Topicalizations, left dislocations and the left-periphery
Abstract
My intention in this paper is to provide as complete an overview as possible of the different types of topic phrases in Latin. After setting out the characteristics and properties of what I call Dislocations (Hanging Topics and ClLD) and Topicalizations, I go on to give a description of each morphological or syntactic device employed in Latin: prepositional DP, case marking, fronting clauses. I then propose a hypothesis concerning the cartography of the left periphery in Latin. In addition, I introduce a brief description of an original way of topicalizing the subjects of embedded clauses, namely proleptic accusative construction. The main conclusion is that the cartography of Latin left periphery is not very different from that to be found in languages with fixed word order.Keywords
left periphery, topic, topicalization, left dislocation, relative clause, proleptic accusativeReferences
Adams, J. N. 1994. Wackernagel’s law and the position of unstressed personal pronouns in classical Latin. The Transactions of the Philological Society 92 (2): 103-178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1994.tb00430.x
Adams, J. N. 2013. Social variation and the Latin language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511843433
Álvarez Huerta, O. 2005. Attraction régressive et corrélation en latin. In de Carvalho P. & Lambert F. (eds.). Structures parallèles et corrélatives en grec et en latin (Actes du Colloque de Bordeaux, Septembre 2002), 181-197. Publications de l’Université de Saint- Étienne.
Álvarez Huerta, O. 2007. El acusativo proléptico en latín. In Purnelle G. & Denooz J. (eds.). Cohérence textuelle et ordre des syntagmes. Communications présentées au 13e Colloque international de Linguistique latine (Bruxelles-Liège, 4-9 avril 2005), 19-29. Bibliothèque de la Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres de l’Université de Liège (diffusion Droz, Genève).
Álvarez Huerta, O. 2010. Les constructions Hanging Topic Left Dislocation et Clitic Left Dislocation en latin. Talk delivered at Colloque International de Syntaxe Grecque et Latine, Nov. 26th -27th, Paris.
Amacker, R. 1998. Ordre des mots et subordination: la traiectio chez Varron. In García- Hernández, B. (ed.). Estudios de Linguïstica Latina. Actas del IX Coloquio Internacional de Linguïstica Latina, 139-154. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Bauer B., 2010, Word order. In Baldi P. and Cuzzolin P. (eds). New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax. Vol. 1. Syntax of the Sentence, 241–316. Berlin. Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110205626
Belletti, A., (ed.), 2004. Structures and Beyond. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 3. New York: Oxford University Press.
Benincà, P. & Poletto, C. 2004. Topic, Focus and V2: defining the CP sublayers. In Rizzi L. (ed.). The structure of CP and IP, The cartography of syntactic structures 2, 52-75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bianchi, V. 2000. The syntax of relative determiners. In Alexiadou, A., Law, P., Meinunger, A. and Wilder, C. (eds), The Syntax of Relative Clauses, 53-75. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.32
Bortolussi, B. 1998. Facite uentum ut gaudeam. Quelques phénomènes d‘ambigüité syntaxique. In García-Hernández B. (ed.). Estudios de lingüística latina. Actas del IX Coloquio Internacional de Linguïstica Latina, 203-216. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Bortolussi, B. 2005. Subordination seconde du relatif. In Calboli G. (ed.). Papers on Grammar IX 1, 479-492. Rome: Herder.
Bortolussi, B. 2011. Ordre des mots et syntaxe du latin – Les contraintes de placement et leur analyse syntaxique. Mémoire d’Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Paris Nanterre.
Bortolussi, B. 2012. Quelle position syntaxique l’accusatif proleptique occupe-t-il ?, Revue de linguistique latine du Centre Alfred Ernout, 7, Etudes sur la prolepse: http://www.paris-sorbonne.fr/numero-7-avril-2012
Bortolussi, B. & Sznajder, L. 2014. Topicalization versus Left-Dislocation in Biblical Latin. Journal of Latin Linguistics 13(2): 163-195. https://doi.org/10.1515/joll-2014-0007
Calboli, G. 1996. The accusative as a default Case in Latin. In Rosén H. (ed.). Aspects of Latin: Papers From the Seventh International Colloquium On Latin Linguistics, 423-436. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenchaft.
Cinque G. 1997. ‘Topic’ constructions in some European languages and Connectedness. In Anagnostopoulou E., van Riemsdijk H. & Zwarts F. (eds.). Materials on Left Dislocation, 93-118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.14
Corblin, F. & de Swart, H. 2004. Handbook of French semantics. Chicago: CSLI Publications.
