Cover not available

Article published In: Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 31:1 (2004) ► pp.7–32

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Tense, mood and aspect in the first grammar of Croatian (Kašić 1604)

 | Tauberbischofsheim
Published online: 30 July 2004
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.31.1.03pan
Summary
This paper deals with the first Croatian grammar published in 1604 by the Jesuit Bartul Kašić (1575–1650). Within the framework of a multi-level approach of historical hermeneutics, the author investigates both the linguistic and the philosophical presuppositions of this grammar. After having established Kašić’s humanistic sources (Manutius, Giambullari, Linacre, Álvares, Gretser), the paper sketches the historical background of the grammatization process of Slavic languages in general. It then analyses the verbal categories of tense, mood and aspect within this humanistic tradition as well as the immanent semantics of Kašić’s work. The focal point of the paper is Aristotle’s definition of time that Thomas Linacre (1524) had reintroduced into the description of verbs and which was taken over by Kašić through the work of Giambullari (1552). This notion of time, however, served not only to portray verbal tenses in vernacular grammars but also those of Greek and Latin (Apollonius Dyscolus, Diomedes, Augustine, Priscian, etc.). As the author tries to demonstrate, Kašić’s work constitutes the genuine crystallising point of the so-called onto-semantic view of language and grammar. Furthermore, Kašić’s analysis of verbal moods is shown to follow the humanistic tradition and that of the grammatization of Slavic moods. Kašić’s attempt to relate the eminently important category of aspect in Slavic to ‘Aristotelian’ and ‘Varronian’ aspects of Latin grammar may be regarded as pioneering in the history of Slavic linguistics.
Résumé
Cette étude examine la première grammaire de la langue croate, publiée en 1604 par le jésuite Bartul Kašić (1575–1650). Dans le cadre de son analyse de l’herméneutique historique, l’auteur tente, en utilisant diverses méthodes, d’esquisser les aspects linguistiques et ceux portant sur la philosophie du langage de cette grammaire. L’étude identifie d’abord les modèles humanistes suivis par Kašić (Manutius, Giambullari, Linacre, Álvares, Gretser). Elle examine ensuite le fondement historique général de la description grammaticale des langues slaves et, en particulier, des catégories verbales du temps, du mode et de l’aspect, et ce dans le cadre de la tradition humaniste et de sa sémantique immanente. Le point central de l’étude est la conception du temps chez Aristote, introduite par Thomas Linacre (1524) dans la description humaniste du verbe, et que Kašić a repris de Giambullari (1552). Selon l’auteur de l’étude, cette conception du temps ne servait pas seulement à la présentation des temps du verbe dans la description grammaticale de diverses langues; depuis l’Antiquité (Apollonius Dyscolus, Diomedes, Augustin, Priscien, etc.), elle représentait aussi la cristallisation véritable de la soi-disant conception linguistique et grammaticale onto-sémantique. De plus, l’auteur présente les modes du verbe présentés par Kašić, avec en arrière-plan la tradition humaniste, dans le contexte du développement des modes slaves. Après tout, la tentative de Kašić de lier la catégorie indispensable de l’aspect slave avec l’aspect ‘Aristotélicien’ et ‘Varronien’ de la grammaire latine a ouvert la voie pour la grammaire descriptive des langues slaves.
Zusammenfassung
Der vorliegende Aufsatz befaßt sich mit der ersten Grammatik der kroatischen Sprache, die der Jesuit Bartol Kašić (1575–1650) 1604 publiziert hat. Der Autor versucht im Rahmen eines mehrstufig aufgebauten methodischen Zugriffs der historischen Hermeneutik die linguistischen und die sprachphilosophischen Aspekte dieser Grammatik zu umreißen. Zunächst werden die humanistischen Vorlagen Kašićs (Manutius, Giambullari, Linacre, Álvares, Gretser) ermittelt, dann der historische Hintergrund der Grammatisierung der slavischen Sprachen generell überprüft, um anschließend die Verbalkategorien des Tempus, des Modus und des Aspekts im Rahmen der humanistischen Tradition und ihrer immanenten Semantik eingehend zu untersuchen. Im Mittelpunkt steht die aristotelische Zeitauffassung, die Thomas Linacre (1524) in die humanistische Beschreibung des Zeitwortes eingeführt und Kašić über Giambullari (1552) übernommen hatte. Diese Zeitauffassung diente nämlich nicht nur zur Darstellung des Zeitwortes in der Grammatik, sondern bildete seit dem Altertum (Apollonios Dyskolus, Diomedes, Augustinus, Priscian u. a.) auch, wie es der Autor nachzuweisen versucht, den genuinen Kristallisationspunkt der sogenannten onto-semantischen Sprach- und Grammatikauffassung. Die Verbalmodi bei Kašić sind außerdem vor dem Hintergrund der humanistischen Tradition im Zusammenhang mit der Herausbildung der slavischen Modi dargestellt worden. Als bahnbrechend für die slavische Grammatik erwies sich schließlich Kašićs Versuch, die eminent wichtige Kategorie des slavischen Aspekts mit dem ‘aristotelischen’ und ‘varronischen’ Aspekt der lateinischen Grammatik zu verknüpfen.
References (87)
References
A. Primary sources
Álvares, Manuel, S. J. 1637. Emmanuelis Alvari e Societate Jesu, De institutione grammatica pro Illyricis accomodata a patribus eiusdem Societatis libri tres. Romae: Franciscus Caballus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1572. De Institutione grammatica libri tres. Olyssipone: Excudebat Ioannes Barrerius, Typographus Regius. (Facsimile ed., prepared by J. Pereira da Costa, Funchal: Junta Geral do Distrito Autónomo do Funchal, 1974.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Apollonius Dyscolus. 1981. The Syntax of Apollonius Dyscolus. Translated and with commentary by Fred W. Householder. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Apollonius Dyscole. 1997. De la construction. Texte grec accompagné de notes critiques, introduction, traduction, notes exégétiques par Jean Lallot. 21 vols. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bochorizh, Adam. 1987 [1584]. Arcticae horulae succisivae. Prevedel in spremno študijo napisal Jože Toporišič. Maribor: Založba Obzorja.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diomedes. 1857. “Artis grammaticae libri III”. Grammatici Latini, vol. I1. 297–529.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donatus. 1864. “Ars grammatica”. Grammatici Latini, vol. IV1. 353–402.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giambullari, Pierfrancesco. 1986 [1552]. Regole della lingua fiorentina. Edizione critica a cura di Ilaria Bonomi. Firenze: L’Accademia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glück, Johann Ernst. 1994 [1704]. Grammatik der russischen Sprache (1704). Hrsg. und mit einer Einleitung versehen von Helmuth Keipert, Boris Uspenskij & Viktor Živov. Köln: Böhlau.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grammatici Latini. 1855–1870. Ed. by Heinrich Keil (71 vols. & supplement). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gretser, Jacobus, S. J. 1605 [1593]. Institutionum linguae Graecae liber secundus. Ingolstadii: Adam Sartorius.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kašić, Bartol (Bartholomaeus Cassius), S. J. 1604. Institutionum linguae Illyricae libri duo. Romae: Zanetti. (Nunc iterum edidit Reinhold Olesch. Köln: Böhlau, 1977.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kašić, Bartol. 1940 [c.1645]. “Autobiografija”. Građa za povijest književnosti hrvatske 151.1–144. (Ed. by Miroslav Vanino.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004 [1604]. Bartholomaeus Cassius, Institutiones linguae Illyricae. Editionem alteram curavit, vernacula interpretatione commentariisque instruxit Zvonko Pandžić. Zagreb: Tusculum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Križanić, Juraj. 1976 [1666]. Gramatično izkazanje ob ruskom jeziku 1666. Nachdruck der Erstausgabe 1848/59 besorgt von Gerd Freidhof. Frankfurt am Main & München: Kubon & Sagner. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lascaris, Constantinus. 1966 [1476]. Greek Grammar. Milan: Dionysius Paravisinus for Demetrius of Crete. 30 January 1476. Fascimile editon by J. J. Fraenkel. Amsterdam: Hakkert. [These incunabula had no title of its own; despite the title of the reprint-edition, the text is in Greek.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linacre, Thomas. 1998 [1524]. De emendata structura Latini sermonis. Introducción, edición crítica, traducción y notas por Luisa Harto Trujillo. Cáceres: Universidad de Extramadura.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lomonosov, Mixail. 1972 [1755]. Rossijskaja grammatika. Sankt Petersburg. Repr., Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der DDR.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ludolf, Heinrich Wilhelm. 1959 [1696]. Grammatica Russica. Ed. Boris O. Unbegaun. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Manutius, Aldus Pius. 1514 [1493]. Grammaticarum institutionum libri quatuor. Venetiis: Aldus Manutius.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Micaglia, Jacobo. 1651. Thesaurus linguae Illyricae. Ancona: Ottavio Beltrano.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Misal. 1971 [1483]. Misal po zakonu rimskoga dvora. Zagreb: Liber & Mladost.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nebrija, Antonio de. 1989 [1492]. Grammatica de la lengua castellana. Estudio y edición de Antonio Quilis. Madrid: Editorial Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Optát, B[eneš], P[etr] Gzel & V[áclav] Philomates. 1974 [1533/1588]. Grammatyka česká. Ed. by Gerd Freidhof. Frankfurt am Main & München: Kubon & Sagner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Priscianus 1855, 1858. Institutionum grammaticarum libri XVIII. Ed. Martin Hertz (= Grammatici Latini vol. 2–3). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smotryc’kyj, Meletij. 2000 [1619]. Grammatiki Lavrentija Zizanija i Meletija Smotrickogo. Ed. by E. A. Kuz’minova. Moscow: Moskovskij gosudarstvenij univerzitet.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Statorius, Petrus. 1980 [1568]. Polonicae Grammatices Institutio. Ed. by Reinhold Olesch. Köln & Wien: Böhlau.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Varro, Marcus Terentius. 1910. De lingua Latina quae supersunt. Ed. by Georg Goetz & Friedrich Schoell. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
B. Secondary literature
Auroux, Sylvain. 1988. “La grammaire générale et les fondements philosophiques des classements de mots”. Langages No. 921.79–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
, ed. 1992. Histoire des idées linguistique. Vol. II1. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. La révolution technologique de la grammatisation. Liège: Mardaga.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Auroux, Sylvain, E. F. Konrad Koerner, Hans-Josef Niederehe, Kees Versteegh, eds. 2000. History of the Language Sciences: An international handbook on the evolution of the study of language from the beginnings to the present. Vol. I1. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertinetto, Pier Marco & Denis Delfitto. 2000. “Aspect vs. Actionality: Why they should be kept apart”. Dahl, ed. 2000.189–225.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Binnick, I. Robert. 1991. Time and the Verb: A guide to tense and aspect. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blank, L. David. 1982. Ancient Philosophy and Grammar. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1994. “Aspect”. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics ed. by R. E. Asher et al., 240–247. Oxford & New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
, ed. 2000. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daiber, Thomas. 1992. Die Darstellung des Zeitwortes in ostslavischen Grammatiken von den Anfängen bis zum ausgehenden 18. Jahrhundert. Freiburg: Weiher.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drews, Peter. 1984/1985. “Die Theorie des quantitierenden Verses in den slavischen Literaturen”. Anzeiger für Slavische Philologie 151/16.101–131.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gabrić-Bagarić, Darija. 1984. Jezik Bartola Kašíca [The Language of Bartol Kašić]. Sarajevo: Institut za jezik.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gandolfo, Maria Delfina. 1998. “Roman Slavdom”. Lepschy, ed. 1998.108–123.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerö, Eva-Carin & Arnim von Stechow. 2003. “Tense in Time: The Greek perfect”. Words in Time: Diachronic semantics from different points of view ed. by Regine Eckardt et al. 251–293. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hewson, John & Vít Bubeník. 1997. Tense and Aspect in Indo-European Languages: Theory, typology, diachrony. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ising, Erika. 1970. Die Herausbildung der Grammatik der Volkssprachen in Mittelund Osteuropa. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jachnow, Helmut & Monika Wingender, eds. 1995. Temporalität und Tempus. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, Kristian. 1986. “ De emendata structura Latini sermonis: The Latin Grammar of Thomas Linacre”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 491.106–125. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Julien, Jacques. 1985. “Mode verbal et diathesis chez Apollonius Dyscole”. Histoire Épistémologie Langage 7:1.83–125. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kakridis, Yannis. 2000. “Greek Influence in the Grammatical Theory of Church Slavonic”. Auroux et al., eds. 2000.450–454.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katičić, Radoslav. 1981. “Gramatika Bartola Kašića”. Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije znanosti i umjetnosti 3881.5–129.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Køtny, Andrzej, ed. 2000. Aspektualität in germanischen und slawischen Sprachen. Poznań: Wydawnictwo naukowe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keipert, Helmuth. 1999. “Grammatik und Theologie”. Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie 581.19–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang. 1994. Time in Language. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klimonow, Wladimir. 1995. “Zur Geschichte der Tempusentwicklung in den unterschiedlichen slavischen Sprachen”. Jachnow & Wingender, eds. 1995.273–296.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Zur Stellung der Aktionsarten innerhalb des russischen und des deutschen Verbalsystems”. Køtny, ed. 2000.184–194.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kociuba, Osap. 1975. The Grammatical Sources of Meletij Smotryc’kyj’s Church Slavonic Grammar of 1619. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koerner, E. F. K. 1995a. Professing Linguistic Historiography. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1995b. “Historiography of Linguistics”. Concise History of the Language Sciences from the Sumerians to the Cognitivists ed. by E. F. K. Koerner & R. E. Asher, 7–16. Oxford & New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krasić, Stjepan. 1997. “Papinski dekreti iz godina 1622. i 1623. o osnivanju katedri za hrvatski jezik na europskim visokim školama i sveučilištima [Papal Decrees, 1622 and 1623, about the founding of Croatian studies at European tertiary institutions and universities]”. Povijesni prilozi 161.57–93.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Law, Vivien. 2003. The History of Linguistics in Europe from Plato to 1600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lepschy, Giulio, ed. 1988. History of Linguistics. Vol. III1: Renaissance and Early Modern Linguistics. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. On the Origin of Syntactical Description in Stoic Logic. Münster: Nodus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Metzler, Josef, ed. 1971–1973. Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda fide Memoria rerum, 1622–1972 (2 vols. in 3). Roma – Freiburg – Wien: Herder.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muljačić, Žarko. 2000. “Tre linguisti croati in cerca della lingua nazionale (1595–1649/51)”. Processi di convergenza e differenziazione nelle lingue dell’Europa medievale e moderna ed. by Fusco Fabiana et al., 385–404. Udine: Forum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oesterreicher, Wulf & Roland Schmidt-Riese. 1999. “Amerikanische Sprachenvielfalt und europäische Grammatiktradition: Missionarslinguistik im Epochenumbruch der Frühen Neuzeit”. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 1161.62–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Padley, G. A. 1976. Grammatical Theory in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1982. “L’importance de Thomas Linacre (env. 1460–1524) comme source dans l’évolution des théories grammaticales en Europe au XVIe et au XVIIe siècles”. Langues et linguistique 81.19–56.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Percival, W. Keith. 1997 [1994]. “Nebrija and the Medieval Grammatical Tradition”. Antonio de Nebrija: Edad media y Renaciemento ed. by Carmen Codoñer et al., 247–257. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pandžić, Basilius. 1972. “L’opera della S. Congregazione per le popolazioni dalla Penisola Balcanica centrale [1622–1700]”. Metzler, ed. 1972 I:2, 292–315.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Santich, Jan Joseph. 1995. Missio Moscovitica: The role of the Jesuits in the Westernization of Russia 1582–1689. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaller, Helmut. 2000. “Frühe grammatische Beschreibungen slawischer Sprachen”. Auroux et al., eds. 2000.792–800.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schäfer-Prieß, Barbara. 2000. Die portugiesische Grammatikschreibung von 1540 bis 1822. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schenker, Alexander M. 1995. The Dawn of Slavic. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt-Riese, Roland. 2003. “Spielräume der Form: Jesuitisches Curriculum und die Ordnung grammatischer Texte”. Autorität der Form – Autorisierung – Institutionelle Autorität ed. by Wulf Oesterreicher, Gerhard Regn & Winfried Schulze, 55–74. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmitter, Peter, ed. 1996. Sprachtheorien der abendländischen Antike. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Springhetti, Emilio. 1960/1961. “Storia e fortuna della Grammatica di Emmanuele Alvares, S. J.”. Humanitas 13/14.283–304.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stammerjohann, Harro, ed. 1996. Lexicon Grammaticorum: Who’s who in the history of world linguistics. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stankiewicz, Edward. 1984. Grammars and Dictionaries of the Slavonic Languages from the Middle Ages up to 1850: An annotated bibliography. Berlin & New York: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Šrepel, Milivoj. 1890. “Latinski izvori i ocjena Kašićeve gramatike [Latin sources and analysis of Kašić’s grammar]”. Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije znanosti i umjetnosti 1021.172–201.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Štefanić, Vjekoslav. 1940. “Prilog za sudbinu Alvaresove gramatike među Hrvatima [A contribution to the destiny of Alvares’ grammar amongst Croats]”. Vrela i prinosi 111.12–34.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tavoni, Mirko. 1998. “Renaissance Linguistics”. Lepschy, ed. 1998.1–108.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thieroff, Rolf. 2000. “On the Areal Distribution of Tense – Aspect Categories in Europe”. Dahl, ed. 2000.265–305.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toscano, Silvia. 1998. “Orthodox Slavdom”. Lepschy, ed. 1998.123–148.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1957. “Verbs and Times”. Philosophical Review 661.143–160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Versteegh, Kees. 1980. “The Stoic Verbal System”. Hermes 1081.338–357.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Maylein, Laura Elisa
2024. Beiträge zur XVI. Internationalen Slavistischen Konferenz [Beiträge zur XVI. Internationalen Slavistischen Konferenz, XI], ► pp. 73 ff. DOI logo
Pandžić, Zvonko
2017. Von Coimbra nach Tobol’sk. Historiographia Linguistica 44:1 ► pp. 72 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue