68. Periphrasis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
654 IX. Flexion 5. References Meder, Gregor & Mugdan, Joachim (1990), “Alle reden von Häufigkeit …: Anmerkungen zum COBUILD (1987) ϭ Collins COBUILD English Thema ‘Frequenz’ in der Morphologie”. In: Bas- Language Dictionary, Editor in Chief John Sinclair, sarak, A[rmin] & Bittner, D[agmar] & Bittner, A[n- Managing Editor Patrick Hanks. London, Glas- dreas] & Thiele, P[etra] (eds.), Wurzel(n) der gow: Collins Natürlichkeit: Studien zur Morphologie und Phono- Ingo, Rune (1978), Suomen kielen pluratiivit eli logie, Vol. IV. Berlin: Zentralinst. für Sprachwis- monikkosanat.A˚ bo (Turku): A˚ bo Akademi (Med- senschaft (Linguistische Studien A 208), 87Ϫ108 delanden fra˚n Stiftelsens för A˚ bo Akademi For- Mugdan, Joachim (1983), “Grammatik im Wörter- skningsinstitut 34) buch: Flexion”. In: Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (ed.), Karlsson, Fred (1985), “Paradigms and Word Studien zur neuhochdeutschen Lexikographie, Vol. Forms”. In: Laskowski, Roman (ed.), Studia III. Hildesheim etc.: Olms (Germanistische Lin- gramatyczne, Vol. VII. Wroclaw etc.: Ossolineum guistik 1Ϫ4/82), 179Ϫ237 (Prace Instytutu Je˛zyka Polskiego 61), 135Ϫ154 Plank, Frans (1981), Morphologische (Ir-)regulari- Karlsson, Fred (1986), “Frequency Considerations täten: Aspekte der Wortstrukturtheorie. Tübingen: in Morphology”. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprach- Narr (Studien zur Deutschen Grammatik 13) wissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 39, Quirk, Randolph & Greenbaum, Sidney & Leech, 19Ϫ28 Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan (1985), A Comprehensive Karlsson, Göran (1957), Suomen kielen nukuksissa Grammar of the English Language. London, New ja hereillä-tyyppiset paikallissija-adverbit. Helsinki: York: Longman Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura (Suomalaisen Soboleva, P[olina] A. (1979), “Defektnost’ para- Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia 250) digmy i semanticˇeskoe tozˇdestvo slova”. Voprosy Kiparsky, Paul (1974), “Remarks on Analogical jazykoznanija 1979.5, 37Ϫ47 Change”. In: Anderson, J[ohn] M. & Jones, Spencer, Andrew (1991), Morphological Theory. C[harles] (eds.), Historical Linguistics, Vol. II: The- Oxford, Cambridge/MA: Blackwell ory and Description in Phonology. Proceedings of ˇ ˙ ˇ the First International Conference on Historical Lin- Stejnfel’dt, Evi A. (1963), Castotnyj slovar’ sovre- guistics, Edinburgh 2ndϪ7th September 1973. Am- mennogo russkogo literaturnogo jazyka. Tallinn: ˙ sterdam, Oxford: North-Holland; New York: Naucˇno-issledovatel’skij institut pedagogiki Eston- American Elsevier (North Holland Linguistic skoj SSR Series 12b), 257Ϫ275 Vincent, Nigel (1987), “The Interaction of Periph- LDEL (1984) ϭ Longman Dictionary of the English rasis and Inflection: Some Romance Examples”. Language. Harlow/Essex: Longman In: Harris, Martin & Ramat, Paolo (eds.), Histori- cal Development of Auxiliaries. Berlin etc.: Mouton Maslov, Ju[rij] S. (1964), “Zametki o vidovoj defek- de Gruyter (Trends in Linguistics: Studies and tivnosti (preimusˇcˇestvenno v russkom i bolgar- Monographs 35), 237Ϫ256 skom jazykach)”. In: Larin, B[oris] A. & Safronov, G[erman] I. (eds.), Slavjanskaja filologija. Le- Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich (1988), “Derivation, Fle- ningrad: Izd. Leningradskogo universiteta, 82Ϫ94 xion und Blockierung”. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Matthews, P[eter] H. (1972), Inflectional Morphol- Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 41, 179Ϫ198 ogy: A Theoretical Study Based on Aspects of Latin Verb Conjugation. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge Univ. Press (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 6) Fred Karlsson, Helsinki (Finland) 68. Periphrasis 1. Defining periphrasis 1. Defining periphrasis 2. Suppletive periphrasis I: paradigm symmetry 3. Suppletive periphrasis II: inflectional The term periphrasis (from Greek perı´phrasis generality ‘paraphrase, circumlocution’), in its most 4. Categorial periphrasis 5. Periphrasis in inflection, derivation, and general sense, refers to the use of longer, syntax multi-word expressions in place of single 6. Periphrasis forms words, or “circumlocution” (this Latin term 7. Conclusion is simply a loan translation of the Greek 8. References term). In a narrower philological context, pe- 68. Periphrasis 655 riphrasis is one of the canonical literary rhe- are expressed by single-word forms. Thus, torical figures (cf. Lausberg 21963: 69), e.g. there is no form with the features ‘future’ and English to be hit with Cupid’s arrow ‘to fall in ‘subjunctive’. The future participle in -urus love’, or German Elbflorenz ‘Florence on the with the copula in the present subjunctive Elbe [Dresden]’. For the purposes of this (e.g. facturus sit lit. ‘he be going to do’) fills handbook, a still narrower, grammatical this gap, as illustrated by the array of 3rd sense of the term is relevant. Periphrasis re- person singular forms of facere ‘do’ in (1); the fers to a situation in which a multi-word ex- periphrastic form is given in square brackets. pression is used in place of a single word in (1) indicative subjunctive an inflectional paradigm: “When a form in a present facit faciat paradigm consists of two or more words it is imperfect faciebat faceret periphrastic” (Matthews 1981: 55), e.g. more perfect fecit fecerit beautiful instead of *beautifuller (cf. (b) be- low). But unlike concepts such as ‘mor- future faciet [facturus sit] pheme’ or ‘auxiliary’, the concept of ‘periph- The future subjunctive is required in certain rasis’ has never been an important issue in subordinate clauses that are subject to a se- linguistics, and it has not been used as a cru- quence-of-tense rule, so that there is a real cial ingredient in any formal grammatical need to fill the gap in the paradigm. framework. In general, the term is used in de- (b) In English, many adjectives have an in- scriptive and typological work in an intuitive flected comparative formed by adding the sense, and attempts at clarifying the concep- suffix -er to the base form (e.g. warm ϳ tual content of the term have remained the warm-er), but other adjectives lack such a exception (cf. Zawadowski 1959; Thümmel form, and comparison is conveyed by a 1966: 157Ϫ164; Rose´n 1992). Historically, multi-word (or phrasal) expression contain- the abstract noun periphrasis in its grammati- ing the adverb more (e.g. beautiful ϳ more cal sense is a back-formation from the adjec- beautiful). In some intuitive sense, the tive periphrastic. In traditional Latin gram- phrasal expression serves the same function mar, the term conjugatio periphrastica was as the inflected form with other adjectives, used to refer to infrequent combinations of and linguists have often felt the need to as- participial forms with the copula, e.g. fac- similate such “periphrastic expressions” to turus sit ‘is going to do [subjunctive]’ (cf. the single-word forms, so that it becomes Kühner & Stegmann 21914: 180). This usage possible to say that more beautiful is the seems to have been the starting point of the “comparative form” of beautiful, just as contemporary use of the term periphrastic. warmer is the comparative form of warm (cf. Moreover, in current usage the term peri- Matthews 1981: 54f.). phrastic is almost always applied to verbal (c) The French construction with the auxil- constructions although there is nothing in its iary aller ‘go’ as in je vais le faire ‘I’m going definition that would require such a restric- to do it’ is commonly referred to as futur pe´- tion. (Thus, it would be perfectly coherent riphrastique. Apparently, the reason for in- but distinctly unusual to say that German cluding it in the inflectional paradigm of the has a periphrastic instrumental case, using French verb is that it expresses a grammatical the preposition mit.) This restriction seems to meaning (cf. Art. 27). This sense of periphras- be a historical accident, reflecting the origin tic is reflected, for instance, in the definition: of the term in the Latin conjugatio periphra- stica. It is shared by the related term auxil- “periphrastic: denoting a construction, especially iary (which always refers to verbs, although one involving a verb, in which one or more auxil- “auxiliary nouns” or “auxiliary adverbs” cer- iary words are used to express grammatical distinc- tions, as opposed to the direct inflection of the lexi- tainly exist; cf. Art. 78), but not by the quasi- cal item involved” (Trask 1993 s.v.) synonym analytic. This latter term has its ori- gin in morphological typology (cf. Art. 115) However, it is not self-evident what should and is contrasted with synthetic. It appears count as an inflectional meaning, and the that analytic is more common in Europe and practice of grammarians is rarely rigorous particularly in Russian linguistics, whereas and consistent. For instance, few would de- periphrastic is more common in English. scribe the French construction je veux le faire There are three types of cases in which ‘I want to do it’ as a de´side´ratif pe´riphras- periphrastic forms may be included in inflec- tique, although it is quite similar to the “peri- tional paradigms: phrastic future” je vais le faire. The reason (a) Latin verbs are inflected for different for restricting periphrastic to the construction tenses and moods, but not all combinations expressing future time reference may be 656 IX. Flexion mainly the expectation that the future more than one morphological category is “should be” an inflectional category, whereas combined, e.g. tense and mood in Latin (1). no such expectation exists for the desiderative. Thus, a language in which verbs inflect only In many cases such expectations are obviously for tense or nouns only for number could