Dankaert, L. 2012. Latin Embedded Clauses. The Left Periphery (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 184). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.184
Devine, A. M. & Stephens L. D. 2006. Latin word order. Structured meaning and information. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195181685.001.0001
Faure, R. & Oliviéri, M. 2013. Stratégies de topicalisation en occitan. Dialectologie: corpus, atlas, analyses. Corpus 12: 231-270. http://corpus.revues.org/2391
Fraenkel, E. 1964. Kleine Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie, Bd. 1: Zur Sprache: 73-130. Roma: Edizioni Di Storia e Letteratura.
Frascarelli, M. 2007. Subjects, Topics and the interpretation of referential pro. An interface approach to the linking of (null) pronouns. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25: 691- 734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-007-9025-x
Giusti, G. & Oniga R. 2007. “Core and Periphery in the Latin Noun Phrase”. In Purnelle, G. and Denooz J. (eds). Ordre et cohérence en Latin. Communications présentées au 13° Colloque International de Linguistique Latine, Bruxelles-Liége, 4-9 avril 2005, 81-95. Genève: Droz.
Kiss, K. É. (ed.) 1995. Discourse configurational languages (Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax). New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kroon, C. 1995. Discourse particles in Latin; a study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben.
Haegeman, L. 2006. Argument fronting in English, Romance CLLD and the left periphery. In Zanuttini R., Campos H., Herburger E.& Portner P. (eds). Cross-linguistic research in syntax and semantics: negation, tense and clausal architecture, 27-52. Washington (DC): Georgetown University Press.
Halla-aho, H. 2012. A historical perspective on Latin proleptic accusatives. Revue de linguistique latine du Centre Alfred Ernout, 7, Etudes sur la prolepse: http://www.paris-sorbonne.fr/numero-7-avril-2012
Halla-aho, H. 2016. Left-detached constructions from early to late Latin (nominatiuus pendens and attractio inuersa). In Adams J. N. & Vincent N. (eds.). Early and Late Latin: Continuity or Change?, 367-389. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316450826
Lohnstein, H. and Trissler, S. (eds.) 2004. The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110912111
Maraldi, M. 1986. The proleptic accusative: problems of structural analysis. In Calboli G. (ed.). Papers on Grammar II: 87-99. Bologna: Libraria Universitaria.
Molinelli, P. 1999. De + ablative: marca di topic in latino. In Petersmann H. & Kettemann R. (eds.). Latin vulgaire - latin tardif V (Actes du Ve Colloque international sur le latin vulgaire et tardif, Heidelberg, 5-8 septembre 1997), 277-285. Heidelberg: C. Winter.
Oniga, R. 2014. Latin: a linguistic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pinkster, H. 2012. Relative clauses in Latin: some problems of description. In Paula da Cunha Corrêa & al. (eds). Hyperboreans: Essays in Greek and Latin Poetry, Philosophy, Rhetoric and Linguistics. São Paulo: Humanitas, CAPES.
Pompei, A. 2011. Relative clauses. In Baldi, P. & Cuzzolin, P. (eds). New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, vol. 4: Complex Sentences, Grammaticalization, Typology, 427-548. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110253412.427
Rizzi, L. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery.” In Liliane Haegeman (ed.). Elements of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8
Rizzi, L. (ed.) 2004. The cartography of syntactic structures. vol 2, The structure of CP and IP. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rizzi, L. & Bocci G. (forthcoming). The left periphery of the clause. In Everaert M., van Riemsdijk H. (eds). The Companion to Syntax, 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rosén, H. 1992. Die Arten der Prolepse im Lateinischen in typologischer Sicht, In Panagl O. & Krisch Th. (eds.). Latein und Indogermanisch, Akten des Kolloquiums der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, (Salzburg, 23.-26. September 1986): 243-262. Innsbruck: IBS.
Salvi, G., 2004. La formazione della struttura di frase romanza. Ordine delle parole e clitici dal latino alle lingue romanze antiche. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Spevak, O. 2011. Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.117
Touratier, C. 1980. La relative, essai de théorie syntaxique (à partir de faits latins, français, allemands, anglais, grecs, hébreux, etc.). Paris: Klincksieck.
Védrenne, P. 2013. Personal subject pronouns and the meta-informative centering of utterances in classical Latin. In Włodarczyk A. & Włodarczyk H. (eds.). Meta-informative Centering in Utterances. Between Semantics and Pragmatics, 285 – 296. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.143
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2017 Bernard Bortolussi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
