Latin BE-periphrases, Aux-cliticization, and the genesis of Romance analytic BE-passives

Lieven Danckaert (UGent, GIST)

2. VPAux/AuxVP in the history of Latin

possum

Average rates of AuxVP:

• earlier period : 31,60%• later period: 58,50%

Statistically significant?

Yes (Independent samples T-test, p = .000)

2. VPAux/AuxVP in the history of Latin

debeo

Average rates of AuxVP:

• earlier period : 32,83%• later period: 51,21%

Statistically significant?

Yes (Independent samples T-test, p = .025)

2. VPAux/AuxVP in the history of Latin

BE

Average rates of AuxVP:

• earlier period : 24,29%• later period: 19,00%

Statistically significant?

No (Independent samples T-test, p = .494)

3. The evolution of the F-pattern

Relative frequency of F-periphrases

Average rates of AuxVP:

• earlier period : 4,55%• later period with

outliers: 29,35%• later period without

outliers: 12,42%

Statistically significant?

• with outliers: Yes (Independent samples T-test, p = .000)

• without outliers: Yes (Independent samples T-test, p = .006)

3. The evolution of the F-pattern

• Frequency of head-initial TPs in E and F-patterns compared:

Average rates of AuxVP:

• Early: E: 29,03%F: 20,38%

• Statistically significant with outliers: No (Independent samples T-test, p = .905)

• Late: E: 12,43%F: 47,11%

• Statistically significant with outliers: Yes (Independent samples T-test, p = .000)

3. The evolution of the F-pattern

• Frequency of head-initial TPs in Late Latin, with different Aux’s: