Cover not available
Part of
Romance Linguistics 2012: Selected papers from the 42nd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Cedar City, Utah, 20-22 April 2012
Edited by Jason Smith and Tabea Ihsane
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 7] 2015
► pp. 147–170

On the Old French subjunctive

This chapter focuses on the syntax of the subjunctive in Old French (OF), comparing it to Modern French (MF). In MF, obviation effects occur between the subject of a volitional complement and the subject the embedded clause (Ruwet 1984): (1) *Je veux que je parte. *I want-1sg that I leave-1sg-subj ‘I want to leave.’ (2) Je veux partir. I want-1sg to.leave.’ Arteaga (1990) first discussed in a theoretical model the fact that Old French lacked obviation effects: (3) En talent oti qu’ili colpast lej chiefj in desire-m-sg-obl had-3sg that he cut-subj the head ‘Hei desired to cut off hisj head. In (3), the subjects of the main and subordinate clause are coreferential. It will be claimed (contra Arteaga 1990 and Martineau 1994) that obviation in OF, and its evolution into MF, can be explained, if we assume the following: The complementizer que was not required to introduce the subjunctive in OF; Complementizer Deletion triggers V2 word order in subjunctive contexts; and the uninterpretable irrealis feature of CForce is valued by that of Mood via Agree (San Martín 2007), which extends the binding domain for the subordinate clause.
Published online: 28 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.7.10art
References (73)
Old French texts consulted
Berger, Roger. 2004. Les séquences de Sainte Eulalie. Paris: Libraire Droz.Google Scholar
Gaston, Paris. 1924. La vie de Saint Alexis. Paris: Ancienne Edouard Champion.Google Scholar
Langois, Ernest. 2000. Le couronnement de Louis. Paris: Editions Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Other references:
Adams, Marianne. 1987. “From Old French to the Theory of Pro-drop”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5.1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 1998. “Parameterizing AGR: Word Order, V-movement and EPP-Checking”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16.491–539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. “The Subject in situ Generalization and the Role of Case in Driving Computations”. Linguistic Inquiry 32.193–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anglade, Joseph. 1965. Grammaire élémentaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Arteaga, Deborah. 1990. The Disjoint Reference Requirement in Subjunctive Clauses: Diachronic Evidence from Romance. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
. 1994. “Impersonal Constructions in Old French”. Issues and Theory in Romance Linguistics ed. by Michael Mazzola, 141–156. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
. 1995. Obviation in Romance: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
. 2009. “On the Existence of Null Complementizers in Old French”. Romance Linguistics: Structure, Interfaces, and Microparametric Variation ed. by Pascual Masullo, Erin O’Rourke & Chia-Hui Huang, 19–36. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, ed. 2013. Research on Old French: The State of the art. Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arteaga, Deborah & Julia Herschensohn. 2004. “Case, Agreement, and Expletives. A Parametric Difference in Old French and Modern French”. Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics ed. by Julie Auger, Clancy Clements & Barbara Vance, 1–15. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “Il était une fois: Diachronic Development of Expletives, Case, and Agreement from Latin to Modern French”. Historical Romance Linguistics: Retrospectives and Perspectives ed. by Randall Gess & Deborah Arteaga, 267–286. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bischoff, Fritz. 1881. Der Conjunctiv bei Chrestien. Ph.D. dissertation, Friedrich-Wilhem University.Google Scholar
Boase-Beier, Jean & Ken Lodge. 2003. The German Language: A Linguistic Introduction. Malden: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brunot, Ferdinand. 1966. Histoire de la langue française des origines à nos jours. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Buridant, Claude. 2000. Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes.Google Scholar
Busse, Carl. 1905. Das finale Satzverhältnis in der Entwicklung der französischen Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Göttingen.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar, Tense, Aspect, and Modality in Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 1991. “The Lack of Infinitival Clauses in Salentino: a Synchronic Analysis”. Theoretical Analyses in Romance Linguistics ed. by Christiane Laeufer & Terrell A. Morgan, 267–294. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. “On Phases”. Ms., MIT.
Costantini, Franceso. 2005. “On Obviation in Subjunctive Clauses: The State of the Art”. Annali di Ca’Foscari 44.97–132.Google Scholar
. 2007. “On Tense Mismatch and a Morphosyntactic Theory of Sequence of Tenses”. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 32.39–64.Google Scholar
. 2009. Interface Perspectives on Clausal Complementation: The Case of Subjunctive Obviation. Venice: Libreria Editrice Cafoscarino Venezia.Google Scholar
De Lage, Guy Raynaud. 1975. Introduction à l’ancien français. Paris: Société d’édition d’enseignement supérieur.Google Scholar
Einhorn, Elsabe Carmen. 1974. Old French: A Concise Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enc, Murvet. 1987. “Anchoring Conditions for Tense”. Linguistic Inquiry 18.633–657.Google Scholar
Ernout, Alfred & François Thomas. 1951. Syntaxe latine. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Farkas, Donka. 1984. “Subjunctive Complements in Rumanian”. Papers from the XIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages ed. by Philip Baldi, 354–372. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foulet, Lucien. 1982. Petite syntaxe de l’ancien français. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Gamillscheg, Ernst. 1957. Historische französiche Syntax. Tübingen: Max Niewmeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Glikman, Julie & Thomas Verjans. 2013. “Old French Parataxis: Syntactic Variant or Stylistic Variation?” Research on Old French: The State of the Art ed. by Deborah Arteaga, 243–260. . Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graeme-Ritchie, Robert Lindsay. 1907. Recherches sur la syntaxe de la conjonction “que” en ancien français. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2000. “Scandinavian Stylistic Fronting: How any Category Can Become an Expletive”. Linguistic Inquiry 31.445–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. “Expletives and Agreement in Scandinavian Passives”. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 4.85–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ingham, Richard. 2013. “A Derivational Approach to Negative Polarity Licensing in Old French”. Research on Old French: The State of the Art ed. by Deborah Arteaga, 261–281. Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia. 1985. “Do Binding Principles Apply to INFL?” NELS15.188–206.Google Scholar
Jensen, Frede. 1974. The Syntax of the Old French Subjunctive. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
. 1990. Old French and Comparative Gallo-Romance Syntax. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempchinsky, Paula. 1986. Romance Subjunctive Clauses and Logical Form. Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
. 1990. “Más sobre el efecto de la referencia disjunta del subjuntivo”. In Indicativo y subjuntivo ed. by Ignacio Bosque, 234–258. Madrid: Ediciones Taurus.Google Scholar
. 2009. “What Can the Subjunctive Disjoint Reference Effect Tell us about the Subjunctive?” Lingua 119.1788–1810. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kowalski, Richard. 1882. Der Conjunctiv bei Wace. Ph.D. dissertation, Georg-August University of Göttingen.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard & Juan Uriagereka. 2005. A Course in Minimalist Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, change, and evolution. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Marnette, Sophie. 2013. “Forms and Functions of Reported Discourse in Medieval French”. Research on Old French: The State of the Art ed. by Deborah Arteaga, 299–326. Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martineau, France. 1994. “The Expression of the Subjunctive in Older French”. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 32.45–69.Google Scholar
Mathieu, Éric. 2013. “The Left-periphery in Old French”. Research on Old French: The State of the Art ed. by Deborah Arteaga, 327–350. Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ménard, Pierre. 1988. Syntaxe de l’ancien français. Paris: Bordeaux Éditions Bière.Google Scholar
Moignet, Gérard. 1959. Essai sur le mode subjonctif en latin postclassique et en ancien français. Alger: Imbert.Google Scholar
. 1988. Grammaire de l’ancien français. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Muller, Henri & Pauline Taylor. 1932. A Chrestomathy of Vulgar Latin. New York: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
Nyrop, Kristoffer. 1930–1935. Grammaire historique de la langue française, 6 vols. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel.Google Scholar
Ormazabal, Javier. 1995. The Syntax of Complementation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Picallo, M. Carme. 1985. Opaque Domains. Ph.D. dissertation, CUNY.Google Scholar
Quiehl, Karl. 1881. Der Gebrauch des Konjunktivs in dem ältesten französichen Sprachdenkmälern bis zum Rolandsliede einschiesslich. PhD. dissertation, University of Kiel.Google Scholar
Rivero, Marisa. 1994. “Clause Structure and V-movement in the Languages of the Balkans”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12.63–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar: Handbook in Generative Syntax ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 1993. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A comparative history of English and French. Norwell: Kluwer. Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Anna Roussou. 1993. Syntactic Change. A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rochette, Anne. 1988. Semantics and Syntactic Aspects of Romance Sentential Complementation. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Ruwet, N. 1984. “ ‘Je veux partir/Je veux que je parte.’ À propos de la distribution des complétives à temps fini et des compléments à l’infinitif en français”. Cahiers de grammaire 7.76–138.Google Scholar
San Martín, Itziar. 2007. “Beyond the Infinitive vs. Subjunctive Rivalry: Surviving Changes in Mood”. Coreference Modality, and Focus: Studies on the syntax-semantics interface ed. by Luis Eguren & Olga Fernández-Soriano, 171–190. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schnellbächer, Karl. 1891. Über den syntactischen Gebrauch des Conjunctivs in den Chansons de Geste. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Giessen.
Togeby, Knud. 1974. Précis historique de grammaire française. Odense: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Vance, Barbara. 1997. Syntactic Change in Medieval French. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webelhuth, Gert. 1992. Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Winters, Margaret. 2013. “Grammatical Meaning and the Old French Subjunctive”. Research on Old French: The State of the Art ed. by Deborah Arteaga, 351–376. Amsterdam: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Emil. 1884. Zur Syntax des Verbums bei Adenet le Roi. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kiel.Google Scholar
Zagona, Karen. 1989. “On the Non-isomorphism of Morphological Tense and Temporal Interpretation”. Studies in Romance Linguistics ed. by Karl Kirschner & Janet de Cesaris, 479–494. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “Times as Temporal-argument Structure”. Paper presented at the conference Time in Language , MIT.
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Arteaga, Deborah L.
2019. Obviation and Old French Subjunctive Clauses. In Contributions of Romance Languages to Current Linguistic Theory [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 95], ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.