| Description |
1 online resource |
| Contents |
Cover; The Romance Verb: Morphomic Structure and Diachrony; Copyright; Dedication; Contents; Acknowledgements; Abbreviations, symbols, and other conventions; 1: Introduction; 2: Morphomic structures in synchronyand diachrony; 2.1 ON THE NATURE OF MORPHOMES AND MORPHOMIC STRUCTURES; 2.2 THE VALUE OF DIACHRONY AND METHODS OF DIACHRONIC DIAGNOSIS OF â#x80;#x98;MORPHOLOGY BY ITSELFâ#x80;#x99;; 2.3 THE PROBLEM OF THE MORPHOME AND THE DIAGNOSIS OF MORPHOMIC PATTERNING; 2.4 THE OBJECT OF ENQUIRY; 2.5 IS AUTONOMY ISOLATION?; 2.6 A PERSPECTIVE ON MORPHOMIC STRUCTURES; 3: The Romance languages and the Romance verb |
|
3.1 THE ROMANCE LANGUAGES: A BRIEF OVERVIEW3.2 SOURCES OF DATA AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS; 3.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THE ROMANCE VERB SYSTEM AND ITS LATIN ANTECEDENTS; 4: PYTA and the remnants of the Latin perfective: Emergence of a morphomic pattern through loss of shared function; 4.1 FORMS AND FUNCTIONS; 4.2 REPLICATIONS OF PYTA; 4.2.1 Coherent change in the PYTA cells; 4.2.2 Avoidance of allomorphy in the PYTA cells; 4.2.3 Defectiveness and suppletion in PYTA; 4.2.4 Heteroclisis and PYTA in Romanian; 4.2.5 PYTA and syncretism; 4.2.6 Person and number endings and the PYTA domain |
|
4.2.7 Convergence and PYTA roots4.2.8 Reactions to lack of convergence; 4.3 SPORADIC COUNTEREXAMPLES TO COHERENCE IN PYTA; 4.4 SYSTEMATIC APPARENT COUNTEREXAMPLES TO COHERENCE IN ITALO-ROMANCE, AROMANIAN, AND ARAGONESE; 4.5 EXTRAMORPHOLOGICAL MOTIVATION OF THE PYTA MORPHOMIC PATTERN?; 4.6 CONCLUSION; 5: The L-pattern and the U-pattern: A phonologically created morphomic pattern; 5.1 ORIGINS AND NATURE OF THE L-PATTERN AND U-PATTERN; 5.2 INDEPENDENCE FROM PHONOLOGICAL OR FUNCTIONAL CONDITIONING; 5.3 REPLICATIONS OF THE L/U-PATTERN |
|
5.4 COHERENCE AND CONVERGENCE IN THE HISTORY OF THE L/U-PATTERN5.5 OCCASIONAL COUNTEREXAMPLES TO COHERENCE IN THE HISTORY OF THE L/U-PATTERN, AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE; 5.6 SYSTEMATIC LOSS OF COHERENCE IN GALLO-ROMANCE: ALIGNMENT WITH PRESENT SUBJUNCTIVE; 5.7 ON THE ROLE OF PHONOLOGICAL CONDITIONING IN THE L/U-PATTERN: THE EVIDENCE FROM INCOHERENCE IN DACO-ROMANCE AND ELSEWHERE; 5.8 CONCLUSION; 6: The N-pattern: Another phonologically created morphomic pattern; 6.1 PHONOLOGICAL CAUSES OF THE N-PATTERN; 6.2 REPLICATIONS OF THE N-PATTERN; 6.2.1 The augment |
|
6.2.2 The verb â#x80;#x98;goâ#x80;#x99; and other cases of N-pattern suppletion6.2.3 N-pattern blending; 6.2.4 N-pattern suppletion and the reflexes of; 6.2.5 N-pattern defectiveness; 6.2.6 N-pattern distribution of periphrastic structures; 6.2.7 N-pattern heteroclisis; 6.2.8 Other manifestations of the N-pattern; 6.2.9 Negative evidence from Sardinian?; 6.3 WHAT MOTIVATES THE REPLICATION OF THE N-PATTERN?; 6.3.1 Markedness; 6.3.2 Differentiation of the first- and second-person plural; 6.3.3 The special status of the verb â#x80;#x98;goâ#x80;#x99;; 6.3.4 Phonological causation of the N-pattern? The role of stress |
| Summary |
This book is the first comprehensive comparative-historical survey of patterns of alternation in the Romance verb that persist through time but have long ceased to be conditioned by any phonological or functional determinant. It explores the status of these patterns and their persistence, self-replication, and reinforcement over time |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Subject |
Romance languages -- Verb
|
|
Romance languages -- Grammar
|
|
FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDY -- French.
|
|
FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDY -- Romance Languages (Other)
|
|
Romance languages -- Grammar
|
|
Romance languages -- Verb
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| ISBN |
9780191056390 |
|
0191056391 |
|
9780191800375 |
|
0191800376 |
|
