Stativity and inchoativity: the case of estar constructions in Old Spanish

MANGIALAVORI RASIA, MARÍA EUGENIA; AUSENSI, JOSEP

Alcalá de Henares

Workshop; COPULAS WITHIN AND ACROSS ROMANCE LANGUAGES; 2019

Universidad de Alcalá (UAH)

Stativity and inchoativity: the case of estar constructions in Old SpanishIntroduction. We observe that in Old Spanish (hereafter, OSp) (data from Sánchez Marco et al. (2009) (hereafter, SM), Corpus Diacrónico del Español (hereafter, CORDE) & Corpus del Español (hereafter, CE)) the copula estar ?beLOC? combines with past participles (PPT) of verbs denoting change of state (1a) (e.g. crecer ?grow?, nacer ?be born?) and change of location (1b) (e.g. llegar ?arrive?, caer ?fall?, venir ?come?, ir ?go?, descender ?descend?) (COSL). Crucially, these combinations: (i)are unavailable in Modern Spanish (MSp) (as well as in further Romance varieties, either Old or Modern ones); (ii)yield stative predications with a strong locative flavor.(1) a. Allí está nacido el monarca.There beLOC.3SG born.PPT.3S the monarch?The monarch is there / You can find the monarch there.? (16th c., CORDE)b. Para la tanta nobleza que aqui esta llegada.for the much nobility that here beLOC.3S arrive.PPT.3S?For the numerous nobility that is here present.? (15th c., CORDE)Theoretic Starting Point. Maienborn (2007) claims that the widely-embraced set of statives actually comprises two kinds of stative predicates: Davidsonian (D-)Statives (e.g. shine, sit, stand, sleep), i.e. eventualities in the sense of Davidson 1967), and Kimian (K)-statives (e.g. know, want, cost, be intelligent, be tired), essentially differing in the presence/absence of eventive-like properties (Maienborn 2007; Rothmayr 2009, i.a.): Maienborn notes that only D-statives pass linguistic diagnostics for eventualities; e.g. possibility of serving as complements of perception verbs (John saw him sit/*be intelligent), possibility of combining with locative and temporal modifiers (John saw him sit on the beach/*know English at school) and manner adverbials, instrumentals or comitatives (John sat calmly/*was hungry angrily). While evidence mounts that distinctions internal to the stative type (D- vs. K-stativity) are necessary, finer distinctions arise within these subtypes. Namely, a novel class of D-statives (inchoative statives (INS)), has been identified crosslinguistically (Bar-el 2005 (Salish); Kiyota 2008 (Japanese); Choi 2010, Chung 2005, Lee 2006 (Korean)). In particular, Marín & McNally [MM] argue (2011) that reflexive psych verbs in MSp such as aburrirse ?be/become bored? and enfadarse ?be/become angry? denote INS, i.e. nondynamic left-bounded (Piñón 1997) predicates. Thus, while they may test as nondynamic verbs, they still show event-related properties?i.e. patterns typical of D-Statives, rather than (K)-Statives (2)?, a key property bearing on the inclusion of a reference to a left boundary marking the temporal onset of a state.(2) El profesor vio a Juan aburrirse / agobiarse en clase/en el trabajo.the teacher saw DAT Juan bore.INCH overwhelm.INCH in class in the work?The teacher saw Juan get bored/overwhelmed in class/at work.? (MSp)Proposal. We contend that: ●Combinations of estar and PPTs of COSL verbs in OSp also yield stative predicates with inchoative interpretation, yet crucially lacking event-related behavior (i.e., amenable to K-statives, vs. MSp INS (MM 2011)). (ii)In OSp. ●Such constructions are productive to the denotation of states referring to a left-boundary.●OSp data conform to the definition of inchoative stativity (Piñón 1997), while introducing a contrast with other INS in the literature (lack of D-stative behavior). This suggests that, within stativity, inchoativity does not define a uniform subclass with mixed state/event properties, and that inchoativity can also arise in full lack of eventive-like properties. If correct, two distinct types of INS need to be differentiated, based on presence or absence of event-related (D-stative) behavior.Evidence. Degree/time/manner modification is key in showing that the OSp constructions at the table denote pure states, but also that they do include reference to an initial interval at which a proposition x (i.e. state/location) is true. Accordingly, degree adverbials like tanto ?much? and mucho tiempo ?much time? (3) target not event progression over time, but rather starting point of a locative state, thus allowing to estimate duration of such a state (vs. COSL). Namely, mucho tiempo (3b) establishes a temporal interval with an identifiable starting point determined not by traversal of a path?as could be expected from the COSL denotation of the base verb?, but rather from a spatial situation which might conceptually relate to, but does not necessarily denote, a prior COSL event. For OSp INSs on verbs classed as COSL verbs like crecer ?grow?, left boundary is also seen in the productive combination with modifiers like desque ?since? (4).(3) a. jx anyos por que tanto sen stauan ya ydos quándo el nascio.ix years for that much INCH beLOC.IMP.3P now gone when he born.PST.3S?9 years, because they had not been there for a long time when he was born.? (13th c., SM)b. Es verdad que están traídos, pero no de mucho tiempo.is true that beLOC.3P bring.PPT.3P but not of much time?It is true that they are here, but this hasn?t been for long? (17th c., CE)(4) Pues desque esten ya crecidos algun poco, pongan-les susthen since beLOC.SBJ.3P now grow.PPT some little put.SBJ.3S-them theirrodrigones pequeñitos.beanpoles little.DIM?From the moment they are a little tall, provide them with their beanpoles.? (16th c., SM)Degree modification (e.g. much ?very?) further shows the lack of eventivity and incremental scalarity in these OSp constructions (in contrast to INS in MSp). Degree modification associated with multi-point (gradable) scales like mucho ?very? is perfectly natural with a punctual verb like llegar ?arrive?, which does not provide an incremental scale to measure on (cf. arrive #a lot). Rather, it brings out a purely stative (spatial) sense of gradability. Estar mucho llegado (5) (Lit.?be much arrived?), is thus interpreted as ?be very close? (i.e. a measure on space, rather than a transitional event/result state), Yet, the key contribution of this example is that degree modification shows even more clearly the lack of COSL denotations (event entailments). Superlatives are also accommodated under the non-eventive sense described, i.e. a purely stative (and spatial) sense of gradability (6). Modification related to potential duration (i.e. mientre ?while? in (7)) is possible but on a stative reading, i.e. establishing a temporal frame within which the homogeneous state holds. Note that such durative modifiers are felicitous even if the base verb is punctual (i.e. llegar ?arrive?), yet, under the characterization building on stative left-bounded predications, this otherwise unexpected pattern also falls out from stativity.(5) Tres fijosdalgo a otra table mucho están llegados vno a otro.Three hidalgos to another table much be-LOC..3P arrive.PPT.3P one to other?Three hidalgos at another table are very close to each other? (14th c., SM)(6) Esto conocen mejor los que más llegados están,this know-.3PL better the that more arrive.PPT.3P be-LOC..3Ppues participan más de la lumbrebecause participate.3P more of the light?This is better known by those that are closer, because they get more light? (16th c., SM)(7) Fizo lo soterrar mientre llegados estauan.made ACC bury while arrive-PPT.3P beLOC.IMP.3p?He had him buried while they were there? (13th c., SM)Moreover, the left boundary is crucial as it explains the distribution with existential haber, as opposed to the unambiguous delimitation of spatial and temporal anchorage typically seen in estar in OSp (cf. the inherently unbounded Todos eran Ricos quantos que alli ha (Cid v. 1215) ?They were all rich, the ones who are there? (Batllori & Roca 2011: 81-7).Conclusion. We advance that estar in OSp combines with PPTs of COSL verbs to describe an eventless stative situation including in its denotation the starting points of a homogeneous non-dynamic stage-level locative predicate. If correct, data argue against major generalizations in Spanish (e.g. estar (i) has increased grammatical functions over the years (some seem lost) and (ii) lost the resultative value in earlier stages (no resultative value here (Gulmiel et al. 2018)).