Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Development of the Declension System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Research on Old French: The State of the Art

Part of the book series: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory ((SNLT,volume 88))

Abstract

The traditional understanding of case systems is that morphological case is needed to mark NPs in order for the speakers to identify their syntactic function. Accordingly, if changes in case systems occur, they are considered to be linked to fundamental reorganizations of the grammatical structure of a language. In contrast to the traditional view, the line of thinking adopted here takes into account the role of the case system with respect to other parts of the grammar. Moreover, our approach is anchored in variational linguistics, implying that synchronic and diachronic variation is both the result of, and the reason for, change. Indeed, the interpretation of variation is one of the greatest challenges for diachronic linguistics. With respect to the break-down of the Old French case system, it is difficult to uncover the underlying tendencies that might explain the apparently chaotic morphological variation. I show in this chapter that diasystematic variation parameters provide clues for the correct interpretation of this system. Finally, I propose that the ultimate break-down of case has proceeded via an intermediate system of case marking on articles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Information on Romance morphology can be found in Meyer-Lübke (1894/1972) inter alia.

  2. 2.

    For Latin, a comparable view is presented by Pinkster (1991). Detges’ conclusion is that morphological case is “extremely redundant but … not entirely useless”.

  3. 3.

    For convenience, I use the terms nominative and accusative not only for Latin forms, but also for OF forms, although the non-nominative forms assume the form and functions not only of the accusative, but also of the genitive, dative, and the ablative forms. See note 5 for details concerning the modifications of the Latin forms.

  4. 4.

    The vocative case has no continuation in OF.

  5. 5.

    The merger is caused by several changes, which are due to the fact that the distinction of quantity (i.e. short:long vowels) replace the opposition of quality (i.e. high:low vowels) with the resultant fusion of vowels, and due to the disappearance of final –m-. Examples of merger caused by the disappearance of these phonetic distinctions are the opposition between the nominative of the first declension with a short a, the accusative with a short a followed in writing by m, which disappeared (accordingly indicated as (m) in Tables 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3), and the ablative with a long a, e.g. nom.sg. mensa, acc.sg. mensam, abl.sg. mensa with a line above the final –a. In the third declension, there was confusion of es and is, accusative plural and genitive singular, respectively, e.g. montis, montes, and the merger of accusative singular with ablative singular: montem - monte. Further examples may be found in Penny (2002:116–117).

  6. 6.

    It is thought that Italian had a distinction between the nominative and the oblique form (Maiden and Sornicola, personal communication). Only traces are found in Old Italian, and probably in some areas only in the nominative form of plural nouns.

  7. 7.

    For an excellent short account of the development from Latin to Romance languages, and a balanced analysis of interacting factors, see Herman (1998, 2000). A fine discussion of different approaches to the many problems related to the development of the declension system is found in the Sornicola (2007) Sect. 9.3. A speculative presentation of the development of case and constructions in Proto-Romance is found in Dardel (2001).

  8. 8.

    In Schøsler and Skovgaard-Hansen (2007), we find in itinerarium Egeriae that only 3.2% of all complex NP are discontinuous; but in this text type continuous NPs are the rule, whereas poetry is characterised by discontinuous NPs, e.g. Catullus: 33.3%, Horace 50.9% and Ovid 52.2% discontinuous NPs.

  9. 9.

    This is a clear example of the well known: Post hoc ergo propter hoc-fallacy.

  10. 10.

    “Minimalistic” in a non-technical sense.

  11. 11.

    The term proposed in Andersen (2008) for this function is “phrase-internal indexing”.

  12. 12.

    The glosses are conform to the Leipzig Glossing Rules. (http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/resources/glossing-rules.php)

  13. 13.

    See Schøsler and Skovgaard-Hansen (2007) for a study of discontinuous NPs in selected passages from more than 20 Latin texts.

  14. 14.

    I believe that the so-called One New Argument Constraint should be connected to the One-Chunk-per-Clause processing principle proposed by Chafe (1994:119) and by Givón (1995:358).

  15. 15.

    Additionally, Detges proposes a comparison between the OF and the corresponding translation of the first 265 verses of the Chevalier de la Charrette. But this can hardly be taken as a convincing piece of evidence concerning the relative frequency of lexical S in OF and MF. Moreover, this text represents just one text type, and I am convinced that it is necessary to proceed to a more balanced investigation, based on different text types (see Sect. 9.5.2).

  16. 16.

    In his conclusion, Detges accepts my view that “morphology is just one of many clues indicating syntactic function and semantic role. In other words, it may be extremely redundant, but not entirely useless”. However, Detges does not develop this view in his paper, which focuses on the “uselessness” of morphology.

  17. 17.

    This is the Silverstein-hierarchy; see Silverstein (1976).

  18. 18.

    See Schøsler (2006) concerning the relevance of the variational parameters for the use of tense forms, Schøsler (2000), for the use of pragmatic particles, and Schøsler (2002) for the use of personal subject pronouns.

  19. 19.

    “The medieval inflexion, as far as it exists, has no syntactic relevance. Its function is rather that of rhetorical ornamentation, indicating correctness of the written language” AT

  20. 20.

    Detges (2008) quotes Klein, qualifying his view as ”somewhat radical and simplifying”.

  21. 21.

    See e.g., Buridant (2000).

  22. 22.

    The parameters of variation used here have been shown to be relevant for the study of other languages and other stages of languages; see Völker (2009), Söll (1974), and Koch and Oesterreicher (1985).

  23. 23.

    The influence of the germanic super- or ad-stratum has often been proposed to explain the preservation of declension in these dialects

  24. 24.

    The term case-role is used for argument marking and for sub-specification of certain arguments, such as patient, recipient, experiencer, etc.

  25. 25.

    The importance of word order rules has been referred to above; more information can be found in Schøsler (1984). Nørgård-Sørensen et al. (2011) contains an introduction to cross-reference.

Bibliography

Sources:Latin

Old and Middle French Electronic Corpora

Old French Manuscripts

  • Le Charroi de Nîmes, transcription of nine ms. of a 12th century Chanson de geste

    Google Scholar 

  • A  =  A1, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, f.fr. 774;

    Google Scholar 

  • E  =  A2, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, f.fr. 1449;

    Google Scholar 

  • F  =  A3, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, f.fr. 368;

    Google Scholar 

  • G  =  A4, Milan, Biblioteca Trivulziana 1025;

    Google Scholar 

  • H  =  F (fragment), Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, nouv. acq.f. 934;

    Google Scholar 

  • K  =  B1, London, British Library, Royal 20 D.XI;

    Google Scholar 

  • L  =  B2, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, f.fr. 24369;

    Google Scholar 

  • M  =  C, Boulogne-sur-Mer, Bibl. Municipale 192;

    Google Scholar 

  • N  =  D, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, f.fr. 1448.

