III. MORPHOLOGY.

88. The most important morphological developments are common to all, or nearly all, the Romance languages. They may therefore be ascribed, in their early stages, to Vulgar Latin, although direct evidence of their beginnings is scanty.

1. DECLENSION.

NOUNS.

89. (1) During the late Vulgar Latin and early Romance period neuter nouns gradually became masculine; this change was doubtless due in part to phonetic developments which obliterated distinctive endings: dōnum ＞ dọn, m.; nōmen ＞ nọm, m. Mare, however, became almost always feminine in Gaul: la mar. Some neuter plurals in -a, used mainly in a collective sense, were preserved and eventually became feminine singulars: fŏlium fŏlia ＞ fǫlha, f. sg.; lĭgnum lĭgna ＞ lẹnha, f. sg.; so luǫgua, pọma, prada, beside lǫc, pọm, prat (and, by analogy, grasa, beside gras ＜ gradus); similarly labia ＞ lavias, f. pl.

(2) Masculine and feminine nouns usually kept their original gender. Abstract nouns in -or, however, regularly became feminine in Gaul, other abstract nouns being mostly feminine in Latin: honōrem ＞ onọr, f.; sapōrem ＞ sabọr, f. With the exception of manus, which generally retained its gender, feminine nouns of the second and fourth declensions, unless they passed into the first declension (pĭrus ＞ pẹra), became masculine, to conform to the usual -us type: fraxĭnus ＞ fraisnes, m.; pīnus ＞ pins, m. Attracted by such words as these, arbor became masculine. There were some other less important shifts.

1. Juventus, passing into the second declension, became masculine (ioven); but we find also ioventut, f. Laus became masculine in Provençal; fin, on the other hand, is always feminine. Mĕrŭla ＞ merle, m. Correitz, linh, both m., occur beside correia ＜ corrĭgia, linha ＜ līnea. Other similar changes might be noted. Pr. dia (also di), like Latin dīes, is usually masculine.

90. Some nouns passed from the fourth to the second declension in the classic Latin period (dŏmus, fīcus); the rest doubtless followed in Vulgar Latin (frūctus,[82] gradus, manus). Fifth declension nouns in -ies went over, for the most part, to the first declension:[83] dīes ＞ dia, facies ＞ fassa, glacies ＞ glassa, rabies ＞ rabia; but we find also di, fatz, glatz (ratge is probably French), following the third declension type. Fifth declension nouns which did not shift to the first came to be declined after the model of the third (fides, res, spes). The five declensions were therefore reduced to three, presumably in Vulgar Latin times. Among these there were some exchanges: polvera, vergena; cf. § 89, (1), (2), 1.

91. The use of cases became more and more restricted in Vulgar Latin, prepositional constructions taking the place of pure case distinction. At the beginning of the Romance period, nouns probably had, in unstudied speech, only two cases in constant use: a nominative and an accusative or accusative-ablative. These two cases were generally retained in Provençal, for the second and third declensions, until the literary period: we may call them nominative and objective.

(1) The locative, which had almost vanished in classic Latin, lingered in Vulgar Latin only in names of places. It has left no sure traces in Provençal.

(2) The vocative, in classic Latin, was like the nominative for most words; in Vulgar Latin it probably disappeared, except in Church phrases, such as mī dŏmĭne. In Provençal we find the nominative regularly used in address (chanzọs, companh, emperaire, ioglars, Papiols), although the objective occasionally occurs in its stead (barọns pl., ioglar malastrüc, trachọr).

(3) The genitive, in the popular language, was little by little replaced by other constructions—commonly by the ablative with de or by the dative; the beginnings of this substitution may be observed as early as Plautus. Among Provençal nouns—aside from such learned forms as ancianọr, christianọr, companhọr, paianọr, parentọr—we find remnants of the genitive only in a few compound words, as diiǫus ＜ dīe Jŏvis, and in the standing phrase ẹs mestięr ＜ est ministĕrii.

(4) The dative, which in most words had the same ending as the ablative, came to be replaced, in the greater part of the Empire, by the accusative with ad; this construction, too, goes back as far as Plautus. Provençal nouns retain no traces of the dative.

(5) The ablative, after the fall of final m (§ 55, M) and the loss of quantitive distinctions in unstressed syllables (§ 21), differed little or not at all from the accusative in the singular of nearly all nouns: causăm causā, dōnŭm dōnō, patrĕm patrĕ, frūctŭm frūctū, dīĕm dīē. Furthermore, some prepositions (especially in) were used both with the accusative and with the ablative. It was inevitable, then, that the two cases should be confounded in the singular, and we have evidence of such confusion as early as the first century of our era; this led gradually to a substitution of the accusative for the ablative in the plural, the accusative plural being somewhat commoner and frequently simpler than the ablative. We may, therefore, take the accusative as the basis of the Provençal objective, remembering, however, that this accusative has been more or less blended with the ablative.

(6) The two-case declension remained theoretically in use in Provençal literature through the 14th century; but in texts later than the 12th, cases are often confused. From the spoken language the declension disappeared, in the west (as in Catalan), before the literary period; in the centre and east, probably in the 12th century; in the north, in the 13th. The case preserved was usually the objective, but sometimes the nominative. Some nouns in -aire -adọr kept both forms, with a differentiation of meaning.

92. In the discussion of declensions some phonetic peculiarities must not be overlooked:—

(1) In the nom. pl. of the 2d declension, a stressed ẹ, followed in the next syllable by final -ị, would regularly give ị (cf. § 27, 1); but the ẹ is preserved by the analogy of the nom. and obj. sg. and the obj. pl.: capĭllī ＞ cabẹl, mĭssī ＞ mẹs, quētī ＞ quẹt, sērī ＞ sẹr. We do, however, find cabil, and (perhaps by analogy) auzil ＜ aucĕllī.

(2) In the nom. pl. of the 2d declension, a c or g before the final -ị would regularly be palatalized (cf. § 55, C, G); but it is preserved from palatalization by the analogy of the other three forms: amīcī ＞ amic, lŏngī ＞ lonc.

(3) For the development of a t between a palatal or an n and a final s, see § 82, S: annos ＞ anz, fīlios ＞ filz.

(4) For the simplification of final scs, sts to cs, ts, see § 78, 2: ✱bŭscus? ＞ bǫcs, trīstes ＞ tritz.

(5) For the history of -arius and -tōrius, see § 23, 1 and § 73, Ry, 1.

93. (1) Nouns whose objective singular ended in s were invariable in the earlier part of the literary period; bracchium ＞ bratz, cŏrpus ＞ cǫrs, imperatrīcem ＞ emperairitz, fascem ＞ fais, latus ＞ latz, lūcem ＞ lütz, mĭssum ＞ mẹs, nasum ＞ nas, ŏpus ＞ ǫps, ŭrsum ＞ ọrs, pĭscem ＞ pẹis, pĕctus ＞ pęitz, prĕtium ＞ prętz, tĕmpus ＞ tems, vĕrsum ＞ vęrs, vīsum ＞ vis, vōcem ＞ vọtz. Later, however, a plural (originally obj. pl.) was made for such words by adding -es, generally at a time when final ts had been reduced to s (§ 64): brasses, cǫrses, mẹsses, pẹisses, vęrses; examples occur as early as the end of the 12th century.

(2) Other invariable nouns are midons, sidons, and often laus and rẹs; the last two sometimes have an objective lau, rẹ. Midons comes from the Church Latin mī dŏmĭne, which was popularized by the substitution of the Provençal don for dŏmĭne and the addition of the nom. -s; the term was transferred from religious to feudal, and thence to amatory use, and came to mean ‘my lady.’ Mi domina was common in Church Latin. Sidons is formed on the model of midons.

(3) For nouns in tš, see § 63, (1): ✱disdūctum ＞ desdüg, frūctum ＞ früch, gaudium ＞ gaug, nŏctem ＞ nuech. Such words were very often written in the plural with -gz, which was pronounced either ts or tš. The pronunciation ts is attested by such rhymes as malfagz: alumenatz.

94. Infinitives used substantively conformed to the 2d declension type: lauzars lauzar (like fǫcs fǫc), rire-s rire (like fabre-s fabre): see § 96. The same thing is true of masculine post-verbal nouns: (getar) gętz gęt, (guidar) guitz guit, (lansar) lans (invariable).

First Declension.

95. This declension came to include a part of the fifth and also some neuter plurals of the second and third. With the exception of dia (nearly always masculine) and of a few learned words, it contained only feminine nouns. As the nominative, accusative, and ablative singular early became identical, leaving only one form in the singular, the plural forms were reduced to one, the accusative crowding out the nominative; this substitution, which must have been begun before the Provençal period, was doubtless helped by the identity of nominative and accusative plural in feminine nouns of the third declension. Causa will serve as a model:—

causa＞ causa

causam＞ causa

causæ ✱causas＞ causas

causas＞ causas

1. Dia sometimes has a nom. sg. dias, following the example of other masculine nouns.

2. Many feminine proper names, in Gaul and elsewhere, developed a Low Latin declension -a -āne(m) or -a -ēne(m), as Anna Annāne. Provençal has few traces of this inflection. The word putana ＜?pūtĭda + ānem + a may be a remnant of it. Cf. Meyer-Lübke, Gram., II, p. 27; E. Philipon, Les accusatifs en -on et en -ain, Rom., XXXI, 201.

Second Declension.

96. This declension came to include the fourth. With the exception of mas, ‘hand’ (generally feminine), it contained only masculine nouns. The different types may be illustrated by fŏcus, dōnum, faber:—

fŏcus＞ fǫcsdōnum ✱dōnus＞ dọnsfaber＞ faure fabre fabres

fŏcum＞ fǫcdōnum＞ dọnfabrum＞ fabre

fŏcī＞ fǫcdōna ✱dōnī＞ dọnfabrī＞ fabre

fŏcos＞ fǫcsdōna ✱dōnos＞ dọnsfabros＞ fabres

For the c of fŏcī, see § 92, (2). For ✱dŏnus, etc., see § 89 (1). Nom. fabre is due to the analogy of the other three cases; the s of fabres is borrowed from the prevailing fǫcs type.

1. Neuters which long preserved their gender often have no -s in the nom. sg.: segle or segles. Nouns in -age from -aticum commonly have no -s: corage, damnage, message, senhorage; but forms with -s occur also. Learned nouns in -i from -ium regularly have no -s: breviari, emperi, iuzizi, testimoni. Post-verbal nouns, on the other hand, usually take the nom. -s: albires, blasme-s, consires, desires (cf. § 94). By the analogy of the fabre-s, segle-s, blasme-s types, many masculines in -e sometimes drop the -s: clergue-s, diable-s, morgue-s, oncle-s, poble-s. Maestre, prestre regularly have no -s.

2. Most proper names are declined like common nouns: Arnautz Arnaut, Boecis Boeci, Enrics Enric, Lozoics Lozoic, Peire-s Peire. Many proper names, however, developed in Gaul and elsewhere, from the 9th century on, a Low Latin declension -us -ōne(m), as Petrus Petrōnis (cf. § 95, 2): hence Carle-s Carló, Peire-s Peiró, etc.; so Bergonhs Bergonhó, etc.

3. Mas, being usually feminine, has a nom. pl. mas.

4. For pagadi, salvi, soli, etc., and beill, peccah, efanh, etc., see § 51, 1.

Third Declension.

97. This declension absorbed a part of the fifth: cf. § 90.

98. Nouns whose stem was different in the nominative and the accusative singular, reconstructed the nominative to correspond to the accusative, the new form being similar to the original genitive: papĭlio papiliōnem ＞ papiliōnis papiliōnem, pēs pĕdem ＞ pĕdis pĕdem. The change began in the Vulgar Latin period. Exceptions to the rule are names of persons, unless they ended in -ans or -ens: nĕpos nepōtem ＞ nęps nebọt; but amans amantem ＞ ✱amantis amantem ＞ amáns amán.

1. Carnis for caro is used by classic writers. Grūis for grūs occurs in the Appendix Probi III, belonging perhaps to the 3d century. Papiliōnis, pĕdis, travis = trabs, and some others are found in the 8th century Glossary of Reichenau.

99. Masculine nouns of the third declension, early in the Provençal period, made their nominative plural conform to the second declension type, thus distinguishing it from the objective plural: pater patrem patres patres ＞ paire paire paire paires (cf. Old French and Italian). Feminines, on the other hand, kept the nominative plural in -s: mater matrem matres matres ＞ maire maire maires maires.

100. A few neuter nouns, becoming masculine in Vulgar Latin, developed distinctively masculine forms in the singular: gĕnus gĕnus ＞ ✱gĕneris ✱gĕnĕrem ＞ genres genre; so fŭlgur (＞ fŭlger) ＞ ✱fŭlgĕrem ＞ fọuzer. Most neuters, however, kept in the singular their original stem: sēmen ＞ sẹm, tĕmpus ＞ tems. But those in -men regularly, and those in -r sometimes, took an -s in the nominative singular: flūmen flūmen ＞ flüms flüm, marmor marmor ＞ marme-s marme; cǫr, in the literary language, usually has no nominative -s. In the plural most neuters brought their forms into harmony with the masculine type, but those in -us kept the -s throughout: (caput >) capus ✱capum capĭta capĭta ＞ caps cap cap caps, cŏr cŏr cŏrda cŏrda ＞ cǫr cǫr cǫr cǫrs, nōmen nōmen nōmĭna nōmĭna ＞ nọms nọm nọm nọms; but cŏrpus cŏrpus cŏrpŏra cŏrpŏra ＞ cǫrs cǫrs cǫrs cǫrs. Mare, becoming feminine, was declined thus: mars mar mars mars.

1. Gĕnus also became ges, which was used as an adverb.

101. The third declension comprises three principal types: (1) nouns which in Latin had no difference of stem or of accent between the nominative and the accusative singular; (2) those which had a difference of stem but not of accent; (3) those which had a difference of accent.

(1) Nouns with no difference of stem or of accent:—

MASCULINE

canis＞ caspater＞ paire-ssōl＞ sọ-s

canem＞ capatrem＞ pairesōlem＞ sọ

canes＞ capatres＞ pairesōles＞ sọl

canes＞ caspatres＞ pairessōles＞ sọls

FEMININE

fīnis[84]＞ fismater＞ mairefĭdes＞ fẹs

fīnem＞ fimatrem＞ mairefĭdem＞ fẹ

fīnes＞ fismatres＞ mairesfĭdes＞ fẹs

fīnes＞ fismatres＞ mairesfĭdes＞ fẹs

1. Masculine nouns of this type which etymologically had no -s in the nom. sg., often took one, even in the earliest times.

2. Laus and res were often invariable, but were sometimes declined like sols and fes.

(2) Nouns with a difference of stem but not of accent:—

MASCULINEFEMININENEUTER

pōns ✱pŏntis＞ ponzpars ✱partis＞ partzlūmen＞ lüm-s

pŏntem＞ ponpartem＞ partlūmen＞ lüm

pŏntes＞ ponpartes＞ partzlūmĭna＞ lüm

pŏntes＞ ponzpartes＞ partzlūmĭna＞ lüms

NAMES OF PERSONS

cŏmes＞ comshŏmo＞ om

cŏmĭtem＞ comtehŏmĭnem＞ ome omne[85]

cŏmĭtes＞ comtehŏmĭnes＞ ome omne

cŏmĭtes＞ comteshŏmĭnes＞ omes omnes

1. For other neuter types, see § 100.

2. Om later developed an inflection oms om om oms.

3. Lex, rex became leis lei leis leis, reis rei rei reis.

(3) Nouns with a difference of accent:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

sĕrmo ✱sermōnis＞ sermọsratio ✱ratiōnis＞ razǫs

sermōnem＞ sermọratiōnem＞ razọ

sermōnes＞ sermọratiōnes＞ razọs

sermōnes＞ sermọsratiōnes＞ razọs

NAMES OF PERSONS IN -ANS, -ENS

amans ✱amantis＞ amánsparens ✱parĕntis＞ paréns

amantem＞ amánparĕntem＞ parén

amantes＞ amán (f. amáns)parĕntes＞ parén (f. paréns)

amantes＞ amánsparĕntes＞ paréns

NAMES OF PERSONS NOT IN -ANS, -ENS

amātor＞ amairesĕnior＞ sęnhermŭlier＞ mọler

amatōrem＞ amadọrseniōrem＞ senhọrmuliĕ́rem[86]＞ molhęr

amatōres＞ amadọrseniōres＞ senhọrmuliĕ́res＞ molhęrs

amatōres＞ amadọrsseniōres＞ senhọrsmuliĕ́res＞ molhęrs

servītor＞ servirebaro＞ barsŏror＞ sǫrre sǫr[87]

servitōrem＞ servidọrbarōnem＞ barọsorōrem＞ sorọr

servitōres＞ servidọrbarōnes＞ barọsorōres＞ sorọrs

servitōres＞ servidọrsbarōnes＞ barọssorōres＞ sorọrs

1. After the same pattern as senher, we have pastor pastōrem ＞ pastre pastór, etc.; after the bar pattern, ✱companio (Einf., § 43) ✱companiōnem ＞ companh companhó, ✱fĭllo (Körting) ✱fillōnem? ＞ fel feló, glŭtto (= glūto) gluttōnem ＞ glot glotó, latro latrōnem ＞ laire lairó, lĕo (treated like the name of a person) leōnem ＞ leu leó, etc. On the model of amaire, servire, we find trobaire trobadór, etc., iauzire iauzidór, etc.; and, for the second and third conjugations, teneire tenedór, etc., beveire bevedór, etc. The inflection of such words became much confused, and some of them eventually developed double declensions: bars bar bar bars, barós baró baró barós; emperaires emperaire emperaire emperaires, emperadórs emperadór emperadór emperadórs. Some proper names follow the bar model: Bret Bretó, Folc-s (Folques) Folcó (later Folcós Folcó), Gasc Gascó, Uc Ugó, (later Ucs Uc); cf. § 96, 2.

ADJECTIVES.

102. What has been said concerning the inflection of nouns applies also to adjectives: see §§ 91-101. For pronominal adjectives see §§ 114 ff.

1. The operation of phonetic laws sometimes results in a difference in stem between the m. and the f.: bos bona, larcs larga, nutz nuda, preon preonda; mut muda, prezat prezada. For pauc pauca, rauc rauca, see § 65, C, 1. For -arius -aria, -tōrius -tōria, see § 23, 1; § 73, Ry, 1.

2. Adjectives in -s or -š are undeclinable in the m. sg.: glorios, perfieg. Those in -s originally had no inflectional ending in the m. pl., but later they sometimes added -es: divers diverses, frances franceses. For the pl. of those in š, see § 93, (3).

103. We must recognize two classes of adjectives: (1) those which in Latin distinguish the feminine from the masculine; (2) those which do not.

1. Adjectives like acer, which, though inflected after the 3d declension type, could distinguish the m. from the f. in the nom. sg., fell into one or the other—usually the first—of the following classes (agre agra, alegre alegra; terrestre terrestre).

(1) Masculine and feminine different:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

bĕllus＞ bęlsbĕlla＞ bęlla

bĕllum＞ bęlbĕllam＞ bęla

bĕlli＞ bęlbĕllæ ✱beĕllas＞ bęlas

bĕllos＞ bęlsbĕllas＞ bęlas

pauper＞ paubre-spaupĕra＞ paubra

paupĕrum＞ paubrepaupĕram＞ paubra

paupĕi＞ paubrepaupĕræas＞ paubras

paupĕros＞ paubrespaupĕras＞ paubras

(2) Masculine and feminine alike:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

gentīlis＞ gentilsgentīlis＞ gentils

gentīlem＞ gentilgentīlem＞ gentil

gentīles＞ gentilgentīles＞ gentils

gentīles＞ gentilsgentīles＞ gentils

1. Some adjectives of the second class were attracted into the first either in Vulgar Latin or in Provençal; this happened to all adjectives in -és, -able, -ible, and also to comun, dous, fol, freble, graile, len, mol, noble, paubre (early), rude, trist: cortes cortesa, durable durabla; comuna, doussa, etc. Some kept both inflections: dolens, dolens or dolenta; grans, grans or granda, etc.

104. In impersonal constructions we frequently find a nominative singular without -s, which is apparently a survival of the Latin neuter: m’es bel (greu, parven, semblan, etc.) que.… But the form with -s sometimes occurs in the same constructions: m’es greus que.…

1. For es mestier, see § 91, (3).

105. Most adverbs of manner were formed by adding -men (-ment, -mens, or -menz) to the feminine singular of the adjective: belamen. These adverbs were originally ablative phrases: serēna mĕnte, etc. In Provençal the specific meaning of the -men was forgotten, but the two parts might still be separated by an intervening word: ẹpsa… ment. When two adverbs in -men were used together, the ending was generally affixed to only one, oftener the first. Bona and mala could be used as adverbs without the suffix.

1. For the adverbial ending -s, see § 82, S, 3.

Comparison.

106. Adjectives and adverbs regularly formed their comparative by prefixing plüs to the positive, and their superlative by prefixing the definite article to the comparative: cara, plüs cara, la plüs cara. This method of comparison goes back to Vulgar Latin times.

1. ‘Than’ is expressed by que and de.

107. Some adjectives preserved their old comparative in -ior. These comparatives had an inflection similar to that of sęnher: cf. § 101, (3) and § 101, (3), 1.

POSITIVECOMPARATIVE

altus:aut——aussọr

✱bellātus = bĕllus:——bellaire bellázer-sbellazọr

gĕnĭtus:gengénser-sgensọr

✱grĕvis = gravis:gręugręuger——

grŏssus:grǫsgruęysser——

laið:lailáiger——

largus:larc——largọr

lĕvis:lęulęuger——

lŏngus:lonc——lonhọr

(grandis):(gran)máiermaiọr

(bŏnus):(bon)męlhermelhọr

(paucus):(pauc)mẹnre-smenọr

nūgālis:————nüalhọr

(malus):(mal)pęierpeiọr

(mŭltus):(mọlt)——plüsọr[88]

sŏrdĭdus:sordesordẹiersordeiọr

108. The following neuter comparatives were used as adverbs: gensẹis gensẹs gensẹtz (＜ génser influenced by longẹis, sordẹis); longẹis longẹitz ＜?✱longĭtius (＜ longĭter + lŏngius); mais ＜ magis; męlhs ＜ mĕlius; mẹns ＜ mĭnus; pęitz ＜ pĕjus; sordẹis ＜ sordĭdius; viatz ＜ vivacius. Mais, męlhs, mẹns, pęitz were used also as neuter pronouns. Viatz lost its comparative sense.

109. A few adjectives, most or all of them learned, preserved the old superlative form with an intensive sense: altisme, carisme, pęsme, prǫsme, santisme.

Numerals.

110. The cardinal numerals are:—

ün

dọs

trẹs

quatre

cinc

sęis

sęt

uęg

nǫu

dętz

ọnze

dọtze

trẹtze

quatọrze

quinze

sętze, sędze

dętz e sęt

dętz e uęg

dętz e nǫu

vint, vin

vint e ün

vint e dọs

trẹnta

quaranta

cinquanta

sessanta

setanta

quatre vint

nonanta

cent, cen

dozent

tresent

quatre cen

cinc cens (de)

mil

dọs milia

trẹs melia

quatre mila

cinc millięrs (de)

cent miria

111. The first two numbers were inflected as follows:—

ü(n)s ünadüi dọidọas dọs

ü(n) ünadọs (düi)dọas dọs

Düi dọi are from Vulgar Latin dŭī = dŭo; dọs is from dŭos, dọas from dŭas. Trẹs has a form trẹi (originally nom. m.), patterned after düi, and a form trẹis, which seems to be a cross between trẹs and trẹi. For the dialect forms of ọnze—sętze, see § 76, (1), Ndc´, and § 80, Dc´. Cen, multiplied by another number, took a plural form when used substantively; when used adjectively, it generally did not, but we find dozentas with a feminine noun. Mil had four plurals, milia miria melia mila; millięrs is a noun.

1. As an example of a longer compound numeral, we have cen e quatre vint e ueg.

2. From ambo we have the obj. forms, m. and f., ams, ambas. Ambo combined with dŭī (dŭos dŭas), and perhaps influenced by Pr. ab (§ 65, P, 2), had this inflection:

amduianduiabduiambeduiamdoas

amdosandosabdosambedosamdoas

112. The ordinal numerals had separate forms for the two genders; the masculine forms followed the second declension type, the feminine forms, the first declension. After 5th, they were made by adding to the cardinal numeral the originally distributive ending -ēnus -ēna.

primięr, primięra

segọn(t), segọnda

tęrz, tęrza

quart, quarta

quint, quinta

seizẹ(n), seizẹna

setẹ(n), setẹna

ochẹ(n), ochẹna

novẹ(n), novẹna

dezẹ(n), dezẹna

onzẹ(n), onzẹna

dozẹ(n), dozẹna

vintẹ(n), vintẹna

centẹ(n), centẹna

milẹ(n), milẹna

113. Beside primięr we find premięr prümier promięr (§ 44, 1, 3), and also prim and primeiran; for the developments of the ending -ięr, see § 23, 1 and § 73, Ry, 1. Tęrz, tęrza regularly became tęrs, tęrsa (§ 73, Rty). Such forms as secọnda, tęrcia, sęxta, octava, nọna, dęcima are learned.

1. As an example of a compound ordinal numeral, we have vintena tersa.

PRONOUNS.

114. Under this head will be treated not only pronouns and pronominal adjectives, but also articles.

115. In popular Latin the personal, possessive, and demonstrative pronouns and adjectives had two sets of forms, according as they were accented or unaccented (§ 19). Ille, when stressed and used pronominally, became a disjunctive personal pronoun of the third person; when unstressed and used pronominally, it furnished the conjunctive forms of the third person; when unstressed and used adjectively, it developed into a definite article. Ipse had similar uses. These differentiations must have begun in Vulgar Latin times.

116. The declension of ĭlle was considerably altered in Vulgar Latin. The neuter ĭllud disappeared, being replaced by ĭlium. Through the influence of quī cūjus cūī, ✱ĭllī illūjus[89] illūī[89] came to be used beside ĭlle illīus ĭllī. The feminine had, beside illīus ĭllī, a genitive and dative ĭllæ; through the analogy of illūjus illūī, ĭllæ was expanded into illæjus[89] illæi.[89] Illīus then went out of use. In the plural, illōrum (which in some regions, by the analogy of illūjus illūī, had a form ✱illūrum) crowded out illārum; this illōrum came to be used also as a dative.

Ipse and ĭste followed in the main the same course as ĭlle.

Articles.

117. The indefinite article comes from ūnus, which seems to have been occasionally so used even in classic Latin:—

ü(n)süna

ü(n)üna

118. (1) The definite article comes from unaccented ĭlle, which, being used as a proclitic, regularly lost its first syllable (§ 19). Ille (✱ĭllī), ĭllum, ĭllī, ĭllos, ĭlla, ĭllas became respectively le (li), lo, li or lhi,[90] los, la, las. Le, lo, li, lhi, la frequently elided their vowel before another vowel (l’an, l’arma), becoming l or lh. Furthermore, le, lo, li, lhi, los, in the intertonic position after a vowel (vé lo páire), regularly lost their vowel (vẹl páire)[91]; and, by analogy, la and las were sometimes reduced to l and ls. We have, then, beside the full forms, the proclitics l, lh, and the enclitics l, lh, ls. Inasmuch as l might be vocalized before a dental,[92] the enclitics l and ls sometimes became u and us (a͡u portęr, e͡uz dias antix).

(2) The particles e and que, with the enclitic l, formed combinations ẹl and quẹl. Quẹl, being understood as qu’el, gave rise to a form ẹl.

(3) In the f. nom. sg. there is a form li or lhi, which is hard to explain. The most likely theory is that when the masculine quī took the place of the feminine quæ (see § 133), the masculine ✱ĭllī came to be used beside ĭlla,[93] for the feminine. The Provençal feminine li (lhi) which resulted was strongly supported by the analogy of a feminine possessive mi, beside ma (see § 127).[94]

(4) The regular forms are, therefore, the following:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

Sg.{nom.:lẹlilẹllalilhillh

{obj.:lọluẹllal

Pl.{nom.:lilhillhlas

{obj.:lọslsuslasls

In many texts the objective forms lo, los, ls are used in the nominative.

1. The m. obj. sg. le, obj. pl. les, which occur in a few texts, are doubtless French. So is the enclitic form s for ls or us: de s, entre s, e s.

2. The enclitic forms combine as follows with the prepositions a, con, de, en, entre, iosta, per, sus, and with the conjunctions e, ni, o, que, si: al au als aus, col, del deu dels deus (des), enl el els eus, entrels, iostal, pel pels, sul suls; eil (= e lhi) el (= e lo), nils, oill (= o lhi), quel, sil. They combine freely with other words: eral (= era le), fals (= fa los), etc.

119. In some southwestern and some southeastern dialects we find forms sọ, sọs, sa, sas, coming from ĭpse.

Personal Pronouns.[95]

120. In Vulgar Latin ĕgo lost its g (§ 55, G). The dative, mĭhi, was preserved only in its contracted form, mī. After the pattern of mī, ✱tī and ✱sī were created for the other persons.

121. Provençal has no nominative forms that are regularly unaccented. In the conjunctive forms of the third person (not reflexive), the direct object is distinguished from the indirect; elsewhere there is no such distinction.

Conjunctive Forms.

122. Latin mē ＞ mẹ, mī ＞ mi, nōs ＞ nọs; tē ＞ tẹ, ✱tī ＞ ti, vōs ＞ vọs; sē ＞ sẹ, ✱sī ＞ si. Me mi, te ti, se si, used as proclitics before a vowel, or as enclitics after a vowel, were reduced to m, t, s: m’ama, t’apela, s’es; o͡m, be͡t, cosi͡s. Nọs and vọs, used as enclitics after a vowel, became respectively ns and us; que͡ns, no͡us; sī vōs ＞ sius, later sieus (§ 32). The forms (all objective) for the first and second persons and for the third person reflexive are, then:—

FIRST PERSONSECOND PERSONTHIRD PERSON (REFLEXIVE)

Sg.:mẹ mi mtẹ ti tsẹ si s

Pl.:nọs nsvọs ussẹ si s

The pronouns of the first and second persons could, of course, be used reflexively.

123. The conjunctive forms of the third person (not reflexive) come in the main from the proclitic ĭlle: ĭllī, ĭllum, illōrum (✱illūrum), ĭllos, ĭlla, ĭllas became respectively li or lhi, lo, lọr (lür), lọs, la, las. When used proclitically or enclitically, under the conditions described in § 118, (1), li (lhi), lo, los were reduced to l (lh), l, ls; and l was sometimes vocalized. O ＜ hŏc was employed also, meaning ‘it.’ The adverb ĭnde became ẹnt ẹn n (and, through the analogy of me m, te t, se s, also ne), which was often used as a pronoun with the sense ‘of it’, ‘of them’, sometimes ‘of him’, ‘of her’; nọs ẹn ＞ nọn, vọs ẹn ＞ vọn. The adverb hīc became i, meaning ‘here’ or ‘there,’ which served also as a dative pronoun, ‘to it,’ ‘to them’; it was then always an enclitic, forming a diphthong with a preceding vowel; it regularly took the place of li in the constructions lọi = lo li, lai = la li. The forms are:—

MASCULINEFEMININENEUTER

Sg.{ gen.:ẹntẹnnnẹẹntẹnnnẹẹntẹnnnẹ

{ dat.:lilhillhililhillhii

{ acc.:lọ lulalọlǫ

Pl.{ gen.:ẹntẹnnnẹẹntẹnnnẹ

{ dat.:lọrlürlọrlür

{ acc.:lọslslas

1. Les for los is doubtless French. Los, ls were occasionally used for m. lor; lors, which occurs rarely for lor, looks like a cross between lor and los.

2. The following combinations illustrate the use of the enclitic forms: aura i, be i, e l, laissa n, no i, qui ll, si ls.

Disjunctive Forms.

124. Vulgar Latin ✱ĕo or ✱ĕu ＞ ęu ięu (§ 30), which before an enclitic became ę ię (ę͡l, ię͡n). The other forms explain themselves. The nominative tü, from the beginning of the 13th century, was sometimes used for tẹ after prepositions; this use may have been suggested by the existence of lü = ‘him’; § 125, (1). Nọs + ẹn ＞ nọn, vọs + ẹn ＞ vọn.

FIRST PERSONSECOND PERSONTHIRD PERSON (REFLEXIVE)

Sg.{ nom.:ęuięuę-ię-tü

{ obj.:mẹmitẹ(ti?)tüsẹsi

Pl.{ nom.:nọsvọs

{ obj.:nọsvọssẹsi

1. We find, besides, the French or borderland forms ie iou iu yo for eu (gi and iey have been noted also), mei tei sei for me te se.

125. The disjunctive pronouns of the third person (not reflexive) come from accented ĭlle, with the exception of ǫ from hŏc. Illūi, illōrum, illæjus, illæi lost their first syllable, perhaps through elision after a vowel; illūjus disappeared. Ille, ✱ĭllī gave ẹl ẹlh, il ilh; ẹl sometimes vocalized its l. Illūī became lüi, in some dialects reduced to lü. Illum became ẹl ẹlh. Illōrum (✱illūrum) gave lọr (lür). Illos became ẹls (often ẹus) ẹlhs. Illa, ĭllam both gave ẹla ẹlha. Illæjus became lęis lięis (in some dialects reduced to lięs).[96] Illæi gave lęi (dialectically lę) lięi. Illas became ẹlas ẹlhas.

(2) In the feminine singular nominative there is, beside ẹla ẹlha, a form ilh il. This is probably to be explained, like the feminine article lhi li, as coming from the masculine nominative ✱ĭllī introduced into the feminine, and supported by the feminine possessive mi: see § 118, (3).

(3) Some dialects preserve the final -i of ẹli (m. pl. nom.) and ilhi ili (f. sg. nom.): see § 51, 1.

(4) Occasionally the conjunctive li (f. sg. obj.) and lo (neuter sg. nom.) were used as disjunctive forms. And sometimes the masculine lüi lü was used for the feminine.

(5) The forms are, therefore, the following:—

MASCULINEFEMININENEUTER

Sg.{ nom.:ẹl ẹu ẹlh il ilhẹla ẹlha ilh il ilhi iliẹl lọ

{ obj.:lüi lü ẹl ẹlhlęis lięis lięs lęi lięi lę ẹla li lüi lüǫ

Pl.{ nom.:il ilh ẹl ẹlh ẹliẹlas ẹlhas

{ obj.:lọr lür ẹls ẹus ẹlhslọr lür ẹlas ẹlhas

In many texts the objective forms ẹls ẹlhs, lęis lęi are used in the nominative. We then find occasionally a new objective, ẹlses.

Possessives.

126. Beside mĕus mĕa, tŭus tŭa, sŭas sŭa, there existed in popular Latin the shorter forms ✱mĕs? ✱ma, ✱tŭs ✱ta, sŭs sa. Of the two forms vĕster and vŏster, only the latter was used. To supply the lack of a third person possessive denoting a plural possessor, illōrum came to be employed as a possessive.

Singular Possessive.

127. (1) The primarily atonic possessives come from the shorter Latin forms. The original masculine singular forms of the first person were displaced by mọs mọ, made on the analogy of tọs tọ, sọs sọ, which come regularly from ✱tŭs ✱tŭm, sŭs, sŭm; so in the objective plural we find mọs, corresponding to tọs ＜ ✱tōs, sọs ＜ sōs. Mĕī, tŭī, sŭī gave męi, tọi tüi, sọi süi (§ 34), which, however, were often replaced by the objective forms. ✱Ma ✱mam ✱mas, ✱ta ✱tam ✱tas, sa sam sas became ma mas, ta tas, sa sas; ma, ta, sa often elided their a before a vowel. The formation of midons has been explained in § 91, (2); § 93, (2); § 118, (3): from it came a feminine singular possessive mi, and, by analogy, ti and si.

(2) The forms are:—

FIRST PERSONSECOND PERSONTHIRD PERSON

Sg.{ nom.:mọsmamitọstatisọssasi

{ obj.:mọmọnmamitọtọntatisọsọnsasi

Pl.{ nom.:me̯imọsmastọitüitọstassọisüisọssas

{ obj.:mọsmastọstassọssas

They are generally used only adjectively, and without the definite article. In some early texts, however, tọs and sọs, preceded by the article, are used substantively.

128. (1) The primarily tonic possessives come from the longer Latin forms. Mĕus mĕum mĕi mĕos ＞ męus męu męi męus, which regularly became mięus etc. (§ 30); an analogical form mięu is found beside mięi. In the feminine of the first person we have, instead of ✱męa, mięua and mia: the first of these two forms is evidently made up from the masculine; the second may be due partly to the analogy of mi, partly to a proclitic use of the word (§ 44, 4).[97] In the second and third persons the masculine forms are mainly, and the feminine forms partially, replaced by analogical formations based on the possessive of the first person; tŭi, sŭi, tŭa, sŭa, however, give regularly tọi tüi, sọi süi, tọa tua, sọa sua (§ 8).

(2) The forms follow, those of the third person (which correspond exactly to those of the second) being omitted:—

FIRST PERSONSECOND PERSON

Sg.{ nom.:męus mięusmia mięuatęus tięustọa tua tięua tia

{ obj.:męu mięumia mięuatęu tięutọa tua tięua tia

Pl.{ nom.:męi mięi mięumias mięuastọi tüi tęi tięi tięutọas tuas tięuas tias

{ obj.:męus mięusmias mięuastęus tięustọas tuas tięuas tias

They may be used adjectively or substantively, with or without the definite article.

1. We occasionally find a neuter sg. nom. form without final -s: lo mieu.

Plural Possessor.

129. Nŏster, vŏster developed regularly after the pauper model: § 103, (1). The masculine singular nominative often took an -s: cf. § 96; § 101, (1). Some southeastern dialects preserved the -i of nǫstri: cf. § 51, 1. Beside vǫstra we occasionally meet vǫstri, due to the analogy of feminine mi, ti, si.

FIRST PERSONSECOND PERSONTHIRD PERSON

Sg.{ nom.:nǫstre-snǫstravǫstre-svǫstra vǫstrilọr lürlọr lür

{ obj.:nǫstrenǫstravǫstrevǫstra vǫstrilọr lürlọr lür

Pl.{ nom.:nǫstre nǫstrinǫstrasvǫstrevǫstraslọr lürlọr lür

{ obj.:nǫstresnǫstrasvǫstresvǫstraslọr lürlọr lür

These forms are used adjectively or substantively, with or without the definite article.

1. In later times lor came to be inflected like a one-gender adjective: § 103, (2).

Demonstratives.

130. Latin īdem went out of use. Latin ĭs was preserved only in the phrase ĭd ĭpsum (ad ĭd ĭpsum ＞ adęs), and in the combination ĕccum, in which it ceased to be recognized, so that ĕccu’ was regarded as a synonym of ĕcce.

131. (1) The demonstrative particles ĕcce and ĕccu’ were often prefixed to pronouns in Vulgar Latin. Being thus proclitically used, they frequently lost their first syllable (§ 19); sometimes, however, under the influence of ac (as in ac sīc ＞ aissi), they preserved it, assuming the vowel of ac: ecce ĭlla ＞ aicẹla, eccu’ ĭsta ＞ aquẹsta; cf. § 43, (2).

(2) The suffix -met was used in Vulgar Latin as an intensive prefix. Its change of place was probably due to such phrases as sēmet ĭpsum, understood as sē metĭpsum. The -t, before a vowel, regularly gives -d- (met-ĭpsum ＞ mẹdes); but we find, besides, -z- (＜ Lat. d), introduced perhaps through the analogy of ĭd in ĭd ĭpsum (✱medĭpsum ＞ mezẹis); and also -t- (＜ Lat. tt), which may be the result of a combination of met- and ĭd- (met-ĭd-ĭpsum ＞ ✱metdĭpsu ＞ metẹis).

132. The pronouns preserved, either in their simple form or combined with a prefix, are the following:—

(1) Of hīc only the neuter, hŏc, was kept Hŏc ＞ ǫ; ecce hŏc ＞ aiçǫ aissǫ, and çǫ so; eccu’ hŏc ＞ aquŏ acŏ. All of these are invariable.

(2) Ipse appears as ẹps ẹpsa, ẹus ẹussa, ẹis ẹissa (with a m. pl. ẹisses and a neuter ẹis); the last forms are the commonest; for the development of the ps, see § 79 and § 80, Ps. Met-ĭpse gives (medips) medẹs, (metẹish) metẹis, and, more commonly, mezẹis (f. mezẹissa, neuter mezẹis); see § 131, (2). ✱Met-ĭpsĭmus becomes medẹsme-s, mesẹsme-s, meẹsme-s (§ 65, D), with feminine forms in -a. Unaccented ĭpsum is probably one source of the neuter sǫ: cf. § 132, (1). For the article (so, sa), see § 119.

(3) Ille, uncombined, developed into an article (§ 118) and a personal pronoun (§§ 123, 125), but went out of use as a demonstrative. Combined with ecce and eccu’ it gave: aicẹl aissẹl, cẹl, sẹl; aquẹl. Echẹl (pronounced ekẹl?) seems to come from eccu’ ĭlle with its original initial vowel preserved. Ipse ĭlle perhaps gave rise also to a sẹl, which ultimately coincided with the form coming from ecce ĭlle. There is a neuter aicelo, perhaps aicẹl + ǫ. Cẹl will illustrate the inflection of all these words; the forms are to be explained like those of the disjunctive personal pronoun (§ 125):—

MASCULINEFEMININE

Sg.{nom.:cẹlcẹucẹlhcẹls[98]cellüicẹlacelhacilcilhcilha[99]

{obj.:cẹlcẹucẹlhcellüicẹlacẹlhacelęicelęiscelięiscilh

Pl.{nom.:cilcilhcẹlhcẹls[100]cẹlascẹlhas

{obj.:cẹlscẹlhs[101]cẹlascẹlhas

(4) Iste gave ẹst, ẹstz, ẹsta, ẹstas. Ecce ĭste became aicẹst (not common) and cẹst sẹst; eccu’ ĭste became aquẹst echẹst, and chẹst. Aquẹst will illustrate the inflection; the forms are to be explained like those of cẹl:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

Sg.{nom.:aquẹstaquẹstaaquistaquisti

{obj.:aquẹstaquẹsta

Pl.{nom.:aquistaquistiaquẹstas

{obj.:aquẹstzaquẹtzaquẹstas

Interrogatives and Relatives.

133. The interrogative and relative pronouns were confused and combined in Vulgar Latin, quī taking the place of quĭs, and quĭd gradually encroaching on quŏd. Furthermore, the masculine forms were used instead of the feminine, which disappeared. We have in Provençal no evidence of the survival of any other cases than the nominative, dative, and accusative singular and the nominative plural:—

MASCULINE AND FEMININENEUTER

Sg.{nom.:quī＞ quiquĭd＞ que, (before vowel) quez

{dat.:cūī＞ cüicūī＞ cüi

{acc.:quĕm＞ quequĭd＞ que, (before vowel) quez

Pl.nom.:quī＞ quiquæ＞ que

The distinction between que ＜ quĕm, que quez ＜ quĭd, and que ＜ quæ could not be maintained; we have, then, simply three forms: a nom. sg. or pl. qui, a nom.-acc. sg. or pl. quẹ (quẹz), a dat. sg. or pl. cüi (sometimes written qui).

134. We have also qualis, which came to be inflected like fezẹls: see § 103, (2); the feminine singular, however, often dropped its -s, and sometimes took the ending -a (cal, cala). Quīnam apparently became quina, which, understood as a feminine form, developed a masculine, quin. There seems to have been also a ✱quīniam (cf. quŏniam?), which gave quinh, quinha. Cf. D. Behrens in the Zeitschrift für französische Sprache, XVII, ii, 67-8, footnote. The phrase de ŭnde became dọnt, dọn, which was often used with the meaning ‘of which’, ‘of whom’.

135. (1) In Provençal the interrogative pronouns are: qui, ‘who’ or ‘whom’; que quez, ‘what’; cüi, ‘to whom’ or ‘whom’, ‘to what’ or ‘what’ (obj.); cals (either alone or preceded by the definite article, inflected as in § 134), ‘which’; quin quinh, quina quinha, ‘which’. Cals is used also as an adjective.

(2) The relative pronouns are: qui, ‘one who’, indefinite (used also, in early texts and in southwestern Languedoc, as the regular relative pronoun for persons); que quez, ‘who’ or ‘whom’, ‘which’; cüi, ‘whom’, ‘which’ (generally used as indirect object of a verb, or after a preposition); lo cals (inflected as in § 134), ‘who’ (‘whom’), ‘which’; don dont, ‘of which’, ‘of whom’.

Indefinite Pronouns and Adjectives.

136. The following words call for special mention:—

(1) Alcüs ＜ ✱alĭqu’ ūnus = alĭquī ūnus, ‘someone’. Inflection: alcüs, alcü(n); alcüna.

(2) Alquant ＜ aliquantum, aliquanti, ‘somewhat’, ‘some’; diminutive, alquantet.

(3) Alques alque ＜ alĭquĭd, used as an invariable neuter pronoun or adverb, ‘something’, ‘somewhat’. The -s form, which originally developed before a vowel, was preferred because of the analogy of other neuter pronouns and adverbs. The preservation of the e is due to association with quez que. Alque was sometimes used as an adjective.

(4) Als al au, used as an invariable neuter pronoun, ‘something else’. Al (au) may have been detached from alques, understood as al ques. Meyer-Lübke, however, takes it, as well as Old French el, from ✱alum = aliud: Gram., II, p. 649. Als owes its -s to the analogy of other neuter pronouns, such as alques, ẹis, mais, męlhs, mẹns, pęis, etc.

(5) Altre autre ＜ alter, ‘other’, pronoun and adjective. A dative ✱altrūī, following illūī, goes back to Vulgar Latin. The Provençal forms autrüs, autrü show the influence of alcüs and negüs; autri belongs to the southeastern dialects (cf. aquẹli, ẹli, nǫstri, tüti, etc.). Inflection:—

MASCULINEFEMININE

Sg.{nom.:autreautresautrüsautra

{obj.:autreautrüiautrüautra

Pl.{nom.:autreautriautras

{obj.:autresautras

(6) Altretals autretals ＜ alter talis; by dissimilation, atretals: by substitution of ai- (first syllable of aissi ＜ ac sīc) for atre-, aitals; by fusion of aitals and atretals, aitretals; through analogy of atressi, atrestals. Cf. § 74, 2. Inflection like that of cals (§ 134).

(7) Altretan atretan aitan atrestan etc. ＜ alter + tantum: see altretals.

(8) Cada un ＜ κατά + ūnum,‘every one’. The Greek preposition κατά was introduced into the Latin territory, probably by Greek merchants, in stating prices: καθ᾽ἕνα = cata ūnum, κατά τρεῐς = cata trēs; hence cada ün, cada trẹi. Inflection: cada üs, cada ü(n); cada üna.

(9) Calacom qualacom qualaquom, ‘something’, ‘a little’, seems to be a Provençal compound of cal and acǫ (§ 132), the last syllable of which was perhaps understood as cọm cọ ＜ quōmŏ(do). Cf. quezacom below. There is a diminutive calacomet, which helped to maintain the m of calacom.

(10) Cals que quals que, cal que qual que, ‘whoever’, is a Provençal compound.

(11) Cant quant can quan ＜ quantum quanti, ‘how much’, ‘how many’. Cant, inflected like bęl (§ 103), is used also as an adjective and as a masculine and feminine pronoun.

(12) Cascüs chascüs, ‘everyone’, ‘every’, appears to be a fusion of cada üs and ✱cescüs ＜ ✱cisqu’ ūnus = quĭsque ūnus = ūnus quĭsque. Inflection: cascüs, cascü(n); cascüna.

(13) Ent en n ne ＜ ĭnde,‘some’: cf. § 123.

(14) Maint mant man manh ＜ Celtic ✱mantî, ‘many’, ‘many a’, ‘many a one’. Obj. pl. in -s, f. sg. in -a, f. pl. in -as.

(15) Molt mout mot mul mon ＜ mŭltum, ‘much’. For mọt, mul, mọn, see § 74, (2) and § 74, 1. Mọlt, inflected like bęl (§ 103), is used also as an adjective and as a masculine and feminine pronoun.

(16) Negüs ＜ nĕc ūnus, ‘no one’. Inflection: negüs, negü(n); negüna. Beside negün we find degün, apparently through dissimilation.

(17) Nüls ＜ nūllus, ‘no’, ‘none’. Inflection: nüls, nül, nül, nülh, nüls; nüla, nülas. From nülh ＜ nūllī comes a set of forms with lh: see § 67, (2). Hence, by metathesis suggested by the analogy of negün, lhün. A fusion of nülh and lhün results in lünh, whence a set of forms with nh.

(18) Om ＜ hŏmo, ‘one’.

(19) Pauc ＜ paucum, pauci, ‘little’, ‘few’. There is also a regular adjective, paucs, ‘small’.

(20) Que que, ‘whatever’, is a Provençal compound.

(21) Quecs ＜ quĭsquis (§ 78, 2), ‘everyone’. From quẹcs were formed an objective quẹc and a feminine quẹga (cf. amics amic amiga).

(22) Quesacom (diminutive quesacomet), ‘something’, ‘a little’, is formed like calacọm above, the first element in this case being either quẹs ＜ quĭd or quẹ s = quẹ es.

(23) Qui que, ‘whoever’, is a Provençal compound.

(24) Res re, ‘anything’, ‘something’.

(25) Tals ＜ talis, ‘such’, inflected like cals (§ 134).

(26) Tamanh ＜ tam magnum, ‘so great’; f. tamanha.

(27) Tant tan ta ＜ tantum, tanti, ‘so much’, ‘so many’. Tant, inflected like bęl (§ 103), is used also as an adjective and as a masculine and feminine pronoun.

(28) Totz ＜ tōttus = tōtus (Gram., I, § 547), ‘all’, had a regular inflection: tọtz, tọt, tọt, tọtz; tọta, tọtas. In the masculine nominative plural, however, we find oftener the forms tüch tüich tüit tüt tüti, which point to a Latin ✱tūctī (cf. Italian tutti); for this no satisfactory explanation has been discovered (see Nigra, Rom., XXXI, 525). Hence we occasionally have in the singular tütz, tüt, and in the objective plural tügz tütz; the last form occurs also as a nominative plural. Tọt is frequently used as a neuter pronoun and as an adverb.

(29) Üs, ‘some’; from ūnus, used as an indefinite adjective or pronoun, we have the plural forms; ü(n), ü(n)s; ünas.

2. CONJUGATION.

THE FOUR CONJUGATIONS.

137. (1) In Vulgar Latin there were some shifts, the verbs of the second and third conjugations being particularly unstable: cadĕre, capĕre, sapĕre, for instance, often passed into the second, while mŏvēre, rīdēre frequently followed the third, and mŏri, sĕqui usually went into the fourth. Pŏsse, vĕlle, with the new infinitives ✱potēre, ✱volēre, were made to conform with more or less regularity to the second conjugation type. Beside do, dant, sto, stant, there came into use the forms ✱dao, ✱daunt, ✱stao, ✱staunt. Beside facĕre there doubtless existed a verb ✱fare,[102] strongly influenced by dare and stare; the first suggestion of shortening probably came from the monosyllabic imperative singular fac (or fa[103]), which must have led to a plural ✱fate beside facĭte. Habēre and vadĕre[103] also came under the influence of dare and stare; the former adopted, beside habeo, habes, habet, habent, the forms ✱ho, ✱has, ✱hat, ✱hant or ✱haunt. Vadĕre generally lost its past tenses, which were replaced by īre and, in southern Gaul, by annare.[104]

(2) In Provençal the first conjugation was well preserved, and the fourth lost but little. The second and the third lost many verbs (especially learned words) to the fourth: delir, emplir, envazir, espandir, fugir, iauzir, merir, regir, relinquir, reluzir, vertir;[105] cọzer cozir ＜ consuĕre,[106] devire devezir ＜ divīdĕre, dire dir ＜ dīcĕre, lęire legir (also lire lir) ＜ lĕgĕre, quęrre querir ＜ quærĕre, sęgre seguir ＜ sĕqui, tenẹr tenir[107] ＜ tenēre. Moreover, the second and third conjugations, which in Provençal differed practically only in the infinitive, were much confused: cabẹr, cazẹr, mǫrdre, rire, sabẹr; cọrre accorrẹr, mentavẹr mentaure ＜ mente habēre, movẹr mǫure, quęrre querẹr, redẹbre rezemẹr ＜ redĭmĕre. Uc Faidit, a 13th century grammarian, enumerates about 500 verbs in -ar, about 100 in -er and -re, and a little over 100 in -ir.

138. The inchoative ending -scĕre lost its original sense. The -īsc- type, for verbs of the fourth conjugation, was very widely extended, the -isc- becoming a part of the regular present stem of the fourth conjugation, and disappearing from the infinitive: finīre, ✱finīsco ＞ finir, finisc. An obscure substitute for the Latin -ēsc- type produced an ending -eissir -ezir -zir (dis-pigrēscĕre = despereissir, evanēscĕre = envanezir[108]), which was used in forming some new verbs: enfolezir[109] ＜ fǫl, envelhezir ＜ vęlh, envelzir ＜ vil, esclarzir ＜ clar, escürzir ＜ escür oscür, espaorzir ＜ paọr.[110] The -āsc- and -ōsc- types appear in old verbs: irāscĕre ＞ iráisser, co(g)nōscĕre ＞ conọisser.[111]

139. New verbs were formed, in late Vulgar Latin and in Provençal, only in the first and fourth conjugations. The commonest suffixes were -āre, -iāre, -icāre, -idiāre (＜ -ίζειν: § 57, Z), -īre: ✱oblītāre ＞ oblidar, ✱altiāre ＞ aussar, ✱carricāre ＞ cargar, ✱werridiāre ＞ guerreiar, ✱abbellīre ＞ abelir. Germanic verbs generally went into the first conjugation, except those in -jan, most of which entered the fourth: roubôn ＞ raubar (also raubir), wîtan ＞ guidar; furbjan ＞ forbir.

FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN INFLECTION.

140. The Latin perfect passive took the sense of a present; amātus est, for instance, under the influence of such phrases as carus est, came to mean ‘he is loved’. This led to the establishment of an entire passive inflection made up of the perfect participle and the parts of the verb ĕsse; and the old passive forms were gradually abandoned, leaving no trace (save the perfect participle and possibly the gerundive) in the Romance languages. So the passive is constructed in Provençal as in French: ẹs amatz, ęra amatz, fọ amatz, será amatz, etc.; the participle regularly agrees with the subject in gender and number. Latin deponent verbs became active: mŏri ＞ morir, sĕqui ＞ seguir.

141. (1) Such phrases as ĭd habeo factum shifted their meaning from ‘I have it done’, etc., to ‘I have done it’, etc. The Latin perfect came to be restricted to its aorist sense, and the perfect was expressed by compounds of habēre with the perfect participle. In the Romance languages all compound tenses were eventually formed in this way: ai cantat, avia cantat, aurai cantat, etc. In Provençal the auxiliary is sometimes ęsser, instead of avẹr, if the main verb is reflexive, passive, or neuter; ęsser is particularly common with neuter verbs of motion: sọi vengütz.[112] A participle used with avẹr may agree in gender and number with the direct object, if there is one: ai cantat or cantada la cansọ.

(2) The Latin perfect indicative continued to be used as an aorist, and is the source of the preterit in Provençal, as in the other Romance languages: vīdī ＞ vi, ‘I saw’. The pluperfect indicative survived in some regions; in Provençal it is used with the sense of a conditional: fŭĕrat ＞ fọra,‘he would be’. The future perfect indicative and the perfect subjunctive did not remain in Provençal: amavĕro = aurai amat, amavĕrim = aia amat. The pluperfect subjunctive assumed the functions of the imperfect, which disappeared from nearly every part of the Romance territory: audīssem (for audīrem) ＞ auzis. The perfect infinitive left no trace: audīsse = avẹr auzit.

142. The Latin future, which was not uniform in the four conjugations, and, in the third and fourth, was liable to confusion with the present subjunctive, was gradually replaced by various periphrastic constructions: instead of faciam people said factūrus sum, dēbeo facĕre, vŏlo facĕre, habeo (ad) facĕre, etc. The construction that prevailed in the greater part of the Empire was facĕre habeo, a combination of the infinitive with the present indicative of habēre. The verb ĕsse was the only one that ultimately retained the old future beside the new: Pr. ęr, ęrs, ęr, beside serái serás será; in the plural, only serẹm, serẹtz, serán. The new composite future was occasionally used by Tertullian, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine, and became common in Italy by the 6th century.[113]

(2) As an imperfect of the future, there was evolved a combination of the infinitive and the imperfect or perfect indicative. To correspond to dīcit quod venīre habet, was constructed dīxit quŏd venīre habēbat (or habuit); to match sī pŏssum, venīre habeo, was made sī potuĭssem, venīre habēbam (or habuī). In Gaul, as in most of the Empire, only the imperfect of habēre was used for this purpose. Traces of such a construction are found as early as the 3d century. This form is generally called the conditional, and it existed in Provençal side by side with the conditional described in § 141, (2): sería, serías, sería, etc., beside fọra, fọras, fọra, etc. The Romance languages developed also a perfect conditional: auría agüt = ‘I should have had’.

143. (1) The present participle remained in use as an adjective: fīlias placentes ＞ filhas plazẹns; cf. § 101, (3). In its verbal function it was replaced by the ablative of the gerund: vĕnit accŭrrens ＞ vĕnit accŭrrendo ＞ ven acorrẹn. In most Provençal dialects, however, the present participle and the gerund coincided in form (amantem and amando both ＞ amán), the gerund being distinguished from the participle only by its lack of inflection: see § 76, (2).

(2) The gerund retained only the ablative case, the use of which was considerably extended: see above. In its other cases it was replaced by the infinitive: artem dīcendī ＞ artem dīcĕre ＞ art de dire. The supine, too, was replaced by the infinitive: vīsum vĕnit nōs ＞ vĕnit nōs vĭdēre ＞ ven nọs (a) vezẹr.

INFINITIVE, PRESENT PARTICIPLE, AND GERUND.

144. The infinitive endings -āre, -ēre, -īre regularly became -ar, -ẹr, -ir; -ĕre became -re or -er: see § 48, (1) and § 52, (1). Ex.: amāre ＞ amár, vĭdēre ＞ vezẹr, audīre ＞ auzir; tŏllĕre ＞ tǫlre, nascĕre ＞ náisser, dīcere ＞ dire dízer. For shifts of conjugation, see § 137.

1. The fourth conjugation verbs enantir, gauzir, grazir, murir, servir sometimes took a final e by the analogy of devire (＜ divīdĕre), dire, rire. On the other hand, dire occasionally lost its -e by the analogy of the fourth conjugation. Lire for leire (＜ lĕgĕre) is probably French, and lir is to be explained like dir.

2. Far beside faire doubtless comes from ✱fare = facĕre: see § 137, (1). Trar beside traire (＜ ✱tragĕre) follows far.

3. Escriure (＜ scrībĕre) sometimes became escrire through the analogy of dire.

4. Some verbs that passed from the second to the third conjugation preserved the old infinitive as a noun: debēre ＞ deure devér, placēre ＞ plaire plazér.

145. The endings -antem -ando, -ĕntem -ĕndo regularly became -an or -ant, -en or -ent: § 76, (2). See § 143, (1). The endings -iĕntem -iĕndo lost their i in Vulgar Latin (§ 40, 1), and were thus reduced to -entem -endo. Ex.: amantem amando ＞ amán (or amánt), vidĕntem vidĕndo ＞ vezén (or vezént), credĕntem credĕndo ＞ crezén (or crezént); sapiĕntem sapiĕndo ＞ ✱sapĕntem ✱sapĕndo ＞ sabén (or sabént), partiĕntem partiĕndo ＞ ✱partentem ✱partendo ＞ partén (or partént). Fourth conjugation verbs which adopted the inchoative -sc- (§ 138), generally introduced it into the present participle and the gerund: florir, florissẹn. Cf. § 155. For the declension of the present participle, see § 101, (3).

PAST PARTICIPLE.

146. The Provençal past participle comes from the Latin perfect participle. It is to be noted that verbs which originally had no perfect participle were obliged to create one in order to form their compound tenses: see § 141, (1). Past participles in Provençal, when inflected, were declined like bęl: §§ 102; 102, 1; 103, (1). See § 141, (1).

147. In the first and fourth conjugations the endings were -ātum and -ītum, which regularly became -at and -it: cantātum ＞ cantát, finītum ＞ fenít. The first conjugation verbs which had a form in -ĭtum discarded it for -ātum: crepāre crĕpĭtum = crebár crebát. On the other hand, aperīre and operīre preserved their participle in -ĕrtum: cubrir (＜ cooperīre), cubęrt (also cubrít); ubrír (＜ aperīre + cooperīre), ubęrt. By the analogy of these, sufrir (＜ suffĕrre) and ufrir (＜ offĕrre) have sufęrt (also sufrít), ufęrt. Tenẹr tenir keeps its Provençal second conjugation ending, tengüt (see § 148); and venir, following the analogy of tenir, has vengüt.

148. (1) Most Latin verbs of the second and third conjugations had no accented ending, but a few had an ending -ūtum, which corresponded very well to the -ātum and -ītum of the first and fourth: arguĕre, argūtum; consuĕre, consūtum; sĕqui, secūtum; solvĕre, solūtum; volvĕre, volūtum. This ending was considerably extended in Vulgar Latin, especially to verbs having a perfect in -ŭī: habēre, habŭī, habĭtum ✱habūtum. In Provençal it spread still further: cazẹr, cazęc, cazegüt. Inasmuch as it was closely associated with the perfect, it came to be attached, more and more frequently, to the stem of that tense.

(2) Of the Provençal verbs of the second and third conjugations, about half adopted the ending -üt. In some the -üt is added to the stem of the infinitive: crezüt, defendüt, escondüt, molüt, perdüt, resemüt, respondüt, rompüt, vendüt, vezüt veüt. Most of the verbs, however, attach the -üt to the stem of the preterit: nasc, nascüt; pasc, pascüt; tems, temsüt; tesc, tescüt, venc, vencüt (from vẹnser); visc, viscüt. A few have both forms: agüt avüt; cazegüt cazüt; vengüt venüt. It is to be noted, in the case of verbs that add -üt to the preterit, that if the third person singular of the preterit ends in a voiceless consonant preceded by a vowel or l or n, that consonant is voiced in the participle: ac, agüt; bẹc, begüt; cazęc, cazegüt; conọc, conogüt; crẹc, cregüt; dẹc, degüt; elęc, elegüt; mǫc, mogüt; nǫc, nogüt; plac, plagüt, plǫc, plogüt; pǫc, pogüt; remas, remazüt; saup, saubüt; sęc, següt; tẹnc, tengüt; tǫlc, tolgüt; valc, valgüt; vẹnc, vengüt (from venir); vǫlc, volgüt. Exceptions are ceupüt, saupüt (beside saubüt), and vencüt (from vẹnser): for ceupüt, saupüt, cf. § 65, P, 3; in vencüt the c was perhaps kept to distinguish the word from vengüt (venir).

(3) The other half of the second and third conjugation verbs generally preserved the old participle with no accented ending: ars, cẹing, claus, dich, düit, estrẹit, fach, iọinch, mẹs, ọnh, pǫst, prẹs, trach, etc. Some of these have also forms in -üt: defẹs defendüt, elig eslęit elegüt, escọs escondüt, mǫut molüt, nat nascüt, remas remazüt, rọt rompüt, vis vezüt. A few verbs made up new forms without a stressed ending: conquęrre, conquẹs conquis; redemer rezemer, redems (rezemüt); sọrger, sọrs; tǫlre, tǫlt tǫut; vezẹr, vist (vis vezüt veüt); vǫlvre, vǫut. Mĭttĕre probably had beside mĭssum a form ✱mīsum (cf. mīsī); hence mẹtre, mẹs mis. By the analogy of this, prendre has beside prẹs a form pris. ęstre borrowed estát from estar ＜ stare. Escriut, from escriure, is probably influenced by the infinitive; escrich follows dich. So, probably, does elig = eslęit, from elegir eslire eslir.

1. For sọi agütz (= ai estat), which is found not only in some Provençal dialects, but also in southeastern France, French Switzerland, and parts of northern Italy, see § 141, (1), footnote 1.

FUTURE AND NEW CONDITIONAL.

149. For the formation of these parts, see § 142, (1), (2). Ex.: amarái, creisserái, florirái. Verbs of the second conjugation regularly, and verbs of the fourth very often, syncopate the e or i of the infinitive: remanrái, volrás; partrái, venría. Third conjugation infinitives with final e drop this e before the ending; those in -er keep the e: vẹndre, vendrái; náisser, naisserái. First conjugation infinitives regularly keep the a (§ 45), but in a few texts (especially the Girart and the Rasos de trobar) the a is changed to e: cantarái, sonaría, trobarẹm; blasmerán, comterá.

1. Esser keeps the old future forms er, ers, er, beside serái, serás, será (serém, serétz, serán).

150. For the phonetic changes exemplified in auría, deurái, mourá; plairía; cairá, veirái; valdrái; remandrém, tendría; poiría, see § 70, βr, C´r, Dr, Lr, Nr, Tr. Anar (＜ annāre) has beside anarái a form irái from ir (＜ īre). ęsser drops its first syllable (serái), perhaps through elision (tu ’sserás, etc.), perhaps in accordance with the general principle stated in § 19. Faire far always makes its future and conditional from the latter form (farái). Sabẹr has beside sabrái a form saubrái, due no doubt to the combined influence of aurái and the preterit saup ＜ sapuit. Vezẹr, following the analogy of beurái, deurái, viurái, has veurái beside the regular veirái.

151. The composite nature of the future and conditional was still sufficiently felt, in the literary period, to admit of the separation of the component parts: amar vos ái, dar n’ẹtz, donar lo t’ái, tornar nos ẹm, tornar s’en ía.

Future Endings.

152. For the 1st pers. sg., the Provençal verb used the form ✱ayo ＞ ai (§ 73, βy); for the 2d and 3d pers. sg. and the 3d pers. pl., the forms ✱has ＞ as, ✱hat ＞ a (§ 82, T), ✱hant ✱haunt ＞ an aun (§ 83, Nt): see § 137, (1). In the 1st and 2d pers. pl., habēmu’(§ 82, S, 2), habētis naturally gave avẹm, avẹtz (§ 64); but inasmuch as the other four terminations were monosyllabic, the av- was dropped when avẹm, avẹtz came to be understood merely as future endings. The future is, therefore, inflected as follows:—

cantar-áicantar-ẹm

cantar-áscantar-ẹtz, -ẹs, -ẹt

cantar-ácantar-án, -ánt, -áun, -áu

1. In Gascony and Languedoc we find -ęi for -ai: see §§ 23, 2; 162, (4). In Gascon and in the modern dialects of some other regions -am is used for ẹm. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -ẹm becomes -ẹn: cf. § 65, M, 1; also § 167, 2.

Conditional Endings.

153. Habēbam ＞ aβẹβa ＞ (probably through dissimilation: § 87, β) aβẹa ＞ avía (§ 26); so avías, avía, aviám, aviátz, avían. But inasmuch as the conditional was formed in imitation of the future, and none of the future forms retained the av-, the conditional endings were reduced to -ía, -ías, -ía, -iám, -iátz, -ían. Some dialects, which substituted -on for -an, introduced -íon into the conditional: § 169. The conditional is, therefore, inflected as follows:—

cantar-íacantar-iám

cantar-íascantar-iátz, -iás, -iát

cantar-íacantar-ían, -íon, -ío

1. In verse these endings are sometimes counted as monosyllabic: poiri͡a. Guiraut Riquier uses -íatz for -iátz. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -iám becomes -ián: cf. § 65, M, 1; also § 167, 2.

PRESENT.

154. The personal endings will be discussed separately in §§ 164-169.

155. The Provençal present indicative and subjunctive come, in the main, directly from the corresponding parts of the Latin verb:—

amo＞ amamāmu’＞ amámfaciam＞ fassafaciāmu’＞ fassám

amas＞ amasamaātis＞ amátzfacias＞ fassasfaciātis＞ fassátz

amat＞ amaamant＞ ámanfaciat＞ fassafaciant＞ fássan

In the 4th conjugation, however, most verbs have adopted the originally inchoative -sc- (§ 138) and incorporated it into the inflection of the present, except in the 1st and 2d pers. pl. of the indicative:—

florīsco＞ floríscflorēmu’＞ florẹm[114]

florīscis＞ florís floríssesflorētis＞ florętz[114]

florīscit＞ florísflorīscunt＞ floríscon

florīscam＞ floríscafloriscāmu’＞ floriscám

florīscas＞ floríscasfloriscātis＞ floriscátz

florīscat＞ floríscaflorīscant＞ floríscan

We occasionally find such forms as florissẹm, florissętz, and florám, florátz.

1. The s coming from sc´ was of course originally palatal; it is sometimes written sh. The sc of the 1st pers. sg., the 3d pers. pl., and the whole pres. subjunctive was replaced, in some dialects, by s or sh: floris florish, florisson florishon, florissa florisha.

156. Of the Latin imperative forms, only the present active, 2d pers. sg. and pl., remained in use. The Provençal verb kept the sg., but substituted for the pl. the 2d pers. pl. of the present indicative:—

ama＞ amatĕne＞ tencrēde＞ crẹ

amāte amātis＞ amátztenēte tenētis＞ tenętzcrēdĭte ✱crēdĭ́tis[115]＞ crezętz

partī＞ partfīnīsce＞ finís

partīte partītis＞ partętz[115]finīte finītis＞ finętz[115]

In negative commands the present subjunctive is generally used instead of the plural imperative, and sometimes the infinitive is employed instead of sg. or pl. The verbs auzir, avẹr, dire, ęsser, sabẹr, vezẹr, volẹr regularly took their imperative forms from the present subjunctive: áuias, digátz, veiátz, etc.

