Cover not available
Part of
Noun Valency
Edited by Olga Spevak
[Studies in Language Companion Series 158] 2014
► pp. 183–210

Chapter 8. Noun valency in Latin

| University of Toulouse 2
This article has two objectives. The first is to present an account of valency nouns in Latin. Lyons’ typology (1977) envisaging three orders of entities is useful for predicting the number and type of complements used with various nouns. Expansions of all the categories are distinguished: concrete entities, relational nouns, agent nouns, verbal nouns, and nouns expressing qualities. Furthermore, Latin shows interesting phenomena closely related to noun valency, namely nominalization of verbal notions in Early Latin and the construction of the dominant participle. The second objective is to examine argument marking at the noun phrase level. The genitive is the “adnominal” case par excellence; other cases (the dative, accusative, and ablative) as well as prepositional phrases are atypical noun complements in Latin, and furthermore they are often restricted to specific categories of nouns.
Published online: 19 June 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.158.08spe
References (45)
References
Baldi, Philip & Nuti, Andrea. 2010. Possession. In New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, Vol. 3: Constituent Syntax: Quantification, Numerals, Possession, Anaphora, Philip Baldi & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 239–387. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1966[1962]. Pour l’analyse des fonctions casuelles: Le génitif latin. In Problèmes de linguistique générale, Vol. 1, 140–148. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bolkestein, A. Machtelt. 1981. Factitivity as a condition for an optional expression rule in Latin: The ‘ab urbe condita’ construction and its underlying representation. In Predication and Expression in Functional Grammar, Machtelt Bolkestein, Caspar de Groot & J. Lachlan MacKenzie (eds), 206–233. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 1989. Parameters in the expression of embedded predications in Latin. In Subordination and Other Topics in Latin. Proceedings of the Third colloquium on Latin Linguistics ( Bologna , 1–5 April 1985) [Studies in Language Companion Series 17], Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 3–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Chappell, Hilary & McGregor, William. 1996. Prolegomena to a theory of inalienability. In The Grammar of Inalienability: A Typological Perspective on Body Part Terms and the Part-whole Relation, Hilary Chappell & William McGregor (eds), 3–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 1995. Slavonic’s closest approach to Suffixaufnahme: The possessive adjective. In Double Case: Agreement by Suffixaufnahme, Frans Plank (ed.), 265–282. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Devine, Andrew M. & Stephens, Laurence D. 2006. Latin Word Order. Structured Meaning and Information. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dressler, Wolfgang. 1970. Comment décrire la syntaxe des cas en latin? Revue de Philologie44: 25–36.Google Scholar
Flobert, Pierre. 1996. Les verbes supports en latin. In Acten des VIII. internationalen Kolloquiums zur lateinischen Linguistik, Alfred Bammesberger & Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 193–199. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Fugier, Huguette. 1983. Le syntagme nominal en latin classique. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 2, 29, 1, Wolfgang Haase (ed.), 212–269. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
GL: Keil, Henricus. 1855–1880. Grammatici Latini. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Happ, Heinz. 1976. Grundfragen einer Dependenz-Grammatik des Lateinischen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Heick, Otto William. 1936. The Ab Urbe condita Construction in Latin. Lincoln NB: Lincoln University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession: Cognitive Sources, Forces, and Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, Roland. 1996. Funktionsverbgefüge im Lateinischen. In Acten des VIII. internationalen Kolloquiums zur lateinischen Linguistik, Alfred Bammesberger & Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 200–212. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Ildefonse, Frédérique. 1997. La naissance de la grammaire dans l’Antiquité grecque. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Kolářová, Veronika. 2006. Valency of deverbal nouns in Czech. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 86: 5–19.Google Scholar
Kühner, Raphael & Stegmann, Carl. 1914. Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache 2, Satzlehre, 2 Vols. Hannover: Hahn.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1949 [1960]. Le problème du classement des cas. In Esquisses linguistiques, 131–150. Wrocław: Akademia Nauk.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1985. On grammatical relationality. Folia linguistica 19: 67–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Sur l’évolution du pronom possessif. In Latin et langues romanes. Études de linguistique offertes à József Herman à l’occasion de son 80e anniversaire, Sandor Kiss, Luca Mondin & Giampaolo Salvi (eds), 37–46. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Longrée, Dominique. 1995. Du fonctionnement syntaxique de la construction ab urbe condita chez Tacite. In De usu. Études de syntaxe latine offertes en hommage à Marius Lavency, Dominique Longrée (ed.), 175–188. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
LLT: Library of Latin Texts, Series A. [URL].
