On the use of the ablative of the gerund and the nominative of the present participle in Latin technical literature

G. Galdi, Jasper Vangaever
{"title":"On the use of the ablative of the gerund and the nominative of the present participle in Latin technical literature","authors":"G. Galdi, Jasper Vangaever","doi":"10.1515/9783110678222-006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Latin, the gerund and the present participle often function as the predicate of an adjunct clause. In Late Latin, the frequency of such clauses is hypothesized to increase with the ablative of the gerund and to decrease with the nominative of the present participle. This evolution leads to the “gradual replacement of the present participle by the gerund” (Pinkster 2015: 549), whereby the former is ousted from its verbal function and confined to a purely adjectival role. This process is triggered by the “semantic bleaching” of the gerund, whose original manner/instrumental value gradually “weakens” into the default value of the present participle, viz. a temporal one. This paper aims to investigate the functional competition between the two clause types in a corpus of technical texts between the 2nd c. BC and the 6th c. AD. We show that the semantic bleaching of the gerund is not significant in our corpus and hence does not confirm its functional competition with the present participle. We argue that the two clause types have different semantic and pragmatic properties and that these differences remain stable over time.","PeriodicalId":125666,"journal":{"name":"Clause and Discourse","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clause and Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110678222-006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Latin, the gerund and the present participle often function as the predicate of an adjunct clause. In Late Latin, the frequency of such clauses is hypothesized to increase with the ablative of the gerund and to decrease with the nominative of the present participle. This evolution leads to the “gradual replacement of the present participle by the gerund” (Pinkster 2015: 549), whereby the former is ousted from its verbal function and confined to a purely adjectival role. This process is triggered by the “semantic bleaching” of the gerund, whose original manner/instrumental value gradually “weakens” into the default value of the present participle, viz. a temporal one. This paper aims to investigate the functional competition between the two clause types in a corpus of technical texts between the 2nd c. BC and the 6th c. AD. We show that the semantic bleaching of the gerund is not significant in our corpus and hence does not confirm its functional competition with the present participle. We argue that the two clause types have different semantic and pragmatic properties and that these differences remain stable over time.
论拉丁语科技文献中动名词和现在分词主格的消蚀用法
在拉丁语中,动名词和现在分词通常用作修饰从句的谓语。在后期拉丁语中,假设这类从句的频率随着动名词的蚀变而增加,随着现在分词的主格而减少。这种演变导致了“动名词逐渐取代现在分词”(Pinkster 2015: 549),因此,现在分词从其言语功能中被驱逐出来,被限制为纯粹的形容词角色。这一过程是由动名词的“语义漂白”引发的,动名词原有的方式/工具价值逐渐“弱化”为现在分词的默认值,即时间值。本文旨在探讨公元前2世纪至公元6世纪科技语篇语料库中两种小句类型之间的功能竞争。我们发现动名词的语义漂白在语料库中并不显著,因此不能证实它与现在分词的功能竞争。我们认为这两种子句类型具有不同的语义和语用特性,并且这些差异随着时间的推移保持稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信