See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274305765

The grammaticalization of the prepositional

partitive in Romance

Chapter · January 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 96

2 authors:

Anne Carlier Béatrice Lamiroy

Université Charles-de-Gaulle Lille 3 University of Leuven
36 PUBLICATIONS 78 CITATIONS 123 PUBLICATIONS 249 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Presentational clefts in French and in Italian: a corpus-based, comparative analysis View project

Master Thesis: A as NP construction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Béatrice Lamiroy on 05 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE GRAMMATICALIZATION OF THE PREPOSITIONAL PARTITIVE IN ROMANCE

Anne CARLIER (Université de Lille 3)

Béatrice LAMIROY (KULeuven University)

1. INTRODUCTION
From a syntagmatic viewpoint, the Romance partitive is used in two configurations:
‐ in the adnominal use, the partitive is linked to a nominal or pronominal quantifying expression (e.g.
Fr. Un morceau du gâteau ‘a piece of the cake’ cf. Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2001);
‐ in the adverbal use, the partitive is used for the expression of core arguments, without any
quantifier (e.g. Fr. Je bois du café ‘I drink coffee’).
This paper will be devoted to the latter case.

1.1.THE PARTITIVE IN INDO-EUROPEAN

The adverbal use of the partitive appears to be an endemic feature of Indo-European, since it appears
in languages or language stages belonging to different branches of the Indo-European family, such as
Sanskrit, Slavonic, Old Germanic, Gothic, Ancient Greek. Contrary to languages such as Finnish or
Basque, endowed with a partitive case, Indo-European languages however do not have a specific
partitive marker, but use either the genitive case or – especially in language stages where nominal
declension is weakening or is missing – an adposition meaning primitively ‘away from’.
Cases, generally speaking, indicate dependency relations, both syntactic and semantic, with respect to
another term. For instance, the genitive typically marks a dependency relation with respect to a noun.
The partitive use of the genitive, as observed in several Indo-European languages is atypical, because,
unlike other inflectional cases, it does not create a specific relationship between the inflected NP and
some external element (Carlier 2007). This flexibility explains why it can be used instead of other
inflectional cases (for a detailed discussion, see Humbert 1960 and Luraghi 2003, 2007: 268 with
respect to Greek, and Serbat 1996 for Latin). The Homeric epics provide some nice illustrations of
the syntactic flexibility of the partitive genitive: it occurs not only in the object position of verbs
meaning ‘to drink’ or ‘to eat’ (1a), but is also used in other syntactic functions such as subject,
locative (2) or instrumental function.
(1) a. haimatos ophra piō
blood-GEN.SG in order that drink.PRS.1SG
so that I drink of the blood [Genitive] (Homer, Odyssey 11, 96)
b. epei pien haima kelainon
after drink-INF.ACT.AOR blood-ACC.SG black.ACC.N.SG
after having drunk the dark blood [Accusative] (Homer, Odyssey 11, 98)
(2) loessamenos potamoio [instead of: en tō(i) potamō(i) [DATIVE]]
bathe-PART.MIDDLE.AOR.M.SG river-GEN.M.SG
after taking a (little) bath in the river [Genitive] (Homer, Iliad 21, 560)
The partitive genitive is however not a syntactic ‘joker’ (Meillet & Vendryes 1927: § 797, Serbat
1996), i.e. its use instead of another inflectional case is not indifferent: the partitive genitive marks an
operation within its constituent, which consists in isolating an indeterminate quantity from the whole.
Humbert (1960:269–70) explains the difference between the two examples in (1) along this line: the
first example, with the partitive genitive, relates the desire of Tiresias to drink some of the blood of
the victims killed by Odysseus, whereas the second example, with the accusative, evokes the strength
he draws from drinking the substance of blood.

1
1.2. THE PARTITIVE IN LATIN
In Classical Latin, the partitive genitive is commonly used for adnominal complements. It indicates
the definite or indefinite whole from which a fraction is isolated:
(3) multum temporis
a lot time-GEN.SG
‘a lot of time’ (Caesar, Gall. 1,1,5)
(4) magna copia frumenti
great-NOM.F.SG abundance-NOM.F.SG corn-GEN.N.SG
‘great supplies of corn’ (Civ. 1, 52, 4)
Interestingly, the prepositional phrase headed by ex or de ‘from’ already enters in competition with the
genitive case in this context:
(5) unus ex capitivis
one-NOM.M.SG of prisoner-ABL.PL
‘one of the prisoners’ (Caesar, Gall. 6, 35, 8)
(6) nulla de virtutibus tuis plurimis
none-NOM.F.SG of virtue-ABL.PL your-ABL.PL very-numerous-ABL.PL
‘none of your very numerous qualities’ (Cicero, Pro Q. Ligaria, 37)
As to the adverbal partitive genitive, it is sporadic in Latin, to the point that it would probably have
gone unnoticed if it were not rather widespread in other Indo-European languages such as Homeric
Greek, Sanskrit and Slavonic. The partitive genitive is nevertheless attested in Pre-Classical Latin,
mainly in non-literary, technical texts, such as medical and culinary treatises. Witness the following
example, quoted from Väänänen (1981), where the object of addito ‘add’ is expressed by the partitive
genitive, whereas the object of indito ‘put in’ has the canonical form corresponding to its syntactic
function, i.e. the accusative case:
(7) Farinam in mortarium indito; aquae paulatim addito
flower-ACC.SG in mortar put-into PST-PTC.ABL.SG water-GEN.SG little by little add-PST-PTC.ABL.SG
‘Put the wheat in the mortar; add (some) water little by little’ (Cato, Agr. 74, 2nd c. BC, quoted
Väänänen 1981)
This tendency to make use of a partitive genitive instead of another case is repressed in the Classical
Latin period, privileging the marking of clear syntactic relations over the expression of subtle
semantic distinctions. But the partitive construction surfaces again in Late Latin, not only in the form
of the genitive case but also as a prepositional construction with de. Examples are legion in the
popularizing texts of the 4th and 5th century written in Gaul, in particular by Christian authors.
A remarkable fact is noted by Väänänen (1981) on the basis of the inventory of all the occurrences of
the prepositional partitive construction in the Vulgate Bible: in a language (or language stage) lacking
a grammaticalized article, all but two occurrences consist of a noun which is either preceded by a
demonstrative or possessive determiner or followed by a relative clause (9) or some determiner (8b-
8c) that indicates the spatiotemporal location of the partition set denoted by the noun. Hence, we find
the following distribution between accusative, on the one hand, and partitive genitive, on the other
hand:
‐ the accusative is normally used when no such partition set is available (8a).
‐ the partitive construction with the preposition de, ex or ab can be used when there is a
contextually specified partition set (8b-8c-9);
(8) a. Ut comedatis carnem et bibatis sanguinem
that eat-SUBJ.2PL meat-ACC.SG and drink-SUBJ.2PL blood-ACC.SG
‘so that you eat my flesh and drink my blood’ (Ezechiel 39,17)
b. Et sic de pane illo edat
and thus of bread-ABL.SG this-ABL.SG eat-SUBJ.3SG
‘And so let him eat of that bread’ (Vulgate, I Corinthians 11, 28)

2
 c. Comede de venatione mea
eat-IMP.2SG of venery-ABL.SG my-ABL.SG.F
‘eat of my venery’ (Vulgate, Gen. 27, 19)
(9) Nam et catelli edunt de micis quae cadunt
for and little-dog.NOM.PL eat-PRS.3PL of crumb-ABL.PL that fall-PRS.3PL
de mensa dominorum suorum
from table-ABL.SG masters-GEN.M.PL their-GEN.M.PL
‘Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table’ (Vulgata, Matthew 15:27)
The expression of the object by means of a PP introduced by de instead of a prepositionless NP in the
accusative, as exemplified in the above examples, is the common starting point for the evolution of the
partitive in Romance.

1.3.THE PARTITIVE IN ROMANCE

1.3.1. The different stages of the grammaticalization process: from preposition to article

In the Romance area, the preposition de combined with the definite article (derived from the Latin
demonstrative ille) grammaticalized into a partitive article. The different stages of the grammaticali-
zation process from Latin to French are represented in figure 1. The label “partitive” applies from
stage III onwards.
FIGURE 1 – Grammaticalization chain: from preposition to partitive article (Carlier 2007)

PREPOSITION HYBRID STATUS ARTICLE

BETWEEN PREPOSITION &
DETERMINER

I II III IV V

Decido de lecto ‘I fall Discere id de me De pane illo edat Il ressent de la

from my bed’ (Plautus, ‘To learn it from me’ ‘Let him eat of this bread’ haine.
Casina 931) (Suetonius, Ner. 46) (Vulgata, I Corinth. 11, 28) ‘He feels hatred.’

De castris procedere Filium habere de aliqua Del vin bevaient Il boit du vin Il a fait ça avec de l’amour.
‘To set forth from a camp’ ‘To have a son from ‘They drank some (of this) ‘He drinks wine.’ ‘He did this with love.’
(Plinius, Ep. 9, 7, 4) someone’ wine’ (Erec)

Crucially, the emergence of the partitive article has to be conceived as a shift in morphosyntactic
category: de, primitively a preposition, turns into an article. Therefore, for each of the stages, we will
specify the semantic and syntactic features that reveal to which paradigm de belongs and to which
degree it is integrated in the paradigm. Importantly, it has to be pointed out that the shift from one
stage to another does not mean that the earlier stage is discarded. According to Hopper (1993),
grammaticalization phenomena often display layering, i.e. the coexistence of more conservative and
more innovative evolutionary stages. This means for example that when de + NP reaches stage III,
usages that were typical of stage I or II may still occur.

3
STAGE I

‐ Syntax: The PP headed by de has the status of an adjunct with respect to the verb.

‐ Semantics: The preposition de has originally a spatial meaning: it heads an NP that introduces a
reference point and, in its primitive meaning, marks a downwards movement (10). As a result of
desemantization, the notion of downwards movement will progressively fade out so that Latin de
can also simply express a movement away from a reference point, as in (11).
(10) Decido de lecto
fall-from-PRS.1SG from bed-ABL.SG
‘I fall from my bed’ (Latin: Plautus, Casina 931)
(11) De castris procedere
from camp-ABL.PL set-forth-INF
‘To set forth from a camp’
(Latin: Plinius, Ep. 9, 7, 4)

‐ Paradigm: the Latin preposition de alternates with zero, on the one hand (the prepositionless
ablative also expresses distancing), and with prepositions such as ex + ablative ‘out of’ and ab +
ablative ‘from’, on the other. In the case of ex, the reference point is conceived as a containing
space, and the preposition indicates a movement out of it, e.g. profluit ex monte ‘it flows out of the
mountain’. In the case of ab, the starting point of the movement is located outside of the reference
point, e.g. aps te abire ‘go away from you’ (Plautus, Miles gloriosus 4,1), caput a cervice revulsum
‘the head pulled off from the neck’ (Vergilius, Georgica 4, 523). Contrary to ex and ab, de does
not specify the position of the moved entity with respect to its reference point, but at least in its
primitive meaning, it describes the pathway as a downwards movement. In the evolution from
Latin to Romance, de will replace ex and ab in most Romance languages. In Italian the situation is
more complex, as Italian developed two distinct prepositions, viz. di (< Lat. de) and da (< Lat. de
+ ab). However, and interestingly, only di will evolve into a partitive article1.

STAGE II

‐ Syntax: de, still a preposition, introduces an argument of the verb, giving it the status of an oblique
complement.

‐ Semantics : de gradually loses its spatial meaning. This process is ongoing in Latin, where de has
developed a variety of non-spatial meanings such as lineage, extraction and partition, and temporal
meaning. In a more advanced stage, the same desemantization process even yields uses where de
combines with verbs expressing a spatial movement towards the reference point, rather than away
from it. Witness the following Old French example:
(12) Il approucha de la dicte fontaine
he approach-PST.SIMPLE.3SG from the say-PST PTCP.F.SG fountain
‘He approached the fountain.’ (French: Jean d’Arras, Mélusine, end 14th C.)

‐ Paradigm: there is a reduction of the paradigm, the only other preposition introducing an oblique
complement in Romance languages being a (< Latin ad / ab, cf. Goyens et al. 2002).

1
The distinction between the ablative case and the genitive case in Latin is expressed in Italian by means of the distinction
between the preposition da and di. The fact that di gives rise to the partitive article in Italian shows that the partitive
replaces the Latin genitive rather than the Latin ablative, as was already suggested by Väänänen (1981). As to Spanish and
French, they did not maintain the distinction between the Latin ablative case and genitive case. On the contrary, this
distinction is blurred, because “de + ablative” used for adjuncts in Latin enters into competition with the genitive and
eventually replaces it (Carlier, Goyens & Lamiroy, forthc.)
4
 STAGE III

‐ Syntax: de is no longer a full preposition. As pointed out by Lehmann (1982/2002: 75) and by
Melis (2003), a preposition is a two-sided relator:
• on the one hand, it establishes a relationship between the PP it heads and some external
element, for instance the verb;
• on the other hand, it behaves as a preposition within the PP insofar as it governs the NP.

In stage III, de evolves from a two-sided towards a one-sided relator:

• De + NP does not have anymore the status of a PP with respect to some external element. It
can be a direct argument of the verb, for instance a direct object of a transitive verb (Sp. ex.
13) or a nominal predicate of the verb ‘be’ (Fr. ex. 14). It can even combine with a preposition
(It. ex. 15):
(13) Cogió del agua en elle e a sus primas dio
take-PST.3SG of-the water in it and to his cousins give-PST.3SG
‘He took some water [into his hat] and gave it to his cousins’ (Spanish, end 12th C. Cid 2801)
(14) Blancandrins fut des plus saives paiens
Blancandrin-NOM be-PAST.SIMPLE.3SG of-the-PL the wisest-PL heathen-PL
‘Blancadrin was amongst the wisest heathens’ (French: Roland [1100], v. 24)
(15) Abbiamo affitato una casa con dei nostri cugini
have-PST.1PL rent-PST.PTCP a house with of-the our-M.PL cousin.M.PL
‘We rented a house with our cousins’ (Italian, quoted from Korzen 1996: 494)

• On the other hand, de still acts as a preposition with respect to the NP it governs. This appears
clearly in examples such as (16), where the NP corresponds to a pronoun2.
(16) Seignors, du vin de qoi il burent avez oï
Lord-pl of –the wine of which they drink-PST.SIMPLE.3PL have-PRS.2PL heard
‘Lords, you heard about the wine of which they drank’
(French, 13th C.: Béroul, Tristan & Iseut, 2133–2135)

‐ Semantics
The prepositional status of de with respect to the nominal constituent has a semantic corollary: the
NP refers to a contextually (deictically or anaphorically) defined partition set and de isolates an
indeterminate part of it. For instance, with respect to example (13), del agua isolates a portion of a
partition set previously mentioned in the text as la linpia fuont ‘the clear source’. Hence, de
acquires a quantitative meaning which foreshadows its status of determiner.
This specific meaning of stage III explains why the partitive frequently, though not exclusively (cf.
examples (14) and (15)), occurs in object position of verbs meaning ‘to eat’, ‘to drink’, ‘to take’ or
‘to give’. The high incidence of stage III partitives in culinary and medical treatises containing
recipes therefore comes as no surprise. For the same reason, stage III partitive only occurs in
combination with concrete nouns, i.e. mass terms or countable nouns, and is not attested with
abstract nouns.

‐ Paradigm: as in stage III, the partitive has lost its role of relating to an external element, for
instance a verb, it only alternates with zero (and no longer with any other preposition).

STAGE IV

‐ Syntax:
• The prepositional status of de is completely lost and the shift from preposition to article is
accomplished. Not only does de combined to an NP no longer confer the status of an indirect

2
Cf. Carlier (2007: 16-22) for a detailed syntactic argumentation.
5
 or prepositional constituent to this NP with respect to some external element (typically a verb),
but moreover, within the constituent, de does not behave as a preposition with respect to the
NP.
• As to its syntactic function, de + NP still occurs dominantly in object position, but extends to
other verbs than those meaning ‘to eat’, ‘to drink’, ‘to take’ or ‘to give’, e.g. avoir ‘have’ in
(17b). If we admit that the presence of an article is a sign of the independence of the object
with respect to the verb, this extension of the partitive article at the expense of zero
determination can be conceived as a progress in the marking of transitivity along two axes:
affectedness and individuation (Hopper & Thompson 1980, Lazard 1996). In stage III, only
highly individuated objects, definite or singular, are introduced by an article, whereas less indi-
viduated objects are not, unless they are highly affected. In stage IV, even objects that have a
low degree of individuation and affectedness may be introduced by the partitive:
(17) a. Pren des grains de poyvre
take-IMPER.2SG of-the.PL grain-PL of pepper
‘Take peppercorns’ (Fr. translation of Albertus Magnus, De falconibus, BNF fr. 2003, 15th C).
b. quant le faulcon a des pouez
when the falcon have-PRS.3SG of-the louse-PL
‘When the falcon has lice, …’ (Fr. translation of Albertus Magnus, De falconibus, BNF ms.
fr. 25342, 15th C).

Zero marking is however maintained when the object is an integral part of the verbal
expression (e.g. avoir lieu ‘take place’, avoir mestier ‘need’), because in this case there is no
real transitivity.
• Although the object position remains dominant, de + NP is more frequently attested in other
syntactic functions. In example (18a), de + NP occurs in subject position3. De can even occur
after a preposition (18b).
(18) a. Il trova .i. ostel en selve clere:
he find-PST.S.3SG one dwelling in forest sparse
De sains moines i a de sa contree
of saint monks there have-PRS.3SG of his region
Qui por l’amor de Dieu bien l’ostelerent.
who for the love of God well him lodge-PST.SIMPLE.3PL
‘He found a dwelling in a sparse forest: there were some saint monks from his land that lodged
him for God’s sake.’ (Aïol, Eds J. Normand et G. Raynaud, p. 23)
b. Et le lendemain le fault tresbien oindre avecques du savon
and the following day him-ACC must-PRS.3SG very-well rub-INF with of-the soap
‘And the following day, you have to rub him very well with soap’. (Fr. translation of Albertus
Magnus, De falconibus, BNF ms. fr. 1304, 16th C.)

‐ Semantics: The semantic shift of the partitive, from stage III to stage IV, not only involves
semantic loss, but also semantic enrichment, as is shown in figure 2.

FIGURE 2: The semantic evolution of the partitive, from STAGE III to STAGE IV (Carlier 2007)

STAGE III STAGE IV

Contextually defined and concrete partition object ----

Unspecified quantity Unspecified quantity
Not univocally identifiable by the addressee

3
As pointed out by Luraghi (forthc.), the progressive extension of the partitive to other syntactic functions follows a
pathway from object to subject in a certain order: first to subject of unaccusative predicatives (typically existential
constructions, as i a 'there are' in (18a)), then to subject of unergative predicates and (finally to that) of transitive verbs.
6
 • In stage IV, de no longer acts syntactically as a preposition with respect to the NP it governs.
As a consequence, the notion of partition and partition set, which is the semantic correlate of
the semi-prepositional status of de, fades away.
• The feature of unspecified quantity remains however intact.
• By a process of pragmatic strengthening, i.e. the integration as a semantic feature of what is at
first no more than a pragmatic inference, the feature of unspecified quantity gives rise to the
feature of indefiniteness (cf. Luraghi, forthc.): the referent is no longer presented as
unambiguously identifiable by the addressee.

‐ Paradigm: The partitive enters into a new paradigm, that of the article. The semantic evolution, as
described in figure 2, is conditioned by this integration into the paradigm structured in terms of two
main parameters: singular versus plural or non-singular and definiteness versus indefiniteness.

• The notion of partition set disappears because it does not contribute to the differentiation of the
partitive article with respect to the other articles already in place.
• The notion of unspecified quantity is maintained, because it allows the new article to enter in
contrast with the indefinite article derived from the numeral ‘one’.
• The feature of indefiniteness develops in a binary opposition with the definite article.

STAGE V

‐ Syntax: The partitive article becomes more frequent in all syntactic positions.

‐ Semantics: The use of the partitive article, which in the early stage is sensitive to the opposition
between abstract and concrete nouns, is extended to abstract nouns and this at the expense of zero
determination.

‐ Paradigm: As a consequence of this double evolution, zero determination is further reduced.

Whereas in the earlier stages, there is some freedom to either specify the category of determination
or to let it unmarked, the latter option becomes more and more constrained and finally disappears.
This evolution of “obligatorification” (Lehmann 2002: 136) contributes to the further tightening of
the paradigm.

1.3.2. The grammaticalization process of the partitive in French, Italian and Spanish

In Romance, the destiny of the partitive article is very different according to the language:
‐ In French, the use of the partitive article is compulsory for indefinite NPs containing a mass noun
or plural count noun.
‐ Italian also developed a partitive article, but contrary to its French equivalent, it is almost never
obligatory. In other words, it still alternates with zero and is most often optional. Moreover, it is
heavily marked by regional variation (cf. Luraghi, forthc.), being far more widespread in Northern
Italian than in the Centre and the South, a point to which we will come back in section 5.
‐ In Spanish, although attestations have been retrieved in medieval corpora, the partitive article did
not develop into a full-fledged article.
Table 1: The Partitive Article in Romance

FRENCH Pierre mange du pain * Pierre mange pain

SPANISH * Pedro come del pan Pedro come pan
ITALIAN Piero mangia del pane Piero mangia pane

A more thorough investigation of the empirical data will show that, with respect to the
Grammaticalization Chain in Figure 1, French went from stage I until stage V, Spanish from I to III

7
and although Italian shows a development from I to V, the process, which shows important regional
variation, is not totally completed.

1.3.3. Research questions

The present paper, which intends to account for the different outcome of the grammaticalization chain
in the three Romance languages, will also tackle the following research questions:
(i) Are the parameters which were significant in the rise of the partitive in Middle French (Carlier
2007) equally significant in Modern Italian ?
(ii) Is the evolution of partitive article consistent with other typological phenomena in the area of
Romance languages on the one hand and in a broader (indo-)European context on the other
hand ?
In order to answer these questions, we will identify the different stages of the evolution of the partitive
through the history of each of the three Romance languages and link the language-specific evolution
of the partitive to other characteristics that define the place of the language in the typology of
Romance. As a preliminary, we will consider the partitive in Late Latin, the common starting point
for the three Romance languages.

2. LATIN

2.1. STAGE III: LATE LATIN

As has been mentioned in section 1.2., the stage III partitive is occasionally attested as a genitive-
inflected NP in Pre-Classical Latin, in particular in technical texts. It becomes exceptional during the
Classical period, but surfaces again in Late Latin: it occurs in popularizing texts, and takes often the
form of a PP. De is the most common preposition, but ex and ab are also used, without any semantic
difference4, as is shown by the following three translations of the same Bible verse.
(19) De ligno quod est scientiae boni et mali non editis
A(b) ligno sciendi bonum et malum non manducabitis
Ex arbore diagnoscentiae boni et mali ne tangerent
‘From the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat’
(Genesis 2: 17, Vetus Latina, Ed. Bonifatius Fischer (Beuron), Freiburg: Heider, 1951)

‐ Syntax: The partitive occurs mainly in object position of transitive verbs instead of the accusative.

‐ Meaning: The partitive presupposes a contextually defined partition set and isolates an unspecified
portion of this partition set. This meaning accounts for some peculiarities of the partitive in Late
Latin.

• As has been pointed out by Väänänen (1981:115), the object of verbs of this type is marked as
a partitive by means of de only when there is a determiner (20) or a modifier, e.g. a relative
clause (21) or a genitive complement (22), which ensures the contextual anchorage of the
partition set. Moreover the head noun of the object NP always refers to a concrete referent.
(20) Si quis manducaverit ex hoc pane,
if someone-NOM.SG eat-PRF.FUT.3SG out of this-ABL.N.M bread-ABL.SG,
vivet in aeternam
live-FUT-3SG in eternal-ACC.F.SG
`If anyone shall eat from this bread, he will live forever.`(John 6, 51)
(21) Nam et catelli edunt de micis quae cadunt de mensa
for even dog-NOM-PL eat-PRST.3PL of crumb-ABL.PL that-NOM.F.PL of/from table-ABL.F.SG

4
Originally, the Latin prepositions de, ex and ab have distinct spatial meanings: ex ‘out of’, ab ‘away from’, expressing
increasing distance with respect to a certain point without implying contact with that point, de ‘coming from (an origin)’
(cf. § 1.3.1). This distinction is no longer relevant in Late Latin.
8
 dominorum suorum.
master-GEN.M.PL their-REFL.GEN.M.PL
‘But even the dogs eat (some) crumbs that fall from the table of their masters’. (Matthew 15,27)
(22) Ampullam, in qua de oleo beati Martini continebatur
Phial-ACC.SG, in which-ABL.F.SG of oil-ABL.M.SG Martin-GEN.M.SG contain-PASS.IMPF.3SG
‘The phial, in which (some) oil of St Martin was contained’ (Vita Aridii)

• The partitive mostly occurs in combination with verbs compatible with the idea of
fragmentation: ‘to eat’, ‘to drink’, ‘to give’, ‘to take’ (cf. ex. 19, 20, 21).

‐ Paradigm : « De + NP-ABL » enters into competition with the prepositionless accusative.

2. FRENCH

2.1. THE GRAMMATICALIZATION CHAIN FROM OLD TO MODERN FRENCH

2.1.1. STAGE III : OLD FRENCH

The partitive is rather infrequent in Old French and would perhaps even not have been noticed if it
were not the ancestor of a newly created article in Middle French. There is considerable controversy
about its status: whereas it is considered as a full-fledged article by Foulet (1916), scholars today are
less affirmative and express their doubt by using quotes (partitive ‘article’) or even accept that de is
still a preposition. In our viewpoint, the partitive in Old French is still in the same stage of evolution
as the Late Latin partitive: it has a hybrid status, between preposition and determiner, which is
characteristic of the stage III partitive.

‐ Syntax : del N occurs as a direct argument of the verb, mostly the direct objet. The following
example, already mentioned above and repeated here, shows however that it occasionally appears
in predicate position from the earliest texts5.

(14) Blancandrins fut des plus saives paiens

Blancandrin-NOM.SG be-INDIC.PST.3SG of-the.REG.PL more wise REG.PL heathens REG.PL
‘Blancandrin was amongst the wisest heathens’. (Chanson de Roland [1100], 24)

Although del N is not a PP with respect to the verb, de still behaves as a preposition with respect to
the NP. Witness the following contrast between (16a) and (16b):

(16) a. la poison qu’il but

the poison that he drink-PST.SIMPLE.3SG
‘the poison he drank’ (Chrétien de Troyes, Cligès, v. 6687-6689)

b. du vin de qoi il burent avez oï

about-the wine of which they drink-PST.SIMPLE.3PL have-PRST.2PL hear-PST.PTCP
‘Did you hear about the wine of which they drank’ (Béroul, Tristran & Iseut, v. 2133-2134)

‐ Semantics : The semantic operation performed by this preposition upon the NP is that of isolating
an unspecified part from a contextually specified partition set expressed by the NP. Hence, the Old
French partitive presupposes a partition set, which is specified in the context.

(23) Le gastel et le vin leur baillent … Del vin volentiers bevaient

The pastry and the wine them-DAT bring-PRS-3PL of-the-M.SG wine-SG gladly drink.IMPF.3PL
‘They bring them the pastry and the wine. They drink gladly (some) of the wine.’ (Chrétien de Troyes, Erec,
3178 [1170])

5
For early Old French, the Chanson de Roland is one of the very few available documents of significant length. It is
therefore impossible to establish a precise chronology of the rise of the partitive in this syntactic position.
9
 This specific meaning of the Old French partitive explains why it occurs frequently as an object of
verbs meaning ‘to eat’, ‘to drink’, ‘to take’, ‘to give’, compatible with the notion of partition. It
also accounts for the fact that the Old French partitive only occurs in combination with concrete
nouns – mass terms or countable nouns – but not with abstract nouns.

‐ Paradigm : the partitive alternates with zero determination, e.g. boivre vin ‘drink wine’/ boivre
del vin ‘drink some of the wine from the bottle on the table’

From the 13th century on, the first occurrences of stage IV partitive are attested in theatre texts that
reproduce the oral register.

(24) Ha !biaus dous fiex, seés vous cois, ou vous arés des eviaus.
Ha ! handsome sweet son, seat-IMP.2PL you-PL quiet, or you-PL have-INDIC.FUT.2PL of-the-
REG.SG.M hits-REG.PL
‘Ha ! Dear sweet son, keep quiet, or you will take hits.’
(Adam de la Halle, Jeu de la Feuillée, 396-397 [1276], quoted Foulet (1916)

These occurrences have the status of ‘exploratory expressions’ (Harris & Campbell 1995:72).
Exploratory expressions can be optionaly produced by the existing grammar and are not intended to
live a long life. However, when they are grammaticalized, they will be retrieved retrospectively as
preludes to change.

2.1.2. STAGE IV : MIDDLE FRENCH

The frequency of the partitive dramatically increases during the 15th century. Evidence for this is
provided in Figure 3, representing the relative frequency of the partitive in four translations of the
same Latin source text6.

FIGURE 3: Relative frequency in ‰ of the partitive in four translations of De Falconibus (Albertus Magnus)

20
Relative Frequency in ‰

15

Translation 1: End of the 14th century: 0,91 ‰

10 Translation 2: Middle of the 15th century: 16,04 ‰
Translation 3: Second half of the 15th century: 19,84 ‰
Translation 4: Beginning of the 16th century: 9,49 ‰
5

th th th
Century XIV XV XVI

6
The four translations are conserved at the French National Library with the following references: nouv. acq. fr 18800, fr.
2003, fr. 25342, fr. 1304. Although there is a frequency increase in the fifteenth century’s translations, there is a frequency
fall in the latest text, which is due to a difference of register: in the spirit of the incipient renaissance, the sixteenth
century’s translation is closer to the Latin text and written in a more learned, less natural style, which results in an
avoidance of the partitive.
10
 ‐ Syntax :

As to the function with respect to the verb, del N still occurs dominantly in object position (25), but
becomes less exceptional in other functions, for instance as a subject (276) or a PP (27). These
statistical tendencies are represented in Figure 4.

(25) Prenez du papier fait de fil de cotton (translation 3)

take-IMPER.2PL of-the.M.SG paper made of yarn of cotton
‘Take paper made of cotton yarn’ (Fr. translation of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr.
25342, 15th C.)

(26) Soit prins pour icelle guerir du lart

be-SUBJ.3SG take-PST.PTCP for that-one-FEM.SG cure-INF of-the-M.SG bacon
‘Bacon should be taken to cure that one’ (Fr. transl. of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr.
1304, 16th C.)

(27) Fault prandre trois morceaux de lart telz que le faulcon les puisse avaller,
must take-INF three piece-PL of bacon such-PL that the falcon them can-SUBJ swallow-INF
et les plonger dedans du miel
and them-ACC dip-INF into of-the.M.SG honey
‘You have to take three pieces of bacon such that the falcon can swallow them and dip them in the
honey’ (Fr. transl. of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 25342, 15th C.)

FIGURE 4: Frequency of the partitive and zero determination according to the syntactic function in
the 15th C. translations of De Falconibus (Albertus Magnus)

With respect to the object position, the partitive is no longer restricted to verbs meaning ‘to eat’, ‘to
drink’, etc. but extends to other verbs which do not necessarily involve the idea of partition or
fragmentation:
(28) Faulcon aiant les piez azurins ne assault pas souvent de plus grans oyseaulx
falcon having the feet-PL blue-PL not attack-PRS.3SG NEG often of more big-PL bird-PL
que pie ou corneille
than magpie or crow
‘A blue-footed falcon does not often attack bigger birds than magpies or crows’ (Fr. transl. of Albert
le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 1304, 16th C.)
(29) Et confians de l’ayde de leurs compaignons,
font de beaux faiz d’armes et tressouvens obtiennent de glorieuses victories
make-PRS.3PL of nice facts-of-arms and very-often get-PRS.3PL of glorious victories
‘And trusting on the help of their companions, they perform nice feats and very often get glorious
victories’ (Fr. transl. of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 1304, 16th C.)
(30) Quant le faulcon a des pouez, …
when the falcon have-PRS.3SG of-the louse-PL …
‘When the falcon has lice, ..’
(Fr. transl. Of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 25342, 15th C.)

11
As already noticed in § 1.3.1. (stage IV), this extension of the partitive article can be conceived as a
progress in the marking of transitivity along two axes: affectedness and individuation (Hopper &
Thompson 1980, Lazard 1996). The article, being a sign of the autonomy of the object with respect to
the verb, is no longer restricted to highly individuated objects, definite or singular, but extends to less
individuated objects, even if they are not highly affected by the verbal process in terms of
fragmentation.

Besides the syntactic function, the internal structure of the NP also proves to be a relevant factor. As
is shown in Figure 5, in our 15th century corpus, the partitive article and zero are equi-probable when
there is no modifier, the partitive article is less likely to occur when there is a prenominal modifier,
and it occurs more readily when there is a post-nominal modifier.

FIGURE 5: Relative frequency in % of the partitive and zero determination according to the internal structure
of the NP in the 15th century translations of De Falconibus (Albertus Magnus)

The following example, which corresponds to two translations of the same Latin sentence, clearly
illustrates this: the partitive article is used in the second translation, where the adjective comes after
the noun, but not in the first translation, where the adjective is placed before the noun.

(31) a. Pren vif argent

take-IMPER.2SG quick silver (Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, f. fr. 2003)
b. Prenez de l’ argent vif
take- IMPER.2PL of-the silver quick (Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 25342)
‘Take some quicksilver.’

‐ Semantics :

As mentioned above, the stage III partitive isolates an unspecified quantity from a contextually
defined partition set. In stage IV, it still refers to an unspecified quantity but the partition set is not
necessarily explicit in the context. As can be illustrated by example (30) repeated here, the feature of
unspecified quantity evolves, by pragmatic strengthening, into the feature of indefiniteness: the
referent is presented as not univocally identifiable by the addressee:

(30) Quant le faulcon a des pouez, …

when the falcon has of-the lice, …
'When the falcon has lice, ..'
(Fr. transl. of Albert le Grand, De Falconibus, BNF, ms. fr. 25342, 15th C.)

However, at stage IV, the combination of de with abstract nouns remains uncommon.

12
 - Paradigm :

The partitive becomes a full-fledged article. Its meaning shift is conditioned by its structural place in
the paradigm of the articles, defined by two binary oppositions: by contrast with un ‘a’, it marks the
feature of non-singular; by contrast with the definite article le(s), it marks indefiniteness.

2.1.3. STAGE V : CLASSICAL AND MODERN FRENCH

‐ Syntax:

The partitive article becomes more frequent in all positions and, hence, continues to reduce the
primitive domain of zero determination.

‐ Semantics:

The partitive article is no longer necessarily linked to the notion of unspecified quantity and becomes
common in combination with abstract nouns.

(32) Il éprouve de la haine pour son frère.

he feel-PRST-3SG of the hatred for his brother
‘He feels hatred for his brother.’

This evolution also leads to the reduction of zero determination. It is however not fully completed:
the very low relative frequency of avec de l’amour, with the partitive article, in comparison with the
pattern without article, in a corpus of Modern French, for the period of 1700 until the present day,
shows that when the abstract noun is embedded in a PP, the partitive article remains exceptional:

(33) a. avec amour : 632 occurrences in the Frantext corpus for the period 1700-2010 or 98 %
with love

b. avec de l’amour : 13 occurrences in the Frantext corpus for the period 1700-2010 or 2 %
with of-the love’

‐ Paradigm:

As a result of the above mentioned evolution, the expression of the article becomes increasingly
obligatory. The progressive elimination of zero determination is a sign of the further paradigmiti-
zation of the article.

2.2 The French partitive and the typology of Romance

2.2.1. From OV to VO

From Latin to Romance, there is globally a shift in word order (S)OV > (S)VO. French is the most
consistent SVO language among the Romance languages (Lahousse & Lamiroy, in press). During the
period of Middle French, the last residues linked to the OV paradigm are evacuated at an accelerated
rate (Buridant 1987, Combettes 1988 and Marchello-Nizia 1995). Following Greenberg (1963),
Lehmann (1973) and Vennemann (1974), Buridant (1987) argues that the shift from OV to VO goes
along with a shift within the NP from “modifier + N” towards “N + modifier”.

In Middle French, the situation is as follows: syntactically heavy nominal modifiers, such as PPs,
relative clauses, participles, are located at the right of the head noun, whereas adjectives can be either
at the left or the right, as is shown in example (34):

13
(34) a.… samblans au noir faucon Adj N
black falcon
… ‘similar to the black falcon’ (Albertus Magnus, De Falconibus, nouv. acq. fr 18800, end 14th C.)
b. … laquele li emplist et engrosce plus les jambes que du faucon noir N Adj
falcon black
‘that fills and enlarges his legs more than the legs of the black falcon’ (ibid. nouv. acq. fr 18800)

From the 15th century on, adjectives tend to be consistently located at the right of the noun. Only
adjectives which have a role of degree marker, bearing on the quantity (un homme simple ‘a simple
minded man’ versus un simple homme ‘a single man’) or on the categorial content of the noun (un
piètre amant ‘a poor/ mediocre lover’, i.e. a lover who does not really deserve the status of lover) stay
in prenominal position. It is in this position that they undergo grammaticalization, involving semantic
weakening, and acquire a role of nominal determination.

According to Lehmann (1974) and Geisler (1982), there is a correlation between the position of the
complement or the modifier and the position of the grammatical morphemes. OV languages tend to
express grammar by means of nominal or verbal suffixes, whereas in VO languages, grammatical
markers tend to be located before the nominal or verbal head:

Lex – V or N – Gramm
Gramm – V or N – Lex

This hypothesis could help us to understand the dramatic increase of the partitive during the 15th C.
and its shift from an intermediate status (stage III) to that of full-fledged article (stage IV). As a result
of phonetic erosion, final –s is lost. The plural marker –s is however not replaced by some other
suffix. We rather observe an increase of the use of the definite article le(s), of the indefinite singular
article un and the creation of the new indefinite non singular, i.e. partitive article. As a result of the
extension of the articles, zero determination becomes exceptional. In other words, the category of
number is systematically expressed by means of a prenominal article. This further grammaticalization
of the articles is, on the formal side, reflected in the fact that they become clitic.

The correlation between shift in word order and the development of grammatical markers before the
nominal head is confirmed by the fact that the first occurrences of the partitive article are more
frequently encountered in the case of “N + modifier” than in the case of “modifier + N”, as is
illustrated by the following contrast between two translations of the same Latin sequence (cf. example
(31) and Figure 5).

Lex – N – Gramm pren vif argent take quick silver

Gramm – N – Lex prenez de l’argent vif take of the silver quick

Case
Number

2.2.2. Information structure, linear order and determination

Leiss (2007:74) observes that languages with a relative flexible word order have the possibility to
express (in)definiteness by word order. Witness the following Czech example, quoted from Kramsky
(1972: 42):

(35) a. Kniha je na stole SV / OV → NP: thematic and definite

Book is on the table
‘The book is on the table’

14
 b. Na stole je kniha VS / OV→ NP: rhematic and indefinite
On table is book
‘There is a book on the table’
In Latin, word order is not strictly constrained by syntactic principles and can be put to service for the
expression of information structure and (in)definiteness.
From Latin to French, word order becomes more and more rigid (Marchello-Nizia 1992). French
represents the most advanced stage in this evolution: word order is strictly constrained by syntax and
hardly available for the marking of discourse function (Lahousse and Lamiroy, in press).
Hence, when word order can no longer be exploited to express the thematic or rhematic status of the
NP (and the associated opposition between definiteness and indefiniteness), a welcome bonus of the
new article system enriched with the partitive article is that of allowing systematic marking of
(in)definiteness.

4. SPANISH

4.1. The Grammaticalization Chain

4.1.1. STAGE III : Old Spanish

- Syntax:

As to its syntactic function, del N appears in Old Spanish texts7 in a way comparable to that of Old
French, i.e. in object position after verbs with concrete meaning, as is shown by the verb comer ‘to
eat’ in (36a) and in subject position, typically with unaccusatives (36b):

(36) a. Cogió del agua en elle e a sus primas dio (Cid 2801)
take-PST.SIMPLE.3SG of the water in it and to his cousins give- PST.SIMPLE.3SG
‘He took some water [into his hat] and gave it to his cousins’.
b. Et salieron a él de los omnes buenos.
and come-out-PST.S.3PL to him of the men good-PL.
‘And some good men came to him’ (Alfonso X el Sabio, Primera Crónica general, 1260-1284,
quoted from Luraghi, forthc.)

- Semantics:

The partitive in Old Spanish is also comparable to that of Old French from a semantic point of view: it
has a real partitive meaning and presupposes extraction from a contextually (deictically or anaphori-
cally) defined partition set. Thus, in example (36a), del agua refers to water that has been previously
mentioned in the text as la la linpia fuont ‘the clear source’.

- Paradigm:

The partitive appears in alternation with the zero marker, as exemplified in (37):

(37) Old Sp. Dexado ha heredades e casas e palaçios (Cid 115)

leave-PRF-3SG inheritances and houses and palaces
‘He has left objects to inherit and houses and palaces.’

7
The period covered by Old or Medieval Spanish runs from the 10th to the beginning of the 15th C. Spanish historical
linguists (e.g. Lapesa 1983) do not distinguish a period of “Middle Spanish” (cf. Middle French or Middle English). Old
Spanish is followed by “Classical Spanish” (from the 15th to the 17th C.), which precedes “Modern Spanish” (from the 18th
C. on).
15
4.1.2. STAGE IV

Surprisingly, the partitive did not pursue its grammaticalization process as it did in French and Italian:
examples of partitive de + NP are sporadic after the 15th Century. A unique attestation is found in a
writing Santa Teresa de Jesus (17th C.), viz. dar de la fruta ‘to give some of the fruit’ (Adillo Rufo,
unpublished ms). The stage III partitive can still be found in Modern Spanish; however, it occurs only
in object position with transitive verbs, typically ‘to eat’ (38a), ‘to drink’, ‘to take’, ‘to give’ and its
meaning clearly remains partitive, and not indefinite. With subject NPs, del is totally ungrammatical
(38b), which proves that it has not become a determiner:

(38) Mod. Sp. a. Comió del pastel y luego se encontró mal

Eat-PST.SIMPLE.3SG of-the cake and afterwards REFLfind-PST.SIMPLE.3SG bad
‘He ate a piece of the cake and felt sick afterwards.’
b. *De los jóvenes entraban y salían
‘Young people went in and out’
cf. Fr. Des jeunes entraient et sortaient / It. Dei giovani entravano e uscivano.

In Modern Spanish, indefiniteness can be expressed, in combination with count nouns, by an

indefinite article which goes back to Latin unum ‘one’ both in singular (un, una) and in plural (unos,
unas), as shown in (38a). Note that Modern French uses the partitive in this case (38b)8:

(39) a. Una lona sostenida en unos palos servía de toldillo

‘A piece of cloth sustained in ones sticks served as canopy’
(Poyato, quoted from Herslund 2007)
b. Un morceau de tissu soutenu par des bâtons servait d'auvent
‘A piece of cloth sustained by sticks was used as a canopy’.

Mass nouns however take the zero marker to indicate an indefinite quantity. Compare example (40) to
(38a).

(40) Cogió agua y sela dió a sus primas

take-PST.SIMPLE. 3SG water and DAT.3PL=ACC.F.SG give- PST.SIMPLE.3SG to his cousins
‘He took water and gave it to his cousins.’

In other words, in Spanish, the partitive never became an indefinite article, nicely showing that
although certain grammaticalization chains seem to be cross-linguistically stable as the one which
leads from partitive nominal constructions to indefiniteness marking (cf. Luraghi, forthc. for a
typological overview), nothing can prevail them from being cut off at a certain point or from not
reaching the end stage.

8
Old French used to have the plural indefinite article uns/unes:
(i) Et avoit unes grandes joes et un grandisme nez plat et unes grans narines lees et unes grosses lèvres .
‘And she had big cheeks and a very big flat nose and big and ugly nostrils and thick lips ...’ (Aucassin et Nicolette,
quoted by Foulet 1916).
The plural form of un did never attain a high frequency and is mostly used to refer to an entity composed of identical parts,
i.e.an internal plural. For a discussion, see Guillaume 1969, Carlier 2001 & Herslund 2003. This plural form of un for the
expression of the internal plural disappears during the period of Middle French and is replaced by the newly created article
des. Witness the following two examples, of which the oldest already contains des:
(ii) Qui a ses soulliers percez, il a besoin d’avoir des chausses.
'The one who has worn-out shoes, he needs to have breeches.’
(Les deux savetiers [end 15th C.], 39, in : Recueil de farces)
(iii) le Duc [estoit] vestu simplement d’unes chausses de veloux noir mouchetté, d’un propoint de treillis et d’une
casaque de mesme.
‘The Duke was dressed in a simple way, with breeches made of black mottled velvet, a doublet of hemp and a coat
of the same fabric.’ (R. de Lucinge, Dialogue du François et du Savoysien [1593])
16
 The gradual loss of the partitive parallels that of the pronominal adverb ende ‘from there’ (Lat. inde)
which is also found until the 15th C.: the disappearance of the two are most probably linked (Posner
1996 :335), as suggested a contrario by the fact that French both developed a partitive article and
maintained the pronominal adverb in parallel (e.g. Il mange du chocolat / Il en mange ‘He eats
chocolate / He eats some’). So did Italian. In the two languages, the partitive became an indefinite
article and the adverb turned into a clitic, viz. Fr. en and It. ne. Spanish maintained neither the
partitive nor the pronominal adverb. Why this happened cannot be fully answered here, but a number
of factors which we summarize hereafter in 4.2. may have played a role.

4.2. The Spanish partitive and the typology of Romance

4.2.1. From OV to VO

In contrast with French, Spanish maintained a strong verbal and nominal morphology based on word
endings, inherited from Latin. Thus -s marks plural in Spanish NPs in an unambiguous way, which
could be one of the reasons why the partitive did not flourish, as there is less need to mark number
with free preposed morphemes when it is already marked by bound suffixal endings.

