# Romance languages: definite articles before possessive adjectives



## Testing1234567

I am aware that in some Romance language, you can put a definite article before the possessive adjectives, and in some other you can't.

French: cannot add definite article: mon père -> *le mon père
Spanish: cannot add definite article: mi padre -> *el mi padre
Italian: can add definite article: mio amore -> il mio amore
Portuguese: can add definite article: meu Deus -> o meu Deus

What's the reason behind all of this? And in the languages that can add a definite article, what's the rule when adding it?


----------



## jakowo

Adding Romanian: can add the definite article:
fratele meu           - my brother
camerele noastre  - our rooms


----------



## Testing1234567

Do you know the rules of Romanian adding the def art?


----------



## merquiades

Just to add some more information.  Spanish originally had an article too _el mío padre_ but lost it when the possessive adjectives were contracted before the noun.  However, if you choose to put the adjective after the noun it modifies the article reappears:  _el padre mío_.  Catalan uses the article "_el meu pare_" but it also has a less common short form resembling French: _mon pare_. There is considerable dialectal difference in this language. Italian seems to drop the article sometimes: "_mio padre_" so does Portuguese at times "_meu pai_".  Normally the article is used in these languages.  In French it's not only impossible to use the article, it's wrong.


----------



## CapnPrep

Testing1234567 said:


> What's the reason behind all of this?


The possessive forms were originally adjectives, but since they typically also correlate with definiteness, in most Romance varieties they became determiners. I guess you could say the reason is economy of expression. The trade-off is that it becomes harder to form an indefinite possessive. You have to say something like _un ami à moi_ in French whereas in Italian you just switch articles, _un mio amico_.

See also this existing thread:
Romance languages - possesive adjectives and definite articles

There are also many discussions of the rules for individual languages in the corresponding forums. And the phenomenon is of course not limited to Romance.


----------



## francisgranada

CapnPrep said:


> ... And the phenomenon is of course not limited to Romance.


Yes, for example in English we have _my house_ and not *_the my house_. However, regardless of the origin and specificities of this phenomenon in various languages, I find interesting that in the Romance languages (but also in English) there are two sets of possessive pronouns, while one of them (typically the "shorter") is _a priori _defininite and it can be placed only before the noun/adjective. For example:

Sp. _mi - mío, tu - tuyo ..._
Fr._ mon - mien, ton - tien ... _
(En._ my - mine, thy - thine ..._)

By the way, in case of the Italian "_mio padre_" I think the definiteness is given by _padre _(father)as it refers to a "well defined" person (somewhat similar to the personal names). For curiosity, in case of father/mother, the definite article can be omitted (though not obbligatorily) also in Hungarian, an agglutinative language where the possession is expressed differently, i.e. by a suffix and not using possessive pronouns/adjectives.

I have two questions:

Is there any common (Proto-Romance/vulgar Latin/classical Latin) explanation/evidence for this phenomenon, or this is rather the result of independant/individual development in some Romance languages? 

In Latin there were no articles, of course, but we have the vocative form _mi_ of _meus _(e.g. _Et tu mi fili Brute?). _Could this _mi _somehow influence this phenomenon, for example the existence of the Spanish _mi_?


----------



## Testing1234567

francisgranada said:


> Yes, for example in English we have _my house_ and not *_the my house_. However, regardless of the origin and specificities of this phenomenon in various languages, I find interesting that in the Romance languages (but also in English) there are two sets of possessive pronouns, while one of them (typically the "shorter") is _a priori _defininite and it can be placed only before the noun/adjective. For example:
> 
> Sp. _mi - mío, tu - tuyo ..._
> Fr._ mon - mien, ton - tien ... _
> (En._ my - mine, thy - thine ..._)



The first set "mi, mon, my, tu, ton, thy" are possessive *adjectives*, while the second set "mio, tuyo, mien, tien, mine, thine" are possessive *pronouns*​.


----------



## Nino83

Testing1234567 said:


> The first set "mi, mon, my, tu, ton, thy" are possessive *adjectives*, while the second set "mio, tuyo, mien, tien, mine, thine" are possessive *pronouns*​.



