Pleonasm

d:/1tps/97-1/cennamo.
3d ± 31/3/99 ± 9:36 ± disk/sh
Transactions of the Philological Society Volume 97:1 (1999) 103±150
LATE LATIN PLEONASTIC REFLEXIVES AND THE

UNACCUSATIVE HYPOTHESIS1
By Michela Cennamo
Department of Modern Philology, University of Naples
(Received 25 October 1997, revised 28 December 1998)
Abstract
This paper illustrates the relevance of the Unaccusative
Hypothesis for a well-known area of Late Latin/early
Romance syntax, the proliferation of pleonastic reflexives
with intransitive verbs denoting change of state/location,
states, verba dicendi and sentiendi. In particular, it is argued
that at some point in Late Latin the accusative and dative
reflexive pronouns (se/sibi) become markers of Split Intrans-
itivity, with se occurring with unergative/class SA verbs, and
sibi with unaccusative/class SO verbs. It is also shown that a
gradient approach to Unaccusativity/Split Intransitivity
accounts neatly for the data, allowing one to locate the
verbs/patterns under scrutiny along a Hierarchy of Un-
accusativity/Unergativity, resulting from the interplay of a
number of parameters, with Telicity and Control being most
relevant in defining the core of the categories.
1
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the XIIth International Conference
on Historical Linguistics, in Manchester, 13 August to 18 August 1995, in the
Department of Greek and Latin of Manchester University in November 1995, and
at the IXth International Conference of Latin Linguistics, in Madrid, 14 April to 19
April 1997. I wish to thank the three audiences, in particular Jim Adams, Kate
Burridge, Robert Coleman, Christian Lehmann, John Payne, Mario Saltarelli and
Thomas Shannon. I have greatly benefited from lengthy and informative discussion,
at different stages, with Jim Adams, Phil Baldi, Oscar Collinge, Arturo De Vivo,
Harm Pinkster, Giovanni Polara, Valeria Viparelli, all of whom I wish to thank for
their comments on earlier versions of the paper. I am also grateful to Antonio
Nazzaro and Paola Santorelli for their help with the Christian Latin data, and to
Martin Maiden, Mair Parry, and Antonella Sorace with whom I discussed some
aspects of the work. Thanks are also due to two anonymous referees for their useful
comments, to Nigel Vincent for his constant encouragment, and to Keith Brown for
his helpful assistance. All shortcomings and misinterpretations are, of course, mine.
# The Philological Society 1999. Published by Blackwell Publishers,

108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

d:/1tps/97-1/cennamo.3d ± 31/3/99 ± 9:36 ± disk/sh
104 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999
1. Introduction
The non-homogeneous nature of intransitives crosslinguistically is a
well-known phenomenon (already noticed by Sapir (1917) for some
Amerindian languages), referred to with a variety of labels, Split
Intransitivity, active-stative, active-inactive patterning, Unaccusa-
tivity/Unergativity, depending on the theoretical perspective
adopted (cf. Merlan 1985; Mithun 1991, among others, and refer-
ences quoted therein).
In several languages, in fact, the sole argument (S) of some
intransitive verbs shares semantic/morphological/syntactic proper-
ties with the Patient-like nuclear argument (O) of canonical transitive
verbs, whereas the sole argument of other intransitive verbs is
semantically/morphologically/syntactically akin to the Agent-like
nuclear argument (A) of canonical transitive verbs (with S, A, O
being syntactico-semantic primitives, referring to the core arguments
of a clause, coinciding, in their prototypical encoding, respectively,
with the notions of subject and object, in the languages where these
relations can be identified (Dixon 1979; 1994: 6±8; Foley & Van
Valin 1984; Andrews 1985; Van Valin 1990; 1993, among others) ).
In the languages where it holds, the distinction can be coded
either morphologically, as in Acehnese (an Austranesian language
of North Sumatra) ( (1) and (2) ), or it can be morphosyntactically
manifested, as in Italian ( (3) and (4) ).
In Acehnese the S argument of some intransitive verbs (e.g. jak
`go') (1a) takes the same cross-referencing pronominal proclitics on
the verb (geu for third person, loÃn for first person) as the A argument
of transitive verbs (1b), whereas the S argument of other intransitive
verbs (e.g. rheÈt `fall') (2a) shows optionality/absence of cross-
referencing pronominal enclitics on the verb, like the O argument
of transitive verbs (2b) (Durie 1987: 366±70).
(1) a. geu2-jak gopnyan
3-go (s)he
`(S)he goes'
2
The following abbreviations are used in the analytic glossing of the examples and
in the tables: A=accusative, AB=ablative, ACT=Actor, antic.=anticausative,
D=dative, F=feminine, G=genitive, GER=gerund, GERD=gerundive, I=infinitive,
IMP=impersonal, IMPER=imperative, IN=inchoative, inher. direct.=inherently

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 105
b. gopnyan geu-mat loÃn

(S)he 3-hold I
`She holds me'
(2) a. gopnyan rheÈt (-geuh)
(S)he fall (-3)
`(S)he falls'
b. gopnyan ka loÃn-ngieng (-geuh)
(s)he IN I- see (3)
Ì saw him/her'
In Italian the different morphosyntactic behaviour of intransitives
shows up mainly in three domains of the grammar, auxiliary
selection, so-called ne-cliticization (i.e., cliticization of a quantified,
postverbal S (`subject') with the partitive clitic ne), participial
absolutes, and is signalled morphologically by the presence vs lack
of past participle agreement. Verbs such as camminare (`walk') (3),
select the auxiliary avere (3a), do not allow ne-cliticization (3b),
participial absolutes (3c) and lack past participle agreement with the
subject, the past participle occurring in the unmarked masculine
singular form (3a). Verbs like partire (`leave') (4), select the auxiliary
essere (4a), allow ne-cliticization (4b), participial absolutes (4c) and
show past participle agreement with the subject:
(3) a. i ragazzi hanno camminato a lungo
the boys have (3PL) walked (PP.M.SG) at length
`the boys have walked for a long time'
b. *ne hanno camminato/i molti
of-them have (3PL) walked (PP.M.SG/PL) many
`many of them have walked'
c. *camminati i ragazzi
walked (PP.M.PL) the boys
`the boys having walked'
directed, M=masculine, N=nominative, NTR=neuter; PL=plural, PP=past partici-

ple, PRP=present participle, RFL=reflexive, SG=singular, SUBJ=subjunctive,
UNDG=Undergoer, V=vocative.
RFL refers to the reflexive function of reflexive pronouns (Lat. se/sibi) and to the
reflexive use of personal pronouns (Lat. me, te, nos, vos). Verbs are given in the tense
in which they occur, with specification of mood and other relevant information in
round brackets.

(4) a. sono partiti molti ragazzi

are (3PL) left (PP.M.PL) many boys
`many boys have left'
b. ne sono partiti molti
of-them are (3PL) left (PP.M.PL) many
`many of them have left'
c. partiti i ragazzi
left (PP.M.PL) the boys
`the boys having left'
The presence/lack of these properties also differentiates the O

argument (òbject') from the A argument (`subject') of a canonical
transitive verb. In particular, the subject of intransitive verbs of the
partire class (4) shares morphosyntactic properties with the object of
canonical transitive verbs (5), such as ne-cliticization, and occur-
rence in participial absolute constructions, where it also shows past
participle agreement (5b±c), unlike the subject of verbs of the
camminare class (3b±c). The latter in fact shares properties with
the subject of transitive verbs: it does not agree with the past
participle (5a), does not allow ne-cliticization (5d) and cannot
occur as the head of a participial absolute construction (5e) (cf.
also discussion in Perlmutter 1989: 67±68; 72±76, and refererences
therein):
(5) a. i bambini hanno visto molti cartoni animati

the children have (3PL) watched (PP.M.SG) many cartoons
`The children have watched many cartoons'
b. i bambini ne hanno visti molti
the children of-them (=cartoons) have (3PL) watched
(PP.M.PL) many
`the children have watched many of them'
c. visti molti cartoni animati, i bambini si addormentarono
watched (PP.M.PL) many cartoons the children RFL fell-
asleep (3PL)
`having watched many cartoons, the children fell asleep'
d. *molti ne hanno visto molti cartoni animati
many of-them (=children) have (3PL) watched (PP.M.SG)
many cartoons

e. *visti molti bambini molti cartoni animati . . .

watched (PP.M.PL) many children many cartoons
`having watched many children many cartoons . . .'
Since Perlmutter's (1978) initial discussion, within Relational

Grammar, of the existence of two subclasses of intransitives in
English and in several other languages (see also Perlmutter & Postal
1984), the issue has been widely debated in the literature (cf.
Grimshaw 1987; Levin & Rappaport Hovav 1995 for a brief over-
view of the different views on the topic), in that it has been shown to
affect the morphosyntax of languages in a deep and pervasive way,
not only synchronically, but also diachronically (cf. Harris 1990: La
Fauci 1994; Cennamo 1995; 1998a), with implications for language
acquisition as well (Sorace 1993a; 1993b; 1995; Bard, Robertson and
Sorace 1996: 48±52).
In particular, the discussion has centered on whether the phenom-
enon is mainly syntactic, semantic or semantico-syntactic, and on
which parameters determine it crosslinguistically (Grimshaw 1987;
Mithun 1991, inter al.).
Proponents of the first view, developed within Relational Gram-
mar (Rosen 1981; 1984; Perlmutter 1989 for Italian; Harris 1982 for
Georgian, among others) and Generative Grammar (Burzio 1986
for Italian; Hale & Keyser 1986; 1987 for English, inter alia) argue
that the different morphosyntactic behaviour of intransitives in
several languages reflects the different syntactic nature of their
surface subject. With some of them, so-called unergatives, the
surface subject is also an initial 1/D-subject, whereby the surface
subject of the English verb walk or the Italian camminare (`walk') is
a subject at all levels of representation of the clause. With other
intransitive verbs, so-called unaccusatives, like the Italian partire
(`leave') or the English exist, the surface subject is an initial 2/D-
object in the initial stratum/D-structure level of representation of
the clause, which explains its sharing several morphosyntactic
properties with the objects of transitive verbs.
Advocates of the semantic approach, on the other hand (Centineo
1986; Van Valin 1990; Mithun 1991, inter al.) argue that the
phenomenon is to be explained on semantic grounds, although
not on a straight bidirectional relation between the thematic relation

of the argument of the verb and its initial syntactic relation, as

originally put forward by Perlmutter 1978 (a view clearly untenable
in its strong version, as firstly put forward by Rosen 1984). They
reject the Unaccusative Hypothesis and the terms unergative/un-
accusative, replacing them with the notion of Split Intransitivity and
the distinction between class SA and SO verbs, corresponding,
respectively, to unergatives/unaccusatives. Under this formulation
S, the sole argument of an intransitive verb, is morphosyntactically
encoded either as the A argument of a transitive verb (class SA), or
as the O argument of a transitive verb (class SO). The different
morphosyntactic behaviour of these classes is regarded as deter-
mined by the interplay of semantic parameters such as inherent
lexical Aspect and the Agent/Patient-like nature of the surface
subject (S) (Centineo 1986; Van Valin 1990) as well as its degree
of Control (Klaiman 1991b: 122) and Affectedness (Mithun 1991).
The syntactico-semantic approach to Unaccusativity/Split
Intransitivity is mid-way between the two extreme views discussed
above. Its proponents retain the notion of Unaccusativity, which
they regard as `syntactically represented but semantically deter-
mined' (Levin & Rappaport 1989: 316; Levin & Rappaport
Hovav 1995: 30), and explore the lexico-semantic properties deter-
mining the different syntactic status of subjects of intransitive verbs,
namely the aspectual nature of predicates and the thematic relation
of the verbal argument (Grimshaw 1987; 1990; Zaenen 1988; 1993;
Levin & Rappaport 1989; Rappaport 1989; Chierchia 1992; Sorace
1995, among others).
In the present study we shall combine insights from semantic and
syntactico-semantic approaches as represented in Van Valin (1990)
and Sorace (1995), taking up the features of their frameworks which
appear to be most enlightening for the phenomenon under investi-
gation (leaving aside the issue of how to integrate them into a more
general model, such as the one recently developed in Van Valin & La
Polla (1997), for which we refer to Cennamo, (in prep.)).
In Van Valin's account, which is framed within Role and
Reference Grammar (RRG), inherent lexical aspect and Agentivity
of the subject are the main features which determine the different
patterning of intransitives crosslinguistically, and to which lan-
guages, and often different constructions within one and the same

language, can be sensitive in different ways and in different degrees.

