The Predicate in Romanian Grammar Books. From Ion Heliade-Rădulescu to Hariton Tiktin *

Abstract

The predicate, as main part of the sentence along with the subject, is competently analyzed for the first time by Ion Heliade-Rădulescu, in his Gramatica românească (1828). It approaches language from a logical-rationalist perspective, dominant at the age, according to which every sentence must be centered upon a subject and a predicate, which he calls Prezis (= Foretold). The next significant grammatical work in Romanian linguistics is Timotei Cipariu's Gramatica limbii române. Consisting of two volumes - Analitica (1869) and Sintetica (1877) -, it is considered to be the first academic grammar of the Romanian language. Conceived along the same logical-rational lines, we can find in it all the features a modern grammar should contain. The two linguists had such an impact on Romanian linguistics that, in the specialized literature, the terms Heliade's age and Cipariu's age are used. The first linguist with an authentic scientific upbringing (acquired in Paris) was Al. Lambrior. His Gramatică română. Fonetica şi morfologia (= Romanian Grammar. Phonetics and Morphology), published in 1892, was held in great esteem among specialists. The last grammarian analyzed in this paper is Hariton Tiktin, with his Gramatica română, in two volumes: Etimologia (= Morfologia) and Sintaxa (published between the years 1891 and 1893). It is a work of unquestionable scientific value, whose greatest merit is to have introduced the basic modern terminology into Romanian grammar books.

Headnote

Abstract:

The predicate, as main part of the sentence along with the subject, is competently analyzed for the first time by Ion Heliade-Rădulescu, in his Gramatica românească (1828). It approaches language from a logical-rationalist perspective, dominant at the age, according to which every sentence must be centered upon a subject and a predicate, which he calls Prezis (= Foretold). The next significant grammatical work in Romanian linguistics is Timotei Cipariu's Gramatica limbii române. Consisting of two volumes - Analitica (1869) and Sintetica (1877) -, it is considered to be the first academic grammar of the Romanian language. Conceived along the same logical-rational lines, we can find in it all the features a modern grammar should contain. The two linguists had such an impact on Romanian linguistics that, in the specialized literature, the terms Heliade's age and Cipariu's age are used. The first linguist with an authentic scientific upbringing (acquired in Paris) was Al. Lambrior. His Gramatică română. Fonetica şi morfologia (= Romanian Grammar. Phonetics and Morphology), published in 1892, was held in great esteem among specialists. The last grammarian analyzed in this paper is Hariton Tiktin, with his Gramatica română, in two volumes: Etimologia (= Morfologia) and Sintaxa (published between the years 1891 and 1893). It is a work of unquestionable scientific value, whose greatest merit is to have introduced the basic modern terminology into Romanian grammar books.

Keywords: predicate, linguistics, grammar, phonetics, etymology, morphology, syntax

In the context of the linguistic schools and theories discussed in our previous article, we deem it of great importance to survey the way in which Romanian grammarians addressed the issue of syntax, in general, and that of the predicate, in particular. Since previous grammar books do not conceptualize these notions, we shall start our analysis with Heliade-Rădulescu's Gramatica românească (= Romanian Grammar).

In striking contrast to previous Romanian grammar books, Gramatica românească, published by Heliade in 1848, surprises by "its Western design" (Ursu, 1961: 323), as well as by its rationalist approach, the author following French models. The rationalist grammar that inspired Heliade was Charles-Constant Le Tellier's Grammaire française, a ¡'usage des pensionnats, published in Paris at the beginning of the 19th century. In addition, the latter published two annexes - Exercices d'analyse grammaticale et logique and Exercices d'analyse logique -, which can also be identified in Heliade's Gramatica - in Deprindere asupra Analysului Grămăticesc (1848: 116-123), and respectively, in Deprindere asupra Analysului Loghicesc (1848: 141-146).

At the basis of syntax, argues Heliade, stands the Judicata (= judgment, logical thinking) which, "when uttered, takes the name of Sentence [...]; thus, the sentence is an uttered judgment/thinking" (Ion Heliade-Rădulescu, 1980: 129-3291).

The sentence consists of a subject (which Heliade calls subjet or subzăcut, i.e. "subject" or "underlier") and a predicate2 (which he calls Prezis, i.e. "foretold").