1. Fait ＜ facĭte (beside faitz) seems to come directly from the Latin form.

2. Before vos the pl. drops final -tz (or -t?): departe vos, vene vos. Ve vos becomes veus; a fusion of ve vos and ec ＜ eccum results in vecvos.

Double Stems.

157. Differences in accentuation and in the environment of vowels or consonants regularly developed different stems in different parts of some verbs. For instance, ádjūtā́re ＞ aidar (§ 45), while adjū́tat ＞ aiüda.

158. Sometimes, as above, an intertonic vowel disappeared: mándūcā́re ＞ maniar, mandūco ＞ ✱mandüc manüc; ✱parabolāre ✱páraulā́re ＞ parlar, ✱parabŏlat ✱paraulat ＞ paraula. In such cases the shortened stem usually prevailed: mania, parla. But in adjutare the longer one was preferred: aiüdar.

159. (1) A vowel which breaks in one part of a verb may be unstressed, and therefore remain unbroken, in another part: probāre ＞ proar, prŏbat ＞ prueva,[116] ✱sequīre ＞ sęguir, ✱sĕquit ＞ sięc.[117] In such cases the phonetic development is generally undisturbed.

(2) A vowel which breaks in one part of a verb may, with different environment, remain unbroken even in another part in which it is stressed: ✱volēre ＞ volẹr, ✱vŏleo ＞ vuelh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl. If the breaking occurs in the 1st pers. sg., the phonetic development is regularly undisturbed; if it occurs in the 2d and 3d pers. sg., it is generally carried into the other forms in which the vowel is stressed: cŏllĭgit ＞ cuęlh, hence cuęlh = collĭgo; ĕxit ＞ ięis, hence ięsc, ięscon, ięsca.

160. A consonant may be followed by e̯ or i̯, and so palatalized, in one part of the verb, and not in another: ✱cadeo ＞ chai, ✱cadēmu’ ＞ chazẹm; dēbeo ＞ dẹch dẹi (§ 73, βy), dēbet ＞ dẹu; faciat ＞ fassa, facĕre ＞ faire; fŭgio ＞ füi, fugĕre ＞ fugir; jaceam ＞ iassa, jacēre ＞ iazẹr[118]; placeāmu’ ＞ plassám, placēmu’ ＞ plazẹm; sapiam ＞ sapcha, sapit ＞ sap; tĕneo ＞ tenh, tĕnet ＞ ten; valeo ＞ valh, vales ＞ vals; vĕniat ＞ venha, venīre ＞ venir; vĭdeam ＞ vẹia, vidētis ＞ vezẹtz; ✱vŏleo ＞ vuęlh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl. Verbs in -eo generally keep this distinction; but we find mǫva, somóna, tẹma = mŏveam, submŏneam, tĭmeam. Most verbs in -io, on the other hand, dropped the i̯ in Vulgar Latin: partio ✱parto ＞ part, partiunt ✱partunt ＞ parton, partiam ✱partam ＞ parta; sen, senton, senta; sięrf, sięrvon, sięrva; etc. A few verbs show forms both with and without the e̯ or i̯: audio ＞ auch (audiam ＞ auia), ✱audo ＞ au; crēdo ＞ crẹ, ✱crēdeo ＞ crẹi[119]; vĭdeo ＞ vẹi[119], ✱vĭdo ＞ vẹ.

161. Verbs in -ng- naturally developed a palatal consonant before e or i (§ 73, Ng´), but not before other vowels: cĭngĕre ＞ cẹnher, cĭngo ＞ cẹnc, cĭngit ＞ cẹnh, cĭngam ＞ cẹnga; so fẹnher, ọnher, plánher, pọnher, etc. The palatal was carried by analogy into the parts that were originally without it: hence the double forms cẹnc cẹnh, cẹngon cẹnhon, cẹnga cẹnha, etc. These double forms led tenẹr, venir to adopt tenc, venc, tenga, venga, beside the regular tenh, venh, tenha, venha. Such forms as these, supported by dẹrc ＜ de-ērĭgo, dic ＜ dīco, pręc ＜ prĕco, sęc ＜ ✱sequo, trac ＜ ✱trago, etc., afforded a starting-point for an ending -c, adopted by some other verbs in the 1st pers. sg. of the present indicative: pĕrdo ＞ pęrt pęrc, pr(eh)ĕndo ＞ pren prenc, remaneo ＞ remanh remanc, etc.

Peculiar Forms.

162. The following verbs have individual peculiarities that call for special mention:—

(1) Anar (＜ annāre), ‘to go’, takes most of its present from vadĕre: indicative, vau vauc (analogy of estau estauc), vas, va vai (analogy of fai), anám, anátz, van vaun (analogy of estan estaun); subjunctive, an or vaza (＜ vadam) vaia (analogy of vai and of traia), vaga (analogy of traga), etc.; imperative, vai (analogy of fai), anátz.

(2) Aucire (＜ occīidĕre: § 43) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. auci (＜ occīdit) and aucis (analogy of aucizém, aucizétz). Cf. auzir, caire, rire, traire, vezér. These forms were doubtless helped by the analogy of ditz (＜ dīcit), dütz, fatz, iatz, letz (＜ lĭcet), platz, tatz.

(3) Auzir (＜ audīre) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. au (＜ audit) and aus (analogy of auzém, auzétz). Cf. aucire, caire, rire, traire, vezér. See also § 160.

(4) Aver (＜ habēre) has in the pres. indicative: ai (＜ habeo: § 73, βy), as, a, avém, avétz (see §§ 167, 168), an aun; see § 137, (1). There is no trace of ✱ho. Instead of ai, the dialects of Aude, Tarn, Tarn et Garonne, and Haute-Garonne have ei (cf. Gram., II, p. 304), which probably developed first in the future (§ 152, 1) through the analogy of the preterit ending -ei which took the place of -ai: amāvi ✱amai ＞ ✱amai amei (§ 175), then amarai ＞ amarei, then ai ＞ ei. The pres. subjunctive is aia (＜ habeam: § 73, βy). For the imperative, see § 156.

(5) Caire cazér (＜ cadĕre ✱cadēre) has in the pres. indicative 3d sg. ca (＜ cadit) cai (analogy of brai ＜ ✱bragit, fai, trai ＜ ✱tragit, vai) cas (analogy of cazém, cazétz: cf. aucire, auzir, rire, traire, vezér).

(6) Conóisser (＜ cognōscĕre) has in the pres. indicative 1st sg. conosc (＜ cognōsco) and conóis (analogy of 2d and 3d sg., conóisses, conóis).

(7) Creire (＜ crēdĕre): pres. subjunctive creza (＜ crēdam) and crega (analogy of diga, sega, traga). See also § 160.

(8) Créisser (＜ crēscĕre): pres. subjunctive cresca (＜ crēscam) and crega (analogy of diga, sega, traga, and of the imperfect subjunctive cregués).

(9) Dar (＜ dare): dau (＜ ✱dao), daun (＜ ✱daunt); see § 137, (1).

(10) Destruire (＜ ✱destrūgĕre = destruĕre): analogy of agĕre, tĕgĕre, etc. Cf. traire. ✱Destrūgit ＞ destrüi.

(11) Dever (＜ debēre) has in the pres. indicative 1st sg., beside dech dei (§ 160), dec (analogy of dic, prec, sec, trac, and perhaps of the preterit dec).

(12) Dire (＜ dīcĕre): dic (＜ dīco) diu (cf. § 51, 3; § 65, G, 1); ditz (＜ dīcit) di (analogy of fai, trai, and of imperative di ＜ dīc); dízon (analogy of ditz, dizém, dizétz); diga dia (both ＜ dīcam: § 65, G). For the imperative, see § 156.

(13) Düire (＜ dūcĕre): dütz (＜ dūcit) düi (analogy of destrüi, trai).

(14) Eissir (＜ exīre): iesc, iescon, iesca, analogy of conosc, florisc, etc.; for vowel, see § 159, (2).

(15) Ésser estre (＜ ✱ĕssĕre = ĕsse). Pres. indicative: sŭm ＞ sọn sọ (§ 82, M), then, by the analogy of ai and füi, sọi süi; ĕs became ęst ięst, perhaps through ĕs tu ＞ ęs-t-u ＞ ęst-tü, supported by the analogy of the preterit ending of the 2d sg. (vọs vendętz, tü vendęst or vendięst, so, to match vọs ętz, a form tü ęst or ięst); ĕst became ẹs, probably through such combinations as quẹ’s (understood as qu’ẹs); sīmu’, which existed in Latin beside sŭmus (Rom., XXI, 347), gave sẹm, while from ĕstis there was constructed an ✱ĕsmus ＞ ęsmes (rare), and from ętz a form ẹm (very common); ĕstis ＞ ęstz ętz (§ 78, 2); sŭnt ＞ sọn sǫ (§ 83, Nt). Pres. subjunctive: sĭm, sīs, etc., were replaced in V. L. by ✱sĭam, ✱sĭas, etc. (on the analogy of fiam, faciam, etc.), which gave sía sías sía siám siátz, sían síon; we find also sẹia, etc., formed apparently on deia, veia. Imperative borrowed from subjunctive.

(16) Estar (＜ stare). Pres. indicative: estáu (＜ ✱stao) estáuc (§ 161); estás (＜ stas); está (＜ stat) estái (analogy of fai, trai); estám (＜ stamu’); estátz (＜ statis) estáitz (after faitz); están (＜ stant) estáun (＜ ✱staunt); see § 137 (1). Pres. subjunctive: estía, etc., estéia, etc., patterned on sia, seia; also estéi, perhaps a cross between esteia and ✱esté ＜ stem. Imperative: está, estáitz.

(17) Faire far (＜ facĕre ✱fare): § 137, (1). Pres. indicative: fatz (＜ facio) fau (analogy of dau, estau) fac fauc (§ 161); fas (＜ ✱fas); fatz (＜ facit) fa (＜ ✱fat) fai (influence of faire, faim, faitz, and of trai); faim (＜ facĭmu’: § 167, 1) fam (＜ ✱famu’) fazém (see fazétz); faitz (＜ facĭtis) fatz (＜ ✱fatis) fazétz (analogy of regular verbs, crezétz, etc.); fan (＜ ✱fant) faun (analogy of daun, estaun). Pres. subjunctive: faça fassa, etc. (＜ faciam, etc.). Imperative: fai (＜ fac); fatz faitz (borrowed from indicative) fait (＜ facĭte).

(18) Iazér (＜ jacēre), also iassér (influence of ias ＜ iatz ＜ jacet, and of iassa?): iatz (＜ jacet) iai (analogy of fai, trai); iassa (＜ jaceam) iaia (analogy of traia, vaia).

(19) Movér móure (＜ movēre ✱mŏvĕre): mova (＜ ✱mŏvam = mŏveam) moga (analogy of traga).

(20) Partir (＜ partīre): part (＜ ✱parto = partio) parc (§ 161); so parta parga.

(21) Perdre (＜ pĕdĕre): pert perc, perda perga; see § 161.

(22) Plazér plaire (＜ placēre ✱placĕre): platz (＜ placet) plai (analogy of fai, trai); plassa (＜ placeam) plaia (analogy of traia, vaia).

(23) Podér (＜ ✱potēre = pŏsse): see § 137, (1). Pres. indicative: posc (＜ pŏssum influenced by cognōsco) puosc puesc (analogy of puoc puec ＜ pŏtui), puecs (? ＜ ✱pots ＜ ✱pŏtsum + puesc), pois (＜ ✱pŏsseo); potz (＜ pŏtes); pot (＜ pŏtet = pŏtest); podém (＜ ✱potēmu’); podétz (＜ ✱potētis); póden (＜ ✱potent) pódon, pon (analogy of potz, pot, and son ＜ sŭnt). Pres. subjunctive: posca puosca puesca (like posc puosc puesc), etc.; poissa (＜ ✱pŏsseam), etc.

(24) Prendre (prĕndĕre = prehĕndĕre) penre (see § 71, end): pren (＜ prĕndo) prenh (analogy of tenh, venh) prenc (§ 161); so prenda prenha prenga.

(25) Rire (＜ ✱rīdĕre): ri (＜ rīdet) ritz (analogy of rizém, rizétz: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, traire, vezér); ria (＜ rīdeam?).

(26) Sabér (＜ ✱sapēre): see § 137, 1. Pres. indicative: sai sei (analogy of ai ei from avér); saps; sap; sabém (＜ ✱sapēmu’); sabétz (＜ ✱sapētis); sáben (＜ ✱sapent) sábon. Pres. subjunctive: sapcha (＜ sapiam). Imperative from subjunctive.

(27) Tazér taire (＜ tacēre ✱tacĕre): tatz (＜ tacet) tai (analogy of taire and of fai, trai).

(28) Tenér (＜ tenēre): tenh (＜ tĕneo) tenc (§ 161); so tenha tenga.

(29) Traire (＜ ✱tragĕre, perhaps also ✱tracĕre, = trahĕre): trac (＜ ✱trago or ✱traco) trai (§ 63, 6)[120]; trai (＜ ✱tragit) tra (analogy of da, esta, fa, va) tratz (＜ ✱tracit?: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, rire, vezér); trázon (analogy of tratz); traga traia (both ＜ ✱tragam).

(30) Vezér (＜ vidēre): vei (＜ vĭdeo) vec (§ 161); ve (＜ vĭdet) ves (analogy of vezém, vezétz: cf. aucire, auzir, caire, rire, traire). Imperative from subjunctive.

(31) Volér (＜ ✱volēre = vĕlle): see § 137, (1). Pres. indicative: vuelh (＜ ✱vŏleo); vols (＜ ✱vŏles); vol (＜ ✱vŏlet); volém (＜ ✱volēmu’)[121]; volétz (＜ ✱volētis); vólon (＜ ✱vŏlent). Pres. subjunctive: vuelha (＜ ✱vŏleam), vuelhas, vuelha, vulhám, vulhátz, vuelhan. Imperative from subjunctive.

