Word order is the means most used by modern Romance languages to show the grammatical relationship between words; statistically the most-frequent order in statements is subjectâverbâobject. In many of the Romance languages, interrogation can be shown by inversion of the subject and verb, placing the verb, as the element on which the interrogation falls, at the beginning of the sentence (Spanish ÂżVino el hombre?, Italian Ă venuto lâuomo? âHas the man come?â). In such examples, however, it is the intonation (represented in writing by the question mark) rather than the word order alone that marks the question. Inversion, without interrogative intonation, is not infrequent in emphatic assertions. Unambiguous question markersâsuch as the Latin particles -ne, nonne, and numâare lacking in most Romance standards; popular speech, though relying everywhere principally upon intonation, often has developed new particles to reinforce interrogation. Romanian has oare (Oare a venit? âHas he come?â); Italian uses dialectal ce, che, or o (Vulgar Tuscan Che Ăš venuto? âHas he come?â; O come si chiame? âWhat is he called?â); Sardinian has a (A morde kkÇstu kÇne? âDoes this dog bite?â); and French and Limousin have ti (generalized from such forms as a-t-il?; French Je suis-ti bĂȘte? Limousin Sieu-ti nesci? âAm I stupid?â). In modern standard French great use is made of est-ce que as an interrogative particle: Est-ce quâil est venu? âHas he come?â Comment est-ce quâil sâappelle? âWhat is his name?â
Negation in Latin was expressed by a range of special items (non, nemo, nihil, nullus, nunquam, and so on). Although some of the others survive in Romance, continuators of non are usually used for negative expression and are regularly prefixed to the verb. Nuances within negation are usually expressed by the adjunction of other items. In France, both north and south, and in northern Italy and some of the Swiss Rhaetian areas, the non particle has been so weakened phonetically that it no longer can express unambiguously the important distinction between negative and positive; hence, formerly positive adjuncts have acquired its negative meaning.
French personne / une personne signifies âno one / a personâ; pas / un pas means ânot / a stepâ; and plus can mean âmore / no more.â In popular speech the non particle is frequently omitted altogether in areas that use these additional forms (e.g., French Je (ne) le vois pas; Occitan Lou vese pas for Noun lou vese âI donât see itâ).
The reduction of the subjunctive
Morphologically, the verb system survived comparatively intact from Latin to Romance; if the schoolbooks, heavily influenced by Latin grammar, are right, the ways in which the verb forms are used are not so very different from Latin either. The most obvious change has been the reduction of uses as well as of forms of the subjunctive, with, at the extreme, modern French treating them as automatically determined variants to be used obligatorily after certain phrases and conjunctions and virtually eliminating tense differences within the subjunctive mood. When the subjunctive retains a function in Romanceâthat is, in contexts in which it can contrast with the indicativeâit has developed emotive overtones, especially suggesting doubt, unreality, or some sort of hypothetical futurity. It is used especially in subordinate clauses dependent on verbal expressions of command and exhortation, emotion, or doubt: Romanian Vreau sÄ vinÄ âI want him to comeâ; Engadine Mieu bap voul châeau lavura âMy father wants me to workâ; French Je doute quâil vienne âI doubt that heâs comingâ; Portuguese Duvido que seja feliz âI doubt that he is happyâ; Italian Temo che sia tarde âIâm afraid itâs lateâ; Spanish Temo que Ă©l lo diga âIâm afraid heâll say it.â The subjunctive also regularly follows subordinating conjunctions that project action forward into the future, notions such as âuntil,â âbefore,â âin order thatâ: French avant que vous soyez venu âbefore you cameâ; Spanish hasta que sea feliz âuntil he is happyâ; Italian perchĂš potessi fare in tempo âso that I might do it in timeâ; Portuguese antes que eu o veja âbefore I see itâ; Catalan abans que vingui âbefore he comes.â
On the whole, however, the Romance languages use the subjunctive less frequently than does Latin, with recession particularly, when no doubt is implied, in indirect speech and in temporal and concessive clauses (in French, use of the subjunctive after concessive conjunctions such as bien que and quoique âalthoughâ was imposed by 18th-century grammarians). The infinitive is often used in subordinate constructions where Latin would have used a subjunctiveâe.g., French dites-lui de sâen aller, for dites-lui quâil sâen aille âtell him to go away.â Romanian, on the other hand, has even extended the use of the subjunctive in such constructions, perhaps reflecting a substratum influence that is felt, too, in some Balkan languages. Greek influence is sometimes credited with similar constructions (usually using the indicative rather than the subjunctive) found in northeastern Sicily, northern Calabria, and the Salentine Peninsula.
Conditional clauses
One area of syntax in which the Romance languages vary widely in the extent to which they retain and in the manner in which they replace the Latin subjunctive is that of past-tense hypothetical conditional clauses. The Latin formula si habuissem dedissem âif I had had it, I would have given it,â though challenged by a type using the indicative tense since Ciceronian times, has sporadically survived into Romance, especially in the older stages of the languages and in scattered languages of southern Italy (Se potessi, facessi âIf I could, I would do itâ), Rhaetian (Sursilvan Jeu vegness, sche jeu vess peda âIâd come, if I had timeâ), and Romanian (dacÄ aĆ fi avut destui bani, aĆ fi cumpÄrat-o âIf I had had enough money, I would have bought itâ).
In most languages, however, a new conditional form replaces the subjunctive in âifâ clauses. Thus, in Spanish, Portuguese, and most Italian dialects, sentences of this type are seen: Spanish si yo tuviese bastante dinero, lo comprarĂa; Italian se avessi abbastanza denaro, lo comprerei; Portuguese se tivesse bastante dinheiro, eu o compraria (âif I had enough money, Iâd buy itâ). Spoken Catalan usually prefers a similar construction (si estudiessis ho sabries âif you studied, you would know itâ). Another construction that replaces the subjunctive by the imperfect indicative in the âifâ clause is normal in Catalan and in French as well as in Corsica and Sardinia: Catalan si estudiaves ho sabries (âif you studied, you would knowâ); French si jâavais assez dâargent, je lâachĂšterais (âif I had enough money, Iâd buy itâ); Logudorian si denĂa abba deo dia buffare (âif I had water, Iâd drinkâ). Other constructions using the imperfect indicative or the conditional in both clauses are found mainly in substandard stylesâboth types are common in French and Romanian, the former in Tuscany, southeastern Italy, and Spain and the latter in much of southern Italy.
Morphology
Romance methods of forming new words from native sources are in part inherited from Latin (the morphological device of adding a suffix and that of prefixing an element that modifies the original meaning) and in part later developments (mainly that of combining two or more free forms to make compound words and of changing or extending the syntactic distribution of an already existing word).
Derivation by means of suffixes is the most popular and widespread device. Verbs in particular must be morphologically marked as members of a conjugation, of which those corresponding to Latin -Äre form by far the most frequent and indeed in modern times virtually the only productive class (thus, Latin plantÄre âto plant,â Italian plantare, Engadine plaunter, French planter, Catalan plantar, from planta âplantâ). Infixes, inserted between the verbal root and the conjugation marker, are common. Sometimes they continue Latin infixes, such as the frequentative (compare jactÄre for jacere âto throw,â Italian gettare, French jeter, Catalan gitar, etc.); sometimes they add semantically to the root meaning (compare pejorative Italian lavoracchiare âto slack offâ from lavorare âto work,â French criailler âto bawlâ from crier âto cryâ). The Greek verbal infix -iz (as in English suffix -ize) is particularly popular in modern Romance languages (e.g., automatiser).
Among noun suffixes, diminutives are frequent and, except perhaps in French, still productive. Romanian uses -aĆ (baieÆ«aĆ âlittle boyâ), but the other languages prefer derivatives of Latin -ittus (especially in Spanish: arbolito âlittle tree,â señorita âMiss, young lady,â etc.; but also French sachet âlittle sack,â Italian foglietta âlittle leaf,â etc.) or of Latin -Ä«nus (preferred in Italian: tavolino âlittle table, desk,â signorina âyoung ladyâ; and Portuguese: copinho âlittle drinking glass,â senhorinha âyoung ladyâ). The Latin -Ćne suffix has, conversely, acquired augmentative meaning in several languages (Italian cavallone, Spanish caballĂłn âlarge horseâ). Romanian -oi, -oaie seems to continue an adjectival form of this suffix -oneus, -a; cÄloi âlarge horse,â cÄsoaie âbig house.â
Other frequent suffixes sometimes have a âlearnedâ modern form alongside the older âpopularâ oneâe.g., Latin -atione becomes Italian -agione / -azione, French -aison / -ation, Spanish -azĂłn / -aciĂłn, Portuguese -azĂŁo / -ação; also Romanian -Äciune / -aÈiune (-aÈie), and Occitan -azĂł.
Suffixes that remain extremely productive include the Latin verbal adjectival -bilis (not found in Romanian), which can be seen in Italian bastevole âenough,â French admirable, Spanish amable âpleasingâ; and Latin verbal nominal -mentum, which can be seen in French abonnement âsubscription,â Spanish cobijamiento âlodging,â Italian abboccamento âinterview, parley,â Romanian acoperÄmĂźnt âcover.â
Prefixing of modifying elements remains frequent in all languages (Italian autostrada âhighway,â Spanish contraveneno âantidote,â French photocopie âphotocopyâ), although some older prefixes may hardly be recognized as such today. The ârepetitiveâ verbal prefix re- remains particularly active (Romanian rÄpune âto kill,â Italian ricattare âto recover,â French racheter âto buy backâ).
Compound words, though less frequent than in the Germanic languages, are not uncommon (e.g., French cheflieu âprincipal town,â Italian primavera and Romanian primÄvarÄ âspring,â Spanish lavamanos âwash basinâ).
Originally a compounding process, the most common method of forming adverbs from adjectives (suffixing of Latin mente âmindâ) has become in most languages a morphological process, although Spanish and Portuguese retain traces of the earlier stage in phrases such as severa e (y) cruelmente âseverely and cruelly.â
Among the syntactic means that most Romance languages use to extend vocabulary is the potent device, unavailable to Latin, of juxtaposing to any part of speech an article or other determiner and using it as a noun (e.g., Italian il perchĂš âthe reason,â Spanish lo Ăștil âutility, something useful,â French un je ne sais quoi âan I-donât-know-whatâ). In French and Spanish, verbal infinitives are frequently so treated (le devoir âduty,â el poder âpower,â etc.); Romanian also uses infinitives as verbal nouns, but they are differentiated formally by retaining the full form (e.g., cĂźntare âsingingâ), compared with the shortened verbal form (cĂźnta). In earlier stages of most Romance languages the verbal root (most often as it appears in the third-person singular present indicative) could be used as a noun, a process known as back-formation (compare Romanian laudÄ âpraise,â Italian domanda âquestion,â French approche âapproach,â dĂ©sir âdesire,â Spanish baila âdance,â Portuguese muda âchangeâ).
Just as former adjectival forms are frequently used as substantives, so are nouns used with adjectival function; there seem to be few restrictions on this use, though practice varies as to whether agreement should be made (French les frĂšres ennemis âenemy brothers,â with agreement; une femme mĂ©decin âa woman doctor,â without agreement). Past-participial forms normally act as adjectives, as in English.
Romance makes use of gender classification to extend and modify its vocabulary, especially by relating the gender markers to sex differences (e.g., Romanian nepot, nepoatÄ, Occitan nebut, nebudo, Spanish nieto, nieta, Portuguese neto, neta, Catalan net, neta ânephew, niece,â with Italian invariable nipote, and French lexically differentiated neveu, niĂšce). Modern French makes particularly fruitful use of gender differences (originally via ellipse); thus, le (vin de) champagne (the drink) / la Champagne (the province); La Normandie (the province) / le Normandie (the ship).