§ 294. SUBSTANTIVE INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS. a. Qui? who? (persons). SUBJECTIVE qui? who? OBJECTIVE [ qui ? whom? de qui? of whom? B. Lequel? which? (animals and things). SUBJ. lequel? laquelle ? OBJ. lequel? laquelle ? lesquels? lesquelles ? which? lesquels? lesquelles? which? duquel? de laquelle ? desquels ? desquelles? of which? auquel? à laquelle ? auxquels? auxquelles? to which? Examples. SUBJECTIVE Lequel est sur la table ? OBJECTIVE Lequel voulez-vous? Avec lequel vous amusez-vous? Duquel parlez-vous? Auquel a-t-il ajouté une page? 7. Que? quoi? what? 1. Que? what? is employed before a verb like the Conjunctive Personal Pronoun. Que voulez-vous? What do you want? 2. Quoi? what? is employed, like the Disjunctive Personal Pronouns, after a preposition or by itself. Avec quoi voulez-vous le faire ? With what do you wish to do it? What? what do you say ? * Dont is never interrogative in Modern French, Indefinite Pronouns. § 295. The Indefinite Pronouns are divided into— Adjective, joined to a noun: Chaque homme était à son poste. Substantive, never joined to a noun: Chacun était à son poste. § 296. ADJECTIVE INDEFINITE PRONOUNS. a. Without flexion. NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER II. § 298. Personal Pronouns in Old French. In one important point the pronouns differ from the substantives, etc. They still retain the subjective and objective forms more or less as they were in Old French. The following paradigms will be sufficient for the present purpose. In them will be seen (1) the modern form, (2) those forms which show the link between Old French and Latin, (3) the dialectic differences which have given the disjunctive forms to Modern French. SINGULAR. Subj.: jo, je 1st Person. PLURAL. nos, nous Obj.: me, mi, moi nos, nous 2nd Person. § 299. Je, tu, etc., and moi, toi, etc. Mon avocat et moi sommes de cet avis Vous, vous le voulez, et moi, je ne le veux pas Ils veulent rester, eux préfèrent partir. In all the above sentences moi, toi, eux, are in the subjective or nominative. But these words are derived from essentially objective forms. How have they come to be thus employed? 1. In Old French, as in Latin, the personal pronouns were often omitted, when no ambiguity arose from such omission. Joieusment (ils) chevauchent, n'est riens qui les tourmente. (Berte, 13th cent.) Car sans vous (je) ne pourroie vivre. (COUCI, 12th cent.) 2. Hence je, tu, il, etc., could have an emphatic disjunctive or predicative use without danger of confusion.* Et je, qui suis au mourir. (Couci, 12th cent.) Bel Sire nies (neveu), et je et vous irons. Tu qui veulz aler par païs. (Ch. de Rol., 11th cent.) (E. DESCHAMP.) Dist Privaut je boif (bois) plus que tu. (Renart, 13th cent.) * Compare Latin. 3. But when, from their increasing association with the verb, the pronouns lost their special emphatic employment, the want of a form upon which the tonic accent could be laid, made itself felt, and recourse was had to the oblique cases.* 4. On the same principle those dialectic forms possessed of the greatest breadth of pronunciation were preferred: moi, toi, soi, lui, eux, were chosen, rather than mi (me), ti (te), si (se), li. It is to this necessity of having a word of sufficient strength to bear the tonic accent that we owe such imperative phrases: Menez-moi, lave-toi, etc. As far as modern practice is concerned, they stand out as isolated instances of the use of moi, toi, in connection with the verb. With perfect consistency, when en is present, moi, toi vanish, and me, te are restored va-t'en; donnez m'en. Also if the pronoun is restored to its proclitic position, me, te reappear: ne me menez pas; ne te lave pas; approche-toi et te mets à ma place.+ § 300. Mon, ma, mes. In the Burgundian dialect "the rule of s strikingly seen. Tu n'es mes hom, ne je suis tes sire. (Ch. de Rol., 11th cent.) *This seems to be the origin of a custom which at first sight appears be a barbarism. In English the struggle is still going on, and it is I, and it is me, are both common. Latham defends it is me, but shrinks from maintaining that it is him, it is her, are equally correct. Dean Alford in his Queen's English' more consistently defends them all. (pp. 142-146.) But neither in English nor French can any defence be set up except that of "modern usage." Both grammar and the practice of the older languages are against the present custom. Nor indeed is it is I the oldest form. Chaucer wrote: I am thy mortal foo (foe), and it am I that loveth so hoote (hotly) Emelye the brighte.-Knightes Tale. And Louis XI. Ouvrez dit-il m'amie ce suis-je. † Exactly analogous is the lengthened form adopted in the substantive possessive pronouns, Donnez le mien, c'est la mienne, etc. (Compare also Verbs, § 393 passim.) The subjective mes remains in messire. This form may have influenced the anomalous pronunciation of Monsieur. (See § 77.) § 301. Adjectival use of mien, tien, sien, and mon, ton, son. The forms mien, tien, sien, come probably from men, ten, sen, the Picardian equivalents of mon, ton, son. Men, ten, sen, were strengthened * into mien, tien, sien, and gradually made de rigueur in the absence of the noun. But at first, according to the dialect, we find mon, ton, son = men, ten, sen = mien, tien, sien. + Et uns siens chevaliers fu montes a cheval. (VILLEHARDOUIN, 13th cent.) Cette sienne resolution arresta sus bout la furie de son maistre. (MONTAIGNE, 16th cent.) § 302. Mon, ton, son, before a feminine Substantive. 1. The strange combination of a masculine attributive form with a feminine noun first arose in the 14th century. Till then the hiatus was either maintained or was avoided in the same way as in the article. La renommee de cil saint home ala tant qu'ele vint a l'apostele Innocent, et l'apostles li manda qu'il sermonnast de la croix par s'auctorite. (VILLEHARDOUIN, 13th cent.) 2. M'amie, now spelt ma mie, only remains of the better forms. Si le roi m'avoit donné Et qu'il m'eût fallu quitter Reprenez votre Paris J'aime mieux ma mie. (MOLIÈRE.) (BÉRANGER.) Ma mie, o vous que j'adore, mais que vous plaignez toujours. * The reason for the strengthened syllable is exactly analogous to that given for me, moi, te, toi, etc. (see § 299), viz.: the necessity for a substantival form upon which to lay the tonic accent. Compare a similar 'diphthongaison' in verbs venir, vient; recevoir, reçoivent, etc. (§ 393.) Also in isolated words pierre (petra), hier (heri), fièvre (febris), legem (loi), etc. This conversion of the simple vowel into diphthongs seems to have begun in the Gallo-Latin of the sixth century: paedem for pedem, whence pied. See Brachet's Dict., pp. lv. (English edition.) † Brachet in his Grammaire historique, p. 109, follows Diez in his derivation of mien, tien, sien. "Moi, mi; toi, tibi; soi, sibi; were mi, ti, si, in the 11th cent. "To this form the suffix en was attached, and the possessive mi-en, ti-en, si-en formed." In his Dictionary we find he gives the derivation mon=men = mien, as above. He contradicts himself. |