Subject Placement in the History of Latin

The aim of this paper is to provide further support for one aspect of the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure proposed in Danckaert (2017a), namely the diachrony of subject placement. According to the relevant proposal, one needs to distinguish an earlier grammar (‘Grammar A’, whos...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Lieven Danckaert
Formato: article
Lenguaje:CA
EN
Publicado: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/2fc20e443c0a4a11b17810266ea38494
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:2fc20e443c0a4a11b17810266ea38494
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:2fc20e443c0a4a11b17810266ea384942021-11-27T10:46:48ZSubject Placement in the History of Latin10.5565/rev/catjl.2091695-68852014-9719https://doaj.org/article/2fc20e443c0a4a11b17810266ea384942017-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://revistes.uab.cat/catJL/article/view/209https://doaj.org/toc/1695-6885https://doaj.org/toc/2014-9719The aim of this paper is to provide further support for one aspect of the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure proposed in Danckaert (2017a), namely the diachrony of subject placement. According to the relevant proposal, one needs to distinguish an earlier grammar (‘Grammar A’, whose heyday is the period from ca. 200 BC until 200 AD), in which there is no A-movement for subjects, and a later grammar (‘Grammar B’, which is on the rise from ca. 50-100 AD, and fully productive from ca. 200 AD onwards), where subjects optionally move to the inflectional layer. Assuming the variationist acquisition model of language change developed in Yang (2000, 2002a,b), I present corpus evidence which confirms that it is only in the Late Latin period that TP-internal subjects fully establish themselves as a grammatical option.Lieven DanckaertUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaarticleLatinlanguage changeword ordersubject placementgrammar competitionPhilology. LinguisticsP1-1091CAENCatalan Journal of Linguistics, Vol 16 (2017)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language CA
EN
topic Latin
language change
word order
subject placement
grammar competition
Philology. Linguistics
P1-1091
spellingShingle Latin
language change
word order
subject placement
grammar competition
Philology. Linguistics
P1-1091
Lieven Danckaert
Subject Placement in the History of Latin
description The aim of this paper is to provide further support for one aspect of the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure proposed in Danckaert (2017a), namely the diachrony of subject placement. According to the relevant proposal, one needs to distinguish an earlier grammar (‘Grammar A’, whose heyday is the period from ca. 200 BC until 200 AD), in which there is no A-movement for subjects, and a later grammar (‘Grammar B’, which is on the rise from ca. 50-100 AD, and fully productive from ca. 200 AD onwards), where subjects optionally move to the inflectional layer. Assuming the variationist acquisition model of language change developed in Yang (2000, 2002a,b), I present corpus evidence which confirms that it is only in the Late Latin period that TP-internal subjects fully establish themselves as a grammatical option.
format article
author Lieven Danckaert
author_facet Lieven Danckaert
author_sort Lieven Danckaert
title Subject Placement in the History of Latin
title_short Subject Placement in the History of Latin
title_full Subject Placement in the History of Latin
title_fullStr Subject Placement in the History of Latin
title_full_unstemmed Subject Placement in the History of Latin
title_sort subject placement in the history of latin
publisher Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
publishDate 2017
url https://doaj.org/article/2fc20e443c0a4a11b17810266ea38494
work_keys_str_mv AT lievendanckaert subjectplacementinthehistoryoflatin
_version_ 1718409036524683264