The interpretation of Latin predicative participles15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin...

The interpretation of Latin predicative participles

EALC.15.06.2012 Øyvind Strand

15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 3

Predicative participles

Dionysius Syracusis expulsus

Dionysius:NOM Syracuse expell:PRTC.PERF.PASS.NOM

Corinthi pueros docebat

Corinth boys teach:IMPF.3.SGL

“After being expelled from Syracuse, Dionysius taught boys at Corinth” (Cic.Tusc 3,27)

• Verbal adjuncts (converb)

• Express events that can stand in a number of different semantic relations with the matrix verb.

Implicit subject (conjunct participle)

Cupiditate regni adductus

desire:ABL kingship:GEN drive:PRTC.PERF.PASS.NOM

novis rebus studebat

new:Dat things:DAT strived:IMPF.3.SG

“Driven by desire of the kingship, he was striving for a revolution” (Caes. Gall 1.9.1).


Explicit Subject (ablative absolute):

oppidum paucis defendentibus

town:ACC few:ABL defend:PRTC.PRES.ACT.ABL

expugnare non potuit

take by storm:INF not:NEG can:PERF.3.SG

“He was not able to take the town by storm, though there were few to defend it” (Caes. Gall 2.12.2).


Central questions:

• What semantic relations can participles be used to express?


Central questions:


• What factors influence or affects our interpretations?


Central questions:



• How frequent are the different interpretations?


Central questions:



• How frequent are the different interpretations?

• Are there any differences in interpretation between participles with an implicit vs. explicit subject?


The corpus:

• The third and fourth book of De bello gallico (The Gallic War) by Julius Caesar.


The corpus:


• Annotated for syntax and morphology in the PROIEL-project.


The corpus:


• Annotated for syntax and morphology in the PROIEL-project.

• 307 predicative participles in total (102 conjunct participles and 205 ablative absolutes).


Thematic participles Germanico bello confecto Caesar

German:ABL war.ABL finished:PRTC.PERF.ABL Caesar:NOM

statuit sibi Rhenum esse transeundum

decided self:DAT Rhine be:INF cross.GER

“The German campaign thus finished, Caesar decided that he must cross the Rhine”(Caes. Gall. 3,23,1)

Syntax: Modify the sentence as a whole (Specifier of IP).

Information structure: Given or inferable information.

Semantics: Temporal, temporal-causal, causal, purpose, conditional, concessive, concessive-conditional.


Rhematic participles Hos item cum conspexissent, subsecuti

them likewise when see: PLP.SUBJ.3.PL follow:PRTC.PERF.PASS.NOM

hostibus adpropinquaverunt

enemy:DAT approached:PERF.3.PL

“And when they saw them, they likewise followed on and drew near to the enemy”(Caes. Gall. 4,25,6).

Syntax: More on level with the matrix verb (adjoined to I`).

Information structure: New and independent information.

Semantics: Narrative progression, contrast.


Elaborative participles Nostri ad unum omnes incolumes perpaucis

our:NOM to one all:NOM unharmed:NOM few:ABL

vulneratis se in castra receperunt

wound:PRTC.PERF.PASS.ABL self to camp returne:PERF.3.PL

“Our men, with not a man lost and but few wounded, returned to camp” (Caes. Gall. 4,15,3).

Syntax: Modify the matrix verb alone (inside the I’ projection).

Information structure: (usually) new, but dependent information.

Semantics: Accompanying circumstances, manner, means, comparison.


Thematic participles fall outside the scope of embeddings such as mood and negations: ne hac parte neglecta

that not this:ABL part:ABL neglect:PRTC.PERF.ABL

reliquae nationes sibi:DAT idem licere

rest:NOM nations:NOM self same be allowed:INF

arbitrarentur

think:IMPF.SUBJ.3.PL

“[…]lest, if this district were neglected, the other nations might suppose they had the same liberty,”. (Caes. Gall. 3,10,1)


Rhematic participles fall inside the scope of embeddings such as mood and negation:

nonnullae sententiae dicebantur ut

some opinion say.IMPF.PASS.3.PL that

impedimentis relictis eruptione

baggage.ABL leave:PRTC.PERF.PASS.ABL sortie:ABL

facta ad salutem contenderent

make:PRTC.PERF.PASS.ABL to safety strive.IMPF.SUBJ.3.PL

“some expressed the opinion that they should abandon the baggage, make a sortie, and strive to win safety” (Caes. Gall. 3,3,2).


Elaborative participles are in the focus of negations:

Non assidens et attente

Not sit:PRTC.PRS.ACT.NOM and attentively

audiens, sed praeteriens

listen:PRTC.PRS.ACT.NOM but pass:PRTC.PRS.ACT.NOM

de oratore saepe iudicat

of orator often judge:PRS.3.SG

“[the intelligent critic]…not by patient sitting and attentive listening, but in passing can often form a correct judgement of an orator” (Cic. Brut.200).


Infering the semantic relation:

• The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991)



• The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991).

• The more complex the relation, the more world-knowledge and/or linguistic information is required for the relation to be successfully inferred.



• The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991).

• The more complex the relation, the more world-knowledge and/or linguistic information is required for the relation to be successfully inferred.

• The reciever will always try to maximize coherence and go for the most informative relation sanctioned by the context.


