Where can working in tandem take us?: Romance Data Meets Grammaticalization Theory

WHERE CAN WORKING IN TANDEM TAKE US? ROMANCE DATA MEETS GRAMMATICALIZATION THEORY Natalya I. Stolova Colgate University This short essay was inspired by two of La cotón tea's recent publications: die Critical Cluster Historical Romance Linguistics: the Death ofa Discipline? organized and edited by Steven N. Dworkin (31.2) and its subsequent overview entitled "A Necessary Discipline: Historical Romance Linguistics" authored by Martin Maiden (32.2). The aforementioned pieces raise a number of issues related to the present state and the future of Romance philology, two ofwhich are the scope of current research in the field and the relation between Romance data and general linguistics. Several of the Cluster's essays express unease about the fact that the comparative and the diachronic approaches which characterized the discipline in earlier times are nowadays practically ignored. For example,Jerry R. Craddock observes that due to the scarcity of Pan-Romance studies, the picture that emerges from consulting the Lexikon der Romanistischen Linguistik can be best described as that of "fragmentation and dispersal" (2003: 20); Peter Koch claims that the historical component serves as the force which "holds Romance philology together at its innermost core" (2003: 42); and Steven N. Dworkin reminds us that "from the outset Romance linguistics was by definition historical and comparative" (2003: 13). As for the link between Romance philology and linguistic theory, the Cluster demonstrates that the field in question not only benefits from die developments in general linguistics, but also contributes to them. Ralph Penny, for instance, points out that Romance data have served as testing ground for general theories of grammaticalization, capitalization and exaptation, as well as for social network theory situated within die sociolinguistic approach (Penny 2003: 86). In Martin La CORoNiCA 34.1 (Fall, 2005): 243-52 244ForumLa coránica 34.1, 2005 Maiden's words, "the potential 'enemy within' is neglect of a truly comparative perspective on the Romance languages" and "the best route, politically, to ensure the prosperity of our subject in universities is for us to assert, loud and clear, that linguistics needs us" (2004: 221). In what follows, I would like to offer some thoughts on the interrelation between the two issues just mentioned. In the process of reading the Cluster one cannot fail to notice that one linguistic theorv irr particular, namely grammaticalization theory, is repeatedly brought up in essav after essay. A number ofcontributors (Steven N. Dworkin, Maria Teresa Echenique-Elizondo, Ralph Penny, John Charles Smith) refer to it to underscore its relevance lor the Romance data, or, as in the case ofJohannes Kabatek, to warn about its shortcomings. Peter Koch's essav "Historical Romance Linguistics and the Cognitive Turn" addresses the aforementioned theorv in more detail. Koch demonstrates that the Romance languages form a microcosm able to illustrate developments attested in other language families. For example, the path LOCATION > EXISTENCE (e.g., Italian c'è) is also present in Germanic (e.g., English there is): the path POSSESSION > EXISTENCE > LOCATION (e.g., French il (y) a, Spanish ha(y), Portuguese há, Catalan (hi I ha) corresponds to Greek éçi. Southern German es hat, Bulgarian ima, Swahili -na, Nubi fíí. etc. (Koch 2003: 45). The universal nature of these paths is not accidental: it can be explained by "cognitivelv natural métonymie or metaphorical bridges" (Koch 2003: 45). These bridges ofmétonymie and metaphorical nature manifest themselves in historical semantics as well. For instance, an ongoing research project entitled "Lexical Change - Polygenesis Cognitive Constraints" directed by Koch at the University ofTübingen has revealed a series of cross-linguistic tendencies in the development of body-part terminology; e.g., the metaphorical change from Latin TFlSTA 'bowl' into such Romance words for 'head' as French tête, Italian testa, arrd Old Spanish tiesta is parallel to the semantic history ofGerman Kopfand English noggin (Dworkin, in press). This microcosrnic quality', according to Koch, makes the Romance data particularly valuable for diachronic cross-linguistic studies undertaken within the cognitive framework. Taking Koch's lirre of thought as mv point of departure, I will argue that reiving on the theorv of grammaticalization not only gives Romance philology the opportunity to participate in a mutually beneficial dialogue with general linguistics, but also...