MM 4-1 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 B 3 110 173 
 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THIC 
 
 University of California. 
 
 i^-i^ (9St:^A^vi^i^^ ^/Oi^iJiLr^^ 
 
 %eceived iAVcL.<^ . i8()3 . 
 
 » 
 
THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 
 
 OP THE 
 
 POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS 
 
 IN ITALIAN 
 
 DISSERT A.TION 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 BY 
 
 LOUI8 EMIL MENGER 
 
 LATE FELLOW IN THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 
 
 h a i, t i m o r k 
 The Modekn Language Association of America 
 
 1883 
 
77-9 
 
 JOHN MUKPHY h CO., PEIKTERS, 
 
 BALTIMORE. 
 
TO 
 
 My Father, 
 PROFESSOR EMIL MENGER, 
 
 Clinton, Mississippi, 
 
 to whose sympathy and aid i am largely indebted fok 
 
 what i may have accomplished 
 
 in my studies, 
 
 THIS MONOGRAPH IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED. 
 
 ^^-^ 0? THS *^ 
 
 ((UHIVBRSI7Y1 
 
 i. 
 
 v^^^.5*L^^ 
 
 X - 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Introduction. List of texts l~" 
 
 I. — Chapter I. Irregular forms of the Possessive Pro- 
 nouns 0-61 
 
 1. Collection of all irregular uses in texts examined 6-16 
 
 2. Irregularities in the Singular discussed 17 
 
 a. Found to have no explanation in common with that 
 
 for like forms in the plural, especially for mia, tua, 
 
 sua ; therefore irregularities for the singular may 
 
 : be eliminated in the consideration of irregularities 
 
 for the plural •^^ 
 
 3. Irregularities in the Plural; notice taken by early gram- 
 
 marians of the plural mia, tua, .ma 22 
 
 4. Unsatisfactory explanation by later grammarians of mia, 
 
 tua, sua 22-28 
 
 rt. mei > j/urt by analogy to lei^-lia 23 
 
 b. Kesult of position in stress-group 25 
 
 c. Phonetical reductions 26 
 
 d. mia adopted from a confusion of mie' = viiei and mie' 
 
 = mia (Sing.) 26 
 
 5. These forms (No. 3) are remnants of the Latin Neuter 
 
 Plural..... : • -8 
 
 a. Time of appearance ; extent of employ ; originated 
 
 among the people ; conclusion 30 
 
 II._Chaptek II. Regular forms of the Possessive Pro- 
 nouns 32-69 
 
 A. First Person, mio, miei ; tonic E and i in hiatus 32-52 
 
 1. Previous treatment of hiatus E 32 
 
 a. Examples 33-39 
 
 2. Hiatus prevents the development of I > <■ 39 
 
 3. Hiatus closes E > i before a, e, 42 
 
 o. Ex. Conditionals in -no < -reo 43 
 
 V 
 
VI TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 4. E and ^ before i > ie 47 
 
 a. Question of *mieo < MEUS 48 
 
 5. Texts examined contain sufficient material for ex- 
 
 planations of all forms studied without recourse 
 
 to constructive forms 49 
 
 6. Conclusions 51 
 
 B. Second and Third Persons, luo, tuoi ; suo, suoi ; tonic v in 
 
 hiatus ' 52-69 
 
 1. Previous explanations rejected 52 
 
 2. Uses in texts consulted 54 
 
 3. toi, .so/ are directly < xui, sui 56 
 
 a. Parallel forms tovum tuum, sovum suum 56 
 
 6. Close phonetic relation of hiatus o and u 57 
 
 4. before I >■ and diphthongizes 57 
 
 5. Influence of v element in developments like bue < 
 
 buvp;m 58 
 
 a. Comparison with puoi < poi < post shows v 
 
 element to be unnecessary 59 
 
 6. before other vowels > w 60 
 
 a. tui, bui, nui, etc 61 
 
 b. The feminine plurals lae, .sue, and jthe mascu- 
 
 line sing, too, SMO, etc 63 
 
 C Tonic u in hiatus remains in Tuscan 64 
 
 Conclusions 64 
 
, .^^ 01 XHS •««' 
 
 THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE 
 POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS IN ITALIAN. 
 
 From the Middle of the Thirteenth to the End 
 OF THE Sixteenth Century. 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 The Possessive Pronouns existing in literary Italian are 
 
 mw 
 
 meum, 
 
 miei 
 
 MEI, 
 
 tuo 
 
 TUUM, 
 
 tuoi 
 
 tui, 
 
 suo 
 
 SUUM, 
 
 suoi 
 
 SUI, 
 
 nostro 
 
 NOSTRUM, 
 
 nostri 
 
 NOSTRI, 
 
 vostro 
 
 VOSTRUM, 
 
 vostri 
 
 VOSTRI, 
 
 mm 
 
 MEAM, 
 
 mie 
 
 MEAE, 
 
 tua 
 
 TUAM, 
 
 tue 
 
 TUAE, 
 
 sua 
 
 SUAM, 
 
 sue 
 
 SUAE, 
 
 nostra 
 
 NOSTRAM, 
 
 nostre 
 
 NOSTRAE, 
 
 vostra 
 
 VOSTRAM, 
 
 vostre 
 
 VOSTRAE. 
 
 These literary forms, as given, are found in the earliest texts. 
 But a mere casual reading of the texts will reveal also many 
 variants; this makes evident the fact that a succession of stages 
 or steps was gone through before the above forms were adopted 
 
 1 
 
2 T.. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 as the regular ones. The simplest method to be followed in 
 discovering what these successive stages of development were 
 must be to begin with the earliest texts in which the variants 
 were sometimes the rule, and follow the occurrence of these 
 variants in chronological order down into those texts in which 
 they are exceptions ; thus finally arriving at literary monu- 
 ments in which no variants occur, but where they have been 
 merged completely into the prevailing literary forms. 
 
 Such a study involves the investigation of one of the most 
 interesting and difficult questions of Italian Philology ; namely, 
 the development of the Latin hiatus vowels e and u. 
 
