J

AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND

HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE

General Editor E. F. KONRAD KOERNER

(University of Ottawa)

Series IV - CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY

Advisory Editorial Board

Henning Andersen (Los Angeles); Raimo Anttila (Los Angeles) Thomas V. Gamkrelidze (Tbilisi); John E. Joseph (Hong Kong) Hans-Heinrich Lieb (Berlin); Ernst Pulgram (Ann Arbor, Mich.) E. Wyn Roberts (Vancouver, B.c.); Danny Steinberg (Tokyo)

Volume 109

William Pagliuca (ed.)

Perspectives on Grammaticalization

PERSPECTIVES ON GRAMMATICALIZATION

Edited by

WILLIAM PAGLIUCA University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA

/

§'" The pape r used in this publication meets the minimum requ irements of American Nat ional Standard for Information Sciences - Permanence of Pape r for Printed Library Materials. ANSI Z39.48-1984.

CUBIF. -----__ dli AOOUIS . Fl __ , _____ ,

FEC t

PRO , r ' . s .. ___ .... ........ -

He. f'AC1U R", ........ . .... .... dritI

:f2qg - -) 2 ] ~, :0 .,--j

1"1{ 1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Perspectives on grammatica liza tion I edited by William Pagliuca. p . em .•. (Amsterdam studies in the theory and hi story of linguistic science.

Se ries IV , Current issues in linguistic theory , ISSN 0304·0763; v. 109) Includes bibliograph ical re ferences and index. 1. Grammar , Comparat ive and general--Grammat icalization. 1. Pagliuca, William. II.

Series. P299,G73P47 1994 415--dc20 ISBN 9Q 272 3612 7 (Eu r,)11-55619-563-X (US) (alk , paper)

CI Copyright 1994 - John Benjamins B.V.

94- 1455 1 CIP

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print , photoprint , microfilm , or any o th er means, without written permission from the publisher.

John Benj amins Publishing Co .. P.O. Box 75577· 1070 AN Amsterdam· The Netherlands John Benjamins Nonh America· P.O.Box 27519· Philadelphia , PA 19118 . USA

,. ,.~.-.', ~'. -;"-"' ~"

,

Preface

The thirteen papers in this volume represent a selection of the papers on grammaticalization topics presented at the Nineteenth Annual Linguistics Symposium of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The theme of the symposium was Explanation in Historical Linguistics, and the first volume of selected papers from the conference has already appeared in this series as Explanation in Historical Linguistics, Garry W. Davis and Gregory K. Iverson (eds) (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory , 84), Most of the papers in the present volume appear in revised form.

The editor would like to thank all those who attended or helped organize the symposium , especially the members of the symposium organiz­ing committee and those who chaired sessions or registration tables. Special thanks go to the College of Letters and Science and several of its affiliated departments at UWM for continued financial and intellectual support of the annual UWM Linguistics Symposium series, and to Garry Davis , who bore primary responsibility for organization and scheduling, and who saw to it that all aspects of what was an exceptionally large symposium ran as smoothly as possible,

FL 4 7048

The Grammaticalization of French a

Patricia Kilroe University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

1. Introduction: Stages of grammaticalization

It will be shown here that an analysis in terms of grammaticaiization fits the historical facts of French d, a preposition with a basically locative function. The focus will be on certain developments of sense and syntax that the preposition has undergone in the course of the history of French. Concern­ing sense change, I will look at how the concrete spatial relations expressi­ble b French a aqd i!.s Lat~ ety~on ad form the semantic basis of the grammatical meanings of ii. I will use the term 'concrete' generally to mean "existing in reality or in real experience, perceptible by the senses."

As for syntactic development, I will look at some of the constructions within which French a has become constrained over the centuries. I will not be concerned with the phonological or morphological changes of gram­maticalization. Reduction of both form and stress occurred in the evolution of the Latin adverb ad to the Latin preposition aa to the French preposition a; except in relation to the definite article, however, French a has not changed its phonological shape or its status as an unbound morpheme since the beginning of Old French. The change in form will therefore be ignored.