The subject is essential for the sentence because without it "we have no ground upon which to base the judgment" (Ibidem: 130-331). In what concerns the foretold (predicate), "its only function in the sentence is to let know about the subject, for the subject, i.e. to show what it is like, or what it is [...]" (Ibidem). Taken in isolation, "the tie between these two parts cannot be perceived," which triggers the need for a link verb, i.e. the verb a fi (= to be), called legătură (= link) or semn al judecăţii (= sign of the judgment/logical thinking) (Ibidem). In numerous situations, however, "the foretold [...] shows up together with the verb," as it happens in sentences such as viaţa trece (= Life passes/goes by), instead of viaţa este trecătoare (= Life is passing/ephemeral) (Ibidem).

Both the subject and the predicate can be simple or compound. The predicate "is simple when it names a single quality put forth by one or several acts of saying. Conversely, it is compound when it names several qualities allowed to the subject, each put forth by one of several acts of saying" (Ibidem).

The subject may receive certain complementation, so that it can be viewed as complemented or uncomplemented. "The uncomplemented subject is also called grammatical, the complemented one - logical [...]" (Ibidem); accordingly, Heliade introduces the notions of "logical subject" and "grammatical subject," notes Valeria Guţu Romalo (Ibidem: 506). The foretold can also be grammatical (the "uncomplemented" one) or logical (the "complemented" one). Complementation of the subject and of the predicate triggers a rather complex classification of sentences. In this context we find it necessary to heed Romalo's warning that "Heliade, following French rationalist models, grants very wide scope to the term complementation (Ibidem: 506).

The chapter entitled Deprindere asupra Analysului Grămmăticesc (= Getting Used to Grammatical Analysis) is illustrative for Heliade's approach to verb analysis. Thus, in the sentence „Lumina când începe a se ivi, întunericul se-ascunde" (= When light begins to show, darkness hides away), începe (= begins) is "adjectival verb, active, variable; in the singular and 3rd person for the subj. lumina (= light); in the present tense, demonstrative mood, 3rd conjugation irregular, and conjugated in the fourth"; se-ascunde (= hides itself) is "Adj. V, refl., sing, 3rd pers. for the subj. întunerecul (= darkness); in the pres. Ts., dem. M, 3rd conj. Reg. (ib. author's abbreviations). Era (= was) - in the sentence „Aceasta (lumina) din nenorocire era stinsă" (= Regrettably the light was out) - is presented as "nominal V., in sing. nr., 3rd pers., t. Incomplete. in dem. M., aux. irreg. v." (1980; author's abbreviations).

If in the above chapter Heliade undertook an analysis of the parts of the sentence, or more exactly, of the parts of speech within a sentence, in the chapter Deprindere asupra Analysului Loghicesc (= Getting Used to Logical Analysis) he offers us models for analyzing the sentence. Thus, the complex sentence, „Lumina cînd începe a se ivi, întunerecul se-ascunde fuge ne putînd vedea faţa ei" (= When light begins to show, darkness hides, runs away, unable to see her face), is analyzed as follows: "This utterance contains in itself a complex sentence, which can be divided into three sentences: 2 main sentences and an incidental one, namely:

1. Întunerecul ne putînd vedea faţa luminii, se-ascunde (= Darkness, unable to see the face of light, hides away); Abs. main sentence.

2. Întunerecul ne putînd vedea faţa luminii fuge (= Darkness, unable to see the face of light, runs away); Abs. main sentence.

3. Cînd lumina începe a se ivi (= When light begins to show), incid. sent, detr. determining the foretold" etc.

This kind of analysis is targeted at youngsters, "who need to gain the skill to truly and fully understand what they write and read".

An important moment in the history of Romanian linguistics was the publication of Timotei Cipariu's Gramatica limbei române (= Grammar of the Romanian language): Part I: Analitica (1869), Part II: Sintetica (1877). Before this grammar, the author had also produced Elemente de limba română după dialecte şi monumente vechi (= Elements of Romanian language as indicated by old dialect and monuments), published in Blaj, in 1854, and Compendiu de gramateca limbei române (= A Compendium of Romanian Grammar), published in Blaj, in 1855. As Mioara Avram shows in her introductory study to Timotei Cipariu's Opere, vol. II (= Works, 2nd vol.), published in 1992 under the auspices of the Romanian Academy, all these works received the generic name of "Cipariu's grammar books" (Cipariu, 1992: V).

