「#5656. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine をめぐる議論の略史」 ([2024-10-21-1]) の続編．2重属格 (double_genitive) の研究史をゆっくりと追いかけている．前回の続きの箇所として，Jespersen (§§1.52 [pp. 15--16]) を引用しよう．
1.52. Kellner recognizes three historical stages:
I. a castell of hers (from 14th c., Chaucer, &c.).
II. a knight of the dukes (not yet Chaucer, frequent in Caxton)
III. that berde of thyne (rare in Caxton, frequent later).
But he overlooks the fact that stage II is really found just as early as I (see Chaucer G 368 an officere of the prefectes), nor is it easy to see why stages I and II should not have sprung into existence at the same time, while there is nothing strange in the later occurrence of III. But Kellner rightly lays stress on the fact that only a few of the constructions admit the partitive explanation; he therefore suggests the name 'pseudo-partitive genitive', but both he and other scholars evidently think that those applications which cannot be explained partitively have developed through analogical extension starting fro the partitive use.
The partitive explanation is the only one recognized by Professor Sonnenschein, who says, §184: 'In sentences like He is a friend of John's there is a noun understood: of John's means of John's friends, so that the sentence is equivalent to He is one of John's friends. Here of means out of the number of.
Sonnenschein does not mention constructions like that long nose of his; but even if we omit them for the moment, the explanation cannot be strictly maintained, for an enemy of ours cannot be the equivalent of an enemy of our enemies, which would be taken in a different sense, just as an enemy of the French is not to be explained as an enemy of the French enemies. And if I say he is a friend of mine, I need not at all imply that I have more than the one friend, though of course it will often be understood in this way. To express the partitive sense we have the unambiguous expression one of my friends. There is a difference between the two sentences 'The General and some of his friends left the house' and 'The General and some friends of his left the house': while the former implies that he had other friends, the latter means only: 'the General and some people who were on friendly terms with him'.
If Einenkel is right that the English expression a friend of his is due to direct imitation of French, where he has found examples like un chevalier des siens, the ultimate beginning of the idiom is partitive, as shown by the French plural. Unfortunately there seems to be no English example old enough to go back to a period when it was possible to distinguish between the singular and the plural of the pronoun: in Old English it would have been, for instance, an dohtor of minum with the plural, and therefore, necessarily, a partitive sense, or an dohtor of minre with the singular, and therefore not partitive. The modern a daughter of mine may be either, as far as the forms is concerned.
But it is not at all certain that the construction came to England from France: it may just as well have come into existence independently of the French idiom. The construction with the genitive of a substantive, as in a friend of my wife's cannot, at any rate, be due directly to French influence, for the French have no such genitive.
この節の議論の要点を書き出すと，次のようになるだろう．
1. 部分属格説が主流
・ Kellner は3つの歴史的段階を指摘
・ しかし，Kellner の分析には疑問も残る
・ 多くの研究者が部分属格の用法から他の用法が類推的に発展したと考えている
2. 部分属格説の限界
・ Sonnenschein は部分属格説のみを認めている
・ しかし，この説明はすべての用法には適用できない
・ a friend of mine の mine は必ずしも複数の友人を含意しない
3. その他の論点
・ フランス語からの影響説も
・ 一方，独立して発展した可能性は排除できない
・ そもそも a friend of my wife's のように of の後ろに代名詞ではなく名詞句が来る構文に関してはフランス語の影響はあり得ない
・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part III. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954.
連日の話題だが，改めて2重属格 (double_genitive) について．
Jespersen (§§1.51--1.59 [pp. 15--23]) に "An old friend of Tom's" と題する詳しい考察がある．とりわけ冒頭の 1.51 では，この表現に関する研究史上の諸説が簡便に紹介されていて有用である．
1.51. These constructions are treated here, because the genitive is here as in the preceding sections a primary; but here, in contradistinction to the constructions mentioned hitherto, a possessive may be used in the same way, for we may say, "an old friend of yours | that old friend of yours." Much has been written on these constructions, which are so characteristic of English, see E. Beckmann, ESt 8.412 (who explains them from an imaginary and seemingly impossible combination a friend mine); L. Kellner in his ed. of Caxton B. XIX; Einenkel, Anglia 33.504; Trampe Bødtker, Christiania Vidsk. Selsk. 1908 no. 6.34; cf also my own GS §194, PG 111, S.P.E. Tract XXV. This tract was occasioned by Mr. Fowler's mention (in MEU 399), where he ranks that nose of his with certain other constructions as 'plainly illogical' and says: 'a friend of mine, i.e. among my friends, but surely not that nose of his, i.e. among his noses; so the logic-chopper is fain to correct or damn; but even he is likely in unguarded moments to let the forbidden phrases slip out'; so even Mr. Fowler reckons it among recognized idioms, sturdy indefensibles, as he terms them. The belief that there is something illogical in this idiom evidently rests on the assumption that of here has to be taken in its partitive sense, one of or among several. But of has several other meanings---in the N.E.D. they are entered under no less than sixty-three numbers---and it may be worth while to examine if another explanation than the partitive might not be admissible.
昨日の記事 ([2024-10-20-1]) でみたように，Jespersen は，以前の著書 Growth and Structure of the English Language では，この表現が部分属格の用法から派生したものとみていた．しかし，上の引用ではそうではない可能性に言及しており，実際にこの先の議論を読み進めていくと，そうではないと結論するに至っているのだ．この変節は何故だろうか．
2重属格表現は学説史の観点からも興味深い．
・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part III. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954.
・ Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 10th ed. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1982 [1905].
連日 a friend of mine のタイプの2重属格 (double_genitive) の表現に注目している．
・ 「#5647. a friend of mine --- 2重属格」 ([2024-10-12-1])
・ 「#5653. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine の2つの意味的特徴」 ([2024-10-18-1])
・ 「#5654. a friend of mine vs. one of my friends」 ([2024-10-19-1])
従来，of mine が果たしている機能について，部分用法 (partitive) と見る向きと同格用法 (appositive) と見る向きがあった．前者であれば "a friend of my friends" と，後者であれば "a friend, who is mine" とパラフレーズできる．後者の解釈をいぶかしく思う向きもあるかもしれないが，昨日の記事 ([2024-10-19-1]) で紹介した "this hand of mine" のような表現を説明するには都合がよい．
学史上，2つの解釈をめぐって議論がなされてきたが，例えば Jespersen （§194 [pp. 173--74]) は，部分用法を前提としつつも，同格用法にも言及している．全体として歯切れの悪い説明だ．以下に引用しよう．
194. Speaking of the genitive, we ought also to mention the curious use in phrases like 'a friend of my brother's'. This began in the fourteenth century with such instances as 'an officere of the prefectes' (Chaucer G 368), where officers might be supplied (= one of the prefect's officers) and 'if that any neighebor of mine (= any of my neighbours) Wol nat in chirche to my wyf enclyne' (ib. B 3091). In the course of a few centuries, the construction became more and more frequent, so that it has now long been one of the fixtures of the English language. A partitive sense is still conceivable in such phrases as 'an olde religious unckle of mine' (Sh.. As III, 3, 362) = one of my uncles, though it will be seen that it is impossible to analyse it as being equal to 'one of my old religious uncles'. But it is not at all certain that of here from the first was partitive; it is rather to be classed with the appositional use in the three of us = 'the three who are we'; the City of Rome = 'the City which is Rome'. The construction is used chiefly to avoid the juxtaposition of two pronouns, 'this hat of mine, that ring of yours' being preferred to 'this my hat, that your ring', or of a pronoun and a genitive, as in 'any ring of Jane's', where 'any Jane's ring' or 'Jane's any ring' would be impossible; compare also 'I make it a rule of mine', 'this is no fault of Frank's', etc. In all such cases the construction was found so convenient that it is no wonder that it should soon be used extensively where no partitive sense is logically possible, as in 'nor shall [we] ever see That face of hers againe' (Shakespeare, Lear I, 1, 267), 'that flattering tongue of yours' (As IV, 1, 195), 'If I had such a tyre, this face of mine Were full as lovely as is this of hers' (Gent. IV, 4, 190), 'this uneasy heart of ours' (Wordsworth), 'that poor old mother of his', etc. When we now say 'he has a house of his own', no one could think of this as meaning 'he has one of his own houses'.
2重属格は，部分用法を起源としながらも，歴史の途中から同格用法を発達させてきたようにみえる．後者の発達の契機は何だったのか，今後くわしく調べていきたい．
・ Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 10th ed. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1982 [1905].
昨日の記事「#5653. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine の2つの意味的特徴」 ([2024-10-18-1]) に引き続き，double_genitive あるいは post-genitive の意味に迫る．今回は a friend of mine とその代替表現とされる one of my friends との意味論的な差異があるかどうかに注目する．
Quirk et al. (17.46) によれば，両表現は通常は同義だが，文脈によっては異なる含意 (entailment) を帯びるという．
The two constructions a friend of his father's and one of his father's friends are usually identical in meaning. One difference, however, is that the former construction may be used whether his father had one or more friends, whereas the latter necessarily entails more than one friend. Thus:
Mrs Brown's daughter [8] Mrs Brown's daughter Mary [9] Mary, (the) daughter of Mrs Brown [10] Mary, a daughter of Mrs Brown's [11]
[8] implies 'sole daughter', whereas [9] and [10] carry no such implication; [11] entails 'not sole daughter'.
Since there is only one composition called the War Requiem by Britten, we have [12] but not [13] or [14]:
The War Requiem of/by Britten (is a splendid work.) [12] *The War Requiem of Britten's [13] *One of Britten's War Requiems [14]
精妙な違いがあるようで興味深い．ところが，ここで最後に述べられている点，および昨日の記事で触れた主要部定性の特徴にも反する用例がある．例えば "that wife of mine", "this war Requiem of Britten's", "this hand of mine", "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's", "that son of yours" などだ．
Quirk et al. は，これらの例を次のように説明する．"this hand of mine" は，ここでは "this one of my (two) hands" の意味ではなく "this part of my body that I call 'hand'" の意味である．また，先行する文脈で一度 "a daughter of Mrs Brown's" が現われていれば，それを参照する際に "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's (that I mentioned)" ほどの意味で使われることがある．さらに，否定的・軽蔑的な意味合いを込めて "that son of yours" などという場合もある．つまり，例外的に決定詞が主要部に付されるケースでは，何らかの（意味論的でなく）語用論的な含意が加えられているということだ．
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
「#5647. a friend of mine --- 2重属格」 ([2024-10-12-1]) に続き，double_genitive あるいは post-genitive と呼ばれる，この妙な表現の意味的特徴を考えてみたい．
Quirk et al. (17.46) によれば意味的特徴は2つある．(1) of の後ろに来る名詞句が定的 (definite) であり人間 (human) であること，(2) 一方，of の前に来る主要部は不定的 (indefinite) であることだ．
. . . It will be observed that the postmodifier must be definite and human:
an opera of Verdi's BUT NOT: *an opera of a composer's an opera of my friend's BUT NOT: *a funnel of the ships
There are conditions that also affect the head of the whole noun phrase. The head must be essentially indefinite: that is, the head must be seen as one of an unspecified number of items attributed to the postmodifier. Thus [1--3] but not [4]:
A friend of the doctor's has arrived. [1] A daughter of Mrs Brown's has arrived. [2] Any daughter of Mrs Brown's is welcome. [3] *The daughter of Mrs Brown's has arrived. [4]
As a consequence of the condition that the head must be indefinite, the head cannot be a proper noun . . . . Thus while we have [5], we cannot have [6] and [7]:
Mrs Brown's Mary [5] *Mary of Mrs Brown [6] *Mary of Mrs Brown's [7]
なるほど a friend of mine のタイプの2重属格表現の各要素を主に定・不定 (definiteness) の観点から分析すると，上記の2つの特徴があることはわかった．だが，考えてみれば，これらは代替表現である one of my friends についても当てはまる意味的特徴である．この2種類の表現が意味的に異ならないとすれば，共存している意義は何なのだろうか．
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
現代英語には奇妙な所有格表現がある．my friend でも one of my friends でもなく，a friend of mine という，もってまわった言い方だ．専門的には2重属格 (double_genitive) と呼ばれる表現である（post-genitive と呼ばれることもある）．
歴史的にみても興味深い構文で，中英語に初めて生起するが，その種は古英語にあったと主張する論者もいる．また，関連する構文として，古英語では不定冠詞と属格代名詞が名詞の前位置に並んで生起するものがあった．現代英語風にいえば *a my friend, *his a man の類いだ．この構文が古英語では許容されていたものの，後に許容されなくなったということは，新しい a friend of mine タイプの構文の出現と関係している可能性がある．
2重属格は，このように英語統語論の歴史でもたびたび注目されてきたが，まだ謎が多く残されている．歴史的に探っていくに当たって，まずこの構文に関して現代英語の事情を把握しておく必要がある．そのために Quirk et al. の該当節を抜き出してみよう．
The 'post-genitive'
5.126 An of-construction can be combined with a genitive to produce a construction known as the POST-GENITIVE (or 'double genitive'). In this construction, the independent genitive acts as prepositional complement following of:
some friends of Jim's ['some of Jim's friends']
that irritating habit of her father's
an invention of Gutenberg's
several pupils of his
But the independent genitive is not in this case elliptical. Rather, the post-genitive contrasts in terms of indefiniteness or unfamiliarity with the normal determinative genitive. Whereas [1] and [2] presuppose definiteness, the presupposition in [1a] and [2a] is one of indefiniteness:
Jim's friend [1] a friend of Jim's [1a] Joseph Haydn's pupil [2] a pupil of Joseph Haydn's [2a]
本ブログでは，2重属格について「#2082. 定着しなかった二重属格 *the knight of his」 ([2015-01-08-1]) でちらっと触れたにすぎない．目下，helwa の Discord コミュニティで盛り上がっている英文法の話題でもあり，今後注目していきたいテーマだ．
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
英語史には，ある変化A→Bが起きた後B→Aという変化によってまた元に戻る現象が見られることがあり，故中尾俊夫先生はしばしばそうした現象をマザーグースの一節になぞらえて「ヨークの殿様」 (Duke of York) と呼ばれた．ヨークの殿様は大勢の兵隊を一度山の上に上げて，それから下ろす．結果を見れば事情は何も変わっていない．しかし，一見無意味に見えるその行動にも何か理由があったはずで，「英語史にそのような変化が見られるときにはその背後にどんな意味があるのか考えなさい．大きな真実が隠れていることがある．」というのが中尾先生の教えであった．
定冠詞を伴う二重属格構造に関する論文の出だしで，宮前 (179) が以上のように述べている．英語史のなかの "Duke of York" の典型例は，「#486. 迂言的 do の発達」 ([2010-08-26-1]) や「#491. Stuart 朝に衰退した肯定平叙文における迂言的 do」 ([2010-08-31-1]) でみた肯定平叙文での do 迂言法の発達と衰退である．16世紀に一度は発達しかけたが17世紀には衰退し，結局，定着するに至らなかった．ほかには，「#819. his 属格」 ([2011-07-25-1]) や「#1479. his 属格の衰退」 ([2013-05-15-1]) の例も挙げられる．
宮前が扱っている二重属格とは a knight of his や this hat of mine のような構造である．現代英語では *a his knight や *this my hat のように冠詞・指示詞と所有格代名詞を隣接させることができず，迂言的な二重属格構造がその代用として機能する．この構造の起源と成立については諸説あるが，a his knight という原型からスタートし，後期中英語に属格代名詞 his が後置され of とともに現われるようになったという説が有力である（宮前，p. 183）．通常，古英語から中英語にかけての属格構造の発達では，属格代名詞が後置されるか of 迂言形に置換されるかのいずれかだったが，二重属格の場合には，その両方が起こってしまったということだ．
二重属格の発達は，14世紀半ばに a man of þair (a man of theirs) のタイプから始まり，名詞の所有者を示す an officer Of the prefectes へも広がった．100年後には，指示詞を伴う this stede of myne のタイプと定冠詞を伴う the fellys of Thomas Bettsons のタイプが現われた．しかし，この4者のうち最後の定冠詞を伴うもののみが衰退し，17世紀中に消えていった．
宮前は，この最後のタイプに関する "Duke of York" の現象を，Dという機能範疇の創発と確立によって一時的に可能となったものの，最終的には「意味的に定冠詞 the をもつ必然性がない」 (192) ために不可能となったものとして分析する．Dという機能範疇の創発と確立は，「#1406. 束となって急速に生じる文法変化」 ([2013-03-03-1]) で触れたように，属格とその代替構造の発達全体に有機的に関わる現象と考えられ，二重属格の発達もその大きな枠組みのなかで捉えるべきだという主張にもつながるだろう（cf. 「#1417. 群属格の発達」 ([2013-03-14-1])）． *
一方，定冠詞タイプの衰退について，宮前は意味的な必然性と説明しているが，これは構文の余剰性と言い換えてもよいかもしれない．your car と端的に表現できるところをわざわざ迂言的に the car of yours と表現する必要はない，という理屈だ（宮前，p. 193）．
"Duke of York" の背後にある大きな真実を探るというのは，確かに英語史の大きな魅力の1つである．
・ 宮前 和代 「英語史のなかの "Duke of York"」『生成言語研究の現在』（池内正幸・郷路拓也（編著）） ひつじ書房，2013年．179--96頁．
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow