Introduction

The history of Romance languages offers a unique possibility for the research in lan- guage change since it has a long span of language records, a well-documented initial state (Latin) and many different outcomes (Romance languages). While the source and the result of the grammaticalization of definiteness in Romance languages are well understood and there is a wide consensus regarding these topics among linguists, the exact process of development of the definite article and especially its timing within the history of Latin are still much debated. Some late Latin texts, like Itinerarium Egeriae from the late fourth century AD, have an unusually high number of demonstratives compared to the texts from the classical period (Hertzenberg 2015, 1). However, even if there is a rich research corpus, there is still little consensus on what exactly the functions of the Latin demonstratives at that time were.

Among others, Hofmann & Szantyr mention that a distal demonstrative ille and intensi- fier ipse can be used sporadically as definite articles in late Latin (Hofmann & Szantyr 1965/1972, 191–192). For Menge, it is in the use with proper names that ille fulfils the function of the definite article (Menge 1953/1990, 238). However, even if there is evidence for article-like behaviour of the demonstrative in late Latin (Epstein 1993; Adams 2013, 482; Hertzenberg 2015), the functions of the same demonstrative can vary within the same text (cf. Adams 2013, 483). Itinerarium Egeriae is a text that has caused a particularly rich discussion within the linguistic community. Even if the fact that the functions of ille and ipse in this text do not always correspond to their classical usage was already noticed by Löfstedt (1911, 64), there is still an ongoing debate what they are exactly. By some the functions of both ille and ipse are perceived either as close to that of the definite article (Aebischer 1948; Renzi 1976; Nocentini 1990) or are evaluated with much greater restraint (Hertzenberg 2015, 340; Adams 2013, 483; Fruyt 2003).

This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the status of definiteness marking in late Latin by outlining a definition of an articloid from a typological perspective. First, I will use the framework of Cognitive Grammar to propose additional insights to the non-grammaticalized definiteness markers (articloids) in general and then, in this light, I will discuss the status of ille and ipse in Itinerarium Egeriae. The focus of this article is to explain how ille and ipse perform their functions in the text and what is the cognitive process behind their usage. The aim of this analysis is not only to provide further insights into the usage of ille and ipse at the time when Itinerarium Egeriae was written but also to contribute to the better understanding of articloids from a cross-linguistic perspective. The focus of this research will be only on ille and ipse, since they are the only source of definite articles in Romance languages.

1 Definiteness

Research on the grammatical category of definiteness and its markers has a long tradition. The beginning of the modern approach to definiteness is the work of Russell (1905). Russell used formal logic to explain how definite descriptions differ from proper names and what the relationship is between definiteness and the existence of objects to which the definite descriptions refer.

However, a breakthrough in the research on definiteness was the work of John Hawkins (1978), which laid the foundations for the current understanding of definiteness. Hawkins focused on the pragmatic circumstances of the definite descriptions, which allowed him to formulate a usage-oriented approach to the uses of definite articles. He noted that the use of definite articles can be explained by patterns that licence a definite interpretation of a noun phrase and that these patterns can be grouped into several categories. Such major types of the usage of definite articles (I will call them types of definiteness) that J. Hawkins systemized are:

• Immediate situation use (Give me that book).

• Anaphoric use (I bought a book yesterday. <…> I was reading the book <…>).

• Indirect anaphora (I bought a book yesterday, but the cover was torn).

• Larger situation use (The sun is shining in the sky).

For Hawkins, the referent of a definite description is either unique or inclusive within a pragmatic set of entities shared by the speaker and the hearer (Hawkins 1978, 160). As we see from the examples above, such a pragmatic set could vary from an object in the immediate proximity of the speaker to an object in the entire world.

However, Hawkins’s approach still poses some problems, as it cannot easily explain all instances of definiteness once we turn to a practical application of Hawkins’ taxonomy of definite article uses to authentic texts (Fraurud 1990). Hence, recent work has yielded further insights into definiteness, especially within the framework of Cognitive Gram- mar. In this article I will use the theory developed by Stéphanie Bakker (Bakker 2009, 146–161), which was applied with promising results to explain the usage of the definite article in ancient Greek. She developed a cognitive explanation of the phenomenon of definiteness. Instead of using a more traditional approach consisting in listing and group- ing different meanings of types of definiteness, Bakker looked for a unified account that could be applied to every definite description and would explain the use of definiteness markers. According to Bakker, a nominal is definite when it is or can be unequivocally related (anchored) to the cognitive ground available for the speaker and the hearer in the current discourse space (CDS) (Bakker 2009, 160). According to Langacker, “[t]he ground consists of the speech event, the speaker (S) and hearer (H), their interaction, and the immediate circumstances (notably the time and place of speech)” and the CDS is ‘comprised of the ground, the context and the shared knowledge of the speaker and the hearer and relationships construed in the speech event’ (Langacker 2001, 144). Since any already grounded instance (cf. Lambrecht 1994, 106–108; Langacker 2000, 49) or even a situation (Bakker 2009, 159), as part of the current speech event, can serve as an available cognitive ground, the speaker has a certain freedom to present the referent as definite or indefinite. Any referent can be presented as definite if the speaker assumes that the hearer is able to unequivocally relate it to the ground:

(1)

Few English speakers who do not speak Spanish or have some knowledge about Mexican culture would know what the zócalo is. However, the cognitive relationship between the zócalo and Mexico City is sufficient to present the referent of the nominal as identifiable, even if the hearer hears about it for the first time. Thus, to be definite, the referent of a nominal does not have to be identifiable in the traditional sense. Its identifiability can only be understood as its successful mapping in the CDS, where it has established relationships with other elements of the CDS.

In this case, the types of definiteness that were systemized by J. Hawkins can be under- stood as circumstances that allow an unequivocal relationship between the referent of the nominal and the cognitive ground. In the case of the immediate situation use, the immediate reach is part of the CDS, hence if there is a thing that can have an unequivocal relationship with it, it can be presented as definite. The discourse and its referents constitute the ground in the case of anaphoric use, the situation itself and referents associated with it in the case of indirect anaphora, and the entire world as we know it serves as the ground in the case of larger situational uses.

Bakker’s conception of definiteness seems very promising since it proposes a unified ac- count of when the nominal can be interpreted as definite and there is no need to further investigate whether there is “one definiteness or several” (Lyons 1999, 157). Uniqueness, inclusiveness, or identifiability can, for example, be understood in this model as conditions ensuring that the unequivocal relationship between the referent and the cognitive ground can be successfully established.

2 The articloid

Aebischer coined the term articloid in his article on Late Latin demonstratives (Aebischer 1948, 186). It was perceived as a natural transitional state between demonstratives and definite articles through which the grammaticalization of definiteness markers gradually progresses. From a theoretical perspective, Greenberg created a model of the evolution of definiteness markers (Greenberg 1978/1990), according to which definite- ness markers may pass through three main stages from “pure demonstrative” to a noun marker. A “zero stage” can be added to the scheme where definiteness marking is possi- ble but not compulsory (Greenberg 1978/1990, 247–252). Typological research strongly suggests that the definite and indefinite articles in European languages might be a fea- ture of the European linguistic area (Haspelmath 2001, 1494) and articloids are attested in languages that have had close contacts with languages that have grammaticalized definiteness markers: the Baltic languages (Rosinas 2009), Polish, Czech (Dickey 2015, 191), Sorbian (Marti 2012, 300) and Slovenian.

Rosinas’ seminal work on demonstratives in the Baltic languages (Rosinas 2009, 87–93) provides the basis for an understanding of how articloids function in Lithuanian and Latvian. From a structuralist perspective, Rosinas lists the functions of the articloid, which could be subsumed under two groups: definiteness marking¹ and expressive usage. Since morphologically both the demonstrative and the articloid are identical, Rosinas argues that tas is to be understood as an articloid when its ‘spatial or temporal coordinates are neutralised” (ibid., 86), and therefore its main function is to ‘identify the referent instead of locating it’. According to his data, articloids have been used in Lithuanian ever since the language was first attested. Since modern Lithuanian does not have a definite article, his analysis shows that an articloid can be used for centuries without being grammaticalized into a definite article.

In the light of Cognitive linguistics, both articles (and, by extension, articloids) and demonstratives are grounding elements that inform the hearer (or the reader) that they can successfully anchor the referent to the cognitive ground (Langacker 2001, 166) or, in Bakker’s term, inform the hearer that there is an unequivocal relationship between the referent and the cognitive ground, hence providing the basis for the identification of the referent. The main difference between them is that definite articles and definite articloids perform only the function of informing that the referent is already accessible in the CDS, whereas demonstratives also provide a crucial piece of information to ensure this accessibility. Demonstratives indicate (literally or metaphorically) a spatial relationship between two entities and therefore provide (directly or indirectly) information needed to successfully anchor the referent (cf. Langacker 2001, 172). Therefore, the articloid is an element that informs the listener or the reader that the referent of a nominal is accessible and identifiable in the CDS or when this informing function becomes more prominent than its original lexical meaning.

Thus, ille in Late Latin should be qualified as an articloid when it does not single out a referent by invoking a contrast (spatial or metaphorical) with other possible referents.

Since in classical Latin ipse is not a demonstrative, it does not imply a spatial contrast as ille does. As an intensifier, in classical Latin it has a meaning of ‘self’, ‘himself’. Therefore, it can be qualified as an articloid if its lexical intensifier meaning providing information needed to anchor and identify the referent is lost, or if it is attenuated to the point that the informing function becomes the main one.

3 The Itinerarium Egeriae and definiteness marking

The text of the Itinerarium Egeriae has drawn a lot of attention for its “vulgar coloration” (Prinz 1960). Since P. Aebischer introduced the notion of articloid (Aebischer 1948, 198) to determine the functions of demonstratives in the text, there have been several major studies that either deepened his approach or contested it. Renzi proposes the theory of two grammars interplaying to affect the usage of the Itinerarium Egeriae. On the one hand, the use of demonstratives in the text does not violate any rule of classical Latin; on the other hand, their frequency does not correspond to that in any classical author (Nocentini 1990, 143; Hertzenberg 2015, 1). Hence, according to Renzi, at the time of the Itinerarium Egeriae the demonstratives must have had a new function, an innovation that allows their extensive use (Renzi 1976, 30–31). A. Nocentini proposes the idea that ille and ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae are either demonstratives or determiners. According to him, the intermediate phase in the development of the definite article that is attested in the Itinerarium Egeriae does not require the introduction of a new grammatical or functional category (i.e., that of an articloid). In his view, ille and ipse are simply used in precisely defined contexts (ille with relative restrictive phrases and ipse in anaphoric contexts) (Nocentini 1990, 143).

Nevertheless, other researchers contest the idea that the demonstratives in the Itiner- arium Egeriae represent a major step in the grammaticalization of the definite article. M. Fruyt does not accept that ille is an articloid in the text (Fruyt 2003, 109), let alone ipse. While the Itinerarium Egeriae shows some innovations in the use of ille and ipse, these are mostly related to the style of the text, especially in the context of early Christian writing (ibid., 118–119). A. Adams also emphasizes the stylistic peculiarities of the text that should be considered when discussing the status of demonstratives (Adams 2013, 482), viz., among other traits, the author’s inclination for emphasis and repetition, and an urge to be very explicit. As Maraval emphasizes, the style of the Itinerarium Egeriae is consistent with the general trend in the writing of early Christianity and the influence of other Christian writings is easily recognisable (Maraval 1982, 53–54). While the text is not written in the purely classical style, it is not a faithful representation of the everyday Latin of its time either (ibid., 52).

Furthermore, there is a distinction in style between the first (paragraphs I to XXIII) and the second part (paragraphs XXIV to XLIX) of the manuscript. This is reflected by the usage of ille and ipse as well. While the first part of the Itinerarium Egeriae has only 10% more words than the second, in the first part there are almost twice as many instances of ille in full nominal phrases and almost three times more of ipse. Nocentini explains this difference through the author’s need to express herself in different registers. According to him, the first part is more colloquial because the main subject is ‘singular events’ seen from a personal perspective. And since the second part relates how the paschal celebrations proceed in Jerusalem, a ‘more elevated, impersonal style’ is more appropriate here (Nocentini 1990, 149–151).

Hence, research into the status of demonstratives in the Itinerarium Egeriae calls for a cautious approach. The following paragraphs will aim at illustrating the main types of usage of ille and ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae and evaluate whether they are used as articloids.

3.1 Ille in the Itinerarium Egeriae

In full nominals in Itinerarium Egeriae, the demonstrative ille is used with nominals that do not have modifiers and with nominals that have adjectival modifiers or relative clauses. The number of instances is summarized in table 1.

The last type of the uses is the most common in the text (almost twice as common as the other two in the first part and on a par with the first two in the second). However, other usage of ille, while not abundant, also offers insights into what function ille has in the text.

A major part of usage of ille in the second part of Itinerarium is restricted to temporal expressions and nominals with the noun locus (81% of all cases). In such cases its usage is equivalent to the usage of is in classical Latin and elsewhere in the Itinerarium:

(2)

However, in the first part there are instances where the usage of ille is closer to that of a definiteness marker:

(3)
²

The mention of civitas in the nominal illius civitatis is definite due to the anaphoric relationship. The referent is first introduced with the proper noun Charra and is then picked up twice with the noun civitas. In the example (3), illius in the nominal illius civitatis does not imply a contrast with other possible referents of the nominal but rather reaffirms the already established reference. Hence the use of the true demonstrative is redundant in this case as it does not contribute to the successful grounding of the referent and this case performs functions as an articloid. A. Rosinas considers anaphoric tracking as one of the core functions of the articloid in the Baltic languages, but languages that have definite articles can use both the article and the demonstrative to perform this function. In such cases the choice between them is usually determined by accessibility: the demonstrative is chosen when the referent is highly accessible (Himmelmann 1996, 229). Even though such a use as in the example (3) allows the interpretation of ille both as an articloid and a demonstrative, ille tends to be used with referents of higher accessibility:

(4)

