Latin datives with prefixed verbs and beyond: A view from the theory of applicatives

Víctor Acedo-Matellán

Abstract

I discuss the syntax and semantics of dative DPs with a spatial (Ground) interpretation, focusing on those dependent on prefixed verbs, in Early and Classical Latin. I assess and discard the two main previous approaches: the one in which the dative realizes an argument of the preverb (its Ground) and the one in which it corresponds to a benefactive/malefactive dative. I propose an analysis whereby the dative is introduced by an applicative head below the eventive head. In the case of predicates headed by a prefixed verb, I assume that the preverb originates in an embedded PP that involves a null nominal of relational semantics. Being under the scope of the dative, the nominal can be interpreted as inalienably possessed by its referent, whence the inference that the dative identifies the Ground of motion. A felicitous prediction is that the spatial dative should not be licensed by unprefixed manner-of-motion verbs, since they do not encode a resulting location.

Keywords

applicatives; argument structure; change-of-location predicates; change-of-state predicates; dative; event structure; Latin; PP; prefixed verbs; preverbs

Full Text:

PDF

References

Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2006. Prefixes in Latin and Romance and the satellite- vs. verb-framed distinction. Universitat de Barcelona (ed.), Actes del VII Congrés de Lingüística General (CD-ROM). Barcelona: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.

Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2010. Argument Structure and the Syntax-Morphology Interface. A Case Study in Latin and other Languages. PhD dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona. Downloadable at http://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/handle/2445/42060 (February 2017).

Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2016. The Morphosyntax of Transitions. A Case Study in Latin and Other Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198733287.001.0001

Acedo-Matellán, Víctor & Mateu, Jaume. 2015. Parameters and argument structure I: Motion predicates and resultatives. In Fábregas, Antonio; Mateu, Jaume & Putnam, Michael. (eds.). Contemporary Linguistic Parameters, 99–112. London: Bloomsbury.

Baker, Mark C. 1997. Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In Haegeman, Liliane (ed.). Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative syntax, 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_2

Baños Baños, José Miguel. 2009. VII. Dativo. In Baños Baños, José Miguel (coord.). Sintaxis del latín clásico, 185–209. Madrid: Liceus.

Bennett, Charles. E. 1910–1914. Syntax of early latin. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bibliotheca Teubneriana Latina Online. 2009. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter. http://www.degruyter.com/view/db/btl (February 2017).

Biskup, Petr. 2009. Prefixes as Prepositions and Multiple Cases. In Zybatow, Gerhild; Biskup, Petr; Junghanns, Uwe & Lenertová, Denisa (eds.). Studies in Formal Slavic Phonology, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics and Information Structure, 3–17. Bern: Peter Lang.

Bonelli, Guido. 1983. Dativo direzionale e significato delle funzioni sintattiche. Latomus 42: 863–868.

Bouchard, Denis. 1995. The Semantics of Syntax: A minimalist approach to grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cabrillana, Concepción. 1997a. Expresión casual de complementos de Venio y Eo. Habis 28: 325–336. Downloadable at http://institucional.us.es/revistas/habis/28/26%20cabrillana%20leal.pdf (February 2017).

Cabrillana, Concepción. 1997b. Complementos direccionales en el marco predicativo de Venio. Minerva 11: 117–137.

Calboli, Gualtiero. 2009. Latin syntax and Greek. In Baldi, Philip & Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (eds.). New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, vol. i: Syntax of the Sentence, 65–193. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110205626.65

Colucci, Loris. 1981. Prospettive per una reinterpretazione del dativo in Virgilio. Roma: Angelo Signorelli.

Cuervo, Mª Cristina. 2003. Datives at Large. PhD dissertation, Massachussets Institute of Technology. Downloadable at http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/dm/theses/cuervo03.pdf (February 2017).

Demonte, Violeta. 1995. Dative alternation in Spanish. Probus 7: 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1995.7.1.5

Devine, Andrew M. & Stephens, Laurence D. 2013. Semantics for Latin: An introduction. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

Dikken, Marcel den. 2010. On the functional structure of locative and directional PPs. In Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. vi: Mapping Spatial PPs, 74–126. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195393675.003.0003

Echarte, Mª José. 1994. Sobre el valor del dativo en latín. El llamado dativo de dirección y el dativo con verbos prefijados. Minerva 8: 211–241.

Emonds, Joseph. 1972. Evidence that indirect object movement is a structure preserving rule. Foundations of Language 8: 546–561.

Ernout, Alfred & Thomas, François. 1964. Syntaxe latine. Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck.

Fay, Edwin W. 1911. The Latin Dative: Nomenclature and Classification. Classical Quaterly 5: 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800019601

García Hernández, Benjamín. 1986. Gramática de casos y disociación intrasubjetiva: dativo profundo y dativo funcional. Cuadernos de Filología Clásica 20: 231–248. Downloadable at https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/CFCA/article/download/CFCA8687110231A/3115 (February 2017).