Information hierarchy:

Thematic participles

Rhematic participles

Elaborative participles

Concessive-conditional

Concessive Contrast

Conditional Comparison

Purpose Means

Causal

Temporal-causal Manner

Temporal Narrative progression

Acc. circumstance 22

Stative participles limited to express causal, concessive and accompanying circumstances relations:

et cognita Gallorum infirmitate

and know:PRTC.PERF.PASS.ABL Gauls weakness:ABL

quantum hostes auctoritatis essent consecuti

how much enemy.NOM authority be acquire

sentiebat.

apprehend:IMPF.3.SG

“Knowing as he did the fickleness of the Gauls, he apprehended how much influence the enemy had already acquired”(Caes.Gall. 4,13,2).


Conditional and concessive-conditional interpretations limited to non-factual contexts where the matrix verb is modal, in the subjunctive/future mood or expressing iterativity.

ab aestu relictae nihil saxa et

from tide leave.PRTC.PERF.PASS.NOM nothing rock and

cotes timerent:IMPF.SUBJ.3.PL

cragfear

“ […] if (whenever) left by the tide, they had no fear of rocks or crags (Caes.Gall. 3,13,9).


Other sentence level factors:

Lexical semantics:

• Causal interpretations typically (ca. 75%) found with participles expressing mental states or conditions like e.g veritus (fearing), adductus (driven).


Other sentence level factors:

Lexical semantics:

• Causal interpretations typically (ca. 75%) found with participles expressing mental states or conditions like e.g veritus (fearing), adductus (driven).

Agent coreference:

• The relations manner, means and purpose require that the agent of the participle is coreferent with the subject of the main verb.


Temporal and temporal-causal interpretations are typically found in contexts where there is a thematic break in the story:

([…]in Sotiatum fines exercitum introduxit.)

Cuius adventu cognito Sotiates

his arrival:ABL know:PRTC.PERF.PASS.ABL Sotiates:NOM

proelium commiserunt

battle join:PERF.3.PL

(he [Caesar] led the army into the territories of the Sotiates)

“Hearing of his arrival, […] the Sotiates joined battle”



% of CP % of AA

Thematic: 53,9% 67,8%

Concessive-conditional - 0,5%

Concessive - 2%

Conditional 1% 4,9%

Causal 28,4% 3,4%

Temporal-causal 13,7% 18%

Temporal 10,8% 39%

Rhematic: 33,3% 24,9%

Contrast 3,9% 0,5%

Narrative progression 29,4% 24,4%

Elaborative: 12,7% 7,3%

Means - 3,4%

Acc.circumstance 12,7% 3,9%

Distribution of the different interpretaions:

• According to Kortmann (1995), there is a general tendency that in languages that have both constructions converbs with an explicit subject will predominantly express relations on the lower part of the information hierarchy, while converbs with an implicit subject to a much larger degree also will be used to express relations on the upper part of the hierarchy.


Distribution of the different interpretaions:

• According to Kortmann (1995), there is a general tendency that in languages that have both constructions converbs with an explicit subject will predominantly express relations on the lower part of the information hierarchy, while converbs with an implicit subject to a much larger degree also will be used to express relations on the upper part of the hierarchy.

• In Latin the other way around?



CP (102) AA (205)

Thematic: 28,4% (55) 71,6% (139)

Concessive-conditional - 100% (1)

Concessive - 100% (4)

Conditional 9,1% (1) 90,9% (10)

Causal 80,5% (29) 19,5% (7)

Temporal-causal 27,4% (14) 72,6% (37)

Temporal 12,1% (11) 87,9% (80)

Rhematic: 40% (34) 60% (51)

Contrast 80% (4) 20% (1)

Narrative progression 37,5% (30) 62,5% (50)

Elaborative: 46,4% (13) 53,6% (15)

Means - 100% (7)

Acc.circumstance 61,9% (13) 38,1% (8)

The function of the absolute

• Absolute constructions seem to have a wider function and express more complex semantic relations in Latin than in other languages.


The function of the absolute

• Absolute constructions seem to have a wider function and express more complex semantic relations in Latin than in other languages.

• Ablative absolute construction used as a substitute for a lacking perfective active participle.


Summary

• Latin predicative participles can fill three different syntactic functions that correspond with different sets of possible interpretations and different roles in the information structure of the sentence.


Summary

• Latin predicative participles can fill three different syntactic functions that correspond with different sets of possible interpretations and different roles in the information structure of the sentence.

• Besides pragmatic inferences based on general world-knowledge and contextual given information, factors like the actionality of the participle, the mood/tense of the matrix verb, the lexical semantics of the participle, restrictions on agent coreference and thematic breaks can further restrict the set of potential interpretations.


Summary

• In De bello gallico relations low on the hierarchy like temporal, temporal-causal, causal, narrative progression and accompanying circumstances are by far the most frequent (ca. 90%), and there are few occurences of the more complex relations.


Summary

• In De bello gallico relations low on the hierarchy like temporal, temporal-causal, causal, narrative progression and accompanying circumstances are by far the most frequent (ca. 90%), and there are few occurences of the more complex relations.

• The participle with an explicit subject seems to play a greater role in latin than in other languages and this must probably be seen in light of the fact that Latin lacks a perfective active participle and therefore resorts to the ablative absolute as a substitute.


The interpretation of Latin predicative participles15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin...

Documents

Transcript of The interpretation of Latin predicative participles15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin...