Generic and definite interpretations from Latin to Italian
Generic utterances refer to the regular way in which events or classes of events happen.
The same way, some NPs refer to the natural kinds to which individuals or classes of
individuals belong, more than to individuals or classes of individuals themselves. It is
then possible to distinguish between genericity at the phrase level and genericity at the
NP level (Carlson & Pelletier1995). Both of them have a morphosyntactic correlate.
Phrase genericity is related to aspectual morphology. Nominal genericity is related to
morphosyntactic properties of nouns. We have phrase genericity for istance in “gli occhi
sono lo specchio dell’anima” and nominal genericity in “devi guardare negli occhi di chi
ti parla” (or “i dinosauri sono estinti) (Delfitto 2005).
This two kinds of genericity, even if distinct, are related. The different behaviour of
English and Italian bare nouns shows this relation. Italian bare nouns cannot be
interpreted as proper nouns of natural kinds, while they can allow for an existential
interpretation under certain circumstances, as, for instance, when they are in object
position, like in “ho visto rifiuti perfino sull’Everest”, or, in subject position, only if they
are modified, like in “nell’Atlantico del Nord, iceberg di grandi dimensioni si staccano
dalla calotta polare.” (Delfitto & Zamparelli 2009). English bare nouns are interpreted
both as proper nouns of natural kinds, and as existential quantifiers. In both cases the
nominal genericity is strictly related to phrase genericity (Longobardi 1994, 1996). The
imperfective aspect determines the generic interpretation (Delfitto 2002).
Unlike English and Italian, Latin does not have the article, and this is important for the
expression of both definiteness and genericity. This work describes Latin generic
utterances and the occurrences of Latin proper nouns of natural kinds. The applicability
of the distinction between phrase and nominal genericity to Latin is investigated. The
relation between Latin expression of genericity and interpretation of Italian bare nouns
and generic utterances is stressed. Finally, a statistical analysis shows to which degree
some morphosyntactic features allow for a generic interpretation of utterances and NPs
both in Latin and in Italian, stressing the diachronic continuities/discontinuities
between these two languages in the expression of genericity and definiteness.
Keywords: genericity; bare nouns; natural kind; aspectuality; Italian; English; Latin.
Bibliography
Carlson, G. (1980). Reference to Kinds in English. New York: Garland.
Carlson, G., & Pelletier, F. (1995). The Generic Book. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago
Press.
Delfitto, D. (2005). Bare Plurals. In H. Van Riemsdijk, Blackwell Companion to Syntax (p.
214-259). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
Delfitto, D. (2002). Genericity in Language. Issues of Syntax, Logical Form and
Interpretation. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso.
Delfitto, D., & Zamparelli, R., (2009). Le strutture del significato. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Longobardi, G. (1995). Reference and Proper Names. A Theory of N-movement in Syntax
and Logical Form. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 609-665.
Longobardi, G. (1996). The Syntax of N-raising. A minimalist Theory. Uthercht: OTS
Working Papers.
Zamparelli, R. (2002). Definite and Bare Kind-Denoting Noun Phrases. In C. Beyssade, R.
Bok-Bennema, F. Drijkoningen, & P. Monachesi, Romance Languages and Linguistic
Theory 2000. (p. 305-342). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.