Part 2 of Studies in Romance Linguistics in Honor of Roger Wright

Classification of the Romance Languages

Evolution of Motion-Based Periphrases as a New Criterion
Natalya I. Stolova

Abstract: Classical Latin had only one periphrastic construction with a motion verb. In contrast, its modern descendents have developed a wide range of such periphrases. The present article examines this typological shift and demonstrates that the grammaticalization of motion-based periphrastic constructions can serve as a criterion for the classification of the Romance languages. The study also highlights the importance of the diachronic dimension by illustrating that to achieve a valid classification we need to take into account not only the starting and the final points (i.e., Latin and the modern Romance varieties) but the intermediate stages as well. Keywords: classification, grammaticalization, motion verbs, periphrases, Romance languages

ne of the main research questions that has guided Roger Wrights scholarship has been the nature of the transition from Latin to the Romance languages. In this article, which serves as a tribute to his academic career, I would like to address one such aspect of this transition: the development of motion-based periphrases. My main goal is to demonstrate that the evolution of periphrastic constructions with motion verbs can serve as a criterion for the classification of the Romance languages. My second objective is to highlight the importance of the historical dimension by illustrating that to achieve a valid classification we need to take into account not only the starting and the final points (i.e., Latin and its modern descendents) but the intermediate stages as well. Copyright 2009 Heldref Publications
82 82

1 WHAT ARE MOTION-BASED PERIPHRASES? Motion-based periphrases are grammaticalized constructions that employ a motion verb as auxiliary. In the case of the Romance languages, such periphrases belong to one of the following formal categories: motion verb + past participle (e.g., Italian, Questo lavoro va fatto This job has to be done), motion verb + gerund (e.g., Portuguese, Anda lendo He is reading), motion verb + infinitive (e.g., French, Je vais lire ce texte demain I am going to read this text tomorrow), and motion verb (+ conjunction) + finite verb (e.g., Spanish, Y entonces, el nio va y se cae And then, the boy suddenly/unfortunately falls). 2 CLASSICAL LATIN AND LATE LATIN Classical Latin had only one little-used periphrastic construction with a motion verb, namely the future passive infinitive formed as a combination of a supine and iri, that is, the present passive infinitive of ire to go: for example, nisi se sciat uilico non datum iri unless she does not know that she is going to be given to a farmer (Plautus, qtd. in Ltoublon 221). To encode the grammatical categories that the modern Romance varieties commonly express with the help of periphrases, Classical Latin employed affixes instead: see, by way of comparison, Latin reficere (< re + facere) to do again and Spanish volver a hacer in the case of iterative aspect; Latin pellegere (< per + legere) to read through, to finish reading and French venir de lire in the case of perfective aspect and past tense, and so forth (Alisova, Repina, and Tariverdieva 25556). In Late Latin, however, it is already possible to encounter constructions that are the predecessors of the periphrases that we find today in the Romance languages. One example of such Late Latin structures is the combination of venire and a past participle, which integrated the passive meaning with that of evolution. Another case of these Late Latin constructions are those combinations in which the idea of movement expressed by verbs of motion accompanied by a gerund is somewhat weakened: for example, duos dies ille ambulavit quaerendo for two days he walked around searching from Itinerarium Antonini (third century A.D., qtd. in Bourciez 270). In addition, Late Latin had examples of periphrastic venire + present participle, as in Vulgatas venit Johannes [Baptista] praedicans in deserto Iudaeae John [the Baptist] came preaching in the desert of Judea (qtd. in Dietrich 467, 487). This type of construction is attested only in translations from Greek. Another rather rare construction (it is found only in translations of the Bible) is veniens + verbum finitum, as in Vulgatas usquedum veniens staret supra, ubi erat puer till it [the star] came and stood over where the child was (qtd. in Dietrich 472, 487), whose development in Late Latin is commonly attributed to Greek and Hebrew influences (Garca Snchez). Early Latin had some periphrastic constructions of ire + supine (or infinitive) type, but their usage was not extensive. Ltoublon gives a Classical Latin example from Livy in which ires sense of movement in combination with a supine seems to be lost (220); yet, because of the small number of examples it is commonly assumed that it would be inaccurate to consider this unit to be periphrastic. The status of motion verb
SPRING 2009, VOL. 56, NO. 2 83

+ infinitive in Late Latin is also controversial. Although some claim that its emergence as a periphrasis did not take place until Early Western Romance, others believe that the structure was already periphrastic in Late Latin. The difficulty in determining whether the construction was lexical or periphrastic has to do with the fact that often both interpretations are possible, as, for example, in the case of Vulgatas dicit eis Simon Petrus: vado piscari. dicunt ei: venimus et nos tecum Simon Peter says to them I go fishing. They say to him: We come with you (qtd. in Dietrich 476). 3 FROM LATIN TO ROMANCE: THE TYPOLOGICAL SHIFT In contrast to Latin, the Romance languages have developed a wide range of periphrases with motion verbs. In other words, we are faced with a typological shift between the proto-language that lacked the phenomenon in question and the daughter languages that have made it an integral part of their grammatical system. These new Romance periphrases have developed by following fifteen different types of grammaticalization pathways, as illustrated in Stolova: (1) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive > future tense Example: (Spanish) Voy a leer este artculo maana. I am going to read this article tomorrow. (2) motion verb + past participle > passive voice Example: (Rhaeto-Romance) El vain lod. He is praised. (3) motion verb + gerund > continuous aspect Example: (Portuguese) Anda lendo. He is reading. (4) motion verb (+ particle/preposition) + infinitive > continuous aspect Example: (Italian) La situazione seguitava ad aggrovigliarsi. The situation kept getting worse. (5) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive > inceptive aspect Example: (French) Les enfants se mettent courir. The children start running. (6) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive > iterative aspect Example: (Sardinian) Torro a lghere cussu libru. I read that book again. (7) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive > (near) past tense Example: (Catalan) El seu discurs va causar un gran impacte en lauditori. Her talk produced a great effect on the audience. (8) motion verb (+ preposition) + past participle / infinitive > resultative marker Example: (Spanish) Lleg a ser abogado. He became a lawyer. (9) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive/past participle > avertive/ proximative aspect Example: (French) Hugo va pour plonger la main dans sa poche. Hugo is about to put his hand in his pocket. (10) motion verb (+ preposition) + infinitive > hortative mood Example: (Portuguese) Vamos lev-lo para o carro. Lets take him to the car. (11) motion verb + gerund/infinitive > sudden/unexpected action Example: (Spanish) Ahora sales diciendo que no sabas nada. Now you are telling me that you did not know anything.
84 ROMANCE QUARTERLY

(12) motion verb + coordinative conjunction + finite verb > modality Example: (Spanish) Y entonces, el nio va y se cae. And then, the boy (suddenly/unfortunately) falls. (13) motion verb + past participle > state Example: (Spanish) Mara anda preocupada por el problema. Mary is worried about this problem. (14) motion verb + preposition + infinitive > cessative/egressive (aspect) Example: (Portuguese) Porque que agora deixaste de o ajudar? Why is it that now you stopped helping him? (15) motion verb + past participle > deontic modality Example: (Italian) Questo lavoro va fatto. This job has to be done. (24748) 4 CLASSIFICATION OF THE ROMANCE LANGUAGES As can be inferred from examples 115 above, the participation in the evolution of motion-based grammaticalization pathways is not limited to any specific linguistic variety, but is rather pan-Romance. However, the degree of such participation differs from language to language, and this degree is precisely the parameter that can serve as a tertium comparationis for the classification of the members of the Romance family. The first step on the way to achieving this classification is to prepare an inventory of the grammaticalization channels attested in each one of the Romance varieties. We prepared this inventory by consulting a wide range of sources, including reference grammars, historical grammars, dictionaries, book monographs and articles on periphrases, and studies on verbal systems. Because such phenomena as periphrases and motion verbs can be defined in a number of possible ways, the studies that we have consulted often provide lists of motion-based periphrastic constructions that differ from one another. In our inventory we have adopted an inclusive strategy, incorporating structures like Spanish salir + gerund or Italian andare + coordinative conjunction + finite verb whose status as motion-based periphrases could be questioned due to the limited number of lexical verbs accepted by the construction in the former case and the presence of the lexical finite verb in the latter case. In the case of Spanish we find thirty different developments, with the type of grammaticalization pathway to which each one of them belongs indicated in brackets: ir + a + infinitive > future tense [1]; ir + past participle > passive voice [2]; venir + past participle > passive voice [2]; andar + past participle > passive voice [2]; ir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; andar + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; venir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; seguir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; seguir + sin + infinitive > continuous aspect [4]; pasar + a + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; entrar + a + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; echarse + a + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; meterse + a + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; volver + a + infinitive > iterative aspect [6]; tornar + a/de/en + infinitive > iterative aspect (OSp.) [6]; venir + de + infinitive > near past tense
SPRING 2009, VOL. 56, NO. 2 85