García Hernández, Benjamín. 1995. El dativo latino. Funciones e interferencias sintácticas y semánticas. In Torrego, Mª Esperanza; Quetglas, Pere J. & Espinilla, Empar. (eds.). Sintaxis del dativo latino, 35–49. Barcelona: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.

Gehrke, Berit. 2008. Ps in Motion: On the Semantics and Syntax of P Elements and Motion Events. Utrecht: LOT Publications. Downloadable at http://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/29301/gehrke.pdf?sequence=1 (February 2017).

Gruber, Jeffrey S. 1965. Studies in lexical relations. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Downloadable at http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/dm/theses/gruber65.pdf (February 2017)

Gustafsson, Fridolf. 1904. De dativo latino. Helsinki: Weillin & Gööds.

Gutiérrez Galindo, Marco Antonio. 1995. Sintaxis, semántica y pragmática del dativo de dirección en latín. In Torrego, Mª Esperanza; Quetglas, Pere J. & Espinilla, Empar. (eds.). Sintaxis del dativo latino, 51–60. Barcelona: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.

Gutiérrez Galindo, Marco Antonio. 2004. El dativo latino: interpretaciones y bibliografía en los dos últimos siglos. Emerita 72: 301–350. https://doi.org/10.3989/emerita.2004.v72.i2.70

Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel J. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel J. (eds.). The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53–109. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press.

Hale, Kenneth & Keyser, Samuel J. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press.

Happ, Heinz. 1976. Grundfragen einer Dependenz-Grammatik des Lateinischen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Havers, Wilhelm. 1912. Dativus sympatheticus. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris 18: 34.

Heyde, Klaas van der. 1934. L’aspect verbal en latin. Problèmes et résultats. Le rôle du préverbe. Revue des études latines 12: 140–157.

Hofmann, Johann B. & Szantyr, Anton. 1965. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. München: Beck.

Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press.

Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press.

Kayne, Richard S. 1985. Principles of particle constructions. In Guéron, Jacqueline, Obenauer, Hans-Georg & Pollock, Jean-Yves (eds.). Grammatical Representation, 101–40. Dordrecht: Foris.

Koopman, Hilda J. 2000. The Syntax of Specifiers and Heads. Collected Essays of Hilda J. Koopman. London & New York: Routledge.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Rooryck, Johan & Zaring, Laurie (eds.). Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5

Kühner, Raphael & Stegmann, Carl. 1912. Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, vol. ii: Satzlehre. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.

Lease, Emory B. 1912. The dative with prepositional compounds. American Journal of Philology 33: 285–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/288996

Lehmann, Christian. 1983. Latin preverbs and cases. In Pinkster, Harm (ed.). Latin Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Proceedings of the 1st International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics. Amsterdam, April 1981, 145–165. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.12.15leh

Lehmann, Christian. 1998. Regiones espaciales en perspectiva tipológica. In García-Hernández, Benjamín (ed.). Estudios de lingüística latina. Actas del IX Coloquio Internacional de Lingüística Latina, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 14–18. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.

Löfstedt, Einar. 1928–1933. Syntactica. Studien und Beiträge zur historischen Syntax des Lateins, vol. i: Über Einige grundfragen der lateinischne Nominalsyntax. Lund: Gleerup.

Mateu, Jaume. 2002. Argument Structure: Relational Construal at the Syntax-Semantics Interface. PhD dissertaton, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Downloadable at http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/4828 (February 2017).

Mateu, Jaume & Rigau, Gemma. 2002. A minimalist account of conflation processes: Parametric variation at the lexicon-syntax interface. In Alexiadou, Artemis (ed.). Theoretical Approaches to Universals, 211–236. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.49.09mat

McIntyre, Andrew. 2006. The interpretation of German datives and English have. In Hole, Daniel; Meinunger, André & Abraham, Werner (eds.). Datives and other Cases, 185–211. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.75.09mci

Miller, D. Gary. 1993. Complex Verb Formation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.95

Murru, Furrio. 1978. Alcune questioni filologico-linguistiche a proposito dell’octavus casus. Glotta 56: 144–155.

Noonan, Máire. 2010. Á to zu. In Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi (eds). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. vi: Mapping Spatial PPs, 161–195. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195393675.003.0005

Nutting, Herbert C. 1921. The dative with certain compound verbs. The Classical Journal 16: 368–369.

Olsen, Susan. 1997. Der Dativ bei Partikelverben. In Dürscheid, Christa; Ramers, Karl-Heinz & Schwarz, Monika (eds.). Festschrift für Heinz Vater, 307–328. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Oniga, Renato. 2005. Composition et préverbation en Latin: problemes de typologie. In Moussy, Claude (ed.). La composition et la préverbation en latin, 211–227. Paris: Université Paris-Sorbonne.

Oya, Toshiaki. 2009. Ground arguments in German particle verbs: A comparison with Dutch and English. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 21: 257–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542709990018

Pfister, Raimund. 1983. Kompetenz in der lateinischen Syntax. In Pinkster, Harm (ed.). Latin Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Proceedings of the 1st International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics. Amsterdam, April 1981, 3–8. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.12.04pfi

Pinkster, Harm. 1988. Non-accusative second arguments of two-place verbs in Latin. Cuadernos de Filologia Clásica 21: 235–245. Downloadable at http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/CFCA/article/download/CFCA8888110235A/3077 (February 2017).

Pinkster, Harm. 2011. The use of the dative with Latin compounds. STUF-Language Typology and Universals / Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 64: 126–135. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2011.0011

Pinkster, Harm. 2015. The Oxford Latin Syntax, vol. i: The Simple Clause. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283613.001.0001

Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing Arguments. Cambridge (Massachusetts): MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262162548.001.0001

Riemsdijk, Henk van. 2007. Case in spatial adpositional phrases: The dative-accusative alternation in German. In Alboiu, Gabriela; Avram, Andrei; Avram, Larisa & Isac, Dana (ed). Pitar Mos: A Building with a View. Papers in Honour of Alexandra Cornilescu, 1–23. Bucharest: Bucharest University.

Rubenbauer, Hans & Hofmann, Johann. B. 1995. Lateinische Grammatik. Bamberg: Buchner.

Rubio, Lisardo. 1982. Introducción a la sintaxis structural del latín. Ariel: Barcelona.

Sánchez López, Cristina. 2007. The possessive dative and the syntax of affected arguments. Cuadernos de lingüística del I. U. I. Ortega y Gasset 14: 153–173.

Scherer, Anton. 1975. Handbuch der lateinischen Syntax. Heidelberg: Winter.

Serbat, Guy. 1996. Grammaire fondamentale du latin. Tome VI. L’emploi des cas en latin, vol. i: Nominatif, Vocatif, Accusatif, Génitif, Datif. Louvain-la-Neuve & Paris: Peeters.

Spencer, Andrew & Zaretskaya, Marina. 1998. Verb prefixation in Russian as lexical subordination. Linguistics 36: 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1998.36.1.1

Svenonius, Peter. 2003. Limits on P: Filling in holes vs. falling in holes. Nordlyd 31: 431–445. https://doi.org/10.7557/12.13

Svenonius, Peter. 2004. Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP. Nordlyd 32: 205–253. https://doi.org/10.7557/12.68

Svenonius, Peter. 2006. The Emergence of Axial Parts. Nordlyd 33: 49–77. https://doi.org/10.7557/12.85

Svenonius, Peter. 2007. Adpositions, particles and the arguments they introduce. In Reuland, Eric; Bhattacharya, Tanmoy & Spathas, Giorgos (eds.). Argument Structure, 63–103. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.108.08sve

Svenonius, Peter. 2010. Spatial P in English. In Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. vi: Mapping Spatial PPs, 127–160. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195393675.003.0004

Talmy, Leonard. 1978. Figure and Ground in Complex Sentences. In Greenberg, Joseph H. (ed.). Universals of Human Language, 625–649. Stanford (California): Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v1i0.2322

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. ii: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Terzi, Arhonto. 2007. Locative Prepositions, Predicate Inversion, and Full Interpretation. In Agathopoulou, Eleni; Dimitrakopoulou, Maria & Papadopoulou, Despina (eds.). Selected Papers from the 17th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 210–219. Thessaloniki: University of Thessaloniki.

Terzi, Arhonto. 2010. Locative prepositions and Place. In Cinque, Guglielmo & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.). The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. vi: Mapping Spatial PPs, 196–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195393675.003.0006

Théoret, Michel. 1982. Les discours de Cicéron. La concurrence du tour casuel et du tour prépositionnel. Montréal: Université de Montréal.

Touratier, Christian. 1994. Syntaxe latine. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.

Van Hoecke, Willy. 1996. The Latin dative. In Van Belle, William & Van Langendonck, Willy (eds.). The Dative, vol. i: Descriptive Studies, 3–38. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cagral.2.04hoe

Van Langendonck, Willy. 1998. The dative in Latin and the indirect object in Dutch. In Van Langendock, Willy & Van Belle, William (eds.). The Dative, vol. ii: Theoretical and contrastive studies, 211–259. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cagral.3.09van

Woodcock, Eric C. 1959. A new Latin Syntax. London: Methuen.

Wunderlich, Dieter. 1991. How Do Prepositional Phrases Fit into Compositional Syntax and Semantics? Linguistics 29: 591−621. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.4.591

Copyright (c) 2017 Víctor Acedo Matellán