The primary expectations of a modern Latin grammar are that it will incorporate the advances of research of the last 30–40 years, especially in the domain of syntax and pragmatics, and that it will deal with topics that have become common not only in general linguistics but also in the description of modern languages. These topics are, in particular, valency, speech acts, word order and discourse cohesion. The only complete Latin grammar that meets these requirements is the late D. Panhuis’ Latin Grammar (2006), which is intended for beginners and intermediate students. For more advanced students, there is H. Pinkster's excellent Latin Syntax and Semantics (1990/1995; http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/navigate.pl?NewPerseusMonographs.19) and his Oxford Latin Syntax is forthcoming. O.'s volume is another contribution that is aimed at filling a gap for English speaking students.
The book provides ‘a comprehensive introduction to Latin grammar from a generative perspective. It combines the outline of traditional descriptions with the most recent advancement of language analysis’ (understand ‘of Generative Grammar’) (p. x). The main text comprises a short introduction, presenting advantages of modern linguistics (understand, Generative Grammar) in comparison with traditional grammar, and the three parts of Latin grammar: phonology, morphology and syntax. There are 28 chapters in total. A short conclusion which follows summarises the advantages of the theoretical approach adopted. The bibliography contains references – suggestions for further reading or, for some chapters, a list of works dealing with the same topic. There is also a helpful index.
The first part deals with phonology and presents the Latin alphabet, phonemes, pronunciation, and prosody and metrics (poetry only).
The second part, devoted to morphology, is the most original section of the book. After preliminary definitions of the basic elements (word, root, stem, parts of speech), O. introduces a theory of inflection (Chapter 8) by starting with a formal representation of morphological rules. This theory of inflection serves as a basis for the presentation of Latin declension and conjugation types. Its originality resides in the fact that each declension and conjugation category is analysed as [stem] + [inflectional ending], for example, the accusative singular rosam is presented as [rosa] + m (p. 64). On the one hand, this approach is useful because it makes it possible to reduce simple phenomena to relatively simple and unitary systems. On the other hand, it results in a kind of (pseudo-)historical presentation of Latin inflection types. I doubt that for a student, it is suitable to present the genitive plural of rosa as [rosa] + long + rum, instead of the traditional ros-ārum, where it is assumed that the ending -ārum amalgamates the thematic vowel and complex inflectional morphemes. Furthermore, this theory of inflection requires a preliminary explanation of phonological features such as vowel deletion, vowel shortening, vowel weakening, or rhotacism. For students, this is simply too much to digest.
This section also deals with some other word classes: adjectives, pronouns, numerals and adverbs. Chapters 15 and 16 on derivation and composition, which present prefixes, suffixes and types of composition, are of special interest because these topics are usually omitted or only very briefly treated in Latin grammars.
The third part is devoted to syntax, and it is the most extensive part of the three. However, this section is not a strong point of the book. It treats questions concerning the simple sentence (phrases, case theory and case syntax in Chapters 18–21), the compound sentence (coordination in Chapter 22) and the complex sentence (embedded, interrogative, relative, infinitival, participial and adverbial clauses in Chapters 23–8).
Valency and theta-roles are introduced as preliminary notions (p. 175). In comparison with Tesnière's valency theory and his distinction of zero/mono/bi/trivalent verbs, according to the number of the arguments required (e.g. quiesco ‘to rest’ is a monovalent verb requiring one argument, the subject; do ‘to give’ is a trivalent verb requiring the subject, the direct object and the indirect object, etc.), Generative Grammar introduces the concept of theta-roles or semantic values and that of argument positions or syntactic values required by a verb. However, the purported advantages of this re-elaboration, praised on p. 179, are not very convincing: the description of the dative (pp. 251–4) is the most illustrative case. O. proposes that the theta-role of Benefactive has the advantage of explaining the following datives under the same label (p. 252): librum tibi celeriter mittam (Cic. Att. 15.27.2) ‘I will send you the book very soon’ and sibi vivit (Sen. Ep. 55.5). Such an interpretation represents a step backwards from two perspectives: according to a modern linguistic description, tibi is a valency complement and sibi an optional, omissible complement; and according to traditional grammar, sibi is regarded as a dativus commodi (‘for himself’), as opposed to tibi with mittam, which is an indirect object. The distinction between valency (obligatory) complements and non-valency (optional) complements is fundamental for understanding the syntax of the cases and for explaining it to students. It is thus a significant drawback of the book that distinctions between theta-roles and argument positions on the one hand, and optional adjuncts on the other are not clearly made and are extremely confusing. If the above-mentioned datives are regarded as bearing the theta-role of Benefactive, this implies that they are both arguments, which is incorrect. In the case of the genitive in the phrase arma hostium ‘the enemies’ weapons’ (p. 244), the genitive hostium is said to bear a theta-role of Possessor – this means that it has to be taken as an argument, which is incorrect. I also cannot see how Purpose can simultaneously be a ‘theta-role of indirect objects’ (p. 251) and ‘rather an autonomous adjunct’ (p. 253). True arguments, in turn, are sometimes misconstrued as adjuncts: complements of verbs such as utor ‘to use’ are interpreted as ‘special uses of the ablative of instrument’ (p. 256).
Sometimes, the concepts used neglect modern approaches: it is well known that nam and ergo (pp. 265–6) are not causal or illative ‘conjunctions’ but discourse markers. There are also instances where aspects of the Latin language are surprising. For example, Chapter 23 deals with ‘embedded clauses’: complement clauses introduced by a subordinator (‘complementizer’ ut, quod, quin). It is not clearly stated that the same function (direct object or subject of the main clause) can also be fulfilled by indirect questions (24.4) and accusative and infinitive clauses (Chapter 26.1), as if Latin only has ‘complementizer clauses’.
There are also some incorrect formulations and errors, and I will only mention some of them. Is, ea, id is not a ‘third personal pronoun’ (p. 93) but an anaphor. Reflexive pronouns (pp. 94–5) are not ‘anaphoric elements’ (confusing formulation). In the framework of Generative Grammar, these pronouns could eventually be explained in terms of external and internal anaphora. The claim that ‘relative clauses have a structure similar to interrogative clauses’ (p. 283) is very disputable. ‘Negative copulative constructions also frequently occur with pronouns, for example nec quicquam’ (p. 264). Such a formulation is incorrect: in the case of coordination, there is a complementary distribution consisting of the use of the negative coordinator followed by an indefinite pronoun (nec quisuisquam instead of et nemo). I come now to errors, for example, nomen adiectivum (not adiectivus, p. 49); the verb noceo figures in two different categories (pp. 252–3).
The main focus of this book is to produce a formal description of the various features of Latin grammar using a small number of universal principles. Its aim is to propose a unitary and simple theory for heterogeneous or odd phenomena. Those who sympathise with this aim will find the book satisfying; those who want a systematic, accurate and comprehensive description of the Latin language should consult another book.