(Gall.) [7]; ir + past participle > resultative marker [8]; salir + past participle > resultative marker [8]; dejar + past participle > resultative marker [8]; venir + a + infinitive > resultative marker [8]; llegar + a + infinitive > resultative marker [8]; ir (imperfect) + a + infinitive > avertive aspect [9]; ir + a + infinitive > hortative mood [10]; salir + gerund > sudden/unexpected action [11]; ir + coordinative conjunction + finite verb > modality [12]; venir + coordinative conjunction + finite verb > modality [12]; ir + past participle > state [13]; venir + past participle > state [13]; andar + past participle > state [13]; and dejar + de + infinitive > cessative/egressive aspect [14]. In the case of Portuguese, the total number of developments is twenty-four: ir (+ a/para) + infinitive > future tense [1]; sair-se + past participle > passive voice [2]; ir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; andar + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; vir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; seguir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; andar + infinitive > continuous aspect [4]; seguir + infinitive > continuous aspect [4]; entrar + a + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; voltar + a + infinitive > iterative aspect [6]; tornar + a + infinitive > iterative aspect [6]; vir + de + infinitive > near past tense [7]; sair-se + past participle > resultative marker [8]; vir + (a) + infinitive > resultative marker [8]; chegar + a + infinitive > resultative marker [8]; passar + a + infinitive > resultative marker [8]; ir (imperfect) (+ a/para) + infinitive > avertive aspect [9]; ir + infinitive > hortative mood [10]; sair(-se) + gerund > sudden/unexpected action [11]; ir + coordinative conjunction + finite verb > modality [12]; ir + past participle > state [13]; vir + past participle > state [13]; andar + past participle > state [13]; and deixar + de + infinitive > cessative/ egressive aspect [14]. French has participated in fifteen developments: aller + infinitive > future tense [1]; sen aller + past participle > passive voice (sixteenth, seventeenth centuries) [2]; aller (+ en) + gerund > continuous aspect (OFr., MidFr., sixteenth and seventeenth centuries) [3]; venir + gerund > continuous aspect (OFr.) [3]; se mettre + + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; venir + de + infinitive > near past tense [7]; sortir + de + infinitive > near past tense [7]; partir + de + infinitive > near past tense [7]; aller + infinitive > past tense (fourteenth through seventeenth centuries) [7]; aller (imperfect) + infinitive > avertive aspect [9]; aller + pour + infinitive > avertive aspect [9]; sen aller + past participle > proximative aspect (sixteenth, seventeenth centuries) [9]; aller + infinitive > hortative mood [10]; (en) + venir + + infinitive > sudden/unexpected action [11]; and laisser + de + infinitive > cessative/egressive aspect (OFr.) [14]. Eleven constructions in question emerged in the case of Italian: venire + past participle > passive voice [2]; andare + past participle > passive voice [2]; andare + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; venire + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; seguitare + a + infinitive > continuous aspect [4]; mettersi + infinitive > inceptive aspect [5]; venire + de + infinitive > near past tense (Gall.) [7]; venire + a + infinitive > sudden/unexpected action [11]; andare + coordinative conjunction + finite verb > modality [12]; lasciare + di + infinitive > cessative/egressive aspect [14]; and andare + past participle > deontic modality [15].
86 ROMANCE QUARTERLY

Both Occitan and Catalan have created six constructions each. In the case of Occitan these are anar + infinitive > future tense [1]; anar + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; tornar + infinitive > iterative aspect [6]; venire + de + infinitive > near past tense [7]; anar + infinitive > past tense [7]; and anar + infinitive > proximative aspect [9], and in the case of Catalan these are anar + a + infinitive > future tense (Cast.) [1]; venir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; anar + gerund > continuous aspect [3]; anar + infinitive > past tense [7]; anar (imperfect) + a + infinitive > avertive aspect [9]; and anar + per + infinitive > proximative aspect [9]. Rhaeto-Romance has three developments in question: vegnir + a(d) + infinitive > future tense [1]; vegnir + past participle > passive voice [2] ; and ir + gerund > continuous aspect [3]. Finally, Sardinian and Rumanian have two developments each: bnnere + past participle > passive voice (Log.) [2] and torrare + a + infinitive > iterative aspect [6] in the case of Sardinian, and a veni + past participle > passive voice [2] and a se porni + infinitive > inceptive aspect (archaic usage) [5], in the case of Rumanian. The inventory of the Romance developments established above opens the way for proposing the following classification. Spanish and Portuguese form the group that has participated in the creation of motion-based periphrases to the fullest extent: both languages possess periphrastic constructions that have evolved by following fourteen out of the fifteen types of grammaticalization channels (i.e., types number 1 through 14). French and Italian belong to the group of languages that have participated in the evolution in question in a substantial way, but not as fully as Spanish and Portuguese, as their periphrases exemplify nine types of grammaticalization channels. In the case of French, the types of pathways one finds are numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 14; whereas in the case of Italian the relevant types are numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14, and 15. The third category in our classification is composed of Occitan and Catalan, with five types of grammaticalization pathways (numbers 1, 3, 6, 7, and 9) in the case of the former, and four types (numbers 1, 3, 7, and 9) in the case of the latter. Finally, the last group is composed of languages with only a limited number of developments: Rhaeto-Romance, which has participated in three types of channels (numbers 1, 2, and 3); Sardinian with two types (numbers 2 and 6); and Rumanian, which also has participated in two types (numbers 2 and 5). At this point, it is important to clarify that the fact that a particular Romance variety has developed only a limited number of periphrases does not necessarily indicate that these periphrases are of little importance to its grammatical system. For example, in the Surselvan dialect of Rhaeto-Romance the come-future vegnir + a(d) + infinitive is the only future form. Many Rhaeto-Romance dialects do not have a passive formed with the auxiliary be, as the vegnir + past participle passive has come to take its place. In a parallel way, in Catalan the go-past anar + infinitive has become the default past form. In other words, even in languages that have participated only in a small fraction of the pathways attested in the
SPRING 2009, VOL. 56, NO. 2 87

Romance family, the periphrases with verbs of motion are not situated at the periphery of the verbal system within which they emerged centuries ago but rather at this systems very core. 5 THE DIACHRONIC DIMENSION The classification that I have proposed highlights the importance of the historical dimension. The case of French is particularly revealing, as a number of motion-based periphrases that are obsolete in Modern French were very common during the earlier stages. For example, in Old French the constructions of the type verb of motion + gerund (especially aller + gerund, but also sen aller + gerund and venir + gerund) were abundantly used to encode continuous aspect in a way similar to the modern construction tre en train de faire qch.: for example, Velz est e frailes, tut sen vat declinant, / Sist ampairt, tut bien vait remanant It [the world] is now old and weak, it all continues to decline / It has worsened so, all good is left behind (Vie de Saint Alexis, qtd. in Ayres-Bennett 151). The periphrasis was highly grammaticalized as it could incorporate verbs that referred to rest or lack of movement, for example, aler demorant, aler arestant, aler sejornant. The frequency was especially high in the epic, partially because of metrical reasons. In Middle French, as well as in the sixteenth century, the construction was still in use (Gougenheim 522). In his detailed survey of the role of the construction in question during the different time periods (stage A: the Middle Ages: twelfthand thirteenth-century poetry; twelfth- and thirteenth-century prose; fourteenth century; fifteenth century; stage B: sixteenth century; stage C: seventeenth century; stage D: eighteenth to twentieth century), Gougenheim demonstrates how in stages B and, especially, C it started losing ground. The seventeenth century is regarded as the period when a number of influential grammarians (e.g., Vaugelas) were criticizing what they considered to be an outdated and incorrect usage of the construction and were suggesting that it should be reserved only for verbs that express some idea of movement (e.g., La rivire va serpentant the river goes meandering, Gougenheim 2231). From the seventeenth century onward the decline of aller + gerund, that is, the gradual shrinking of its compatibility restrictions progressed further (Squartini 244). In our days, this periphrasis is extremely rare: it is restricted to verbs that imply real or metaphoric movement, thus exhibiting lexicalization (Squartini 244), and is used mostly with telics. As for venir + gerund, it is no longer a part of the French language. The case of motion verb + past participle illustrates a similar tendency. During the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century, French possessed the periphrastic construction sen aller + past participle that encoded the proximative aspect, for example, La conjuration sen alloit dissipe, / Vos desseins avorts, votre haine trompe (Corneille, qtd. in Gougenheim 112). As Gougenheim explains, this periphrasis could appear with both passive (e.g., sen aller dtruit = tre sur le point dtre dtruit) and active (e.g., sen aller mort = tre sur le point de mourir) senses. In the sixteenth century, the combination with an adjective was also possible, as in Vostre royaulme sen va le plus misrable quil
88 ROMANCE QUARTERLY