 In the course of a research carried on as just suggested are 
 discovered irregular forms which appear and disappear without 
 any apparent preceding stage, and leaving no successors on their 
 disappearance. At a certain time in the history of the Italian 
 language there is a frequent use of the anomalous mia, tvxi, 
 sua; they are found with the plurals of masculine and femi- 
 nine nouns alike. This is the sole marked irregularity in 
 the use of plural Possessive Pronouns in Italian, and for a 
 full understanding of the general subject of the pronoun in 
 this language, the appearance of these abnormal forms must be 
 accounted for. 
 
 The study thus divides itself into two parts : first, it must 
 be determined what the irregular forms are ; they must be ex- 
 plained and eliminated ; then the development of the regular 
 forms can be discovered. A division of the material within 
 these limits is carried out in the following monograph. In 
 Chapter I the irregular mia, tua, sua, and all irregular uses of 
 the Possessive Pronouns connected Avith these forms, are con- 
 sidered. In Chapter II the regular developments are taken 
 up which can be understood only when definite hiatus laws for 
 E and u have been established, — so that in this chapter (II), 
 in addition to the Possessive Pronouns, all words in which 
 these hiatus vowels occur are studied. When, from a considera- 
 tion of all the phenomena, the laws of growth are discovered, 
 these laws are applied to the development of the Possessive 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 3 
 
 Pronouns which are thus seen to evolve regularly and accord- 
 ing to fixed principles from the Latin. 
 
 The following texts have been examined ; they comprise the 
 works of Tuscan authors for a period of three hundred years, 
 from Guittoue d'Arezzo (1250) to Torquato Tasso (1595). As 
 it may be of interest to students of Italian to know where cer- 
 tain rare editions which are included in this Bibliography were 
 found, I will state that all such works mentioned were con- 
 sulted in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. There also are 
 to be found the works of the early Italian grammarians who 
 will be quoted in the course of this monograph. The authors 
 will be referred to hereafter as A, B, C, etc., according to the 
 letter of the alphabet placed in front of their names. 
 
 A. — Guittone d'Arezzo : (In) Rime di diversi antichi autori 
 Toscani in dieci libri raccolte. Venegia, 1532. 
 
 B. — Chiaro Davanzati : (In) Collezione di Opere inedite o 
 rare, iii, 1-177; 261-265; 387-389. 
 
 C. — Cino da Pistoja : Le Rime di Messer Cino da Pistoja, 
 ridotte a miglior lezione da Biudi e Fanfani. Pistoja, 1878. 
 Also in A. 
 
 D. — Riccomano Jacopi : Libro della Tavola di Ric. Jac, 
 edited by Carlo Vesme, (in) Archivio Storico Italiano, 3* serie, 
 Vol. XVIII (1873). 
 
 E.— Dante da Maiono: In A, pp. 74-90, 134, 138, 140, 141. 
 
 F. — Albertano di Brescia : Volgarizzamento dei Trattati 
 Morali di Albertano Giudice di Brescia. Fatto innanzi al 
 1278. Trovato da S. Ciampi. Firenze, 1832. 
 
 G. — Ricordi di una Famiglia Senese del secolo decimoterzo 
 (1231-1243). Pub. by G. Milanesi in Archiv. Stor. Ital. 
 Appendice, Vol. v. Firenze, 1 847. 
 
 H. — Ranieri Sardo : Cronaca Pisana di Ran. Sar., DalP 
 Anno 962 sino al 1400. Pub. by F. Bonaini in Archiv. Stor. 
 Ital. Vol. VI, parte 2% pp. 73-244. Firenze, 1845. 
 
 I. — Fiore di filosofi e di molti savi, attribuito a Brunette 
 Latini. Testo in parte inedito, citato dalla Crusca, e ridotto a 
 
4 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 miglior lezione da Antonio Cappelli. (In) Scelta di curiosita 
 letterarie o rare, Vol. lxiii. Bologna, 1865. 
 
 J. — Lettere Volgari del secolo xiii, scritte da Senesi. Pub. 
 by Paoli e Piccolomini in Scelta ecc., cxvi. Bologna, 1871. 
 
 K. — Dodici Conti Morali d'Anonimo Senese. Testo inedito 
 del secolo xiii, pub. da Zambrini. Scelta ecc, ix. Bologna, 
 1862. 
 
 L. — Conti di Antichi Cavalieri. (In) Giornale Storico della 
 Letteratura Italiana, Vol. iii, pp. 192-217. Torino, 1884. 
 
 M. — Le ciento Novelle Antike. Bologna (Gualteruzzi), 1 525. 
 
 N. — La Tavola Ritonda, o I'Istoria di Tristano. Pub. in 
 two vols, by F.-L. Polidori in Collezione di Opere inedite o 
 rare. Bologna, 1864. 
 
 O. — Guido Cavalcanti : Le Rime di Guid. Cav. Testo 
 critico pubb. dal Prof. Nicola Arnone. Firenze, 1881. Also 
 in A. 
 
 P. — Dante : Le Prime Quattro Edizione della Divina 
 Commedia letteralmente ristampate per cura di G. J. Warren, 
 Baron Vernon. Londra, 1858. 
 
 Q. — Petrarca : Rime di Pet. 2 vols. Padova, 1819. 
 
 R. — Jacopo di Pistoja : Statuti dell' Opera di S. Jacopo di 
 Pistoja, volgarizzati I'anno Mcccxiir da Mazzeo di Ser Giovanni 
 Bellebuoni, con due inventarj del 1340 e del 1401. Pubb. da 
 S. Ciampi. Pisa, 1814. 
 
 S. — Bindo Bonichi : Rime di Bind. Bon. da Siena. Scelta 
 ecc, Lxxxii. Bologna, 1867. 
 
 T. — Guido da Pisa : II Libro chiamato Fiore d'ltalia. 
 Bologna, Oct. 25, 1490. 
 
 U. — Ricordi di Miliadusso Baldiccionede' Casalberti. Pubb. 
 da Bonaini e Polidori in Archiv. Stor. Ital. Appendice, Vol. 
 viri, pp. 17-71. (First record 1339, last 1382.) Firenze, 1850 
 
 V. — Boccaccio : (1) L'Amorosa Fiammetta di Messer 
 Giovanni Boccaccio. Vinegia, 1575. — (2) Ameto, over Com- 
 edia delle Nimphe Florentine compilata da Messer Giov. Bocc 
 Venegia, 1534. — (3) II Decamerone di Messer Giov. Bocc. 
 Venetia, 1471. 
 
. ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 5 
 
 W.— Giovanni Fiorentino : 11 Pecorone. 2 vols. Milano, 
 
 1804. 
 
 X.— Fazio degli Uberti : Opera di Faccio Degliuberti Fio- 
 rentino Chiamato Ditta Mundi. Venetia, 1501. 
 
 Y. Forestani : Storia d'una Fanciulla Tradita da un suo 
 
 Amante. Di Messer Simone Forestani da Siena. Ed. da 
 Zambrini. Scelta ecc, VI. Bologna, 1862. 
 
 Z. — Sercambi : Novelle di Giovanni Sercambi. Ed. da 
 Alessandro d'Ancona. Scelta ecc, cxix. Bologna, 1871. 
 
 AA.—Sacchetti : Novelle. 3 vols. Milano, 1804. 
 
 BB.— Zenone da Pistoja : La Pietosa Fonte. Ed. da Zam- 
 brini. Scelta ecc, cxxxvii. Bologna, 1874. 
 
 CC— Lamenti Storici dei secoli xiv, xv e xvi. Raccolti 
 di Medin e Frati. Scelta ecc, ccxix. Bologna, 1887. 
 
 DD.— I Cantari di Carduino ; giuntovi quello di Tristano 
 e Lancielotto. Pubb. per cura di Pio Rajna. Scelta ecc, 
 cxxxv. Bologna, 1873. 
 
 EE.— Leon Battista Alberto : Hecatomphila di Messer L. 
 B. Alb. Vineggia, 1534. 
 
 FF.— Gambino d'Arezzo : Versi. Ed. da Gamurrini. 
 Scelta ecc, clxiv. Bologna, 1878. 
 
 GG. — Pulci : I Fatti di Carlo-magno e de' suoi Paladani. 
 Opere del Morgante. Date in luce per Pulci. Venetia, 1481. 
 
 HH.— Poliziano : Stanze, I'Orfeo ed altre Poesie. Milano, 
 
 1808. 
 
 ' IL— Burcelo : Li Soneti del Burcelo Fiorentino. Veniegia, 
 
 1477. 
 
 J J. — Lorenzo de' Medici : Poesie. Firenze, 1859. 
 
 KK. — Bojardo : Orlando Innamorato(Berni's Rifacimento). 
 4 vols. Milano, 1806. 
 
 LL. — Bernardo Bellincioni : Rime. Ed. da Fanfani. Scelta 
 ecc, CLi. Bologna, 1876. 
 
 MM. — Benvenuto Cellini : Opere. 3 vols. Milano, 1806. 
 
 NN. — Ariosto : Orlando Furioso. 5 vols. Milano, 1812. 
 
 OO.— Machiavelli : Opere Milano, 1804. Vol. i, II 
 Principe ; Vol. viii, Commedie. 
 
6 L. EMIL MERGER. 
 
 PP.— Pietro Bembo : Opere. Milano, 1808. Vol. i, Gli 
 Asolani. 
 
 QQ. — Trissino : Opere. Yerona, 1729. 
 
 RE.— Leonardo Salviati : Opere. Milano, 1809. Vol. i, 
 Commedie. 
 
 SS.— Torquato Tasso : II Goffredo. Yinegia, 1580. 
 
 TT. — Batecchio, Commedia di Maggio. Composto per il 
 Pellegrino Ingegno del Fumoso della Congrega de' Rozzi. 
 Scelta ecc, cxxii. Bologna, 1871. 
 
 UU. — Giosne Carducci : Studi Letterari. Livoruo, 1874. 
 
 Chapter I. 
 
 Irregular forms of the Possessive Pronouns with 
 
 especial reference to the two-gender 
 
 PLURALS mia, tua, sua. 
 
 1 . Collection of all irregular uses in texts examined, 
 
 I do not hold the opinion that irregularities which occur in 
 the singular had anything to do with corresponding ones in the 
 plural ; that, for instance, mia in mia cavallo (supposing such 
 an example to exist) had anything in common with mia in mia 
 cavalli. But such an opinion has been expressed. Schuchardt, 
 in writing of a kindred topic, says : ^ " Gelegentlich der Formen 
 mia, tua, sua, mochte ich hier eine Frage vorbringen die aller- 
 dings mit der Hauptfrage Xichts zu thun hat. Ich finde 
 liberall nur von ihrer pluralischen Yerweudung gesprochen ; 
 ich habe mir aber vor fast eiuem Yierteljahrhundert in Rom, 
 allerdings nicht aus geh5rter Rede, und auch nicht aus Belli, 
 sondern aus andern Schriften in romischer Mundart Falle wie 
 Jijo mia, er norae sua, a commido sua, lo sposo mia, u. s. w. auf- 
 gezeichnet. Kommt nun Solches wirklich in der Yolkssprache 
 vor?" 
 
 ^Literaturblali, Dec, 1891, col. 413. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 7 
 
 Now, to ascertain the truth of the connection, if any exist, 
 between singular and plural irregularities of the kind under 
 discussion, I have noted all irregular uses occurring in the 
 singular as well as in the plural and treated them in the first 
 part of this essay, where I have attempted explanations of them. 
 I then show that these irregularities in the singular cannot be 
 the origin of like irregularities in the plural, nor those in the 
 plural the origin of corresponding forms in the singular. My 
 plau is to mention in chronological sequence all the texts I have 
 consulted giving the irregularities in the following order : 
 
 First Person, 
 
 Masc. 
 
 Sing. 
 
 Fem, 
 
 , Sing. 
 
 (C 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 Second Person, 
 
 
 Sing. 
 
 
 Sing. 
 
 a 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 Third Person, 
 
 
 Sing. 
 
 
 Sing. 
 
 a 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 
 Plu. 
 
 The discussion of these pronouns is reserved until the full 
 list of texts has been examined wherein all forms are omitted 
 that are not concerned in the development of mia, tua, sua. 
 (A few texts will be mentioned in which no irregularities occur, 
 but these authors are given to show the extent of the occurrences 
 in the period of time represented by the texts quoted as bearing 
 directly on my subject.)^ 
 
 A. — In the few pages of this collection which contain the 
 poetry of Guittone no irregularities occur. 
 
 B. — This author sometimes uses the atonic forms mi' (masc. 
 and fem.) and m' (masc). — tuo = tuoi: p. 68, U tuo filgli. — 
 suo = suoi: p. 14, li suo filgli ; p. 167, i suo sembianti. 
 
 C. — mie' = miei : p. 4, occhj mie'. — tuo = tuoi: p. 229, de' 
 tuofigli. — suoi^sue: p. 81, In quelle parti, chefurongid suoi. 
 
 J). — SMo' = suoi : p. 1 , suo' santi. 
 
 ^Nostro, etc., vostro, etc., are directly from nostrum, etc., vostrum, etc., 
 with no intervening stage in the development, and they will therefore not 
 be mentioned again. 
 
8 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 E. — No irregularities. 
 
 F. — tu'==tuo: p. 10, tu' viaggio. — tuo = tua: p. 51, la tuo 
 volontd. — tuo' = tuoi : p. 6, i tuo' facti ; p. 47, li vecchi tuo'; 
 p. 65, tuo' aversarii; p. 66, tuo' nemici; p. 73, tuo' consigli. — 
 tuoi = tue: pp. 15, 27, le tuoi parole. — su'=suo: p. 36, su' 
 abitamento. — suo' = suoi: p. 19, li suo' capelli. — suoi = sue: 
 p. 76, per suoi parole. 
 
 G. — No irregularities. 
 
 H. — su'=sua: p. 161, colla su' arme. — suoi = sue: p. 84, 
 le suoi rughe; p. 86, le suoi intrate, le suoi castella; p. 94, le 
 suoi genti; p. 95, a suoi spese ; p. 114, di suoi cose, 
 
 I. — No irregularities. 
 
 J. — No irregularities. 
 
 K. — No irregularities. 
 
 L. — mei = miei, p. 211. — suoi = sue : p. 205, le cose suoi. — 
 suoe = sue: p. 208, ossa suoe. 
 
 M. — No irregularities. 
 
 N. — mie' = mia : pp. 479, 486, 487, j^^r mie' fe. — suo' ;= 
 suoi: p. 78, suo' haroni ; p. 284, suo' fratelli ; p. 324, suo'fgli. 
 
 O. — mi' = mio : p. 24, mi' parere ; p. 43, mi' core. — mie = 
 mio : p. 6e5, mie spirito (variant). — tu' = tuo: pp. 14, 61, tu' 
 pensamento ; p. 71, tu' amore. — su' = suo: p. 15, su' I'iso ; p. 
 16, su' valore ; p. 18, su' viso, etc., su' thus occurring sixteen 
 times. — suo = sua : p. 4, suo virtu e suo potenga (variant). — 
 mie' = miei: p. 64, mie' martiri; p. 74, mie' foil occhi. One 
 of the manuscripts from which variants are given (Laurent. B. 
 XV cent.) reads mia in the following cases where the editor has 
 adopted miei for the published text : pp. 20, 26, occhi mia ; 
 pp. 35, 48, mia spiriti ; p. 64, mia desiri. Several other vari- 
 ants read mei in these instances. 
 
 P. — mei = miei : Inf i, 23, parenti mei ; xiv, 6 ; xxxi, 33, 
 occhi mei; xxvi, 41, mei compagni; Purg. i, 6, 29 ; iv, 29 ; 
 X, 39 ; XXI, 42 ; xxiv, 34, occhi mei ; i, 38, mei passi ; iii, 
 41, peccati mei; xvii, 4, mei compassi; xxxi, 5, /rati mei; 
 XXVII, 23, mei saggi; xxviii, 20, prieghi mei; Par. xvil, 37, 
 mei carmi ; xxiii, 27 ; xxvi, 38 ; xxvii, 4 ; xxx, 25 ; xxxi, 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. V 
 
 47, occhi mei. — mie = miei : Inf. x, 28, mie popoli ; xv, 32, 
 orecchie mie; XViil, 14; xxv, 49, occhi mie; xxvi, 41, mie 
 compagni; xxxiii, 13, mie jigliuoli ; Pnrg. i, 6 ; Viii, 29 ; X, 
 39, occhi mie; i, 38 ; xxv, 42, mie passi; xi, 21, mie maggiori; 
 xiii, 38, mie anni ; xxiv, 48, mie dottori ; xxx, 47, prieghi 
 mie; xxxi, 8, mie desiri; Par. xiv, 26, 28, occhi mie; IV, 3, 
 mie dubi; xvi, 10, mie blandimenti; xvi, 15, mie maggiori; 
 XVII, 37, mie carmi; xxiv, 20, mie concepti ; xvii, 29, mie 
 pief^;. — toi = tuoi: Inf. xx, 34, toi ragionamenti ; xxii, 11, 
 ^oi concepti. — tui = tuoi: Inf. x, 14, maggior tui. — tuo = tuoi: 
 Inf. V, 39, iuo marriii ; xxvi, 2, ^ito citadini ; xxx, 40, /wo 
 fratelli; Pnrg. i, 28, /mo re^wi; VI, 37, tuo gentili ; xi, 47, iuo 
 vicini; xiii, 7, tuo raggi ; Par. xi, 7, tuo pensieri; xxi, 6, 
 occ/ii tuo ; xxviii, 20, tuo diti. — tuoe = tue : Inf. ii, 46, parole 
 tuoe. — soi=^suoi: Inf. I, 19, soi pensier ; ix, 38, soi termini; 
 XI, 14, soi beni; Xix, 11, soi conforti; xix, 12, soi torti; xxiii, 
 18, soi pie; xxix, 14, soi conversi ; Pnrg. iv, 41, aiti soi; Vii, 
 44 ; xxvii, 42 ; XXI, 37, occhi soi; Par. xv, 12, occhi soi. — 
 sui = suoi: Inf. ii, 26, cerchi sui ; III, 21, inimici sui; IX, 
 corpi sui. — suo = suoi: Inf. IV, 20, suo nati ; xix, 11, swo 
 conforti; Purg. i, 12, suo capelli ; ill, 6; VI, 19, suo raggi; 
 XXI, 12, suo pie; xxvii, 18, occhi suo; xxvii, 36, suo belli 
 occhi; XXIX, 4, suo passi ; Par. xvi, 20, suo jigli ; xx, 3, suo 
 died-; xxiii, 1, sxio nati; xxxi, 23, suo meriti ; xxxii, 2, 
 suo piedi. — suoe = sue : Inf xiii, 34, suoe spalle. — suo = sv,e : 
 Inf. XIV, 12, suo schieri; Purg. IV, 7, suo spine; IX, 13, suo 
 braccia; xxviii, 9, suo picciol onde ; Par. vii, 37, le suo vie. 
 A variant to Purg. ix, 13, reads le sua braccia. 
 
