# Romance: Historical basis for the definite/indefinite articles?



## Donnerstag

Salve,

I've been studying Italian for just under a month now and I've been unable to find an answer to this question anywhere. Does anybody know why there are so many Italian articles? For example, a word in masc. sing. can take 3 different definite articles (il, lo, l') and two indefinite (un, uno) as well as 2 in the plural (i, gli)

Other romance languages don't have this huge number of different articles. At least Spanish and French don't.

So I was wondering whether this was some remnant of the old latin case/declension system? What is the historical basis for this big variation in articles?


----------



## CapnPrep

The three Romance languages you mention are actually quite similar: they all have a definite article derived from ILLE and an indefinite article derived from UNUS. The details of this development were different in each language, however. You might start reading section 8.9 of this book for a quick overview.



Donnerstag said:


> So I was wondering whether this was some remnant of the old latin  case/declension system?


Not really. All three languages threw away most of the Latin case system, and the articles basically started out with just four forms: masculine/feminine × singular/plural. But these forms were subject to phonetic erosion because they were unstressed and pronounced as a unit with the following (or sometimes the preceding) word. This erosion produced different results depending on the phonetic context (before vowels vs. consonants, before a stressed vs. unstressed syllable, etc.) So for example in Italian we have _gli_ before a vowel and _i_ before a consonant, but both forms come from Latin _illi_.

These kinds of changes happened to some extent in all of the languages mentioned. But Italian developed a particularly rich set of contextual forms, and when it came time to standardize the language, many of the forms were maintained and rules were established for their distribution.

This topic is covered in detail in textbooks about Italian historical linguistics, for example Maiden (1995). It is also touched upon briefly in some previous WRF threads, for example:
*Lo Mugnone vs. il Mugnone*
*Gli/lo*
*ille-->ell-->el (el latín al castellano medieval al de hoy) *[about Spanish]


----------



## artion

Donnerstag said:


> Salve,
> why there are so many Italian articles? For example, a word in masc. sing. can take 3 different definite articles (il, lo, l') and two indefinite (un, uno) as well as 2 in the plural (i, gli) ..


 
You are lucky to learn a language with relatively few articles. In Greek there are 3 definite articles in singular plus one (τω) for the donative of the ancient Gr., and equal number in plural. These are different for the three genders. Plus 3 indefinite (one for each gender) that have 2-3 different forms each (nominative, genitive, accusative). Totally over 20 different forms of articles in new Gr. plus half a dozen for donative. I'm not sure about the articles in the archaic dual number.


----------



## olaszinho

Italian does not only  possess lots of articles compared to most Romance languages but it also has plenty of contracted prepositions. As stated by CapnPrep the romance articles derive from Latin Ille, Illa and so on, but Italian is the only language retaining the whole form in contracted prepositions: dELLA, nELLO, nELLE and so on.


----------



## Istriano

Spanish articles seem like a piece of cake.


----------



## CapnPrep

Favara said:


> Catalan has...
> -Definite: el/l'/'l/-lo/lo/es/so, la/-la/sa, els/'ls/-los/sos, les/-les/ses.


You are mixing up articles and pronouns here. And mixing up distinct varieties of Catalan.


----------



## olaszinho

Favara said:


> Please define what's "too many articles" for you.
> Catalan has...
> -Definite: el/l'/'l/-lo/lo/es/so, la/-la/sa, els/'ls/-los/sos, les/-les/ses.
> -Contracted def.: al/als/as, del/dels/des, pel/pels/pes, cal
> -Personal: en, na, can (contracted)
> -Indefinite: un, una, uns, unes
> 
> That's 34 articles, with 5 definites not derived from ILLE but IPSE (es/sa/ses/so/sos). And some dialects even use _de_ as a partitive (like French _du_).


 
As far as I know all the forms above are not used everywhre in the Catalan speaking area. For instance, the "article salat" (es/sa/ses/so/sos) are mainly used in the Balearics and part of "Costa brava" but they tend to be replaced by the standand articles: el, la, l', els, les.
Anyway, I do not want to start a competition among the Romance languages, but by using the method above Italian would have:
7/8 definite articles (il, lo, la, l', i, gli, (gl'), le)
7 indefinite articles (un, uno, una, un', plural dei, delle, degli)
7 partitive articles (del, dello, dell', della, dei, degli, delle)
The contracted prepositions are too many in Italian: about 40
To sum up we could count more than 60 forms.


----------



## Favara

Well, maybe I messed up with pronouns, but all of the articles (except for _lo_, exclusively northwestern) are used in the balearic dialects. _Salat_ is used with most things, while _literari_ is used with things requiring some formality. So they say _es cotxe_ (the car) but _el nostre senyor _(our lord), all in a single dialect. Both can be used even in the same sentence.
By the way, _salat_ is also used in some places in País Valencià, Olaszinho. And this is not a competition, I just wanted to show the OP that most Romance languages do indeed have a lot of articles - I'm sure that French articles, for example, will also be a ton.


----------



## olaszinho

*I'm sure that French articles, for example, will also be 30+. *

No, I do not think so.. French has the following articles:
definite articles: le, la, l', les
indefinite articles: un, une, des
partitive articles: du, pas de/d', de la etc.
contracted prepositions: au, aux, du, des
That's all.


----------



## Donnerstag

Favara said:


> Please define what's "too many articles" for you.
> Catalan has...
> -Definite: el/l'/'l/-lo/lo/es/so, la/-la/sa, els/'ls/-los/sos, les/-les/ses.
> -Contracted def.: al/als/as, del/dels/des, pel/pels/pes, cal
> -Personal: en, na, can (contracted)
> -Indefinite: un, una, uns, unes
> 
> That's 34 articles, with 5 definites not derived from ILLE but IPSE (es/sa/ses/so/sos). And some dialects even use _de_ as a partitive (like French _du_).



I'm sorry, where did I say that these were "too many articles" for me? Read the post before you post comments like that. I speak German, Old Norse and Icelandic, which all have articles in Masculine/Feminine/Neuter in Nominative, Accusative, Dative and Genetive. Icelandic especially is almost certainly more complicated than Catalan.

I just asked the question because compared to the other romance languages with which I am familiar, Italian has a plethora of articles. No disrespect meant and neither was I complaining. Just asking a question.


----------



## Favara

Sorry, I should have said "too many articles for a Romance language", as in you finding odd that Italian had that many. I wasn't meaning Catalan was more complex than other languages, I was just trying to express that Romance languages aren't that simple in that aspect, so maybe Italian articles aren't that strange for this kind of languages. Sorry if you felt insulted in any way, that wasn't my intention.

I just wanted to say that sure, these languages apparently have a few "basic" articles, but once you start using them you find a ton of slight alterations and exceptions. I know they're pretty simple compared to the nightmare (from a learner's point of view, of course) of germanic grammar, but they're not that simple either.


----------



## OBrasilo

olaszinho said:
			
		

> Italian does not only  possess lots of articles compared to most Romance  languages but it also has plenty of contracted prepositions. As stated  by CapnPrep the romance articles derive from Latin Ille, Illa and so on,  but Italian is the only language retaining the whole form in contracted  prepositions: dELLA, nELLO, nELLE and so on.


As does Portuguese. Cf. Portuguese:
_do_, _da_, _dos_, _das_;
_no_, _na_, _nos_, _nas_;
_pelo_, _pela_, _pelos_, _pelas_;
_ao_, _à_, _aos_, _às_.
In Brazilian Portuguese, the d- and n- ones even have their indefinite counterparts:
_dum_, _duma_, _duns_, _dumas_;
_num_, _numa_, _nuns_, _numas_.

Also, it looks like everyone forgot Romanian, which has enclitic articles, so in the end of the noun.
Masculine:
Singular nominative indef. _un control_, def. _controlul_;
Singular genitive/dative indef. _unui control_, def. _controlului_;
Singular vocative _controlule_;
Plural nominative indef. _nişte controli_, def. _controlii_;
Plural genitive/dative indef. _unor controli_, def. _controlilor_;
Plural vocative _controlilor_.

Feminine:
Singular nominative indef. _o cetate_, def. _cetatea_;
Singular genitive/dative indef. _unei cetati_, def. _cetatii_;
Singular vocative _cetateo_;
 Plural nominative indef. _nişte cetati_, def. _cetatile_;
Plural genitive/dative indef. _unor cetati_, def. _cetatilor_;
Plural vocative _cetatilor_.

Neuter:
Singular nominative indef. _un deget_, def. _degetul_;
 Singular genitive/dative indef. _unui deget_, def. _degetului_;
 Singular vocative _degetule_;
  Plural nominative indef. _nişte degete_, def. _degetele_;
 Plural genitive/dative indef. _unor degete_, def. _degetelor_;
 Plural vocative _degetelor_.

So if you think Italian is complex, believe me, Romanian is even more complex.


----------



## olaszinho

*So if you think Italian is complex, believe me, Romanian is even more complex*. 

I do not think Italian is complex but the Italian articles are, for instance, more complex than the Portuguese ones, which are a piece of cake, at least the definite and indefinite articles:
o, a, os, as/ um uns, uma umas. It is true, anyway, that Portuguese has some contracted prepositions, unlike Spanish (only al/del). Besides Portuguese and Spanish lack the partitive article. As for Romanian, I know its grammar quite well. The Romanian neuter is just masculine in singular and feminine in plural. We have examples of what is called neuter in Romanian in a few Italian nouns as well: ex. "uovo" (egg) singular masculine "uovA" plural feminine, ditO/A, (finger) muro/mura, (wall(s). Besides, Italian retains the latin plural ending in -A, unlike Romanian, in all these examples.
I would like to add that personally I do not think that languages with cases are necessarily more difficult than other languages, but that's probably just me.


----------



## francisgranada

Istriano said:


> Spanish articles seem like a piece of cake.


I agree. 

definite articles: (_singular_) *el*, *la*, (_plural_) *los*, *las*
indefinite articles: *un*, *una*
contracted prepositions: *del*, *al*

Altogether *8* 'pieces' (hope I haven't forgotten anything). Plus, we have 3 forms: _lo_, _unos_, _unas_ that have specific functions (not strictly articles). 

****************************** 
I like also the relatively "simple solution" concerning the orthography in Spanish (in this case), because the spontaneous pronounciation does not correspond always _exactly_ to the written form (generally, not only in Spanish). So if we wanted to be _extremely_ _precise_, we could perhaps introduce other orthographical forms even in the Spanish. Hypothetical examples (some of them can be found in old manuscripts):

*d'*España _instead of_ *de* España
*el'*agua _instead of _*el* agua
*del*'agua _instead of _*del* agua
*al'*agua _instead of _*al* agua


(a native Spaniard could probably find other examples, too ...)


----------



## CapnPrep

By the way, there is already a thread in All Languages for determining who has the biggest definite article paradigm:
*Definite articles*



olaszinho said:


> We have examples of what is called neuter in Romanian in a few Italian nouns as well: ex. "uovo" (egg) singular masculine "uovA" plural feminine, ditO/A, (finger) muro/mura, (wall(s). Besides, Italian retains the latin plural ending in -A, unlike Romanian, in all these examples.


The plural ending _-a_ has not been retained in _mura_ and _dita_, because these were historically masculine, not neuter. Anyway, we are talking about articles here, not nouns, and Italian has not retained any plural articles ending in _-a_.



francisgranada said:


> So if we wanted to be _extremely_ _precise_, we could perhaps introduce other forms even in the Spanish.


Good point, this is why I mentioned standardization above. The relatively small inventory of written forms in standard Spanish and French masks the significant contextual variation that existed (and still exists) in these languages. To add to your examples, French uses a single written form ‹les› in the plural, but it has two different pronunciations, depending on the following word. It's very similar to the _i_~_gli_ alternation in Italian, it's just not reflected in writing. 

On the other hand, the fact that French uses _les_ for both genders in the plural represents a true simplification compared to all of the other Romance languages discussed so far (including Greek ). "This is not a competition" … but French wins in this case, in the sense that it is the closest to English.


----------



## francisgranada

olaszinho said:


> ...I do not think Italian is complex but the Italian articles are, for instance, more complex than the Portuguese ones, which are a piece of cake, at least the definite and indefinite articles:
> o, a, os, as/ um uns, uma umas. It is true, anyway, that Portuguese has some contracted prepositions, unlike Spanish (only al/del).... I would like to add that personally I do not think that languages with cases are necessarily more difficult than other languages ...


Yes, generally it's hard or (almost) impossible to decide which language is more complex or more difficult. It depends on so many things ... (to be discussed in other threads ...) 

I can only say, that from the point of view of a non-native speaker, the Spanish grammar seems to be more "simple" and a bit more "regular" or more "logical" than e.g. the Italian or the French, due to the less number of specific rules to be memorized (or understood), including the *articles* that we are speaking about.



CapnPrep said:


> ... French uses a single written form ‹les› in the plural, but it has two different pronunciations, depending on the following word...


Even more, we have to know some additional rules about the _liaison_, _H aspiré, __H muet ..._ to be able to pronounce correctly the article _"*les*"_ (though written always in the same form). 


> ... On the other hand, the fact that French uses _les_ for both genders in the plural represents a true simplification compared to all of the other Romance languages discussed so far ... French wins in this case, in the sense that it is the closest to English.


 
Yes  ... (from the statistical point of view). Otherwise, from the position of a non-native, it can be a problem (or other rules to know about): _*los*_ and _*las*_, even if two different forms, may be easier to memorize or to use spontaneousely, because of the "fixa idea" that in the Romance languages *-o* typically represents the masuline and *-a* the feminine gender....


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

olaszinho said:


> Italian does not only  possess lots of articles compared to most Romance languages but it also has plenty of contracted prepositions. As stated by CapnPrep the romance articles derive from Latin Ille, Illa and so on, but Italian is the only language retaining the whole form in contracted prepositions: dELLA, nELLO, nELLE and so on.



The whole?

The contraction with "con" in the masculine before nouns with initial consonants isn't obligatory nowadays. Contraction with the article before "s impura", initial vowels and feminine nouns isobsolete.

"Per" used to be contracted, but isn't contracted anymore.


----------



## olaszinho

Angelo di fuoco said:


> The whole?
> 
> The contraction with "con" in the masculine before nouns with initial consonants isn't obligatory nowadays. Contraction with the article before "s impura", initial vowels and feminine nouns isobsolete.
> 
> "Per" used to be contracted, but isn't contracted anymore.


 

Who said that the contracted prepositions with "per" are still alive in contemporary Italian? Anyway "col" and "coi" may be used and you can find them in both spoken and written language. 
As for the Latin "Ille" as the ancestor of most Romance articles, Heinrich Lausberg in his famous essay, titled: " _Romanische Sprachwissenschaft_", on page 143, writes: "Postconsonantic forms are retained in fixed phrases such as: IN ILLA CASA > IT. nella casa." So, in my previous post I just wanted to say that the complete form of Latin demonstative ILLE, ILLA are only preserved in a few Italian contracted prepositions, just by changing the vowel i into e. That's all.


----------



## CapnPrep

olaszinho said:


> So, in my previous post I just wanted to say that the complete form of Latin demonstative ILLE, ILLA are only preserved in a few Italian contracted prepositions, just by changing the vowel i into e. That's all.


It is "preserved" in ECCE ILLA > _quella_ as well, and therefore also in Sp. _aquella_, Pt. _aquela_, etc. Of course Italian has stayed the closest to Latin phonetically, but the other Romance languages occasionally do a pretty good job, too. That's all.


----------



## francisgranada

... and in Spanish _*ella*_, _*ello*_ (pers. pronoun 3. pers. sg. f.,n. from the Latin ILLA, ILLUD) 
(_ella_ also in Italian, though today substituted by _lei_)


----------



## olaszinho

francisgranada said:


> ... and in Spanish _*ella*_, _*ello*_ (pers. pronoun 3. pers. sg. f.,n. from the Latin ILLA, ILLUD)
> (_ella_ also in Italian, though today substituted by _lei_)


 
We were talking about articles, weren't we?  As for the personal pronouns Italian retains esso, essa, essi, essi from Latin ipse, ipsa and so on.


----------



## francisgranada

olaszinho said:


> We were talking about articles, weren't we?  ....


 
I have only added my "two cents"  to CapnPrep's post #19 (_quella/aquella/aquela_ are not articles as well). Though, from the historical point of view, it may be interesting that the same demonstrative pronoun ILLE/ILLA/ILLUD is used both in function of articles and personal pronouns in most of the Romance languages (but not in the Sardinian, for example).

But you are right, we were talking about articles and not about pronouns in general  ....


----------

