<HAVE + PERFECT PARTICIPLE> in ROMANCE and ENGLISH
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
<HAVE + PERFECT PARTICIPLE> IN ROMANCE AND ENGLISH: SYNCHRONY AND DIACHRONY A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Diego A. de Acosta May 2006 © 2006 Diego A. de Acosta <HAVE + PERFECT PARTICIPLE> IN ROMANCE AND ENGLISH: SYNCHRONY AND DIACHRONY Diego A. de Acosta, Ph.D. Cornell University 2006 Synopsis: At first glance, the development of the Romance and Germanic have- perfects would seem to be well understood. The surface form of the source syntagma is uncontroversial and there is an abundant, inveterate literature that analyzes the emergence of have as an auxiliary. The “endpoints” of the development may be superficially described as follows (for English): (1) OE Ic hine ofslægenne hæbbe > Eng I have slain him The traditional view is that the source syntagma, <have + noun.ACC + perfect participle>, is structured [have [noun participle]], and that this syntagma undergoes change as have loses its possessive meaning. In this dissertation, I demonstrate that the traditional view is untenable and readdress two fundamental questions about the development of have-perfects: (i) how is the early ability of have to predicate possession connected with its later role in the perfect?; (ii) what are the syntactic structures and meanings of <have + noun.ACC + perfect participle> before the emergence of the have-perfect? With corpus evidence, I show that that the surface string <have + noun.ACC + perfect participle> corresponds to three different structures in Old English and Latin; all of these survive into modern English and the Romance languages. I propose that the likeliest source of the have- perfect is the structure exemplified in: (2) Now he has his opponent cornered. Sentences like (2), amply attested in Latin and Old English, contain an aspectual periphrasis that potentially describes two stages of a complex situation: the subject’s achievement of a result and a persisting resultant state. I hypothesize that the structure exemplified in (2) only became available after have had undergone semantic widening and entered into a systematic association with other expressions of possession and pertaining. I also devote considerable attention to the differing values <have + perfect participle>. Though English and the Romance languages all have a formally equivalent verbal construction, the time reference of this “same” construction varies significantly across languages. I argue that the value of <have + perfect participle> in a given language is best understood, synchronically and diachronically, in terms of the values of the verb forms that it complements. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Diego A. de Acosta was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina in 1975. He was raised in Caracas, Venezuela, Madison, Wisconsin, and Shaker Heights, Ohio. He graduated from Princeton University in 1998, and in 1998-1999 worked as a Princeton-in-Asia intern teaching English as a second language in Almaty, Kazakhstan. He earned his Masters degree in linguistics from Cornell University in 2003. While enrolled at Cornell, he had the opportunity to take language and linguistics courses at the Universidade de Coimbra, the Universidade de Lisboa, and the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation could not have been written without the help of many teachers, colleagues, friends, and family members. I am delighted to have the opportunity to thank you all. I owe a special debt of gratitude to my committee members for their energy, interest, and expertise. Carol Rosen, thank you for serving as an enthusiastic committee chair, for sharing your erudition in all things Romance, for meeting with me so frequently, for providing constant feedback and gomitate, and for carefully reading and rereading various versions of the material in this dissertation. I feel very fortunate to have worked with you. Wayne Harbert, thank you for constantly encouraging me to add new dimensions to this work, for repeatedly pointing out valuable books and articles, and for generously sharing your time and tea to help me with Germanic grammar and undecipherable passages of Old English. John Whitman, thank you for your continued interest in my project from its conception in your Diachronic Syntax class, for motivating me to keep theoretical considerations in mind, and for sharing the dinner table with graduate students and professors alike. Alan Nussbaum, thank you for your incalculable help with Proto-Indoeuropean and for contributing your meticulousness, patience, and magna sapientia to the analysis of the Latin materials. Other professors who have contributed significantly to this dissertation are Sally McConell-Ginet, who led the research workshop where I first presented this material to colleagues, and Elena de Miguel of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, who read an earlier version of some of this work and introduced me to new ideas on aspect. Thank you both for taking the time to read and provide feedback on my work. iv Tanya, thank you for your constant support, company, and reminders to contemplate and enjoy the vast world of non-dissertation. I’m glad I can thank you in person every day. To my main support network—Devon, Dan, Andrew, Eric, and Leah—thank you for sharing all the coffees, teas, movies, puzzles and board games, and dips in Lake Cayuga. I can’t imagine what Cornell would have been like without you. To my extended academic family of fellow grad students and recent Ph.D.’s—Johanna, Marc, Teju, Rob, Ana, Cristina, Ellert, Marisol, Irene, Yumiko, Rachel, Edith—thank you for listening, asking questions, and commiserating about Ithaca winters and grad student life. Marty, thanks for helping me sit down and write this thing...and for helping me get out of the chair and go for a walk. You are an inspiration. Angie Tinti and Sheila Haddad, thank you for your hard work and support. The research for this dissertation was funded in large part by a generous graduate student fellowship provided by the National Science Foundation. Thank you to the Foundation for this great honor. Finally, I would like to thank my family—Mamá, Papá, and Alejandro—whose support and nonchalant attitude of “of course you’ll finish your doctorate, we all did” was the finest anti-anxiety prescription I could ask for. Gracias. v TABLE OF CONTENTS page Biographical Sketch.............................................................................................. iii Acknowledgments................................................................................................. iv Table of Contents.................................................................................................. vi List of Figures....................................................................................................... vii List of Tables........................................................................................................ ix List of Abbreviations and Symbols....................................................................... x Chapter 1: Rethinking the study of <have + perfect participle>........................... 1 Chapter 2: A classification of predicates according to inherent lexical aspect..... 24 Chapter 3: <have + perfect participle> in present-day English and the modern Romance languages............................................................................................... 49 Chapter 4: Complex predicates in Relational Grammar....................................... 95 Chapter 5: <have + noun.ACC + perfect participle> in present-day English and the modern Romance languages........................................................................... 112 Chapter 6: Rethinking the genesis of the Romance periphrastic perfect.............. 148 Chapter 7: Rethinking the genesis of the English periphrastic perfect................. 209 Bibliography.......................................................................................................... 241 vi LIST OF FIGURES page 4.1 Janis has opened the door.......................................................................... 95 4.2 Janis kept the door open............................................................................ 95 4.3 Janis has kept the door open...................................................................... 96 4.4 Poirot caught the cat burglar red-handed................................................... 98 4.5 Poirot caught the cat burglar stealing the crown jewels............................ 99 4.6 The cat burglar was stealing the crown jewels.......................................... 101 4.7 Philip knows the old man drinking a coffee.............................................. 103 4.8 She found the door locked......................................................................... 104 4.9 She heard the door locked (by the guard) ................................................. 104 4.10 Poirot saw the cat burglar stealing the crown jewels—reinitialization..... 107 4.11 Poirot saw the cat burglar stealing the crown jewels—inheritance........... 107 4.12 She saw the guard lock the door—null-valent inner predicate.................. 110 4.13 She saw the guard lock the door—raising................................................. 110 5.1 Henry has the radio on............................................................................... 120 5.2 Henry has the gardener trimming the hedges............................................ 120 5.3 I have the key hidden................................................................................