Following Lehmann (1982), Heine and Reh (1984), and Bybee and Pagliuca (1985), J posit that grammaticalization follows a predictable pat­tern, and that the historical evidence from the French preposition a upholds the pattern hypothesized. My interpretation of the pattern, which I am proposing for the grammaticalization of French a, is given in (1).

50

(1) STAGE

2 3 4

SENSE

transferred generalized grammatical empty

SYNTAX

free I I ,

de pe ndent

Patricia Kilroe

The history of French prepositions, which I will illust rate with tI , provides evidence that gra mm atical ization is unidirectional , proceeding from con­crete to abstract sense by means of metaphorical or metonymic transfer . and proceeding syntactica lly from relative freedom and indepe nde nce to

dependence a nd fixation,l Several stages of grammaticalization are identifiable in the history of

Latin adfFrcnch a. These stages are identified in the present section; exam­ples are provided in sect ion 3. The term 'stage' is employed broadly here, in reference to a developmental, transitional process occurring over a period of time, as well as to the results of that process.

At Stage 1, the preposition express ing, hypothetically, a single, con­crete sense, len t itself to semantic transfer. This first stage was also the first step in the bleaching of the semantic content of the preposition , since a word form necessarily loses some of the specificity of its original, unique sense when it becomes polysemous. So, a t Stage 1, the stat us of the prepo~ sition shifted from monosemous to polysemous. Metonymically acquired concrete senses as well as metaphorical, no nconcre te senses develo ped from the earliest , spatial meaning of Latin ad, which was allat ive without obligatory specificatio n of goal attainment. In componential terms, the ear~

liest use of ad expressed ~h e components PATH and TOWARDS. The metonymic. senses include, in hypothe tical order of acquisition , goal of motion , proximity , limit of motion , and loca tive . Metaphorically derived senses were many, e.g. time, accorda nce , and comparison.

At Stage 2, several of the transferred senses underwent gene ralization , so that these transferred senses became more frequent, gained wider syn~

tactic dist ributional possibilities, and conseque ntly underwent further bleaching. It would seem that metaphor was a mechanism of Stage 2 development (as well as of Stage 1) ; the gene rali za tion from one sort of dis­tribution to ano ther, e.g. preposition + locative noun to prepositio n + infinitive, is typically a development of a concrete~to~ abstract nature. 2

A t Stage 3, as a specific transferred sense was undergoing generaliza~

tio n, the preposition was at the same time losing syntactic freedom , with the result that it increasingly occurred in conventiona l grammatical frames.

The Grammaticalization of French a 51

At this stage , the relation expressed by the preposition in the conventional frame in question can be called gra mmat ical ; the preposition is being e mployed as a grammatical re lator to a greater degree than it is being e mployed to express le xico~semantic content. The preposition has become a n indispensable grammatical device in these various structures, and, as Lehmann (1985) observes, it cannot be omitted o r replaced in those struc­tures. So , at Stage 3, generalized sense became grammat ical sense, which necessarily entailed increased syntact iciza tion of the preposition in some distributions. This syntacticization in turn went hand in hand with con­tinued bleaching of the semantic content o f the word in particular distribu­tions, with the result that the sense of the grammaticalized form became subordinated to the conventionalized meaning expressed by the structure in which it appeared.

Within Stage 3, a d istinctio n can be made between uses o f the preposi­tion as a grammatical relator in product ive constructions, and uses in fro~ zen, nonproductive phrases which may neverthe less occur commonly in la n~

guage use. This distinction will not, however, be of concern here . There is also a fourth stage of development that the preposition 0 has

undergone in some distributions , in which it has lost its ability to express a part icular relatio n, thus becoming virtually e mpty of sense. In Stage 4, the

relation that had been expressed was perceived as redundant or insignific­a nt in its construction , and the prepositional form expressing that re lat ion was eliminated from that constructio n. Evidence of this sort of develop­ment can only be identified historica ll y, since only following the eliminat ion of a grammatica li zed word can it be assumed that the word form must have become empty of sense in the period prior to its elimination. An example from French is the use of 0 to introduce a noun attribute complement , which wi ll be taken up later (section 3.3.). Stage 4 is also the stage at which the preposition can no longer express a re latio n that ~pparently continues to need expression. For French 0, this is evidenced by distributions in which the preposit ion has been replaced by a less bleached preposition . So, Stage 4 is the eliminat ion or replacement of the preposition in particular distribu-tions. \

These stages are meant to indicate approximate focal points on a con ~

tinuing scale of deve lopment. In real time, the stages occurred simul ~

taneouly for some uses of the preposit ion, so that , for example , a new sense was be ing acquired even as ano ther sense was being generalized. Further , spatial relations, such as the locative , continued to be expressed by the preposition even following acquisition of grammatical meaning. It is , more~

.' "

52 Patricia Kilroe

over, impossible to determine where the boundary between these stages actually falls. This problem is especially acute for Stages 1 and 2; the differ­ence between a semantically transferred sense and a syntactically generalized sense is often elusive. Nevertheless, when considered synchron­ically, examples of the use of Ii can be categorized with little difficulty into the stages as I have delimited them. Despite their oversimplification, these stages serve as a useful guide to a general understanding of the history of the preposition Ii. What the data from the history of French show is that it is not the number of transferred Stage 1 senses of the preposition a which have increased since the beginning of Old French , but rather it is the generalization and syntacticization of these senses, Stages 2 and 3, that best characterizes the history of French il.

2. Relations expressed by Latin ad, Old French ,;

As stated earlier . French a is derived from the Latin preposition ad. The two basic spatial senses of Classical Latin ad were allative and locative. Latin ad could also express a host of transferred relations which had been generalized. Thus, gramrnaticalization stages 1 and 2 had already occurred in Latin. The Oxford Latin Dictionary (1982) lists no fewer than forty-six different senses for Classical Latin ad. These are grouped into seven gen· eral categories , given in (2):

(2) General Relations Expressible by Latin ad (OLD 1982) a. motion , direction (concrete and metaphorical) b . limit (in space, time , of a thought , etc.) c. position, situation (at , near, in contact with , in front of, for

space, time; for numbers, approximately) d . addition , increment , application e. response, opposition, dealing with f. accordance, comparison , standard g. function , purpose, result

In addition to these senses inherited by Old French Ii from Latin ad, phonetic merging of Latin ad with the Latin prepositions ab 'from'. and apud 'at, near, by with', resulted in a partial semantic merger, such that it was possible for the Old French form [a J to express relations other than those expressed by Latin ad. The merging of ad with ab was complete by the beginning of Old French , with the result that Old French Ii was able to

The Grammaticalization of French d 53

express the ablative-derived senses of source and agent. The phonetic development of [apudJ > [od], [oj eventually resulted in another phonetic merger with d, which resulted in the use of d to express comitative functions in Old French (ad could , however, already replace apud in certain distribu­

tions in Classical Latin) . The major relations expressed by Old French Ii are given in (3). These

relations are organized on the basis of the classification in Godefroy (1937) , where examples from Old French texts can be found.

(3) Relations expressible by Old French Ii a. Allative

i. direction in physical space toward a person, place, object ii. direction or duration in time iii . goal, purpose , destination iv. goal in sense of attribute, quality v. possession3

vi. dative b. Locative

i. in physical space ii . in time

iii. situation with regard to someone or something

c. Comitative function I. accompaniment; beside, compared to

II. manner ; according to , in accordance with; in adverbial locutions expressing manner ; condition

iii. cause iv. instrument v. material

d. Ablative « Latin ab) I. source before a noun, +/-animate

ii. agent

, 3. French a: Grammaticalization stages 2, 3, and 4

The bulk of the evidence for Stage 1 of the grammaticalization pattern into which French a fits is in Latin and pre-Latin . The remainder of this paper will focus on a selection of the evidence concerning Stages 2, 3, and 4 in

French.

54 Patricia Kilroc

3. 1 Stage 2: From transferred to generalized sense

At Stage 2, the use o f a before abstract complements can be identified . Most of this evidence is found in Old French, some in Late Latin , and some in Middle French and Classical French .

The sense of goal expressible by French d , for example, was generalized when it became able to int roduce a host of abstract noun com­plements. T he use of a to express goal before an infinitive is a further generalization of the goal metaphor , with the infinitive referr ing abstractly by definition. The construction ad + Infinitive first appeared in Late Latin before an infinitive expressing a concrete activity , as seen in (4a) . The cor­responding construction appears in Old French, with a typically appearing after a verb of physical activity and before an infinitive referring to physical act ivity, as shown in (4b) and (4c). Also found in Old French, a lthough less often, is a following a verb of nonconcrete activity and preceding an infini­tive of phys ical activity or perception , as in (4d); rarely. the fo llowing infin­itive as well as the preceding verb refer to abstract phenomena , as in (4e).

(4) Stage Two Grammaticalization a. dare ad manducare

'to give to eat' (i.e. 'for eating') (ltala, John 6 ,52) b. as plus povres ie donel a mangier

'he gives it [food] to the poo rest people for eat ing' (Saint A lexis)

c. Or poez savoir que mull de cels del ost aleren! a veoir Con­stantinople

' Now , you may know that many of those of the army went (in order) to see Constantinople' (Villehardouin)

d . Celui qu'ele desirroit a veoir 'The one that she wanted to see' (Lancelot)

e. Quat a si grant chose convient moult a penser 'For, about such an important thing it is fitting to reflect a great deal' (Villehardouin 13)

3.2 Seage 3: Grammatical meaning

There are many productive Stage 3 constructions in modern French, in which a is an indispensable re lator. Most of these have developed since the Old French period . A small selection will be highlighted here.

The Grammaticalization of French a 55

3.2. 1 Manlier The Latin preposition ad could express manner, having apparently derived this sense from the sense of instrument , which in turn was derived from the sense of proximity or contact. 4 The expression of manner is a more abstract , more general, sense than that of concrete instrument. A was widely used to express manner in Old French, but free, independent uses have mostly been replaced by avec 'with ', the basic comitative marker in modern French.

A construction in modern French expressing manner, however, into which a host of expressions fits, is a + (Concrete or Abstract) Noun, with the noun usually indeterminate but sometimes preceded by a possessive adjective . Examples are given in (5a).

(5) Stage Three Grammaticalizat ion a. Manner

a genoux 'on bended knee ' au galop 'at a gallop' a son gre ' to one's liking' a mon insu ' unknown to me ' a sa guise 'as one likes' (dormir) a poings ferm es ' (to sleep) soundly' (lit. 'with closed fists' )

b. Manner of Transportation a pied 'on foot' a cheval 'on horseback' a bicyc/ette ' by bicycle' a vela ' by bicycle, moped' a skis 'on skis'

56

c. a + Fem.Sg. Def.Art . + {Fem.Sg.Adj.} or

a la fran raise ' in the French style' a la legere 'lightly, carelessly' a la diable

{m.lf. noun }

'any old way' (i.e. 'devil's style'; diable is a masculine noun in French) a La Mitterand

Patricia Kilroe

'Mitterand style' ('Mitterand ' a proper name whose refe rent is male)

A "t ransportation" subset of manner exists for this construction, as illus­trated in (5b). The last th ree examples in (5b) apparently came about by analogy with the first two in (5b), but a is now in competi tion with en ' in ' in these phrases, i.e. en bicyclelle, en velo, en skis. The substitution of en for Ii is probably by analogy with en voilure 'by car' (Grevisse 1986) , although it has also been suggested that en skis occurs by analogy with en chaussures ' in shoes' and ell sabots ' in clogs' . This use of ell merits observation to see if it will influence other expressions in the transportation subset, and perhaps even non-transportation manner express ions in this construction, to replace a with ell . If this change continues to be generalized, then the use of a in the a + Indete rminate Noun manner construction may ultim ately reach Stage 4 grammatica liza tion, with a being ousted by en for all future innovations within this construction .

Another Stage 3 manner construction in modern French is a + Feminine Singular Definit e Article + Feminine Singular Adj ective O R Masculine or Feminine Noun . This construction is ellipt ical, the recovered construction being a la maniere (de) ... 'in the manner of' o r a fa mode (de) ... ' in the style of. Examples are given in (5c).

3.2.2 Purpose The construction Determiner + Concrete Noun + a + (Indeterminate) Concrete Noun, to indicate the concrete purpose for which a mate rial object is intended, is widely employed in modern French. The sense of pur­pose expressible by a is part of the goal metaphor, derived from the allative sense. Examples are given in (6) .

The Grammaticalization of French a

(6) Pu rpose une (asse a the 't""cup' (i.e. 'a cup fo r tea ') line machine a ecrire ' typewri ter' un moulin a cafe 'coffee mill ' un ver a soie 'silkworm' line bofte aux [eares

'mailbox' un pot a jleurs ' fl owerpot'

3.2.3 Dative marker

57

The preposit ion a is the basic dative marker in modern French. The use of a to signal the dative is a Stage 3, grammaticalized extension of the goal metaphor. Examples are provided in (7).

(7) Dative Marker elle a parle a Marie 'she spoke to Marie' nOLis l' aVails dOllne a Paul 'we gave it to Paul'

3.3 Stage 4: Emply of sense

One of the clearest illustrations of Stage 4 gra I11l11aticaliza tion in French is the use of a to introduce a noun attribute complement, derived from its use to express metaphorical goal. An example is given in (8).

(8) Noun +Verb +it+Noun Attribute Complement O. Fr.: Charlon elistrent a roi

'They chose Charles to be king' Mod.Fr.: A" a iilu Charles president

' they elected Charles president'

This now~defuncl use of a, which began with Class ical Latin ad and was greatly extended in Late Latin , had almost completely disappeared by Mid­

dle French.'

58 Patricia Kilroe

In general, a is less in use in modern French than it was in Old French. There has been a general retreat of OJ especially before ani mate nouns. From O ld French to modem French there has been a loss of some construc­tions as well as nuances of senses, particularly those derived from the late­Latin absorbed ab senses (source. agent), and apud senses (the comitative function) . Of the concrete relations in physical space expressible by Old French d, only the expression of the locative is stable and independent in modern French . It appears to be the case that a ll of the uses of a in Old French that were at Stages 1 and 2, that is, all of the relatively free, nonsyn­tacticized uses of a expressing all transferred relations, EXCEPT the locat ive, have been o r are in the process of being repl aced in modern French. Tn relatively nonsyntacticized phrases, pour 'for ', for example, replaces a in the. expression of goal, a phenomenon that has been increasing since the 16th century ; avec 'with ' replaces ii in the comitative function, especially before an animate noun ; de 'of, from ' has replaced a in most of the expres­sions of possession and source in which a could appear in Old French; par 'by' and de replace a in the expression of agent, a phenomenon that has been increasing since the 17th century.

Further , the ability of modern French a to express the allative in phys­ical space (PATH TOWARDS or GOAL) has been severely restricted, its use being for the most part confined to a Verb + a + Locative Complement construction in which the verb indicates a change of location (e.g. aller 'go', venir 'come'), and goal attainment is specified (9a). When goal attainment is not specified, that is, to express path without goal, the preposition vers ' toward ' is used in place of a (9b); vers can also be found in place of earlier a before an animate complement when goal is implied (9c). Following verbs which focus on the manner of a change of location, e.g. nager 'to swim ' and courir ' to run ', the prepositional phrase jusqu'a 'to , up to, until' is preferred to a when goal attainment is specified (9d). Jusqu'a is required before com­plements where the goal meaning of a could be confused with the locative (ge).

(9) Movement in Physical Space a. oller a Paris

' to go to Paris' conduire quelqu'un a I'h6tel 'to drive someone to the hotel' retourner a son Jardin ' to re turn to one's garden '

The Grammalicalization of French a

b. aller vers fa ville ' to go in the direction of the city' aller vers La fenelre ' to go toward the window'

c. if se tourne vers SOil pere 'he turns to his father '

d. nager jusqu' au rivage ' to swim to the shore'

e. prendre "ascenseur jusqu'au quatrierne ' to take the elevator to the fourth fl oor'

59

A simplified , summary schema of the historical development of ad/a in terms 0f the components PATH , GOAL, and LOCATIVE is given in (10). Recall that , historically, the use of Latin ad to express the locative derived from its use to express goal, which derived in turn from the expression of path towards.

