Possession

This chapter of the Historical Latin Syntax traces the evolution and use of predicative possessive constructions from Archaic to Late Latin. We demonstrate that, far from being merely a so-called “be-language”, Latin is a language where the major possessive type is based on a transitive verb (habeo) since the archaic stage. A textual, contrastive analysis of the habeo x and mihi est x types proves that between these two constructions there is a functional differentiation (i.e. syntactic and pragmatic, while the semantic level is relevant only to a minor extent). This, thus, explains: their different occurrence in the Latin corpus; their division-of-labour and, therefore, their coexistence through the history of Latin; and, finally, the diahronic evolution towards the transitive type. A comparison between the mihi est x and the genitive predicative type, which are fully differentiated on a functional plane, completes the picture of the whole architecture of predicative possession in Latin. Consequences can be drawn on the general plane, as “mixted” types (i.e. languages that are both have- and be-), such as Latin, must be taken into consideration when we approach the typology of predicative possession. An analysis of attributive constructions is then offered, at the light of parameters such as: the order of the elements in the sequence, the definite status of the possessor/possessum constituents of the phrase, the semantic profile of the relation expressed, and the different morphological markers, etc.. Conclusions partly confirm previous hypotheses about the relation between the Latin stage and the Indoeuropean stage, while several generalizations from the typological point of view have to be adjusted (e.g. external possessor constructions). The part on predicative possession is mainly due to Andrea Nuti; the part on attributive possession mainly to Philip Baldi. However, as the whole chapter is the result of a deep, mutual work carried on in full cooperation, the authors have agreed not to state explicitly and neatly an author-to-pages correspondence