Chapter published in:
Studies in Historical Ibero-Romance Morpho-Syntax
Edited by Miriam Bouzouita, Ioanna Sitaridou and Enrique Pato
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 16] 2018
► pp. 195–222

Allative to purposive grammaticalisation

A quantitative story of Spanish para

| The Pennsylvania State University
| The Pennsylvania State University
The Spanish preposition para arises from fusion of older por followed by a, via usage-based chunking (Bybee, 2010) associated with the frequency of the sequence. At an early stage, semantic compositionality involving an independent meaning contribution from the preposition a is discernible in allative uses with a destination that is a person. A general decline of allative uses of para with a nominal complement, for both person and place destinations, ensues after the 14th century. In a second change beginning in the 18th century, para replaces por with infinitive complements to become the majority purposive variant. Thus, allative-to-purposive grammaticalisation (Heine & Kuteva, 2002) occurs through changes both in para’s distribution across contexts and in its variation with the older preposition.
Keywords: chunking, compositionality, frequency, grammaticalization, preposition, allative, purposive, Spanish
Published online: 17 July 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.16.09tor
References

References

Aaron, J. E., & Torres Cacoullos, R.
(2005) Quantitative measures of subjectification: A variationist study of Spanish salir(se). Cognitive Linguistics, 16(4), 607–633. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Allen, J. H., & Greenough, J. B.
(1931) New Latin grammar for schools and colleges founded on comparative grammar. J. B. Greenough, A. A. Howard, G. L. Kittredge & B. L. D’ooge (Eds.). New York, NY: Ginn and Company.Google Scholar
Alonso, A. & Henríquez Ureña, P.
(1959) Gramática castellana, Curso 2o. Buenos Aires: Losada.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. L.
(1945) Purpose with por and para . Modern Language Journal, 28(1), 15–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brea, M.
(1985) Las preposiciones, del latín a las lenguas románicas. Verba, 12, 147–182.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L.
(2002) Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. In T. Givón & B. F. Malle (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language (pp. 109–134). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cappelli, A.
(1990) Lexicon Abbreviaturarum: Dizionario di abbreviature latine ed italiane. Trento: Ulrico Hoepli Editore.Google Scholar
Company Company, C.
(2002) Grammaticalization and category weakness. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 201–215). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Introducción. In C. Company Company (Ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Primera parte: La frase verbal (Vol. 1; pp. xi–xxxiii). Ciudad de México: Fondo de Cultura Económica/Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Corominas, J.
(1980–1991) Diccionario crítico-etimológico castellano e hispánico. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Cuervo, R. J.
(1994) Diccionario de construcción y régimen de la lengua castellana. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A.
(2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Delbecque, N.
(1996) Towards a cognitive account of the use of the prepositions por and para in Spanish. In R. Dirven, R. Langacker & J. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics in the redwoods: The expansion of a new paradigm in linguistics (pp. 249–318). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Espinosa Elorza, R. M.
(2010) Procesos de formación y cambio en las llamadas “palabras gramaticales”. Logroño: Cilengua.Google Scholar
García de Diego, V.
(1951) Gramática histórica española. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Hanssen, F.
(1911) Cuestiones de gramática. Observaciones sobre la preposición PARA. Bulletin Hispanique, 13, 40–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1945) Gramática histórica de la lengua castellana. Buenos Aires: El Ateneo.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
(1993) A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) The gradual coalescence into “words” in grammaticalization. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp. 342–355). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T.
(2002) World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kapatsinski, V.
(2009) Adversative conjunction choice in Russian: Semantic and syntactic influences on lexical selection. Language Variation and Change, 21(2), 157–173. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keniston, H.
(1937) The syntax of Castilian prose. The sixteenth century. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
(1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites, Vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Ch
(2002) New reflections on grammaticalization and lexicalization. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, S.
(2010) Adverbial phrases. In P. Baldi & P. Cuzzolin (Eds.), New perspectives on historical Latin syntax (pp. 19–107). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Maldonado, R.
(1999) A media voz: Problemas conceptuales del clítico se. Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Melis, Ch
(1992) La preposición para del español: Un acercamiento a sus orígenes. In R. Barriga Villanueva & J. García Fajardo (Eds.), Reflexiones lingüísticas y literarias, volumen 1: Lingüística (pp. 69–86). Ciudad de México: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
(1997) Sobre los inicios de la función ‘final’ de para (que). In C. Company (Ed.), Cambios diacrónicos en español (pp. 99–121). Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Menéndez Pidal, R.
(1940) Manual de gramática histórica española. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Meyer-Lübke, W.
(1890–1906) Grammaire des langues romanes. III. Syntaxe. Paris: Welter.Google Scholar
Moyna, M. I.
(2018) The history of concatenative compounds in Spanish. In M. Bouzouita, I. Sitaridou & E. Pato (Eds.), Studies in historical Ibero-Romance morpho-syntax (pp. X–X). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 47–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S.
(2001) Variability, frequency and productivity in the irrealis domain of French. In J. Bybee & P. Hopper (Eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 405–428). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S., & Tagliamonte, S.
(1996) Nothing in context: Variation, grammaticization and past time marking in Nigerian Pidgin English. In P. Baker & A. Syea (Eds.), Changing meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact languages (pp. 71–94). London: Westminster University Press.Google Scholar
Pottier, B.
(1968) Lingüística moderna y filología hispánica. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Rice, S., & Kabata, K.
(2007) Crosslinguistic grammaticalization patterns of the ALLATIVE. Linguistic Typology, 11, 451–514. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Riiho, T.
(1979) Por y para. Estudio sobre los orígenes y la evolución de una oposición prepositiva iberorrománica. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Sankoff, D.
(1988) Sociolinguistics and syntactic variation. In F. Newmeyer (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, 4: Language: The socio-cultural context (pp. 140–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R., & Bauman, J.
(2014) Las preposiciones por, pora y para . In C. Company Company (Ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Tercera parte: Preposiciones, adverbios y conjunciones. Relaciones interoracionales (pp. 1479–1564). Ciudad de México: Fondo de Cultura Económica y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R., & Schwenter, S. A.
(2005–2007) Towards an operational notion of subjectification. In R. T. Cover & Y. Kim (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General session and parasession on prosodic variation and change (pp. 347–358). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
(2008) Constructions and pragmatics: Variable middle marking in Spanish subir(se) ‘go up’ and bajar(se) ‘go down’. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 1455–1477. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Corpus

Bandidos
=Manuel Payno, Los bandidos de Río Frío. In Obras completas, M. Sol (Ed.) Ciudad de México: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes 2000.Google Scholar
Calila = Calila e Dimna
. J. M. Cacho Blecua, & M. J. Lacarra (Eds.) Madrid: Castalia 1984.Google Scholar
Celestina = Fernando de Rojas, La Celestina
. D. S. Severin (Ed.) Madrid: Cátedra 1993.Google Scholar
Cid = Cantar de mio Cid. Texto, gramática y vocabulario, Vol. 3: Texto
, R. Menéndez Pidal (Ed.) Madrid: Espasa Calpe 1944–1945.Google Scholar
CN/Sí = Leandro Fernández de Moratín, La comedia nueva. El sí de las niñas
. J. Dowling, & R. Andioc (Eds.) Madrid: Castalia 1968.Google Scholar
Corbacho = Alfonso Martínez de Toledo, Arcipreste de Talavera o Corbacho
. M. Gerli (Ed.) Madrid: Cátedra 1992 [1979].Google Scholar
Davies, M.
(2002–2016) Corpus del Español: 100 million words, 1200s-1900s. Retrieved from http://​www​.corpusdelespanol​.org
DLNE = Documentos lingüísticos de la Nueva España. Altiplano central
. C. Company Company (Ed.) Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 1994.Google Scholar
Fazienda = La Fazienda de Ultramar
D. Arbesú Ed. Retrieved from http://​www​.lafaziendadeultramar​.com
GE = Alfonso X el Sabio, General estoria, primera parte
. A. Solalinde (Ed.) Madrid: Centro de Estudios Históricos 1930.Google Scholar
GEI = Alfonso X el Sabio, General estoria. Primera parte
. L. Kasten, J. Nitti, & W. Jonxis-Henkemans (Eds.) The electronic texts and concordances of the prose works of Alfonso X, El Sabio. Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies 1997.Google Scholar
LT = Tri-linear edition of Lazarillo de Tormes of 1554 (Burgos, Alcalá de Henares, Amberes)
. J. V. Ricapito (Ed.) Madison: The Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies 1987.Google Scholar
Lucanor = Don Juan Manuel, El conde Lucanor o Libro de los enxiemplos del conde Lucanor et de Patronio
. J. M. Blecua (Ed.) Madrid: Castalia 1971.Google Scholar
Madrid = El habla de la ciudad de Madrid: materiales para su estudio
. M. Esgueva, & M. Cantarero (Eds.) Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas 1981.Google Scholar
México = El habla de la ciudad de México. Materiales para su estudio
. J. M. Lope Blanch (Ed.) Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 1971.Google Scholar
Quijote = Miguel de Cervantes, Don Quijote de la Mancha
. In Obras completas, F. Sevilla Arroyo, & A. Rey Hazas (Eds.) Madrid: Alianza Editorial-Centro de Estudios Cervantinos 1996.Google Scholar
Regenta = Leopoldo Alas “Clarín”, La Regenta
. G. Sobejano (Ed.) Madrid: Castalia 1981–1982.Google Scholar
Zifar = El libro del cavallero Zifar
. Ch. Ph. Wagner (Ed.) Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press 1929.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Melis, Chantal & Marcela Flores
2018.  In Studies in Historical Ibero-Romance Morpho-Syntax [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 16], ► pp. 123 ff. Crossref logo
Moyna, María Irene
2018.  In Studies in Historical Ibero-Romance Morpho-Syntax [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 16], ► pp. 47 ff. Crossref logo
Schulte, Kim
2018.  In Studies in Historical Ibero-Romance Morpho-Syntax [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 16], ► pp. 173 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 january 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.