The example above shows two referents: statuae and arbor sicomori repeated with ille in the last line. However, the referent of the nominal arbor sicomori is slightly more ac- cessible due to the shorter span between the nominal and its antecedent. This might be the reason why the nominal illas statuas is further specified with a relative clause, which makes the referent of illas statuas more accessible to the reader. Therefore, if ille functions as an articloid in the example (4), it might not be on the grammaticalization path to the definite article yet and its usage is closer to the articloids of the Baltic languages than to the definite article as attested in early Romance texts. There are few cases where the usage of ille is close to that of the definite article and it can securely be treated as an articloid:

(5)

The first mention of vitulus is a bare nominal. However, the referent is definite since the history of the calf is a well-known episode of the Old Testament and hence the reader can anchor the referent due to their knowledge of the Biblical context. The second mention of the same referent is used with ille, which does not contribute to the relationship between the referent and the cognitive ground. The nominal itself can establish this relationship, hence the function of ille is to inform the reader about the possibility to map the referent in the CDS rather than to contribute in any kind to this mapping. However, we must note that the third mention of the same referent is again a nominal without an articloid.

In addition to the usage described above, there are instances where ille is clearly used as a demonstrative:

(6)

In the paragraph from which the example (6) is taken, the author lists a number of cities that were seen from an elevated point in the mountains. In the example, the first mention of civitates is definite due to immediate situation use. The second mention of civitates is a definite nominal due to anaphoric relationship with its first mention (civitates omnes). Nevertheless, illas in this case creates a contrast between the cities that the author saw at that moment and other referents to which the nominal could refer (there is more than one story about fighting against cities in the Old Testament) even if there is no explicit special contrast between the actual and other possible referents. Hence, the demonstra- tive meaning of illas is preserved here and its contribution is crucial to the successful anchoring of the referent.

Up to this point, the analysis of ille shows that it can have a variety of meanings ranging from that of the classical demonstrative to that of an articloid. I must note that ille was never used with first-mentioned referents. When ille is used with second-mention nominals that have adjectival modifiers or dependent relative clauses, its usage does not differ from that with nominals without modifiers. In these contexts, it can be either an articloid or a demonstrative:

(7)

The referent of sanctus presbyter is introduced without ille. Its second mention has additional information provided about the referent with simple modifiers and a relative clause. This information is not crucial for the successful grounding of the referent and ille also does not contribute to it since there is no choice between possible referents in the CDS that ille could help to clarify. Since the referent is highly available, the emphatic use of ille due to the stylistics of the text would be odd and hence the usage of an articloid is more plausible.

In some nominals that have relative clauses, the demonstrative meaning of ille is clearly recognizable and it is the relative clause that allows such an interpretation:

(8)

In the paragraphs preceding the given example, the author explains that from far away Sinai appears to be a single mountain, however, once a traveler approaches the mountain, it becomes visible that it has several summits. Nevertheless, the whole mountain is called the mountain of God. Hence, the nominal summitatem illam could have several referents, although the referent of this nominal has been introduced before. The referent of the nominal can be identified due to the information provided by the restrictive relative clause. From a typological perspective, ille in this position could be used either as a demonstrative or as a definiteness marker (cf. Hertzenberg 2015, 340). However, since there is a contrast between possible referents (several summits of the same mountain) and this contrast includes a spatial distinction, the meaning of a demonstrative seems more plausible here. Since the style of the text is exact and precise, in this case, it further supports the ‘classical’ interpretation of ille. There are instances of similar usage with an anaphoric antecedent as well:

(9)

In the example above, the author tells the story of how by the grace of God a spring erupted when the Persians, who had surrounded the city, diverted the water so that the inhabitants should die of thirst. The second mention of the referent ‘water’ has a relative clause that provides information for successful identification of the referent. However, since there is more than one possible referent for the nominal illa aqua, ille can be understood as maintaining its deictic force (or in Langacker’s terms directive force, Langacker 2008, 284) in this situation. In this case illa carries additional information to single out the referent and in this way contributes to the successful reference, and therefore it does not qualify as an articloid.

It must be noted, however, that the usage of ille with relative clauses has a grey zone where both the demonstrative and the grammatical meaning of definiteness marking can be justified. As noticed by several researchers (Renzi 1976, 29; Selig 1992, 165; Fruyt 2003, 109, Carlier & De Mulder 2010, 247), ille has little competition in the Late Latin corpus when used with first-mention nominals that have ‘[their] identity established by a relative clause’ (Carlier & De Mulder ibid.). Consider example (10):

(10)

The nominal mare illud Parthenicum is a first-mention definite, and an example of larger situation use. The reader familiar with the Scriptures and their geography would successfully anchor the referent due to shared knowledge even without the relative clause. However, it is doubtful that situational definiteness alone would have triggered the use of ille since there are no other such examples in the Itinerarium. Also consider example (11):

(11)

The referent of the nominal puteum illum is introduced for the first time in the example above. Its successful grounding is ensured by the relative clause. However, in the example (11) the usage of ille differs from the use in the example (10) because the situation itself contributes to an unequivocal relationship between the referent and the cognitive ground. The Biblical story of Rebeca is well known and the since the author is visiting the city where it happened and mentions the house of Abraham, which was near the place where it happened, no other famous well in that place would have come to the reader’s mind since the well from which Rebeca carried water is by far the most prominent one. Therefore, illum in the example (11) does not admit of other referents and it does not have a contrastive meaning with other possible referents. And even the situational use alone would not account for the use of ille as in the example (10); since there is no such use in other contexts in the text, the lack of a deictic element would signify that it is used as an articloid. On the other hand, since from a typological perspective, demonstratives can be used with nominals having restrictive relative clauses, it could be the case that the usage of ille in examples (10) and (11) is stimulated by the style of the text⁴. Having in mind the frequency of ille in nominals with relative clauses, these ambivalent contexts could open the way for a rising number of articloids in Late Latin and as noted by Selig, could eventually lead to the grammaticalization of the definite article in Romance (Selig 1992, 169).

3.2 Ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae

We have seen that the analysis of ille in Itinerarium yields a spectrum of meanings. The interpretation of ipse is even more complex. Since ipse is the source of the definite article in Sardinian and Balearic dialects of Catalonian, its path of grammaticalization and status in late Latin has raised a problem to which researchers have proposed different solutions. In classical Latin ipse is used as an intensifier ‘self’ or ‘very’ or to emphasise the referent with the meaning ‘very, precisely’. As for the meaning of ipse in late Latin, there is even less linguistic consensus than about the question of the articloid. According to Aebischer (1948, 201), ille and ipse were synonymous in late Latin and could be used interchangeably as articloids. Väänänen (1987, 49) and Hertzenberg (2015, 336) favor the theory that ipse is used as a marker of anaphoricity. While Hertzenberg rejects the idea that ipse could be used as an articloid, the numerous examples of anaphoric usage of ipse lead Nocentini to claim that such usage shows the ‘first phase of evolution in late Latin towards the definite article of Romance’ (Nocentini 1990, 147). Väänänen, Nocen- tini and Hertzenberg all agree that there are instances where ipse is used with its classical meaning, but they argue that such usage is very restricted and statistically irrelevant⁵ (Väänänen 1987, 49; Nocentini 1990, 145–146, Hertzenberg 2015, 336). On the other hand, contrary to Hertzenberg, Fruyt argues that ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae is used primarily as an intensifier and has developed an additional meaning to express similarity. While not identical to idem ‘the same’, according to Fruyt, it is in complementary distribution with it to ‘reinforce the sense of identity’ (Fruyt 2003, 104). The development of ipse into a synonym of idem is doubtful in classical Latin, however it is possible at the time of the Itinerarium Egeriae, since otherwise it is difficult to explain its usage in the “classical way” (Pinkster 2015, 1163).

Another proposal to account for the semantic development of ipse was made by Harris. He claimed that the demonstrative system of classical Latin underwent a shift consisting in iste taking the place of hic as a proximal demonstrative, ipse taking the place of iste as the medial demonstrative and ille retaining its value as a distal demonstrative (Harris 1978, 69). Harris’s theory is based on the outcome in Romance language where Portuguese, Spanish and Catalan have developed three-term demonstrative systems. The the- ory according to which ipse passed through a demonstrative phase is attractive because from the typological perspective demonstratives (most commonly distal demonstratives) are the most common source of definite articles (Greenberg 1978, 61).

The variety of approaches that aim at explaining the usage of ipse in Late Latin shows that its meanings and functions are difficult to formulate. Furthermore, in some cases it can be interpreted in either way, as an anaphoric marker or intensifier for example (see also Pinkster 2015, 1163). Since the analysis of the status of ipse must consider the stylistic peculiarities of the Itinerarium Egeriae, the following analysis favours classical meanings of ipse where possible. To evaluate whether ipse acts as an articloid, I will assess whether its lexical meaning contributes to the successful establishment of the reference of the nominal or if its main function is definiteness marking (in which case it functions as an articloid). The number of nominals with ipse is summarized in table 2.

As noted in previous research, ipse is often used with a second (or subsequent) mention of the same referent. However, in such cases the original intensifying meaning of ipse can often be inferred. Consider the examples (12) and (13):

(12)

(13)

While an intensifier might seem redundant here, the style of the Itinerarium Egeriae aims to be as specific as possible. This special style is especially prominent in the first part of the text, where such examples are much more common. In such cases, ipse preserves its classical meaning and therefore does not perform the function of an articloid. Even if in the examples above, the reader could successfully ground the referent without ipse, its intensifying meaning is still prominent and consequently it contributes to the successful reference rather than merely informing the reader that they can identify the referent due to unequivocal relationship to the cognitive ground.

The original non-attenuated meaning of ipse is particularly obvious when ipse is used with personal name. In the Itinerarium Egeriae there are four such instances:

(14)

The nominal ipse sanctus Helias ‘holy Elijah’ is the third mention of the referent and the first one with ipse. Such examples have often led researchers to the conclusion that ipse is an operator of anaphoric relations (Aebischer 1948; Nocentini 1990). However, the interpretation according to which ipse is an intensifier that contributes to the successful grounding seems more plausible (see also Fruyt 2003; Adams 2013, 486; Hertzenberg 2015, 22) and it the only possible interpretation if ipse in the example (14) acts as secondary predicate (cf. Pinkster 2015, 1150–64). As a classical intensifier, it marks a referent that is not expected in the given context or that the referent is pragmatically prominent in the given context (Siemund 2000, 128). The writer, as a pious woman, must be deeply impressed when she sees an artifact deposed by the holy man himself. Such usage is even more evident with the first-mentioned referents:

(15)

Even though A. Rosinas claims that the articloid in Lithuanian is frequently used with names (Rosinas 2009, 90), the usage of definite articles in such context in Romance languages is rare. Since other demonstratives are not used with proper nouns in the Itinerarium Egeriae, the assumption that ipse functions as a definiteness marker in the examples (14) and (15) would make its distribution much wider than that of other demonstratives in the text and even wider than the distribution of the definite article in Romance languages. Moreover, this would mean that Late Latin allows the usage of an articloid in contexts where from the typological perspective fully grammaticalized definiteness markers are common (Greenberg 1978/1990, 255–277; Lyons 1999, 339). Therefore, ipse in such cases is also not an articloid.

There are instances of usage of ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae where its intensifying meaning is closer to the classical Latin ‘very’. Such usage is in accordance with the stylistic peculiarities of the text (see also (Adams 2013, 482; Maraval 1982, 53–54)).

Consider the examples (16) and (17):

(16)

(17)

The referent in both examples is the same and is first introduced by a nominal without a determiner ad summitatem. Such usage is like the usage of ille in chapter 3.1 where I have argued that we can interpret ille as an articloid. However, in the examples above, it is possible to interpret ipse as having an intensifying meaning and therefore it contributes to the grounding of the referent rather than informing the reader that they can successfully anchor the referent to the cognitive ground. Since ipse, as an intensifier, specifies reference, its function does not come close to that of a definiteness marker and, in such cases, it does not function as an articloid.

In addition to its classical intensifying meaning, ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae develops additional meanings alongside those it had in Classical Latin. Many authors have noted that ipse can be used with the meaning of idem ‘same’ (Väänänen 1987, 49; Nocentini 1990, 145) or indicated that the development of ipse into a synonym of idem might have been underway at the time of Itinerarium Egeriae (Pinkster 2015, 1163). Fruyt subsumes this Late Latin usage under the term ‘expression of similarity’. According to Fruyt, in the Itinerarium Egeriae ipse together with is (neutral demonstrative), idem ‘same’ and hic ‘this’ can express various aspects of similarity (Fruyt 2003, 104).

The analysis of Itinerarium Egeriae examples shows that ipse with a meaning close to ‘same’ differs from idem, because ipse is used as an extension of its classical meaning ‘very, just, precisely’, thus meaning ‘exact’, ‘exactly the same’ etc. and, by extension ‘same’. Such usage of ipse is common when the author talks about Old Testament readings:

(18)

(19)

As we know from the text, there was a custom to say a prayer and read the appropriate part from the Scriptures after visiting a place which is mentioned there. Ipse cannot be used as a marker of anaphoricity since there is no antecedent to which it could refer. The usage of ipse here is related to the classical meaning ‘very, just, precisely’, but even having in mind the style of the text, emphasis alone as in Classical Latin seem to be redundant in these examples. Hence, the assertion of the identity of the referent (in a way that idem does) is a more persuasive function (cf. Fruyt 2003, 104). Nevertheless, there are examples of this type that are more ambivalent:

(20)

While the nominal die ‘day’ is introduced for the first time in the sentence provided in the example, the author of the Itinerarium Egeriae continues her narrative about what happened on one particular day. Hence, ipsa die could refer to an inferred situation, to the referent that is evident in the given discourse. However, the interpretation where ipse shows signs of semantic development towards the meaning ‘same’ is also possible as the translation shows. The example (21) is similar to the example (20) but the nominal in which ipse is used does not have an immediately available antecedent:

(21)

While visiting a place near Salim, the author remembers that holy John baptized nearby, and the presbyter explains that the source of the water that they see at that moment comes from the spring where holy John had ministered. The referent of ipso fonte is definite due to the shared knowledge by the speaker and the author of the text and is first introduced in the given example. Even if the theme of holy John has been introduced before, it is difficult to analyze the nominal ipso fonte as a case of indirect anaphora. From a typological perspective also, the interpretation of ‘same’ in this case is preferable since the usage of definiteness markers with indirect anaphora, where the referent must be inferred from the situation, is characteristic of grammaticalized definite articles (Greenberg 1978/1990, 255–277; Lyons 1999, 339).

However, in the situation where the direct or indirect anaphora is not possible and ipse is not used as an intensifier, the meaning of ‘same’, ‘exactly the same’ is the most suitable interpretation. In the text there are nominals like this with and without relative clauses, which does not affect the intended usage of ipse:

(22)

In the example above, we cannot translate ipse as itself, because this would yield a meaningless sentence. Since there is no antecedent, it is not a marker of anaphoricity. In such context ipse could be used increasingly as, in Fruyt’s terms, a marker of identity (Fruyt 2003, 104) and consequently develop meanings that are characteristic of Late Latin. The example (24) illustrates the same usage but with a nominal that does not have a relative clause:

(23)

Up to this point my analysis is concurrent with the work of M. Fruyt (2003) and shows that ipse acts as a classical intensifier or exhibits signs of a shift towards the meaning of ‘same’, which is close to the use of idem in Classical Latin. Whether ipse functions as an intensifier or as a modifier with the meaning ‘same’, its lexical meaning is still present, and its main function is to contribute to successful reference by ensuring that the reader can unequivocally relate the referent to the cognitive ground and correctly map it within the current discourse space. In these cases, ipse does not perform the function of an articloid as a definiteness marker.

Nevertheless, there are instances in Itinerarium Egeriae where ipse functions as an ar- ticloid and show a tendency to grammaticalize as a definiteness marker. Ipse as an articloid can be found where its contribution to the successful reference is insignificant or null. First, there are cases where the author uses ipse repeatedly with the same referent as in the example below:

(24)

Even if ipse is used with the transitional meaning of ‘very same’ and ‘the same’, it does not provide additional information in the third mention of the nominal vicus. Such usage allows the bleaching of the semantic content of ipse in Late Latin and, through this loss, leads to its grammaticalization. Such articloid usage of ipse is possible with secondmention referents as well where the intensifier meaning of ipse is not possible and the above-mentioned Late Latin meaning of ‘same’ seems redundant:

(25)

In the example above, the intensifying meaning of ipsam is not possible and is an extension from the meaning that ensures identity. Even having in mind the style of the text, which allows the conservative meaning interpretation in other parts of this analysis, there is little here that ipsam could contribute to the successful grounding. However, such contexts where ipse is used as an articloid do not show any signs of its shift towards a medial demonstrative as indicated by Harris (Harris 1978, 69). According to the analysis of the usage of ipse in the Itinerarium Egeriae, its grammaticalization through the semantic bleaching ‘intensifier > very, exactly > same > above mention > known’ is more probable than through the demonstrative phase. The research based on a later corpus that does not show any sign of such replacement either (Carlier & De Mulder 2010, 242–243), further supports this theory. Thus, it is highly improbable that it would have taken place at the time when the Itinerarium Egeriae was written.

Conclusions

The results of the analysis show that in the Itinerarium both ille and ipse have a spectrum of interrelated meanings. There are instances where ille is used as a demonstrative, especially when it contributes to the ground by providing spatial information about the referent. While its spatial contrast (near/far) is not always present, in such cases it nev- ertheless creates a contrast with other referents or evokes a group of referents, one of which is anchored due to the information provided by ille. In addition, ille is used as an articloid when information about the accessibility of the referent can be deduced as its main function. When the first-mentioned referent is introduced with a relative clause that provides a crucial piece of information needed to successfully anchor the referent, ille can be either a demonstrative or an articloid. Since these contexts are common in the Itinerarium, they can provide an opportunity for further grammaticalization of ille as a definiteness marker. However, in the Itinerarium ille functions as an articloid of textual ostension (typologically, like the articloid in Lithuanian) and does not show signs of usage in contexts that are usually reserved for definite articles.

In full nominals ipse is also used with the classical, intensifying meaning. However, there are cases where the meaning of ipse expresses identity confirmation, similar (but not identical) to the Classical Latin idem. Through this usage (and not through an intermediate demonstrative phase), ipse can be further grammaticalized as a definiteness marker. The results of the analysis suggest the following path of semantic change: ‘intensifier > very, exactly > same > above mention > known’, of which the first four meanings are attested in the Itinerarium.

Referencias

Adams, John N. 2013. Social Variation and the Latin Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Aebischer, Paul. 1948. Contribution à la protohistoire des articles ille et ipse dans les langues romanes. Cultura neolatina 8, 181–203.

Bakker, Stéphanie J. 2009. The Noun Phrase in Ancient Greek: A Functional Analysis of the Order and Articulation of NP Constituents in Herodotus. Leiden/Boston: Brill.

Carlier, Anne and de Mulder, Walter. 2010. The emergence of the definite article: ille in competition with ipse in Late Latin. Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization. Kristin Davidse, Lieven Vandelanotte and Hubert Cuyckens, eds. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 241–276.

Dickey, Stephen M. 2015. Outline of a comparative analysis of the development of the imperfective general-factual in Slavic. Die Welt der Slaven 56. München, Berlin, Washington/D.C: Otto Sagner. 179–195.

Epstein, Richard. 1993. The definite article: early stages of development. Historical Linguistics. Jaap van Marle, ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 111–134.

Fraurud, Kari. 1990. Definiteness and the Processing of Noun Phrases in Natural Discourse. Journal of Semantics 7, 395–433.

Fruyt, Michèle. 2003. Anaphore, cataphore et déixis dans l‘Itinerarium d’Egérie. Latin vulgaire / Latin tardif VI: Actes du VIe colloque international sur le latin vulgaire et tardif, Helsinki, 29 août – 2 septembre 2000. Martti Leiwo, Heikki Solin, Hilla Halla-aho, eds. Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann. 99–119.

Greenberg, J. H., 1978/1990. How Does a Language Acquire Gender Markers. On Language. Selected Writings of Joseph H. Greenberg. Keith Denning & Suzanne Kemmer, eds. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. 241–271.

Harris, Martin. 1978. The Evolution of French Syntax: a comparative approach. London: Longman.

Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. The European linguistic area: Standard Average European. Language Typology and Language Universals. Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wolfgang Raible, Wulf Oesterreicher, eds. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 1492–1509.

Hawkins, John A. 1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness: A Study in Reference and Grammaticality Prediction. London: Croon Helm.

Herzenberg, Mari Johanne Bordal. 2015. Third Person Reference in Late Latin. Berlin/ Boston: Walter de Gruyter.

Himmelmann, Nicolaus P. 1996. Demonstratives in Narrative Discourse: A Taxonomy of Universal Uses. Studies in Anaphora. Barbara A. Fox, ed. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 205–255.

Hofmann, J. B., 1965/1972. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. München: Beck. Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2000. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2001. Discourse in Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 12, 143–188.

Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Löfstedt, Einar. 1911. Philologischer Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.

Lyons, Christopher. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Maraval, Pierre. 1982. Journal de voyage (itinéraire) et lettre sur la bienheuruese Egérie. Manuel-C Diaz Y Diaz, Pierre Maraval, Égérie, Valerius Du Bierzo Saint, eds. Paris: Éditions du Cerf

Marti, Roland. 2012. (Un)articulated definiteness. Nominal determination in Sorbian: Moving from an articleless language to a language with articles? STUF – Language Typology and Universals 65(3), 296–316.

McGowan Anne, Paul F. Bradshaw. 2018. The Pilgrimage of Egeria. A New Translation of the Itinerarium Egeriae with Introduction and commentary. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press Academic.

Menge, Hermann. 1953/1990. Repetitorium der Lateinischen Syntax und Stilistik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Nocentini, Alberto. 1990. L’uso dei dimostrativi nella Peregrinatio Egeriae e la genesi dell’articolo romanzo. Atti del convegno internazionale sulla Peregrinatio Egeriae. 137–158.

Pinkster, Harm. 2015. The Oxford Latin Syntax: Volume 1: The Simple Clause. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Prinz, Otto. 1960. Itinerarium Egeriae (Peregrinatio Aetheriae). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

Renzi, Lorenzo. 1976. Grammatica e storia dell’articolo italiano. Studi di grammatica italiana 5, 5–42.

Rosinas, Albertas. 2009. Baltų kalbų įvardžių semantinė ir morfologinė struktūra. [Semantic and morphological structure of demonstratives in Baltic languages]. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.

Russell, Bertrand. 1905. On Denoting. Mind 14(56), 479–493.

Selig, Maria. 1992. Die Entwicklung der Nominaldeterminanten im Spätlatein. Romanischer Sprachwandel und lateinische Schriftlichkeit. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Siemund, Peter. 2000. Intensifiers in English and German: a comparison. London: Routledge.

Väänänen, Veikko. 1987. Le Journal-Épître d’Égérie (Itinerarium Egeriae): Étude linguistique. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Sources

Itin. – Journal de voyage (itinéraire) et lettre sur la bienheuruese Egérie. Manuel-C Diaz Y Diaz, Pierre Maraval, Égérie, Valerius Du Bierzo Saint, eds. Paris: Éditions du Cerf. 1982.

Notes