Latin word order

Latin word order is relatively free. The subject, object, and verb can come in any order, and an adjective can go before or after its noun, as can a genitive such as "of the enemy". A common feature of Latin is hyperbaton, in which a phrase is split up by other words: "it is Sextus Tarquinius".

A complicating factor in Latin word order is that there are variations in the style of different authors and between different genres of writing. In Caesar's historical writing, the verb is much likelier to come at the end of the sentence than in Cicero's philosophy. The word order of poetry is even freer than in prose, and examples of interleaved word order (double hyperbaton) are common.

In terms of word order typology, Latin is classified by some scholars as basically an SOV (subject-object-verb) language, with preposition-noun, noun-genitive, and adjective-noun (but also noun-adjective) order. Other scholars, however, argue that the word order of Latin is so variable that it is impossible to establish one order as more basic than another.

Although the order of words in Latin is comparatively free, it is not random but frequently different orders indicate different nuances of meaning and emphasis. As Devine and Stephens, the authors of ''Latin Word Order'', put it: "Word order is not a subject which anyone reading Latin can afford to ignore. . . . Reading a paragraph of Latin without attention to word order entails losing access to a whole dimension of meaning."

Influence on meaning

Studying word order in Latin helps the reader to understand the author's meaning more clearly. For example, when a verb is placed at the beginning of a sentence, it sometimes indicates a sudden action: so means not just "Trimalchio clapped his hands" but "Trimalchio suddenly clapped his hands". In another sentence, the initial verb functions as a topic: does not mean merely "Corellius Rufus has died" but rather "The person who has died is Corellius Rufus." In other examples, the initial verb is emphatic: "with my own eyes, I saw the forum".

The placement of adjectives also affects the emphasis. So the phrase , with the possessive before the noun, in the introduction to Livy's history means not "my fame" but "my ''own'' fame," contrasting with other people's fame. In the sentence from Caesar, with the number at the end of the sentence and separated from its noun, does not mean only "five ships were burnt" but "no fewer than five ships were burnt."

The use of hyperbaton (separation of words that normally go together) is also common in Latin. Thus, Caesar's , with "these" separated from "flood waters", means not "These floods remained for several days" but "This time, the flood waters (unlike the previous ones) remained for several days."

Theoretical approaches

In the past 100 years, especially since the advent of computerised texts, Latin word order has been extensively studied with a view to elucidating the principles on which it is based. Two major recent works on Latin word order, based on different approaches, are those of Devine and Stephens (2006) and Olga Spevak (2010).

It is generally agreed that pragmatic factors such as topic and focus, contrast, emphasis, and heaviness play a major role in Latin word order. The topic (what is being talked about) is often at the beginning of the sentence, with the focus (what is said about the topic) being at the end or in the penultimate position.

Other factors that play a role in word order are semantic (for example, adjectives of size usually precede the noun, and those of material more often follow it). In some Latin authors, consideration of such matters as euphony, assonance, and rhythm is also important.

One major area of disagreement is how far syntax plays a role in word order. According to Devine and Stephens (2006), Latin has a basic neutral word order, which they state is as follows:

* Subject – Direct Object – Indirect Object / Oblique Argument – Adjunct – Goal or Source – Non-Referential Direct Object – Verb

A "non-referential object" goes closely with the verb and makes a phrase with it like in the phrase "to make an attack".

Following the theories of generative grammar, Devine and Stephens assume that deviations from that basic unmarked order are made to put emphasis on different elements. They use the term "scrambling" if constituents come in a different order from the basic one, and they assume that scrambling occurs when an element is moved leftwards, towards the beginning of the sentence. Leftwards movement is called "raising".

Olga Spevak (2010), on the other hand, basing her work on theories of functional grammar, rejects that approach. She considers that there are so many deviations from the so-called neutral order between authors and even in the works of the same author that it is not possible to discover what the neutral order must be. Therefore, an approach insisting on a basic unmarked order "does not really help a Latinist to better understand Latin constituent order." She stresses that according to the principles of functional grammar, as outlined by the Dutch linguist Simon Dik, words take their positions in a sentence according to a certain template, not by being moved from elsewhere.

Harm Pinkster (1990a) also favours a pragmatic approach and writes: "there is no reason for assuming a SOV order in Classical Latin, nor is there one for assuming a SVO order by AD 400".

However, not all scholars are ready to dismiss syntactic factors entirely. J.G.F. Powell, in his review of Spevak's book, commented that "nobody has yet succeeded in unifying the insights of all the different scholarly approaches to the fascinating and peculiar problem of Latin word order". In his view, an approach that combines the various schools of thought on Latin word order "may succeed in finding a more satisfactory solution".

Topic and focus

Several recent books, such as those of Panhuis and Spevak, have analysed Latin sentences from a pragmatic point of view. Syntactic approaches traditionally analyse a sentence into Subject and Predicate, but a pragmatic analysis considers a sentence from the point of view of Topic and Focus (or Theme and Rheme, as Panhuis (1982) puts it). This type of approach was also proposed by Sturtevant (1909), who referred to the topic as the "psychological subject".

As with Subject, Object and Verb, Topic and Focus can be arranged in different ways in a sentence.

Topic

Types of topic

The topic is the thing or person that is being talked about in the sentence. Spevak (2010) distinguishes various kinds of topic: discourse topic, sentence topic, sub-topic, future topic, theme, and so on. A sentence topic is one that picks up the immediately preceding context (e.g. below) and has precedence over the discourse topic ( below):
:
:"To this Caesar replied..."

A topic will often take precedence over a conjunction, and the following word order where the topic (in this case the grammatical subject) precedes "when" is fairly common:
:
:"As for Tubero, when he reached Africa, he found Attius Varus in the province with military command."

Topicless sentences

Not every sentence has a topic, but some present information which is entirely new. Pinkster gives the following as an example:
:.
:"There were two roads in all."

Such sentences are sometimes called " presentative sentences" and often start with a verb.

Focus

The focus is the new information, i.e. the message which is being conveyed to the listener.

Final focus

Often in Latin the topic comes first, and then the focus. For example, in the sentence below, the topic is "in the bathhouse" (), which has been previously mentioned, and the sub-topic is the hot-room () (since it can be assumed that all bath-houses have a hot room); the new information is that Cicero has moved the hot room, and the place to which he has moved it:

:
:"In the bath-house the hot room I have moved into the other corner of the changing-room."

Similarly, in the following example, the new information is the sumptuousness of the funerals in question:

:.
:"Their funerals are magnificent and expensive."

In the following example, where the adverb "quickly" is placed early in the sentence, the main information is the action "took up arms"; the speed is subsidiary information (Devine and Stephens use the terms "nuclear focus" and "weak focus" for this):D&S, p. 102.

:.
:"Our men quickly took up arms."

Often the verb can be part of the topic,Sturtevant (1909), p. 26. as in the following example. The new information, or focus, is the person who followed and the number of ships he brought:

:
:"Following him came the quaestor Marcius Rufus with twelve ships."

Penultimate focus

A very frequent place for the focus, however, is in penultimate position, just before the verb or another element. In the example below, Alba has been mentioned in the previous sentence, and the fact that cities have rulers can be assumed; the new information or focus is the name of the ruler at that time, Gaius Cluilius. In this sentence, as in the previous example, the verb itself acts as a topic:

:
:"The ruler of Alba at that time was Gaius Cluilius."

When an unemphatic argument, neither focus nor topic, such as above, follows the focussed word in this way, it is known as a "tail".

In the following example the fact that northerly regions have winters is already known, and the new information is the fact that they come early:
:.
:"In this region, winters () are early"

In the following, the fire has already been mentioned; the new information is that it continued day and night, with the main emphasis on the fact that it was continuous:
:
:"The blaze was continuous by night and day."

In the following, the fact that the road has been measured can be assumed (Cicero has just mentioned the measurement); the new information is that he measured it himself:
:.
:"For I measured it myself."

Similarly in the following, the fact that orders were given has already been mentioned, and the fact that they were carried out can be assumed; the new information is that they were carried out quickly:
:
:"They carried out his instructions quickly."

In the following, the sentence answers the unspoken question "What did the general do with all the money he found in the captured city?", the answer being "He sent it to Rome" (with "Rome" being the most important word):
:
:"He sent all the money to Rome."

Initial focus

Occasionally, the focus can be given extra emphasis by being placed before the topic. In the following pair of sentences, the focus of one is at the beginning, and of the other at the end:
:
:"My mother was Samian; (but at that time) she was living in Rhodes."

In the sentence below from Livy, the sentence topic ("that year") and discourse topic ("the war") are in the middle of the sentence. The fact that war was waged on both land and sea is a weak focus placed in penultimate position; but the new and surprising information is that the number of Roman legions was no fewer than 23, and this comes at the beginning of the sentence before the topic:
:
:"That year war was waged on land and sea with (no fewer than) 23 Roman legions."

Emphatic topics

In the following sentence with antithesis, two topics, "the land journey" and "the journey by sea", are contrasted. Because they are contrasted, the topics are more emphatic than the focus:
:
:"The journey there by land is short, and the sea journey from Naupactus is also short."

Similar is the following, where the contrasted topics are "when I was a young man" and "now that I am an old one":
:
:"I defended the republic as a young man, I shall not desert her as an old one."

Devine and Stephens refer to such emphatic topics used contrastively as "co-focus".D&S, p. 147.

Another example is the following, where the phrase "this place" (namely the city of Laurentum which was mentioned in the previous sentence) is in the emphatic penultimate position, as though it were the focus:
:.
:"The name Troy is also give to this place."

No recordings exist of Latin from the classical period, but it can be assumed that differences in emphasis in Latin were shown by intonation as well as by word order.

Euphony and rhythm

Euphony and rhythm undoubtedly played a large part in Roman writers' choice of word order, especially in oratory, but also in historians such as Livy. Statements from the writers themselves make it clear that the important consideration was the clausula or rhythm of the final few syllables of each clause.

Cicero himself, commenting on a speech of the tribune Gaius Carbo, quotes the sentence below, which apparently caused the audience to burst into shouts of approval:
:
:"The wise words of the father have been proved by the rash behaviour of his son."

He notes that the sentence would be ruined rhythmically if the word order of the last three words were changed to . What was apparently admired here was the clausula of with its double trochaic – u – – rhythm; whereas would make a rhythm of u u u –, which Cicero says would produce an unsatisfying effect in Latin, despite being recommended by Aristotle.

In another passage from the same work, Cicero criticises a sentence from the orator Crassus on the grounds that it sounds like a line of iambic poetry. To avoid this, he says it would be better if the sentence ended (– u – – –) rather than (– – – u –).

The 1st-century A.D. teacher of oratory, Quintilian, remarks that hyperbaton (switching words round) is often used to make a sentence more euphonious. He gives the example of the following sentence from the opening of Cicero's :
:.
:"I noticed, judges, that accuser's speech is divided into two parts ()."

Quintilian says that would be correct, but "harsh and inelegant".

In another place he says that to end a sentence with the verb is best, because the verb is the most forceful part of the sentence (); but if putting a verb finally is rhythmically harsh, the verb is frequently moved.

Another example where euphonic considerations may have played a part in word order is the following, from a letter by Pliny the Younger:
:
:"It is a big crop of poets this year has brought."

Since was pronounced , the unusual order with the demonstrative following the noun produces a favourite double cretic clausula (– u – – u –). There is also a pleasing assonance of the vowels ''a-u-i a-u-i'' in the last three words.

Individual style

Another factor affecting word order was the individual style of different authors. Devine and Stephens note for example that Livy is fond of putting the object after the verb at the end of the clause (e.g. "he placed a camp", rather than , which Caesar preferred).

Other differences between authors have been observed. For example, Caesar frequently places a number after a noun (in about 46% of cases), but this is rarer in Cicero (only 10% of cases).Walker (1918), p. 648.

Verb position

Several scholars have examined Latin sentences from a syntactic point of view, in particular the position of the verb.

Final verb

In sentences with Subject, Object, and Verb, any order is possible. However, some orders are more common than others. In a sample of 568 sentences of Caesar containing all three elements examined by Pinkster, the proportions were:
*SOV : 63%
*OSV : 21%
*OVS : 6%
*VOS : 5%
*SVO : 4%
*VSO : 1%

An example of the typical Subject-Object-Verb (SOV) word order in Caesar is:
:
:"Caesar withdrew his forces to the nearest hill."

A dependent infinitive, such as "to be killed" below, also in Caesar usually precedes its verb:
:
:"He ordered the majority of them to be killed."

However, in other genres of Latin, especially more colloquial types such as the comic dialogues of Plautus, Cicero's letters, or Petronius

HOME


Content is Copyleft
Website design, code, and AI is Copyrighted (c) 2014-2017 by Stephen Payne


Consider donating to Wikimedia



As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases