1
ACED 16
June 6, 2014, București
Four ‘silent’ constructions in Romanian
Mihaela Tănase-Dogaru
University of Bucharest
1. Introduction
- silent nouns, although lacking a phonetic matrix, are active in syntax
- all silent nouns are semi-lexical, i.e. they exhibit both lexical and functional features, and occupy the head of the
Classifier Phrase (see Tănase-Dogaru 2009).
- the most prominent representatives of this category are NUMBER, AMOUNT, YEAR, HOUR (Kayne 2002,
2003), KIND (Leu 2004), TOKENS (van Riemsdijk 2005), PLACE, TIME, PERSON (a.o. Corver 2008).
- the present paper: three silent nouns, NUMBER, AMOUNT and TYPE, in four constructions of Romanian.
- the paper is organized as follows: section 2 will analyse ce de-exclamatives and la-exclamatives in order to show
that these structures contain NUMBER and AMOUNT; section 3 will discuss de care-interrogatives, N de N
constructions and one particular type of imprecation, aiming to demonstrate that TYPE is part of their structure.
2. NUMBER and AMOUNT
Kayne (2002) analyses English degree quantifiers (many, much, little, few) as adjectives that always select silent
NUMBER and AMOUNT when they appear to modify count and mass nouns, respectively. The presence of the two
singular silent nouns can account for the odd behaviour of these quantifiers: in (1), NUMBER justifies the presence
of both the singular indefinite article and the quantifier every.
(1)
a. a few NUMBER students
b. every few NUMBER days
The postulation of an unpronounced NUMBER is supported by the fact that few can also modify its overt
counterpart (2a). A similar pattern may be identified in Romanian what-exclamatives on nouns, where overt number
may sometimes replace an otherwise silent classifier head (2b,c).
(2)
a. John has too few a number of books.
b. Ce număr mare de băieţi sunt la petrecere!
what number large of boy-pl are-3pl at party
‘What a large number of boys at the party!’
c. Ce de băieţi sunt la petrecere!
‘How many boys there are at the party!’
(Kayne 2003: 1)
In what follows, we will closely look at the construction illustrated in (2c), in an attempt to show that the silent
nouns NUMBER and AMOUNT can be part of its syntax.
2.1. Ce-exclamatives
2.1.1. NUMBER, AMOUNT and TYPE

This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS –
UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0959.
Sections 2.2, 3.1. and 3.2 were presented in co-authorship with Ioana Dumitrescu at the Said and the Unsaid
Conference, Vlore, 2011
.
2
Notice first that while the exclamation in (2c) is about the relatively large number of boys, (3a), where de (‘of’) is no
longer present, can only be about some salient property of the boys, for example their being handsome or tall. In this
respect, Romanian differs from languages like English or Dutch, where what-exclamatives are consistently
ambiguous between an interpretation involving the number of elements and one under which some other “relatively
excessive property” (van Riemsdijk 2005: 5), such as the size or deformation of the dents in (3b), is marvelled at:
(3)
a. Ce băieţi sunt la petrecere!
‘What boys there are at the party! (really handsome, tall, etc.)’
b. Wat heft die auto een deuken!
(van Riemsdijk 2005: 5)
what has dem car a dent-pl
‘What dents that car has!’
In Romanian, what appears to make the difference is the presence of de. It then seems safe to assume that the deconstruction involves the silent noun NUMBER, which selects for the preposition (4a), whereas the de-less
construction may be viewed as containing a silent TYPE / KIND (4b), introduced in Leu’s (2004) analysis of Dutch
wat voor constructions in order to account for the otherwise spurious occurrence of the indefinite article (4c).
(4)
a. Ce NUMBER de băieţi sunt la petrecere!
b. Ce TYPE băieţi sunt la petrecere!
c. Wat voor (een) TYPE jongens zijn dat?
what for (a) TYPE boy-pl are-3pl dem
‘What kind of boys are those?’
(Leu 2004: 5)
One argument in favour of NUMBER is the obligatory presence of de, recalling overt number (2b). This similarity
also explains the lack of number agreement between the silent noun and the verb in (2c): overt număr, which agrees
with the predicate as a lexical noun, denoting an actual number (5a), is not involved in agreement processes when it
is semi-lexical and close in meaning to some, behaving like a classifier (5b); NUMBER, which is semi-lexical by
virtue of being silent, will behave like its overt counterpart.
(5) a. Ciclul primar a fost urmat de un număr de copii ce a crescut de la 70% la 80% din total 1.
cycle-def elementary has been attended by a number of child-pl which has grown of at 70% at 80%
from total
‘Elementary school was attended by a number of children that grew from 70% to 80% of the total.’
b. De programele acestui centru au beneficiat un număr de copii şi tineri dezavantajaţi social2.
of program-pl-def dem-gen center have-3pl benefited a number of child-pl and youth-pl
disadvantaged-pl social
‘A number of socially disadvantaged children and youths benefited from the programs of this center.’
With mass nouns, the interpretation of the de-pattern seems to favour AMOUNT as a silent classifier (6a), whereas
the de-less pattern, which exclaims about some relevant property of the referent other than amount, probably
involves TYPE (6b). The idea that the presence of de is triggered by AMOUNT is supported by examples involving
abstract nouns (6c). The use of de is odd in such exclamations because AMOUNT is absent: abstract notions cannot
be quantified in the strict sense, i.e. their silent classifier cannot be AMOUNT, but rather TYPE, which does not
select de.
(6) a. Ce de vin a băut! = Ce AMOUNT de vin a băut!
what of wine has drunk
‘What an amount of wine did the guy drink!’
b. Ce vin au avut la petrecere! = Ce TYPE vin au avut la petrecere!
what wine have-3pl had at party
‘What a wine they had at the party!’ (good, etc)
c. ??Ce de bucurie la masa veselă!3
1
2
http://facultate.regielive.ro/referate/geografie_merceologie/lumea_a_treia_etiopia_si_brazilia-125472.html
http://ortodoxie.3x.ro/diverse/_______Biserica%20ortodoxa%20si%20fiii%20ei.html
3
what of joy at table-def cheerful-f
‘What joy at the cheerful table!’
► Ce-exclamations about nouns involve silent NUMBER whenever the preposition de precedes a plural countable
noun, silent AMOUNT when it precedes a mass noun, and the silent noun TYPE in the absence of the preposition, in
exclamations about some relevant property of the referent other than its (large) number/amount.
2.1.2. MANY NUMBER and MUCH AMOUNT
As suggested in Constantinescu (2007), a more fine-grained representation of ce de-exclamatives is the one in (7),
where the silent adjectives MANY and MUCH modify NUMBER and AMOUNT, respectively.
(7) a. Ce MANY NUMBER de băieţi!
b. Ce MUCH AMOUNT de vin!
The presence of MANY and MUCH is justified if we consider constructions involving the overt counterparts of
NUMBER and AMOUNT. If număr, for example, were modified by ce alone, as in (8), the reading would not
necessarily be that of ‘large number’, but rather a qualitative interpretation, as in (3a) above, referring to any
property of the number of boys, probably in the presence of silent TYPE.
(8) Ce număr de băieţi!
‘What a number of boys! (large, small, even, palindromic, etc.)’
If the quantitative reading requires that overt number be modified by an adjective expressing large size, such as
mare in (2b) above, it may be assumed that unpronounced NUMBER also needs to be modified by MANY in ce deexclamatives, whose superlative interpretation cannot be captured by the presence of NUMBER alone. The same
type of reasoning supports *(MUCH) AMOUNT in (7b). The semantic equivalence between (2c) and (9a) also
supports the presence of MANY as the modifier of NUMBER, whose occurrence in (9a) is triggered by its overt
licenser, mult. If MANY and MUCH do appear in these constructions, then ce is the degree word of the silent
adjective rather than a modifier of the silent noun itself. This becomes obvious when MANY/MUCH is overt, as in
(9a). Notice that de is no longer present in this case, which means it is the combination MANY NUMBER and not
NUMBER alone which selects it. The inappropriate use of overt mult, but also of its antonym puţin (‘few’), in ce deexclamatives (9b) shows that silent MANY must be present in these constructions.
(9) a. Ce mulţi NUMBER băieţi!
what many-pl NUMBER boy-pl
‘How many boys!’
b. Ce MANY NUMBER de băieţi frumoşi/*mulţi/*puţini!
‘How many handsome(/*many/*few) boys!’
►The trigger of the quantitative reading in ce-exclamatives is the unpronounced combination MANY NUMBER /
MUCH AMOUNT and not the silent noun alone. The construction discussed in the next section will serve as
evidence that the occurrence of these silent items is independent from ce and de and strictly related to the large
quantity reading of exclamatives.
2.2. La-exclamatives
As proposed in Dumitrescu (2010), MANY NUMBER and MUCH AMOUNT may underlie another exclamative
construction, specific to familiar Romanian, illustrated in (10). Uttered with a suspension intonation and vowel
lengthening, it is characterised by the presence of the preposition la (‘at’) introducing nouns whose number or
amount is thus qualified as superior.
3
http://ionutm.go.ro/eu/15iunie/ziuamea21.htm
4
(10) a. Am băut la bere de mi s-au umflat amigdalele cât cireaşa dar merită!4
have-1sg drunk at beer that cl-dat1sg refl3pl-have-3pl swollen tonsil-pl-def how+much cherrydef but worth-3sg
‘I’ve drunk so much beer that my tonsils got as big as cherries but it’s worth it!’
b. Da’ ştiu că ai văzut la filme zilele astea!5
but know-1sg that have-2sg seen at film-pl day-pl-def dem-f pl
‘How many films you’ve seen these days!’
Direct objects in Romanian do not normally require la, therefore its occurrence in these exclamations can be related
to their large quantity reading6. If, as in the case of ce de-constructions, this reading is attributed to MUCH
AMOUNT / MANY NUMBER, la can be viewed as a genitive marker, as it now follows a noun and not a verb. Its
otherwise odd occurrence, which forces traditional grammars to analyse la as a quantitative adverbial particle, is
then explained.
(11) a. Am băut MUCH AMOUNT la bere!
b. Ai văzut MANY NUMBER la filme!
Initially used as a genitive marker in popular Romanian, where it introduced plural nouns, la extended to all types of
nouns in non-standard variants of the language. It competes with morphological case (12a), being analysed as
slightly more precise in meaning (Avram 1986). La is also the familiar alternative to the a-genitive, employed when
morphological case cannot mark an invariable determiner (12b).
(12) a. Acoperişul la casa aia ţărănească e cam strâmb.7 = acoperişul casei
roof-def la house-def dem-f peasant-f is rather slant = roof-def house-gen
‘The roof of that peasant house is rather slant.’
b. Acoperişurile a patru case au fost distruse parţial.8
roof-pl-def a four house-pl have-3pl been destroyed-n pl partial
‘The roofs of four houses were partially destroyed.’
Consequently, la can be analysed as a possessive marker in (11), relating the overt nouns to silent
AMOUNT/NUMBER. Arguably, la cannot be partitive in such exclamatives – a possible argument is that pronouns,
which do not need MANY NUMBER / MUCH AMOUNT, do not have the same reading as nouns: (13) cannot be
read as ‘How much beer I drank!’ but has a partitive interpretation. The silent pair and partitive la thus exclude each
other, which means a partitive reading is blocked in (13).
(13) Am cumpărat multă bere. Şi am băut la ea!
have-1sg bought much-f beer and have-1sg drunk at it-f
‘I bought a lot of beer. And I kept drinking out of it!’
If the presence of la represents evidence for the two silent nouns, arguments for their silent adjectives are also
required. Overt much is felt as pleonastic when it modifies nouns in such constructions (14a), which means that
4
http://juvo.weblog.ro/2007-06.html
http://www.culinar.ro/forum/continut-pagina/5606/Ce-filme-ati-mai-vazut-si-v-au-placut-/pagina/420/
6
Exceptionally, in non-exclamative contexts, la may introduce direct objects with a partitive reading:
(i) Părul (...) şi-a plecat crengile-n jos; şi ea a mâncat la pere şi şi-a luat la drum câte i-au trebuit. (I. Creangă, Fata babei
şi fata moşneagului)
pear+tree-DEF CL-GEN3SG-has bent branch-PL-DEF-in down; and she has eaten at pear-PL and CL-DAT3SG-has taken
at road how+many-F CL-DAT3SG-have-3PL required
‘The pear tree bent down its branches; and she ate some of the pears and took as many as she needed for the trip.’
7
http://www.visualart.ro/forum/showthread.php?p=298436
8
www.evenimentul.ro/articol/grindina-a-facut-ravagii1.html
5
5
silent MUCH / MANY is already there. A continuation denying the large quantity reading is odd for the same reason
(14b).
(14) a. *Am băut la bere multă!
b. Am băut la bere! #Nu prea multă totuşi.
‘I drank so much beer! #Not too much though.’
►Romanian la-exclamatives contain MANY NUMBER / MUCH AMOUNT, with la as a possessive marker. This
construction shows that the large quantity reading which obtains in ce de-exclamatives is independent from whelements and prepositions, and may be attributed to silent nouns and their silent adjectives.
3. TYPE
Resuming the discussion on TYPE, the present section identifies other constructions of Romanian where this silent
noun may occur. Recall that the most important piece of evidence for TYPE in Dutch wat voor interrogatives is the
optional occurrence of the singular indefinite article, which cannot belong to the plural or mass overt nouns it
appears to introduce (15a). The presence of this silent noun is supported by the English translations, which
obligatorily contain overt counterparts of TYPE. Moreover, its overt Dutch counterparts, soort and slag, are
sometimes present in wat voor questions, in which case the indefinite article is also optional (15b).
(15) a. Wat voor (een) TYPE musea heb je bezocht?
what for a TYPE museum-pl have-2sg you-sg visited
‘What kind of museums did you visit?’
b. Wat voor (een) slag meisjes gaan naar die kroeg?
what for a type girl-pl go-3pl to dem bar
‘What kind of girls go to that bar?’
(Van Riemsdijk 2005: 1)
However, van Riemsdijk (2005) observes that the type interpretation is not the only possibility for wat voor
questions. The question in (15a) for instance can trigger the answer in (16a), denoting a type, or the one in (16b), in
which case the question asks for a list. The latter reading is only available in the absence of the singular indefinite
article and is argued to imply the presence of the silent noun TOKENS, assumed to be plural and therefore
compatible with the null indefinite plural article only.
(16) a. Musea voor moderne kunst.
‘Museums of modern art.’
b. Het Rijksmuseum en het Van Gogh museum.
‘The Rijksmuseum and the Van Gogh museum.’
(Van Riemsdijk 2005: 4)
Although he notes that “the idea that silent heads have a morphology is not obvious” (2005: 5), van Riemsdijk
suggests that the singular form TOKEN is also available, competing with TYPE in questions about referents of
singular nouns that can be interpreted as both mass and count, and in which TOKEN requires the presence of the
indefinite article:
(17) Wat heft Piet vor een TYPE/TOKEN wijn uitgezocht?
what has Pete for a TYPE/TOKEN wine selected
‘What kind of wine did Pete select?’
(Van Riemsdijk 2005: 5)
In Romanian, the counterparts of wat voor-interrogatives involve ce (18a) and two possible types of answer:
intensional - roşu (‘red’) in this case - and extensional - un Sânge de taur din 2002, a specific wine. Consequently,
it might be argued that TYPE and TOKEN(S) take invariable ce as their modifier. Unlike their Dutch counterparts,
Romanian ce-interrogatives contain no morpho-syntactic clue in favour of either silent noun –interpretation depends
exclusively on the context. With fel, an overt counterpart of TYPE grammaticalized in such questions, the only
possible answer is intensional (18b), which suggests that silent TYPE may also occur in ce-questions under this
reading.
(18) a. Ce TYPE / TOKEN vin ai cumpărat?
6
what TYPE / TOKEN wine have-2sg bought
‘What kind of a wine did you buy? / Which wine did you buy?’
b. Ce fel de vin ai cumpărat?
- Sec / Alb / ??O fetească albă de Cotnari din 1986.
‘What kind of a wine did you buy?’
- Dry / White / ??A 1986 Cotnari white Fetească.’
► In sum, there are no syntactic arguments for the presence of either TYPE or TOKEN(S) in ce-questions. An
interrogative construction where there is actual evidence for TYPE in Romanian is discussed below.
3.1. De care interrogatives
Unlike ce-questions, de care (literally of which) interrogatives are restricted to the type reading:
(19) De care vin poftiţi, întrebă călugărul, scoţând două gărăfi, Odobeşti ori Cotnari? (C. Hogaş, La Pângăraţi)
of which wine want-2pl asked-3sg monk-def taking+out two-f decanter-pl Odobeşti or Cotnari
‘What kind of a wine do you want, the monk asked, taking out two decanters, Odobeşti ori Cotnari?’
In (19), the speaker offers two options, two types of wine, a specific reading (implying TOKENS) being excluded in
such questions. The intensional reading of the overt noun can then be attributed to the silent noun TYPE, acting as
the former’s classifier. A related argument for the presence of TYPE in de care-questions is their incompatibility
with contexts which impose a specific, extensional reading: in (20a), the definite articles disallow a reading under
which the names of wine denote types, therefore (20b) is not an appropriate continuation unless it has a partitive
interpretation. The incompatibility between (20a) and (20b) may thus be attributed to the hypothesis that de care
always introduces TYPE under its prominent kind reading.