Taking up Vendler's (1967) four-way classification of predicates
into states, achievements, accomplishments and activities, imple-
mented with the Agentive/non-Agentive contrast in Dowty (1979),
Van Valin shows that the different behaviour of intransitives in
Italian appears to be sensitive to the state/activity distinction (but
see also Centineo 1986). Class SO verbs (characterized by ne-
cliticization, selection of auxiliary essere (`be')), possibility of
participial absolutes, and past participle agreement of the subject,
all have a state predicate in their Logical Structure, whereas class SA
verbs (which do not allow ne-cliticization, participial absolutes,
select the auxiliary avere (`have')) and lack past participle agreement
with the subject, are all activity verbs.
In Acehnese, on the other hand, Split Intransitivity does not
appear to be sensitive to the inherent lexical aspect of predicates, but
only to the parameter of Agentivity, so that class SO verbs system-
atically have a Patient-like S (Undergoer in Van Valin's termino-
logy), whereas class SA verbs have an Agentive-like (Actor) S.
The two semantic macroroles of Actor/Undergoer posited in the
theory subsume the different thematic relations of the core argu-
ment(s) of a clause to its (their) predicate (Van Valin 1990: 226, n. 5;
1993: 43; also Van Valin & La Polla 1997: 139±46). They are defined
respectively as `the argument of a predicate which expresses the
participant which performs, effects, instigates, or controls the situ-
ation denoted by the predicate' and `the argument which expresses the
participant which does not perform, initiate, or control any situation,
but rather is affected by it in some way' (Foley & Van Valin 1984: 29).
These categories are intended to be the interface between syntactic
relations such as subject, object and thematic relations such as Agent,
Patient . . ., and though not directly equatable to these notions, they
do coincide with them in their prototypical realizations.
The semantic continuum of Actor/Undergoer and the thematic
relations instantiating them can be illustrated as in figure 1.
The prototypical Actor is an Agent, and the prototypical Under-
goer is a Patient,3 but Effectors, Experiencers, Locatives and even
3
In RRG Patient is a Participant which is in a state or which undergoes a change
of state. Theme is a Participant which is in a location or undergoes a change of
location. In the present study these terms are used slightly departing from Van Valin

Actor Undergoer
!
Agent Effector Experiencer Locative Effector/Theme Theme Patient
Figure 1. The Actor/Undergoer Hierarchy
Themes (with intransitive activity verbs of motion) can also be

Actor, as in the English walk, and Locatives and Themes can also be
Undergoer (Van Valin 1993: 46; see also the recent, revised version
in Van Valin & La Polla 1997: 146). Intransitive verbs can take
either Macrorole, depending on the Logical Structure (LS) of the
verb. If the verb has an activity predicate in its LS, the Macrorole is
Actor. If the verb has no activity predicate in its LS, the Macrorole
is Undergoer (Foley & Van Valin 1984: 28±36; Van Valin 1990: 225±
30; 1993: 43±9; Van Valin & La Polla 1997: 143±46).
Sorace's (1995) account (cf. also Sorace 1993a; 1993b) is in line
with Levin & Rappaport's view that Unaccusativity is a semanti-
cally determined syntactic phenomenon, and aims to give a more
fine-grained description of the lexico-semantic properties determin-
ing the morphosyntactic encoding of a verb as unergative/un-
accusative (cf. Sorace 1995: 157).
In the wake of other works on the lexicon (Guerssel et al. 1985;
Hale & Keyser 1986; and especially Jackendoff 1990, inter alia),
Sorace argues for a multistratal theory of grammar, positing three
levels of representation and ìndirect correspondence between a non-
homogeneous lexical-semantic level and the syntactic one' (Sorace
1995: 157). In particular, she recognizes the existence of a conceptual
structure (the level of the formal representation of the meaning of
lexical items and the thematic relations of the verbal arguments), an
argument structure (specifying the number and type of arguments of
a verb) and a syntactic structure, encoding syntatic relations.
Correspondences between the conceptual and the syntactic struc-
(1990; 1993: 41±3). In particular, a Patient is a Participant which is highly affected by

the verbal process, as with (intransitive) change of state verbs. Theme is a Participant
which undergoes a change of location and which is in a particular state/position (cf.
discussion in Andrews 1985: 70; Klaiman 1991b: 40, among others).

ture levels are mediated by argument structure (cf. also Jackendoff

1990: 55), and the mapping among levels is governed by a set of
linking rules, which are `language-specific and the main locus of
cross-linguistic variation' (cf. Sorace 1995: 158).
Languages vary as to the (semantic) parameter relevant for the
coding of the unaccusative/unergative distinction. In particular,
Unaccusativity in French appears to be triggered by the notion of
a change leading to a new location, whereas the semantic parameter
triggering Unaccusativity in English is that of change of state (cf.
Sorace 1995: 160±61). In Italian, on the other hand, unaccusative
syntax is triggered by the existence of a state component in the LS of
intransitive predicates (cf. also Van Valin 1990). In Late Latin, as we
shall see (section 3), the semantic parameter triggering unaccusative
syntax seems to be the notion of change (of state/location).
Central to this approach is the idea (hinted at in Van Valin (1993:
97) ), that Unaccusativity/Split Intransitivity is a gradable phenom-
enon, determined by the interplay of three `dimensions' referring to
the internal structure of the situations described by the verbs,
namely the features Dynamic/Static, Concrete/Abstract, Telic/
Atelic, with the Agent-like, Theme4-like nature of the subject of
intransitive verbs. The interaction among these parameters allows to
set up a Hierarchy of Unaccusativity/Unergativity, brought out by
her studies on the acquisition of morphosyntactic properties of
intransitive verbs in Italian L2, illustrated in figure 2 (cf. Sorace
1993a; 1993b; 1995).
In this framework verbs denoting inherently directed change of
location (e.g., Italian andare `go') instantiate Core Unaccusativity,
in that they have a Theme subject and are the most telic, concrete,
dynamic. State verbs denoting existence of a state (condition in
Sorace's terminology) (e.g., Italian esistere èxist') lie at the peri-
phery of the Unaccusativity Hierarchy, since they denote static,
atelic, abstract situations, though having a Theme subject. Intransi-
tive change of state verbs having a transitive counterpart (paired
(dyadic) verbs with a transitive alternant in her terminology) (so-
called anticausatives in the typological literature) (e.g., Italian
4
Sorace's notion of Theme differs from the one adopted in this paper, in that it
comprises also Participants undergoing a change of state (Patients in our termino-
logy).

(a) Unpaired (monadic) verbs Unaccusativity Hierarchy

Change of Location
Andare (`go')
Change of Condition
Sparire (`disappear')
Continuation of a Pre-Existing Condition
Durare (`last')
Existence of a Condition
Esistere (èxist')
(b) Paired (dyadic) verbs

With a Transitive Alternant
Aumentare (ìncrease')
With an Atelic Alternant
Correre (`run')
(a) Unpaired (monadic) verbs Unergativity Hierarchy

Non-Motional Activity
Dormire (`sleep')
Motional Activity
Nuotare (`swim')
(b) Paired (dyadic) verbs

With a Telic Alternant
Correre (`run')
Figure 2. The Unaccusativity/Unergativity Hierarchies
aumentare ìncrease') and change of location verbs having an atelic

counterpart (i.e., a non-directional counterpart, like Italian correre
`run'), with telicity added compositionally by means of a directional
phrase, appear to be most peripheral along the Unaccusative
Hierarchy. The Unergativity Hierarchy consists of three subtypes.
Core unergatives have an Agentive subject and denote non motional
activity, i.e., static, atelic, concrete situations, as Italian dormire
(`sleep'), with more peripheral unergatives instantiated by atelic
verbs denoting change of location, having a telic counterpart and
intermediate positions realized by motion activity verbs such as the
Italian nuotare (`swim'). As we shall see, our data speak for slightly
different Unaccusativity/Unergativity hierarchies, with core Un-
accusatives realized by verbs denoting change of state, i.e., concrete,
dynamic, telic situations with a Patient subject (e.g., Italian perire
`perish'), and core Unergatives instantiated by concrete, dynamic,

atelic situations with an Agentive subject, like the Italian lavorare

(`work').
In the next sections we will show how bringing together aspects of
the two strands of research so far illustrated, namely Sorace's notion
of Unaccusativity/Split Intransitivity as a gradient, Van Valin's
macroroles of Actor/Undergoer, and the related continuum of
Control,5 itself a scalar category, provides useful tools for describing
and throwing new light onto the issue of Late Latin syntax under
study.
In the course of discussion we shall also use the terms Un-
accusativity/Split Intransitivity interchangeably, in that, despite
the differences between them, these notions refer to the same
phenomenon, the different morphosyntactic behaviour of intrans-
itives crosslinguistically, highlighting different aspects of it.6
2. Latin reflexives
We shall now illustrate the domain of Latin syntax which appears to
show the diachronic relevance of the Unaccusative Hypothesis,
namely `pleonastic reflexives'. The term is usually used in the
literature to label a variety of different uses of the reflexive pronouns
se/sibi, respectively the accusative/ablative and dative forms of the
reflexive pronoun (cf. also Cennamo 1991; 1995). Our analysis will
proceed from their canonical functions, some of which are semanti-
cally motivated (section 2.1), to the non-canonical and pleonastic
ones (sections 2.2, 2.3), showing, whenever possible, their inter-
action with the intermediate stages of their grammaticalization
process and the different areas of the grammar they belong to.
5
This notion, reflecting the degree of `primary responsibility' (Lakoff 1977) of a
core argument of the clause in the verbal process, results from the interplay of
different parameters, involving the inherent characteristics of the verbal argument(s)
(e.g., Animacy) and its/their thematic relation(s) (e.g., Agent, Patient, Theme) (cf.
Lehmann 1988; Comrie 1989: 59ff; Klaiman 1991a; 1991b: 110ff ).
6
In particular, Unaccusativity can be regarded as a `covert' type of active stative
patterning (Klaiman 1991b: 128) and Split Intransitivity as an overt one (cf. also
Cennamo 1995).

2.1. Canonical uses of se/sibi

Latin se/sibi mark, in their prototypical functions, the `direct object'
and ìndirect object/dative of interest' (so-called reflexive (6) and
middle (7) functions), denoting coreference between the (Agent/
Patient) participants of a two-place predicate and between the
Agent and the Recipient/Benefactive of a three-place predicate.
They can be regarded as the ending points of a Continuum of
Involvement/Participation, with se marking mainly the affectedness
of the surface subject (although strictly speaking it has a dual Agent/
Patient role (cf. Harris 1978) ), characterized by the features [+An],
[+Control], and sibi denoting the Ìnterest' taken by the surface
subject ([+ An], [+ Ag]) in the verbal process.
In these prototypical uses (which comprise also the reciprocal
function of se (8), with A and O acting on each other, at the same
time the Agent and Patient of the verbal process), therefore, the
occurrence of se, sibi appears to be highly motivated (Haiman 1983;
1985; Kemmer 1993):
(6) istae veteres, quae se unguentis unctitant (Plaut. Most. 274)
these (N) old (N.PL) who (N) RFL ointments (AB) smear (3PL)
`these old ladies, who smear themselves with ointments'
(7) si sibi nunc alteram (sc.fidicinam) ab legione abduxit (Plaut.
Epid. 90a)
if RFL now another (A) (lyre singer) from army (AB) brought-
away (3SG)
ìf he has now brought back with him (lit. `for himself') from the
army another one (=lyre singer)'
(8) cum angusto exitu portarum se ipsi premerent (Caes. Gall. 7,
28, 3)
as narrow (AB) passage (AB) gates (G) RFL themselves (N)
pushed (3PL.SUBJ)
às they crowded one another at the narrow passages of the
gates'
In Archaic and Classical Latin se also occurs to mark anti-
causatives (9), intransitive patterns derived from transitive ones,
with the original object (O), [-An], subjectivized, retaining Control

over the verbal process, which is presented as taking place spon-

taneously (Siewierska 1984: 77; Haspelmath 1987: 7; 1993; 15),
induced by an internal quality of the subject, though an external
Cause(r) may be supplied by context (9b):
(9) a. neque herba nascetur neque lutamenta scindent se (Cato Agr.

128)
neither weed (N) will-grow (3SG) nor plasters (N) will-break-
up (3PL) RFL
`neither weeds grow, nor the plasters crack'
b. commutatque (sc.brassica) sese semper cum calore (id. 157)
changes-and (cabbage) RFL always with heat (AB)
ànd it (=cabbage) always changes with the heat'
Unlike se, whose occurrence is more constrained, both syntactic-

ally and semantically, sibi occurs in a wide range of patterns,
marking different facets of the subject's interest/participation in
the verbal process (the above-mentioned middle function) (cf.
Cennamo 1991; 1998b for a full discussion of the issue). Of the
various categories realizing this function we regard the Dativus
Commodi/Incommodi illustrated in (7) as the prototypical, core
function, which shades off into other related uses, generally regis-
tered in the literature as Dativus Ethicus (10), characteristic of the
Vulgar language and occurring at first with first and second persons
only, denoting an àbstract interest' (Landgraf 1893: 49), Dativus
Iudicantis (11), indicating the person in whose opinion something is
true, Dativus Sympatheticus (12), which often replaces a genitive or a
possessive pronoun, and other related uses, such as the datives of
purpose, role, goal, capacity, adjectival reference, and so forth (cf.
Landgraf 1893: 39±76; Bennett 1914: 133±90; Bassols de Climent
1945: §142±50, among others).
(10) Quid mihi Celsus agit? (Hor. epist. 1,3,15)

what I (D) Celsus (N) does
`How's Celsus getting on?'
(11) a. erit ille mihi semper deus (Verg. ecl. 1,7)

will-be (3SG) he (N) I (D) always god (N)
`he shall always be a god to me'

b. et id huc revorti uti me purgarem tibi (Plaut. Amph. 909)

and that here came-back (1SG) in-order-to I (A) cleared
(1SG.SUBJ) you (D)
ànd I have come back here to clear myself of that with you'
(12) nam mihi iam intus potione iuncea onerabo gulam (Plaut. Stich.
639)
in-fact I (D) now inside drink (AB) of-rush (AB) will-load
(1SG) gullet (A)
ìn fact I will now load my gullet inside with a rush-drink'
Alongside the prototypical, canonical uses (some of which are)

illustrated above, there occurred in Latin several peripheral forms,
apparently marginal and confined to idiomatic expressions, which
however pave the way for later developments of the reflexive
pronoun. This is especially true of sibi, which grammaticalizes
earlier than se, occurring, already in Early Latin, in patterns
which show different degrees of rigidification, and sometimes even
fossilization (cf. Cennamo 1991 and references therein; section 2.2).
This situation of course, changes over time, and is quite different in
Late Latin, when, as we shall see in the course of discussion, the
grammaticalization process will involve to a larger extent the
accusative reflexive as well.
The range of non-canonical uses of the reflexive (both se and sibi)
in the traditional literature are often referred to as `pleonastic' (cf.
LoÈfstedt 1911: 140±3; 1933: 387±96; DahleÂn 1964, among others).
There is however much variation, among authors, as to the
meaning of the term itself, sometimes equalling òptional', as in
(13), which can alternate with the form without the reflexive and no
change of meaning (14), apart from an emotional overtone (cf.
Landgraf 1893: 45±9; Hofmann-Szantyr 1965: §165; Feltenius 1977:
16). At other times, on the other hand, `pleonastic' is identified with
a form which is devoid of syntactic and semantic meaning, as in
(15), where the reflexive (sibi) is a fossilized (optional) item (DahleÂn
1964: 178ff) and in (16), exemplifying the anticausative use of the
reflexive (se) (alternating, especially in Late Latin, with the plain
active and no difference in meaning) (cf. Pirson 1906: 392±97;
Feltenius 1977) ):

(13) a. Quid igitur sibi volt pater? (Ter. Andr. 375)

what then RFL wants father (N)
`What then does my father want?'
b. quo me vortam nescio (Plaut. Curc. 69)
where I (A) turn (1SG.SUBJ) know-not (1SG)
Ì don't know where to turn'
(14) a. animus nescit quid velit (Enn. trag. 199)
mind (N) knows-not what want (3SG.SUBJ)
`the mind knows not what it wants'
b. quo vortisti ? (Plaut. Merc. 434)
where turned (2SG)
`where have you turned to?'
(15) suo sibi lautum sanguine tepido (Acc. trag. 405)
his (AB) RFL bathed (A) blood (AB) warm (AB)
`bathed in his own warm blood'
(16) a. dum se vinea corroboret (Colum. 4,12,2)
till RFL vine (N) strengthen (3SG.SUBJ)
ùntil the vine strengthens'
b. ubi vero iam corroborata fuerint (sc.semina) (id. 5,5,6)
when in-fact already strenghtened (PP.PL) will-have-been
(3PL) (seeds)
`when they (=seeds) will have strengthened'
The term pleonastic is therefore to a large extent misleading, in
that it groups together different aspects of, as well as different stages
in, the grammaticalization process of the reflexive pronoun.
In the course of discussion we shall consider two different types of
non-canonical uses, which appear to be relevant to the phenomenon
under scrutiny, one related to voice, i.e., the reorganizaton of voice
distinctions, whereby the R-form is gradually replaced in time by the
analytic se / (marginally) sibi + active verb, the other involving
grammaticalized uses of sibi, and later se, in fixed expressions
such as suus sibi, per se, de se, and in conjunction with adjectives,
as in sibi solus, sibi parcus, de se meritus, . . . (DahleÂn 1964: 194±196;
Cennamo 1991 and sections 2.2, 2.3).
Although for ease of presentation we shall keep these uses apart,
we shall see (section 3) that at some point they merge together into

one and the same area, one that seems to show patterns of active-like
typology also in the domain of verbal syntax, pairing the patterns of
active alignment of grammatical relations attested in Late/Medieval
Latin, discussed at length by Plank (1985: 287±93; 1995: 1193) (see
also La Fauci 1991; 1994: 21±49; Zamboni 1998 for a recent
discussion of the issue of (Late/Medieval) Latin active forms of
morphological organization surviving in Romance morphosyntax).
2.2. Non-canonical/Pleonastic sibi

A characteristic feature of Vulgar Latin, already by the time of
Plautus, was the pleonastic use of the dative reflexive in conjunction
with the possessive adjective suus, where sibi is a fossilized item,
merely strengthening the possessive adjective, the whole pattern
meaning òne's own', and fixed in the order suus sibi, with the
reflexive following the possessive adjective (DahleÂn 1964: 178±86;
Cennamo 1991).
This expression, well-attested in Plautus (17), Terentius (18) and
even Accius, is avoided by Classical authors (Caesar, Cicero). It
reappears during the Imperial age, both in the literary language
(Petronius, Apuleius, Gellius, Minucius Felix) (19) and in technical
writers (Vitruvius), and it really thrives in later, technical works of
the 4th century A.D. (Apicius, Mulomedicina Chironis) (20), prob-
ably in the wake of fixed formulae such as suo sibi gladio (18) (cf.
DahleÂn 1964: 178):
(17) a. ita nunc ignorans suo sibi servit patri (Plaut. Capt. 50)
so now unaware (N) his (D) RFL serves father (D)
`so now he is serving his father unaware'
b. suo sibi suco vivunt (sc.coclae) (id. 81)
their (AB) RFL juice (AB) live (3PL) (snails)
`they (=snails) subsist on their own juice'
c. me malum esse oportet . . . atque hunc telo suo sibi, malitia,
a foribus pellere (Plaut. Amph. 269)
I (A) bad (A) be (INF) is-necessary (IMP) and this (A)
weapon (AB) his (AB) RFL slyness (AB) from doors (AB)
drive-away (INF)

ìt is necessary for me to be wicked, and drive him away

from the door with his own weapon, slyness'
(18) suo sibi gladio hunc iugulo (Ter. Ad. 957)
his (AB) RFL weapon (AB) this (A) slaughter (1SG)
Ì'll slaughter him with his own weapon'
(19) cum sua sibi natione captivus (Min. Fel. 10, 6)
with his (AB) RFL people (AB) captive (N)
`he (=God) is in captivity with his own people'
(20) spatolam porcinam coctam concides cum sua sibi tergilla (Apic.
4, 3, 4)
shoulder (A) of-pork (A) cooked (A) will-chop (2SG) with its
(AB) RFL skin (AB)
`chop the cooked shoulder of pork together with its own
skin'
By the Imperial age (roughly from the 1st century A.D. onwards)
suus sibi also occurs in idiomatic expressions such as de suo sibi,
which can be regarded as representing the ultimate stage in the
grammaticalization process, in which the whole expression changes
its function, acquiring a different meaning, roughly paraphrasable
as `by itself' (cf. Svennung 1935: 640):
(21) a. habuimus . . . betam et panem autopyrum de suo sibi (Petron.
66, 5)
had (1PL) beet (A) and bread (A) wholemeal (A) by its
(AB.M.SG) RFL
`we have had beet and pure wholemeal'
b. de suo sibi fricabis (Apic. 4, 2, 27)
by its (AB.M.SG) RFL will-smear (2SG)
`you will smear it by itself'
c. suffundes ius de suo sibi (ibid.)
will-sprinkle (2SG) juice (A) by its (AB.M.SG) RFL
`you will sprinkle the juice by itself '
By the 1st century A.D., and even more so at later times, a weakly
pleonastic sibi also occurs with adjectives, with [+An] participants,
with the meaning `himself/herself ', as in sibi solus, sibi benemerens,
sibi pauper (cf. Pirson 1901: 174±5; Norberg 1944: 63±6; DahleÂn

1964: 193), at times alternating, with the same meaning, with the
phrases a se/de se (literally `by oneself') in the Inscriptions (cf. Pirson
1901: 174±5; Konjetzny 1908: 194±5) (for a different interpretation
of these phrases, see DahleÂn 1964: 194±5):
(22) a. sed solus sibi immotus Atreus constat atque . . . deos terret
minantes (Sen. Thy. 703±4)
but alone (N) RFL still (N) Atreus (N) stands and gods (A)
threatens menacing (A)
`but Atreus stands alone, still, and threatens the menacing
gods'
(23) a. marito sibi merentissimo (CIL XII, 3453)
husband (D) RFL very-meritorious (D)
`to (her) husband himself highly meritorious'
b. uxori a se merentissimae (CIL XII, 194)
wife (D) by RFL very-meritorious (D)
`to (his) wife herself highly meritorious'
c. uxori de se meritae (CIL XII, 2OO)
wife (D) by RFL meritorious (D)
`to (his) wife herself meritorious'
By this time sibi can also occur (though more rarely) with [-An]
participants (24) under the same meaning (`(by) itself '), equalling
the phrase per se (25), which is however the form most typically used
(also attested under the meaning ònly' (25d) during the 4th±5th
centuries A.D.), a usage which will become more common in later
centuries (cf. LoÈstedt 1911: 335; Svennung 1935: 316±8):
(24) nam scorpio sibi ipse pulcherrimum medicamentum est (Cels.5,
27, 5)
in-fact scorpio (N) RFL itself (N) excellent (N) drug (N) is
ìn fact scorpio itself is an eccellent drug'
(25) a. Medicamentum est etiam vel plantaginis succus per se, vel
marrubii cum melle incoctus (id.3, 22, 35)
remedy (N) is also either plantain (G) juice (N) by RFL or
horehound (G) with honey (AB) cooked (PP.M)
À further remedy is either plantain juice by itself, or a
horehound juice cooked with honey'

b. dandae erunt sorbitiones . . . modo per se solae, modo cum

rosa unguentaria mixtae (Marcell. 27, 22)
to-be-given (GERD.N.PL) will-be (3PL) drinks (N) at-
times by RFL themselves (N) at-times with rose (AB) of-
perfumier (AB) mixed (PP.N.PL)
`drinks are to be given at times by themselves, at times
mixed with perfumer's oil of roses'
c. vel ex vino aut per se datum (sc.puleium) (Ps. Apul. herb. 93,
15)
either in wine (AB) or by RFL given (PP.N.SG) mint (N)
`given (=mint) either in wine or on is own/by itself'
d. et ossa per se remanent (id. 130)
and bones (N) by RFL remain (3PL)
ànd only bones remain'
During the 3rd century A. D. sibi appears to have replaced the phrase
per se (that ends up also equalling the prepositional phrase ex se (`by
oneself') (cf. Svennung 1935: 360; DahleÂn 1964: 89, note 1) in its
canonical uses as well, denoting the lack of External Causation, both
when it expresses, with [-An] subjects, the spontaneous manifestation
of a process, as in (26), and when it indicates, with [+An] subjects,
that the subject performs the verbal activity with no external aid,
marking therefore a high degree of Control, as in (27) below:
(26) a. maturescit (sc.furunculus) enim per se atque erumpit (Cels.5,
28, 4)
ripens (boil) in-fact by RFL and bursts
ìt (=the boil) ripens of itself and bursts'
b. id (sc.ulcus) et per se nascitur et . . . (id.5, 28, 3)
this (ulceration) either by RFL arises or
`this (=the ulceration) either may arise spontaneously or . . .'
c. donec ea (sc. tonsillae) suppurent, et per se aperiantur (id. 6,
10, 15)
till they (N) (tonsils) suppurate (3PL.SUBJ) and by RFL
open (3PL.SUBJ)
`till they (=the tonsils) suppurate and open spontaneously'
d. sine amminiculo vitis per se stabat (Plin. nat. 17, 165)
without stay (AB) vine (N) by RFL stayed (3SG)
`the vine stood by itself without a stay'

(27) a. contra naturam est, quae pedes dedit, ut per nos ambularemus,
oculos, ut per nos videremus (Sen. epist. 55, 1)
against nature (A) is that feet (A) gave (SG) so-that by
RFLwalked (1PL.SUBJ) eyes (A) so-that by we (A) saw
(1PL.SUBJ)
ìt is against nature, that gave us legs for us to walk by
ourselves, eyes for us to see by ourselves'
b. dicens quod per semetipsa moverentur (sc.animalia) (Tert.
nat. 2, 3, 11; Corp. Christ. 1, 45)
saying (PRP.N) that by themselves (A) moved (3PL.SUBJ)
(animals)
`saying that they (=the animals) moved by themselves'
This `spontaneous' reading of sibi equalling per se (reported by
DahleÂn (1977: 15) as probably due to Greek influence) is already
attested in Itala (though apparently confined to adjectives denoting
change of state such as sibi mortuus (28a) and is quite common in 4th
century technical works (eg. Mulomedicina Chironis), and in Chris-
tian writers, with [+An] subjects (cf. Svennung 1935: 317; DahleÂn
1964: 116). It occurs in particular with intransitive verbs denoting
change of state (29) and location (30), with anticausatives (31) and
state verbs (32):
(28) a. ex carnibus eorum non manducabitis et sibi mortua eorum non
tangetis (Itala Lev. 11, 8, cod. Lugd.)
from meat (AB.PL) they (G) not will-eat (2PL) and RFL
dead (N.PL) they (G) not touch (2PL.SUBJ)
`do not eat their meat and do not touch their flesh if they
died naturally'
b. ut sibi mortuae (sc. haemorroidas) caderent (Soran. 2, 30,
83)
so-that RFL dead (N.PL) (haemorrhoids) fell (3PL.SUBJ)
`so that they (=haemorrhoids) fell spontaneously'
(29) a. genus vulneris qui sibi nascantur7 locis commissurabilis

(Chiron 52)
7
In this example the relative pronoun (qui) and the verb (nascuntur) do not agree
with the `logical' subject (genus vulneris), which is singular.

type (N) wound (G) which (N) RFL arise (3PL.SUBJ)

places (AB) of-joint (AB)
à type of wound that arises at joints'
b. qui et sibi quidem post unam horam sani fiunt (id. 502)
who (N) also RFL some (N) after one (A) hour (A) healthy
(N) become (3PL)
`there are also some that after an hour recover by them-
selves'
(30) ambulavimus nobis per heremum dies V vel VI (Anton. Plac.
Itin. 36, cod. G; Corp. Christ. 175, 147)
walked (1PL) RFL through desert (A) days five or six
`we wandered around on our own through the desert for five or
six days'
(31) a. tubergula . . . quae et per se erumpunt et sanatur sibi 8 (Chiron
364)
cysts (N)that (N) either by RFL arise (3PL) or heals RFL
`cysts that either arise naturally or heal spontaneously'
b. sed . . . si iam sibi laxaverint (sc. ossa), tunc ea educito (id.
58)
but if now RFL came-off (3PL.SUBJ) (bones) then they (A)
will-remove (2SG.IMPER)
`but, if they (=the bones) came off naturally, then remove
them'
(32) sedebam mihi super lactucam (Greg. M. dial. 1, 4; SC 260, 44)
sat (1SG) RFL on lattuce (A)
Ì was sitting on my own on a lettuce'
The `spontaneous' reading also occurs with some non-canonical
`middle' patterns (33), i.e., transitive structures where the surface
subject, [+An], has no Control over the verbal process, which is
portrayed as taking place by itself, rather than being carried out by
the surface subject or by an External Causer (for a detailed discus-
sion of `middle' situations, both synchronically and diachronically,
see Kemmer 1993; with reference to Latin, cf. Cennamo 1998b):
8
Notice the lack of agreement between the verb (which is in the third person
singular) and the plural `logical' subject.

(33) et non post multum solet (sc. iumentum) sibi refrigerare (Chiron
414)
and not after long uses (donkey) RFL cool-off (INF)
ànd after not too long it (=the donkey) uses to cool off by
itself'
The occurrence of sibi in (33) however, might also be regarded as

exemplifying the equivalence se/sibi, which, according to some
authors (cf. Salonius 1920: 273) is already well-established by the
4th century. This equivalence seems to involve, by this century
(though marginally), also the anticausative use of se, as in (34):
(34) liquamen modicum infundis ipsas turtures ut combibant sibi et sic

assas (Apic. exc. 30)
juice (N) small (N) sprinkle (2SG) themselves (A) turtle-doves
(A) so-that soak-up (3PL.SUBJ) RFL and then roast (2SG)
`sprinkle these turtle-doves with a small amount of juice so that
they soak up, and then roast them'
However, already from its earlier occurrences (dating back to the

3rd century A.D.) (e.g., in Sortes Sangallenses) and even more so
later on, sibi appears also as fully pleonastic, that is, it is no longer
weakly motivated, as in (28)±(33) above, but occurs in fully
grammaticalized forms, as in (34) and (35)±(37) below. Fully
pleonastic uses of sibi are attested in particular both with inherently
directed (35a±f) and non-inherently directed change of location
verbs (35g) (though apparently attested later with the latter), with
change of state verbs (36), and with state verbs, denoting either
location (37a) or relation (37b±e)
(35) a. vade tibi, fatue (Sort. Sang. 7,1)

go (2SG.IMPER) RFL silly (V)
òff you go, silly man'
b. et transite vobis habitatio Pulchra, confusa ignominia (Vulg.
Mich. I, 11)
and go (2PL.IMPER) RFL home (N) beautiful (N) bewil-
dered (N) shame (AB)
ànd go, your beautiful home is bewildered with shame'

c. vade tibi in propriam ecclesiam (Cereal. 20; Migne, PL 58,

768 B)
go (2SG.IMPER) RFL in own (A) community (A)
`go to your own community'
d. remitte (sc.veretrum):statim fugiet sibi (Chiron 681)
release (2SG.IMPER) (penis) soon will-slip-away (3SG) RFL
`release it (=penis): it will soon slip away' .
e. ecce hiems transiit, pluvia abiit sibi (Hier. epist. 18 B, 4; CSEL
54, 101)
now winter (N) went-away (3SG) rain (N) stopped (3SG)
RFL
`now winter has gone away, the rain has stopped'
f. revertatur sibi ad parentes suos (Ed. Roth. 216; MGH leg.IV,
53)
go-back (3SG.SUBJ) RFL to parents (A) his (A)
`that he go back to his parents'
g. ille solemniter sibi ambulabat (Formul. Tur. 30; FMK 34, 10)
he (N) solemnly RFL walked (3SG)
`he walked solemnly'
(36) dum optima Cartaginis antiquaque potentia sibi pugnando periit
(Fulg. aet. mund. 169, 14)
till great (N) Carthage (G) old (N)-and power (N) RFL
fighting (GER.AB) perished (3SG)
`till in the fight Carthage's great and old power perished'
(37) a. permissum est Paulo manere sibimet cum custodiente se milite
(Vulg. act. 28, 16)
allowed (PP.NTR.SG) is (IMP) Paul (D) remain (INF)
RFL with holding-in-custody (PRP.AB) he (A) soldier (AB)
`Paul is allowed to remain with the soldier who held him in
custody'
b. ostendit unamquamque in Trinitate personam . . . ipsam sibi
esse quod habere naturaliter preadicatur (Fulg. Rusp. epist.
14, 16; Corp.Christ. 91, 403)
shows each (A) in Trinity (AB) person (A) herself (A) RFL
be (INF) that (N) have (INF) naturally is-said
`he shows that in the Trinity each Person itself is, a fact that
is said to occur naturally'

c. quod hereditates paterna sibi sit legitima ad possidendum

(Lex Alam. 2, cod. B, 13± 4; MGH leg. sect. I: V, 66)
that inheritance (N) paternal (N) RFL be (3SG.SUBJ)
legitimate (N) for possessing (GER.A)
`that it is legitimate to possess one's father's inheritance'
d. sed sit sibi causa finita (Edict. Roth. 74; MGH leg. IV, 24)
but be (3SG.SUBJ) RFL contention (N) ended (N)
`but that the contention be over'
e. sit sibi contemtus (id. 43; MGH leg. IV, 20)
be (3SG.SUBJ) RFL despised (N)
`that he be despised'
During the Imperial age and later on sibi also occurs, though more
rarely, with perception verbs, in such idiomatic expressions as sibi
(male) sentire (`fall ill' (lit. `feel unwell'), where the surface subject
shares the Undergoer/Patient role of the subject of the classes of
verbs taking pleonastic sibi discussed above:
(38) a. cum male sibi senserint, ustulant se foco in stomacho
(Anthim. 3,6)
when bad RFL felt (3PL.SUBJ) burn (3PL) RFL fire (AB)
in stomach (AB)
`when they feel ill, they burn in their stomach'
b. posuerunt Gaianus et Eucharis . . . qui sibi senserunt III Idus
(CIL VI, 27556)
built (3PL) Gaianus (N) and Eucharis (N) who (N) RFL felt
(3PL) three Ides (G)
`Gaianus and Eucharius built (this tomb), who fell ill on the
third day from the Ides'
Generally speaking, pleonastic sibi does not appear to occur with
mental process and speech act verbs, with which it either marks
different types of Dativus Commodi or is restricted to idiomatic
expressions (eg. sibi lente dicere `to talk at a low voice' (cf. DahleÂn
1964: 132 ff)).

2.3. Non-canonical / Pleonastic se

As with pleonastic sibi, also for pleonastic se we can identify two
broad areas, one related to Transitivity (i.e., voice distinctions) and
one which can be regarded as the grammaticalization of contam-
inations occurring in the Vulgar language. (These, in turn, corres-
pond to two different paths followed by the reanalysis of the
reflexive in the course of time (cf. Cennamo 1993: 81±82; 1998b;
(in prep.) ).
We have already pointed out (section 2.1) that the usage of se in
Archaic and Classical Latin was rather restricted, in that it occurred
only in truly reflexive clauses and in anticausative patterns, with the
surface subject ( [+An], [-An], respectively) having Control over the
verbal process. At some point in Late Latin, roughly from the 4th
century A.D. onwards, but probably before then (cf. Wistrand
(1941: 67) for an uncertain example of passive se, dating back to
the 2nd century A.D.), se becomes a marker of External Causation,
the pattern acquiring a so-called passive value, as in (39) (cf.
discussion in Cennamo 1998b; 1998c):
(39) stercora si se post ex aggravatione stercoris provocaverint

(Chiron 230)
excrement (N.PL) if RFL then from burden (AB) excrement
(G) caused (3PL.SUBJ)
èxcrement, if it is then induced owing to the burden of the
excrement'
By the time of the occurrence of `passive' se, the reflexive appears
to have taken up some of the non-canonical `middle' functions as
well, as exemplified in (40a) (cf. also (40b), of the 6th century A.D.),
where the surface subject, though animate, is affected by the verbal
activity and the verb is resultative, that is, highly transitive:
(40) a. si quod iumentum caudam parietibus fricat, et exulcerat se, sic

curato (Chiron 717)
if some (N) donkey (N) tail (A) walls (AB) rubs and gets-
wounded RFL thus will-treat (2SG.IMPER)
ìf some donkey rubs its tail against the walls, and gets
wounded, you will treat it in this way'

b. cum male sibi senserint, ustulant se foco in stomacho

(Anthim. 3, 6)
when bad RFL felt (3PL.SUBJ) burn (3PL) RFL fire (AB)
in stomach (AB)
`when they fall ill, they burn with fire in their stomach'
Already by the 3rd-4th centuries A.D., and even more so later

on, pleonastic se is also attested with intransitive mental process
verbs mainly denoting emotion (41a-b) and later also perception
(41c) (cf. Compernass 1914: 108±9), with intransitive speech act
verbs with an emotional overtone (42) as well as with some
intransitive state verbs (often denoting location, either physical
(43a±b) or abstract (43c) ) (cf. LoÈfstedt 1933: 389±95; Norberg
1943: 159±70; DahleÂn 1964):
(41) a. ubi vades, paenitebis te (Sort. Sang. 2, 10)

where go (2SG) will-repent (2SG) RFL
`wherever you go, you will repent'
b. non desperans memetipsum sed spem multam habens effu-
giendi infirmitatem (Vulg. 2 Mach. 9, 22)
not desparing (PRP.N) RFL but hope (A) much (A) having
(PRP.N) escaping (GER.G) illness (A)
`without despairing, but having much hope to escape ill-
ness'
c. se stupuit tunc ipse reor (Ennod. Carm. 1, 9, 33; MGH auct.
ant. VII, 43)
RFL surprised (3SG) then I-myself (N) trust/be persuaded
(1SG)
`he was surprised, so I myself trust him'
(42) et tunc lamentabunt se omnes tribus terrae (Itala Matth. 24,

30 h)
and then will-moan (3PL) RFL all (N) people (N) earth (G)
ànd then all the people of the earth will moan'
(43) a. hic humor sudoris in ventrem se desidet (Chiron 220)

this bead (N) perspiration (G) in abdomen (A) RFL settles
`the beads of perspiration settle in his abdomen'

b. hoc facito, donec se vulnus ei insidat (id. 669)

this (A) will-do (2SG.IMPER) till RFL wound (N) he (D)
adhere (3SG.SUBJ)
`do thus, till the wound heals'
c. ut . . . neque quicumque clericus se illi adhaereret (Agnell.
112; MGH lang. I, 351, 12)
so-that neither whoever (N) clergyman (N) RFL he (D)
adhered (3SG.SUBJ)
`so that no clergyman will be devoted to him'.
d. priusquam se incipiat adparere ut cadat corporis tumor
(Orib. Syn.1, 3, 36 m. Aa)
before RFL start (3SG.SUBJ) be-apparent (INF) that fall
(3SG.SUBJ) body (G) swelling (N)
`before it starts to be apparent that the swelling of the body
will decrease'
During the 8th-9th centuries A.D., pleonastic se also occurs with
pure intransitive speech act verbs (eg., se periurare `perjure') (44),
and with intransitive activity verbs such as se vacare `deal with', se
contremulare `tremble', se obdormire `sleep', se pausare `stop' (the
latter already attested in the 6th century) (cf. Norberg 1943: 161;
165; DahleÂn 1964: 104; 1977: 33):
(44) si aliquis alicui imputaverit quod se periuraret (Lex Sal. 48, 2 k;
MGH leg. sect. I, IV: I, 187)
if somebody (N) someone (D) ascribed (3SG.SUBJ) that RFL
perjured (3SG.SUBJ)
ìf somebody blamed somebody else of perjury'
(45) a. aqu(a)e se contremulent (Ordin. Iudic. Dei, 4,1; MGH. leg.
sect. V, 648)
waters (N) RFL tremble (3PL.SUBJ)
`waters tremble'
b. vacabant se supradicti martires Christi die noctuque oratio-
nibus et ieuniis (Passio Kil. 9; MGH Mer. V, 725, 21)
dealt-with (3PL) RFL afore-mentioned (N) martyrs (N)
Christ (G) day (AB) night (AB)-and prayers (AB) and
fasts (AB)
`the afore-mentioned martyrs prayed and fasted day and
night'

By the 5th±6th centuries A.D., and even more so later on (cf.

Norberg 1943: 162±164), pleonastic se is also attested with transitive
mental process verbs, as in (46):
(46) a. anima mea speravit se quia mortem vel crucem pertimesceret
(Sermo de Conf. Diab. 107 v)
my (N) soul (N) hoped (3SG) RFL that death (A) or Cross
(A) feared (3SG.SUBJ)
`My soul hoped that he feared either death or the Cross . . .'
b. putabam me quia . . . (id. 111v)
thought (1SG) RFL that
Ì thought that . . .'
c. ut ea (sc. sua mala facta) aut de suis rebus redimant aut se
sciant si noluerint (Edict. Chilp. 7; MGH leg. II, 11, 29)
so-that they (A) (his bad actions) either with their (AB)
means (AB) ransom (3PL.SUBJ) or RFL know (3PL.SUBJ)
if wished-not (3PL.SUBJ)
`so that they either ransom him (from his crimes) with their
money or they (should) know if they did not wish . . .'
d. sciat se quia de ipso honore eum expellimus (Leg. Ratchis 1;
MGH leg. IV, 184,6)
know (3SG.SUBJ) RFL that from itself (AB) office (AB) he
(A) oust (1PL)
`he ought to know that we oust him from his office'
e. et si se recognoscere noluerit (Cod. Dipl. Long. 50; Schia-
parelli, 1, 170, 28)
and if RFL realize (INF) wished-not (3SG.SUBJ)
ìf he was unwilling to realize'
Also the occurrence of pleonastic se with transitive speech act
verbs is a late phenomenon, attested only by the 6th century (47),
but not well-established before the 7th±8th century A.D. (cf.
Norberg 1943: 165±6):
(47) multi . . . qui se fatentur tale aliquid numquam fuisse (Greg. M.
epist. 5, 11; Corp. Christ. 140, 277)
many (N) who (N) RFL admit (3PL) similar (N) something
(N) never had-been (INF)
`there were several people who said that nothing similar had
ever happened'

The spread of se to transitive mental process and speech act verbs

does not appear to be related to Transitivity, unlike its use with
middles and the intransitive mental process and activity verbs
discussed above (egs. (40)±(45). With these classes, in fact, the
occurrence of the reflexive pronoun can be regarded as reflecting
the dissolution of voice distinctions, that had probably already
taken place by the 4th±5th centuries A.D., whereby the R-form
came to be increasingly replaced in the vulgar language by the
analytic se/ (marginally) sibi + active verb, with all verb classes, with
analogy working in all directions (cf. Norberg 1943: 151±74;
Cennamo 1998b; 1998c).
Se + transitive mental process and speech act verbs, on the other
hand, seem to be related to contaminations between the two
different constructions these verbs entered into: the accusative +
infinitive and ut/quia, + subjunctive (cf. Norberg 1943: 163±6;
DahleÂn 1964: 138±40):
(a) scire (b) scire
promittere ut + subjunctive promittere + AcI
iurare iurare
dicere dicere
sperare (quia) sperare
This is clearly illustrated in (48) below:
(48) a. sciat se hoc esse redditurum (Lex Cur. 3, 17, 3; MGH leg. V,
338)
know (3SG.SUBJ) RFL that this (A) be to-return
(INF.FUT.A.)
`he ought to know that he will return this'
b. omnis homo sciat, ut hec (sc.legem) custodire debeat (id. 1, 1,
2; MGH leg. V, 308)
every (N) man (N) know (3SG.SUBJ) that this (A) (law)
respect (INF) must (3SG.SUBJ)
èverybody ought to know that he has to respect this (=the
law)'

c. sciat se ipse custor, ut ipsum reum presentare debeat (id. 9, 2,

2; MGH leg. V, 368, 8±9)
know (3SG.SUBJ) RFL this (N) guardian (N) that this (A)
culprit (A) bring (INF) must (3SG.SUBJ)
`this guardian ought to know that he has to bring the culprit
himself'
2.4. Equivalence se / sibi

Another aspect of the grammaticalization of the reflexive pronoun,
which is related to some extent to the pleonastic uses discussed so
far, is the equivalence between the accusative (se) and the dative
reflexive (sibi) that occurs at first in peripheral phrases such as per
se, ex se, per se sibi, where, as already noticed (cf. section 2.2.),
owing to contaminations taking place in the vulgar language, the
phrases ex se and per se become equivalent to sibi, denoting the lack
of External Causation (either marking the spontaneous taking place
of an event (with the subject being inactive, as in sibi mortuus, sibi
nasci) or indicating a high degree of Control of the surface subject,
meaning òn one's own', by oneself ', as in sibi ambulare. In Late and
even more so Medieval Latin the equivalences se/sibi become more
systematic, spreading from the periphery towards the core of the
categories, involving therefore prototypical uses as well, so that se is
used to mark the interest/benefit of the surface subject over the
verbal process, and sibi denotes the affectedness of the surface
subject (cf. Norberg 1943: 171±73).
According to Salonius (1920: 273; cf. also section 2.2) the
phenomenon is well-established by the 4th century A.D., and we
may regard it as responsible for the isolated occurrence of se vadere
vs (the usual form) sibi vadere in the Peregrinatio Aetheriae (49a) vs
(49b) (cf. LoÈfstedt 1911: 140; 1933: 391) and for the use of pleonastic
se with state verbs, as in se desidere, se residere, se inhaerere (50) and
so forth (cf also table 1) :
(49) a. et vadent se unusquisque ad hospitium suum (Per. Aeth. 25, 7)
and go (3PL.SUBJ) everybody (N) to lodging (A) his (A)
ànd let everybody go to his lodging'
b. = (35a) vade tibi, fatue (Sort. Sang. 7, 1)

(50) = (43a) hic humor sudoris in ventrem se desidet (Chiron 220)
The equivalence is well-documented for later centuries, when the

distinction between se/sibi is completely neutralized, affecting the
whole paradigm (in some texts) by the 8th century (cf. Norberg
1943: 171±2).
(51) qui sibi anxiant in stomacho (Reich. Antid.; Sieg. 44)

those-who (N) RFL torment (3PL) in stomach (AB)
` those who are tormented in their stomach'
Table 1. sibi / se as unaccusative/unergative markers
sibi combibere change of state verbs se combibere change of state verbs

sibi laxare (anticausatives) (se laxare) (anticausatives)
sibi sanari (se sanare
sibi perire change of state verbs se poenitere state verbs

sibi nasci se stupere mental process
sibi fieri se desperare (emotion)
sibi obdormiscere se confidere
sibi vadere change of location se lamentare speech act verbs

sibi discedere verbs (+ inher. direct.) se flere (emotional overtone)
sibi abire se plorare
sibi transire se periurare
sibi reverti se reclamare
sibi ire
sibi pertransire
sibi percurrere se vacare other activity verbs
sibi vagari (7 inher. direct.) se pausare
sibi ambulare se obdormire
sibi peregrinare se contremulare
sibi currere
sibi gradi
sibi manere state verbs

sibi stare (location/relation)
sibi sedere
sibi esse

(52) filius noster . . . contra voluntate parentum ipsius femine sociavit

sibi ad coniu gium (Form. Sal. Bignon.11; FMK 57, 20)
son (N) our (N) against will (AB) parents (G) herself (G)
woman (G) united (3SG) RFL in marriage (A)
Òur son married against the will of the woman's parents'
The exchange in function of the dative and accusative forms of

the reflexive is just another aspect of one and the same phenom-
enon: the slow erosion of the R- form, gradually replaced by se/
sibi. The accusative and the dative reflexive pronouns take up at
first different domains of the R- suffix, collocating at the opposite
ends of the continuum of Participation/Involvement. In Late
Latin, however, the dividing lines between the categories and
their functions increasingly disappear (cf. also Cennamo 1991;
1998b).
In particular, sibi takes up the inactive domain of the R-form,
gradually weakening its original meaning of Dativus Commodi
(where it was mainly confined to High participants, i.e., to animate,
human, wilfull entities) till it ends up marking the spontaneous
manifestation of a situation (whether action, event or state) regard-
less of the animacy of the surface subject. No External Causer is
either overtly expressed or implied (recall the difference between
iumentum se refrigerat and iumentum sibi refrigerat), and sibi is also
used with inanimate participants which have no Control over the
process (tubergula sibi nascuntur).
Se on the other hand ends up marking External Causation, as in
the so-called `passive' use of the pattern se + active verb.
3. Pleonastic reflexives and Unaccusativity

We shall now see how the pleonastic uses discussed so far relate to
the much debated issue of Unaccusativity, revealing its diachronic
relevance in uncovering a pattern of change which would otherwise
go unnoticed.
We can argue, in fact, that at some point in the course of time,
roughly between the 4th±5th centuries A.D., truly pleonastic se/
sibi come to differentiate two different subclasses of intransitive
verbs, corresponding to what are usually referred to in the

literature as unergatives and unaccusatives, i.e., they become

markers of Split Intransitivity. In particular, sibi occurs mainly
with verbs denoting change of state (alternating with se at some
point, though with a difference in Control for anticausatives),
change of location, states (mainly predicates denoting location and
relation). Sibi therefore ends up marking a Patient/Theme subject,
characteristic of change of state verbs, of processes denoting
change of location, and states. The accusative reflexive se, on
the other hand, occurs with anticausatives (where it can alternate
with sibi, though generally with a difference of meaning), with
intransitive (emotive) mental process and speech act verbs and
later on with other activity verbs.
Two parameters appear to be crucial in the patterns of active-like
syntax we are arguing for: the nature of the surface subject, i.e., its
Control (Animacy, Agentivity . . .) and inherent lexical aspect, in
particular the notion of Telicity, although also such features as the
Dynamic/Static, Concrete/Abstract nature of the situation described
by the verb appear to be involved, as illustrated in table 2.
In point of fact, a careful analysis of the verbs with which
pleonastic sibi occurs (see also table 1), shows that in many of
them the process is telic (that is, it denotes an event with an
endpoint/resultant state), as with intransitive verbs denoting
change of state (sibi perire), with anticausatives (sibi combibere)
and intransitive verbs denoting inherently directed change of loca-
tion (i.e., movement) (sibi vadere, sibi fugere). Also non-directed
change of location (i.e., atelic) verbs can take sibi (eg. sibi ambulare,
sibi vagari, sibi peregrinare) though they are apparently attested later
than inherently directed ones (e.g., sibi vadere, sibi fugere, sibi
discedere . . .) (cf. LoÈfstedt 1933: 389±96; DahleÂn 1964).
Sibi can also occur with state verbs denoting location and relation
(e.g., sibi manere, sibi stare, sibi esse), which are inherently atelic, but
where the surface subject has low or no Control over the verbal
process, being ìnert' or `neutral' (cf. Vincent 1982). Se, on the other
hand, occurs with verbs which are inherently atelic (mental process,
speech act and other activity verbs which have an Experiencer/
Agentive subject (though also attested with telic verbs such as se
poenitere) and with state (location) verbs such as se insidere, se
residere, se inhaerere, having a Theme subject. We can therefore say

Table 2. Hierarchies of Unaccusativity/Unergativity for Late Latin pleonastic reflexives
Unaccusativity Hierarchy Unergativity Hierarchy
High Low Low High
Change of state verbs Change of location verbs State verbs Mental process verbs Speech act verbs Other activity verbs
(inher. direct.) Location Relation
sibi perire sibi vadere sibi vadere sibi manere sibi esse se poenitere se desperare se lamentare se vacare
sibi nasci sibi fugere sibi sedere se stupere se confidere se flere se pausare
sibi fieri sibi abire sibi stare se plorare se contremulare
sibi obdormiscere sibi discedere se periurare se obdormire
*se nasci se reclamare *sibi vacare
*sibi periurare
(anticausatives) (non-inher. direct.)
sibi combibere/se combibere sibi ambulare se insidere se esse
(sibi laxare/se laxare) sibi vagari se desidere
(sibi sanari/se sanare) sibi peregrinare se adhaerere
situation: situation:
telic, dynamic, concrete, telic (inher. direct.) atelic, static, telic/atelic, dynamic/static, atelic, dynamic, atelic, dynamic,
atelic (non-inher. direct.) concrete /abstract abstract concrete concrete
dynamic, concrete
subject: Subject:
UNDG/Patient ACT/Theme UNDG/Theme ACT/Experiencer ACT/Agent ACT/Agent
-Control (+Control-antic.) +Control +Control -Control +Control +Control

that canonical uses of fully pleonastic sibi occur with verbs having
telic aspect and an Undergoer subject, denoting a dynamic, concrete
situation. Canonical uses of fully pleonastic se, on the other hand,
are attested with inherently atelic verbs having an Actor subject,
denoting concrete, dynamic situations.
The interplay of the parameters of Aspect, Control, Dynamic/
Static, Concrete/Abstract, enables us to locate the patterns under
scrutiny along a continuum of Unaccusativity/ Unergativity, illus-
trated in table 2. High unaccusatives are characterized by the
presence of all parameters but Control, as with change of state
verbs, having the features telic, dynamic, concrete, -Control. Low
Unaccusativity on the other hand is characterized by the absence of
the above-mentioned parameters, namely by the features static,
abstract, -Control, atelic (sibi esse), with intermediate points char-
acterizable as concrete, static, -Control situations, as in sibi manere,
or dynamic, telic/atelic, concrete, +Control situations (as in sibi
vadere, sibi ambulare). High unergatives, on the other hand, denote
atelic, dynamic, concrete situations with an Actor subject. More
peripheral unergatives denote atelic, static, abstract situations with
an ACTOR/Experiencer subject, as in mental process verbs, such as
se desperare. Intermediate points are instantiated by telic, dynamic,
abstract situations, as in se poenitere/se stupere.
Fluctuations in the use of se/sibi appear to occur at the periphery
of the categories of Unergativity/Unaccusativity, in particular with
state verbs denoting location/relation, that is with atelic, concrete/
abstract, -Control, static situations (e.g., sibi manere, sibi stare, sibi
esse vs se residere, se desidere, se inhaerere, se esse), so that we either
have alternations of the two forms (53a±b) (both of the 6th century
A.D.), or we find some intransitive verbs taking se, with others
taking sibi, all other features being equal, as in (43a±d) vs (37a±e)
above, a fact which might reflect the different historical paths
pointed out above (cf. sections 2.2±2.3).
(53) a. = ( 37b) ostendit unamquamque in Trinitate personam . . .
ipsam sibi esse quod habere naturaliter predicatur (Fulg.
Rusp. epist. 14, 16; Corp. Christ. 91, 403)

b. si quis vero . . . se fuerit. . . . qui contra hanc vindicione venire

aut resultare presumpserit (Form. Andec. 4; FMK 2, 27±28)
if somebody (N) in-fact RFL were (3G.SUBJ) who (N)
against this (A) purchase (A) come (INF) or reject (INF)
had-thought (3SG.SUBJ)
ìf there is somebody who thinks to act against or to reject
this purchase'
It is also worth recalling that the picture so far described is not

clear-cut, with fluctuations between se/sibi often occurring owing to
the equivalence of the accusative/dative forms of the reflexive in
some constructions and with some verbs, with differences which
might reflect not only the type of text considered (whether literary or
more vulgar), but also personal choices on the part of the author as
well as regional variation for early Medieval texts. These facts will
all have to be taken into account in trying to verify the hypothesis
put forward in this study, with a thorough-going investigation of a
wider selection of texts and statistical analysis.
Further research is also needed, in order to uncover the peripheral
points along the hierarchies of Unaccusativity/Unergativity, which
appear to be characterized, in their core instantiations, respectively,
by verbs denoting telic, concrete, dynamic situations with an Under-
goer subject, and by verbs denoting atelic, concrete, dynamic situ-
ations with an Actor subject, with Telicity and Control being most
relevant in determining the occurrence of se vs sibi at the core of the
categories. As we move away from the core, other parameters, such
as the dynamic/static, concrete/abstract nature of the situation
described by the verb appear to play a role, with their overlapping
for state verbs denoting location/relation, and the ensuing alterna-
tion of se/sibi.
Indirect further evidence for our claim also comes from the
concomitant active realignment of grammatical relations, the so-
called èxtended accusative' (Plank 1985; 1995, taking up a termino-
logy originally introduced by Moravcsik 1978). The term refers to
the use of the accusative in `subject'/pivot function, replacing the
nominative, well-attested by the 4th century A.D. with some of the
classes of verbs/patterns with which pleonastic sibi occurs, intrans-
itive verbs denoting change of state (54a), change of location (54b),

anticausatives (54c), equative structures (54d) (as well as passives

(54f) and impersonals (54g)) (Norberg 1944: 21±33; Pinkster 1985;
Plank 1985; 1995):
(54) a. nascitur ei genuorum contractionem et claudicationem
(Chiron 516)
arises he (D) knees (G) contraction (A) and limping (A)
`there arise contraction of its knees and limping'
b. si sequenter ipsum currit (Lex Alam. 94 E codd. A; MGH leg.
sect. I: V, 154)
if subsequently himself (A) runs
ìf subsequently he himself runs'
c. ille heres, cui talem servum in porcionem venit (Lex Cur. 2,
23, 5; MGH leg.V, 320)
that (N) heir (N) who (D) such (A) servant (A) in share (A)
comes
`that heir, to whose share such a servant falls'
d. ficum contundito . . . dum minutum fiat (Chiron 890)
fig (A) will-chop (2SG.IMPER) till tiny (A) become
(3SG.SUBJ)
`chop the fig till it turns into very small pieces'
e. totam curationem haec est (Chiron 526)
whole (A) treatment (A) this (N) is
`this is the whole treatment'
f. sardam exossatur (Apic. 9, 10)
pilchard (A) is-filleted
`the pilchard is filleted'
g. cum factum fuerit missam (Per. Aeth. 32, 2)
when done (PP.NTR) was (IMP.SUBJ) service (A)
`when the service is over (lit. one ends the service)'
Indeed, the correspondence between verbs/patterns taking sibi and
occurring with the accusative in subject function is striking: they
correspond to verbs/patterns usually referred to as unaccusatives/
class So verbs. Both changes, in fact, point to one and the same
phenomenon: the move towards active syntax, which manifests itself
in different domains of the grammar (cf. La Fauci 1991; 1994;
Cennamo 1995; 1997; Zamboni 1998).
It is difficult to outline the actual spread of pleonastic se/sibi

through lexical classes, in that the texts show their occurrence with
most of the afore-mentioned classes by the 3rd±4th centuries. We
may hypothesize, however, that the spread of se/sibi follows two
parallel, distinct paths along the continuum of Unaccusativity/
Unergativity illustrated in table 2.
In particular, sibi seems to proceed from intransitive change of
state/inherently directed change of location verbs to non-directed
change of location verbs and then states, i.e., there is a progression
from high to low Unaccusativity.
Se on the other hand spreads from anticausatives denoting
change of state to states (mainly mental process, though it can
also occur with location state verbs) and then to emotive speech acts
and other activity verbs, i.e., it proceeds from low Unaccusativity to
Unergativity.
By the 8th±9th centuries the two paths converge, and the
distinction between the two sets of intransitives gets formally
neutralized, due to the falling together of the dative and accusative
forms of the reflexive, so that the distinction is lost and se gets used
with unaccusative verbs and sibi occurs with unergative ones (cf.
Norberg 1943: 171±2; DahleÂn 1964, who discuss the issue within a
traditional framework). By this time there is no longer a distinction
between iumentum se refrigerat and iumentum sibi refrigerat, cicatrix
se sanat and cicatrix sibi sanatur, and one can also find se with verbs
that in earlier centuries only occurred with sibi (i.e., also with
unaccusatives) (e.g. se ire `go', se turnare, se reverti `go back'), and
sibi with verbs that most typically took se (e.g., sibi recognoscere
`recall').
This pattern of active alignment continues however in early
Romance, and is still apparent in the Romance languages, though
to a different extent.9
Confining our discussion to Italian, we can notice that, unlike
9
It is also worth noticing the following Spanish examples, where the occurrence vs
non-occurrence of the reflexive with some intransitive verbs appears to be a reflex of
the restrictions we noticed in Late Latin for the occurrence of sibi with intransitive
verbs denoting change of state:
iii. Juan se murioÁ (accidental death) `John died'
iii. Juan se murioÁ *asesinado
iii. Juan murioÁ; asesinado `John was murdered'

in Old Italian, residues of unaccusative sibi verbs are relatively

rare in contemporary standard Italian, cropping up however in
one of the classes of verbs sibi occurred with in Late Latin, i.e.,
unaccusatives denoting inherently directed change of location, as
in (55) below:
(55) a.Mario se ne andoÁ b.Mario se ne scappoÁ
Mario RFL away went (3SG) Mario RFL away ran (3SG)
`Mario left' `Mario ran away'
c. il bottone se n'eÁ caduto
the button RFL away-is fallen (PP.M.SG)
`the button has fallen down'
These forms are very common instead in some central/southern
dialects (e.g., in several Molisan varieties) and in the regional variety
of Italian spoken in these areas, clearly reflecting the dialect. Here
the reflexive occurs systematically with the same classes of verbs
with which sibi occurred in Late Latin, anticausatives, intransitive
verbs denoting change of state, and marginally, change of location
and (physical) state verbs as well, thereby identifying a subclass of
intransitives (for ease of presentation the examples are quoted in the
regional variety of Italian):
(56) a. s'eÂ partorita mia cognata' (change of state)
RFL is given-birth (PP.F.SG) my (F) sister-in-law (F)
`my sister in law has given birth to a child'
b. s'eÁ morto il calzolaio
RFL is dead (PP.M.SG) the shoe-repair (M)
`the shoe-repair died'
c. s'eÁ morta e poi s'eÁ risuscitata
RFL is dead (PP.F.SG) and then RFL is resuscitated
(PP.F.SG)
`she died and then she came back to life'
d. (me) s'eÁ passato il dolore
(I-D) RFL is gone (PP.M.SG) the pain
`the pain has gone away'

e. (me) se so' saltate le mattonelle del terrazzo

(I-D) RFL are (3PL) come-off (PP.PL.F) the tiles of-the
balcony
`the tiles on the balcony have come off'
f. ma quanto tempo si passa per fare questo sopraluogo?
but how-much time RFL elapse (3SG) for do (INF) this
inspection
`but how long does it take to do this inspection?
g. s'eÁ venuta bene la maglia (change of state/location)

RFL is come (PP.F.SG) well the jumper
`the jumper has come out nicely' (after washing)
h. s'eÁ finito il detersivo per i panni (anticausative)
RFL is finished (PP.M.S) the powder for the clothes
`the washing-powder has run out'
i. la ferita s'eÁ guarita
the wound RFL is healed (PP.F.SG)
`the wound has healed'
j. s'eÁ cambiato il tempo/tutto
RFL is changed (PP.M.SG) the weather/everything
`the weather has changed/everything has changed'
k. Giovanna non si vuole stare a casa mia (state)
Jane not RFL wants stay (INF) at house mine
`Jane won't stay with me/at my house'
This pattern, on the other hand, is impossible with unergative
verbs (*Mario s'eÁ lavorato ± Mario RFL-is worked (PP.M.SG) ±
`Mario has worked') (cf. Cennamo, forthcoming b).
4. Conclusion
The area of Late Latin syntax investigated provides further evidence
for the diachronic relevance of the Unaccusative Hypothesis,
pointing to the validity of semantic and syntactico-semantic
approaches to the phenomenon along the lines proposed by Van
Valin 1990; Sorace 1995.
The data so far discussed, in fact, show that at some point in Late
Latin, roughly between the 3rd±4th century A.D., truly pleonastic

se/sibi function as unergative/unaccusative markers respectively,

with sibi occurring with change of state, change of location and
some state verbs (mainly denoting location/relation), and se with
state verbs such as mental processes (emotion), emotive speech act
and other activity verbs (as well as occurring with transitive (mental
process and speech act) verbs).
In particular, an approach to Unaccusativity based on the
interaction among the parameters of Control, Telicity and other
inherent characteristics of the situations expressed by the verbs such
as their dynamic/static, concrete/abstract nature, allows one to
make more subtle distinctions within the unaccusative and un-
ergative classes, which in purely syntactic approaches are just
`lists' of verbs belonging to different subclasses (ergatives, raising,
passive . . .), all having in common a surface subject which is either a
D-structure object (Burzio 1986, among others) or an initial 2
(Perlmutter 1978; Harris 1982; Rosen 1981; 1984, inter alia). The
approaches we have outlined, on the other hand, allow one to
classify verbs as more or less unaccusative and more or less
unergative, according to the interplay of the parameters identified,
in a way that relates them to their Transitivity status within the
Transitivity continuum, i.e., along hierarchies reflecting the
transitivity characteristics of the verbs/patterns under scrutiny (cf.
Cennamo 1998a; 1999), and which partially express also the
diachronic development of se/sibi as markers of Split Intransitivity
(an issue that we leave for further investigation).
Dipartimento di Filologia Moderna,

UniversitaÁ degli Studi Napoli Federico II,
Via Porta di Massa, 1,
80133 Napoli.
email: micennam@unina.it
Texts
Acc. Trag.= Accius, Oeuvres (fragments), par J. Dangel, Paris: Les Belles Lettres,
1995.
Agnell. = Agnelli Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. O. Holder-Egger,
Monumenta Germaniae Historica , Scriptores Rerum Langobardicarum et Italicarum
Saec. VI-IX, I, Hannover: Hahnsche, 1878.

Anthim. = Anthimi, De Observatione Ciborum ad Theodoricum Regem Francorum

Epistula, rec. E. Lichtenhan, Leipzig: Teubner, 1928 (Corpus Medicorum Lati-
norum VIII, 1).
Anton. Plac. Itin. = Antonini Placentini Itinerarium, c. et s. P. Geyer, Turnhout:
Brepols, 1965 (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 175, Itineraria et Alia
Geographica [=Corp. Christ.] ).
Apic. = Apicii Decem Libri cui Dicuntur de Re Coquinaria et Excerpta a Vinidario
Conscripta, ed. M. E. Milnham, Leipzig: Teubner, 1969.
Caes. Gall. = C. Iulii Caesaris Commentarii Rerum Gestarum, ed. O. Seel, tom. I,
Bellum Gallicum, Leipzig: Teubner, 1961.
Cato Agr. = M. Porci Catonis, De Agri Cultura, ed. A. Mazzarino, Leipzig: Teubner,
1962.
Cels. = A. Cornelii Celsi, De Medicina, Libri Octo, rec. C. Daremberg, Leipzig:
Teubner, 1891.
Cereal. = Cerealis Episcopi, Contra Maximinum Arianum Libellus, Patrologia Latina
58, ac. J.P. Migne, 1862 [=Migne, PL] ).
Chiron = Claudii Mermeri, Mulomedicina Chironis, ed. E. Oder, Leipzig: Teubner,
1901.
CIL= Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin 1863ff.
Cod. Dipl. Long. = Codice Diplomatico Longobardo, vol. 1, ed. L. Schiaparelli, Roma:
Tipografia del Senato, 1929.
Colum. = Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella, De Re Rustica, ed. H. Boyd Ash, vol.
1 (Res Rustica I-IV), London: Heinemann, 1968.
Edict. Chilp. = Chilperici Regis Edictum, ed. G.H. Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae
Historica, legum II, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1965.
Edict. Roth.= Edictus Rothari, ed. F. Bluhme, Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
legum IV, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1965.
Enn. Trag. = The Tragedies of Ennius, ed. H.D. Jocelyn, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1969.
Ennod. Carm.= Ennodius, Carmina, in Magni Felici Ennodi Opera, rec. F. Vogel,
Monumenta Germaniae Historica, auctores antiquissimi, VII, Berlin: Weidmann,
1961.
FMK= Merowingische und Karolingische Formulare, hrsg von J. Pirson, Heidelberg:
Winters, 1913.
Form. Andec.= Formulae Andecavensis, in FMK., 1±11.
Form. Sal. Bignon.= Formulae Salicae Bignonianae, in FMK, 57±61.
Form. Tur. = Formulae Turonensis, in FMK, 33±40.
Fulg. aet. mund.= Fabii Claudii Gordiani Fulgentii, V.C., De Aetatibus Mundi et
Hominis, in Fabii Planciadis Fulgentii V.C., Opera, rec. R. Helm, Leipzig: Teubner,
1898.
Fulg. Rusp. epist. = Epistula XIV Seu Sancti Fulgentii Episcopi Liber ad Ferrandum
Diaconum de Quinque Quaestionibus, in Sancti Fulgentii Episcopi Ruspensis Opera,
c. et s. J. Fripont, Turnhout: Brepols, 1968 (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina
91).
Greg. M. dial. = Gregoire Le Grand, Dialogues, tom. 2 (Libri I-III), ed. A. de VoguÈeÂ,
Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1979 (Sources ChreÂtiennes 260 [=SC] ).
Greg. M. epist. = S. Gregorii Magni Registrum Epistularum, libri I-VII, ed. D.
Norberg, Turnhout: Brepols, 1982 (Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 140).
Hier. Epist. = Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae, pars I: Epistulae I±LXX, rec.

I. Hilberg, Wien: Tempsky, 1910 (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum

54 [=CSEL] ).
Hor. Epist. = Horace, E Â pitres, par F. Villeneuve, Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 19676.
Itala, Lev.= Leviticus, in Pentateuchi Versio Latina Antiquissima e Codice Lugdunensis
(Versione Latine du Pentateuque AnteÂrieure a Saint JeÂrome), par U. Robert, Paris:
Firmin-Didot, 1881.
Itala, Matth. = Itala, das Neue Testament in altlateinischer U È berlieferung nach den
Handschriften, tom. 1, Mattheaus Evangelium, hrsg. von A. Julicher, Berlin: de
Gruyter, 1938.
Lex Alam. = Lex Alamannorum, ed. K. Lehmann, Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
legum sectio I: V, Hannover: Hahnsche, 1966.
Leg. Ratchis = Ratchis Leges, ed. F. Bluhme, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, legum
IV, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1965.
Lex Sal. = Pactus Legis Salica, ed. K.A. Eckhardt, Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
legum sectio I, IV: I, Hannover: Hahnsche, 1962.
Lex Cur. = Lex Romana Raetica Curiensis, ed. K. Zeumer, Monumenta Germaniae
Historica, legum V, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1965.
Marcell. = Marcelli De Medicamentis Liber, ed. G. Helmreich, Leipzig: Teubner,
1889.
Minuc. Felix = M. Minuci Felix, Octavius, ed. B. Kytzler, Leipzig: Teubner, 1982.
Ordin. Iudic. Dei = Ordines Iudiciorum Dei, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, legum
sectio V, ed. K. Zeumer, Hannover: Hahnsche, 1963.
Orib. Syn.= Oribasius Latinus, Synopsis I±II, hrsg. von H. Mùrland, Oslo: Brùgger,
1940.
Passio Kil. = Passio Kiliani Martiris Wirziburgensis, ed. B. Krusch et W. Levison,
Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptorum Rerum Merovingicarum V, Hann-
over: Hahnsche, 1910.
Per. Aeth. = Silviae vel potius Aetheriae Peregrinatio ad loca Sancta (Itinerarium
Aegeriae), hrsg. von W. Heraeus, Heidelberg: Winters, 19233.
Petron = Petronii Arbitri, Satyricon, ed. C. Pellegrini, Roma: Ateneo, 1975.
Plaut.= T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, rec. W., M. Lindsay, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, vols 1±2, 1946±1950.
Amph. = Amphitruo, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol. 1.
Capt. = Captivi, in T. M. Plauti, Comoediae, vol.1.
Curc. = Curculio, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol. 1.
Epid. = Epidicus, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol.1
Merc. = Mercator, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol.1.
Most. = Mostellaria, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol.2.
Stich.= Stichus, in T. Macci Plauti, Comoediae, vol. 2.
Plin. nat. = Pline L'Ancienne, Histoire Naturelle, Livre XVII, par J. AndreÂ, Paris: Les
Belles Lettres, 1964.
Pseud. Apul. herb.= Pseudo-Apulei-platonici Herbarius, ed. E. Howald et H. E.
Siegerist, Leipzig: Teubner 1927 (Corpus Medicorum Latinorum IV).
Reich. Antid.= Das Reichenauer Antidotarium, in H. E. Siegerist, ed., Studien und
Texten zur fruÈhmittelalterlichen Rezeptliteratur. Leipzig: Barth, 1923.
Sermo de Conf. Diab.= Eine Predigt uÈber Christi HoÈllenfahrt, Sermo de Confusione
Diaboli et Inferni, ed. E.K. Rand und O. Key, 1906, Archiv fuÈr Lateinische
LexiKographie und Grammatik 14, 253±268.
Sen. Epist. = L. Annaeus Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistules Morales (Libri I±XIII), rec.
L. D. Reynolds, vol. 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966.

Sen. Thy. = L. Annaeus Seneca, Thyestes, in L. Annaei Seneca, Tragoediae, rec. Otto
Zwierlein, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 19883.
Soran. = Sorani Gynaeciorum, ed. V. Rose, Leipzig: Teubner, 1882.
Sort. Sang.= Die OrakelspruÈche im St. Galler Palimpsestcodex 908 (die sogenannten
Sortes Sangallenses), hrsg. von A. Dold, Wien: O È sterreische Akademie der
Wissenschaft, 1948.
Ter. Ad. = P. Terentius Afer, Adelphoe, in Publi Terenti Afri, Comoediae, rec.
R. Kauer et W. M. Lindsay, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1926.
Ter. Andr.= P. Terentius Afer, Andria, in P. Terenti Afri, Comoediae, rec. R. Kauer et
W. M. Lindsay, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1926.
Tert. Nat. = Q.S. Fl. Tertulliani, Ad Nationes, Libri II, c.et s. J. G. Ph. Borleffs,
Turnholt: Brepols, 1954 (Corpus Christianorum 1)
Verg. ecl. = P. Vergilius Maro, Eclogae, in P. Vergili Maronis, Opera, rec. R. A. B.
Mynors, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972.
Vulg. act. = Liber Actuum Apostulorum, in Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem,
rec. R. Weber OSB, tom. 2, Stuttgart: WuÈrttembergische Bibelanstalt, 19752.
Vulg. Mich.= Micha, in Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, rec. R. Weber OSB,
tom. 1, Stuttgart: WuÈrttembergische Bibelanstalt, 19752.
References
Andrews, Avery, 1985. `The major functions of the noun phrase', in Timothy
Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 1, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 62±154.
Bard, Ellen G., Robertson, Daniel and Sorace, Antonella, 1996. `Magnitude
estimation of linguistic acceptability', Language 72, 32±68.
Bassols de Climent, Mariano, 1945. Syntaxis Historica de la Lengua Latina,vol. 1,
Barcelona: Escuela de FilologõÂa.
Bennett, Charles E., 1914. Syntax of Early Latin, vol.2, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Burzio, Luigi, 1986. Italian Syntax, Dordrecht: Reidel.
Cennamo, Michela, 1991. `Se, sibi, suus nelle Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae
Veteres ed i successivi sviluppi romanzi', Medioevo Romanzo 25, 3±21.
Cennamo, Michela, 1993. The Reanalysis of Reflexives: a Diachronic Perspective,
Napoli: Liguori.
Cennamo, Michela, 1995. `Patterns of active syntax in Late Latin pleonastic
reflexives', in John C. Smith and Delia Bentley (eds), Proceedings of the XII
International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Selected Papers, Amsterdam:
Benjamins, to appear.
Cennamo, Michela, 1997. `Tra scritto e parlato: l'extended accusative' e le nozioni di
voce e di relazione grammaticale nel latino tardo e medievale', in Rosanna
Sornicola (ed.), Langue eÂcrite et Langue ParleÂe,, Napoli: Liguori, to appear.
Cennamo, Michela, 1998a. `TransitivitaÁ e inaccusativitaÁ in testi antichi abruzzesi e
napoletani', in Paolo Ramat and Elisa Roma (eds), 93±109.
Cennamo, Michela, 1998b.'The loss of the voice dimension between Late Latin and
early Romance', in Monica Schmid, Jennifer R. Austin and Dieter Stein (eds),
Historical Linguistics 1977: Selected Papers from the XIII International Conference
on Historical Linguistics, DuÈsseldorf 10±17 August 1997, Amsterdam: Benjamins,
77±100.
Cennamo, Michela, 1998c. `Classi verbali e cambiamento sintattico: la reinterpre-

tazione passiva del costrutto riflessivo', paper delivered at the XXXII Convegno
Internazionale della SocietaÁ di Linguistica Italiana, Budapest 29±31 October 1998.
Cennamo, Michela, 1999. ÌnaccusativitaÁ tardo-latina e suoi riflessi in testi italiani
antichi centro-meridionali', Zeitschrift fuÈr romanische Philologie 115.2.
Cennamo, Michela (forthcoming a). `Transitivity and argument marking in Late
Latin'.
Cennamo, Michela (forthcoming b). `Tracce di inaccusativitaÁ tardo-latina in alcuni
dialetti italiani centro-meridionali'.
Cennamo, Michela (in preparation). Transitivity and Argument Structure: a Dia-
chronic/Variational Study.
Centineo, Giulia, 1986. À lexical theory of auxiliary selection in Italian, Davies
Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 1±35.
Chierchia, Gennaro, 1992. `Subjects and Aspect', MS.
Compernass, Johannes, 1908. `Vulgaria' Glotta 8: 88±121.
Comrie, Bernard, 1989. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology, 2nd ed.,
London: Blackwell.
DahleÂn , Eric, 1964. Etudes Syntaxiques sur les Pronoms RefleÂchis PleÂonastiques en
Latin, GoÈteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
DahleÂn, Eric, 1977. Remarques Syntaxiques sur Certains Verbes Pronominaux en
Latin et en Langues Romanes, GoÈteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Dixon, David R., 1979. Èrgativity', Language 55, 59±138.
Dixon, David R., 1994. Ergativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dowty, David, 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, Reidel: Dordrecht.
Durie, Mark, 1987. `Grammatical Relations in Acehnese', Studies in Language 11,
365±99.
Feltenius, Leif, 1977. Intransitivizations in Latin, Uppsala: Almkvist & Wiksell.
Foley, William A, and Van Valin Jr., Robert D., 1984. Functional Syntax and
Universal Grammar, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grimshaw, Jane, 1987. Ùnaccusatives: an overview', Proceedings of the North-East
Linguistic Society 17: 244±58.
Grimshaw, Jane, 1990. Argument Structure, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Guerssel, Mohamed, et al., 1985. À cross-linguistic study of transitivity alterna-
tions', in William H. Eilfort, Paul D. Kroeber and Karen L. Peterson (eds)
Papers from the Parasession on Causatives and Agentivity, Chicago: Chicago
Linguistic Society, 48±63.
Haiman, John, 1983. Ìconic and economic motivation', Language 59, 781±819.
Haiman, John, 1985. Natural Syntax, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hale, Ken and Samuel J. Keyser, 1986. `Some transitivity alternations in English',
Lexicon Project Working Papers 7, Center for Cognitive Science, Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT.
Hale, Ken and Samuel J. Keyser, 1987 À view from the middle', Lexicon Project
Working Papers 10, Center for Cognitive Science, Cambridge, Mass,: MIT.
Harris, Alice, 1982. `Georgian and the unaccusative hypothesis', Language 58, 290±
306.
Harris, Alice, 1990. Àlignment typology and diachronic change', in Winfred P.
Lehmann (ed.), Language Typology 1987. Systematic Balance in Language,
Amsterdam: Benjamins, 67±90.
Harris, Martin, 1978. Àlternatives to the morphological passive in Romance',
Semasia 5, 65±87.

Haspelmath, Martin, 1987. Transitivity Alternations of the Anticausative Type,

KoÈln: Institut fuÈr Sprachwissenschaft, UniversitaÈt zu KoÈln (Arbeitspapiere N.F. 5).
Haspelmath, Martin, 1993. `More on the typology of inchoative/causative
alternations', in Bernard Comrie and Maria Polinsky (eds), Causatives and
Transitivity, Amsterdam: Benjamins, 87±120.
Hofmann, Johann B., and Szantyr, Anton, 1965. Lateinische Syntax und Stylistik,
vol. 1, Munich: Beck.
Jackendoff, Ray, 1990. Semantic Structures, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kemmer, Suzanne E., 1993. The Middle Voice: a Typological and Diachronic Study,
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Klaiman, M. H., 1991a. `Control and grammar', Linguistics 29, 623±51.
Klaiman, M. H., 1991b. Grammatical Voice, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Konjetzny, Guilelmus, 1908. `De idiotismis syntacticis in titulis latinis urbanis
conspicuis', Archiv fuÈr Lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 15, 299±351.
La Fauci, Nunzio, 1991. `La ContinuitaÁ nella diversitaÁ formale: aspetti di morfo-
sintassi diacronica romanza', in Vincenzo Orioles (ed.), Innovazione e Conserva-
zione nelle Lingue, Atti del Convegno della SocietaÁ Italiana di Glottologia, Pisa:
Giardini, 135±68.
La Fauci, Nunzio, 1994. Objects and Subjects in the Formation of Romance
Morphosyntax, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications.
Lakoff, George, 1977. `Linguistic gestalts', in Woodford A. Beach, Samuel E. Fox
and Shulamith Philosoph (eds), Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting of the
Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago: University of Chicago, 238±87.
Landgraf, Gustav, 1893. `Der Dativus commodi und der Dativus finalis mit ihren
Abarten', Archiv fuÈr Lateinische Lexikographie 8, 39±76.
Lehmann, Christian, 1988. `Predicate classes and participation', in Studies in General
Comparative Linguistics, KoÈln: Akup, 33±77.
Levin, Beth, and Rappaport, Malka, 1989. Àn approach to unaccusative mis-
matches', Proceedings of the North-East Linguistics Society 19, 314±28.
Levin, Beth and Rappaport Hovav, Malka, 1995. Unaccusativity at the Syntax-
Lexical Semantics Interface, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
LoÈfstedt, Einar, 1911. Philologische Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae,
Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell.
LoÈfstedt, Einar, 1933. Syntactica, vol. 2, Lund: Gleerup.
Merlan, Francesca, 1985. `Split intransitivity: functional oppositions in intransitive
inflection', in Johanna Nichols and Anthony C. Woodbury (eds), Grammar Inside
and Outside the Clause, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 324±62.
Mithun, Marianne, 1991. Àctive/Agentive case marking and its motivations',
Language 67, 511± 46.
Moravcsik, Edith A., 1978 Òn the distribution of ergative and accusative patterns',
Lingua 45, 233±79.
Norberg, Dag, 1943. Syntaktische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete des SpaÈtlateins und
des FruÈhen Mittellateins, Uppsala: Lundequistska Bokhandeln.
Norberg, Dag, 1944. BeitraÈge zur SpaÈtlateinischen Syntax, Uppsala: Almqvist &
Wiksell.
Perlmutter, David M., 1978. Ìmpersonal passives and the Unaccusative Hypo-
thesis', in Jeri J. Jaeger et al. (eds), Proceedings of Fourth Meeting of the Berkely
Linguistics Society, 157±89.

Perlmutter, David M., 1989. `Multiattachment and the Unaccusative Hypothesis:

the perfect auxiliary in Italian', Probus 1, 63±119.
Perlmutter, David M. and Postal, Paul M., 1984. Ìmpersonal Passives and some
relational laws', in David M. Perlmutter and Carol G. Rosen (eds), Studies in
Relational Grammar 2, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 126±70.
Pinkster, Harm, 1985. `Latin cases and valency grammar, some problems', in
Christian Touratier (ed.), Actes du II me CongreÁs International de Linguistique
Latine, Aix-en Provence: Publications UniversiteÂ de Provence, 163±86.
Pirson, Jules, 1901. La Langue des Inscriptions Latines de la Gaule, Bruxelles: SocieÂteÂ
Belge de Libraire.
Pirson, Jules, 1906. `Mulomedicina Chironis. La syntaxe du verbe'. Festschrift zum
XII Allgemeinen Deutschen Neuphilologentage, Erlangen, 390±431.
Plank, Frans, 1985. `The extended accusative/restricted nominative in perspective',
in Frans Plank (ed.), Relational Typology, Berlin: Mouton, 113±40.
Plank, Frans, 1995, Èrgativity', in Johachim Jacobs et al. (eds), Syntax. An
International Handbook of Contemporary Research, vol. 2, Berlin: De Gruyter,
1184±1199.
Ramat, Paolo and Roma, Elisa, 1998 (eds), Sintassi Storica, Atti del XXX Congresso
Internazionale della SocietaÁ di Linguistica Italiana, Roma: Bulzoni.
Rappaport, Malka, 1989. Ùnaccusativity and verbs of motion', Proceedings of the
2nd Symposium on English and Greek: Description and/or Comparison of the two
Languages. Thessaloniki: Aristotle University.
Rosen, Carol, 1981. The Relational Structure of Reflexive Clauses: Evidence from
Italian. PhD. Thesis, Harvard: University of Harvard.
Rosen, Carol, 1984. `The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical
relations', in David Perlmutter and Carol Rosen (eds), Studies in Relational
Grammar 2, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 38±77.
Salonius, Aarne H., 1920. Vitae Patrum, Lund: Gleerup.
Sapir, Edward, 1917. Review of Uhlenbeck 1917, International Journal of American
Linguistics 1, 82±6.
Siewierska, Anna, 1984. The Passive: A Comparative Linguistic Analysis, London:
Croom Helm.
Sorace, Antonella, 1993a. Ìncomplete vs divergent representations of unaccusa-
tivity in non-native grammars of Italian', Second Language Research 9, 22±47.
Sorace, Antonella, 1993b. Ùnaccusativity and auxiliary choice in non-native
grammars of Italian and French: asymmetries and predictable indeterminacy',
Journal of French Language Studies 3, 71±93.
Sorace, Antonella, 1995. Àcquiring linking rules and argument structure in a
second language: the unaccusative/unergative distinction', in Lynn Eubank, Larry
Selinker and Michael Sharwood Smith (eds), The Current State of Interlanguage,
Svennung, Josef, 1935. Untersuchungen zu Palladius und zur Lateinischen Fach- und
Volkssprache. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell.
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr., 1990. `Semantic parameters of split intransitivity',
Language 66, 221±60.
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr., 1993. À synopsis of Role and Reference Grammar', in
Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (ed), Advances in Role and Reference Grammar,
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and Randy J. La Polla, 1997. Syntax. Structure,
Meaning and Function, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vendler, Zeno, 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Vincent, Nigel, 1982. `The development of the auxiliaries habere and esse in
Romance, in Nigel Vincent and Martin Harris (eds), Studies in the Romance
Verb, London: Croom Helm, 71±96.
Wistrand, Erik, 1941. U È ber das Passivum, GoÈteborg: Wettengren.
Zaenen, Annie, 1988. Ùnaccusative verbs in Dutch and the syntax-semantics
interface' (Report no. CSLI-88±123) Stanford: Stanford University, CSLI.
Zaenen, Annie, 1993. Ùnaccusativity in Dutch: integrating syntax and lexical
semantics', in James Pustejovsky (ed.), Semantics and the Lexicon, Dordrecht:
Kluwer, 129±61.
Zamboni, Alberto, 1998. `Dal latino tardo al romanzo arcaico: aspetti diacronico-
tipologici della flessione nominale', in Paolo Ramat and Elisa Roma (eds), 127±
46.

Pleonasm

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pleonasm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

d:/1tps/97-1/cennamo.

3d ± 31/3/99 ± 9:36 ± disk/sh

Transactions of the Philological Society Volume 97:1 (1999) 103±150

LATE LATIN PLEONASTIC REFLEXIVES AND THE

# The Philological Society 1999. Published by Blackwell Publishers,

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

104 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 105

b. gopnyan geu-mat loÃn

directed, M=masculine, N=nominative, NTR=neuter; PL=plural, PP=past partici-

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

106 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

(4) a. sono partiti molti ragazzi

The presence/lack of these properties also differentiates the O

(5) a. i bambini hanno visto molti cartoni animati

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 107

e. *visti molti bambini molti cartoni animati . . .

Since Perlmutter's (1978) initial discussion, within Relational

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

108 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

of the argument of the verb and its initial syntactic relation, as

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 109

language, can be sensitive in different ways and in different degrees.

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

110 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

Figure 1. The Actor/Undergoer Hierarchy

Themes (with intransitive activity verbs of motion) can also be

(1990; 1993: 41±3). In particular, a Patient is a Participant which is highly affected by

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 111

ture levels are mediated by argument structure (cf. also Jackendoff

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

112 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

(a) Unpaired (monadic) verbs Unaccusativity Hierarchy

(b) Paired (dyadic) verbs

(a) Unpaired (monadic) verbs Unergativity Hierarchy

(b) Paired (dyadic) verbs

Figure 2. The Unaccusativity/Unergativity Hierarchies

aumentare `increase') and change of location verbs having an atelic

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 113

atelic situations with an Agentive subject, like the Italian lavorare

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

114 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

2.1. Canonical uses of se/sibi

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 115

over the verbal process, which is presented as taking place spon-

(9) a. neque herba nascetur neque lutamenta scindent se (Cato Agr.

Unlike se, whose occurrence is more constrained, both syntactic-

(10) Quid mihi Celsus agit? (Hor. epist. 1,3,15)

(11) a. erit ille mihi semper deus (Verg. ecl. 1,7)

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

116 transactions of the philological society 97, 1999

b. et id huc revorti uti me purgarem tibi (Plaut. Amph. 909)

Alongside the prototypical, canonical uses (some of which are)

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.

cennamo ± unaccusative hypothesis 117

(13) a. Quid igitur sibi volt pater? (Ter. Andr. 375)

Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.