feust jamais (Monluc, qtd. in Gougenheim 112). In spite of the wide usage of the periphrasis in earlier times, throughout the seventeenth century the construction was disappearing from the language, and in the eighteenth century it was labeled as outdated: Autrefois, on employoit <sen aller> avec les participes passs des verbes, pour exprimer une chose prte darriver [. . .] Ce tour est surann (Fraud, Dictionnaire grammatical de la langue franaise [1768], qtd. in Gougenheim 11113). The Dictionnaire de lAcadmie Franaise mentions the construction as late as its 1878 edition, and Littr refers to it in his 186372 Dictionnaire de la langue franaise, but it is generally agreed that by that time the periphrasis was practically extinct (Gougenheim 113). French combinations motion verb + infinitive show a similar contrast between the modern language and its earlier stages. For example, from the fourteenth to the sixteenth/seventeenth centuries the French language witnessed a tendency to develop aller + infinitive as a preterit (Fleischman 8283). This development has been interpreted as a result of the Gascon influence by some linguists and as an autochthonous French development by others. When referring to the past time frame, the periphrasis was usually surrounded by verbs conjugated in simple past and often specified sudden/inchoative actions, like verba dicendi: Si se bessa de rechef et redressa le roy dEspaigne, lequel va commencer dire [. . .] (Jean de Paris, qtd. in Gougenheim 96). Sometimes both the past and the future usages of aler + infinitive are attested within the same sentence. In Et adoncques, elle va dire aux autres: je la vois faire parler (Jean DArras), for example, the first construction with aller (va dire) refers to the preterite, whereas the second one (vois faire) to the future (qtd. in Flydal 16). Because the two meanings (past and future) are the opposite of one another, the increasing prominence of aller + infinitive as a future marker triggered the disappearance of the preterite usage (Flydal 16; Fleischman 83). The development laisser + de + infinitive > cessative aspect, attested for the first time in French in the twelfth century, is obsolete in Modern French as well. 6 CONCLUSION Using the evolution of motion-based periphrases as a criterion for classifying the Romance varieties has two ramifications. On the one hand, it provides food for thought in terms of some long-standing questions addressed by Romance historical linguistics, as, for example, the place of Catalan within the Romance family and the identity of the most innovative Romance variety. At the same time, the developments analyzed above have parallels in languages outside of the Romance family, since the constructions with motion verbs are a renowned universal source of grammatical markers of tense, aspect, and mood. Establishing an inventory of the relevant Romance developments and assessing the role of each Romance variety in the motion verb > grammatical marker diachronic pattern provides the necessary foundation for integrating Romance data and general linguistics. Colgate University
SPRING 2009, VOL. 56, NO. 2 89

WORKS CITED Alisova, T. B., T. A. Repina, M. A. Tariverdieva. Vvedenie v romanskuju filologiju. [Introduction to Romance Philology.] Vol. 1. Moscow: Vysshaia Shkola, 1987. Ayres-Bennett, Wendy. A History of the French Language Through Texts. New York: Routledge, 1996. Bourciez, douard. lments de linguistique romane. Paris: Klincksieck, 1967. Dietrich, Wolf. El aspecto verbal perifrstico en las lenguas romnicas. Trans. Marcos Martnez Hernndez. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1983. Fleischman, Suzanne. The Future in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1982. Flydal, Leiv. Aller et venir suivis de linfinitif comme expressions de rapport temporels. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1943. Garca Snchez, Jairo Javier. Tomo y me voy. Entre el influjo bblico y la gramaticalizacin obvia. Studi in memoria di Eugenio Coseriu. (Pluriliguismo. Contatti di lingue e culture. Sup. 10.) Ed. Vincenzo Orioles. Udine: U degli Studi di Udine, 2003. 13950. Gougenheim, Georges. tude sur les priphrases verbales de la langue franaise. Paris: Librairie A.-G. Nizet, 1929. Ltoublon, Franoise. Les verbes de mouvement et lauxiliarit en latin. Glotta 61.34 (1983): 21828. Squartini, Mario. Verbal Periphrases in Romance: Aspect, Actionality, and Grammaticalization. Berlin: Gruyter, 1998. Stolova, Natalya I. Where Can Working in Tandem Take Us? Romance Data Meets Grammaticalization Theory. La cornica 34.1 (2005): 24352.

90

ROMANCE QUARTERLY