 Q. — mie' = miei: i, 162, mie' affanni ; il, 196, mie' ingegni; 
 mie' arti. — tuo' = tuoi: ii, 12, tuo' ingegni; ii, 144, tuo' piedi. — 
 mo'=moi: i, 35, suo' laudi ; ii, 176, suo' argomenti. 
 
 R. — miei = mie : p. 2, alle miei mani. 
 
 S. — tuo = tua: p. 201, la tuo derrata. — tuo' ^ tuoi: p. 185, 
 tuo' sccdzi. — m' = mo: p. 174, su' or. — su'=sua: p. 1, sit' 
 arte, — sua = suoi : p. 42, sua fatti (variant). 
 
 T. — mei = miei occurs twenty times. 
 
 Of 
 
 eap V. *v .<■/ 
 
10 L. EMIL MENGEE. 
 
 U. — mio = mia : pp. 29, 30, meta mio (on both pages occurs 
 also metd, mia). — 7nlee = mie : p. 25, nipote miee. — suoe = sue : 
 p. 63, suoe spesie. 
 
 V. — Fiammetta. mei = miei: p. 23, mei conforti ; p. 138, 
 mei danni. — mie = miei: p. 136, mie desidei'i. — tuo = tuoi: p. 
 32, tuo sudditi. — suo = suoi : p. 43, suo homeri. 
 
 Ameto. mie:=:miei: p. 8, mie aspetti. — mei:=miei: p. 31, 
 desidernj mei. — tuo = tuoi : p. 24, tuo versi. — suo = suoi: p. 42, 
 suofrutti; p. 78, suo compagni. — sua=sue: p. 56, lesua coma; 
 p. 57, le labra .sua. 
 
 Decamerone. mei == miei occurs eleven times. — mid = mie : 
 Lbj 3,^ le miei novelle. — tuoe = tue : Yiiij, tuoe node, tuoe pro- 
 messioni. — suo = suoi : Cb, suo discendenti ; H, suo qfficiali. — 
 suoe = sue : Zb, suoe 7'obe. 
 
 W. — No irregularities. 
 
 X. — mie = mia : giiij 8, la mie speranza ; qiiij 2, la mie 
 guida^ — mi ^= mia: hiiij, mi voglia. — mie = miei occurs seven 
 times (cf. aiiij 6, bij, eij, fij, giiij, kij, Oiiij 8), and mei = mid 
 twenty-two times (cf. Aiiij 7, Bj, ciiij, diiij 9, etc.). — miei = 
 mie: eiiij 2, le miei confine; iiiij 2; kj, le miei giente; kij, li- 
 magine miei; Eiiij, siiij 4, le parole miei; t, le miei guide. — 
 me = miei : eiij, i me danni. — me = mie : diiij 6, le me ziglia. — 
 tuo = tuoi : C, tuo brevi py^ologi. — sue = suo : fij, al sue desio; 
 Oiiij 8, el sue nome; ciij, el sue grembo. — sua = suo : giiij, per 
 sua dardano; Dj, el maschio sua. — suo = suoi occurs twenty- 
 four times (cf. diiij, eiij, fiiij, hj, etc.). — sue^=sua: diiij 2, la 
 sue spoglia; hiiij 6, la sue lucie; &iiij 2, la sue virtu. — suo = 
 sua: giiij 6, ogne suo virtu,; hiij, la suo matricola; miij 2, ogni 
 suo empresa; piiij 2, suo arte; piiij 8, suo posta; uiiij 3, suo 
 giorna; 9j, suo plncerna; Jtiiij 7, la suo tromba. — suoi = sue: 
 siiij 3, le suoi schiumi; tij, le suoi confini; z, suoi pendice. — 
 swo = sue: diiij 6, le suo porti; tiiij, le bataglie suo; fiiij, le suo 
 
 ^ In looking for this reference it will be necessary to count three pages 
 forward from the folio lettered Lbj. This system is observed in giving 
 references to all editions divided according to folios. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 11 
 
 sorte; niiij, le mo arte; piiij 7, qiiij, le suo cose; qj, le suo ripe; 
 siij, le suo parole; tiiij 6, le suo rene; Oiiij 6, le sorelle suo. 
 
 Y. — mie' = miei : p. 35, passi mie'; p. 42, i mie' giorni. — 
 tuo = tuoi : p. 44, iito' paesi. 
 
 Z. — miei = mie: p. 109, de' 77^^■e^ ro6e; p. 240, le miei bri- 
 gate. — iuoi = tue: p. 240, (JelV opere tuoi; p. 98, tuoi gioie. — 
 suoi = 8ue: p. 11, suoi gare; p. 169, le suoi ingiurie; p. 170, 
 le suoi infinite (cose); p. 84, le suoi figliuole; p. 176, le suoi 
 scfiitture; p. 228, le suoi terre; p. 260, le suoi genti; p. 260, le 
 suoi brigate. 
 
 AA. — mie' = mid: II, 13, m*V d*; ii, 211, m?V signori. — 
 mia = miei: i, 139, U fatti mia; ii, 248, certi mia fatti; iii, 
 179, a mia parenti. — mia = mie: ii, 77, le mia forme; ill, 6, 
 mia dipinture; iii, 217, le carni mia. — tuo' = tuoi: ii, 122, 
 con tuo' strufinacci. — suo' = suoi: i, 76, suo' parenti; i, 77, 
 suo' vieini; i, 198, suo' dazj ; ill, 185, suo' pari; iii, 336, 
 suo' casi. — sua = suoi: i, 6, sudditi sua; i, 124, sita cavalli; 
 I, 200, sita /a^^i; iii, 251, sua panni. — sua =^ sue: ii, 98, le 
 came sua. 
 
 BB. — mie' = miei : p. 55, e' mie' chiovi. — tuo = tua : p. 6, 
 la tuo moneta; p. 39, tuo misericordia ; p. 71, la, tuo gran cor- 
 tesia; p. 60, la tuo mente; p. 81, la tuo beatrice. — tuo = tuoi: 
 p. 59, tuo disii. — suo' = suoi: p. 35, di suo' guai; p. 70, ne 
 suo' versi. — su'=sua: p. 16, la su' arte. — suo = sua: p. 4, 
 suo ira; p. 53, suo possa; pp. 45, 85, 88, la suo vita; p. 79, 
 la suo ghirlanda; p. 68, la suo gran chiarezza; p. 71, la suo 
 vista; p. 80, la suo luce; p. 8Q, suopartenza; p. 89, suo volonta; 
 p. 89, suo bocca; p. 90, suo bilancia. — suo = sue: p. 83, suo 
 cose. 
 
 CC. — tuo' = tuoi: p. 266, ^i tuo' dohi occhi. 
 
 DD. — mie = mio: pp. 5, 12, mie padre. — mie = mia: pp. 
 14, 26, mie madre ; p. 17, mie sorella ; p. 49, mze vita; p. 52, 
 mie leanza; p. 59, mie spada. — tuo = tua: p. 13, iwo nazione, 
 tuo madre, tuo condizione ; p. 18, tuo sorella; pp. 32, 58, tuo 
 bontade; p. 52, tuo contrada; p. 54, tuo presenza; pp. 58, 62, 
 <wo wto ; p. 61, tuo posanza. — suo = sua: p. 4, suo gente; p. 
 
12 L,. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 12, suo baronia, suo madre; p. 17, suo arte; p. 20, suo corte; 
 p. 25, SMo virtue ; p. 35, smo gara; p. 43, s^to ciera ; p. 51, smo 
 parte; p. 54, smo via; p. 61, smo spada. — suo = suoi: p. 13, 
 SMO fratei; p. 14, swo baroni. — suo = sue: p. 9, swo gioie; p. 
 17, SMo voglie. 
 
 EE. — mei = miei: p. 2, me* amori; p. 3, me* errori; p. 15, 
 mei sospiri; p. 16, mei pensieri; p. 21, rnei ma?i; p. 27, amici 
 met. — ^wo = ^Moi .- p. 6, ^wo c?owi. — suo = suoi : p. 26, suo erucd. 
 
 FF. — mV = mio: p. 173, «^ mi' ingegno. — mie' = miei : p. 
 2, mie' pensieri; p. 20, miV mirti; p. 89, mzV toscani; p. 180, 
 m«e' martii'i. — su' = sua: p. 29, /a su' razza. — suo' = suoi: p. 
 68, srto' ^es^t. — sm' = sue : p. 20, iwf^e su' piaghe. 
 
 GG. — mei = miei: fo. e 4, m^r compagni. — mie = miei: fo. 
 a 3, mie fratelli. — tuo = ^wa ; fo. i 3, ogni cosa sia tiio ; fo. a 4, 
 iwo vilania. — i^wa = tue : fo. d, alle tua mura. — suo = sua : fo. 
 a 4, suo coda. — suo ^ suoi: fo. b 1, suo fratei: fo. e 2, suo 
 baroni ; fo, e 4, swo tradimenti ; fo. i 3, swo suggedi. 
 
 HH. — mie' = miei : i, 6, raie' versi. 
 
 II. — mie = mio : fo. eq 6, un mie sonetto.—mei = miei : fo. 
 cq, mei occhi; spiriti mei ; fo. tliij, signor mei; fo. dq 2, tutti i 
 mei; fo. g, parenti mei; fo. r, occhi mei; fo. gq 9, mei amid. — 
 mie = miei : fo. hq 5, mie detti. — mia = mie : fo. bq 6, le parole 
 mia. — tuo = tuoi : fo. gz, tuo belli occhi. — tua = tuoi : fo. eq 8, 
 tua sciochi. — suo =■ suoi : fo. c, suo Jior ; suo gred. — sua = 
 suoi: fo. dq, sua panni. — sua ^ sue: fo. fq 6, le sua alia. 
 
 J J. — mie' = miei: p. 241, mie' giovenchi. — mei ^:^ miei: p. 
 133, i pensier md. — mia = miei: p. 118, a' pianti mia; p. 70, 
 occhi stanchi mia; p. 244, de' fatti mia. — mia::=mie: p. 372, 
 le membra mia. — tuo' =: tuoi: p. 239, tuo' pagliai ; p. 249, tuo' 
 begli occhi; p. 361, tuo' prieghi; p. 377, tuo' fratelli. — tua = 
 tuoi: p. 255, i colpi tua. — tua :^ tue: p. 241, le tua bestie. — 
 suo' = suoi: p. 302, suo' anni. — suo' = sue: p. 292, suo'foglie. 
 
 KK. — mia = mio : xii, 66, alcun tempo mia (rhyme). — 
 mei := miei: liii, 18, mei baroni. — tu' ^=tuoi: xxvii, 37, de' 
 tu' occhi. 
 
 LL. — mia = mie : p. 38, ossa mia. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 13 
 
 MM.—inia = miei: i, 12, 203, 222, 426 ; ii, 127, 159, 362, 
 i casi mia; i, 39, 60, 60, 72, 349, 354, 363 ; ii, 198, 295, 296, 
 300, 413, 308, 379, i mia danari; i, 43, 44, 46 ; ii, 71, awer- 
 sarj mia; i, 54 ; ii, 202, mia pari; i, 54 ; ii, 195, 303, 317, 
 mia disegni; i, 60; ii, 295, mia scudi; i, 62, mia affari ; i, 
 62; II, 12, 491, mia jigliuoli; i, 83, atudj mia; ii, 380, mia 
 studj ; II, 478, mia danni; i, 393; ii, 299, mia dispiaceri; i, 
 327, 392, miaferruzzi; i, 254, 293, 385, nemici mia; i, 204, 
 236, 383, 396 ; ii, 108, 167, 191, 24S, fatii mia; i, 434, 438 ; 
 II, 307, mia occhi; i, 422; ii, 110, mia libri; i, 422, mia 
 uomini; i, 164, 232, 236, 261, 262, 263, 386, mia nemici; i, 
 384, 384, 385, 415 ; ii, 56, 113, 400, mia servitori ; i, 99, mia 
 aceiari; i, 115, 252, 253, 288, 300, 307, 310, 312, 317, 353, 
 363, 400, 410, 413 ; ii, 132, 233, mia amid; i, 132, mia sojji- 
 oni; I, 190, mia afanni; i, 194, 460; ii, 31, 68, 100, 170, 
 195, 279, 292, 349, mia lavoranti; i, 287, mia ferri; i, 295, 
 mia scoppietti; i, 295, mia modelletti ; i, 310, mia piedi ; i, 
 315, mia stivali; i, 317 ; ii, 147, mia conoscenii; i, 339, mia 
 Italiam; i, 347, 350, 351, 358, 384 ; ii, 20, 22, 23, 27, 56, 71, 
 112, 116, 120, mia giovani ; i, 361, mia cavalli ; i, 369, signori 
 mia ; ii, 291, signori mia ; ii, 97, 274, mia travagli ; ii, 114, 
 occhi mia; ii, 124, mia fatti ; ii, 154, 356, mia salarj ; ii, 
 162, mia spiriti ; ii, 178, mia compagni ; ii, 181, mia ribaldi; 
 II, 193, 234, mia bisogni; ii, 199, mia pensieri ; ii, 202, ^an 
 mia; ii, 211, mia allevati ; ii, 282, mia panni ; ii, 285, mia 
 piatti ; II, 286, mia conati ; ii, 319, 320, mia bastoni ; ii, 367, 
 mia anni; ii, 379, mia ajati; ii, 452, mia debitori; mia eredi. 
 
 mia = mie : i, 25, mia belle- ; mia sorelle ; i, 338, cose mia ; 
 
 I, 390, 7ma lenzuole ; ii, 73, 7nia teste ; ii, 74, mia forme ; ii. 
 125, mia maiii ; ii, 274, mia nepotine. 
 
 tua z= tuoi : i, 24, Jigliuoli tua ; i, 29, tua disegni ; i, 60, tua 
 scudi; I, 21 S, fatti tua; i, 251, casi tua; ii, 481, tua bisogni; 
 
 II, 482, tua piaceri. 
 
 sua = suoi : i, 63, sua atti ; i, 68, 394, 403, 404, sua gen- 
 tiluomini ; i, 97, 253, sua amid; i, 112, stia capitani ; i, 156, 
 stia afanni ; sua scritti ; i, 271, casi sua; i, 284, sua ferri; 
 
 
 A^ OP TK- 
 
 .•5=.^^ 
 
 TTHIVE 
 
14 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 I, 305, bisogni sua; i, 173, 220 ; ii, 234, sua danari ; i, 217, 
 sua birreschi ; i, 220 ; ii, 295, sua scudi; i, 331, sua domestici; 
 I, 302, ornamenti sua ; i, 368, sua caporali ; i, 370, sua regni ; 
 I, 379, vizj sua ; i, 388, medid sua; i, 388, 403, 439, 448, sua 
 servitmi; i,S90, tuttii sv,a^; i, 412, amid suu ; i, 452, segreti 
 sua; II, 377, suu piedi ; n, 394, sua lavoranti; ii, 442, sua 
 eredi ; ii, 12, 461, sua jigliuuli ; n, 44, 377, ma cortigiani; 
 u, 57, sua ribaldj ; ii, 303, sua segretarj ; ii, 117, 117, nemid 
 sua; II, 169, tempi sua; ii, 202, sua pari ; ii, 445, sua voca- 
 boli ; II, 486, sua confini ; ill, 238, sua squadratori ; iii, 248, 
 248, sua modelli. 
 
 sua ^ sue: i, 256, cose sua; ii, 30, lettere sua; ii, 109, /a- 
 cende sua. 
 
 NN. — mie' = miei: v, 27, Ii mie' uguali ; xxxviii, 84, ?ntV 
 jigli. — toi = tuoi: XXXV, 43, toiprigion (variant). — tuo'=tuoi: 
 XXIII, 73, tuo' vestigi; xxxviii, 63, tuo' infiniti. (A variant 
 reads here tui.) — suo' = suoi : xxv, 49, suo' begli occhi (vari- 
 ant) ; XXV, 5, .SMo' amid (var.) ; xxxix, 33, suo' amid (as a 
 variant to this appears sua); xxxi, 82, suo' amid; xli, 49, 
 suo' amori. — sui^suoi: TV, occhi sui; xvii, 114, cavalieri 
 sui; xviii, 153, tutti i sui-; xxni, 22; xxxvii, ^6,frateUi 
 sui; XXXI, 35, cugin sui; xxxiii, 18, servitori sui; xxxiv, 
 S2,fatti sui; xliv, 59, affanni sui; XLV, 44, d^ sui-. — soi z= 
 suoi : XXXIII, 1 24, soi baroni. 
 