In the same introductory study, Avram argues that the topicality of "Cipariu's grammar books" was "supported by the fact that they contain forms, constructs or observations that are absent until today from other grammars, even from sizeable ones or from detailed studies regarding certain issues, as well as by the coincidence of his views with those of our days. This coincidence becomes obvious when using Cipariu's work today, as bibliography for some scientific research, e.g. on transformational grammar, with reference to Em. Vasiliu, Sanda Golopenţia-Eretescu, Sintaxa transformaţională a limbii române (1969: XLV; see also Mioara Avram, Prima gramatică academică a limbii române, 1966, nr.4: 487-507, passim, and subsequentes, Avram, 1966).

In what regards syntax, which makes up the second part of the Gramatica (i.e. Sintactica), Carmen-Gabriela Pamfil notes: "In the previous century, logicians, and perhaps some grammarians also, established that every word - with the exception of relational words - expresses a notion. The terms proposed are noun notions, adjective notions, numeral notions, verb notions, adverb notions [...]. In Cipariu's view, however, the noun (subject) is the only category which expresses notions, while the other words, including the verb, express qualities, determinants of the noun, therefore "notes" of a notion's content" (Pamfil, 1983: 477, note 148). Pamfil also emphasizes that "on a European level [...], Cipariu's age witnesses a departure from the logical-philosophical approach to language in favor of a technical kind of research" (Pamfil, 1983, nr. 2: 83), which explains the richness of "forms, constructs or observations" Mioara Avram observes.

Studying Gramatica, we can see that Cipariu's approach is somewhat between the two tendencies mentioned by Pamfil. Illustrative in is sense is the definition and functions he proposes for the subject and the predicate, which are in good measure indebted to logicism.

The in extenso quotations below highlight Cipariu's view of the two main parts of the sentence:

"The subject and the predicate can be simple or compound, complex or non-complex (simplex, compositum, complexum, incomplexum).

They are simple or compound according to the number of ideas or notions that they present to the mind; they are complex or non-complex, depending on whether the ideas or notions are expressed by a single word or by a complex (complexus) or several words".

"The predicate is simple when it expresses a single quality of the subject, e.g. in the examples above: Omul e muritoriu (= Man is mortal); Omul e cea mai frumoasă făptură a lui D-zeu (= Man is God's most beautiful creature); Sultanii asiatici guvernează pre supuşii lor cu o autoritate despotică (= Asian sultans govern over their subjects with tyrannical authority). In all these sentences, the predicate is simple, albeit in the second and third sentences it is expressed via several words, as all those words contribute to building up the notion of a single quality.

The predicate is compound when it expresses several qualities, e.g. in the sentences: Vechii romani erau bravi, frugali şi morali (= The ancient Romans were brave, thrifty and moral); Arabii sunt generoşi, ospitali, dar şi răzbunători (= Arabs are generous and hospitable, but also vengeful).

The predicate is complex when the main word, whose function is to state the subject's quality, is accompanied by several words which modify its meaning, e.g. in the following: Oamenii sunt orbi pentru lucrurile ce nu vor a le vedea (= People are blind for the things they don't want to see); Io scriu în toate zilele două-trei linie româneşte (= Every day I write two-three sentences in Romanian).

Hence results that sentences are also simple and compound, or complex or non-complex.

A sentence is simple when both the subject and the predicate are simple; they are compound when either the subject or the predicate is, or both of them are, compound. In the same way:

A sentence is complex when either one or the other is, or both the essential parts are complex; they are non-complex when neither one nor the other is complex.

Hence results that, in a complex sentence, we can identify a logical subject or predicate and a grammatical (syntactic) subject or predicate; for example, the logical subject consists of all the words that come together and are necessary to express a full notion, e.g. in the sentence: Religiunea creştină e mai conformă raţiunei decât idolatria grecilor şi romanilor (= Christian religion is closer to reason than the idolatry of the Romans or the Greeks), the logical subject is represented by the groups of words: religiunea creştină (= Christian religion) and idolatria grecilor şi romanilor (= the idolatry of the Romans or the Greeks); conversely, the grammatical subject consists merely of the words religion and idolatry, the other words being necessary to develop, extend and modify the main or fundamental notions.

The example proposed can also highlight the difference between the logical and the grammatical predicate".

Pamfil also discusses Cipariu's positivist approach, which becomes more obvious when the analysis is directed at the description of the predicate. The very definition of grammar - as "the science that deals with the study of the language, focusing on the form of words and on the way they are linked together to produce utterances [...]" - points to such an approach. In dealing with synthetics (syntax), however, Cipariu brings back into discussion the idea of logical projection, because "synthetics [.] can explain how, in speech, words are linked together to build up logical utterances [...]". In this sense, illustrative are the linguist' considerations regarding the subject, and especially, the predicate:

"The predicate (praedicatum) can be defined as the word that expresses the nature, quality, state or condition of the object referred to (the sentence's attribute), e.g. is good, with reference to God, mortal with reference to man".

The copula (copula), or the relator/joiner (Rom. împreunător) is the word which brings together the subject and the predicate, e.g. the verb este or e (= is/'s).

In its simplest form, the sentence is what the science of reason (Logic) refers to as judeţ (judicium) or judecată (= reason), a true judiciary sentence passed upon a real or an unreal object: ce este? (= what is?) or ce nu este? (= what is not?).

"According to logical judgment, the subject is a larger notion (notio, conceptus), which contains in itself several smaller or lesser notions, the predicate being one of those lesser notions, also called notes, while the copula that follows represents the very utterance of the mind/idea, showing that the note expressed is by necessity either contained or not among the notions of the subject, i.e. of the larger notion [...].

By their wider or narrower extensions, the notes of the predicate may express the so-called gender (genus) or species (species), with their countless subdivisions and subordinates.

Therefore, the predicate may also consist of two notes, one generic, another specific, and then the sentence becomes what in logic is called definition, where the first note is called gender/genus and the second ultimate difference (ultima diferentia), e.g. omul este animale (genus) cuvântătoriu (= Man is a speaking animal/an animal endowed with speech) [...].

Within the sentence, the main parts - the subject and the predicate - stand is close a relation or reference, expressed by the way they correlate, so that they are called correlates (correlata), while the accidental parts of the sentence stand in a relation of dependence to the essential elements; hence they are subordinates, as opposed to the essential parts, which are coordinates".

"As a rule, the predicate of the sentence is an adjective name, e.g. bun (= good), frumos (= beautiful), , neputincios (= powerless); D-zeu e bun (= God is good) [...].

However, instead of an adjective, other words can be and are placed within the predicated, as surrogates, such as:

a) participles, which, incidentally, all have adjectival forms, e.g. muritoriu (= mortal), lăudat, (= praised), plăcut (= pleasing), fericit (= happy); Făcătoriul de bine e lăudat de toţi oamenii (= Good doers are praised by everybody); Faptele bune sunt plăcute lui D-zeu (= Good deeds are pleasing to God); [...].

b) numeral names; unu (= one), doi (= two), trei (= three); întâi (= first), al doilea (= second), etc., since they are adjectival by nature, e.g. Astăzi sunt treizeci de ani [...] (= It's thirty years since); Şi vor fi cei de apoi întâi (= The last ones will be the first) etc.;

c) a noun standing alone, or having an adjective or some other word appended, e.g. Minciuna încă e vorbă (= A lie is still a statement); [.] Parisul e cetate frumoasă (= Paris is a beautiful city) [...]; or even an elliptical appendage, e.g. Orologiul lui e de aur (= His clock is of gold); [...], i.e., Orologiul lui e orologiu de aur (= His clock is a clock made of gold) [...].

d) in a sentence, an adverb or an interjection can also stand for the predicate, when they take on adjectival meanings, e.g. Cu toţii suntem ca vai de noi (= We are all so poor); Să-ţi fie de bine (= Bless you); etc..

e) all verbs which carry meaning, not only a copula but also the predicate, only under a different form, e.g. io scriu (= I write), i.e. io sîm scriind (= I am writing) or sîm ocupat cu scrierea (= I am busy with the act of writing), like in the Latin scribo, i.e. ego sum scribens; scribam, i.e. ego sum scripturus, which are still used (18/268).

As the editor of the volume points out, "Cipariu, like all logicians gathers under the heading predicate the adjectives, nouns, adverbs, etc., i.e. what present-day grammars call nume predicative (= predicative)" (p. 477, n. 149).

In what regards the copula or "relator/joiner" Timotei Cipariu points out that the word which joins together the subject and the predicate and vice versa is the noun verb: sîm (= am), eşti (= are), este (= is), etc., from Latin sum, es, est [...].

"Latin grammarians call the verb sum "supporting verb" (verbum substantivum), the only one of this kind among verbs, because it alone and by itself expresses the most essential notion of life, existence, and it is also the only verb that needs no other word in the utterance, expressing everything by itself, being simultaneously subject and predicate: sum".

