Home The complementary distribution between nē and nōn revisited: a semantic approach to wish and result clauses
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The complementary distribution between and nōn revisited: a semantic approach to wish and result clauses

  • Anne-Li Demonie EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 20, 2022
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This paper revisits the well-established complementary distribution between the sentential negators in Classical Latin, and nōn. It will be shown that in wish and result clauses these negators alternate in a seemingly free manner, which would violate the complementary distribution in its strictest sense. However, this paper argues that the negators can be clearly differentiated semantically, and that there is as such no overlap between their functions. Building on Mellet (1992. L’alternance ne/non en latin Classique. L’Information Grammaticale 55. 28–32), the alternation in wish and result clauses is discussed, and it is demonstrated that the choice of negator depends on the presence of the subjunctive mood and the presence or absence of epistemic certainty: is the negator which is incompatible with epistemic certainty, whereas nōn is the negator which is compatible with it.


Corresponding author: Anne-Li Demonie, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium, E-mail:

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments, and also my two supervisors, Karen De Clercq and Giuseppe Magistro, for their support, guidance and valuable comments on both my BA dissertation and earlier drafts of this paper, which is an adaptation of my dissertation.

References

Allen, Joseph H. & James B. Greenough. 1903. Allen and Greenough’s new Latin grammar. Boston: Ginn & Company.Search in Google Scholar

Álvarez Huerta, Olga. 2012. Latín ne y -ne: ¿una o dos partículas? Linguarum Varietas 1. 91–97.Search in Google Scholar

Cabrillana, Concepción. 2011. Purpose clauses and result clauses. In Philip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax, 4: Complex sentences, gramaticalization, typology, 19–92. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110253412.19Search in Google Scholar

Calboli, Gualtiero. 2012. Die Modaladverbien. Lustrum 54(1). 143–196. https://doi.org/10.13109/lutr.2012.54.1.7.Search in Google Scholar

Clackson, James. 2011. A companion to the Latin language. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444343397Search in Google Scholar

Coates, Jennifer. 1995. The expression of root and epistemic possibility in English. In Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds.), Modality in grammar and discourse, 55–66. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.32.04coaSearch in Google Scholar

Crystal, David. 2008. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics, 6th edn. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9781444302776Search in Google Scholar

Danckaert, Lieven. 2012. Latin embedded clauses: The left periphery. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.184Search in Google Scholar

De Haan, Ferdinand. 1997. The interaction of modality and negation: A typological study. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Devine, Andrew M. & Laurence D. Stephens. 2013. Semantics for Latin: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Foster, Reginald T. & Daniel P. McCarthy. 2016. Ossa Latinitatis Sola Ad Mentem Reginaldi Rationemque: The mere bones of Latin according to the thought and system of Reginald. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.10.2307/j.ctt1g69z8rSearch in Google Scholar

Fruyt, Michèle. 2008. Négation et Grammaticalisation en Latin. Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Ernout de la Lingua Latina 1. 1–44.Search in Google Scholar

Gianollo, Chiara. 2017. Focus-sensitive negation in Latin. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 16. 51–77. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.211.Search in Google Scholar

Gildersleeve, Basil L. & Gonzalez Lodge. 2013. Gildersleeve’s Latin grammar. North Chelmsford, MA: Courier Corporation.Search in Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 1994. Irrealis and the subjunctive. Studies in Language 18(2). 265–337.10.1075/sl.18.2.02givSearch in Google Scholar

Hamp, Eric P. 1982. Latin ut/nē and ut (… nōn). Glotta 60(1/2). 115–120.Search in Google Scholar

Hofmann, Johann B., Manu Leumann & Anton Szantyr. 1972. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Munchen: C.H. Becksche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Search in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 2001. A natural history of negation. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. & Heinrich Wansing. 2020. Negation. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/negation/ (accessed 16 May 2020).10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0032Search in Google Scholar

Kühner, Raphael & Carl Stegmann. 1966. Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache/2. Bd. Teil 2, Satzlehre. Hannover: Hahn.Search in Google Scholar

Lakey, Holly A. 2015. The grammaticalization of Latin nē + subjunctive constructions. Journal of Latin Linguistics 14(1). 65–100. https://doi.org/10.1515/joll-2015-0004.Search in Google Scholar

Library of Latin texts: Series A. 2000. Centre Traditio Litterarum Occidentalium (CETEDOC) & Brepols (Firm). Turnhout: Brepols.Search in Google Scholar

Loeb Classical Library . 2020. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Magni, Elisabetta. 2010. Mood and modality. In Philip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax 2, 193–275. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110215458.193Search in Google Scholar

Mellet, Sylvie. 1992. L’alternance ne/non en latin Classique. L’Information Grammaticale 55. 28–32. https://doi.org/10.3406/igram.1992.3183.Search in Google Scholar

Mesa Sanz, Juan-Francisco. 1998. Estudio Pragmático de utinam + subjuntivo. In Benjamin G. Hernández (ed.), Estudios de lingüística latina: actas del IX Coloquio Internacional de Lingüística Latina, 541–554. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197631Search in Google Scholar

Núñez, Salvador. 1998. Les adverbes modalisateurs profecto et certe: Remarques sur la subjectivité épistémique en Latin. In Michèle Fruyt & Claude Moussy (eds.), Les Modalités en Latin: Colloque du Centre Alfred Ernout, Université de Paris IV, 1998, 187–308. Paris: Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne.Search in Google Scholar

Palmer, Frank R. 2001. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139167178Search in Google Scholar

Pinkster, Harm. 1986. Three notes on the Latin Subjunctive. Informatique et Statistique Dans Les Sciences Humaines 22. 147–156.Search in Google Scholar

Pinkster, Harm. 2015. The Oxford Latin syntax: The simple clause. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283613.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Pinkster, Harm. 2018. Woordenboek Latijn/Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Saeed, John I. 2015. Semantics, 4th edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Sloman, Arthur. 1906. A grammar of Classical Latin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Touratier, Christian. 1994. Syntaxe Latine. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Search in Google Scholar

Utinam. n.d. In Lewis and Short dictionary. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=utinam&la=la#lexicon (accessed 16 May 2020).Search in Google Scholar

Wackernagel, Jacob. 2009. Jacob Wackernagel lectures on syntax: With a special reference to Greek, Latin and Germanic. David Langslow (trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Woodcock, Eric C. 1959. A new Latin syntax. Wauconda, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Zumpt, Karl G. 1838. Latin syntax: Chiefly from the German of C. G. Zumpt. Boston: C.C. Little and J. Brown.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2022-01-20
Published in Print: 2021-10-26

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 25.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/joll-2021-2006/html
Scroll to top button