AGI Paper Libre

8/21/2019 AGI Paper Libre

1/29

THE INDEFINITE USAGE OF UOMO(MAN) IN EARLY ITALO-ROMANCE

GRAMMATICALIZATION AND AREALITY1

ANNA GIACALONE RAMAT, ANDREA SANS

Dipartimento di Linguistica Teorica e ApplicataUniversit di Pavia

Riassunto

Luso indefinito di elementi lessicali che significanouomo (il tipoman sagt, on dit < homo dicit) si configura, in vir-t della sua diffusione nelle lingue dEuropa, come un tratto finora misconosciuto dello Standard Average Europe-

an (Giacalone Ramat e Sans 2007). Tale uso, sconosciuto alle variet italo-romanze contemporanee (eccezion fattaper labruzzese e per alcune variet lombarde orientali), era invece diffuso negli antichi volgari italiani, che ne presen-tano attestazioni non occasionali. In considerazione di ci, la scomparsa di questi usi nella storia delle variet italo-romanze pu considerarsi come la vera e propria perdita di un tratto dello Standard Average European e costituiscepertanto un fenomeno interessante dal punto di vista areale.

In questo lavoro affrontiamo il problema degli usi indefiniti di uomoin italo-romanzo e della loro scomparsa in unaduplice prospettiva: da un lato prendiamo in esame la distribuzione geografica di questi usi negli antichi volgari,dallaltro teniamo in considerazione il loro grado di grammaticalizzazione in ciascuna variet. Quanto a questultimoaspetto, il processo di grammaticalizzazione di uomocome elemento indefinito pu essere descritto come uno sviluppoin tre stadi (uomocome generico di specie > uomocome elemento indefinito non-referenziale > uomocome elementoindefinito referenziale): solo nellultimo di questi stadi lelemento lessicale che significa uomo pu acquisire alcunepropriet sintattiche proprie dei pronomi. Un ulteriore stadio di sviluppo costituito dalla reinterpretazione di uomocome equivalente di una prima persona plurale (sviluppo gi presente in antico lombardo e rimasto vitale nel bergama-

sco moderno).I dati dellindagine, tratti dal database testuale dellOpera del Vocabolario Italiano (OVI), mostrano che nelle va-

riet italo-romanze antiche uomoera in generale solo scarsamente grammaticalizzato. Non mancano tuttavia due ecce-zioni a questa generalizzazione: da una parte, i volgari settentrionali presentano casi in cui uomo utilizzato come e-lemento indefinito referenziale o come equivalente di una prima persona plurale; dallaltra, in testi che sono volgariz-zazioni o adattamenti di testi antico-francesi, compaiono numerosi casi in cui uomo pi grammaticalizzato che in testicoevi non dipendenti dal modello francese. Entrambi questi fatti sembrano confermare lipotesi, peraltro non nuova,che il modello per lo sviluppo di questi usi in italo-romanzo sia da ricercarsi nellantico francese, variet che godeva digrande prestigio nellItalia (settentrionale e centrale soprattutto) del basso medioevo, per ragioni sia culturali che eco-nomiche, e per lampia mole di traffici di beni e di spostamenti di persone lungo le direttrici che mettevano in comuni-cazione la Francia con la penisola italiana. Il progressivo declino e la finale scomparsa di questi usi coincide conlaffievolirsi dellinflusso francese sui volgari italiani.

Le vicende degli usi indefiniti di uomoin italo-romanzo mostrano pertanto la necessit di ripensare ai modelli in-terpretativi e descrittivi correnti della diffusione dei tratti linguistici in Europa: la formazione dello Standard AverageEuropean non un processo unitario sempre progressivo, ma il risultato di una serie di processi di diffusione che han-no avuto luogo in epoche diverse e i cui risultati non sono sempre sopravvissuti al venir meno dei fattori che hannocontribuito alla loro diffusione.

1. INTRODUCTION

It is very common for nouns meaning man to be used as indefinite elements across languages(Lehmann 1995: 50ff.; Haspelmath 1997: 182-183; Heine and Kuteva 2002: 208; Giacalone Ramatand Sans 2007). These nouns either combine with simple indefinite pronouns to form complex in-definite expressions (e.g. Latin nemo < ne + *hemo; Old English nig man, sum man, cf. Rau-molin-Brunberg and Kahlas-Tarkka 1997: 71ff.) or are used without modifiers to render meanings

1This paper is the result of joint work by the two authors. However, Anna Giacalone Ramat is responsible for Sections1, 3, and 5, and Andrea Sans is responsible for Sections 2 and 4. We also profited greatly from discussions with (andcomments from) Giuliano Bernini (Bergamo), Davide Ricca (Turin), Tullio Telmon (Turin), and Alberto Zamboni (Pa-dua).


2/29

like (some/any)one, and the like (German man, French on< homo, etc.). The latter usage, in par-ticular, is widespread across Europe: it shows up consistently in the so-called Charlemagne area(in the sense of van der Auwera 1998: 823ff.), and tends to diffuse eastwards to West and SouthSlavonic languages, whereas East Slavonic languages do not exhibit clear instances of it. Thisskewing enables us to consider this usage as a truly areal feature of the Standard Average European

(SAE) area (Giacalone Ramat and Sans 2007).Investigations into the indefinite usages of nouns meaning manhave a distinguished history inRomance linguistics (Nyrop 1925: 368ff.; Barrett Brown 1931, 1936; Reichenkron 1933: 66-67;Schlpfer 1933; Rohlfs 1949: 273-274; Kontzi 1951: 100ff.; Jensen 1986: 163-165; 1990: 237-238;Welton-Lair 1999; Salvi, n.d.; DAlessandro and Alexiadou 2006, among others). The present studydiffers significantly from previous works in that we attempt to integrate the history of these usagesin early Italo-Romance varieties into an areal-typological framework. Although uomo, man, is nolonger in use as an indefinite element in modern Italo-Romance (the only exceptions being someLombard varieties and Modern Abruzzese, see Section 4.4), in ancient vernaculars it was used morethan occasionally as a generic/indefinite subject whose meaning roughly corresponded toone/anyone. This fact raises the question as to why this usage developed and eventually disap-

peared. Drawing on the results of a far-ranging areal survey of indefiniteman2in Europe (GiacaloneRamat and Sans 2007), in this paper we argue that the history of indefiniteuomoin Italo-Romanceis better accounted for if the areal mechanisms involved in the formation of the SAE are taken intoconsideration. At the same time, what we may learn from the study of an area in which these usageshave not survived is important and should play a role in framing an adequate approach to the pat-terns of diffusion which gave rise to the SAE: the current modelling of areal diffusion in Europe canbenefit considerably from the careful investigation of individual case histories which can cast lighton the multilayered historical scenarios lying behind the formation of the SAE.

In what follows, we begin by considering the typical contexts of usage of manas an indefiniteelement and sketch a possible path of grammaticalization of man from a fully-fledged noun to apronoun (Section 2). Section 3 is devoted to the Late Latin ancestors of these usages, while in Sec-tion 4 the situation in early Italo-Romance varieties is surveyed. We do not merely aim to sketch ageographical picture of the distribution of these usages in early Italian vernaculars: the diffusion ofthe indefinite usages of uomois examined both in areal terms and with respect to their degree ofgrammaticalization. As grammaticalization is highly contagious in situations of language contact(Heine and Kuteva 2005), looking at the degree of grammaticalization of uomo in different areaswould amount to identifying the possible patterns of diffusion of these usages. An interesting casestudy is discussed in Section 4.3: many grammaticalized occurrences of uomoas an indefinite ele-ment concentrate significantly in texts of French origin (being translations or, rather, reworkings ofFrench originals:Il Milioneby Marco Polo, the story of Tristan, etc.). This fact, along with the arealskewing of these usages in Italy, brings us to the hypothesis of a French influence on the emergence

and development of indefinite uomoin Italo-Romance. This hypothesis, which is by no means newor original (see, e.g., Meyer-Lbke 1890-99: III, 108; Kontzi 1951: 101, quoting Schlpfer 1933:64), will be reviewed in the light of the dynamics of diffusion/contact that brought the SAE areainto existence. In Section 4.4 we deal with the eventual disappearance of indefinite uomoin manyItalo-Romance varieties, and we come at last to the modern Italo-Romance outcomes of indefiniteuomo(Modern Abruzzese and Modern Bergamasco). Finally, in Section 5 we present some generalremarks about how the emergence and retraction of indefinite uomoin Italo-Romance can be mod-elled within the areal-typological framework adopted in this paper.

2For the sake of clarity, in the general discussion in Sections 1 and 2 man(italicized) will be used to refer to the nomi-nal element meaning man used as an indefinite element. Uomo(italicized) will be used when referring to any form(uom, omo, om, etc., see 4.1) meaning man used as an indefinite element in early Italo-Romance vernaculars.


3/29

2. INDEFINITEMAN: CONTEXTS OF USE AND GRAMMATICALIZATION

The grammaticalization of manas an indefinite element is a gradual, three-stage process (Giaca-lone Ramat and Sans 2007: 98ff.). In this section, we will identify three typical contexts of use ofindefinite man, which differ in the referentiality/definiteness properties of the referent of man.

These three stages of development may correlate with a change in the behavioural properties ofman, although there is no necessary one-to-one correspondence between the behavioural and thesemantic/pragmatic sides of this grammaticalization process. Most examples in this section aredrawn from early Italo-Romance vernaculars because we wanted to illustrate the grammaticaliza-tion path using exclusively Italian material: the reader should not infer from these examples anygeneralization about the degree of grammaticalization of indefinite uomoin these vernaculars (seealso note 4 below).

Species-generic generalizations such as (1) and (2) are the discourse environment triggering thereanalysis of manas an indefinite element (Stage 0). In such cases, two interpretations are possible:one in which manis interpreted as corresponding to the human raceor mankind(often opposed toGod, or other species), and the other in which mancan be paraphrased as one, anyone.

OLD LOMBARD

(1) De o dixe sancto Paulo in soa predicana / Ke lomo debia vive con grande temperana(Pietro da Bescap, Sermone, 38;1274)Therefore Saint Paul says in his sermon that man / oneshould live with great moderation

OLD TUSCAN (PISA)

(2) co(n) cisia cosa che Dio sia inn o(n)gna luogo, inn ogna luogo pu luomoservire Dio. (A-nonimo, Trattati di Albertano da Brescia volgarizzati, IV, 23; 1288)since God is everywhere, man / onecan serve God everywhere

The availability of multiple analyses of these clauses favours a reanalysis ofmanas an indefiniteelement. Examples (3) and (4) are particularly instructive as to the initial stage of grammaticaliza-tion of man. In both these examples, mancan only mean one, i.e. it is used as an equivalent of anon-referential, indefinite human subject ( one/anyone; Stage I), its interpretation as a species-generic being definitely excluded in these cases.3

OLD ABRUZZESE (LAQUILA)

(3) Sacciate cha fo in Aquila una granne caresta; / Vinti solli la coppa dello grano vala, / Etlomo non trovavane quanto ne vola (Buccio di Ranallo, Cronaca Aquilana rimata, 72;1362)I want you to know that in Aquila there was a severe famine. A cup of grain cost 20 soldi,and onecould not find as much as one wanted

3 Following Givns (1984) hierarchy of referentiality/definiteness, we consider man as a non-referential (or non-specific) indefiniteelement if the speaker does not have a specific entity in his/her mind, and at the same time s/he doesnot want the hearer to infer that such a specific entity exists, as in, e.g., potrebbe gi luomo opporre contra me e dicereche,onecould in fact argue against me (i.e. against what I said) and say that... (Dante, Vita Nuova, 12, 17).Man isreferential (orspecific) indefinite if it refers to a specific entity which has not been mentioned before or which cannotbe identified more precisely (e.g.on a tu le President, someone murdered the President / the President has been mur-dered).


4/29

OLD SICILIAN (SIRACUSA)

(4) Poy lu Conti fichi fari duy castelli, et potia andari lomudi lunu a laltru, ca illu chi aviafattu fari una via clausadi sipalli et grossi petri, ch lomu chi andava covertamenti(Simoneda Lentini, La conquesta di Sichilia fatta per li Normandi translatata per frati Simuni da Len-

tini, 19;1358)Then the Count had two castles built, and it was possible to go (lit.: the mancould go) fromone to the other, because he had a road built enclosed by palisades and big stones, so that onecould go covertly

In these examples, uomo, to some extent, refers implicitly to a contextually bound sub-group ofhumanity (people experiencing a severe famine in (3); people living in the two castles in (4)) andnot to all humanity. This usage correlates significantly with non-referential and non-assertive con-texts (a negated context in (3); a potential context in (4)). The reason for this correlation has chieflyto do with the origin of this usage from species-generic generalizations. Species-generic generaliza-tions are usually associated with linguistic features (such as the use of a given tense or aspect)

which trigger an atemporal interpretation, and are inherently non-assertive/non-referential. Whenmanstarts being grammaticalized, it first spreads to other non-referential contexts. Lack of asser-tiveness/referentiality may be triggered by other operators such as negators, temporal and hypo-thetical subordinators such as if, when, etc., and thus appears to be the major feature shared by thetwo different usages of man as a species-generic in generalizations about the human race (Stage 0)and as a non-referential indefinite element (Stage I).

In many European languages, the grammaticalization process of manstops at this stage. How-ever, mancan also be used as a referential indefinite element, i.e. as referring to a real-world spe-cific human subject that the speaker does not want to specify (Stage IIa). This usage is exemplifiedby the following passages:4in both (5) and (6), the action takes place in the past and is bound to aspecific spatio-temporal setting, and thus there must have been one or more specific agents.

OLD VENETAN

(5) E molte altre paroley disse, tante quella non savea che dir n responder. Puo ello domandle soe arme, et lomo lile port. E quando ello fo armado, elo vene permeo la chorte, et

prende lo so schudo e la soa lana, e s se parte de ldentro tuto solo, quello non volsse averalguna conpania(Tristano veneto, 132; 1400)And he said many other words to her, so many that she did not know what to answer. Then,he asked for his weapons, and someonebrought them to him. And when he was armed, hewent across the court and picked up his shield and his spear, and then he left the court all

alone, because he did not want to be accompanied by anybodyOLD TUSCAN

(6) Siri cavaliere, onde venite voi? Fuste voi ala magione del re Art? Sapetevoi novelle diquello ostello? Certo disse lo cavaliere, anco non sono due giorni che io me ne part daquello ostello. Ma per la fede che io do a Dio, unquamai non vidi quello albergo s discon-

fortato, s comeelli era a quello punto che io mi part. Lo re piangeva s perduta mente, comeselli vedesse dinanzi da s morto tutto lo mondo; che in quello giorno medesimogli erano

4Examples (5)-(8) are drawn from Italian versions of French texts (Le divisament dou monde,Le Roman de Tristan).

Although these are undeniably Italian texts, they appear to be influenced by French at many levels, as will be discussedat length in Section 4.3. The reader should not infer from these examples that uomowas fully grammaticalized as an in-definite element in Old Venetan and Old Tuscan (see Section 4.2 for a careful picture of the usages of indefinite uomoin these two vernaculars).


5/29

venute novelle che Palamides era morto, e lore Bandemagus morto e Erdes filio [di] Lancil-lotto morto,e tanti de compagni de la Tavola ritonda morti, cherauna meraviglia a udire.

Lo re Art di questa novellache luomo li avea contata tutto di fresco, era duramente tuttodisconfortato, s che io non credo chellisi conforti per uno grande tempo(Tristano Riccar-diano, pp. 403-404; 1300)

Sir, where are You coming from? Have You been to King Arthurs castle? Have You heardnews about that castle? Indeed, answered the knight, I left that castle less than two daysago. But, by God, I have never seen that place as disheartened as it was when I left. The Kingwas crying as desperately as if he had seen the whole world dead in front of him. On that verysame day, he had heard that Palamedes was dead, and that King Bandemagus was dead, andthat Erdes, son of Lancelot, as well as many companions of the Round Table, were dead,which was truly astonishing to hear of. The King was so greatly discouraged at the news thathe had just been told (lit.: that the man had just told him), that I believe that he will not findconsolation for a long time

The semantic/pragmatic development leading from manas a species-generic to a referential in-

definite element may be accompanied by a change in the behavioural properties of man. In StageIIa, manis likely to assume the following behavioural properties typical of a pronoun:

it can be anaphorically referred to by man, as in (7). This example should be contrasted withthe fully nominal anaphoric pattern uomo egli (he) in (8), an example drawn from thesame text:

OLD TUSCAN

(7) Quando luomo si parte di questa provincia, luomova .x. giornate tra greco ellevante (IlMilione,versione toscana del trecento, 60, 1; 1310)When one leaves this province, one rides ten days between north-east and east

(8) E quando luomosi parte dErguil e vassi per levanteVIIJ giornate, egli truova una provin-ciachiamata Egrigaia(Il Milione, versione toscana del trecento, 72, 1)Setting off from Erguiul, you ride eastward for eight days, and then come (lit.: when themanleaves hefinds) to a province called Egrigaia

it may be used without an article, as in (9) below

OLD UMBRIAN (CITT DI CASTELLO)

(9) De lalifante grande maravelia / molte fade udito agio contare, / k a la potentia sua non re-similia / altra fera komopossa pensare (Anonimo,Bestiario moralizzato, p. 744, 1300)About the elephant I heard a lot of wonderful stories many times, (namely) that no other wildanimal that onecan imagine equals its strength

it does not take modifiers such as adjectives, genitives, or relative clauses. It might be usefulto contrast the behaviour of manin a language in which it is clearly a full pronoun (ModernGerman) with a variety (Old Tuscan) in which man, though used as an indefinite element, hadnot acquired the behavioural properties of pronouns and thus may take modifiers such as ad-

jectives (as in (13)) and relative clauses (as in (12)):

GERMAN

(10) *Wennman, der die Packung aufgerissen hat, nicht bezahlt, wird er ...


6/29

Lit.: if someone who has opened the package does not pay, he is (11) *Man Student5

*one student

OLD TUSCAN

(12) ondio lasciai la cima / cadere, e stetti come luom che teme (Dante, Inferno, 13, 44-45;1321)whereon I let fall the tip, and stood like one who is afraid (transl. Ch. S. Singleton)

(13) Attienti ben, ch per cotali scale, / disse l maestro, ansando comuomlasso, / conviensidipartir da tanto male (Dante,Inferno, 34, 82-84)Cling fast, said the master, panting like a man forspent, for by such stairs as these wemust depart from so much evil (transl. Ch. S. Singleton)

it does not appear as indefinite element in non-subject positions. Again, contrast the behav-iour of German manin (14) with example (15):6

GERMAN

(14) *Ich habemangetroffenI met someone

OLD TUSCAN (SIENA)

(15) Allora cominci a confortare sua gente, e disse: Signori,io assai provato che parola nond virt ad uomo(Fatti di Cesare, Sal. L. 1, cap. 25; around 1300)Then he started comforting his people, and said: Sirs, I have experienced on many occasionsthat words do not give virtue to man (i.e. do not make a man virtuous)

A further development of indefinite maninvolves its usage as an equivalent of a 1stperson pluralform (as in French: au premier coup de canon qui nous a rveills 2 hs du matinonsest dress,at the first gun shot, which woke us up at 2 oclock in the morning, wegot dressed, from Graf-strm 1969: 272-273). This usage (Stage IIb) does not, strictly speaking, belong to this grammati-calization path. Rather, it appears to be a different phenomenon involving the reinterpretation of animpersonal clause as a personal one (i.e., manis reanalyzed as referring to a group of individuals in

5Manin German is a weak pronoun according to the classification proposed by Cardinaletti and Starke (1999). Withrespect to the possibility of taking modifiers, its behaviour contrasts with that of strong pronounssuch as ihr, wir, einer,etc.: *man Student, but ihr Idioten, wir Studenten, etc. The fact that both non-pronouns (i.e. full noun phrases) such asuomoin many early Italian vernaculars and strong pronouns such as German wir, ihr, etc. behave similarly with respectto the possibility of being modified is only apparently contradictory, as strong pronouns are usually considered to becloser to lexical nouns than weak pronouns and clitics (Egerland 2003). A discussion of the properties of man(and on)as weak pronouns is beyond the purposes of this paper, but see Giacalone Ramat and Sans (2007: 112ff.)6In formal terms, this peculiarity of pronouns derived from man(German man, French on, etc.) has been explained (e.g.by Egerland 2003: 92ff.) as having to do with the loss of lexical features of these pronouns: the more void of lexical fea-tures (number, gender, etc.) a pronominal element is, the less likely it is that it will appear as an internal argument of apredicate. In less formal terms, pronouns in object positions are possible only if they maintain some informational con-tent allowing the identifiability of their intended referent (even in very general terms). French onand German manaredefinitely excluded from the object position because they do not have such informational content: they are underspeci-

fied with respect to number (being inherently ambiguous between plural and singular), person (allowing both inclusiveand exclusive readings), and gender (applying also to feminine referents), they cannot be linked anaphorically to previ-ous linguistic material, and their referent cannot be directly referred back to (i.e., they are discursively inert elements).For a detailed discussion of this peculiarity the reader is referred to Giacalone Ramat and Sans (2007: 112ff.).


7/29

which the speaker is included).7Such a reinterpretation is facilitated by some degree of semanticsimilarity between first person plural forms and impersonal clauses with generic subjects: bothforms usually refer to groups of people varying in size and composition, and both may ultimatelyrefer to the whole human race (see, for a less cursory discussion, Coveney 2000; Giacalone Ramatand Sans 2007: 104-106). The usage of uomoplus a 3rdperson singular form as an equivalent of a

1st

person plural form is found in Northern Italo-Romance, and will be discussed in Sections 4.2.1,and 4.4.Table 1 summarizes the semantic/pragmatic and behavioural features of the grammaticalization

path for manfrom a species-generic to a referential indefinite:

Stage 0: man= species-generic Stage I: man= non-referential indefinite Stage IIa: man= referential indefinite[(Stage IIb: man 1stperson plural)]

Contexts

of use

generalizationsgnomic sentences

non-assertive contexts (irrealis, non-factual, negated, habitual, potential, anddeontic contexts)

assertive contexts (factual contexts; spe-cific-time reference)

Behavioural features increase in pronominality -------------------------------------------->

noun pronoun

Table 1. The grammaticalization path of manas an indefinite element.

In Table 1, the first row shows the grammaticalization path of manas an indefinite element. Thesecond row shows the contexts of use typically associated with the three stages of this path, whilethe third row depicts the change in the behavioural properties of manwhen used as an indefiniteelement. Our former cross-linguistic investigation (Giacalone Ramat and Sans 2007), though lim-ited to European languages, has shown that the increase in pronominality of man starts betweenStage I and Stage IIa. In other words, although manacquires fully pronominal properties only whenit is used as a referential indefinite element, in Stage I it may have already acquired some propertiesthat set it off from other nouns. In ancient Italian vernaculars, the lack of a definite article withuomois precisely one of these properties: according to Salvi (n.d.: 49), in early Italo-Romance va-rieties a species-generic interpretation of uomois impossible if uomolacks the article, and thus, inthe following example, only a non-referential indefinite interpretation ofuomois available:

OLD ROMANESCO

(16) E dice che soa grannezza fu nulla cosa in comparazionede Romani. Questo dicenno responneaduna questione la qualeomoli potria fare (Anonimo Romano,Cronica,cap. 1, p. 5; 1400)And he says that its greatness was nothing in comparison with that of the Romans. Saying so,he answers a question that onemight ask of him

Somewhat surreptitiously, the few examples cited above have been chosen so as to show how farfrom homogeneous was the degree of grammaticalization of uomoin early Italo-Romance varieties,from both a semantic/pragmatic and a behavioural point of view. In Section 4.2, we will provide anoutline of the geographical distribution of the indefinite usage of uomo in ancient Italo-Romancevarieties. While there is little doubt that Italo-Romance vernaculars developed quite early an indefi-nite usage of uomo, the evaluation of its degree of grammaticalization has never attracted a greatdeal of attention. Before addressing this issue, however, we want to turn our attention to the LateLatin ancestors of these usages, which will be the topic of Section 3.

7Moreover, this development is not limited to this construction, but appears to be a well-documented possibility forother impersonal/passive constructions as well (e.g., the reflexive passive in Modern Tuscan, and, to a lesser extent, inStandard Italian: (noi) si va a Firenze, we go to Florence).


8/29

3.INDEFINITE UOMO: LATE LATIN ANCESTORS

Occasionally, the simple fact of recognizing that an indefinite usage of uomoexisted in ancientItalian vernaculars as well as in other Romance varieties has been used (e.g. by Welton-Lair 1999:4-9) to argue in favor of a Latin origin (and against a Germanic, more precisely Frankish, origin) of

onin French:that an indefinite reflex of homois shared by most of the Romance languages suggests strongly that it originatedin the pre-Romance period of Latin and survived in the individual Romance languages as they branched off fromLatin in the medieval period (Welton-Lair 1999: 4)

It is not our intention to deny that Latin ancestors of these usages did exist, and that they might havesurvived into some modern varieties. The Latin data, however, are too scanty to settle the questionof whether the origin of these usages in early Romance vernaculars is to be traced back to LateLatin. More importantly, even if the hypothesis of a Latin origin of these constructions in earlyItalo-Romance is feasible for French, our data are suggestive of a more recent irradiation process in

Italy originating from Old French. In this section, we present the main facts about Late Latin indefi-nite homo. The discussion is very cursory, and perhaps does not do justice to the complexity of lin-guistic facts. The reader is referred to Giacalone Ramat and Sans (to appear) for a more compre-hensive account of the Latin situation, based on theLibrary of Latin Texts corpus.

The development of the indefinite usages of homoin Latin starts in Late Antiquity, and the earli-est clear instances occur in the Bible (see (17)-(20)), where homo appears to be used more fre-quently than its Greek counterpart a[nqrwpo"in indefinite contexts (see example (20) below, wherehomocorresponds to the Greek indefinite pronoun ti"in (19)).(17) fratres et si praeoccupatus fuerithomo in aliquo delicto vos qui spiritales estis huiusmodi ins-

truite in spiritu lenitatis considerans te ipsum ne et tu tempteris(Galatians 6,1)

My brothers, if someoneis caught in any kind of wrongdoing, those of you who are spiritualshould set him right. And keep an eye on yourself so that you will not be tempted, too(18) Sic nos existimethomout ministros Christi (Corinthians I, 4, 1)

One should look on us as Christs servants(19) kai;ejlavlhsen kuvrio" pro;" Mwush'n ejnwvpio" ejnwpivw/, wJ" ei[t lalhvsei pro;" to;n

eJautou'fivlon(Exodus, 33, 11)(20) Loquebatur autem Dominus ad Moysen facie ad faciem, sicut solet loqui homo ad amicum

suum

Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, as onespeaks to his friend

The perpetuation of these usages into later periods has been probably fostered by the authority at-

tached to the language of holy texts. The citation of passages from the holy texts was indeed a fre-quent rhetorical device exploited by writers ofsermonesand homiliae: in these texts, besides cita-tions of the holy texts, we also find original, first-hand instances of indefinite homo in non-assertive/non-specific contexts, as in (22). Other remarkable examples of indefinitehomoappear inthe so-called itineraria ad loca sancta, and in Gregory of ToursHistoria Francorum. All these ex-amples show that the original lexical value of homohad weakened to such an extent that it came tobe used as a near equivalent of (some)one:

(21) Et quoniam pro monazontes, qui pedibus uadent, necesse est lenius iri: ac sic peruenitur inierusolima ea hora, qua incipit homo hominem posse cognoscere, id est prope luce, ante

tamen quam lux fiat (Itiner. Eg. 25, 6; 2ndhalf of the 4thcentury AD)And since, for the sake of the monks who go on foot, it is necessary to walk slowly, the arri-val in Jerusalem thus takes place at the hour when onebegins to be able to recognize others,that is, close upon but a little before daybreak


9/29

(22) Sicut enim, quando pustulam incurrit homo, desiderat ut cito spondolum faciat, et optat utsine aliqua mora ipsa mala pustula aliquam particulam tollat de corpore, et cum ipsa disce-

dat, ne venenum ipsius totum corpus occupet, et animam petat (Caesarius Arelatensis, Ser-mones, 181, 6, 6; 1sthalf of the 6thcentury AD)In the same way, when onehas a carbuncle, one wants it to form a scar soon, and hopes that

it rapidly detaches a small part of the body and falls thereby, so that its poison does not ex-pand to the whole body and does not reach the soul(23) Erat enim seris fortissimis clavisque firmissimis obseratum, verumtamen non erat ita leviga-

tum, ut inter tabulas aspicerehomo non possit (Greg. Turon.,Hist. Fr. 4, 12; 2ndhalf of the6thcentury AD)It was locked by means of very strong chains and very resistant nails, but it was not so pol-ished that onecould not see between the planks

(24) Audivimus enim eo anno in Narbonensem urbem inguinarium morbum graviter desevire, itaut nullum esset spatium, cumhomo correptus fuisset ab eo (Greg. Turon.,Hist. Fr. 6, 14)We heard that at Narbonne in that year the bubonic plague was very fatal, so that when onewas struck by it one had no time to live

Less common, but also occurring, are examples of indefinite homoin less popular registers, andin more cultivated authors such as Isidore of Seville, or Cassiodore, pour qui le choix des mots, etnotamment le rejet des termes vulgaires, habituels, trangers, barbares, tait lobjet dune attentionconstante, de manire satisfaire au respect du convenable, du decorum, essentiel la recherche decette latinit durement prserve depuis la Rpublique (Banniard 1992: 176-177):

(25) et licet praestentur uilia, ad auctores suos magna sunt commoditate reditura: datur enim ple-rumque, quod maiori utilitate recipitur, et frequenter homolucra sua complectitur, cum ne-

cessario pro temporis qualitate largitur (Cassiodorus, Uariarum libri duodecim, 1, 28, 11 ;538 AD)and even though they are paid at a low rate at the beginning, those who do this are going toobtain a great and adequate reward: indeed, donations are mostly made in order to obtaingreater advantages, and often oneobtains a proper gain when one makes a donation inducedby necessity, proportionally to the conditions of the period

(26) Haruspices nuncupati, quasi horarum inspectores: dies enim et horas in agendis negotiis op-eribusque custodiunt, et quid per singula tempora obseruare debeat homo, intendunt (Isi-dorus Hispalensis,Etym.,8, 9, 17 ; before 636 AD)The haruspices are thus named as if they were observers of the hours: indeed, they areconcerned with the hours and the days appropriate for carrying out tasks, and pay attention towhat oneshould do at every moment

It must also be remarked that we found no cases in which homohas the value of a referential in-definite element. Thus, homowas only weakly grammaticalized as an indefinite element, althoughthe textual types in which these examples occur (as well as its occasional occurrence in more liter-ary registers) allow us to conclude that this usage was a tendency already long in existence whenthe first Romance varieties began to appear in written records.

The hypothesis of a Latin origin of these usages in (at least part of) the Romance domain is thusa concrete possibility. Equally plausible is the hypothesis that the development of these usages inGermanic languages was (at least partially) helped or accelerated by contact with Latin-speakingcommunities. Denying these hypotheses would amount to downplaying the role of Latin as a lan-guage of communication in the process of formation of the SAE. This is, by the way, common prac-

tice in the current literature on Standard Average European. Haspelmath (2001: 1507), for instance,gives little importance to Latin as a possible source of the features of the SAE:


10/29

most SAE features were absent in Latin and developed only in the Romance languages. There are only two fea-tures for which Latin influence is a likely factor: negation and relative pronouns. In the case of these two features,the standard languages sometimes show deviation from the vernacular dialects, so at least the written standard lan-guages may have been influenced by Latin, the European written language par excellence for many centuries

It should be remarked, however, that many SAE traits are indeed found in Late Latin (recall, be-

sides negation and relative clause formation strategies, the development of an analytic perfectformed by habeo + past participle, and the development of passive periphrases involving auxiliariessuch as esse, to be, andfieri, to become). This fact, along with the presence of indefinite usagesof homo, suggests that the role of Latin in the formation of the SAE, be it a passive or an active one,might not be as marginal as is currently believed.

Be that as it may, as far as Italo-Romance is concerned, the possibility of a Latin origin for in-definite uomoshould be weighed against other alternative possibilities. It is to this task that we nowturn.

4. INDEFINITE UOMOIN EARLY ITALO-ROMANCE VARIETIES

The areal-typological approach adopted in this paper requires that we address two types of prob-lems. On the one hand, we must sketch the geographical distribution of indefinite uomo in earlyItalo-Romance varieties. On the other hand, we must determine the degree of grammaticalization ofuomoin each variety. These two problems are two sides of the same coin. One of the main effectsof intensive, long-lasting language contact is the emergence of new usage patterns in the languagesin contact (often in only one of them, which will be called replica language, following Heine andKuteva 2005: 3): grammaticalization patterns, especially incipient and emerging ones, are often de-pendent on a model language in which a similar pattern is more firmly established. What an incipi-ent grammaticalization process can tell us about areality is the direction of diffusion from a model

language to one or more replica languages. The data surveyed in this section are hardly accidental,and, at least in part, point towards a process of diffusion of the indefinite usage of uomowhich hasits irradiation point in Old French. But lets discuss this in detail.

4.1. The corpus

The corpus used in the present study is the Opera del Vocabolario Italiano(OVI) textual data-base, a large-scale corpus of early Italian containing 1849 vernacular texts (21.2 million words,479,000 unique forms), the majority of which are dated prior to 1375, the year of Giovanni Boccac-cios death. This corpus aims to collect both literary and non-literary texts in a single repository: be-sides early masters of Italian literature like Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio, lesser-known and ob-

scure texts by poets, merchants, and medieval chroniclers, as well as non-literary texts such asStatuti(statutes) andRegistri(official records) are well-represented in the database.8Texts are cate-gorized according to various parameters. The most important for our purposes are Generic areaand Specific area (roughly corresponding to a regional and a sub-regional classification of eachtext). The search string included the whole array of variants of uomo: uomo, homo, uom, omo,hom(m),omm(o),ommu,omu,huom(o),on, om, uon(o), um, am.

8The examples used throughout this paper are quoted following the citation system adopted by the OVI Textual Data-base: along with the number of the textual unit containing the passage (Chapter, Canto, Stanza, Appendix, etc.), refer-ence is made to the page where the passage appears in the original printed source(s) of the text (the complete list ofprinted sources is available on the web site of the OVI Database: http://ovisun198.ovi.cnr.it/italnet/OVI).


11/29

4.2. Indefiniteuomo: Grammaticalization and areality

4.2.1. Northern Italian varieties

We start this section by examining the use of uomoas an indefinite element in two areas that are,

for different reasons, quite peripheral to the cultural centres which played a prominent role in theformation of a literary koinin Northern Italy, namely Piedmont and Liguria.That Old Piedmontese is linguistically close to Old French, forming a natural continuumstretch-

ing over both sides of the Alps, has been widely held among scholars of Romance dialectology for along time, and cannot be seriously questioned. A major consequence of this closeness is that theSermoni Subalpini, the most important document in Old Piedmontese, have been considered alter-nately as either French texts copied in a Piedmontese area or Piedmontese texts heavily influencedby the prestigious Frenchscripta(see, for a recent assessment, Tressel 2004). A closer look at themorphophonetic features of this text shows that French features are a minor component with respectto Piedmontese traits (Stella 1994a: 79ff.). The following passages, drawn from this text, exemplifythe usage of uomoas a non-referential indefinite element. Note also that in none of these examples

does uomoappear with the article:

OLD PIEDMONTESE

(27) li degrai, per unthomi montava, covr de purpura, qui est real vestiment, e si se teigdel sancdun peisun quehomapelaconca marina (Sermoni subalpini 5, p. 232; 1300)he covered with purple, which is a royal vestment, the steps thanks to which onewent upthere, and so they (i.e. the steps) took the colour of the blood of a fish which is called (lit.:mancalls) conca marina

(28) Ke devementendre per lo munt de mirra, qui est unaespecia munt amara, e si napareillahomli corp deil homes morz, que il no possen marcer? (Sermoni subalpini8, p. 240)What should we understand by mount of myrrh, which is a very bitter spice, and onetreatsthe corpses of dead men with it so that they do not putrefy?

(29) Eles se troven a Damiata enterra de Sarrazins en unes caves munt preunde,si quehomno poveer lo funt (Sermoni subalpini10, p. 253)They are found in Damietta, in the land of the Saracens, in caves so deep that onecannot seetheir bottom

(30) Quam lo nostre Seignor[saproism] de Ierusalem, si ven a un casal que homapelaBetpha-ge in mont Olivet (Sermoni subalpini22, p. 280)When our Lord approached Jerusalem, he came to a farmhouse that is called (lit.: onecalls)Bethphage, on the Mount of Olives

Even more interesting are the following examples, from Old Ligurian. In both (32) and (33), theverb is in the past tense. An interpretation of uomoas a nonreferential indefinite element is thus ex-cluded: if the action took place in the past, there must have been one or more specific agents. Inthese passages, uomocan be interpreted either as a referential indefinite human entity, or, perhapsmore convincingly given the context (see, e.g., Nicolas 1994: cxciv), as corresponding to an un-specified group of referents including the speaker (per le cosse como viste because of thethings that we saw). This possibility will be discussed soon in connection with some Old Lombardexamples.

OLD LIGURIAN

(31) Monto bel ese in tar logo, / dondeomov far tar feste e zogo, / vegando gram deversitae /de terre, vile e citae (Anonimo Genovese (ed. Cocito), 38, p. 238; 1311)


12/29

It is great to be in a place where onesees people partying and playing, experiencing a greatdiversity of lands, towns and cities

(32) E li maistri encontenente / respose pareisemente: / S certe raxon n mostrae / che le menten mutae / e, per le cosse cheomo viste / n convertui a Jeso Criste (Anonimo Genovese(ed. Cocito), 12, p. 140)

And the masters soon answered overtly: The reasons that he showed us are so good that hechanged our minds, and converted us to Christianity because of the things that wesaw(33) denanti tute le gente / dixem pur avertaamente: / E noi semo p cristianai, / per De morir

apareiai, / servor de Jeso Criste, / per le cosse como viste (Anonimo Genovese (ed. Coci-to), 12, p. 147)In front of all people, they said frankly: We are now converted to Christianity, ready to diefor God, servants of Jesus Christ, because of the things that we saw

A process of koinization appears to characterize the early history of Lombard vernaculars(Grignani 1990: 38ff.; Stella 1994b: 154): local, idiosyncratic linguistic traits are progressivelyabandoned in favour of traits found in the whole area comprised between Eastern Piedmont and Ve-

rona. This fact allows us to consider Old Lombard as a single, though internally complex, dialectalarea including sub-areas which nowadays appear to share significant traits with Emilian varieties(Pavia, Cremona). The following passages exemplify the vitality of indefinite uomo in the Cre-monese, Mantuan, Milanese, and Pavese varieties respectively:

OLD LOMBARD (CREMONA)

(34) Mato soperbio quelo qe blasma ognaltrui dito / e vol com lod lo so, o sa tort o dreto(Patecchio, Splanamento de li Proverbii de Salamone, p. 567; 1230)Who blames whatever others say and wants one to praise what he says, be it right or wrong,is crazy and arrogant

(35) lo mat senegna e guaita comel podes scoltar, / mai lo savi fai sena, comno l possa bla-smar(Patecchio, Splanamento de li Proverbii de Salamone, p. 569)the fool man strives to find out how he can eavesdrop, while the wise man does not, so thatno onecan blame him

(36) q[u]e no vos chonfaa a ti, ad altri no lo far(Uguccione da Lodi,Libro,p. 610; 1210)What you dont want one to do to you, dont do to others

(37) E [en] linferno un albro maior, / q [m]aior de negun chomovedhes ancor(Uguccioneda Lodi,Libro,p. 600)And in hell there is a big tree, bigger than any other that one can see