(20) a. Ţi-am spus să aduci din beci Tămâioasa Românească sau Grasa de Cotnari.
cl-dat2sg-have-1sg told subj bring-2sg from cellar Tămâioasă-def Romanian-f or Grasă-def of Cotnari
‘I told you to bring from the cellar the Romanian Tămâioasă or the Grasă de Cotnari.’
b. De care ai adus?
of which have-2sg brought
‘What kind did you bring? / Out of which did you bring an amount?’
Further evidence for the presence of TYPE comes from the English translation of such questions, which requires one
of its overt counterparts, and from their synonymy with ce fel de questions, illustrated above. Moreover, de carequestions also allow overt counterparts of TYPE, which means that the silent noun can be part of their syntax:
(21) a. De care tip de „control” şi ce fel de „îngrădire” reclamă de această dată colegii noştri din presă?9
of which type of control and what kind of obstruction denounce-3pl of dem-f time colleague-pldef poss-1pl from press
‘What type of control and what kind of obstruction do our colleagues of the press denounce this time?’
b. Nu ai precizat de care fel de ciuperci ai introdus în supă. 10
neg have-2sg specified of which kind of mushroom-pl have-2sg introduced in soup
‘You didn’t specify what kind of mushrooms you put in the soup.’
But the most important piece of evidence in favour of TYPE is perhaps the obligatory presence of the preposition
de, which appears to have no syntactic role, since it is not part of the predicate, as in (22a); in fact, it is not even
related to a specific case or syntactic function: a direct object in most cases, the overt noun may occasionally be a
subject (22b). It may then be argued that the preposition introduces TYPE just as it introduces its overt counterpart
in (22c), which may be the answer to (22d). Care will thus modify TYPE and not the overt noun, since the question
is actually about the type of wine and not simply about the wine. The dependency relation between TYPE and de is
highlighted by examples like (22e): such a sequence of prepositions would normally be ungrammatical in
Romanian, which means that de must be selected by a silent element; in its absence, the question is still valid but
9
http://www.cciasb.ro/fileadmin/user_upload/euro_economia_nr207_20_martie_2009.pdf
http://www.simonatache.ro/2009/05/20/am-fost-in-bucatarie/
10
7
about a specific drug, so the type reading may be attributed to this silent selector. As in the case of ce-exclamatives
containing TYPE, no preposition intervenes between the classifier and the overt noun. Note that the silent noun is
not a classifier in the strict sense of its “individuation with the purpose of reference” function (Tănase-Dogaru 2009:
84), i.e. not a unit of measure in all cases, as de care-interrogatives are not restricted to mass nouns like wine: with
countable nouns (22f), its function could be that of dividing the class denoted by the overt noun into types to be
selected.
(22) a. De care vin vorbeşti?11
of which wine talk-2sg
‘Which wine are you talking about?’
b. De care vin vă interesează?12
of which wine cl-acc2pl interests
‘What kind of wine are you interested in?’
c. Domeniile Clos des Colombes Terra Rossa este un vin de tip Bordeaux, asamblat din Merlot şi
Cabernet Sauvignon.13
Domain-pl-def Clos des Colombes Terra Rossa is a wine of type Bordeaux assembled from Merlot
and Cabernet Sauvignon
‘Domeniile Clos des Colombes Terra Rossa is a Bordeaux type of wine, assembled from Merlot and
Cabernet Sauvignon.’
d. De care vin e Domeniile Clos des Colombes Terra Rossa? = de care TYPE vin
‘What kind of a wine is Domeniile Clos des Colombes Terra Rossa?’
e. Matale cu de care drog te-ai tratat de ţi-a ars jumătate din creier?14
you-sg with of which drug cl-acc2sg-have-2sg treated that cl-dat2sg-has burnt half from brain
‘With what kind of a drug did you treat yourself so that it burnt half of your brain?’
f. Cum ai crede tu c-aş face eu una ca asta? Dar de care femeie mă crezi? (I. Creangă, Povestea lui
Ionică cel prost)
how cond-2sg believe you-sg that-cond-1sg do I one-f like dem-f but of which woman clacc1sg believe-2sg
‘How could you believe I would do something like that? What kind of a woman do you think I am?’
► TYPE and TOKENS, argued in van Riemsdijk (2005) to be part of the syntax of Dutch wat voor questions, may
also occur in their Romanian counterparts involving ce. De care-interrogatives were demonstrated to be restricted to
an intensional reading and to contain TYPE only.
3.2. Imprecations
Other constructions of Romanian where TYPE may appear are imprecations (23a,b) and hypocoristic exclamations
(actually endearing threats) (23c), in which the presence of de is unexpected: in non-exclamative contexts, either no
preposition (23d) or the accusative marker pe (23e) should precede the noun whose referent is ‘cursed’ in their
exclamative counterparts. A possible explanation for the insertion of de is the presence of silent TYPE, which can
readily be integrated into the semantics of these constructions.
(23) a. Bată-l Dumnezeu de turc!
(George Coşbuc, Dorobanţul)
beat-subj-cl-acc3sg m God of Turk
‘May God punish the Turk!’
b. Fir-aţi voi să fiţi de actori! Ce vă mai place să vorbiţi!15
11
12
http://morar.catavencu.ro/2008/03/01/vinul-saptaminii-e-din-africa-de-sud-ruby-cabernetmerlot-2004/
http://www.moldova-uk.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=230
13
http://www.closdescolombes.eu/scm/clos_des_colombes-romana-vinul/terra_rossa.mbs
14
http://www.realitatea.net/profesorii-banuiti-ca-ar-fi-implicati-in-fraudarea-examenului-de-bacalaureat.html
15
http://www.revistavip.net/Evenimente_VIP/Superlativele_VIP_2006_Audienta_record_de_personalitati._/37/
8
be-cond-2pl you-pl subj be-2pl of actor-pl what you-pl-dat more likes subj talk-2pl
‘Damn you actors! Don’t you just love to talk!’
c. Mânca-l-ar mama de băiat drăguţ şi scump!!!16
eat-cl-acc3sg m-cond-3sg mother-def of boy sweet and dear
‘He’s such a sweet and dear boy I could eat him up!’
d. Vreţi să fiţi actori şi să jucaţi într-un spectacol adevărat?17
want-2pl subj be-2pl actor-pl and subj perform-2pl in-a show real
‘Do you want to be actors and perform in a real show?’
e. De ce l-a adus Dumnezeu pe turc şi n-a adus alt neam?18
of what cl-acc3sg m-has brought God acc Turk and neg-has brought another people
‘Why did God bring the Turk and not another people?’
When de introduces a non-scalar noun (23a,b), TYPE will probably stand for the implicit property the exclamation
is about, as in the case of ce-exclamatives: in (23b) for instance, this property will be verbosity. On the other hand,
when the referent of such a noun is explicitly attributed one or several epithets (23c), or when the noun is scalar and
expresses an epithet itself (24a), the silent noun can simply act as a classifier, thus triggering the presence of de.
Finally, when de appears to introduce adjectives (24b), they probably become nouns because the silent noun acts as
their classifier, since there is no determiner that could motivate conversion. The possibility that they modify TYPE
is excluded by the lack of agreement in the context of feminine referents (24c). Note that the classifier role of TYPE
is highlighted by the ungrammatical use of proper names in these constructions: as rigid designators, proper names
do not need classifiers, so if (24d) is ungrammatical it probably means that a silent classifier is obligatory in
imprecations.
(24) a. Şi aveţi noroc că blogul meu nu e ţara voastră, fir-aţi voi să fiţi de mitocani!19
and have-2pl luck that blog-def poss-1sg neg is country-def poss-2pl f be-cond-2pl you-pl subj
be-2pl of churl-pl
‘And you’re lucky that my blog is not your country, you damned churls!’
b. Ce aveţi cu Mazăre? […] mânca-l-ar mama de frumos şi de deştept!
what have-2pl with Mazăre eat-cl-acc3sg m-cond-3sg mother-def of handsome and of smart
‘What do you have against Mazăre? He’s so handsome and smart I could eat him up!’
c. Încă mai răspunzi, bătu-te-ar Dumnezeu de afurisită?
(I. H. Rădulescu, Bată-te Dumnezeu)
still more answer-2sg beat-cl-acc2sg-cond-3sg God of shrew-f
‘Are you still talking back? God punish you, you shrew!’
d. *Bată-l Dumnezeu de Ion!
‘God punish Ion!’
