The primary aim of this essay is to apprise Hispanists working in adjacent fields of significant advances in knowledge of the history of Spanish made over the past decade. But beyond its purely informational value, I hope to provide a research tool of value to several groups of potential readers. Firstly, Hispanists curious about -though not necessarily specialists in- linguistics will be pleased to find that the dearth of introductory manuals that had characterized our field prior to 1980 has been replaced by a plethora of such works, aimed at audiences of differing degrees of linguistic sophistication. Secondly, students taking a first course in Spanish historical linguistics will be able to see at a glance what sorts of issues are currently being debated. They may even be astonished to learn that this is not a field in which all the meaningful breakthroughs have been made and all significant questions answered -an impression we professors are occasionally guilty of imparting. Thirdly, the professors teaching those courses who wish to assign a special term project to each student will have at their disposal a topically organized bibliography of ongoing research from which they, or the students themselves, may select readings from the particular domains that most appeal to them. Finally, though the bibliography does not pretend to be exhaustive, I hope that research scholars will find it a useful source of information on the latest thinking of their fellow specialists¹⁰⁶.

No fewer than ten introductory manuals have appeared in the last decade, of varying degrees of distinction. Bergquist (1) amalgamated standard historical grammars of Spanish, Catalan, and Portuguese to produce a work of little originality, whose intended audience is indeterminate. The diachronic ingredient of Burt's opuscule (2) is decidedly weak, though he displayed some originality by incorporating a chapter on semantics. Lathrop wrote a useful textbook (3), marred, however, by ubiquitous misprints and errors of all sorts, most of which have been corrected in the vastly improved Spanish version (4). For specialists and advanced graduate students, Lloyd's sober, even-handed, thorough, and often original introduction (5), which now supersedes Menéndez Pidal's classic Manual de gramática histórica española, represents the indisputable first choice. Reznick's textbook (6) is serviceable for an introductory course, affording more than the usual quota of information on lexical development and loanwords. Candau (7), Cano (9), and Liberatori (11) condensed knowledge readily available in earlier works. The newly revised and expanded editions of Lapesa's classic (8) devote substantially more space to American, Andalusian, and Judeo-Spanish, to Hispano-Arabic, as well as to sibilant development, while also reproducing a sizeable quantity of obsolete material and overlooking some major contributions by other scholars. Messner/ Müller's uneven introduction (12) offers concise structural sketches of peninsular languages and dialects.

Malkiel's highly readable encyclopedia-style survey (13) reports on research into Medieval Spanish, discusses preeminent figures, laments the inadequacy of available research tools, and concludes with a handy basic bibliography. Lope Blanch (14) analyzed in detail the phonology, morphology, and syntax of nine letters written in 1529-30.

Green (15) furnishes a thumbnail sketch of the external history of Spanish, while Lapesa's manual (8) remains the best source for a more detailed account. Mondéjar's pamphlet (16), perhaps prompted by political developments in Spain, supplies historical data on use over the centuries of español vs. castellano. Neira (17), who suffers from an acute case of substratomania, nonetheless offers a highly readable panorama of the external history of the Hispano-Romance languages and dialects. Penny (18) applies the

––––––––   178   ––––––––

latest insights of sociolinguistics to the history of Spanish in a most enlightening fashion in an essay that one would like to see expanded and published in a more accessible forum. Torreblanca (19) brackets pre-1200 western Rioja with Castile in regard to linguistic trends. Winkelmann (20) traces the rise of Castilian from a local dialect to national standard during the centuries of the «Reconquest». Trask/Wright (21) study 14 Spanish features that have been credited to Basque influence, concluding that such attribution is disputable in all cases.

Malkiel (22) posits, based on wavering outcomes of PL- and Ŭ, two waves of Latinity in Spain, the first emanating from central Italy and the second radiating centuries later from Lyon, initially a Celtic city which by the third century had achieved the status of economic and cultural center of gravity of the entire Empire. Penny (23) suggests that most phonetic features routinely associated with southern peninsular speech -especially with Andalusian dialect- may have germinated in the far north, bursting into the south as a result of the territorial expansion. C. Pensado has authored a theoretical treatise on the relative chronology of phonological processes (24), followed by a highly detailed application of the principles enunciated to changes in the history of Spanish (lenition, syncope, and certain vowel changes) [25]. The latter volume, an imposing achievement by any standard, is destined to become a standard reference source. But the proliferation of abbreviations, charts, and diagrams made sustained reading of this 630-page work «rough sledding» even for a reader of Malkiel's sophistication (26).

Anderson (27) reported on the resistance of /a/ to conditioned changes that regularly modify other vowels, while Montgomery (28) examined unpredictable closing of mid-vowels in such common words as sin «without», for which he proffered a satisfying explanation (avoidance of confusion with en `in' after words ending in -s). C. Pensado [29] showed that Late Spoken Latin /o/ preceded by a word-initial front glide regularly closed to /u/ in Spanish, while the glide itself might evolve in a number of different ways.

Terry (30), appropriating ideas of Alarcos, Delattre, and Malmberg, asserts -not very convincingly- that weakening of implosive consonants, which boosted the frequency of open syllables, encouraged diphthongization of tonic Ĕ and Ŏ. Craddock (31), pursuing a suggestion by Malkiel, explained V. L. */w/ > Sp. / jó/ by hypothesizing intermediate stages */jw/ > */jów/ (a form still current in certain Asturian dialects). Malkiel's thinking on Spanish rising diphthongs is set forth in four articles, in which he explored their reversion to monophthongs in certain contexts (32, 35), their occasional emergence in environments usually calling for monophthongs (33), and their failure to appear in the context of a following front glide (34).

Malkiel (36) compared Spanish and Portuguese outcomes of the frequent Latin clusters CT and PT in both the popular and learned segments of the lexicon, demonstrating through a wealth of data that correspondences between the two languages are anything but straightforward. Hartman (38) applied the binary feature framework to the evolution of NGE and NG'L in Spanish to construct an admirably simple account. Moreno (39) contributed useful data on -but little analysis of- changes affecting postconsonantal B and V, while for Malkiel (40), RB > rv ranks as a regular sound change. Penny (41) blamed assimilation to a previous voiceless stop for the apparent failure to voice of the intervocalic stops of such words as COMPUTĀRE «to calculate» (> contar) and HOSPITĀLE «guest chamber» (> hostal).

Otero (42) discussed the interaction in proto-Spanish of spirantization and apocope, while Sánchez (43) proved that the Morisco Spanish distribution of [d] vs. [] was identical to modern standard usage, except after /s/, where Moriscos presumably employed the stop allophone. Torreblanca's interpretation of Arabic evidence (44) leads him to assert, against the available comparative evidence, that voiceless stops were aspirated in all pre-1200 Hispano-Romance varieties. That same scholar (45) argued, by a string of unverifiable conjectures, against any role for Basque or Celtiberian substrates in the aspiration of F.

The intricate historical and geolinguistic issues surrounding Spanish sibilant evolution have not lost their fascination for language historians. Torreblanca (46), after assembling a mass of largely inconclusive evidence from Hispano-Arabic geographers, surmised that Latin dorsal /s/ first became apicoalveolar in

