This study compares the Vulgar Latin Raetia, Noricum, Venetia et Histria, Pannónia Superior, Pannónia Inferior and Dalmatia with each other and their provincial capitals in relation to the hypothesized large dialectal isoglosses of Vulgar Latin, and in turn, to the modern Romance languages located in those areas, such as Western Romance, Northern Italian, Southern Italian and Eastern Romance dialects. The analysis is done on the palatal and velar vowels, the V∼B merger, intervocalic V drop, sonorization, degemination, assimilation, palatalization and final /-s/ drop. The territories of the Alps-Danube-Adria region will be classified according to their similarities to each other and their similarity to the Vulgar Latin or Romance dialects.
This paper compares the romanization of Gaul in the 1st century BC and the gallicization of the island of Martinique during 17th-century French colonial expansion, using criteria set out by Muf- wene's Founder Principle. The Founder Principle determines key ecological factors in the formation of creole vernaculars, such as the founding populations and their proportion to the whole, language varieties spoken, and the nature and evolution of the interactions of the founding populations (also referred to as “colonization styles”). Based on the comparison, it will be claimed that new languages arise when a language undergoes vehicularization and subsequently shifts from one speech community to another. In other words, linguistic genesis would be a complicated case of language contact, where not only one, but sev- eral dialects of both superstrate and substrate varieties are involved, in a historical context where the identity function of language, or the norm, is overriden by the need to communicate. Research also indicates that language varieties spoken at the time of the shift did not pertain to normative usage, but to popular varieties, dialects, or both, since the emerging vernaculars - in Gaul, as well as in Martinique - preserved some of their phonological and lexical particularities.
I examine verbal prefixation analyzing the functional changes of the Latin ad- prefix from Classical Latin to Italian. In order to conduct the research properly I needed to separate the verbs in ety- mological groups directly derived from Latin (Classical, Vulgar or Late Latin) from the verbs created in the Romance period and the Latin loan verbs. The different origin of the verbs influences our expectation regarding the analyzability of a given verb (the recognisability of the prefix as an independent element and its semantic value - which can be different from that of its Latin origin). This division is not as clear cut as it seems to be, because, in the case of the Italian, phonetic evidence in favour of one group or another is often missing. I present the possible solutions I found for the grouping problems using semantic evidence, comparison with the other Romance languages, dating of the given verb, etc. Furthermore, I highlight the general and specific factors which determine the assignment of a certain verb to a certain group in order to obtain a precise but still flexible set of verbal categories.
Proto-Romance linguistic transformations are partially hidden by the archaic style that char- acterizes Late Latin documents. However, these texts (e. g. chronicles) permit insights into the changes undergone by the oral language, because authors and scribes can reproduce unconsciously their own speech habits, already different from Classical standard. In our presentation, this curious duality is shown by the example of noun declension, which is undermined, but not yet completely eliminated, in 7th century Latin. A comparison is made between the so-called Fredegarius, a Merovingian chronicle, and an early French poem, the Eulalia Sequence, which manifests the last stage of the declension, just before its disappearance. The morphological change has its counterpart in the restructuration of the sentence: the neighbourhood of subject and verb becomes usual in the surface structure, and certain limitations are im- posed upon the freedom of word order. Thus, the reconstruction process we propose has two aspects: it is necessary to describe the diastratic variation at different moments of the history of Late Latin, and, on the other hand, the results need to be compared with the Early Romance linguistic systems. In this manner, reconstruction can show the coexistence of tradition and innovation in the language, a necessary condition of its normal functioning.
