Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Between demonstrative and definite: A grammar competition model of the evolution of French l-determiners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2020

Alexandra Simonenko
Affiliation:
FWO & Universiteit Gent
Anne Carlier
Affiliation:
Sorbonne Université

Abstract

This article investigates the spread of the le/la/les-forms in the diachrony of French on the basis of large-scale corpora. It focuses on the issue of their “mixed” distribution viz. the observation that during a long period of time the le/la/les-forms in French do not pattern as either (anaphoric) demonstratives from which they originate (Late Latin ille), nor as (uniqueness-based) definites, which they end up becoming in Modern French. We model the phenomenon as a competition between two grammars which ascribe different Logical Forms to the l-forms and test model predictions in contexts which differ with respect to whether they satisfy the relevant conditions for either demonstrative or definite semantics. We also suggest that this change was part of a larger change involving the spread of presupposition triggers within noun phrases. We show that our model correctly predicts the relative rates of determiner spread in various contexts.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article étudie le développement des formes le/la/les dans la diachronie du français sur la base de corpus à grande échelle, en examinant la question de leur distribution “mixte” : pendant une longue période les formes le/la/les en français ne se comportent ni comme les démonstratifs (anaphoriques) dont elles sont issues (ille du latin tardif), ni comme les déterminants définis (marqueurs d'unicité) qu'elles finissent par devenir en français moderne. Nous modélisons ce phénomène de “distribution mixte” comme une compétition entre deux grammaires qui assignent des formes logiques distinctes aux formes en l- et nous testons les prédictions de ce modèle tour à tour dans des contextes qui satisfont aux conditions d'emploi des démonstratifs, d'une part, et à celles des déterminants définis, d'autre part. Nous suggérons que ce changement s'inscrit dans une évolution plus globale impliquant l’émergence des marqueurs de présupposition d'existence au sein des syntagme nominaux. Nous montrons que notre modèle prédit correctement les différences quant au rythme de développement des déterminants en l- en fonction du type de contexte.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

This works owes much to the inspiration from Anthony Kroch and the relentless corpus work by Beatrice Santorini. We are extremely grateful to Igor Yanovich for most thorough and helpful comments on the statistical modeling part, as well as to our anonymous reviewers. The project has benefited from the discussions with participants of the Formal Diachronic Semantics workshop in 2016 and the workshop of the research group Multidisciplinary Empirical Research Modelling Acquisition In Diachrony that took places at the University of Mannheim in 2018. On the part of the second author, this research was carried out as part of the Franco-German PaLaFra project (ANR-DFG-14-FRAL-0006).

References

Barker, Chris. 2008. Possessives and relational nouns. In Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, ed. Maienborn, Claudia, von Heusinger, Klaus, and Portner, Paul, 11091130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Beck, Sigrid. 2012. Pluractional comparisons. Linguistics and Philosophy 35(1): 57110.Google Scholar
Boucher, Paul. 2005. Definite reference in Old and Modern French: The rise and fall of DP. In Grammaticalization and parametric variation, ed. Batllori, Carme Picallo Montserrat, Hernanz, Maria-Lluïsa and Roca, Francesc, 95108. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne. 2007. From preposition to article: The grammaticalization of the French partitive. Studies in Language 31(1): 149.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne. 2013. Grammaticalization in progress in Old French: Indefinite articles. In Research on Old French: The state of the art, ed. Arteaga, Deborah, 4560. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne and De Mulder, Walter. 2010. The emergence of the definite article in Late Latin ille in competition with ipse. In Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, ed. Cuykens, H., Davidse, K., and Van de Lanotte, L., 241275. The Hague: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Carlier, Anne and Goyens, Michèle. 1998. De l'ancien français au français moderne : régression du degré zéro de la détermination et restructuration du système des articles. Cahiers de l'Institut de linguistique de Louvain 24(3–4): 77112.Google Scholar
Corblin, Francis. 1987. Indéfini, défini et démonstratif: constructions linguistiques de la référence. Paris: Droz.Google Scholar
Crisma, Paola. 2011. The emergence of the definite article in English. In The Noun Phrase in Romance and Germanic. Structure, variation, and change, ed. Sleeman, P. and Perridon, H., 175192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Mulder, Walter and Carlier, Anne. 2006. Du démonstratif à l'article défini : le cas de “ce” en français moderne. Langue française (152): 96113.Google Scholar
De Mulder, Walter and Carlier, Anne. 2011. Definite articles. In The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, ed. Bernd, Heine and Heiko, Narrog, 522–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Déchaine, Rose-Marie, Dufresne, Monique, and Tremblay, Mireille. 2018. The trajectory of φ-features on Old French D and n. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 63(2): 167193.Google Scholar
Delfitto, Denis and Schroten, Jan. 1991. Bare plurals and the number affix in DPs. Probus 3(2): 155185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dever, Josh. 2001. Complex demonstratives. Linguistics and Philosophy 24: 271330.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 1999. The morphosyntax of demonstratives in synchrony and diachrony. Linguistic Typology 3: 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2013. Indefinite articles. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, ed. Dryer, Matthew S. and Haspelmath, Martin. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. URL https://wals.info/chapter/38.Google Scholar
Egedi, Barbara. 2014. The DP-cycle in Hungarian and the functional extension of the noun phrase. In The evolution of functional left peripheries in Hungarian syntax. Oxford studies in diachronic and historical linguistics, ed. Kiss, Katalin É., vol. 11, 5682. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elbourne, Paul. 2008. Demonstratives as individual concepts. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(4): 409466.Google Scholar
Fournier, Nathalie. 2002. Grammaire du français classique. Paris: Éditions Bélin.Google Scholar
Fox, Danny. 2002. Antecedent-contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33(1): 6396.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. How does a language acquire gender markers? Universals of Human Language, Vol. 3, Word structure. Ed. Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles H. Ferguson and Edith A. Moravcsick: 4782. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Grimm, Scott. 2014. Individuating the abstract. In Proceedings of Sinn and Bedeutung, vol. 18, 182200.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1991. Articles and definiteness. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, ed. von Stechow, Arnim and Wunderlich, Dieter. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hertzenberg, Mari Johanne Bordal. 2015. Third person reference in Late Latin: Demonstratives, definite articles and personal pronouns in the Itinerarium Egeriae, vol. 288. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kauhanen, Henri and Walkden, George. 2018. Deriving the Constant Rate Effect. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36(2): 483521.Google Scholar
Keenan, Caitlin. 2011. Greenberg revisited: Diachronic development of article systems & the structure of DP. Paper presented at the 13th International Diachronic Generative Syntax Conference.Google Scholar
King, Jeffrey C. 2001. Complex demonstratives: A quantificational account. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
King, Jeffrey C. 2008. Complex demonstratives, QI uses, and direct reference. Philosophical Review 117(1): 99117.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1(3): 199244.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony and Santorini, Beatrice. 2010. Penn Supplement to the MCVF (Martineau et al.).Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony and Santorini, Beatrice. 2014. On the word order of Early Old French. Handout for a talk at the 7th Conference on Syntax, Phonology and Language Analysis (SinFonIJA 7), Graz, Austria.Google Scholar
Labelle, Marie. 2007. Clausal architecture in Early Old French. Lingua 117(1): 289316.Google Scholar
Labelle, Marie and Hirschbühler, Paul. 2005. Changes in clausal organization and the position of clitics in Old French. In Grammaticalization and parametric variation, ed. Batllori, Montserrat, Hernanz, Maria-Lluïsa, Picallo, Carme, and Roca, Francesc, 6071. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lamiroy, Béatrice. 2003. Grammaticalization and external possessor structures in Romance and Germanic languages. In From NP to DP, ed. Coene, Martine and D'hulst, Yves, vol. 2, 257280. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Le Bruyn, Bert. 2014. Inalienable possession: The semantics of the definite article. Weak referentiality, ed. Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts, 311334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Löbner, Sebastian. 1985. Definites. Journal of Semantics 4(4): 279326.Google Scholar