The presence of accusative clitics in imprecations with non-copular verbs is an argument in favour of the oddity of
de, because the natural sequel would be accusative marked objects, i.e. the insertion of pe. The fact that pe can occur
in such constructions suggests that the trigger of de is not among the overt items – in (25a), the ‘object’ of the curse
is one specific referent who does not need classification i.e. TYPE, hence the absence of de. One argument in favour
of TYPE is that nouns entering these constructions allow adjectival modification but not determiners (25b) – they
cannot have determined reference, which probably indicates they are complements of TYPE: overt tip does not
allow determiners on its prepositional complements either. But the essential question now regards the position of the
silent noun, i.e. whether it precedes or follows de, and the implications of this position. The two possibilities are
(25c) and (25d). One major drawback of the latter is that it does not actually explain the occurrence of de, which is
not selected by the verb. On the other hand, in (25c) de separates semi-lexical TYPE from the overt lexical noun, as
in N de N constructions. With copula verbs, the noun is actually the syntactic subject (the predicate being a(i)/al(e)
dracului, literally of the devil, implicit in these examples), so in order to prevent it from being introduced by de
(which is not allowed with subjects in Romanian) attributing the preposition to TYPE is the perfect solution. The
subject will be TYPE de N, and it does not require any preposition with copulas, as expected. With non-copular
16
http://www.121.ro/forum/sugestii-reclamatii-diverse-f24/fara-garnier-pls-t10537-15.html
http://www.comunicatemedia.ro/listare_evenimente.php?m=11&y=2009&d=10&pag=2
18
http://www.lumeacredintei.com/sct_3/st_666/navPage_3/papolingii_de_astzi.htm
19
http://bombonel.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/
17
9
verbs, the silent noun presumably satisfies the verb’s selectional requirements so that the nominal projection no
longer has to be marked for accusative case. In conclusion, if TYPE occurs in imprecations it precedes the
preposition de.
(25) a. Apoi s-o bată Dumnezeu pe cioroaica a bătrână!
(I. H. Rădulescu, Bată-te Dumnezeu)
then subj-cl-acc3sg f beat-3sg God acc rook-f def old-f
‘Then may God punish that old gypsy-woman!’
b. *Mânca-l-ar mama de băiatul meu / ăsta!
eat-cl-acc3sg m-cond-3sg mother-def of boy-def poss-1sg / dem
c. Bată-l Dumnezeu TYPE de turc!
d. Bată-l Dumnezeu de TYPE turc!
►Romanian imprecations and hypocoristic exclamations involving an otherwise unjustified de may contain the
silent classifier TYPE, which with non-scalar nouns could stand for an implicit property of the referents.
4. Conclusions
The paper analysed four types of constructions in Romanian with a view to identifying silent nouns. We concluded
that NUMBER and AMOUNT, modified by MANY and MUCH, respectively, are part of the syntax of ce deexclamatives and la-exclamatives. TYPE was argued to appear in ce-exclamatives on nouns under the qualitative
reading, in de care- interrogatives, and in imprecations whose ‘addressee’ is clause-final and introduced by de.
References
Avram, M. (1986) Gramatica pentru toţi. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii
Socialiste România.
Constantinescu, C. (2007) On some Romanian (A de A) degree constructions. In G.
Alboiu et al. (eds.), Pitar Moş: a Building with a View. Papers in Honour of
Alexandra Cornilescu. Bucharest: BUP.
Corver, N. (2008) On Silent Semi-lexical Person. Lingue e linguaggio VII.1: 5-24.
Dumitrescu, I. (2010) Silent Nouns Have a Say in Romanian. MA dissertation, University
of Bucharest.
Kayne, R. S. (2002) On some prepositions that look DP-internal: English of and French
de. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1: 71-116.
Kayne, R. S. (2003) Silent Years, Silent Hours. In L.-O. Delsing et al. (eds.), Grammar
in Focus. Festschrift for Christer Platzack. Lund: Wallin and Dalholm, 209-226.
Leu, T. (2004) What for properties are odd? Ms., New York University.
Riemsdijk, H. C. van. (2005) Silent Nouns and the Spurious Indefinite Article in Dutch.
In M. Vulchanova, T.A. Åfarli (eds.), Grammar & Beyond: Essays in honour of
Lars Hellan. Oslo: Novus Press, 163-178.
Tănase-Dogaru, M. (2009) The Category of Number. Its Relevance for the Syntax and the
Semantic Typology of the Nominal Phrase. Bucharest: BUP.