Latin Particles and Word Order

by

Olga Spevak

• LAST MODIFIED: 22 November 2024
• DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195389661-0421

Introduction

The term “particle” (Latin particula “a small part,” related to partes orationis “parts of speech, word classes”) means a short, especially indeclinable word. Traditionally, “particle” is used for invariable words in general (adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections), sometimes with the exclusion of adverbs. The term “particle” is used in both a narrower and a broader sense. In a narrower sense, particles can be defined as invariable words with a grammatical function that do not fit into a standard classification of word classes (including conjunctions and connectors) (see Crystal 2008 cited in the Oxford Bibliographies in Linguistics article Phonetics). Unlike adverbs of all sorts, including modal or epistemic adverbs such as certe “certainly,” particles are non-autonomous words, i.e. words that cannot be used alone to form a sentence. Latin particles in a narrower sense include, especially, emphasizing (focusing) particles, interrogative particles, and interactional particles. In a broader sense, the term ‘particle’ is used for connective words of all sorts, including coordinators (et “and”), used for sentence connection, connectors (autem “but”), parenthetical words (quaeso “please”), temporal markers (nunc “now”), and modal or epistemic adverbs (scilicet “obviously”). They are called “discourse/pragmatic particles” or “discourse/pragmatic markers.” Studies on Latin particles are concerned, in particular, with the apparent synonymy of connectors and particles; the description of their meaning(s)/functions, since connectors and particles are often polysemous and polyfunctional; the position they occupy in the sentence; and the evolution of their meaning(s) in the diachrony of Latin. Word order in Latin is variable—“free word order”—in that the position of a word in its clause is not determined by the grammatical structure of the clause, nor is it indicative of the grammatical function that the word fulfils in the clause. The way in which words are ordered in a Latin clause or sentence can be considered from several perspectives. Most of the recent studies adopt a functional approach working with the concepts of “given” information and “new” information (also known as topic—comment; or theme—rheme). They describe Latin word order in terms of Topic (the entity the sentence is about) and Focus (salient information). These studies concentrate on the main sentence or clause constituents (subject, object(s), verb), which often bear a pragmatic function. The main sentence or clause constituents as well as various adjuncts (“circumstantials”) are described as “mobile” words, i.e. words that can occupy any position in the sentence. Mobile words are distinguished from “non-mobile” words, which have a more or less fixed position: prepositions, interrogative and relative pronouns, conjunctions, connectors, coordinators, and subordinators. A number of studies deal with the categorization of Latin from a typological point of view. They discuss whether Latin belongs to the S(ubject) O(bject) V(erb) or S(ubject) V(erb) O(bject) languages and in some cases postulate a word order change over time. Some studies of Latin word order adopt the formal approach of Generative Grammar. In these various approaches, word order at the clause level, concerning the position of the verb and the other constituents, is distinguished from word order at the noun (and prepositional) phrase level, concerning the position of modifiers with respect to their head noun (anteposition, postposition). In Latin, modifiers can be separated from their head noun (so-called discontinuity or hyperbaton).

General and Theoretical Approaches to Latin Connectors and Particles

Words such as at “but,” nam “for,” and ergo “so” are traditionally described as coordinating conjunctions. Unlike true coordinators such as copulative et “and” and adversative sed “but,” these words do not have a coordinating function. Their role is rather to make the semantic relationship between sentences explicit. To differentiate them, these non-autonomous words with a connective function that contribute to discourse coherence are called “connectors.” Their non-autonomous character, i.e. the fact that they cannot form a sentence, is stressed in Pinkster 2005. Pinkster 2021a (chapter 24) provides the fullest account of these words, including conjunctive (et “and”), disjunctive (aut “or”), adversative (autem “on the other hand”), explanatory and justificatory (quippe “for”), consecutive (itaque “thus”), and sequential (tum “then”) connectors. From connectors proper, it distinguishes connective adverbs such as tamen “yet” (which are autonomous, sentence forming words) and interactive particles such as enim “of course” or nempe “indeed” that appeal to knowledge shared between the speaker (writer) and the addressee (reader). To tackle the problem of the apparent synonymy of connectors (especially between nam and enim, and between autem, vero, and at), Kroon 1995 proposes an interpretative framework distinguishing between three levels of discourse: representational, presentational, and interactional level. The representational level concerns clause combining and the semantic relationship between sentences. The presentational level pertains to the way in which the speaker (writer) structures text units. The interactional level concerns the relation between the speaker (writer) and the addressee (reader). This framework is applied to the analysis of several Latin particles in Kroon 1998, Kroon 2011, Schrickx 2011, and Schrickx 2021. Words such as etiam “also” have an emphasizing function to highlight a constituent or part of it. Pinkster 2021b (chapter 22) provides a complete overview of emphasizing particles in Latin. Rosén 2009 proposes an overview of Latin particles in a broader sense, including modal adverbs and emphasizing (focusing) particles. The catalogue of Latin particles in Hand 1829–1845, including invariable words of any kind, unfortunately stops with the letter P, but it is still useful.

• Hand(ius), Ferdinand. 1829–1845. Tursellinus seu de particulis Latinis commentarii. 4 vols. Leipzig: Wiedermann.

  Reprint in 1969 (Amsterdam: Hakkert). This monumental treatise in four volumes, written in Latin, discusses the use of Latin invariables (adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections). Hand builds on and extends Tursellinus’s treatise De particulis Latinae orationis “On particles of the Latin language” (1598). Hand’s work remains unfinished. Volume 1 contains words from a (ab, abs) to autem, Volume 2 words from ba to gratuito, Volume 3 words from ha to multum, and Volume 4 words from nam to puta.

• Kroon, Caroline H. M. 1995. Discourse particles in Latin: A study of nam, enim, autem, vero and at. Amsterdam: Gieben.

  DOI: 10.1163/9789004408999

  A pioneering work adopting a specific interpretative framework distinguishing between three discourse levels (representational, presentational, and interactional) to analyze words that are traditionally called “adversative coordinating conjunctions,” namely at “but,” autem “on the other hand,” and vero “but indeed,” and “causal coordinating conjunctions” nam “for” and enim “indeed.” The discourse particles under examination are interpreted as operating at one of these levels, e.g., sed “but” (representational level), nam “for” (presentational level), and enim “indeed” (interactional level).

• Kroon, Caroline H. M. 1998. A framework for the description of Latin discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics 30.2: 205–223.

  DOI: 10.1016/s0378-2166(98)00025-3

  Provides a theoretical framework for the analysis of the so-called adversative, causal, and consecutive conjunctions. Adopts, among others, the interpretative model of the Geneva school See Eddy Roulet, A. Auchlin, J. Moeschler, C. Rubattel, and M. Schelling, L’articulation du discours en français contemporain, 3d ed. (Berne, Switzerland: P. Lang, 1991) distinguishing between three levels of discourse (cf. Kroon 1995).

• Kroon, Caroline H. M. 2011. Latin particles and the grammar of discourse. In A companion to the Latin language. Edited by James Clackson. 176–195. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

  DOI: 10.1002/9781444343397.ch12

  A concise overview of the issue of Latin discourse particles, their types, and their functions. Deals with words traditionally called “coordinating conjunctions.” Focuses on markers of coherence relations (sed “but,” nam “for,” igitur “therefore,” etc.) and conversation management particles (vero “but,” modo “only,” ergo “so,” etc.). Well suited for students.

• Pinkster, Harm. 2005. On Latin adverbs. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Univ. Press.

  DOI: 10.1515/9789048503995

  Originally published in 1972. A foundational work on the classification of Latin adverbs. Chapter 8 (pp. 135–143) deals with the so-called modal adverbs (profecto “truly”) and other indeclinable words (conjunctions and interjections). It addresses the issue of their ability to be used independently as one-word sentences.

• Pinkster, Harm. 2021a. Discourse. In The Oxford Latin syntax. Vol. 2, The complex sentence and discourse. By Harm Pinkster, 1138–1231. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

  DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0024

  Sections 24.15–46 (pp. 1162–1217), devoted to the syndetic connection of sentences, deal with connectors, connective adverbs, and interactional particles. Several semantic categories of connectors are distinguished: conjunctive (atque “and”), disjunctive (aut “or”), adversative (at “but”), explanatory and justificatory (nam “for”), consecutive (igitur “therefore”), and sequential connectors (deinde “afterward”). Connective adverbs are, e.g. contra “by contrast” or propterea “therefore.” Interactional particles include enim “indeed,” nempe “of course,” and ergo “therefore.”

• Pinkster, Harm. 2021b. Information structure and extraclausal expressions. In The Oxford Latin syntax. Vol. 2, The complex sentence and discourse. By Harm Pinkster, 826–947. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

  DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0022

  Sections 22.20–40 (pp. 865–905), “Information Structure and Extraclausal Expressions,” provide a comprehensive overview of expressions functioning as emphasizing particles, also called “focus(ing) particles.” They are subdivided into three categories: additive particles (quoque “also”), exclusive particles (solum “only”), and particularizing particles (quidem “indeed,” saltem “at least”). Attention is paid to the position they occupy with respect to the constituent or part of it that they modify.

• Rosén, Hannah. 2009. Coherence, sentence modification, and sentence-part modification—the contribution of particles. In New perspectives on historical Latin syntax. Vol. 1, Syntax of the sentence. Edited by Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin, 317–441. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  DOI: 10.1515/9783110205626.317

  Provides an overview of Latin particles in a broader sense, subdivided into four categories: connective particles (sed “but,” ergo “so”), discourse markers (autem “but,” nunc “now”), modalizing particles (profecto “truly,” amabo “please”), and focus markers (quoque “also,” quidem “indeed”). Concentrates on their functions, combinability, and formation.

• Schrickx, Josine. 2011. Lateinische Modalpartikeln: Nempe, quippe, scilicet, videlicet und nimirum. Amsterdam: Brill.

  DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004202757.i-304

  Adopts Kroon’s (Kroon 1995) interpretative framework distinguishing three discourse levels. Discusses the use of the modal adverbs nempe “assuredly,” scilicet “obviously,” videlicet “evidently,” and nimirum “surely” to show that they function at the interactional level entailing cooperation between the speaker and the addressee. Argues that quippe “for, of course” belongs to the presentational level, making the relationship between two actually expressed elements explicit. The words under discussion are compared with the other modal adverbs such as certe “certainly” and profecto “truly.”

• Schrickx, Josine. 2021. Latin particles and common ground. In Linguisticae Dissertationes: Current perspectives on Latin grammar, lexicon and pragmatics; Selected papers from the 20th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain, June 17–21, 2019). Edited by Antonio María Martín Rodríguez, 827–836. Madrid: Ed. Clásicas.

  Deals with particles, discourse markers, and modal particles (enim “of course,” scilicet “obviously,” etc.) that appeal to knowledge shared between the speaker and the addressee.