N – Gramm rather than Gramm - N

Number Number

Worth noting is that Spanish not only differs from French, whose nominal system hardly has any
plural marking at all (in spoken language), but also from Italian (Stark 2007): whereas one and the
same plural morpheme, viz. -s is used in all occasions in Spanish, Italian has several plural
morphemes (e.g. can-i ‘dogs’, donn-e ‘women’, labr-a ‘lips’), some of which in addition can also act
as singular morpheme (e.g. legg-e ‘law’, ragazz-a ‘girl’). Of the three Romance languages under study
Spanish thus displays the most “efficient” plural marking system based on suffixation, because it is
the most unambiguous: one form / one function.

This property of Spanish of being a far more synthetic language than French for example (and hence,
closer to Latin in this respect) could account for the fact that Spanish never fully developed a
sophisticated prenominal determiner system as French did. In fact, Company Company (1991) points
out that the spreading of the article in general, i.e. including that of the definite article, was also less
general in medieval Spanish than in medieval French (e.g. Vassallos de mio Çid seyense sonrissando
‘the vassals of the Cid sit down and smile’, from Lapesa 1983:211), which could be due to the same
reason.

4.2.2. Information structure, linear order and determination

Another important factor here may be word order9. As already noted, languages with a free word order
may express (in)definiteness by giving the NP a particular position in the sentence (Leiss 2007:74).
Compared to French, which during the course of its history acquired a rigid SVO order (Marchello-

9
Zamboni (1998) also ascribes the profound morphosyntactic restructuration which took place between the Late Latin
system and proto-Romance to the change of basic word order from SOV to SVO and the loss of nominal flexion.
Importantly, these changes did not affect Northern and Southern Romania in the same way: one of the different properties
that opposes the North (Gallo-Romance and Northern Italo-Romance) to the South (Ibero-Romance and Southern Italo-
Romance) according to Zamboni is, for the object, the rise of the partitive in the North, and the rise of the prepositional
accusative in the South, and for the subject, the rise of personal pronouns in the North vs their absence in the South. The
intermediate position that Italian occupies between French and Spanish regarding the partitive may thus go back to a major
shift that originated in archaic Romance. The typological hypothesis which establishes a relationship between partitives
and differential object marking is however rejected by Luraghi (forthc.).
17
Nizia 1992), Spanish displays a flexible word order : although discursive constraints are obviously at
play, all word orders can still be found in Spanish, viz. SOV, SVO, VSO, VOS, OSV, OVS (Lahousse
and Lamiroy in press ; Zubizarreta 1999). As we will see, Italian also has a much more flexible word
order than French, but less than Spanish. As words can be moved around in the Spanish sentence to
indicate their thematic (definite) vs rhematic (indefinite) character, there is less need to mark
(in)definiteness by an explicit prenominal marker.

5. ITALIAN

5.1. The Grammaticalization Chain

5.1.1. STAGE III

- Syntax

In Old Italian10, del N appears in object position after verbs with concrete meaning such as ‘eat’,
‘give’, etc., as the examples in (41a-b) illustrate. The example (40c) shows that the partitive even
occurs in subject position in Old Italian, typically in existential sentences.
(41) a. Ela mançà del pomo qe li de' un serpente
she eat-PST.S.3SG of-the.M.SG apple that her give-PST.S.3SG a snake
‘She ate of the apple that a snake gave her’,
(Uguccione da Lodi, beginning of 13th C., quoted from Luraghi, forthc.)
b. Se tu ai corno, del vino ti do volentieri
if you have wheat, of-the wine to you give-PRS.1SG with pleasure
‘If you have wheat, I will be happy to give you some wine’
(Novellino, end of 13th C., quoted from Tekavčic 1980 : 115)
c. Che del ben non vi sia
that of-the good NEG there be-CONJ.PRS.3SG
‘That there is not some good’
(Ubertino del Bianco d'Arezzo, a. 1269, quoted from Luraghi, forthc.)

- Semantics

Not surprisingly, the meaning of del vino here is truly partitive : del indicates extraction from a
deictically defined partition set. In (41b) for example, which is a dialogue between two speakers, one
of them possesses wheat while the other has wine, the two agree upon sharing their respective goods.

- Paradigm:

From its origin up till now, de + NP enters in a paradigm in which it appears in alternation with the
zero marker:

(42) Abbiamo bevuto vino / abbiamo bevuto del vino 11

Have-PST.1PL drink-PST.PTCP wine / Have-PST.1PL drink-PST.PTCP of-the wine

10
Old Italian covers the period that stretches from the 10th till the 16th C., i.e. till 1582, the founding date of the Accademia
della Crusca (Tekavčic 1980).
11
A Google hit (April 10, 2012) on this sentence does not show an enormous difference between the number of speakers
who use the partitive (883.000) and those who do not (913.000).
18
 5.1.2. STAGE IV

- Syntax:

From a syntactic point of view, the partitive gradually extended to other positions than the
(proto)typical direct object. In the same way as in French, it spread to regular subject position (i.e. not
subjects of unaccusatives, which are in fact objects), e.g. subject of transitive verbs (as in 43 a-b) and
to the PP, as shown by the examples in (44):

SUBJECT
(43) a. Delle feste solenni riuniranno i nuovi figli della Libertá
Of-the parties solemn bring-FUT.3PL together the new children of the Freedom
‘Solemn feasts will bring together the new children of the Freedom’.
(from the newspaper Monitore Napoletano dated 1799, quoted by Serianni 1989:154)
b. Delle donne sconosciute hanno aperto la porta (native speaker judgment)12
of-the women unknown open-PRF.3PL the door
‘Unknown women have opened the door’.

PP (a, con, da, in, per, su, sotto, verso)

(44) a. Ecco una ricetta per dei buonissimi biscottini di pasta frolla da accompagnare
here a recipe for of-the very good biscuits of pastry shortcrust to accompany
con del tè o caffè. http://www.ricettaidea.it/cucina-base (29.7.2010)
with of-the tea or coffee
‘Here comes a recipe for very good biscuits of shortcrust pastry to have with tea or coffee’
b. L’idea che qualcosa che dà fiducia possa comunque portare a dei pericoli
the idea that something that give-PRS.3SG faith may-SUBJ.3SG however lead to of-the dangers
per il sistema bancario è sempre stata considerata troppo assurda da credere.
for the system banking consider-PASS.PRF.3SG always too absurd to believe
‘The idea that something that gives confidence can still become dangerous for the banking system has
always been considered as too absurd to believe.’ (24 Ore Il Sole 3.8.2010).
c. Può essere infatti coperto da del cioccolato oppure proposto
can-PRS.3SG in fact cover- PASS.PRF.3SG by of-the chocolate or propose-PST PRTC.
in varie dimensioni e forme in base alle proprie esigenze.
in various dimensions and forms in basis to-the proper needs
http://www.ricettaidea.it/cucina-base (26.7.2010)
‘It can in fact be covered with chocolate or presented in various dimensions and forms according to
everyone’s own need’.
d. Il viandante che fosse incontrato da de' contadini, fuor della strada maestra
the passerby who would.be encountered by PRTV peasants outside of-the road main
‘The passerby who should be encountered by some peasants outside the main road’
(Manzoni, I promessi sposi)

Examples such as (44c-d) show that some of the constraints still mentioned in Italian grammars,
according to which *da del is ungrammatical or regional (e.g. Renzi et al. 2001 : 318 ff), in fact do not
hold, since this combination already appears in Manzoni’s 19th Century novel.

12
We wish to thank here the Italian native speakers to whom we submitted our data: Elisabetta Bonvino, Claudio Iacobini,
Stefania Marzo, Sara Scoz and Giuseppe Massangioli.
19
- Semantics:

With respect to its meaning, the partitive spreads, from the the 14th C. on, to contexts in which del N is
no longer a contextually defined partition set, as shown by the following examples from Dante quoted
from Tekavčic (1980 : 115):

(45) a. Chi del fango ingozza (Infierno 7, 129)

who of-the mud swallows in great quantities
‘Who swallows mud in great quantities’
b. Rompendo della scorza, non che dei fiori e delle foglie nove (Purgatorio 32, 113)
breaking (of-the) bark, not only (of-the) flowers and (of-the) new leaves
‘Breaking some bark, not only flowers and new leaves’

- Paradigm:

Although the partitive up till now still largely alternates with zero marking, its status has changed over
time: it no longer introduces a prepositional complement, but fully belongs to the paradigm of the
nominal determiners where it functions as an indefinite article (Spore 1987). As pointed out by Renzi
(1982), the “real plural of the article uno” in Modern Italian are the forms of the partitive degli/delle.
This is indeed clearly suggested by the fact that they can appear in preverbal subject position, as in the
examples of (42). However, although most Italian normative grammars (e.g. Brunet 1979:111,
Fogarasi 1969:123, Regula-Jernej (1975:119) analyze del/degli as indefinite articles, they still often
condemn it as “unpleasant for the ear” (Brunet) or “unelegant” (Fogarasi) and recommend zero
marking especially with a negation and after certain prepositions.

5.1.3. STAGE V

- Syntax:

Although the partitive is not excluded in any syntactic position in Modern Italian, a small corpus study
based on journalistic texts (Corriere della Sera and 24 Ore Il Sole) and recepies on Internet (www.
Ricettaidea.it.)13 shows that its favorite function is still that of determiner of a direct object NP14, as
was the case in Middle French (cf. supra Fig. 3) :

FIGURE 6: Frequency of the partitive according to the function with respect to the verb

13
The data were downloaded from 18.7 till 18.8.2010 with glossanet, a software developed at the Université Catholique de
Louvain (http://glossa.fltr.ucl.ac.be).
14
Interestingly, a corpus study by Luraghi (forthc.) yielded similar results.
20
 Interestingly, the study of the same sample with respect to the internal structure of the NP reveals that,
as in Middle French (cf. supra Fig. 4), postposed adjectives and participles, relative clauses or
prepositional complements that follow the noun tend to favor the use of the partitive.

FIGURE 7: Frequency of the partitive according to the internal structure of the NP

Partitive

80
60
40 Partitive
20
0
e]

]
]
]

j]
–]

N
N

le
Ad

us
cip
N

rt)
dj

la
[N
[A

[–

(a
rti

lc
Pa

de
re
[N

[N

[N

The same tendency is further confirmed by the answers of our native speakers: in (46) produced by
our informants, the NP is introduced by the partitive when it is followed by a postposed Adj /
Participle and by the zero marker otherwise:

(46) a. Abbiamo bevuto vino / abbiamo bevut del vino maturato in cantina
drink-PRF.1PL wine / drink-PRF.1PL of-the wine riped in cellar
‘We drank wine / we drank wine riped in the wine cellar.’
b. Piero e Gianni sono diventati medici / sono diventati dei medici molto stimati
Peter and John become-PRF.3PL doctors / become-PRF.3PL of-the doctors much appreciated
‘Peter and John became doctors / became very much appreciated doctors

The following examples illustrate the combination of the partitive with a relative clause following the
NP. According to Renzi et al. (2001: 378 ff), example (47a) is a case in which the partitive is even
obligatory:
(47) a. Ecco del vino che hanno portato dall’Alsazia
Here of-the wine that bring-PRF.3PL from the Alsace
‘Here you have some wine which they brought from Alsace’.
b. Passa del tempo che sembra lunghissimo,in attesa dei soccorsi
pass-PRS.3SG of-the time that seem-PRS.3SG very long, in wait of-the help
‘Time seems very long, when you are waiting for help’. (Corriere della Sera, 26.5.2010)

- Semantics:

With respect to its semantics, the use of the Italian partitive is not limited to any particular noun type,
i.e. it can precede all kinds of nouns, including those with abstract referents:
(48) a. Bisogna avere della pazienza.
need-PRS.3SG have of-the patience
‘One needs to have patience’ (quoted from Tekavčic 1980 : 116)
b. Vogliamo soltanto fare del bene e dare una mano, mai saremmo andate
want-PRS.1PL only do-INF of-the good and give a hand, never go-COND.1PL
contro la chiesa, davvero non capisco le polemiche.
against the church really not understand-PRS.1SG the polemics
‘We only want to do good and give a hand, we would never have criticized the Church, really I don’t
understand the controversy.’ (Corriere della Sera, 1.6.2010)

21
However, although for some native speakers there is no meaning difference at all between zero and
the partitive, several linguists (e.g. Brunet 1979 in (49), but see also Korzen 1996) as well as some of
our native informants (ex. 50 and 51) mention that semantic constraints still characterize the partitive.
According to them, the partitive often has some of its residual (original) partitive meaning and is not
always synonymous with the zero marker:
(49) a. Fare delle smorfie (Brunet 1979:109)
make-INF of-the faces
‘to pull faces’
b. Fare smorfie
make-INF faces
‘to grin’
(50) a. Abbiamo bevuto del vino caldo
drink-PRF.1PL of-the wine hot
‘We drank some hot wine’
b. Abbiamo bevuto vino caldo
drink-PRF.1PL wine hot
‘We drank vino brucciato'
(51) a. Piero beve dell’acqua
Peter drink-PRS.3SG of-the water
‘Peter drinks some water’
b. Piero beve acqua
Peter drink-PRS.3SG water
‘Peter (usually) drinks water’

- Paradigm:

Although Modern Italian still displays a large alternation of the partitive with zero marking, which
suggests that the partitive is still in an overlap stage (Heine & Kuteva 2002) in Modern Italian, many
cases are found where the two are used without any meaning difference. Thus in (52), the postverbal
subject after esistono is used once with zero marker and once with the partitive by the same speaker:

(52) esistono per vostra conoscenza queste proprio non lo so eh ma esistono

exist-PRS.3PL for your knowledge these proper not it know-PRS.1SG eh but exist-PRS.3PL
dizionari etimologici (…) questo per dire che praticamente esistono dei livelli di
dictionaries etymological (...) this to say that practically exist-PRS.3PL of-the levels of
approssimazione
approximation
'There are, if you want to know, these actually I do not know eh but there are etymological dictionaries
(...) with this I want to say that there are actually different levels of approximation'
(quoted from Bonvino 2001)

5.2. The partitive and the typology of Romance

5.2.1 From OV to VO

A very important property of Italian not mentioned so far is its regional variation. In many respects,
the Northern variants differ from those of Centre and the South. The partitive seems to be more
frequent in the North (Tekavčic 1980 : 116, cf. also Luraghi forthc.), as was also confirmed by our
informants, those from Milan using the partitive more willingly than those from Naples.

Interestingly, the frequent use of the partitive in the North patterns with a similar variation in other
domains of « neo-Italian » (Sabatini 1985) that are consistent with OV  VO, in particular the
gradual loss of the past tense which is being replaced by the present perfect, more so in the North than
in the South.
22
 South North

V – Gramm Gramm - V

Tense Tense

As we have already mentioned, number and gender end marking of N is, in contrast with the Spanish
system, ambiguous in Italian (Stark 2007), which could be a further reason why Italian introduced pre-
posed free morphemes, like French did. Recall however that Italian occupies an intermediate position,
between Spanish, which expresses plural by means of one unique suffix, and French, which has
virtually no morphological plural marking on the noun at all (in spoken language at least).

FIGURE 8 - Plural endings in Italian, Spanish and French

Italian

SINGULAR PLURAL
CasA ‘house’ CasE
CanE ‘dog’ CanI
LibrO ‘book’ LibrI
BracciO ‘arm’ BracciA

Spanish

SINGULAR PLURAL
CasA ‘house’ CasaS
MentE ‘mind’ MenteS
LibrO ‘book’ LibroS

French

SINGULAR PLURAL
Rose [Roz] ‘rose’ Roses [Roz]
Livre [livR] ‘book’ Livres [livR]

5.2.2. Information structure, linear order and determination

A similar observation regarding Italian occupying an intermediate position between Spanish and
French holds for word order. On the one hand, it is less free than in Latin and in Spanish; on the other
hand, it is far more free than French, as it allows almost all types, albeit with particular constraints
(Belletti and Shlonsky 1995, Lahousse and Lamiroy in press, Sornicolá 1994). If there is a significant
relationship between free word order and lack of nominal determiners, as we have suggested above in
4.2.2. for Spanish, it comes as no surprise that the use of the partitive in Italian is in between the
French situation, where word order is rigid and the partitive obligatory, and the Spanish one, where
word order is free and the partitive inexistent.

23
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The grammatical category of the articles is typologically rather uncommon. Moreover, its spread in
Western-European languages is a recent phenomenon, probably due to contact (Heine & Kuteva
2006). Schroeder (2006) has shown that there is a continuum from West to East:

Western-European languages Central-European languages Eastern-European languages

e.g. English, French, Spanish,
Italian
Definite article ≠ demonstrative
e.g. German e.g. Russian, Finnish
No article-use of demonstrative
Definite article = demonstrative Incipient article-use use of
demonstrative

What we have shown in this paper is that there is also a continuum in the Romance group:

French (North-)Italian Spanish, Portuguese

Although the source expression of the partitive is available for all Romance languages, we have
showed here that the outcome of the evolution is quite different according to the language: whereas
the partitive does not grammaticalize into an article in Spanish at all, it becomes an article both in
Italian and French. However, in Italian it remains basically optional (and depends heavily on the
region), i.e. – in Italian the grammaticalization process form preposition to article has not totally
reached its endpoint, as it did in French. Our data also provide evidence for the hypothesis that there
is a significant relation between the overall typological evolution of the Romance languages regarding
other independent domains and the emergence of the partitive.

On the one hand, there seems to be a significant correlation between the evolution of word order in
Romance and the position of the grammatical morphemes: insofar as there is a shift from OV to VO,
the language tends to recruit existing free morphemes at the right of the verb of the noun for the
expression of grammatical functions, instead of keeping or renewing the existing suffixal morphology.
For instance, in the verbal domain, clitic pronouns take over the role of personal inflection and the
present perfect ‘have/be’ + past participle (Fr. il est venu) is used instead of the aoristic past tense
(“passé simple”, e.g. Fr. il vint). In the nominal domain, prepositions are grammaticalized in order to
express the syntactic functions of core arguments formerly expressed by case inflection and articles
are developed for the expression of number (and gender), which makes the suffixal markers of number
and gender superfluous. As French has the most consistent VO order, the grammaticalization of the
free morphemes at the right of the nominal or verbal head seems in an advanced stage. For instance,
the aoristic past tense (“passé simple”) is no longer used in oral speech, the former present perfect
being the normal expression of the past tense. In Spanish, on the contrary, where OV is still possible,
the aoristic past tense conserves it vitality and the present perfect still has its full aspectual value.
Italian occupies once more the intermediate position and this in two ways, both as a whole between
French and Spanish and internally between the North and the Centre/South of Italy: whereas the
Northern variants tend to lose the aoristic past (similarly to French), the Centre and the South favor
the conservative alternative, viz. the use of the aoristic past tense (“passato remoto”). The different
stages of the development of the partitive in the three Romance languages considerered here and the
regional differences between North Italian with respect to Centre and the South, can be accounted for
in the same perspective.

On the other hand, there is a correlation between the rigidification of word order and the development
of articles as markers of the discourse status of referents: when word order becomes rigid and is put
into service to mark exclusively syntactic function, it can no longer be used to express the discourse

24
 status, thematic or rhematic, of the nominal referents. This is the case for French which evolved into a
totally rigid SVO order. In these conditions, a full article system which includes a partitive (indefinite)
marker is a welcome bonus to mark the discourse status of the nominal referents (indefinites being
prototypically associated with the rhematic position and definites with themes). In Spanish to the
contrary, word order is virtually free, so the constituents can be moved in the sentence for semantic
and discursive reasons. As a consequence, the need of a full article system is less stringent: zero
determination is still widespread and the prepositional partitive did not evolve into an article. Once
again, Italian occupies the intermediate position, between French and Spanish, and with an internal
contrast between the North, where the partitive article is common, and the Centre and the South,
where zero marking of the NP is still often preferred.

References

Adillo Rufo, Sergio. 2006. La partitividad en francés y español: un enfoque diacrónico. Actas del
XXXVI Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Lingüística (unpublished ms.)
Belletti, Adriana & Ur Schlonsky. 1995. The order of verbal complements: A comparative study.
Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13. 489-526.
Bonvino, Elisabetta. 2005. Le sujet postverbal. Une étude sur l’italien parlé. Paris : Ophrys.
Brunet, Jacqueline. 1978-2008. Grammaire critique de l’italien. Paris: Université de Paris 8-
Vincennes.
Campbell, Lyle & Alice C. Harris. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Carlier, Anne. 2001. La genèse de l’article un. Langue française 130, 65-88.
Carlier, Anne. 2004. Sur les premiers stades de développement de l’article partitif. Scolia 18: 115-146.
Carlier, Anne. 2007. From Preposition to Article : The Grammaticalization of the French Partitive.
Studies in Language 31: 1-49.
Carlier Anne, Goyens Michèle & Lamiroy Béatrice, forthc. De: a genitive marker in French? Its
grammaticalization path from Latin to French. In Verstraete J.-Ch. & Carlier A. (eds). The
Genitive. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Company Company, Concepción. 1991. La extensión del artículo en el español medieval. Romance
Philology, XLIV, 4, 402-424.
Ernout, Alfred and François Thomas. 1951. Syntaxe latine. Paris : Klincksieck.
Fogarasi, Miklós. 1969. Grammatica Italiana del Novecento. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.
Foulet, Lucien. 1916. Petite syntaxe de l’ancien français. Paris : Champion.
Fournier, Jean-Marie. 2004. Histoire d’une catégorie. Le partitif dans les grammaires françaises
(16ème-18ème siècle). In G. Hassler & G. Volkmann (eds.) Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft
in Texten und Konzepten. Münster: Nodus Publikationen, 119-130.
Guillaume, Gustave. 1969, Langage et science du langage, Paris : Nizet.
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2002. The World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language contact and Grammatical change. Cambridge: CUP.
Herslund, Michael. 2003. Le pluriel de l’article indéfini en ancien français. In Blumenthal, P. &
J.E. Tyvaert (eds.) La cognition dans le temps. Etudes cognitives dans le champ historique des
langues et des textes. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 75-84.
Herslund, Michael. 2007. Roman et germanique: l'exemple de l'article indéfini. In , L. Bégioni &
C. Müller. (eds.) Problèmes de sémantique et de syntaxe. Hommage à André Rousseau. Lille:
Ed. du Conseil Scientifique de l'Université de Lille 3, 221-230.
Hopper, Paul. 1993. On some principles of grammaticization. In: Hopper, P. & E. Traugott (eds.)
Grammaticalisation. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press,17-35.
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria. 2001. ‘A piece of the cake’ and ‘a cup of tea’: Partitive and pseudo-
partitive nominal constructions in the Circum-Baltic Languages. In Ö. Dahl & M. Koptjevskaja-
Tamm (eds). The Circum-Baltic Languages: Typology and Contact, v.1-2. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Korzen, Iørn. 1996. L’articulo italiano fra concetto ed entità. (Etudes romanes 26), Copenhague :
Museum Tuscalanum Press
Lahousse, Karen and Béatrice Lamiroy (in press). VOS Word Order in Romance. A

25
 grammaticalization account. Folia Linguistica, 2 (2012).
Lamiroy, Béatrice and Walter De Mulder (2011). Stages of Grammaticalization across Languages. In
B. Heine & H. Narrog (eds.) Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: OUP, chapter 24.
Lamiroy, Béatrice, Michèle Goyens & Ludo Melis. 2002. Déplacement et repositionnement de la
préposition A en français. Lingvisticae Investigationes 25/2, 275-310.
Lapesa, Rafael. 1983. Historia del español. Madrid: Gredos.
Leiss, Elisabeth. 2007. Covert patterns of definiteness / indefiniteness and aspectuality in Old
Icelandic, Gothic, and Old High German. In E. Stark et al. (eds.), 73-102.
Luraghi, Silvia. 2009. The internal structure of adpositional phrases. In J. Helmbrecht, Y. Nishina,
Y.M. Shin, S. Skopeteas, E. Verhoeven. (eds). Form and Function in Language Research.
Papers in honour of Christian Lehmann. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 231-254.
Luraghi, Silvia (forthc.). Partitives and differential marking of core arguments: a cross-linguistic
survey.
Marchello-Nizia, Christiane. 1992. L’évolution du français. Ordre des mots, démonstratifs, accent
tonique. Paris : Armand Colin.
Meillet, Antoine. & Joseph Vendryes. 1927. Traité de grammaire comparée. Paris: Champion.
Posner, Rebecca. 1996. Las lenguas romances. Madrid: Cátedra.
Presslich, Marion. 2000. Partitivität und Indefinitheit. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang.
Real Academia Española / Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española. 2009. Nueva gramática
de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa.
Regula, Moritz. & Josip Jernej. 1975. Grammatica Italiana descrittiva su basi storiche e
psichologiche. Berne: Francke Verlag.
Renzi, Lorenzo. 1982. Il vero plurale dell’articolo uno. Lingua Nostra 43, 63-68.
Renzi, Lorenzo, Giampaolo Salvi & Anna Cardinaletti. 2001. Grande Grammatica di Consultazione.
Bologna: Il Mulino, vol. 1, 371-437.
Sabatini, Francesco.1985. L’italiano dell’uso medio: una realtà tra le varietà linguistiche italiane. In
G. Holtus, E. Radtke (eds.), Gesprochenes Italienisch in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Tübingen:
Narr:155-184.
Serbat, Guy. 1996. Grammaire fondamentale du latin. Leuven: Peeters.
Serianni, Luca. 1989. Appunti di grammatica storica italiana. Roma: Bulzoni.
Sornicolà, Rosanna. 1994. On Word-order Variability: A Case-study from a Corpus of Italian. Lingua
e Stile, 29, 1: 25-57.
Spore, Palle. 1987. L’article partitif en italien moderne. Revue Romane 22, 1, 30-39.
Stark, Elisabeth. 2007. Gender, number and indefinite articles. About the typological inconsistency of
Italian. In E. Stark et al (eds.), 49-71.
Stark, Elisabeth, Elisabeth Leiss & Werner Abraham (eds.). (2007). Nominal Determination:
Typology, Context Constraints, and Historical Emergence. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Tekavčic, Pavao. 1980 . Grammatica Storica dell’italiano. Bologna : Il Mulino.
Zamarro Calvo, María José. 1992. Configuración sémica de la preposición “de”. In M. Ariza Viguera
et al. Actas del II Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Lengua Española. Madrid: Pabellón
de España. Vol. 1, 905-916.
Väänänen, Veikko. 1981. La préposition latine de et le génitif. Recherches et récréations latino-
romanes. Napoli : Bibliopolis.
Veldre-Gerner, Georgia. 2006. “Condito con della soia, olio e sale”. Teilungsartikel vs. Nullartikel im
aktuellen gesprochenes Italienisch. In C. Kelling, , J. Meinschaefer & K. Mutz (eds.)
Morphologie und romanistische Sprachwissenschaft. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz,
Arbeitspapier 120.
Von Wartburg, Walther. 1950. Die Ausgliederung der romanischen Sprachräume. Bern : Francke.
Zamboni, Alberto. 1998. Dal latino tardo al romanzo arcaico : aspetti diacronico-tipologoci della
flessione nominale. In : Ramat, P. and Roma, Enzo (eds) Sintassi storica. Società Linguistica
Italiana 39. Roma : Bulzoni. Bern : Francke, 127-146.
Zubizarreta, María Luisa. 1999. Las funciones informativas: Tema y foco. In I. Bosque & V. Demonte
(eds). Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, Vol. III: 4215–
4244.

26

View publication stats