( 10) Development of ad/a by Components PATH GOAL LOCATIVE

Earliest Lat. x Pre-Cl. Lat. x x CI. Lat. , Late

Lat. & O.Fr. x x x CI. French x x Modern French (x) x

4. Conclusion

In order to appreciate grammaticalizat ion as a diachronic process, it is use­fu l to observe data for which there is evidence extending over an extended period of time. The historical facts from pre-Latin, Latin and French pro­vide documentation that contributes to our understanding of the gram­mat icalization of modern French prepositions.

The grammaticalization pattern explored here has been applied only to French a. My research suggests , however, that a similar pattern holds for the full set of French prepositions, and probably fo r the prepositions in many, perhaps all , Romance languages.

60 Patricia Kilroe

Noles

I. An explanation of the use of the term 'metonymic' is necessary here. While the most common usc of 'metonymy' in recent linguistic li terature has retained the relatively speci fic sense of "part for whole." broader uses of the term occur at least as early as Ullmann (1964: 177) to mean that two objects or ideas may be associated " by 'contiguity' , the fact that they coexist in the same menIal co ntex t. " It is in this broad se nse that I apply the term 'metonymic' to changes in the concrete relations of Lat in ad. The type of changes to which I apply this term, moreover. e.g. the development of the locative from the al1 ati ve . have been alluded to by Stern (1 93 1:63-4) as "lack of knowledge concerning the referent" or "objective uncertainty" . Stern ill ustrates this notion by the fact that the French word form cuisse ' thigh' has as its Lati n etymon the word form coxa . mea ning 'h ip', explaining this sense change as a result of the difficul ty in determining where the referent of hip ends and that of Ihigh begins.

2. There are, of course , steps in between the prep. + locative noun to prep. + infi nitive development , including such complements as animate noun, inanimate noun , and verbal noun of physical activity. At each of these steps, the se mantic component G OAL remains

constan!.

3. Godcfroy (1937) cl asses the use of a to express possession as locative-derived . See Kilroe (1989) (or an account of Ihis use as allative-derived via the goal metaphor, as shown in

(3) .

4. Sec, in this regard , Meye r-Lubke ( 19OQ).

S. There remains an extremely limited use of a to signal noun attribute complement in a few frozen expressions in modern French , e .g. prendre a Ib noin 'to call to witness'.

References

Bybee, Joa n & WilJ iam Pagliuca . 1985. "Cross-lingu istic co mpariso n a nd the develop­me nt of grammati cal mcaning". Historical Semantics. Historical Word-Formatioll, ed. by J ace k F isiak , 59-83. A msterdam: Mouton .

G lare, P.O.W. (ed.) 1982. Th e o.xford Latin Dictionary . O xfo rd : Oxford U nive rsity

P re ss . Godcfroy, Frederic. 1937 . Dictionnaire de I'ancien langue /raTl faise. Paris: Lib rairie des

Sciences et des A rts. G revisse, Maurice. 1986. Le Bon Usage. Pa ris: Ducu lot. H eine, Be rnd & Mecbtbild Re h. 1984. Grammaticalizatiofl and Retmalysis in African

Languages. H a mburg: He lmut Buske. Kilroe , Patricia . 1989. The Grammaticalization of French ii . U npublished Ph .D . d isser­

ta ti on , T he Unive rsity o f Texas at A ust in . Lehmann, Christ ian. 1982. Thoughts on Gram maticalizatiOfI. A Programmatic Sketch .

Vol. L A KUP 48. Le hm ann, Christia n . 1985 . "Gramm aticalization: Synchronic variation a nd diach ronic

change". Lingua e stile 20 .303-18.

The Grammaticalization of French a 61

Meyer-Lubke, W . 1900. Grammaire des tangues romanes. Vol 3. T ra nslated by A. and G. Dout)"cpont. Paris: Welter.

Ste rn , Gustaf. 193 1. Meaning and Change of Meaning. Bloo m ingto n : India na U niversity

Press. U ll ma nn , Stephen. 1964. Language and Style . Oxfo rd : Basil Blackwell .