2.2. Etymological issues
Among the reasons for the separation of interjections from adverbs are the etymological explanations of the word interiectio. Interiectio was already in use, in Quintilian's works, as a technical term, equivalent to the Greek parenthesis. A deverbal derivate of intericio (‘to throw in between', ‘to intercalate'), the feminine noun interiectio is present in Rhetorica ad Herenium with the meaning "interposition", "intercalation". This etymology (interiectio < intericio) is often contaminated by a confusion with the verb interiacio ("to lie in the middle"). The confusion is explainable if we take into account the paronymic similarity of the two verbs, in an age (postclassical) when verbal paradigms tend to lose their identity, especially if the semantic weight is attributed rather to the prefix than to the base.
The use of the feminine interiectio as a technical term, designating the word class defined as expression by excellence of affects, is explained by Priscian, one of the most famous and quoted grammarians in the antiquity and middle ages, by reference to the verb interiacio:
"interiectio... quae his interiacet" (Institutionum..., lib. XVI, § 6).
|
|
The explanation is to be found in Diomedes:
"quae aliis partibus orationis interiaci et inseri solet" (Ars, lib. I, § De interiectione).
|
|
Donatus, however refers to the correct derivation, from intericio:
"Interiectio est pars orationis interiecta aliis partibus orationis ad exprimendos animi adfectus" (Ars grammatica, §II.6)
|
|
Cledonius, who explicitly declares to follow Donatus' example, offers the same solution:
"Interiectio quid est ? pars orationis : interiectio dicta, quod interponitur ad experimendos tantum animi affectus." (Cledonius, De partibus..., §De interiectione).
|
|
The anonymous commentary on Donatus' grammar (Commentum einsidlense ) from the XIIth – XIIIth centuries underlines the role of interjection as an incidental enounce. The author establishes a link between the Latin word interiectio and the Greek parenthesis, and proposes an extended definition of interjection, meant to explain the interjectional use of other parts of speech when they are "interposed" in order to express affects:
"Igitur interiectio, quae Graece parénthesis vocatur, ab interiacendo nomen sortita est, cum de aliis partibus loquimur, subito inter eas proferimus interiectionem. Unde et aliae partes, quae subita voce proferuntur, interiectioni deputantur, ut pro dolor, pro nefas, deo gratias. Dicitur etiam, ut aiunt, interiectio quasi "interius iacens ratio", dum vox plerumque impraemeditative exterius emergit.
Interiectio dicitur ab interiaciendo, quia, quando de aliis partibus loquimur, erumpimus in interiectivam vocem acti gaudio vel tristitia, metu vel dolore. Interiecta – interposita. Inventa est interiectio ad hos affectus animi exprimendos."
|
|
Other authors have the tendency to explain the syntactic regimen of interjections, as "interpositions", on etymological bases and attribute their expressive force to this feature.
Sergius considers that the syntactic quality of interposition offers the interjections the adequate meaning to forcefully express feelings; by adding interjectional particles, one can efficiently express or disambiguate the emotional state accompanying the communication, toward which sermo (the referential discourse) remains neutral:
"Est etiam interiectio, quae interponitur ad exprimendum animi motum, et plerumque quod exprimere sermo non potest, hoc interiectio explicat. Ut puta si dicamus mortuus est Achilles, utrum laete hoc feras an maeste, adhuc expressisti. Dicis vah mortuus est Achilles, ostendisti quod hoc laete feras. Item dixisti vae mortuus est Achilles, ostendisti quod maeste feras. Ita illud, quod non potuimus explicare integro et alias pleno sermone, adiecta hac particula exprimimus." (Sergius, Explanationum... lib. I).
|
|
Pompeius supports a similar position supports:
"Interiectio dicta est quia interponitur ad exprimendos animi affectus. Si dixeris mortuus est Vergilius, dixisti quidem illum mortuus esse; sed quo affectu hoc pertuleris, non est expressum, nisi interponas illam particulam. Nam si dicas va mortuus est Vergilius, laetantis est; si dicas heu mortuus est Vergilius, dolentis est. Si hic solum dicas, mortuus est, ambiguum est, quo affectu hoc pertuleris. Vides ergo quia haec particula interposita exprimit nobis animi affectus. Nam aliquoties illam ambiguitatem discernit. Ecce dixi tibi et nomina partium et ordinem, et quare ita vocatae sunt, et quare ipso ordine posita sunt." (Commentum Artis Donati).
|
|
The etymology of the word interiectio is meant to justify the necessity to separate within an independent class all linguistic units, which, by having the specific syntactic regimen of intercalation, of being thrown in the middle of the discourse, can efficiently manifest affective states. Interjections have thus the function of disambiguating the attitude of the speaker towards the information transmitted by the referential discourse. They are not simply redundant elements, and their elimination from a given enounce is able to change the nature of the latter.
Copyright©2004 Gabriela SAUCIUC, all rights reserved.
The author's written consent is required in order to reproduce any part of this article. Free to use in Search Engines.
|