No. They are also adjectives (in Spanish). 
_El hermano mio _(for example).


----------



## Testing1234567

It seems that Spanish and Italian can use possessive pronouns as adjectives, but English and French cannot. Interesting...


----------



## Nino83

Testing1234567 said:


> It seems that Spanish and Italian can use possessive pronouns as adjectives, but English and French cannot. Interesting...



Mh...no. In the sentence _il mio amico_, _o meu amigo_, _il mio_ and _o meu_ are not pronouns, they are adjectives preceeded by an article (definite or indefinite). 
In fact, you can say _un mio amico, um meu amigo _(indefinite article + adjective) but you can't reply to the question _di chi è?_ (_whose is this__?_) with _è un mio!_ but only with _è il mio!_ or _è mio _​(possessive pronoun).


----------



## Testing1234567

Which language is Dios mio? Oh, it is Spanish.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> Mh...no. In the sentence _il mio amico_, _o meu amigo_, _il mio_ and _o meu_ are not pronouns, they are adjectives preceeded by an article (definite or indefinite).


I am sure he means "pronoun" in the classical sense of "pronomen" where "nomen" included nouns (_nomina substantivi_) and adjectives (_nomina adjectiui_).


----------



## jakowo

Testing1234567 said:


> Do you know the rules of Romanian adding the def art?


 
In Romanian the definite articles are attached to the end of the noun or adjective as enclitics instead of being placed in front. Some examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_grammar#Definite_article


----------



## Youngfun

Testing1234567 said:


> It seems that Spanish and Italian can use possessive pronouns as adjectives, but English and French cannot. Interesting...


First of all, in Romance languages an adjective can be both before and after a noun.
About the difference between an adjective and a pronoun:
- if its located next to a noun (no matter before of after it) it's an adjective.
- if there's no noun next to it, then it's a pronoun.

mi hermano / (il) mio fratello -> adjective
el hermano mio / il fratello mio -> still adjective

As francisgranada said, in Italian for relatives the article is often omitted, when the possessive adjective is before the noun.


----------



## gburtonio

Testing1234567 said:


> The first set "mi, mon, my, tu, ton, thy" are possessive *adjectives*, while the second set "mio, tuyo, mien, tien, mine, thine" are possessive *pronouns*​.



In some grammatical descriptions of English, 'my, your, his' etc. are classified as possessive pronouns as they replace phrases like 'John's', 'the dog's'.


----------



## merquiades

Youngfun said:


> First of all, in Romance languages an adjective can be both before and after a noun.
> About the difference between an adjective and a pronoun:
> - if its located next to a noun (no matter before of after it) it's an adjective.
> - if there's no noun next to it, then it's a pronoun.
> 
> mi hermano / (il) mio fratello -> adjective
> el hermano mio / il fratello mio -> still adjective



In Spanish the long form with a postponed adjective is required with an indefinite article:  un amigo mío.  The structure is "kind of" similar in French:  un ami à moi.  
Is that the same in Italian?


----------



## Youngfun

It's complicated. Because normally the article is required with the postponed adjective, but it's omitted in vocatives.
Like "mamma mia".

It can be also omitted in other cases, especially with people, such as: Tu sei amico mio. Ho visto papà tuo (but ho visto l'amico tuo).


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

merquiades said:


> Just to add some more information.  Spanish originally had an article too _el mío padre_ but lost it when the possessive adjectives were contracted before the noun.  However, if you choose to put the adjective after the noun it modifies the article reappears:  _el padre mío_.  Catalan uses the article "_el meu pare_" but it also has a less common short form resembling French: _mon pare_. There is considerable dialectal difference in this language. Italian seems to drop the article sometimes: "_mio padre_" so does Portuguese at times "_meu pai_".  Normally the article is used in these languages.  In French it's not only impossible to use the article, it's wrong.



The rule of thumb for Italian is: you omit the definite article before possessive adjectives only with nouns indicating family relationships. However, in older literature they also omit the article before possessive adjectives also in other contexts, and I've even seen a major author (Gabriele D'Annunzio) break the abovementioned rule: "trami un tradimento contro al tuo fratello" ("Francesca da Rimini").
Older Catalan made a more extensive usage of the short (unstressed?) possessive pronouns, nowadays at least the Central (i. e. Barcelona) variety uses it only with family members, thus indicating greater intimacy, and maybe also in fossilised expressions.


----------



## merquiades

Youngfun said:


> It's complicated. Because normally the article is required with the postponed adjective, but it's omitted in vocatives.
> Like "mamma mia".
> 
> It can be also omitted in other cases, especially with people, such as: Tu sei amico mio. Ho visto papà tuo (but ho visto l'amico tuo).



Yes, the omission of the article is also good for Spanish: _ Eres amigo mío_.  But _He visto a tu padre, a uno de tus padres_.

So what do you say at the beginning of a sentence:  Un amico mio è venuto?



			
				Angelo di fuoco said:
			
		

> Older Catalan made a more extensive usage of the short (unstressed?) possessive pronouns, nowadays at least the Central (i. e. Barcelona) variety uses it only with family members, thus indicating greater intimacy, and maybe also in fossilised expressions.


  In other varieties of Catalan the short form is used much more so _sa vida, ton amic, mon cotxe_ is not so odd.


----------



## Youngfun

merquiades said:


> So what do you say at the beginning of a sentence:  Un amico mio è venuto?


In Rome we do say "È venuto un amico mio". 
But in Standard Italian you have to say "È venuto un mio amico" (since possessive adjectives allow bth the definite and the indefinite article before it) (Also in such sentences it's preferred to put the verb before the subject).

I think the adjective after noun is regional, I guess Central and Southern Italian. 
In Standard Italian the adjective after noun is allowed only in vocatives and emphasis - e.g. quello è il fratello mio, non il tuo ... although it could also be rephrased as "quello è MIO fratello, non TUO" pronouncing mio and tuo with more emphasis.

I think "ho visto papà tuo" could also be considered a particular "vocative" although not speaking directly to the person. Otherwise you have to say "ho visto tuo padre" or "ho visto il tuo papà". - but I'm not sure if the first is accepted in Standard Italian.


----------



## Nino83

Youngfun said:


> I think the adjective after noun is regional, I guess Central and Southern Italian.



I'd say it's a Roman-Neapolitan thing (in Sicilian, you can say _l'amicu tòi_, instead of _(l)__u to amicu_, but the first one is used with irony, meaning _that best friend of yours_, while the second one is the normal way to say it. In Roman and Neapolitan, on the other hand, the first construction is normal). 



Youngfun said:


> I think "ho visto papà tuo" could also be considered a particular "vocative" although not speaking directly to the person. Otherwise you have to say "ho visto tuo padre" or "ho visto il tuo papà". - but I'm not sure if the first is accepted in Standard Italian.



I'm not sure _papà tuo_ is Standard Italian (it's, I think, more regional and colloquial). 
This construction is found in idioms, like _mamma mia_. 

In general, Standard Italian allows both constructions (_il mio amico, un mio amico_). It's the same in Portuguese (_o meu amigo, um meu amigo_) but _um meu amigo_ is rarely used, being _um amigo meu_ the most used one.


----------



## gburtonio

Angelo di fuoco said:


> The rule of thumb for Italian is: you omit the definite article before possessive adjectives only with nouns indicating family relationships. However, in older literature they also omit the article before possessive adjectives also in other contexts, and I've even seen a major author (Gabriele D'Annunzio) break the abovementioned rule: "trami un tradimento contro al tuo fratello" ("Francesca da Rimini").
> Older Catalan made a more extensive usage of the short (unstressed?) possessive pronouns, nowadays at least the Central (i. e. Barcelona) variety uses it only with family members, thus indicating greater intimacy, and maybe also in fossilised expressions.



There are other examples in Italian, though – not involving family members. You can say 'a casa mia', 'a nome mio", 'a modo mio', 'in cuor mio', and I'm sure there are plenty of others that don't spring immediately to mind. But are these best just viewed as exceptions? I think the most of these are structures starting with the 'a' preposition.