"Most Romanian grammarians of the previous century - notes Carmen-Gabriela Pamfil - called the syntactic functional verb a fi (= to be) either 'noun verb' (thus following an older tradition), or simply 'verb', while the predicative was referred to as 'predicate' or 'attribute'" (Pamfil, 1983: 477, n. 61).

Apart from the general criticism of the book's etymological orthography, let us state that the part focusing on syntax was received with some reserve, too, even though it exceeds both in size and amount of information everything that had been published until that moment. "The fact [...] seems significant that Cipariu was accused of too little attention paid to syntax, of his limitation to the parts of the sentence and to word order, critics failing to notice that syntax was the very branch of grammar that, compared to previous works, he developed the most [...]" (Avram, 1966: 491). And yet, Cipariu's grammar "goes far beyond the phase of faithful imitation of foreign models" (Ibidem: 498)3.

In 1893, in Iaşi, Editura Librăriei Kuppermann publishes a work that carries on the front page the inscription Al. Lambrior, Gramatica română. Sintaxa, by Gh. Ghibănescu, teacher. The latter also signs the Preface. The book consists of two sections: Section I deals with the theory of the sentence (Teoriei propoziţiunii); Section II is dedicated to Romanian syntax (Sintaxa românească).

In what regards the research object of syntax, it is shown in the book that "it targets parole that expresses ideas, feelings or acts of volition [...]" (p. 2). The word "gives utterance to an idea; and when two ideas are united, the result is a judgment/an act of thinking". "A sentence is a word-based expression of a judgment" (p. 3). And yet, between a judgment and a sentence there is no exact correspondence, because a judgment can often be rendered by means of several sentences. Therefore, the organization of a sentence must abide by certain logical requirements.

According to their meaning, sentences are affirmative, dubitative, interrogative, optative and imperative, and there are also those which express amazement, i.e. exclamatory sentences. According to they form, they take on "two basic forms: a) sentences with an object: graba strică treaba (= haste ruins the job); b) sentences with an attribute: Eu ţi-s omul (= I'm your man); s-a ales un rău (= he ended badly)" (p. 7).

The terms of a sentence with an object are the subject, the verb and the internal or external object. "We call subject the term that indicates the being, verb the term that indicates the action. The subject and the verb are the fundamental terms of the sentence" (p. 8). In a later passage, dealing with "the verb of the sentence," the term predicate is employed (p. 9).

Concerning the place of the verb and of the subject, it is specified that "in Romanian, the verb never occurs at the end of the sentence, except in cases of poetic inversion. Usually, the verb stands in the middle of the sentence so as to establish a relation of antithesis between its two terms: the subject and the object, or the subject and the attribute" (p. 69).

The subject occupies the initial position "in affirmative sentences, but it changes its place in hypothetical (interrogative or optative) sentences (p. 70-71).

As for sentences with an attribute, they occur "when the verb does not actually designate the subject's act, but rather functions as connector between the subject and its attribute" (p. 10), as in: Ţăranul este îndurător (= The peasant is long-suffering). In fact, this case regards the status of the verb a fi (= to be): "By its very nature, the attribute carries a double meaning: active or passive, depending on whether the feature it denotes is an action performed by the subject, or a state of affliction it undergoes" (p. 16), as in: ţăranul este îndurător - active, vs. ţăranul este nedreptăţit (= The peasant is mistreated) - passive.

The verb to be is not the only one that can build up an attribute; "this function of copulative verbs is performed by many other verbs [...]" (p. 18), such as: a ajunge (= to arrive), a să arăta (= to show up), a deveni (= to become), a eşi (= to get out), a să allege (= to select), a muri (= to die), a să naşte (= to be born), a să numi (= to be called), a să socoti (= to estimate/reckon), a să face (= to be done), a să uita (= to look at), a remânea (= to remain), a vini (= to come)" (p. 18-19).

In essence, "the attribute is in the sentence the term which indicates the subject's state, who it is, what characteristics it has etc." (p. 77); hence it becomes obvious that Lambrior uses the term attribute for what we call today predicative (for what modern grammars call attribute, Lambrior uses the term attributive).

Worthy of interest are also the rulings regarding the agreement between subject and verb, which are "of number and person" (p. 90); they are performed because our mind distinguishes the idea of unity and of plurality" (Ibidem). Agreement between subject and attribute follows gender, number and case differences and "is either fully operational or not", depending on the word functioning as attribute - a name (noun, adjective or participle) or a pronoun -, and also on whether it has or not different gender forms" (p. 93).

Al. Lambrior is considered to be "the first Romanian linguist with a rigorously scientific formation, [an author who] [...] exercised a powerful influence on subsequent Romanian grammarians" (ILR, 1978: 76). His Grammatica - published posthumously, and partially only edited out by its author - is the first scientific grammar of our language before Tiktin" (ILR, 1978: 78).

We must also mention the fact that Al. Lambrior developed his conception regarding language under the influence of two prominent linguistic schools: that of naturalists and that of Neogrammarians. He was a disciple of Gaston Paris and of Arsene Darmesteter, his works bearing the influence of the comparative-historical method. He collaborated to the prestigious magazine Romania, founded in 1872.

Another assertion of importance is his idea that "apart from phonetic laws, semantic ones must also be established, the science of language being unfulfilled until both categories of laws are discovered [...]" (ILR, 1978: 96)4.

Gramatica română (Romanian Grammar) is one of Hariton Tiktin's most important works; the first part, Etimologia (= Etymology) - the old term used for Morphology -, was published in 1891; the second part, Sintaxa (Syntax), in 1893. After nearly half a century, in 1945, I.A. Candrea revised and published its 3rd edition (Bucureşti, Editura Tempo), under the title Gramatica română. Etimologia şi sintaxa (Romanian Grammar. Etymology and Syntax). "In this interval of time," argues Candrea in his Foreword to the edition, "tens of similar textbooks were published, targeted at high school students [...]; none of them, however, can equal the flawless work of this great defunct philologist" (p. V.). "Moreover", Candrea emphasizes, "I can say without the fear of exaggerating that so far, for no other European language has there been written a safer guidebook than this unique Grammar, a more accessible manual, a handbook that can get you out of trouble in all ambiguous cases" (Ibidem).

In his Preface to the 1st edition, Hariton Tiktin establishes the objectives of his grammar: "In the theoretical part I have tried to apply profitably both the latest results of modern linguistics in general and a profound knowledge of regarding the peculiarities of the Romanian language and the history of its development [...]. To reach this goal, we had to approach certain essential sections of grammar in a totally different way and to change for the most part the terminology employed so far" (p. IX).

The section dedicated to Syntax begins with a definition of the sentence, which Tiktin views as "a union of words by which an idea is expressed [...]". He insists, however, that "not all grammatical word groups are sentences;" it is essential that this "union of words should express a thought, i.e. that it should say something, that it should contain in itself an utterance" (p. 132). Sentences are based on two main parts: the subject, i.e. "the word which names the being or object the sentence says something about," and the predicate, which designs "the word by which something is said about the subject" (p. 137).

In Romanian there are two kinds of predicate: action predicates and feature predicates. The former "names the act (action) of the subject and answers the question What is the subject doing/undergoing?"; the latter "endows the subject with a feature and answers the question What is the subject? or What is the subject like?

An action predicate is expressed by a predicative verb, while the feature predicate "by a word (or word group) which names the feature united with the subject by a verb, called copulative verb, or copula. "The word naming the feature is called predicative" - the equivalent of what present day grammars call nume predicative (p. 156).

The predicative can be expressed by:

* an adjective or some other adjectival name (pronoun, numeral or a participle in the Nominative case: Casa era înaltă (= The house was high); a treia din stradă (= the third on the street); a noastră, vândută (= ours, sold);

* a noun or some other nominal name in the Nominative or Genitive: Fierul este un metal (= Iron is a metal); Aerul este al oricui (= Air is anybody's).

* a participle preceded by preposition: Buruienile sînt de stîrpit (= Weeds are to be stamped out);

* an Infinitive: A trăi este a se lupta (= To live means to fight);

* an adverb or a noun with a preposition: Soarele era sus (= The sun was up). Viaţa ta este în primejdie (= You life is in danger) (p. 156-157).

In what regards copulative verbs, "a fi (= to be) is the most frequently used." Besides it, Tiktin also lists a sta (= to stand), a deveni (= to become), a ieşi (= to get out), a rămânea (= to remain), a părea (= to seem), a arăta (= to show), a se face (= to become), a se naşte (= to be born), a se numi (= to be called), a se chema (= to be called), a se alege (= to select), etc. (p. 157).

Even though he could not shake off the influence of logicism altogether, Tiktin rejected the idea of a correlation between logical and grammatical categories. He voiced his opinions on this issue in an article entitled O chestiune de sintaxă (= A Matter of Syntax), published in Archiva, in 1893, asking us not to identify "our ideas with the linguistic coat in which we clothe them [...] because we can express the same idea under various forms, different from a grammatical point of view" (I. Rizescu, 1971: 45).

Just like Al. Lambrior, Hariton Tiktin was a Neogrammarian in his general conception regarding language, but "some of his opinions tell him apart from the rest of Neogrammarians; he believes in the existence of phonetic laws, but gradually he embraces the viewpoint according to which language is a social phenomenon, whose role is to mediate communication" (ILR, 1978: 97).

Tiktin was not fully aware of the importance of an aspect of grammatical analysis he proposes in the syntax part of his Gramatica: the use of illustrative schemes for syntactic connections, i.e. of a figurative synthesis, as he calls it; such schemes, the author argues, "also provide the best way for assessing the exactness of the analysis" (p. 204). In his figurative synthesis Tiktin assigns functional preponderance to the verb (predicate). By this procedure, the linguist prefigures the figurative methods proposed by Lucien Tesniere and even by the American structuralists. It is Eugen Coseriu who points to these facts in his article Un précurseur méconnu de la syntaxe structurale: H. Tiktin, published in Recherches de linguistique. Hommage á Maurice Leroy (1980, p. 4862), of which an excerpt was reproduced in the collective volume published in 2006 by the Romanian Academy, with the title Locul lui H. Tiktin, membru de onoare al Academiei Române, în lingvistica românească (= The Place of H. Tiktin, Honorary Member of the Romanian Academy, in Romanian Linguistics). As Eugen Coseriu points out, "l'ordre dans lequel les unites syntaxiquement combinées figurent dans ses graphes, aspirant a reproduire l'ordre fonctionnel de la structuration syntaxique, est souvent tres different de l'ordre linéaire" (Coseriu, 2006: 149).

In the chapter Analiza logică a propoziţiei simple (= Logical analysis of the simple sentence) (p. 203-207), Hariton Tiktin establishes the following logical order: subject; predicative (when the verb is a copula); complement in the accusative; complement in the dative; prepositional complement; modifiers of the predicate. "For each of these elements we will also look for its determinations" (Ibidem).

In addition, Tiktin provides suggestions concerning the organization of the figurative synthesis: "The verb of the predicate will be written in the middle; the subject to the left (a little below it); the predicative and the complements to the right (a little below, too, except when there are several complements); the other determinants - below the word they relate to. Straight lines will be used to link the elements to one another" (p. 204).

For the sentence Buturuga mică răstoarnă carul mare (= A small stump will knock over a big farm cart, i.e. as in the proverb Little strokes fell great oaks), he proposes the following scheme:

Or, for a negative form: Corb la corb nu scoate ochii (=Crows don't pick crow's eyes):

"The elements not expressed", he explains, will be written in brackets, as in Schimbarea domnilor, bucuria nebunilor (= A master's change, a joy for fools):

Tiktin proposes such graphical representations to complex sentences, too.

"On remarquera", Eugen Coseriu comments, "l'analogie presque parfaite dans la conception grammaticale sous-jacente au explicite, et souvent jusque dans les détails entre l'analyse (?synthese?) de Tiktin et celle de Tesniere" (Coseriu, 1953; Coseriu, 2006: 148). "Chez les deux auteurs", Coseriu continues, "l'idée de base est de l'ordre ?régissant??régi? avec le verbe conjugué en tant que premier régissant" (Ibidem). Obviously, there are also differences between the two linguists in this respect; what is important, however, is that they both assign primary position in the sentence to the verb predicate and that they propose to present the structure of the sentence and determinations within it schematically, thus very clearly.

According to Coseriu, Hariton Tiktin took over the method of syntactic models from German textbooks, especially from Franz Kern's Zur Methodik des deutschen Unterrichts (Berlin, 1883), which makes Coseriu conclude: "En tout cas, un fait beaucoup plus important du point de vue historique nous paraît acquis: c'est que l'histoire de la grammaire et de l'idéologie grammaticale est en grande partie celle des manuels scolaires et de l'enseignement grammatical" (Hariton Tiktin, in Eugen Coseriu, 2006: 156).

Last but not least, Hariton Tiktin is also recognized for his important contribution to establishing the terminology of grammar, both in the field of morphology and that of syntax: "Tiktin uses, for the first time in a Romanian grammar book, all the terms required for naming the various grammatical categories and forms" (Hariton Tiktin, in Eugen Coseriu, 2006: 140)5.

Footnote

* Paper presented at the International Symposium "RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IN INNOVATION ERA", "Aurel Vlaicu" University of Arad, 8-9th of November 2012.

1 Our translation; all subsequent translations are our own.

2 Heliade-Rădulescu's Gramatica... introduces for the first in Romanian linguistics the notion of copulative verb: "The concept and notion of copula cannot be found in earlier Romanian grammars (see also Dimitrie Eustatievici Braşoveanul, Gramatica românească [...]; Samuil Micu, Gheorghe Şincai, Elementa linguae daco-romanae sive valachicae [...]. The idea of copulative verb in a sentence, in relation to the logical copula, with reference exclusively to the verb a fi (= to be), appears for the first time in Heliade-Rădulescu's Gramatică românească (Sibiu, 1828)" [...]" (Dimitriu, 1999: 378379). See also Frâncu (1998) and Iordan, 1978b: 165-170; ILR, 1978: 27-30 and 50-52).

3 For further references to Timotei Cipariu's Gramatica, see also ILR, 1978: 59-60; Iordan, 1978b: 170-178; Gheţie, 1966, nr. 5: 487-502; Costinescu, 1979: 87-88; Dimitriu, 1988, nr. 2: 155-162; Pamfil, 1983, nr. 2: 84-95.

4 Regarding the importance of Al. Lambrior's grammar, see also Iorgu Iordan, 1978b: 178-182; D. Gafiţianu, AUI (new series), section III (social sciences), vol. II (1956), fasc.1-2.

5 See also Iorgu Iordan, 1978b: 182-185; Vasiliu, 1954, nr.1: 51-60; Rizescu, 1968, nr.1: 11-14; Rizescu, 1971: 45.

References

REFERENCES:

Avram, Mioara, Prima gramatică academică a limbii române, LR, 1966, nr. 4.

Cipariu, Timotei, Opere, vol. II. Ediţie îngrijită de Carmen-Gabriela Pamfil. Studiu introductiv de Mioara Avram, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, 1992.

Coseriu, Eugen, Un précurseur méconnu de la syntaxe structurale : H. Tiktin, în vol. Locul lui H. Tiktin, membru de onoare al Academiei Române, în lingvistica românească, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, 2006.

Coseriu, Eugen, Paris, Esquisse d'une syntaxe structurale, 1953.

Costinescu, Mariana, Normele limbii literare în gramaticile româneşti, Bucureşti, 1979.

Dimitriu, C., Actualitatea Sintaxei lui Timotei Cipariu, LR, 1988, nr. 2.

Dimitriu, Corneliu, Tratat de gramatică a Limbii române. I : Morfologia, Iaşi, Editura Institutului European, 1999, p. 378-379.

Frâncu, C., Evoluţia reflecţiilor privind limbajul din Antichitate până la Kant, Iaşi, Casa Editorială „Demiurg", 1998.

Gafiţianu, D., Concepţia lingvistică a lui Al. Lambrior, AUI (seria nouă), secţiunea III (ştiinţe sociale), tom II (1956), fasc. 1-2.

Gheţie, Ion, Societatea Academică Română şi unificarea limbii române literare, LR, 1966, nr. 5.

Heliade-Rădulescu, Ion, Gramatică românească, Ediţie şi studiu de Valeria Guţu Romalo, Editura Eminescu, Bucureşti, 1980.

Iordan, Iorgu (coord.), Istoria lingvisticii româneşti, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, 1978.

Lambrior, Al., Gramatica română. Sintaxa, Iaşi, Editura Librăriei Kupperman, 1893.

Pamfil, Carmen-Gabriela, Contribuţia lui Timotei Cipariu la teoria limbii, LR, 1983, nr. 2.

Rizescu, N., H. Tiktin. Omul şi opera, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică, 1971.

Rizescu, N., H. Tiktin şi problemele de teorie a limbii, LR, 1968, nr. 1.

Tiktin, H., Gramatica română. Etimologia şi sintaxa. Ediţia a III-a, revăzută de I. A. Candrea, Bucureşti, Editura Tempo, 1945.

Ursu, N. A., Modelul francez al gramaticii lui Ion Heliade-Rădulescu, LR, 1961, nr. 4.

Vasiliu, Em., Din activitatea în domeniul gramaticii a lui H. Tiktin, LR, 1954, nr. 1.