PhiN 45/2008: 1
Loreto Catoira (Palo Alto)
Whose Syntax Is It Anyway?
(5) Standard English
Various aspects concerning pronominal resumption in RCs have been widely studied. Suñer (2001) and Hawkins (2007), among many others, addressed the central typological generalization about these constructions. In addition, the study of resumption functionality in RCs was thoroughly examined according to three different categories: semantic (Doron 1982; Sells 1984), pragmatic (Prince 1990, 1997; Suñer 1998) and syntactic (Shlonsky 1992; Doron and Heycock 1999). By contrast, it is striking that neither reference grammars nor more recent studies have been able to provide a comprehensive study on the origin of pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs. While most research unanimously concluded that the resumptive strategy derived from Latin (Lapesa 1968; Lope Blanch 1984), only a few linguists claimed this phenomenon to be an Arabic-inherited structure resulting from language contact (Van Wijk 1946; Gehman 1982). Other Indo-European and Semitic hypotheses involving Bible translation have also been put forth in an attempt to find alternative sources of resumptive relativization in Greek (Rönsch 1875) and Hebrew (Touratier 1980). This article examines the validity of these arguments and suggests a final proposal.
2 Indo-European and Semitic Links: Latin and Arabic
In his Gramática histórica de la lengua castellana (1913), Hanssen provided the first analysis of pronominal resumption in Spanish and defined it as "a noun, a personal or relative pronoun in absolute state [in the main clause] whose structure is later indicated by a personal pronoun [in the subordinate clause]" (1913: 193). Resumptive relativization primarily affected Old Spanish, according to the German philologist, although research carried out by various linguists indicates that this syntactic structure is also frequently found in the Castilian prose of the Renaissance (Keniston 1937; Iglesias Casal 1996) and even in Modern Spanish (DeMello 1992; Silva-Corvalán 1996; Suñer 2001).
Because of the genetic linkage that Latin holds with its diachronic successors (i.e. Romance languages), it was traditionally assumed that Spanish inherited pronominal resumption from Latin (Lapesa 1968; Lope Blanch 1984). In Classical Latin, RCs function very similarly to Spanish RCs except when it comes to the position of the relative complementizer, which does not always appear immediately before the subordinate clause. The relative complementizer qui 'who/that' serves as a bridge between the head noun phrase and the RC by agreeing in gender and number with the head noun, at the same time that it also indicates the head noun's case in the subordinate clause.
(6a) Verum ego seditiosus, uti Sulla ait, qui praemia turbarum queror (cf. Cano 2005)
(6b) Phaselus ille, quem videtis, hospites, ait fuisse navium celerrimus (cf. Cano 2005)
Modern Spanish RCs have only retained the inflection mark for gender and number in cuyo "whose/of which", which establishes a genitive relation with the thing possessed (and not with the antecedent).
(7) El apartamento cuya propietaria es la madre de Victoria está en venta
Pronominal resumption in Latin functions as an optional strategy that seeks to resolve syntactically ambiguous sentences. Found in both academic writings and less formal documents, it initially appeared in legal and judicial texts written in Classical Latin, being quite popular in the writings of Caesar. However, resumptive relativization gradually disappeared from Classical texts while it survived in the spoken variety and in some texts written in decadent Latin (Bassols de Climent 1956: 240). Resumption featured primarily personal pronouns or, less frequently, indefinite pronouns (e.g. quisquis 'any') and adverbs (e.g. ubi 'where') embedded within the subordinate clause. The resumptive pronoun agreed in gender, number and case with the relative complementizer.
When Vulgar Latin began to evolve into the different Romance languages known today, it is possible that resumptive pronouns helped avoid semantic confusion in the absence of marks of declension. In many cases, flexibility in the grammatical norms in oral discourse led to ungrammatical agreements between the relative pronoun, its head noun and the correspondent resumptive. Thus, it was not uncommon to find instances such as (8), wherein quem 'to whom' reproduces the accusative case of the head noun hominem 'to a man', when it should be in the dative case.
(8) Hominem quem ego beneficium ei feci (cf. Touratier 1980: 512)
In order to ensure further clarity, decadent Latin would occasionally resort to using resumptive strategies that echoed the head noun in the RC, not by introducing a pronoun or an adverb but by repeating the head noun (9a). Similar syntactic strategies are also attested in documents written in Medieval Spanish (9b).
(9a) Erant omnino duo itinera quibus itineribus domo exire possent (cf. Bassols de Climent 1956: 241)
(9b) Está sepultado en un monasterio el cual monasterio fundó el rey (cf. Bassols de Climent 1956: 241)
It was Van Wijk (1946) who first challenged the assumption that pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs was a phenomenon inherited from Latin. Thus, based upon observations made in his study of resumption in Venezuelan speech, he stated:
Interference between Arabic and Spanish could have been triggered by two different types of language contact: conquest and translation. A Muslim-predominant Iberian Peninsula for almost nine centuries enabled sufficient language contact to count in Modern Spanish with over 4,000 arabismos. These linguistic incursions from Arabic primarily occurred at the semantic level (see for instance Maíllo 1998), leaving open the question whether phonetic and syntactic borrowing did also take place.3 Translations of Classical works, on the other hand, played a major role in the transmission of grammatical items from one language to another, although acceptance of a specific feature in a literary tradition by no means indicates its entrenchment in common speech. Nevertheless, texts that were translated into Spanish during the Middle Ages let us observe to a certain extent the degree of influence that the syntax of the original Arabic document may have exerted on the Romance language (see Galmés de Fuentes 1996). The first translations carried out in the 13th century showed, for instance, a choppy syntax that clearly reflected the original Arabic, including the typology of relative clauses (Alonso Pedraz 1962: 146).
The structure of RCs in Arabic shares some features with that of Spanish RCs while it also displays its own distinctive characteristics. In accordance with other Semitic languages, the configuration of Arabic RCs depends on the definite nature of the head noun phrase. When the RC is modifying an indefinite antecedent, the relative pronoun is left out.
(10) kataba kitāban qara'tuhu
Even though sentence (10) would be ungrammatical in Modern Spanish, Alonso Pedraz (1962) claimed to have found in the 1251 Castilian translation of Calila e Dimna, such syntactic structures that imitated the original Arabic pattern.
(11) Como los sueños del durmiente (Calila e Dimna, cf. Alonso Pedraz 1962: 148)
In instances wherein the Arabic RC modifies a definite noun, a relative pronoun must be used. The relative pronoun, alladhī, is inflected only for gender and number, and its dual variant, alladhāni, inflects for gender, number and case (nominative and accusative/genitive). The relative pronoun is usually placed immediately after the head noun and before the RC.
(12a) huwa l-walad alladhī yadrusu hunā
(12b) Karīm wa-wālid al-waladān alladhāni yadrusāni hunā
Another attempt by Alonso Pedraz (1962) to identify Arabic-influenced constructions in Calila e Dimna aimed to see in sentence (13) an alleged version of a typical Arabic anaphoric structure with the complementizer alladhī. Yet this example cannot serve to signal the parallelism with resumptive relativization between both languages.
(13) Lo que vosotros gastares en limosnas (cf. Alonso Pedraz 1962: 148)
Pronominal resumption in Arabic is not as optional as in Latin and Spanish. Whether the RC is introduced by a complementizer or not, all cases but nominal subject require a resumptive pronoun that must agree in gender and number with the head noun phrase. The resumptive pronoun is commonly represented by a cliticized personal or possessive pronoun, which suffixes to the subordinate verb or to a preposition when functioning as direct or indirect object (14a), to the object possessed to indicate the genitive case (14b), and to a preposition when functioning as locative (14c).
(14a) jā'a l-walad alladhī ra'aytuhu fī l-sūq
(14b) jā'a l-walad alladhī kitābahu ištaraytu fī l-sūq
(14c) jā'a l-hafilat allatī bīhā'arkabu
Several studies that evaluated pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs following Van Wijk's claims showed a tendency towards a final consideration that would encompass both the Latin and the Arabic hypotheses. Marcos Marín (1978), for instance, acknowledged the occurrence of resumption in Latin as well as the interference between Arabic and Spanish as significant factors that may have caused pronominal resumption to appear in early Spanish literary works:
A more in-depth theoretical discussion surrounding this topic took place during the early 1980s, when the linguists Gehman (1982) and Lope Blanch (1984) embarked in a thwarted argument in favor of the Arabic and the Latin-based proposals. The former claimed that cases of pronominal resumption attested in literary works such as the Poema de Mio Cid and Don Quijote (Part I, 1605, Part II, 1615) proved to be a syntactic loan from Arabic based on the structural similarity between both languages. His investigation, however, did not prove such thing. Two years later, Lope Blanch recuperated the Latin-based theory to undermine the statements previously made by Gehman. In Despronominalización de los relativos, Lope Blanch (1984: 268–289) explained how the lack of data and conditions had led Gehman to falsely believe that analogous syntactic structures were correlated. Moreover, Lope Blanch called into question the degree of syntactic influence that Arabic could have exerted on Spanish ("Are we to assume, for instance, that in Medieval Castile there was such a strong and widespread Spanish-Arabic bilingualism that allowed syntactic interferences? No"). He refused to accept any Arabic interference with Spanish alleging that resumption occurs in other Romance languages: "It is hard to believe that a phenomenon found in all Romance languages could have originated in Arabic." Thus, an internal development already present in Vulgar Latin should account for resumptive relativization in Modern Spanish RCs, according to Lope Blanch, whereas similarities to the Arabic resumptive structure must be considered "just a coincidence" (1984: 267).
Could this be a structure inherited from Latin, as Lope Blanch postulated? Statements made by Augustine of Hippo in Doctrina Christiana (397–426 CE) expressed conflict with the Latin-based assumption. While examining excerpts from the Sacred Scriptures, the Christian philosopher and theologian noted and wrote that resumptive structures found in the Bible appeared to be foreign elements not associated with Latin:
Despite Augustine's assertion, the Vulgar Latin hypothesis put forth by Lope Blanch gained widespread acceptance among Romance linguists, hence closing off further debate on the subject. Yet a small number of studies that propose other Indo-European and Semitic links to pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs may shed further light on the matter.
3 Other Indo-European and Semitic Links: Greek and Hebrew
A few scholars (Bassols de Climent 1956; Marcos Marín 1978; Touratier 1980) who analyzed instances of RCs from Latin documents observed that pronominal resumption occurred more frequently in Christian writings than in secular literature. This could suggest that resumption may have ultimately ended up in Spanish RCs as part of a literary transmission process initiated by a language that contained pronominal relativization. Touratier (1980: 491) pointed out, for instance, that all cases of relative pléonastique found in Christian authors made reference or quoted directly a passage from the Bible, being the Old Testament the source that included most cases of resumption. On the basis of these observations, it could therefore be argued that two more languages (aside from Latin and Arabic) may have also contributed to the occurrence of resumption in Spanish RCs: Greek and Hebrew.
The Greek translation of the Hebrew and Aramaic Jewish Scriptures, the Septuagint as is well known, was carried out between the 3rd and 1st centuries BCE (probably ca. 280–250 BCE) and let us observe numerous instances of resumptive relativization that could have resulted from direct translations from the Hebrew text (which featured this syntactic phenomenon) or that may have appeared as part of a common strategy used in the contemporary variety of spoken Greek. The Septuagint later served as one of the textual sources of the collection of biblical manuscripts written in Old Latin that comprised the Vetus Latina (ca. 2nd c. CE). This first Latin translation of the Bible reproduced most resumptive relatives from the original Greek, which led Rönsch (1875) to consequently categorize resumptive relativization as a Hellenism, although historical Greek grammars have traditionally attributed this phenomenon to a foreign influence. A few years later, Greek grammarian Jannaris (1897: 353) identified resumptive relativization in Greek as a Hebraism found in the Septuagint and imitated by authors of the New Testament, who then introduced it into the language spoken at that time.
If we take into account in the context of Bible translation that there may be "structural influence from a prestigious literary language…through the written medium alone, without actual oral bilingualism among borrowing-language speakers" (Thomason and Kaufman 1988: 78), the possibility that structural borrowing from Biblical Hebrew did occur becomes more feasible. In fact, it has been widely attested that the work of translators of biblical documents such as the Vetus Latina exerted a significant degree of influence on language development in such a way that it proved pivotal in the formation of Christian Latin and the transmission of certain popular expressions (Mohrmann 1977: 119; Schrijnen 1977: 45).
In addition to the Vetus Latina, the most influential Latin version of the Hebrew Bible is the Vulgate. Translated by Jerome between 390 and 405 CE after having undertaken at an earlier stage the revision of the Vetus Latina of Psalms, it also serves as a source of instances of resumptive relativization that allegedly transferred from the original Hebrew.
(15) Beatus uir cuius est nomen Domini spes eius (cf. Touratier 1980: 492)
The Hebrew Bible, which Jerome closely followed, comprises around 5,500 marked RCs wherein gap structures alternate with pronominal resumption. The relative pronoun 'asher is, unlike Classical Latin, not inflected for case, person, gender, or number (although as noted earlier, a few examples from decadent Latin showed no mark of declension).
(16) 'anî yhwh 'asher hosetika me Ur Kasdim (cf. Joosten 1993: 276)
Resumption in Biblical Hebrew RCs occurs when a syntactic constituent (mostly a cliticized personal or possessive pronoun) appears within the subordinate clause to capture the head noun in the main clause. As in Arabic, the resumptive pronoun may be attached to a verb, an accusative marker (e.g. 'ot) or to a locative preposition (as in 17).
(17) bammāqôm 'asher yibhar yhwh 'elōhêkā bô (cf. Holmstedt 2002: 2)
According to Ewald (1879), resumption in Biblical Hebrew RCs is linked to the loss of inflection of the relative pronoun. A similar argument applied to cases of resumption in Latin RCs (see Bassols de Climent 1956) when the inflection of qui began to disappear as grammatical restrictions were relaxed in less formal varieties of Latin. In Spanish, Lope Blanch (1984) has accordingly called this phenomenon the 'depronominalization of que'. Ewald also observed that when the RC is removed from its head noun by a significant distance, the resumptive strategy is favored in the subordinate clause.
(18) 'anî yosēp 'ahîkem 'asher məkartem 'ōtî misrāymah (cf. Holmstedt 2002: 30)
As in Latin, resumptive pronouns (especially in object position) in Biblical Hebrew were used for clarity and to avoid ambiguity in regard to the syntactic function of the antecedent.
(19) wayya'abdû elōhîm 'ahērîm wayyshitah'awû lāhem 'elōhîm 'asher lō' yədā'ûm (cf. Holmstedt 2002: 29)
On the basis of these observations, and as Jannaris (1897) already postulated, it could be argued that Hebrew played an important role in spreading resumptive relativization. The pleonastic strategy would therefore have arisen in Romance languages as the result of literal translations from the original Hebrew sources. Could Hebrew consequently be the missing link?
4 Whose Syntax Is It Anyway?
While it may seem feasible to ultimately make Hebrew responsible for pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs, there is one fundamental fact that instantly invalidates this hypothesis. There is written attestation of these resumptive structures in the work of Roman authors such as Plautus (254–184 BCE) and Titus Livius (59 BCE–14 CE), which date from the era prior to the first translation of the Bible into Latin.
(21) Titus Livius
This last piece of evidence leads to one final conclusion; resumptive relativization was a syntactic phenomenon already present in Latin (found in some Classical texts but predominant in Vulgar Latin). The periods of intensive translation activity may have contributed to preserve this feature primarily as a disambiguation strategy. Additionally, the first translators of the Bible were common people who, despite their efforts to closely follow the original Hebrew or Greek, unknowingly left traces of their less formal speech (i.e. Vulgar Latin) in the final document.
Hence, this study concludes that, although Semitic languages like Arabic and Hebrew, and Indo-European such as Greek may have been involved in resumptive relativization in Spanish, whether directly or indirectly (especially in regard to frequency), there is no doubt that pronominal resumption in Spanish RCs should be considered a phenomenon inherited from Latin.
Alonso Pedraz, Martín (1962): Evolución sintáctica del español; sintaxis histórica del español desde el iberorromano hasta nuestros días, Madrid.
Augustine, Saint (1958): On Christian Doctrine, translated by D. W. Robinson, New York.
Bassols de Climent, Mariano (1956): Sintaxis Latina, Madrid.
Cano, Pedro (2005): Aula de Latín. [http://antalya.uab.es/pcano/aulatin/]
DeMello, George (1992): "Duplicación del pronombre relativo de objeto directo en el español hablado culto de once ciudades", in: Lexis 16.1: 221−234.
Doron, Edit (1982): "The Syntax and Semantics of Resumptive Pronouns", in: Texas Linguistic Forum 19,1−8.
Doron, Edit / Heycock, Caroline (1999): "Filling and Licensing Multiple Specifiers", in: Adger, D. / Pintzuk, S. / Plunkett, B. / Tsoulas, G. (ed.), Specifiers: Minimalist Approaches, Oxford, 69−89.
Ewald, Heinrich (1879): Syntax of the Hebrew Language of the Old Testament, translated by J. Kennedy, Edinburgh.
Galmés de Fuentes, Álvaro (1996): Influencias sintácticas y estilísticas del árabe en la prosa medieval castellana, Madrid.
Gehman, Henry Snyder (1982): "Arabic Syntax of the relative pronoun in Poema de Mio Cid and Don Quijote", in: Hispanic Review 50, 53−60.
Hanssen, Federico (1913): Gramática histórica de la lengua castellana, Halle.
Hawkins, John A. (2007): "Acquisition of Relative Clauses in Relation to Language Universals", in: Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29: 337–344.
Hernández, Laura (1990): "El sustrato árabe y la evolución de la /f/ latina en aspiración: una nueva hipótesis", in: Company, C. (ed.), Heterodoxia y ortodoxia medieval, Mexico, 199−205.
Holmstedt, Robert (2002): The Relative Clause in Biblical Hebrew: a Linguistic Analysis, Diss. University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Huffman, Henry R. (1977): "Two Examples of Influence of Arabic Syntax on Spanish", in: Journal of the American Oriental Society 97.1, 27−34.
Iglesias Casal, Isabel (1996): Los relativos en la prosa renacentista castellana, Oviedo.
Jannaris, Antonius Nicholas (1897): An Historical Greek grammar Chiefly of the Attic Dialect, London.
Joosten, Jan (1993): "The Syntax of Relative Clauses with a First or Second Person Antecedent in Biblical Hebrew", in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 52.4, 275−280.
Keniston, Hayward (1937): The Syntax of Castilian Prose. Chicago.
Lapesa, Rafael (1968): Sobre los orígenes y evolución del leísmo, laísmo y loísmo, Tübingen.
Lope Blanch, Juan Miguel (1984): "Despronominalización de los relativos", in: Hispanic Linguistics 1.2, 257−272.
Maíllo, Felipe (1998): Los arabismos del castellano en la Baja Edad Media, Salamanca.
Marcos Marín, Francisco (1978): Estudios sobre el pronombre, Madrid.
McKee, Cecile / McDaniel, Dana (2001): "Resumptive Pronouns in English Relative Clauses", in: Language Acquisition 4, 105−138.
Mohrmann, Christine (1977): "Dopo quarant'anni", in: Schrijnen, Joseph (ed.), I caratteri del latino cristiano antico, Bologna, 96−119.
Moosally, Michelle (1994): Resumptive Pronouns in Modern Standard Arabic: a Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar Account, Diss., University of Texas, Austin.
Plautus, T. Maccius (1888): Comedies of Plautus: The Trinummus, Menaechmi, Aulularia, and Captivi, edited and translated by Henry Thomas Riley, London.
Prince, Ellen (1990): "Syntax and Discourse: A Look at Resumptive Pronouns", in: Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 16, 482−497.
Prince, Ellen. (1997): "On Kind-Sentences, Resumptive Pronouns, and Relative Clauses", in: Guy, G.R. / Schiffrin. D. / Baugh J. (ed.), Towards a Social Science of Language. Papers in Honor of William Labov, Vol. 2: Social Interaction and Discourse Structures, Amsterdam, 223−235.
Pusch, Claus (2006): La gramàtica pronominal del català variació, evolució, funció, Aachen.
Rönsch, Hermann (1875): Itala und Vulgata, Marburg.
Schrijnen, Josef (1977): I caratteri del latino cristiano antico, Bologna.
Sells, Peter (1984): Syntax and Semantics of Resumptive Pronouns, Diss. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Shlonsky, Ur (1992): "Resumptive Pronouns as a Last Resort", in: Linguistic Inquiry 23, 443−468.
Silva-Corvalán, Carmen (1996): "Resumptive Pronouns: A Discourse Explanation," in: Parodi, Claudia / Quicoli, Carlos (ed.); Saltarelli, Mario (ed.); Zubizarreta, María Luisa (ed.), Aspects of Romance Linguistics, Washington. 383−395.
Suñer, Margarita (1998): "Resumptive Restrictive Relatives: A Crosslinguistic Perspective," in: Language 74.2: 335−364.
Suñer, Margarita (2001): "The Puzzle of Restrictive Relative Clauses with Conjoined DP Antecedents," in: Herschensohn, Julia / Mallén, Enrique / Zagona, Karen (ed.), Features and Interfaces in Romance. Amsterdam, 267−278.
Thomason, Sarah / Kaufman, Terrence (1988): Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics, Berkeley.
Touratier, Christian (1980): La relative, essai de théorie syntaxique, Paris.
Van Wijk, Henri Louis Anne (1946): Contribución al estudio del habla popular de Venezuela, Amsterdam.
1 Also, "Fue un momento que recordaremos siempre."
3 Hernández (1990) defends the hypothesis of an intermediate fricative bilabial [φ] in the evolution from [f] to [h], which was probably affected by Arabic, as it features two aspirate voiceless consonants. In syntax, Huffman (1977) considered the Spanish syntactic pattern no…sino "not only…but" a possible borrowing from Arabic.