----------



## Nino83

gburtonio said:


> There are other examples in Italian, though – not involving family members. You can say 'a casa mia', 'a nome mio", 'a modo mio', 'in cuor mio', and I'm sure there are plenty of others that don't spring immediately to mind. But are these best just viewed as exceptions? I think the most of these are structures starting with the 'a' preposition.



_A casa mia_ is an exception while you can also say _a mio nome (e.g. ho prenotato a mio nome), a mio modo (e.g. a mio modo di vedere), *nel* mio cuore_.


----------



## bearded

Yes, ''ho visto tuo padre'' is quite correct in Standard Italian.  By the way, I would like to add that we omit the determinative article not only with relatives, but also in set phrases like ''a casa mia'' , ''per merito mio'' and many more.


----------



## Outsider

In Portuguese the usual syntax is article + possessive + noun. 

The article is mandatory when the possessive acts as a pronoun (*tenho o meu, tens o teu*; I have mine, you have yours). Possessive adjectives are identical to possessive pronouns, so maybe adding the article was initially a way to distinguish between the two functions. When the possessive acts as an adjective, the article may be omitted, but the usual in Portugal is to add it, while omitting the article tends to sound more poetic or old-fashioned. In Brazil the article is omitted more often (perhaps even predominantly) before possessive adjectives. With family relations the ordinary in Portugal is to add the article (*o meu pai, a minha mãe*; my father, my mother), while in Brazil it seems like it's the opposite (*meu pai, minha mãe*; my father, my mother).

With less common kinds of syntax, such as noun + possessive, e.g. *um amigo meu* (a friend of mine), or in some set phrases (e.g. *em minha casa*, a slightly formal variant of *na minha casa*, in my house), the article may not always be added.


----------



## Emmett M. Hogan

This is my understanding, too; as further proof, the eponymous hero of Spain's greatest medieval epic poem is frequently referred to therein as "El Mio Cid."


----------



## Penyafort

The use of it was already attested around 1,000 AD in the _Glosas Emilianenses_, first text in Old Aragonese.

_Facanos Deus Omnipotes
tal serbitio fere ke
denante *ela sua face*
gaudioso segamus
_
(Modern Aragonese)
_Faga-nos Dios Omnipotent
tal servicio fer que
debant (de) la suya faz
goyosos sigamos._​


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

I'd qualify that rather as remnants of the Latin demonstrative pronouns rather than articles.


----------



## danielstan

Testing1234567 said:


> Do you know the rules of Romanian adding the def art?


Romanian and its Balkan dialects (Daco-Romanian = Romanian proper, Aromanian, Istro-Romanian and Megleno-Romanian) have as general rule:
noun + adjective.
It is possible to use in Romanian the reverse: adjective + noun,
but this usage has a slight difference in meaning: underlining the quality expressed by the adjective.
Albanian (although it is not a Romance language) has the same rule in using the adjective.
Albanian is a pre-latin Balkan language which survived Romanisation and is supposed of Illyrian origin - a sister group to Dacian and Thracian languages in the Balkans.

Based on these linguistic facts only, some linguists made the assertion that the Daco-Thracian substratum has influenced the Romanian rule of "adjective before noun".
This assertion is taken with precaution, as the written evidence about ancient Albanian, Dacian or Thracian are extremely rare (usually - Greek chronicles recorded isolated glosses, toponyms and anthroponyms from these languages)

*Note: when linguists talk about substratum in Romanian they use only common features of Romanian and Albanian and make conjectures.

The rule "adjective + noun" is supposed to be the main reason why the Romanian definite article is post-posed (enclitic), in opposition to the Western Romance languages.

Definite article in Romance languages is coming from the demonstrative pronoun in Latin (_ille_) which has been gramaticalized as article.
As a consequence, the definite article in Romanian is post-posed, with the following reconstructed (hypothetical) evolution:
Latin _lupus ille bonus_ (nominative) / _lupum illum bonum_ (accusative) > Vulgar Latin *_lupu *illu *bonu _> Romanian _lupul bun, _Aromanian_ luplu bun
_
Regarding the topic in question, Romanian have as normal way of usage (with definite article):
_frate*le* meu
omu*l* meu
mam*a* mea_

Acceptable forms, but with the slight change of meaning exposed before (underlining the pronoun) are:
_al meu frate   (al < ad + ille)
al meu om
a mea mamă_

In every day speech these forms are almost not used - when somebody uses them he clearly wants to put a stress in the sentence on them.
In poetry they are used for reasons of rhythm and rhyme.

It is also acceptable to use the non articulated forms:
_Un frate al meu_...
or, more often:
_Un frate de-al meu_ ...  (literally: "a brother of mine", but meaning "one of my brothers")

----------------------
As evidence of Romance definite article coming from Latin demonstrative pronoun it is usually cited the text _Peregrinatio Etheriae/Itinerarium Egeriae_, supposedly written in 380 AD:
Egeria (pilgrim) - Wikipedia


----------



## Sardokan1.0

Unlike Italian where the definite article can be used with possessives, in Sardinian the definite article before possessives is not used, there are situations where the article is used in the same phrase, but never before the possessive, it's a mistake.

my father = babbu meu
my mother = mama mia,mea / or mamma (without possessive)
my brother = frade meu
my sister = sorre mia,mea
my love = amore meu / in this case I can also use the article, "s'amore meu"
my God = Deus meu

example : 

*- (Italian) -* *La nostra* casa è grande, ci viviamo in sei, mio padre, mia madre, *i miei* fratelli, e *il mio* cane
*- (Sardinian) -* Domo nostra est manna, bi vivimus in sés, babbu meu, mamma, frades mios, e *su *cane meu 

in this case I used the article just in the end, with "su cane meu", but I could also omit the possessive and simply say "su cane" (the dog) for all the others the article wasn't needed


----------



## danielstan

After so many examples (linguistic facts) I would like to address the original question:
- why some Romance languages use the definite article along with the possessive adjective, while others not?

In my opinion (I am not a linguist):

There is a competition between different qualifiers attached to a noun in a sentence: adjective, pronoun, article and so.
The Romance definite article has been reduced, over the centuries, from an original Latin demonstrative pronoun of 2 syllable (_ille_ and its derivates) to 1 syllable definite article in all Romance languages, thus it suffered a "linguistic erosion" due to its very frequent use.
I suppose that the overuse of this article has made it useless for some speakers in a certain language when it came in competition with another qualifier for the noun, in our case the possessive adjective.
Anyway, nobody knows why the speakers of a language drop some words over generations, why they think some words become obsolete and could be reduced in use up to disappearance.

For a complete picture of the problem I would like to state that we speak here of the standard national languages used in current days in their countries,
but we don't consider the fact that a national language is not uniform over its area of use, neither over the centuries.
In Romanian there are regional aspects which contradict the standard usage of the definite article - as I expect in other Romance languages, too.
(example: _frate-miu_ used in Southern Romania as an alternative to standard _frate*le* meu_)
Oldest surviving Romanian document, written in 1521, has the non standard form:
_genere miu_ (today standard: _ginere*le* meu = "my son in law"_)

As a conclusion: I appreciate the speakers of a Romance language felt useless sometimes the definite article, while other times they felt mandatory to use it even in the company of possessive adjective, and this resulted in the hazard of the language evolution and the "rules" that we have today.


----------



## Christo Tamarin

This could be helpful as well. Please note that it should be possible to express definiteness-indefiniteness with possessive adjectives, too.

Definite, indefinite possessive => http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/definite-indefinite-possessive.3046228/


----------



## irinet

jakowo said:


> Adding Romanian: can add the definite article:
> fratele meu           - my brother
> camerele noastre  - our rooms



I wonder if this is true because the definite article is embedded in the noun, which does not mean that it is placed before the possesive adjectives at all. This kind of embedding or I'd better say, blending, is special in my language. And we can see many blends in English too, though English belongs to another linguistic branch.

Or, at least, I don't see, nor sense it this way as a native speaker.


----------

