How numerals came to count for something: On the 'numeric turn' in sixteenth-century grammar writing
In the present day, numerals figure prominently in the lived experience of (Western) foreign language learners and professional linguists alike, a prominence that is mostly taken for granted. It may even seem nothing less than obvious, in light of this word class’s high degree of amenability to analogy-based analysis, which makes it attractive from a foreign-language-didactic point of view: indeed, their propensity for readily discernible form-meaning patterns makes numerals highly ‘teachable’. Nonetheless, in didactic grammars from Graeco-Roman antiquity to the Italian Renaissance, interest in numerals was scarce at best, when not entirely lacking. This state of affairs seems to have changed quite abruptly from the early sixteenth century onward, a development set into motion by the influential Latin grammarian Antonio de Nebrija (1444–1522), a Spanish humanist better known today for having written the first grammar of Spanish. So far, this sixteenth-century ‘numeric turn’ – or the millennia-long lack of grammaticographical interest preceding it – seems to have attracted little scholarly attention. Therefore, it is the aim of this talk to present a broad view of the relevant evolutions, going from Graeco-Roman antiquity to the spread across Europe of Renaissance humanism (which includes humanist grammar) and the different branches of grammatisation that grew from it: (1) the ever-growing flow of grammars of the ‘learned’ languages, especially Latin, Greek and Hebrew; (2) the gradual appearance of grammars of European vernaculars such as German and French; and (3) the rise of new traditions of grammar in the colonies. In this, due attention will be given to the role of Nebrija and the interesting earlier contribution by the Italian humanist grammarian Niccolò Perotii.
Publication Details
- Journal
- Lirias (KU Leuven)
- Published
- 2024-08-29
- Primary Topic
- Historical Linguistics and Language Studies
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00