163. In verse the present subjunctive ending -ia sometimes counts as one syllable: si͡atz. Cf. § 153, 1.

Personal Endings[122].

164. (1) In the first person singular final -o and -em regularly disappeared: amo ＞ am, amem ＞ am. When, however, the -o or -em was preceded by a consonant group requiring a supporting vowel (§ 52), the ending was regularly retained as -e: dŭbĭto ＞ dọpte, sŭffĕro ＞ suffre, trĕmŭlem ＞ tremble.

Through the analogy of ai, crẹi, dẹi, sọi, vẹi, and the 1st pers. sg. of the preterit, this -e was in the indicative generally changed at an early date to -i: ✱cŏpĕro ＞ cǫbre cǫbri, ✱opĕro ＞ ǫbre ǫbri; so ĭmpleo ✱ĭmplo ＞ ompli. This -i (occasionally -e) was then taken as a distinctive ending of the 1st pers. sg., and was added to many verbs that needed no supporting vowel: auzir, au auze; azorar, azọr azọri; cantar, can canti; cọrre, cọr cọrri; mẹtre, mẹt mẹti; prezar, prętz pręzi; remirar, remir remire remiri; respondre, respon respondi; sentir, sen senti; vẹndre, vẹn vẹndi.

In the subjunctive, when a final vowel was required, -e was usually kept; it was also extended to some verbs that did not need it: acabe, dọne, mire, plọre. Very rarely an unnecessary -i was added instead of -e: laissar, lais laissi.

(2) The ending -am regularly gave -a: audiam ＞ auia.

165. In the second person singular final -as regularly remained, and -ēs and -ī̆s became -s (or, when a supporting vowel was required, -es): amas ＞ amas; valēs ＞ vals, sapĭs ＞ saps, partīs ＞ partz; dŭbĭtēs ＞ dọptes. Cf. § 82, S. Sometimes, especially in late texts, -s is expanded into -es: canz cantes, partz partes, saps sabes, vals vales; so floris florisses, etc.

Final -a remained, and -ē̆ and -ī fell: ama ＞ ama, tĕne ＞ ten, crēde ＞ crẹ, partī ＞ part.

166. In the third person singular final -at became -a, -ĕt and -ĭt fell (but remained as -e when a supporting vowel was needed): amat ＞ ama, amet ＞ am, tĕnet ＞ ten te, vĕnit ＞ ven ve; trĕmŭlet ＞ tremble. Cf. § 82, T.

167. In the first person plural the final -s disappeared early, s being perhaps regarded as a distinctively second person ending[123]. The rare form ęsmes = sŭmus is the only one that retains the s: cf. § 162, (15).

Then -āmu’, -ēmu’ gave regularly -am, -ẹm: cantāmus ＞ cantám, habēmus ＞ avẹm. Likewise -ĭmu’, through the analogy of -āmu’, -ēmu’, came to take the accent on its penult, and then regularly developed into -ẹm: crēdĭmus ✱credĭ́mu’ ＞ crezẹm. This -ẹm of the second and third conjugations passed into the fourth, and entirely displaced the -im that would have been the regular representative of -īmu’: partīmus ＞ ✱partím partẹm.

1. In faim ＜ facĭmu’ the old accentuation apparently survives: cf. § 52, (4), 1.

2. In some dialects of Béarn, Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné, -m apparently becomes -n: devén, havén, volén; so aurián, trobarén, segrián (cf. § 152, 1; § 153, 1). Cf. § 65, M, 1.

168. In the second person plural -ātis regularly gave -atz: amātis ＞ amatz, audiātis ＞ auiatz. The regular form from -ētis is -ẹtz, which we find kept in the future (veirẹtz) and in the present subjunctive (cantẹtz); in the present indicative it was replaced by -ętz, probably through the analogy of ętz ＜ ĕstis: habētis ＞ avẹtz avętz, ✱potētis ＞ podẹtz podętz, so sezętz, valętz, etc.; the rare avẹtz and podẹtz are the only forms that preserve ẹ. The ending -ĭtis, taking the accent on its penult (cf. § 167), became ✱-ẹtz, then -ętz: crēdĭtis ＞ crezętz. This -ętz also displaced the -itz that would have been regular in the fourth conjugation: partītis ＞ partętz.

The final -tz was reduced, in some of the principal dialects, to -s (§ 64): cantás, sezęs, partęs. In other dialects it was replaced very early by -t (§ 64): auiát, avęt, passát, podęt; so partirẹt, etc.

1. In faitz ＜ facĭtis the old accentuation apparently survives.

169. In the third person plural -ant, -ent, -unt gave respectively -an -ant, -en, -on -o (§ 83, Nt): amant ＞ áman ámant, audiant ＞ áuian áuiant; valent ＞ válen, ament ＞ ámen; vēndunt ＞ vẹndon vẹndo. In Languedoc -an was replaced by -on or -o in the 13th century; in other regions, later: ámon, chanto ls, coménso l. The Boeci has -en for -an: amen, monten. In Gascony and some of the Limousin territory -en partially displaced -on (floríssen, párten, vẹnden), elsewhere -on or -o displaced -en (válon).

IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.

170. In the first conjugation -abam regularly gave -ava. In the second, through the analogy of aβéa ＜ habēbam (§ 153), -ēbam came to be replaced, in southern Gaul, by -éa, which regularly changed to -ía (§ 26). In the third, -iēbam regularly became -ēbam (§ 40, 1); and this and original -ēbam were replaced by the -éa ＞ -ía of the second conjugation. In the fourth, -ībam, which had in the accented syllable the characteristic vowel of the conjugation, crowded out -iēbam; -ībam then lost its β through the analogy of the second and third conjugations. We have, then, in Provençal, only two sets of endings: -áva, etc., in the first conjugation; -ía, etc., in the second, third, and fourth.

amávavezíafazíapartía

amávasvezíasfazíaspartías

amávavezíafazíapartía

amavámveziámfaziámpartiám

amavátzveziátzfaziátzpartiátz

amávanvezíanfazíanpartían

1. In poetry ía is sometimes counted as one syllable: avi͡an, devi͡an.

2. For some subsequent developments of western dialects, see Meyer-Lübke, Gram., II, p. 326.

3. For the personal endings, see §§ 164-169.

4. Esser has: ęra, ęras, ęra, erám, erátz erás, ęran ęron ęro.

PRETERIT, OLD CONDITIONAL, AND IMPERFECT SUBJUNCTIVE.

171. These parts are all formed from the same stem, that of the Latin perfect: cf. § 141, (2). Ex.: cantęi, cantęra, cantęs; vendęi, vendęra, vendęs; partí, partíra, partís; vi, vira, vis; dẹc, dẹgra, deguẹs.

Preterit.

172. Preterits which stress the ending throughout are called weak; those which do not stress the ending throughout are called strong: partí, partíst, partí, partím, partítz, partíron is weak; saup, saubíst, saup, saubém, saubétz, sáubron is strong. Verbs of the first and fourth conjugations regularly have weak preterits (amęi, finí). Verbs of the second and third, with very few exceptions, originally had strong preterits (placuī ＞ plac, fēcī ＞ fis): many of them, however, developed weak preterits either in Vulgar Latin or in Provençal (irasquęi, nasquęi, tessęi tesquęi, visquęi); some assumed a weak form in -í in the 1st pers. sg. (dis dissí, pris prenguí, remas remanguí, trais traguí: cf. §§ 173, 177); quęrre, on the other hand, substituted a strong preterit (quis, etc.) for a weak one.

173. (1) Final -ī, in the first pers. sg., doubtless remained through the earlier stages of Provençal (habuī ＞ águi, dīxī ＞ díssi): cf. § 51, (2). Before it fell, it changed an accented ẹ in the preceding syllable to i (vēnī ✱vēnuī ＞ ✱vẹngui vinc): cf. § 27; occasionally, however, the ẹ was kept, through the analogy of the other persons (pris prẹs). Sometimes, instead of falling, the -i took the accent (following the analogy of the fourth conjugation) and remained: águi ＞ ac or aguí, díssi ＞ dis or dissí (cf. § 177).

When the -i was immediately preceded by an accented vowel, it regularly formed a diphthong with that vowel, and did not fall (fuī ＞ füi): cf. § 51, (3); but -íi was simplified to -i (partīvī partīī ＞ partí).

Before enclitic l, -ei -iei were often reduced to -e -ie: cantiel.

(2) In the 2d pers. sg., -stī became -st, a preceding ẹ being changed to i (§ 27): partīstī ＞ partíst, debuĭstī ＞ deguíst; sometimes, through the analogy of the 2d pers. pl., ẹ remains (venguẹst: cf. § 27, 2). Occasionally the final -t disappears: anięst anięs, fezíst fezís.

(3) The -t of the 3d pers. sg. was lost in strong preterits: placuit ＞ plac, vīdit ＞ vi. In weak preterits, it was retained by most dialects after é, and by many after í: donęt donę, vendęt vendę; partí partít. Cf. § 82, T.

(4) In the 1st pers. pl., -mus -mu’ (see § 167) was reduced to -m: vīdĭmu’ ＞ vim.

(5) The -stis of the 2d pers. pl. regularly became -tz (§ 78, 2), later in many dialects -s (§ 64): debuĭstis ＞ deguẹtz deguẹs.

(6) The -runt of the 3d pers. pl. regularly gave -ron or -ro (§ 83, Nt): partīrunt ＞ partíron partíro, vīdĕrunt ＞ viron viro. In some dialects -en is substituted for -on: fŭĕrunt ＞ fọron fọren (cf. § 169).

The e before -runt, which in classic Latin was usually long, was always short in Vulgar Latin when it was preserved at all: amavĕrunt ＞ amārunt, fēcĕrunt.

Weak Preterits.

174. (1) In the first and fourth conjugations we find in Latin the following endings:—

-āvī -āī-āvĭmus-īvī -īī-īvĭmus

-āvĭstī -āstī-āvĭstis -āstis-īvĭstī -īstī-īvĭstis -īstis

-āvit -aut-āvēre -āvē̆runt -ārunt-īvit -īit -īt-īvēre -īvē̆runt -īrunt

The popular speech preferred in every case the shortened form, and generally reduced -āvĭmus, -īvĭmus to -āmus, -īmus (in southern Gaul -āmu’, -īmu’: § 167), on the analogy of the 2d pers. sg. and pl.

(2) In the second conjugation a few verbs (delēre, flēre, nēre, -olēre, -plēre, viēre) had similar endings (delēvī, etc.), which were doubtless contracted in like fashion in so far as these words were in common use. Most verbs of this conjugation, however, had strong preterits (tacēre, tacuī; vidēre, vīdī; etc.).

(3) The third conjugation had in classic Latin no weak endings corresponding to those of the first, second, and fourth; but the vulgar speech developed a set in the following manner. Compounds of dare formed their perfect in -dĭdī (perdĭdī); this -dĭdī, in accordance with the principle set forth in § 16, 3, came to be pronounced -dę́dị (condédi); and -dędị, probably through dissimilation[124], was shortened to -dęi (✱credéi). With this form as a starting-point, a weak preterit was created on the analogy of those of the other conjugations, the endings being something like -ęi, -ęstị, -ęt, -ęmus -ęmu’, -ęstis, -ęrunt. This inflection was probably extended to some verbs outside the -dĕre class (✱battéi, etc.?).

175. (1) In Provençal the weak inflection disappeared from the second conjugation, delēre and -plēre passing into the fourth, and the other weak verbs going out of use.

(2) Verbs of the fourth conjugation (except venir) all took the weak endings -í, -íst, -í, -ím, -ítz, -íron: partí, partíst, partí, partím, partítz, partíron. Irregular verbs either disappeared or became regular (sensī = sentí), with the exception of venīre ＞ venir (vinc).[125]

(3) The new weak endings of the third conjugation developed into -ęi, -ęst, -ęt, -ém, -ętz, -ęron: vendęi, vendęst, vendęt, vendém, vendętz, vendęron. In the 1st pers. sg. the ę often broke (vendięi), and the diphthong was sometimes carried into the 2d pers. sg. (vendięst). These endings were considerably extended in Provençal (cazęt, etc.), and were occasionally attached to a strong preterit stem (nasquęt, tesquęt, venquęt, visquęt). Most verbs, however, kept their strong preterit (mis, conọc). The -īvī perfect disappeared from the third conjugation: quæsīvit ＞ ✱quæsit ＞ quẹs.

(4) The first conjugation discarded its own weak endings, and substituted those of the third: cantęi cantięi, cantęst cantięst, cantęt, cantém, cantętz, cantęron. This strange phenomenon seems to have originated as follows: dare, dĕdī ＞ dar, dęi; from dar the ending -ęi was readily extended to estar (estęi); and from these two very common verbs it spread to the whole first conjugation.

Irregular verbs (except dare, stare) either disappeared or became regular.

1. According to Meyer-Lübke, Gram., II, p. 304, Latin -ai became by phonetic process -ęi in Vulgar Latin, and -ęi or -ięi in Provençal. There seems to be no evidence to support this theory. Cf. § 23, 2.

2. In the dialects of Béarn and Catalonia the original a remains in some parts of the preterit.

176. A final -c, which developed in the strong -ui preterits (§ 184), often became attached to the 3d pers. sg. of weak preterits of the fourth conjugation: floríc, fugíc, iauzíc, partíc.[126] It was sometimes extended to other weak preterits: chantęc, entendęc, nasquęc,[127] paręc.[128] We find also a 3d pers. pl. cazęgron, etc., and even a 1st pers. sg. ameguí, etc. In some western dialects the final -c was adopted by the whole first conjugation: donęc, portęc, etc.

177. Some strong preterits occasionally assumed weak endings:—

(1) In the 1st pers. sg. several verbs in -s sometimes either added an -í or shifted the stress to an originally unaccented final -i (cf. §§ 172, 173): dis dissí, pris presí, quis quesí, respos respozí. A few verbs in -c did the same: aic aiguí, bẹc beguí, conọc conoguí, saup saubí, vinc venguí, vǫlc volguí. An ending -guí being thus established, this syllable was sometimes added to preterits not of the -c class: costrenguí, destrenguí, prenguí, remanguí, restrenguí, traguí.