Marchello-Nizia, Christiane. 1995. L’évolution du français. Ordre des mots, démonstratifs, accent tonique. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Marchello-Nizia, Christiane and Rouquier, Magali. 2012. De (S)OV à SVO en français: où et quand? L'ordre des constituants propositionnels dans la “Passion de Clermont” et la “Vie de saint Alexis”. In Constructions en changement. Hommage à Paul Hirschbühler, ed. Dufresne, Monique, 111155. Québec: Presses de l'Université de Laval.Google Scholar
Martineau, et al. 2010. Corpus MCVF annoté syntaxiquement, (2005–2010), dirigé par France Martineau, avec Paul Hirschbühler, Anthony Kroch et Yves Charles Morin.Google Scholar
Mathieu, Éric. 2009. From local blocking to cyclic agree. In Determiners: Universals and variations, ed. Ghomeshi, Jila, Paul, Ileana, and Wiltschko, Martina, vol. 147, 123158. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Neale, Stephen. 1993. Term limits. Philosophical Perspectives 7: 89123.Google Scholar
Nicolas, David. 2018. The logic of mass expressions. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, winter 2018 ed.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 1987. Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers, ed. J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, and Martin Stokhof, vol. 8, 115143. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. 2003. Variationist approaches to syntactic change. In The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D., 509528. Wiley Online Library.Google Scholar
Powell, George. 2001. Complex demonstratives. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 13.Google Scholar
Randall, Beth. 2010. CorpusSearch. URL http://corpussearch.sourceforge.net/.Google Scholar
Rickard, Peter. 1989. A History of the French Language. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Roca, Francesc. 2009. The left periphery of nominal constructions and the evolution of definite determiners in Romance. Diachronic Linguistics 495551.Google Scholar
Rouillard, Vincent and Schwarz, Bernhard. 2017. Presuppositional implicatures: Quantity or Maximize Presupposition? Poster presented at Sinn and Bedeutung 22, Berlin/Potsdam, September 710.Google Scholar
Sauerland, Uli. 2008. Implicated presuppositions. In The discourse potential of underspecified structure, ed. Steube, Anita. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schøsler, Lene. 2018. How useful is case morphology?: from Latin to French. In Latin tardif, français ancien: Continuités et ruptures, ed. Carlier, Anne and Guillot-Barbance, Céline, 127170. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Florian. 2009. Two types of definites in natural language. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Sharvy, Richard. 1980. A more general theory of definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review 89(4): 607624.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra. 2014. Grammatical ingredients of definiteness. Doctoral dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra. To appear. Full vs. clitic vs. bound determiners. Oxford Handbook of Determiners, ed. Wiltschko, Martina and Armoskaite, Solveiga. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/004519.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra and Carlier, Anne. Under review. Semantic evolution of pre-nominal possessives: A comparative quantitative study of French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian. URL https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/005079.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra, Crabbé, Benoit, and Prévost, Sophie. 2018. Effects of text form on grammatical changes in Medieval French. A treebank-based diachronic study. Diachronica 35(3): 394429.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra, Crabbé, Benoit, and Prévost, Sophie. 2019. Null subject loss and subject agreement syncretisation: Quantificational models for Medieval French. Language Variation and Change 31(3): 275301.Google Scholar
Skrzypek, Dominika. 2012. Grammaticalization of (in)definiteness in Swedish. Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar
Van Gelderen, Elly. 2007. The definiteness cycle in Germanic. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 19(4): 275308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vance, Barbara. 1997. Syntactic change in Medieval French. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Fintel, Kai. 2004. Would you believe it? The King of France is back! (Presuppositions and truth-value intuitions). In Descriptions and beyond, ed. Reimer, M. and Bezuidenhout, A.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiltschko, Martina. 2012. What does it take to host a (restrictive) relative clause? Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle of the University of Victoria 21(2): 100145.Google Scholar
Wolter, Lynsey Kay. 2006. That's that: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Demonstrative Noun Phrases. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Yang, Charles. 2002. Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zaring, Laurie. 2011. On the nature of OV and VO order in early Old French. Lingua 121: 18311852.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 13
Total number of PDF views: 96 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 03rd September 2020 - 17th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-77fc7d77f9-g622z Total loading time: 0.549 Render date: 2021-01-17T13:41:21.629Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags last update: Sun Jan 17 2021 13:01:09 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Feature Flags: { "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": true, "relatedCommentaries": true, "subject": true, "clr": true, "languageSwitch": true, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Between demonstrative and definite: A grammar competition model of the evolution of French l-determiners
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Between demonstrative and definite: A grammar competition model of the evolution of French l-determiners
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Between demonstrative and definite: A grammar competition model of the evolution of French l-determiners
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *