The interpretation of Latin predicative participles

The interpretation of Latin predicative participles EALC.15.06.2012 Øyvind Strand

Predicative participles Dionysius Syracusis expulsus Dionysius:NOM Syracuse expell:prtc.perf.pass.nom Corinthi pueros docebat Corinth boys teach:impf.3.sgl After being expelled from Syracuse, Dionysius taught boys at Corinth (Cic.Tusc 3,27) Verbal adjuncts (converb) Express events that can stand in a number of different semantic relations with the matrix verb. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 3

Implicit subject (conjunct participle) Cupiditate regni adductus desire:abl kingship:gen drive:prtc.perf.pass.nom novis rebus studebat new:dat things:dat strived:impf.3.sg Driven by desire of the kingship, he was striving for a revolution (Caes. Gall 1.9.1). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 4

Explicit Subject (ablative absolute): oppidum paucis defendentibus town:acc few:abl defend:prtc.pres.act.abl expugnare non potuit take by storm:inf not:neg can:perf.3.sg He was not able to take the town by storm, though there were few to defend it (Caes. Gall 2.12.2). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 5

Central questions: What semantic relations can participles be used to express? 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 6

Central questions: What semantic relations can participles be used to express? What factors influence or affects our interpretations? 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 7

Central questions: What semantic relations can participles be used to express? What factors influence or affects our interpretations? How frequent are the different interpretations? 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 8

Central questions: What semantic relations can participles be used to express? What factors influence or affects our interpretations? How frequent are the different interpretations? Are there any differences in interpretation between participles with an implicit vs. explicit subject? 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 9

The corpus: The third and fourth book of De bello gallico (The Gallic War) by Julius Caesar. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 10

The corpus: The third and fourth book of De bello gallico (The Gallic War) by Julius Caesar. Annotated for syntax and morphology in the PROIELproject. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 11

The corpus: The third and fourth book of De bello gallico (The Gallic War) by Julius Caesar. Annotated for syntax and morphology in the PROIELproject. 307 predicative participles in total (102 conjunct participles and 205 ablative absolutes). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 12

Thematic participles Germanico bello confecto Caesar German:ABL war.abl finished:prtc.perf.abl Caesar:NOM statuit sibi Rhenum esse transeundum decided self:dat Rhine be:inf cross.ger The German campaign thus finished, Caesar decided that he must cross the Rhine (Caes. Gall. 3,23,1) Syntax: Modify the sentence as a whole (Specifier of IP). Information structure: Given or inferable information. Semantics: Temporal, temporal-causal, causal, purpose, conditional, concessive, concessive-conditional. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 13

Rhematic participles Hos item cum conspexissent, subsecuti them likewise when see: PLP.SUBJ.3.PL follow:prtc.perf.pass.nom hostibus adpropinquaverunt enemy:dat approached:perf.3.pl And when they saw them, they likewise followed on and drew near to the enemy (Caes. Gall. 4,25,6). Syntax: More on level with the matrix verb (adjoined to I`). Information structure: New and independent information. Semantics: Narrative progression, contrast. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 14

Elaborative participles Nostri ad unum omnes incolumes perpaucis our:nom to one all:nom unharmed:nom few:abl vulneratis se in castra receperunt wound:prtc.perf.pass.abl self to camp returne:perf.3.pl Our men, with not a man lost and but few wounded, returned to camp (Caes. Gall. 4,15,3). Syntax: Modify the matrix verb alone (inside the I projection). Information structure: (usually) new, but dependent information. Semantics: Accompanying circumstances, manner, means, comparison. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 15

Thematic participles fall outside the scope of embeddings such as mood and negations: ne hac parte neglecta that not this:abl part:abl neglect:prtc.perf.abl reliquae nationes sibi:dat idem licere rest:nom nations:nom self same be allowed:inf arbitrarentur think:impf.subj.3.pl [ ]lest, if this district were neglected, the other nations might suppose they had the same liberty,. (Caes. Gall. 3,10,1) 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 16

Rhematic participles fall inside the scope of embeddings such as mood and negation: nonnullae sententiae dicebantur ut some opinion say.impf.pass.3.pl that impedimentis relictis eruptione baggage.abl leave:prtc.perf.pass.abl sortie:abl facta ad salutem contenderent make:prtc.perf.pass.abl to safety strive.impf.subj.3.pl some expressed the opinion that they should abandon the baggage, make a sortie, and strive to win safety (Caes. Gall. 3,3,2). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 17

Elaborative participles are in the focus of negations: Non assidens et attente Not sit:prtc.prs.act.nom and attentively audiens, sed praeteriens listen:prtc.prs.act.nom but pass:prtc.prs.act.nom de oratore saepe iudicat of orator often judge:prs.3.sg [the intelligent critic] not by patient sitting and attentive listening, but in passing can often form a correct judgement of an orator (Cic. Brut.200). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 18

Infering the semantic relation: The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991) 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 19

Infering the semantic relation: The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991). The more complex the relation, the more worldknowledge and/or linguistic information is required for the relation to be successfully inferred. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 20

Infering the semantic relation: The different semantic relations can be ordered hierarchicly in terms of their cognitive or informational complexity (Kortmann 1991). The more complex the relation, the more worldknowledge and/or linguistic information is required for the relation to be successfully inferred. The reciever will always try to maximize coherence and go for the most informative relation sanctioned by the context. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 21

Information hierarchy: Thematic participles Rhematic participles Elaborative participles Concessiveconditional Concessive Contrast Conditional Comparison Purpose Means Causal Temporal-causal Manner Temporal Narrative progression Acc. circumstance 22

Stative participles limited to express causal, concessive and accompanying circumstances relations: et cognita Gallorum infirmitate and know:prtc.perf.pass.abl Gauls weakness:abl quantum hostes auctoritatis essent consecuti how much enemy.nom authority be acquire sentiebat. apprehend:impf.3.sg Knowing as he did the fickleness of the Gauls, he apprehended how much influence the enemy had already acquired (Caes.Gall. 4,13,2). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 23

Conditional and concessive-conditional interpretations limited to non-factual contexts where the matrix verb is modal, in the subjunctive/future mood or expressing iterativity. ab aestu relictae nihil saxa et from tide leave.prtc.perf.pass.nom nothing rock and cotes timerent:impf.subj.3.pl cragfear [ ] if (whenever) left by the tide, they had no fear of rocks or crags (Caes.Gall. 3,13,9). 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 24

Other sentence level factors: Lexical semantics: Causal interpretations typically (ca. 75%) found with participles expressing mental states or conditions like e.g veritus (fearing), adductus (driven). Agent coreference: The relations manner, means and purpose require that the agent of the participle is coreferent with the subject of the main verb. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 26

Temporal and temporal-causal interpretations are typically found in contexts where there is a thematic break in the story: ([ ]in Sotiatum fines exercitum introduxit.) Cuius adventu cognito Sotiates his arrival:abl know:prtc.perf.pass.abl Sotiates:NOM proelium commiserunt battle join:perf.3.pl (he [Caesar] led the army into the territories of the Sotiates) Hearing of his arrival, [ ] the Sotiates joined battle 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 27

% of CP % of AA Thematic: 53,9% 67,8% Concessive-conditional - 0,5% Concessive - 2% Conditional 1% 4,9% Causal 28,4% 3,4% Temporal-causal 13,7% 18% Temporal 10,8% 39% Rhematic: 33,3% 24,9% Contrast 3,9% 0,5% Narrative progression 29,4% 24,4% Elaborative: 12,7% 7,3% Means - 3,4% Acc.circumstance 12,7% 3,9% 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 28

Distribution of the different interpretaions: According to Kortmann (1995), there is a general tendency that in languages that have both constructions converbs with an explicit subject will predominantly express relations on the lower part of the information hierarchy, while converbs with an implicit subject to a much larger degree also will be used to express relations on the upper part of the hierarchy. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 29

Distribution of the different interpretaions: According to Kortmann (1995), there is a general tendency that in languages that have both constructions converbs with an explicit subject will predominantly express relations on the lower part of the information hierarchy, while converbs with an implicit subject to a much larger degree also will be used to express relations on the upper part of the hierarchy. In Latin the other way around? 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 30

CP (102) AA (205) Thematic: 28,4% (55) 71,6% (139) Concessive-conditional - 100% (1) Concessive - 100% (4) Conditional 9,1% (1) 90,9% (10) Causal 80,5% (29) 19,5% (7) Temporal-causal 27,4% (14) 72,6% (37) Temporal 12,1% (11) 87,9% (80) Rhematic: 40% (34) 60% (51) Contrast 80% (4) 20% (1) Narrative progression 37,5% (30) 62,5% (50) Elaborative: 46,4% (13) 53,6% (15) Means - 100% (7) Acc.circumstance 61,9% (13) 38,1% (8) 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 31

The function of the absolute Absolute constructions seem to have a wider function and express more complex semantic relations in Latin than in other languages. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 32

The function of the absolute Absolute constructions seem to have a wider function and express more complex semantic relations in Latin than in other languages. Ablative absolute construction used as a substitute for a lacking perfective active participle. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 33

Summary Latin predicative participles can fill three different syntactic functions that correspond with different sets of possible interpretations and different roles in the information structure of the sentence. Besides pragmatic inferences based on general worldknowledge and contextual given information, factors like the actionality of the participle, the mood/tense of the matrix verb, the lexical semantics of the participle, restrictions on agent coreference and thematic breaks can further restrict the set of potential interpretations. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 35

Summary In De bello gallico relations low on the hierarchy like temporal, temporal-causal, causal, narrative progression and accompanying circumstances are by far the most frequent (ca. 90%), and there are few occurences of the more complex relations. The participle with an explicit subject seems to play a greater role in latin than in other languages and this must probably be seen in light of the fact that Latin lacks a perfective active participle and therefore resorts to the ablative absolute as a substitute. 15.06.2012 The interpretation of Latin predicative participles, EALC 2012, Øyvind Strand 37