––––––––   179   ––––––––

southern Portugal, an area which to this day exhibits the dorsal phoneme. Abad (47) surveyed the literature on ceceo/seseo, with some heed to the sociolinguistic dimension. In two thorough and informative studies (48, 49), the first unfortunately marred by confusing misprints, Torreblanca contended that the voiced sibilants found in western Spain and highland Ecuador represent recent innovations rather than archaisms, as other scholars had maintained. Malkiel reviewed Cuervo's weighty contribution to the opening stages of «the great sibilant debate». In a string of impressive studies (51, 52, 53, 54), Frago has adduced nonliterary testimony to prove that sibilant changes were considerably earlier than scholars have been willing to admit and that aspiration of implosive /s/ may have arisen in the north rather than the south of Spain (as Penny [23] also maintained in an article published in the same year). Torreblanca (55), after comparing phonetic contexts favoring aspiration in different modern dialects, advanced a plausible relative chronology for the various phases of the change. Walsh (56) argued for Portuguese-style palatalization of Old Spanish implosive /s/ in southern Spain, with that phone subsequently undergoing the velarization that ultimately changed // to /x/ (or /h/) in all dialects. Torreblanca (57) roundly disagreed, favoring the traditional appeal to phonetic weakening. Seklaoui (58) showed that contextual factors almost invariably resolve the person and number ambiguities potentially caused by /s/-deletion, and compared Spanish /s/-weakening and -deletion to parallel processes operative in the history of French and Italian (59). Muñoz (60) presented evidence from 1608 for seseo in a Castilian/Valencian border district, while Mondéjar (61) detected hints of seseo in Seville as early as 1302 (only 54 years after the «reconquest» of that city). Díez (62) uncovered s for expected ç in late 13th-c. documents from Valencian-influenced Murcia. Pascual (63), who reminds fellow scholars of the value of wielding original documents rather than copies when endeavoring to establish absolute chronology of sound changes, implicates non-Castilian speakers' pronunciation of that dialect in the early confusion of // and //. Díaz (64) identified instances of devoicing of /z/ and /dz/ (but preservation of //), along with deaffrication of /ts/ and /dz/ in a 14th-c. law code from New Castile, while Douvier (65) contributed some 14th- and 15th-c. evidence for devoicing. Torreblanca (67) strung together a complicated sequence of largely unconvincing arguments to account for failure of /s/ to palatalize in beso, queso, etc. (cf. better behaved Port. beijo/queijo).

Lázaro Mora (69) investigated the use of ll (< rl), frequent in some dialects in infinitive + pronoun sequences, by poets for rhyming purposes. Rohlfs (70) saw a pre-Roman substrate lurking behind Spanish palatalization of LL and NN. Torreblanca (71) invoked toponymic evidence in support of Corominas's belief that /CI-/ > /Cr-/, a change characteristic of Portuguese, once typified Castilian-speaking areas as well.

Craddock's methodical study (72) of the far-reaching effects of following front glides and palatal sonorants on vowel development led him to a more precise understanding of general patterns vs. exceptional developments in this complex area. Ariza's misleadingly titled article (73) examined sounds corresponding to OSp. y, with particular attention to their phonemic status -a question phonologists have yet to resolve for the modern language. After carefully scrutinizing use of graphemes i, j, g, and y in Alfonsine Spanish, Penny (74) tendered a compelling analysis of the development of G-followed by front vowel and J- to a mid-palatal fricative.

Malkiel has devoted considerable attention of late to «secondary phonosymbolism» (75, 76, 77), defined as a connection between some noticeable idiosyncrasy of meaning and a certain canonical shape; cf. numerous Spanish adjectives of the form C₁ VC₁- (e. g., bobo, ñoño, lelo, memo, all denoting personal shortcomings). In a similar vein (78), he showed how a given sound or sound sequence can become linked in the popular mind with socially disfavored concepts.

Mourin (79), ignoring critical earlier work by Montgomery, posited an analogical rather than phonetic source for vowel raising in various 3d-conj. verb forms. Montgomery (80, 81), after establishing a connection in Spanish verbs between closed vowels and dynamic actions, investigated the historical causes of the unusual opposition between 3d-conjugation high vowels and 2d-conjugation mid vowels, pointing to Latin vowel quantity as a leading factor. Malkiel has issued a series of papers (82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87) in which Spanish evidence is adduced to buttress his hypothesis

––––––––   180   ––––––––

of morphological conditions acting as coefficients in -though not sole causes of- phonetic change. His thinking has recently been challenged by Méndez/C. Pensado (88), who lean toward the traditional view of change as initially phonological with ensuing morphologization¹⁰⁷.

In a book (89) that has elicited a near unprecedented wave of critical reactions, from the enthusiastically positive to the stridently negative¹⁰⁸, Wright insisted that Latin in pre 12th-c. Spain was considered the written form of vernacular, rather than a distinct linguistic code. In a recent article (95), he responds to some of his critics, especially Marcos Marín (92). Puentes (96, 97), after making highly useful observations on the relationship between spoken and written codes, analyzed 9th-, 10th-, and 11th-c. documents from various parts of Spain, charging systematic departures from correct usage to a scribal desire to adapt Latin to the needs of the moment. Blake has pointed, in an impressive string of studies (98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103), to nonliterary documents (preferably originals), in both Latin and vernacular, as valuable sources of information on earlier stages of Spanish. Following up on his own recommendation, he has extracted from such documents important information on the phonetic stages and geographic spread of F-aspiration. Frago (105, 106) made a similar argument, unearthing nonliterary evidence for Andalusian merger of //, //, and /h/ (< F) in the 15th century and deletion of intervocalic /d/ as early as the 14th. Torreblanca (107) warns scholars against pouncing too impatiently on scribal misspellings involving omission of a letter, and produces a number of cases in which such misspellings were doubtless caused by slipshod scribal practices. He also recommends (108, 109), wisely, that scholars not mix data culled from late copies with more trustworthy information drawn from original documents -a trap which Menéndez Pidal himself did not always successfully avoid.

Cravens (110) employed a consonantal strength hierarchy to account for the effects of lenition in Spanish and Aragonese, while Hartman (111) reported on a sophisticated computer program capable of deriving Spanish from Latin input, with some discussion of its successful application to specific problems. Meier (112) surveyed currents of linguistic thinking that have come in and out of vogue in recent decades, outlining his own view of how language history should be approached. In a later article (113), he tried out some of those ideas on sporadic sound changes. Torreblanca (114) refused to accept the notion, held by Malmberg and others, that Spanish has at all stages exhibited generalized consonantal weakening in syllable-final position. He also disagreed with Mańczak's view of frequent use as a cause of unusually rapid phonetic evolution (115), though in the end he adopted a more conciliatory posture.

Mariner (116) discussed contact between Spanish Latin and other languages spoken in Spain and around the Mediterranean, exhibiting considerable skepticism in regard to Menéndez Pidal's hypothesis of strong southern Italian influence in the Latin of Spain. Elerick (117), who credited to the great Spanish scholar a position diametrically opposed to the one he actually championed, argued unconvincingly in favor of such influence. Pocklington (118) envisioned 15th-c. Morisco Arabic exerting a strong influence on eastern Andalusian Spanish as illustrated in six specific features. His contention that the influence could not have run in the opposite direction is difficult to defend in the light of recent findings by Frago and others (see above).

Alvar/ Pottier's (119) manual, originally intended for inclusion in the ELH, constitutes a fairly useful structuralist account, weakened, however, by excessive concentration on phonetic development of individual forms, to the exclusion of evolutionary trends affecting the system as an organic whole. Almost the same criticism may be levelled against Urrutia/Álvarez's book (120), designed chiefly as a course text.

Penny (122) rejected the long-held view that Spanish nouns descend directly from the Latin accusative, arguing persuasively that they are better analyzed as reflecting amalgamation of the Latin nominative and oblique cases.

Abad (124) offers a serviceable, if unoriginal, summary of the ideas of Cuervo, Fernández Ramírez, and Lapesa on the history of leísmo/loísmo. Echenique (125, 126) analyzed factors (e. g., parallelism with me, te, se, as well as with este, -a, -o; personal a; survival of verbs governing the dative in Latin) that may have led to the

––––––––   181   ––––––––

uniquely Spanish extension of dative le into contexts previously requiring a direct object form. Quilis et al. (127) summarized the history of le-/lo-/laísmo, before studying modern usage in Madrid. García (128) saw le-/laísmo as an instance of gender overriding case as criterion in pronoun selection, while Klein-Andreu (129) found an extraordinarily high rate of le-/laísmo in Valladolid, a situation she attributed to Leonese substrate. De Granda (130) invoked multiple causation to explain the emergence of leísmo in Paraguay and -by implication- in other parts of Latin America. Rini (131) attributed the frequent substitution of le for pl. les to use in sing. /pl. conjuncts, with later spread to nonconjoined structures. C. Pensado (132) charged -i of esti «this», li «to him/her», etc., forms characteristic of some varieties of Old Spanish, to descent from the Latin dative (ISTĪ/ ILLĪ «to that person») rather than nominative case. According to her (133), the personal a is a by-product of Latin topicalization strategies. Malkiel (134) treated hypercharacterization of gender in pronouns and articles.

Pountain's theoretical monograph (135) on the Romance verb includes two highly readable chapters on the evolution of conditional and temporal sentences from Latin to Romance, including Spanish, while Bybee (and Brewer) [136, 137] attempts to extract general theoretical principles of analogy from the study of Spanish, Occitan, Leonese, and Aragonese verb paradigms. Schede (138) provides 600 pages of Old Spanish verb forms, with entries ordered alphabetically by verb, and the internal content of entries arranged by tense. Brief opening chapters contain the results of statistical analyses.

Company (139) discovered, against all expectations, that Old Spanish synthetic (cantaré «I shall sing») and analytic (cantar-lo-e «I shall/must sing it») futures are not functionally equivalent, with the latter marked for topicalization and possible obligatory meaning; while Kitova (140) studied the temporal and model values of both future and conditional, finding, inter alia, that the Old Spanish conditional was virtually never used as a future of the past. Montgomery (141) rejected the standard derivation of eres from fut. ERIS, opting for an even more implausible *eses, later affected by «dissimilatory rhotacism».

Silva-Corvalán (142) saw Basque substrate at work in the replacement of past subjunctive by conditional in Covarrubias (Old Castile). Rojo/Montero's monograph (143) on the historical evolution of conditional sentences in a large corpus of texts provides detailed information on changing patterns, along with fascinating statistical analyses. (Rojo presented the same material in condensed form in 144). Moreno (145) reported on archaic conditional -and, to a lesser extent, imperfect- forms in -ie used today in the province of Toledo. Harris (146), who renounced any claim to originality, furnished a coherent empirical account of the evolution of conditionals in Romance. Castronovo (147) compared the various grammatical labels that have been applied to the conditional by professional grammarians.

Cruz Martínez (148) attributed the innovative Old Spanish meaning of cantara «s/he would have sung» (< «s/he had sung») to the emergence of periphrastic había cantado «s/he had sung»; while Chevalier (149) convincingly analyzed OSp. cantara, often used with simple past meaning, as imperfect of ha cantado «s/he has sung» rather than pluperfect of canta.

Eberenz (150) investigated the replacement of the future subjunctive by other forms in conditional, relative, and temporal clauses, seeking in the process to identify systemic factors responsible for that paradigm's ultimate demise.

De Gorog (151) analyzed OSp. doy «I give», estoy/soy «I am», voy «I go» (from earlier do, esto, so, vo) as borrowings from Old Leonese, which may in turn have appropriated them from Old Galician. After an informative review of earlier hypotheses, C. Pensado (152) traced the final glide to a paragogic vowel (doe, etc.) inserted to avoid the phonotactic awkwardness of stressed monosyllables.

Blaylock (153) studied loss of /d/ in 2d-pers. -pl. endings, adducing new evidence that /d/-deletion in proparoxitones may have been earlier than previously believed; while Dworkin (154, 155) speculated that suppression of /d/ may have begun in 2d -pers.-pl. suffixes, spreading by lexical diffusion to participial -ado/-ido then to verbs, nouns, adjectives, ultimately becoming a general phonetic rule in certain dialects.

Yllera (156) dilutes the meaning of «periphrasis» by taking it to mean virtually any conjugated verb followed by infinitive. Vincent (157) analyzes ESSE + participle constructions in all Romance languages, while Company (158) focused attention exclusively on formal and

––––––––   182   ––––––––

semantic properties of the Old Spanish perfect tenses. Pellen (159) narrowed the focus further, using computer technology to analyze perfects used in the Poema de Mio Cid, with full attention to order of auxiliary and participle, participle-object agreement, and choice of aver vs. ser as auxiliary. Dietrich (160) studied less frequent structures using it quedar venir as auxiliaries. Martínez-Díez (161) investigated verbal expression of anteriority in one medieval literary work, while Aleza (162) analyzed ser + participle constructions. Pountain (163) made a strong case for the interdependence of such innovations as generalization of auxiliary haber at the expense of ser loss of participle agreement in periphrases, specialization of estar in locatives and ser in passives, loss of passive meaning of haber, and several others.

Vaño-Cerdá's book (164) on ser and estar + adjectives includes a long final chapter on the history of such constructions, while Silva-Corvalán, in her important article on the generalization of estar at the expense of ser in Los Angeles Spanish (165), concluded that language contact may accelerate internally motivated changes.

Lapesa (166) followed the history of constructions involving infinitives modified by articles, demonstrative, descriptive, and possessive adjectives, and similar structures. Malkiel (167) found Kurylowicz's analysis of Old Spanish conjugation classes wanting. Elson (168) presented a coherent account of phonetic and semantic factors leading to generalization of the «velar insert» in such forms as pongo «I put», salgo «I leave», etc., in an article weakened by lack of attention to other scholars' work. Schaffer (170, 171) studied the evolution of -TŪDINE > -dumbre (e. g., muchedumbre 'crowd'), a suffix which ultimately withered in Spanish owing to lack of a sharply profiled semantic image. Björk-man's monograph (172) on Romance -esco provides abundant information on that suffix's growth in Spanish, a language in which it continues to exhibit considerable vitality. Gulsoy (173) largely reproduces Menéndez Pidal's thinking on the evolution of -IDUS. Dworkin (174, 175) identified factors in the generalization of -ido, originally a participial suffix, which acquired the ability to derive parasynthetic adjectives from nominal and adjectival roots. For him, etymology and derivational morphology are inseparable. Malkiel (176) adduced some intriguing data in support of Dworkin's analysis. Dworkin (177) has convincingly charged the replacement of -ir by -ecer in a number of verbs (reverdir «to turn green» > reverdecer) to speakers' aversion to root allomorphy. Malkiel (178) suggested analyzing infinitive endings as nominal suffixes since they display a vocal gamut typical of nominal derivatives. He explained the unexpected evolution of -ín < -ino through pressure from its polar opposite -ón (179) and proved that -dor of comedor, mirador, etc., is a Gallo-Romance intruder rather than a direct descendant of -ŌRIU (180). Klingebiel (181) offered interesting observations on the few Spanish formations of the type mantener, while Karlsson (182) followed the development of OS p. -mientre «-ly» (< MENTE x -ITER?) through -miente to modern -mente. Baldonado (183) identified factors determining gender in Old Spanish deverbal nouns, while Penny (184) detected considerable free variation among suffixes used to derive abstract nouns in the formative Alfonsine period. England (185, 186) followed the emergence through analogy of -ora < -or, -esa < -és, and -ona < -ón.

Mondéjar (188) offered observations on the study of syntactic change, while Bossong (189) isolated pragmatic factors influencing word order in the Lazarillo, concluding with valuable remarks on word-order evolution. England's three studies (190, 191, 192) on the position of object nouns and predicate nouns and adjectives are required reading for anyone curious about Old Spanish word order or word order typologies in general.

More progress has been made in our understanding of the behavior of atonic pronouns in Old Spanish over the past decade than in any comparable previous time period. Barry (193) saw the personal a as an important factor in the rise of impersonal se, which emerged through extension of the se passive, a construction far less frequent than ser + past participle in the medieval period. She has also identified discourse and thematic factors apt to determine clitic pre- or postposition (194) and historical reasons for variability of clitic position in aux. + present participle structures (195). Chevalier (196) extracted from a massive body of data a theoretical explanation for change in clitic position between Old and Modern Spanish.

––––––––   183   ––––––––

González Ollé (198) found a long-term trend away from post- to preposition of clitics to past participles. Riiho (199) reported on the infrequency of redundant clitics in Old Spanish. Rivero, who used contemporary syntactic theory and a psychological model to analyze Old Spanish atonic pronouns, argued in a string of studies (200, 201, 202, 203, 204) that they were phonologically clitics, but syntactically full phrasal elements. Wanner, who saw Spanish clitic movement as an historical relic (206), has authored a thick volume on the history of Romance clitic pronouns (207), which in many ways supersedes Ramsden's more modest study. Unfortunately for the Hispanist, information on Spanish is scattered throughout, instead of being collected into a single chapter or section. Since only one page reference is listed under «Spanish» in the index (fewer than under «Biblical Hebrew», «Greek», or «Sanskrit»), the only solution available to the interested (and, one hopes, patient) researcher is to inspect all 607 pages, compiling one's own index.

Elvira (209) saw OSp. qual > el qual as an internal Spanish development since Latin lacked *ILLE QUĀLIS, all of which makes one wonder why most Romance languages should have independently developed virtually identical structures. Gehman (211) argued unconvincingly for Arabic influence in certain types of relative clauses. Lope Blanch (212) deftly analyzed 395 relative pronouns and adverbs in early 15th-c. letters (in an article later to form a chapter of entry 14). Rini (213) felt that Arabic influence was one of a number of factors favoring development of redundant object pronouns. Rivero (214, 215, 217, 218), who views learnability as crucial in the evolution of relative clauses, was criticized for her handling of Old Spanish (and Old Aragonese) data by Posner (216).

Monedero (219) offers abundant data bearing on the generalization of the personal a, which she maintains acquired its new function despite -not because of- its use as indicator of indirect objects.

Esposito (220) discussed formal and functional differences among verbal negation processes in three Hispano-Romance varieties.

Silva-Corvalán (221, 222) attributed replacement of past subjunctive by conditional in certain regions of Old Castile to a process of semantic weakening, perhaps abetted by Basque substrate. She also viewed topicality as favoring use of reduplicative pronouns (223). Wright (224) reviewed semantic changes affecting words denoting parts of the face, which he credits to the inherent vagueness of such terms. García (225) studied the semantic generalization of OSp. ende «(from) there», which she attributed to enhanced frequency of use. Disappointingly, she has little to say about that handy particle's ultimate disappearance.

The reader curious about developments in Romance etymology between World War 2 and the late 1970s will wish to consult Craddock/Dworkin/Poghirc's highly informative essay (227), which covers different genres of research, includes a special section on each language, and analyzes the style of currently active etymologists. Dworkin, in a separate essay (228), surveyed current trends and explored the relationship between etymology and other branches of linguistics. That same scholar has identified phonotactic awkwardness (229) and unproductivity of a suffix as motives for a word's falling out of use (230). Enguita (231) took a special interest in semantic evolution of Spanish lexemes in a New World context. Malkiel (232) envisioned a crucial role for etymology in the establishment of diachronic phonological rules, especially in instances where such rules have operated on a relatively small number of lexical items. He has pointed out directions etymologists might productively pursue, with ample illustration from recent work of his own (233). In a subsequent piece (234), he traced growing awareness in the 19th century of the distinction between popular and (semi-)learned vocabulary, identifying in the process certain problems still unresolved. Meier's mistitled article (235) concentrates almost exclusively on etymological dictionaries, awarding more merit to García de Diego's efforts than most experienced scholars would be willing to do. Pharies (236) fills a gap by studying blending against the backdrop of other less marginal modes of word formation.

Alonso Pedraz's two-volume Old Spanish dictionary (237), may, despite patent idiosyncrasies, be serviceable as

––––––––   184   ––––––––

a work of first consultation for Hispanists (including literature specialists) accustomed to wielding four or five basic lexica each time they wish to know the meaning of an unfamiliar word. Müller (238) bemoaned the lack of a comprehensive dictionary of Old Spanish along the lines of Godefroy's and Tobler-Lommatzsch's Old French lexica. After reviewing the few existing dictionaries, he announced a new Diccionario del español medieval (DEM), soon to begin appearing in fascicles, of which the first three have by now materialized (entries a-abrego) [239], with the fourth due out in late 1989. Pottier has made available to scholars a considerable cache of data from nonliterary sources compiled 35 years ago (240). Van Scoy's unpublished 1939 Wisconsin thesis on approximately 1,000 words defined in the works of Alfonso X has been skillfully updated and edited by Corfis (241). Far from appealing exclusively to lexicographers, the work will captivate all those curious about the world-view of educated mid-13th century Spaniards.

Tovar (242) discussed problems involved in compiling a comprehensive historical dictionary. Gómez's etymological dictionary (243) will be of little interest to the professional linguist, but might have appealed to the curious layman were it not for the exorbitant price. In any event, it falls far short of challenging Corominas's Breve diccionario, which may still be warmly recommended.

Corominas has, with the assistance of Pascual, revised and expanded his four-volume dictionary, the first edition of which appeared in the mid-1950s, to six hefty tomes (244), of which all but the last are now available. While reviewers unanimously agree that the DECH is a remarkable achievement and that no other Spanish etymological dictionary even remotely approaches it, a number of scathing criticism have been voiced. Colón (245), who praised the numerous additions to the original edition, especially in regard to Galician-Portuguese material, nonetheless complained that the author(s) had retained an unjustifiable number of etymologies since proven to be incorrect and had failed to take account of much research published since 1957 in standard journals, including a number of pieces from the pen of Colón himself. Straka's (256) faith in the whole enterprise was diminished by the author's refusal to take account of even one of von Wartburg's comments on 70 Gallo-Romance items in the original edition. Straka took up five of von Wartburg's observations, showing that each one was right on the mark. Tovar (258) regrets Corominas's refusal to consult the files of the Real Academia, something the Catalan scholar may have been prevented from doing by political rather than intellectual circumstances. Other critics supply attestations that predate -some by a considerable margin- the earliest occurrences of words cited in the DECH (247, 249, 257). Meier's criticisms, voiced in two journal articles (250, 251) and a full-length book (252), are for the most part misdirected for reasons stated forcefully and succinctly by Malkiel (253), who called Meier's approach to Romance etymology «aberrant», an assessment evidently shared by Mondéjar (254).

While nonspecialists may believe that the origins and histories of almost all Spanish words are solidly established, the fact is that many, including some involving common words, are still in doubt, misunderstood, or completely unknown. The past decade has seen the appearance of roughly 100 articles and books treating aspects of lexical development -approximately half of which came from the pens of Malkiel and his students.

Alvar/Alvar (259) followed the trajectory of romance, a word of late appearance (despite its supposed direct descent from RŌMĀNICĒ) which has at all periods denoted «neo-Latin vernacular», but which later acquired a host of other uses, such as designation of certain literary genres. M. Alvar (260) untangled the Latin, Arabic, and Romance strands of mantel «tablecloth» and mandil «apron». Bursch (262) rejected the generally accepted Basque etymology for perro «dog», preferring Lat. UERRĒS «boar», a solution reminiscent of Meier-style etymology (see below). Cano (263) seeks to throw light on the precise semantic value of castellano drecho in Alfonsine Spanish. Capuano (264) argued that dial. Marra «hoe» was a popular rather than a learned word and later (265) studied the numerous Hispanic descendants of MENTASTRUM «apple mint». Corriente (266) accepted the general consensus that hasta «until» is an Arabism, but contended that Arabic took it from Latin (AD ISTA). Cowan (267), rejecting Malkiel's earlier thinking, analyzed hasta as a blend of the words for «until» in two Arabic dialects which entered the peninsula at different dates.

––––––––   185   ––––––––

Craddock (268), who rejected the commonly assumed link of OSp. sandío «crazy, mad» to the concept of «watermelon», made a strong case for deriving it from an Old French exclamation signifying «by God's blood», perhaps heard along the route to Santiago de Compostela. In an exhaustive study (269) of numerals from 40 through 90 in Alfonsine Spanish, he showed that loss of pretonic /a/ (in quaraenta, cinquaenta, etc.) was far more frequent in the word for «forty», whence it later spread to other members of the series. Cravens (270) attributes currency of feminine la mar in the speech of sailors and people whose livelihood is connected to the sea to analogy with agua «water», marea «tide», and ola «wave». Delport (271), who overlooked an important article by Malkiel, studied the history of trabajo/trabajar «(to) work» in great detail, in the end declaring it a blend of TRIPĀLIĀRE and trabar «to impede, obstruct».

Dworkin, a scholar known for his interest in derivational and inflectional processes, has also been active as an etymologist. According to him (272), OSp. coa, containing the phonotactically awkward sequence /oa/, acquired its medial consonant through influence of culo. OSp. garrido «silly, handsome» is analyzed as a blend of OSp. guarnido and OFr. garni «well equipped». Dworkin (274) traced OSp. tienlla «cheek», a word doomed by phonotactic clumsiness, to TEMPORA «temple». Lat. TOLLERE «to remove» yielded OSp. toller a verb moribund by 1400 owing chiefly to morphophonemic complications, which is survived only by tullir «to cripple»/ tullido «crippled». OSp. vel(l)ido «beautiful, handsome» was interpreted as a blend of MELLĪTU «honey-like» (first suggested by Malkiel forty-two years ago) and OSp. vell- «hairy» (276). Invoking ideas recently advanced by Pharies (see below), Dworkin traced entelerido «shivering» to *enterido, ultimately a derivative of INTEGRĀRE, with interference from tiritar «to shake, tremble» (277). Finally, the demise of numerous Old Spanish abstract nouns was charged by Dworkin to loss of adjectival bases and lack of productivity of the suffixes by which they were derived (278).

Elerick (279), who felt that certain meanings of echar «to throw» could not be explained by derivation from IACTĀRE «to throw», -posited a blend with *ĀCTĀRE and *FACTĀRE, a gambit that would have carried greater conviction had the proposed etyma been on record. García (280), who started out seeking to explain the replacement of OSp. y «there» by allí, concluded with generalizations about language change. González Ollé (281) derived quizá «perhaps» from QUĪ ID SAPIT «who knows it?», a solution which explains the Old Spanish medial affricate. Hartman (283) argued, against Malkiel, in favor of dulce «sweet» as representing regular phonetic development from DULCE. The same linguist (284) interpreted macho «male», which first appeared in (written) Spanish in the 15th century (in place of older maslo, which had acquired taboo connotations), as a borrowing from Portuguese. Höfer (285) derived guiñar «to wink» from hypothetical bases, for whose existence she provided no supporting arguments. Lapesa compared entries for popular alma and learned ánima «soul» in the Real Academia's historical dictionary (286), traced OSp. linencia «sickness, wound» to NEGLIGENTIA «carelessness» (287), and offered etymologies for a number of Old Spanish words with stems in co- (288). Lipski (289) offered a colorful account of filibustero «pirate», which he traced back to Eng. flyboat or its Dutch cognate.

Though Malkiel has devoted more and more attention over the years to questions of historical phonology and morphology, he has never lost his fascination with etymology, which for him subsumes both origin and history of words. The reader of his articles will easily understand why etymology has been called the most integrated of linguistic disciplines: Lexical change cannot be understood without full attention to phonological, morphological, semantic, and occasionally even syntactic influences -to say nothing of psycho- and sociolinguistic factors. Malkiel is the acknowledged master when it comes to identifying conflicting pressures and showing how they may have interacted to deflect a lexical item from its expected path of development. While the quantity of relevant data he brings to bear on each problem studied can approach the overwhelming, he is invariably eager to extract general theoretical principles from each solution proposed¹⁰⁹. The paragraph to follow represents the barest sampling of etymological solutions he has championed in the 1980s.

OSp. lueñe «far» fell out of use owing to phonotactic awkwardness, with luengo «long» following it into oblivion. The gaps created were filled by lexos «more widely» and largo

––––––––   186   ––––––––

«abundant, large» (290). With the help of Catalan evidence, Malkiel argues that OSp. pora «for», with equal stress on both syllables, evolved into para, so as to head off any possibilty of confusion with por (292). Abuelo «grandfather» descends from the Latin root AU-«grandfather» + diminutive -OLU (as reflected in hijuelo «little boy») [294]. OSp. ledo «merry, cheerful» ceased to be used since adjectival roots of the form CVC- had come to be associated with derogatory meanings (295; reaction by Stagg in 349). Tatarabuelo «greatgreat-grandfather» shows influence of Lat. TER «thrice», not tras «behind, after» as Corominas had thought (296). Almuerzo «lunch» reflects a blend of MORDĒRE «to bite» with almueza «that which fits in the hands», a word of Celtic origin (297, 300). Formally similar words such as SPLENDĒRE «to shine»/ EXPANDERE «to expand»/ EXPENDERE «to weigh out» (298), FERRE «to carry»/ FERRE «to wound» (310), and NŌDUS «knot»/ NUPTIAE «wedding»/ NURUS «daughter-in-law»/ NUX «nut» (320) may repeatedly influence each other's development despite lack of semantic affinity. Spanish lacks *alentar «to slow up», a potential derivative of lento «slow», since there already exists another verb of that form belonging to an entirely different word family (cf. alentar «to encourage») [299]. Estribillo «refrain», derived from estribo «stirrup», acquired its literary denotation through a calque on an Arabic term (301). Among Old Spanish reflexes of SYNAGŌGA, Malkiel found sinoga, senoga, snoga, esnoga, and sinoa (302). OSp. trocir «to cross» descends from TRĀDŪCERE, with pressure from OSp. deçir «to descend» (303). Acosar «to pursue» was not derived from coso «closed in area», but rather descends directly from *ACCURSĀRE (304). Colmena «beehive» reflects CRUMĒNA «type of bag», of the sort beekeepers might place over the hive while collecting honey (306). OSp. deçir «to descend» echoes DISCĒDERE «to depart», with influence of several other Latin verbs. Deçir was doomed by late medieval sibilant devoicing, which caused dezir «to say» to become indistinguishable from it (309). Villancico «carol» reflects earlier *villance < *UĪLLĀNICĒ, coined by analogy to RŌMĀNICĒ/UASCONICĒ (311). Corzo «roe deer» and escuerzo «toad» both go back ultimately to a verbal derivative of CURTUS «short» (313). On the model of AUIA «grandmother» and NEPTIA «granddaughter», speakers coined *NOUIA (> novia «newly married woman») and CONUORTIA (> OSp. combleça «concubine») [314]. Trasegar «to move about, to decant wine» is related to It. trafficare «to deal in», both coming from *TRANSFAECĀRE, a derivative of FAEX «dregs» (317). Correrse «to be embarrassed» echoes CORRIGERE «to set straight, amend», rather than CURRERE «to run» (319). Pudiente «stinking» survived the loss of its base verb pudir «to stink», ultimately crossing with pudiente «powerful» to produce an adjective suggesting «stinking rich», while pudiendo «being able», instead of expected pudiendo, may reflect influence of pudir on poder «to be able» (321). SUPERBUS «haughty» should have given Sp. *sobiervo, but was influenced by abstract soberbia «haughtiness» < SUPERBIA. The awkward phonological form and semantic emptiness of the apparent «suffix» -espe led to substitution of OSp. orespe «goldsmith» (< AURIFICE) by a semantically extended platero «silversmith» (325).

Marchand/Baldwin (326) derived OSp. echan «cupbearer» from echar «to pour» with the aid of -an(o), a solution that fell short of convincing Malkiel (318). Marcos Álvarez (327) proposed an Anglo-French origin for sangría (cf. Fr. sang gris), a word first attested in -of all places- late 18th-century Louisiana. Marcos Marín (328, 329) traced OSp. mañero/mañería, juridical terms denoting legal obligation, to a Celto-Latin root.

After Corominas and Malkiel, the most active etymologist working on Spanish in recent years has been Harri Meier (250, 251, 252, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337). I regret to report that solutions advocated by that scholar are, as a rule, difficult to take seriously owing to idiosyncratic features of his approach. Programmatically excluding the possibility of borrowings from pre-Roman or Germanic languages, lexical blends, metaphorical extensions of meaning, and other such well attested phenomena, he proposes Latin etyma for virtually all Spanish words (e. g., abacero «grocer» < *SUBĀVERSĀRIUS [332]; izquierdo «left» < *EXQUADRIUS [337]). The etyma suggested are, in the large majority of cases, unrecorded, morphologically implausible affixal variants of known Latin words. Meier routinely declines to offer supporting argumentation for the hypothetical bases so posited, presumably believing that merely proposing them is sufficient to convince

––––––––   187   ––––––––

the reader. Since the phonetic and semantic fit between etymon and reflex is almost always imperfect, sporadic sound changes and bizarre alterations of meaning are arbitrarily assumed to have operated. Rather than pursue these criticisms further, I refer the reader to the assessments of Craddock (227), Dworkin¹¹⁰, Malkiel (253), and Mondéjar (254).

Mondéjar (338) traced calima/calina «mist, buoy» back to several Greek and Latin roots, while Müller (340) saw joya «jewel» coming from OFr. joi(e) «valuable object»: Patterson (345) divided the 5,000 most common Spanish words according to whether they are inherited, borrowed, or internally created, then analyzed their synchronic properties. Pountain (346), after observing that Spanish has never had a single verb for «become» (devenir is a patent Gallicism), studied the numerous expressions that have served over the centuries to convey that concept (e. g., pararse). Ricard [347] associated marica «effeminate man» to a sparsely attested Greek word, which he claims was borrowed before the 4th century BC. No explanation is offered for c's failure to voice. Sandow (348) proposed a Meier-style etymology for matar «to kill». Stehmeier (350) derived emplear «to employ» from IMPLICĀRE «to involve», offering plausible reasons for the Latin word's failure to evolve regularly to *enchegar. Tovar (352) traced Spanish words for «spit» (for cooking) to a Germanic root. Vallvé (353) argued on textual evidence that Andalucía reflects an Arabic adaptation of Atlantis, absolving the Vandals of all responsibility in the affair. Vázquez assumed an Arabic origin for chumbo/chumbera «prickly pear» (354), as well as for boda «wedding» (355), which in his view had nothing to do with UŌTA «vows». Walsh (356), elaborating on an earlier study by Malkiel, traced despejar «to clear away (obstacles), to clear up (weather)» to two hypothetical Latin verbs whose existence is supported by other Romance evidence. He explained ordeñar «to milk» as a Lusism (357) and cejar «to move back» as a derivative of CESSĀRE «to cease, move back», later influenced by its polar opposite OSp. puxar «to exert force to move ahead» (358). Zamora (359) notes that the Spanish Anglicism mitin originally signified «rowdy meeting», a sense it preserves to this day in the expression dar el mitin.

Some of the most original and promising research of the past decade on lexical development in Spanish has been conducted by Pharies, who -following up on an idea tossed off by Malkiel over two decades ago- has discovered that many of the over 400 words believed to be spontaneous «expressive creations» by Corominas are in fact derived from identifiable bases and subjected to abstract rules of word formation, just like most other words. In a string of articles and a major book (364), he has posited templates, which transform lexical items so as to make them conform to certain abstract -and sometimes quite complex- canonical forms (361). Among phonological mechanisms Pharies has encountered in such derivations are apophony, onomatopoeia, phonesthetics, reduplication, and truncation (360, 361). Applying those templates, he has been able to provide convincing etymologies for numerous standard and dialectal words (e. g., ajilimójili «garlic and pepper sauce», chichirimoche «false hopes», pipiritaña «cane flute», titiritar «to tremble») whose origins were heretofore opaque. He has recently tried his method out on words formed with the so-called sufijos átonos, with encouraging results (365)¹¹¹.

García de la Fuente (366) studied borrowings from Biblical Latin in works of Berceo and the Poema de Alexandre. Wright (367) attributed the existence of learned vocabulary not to late borrowing from Latin, but rather to lexical diffusion: Cultismos for him are popular words that certain sound changes never affected (this interpretation is repeated in 89). Bustos Tovar (368) studied Latinisms borrowed into Spanish in the 15th century, a period during which their status changed from that of oddity to acceptability in speech. Stefnelli (370) detected far-reaching parallelisms between Spanish and French appropriation of Latin lexical material, raising the intriguing possibility of transfer of Latinisms from one Romance language to another. Hartman (371) advocated a special category for words that seemingly escaped the operation of only a single phonological change and recommends testing the lexical diffusion hypothesis on slices of Romance material.

Zulema's pamphlet (372) listing Spanish Arabisms will be of little if any use to the specialist, but may please the curious layman. Maíllo (373) analyzed 260 Arabisms introduced into Spanish between 1300

––––––––   188   ––––––––

and 1514. Vásquez/Herrera (374) treated the Hispanization of Medieval Latin medical terms borrowed through the medium of Arabic, making observations useful for the study of Arabisms in general. Marcos Marín (375) insisted that Arabisms in the three major Hispano-Romance languages must be studied together. Menocal (376), after scolding Romanists for resistance to admitting the importance of oriental influence, advanced Arabic etyma for matar «to kill», usted «you» (which she traces to Ar. ustad «professor», occasionally used as a general term of respect), and OSp. trobar «to find, to compose poetry». Malkiel's «editorial postscript» (377) contains some interesting observations on the phonetic irregularity of AFFLĀRE > hallar «to find». Torreblanca contends that certain Romance words in Arabic documents from «reconquered» Toledo which Galmés had called Mozarabisms are in effect Castilianisms (379).

Vallejo (380) chanced upon 15 original Gallicisms in late 18th-c. Spanish magazines, while Verdonk (381, 382) has identified a small number of French and Italian words that entered the Spanish of Flanders during the period of Spanish domination and soon penetrated the peninsular standard.

After observing that some Italianisms entered Spanish through the medium of Catalan, Nelson studied the arresting phenomenon of Spanish words coming to be used with the meaning of their Italian cognates (383). Montes (384) traced certain Spanish American regionalisms to Greek roots.

León (385) saw Nahuatlisms that penetrated into peninsular Spanish as useful guideposts for cultural history.

Terrado's detailed scrutiny (386) of a 1380 document from southwest Andalusia yielded a higher than expected number of Leonesisms and Lusisms.

Billick and Dworkin's useful repertory of glossaries, vocabularies, and word lists based on editions of medieval texts, contains over 500 entries (60 based on the Cid alone). Appearing first as a series of journal articles (387), it was later expanded and published in book form (388).

Abad (389) insisted that history of the literary tongue ought to be a well defined subdiscipline within Spanish historical linguistics, while Lázaro (390) advocated creation of a «diachronic poetics». Lapesa (392) reviewed the rivalry between competing linguistic norms in Alfonsine Spanish, with special attention to apocope, a phenomenon that has fascinated him for decades.

García Larragueta (393) has provided a good edition of the text containing the Glosas Emilianenses, reporting accurately on earlier scholars' observations. Wright (394) has offered a new interpretation of his own, namely that the glosses were prepared phrasebook-style for a Catalan or French visitor eager to pronounce Latin in the Riojan manner. Straka (395) assessed arguments for different datings of the Silos glosses, finally assigning them to the mid-11th century. Alarcos (396) offers some sober comments on various aspects of early Spanish glosses, couched in a style easily accessible to the nonspecialist.

Väänänen (397) expertly reviewed linguistic features of the «Itinerarium Egeriae», assigning the text, written in «cristianorromance», to late 4th-c. northwestern Spain. Molho (398) posited an Arabic «graphic substrate» to account for the odd spelling conventions employed in the «Auto de los reyes magos».

In summary, the 1980s have witnessed major progress in many if not most of the subfields that constitute our discipline. Nonetheless, numerous questions remain open, while others will require us to gather more data before they can be properly formulated.

Having surveyed in some detail recent and current trends, we are perhaps entitled to venture a few predictions for the 1990s. For historical phonology, one foresees further discoveries supporting ultimate northern provenience of features associated with southern peninsular Spanish, more evidence coming to light in support of early emergence of those features, enhanced attention -perhaps aided by computer models- to the relative chronology of major phonological innovations, and more precise understanding of the effects of palatal consonants on preceding vowels.

In morphology, we may look forward to important discoveries bearing on both morphophonology and morphosyntax, especially in regard to the verbal system. In syntax, a field traditionally neglected in historical work, we may witness application of contemporary

––––––––   189   ––––––––

theoretical models to certain difficult problems, along with greater emphasis on theme/ rheme relations as motivation for certain syntactic changes.

In semantics, more work is needed on the ways in which verbal tenses and moods convey their characteristic shades of meaning, with heightened attention to changes in relations among, say, the future and conditional tenses, on the one hand, and the various tenses of the subjunctive, on the other. In lexical studies, the origins of numerous words await compelling explanations, the traditional reasons given for the failure of certain words (i. e., cultismos) to suffer changes that should have affected them are under attack, and new insights are being gained into why once vital words may suddenly wither.

All these issues are sure to be debated, along with others impossible to discern from our current vantage point. In short, all indications are that we are entering an exciting decade.

Items marked with «*» were not available in any of the libraries where part of the preparation for this survey was carried out (Library of Congress, plus libraries of Georgetown University, the University of Chicago, and Washington University [St. Louis]). Consequently, they were not read by its author and are not discussed in the foregoing essay. Though most of the references cited were culled from sources other than the MLA's International Bibliography of Books and Articles on the Modern Languages and Literatures, MLA journal acronyms are employed throughout. Full journal titles may be discovered alongside acronyms in the «Master List of Periodicals in Acronym Order», conveniently placed at the beginning of each year's MLA International Bibliography, as well as in the MLA Directory of Periodicals.

TESTIMONIAL AND PROCEEDINGS VOLUMES

Actas Menéndez Pidal = Actas del coloquio hispano-alemán Ramón Menéndez Pidal. Eds. Wido Hempel and Dietrich Briesemeister. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1982.

Actas Hispanistas = Actas del VIII Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas. Ed. A. David Kossof et al. 2 vols. Madrid: Istmo, 1986.

Actas Cáceres = Actas del I Congreso Internacional sobre la Historia de la Lengua Española. (Cáceres, 1987). Eds. M. Ariza et al. 2 vols. Madrid: Arco, 1988.

Actes Aix = Actas du XVIIème Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes. (9 vols. Aix-en-Provence: UP, 1985.

Actas Trèves = Actas du XVIIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes. University de Trèves (Trier). Ed. Dieter Kremer. 7 vols. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1989.

Berkeley Linguistics Society = Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Eds. Monica Maccaulay et al. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 1982.

Estudios Lapesa = Lapesa, Rafael. Estudios de historia lingüística española. Madrid: Paraninfo, 1985.

Estudis Sanchis = Estudis en memòria del professor Manuel Sanchis Guarner. 2 vols. Valencia: UP, 1984.

Estudis Aramon = Estudis de llengua i literatura catalanes oferts a R. Aramon i Serra en el seu setantè aniversari. 4 vols. Barcelona: Curial, 1979-84.

Etudes Horrent = Etudes de philologie romane et histoire littéraire offertes à Jules Horrent à l'occasion de son soixantième anniversaire. Eds. Jean Marie D'Heur and Nicoletta Cherubim. Liège: GEDIT, 1980.

Festschrift Hubschmid = Festschrift für Johannes Hubschmid zum 65. Geburtstag. Beiträge zur allgemeines, indogermanischen and romanischen Sprachwissenschaft. Eds. Otto Winkelmann and Maria Braisch. Bern/München: Francke, 1982.

GURT =Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1988. Ed. Thomas J. Walsh. Washington, DC: Georgetown UP, 1989.

Historical Semantics = Historical Semantics and Historical Word Formation. Ed. Jacek Fisiak. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1985.

Homenaje Galmés = Homenaje a Álvaro Galmés de Fuentes. 3 vols. Oviedo: UP and Madrid: Gredos, 1985-87.

Homenaje Zamora = Homenaje a Alonso Zamora Vicente. Madrid: Castalia, 1988. Vol. 1.

Homenaje Barrenechea = Homenaje a Ana María Barrenechea. Eds. Lía Schwartz Lerner and Isaías Lerner. Madrid: Castalia, 1984.

Hommage Pottier = Hommage à Bernard Pottier. 2 vols. Paris: Klincksieck, 1988.

Introducción plural = Introducción plural a la gramática

––––––––   190   ––––––––

histórica. Ed. Francisco Marcos Marín. Madrid: Cincel, 1982.

Perspectives = Perspectives on Historical Linguistics. Eds. Winfred P. Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1982.

Philologica Alvar = Philologica Hispaniensia in honorem Manuel Alvar. 4 vols. Madrid: Gredos, 1983-87.

Scritti Pellegrini = Scritti linguistici in onore di Giovan Battista Pellegrini. Ed. Paola Benincà et al. 2 vols. Pisa: Pacini, 1983.

Serta Lázaro = Serta Philologiea F. Lázaro Carreter. Natalem diem sexagesimum celebranti dicata. 2 vols. Madrid: Cátedra, 1983.

Studia Coseriu = Logos semantikos. Studia linguistica in honorem Eugenio Coseriu. Eds. Horst Geckeler et al. 5 vols. Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter and Madrid: Gredos, 1981.

Studies = Studies in Romance Linguistics. Ed. Osvaldo Jaeggli and Carmen Silva-Corvalán. Dordrecht: Foris, 1986.

GENERAL WORKS/ INTRODUCTIONS/ MANUALS

Introductory textbooks

1. Bergquist, M. Fräncille. Ibero-Romance. Comparative Phonology and Morphology. Washington, DC: UP of America, 1982.

2. Burt, John R. From Phonology to Philology: An Outline of Descriptive and Historical Linguistics. Lanham, MD: UP of America, 1980.

3. Lathrop, Thomas A. The Evolution of Spanish: An Introductory Historical Grammar. Newark, DE: Juan de la Cuesta, 1980.

4. ___. Curso de gramática histórica española. Barcelona: Ariel, 1984.

5. Lloyd, Paul M. From Latin to Spanish. Vol. 1: Historical Phonology and Morphology of the Spanish Language. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1987.

6. Resnick, Melvyn C. Introducción a la historia de la lengua española. Washington, DC: Georgetown UP, 1981.

7. Landau de Cevallos, María del Carmen. Historia de la lengua española. Potomac, MD: Scripta Humanistica, 1985.

8. Lapesa, Rafael. Historia de la lengua española. 8th ed./ 9th ed. Madrid: Gredos, 1980/ 1981.

9. Cano Aguilar, Rafael. El español a través de los tiempos. Madrid: Arco, 1988.

10. *Mańczak, Witold. Fonética y morfología histórica del español. Kraków: UP, 1980.

11. Liberatori, Filomena. Nozioni di storia delta lingua e di grammatica storica spagnola. Napoli: Libreria Sapere, 1986.

12. Messner, Dieter and Hans-Joachim Müller. Ibero-romanisch: Einführung in Sprache and Literatur. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985.

Old Spanish

13. Malkiel, Yakov. «Spanish Language». Dictionary of the Middle Ages. 12 vols. New York: Scribner, 1982-88. Vol. 11, 390-405.

14. Lope Blanch, Juan M. El habla de Diego de Ordaz. México, DF: UP, 1985.

External history/Foreign influences

15. Green, John N. «Spanish». The World's Major Languages. Ed. Bernard Comrie. London/ Sydney: Croom Helm, 1985. 237-41.

16. Mondéjar Cumpián, José. «Castellano» y «español». Granada: Don Quijote, 1981.

17. Neira Martínez, Jesús. «Lenguas y áreas lingüísticas peninsulares: El proceso dialéctico de su constitución». Archivum 31-32 (1981-82): 593-614.

18. Penny, Ralph J. Patterns of Language Change in Spain. London: Westfield College, 1987.

19. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Sobre la antigua frontera lingüística castellanonavarra». JHP 9 (1985): 105-19.

20. Winkelman, Otto. «Vom Dialekt zur Nationalsprache. Die Entwicklung des Kastilischen während der Reconquista»: Entstehung von Sprachen und Völkern. Glotto- and ethnogenetische Aspekte europäischer Sprachen. Akten des 6. Symposions über Sprachkontakt in Europa, Mannheim, 1984. Ed. P. Sture Ureland. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1985. 193-208.

21. Trask, Larry and Roger Wright. «El "vascorrománico"». Verba 15 (1988): 361-73.

PHONOLOGY/ PHONETICS

General

22. Malkiel, Yakov. «Alternatives to the Classic Dichotomy Family Tree/ Wave Theory? The Romance Evidence». Language Change. Eds. Irmengard Rauch and Gerald F. Carr. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1983. 192-256.