    Google Scholar 

References

  • Andersen, Henning. 2001. Actualization and the (uni)directionality of change. In Actualization. Linguistic change in progress, ed. Henning Andersen, 225–249. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, Henning. 2008. Grammaticalization in a speaker- oriented theory of change. In Grammatical change and Linguistictic theory, ed. Thórhallur Eythórsson, 11–44. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, Barry J. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buridant, Claude. 2000. Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerquiglini, B. 1989. Eloge de la variante. Histoire critique de la philologie. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chafe, Wallace. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaurand, Jacques. 1999. Nouvelle histoire de la langue française. Paris: Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Dardel, Robert. 2001. Éléments de rection verbale protoro- mane. Revue de linguistique romane 65: 341–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detges, Ulrich. 2008. How useful is case morphology? The loss of the Old French two-case system within a theory of preferred argument structure. In The role of semantic, pragmatic, and discourse factors in the development of case, Studies in Language Companion Series, ed. Jóhanna Barđdal and Shobhana Chelliah, 93–120. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Givón, Talmy. 1995. Functionalism and grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, József (ed.). 1998. La transizione dal latino alle lingue romanze. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, József. 2000. Vulgar Latin. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupka, W. 1982. Zur Funktionalität der altfranzösischen Zwei kasusdeklination. In Fakten und Theorien: Beiträge zur ro manischen und allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft, Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik 119, ed. S. Heinz and U. Wandruszka, 95–109. Tübingen: Narr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, W. 2003. Wozu braucht man eigentlich Flexionsmorphologie? Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 131: 23–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, Peter, and Wulf Oesterreicher. 1985. Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungs feld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36: 15–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchello-Nizia, Christiane. 1999. Le français en diachronie: douze siècles d’évolution. Paris: Ophrys.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Lübke, Wilhelm. 1894/1972. Grammatik der Romanische Sprache II: Romanische Formenlehre. Leipzig: O.R. Reisland; Repr., Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesell schaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nørgård-Sørensen, Jens, Lars Heltoft, and Lene Schøsler. 2011. Connecting grammaticalisation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penny, Ralph. 2002. A history of the Spanish language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: CUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkster, Harm. 1990. Latin syntax and semantics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkster, Harm. 1991. Evidence for SVO in Latin? In Latin and the romance languages in the early middle ages, ed. Roger Wright 69–82. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 1984. La déclinaison bicasuelle de l’ancien fran- çais, son rôle dans la syntaxe de la phrase, les causes de sa disparition. Etudes romanes de l’Université d’Odense, vol. 19. Odense: Odense University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2000. The pragmatic functions of the old French particles AINZ, APRES, DONC, LORS, OR, PUIS, and SI. In Textual parameters in older languages, ed. With Susan C. Herring, Pieter van Reenen, and Lene Schøsler, 59–105, ISBN: 90-272- 3702-6. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2001a. The coding of the subject-object distinction from Latin to modern French. In Grammatical relations in change, ed. Jan Terje Faarlund, 273–302. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2001b. From Latin to modern French: Actualization and markedness. In Actualization. Linguistic change in progress. Papers from a workshop held at the 14th international conference on historical linguistics. Vancouver, BC, 14 Aug 1999. Current issues in linguistic theory 219, ed. Henning Andersen, 169–185. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2002. La variation linguistique: le cas de l’expres-sion du sujet. In Interpreting the history of French, A Festschrift for Peter Richard on the occasion of his eightieth birthday, ed. R. Samson and W. Ayres-Bennet, 187–208. Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2006. Grammaticalisation et dégrammaticalisation. Etude des constructions progressives en français du type Pierre va/vient/est chantant. In Sémantique et diachronie du système verbal français, Cahiers Chronos 16, ed. Emmanuelle Labeau, Carl Vetters, and Patrick Caudal, 91–119. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene. 2008. Argument marking from Latin to modern Romance languages: An illustration of ‘combined grammaticalisation processes’. In Grammatical change and Linguistic theory, ed. Thórhallur Eythórsson, 411–438. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schøsler, Lene, and Michael Skovgaard-Hansen. 2007. Undersøgelse over komplekse nominalsyntagmer i latin. In: Fra Plautus over klassisk latin, senlatin til humanismen, ALBVM AMICORVM. Festskrift til Karsten Friis-Jensen i anledning af hans 60 års fødselsdag/Studies in Honour of Karsten Friis-Jensen on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Ed. Marianne Pade i samarbejde med/in collaboration with Eric Jacobsen, Hannemarie Ragn Jensen, Lene Waage Petersen, Lene Schøsler, Minna Skafte Jensen, Peter Zeeberg, Lene Østermark-Johansen (39 pages) Renæssanceforum 3 2007 http://www.renaessanceforum.dk/rf_3_2007.htm

  • Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Grammatical categories in Australian languages, ed. R.M.W. Dixon, 112–171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sornicola, Rosanna. 2007. Riflessioni sullo studio del cambia mento morfosintattico dalla prospettiva di un Romanista: sincronia e diacronia rivisitate. Revue de linguistique Romane 71: 5–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Söll, Ludwig. 1974. Gesprochenes und geschriebenes Französisch. Berlin: Schmidt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovaïa, Lydia A. 1993. Sur la déclinaison bicasuelle en ancien français: point de vue scriptologique. Travaux de Linguis- tique et de Philologie XXXI: 163–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Völker, Harald. 2003. Skripta und Variation. Untersuchungen zur Negation und zur Substantivflexion in altfranzösischen Ur- kunden der Grafschaft Luxemburg, 1237–1248. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Völker, Harald. 2009. La linguistique variationnelle et l’intralinguistique. Revue de linguistique Romane, 73: 27–76.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English, Germanic and Romance Studies, The University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Lene Schøsler

Authors
  1. Lene Schøsler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lene Schøsler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Foreign Languages, University of Nevada, 4505 S. Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, 89154-5047, Nevada, USA

    Deborah L. Arteaga

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schøsler, L. (2013). The Development of the Declension System. In: Arteaga, D. (eds) Research on Old French: The State of the Art. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 88. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4768-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation