Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].
Previous SubSect

12.4. Cohesion between sentences and within sentences (connectors, coordinators and subordinators)

Generally speaking, the grammars do not make a clear distinction between `coordination' of constituents within sentences and the `connection' of independent sentences. Thus, for instance, under the heading `asyndeton' we find both instances such as (3)–(6) and clear instances of `constituent-connection' as in (49):

(49) quippe qui … sex, septem diebus … multitudini in odium … venerit (`Since in six, seven days he has brought upon himself the hatred of the masses', Cic. Att. 10.8.6.)

For examples are K.-St. II. 149–55. Incidentally, in actual texts it is often difficult to determine what exactly we are dealing with, see examples (5) and (37) above. Likewise, in K.-St. (II. 3–50) we find under the heading `kopulative Beiordnung' not only instances such as (50), but instances such as (51) as well: [35]

(50) (Remos) paratosque esse et obsides dare et imperata facere (`That they were willing both to give hostages and to execute orders', Caes. Gal. 2.3.3)

(51) … crebri ad eum rumores adferebantur litterisque item Labieni certior

-- 258 --

fiebat + AcI (`Many rumours reached him and he was also informed by letters from L. that …,', Caes. Gal. 2.1.1)

In (50) we find coordination in the strict sense of the term. The constituents obsides dare and imperata facere have the same syntactic and semantic function with regard to paratos esse and can, therefore, be coordinated (see p. 30). In (51), on the other hand, we are dealing with two complete predications which are together regarded as one main sentence, because it is attractive to consider the AcI as depending on the sub-sentence crebri … adferebantur as well. Here, too, it is sometimes difficult to determine whether we are dealing with `constituent connection' (coordination of two sub-sentences), as in (51), or with sentence connection. A clear example of the latter is (52):

(52) Et tu hoc loco laudas Milonem et iure laudas (`You, too, praise Milo's behaviour in this connection, and rightly so', Cic. Sest. 86) [36]

Not only do the grammars fail to distinguish between additive cohesion and coordination, but in the case of the adversative and disjunctive particles the distinction is often lacking as well. In all these cases the grammars speak of conjunctions (so-called `coordinating conjunctions').

They do distinguish between, for example the so-called subordinating causal conjunctions such as quia (`because')–which I call `subordinators'– and the so-called coordinating causal conjunctions such as enim-which I call `connectors'. Syntactically, this distinction is much more apparent than the distinction between the groups of words mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Semantically, of course, enim and quia are comparable. In the texts the choice between the subordinating, hypotactic form or the `paratactic' form, i.e. independent sentences with a connector, sometimes seems a matter of personal preference on the part of the author. Detailed study, however, reveals semantic and pragmatic differences between words of these kinds. [37]

Bibliographical information

General information on textual cohesion may be found in Beaugrande & Dressler (1981)–with many references to further literature, Halliday & Hasan (1976), whom I follow in part, Kesik (1989), Longacre (1982) and Schiffrin (1987). There is no good up-to-date monograph on textual cohesion in Latin. Mendell (1917) devotes a lot of attention to lexical connections. For this also Nye (1912) on Livy is important. For the category of connectors see Pinkster (1972c: 153–78). Handius (1829–45!) still deserves special attention. The role of the context in the choice between different constructions is demonstrated in a number of articles by Bolkestein (1981a; 1983b; 1985; 1989). 37a

-- 259 --

Previous SubSect

Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].
Powered by PhiloLogic