23. Penny, Ralph J. «The Peninsular Expansion of Castilian». BHS 60 (1983): 333-38.

24. Pensado, Carmen. El orden histórico de los procesos fonológicos. Salamanca: UP, 1983.

25. ___. Cronología relativa del castellano. Salamanca: UP, 1984.

26. Malkiel, Yakov. «An Experimental Connubium Between Modernity and Traditionalism in Spanish Phonology». RPh 41 (1989): 408.

Vowels

27. Anderson, James M. «Resistance to Syntagmatic Influence of the Vowel /a/ in Spanish». Folia Linguistica Historica 4 (1983): 241-45.

28. Montgomery, Thomas. «Vocales cerradas antietimológicas en español». ZRP 99 (1983): 355-66.

29. Pensado, Carmen. «Sobre los resultados de las vocales velares latinas precedidas de yod inicial». Revista de Filología Románica 1 (1983): 109-35.

Diphthongs

30. Terry, Robert M. «Open Syllabification and Diphthongization of /è/ and /ò/ in Preliterary Spanish». Word 31 (1980): 199-215.

31. Craddock, Jerry R. «Descending Diphthongs and the Regular Preterite in Hispano-Romance». BHS 60 (1983): 1-14.

32. Malkiel, Yakov. «The Fluctuating Intensity of a Sound Law: Some Vicissitudes of Latin ĕ and ŏ in Romance». RPh 34 (1980): 48-63.

33. ___. «Contrastive Patterns of Overextension of Diphthongs in Old Spanish». RPh 36 (1982): 18-28.

34. ___. «Old Spanish Resistance to Diphthongization or Previous Vowel Lengthening?» Language 60 (1984): 70-114.

35. ___. «Spanish Diphthongization and Accentual Structure (in Diachronic Perspective)». Diachronica 1 (1984): 217-41.

Consonants

Stops

36. Malkiel, Yakov. «Sound Correspondences and Levels of Transmission: Problems in the Fluctuating Representation of Medial /kt(j)/, /pt(i)/ in Hispano-Romance». In Honor of Ilse Lehiste. Eds. Robert Channon and Linda Shockey. Dordrecht: Foris, 1987. 451-63.

37. ___. «The Development of Three Late Latin Consonant Clusters in Old Spanish and Old Portuguese: ARDEŌ, *PERDIŌ, HORDEOLU, VIR(I)DIA; GRUNDIŌ, ĪRĀ-, VERĒCUNDIA: AUDIŌ, GAUDIU». NM 85 (1984): 7-18.

38. Hartman, Steven Lee. «On Opening Black Boxes: Latin -nge- and -ng'l- in Hispano-Romance». Selected Papers from the XIIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages. Eds. Larry D. King and Catherine A. Maley. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins, 1985. 149-62.

39. Moreno Fernández, F. «B y V en interior de palabra (posición no intervocálica) durante los siglos XIII, XIV y XV» RFE 67 (1987): 35-48.

40. Malkiel, Yakov. «Una correspondencia fonética latina/ luso-española débilmente perfilada: -RB- > - RV-». NM 88 (1987): 109-25.

41. Penny, Ralph. «Secondary Consonant Groups in Castilian». JHP 7 (1983): 135-40.

Fricatives (including Sibilants)

42. Otero, Carlos P. «Sobre la pronunciación del romance hispano medieval»: Homenaje Galmés, vol. 2, 151-64.

43. Sánchez Álvarez, Mercedes. «En torno a d y del español medieval». XVI Congrés Internacional de Lingüística i Filologia Romàniques. Actes. Ed. Aina Moll. 2 vols. Palma de Mallorca: Moll, 1982-85. Vol. 2, 53-59.

44. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Las oclusivas sordas hispanolatinas: El testimonio árabe». Anuario de Letras 24 (1986): 5-25.

45. «La "f" prerromana y la vasca en su relación con el español antiguo». RPh 37 (1984): 273-81.

46. ___. «La "s" hispano-latina: el testimonio árabe». RPh 35 (1982): 447-63.

47. Abad Nebot, Francisco. «Seseo y ceceo como problema de lingüística general». Introducción plural, 88-95.

48. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Las sibilantes sonoras del oeste de España, ¿arcaísmos o innovaciones fonéticas?» Revista de Filología Románica 1 (1983): 61-108.

49. ___. «La "s" sonora prevocálica en el español moderno». Thesaurus 41 (1986): 59-69.

50. Malkiel, Yakov. «La teoría de las sibilantes propuesta por Rufino José Cuervo: noventa años de discusiones». NRFH 35 (1987 [-88]): 5-36.

51. *Frago Gracia, Juan A. «Nueva contribución a la historia del reajuste fonológico del español moderno». Cuadernos de Filología, Studia Lingüística Hispánica II, 2 (1981): 53-74.

52. ___. «El reajuste fonológico del español moderno en su preciso contexto histórico: sobre la evolución /, / > /x/». Serta Lázaro, vol. 1, 219-30.

53. ___. «Materiales para la historia de la aspiración de /-s/ implosiva en las hablas andaluzas». Lingüística Española Actual 5 (1983): 153-71.

54. ___. «De los fonemas medievales /ŝ, / al interdental fricativo // del español moderno». Philologica Alvar, vol. 2, 205-16.

55. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Cronología relativa de la caída de la /s/ implosiva»: Actas del II Congreso Internacional sobre el español de América. Ed. José G. Moreno de Alba. México, DF: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Autónoma de México, 1986.

56. Walsh, Thomas J. «The Historical Origin of Syllable-Final Aspirated /s/ in Dialectal Spanish». JHP 9 (1986): 231-46.

57. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Sobre la evolución de sibilantes implosivas en español». JHP 11 (1987): 151-73, 223-49.

58. Seklaoui, Diana. «The Role of Context in Language Change: Evidence from Andalusian Spanish». GURT, 280-92.

59. ___. Change and Compensation: Parallel Weakening of [s] in Italian, French, and Spanish. New York/Bern/Frankfurt: Lang, 1989.

60. Muñoz Garrigós, José. «Sobre unas rimas anómalas en sibilante». Homenaje Galmés, vol. 2, 131-50.

61. Mondéjar, José. «Disquisiciones históricas y metodológicas sobre la interpretación de los datos en el estudio del "şeşeo"». RLiR 49 (1985): 271-86.

62. *Díez de Revenga, P. «Problemas de sibilantes en documentos murcianos del siglo XIII». Cuadernos de Filología 2 (1986): 65-74.

63. Pascual, José A. «Notas sobre las confusiones medievales de las sibilantes»: Lingüística Española Actual 10 (1988): 125-31.

64. Díaz Montesinos, Francisco. «Sobre las sibilantes en el Fuero de Huete». RFE 67 (1987): 287-321.

65. Douvier, Elizabeth. «Les anomalies graphiques du MS. 1182 du "Libro de los gatos". Sont-elles les indices d'une évolution du système consonantique castillan?» Cahiers de Linguistique Hispanique Médiévale 10 (1985): 39-70.

66. *Alarcos Llorach, Emilio. «De nuevo sobre los cambios del siglo XVI». Actas Cáceres, vol. 1, 47-59.

67. Torreblanca, Máximo. «Latín basium, castellano beso, catalán bes, portugués beijo». HR 56 (1988): 343-48.

68. *Cierbide Martinena, Ricardo. «Fonética y fonología diacrónicas de las articulaciones sibilantes en la documentación medieval navarra: estado de la cuestión». Actas Cáceres, vol. 1, 83-90.

Liquids

69. Lázaro Mora, Fernando A. «RL > LL en la lengua literaria». RFE 60 (1978-80): 267-83.

70. Rohlfs, Gerhard. «Span. año (caballo): ein phonetisches Problem». Studia Coseriu, vol. 5, 359-64.

71. Torreblanca, Máximo. «El paso de /1/ a /r/ postconsonántica en español». Hispania 72 (1989): 692-99.

Glides

72. Craddock, Jerry R. «The Contextual Varieties of Yod: An Attempt at Systematization». Festschrift for Jacob Ornstein: Studies in General Linguistics and Sociolinguistics. Eds. Edward L. Blansitt, Jr. and Richard V. Teschner. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1980. 61-68.