Cover not available
Part of
Exaptation and Language Change
Edited by Muriel Norde and Freek Van de Velde
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 336] 2016
► pp. 261–285

How functionless is junk, and how useful is exaptation?

Probing the - i/esc - morpheme

We address the issue of the notion of linguistic functionality in relation to exaptation. Our case is the evolution of the -i/esc- morpheme from Latin to Romance. The exaptive nature of the - i/esc - morpheme used to be considered the historical linguists’ chestnut: from Latin inchoative marker, the - i/esc - morpheme was said to have evolved into a stress-aligning device. The validity of this proposal is questioned in the light of Lass’s definitions of exaptation (Lass 1990 and 1997). Drawing on the historical evolution of the - i/esc - morpheme, we identify several issues with the core concepts of exaptation: (i) junk, (ii) innovation and (iii) functionality. We then argue that exaptation, in its strictest definition (Lass 1990), cannot be said to apply to - i/esc-.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction and outline
  • 2.The -i/esc- morpheme as a prototypical case of exaptation?
    • 2.1The historical data
    • 2.2A case for exaptation?
  • 3.Problems with an account in terms of exaptation
    • 3.1The notion of ‘junk’
    • 3.2‘Conceptual novelty’ (Lass 1990: 80)
    • 3.3What function does the - i/esc - morpheme have?
  • 4.If not exaptation, what else?
  • 5. Back to exaptation and the - i/esc - morpheme: A dead end?
  • 6.Discussion: (re)|(de)|fining exaptation
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 February 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.336.09ver
References (80)
Allen, Andrew S.
1980 The Development of the Inchoative Suffix in Latin and Romance. PhD Dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar
1995 “Regrammaticalization and degrammaticalization of the inchoative suffix”. Historical Linguistics 1993: Selected Papers from the 11th ICHL, Los Angeles, 16–20 August 1993 ed. by Henning Andersen (= Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 124), 1–8. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R.
2008 “Phonologically conditioned allomorphy in the morphology of Surmiran (Rumantsch)”. Word Structure 1.109–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Stress-conditioned allomorphy in Surmiran (Rumantsch)”. Morphological Autonomy: Perspectives from Romance Inflectional Morphology ed. by Martin Maiden, Maria Goldbach & John Charles Smith, 13–35. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark
1994 Morphology by itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes (= Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, 22). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aronoff, Mark & Kirsten Fudemann
2011 (2nd edition). What Is Morphology? Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Aski, Janice M.
1995 “Verbal suppletion: an analysis of Italian, French and Spanish to go ”. Linguistics 33.403–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
2004 Morphological Productivity (= Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berrettoni, Pierangiolo
1971 “Considerazioni sui verbi latini in -scō ”. Studi e Saggi Linguistici 11.89–169.Google Scholar
Blaylock, Curtis
1975 “The Romance development of the Latin verbal augment -sk- ”. Romance Philology 28.434–444.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert
2010 Construction Morphology. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Breban, Tine
2014 “What is secondary grammaticalization? Trying to see the wood for the trees in a confusion of interpretations”. Folia Linguistica 48:2.469–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Dieter Stein
1995 “Functional Renewal”. Historical Linguistics 1993: Selected Papers from the 11th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Los Angeles, 16–20 August 1993 ed. by Henning Andersen (= Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 124), 33–47. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott
2005 Lexicalization and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Camilli, Amerindo
1929 “Il dialetto di Servigliano”. Archivium Romanicum 13.220–271.Google Scholar
Capozzoli, Raffaele
1889 Grammatica del Dialetto napoletano. Napoli: Luigi Chiurazzi.Google Scholar
Cernecca, Domenico
1986 Dizionario del Dialetto di Valle d’Istria. Trieste: Edizioni LINT.Google Scholar
De Cuypere, Ludovic
2005 “Exploring exaptation in language change”. Folia Linguistica Historica 26.13–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Fabio, Elvira G.
1990 The Morphology of the Verbal Infix /-isk-/ in Italian and in Romance. PhD Dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang U.
2003 “Degrees of grammatical productivity in inflectional morphology”. Rivista di Linguistica 15:1.31–62.Google Scholar
Duhoux, Yves
2000 Le verbe grec ancien: éléments de morphologie et de syntaxe historiques. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
Ernout, Alfred
1954 Aspects du vocabulaire latin. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Giacalone Ramat, Anna
1998 “Testing the boundaries of grammaticalization”. The Limits of Grammaticalization ed. by Anna Giacalone Ramat & Paul J. Hopper (= Typological Studies in Language, 37), 107–127. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giammarco, Ernesto
1979 Abruzzo. Pisa: Pacini.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen J. & Elisabeth S. Vrba
1982 “Exaptation: A missing term in the science of form”. Paleobiology 8: 1.4–15.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H.
1991 “The last stages of grammatical elements: contractive and expansive desemanticization”. Approaches to Grammaticalization ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine (= Typological Studies in Language, 19), 301–314. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell
1995 Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective (= Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haverling, Gerd
2000 On sco-Verbs, Prefixes and Semantic Functions. A Study in the Development of Prefixes and Unprefixed Verbs from Early to Late Latin. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgiensis.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer
1991 Grammaticalization: a Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hofmann, Johann Baptist & Anton Szantyr
1997 [reprint of 19722] [19651]. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik (= Lateinische Grammatik. Zweiter Band, by Leumann, Hofmann & Szantyr). München: Beck.Google Scholar
Iannace, Gaetano A.
1983 Interferenza Linguistica ai Confini fra Stato e Regno. Il dialetto di San Leucio del Sannio. Ravenna: Longo.Google Scholar
Iliescu, Maria
1972 Le frioulan à partir des dialectes parlés en Roumanie. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Esa
2002 “Grammaticalization as an analogue of hypothetico-deductive thinking”. New Reflections on Grammaticalization ed. by Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (= Typological Studies in Language, 43), 413–422. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Job, Léon
1893 Le présent et ses dérivés dans la conjugaison latine d’après les données de la grammaire comparée des langues indo-européennes. Paris: Bouillon.Google Scholar
Keller, Madeleine
1992 Les verbes latins à infectum en -sc-. Étude morphologique à partir des formations attestées dès l’époque préclassique. Bruxelles: Latomus.Google Scholar
Kilani-Schoch, Marianne & Wolfgang U. Dressler
2005 Morphologie naturelle et flexion du verbe français. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold
1996 “Reconstruction in morphology”. The Comparative Method Reviewed: regularity and irregularity in language change ed. by Mark Durie & Malcolm Ross, 218–263. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lanly, André
1977 Morphologie historique des verbes français. Paris: Bordas.Google Scholar
Lass, Robert
1990 “How to do things with junk: exaptation in language evolution”. Journal of Linguistics 26.79–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Historical Linguistics and Language Change (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, 81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lausberg, Heinrich
1956–1962 Romanische Sprachwissenschaft (3 vol.). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam
2009 Grammatica Diacronica del napoletano. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Anton
1907 “Il vernacolo di Subiaco”. Studî Romanzi 5.237–300.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Paul M.
