastic perfect. Diachronica, 28(2), 143–185.Search in Google Scholar
Drinka, B.. 2007. The development of the HAVE perfect: Mutual influences of Greek and Latin. In Aranovich, Raul (Ed.), Split auxiliary systems: a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 101–122). Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.69.06driSearch in Google Scholar
Fleischman, S.1983. From pragmatics to grammar: diachronic reflections on complex pasts and futures in Romance. Lingua, 60, 183–214.Search in Google Scholar
Fruyt, M.2011. Grammaticalization in Latin. In P.Baldi & P.Cuzzolin (Eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax 4: complex sentences, grammaticalization, typology (Vol. Vol. 4, pp. 661–864). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110253412.661Search in Google Scholar
Happ, H.1967. Die lateinische Umgangssprache und die Kunstsprache des Plautus. Glotta, 45(1/2), 60–104. doi:10.2307/40266011Search in Google Scholar
Harre, C. E.1991. Tener + past participle: a case study in linguistic description. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Harris, A. C., & Campbell, L.1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620553Search in Google Scholar
Harris, M.1982. The ‘past simple’ and ‘present perfect’ in Romance. In N.Vincent & M.Harris (Eds.), Studies in the Romance verb: essays offered to Joe Cremona on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 42–70). London: Croom Helm.Search in Google Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T.2006. The changing languages of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199297337.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hofmann, J. B., & Szantyr, A.1972. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik (2. ed. Vol. 2). München: C. H. Beck.Search in Google Scholar
La Fauci, N.1988. Oggetti e soggetti nella fomazione della morfosintassi romanza. Pisa: Giardini.Search in Google Scholar
Loporcaro, M.1995. Grammaticalizzazione delle peripfrasi verbali perfettive romanze e accordo del participio passato. Archivio glottologico italiano, 80(1-2), 144–167.Search in Google Scholar
Meyer-Lübke, W.1974. Grammaire des langues romanes (A. Doutrepont & G. Doutrepont, Trans. Vol. III, Syntaxe). Genève: Slatkine reprints.Search in Google Scholar
Nuti, A.2005. A few remarks on the habeo + object + passive perfect participle construction in Archaic Latin, with special reference to lexical semantics and the reanalysis process. In G.Calboli (Ed.), Papers on grammar IX.1, Latina lingua! Proceedings of the twelfth international colloquium on Latin linguistics (Bologna, 9–14 June 2003) (pp. 392–404). Roma: Herder.10.1515/joll.2005.9.1.393Search in Google Scholar
Olbertz, H.1998. Verbal periphrases in a functional grammar of Spanish. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110820881Search in Google Scholar
Pinkster, H.1987. The strategy and chronology of the development of future and perfect tense auxiliaries in Latin. In M.Harris & P.Ramat (Eds.), The historical development of auxiliaries (pp. 193–223). Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Pulgram, E.1978. Latin-Romance habere: Double function and lexical split. Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 94, 1–8.Search in Google Scholar
Ramat, P.1982. Ein Beispiel von ‘Reanalysis’, typologisch betrachtet Folia Linguistica (Vol. 16, pp. 365).10.1515/flin.1982.16.1-4.365Search in Google Scholar
Ramat, P.1984. Linguistica tipologica. Bologna: Mulino.Search in Google Scholar
Ramat, P.1987. Introductory paper. In M.Harris & P.Ramat (Eds.), Historical development of auxiliaries (pp. 3–19). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Rohlfs, G.1969. Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti (Vol. 3, Sintassi e formazione delle parole). Torino: Einaudi.Search in Google Scholar
Salvi, G.1987. Syntactic restructuring in the evolution of Romance auxiliaries. In M.Harris & P.Ramat (Eds.), Historical development of auxiliaries (pp. 225–236). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Schwarze, C.2001. Representation and variation: on the development of Romance auxiliary syntax. In M.Butt & T. H.King (Eds.), Time over matter: diachronic perspectives on morphosyntax (pp. 143–172). Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Seifert, E.1930. “Haber” y “tener” como expresiones de la posesión en español. Revista de filología española, 17(3-4), 233-276, 345-389.Search in Google Scholar
Thielmann, P.1885. Habere mit dem Partizip Perfekt Passiv. Archiv für lateinische Lexicographie und Grammatik, 2, 372-423; 509–549.Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B.2005. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Vincent, N.1982. The developent of the auxiliaries habere and esse in Romance. In N.Vincent & M.Harris (Eds.), Studies in the Romance verb: essays offered to Joe Cremona on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 71–96). London: Croom Helm.Search in Google Scholar
Woytek, E.1970. Sprachliche Studien zur Satura Menippea Varros. Wien.Search in Google Scholar
©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- To conquer a papyrus as a castle through an adverb: Linguistic traces of Caecilius Statius in a burnt papyrus from Herculanum and Horace
- How to say ‘please’ in post-Classical Latin: Fronto and the importance of archaism
- Habere + pp and the Origin of the Periphrastic Perfect
- The Grammaticalization of Latin nē + Subjunctive Constructions
- Computational valency lexica for Latin and Greek in use: a case study of syntactic ambiguity
- Socrates Playing with Meletus: the Pedigree, Birth, and Afterlife of a Chreia
- Book Review
- McGillivray, Barbara: Methods in Latin Computational Linguistics
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- To conquer a papyrus as a castle through an adverb: Linguistic traces of Caecilius Statius in a burnt papyrus from Herculanum and Horace
- How to say ‘please’ in post-Classical Latin: Fronto and the importance of archaism
- Habere + pp and the Origin of the Periphrastic Perfect
- The Grammaticalization of Latin nē + Subjunctive Constructions
- Computational valency lexica for Latin and Greek in use: a case study of syntactic ambiguity
- Socrates Playing with Meletus: the Pedigree, Birth, and Afterlife of a Chreia
- Book Review
- McGillivray, Barbara: Methods in Latin Computational Linguistics