Luhtala, Anneli. 2005. Grammar and Philosophy in Late Antiquity: A Study of Priscian’s Sources [Studies in the History of the Language Sciences 107]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics, 2 Vols. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Merguet, Hugo. 1877–1884. Lexikon zu den Reden des Cicero, 4 Vols. Jena: Fischer.Google Scholar
Nutting, Herbert C. 1932. On the adnominal genitive in Latin. University of California Publications in Classical Philology 10(10): 245–308.Google Scholar
Panagl, Oswald. 2006. Zur verbalen Konstruktion deverbativer Nomina. In Word Classes and Related Topics in Ancient Greek, Emilio Crespo, Jesús de la Villa & Antonio R. Revuelta (ed.), 91–104, Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
Panevová, Jarmila. 2002. K valenci substantiv s ohledem na jejich derivaci (On noun valency with respect to their derivation). Zbornik Matice Srpske za Slavistiku 61: 29–36.Google Scholar
Pinkster, Harm. 1985. Latin cases and valency grammar. Some problems. In Syntaxe et latin. Actes du IIe Congrès international de linguistique latine (Aix-en-Provence, 28–31 mars 1983), Christian Touratier (ed.), 163–189. Aix-en-Provence: Presses Universitaires.Google Scholar
. 1990/1995. Latin Syntax and Semantics. London: Routledge. Revised and enhanced edition Sintaxis y semántica del latín. Madrid: Ed. Clásicas, [URL] (September 2012).Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. The Oxford Latin Syntax.
Porzig, Walter. 1942. Die Namen für Satzinhalte im Griechischen und im Indogermanischen. Untersuchungen zur indogermanischen Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft 10. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan. 2002. The Noun Phrase. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roesch, Sophie. 2001. Les emplois de verbum et sermo dans les expressions à verbe support verba facere, verba habere et sermonem habere . In De lingua Latina novae quaestiones. Actes du Xe Colloque international de linguistique latine , Paris-Sèvres, 19ߝ23 avril 1999, Claude Moussy (ed.), 859–874. Louvain: PeetersGoogle Scholar
Rosén, Hannah. 1978. The emergence of a syntactic notion: Genitive of the object and genitive of the subject in continental Renaissance grammars of Latin. Folia linguistica 12(3–4): 267–283.Google Scholar
. 1981. Studies in the Syntax of the Verbal Noun in Early Latin. Munich: Fink.Google Scholar
. 1983. The mechanisms of Latin nominalization and conceptualization in a historical view. In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 2, 29, 1, Wolfgang Haase (ed.), 179ߝ211. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob. 1983. Possession as an Operational Dimension of Language. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Seitz, Johannes. 1938. Über die Verwendung der Abstrakta in den Dialogen Gregors des Grossen. Borna: R. Noske.Google Scholar
Spevak, Olga. 2010. Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose [Studies in Language Companion Series 117]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. The Noun Phrase in Classical Latin Prose [Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology 21]. Amsterdam: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ThLL: Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. 1900–. Leipzig: TeubnerGoogle Scholar
Torrego, M. Esperanza. 1989. Caracterización funcional de los sintagmas preposicionales en latín: pro + abl., contra, adversus, in + ac. In Actas del VII Congreso español de estudios clásicos, 609–616. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.Google Scholar
. 1991. The genitive with verbal nouns in Latin: A functional analysis. In New Studies in Latin Linguistics. Selected Papers from the 4th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics , Cambridge , April 1987 [Studies in Language Companion Series 21], Robert Coleman (ed.), 281–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Garzón Fontalvo, Eveling & Cristina Tur
2022. Further verbal characteristics of Latin predicate nouns. Journal of Latin Linguistics 21:2 ► pp. 199 ff. DOI logo
Valentini, Cecilia
2019. Competing possessive constructions in Late Latin documents from Italy. In Possession in Languages of Europe and North and Central Asia [Studies in Language Companion Series, 206], ► pp. 365 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 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.