Terence Masterproef
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Word Order of Demonstrative Pronouns in Terence’s Comedies Kris Wayenberg Universiteit Gent, master taal- en letterkunde, twee talen: Latijn en Engels Masterproef academiejaar 2010-2011 Promotor: Wolfgang de Melo Table of contents: 1. General introduction.............................................................................................................. p. 3 2. Introduction to Roman comedy.............................................................................................. p. 4 2.1. Greek origins..................................................................................................................... p. 4 2.2. Language........................................................................................................................... p. 5 2.3. Metrical features................................................................................................................ p. 6 3. Introduction on Terence......................................................................................................... p. 6 3.1. Terence’s life..................................................................................................................... p. 6 3.2. Terence’s comedies........................................................................................................... p. 7 3.2.1. Andria ..................................................................................................................... p. 8 3.2.2. Hecyra ..................................................................................................................... p. 9 3.2.3. Heauton Timorumenos .......................................................................................... p. 10 3.2.4. Eunuchus ............................................................................................................... p. 10 3.2.5. Phormio ................................................................................................................. p. 11 3.2.6. Adelphoe ............................................................................................................... p. 12 3.3. Terence’s language.......................................................................................................... p. 12 4. Word order of demonstrative pronouns in nominal phrases................................................ p. 13 4.1. Existing theories.............................................................................................................. p. 13 4.2. Earlier research into the position of demonstrative pronouns......................................... p. 16 5. Research in Terence’s comedies.......................................................................................... p. 17 5.1. Methodology................................................................................................................... p. 17 5.2. Results............................................................................................................................. p. 18 5.3. Examples and explanations of less common positions................................................... p. 19 5.3.1. Position 1.................................................................................................... p. 21 5.3.2. Position 3.................................................................................................... p. 26 5.3.3. Position 4.................................................................................................... p. 29 5.4. Comparative research: prepositional phrases.................................................................. p. 33 5.5. Evaluation of existing theories........................................................................................ p. 35 6. Conclusion........................................................................................................................... p. 36 Works cited............................................................................................................................... p. 38 2 1. General introduction Fairly little investigation into the word order of demonstratives in Latin has yet been conducted. The vast majority of these investigations were based on Latin prose corpora and seem to have forgotten about Latin verse. Even though the word order which is considered to be regular is most likely to be found in prose, one can only consider a certain positioning of constituents to be a universal principle if it is truly universal, that is, if it is found both in prose and in verse. Many scholars appear to have forgotten that poetry is a very important galaxy in the universe of the Latin language. Terence’s plays are very interesting in this respect: naturally, they are written in verse, but they are nonetheless comparable to prose, since the iambic and trochaic metres allow much more variation than, for instance, hexameters. They provide an insight into a more colloquial (or rather: less elevated) register of the Latin language just before the classical period. In my paper, I shall try to make my own contribution to the linguistic investigation of the positioning of adjectivally used demonstratives based on a corpus of poetry: all of Terence’s comedies, making up a total of 6074 verses. By expanding the corpus from one to all comedies of Terence, I should be able to solve the problems encountered in my bachelor paper, and to come to more general conclusions. A first goal of this more thorough investigation will be the verification of the conclusions that were drawn on the basis of my research in Eunuchus alone: was the distribution across the various positions representative for that of Terence’s oeuvre in general, and are the factors that were discovered (Focus, Head Focus and preposing of the verb) still able to account for the displacement of demonstratives? The second target of the expansion of the corpus is to be able to have a more detailed picture conclusions concerning the paradigms iste and ille (which did not occur very often). For instance, do iste and ille behave similarly to hic , or is there a greater tendency to prenominal placement? A third is to draw more firm conclusions about the fourth position demonstratives (those in hyperbaton after the Head) across paradigms. Do the factors that could account for the displacement in other positions also explain the displacement to position 4? Should the third position be considered to be a minor one, or is it more frequent in the five other comedies? Is there a relation between the positioning of demonstratives and the cataphoric use? And is Terence just as fond of preposing the verb in the other, non-Plautine comedies. I shall try to provide an answer for these questions in section 5. In addition to the research concerning demonstratives, I shall compare the results to a limited selection of adjectivally used modifiers. To conclude this introduction, I shall give an outline of the structure of this dissertation. In order to provide a full understanding of the context of the plays, this thesis shall begin with an overview of some important facts about Roman comedy, Terence himself, his language and all of his plays. Next is the linguistic part of this paper, in which I will first give a summary of the different existing theories and an overview of some investigations concerning the adjectival use of demonstratives. Then I shall give a detailed account of the methodology I have followed, before presenting the results of my own investigation. Subsequently, I will discuss these results and provide an explanation for the positions which are less common, making use of examples from the text. After this, a brief discussion of the validity of the existing theories in relation to my investigation will follow. I shall end with a conclusion summarizing the main findings. After this brief introduction to my paper, I shall now give an introduction to Roman comedy. 3 2. Introduction to Roman comedy 2.1. Greek origins The Roman comedies that survived until today are basically reworked Greek originals. They are fabulae palliatae 1, which means the outlines of the Greek models are more or less retained. All of Terence’s comedies are based on New Comedy 2 originals, four are based on Menander’s works, the two others on Apollodorus’. However, this does not imply that the Roman comedies were simply translations of their Greek originals: ‘[playwrights wrote] for a different kind of audience at a different kind of festival in a different kind of theatre.’ 3 Stage conventions are identical to those of the Greek comedies, with the exception of the number of speaking characters on stage. In Greek comedies, the number was limited to only three, while Roman comedy allowed more actors on stage. Even though the other conventions are nearly identical, Terence sometimes makes an original, ironic 4 use of them (Duckworth 1952: 137-8). The stock characters are basically those which can be found in the Greek comedies, but their depiction is often more refined and less monolithical. Duckworth notes that Terence developed the New Comedy (which, apparently, resembled social drama) into a more subtle and artful direction (1952: 394). The exact extent of what has been preserved from the Greek comedies, and what is to be seen as invented is difficult to establish, since the originals survive only in fragments (as is the case for earlier Roman comedy, with the exception of Plautus; the influence of non-Plautine Roman comedy is even less clear). Terence has often been considered