We know about a significant number of inscriptions – the major part of them were found in Rome - in which the pronoun idem, the form of the nominative masculine, stands in the place of another grammatical gender or case of the same word (usually a dative), or in the place of the adverb item. In the edited epigraphic corpora, this form is usually interpreted as adverbial and emendated for item. However, in similar context (as for example in the title), we can often see isdem too, the archaic form of the nominative masculine, which cannot be explained on the base of the phonology as derivated from item. In the 19th century, Friedrich Ritschl thought that these forms substituted in reality eidem (dative singular of idem), and explained the change based on phonology (eidem to idem), and then on analogy (idem to isdem). An explanation like this imply the fossilisation of the pronoun, since the variants of the nominative masculine occure in the place of another inflected form of the word, specifically in the dative. In 1907, E. H. Sturtevant published an article (Some Unfamiliar Uses of Idem and Isdem in Latin Inscriptions) in which he intended to refute Ritschl’s claim and to give another interesting interpretation. In his opinion, the fenomenon has different origins in Ostia and in Rome. In his theory, the occurrences of the form idem in a position, which is different from the nominative masculine of the pronoun, are dialectic variants of item if they are from Ostia; though the same forms registrated in Rome are interpreted as consciously used nominatives. In consequence, the fossilisation of the word would be a non-existent fenomenon. The aim of this study is to examine critically Sturtevant’s argumentation concerning the fossilisation of the pronoun idem and its eventual fusion with the adverb item.
This paper intends to show that when grouping the various kinds of omissions of final -m in Väänänen‘s study on the Vulgar Latin of Pompeian inscriptions, the subcategories in his category b) (‘m omis sans raison apparente’ i.e. where -m is omitted due to a phonetic process) as “Accusatifs en -a(m)” like Succesus amat ancilla(m) and ad porta(m) Romana(m) or “Accusatifs en -e(m)” such as qu(a)e amas Felicione(m) and ante aede(m) must be rearranged in the following two subcategories: 1) cases after prepositions like ad porta(m) Romana(m) and ante aede(m) etc. where besides the phonetic interpretation a parallel morphosyntactic explanation of case confusion cannot be ruled out; and 2) cases with the objective use connected to verbs like Succesus amat ancilla(m) and qu(a)e amas Felicione(m) where, due to the preference of the phonetic interpretation, the morphosyntactic explanation seems to be less probable or even unlikely.
This paper focuses on the uses and forms of the relative pronouns as evidenced from the Latin epigraphy in Lusitania. Inscriptions are considered from the 1st to the 8th century AD, with special attention being paid to the future developments in the Portuguese language. To this purpose, other in- scriptions or documents of a different nature dated to later chronologies are also considered as a point of comparison.
Jupiter Dolichenus was a Roman god, a so-called ‘Oriental deity’ whose mystery cult gained popularity in the 2nd century AD, reached a peak under the Severi in the early 3rd century AD, and died out shortly after. As for Jupiter Dolichenus, he is sometimes referred to by scholars as ‘Baal of Doliche’ or ‘Dolichenian Baal’.1 The name Baal is derived from the term Ba’al, meaning ‘owner’ or ‘lord’, and the word must have been used as a title for gods in general. Over six hundreds monuments – mainly inscriptions – of the Dolichenian cult have come to light from the Eastern and Western parts of the Empire. The name Jupiter with the epithet Dolichenus – from the original name of Doliche – appears in inscriptions in many incorrect forms including Dolichenius, Dolychenus, Dolochenus, Dolicenus, Dolcenus, Dulcenus, Dolucens.
Which of the above epithets reflects the original Syrian form and tradition? Is it possible that Dulcenus is the original and correct form of the deity’s name, or is it just another vulgar change which appeared separately in time and space? This paper tries to prove the latter with the help of the LLDB. The Dolichenian cult is thought to have first been introduced by Syrian merchants and auxiliary soldiers, including troops from Commagene (the province that includes Doliche). In the light of the names of the priests of Jupiter Dolichenus, Speidel2 states that the Jupiter Dolichenian cult in the army was largely supported by Syrians and other Orientals.
This paper gives a short review of the research from recent years on texts of Latin curse tablets from Pannonia. In the last decade, four new lead tablets of quite long and well-readable texts came to light in well documented archeaological context in Pannonia. On one hand, these findings have not only doubled the small corpus, but they presented new data from both the field of magic and linguistics. On the other, in connection with the examination of the new pieces, the reconsideration of earlier ones could not be delayed any longer.