1987 From Latin to Spanish. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Löfstedt, Einar
1933 Studien und Beiträge zur historischen Syntax des Lateins. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin
1992 “Irregularity as a determinant of morphological change”. Journal of Linguistics 28.285–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 “A strange affinity: perfecto y tiempos afines”. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 58.441–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 “Verb augments and meaninglessness in Early Romance morphology”. Studi di Grammatica Italiana 22.1–61.Google Scholar
2004 “When lexemes become allomorphs. On the genesis of suppletion”. Folia Linguistica 38:3–4. 227–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005a “La ridistribuzione paradigmatica degli “aumenti” verbali nelle lingue romanze”. Latin et langues romanes. Études de linguistique offertes à József Herman à l’occasion de son 80ème anniversaire ed. by Sandor Kiss, Luca Mondin & Giampaolo Salvi, 431–440. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
2005b “Morphological autonomy and diachrony”. Yearbook of Morphology 2004 ed. by Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle, 137–175. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Morphophonological innovation”. The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages, vol. 1 ed. by Martin Maiden, John Charles Smith & Adam Ledgeway, 216–267. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marchetti, Pascal
2001 L’usu córsu. Ajaccio: Alain Piazzola.Google Scholar
Masotti, Adelmo
1999 Grammatica romagnola. Ravenna: Edizioni del Girasole.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine
1967 [reprint of 19378] [19031]. Introduction à l’étude comparative des langues indo-européennes. Alabama: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. & Joseph Vendryes
1924 Traité de grammaire comparée des langues classiques. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Meul, Claire
2013 The Romance Reflexes of the Latin Infixes -i/esc- and -idi̯-: Restructuring and Remodeling Processes. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Meyer-Lübke, Wilhelm
1974 Grammaire des langues romanes [reprint of the French translation (1890–1906) of the original German version of (1890–1902)] (4 vol.). Genève: Slatkine Reprints / Marseille: Laffitte.Google Scholar
Mignot, Xavier
1969 Les verbes dénominatifs latins. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Mistral, Frédéric
1878–1887 Lou Tresor dóu felibrige ou dictionnaire provençal-français. Aix-en-­Provence: Veuve Remondet-Aubin.Google Scholar
Narrog, Heiko
2007 “Exaptation, grammaticalization, and reanalysis”. California Linguistic Notes 32:1.1–25.Google Scholar
Nicoli, Franco
1983 Grammatica milanese. Busto Arsizio: Bramante.Google Scholar
Norde, Muriel
2009 Degrammaticalization. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pirrelli, Vito
2000 Paradigmi in Morfologia. Un approccio interdisciplinare alla flessione verbale dell’italiano. Pisa-Roma: Istituti editoriali e poligrafici internazionali.Google Scholar
Ramat, Paolo
1992 “Thoughts on degrammaticalization”. Linguistics 30.549–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohlfs, Gerhard
1966–1969 Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti (3 vol.). (Italian translation of the original German version of 1949–1954, Bern: Francke). Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
1970 Le gascon: études de philologie pyrénéenne (= Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 85). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Miret, Fernando
2006 “Productivity of the weak verbs in Romanian”. Folia Linguistica 40:1–2.29–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwarze, Christoph
2009 “On the development of Latin -sk- to French and Italian”. Italian Journal of Linguistics 21:2.343–382.Google Scholar
Shannon, Claude E.
1948 “A mathematical theory of communication”. Bell System Technology Journal 27.379–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, John Charles
2006 “How to do things without junk: the refunctionalization of a pronominal subsystem between Latin and Romance”. New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics, vol II: phonetics, phonology and dialectology ed. by Jean-Pierre Montreuil (= Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 276), 183–205. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Change and continuity in form-function relationships”. The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages: Volume 1, Structures ed. by Martin Maiden, John Charles Smith & Adam Ledgeway, 268–317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tekavčić, Pavao
1972 Grammatica storica dell’italiano (3 vol.). Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2004 “Exaptation and grammaticalization”. Linguistic studies based on corpora ed. by Minoj Akimoto, 133–156. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Vermandere, Dieter
& Claire Meul 2014 “La variazione morfologica nei dialetti dell’Italia settentrionale: una causalità multifattoriale”. L’Italia Dialettale LXXV.273–297.Google Scholar
Veselinova, Ljuba N.
2007 Suppletion in Verb Paradigms. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vincent, Nigel
1995 “Exaptation and grammaticalization”. Historical Linguistics 1993: Selected Papers from the 11th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Los Angeles, 16–20 August 1993 ed. by Henning Andersen (= Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 124), 433–448. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagner, Max Leopold
1952 Historische Wortbildungslehre des Sardischen [Romanica Helvetica 39]. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Zamboni, Alberto
1982–1983 “La morfologia verbale latina in +sc+ e la sua evoluzione romanza: appunti per una nuova via esplicativa”. Quaderni patavini di Linguistica 3.87–138.Google Scholar
Zerdin, Jason
2002 “The iterative-intensives in -σκον ”. Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics 7.103–130.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by 3 other publications

Rupp, Laura & David Britain
2019. Introduction. In Linguistic Perspectives on a Variable English Morpheme, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Rupp, Laura & David Britain
2019. Past BE. In Linguistic Perspectives on a Variable English Morpheme, ► pp. 165 ff. DOI logo
Rupp, Laura & David Britain
2019. Verbal –s. In Linguistic Perspectives on a Variable English Morpheme, ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.