(2) In the 3d pers. sg. weak endings are rare: ac aguęt, vẹnc venguęt.

(3) In the 3d pers. pl. the weak ending is not uncommon in -s preterits: diron dissęron, düistrent düissęron, mẹsdren mezęron, prẹson presęron, remastrent remazęron, traissęron. We probably have to deal here, as in (1), with a shift of accent—dīxĕrunt ＞ ✱dísseron ＞ dissęron, etc.: see § 49, (2). The same thing may be true of such a form as aguęron, beside ágron, from ✱áβwerunt = habuĕrunt; such a form as visquęron, on the other hand, is doubtless imitative.

Strong Preterits.

178. (1) The reduplicative perfects were discarded in Vulgar Latin, with the exception of dĕdi (and its compounds) and stĕti, whose reduplicative character was no longer apparent. Cecĭdī became ✱cadui or ✱cadéi; the rest either disappeared or passed into the -sī class: cucŭrrī ＞ ✱cŭrsī, momŏrdī ＞ ✱mŏrsī, pepĕndī ＞ ✱pē(n)sī, pupŭgī ＞ ✱punxī, tetĕndī ＞ ✱tē(n)sī, tetĕgī ＞ ✱taxī ✱tanxī.

(2) The -i perfects were greatly reduced in number in Vulgar Latin. Some disappeared (ēgī), some became weak (fūgī ＞ ✱fugīī ＞ fügí); others passed into the -sī or the -uī class: prehĕndī ＞ ✱prē(n)sī ＞ pris; bĭbit ＞ ✱bĭbuit ＞ bẹc, vēnit ＞ ✱vēnuit ＞ vẹnc. In Provençal only three -ī verbs remained: fēcī ＞ fis, fuī ＞ füi, vīdī ＞ vi.

(3) Of the -sī class (including -ssī and -xī) over twenty verbs were preserved in Vulgar Latin (dīxī, excŭssī, mīsī, traxī, etc.), and about the same number passed into this class from others (absco(n)sī, ✱fraxī ✱sŭrsī, etc.): cf. (1) and (2) above. In Provençal nearly half the verbs of the second and third conjugations have -sī preterits: rema(n)sī ＞ remas, ✱respō(n)sī ＞ respọs[129].

(4) The -uī class held its own very well in Vulgar Latin (placuī, etc.) and received some additions (natus sum ＞ ✱nacuī, sustŭlī ＞ ✱tŏluī, vēnī ＞ ✱vēnuī, vīcī ＞ ✱vĭncuī, vīxī ＞ ✱vīscuī, etc.)[130]. To this class belonged, in Vulgar Latin (and, according to Meyer-Lübke[131], in classic Latin also), all perfects in -vī, this ending being pronounced -wŭī, later -wwị or -βwị: cognōvī ＞ ✱conōvuī ＞ conọc, crēvit ＞ ✱crēvuit ＞ crẹc, mōvī ＞ ✱mŏvuī ＞ mǫc. Cf. § 148. In Provençal not far from half the verbs of the second and third conjugations have -uī preterits. For a combination of a -c ＜ -uī stem with a weak ending, see § 175, (3). For the extension of -c ＜ -uī to other conjugations, see § 176.

179. In the 1st pers. pl. the accent was shifted to the ending, to make this form correspond to the 2d pers. sg. and pl.: fēcĭmus ＞ ✱fēcĭ́mu’ ＞ fezẹm (cf. fecĭstī ＞ fezist, fecĭstis ＞ fezẹtz), ✱prē(n)sĭmus ＞ ✱presĭ́mu’ ＞ prezẹm, debŭĭmus ＞ deβwĭ́mu’ ＞ deguẹm. Exceptions are fŭĭmus ＞ fọm, vīdĭmus ＞ vim; in these verbs the 2d pers. forms also are monosyllabic (füst, fọtz; vist, vitz).

180. We find in some verbs an irregular 3d pers. pl. without -r-, made by adding -on or -en to the 3d pers. sg., the final consonant of which is voiced in all verbs in which it is voiced in the other persons of the plural: (aucire) aucis, aucíson; (plánher) plais, pláisson; (prenre) prẹs, prẹson; (remanre) remas, remáson; (venir) vẹnc, vẹnguen; (volẹr) vǫlc, vǫlgon.

1. Prenre has preiron (beside preson preseron), probably through the analogy of feiron ＜ fēcĕrunt. Mairon, from maner, is perhaps to be explained in the same way.

181. (1) Through the change of -e- to -i- by the influence of a final -ī, as described in § 173, (1), a distinction was established between the first and the third person singular of some preterits: crēvī ＞ cric, crēvit ＞ crẹc; fēcī ＞ fis, fēcit ＞ fẹs; ✱prē(n)sī ＞ pris, ✱prē(n)sit ＞ prẹs; tĕnuī ✱tēnuī[132] ＞ tinc, tĕnuit ✱tēnuit ＞ tẹnc; vēnī ✱vēnuī[132] ＞ vinc, vēnit ✱vēnuit ＞ vẹnc. Mẹtre, also, has mis, mẹs, which may come from ✱mĭssī ✱mĭssit (cf. mĭssum) = mīsī, mīsit; or perhaps mis comes from mīsī and mẹs is analogical. Through the analogy of such forms, quęrre has quis, quẹs. In the preterit of podẹr, both pŏtuī and pŏtuit would regularly have given pǫc puǫc puęc (§ 37), but pǫc was kept for the 3d person, and puǫc puęc was used for the 1st. The preterit of volẹr differentiates the two persons similarly—vuęlc, vǫlc; here the diphthong (perhaps under the influence of puęc) is borrowed from the present, where we have ✱vŏleo ＞ vuęlh, ✱vŏlet ＞ vǫl (§ 37). Avẹr, likewise, borrows a distinction from the present: aic, ac reproduce the vowels of ai, a; aic + aguí ＞ aiguí.

(2) For -í as a characteristic of the first person, see § 177, (1).

(3) For -c as a distinctive mark of the third person, see § 176.

182. The three -ī perfects developed in Provençal as follows:—

(1) Facĕre ＞ faire (✱fare ＞ far) has:

fēcī＞fis, fezífēĭmus ✱fēcĭ́mu’＞fezẹm

fēcĭ́stī＞fezíst fezísfēcĭstis＞fezẹtz fezẹs

fēcit＞fẹtz fẹsfēcĕrunt＞fẹiron fẹiro

1. We do not find, in the 1st pers. sg., as we should expect (§ 65, C´), fitz beside fis; doubtless the form came early under the influence of mis, pris, quis, etc. For fezí, see § 177, (1). There is also a form fi, due, perhaps, to the analogy of vi ＜ vīdī; corresponding to fi are 3d pers. sg. fe, and pl. fem, fes, feron. A rare figuí is evidently made on the model of aiguí, etc. In the 3d pers. sg. we find also fei, which seems to be patterned after feiron or after the present fai.

(2) Esse (＞ ✱ĕssĕre ＞ ęsser ęstre) had originally a long u in the perfect. In literary Latin the u was shortened, but the popular speech seems to have kept ū beside ŭ. The Provençal 1st and 2d pers. sg. apparently come from fūī, ✱fūstī = fuĭstī (although Pr. füi might be taken from fŭī), while the other forms presuppose ŭ:

fūī＞füifŭĭmus ✱fŭmu’＞fọm

fūĭstī ✱fūstī＞füst füsfŭĭstis ✱fŭstis＞fọtz fọs

fŭit ✱fŭt＞fọ, fọn, fọncfŭĕrunt ✱fŭrunt＞fọron fọro, fọren

1. A rare fo in the 1st pers. sg. seems to be simply borrowed from the 3d. In the 3d pers. sg., fon beside fo is due to the analogy of -on -o in the 3d pers. pl., and, in general, of such double forms as bon bo, mon mo, son so, ton to: cf. § 63, (5). Fonc shows the influence of tenc, venc.

(3) Vidēre ＞ vezẹr has:

vīdī＞✱viði ✱við vi, vicvīdĭmus ✱vīdĭmu’＞✱viðmu ✱viim vim

vīdĭstī＞vist visvīdĭstis＞vitz vis

vīdit＞✱við vi, vit, vicvīdĕrunt＞✱viðrun viron viro

1. The 1st pers. sg. vic is patterned upon aic ＜ habuī, cric ＜ crēvi, etc. The 2d pers. forms are irregular, as we should expect ✱vezist, ✱vezetz: evidently the 2d pers. followed the analogy of the 1st and 3d. In the 3d pers. sg., vit and vic follow the model of partit, partic, etc.: see § 173, (3), and § 176.

183. In the -sī perfect the 3d pers. pl. presented difficulties. If the -e- of the penult fell, an s or z and an r were brought together. Most dialects apparently preserved the -e-, and shifted the accent to it (aucizęron, condüissęron, dissęron, prezęron, remazęron, traissęron), or else borrowed outright the weak ending (respondęron): cf. § 49, (2), and § 177, (3). Dialects which lost the -e- too early to follow this method, generally suppressed the sibilant (aucíron, diron, mẹron from mẹtre, remáron), or omitted the -r- and formed the 3d pers. pl. directly from the 3d pers. sg. (aucízon, pláisson, prẹzon, remázon: § 180), or else imitated a preterit of another class (mairon from manẹr, prẹiron from prenre, doubtless patterned after fẹiron ＜ fēcĕrunt); some borderland dialects kept the sibilant and the r, and developed a dental between them (düystrent ＜ dūxĕrunt, mẹsdren ＜ mīsĕrunt + ✱mĭssĕrunt: § 70, Sr, Zr).

As examples of the -sī perfect we may take the preterit of dire ＜ dīcĕre and penre prenre ＜ pr(eh)ĕndĕre:—

(1)

dīxī＞dis, dissídīxĭmus ✱dīxĭ́mu’＞dissẹm

dīxĭstī＞dissístdīxĭstis＞dissẹtz dissẹs

dīxit＞disdīxĕrunt＞dissęron, diron diro

(2)

✱prē(n)sī＞pris, prẹs, presí✱prē(n)sĭmus ✱prēsĭ́mu’＞presẹm

✱prē(n)sĭstī＞presíst✱prē(n)sĭstis＞presẹtz presẹs

✱prē(n)sit＞prẹs✱prē(n)sĕrunt＞presęron, prẹson, prẹiron

(3) Escriure ＜ scrībĕre has, beside escris ＜ scrīpsī, a preterit escrius (cf. p. p. escriut escrit escrich), in which the u is probably due to the influence of the infinitive.

(4) For dissí, presí, quesí, respozí, see § 177, (1). For pris prẹs, etc., see § 173, (1).

184. In the -uī perfect the development depends somewhat upon the consonant preceding the u. The treatment of the various cons. + w groups, which was discussed in § 72, may be illustrated by habuit ＞ ac[133], crēvit ✱crēvuit ＞ crẹc[134]; nŏcuit ＞ nǫc[135]; sēdit ✱sĕduit ＞ sęc, pŏtuit ＞ pǫc; valuit ＞ valc[136], tĕnuit ✱tēnuit ＞ tẹnc[137], mĕruit ＞ męrc; sapuit ＞ saup[138]: the noteworthy features are the change of u to -c (through w, gw, g), the absorption of the preceding consonant unless it be a liquid, a nasal, or a p, the preservation of the liquid or nasal, and the metathesis of the p.

Avẹr ＜ habēre, podẹr ＜ ✱pŏtēre pŏsse, volẹr ＜ ✱vŏlēre vĕlle, sabẹr ＜ ✱sapēre sapĕre will serve as examples (for the accentuation of the 3d pers. pl., see § 16, 2):—

(1)

habuī＞ac, aguí, aic, aiguíhabuĭmus ✱aβwĭ́mu’＞aguẹm

habuĭstī＞aguísthabuĭstis＞aguẹtz aguẹs

habuit＞achabuĕrunt＞ágron ágro, aguęron

1. For aguí (beguí, conoguí), see § 177, (1). For aic, aiguí, (cric), see § 181, (1). For aguęron (visquęron), see § 177, (3).

(2)

pŏtuī＞pǫc puǫc puęcpotuĭmus ✱potwĭ́mu’＞poguẹm

potuĭstī＞poguístpotuĭstis＞poguẹtz poguẹs

pŏtuit＞pǫc, pǫtpotuĕrunt＞pǫgron pǫgro

1. For puoc, see § 181, (1). Pot is apparently due to the combined influence of weak preterits and the parts of poder in which the dental is preserved.

(3)

vŏluī＞vǫlc, vuęlc, volguívoluĭmus ✱volwĭ́mu’＞volguẹm

voluĭstī＞volguístvoluĭstis＞volguẹtz volguẹs

vŏluit＞vǫlcvoluĕrunt＞vǫlgron vǫlgro

1. For vuelc (tinc, vinc), see § 181, (1); for volguí (venguí), § 177, (1).

(4)

sapuī＞saup, saubísapuĭmus ✱sapwĭ́mu’＞saubẹm

sapuĭstī＞saubístsapuĭstis＞saubẹtz saubẹs

sapuit＞saupsapuĕrunt＞sáubron sáubro, sáupron

1. For saubí, see § 177, (1). For sáupron (sáupra, saupés, saupút), see § 65, P, 3; cf. § 148, (2).

Old Conditional.

185. The old conditional came from the Latin pluperfect indicative, which had been supplanted in its pluperfect sense by a compound form, and was gradually restricted in its use to the functions of a preterit, a perfect conditional, and a simple conditional: see § 141, (2). In Provençal it had only the conditional meaning; and as the new conditional rendered it superfluous, it fell into disuse (with the exception of ágra and fọra) in the 13th and 14th centuries: see § 142, (2).

186. In the fourth conjugation the old conditional comes from the contracted form of the pluperfect (audīram ＜ audīvĕram). Weak verbs of the third conjugation constructed a similar form (✱vendęram). First conjugation verbs started with the contracted pluperfect (amāram ＜ amāvĕram), but in Provençal substituted ę for á, as in the preterit: § 175, (4). The Provençal types of the old conditional of weak verbs are, therefore, represented by: amęra, vendęra, auzíra. The inflection is as follows:—