OLD LOMBARD (MANTUA)(38) chel plu viaz lo sen del vedir cha quel de loldir, e perznu vezom inanz la clareza com

olda l son(Belcalzer (ed. Ghinassi), Volgarizzamento del De proprietatibus rerum di Bar-tolomeo Anglico, p. 168; 1309)because the sense of sight is faster than that of hearing, and thats why we see the light beforehearing the sound

OLD LOMBARD (MILAN)

(39) Deo imprimamente, s com rex posente, orden uno bellentissi[m]oparaxio ke nuy apelemolo regniamo de celo; poyorden una prexone comapel inferno (Elucidario, L. 1, quaestio23, p. 94; 1310)


13/29

Firstly, God, as a powerful king, created a very pleasant place that we call the kingdom ofheaven; then, he created a prison that was called hell (lit.: thatman called hell)

OLD LOMBARD (PAVIA)

(40) Hii savij determinan diffinissan e dixan che deleto si usar al sopiaser che lomodexira(Parafr. pav. del Neminem laedi, cap. 8, p. 38; 1342)The wise men determine, define and say that delight is to use whatonewishes for ones en-

joyment

Other passages are more difficult to be assigned to a specific Lombard variety. In (41) we find aninteresting, and rare, example of indefinite uomo in a private, non-literary text (a letter fromModena jail written by a Lombard prisoner in the second half of the 14thcentury).

OLD LOMBARD

(41) Etomve pregache, se vo port monetha, che vo gard cumo ve la dug, che vo la portpluaschosa che vo podeti (Lettera dal carcere di Modena, p. 235; 1375)If you bring money, we ask you to pay attention to how you carry it: you must carry it asconcealed as you can

(42) ben rason qeo faza / un sirvents lonbardo, / q del proenzalesco / no macresco: / e fracosa nova, / qomnon trova sirvents lombardesco. / Qua far pur cosusaa, / bem qomfaza

bonovra, / la mainera par povra (Poi qe neve ni glaza / Sirventese lombardesco, p. 503;1300)There is a reason why I am composing a Lombardsirventese: it is because I do not pride my-self on Provenal. And this would be something of a novelty, because one does not find aLombardsirventese. And when one does something ordinary, even if onedoes it well, onesskill appears poor

Two other, perhaps more profound, manifestations of the vitality of indefinite uomo in OldLombard should be mentioned:

(i) the first case is the grammaticalization of indefinite uomoas an equivalent of the 1stpersonplural form of the verb, already attested in the earliest vernacular documents. In (38) above,we find a significant alternation between a 1stperson plural form of the verb vedere, to see(vezom), and an indefinite instance of uomowhich can be roughly paraphrased as a 1stpersonplural (om olda = oldom, we hear). In the following passages from Bonvesin, the 1stperson

plural interpretation of indefinite uomois beyond doubt, given the context (compare the alter-nation with a 1st person plural form in (43) and the plural agreement with the adjective in(44)-(46)). A similar interpretation of indefinite uomoseems to be plausible for Old Ligurianexamples (32) and (33) above, as well as for (41). Other similar examples are from 14thand15thcentury Bergamasco ((47)-(50)):

OLD LOMBARD (MILAN)

(43) Tu sai ben, glorosa, kums de vil natura, / Ke nu sem fragel cossa (Bonvesin, Volgari,Depeccatore cum Virgine, p. 52; 1280)You know well, o glorious Virgin, that weare of a vile nature (lit.: that man is of vile na-

ture), that we are a fragile thing


14/29

(44) Adonca, bon companio, guarda no m tr a dexnor, / Fa penitentia mego a lox del Salvator, /Az kum sa digni daver s grand dolzor, / Daver solaz e festa, richeza e grand honor

(Bonvesin, Volgari,De anima cum corpore,p. 58)So, good companion, take care lest you bring me into disgrace repent with me to the gloryof the Savior, and wewill be worthy of that great sweetness, of solace and festival, wealth and

great honour (transl. R. Stefanini and P. Diehl)(45) Attend al me conseio: vivem in castit / E acatem bon stao in leternal cit, / Az kumveniaentrambi in grand prosperit(Bonvesin, Volgari,De anima cum corpore,p. 63)Heed my advice. Let us live continently, and obtain a good resting-place in the Eternal City thus we will both enter into great prosperity (transl. R. Stefanini and P. Diehl)

(46) Vezando Iesum Criste ke mostrar li signi, / Le plaghe kel sostenne per f kumfoss benigni(Bonvesin, Volgari,De die iudicii,p. 196)Seeing Jesus Christ who will show his signs, the wounds that he suffered to make us happy

OLD LOMBARD (BERGAMO)

(47) Se tu no-l fe yustisia / Denanz a Cesar tam acusa (Passione, 73-74; 14th century; Lorck1893: 79)If you dont do him justice, well accuse you before Caesar

(48) quanamstemava(Contesa di confini; 15thcentury; Lorck 1893: 94)when we estimated

(49) Al e vera chenoyde Anesam teche el fondo de quella peza de tera sie nostro(Contesa diconfini; 15thcentury; Lorck 1893: 95)it is true that we from Anes hold that that piece of land belongs to us

(50) Cal ne conservi e si ne guard / Cham sia desfis da-l fog ternal (Salve Maria, 15-16; 14thcentury; Lorck 1893: 75)May He preserve and protect us, so that weare safe from the eternal fire

(ii) The second case in point is the 1st person plural ending -um/-om, already attested in OldLombard vernaculars (e.g. vez-om, we see, in example (38) from Belcalzer, see Ghinassi1965: 120-121) and perpetuated in Modern Lombard varieties. Some scholars (e.g. Spiess1965: 112ff.; Lurati 1973) maintain that this ending derives from the loss of autonomy ofpostverbal uomo resulting in its affixation to a 3rd person singular form (cnt-um

Documents

AGI Paper Libre