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

Next SubSect

3.1. Restrictions on the addibility of Adjuncts

It is not the case that any given nuclear predication can be extended by means of any type of Adjunct. It is, for instance, quite clear that an Adjunct with the semantic function Direction cannot be added to a nucleus with the predicate habitare (`to live, dwell'). In order to allow the addition of a Direction Adjunct, the nuclear predication must express a kind of `movement'. [1] In this case the meaning of the predicate is the decisive factor. In other cases the addibility of an Adjunct is determined by the semantic properties of the nuclear predication as a whole. In crosssection 2.4. we have already seen that certain categories of nuclear predication allow certain types of Adjunct and exclude others: the occurrence of Adjuncts with the semantic functions Instrument, Beneficiary, Purpose and (in part) Manner is limited to those nuclear predications which are controlled (viz. Actions and Positions, cf. p. 19). In (1)–(6) I give a number of normal cases of these types of Adjunct: Instrument ((1)–(2)); Beneficiary ((3)–(4)); Purpose ((5)–(6)). [2]

-- 26 --

(1) (lituo) … regiones vineae terminavit (`He marked out the vineyard into sections with the augural staff', Cic. N.D. 2.9)

(2) arcumque manu celerisque sagittas corripuit (`He seized in his hand his bow and swift arrows', Verg. A. 1.187–8)

(3) haec … ego non multis sed tibi (scribo) (`I write these things not for many people, but for you', Sen. Ep. 7.11)

(4) cui flavam religas comam (`For whom do you bind up your blond hair', Hor. C. 1.5.4)

(5) me a portu praemisit … ut haec nuntiem uxori suae (`He sent me ahead from the harbour, to report this to his wife', Pl. Am. 195)

(6) esse oportet ut vivas, non vivere ut edas (`One should eat in order to live, not live in order to eat', Rhet. Her. 4.39)

Common to all these instances is the fact that an animate being (Agent) executes the action expressed by the main verb. The verbs are in accordance with the criteria mentioned with regard to controllability (occurrence in the imperative, occurrence in clauses governed by verbs meaning `to order', occurrence in promises). Many Manner Adjuncts, too, exclusively occur in connection with controlled nuclear predications. However, there are Manner satellites which occur in connection with Processes, such as satellites which indicate Tempo: [3]

(7) paulatim licentia crevit (`Their licence gradually increased', Sal. Cat. 51.30)

On p. 18 we have already pointed out that the occurrence of Duration satellites depends in part on whether or not the nuclear predication is dynamic. With verbs expressing the accomplishment of something (i.e. those which have an effected Object, the so-called `terminative verbs'), for example, the addition of a Duration Adjunct is excluded (cf. crosssection 11.1.1). The following sentence would be impossible:

(8) *tres menses opus perfecit (`*For three months he completed the work') [4]

There are other factors which play a part in the addibility of Duration Adjuncts, such as the `definite/indefinite' distinction. Thus we find (9), but not (10):

(9) John ate rolls for an hour

(10) *John ate the rolls for an hour

Adjuncts with the semantic function `Time within which', on the other hand, cannot occur with non-dynamic nuclear predications, but are possible with nuclear predications such as the one seen in (8) above (see also chapter 11).

-- 27 --

Above a number of Adjuncts has been discussed with semantic functions which can only occur with certain categories of nuclear predication. `Control' and `dynamism' appear to be important factors in allowing certain Adjuncts to occur. Below I will treat a number of types of Adjunct which are not subject to such restrictions. Before doing so, however, it should be noted that the very fact that the nuclear predication functions as a whole (in the sense that the nuclear predication exerts a significant influence on the addition of Adjuncts) is yet another important argument for distinguishing between nuclear predication and periphery within the structure of the sentence.

Besides `nucleus-sensitive' Adjuncts such as Instrument and Beneficiary there are also types of Adjunct which are not limited in their occurrence to one or more defined semantic classes of nuclear predication. Examples are Cause Adjuncts ((11)–(12)) and Result Adjuncts ((13)–(14)):

(11) (sues), quarum odore praeterire nemo pistrinum potest (`Because of the smell of the pigs nobody is able to pass the mill', Pl. Capt. 808)

(12) aetate hoc corpus putret (`Owing to old age this body is rotting', Pac. 340)

(13) si quando non pluet, ut terra sitiat (`If at some point it does not rain, so that, as a result, the land is dry', Cato Agr. 151.4)

(14) (Romani) ex loco superiore … strage ac ruina fudere Gallos, ut numquam postea nec pars nec universi temptaverint tale pugnae genus (`From their higher position the Romans crushed the Gauls, so that after that they never tried this strategy again, neither together nor only part of them', Liv. 5.43.3) [5]

Previous SubSect

Next SubSect

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