 OO. — mie' = miei : p. 276, mie' affanni. — mia = mid : p. 
 257, mia desiderj ; p. 257, mia martiri; p. S96, pensier mia. — 
 tuo' = tuoi : p. 394, tuo' accenti. — tua = tuoi : p. 260, tua con- 
 forti; p. 393, tua lumi. 
 
 PP, QQ, RR, no irregularities. 
 
 SS. — tuo = tua : p. 8, guerra tuo. — suo' = suoi : p. 4, suo' 
 fanti; p. 28, suo' mali ; p. 43, suo' error ; p. 52, suo' cad. — 
 su' = suoi: p. 49, de' su' qffici. 
 
 TT. — mie = mio: p. 63, mie male; p. 73, un mie pari; p. 
 78, el mie martire; p. 104, mie padron ; mie difetto ; p. 105, 
 mie canto. — mie z= mia: pp. 56, 64, 75, 85, la mie mnnza ; p. 
 62, mie vita ; p. 86, mie dama ; p. 88, mie persona ; p. 104, 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 15 
 
 mie moglie; mie colpa. — tuo = tua : p. 58, tuo hella manza ; p. 
 85, la tuo speranza ; p. 87, tuo voglia ; pp. 92, 98, tuo valentia ; 
 p. 96, tuo moglie. — tuo = tue : p. 87, le tuo spalle. — suo = sua : 
 p. 63, la suo vita. — suo' = suoi : p. 88, e' suo' fatti. — suo' = 
 sue: p. 76, le suo' mercanzie. 
 
 UU. — mie' = mio: p. 415, un mie' sparvier' ; p. 427, 'I mie' 
 sparvero ; p. 428, 'I mie' diffetto ; p. 437, '/ mie' amove. — mie' = 
 mia : p. 408, mie' compagna ; p. 437, mie' donna. — tuo' =. tua : 
 p. 435, di tuo' biltate. — suo' = sua : p. 428, suo' tana ; p. 436, 
 sua' pena. — suo' =z sue: p. 425, disuo' penne; p. 442, lesuo' ali. 
 
 Resume. 
 
 The following Table gives a resume of the examples of 
 irregularities noted above. The capital letters refer to the 
 authors, the numerals to the number of times a given irregu- 
 larity occurs in the author mentioned. Where forms were 
 printed with the apostrophe, these are placed first ; the corres- 
 ponding form without the apostrophe to the right of that 
 with it. 
 
 mi' = mio, B, 02, FFl. 
 
 mi' — mia, B. 
 
 
 
 mi — mia, X2. 
 me — miei, XI. 
 me — mie, XI. 
 
 tu'— tuo, Fl, 02. 
 
 
 
 
 <w'=— tuoi, KKl. 
 
 
 
 
 sw' — suo, B, Fl, < 
 
 02, 
 
 SI 
 
 
 su' — sua, HI, SI, 
 
 , BBl, 
 
 FFl. 
 
 su' — suoi, SSI. 
 
 
 
 
 su'— sue, FFl. 
 
 
 
 
 mie'= mio, UU4. mie = mio, Ol, DD2, III, TT6. 
 
 mie'= mia, N3, UU2. mie = mia, X2, DD6, TT6. 
 
 mio = mia, U2. 
 tuo'= tua, UUl. tuo = tua, Fl, SI, BBS, 
 
16 L. EMIL MENGEB. 
 
 DDll, GG2, SSI, TT6. 
 sue = suo, X3. 
 swa =^ suo, X2. 
 sue = sua, X3. 
 suo'=sua, UU2. .mo =: swa, 02, X8, BBll, DDll, GGl, 
 TTl. 
 
 mei = m{ei, Bl, LI, P22, T20, V14, X22, EE6, GGl, 118, 
 
 JJl, KKl. 
 mie'=miei, CI, 02, Q3, Y2, AA2, BBl, FF4, HHl, JJl, 
 
 NN2, OOl. 
 mie = miei, P25, V2, X7, GGl, III. 
 tuo'=tuoi, F5, PIO, Q2, SI, Y2, AAl, CCl, FFl, JJ4, 
 
 NN2, OOl, TTl. 
 tuo = tuoi, Bl, CI, V2, XI, BBl, EEl, III. 
 mo'=suoi, Dl, Fl, N3, P14, Q2, AA5, BB2, FFi, JJl, 
 
 NN2, SS4, TTl. 
 mo = suoi, B2, V5, X24, DD2, EEl, GG4, 112. 
 
 miei^=mie, R1,V1, X5, Z2. 
 
 tuoi r= tue, Fl, Z2. 
 
 suoi = sue, CI, Fl, 116, LI, X3, Z8. 
 
 miee^mie, JJl. 
 
 tuoe = tue, PI, V2. 
 
 suoe=r.sue, Ll, PI, Ul, VI. 
 
 tuo = tue, FFl. 
 
 mo'= sue, JJl, TTl, UU2. 
 
 mo = sue, P6, X9, BBl, DD2. 
 
 mia = miei, 03, AA3, JJ3, MM157, 003. 
 mia = mie, AA3, III, JJl, LLl, MM8. 
 tua = tuoi. III, JJl, MM7, 002. 
 tua^^ tue, GGl, JJl. 
 sua = moi, SI, AA4, III, MM51, NNl. 
 ma = me, P1,V2, AAl, III, MM3. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 17 
 
 2. Irregularities in the Singular discussed. 
 
 If we view the irregularities occurring in the singular as a 
 whole, three general reasons for thera suggest themselves. 
 
 First, it is to be remarked that in the greater number of 
 cases the masculine is used for the feminine form (cf. Table, 
 suo = sua, tuo = tua, etc.). In the plural the feminine is 
 never used for the masculine. When the indefinite tuo\ suo', 
 as used for- masculine and feminine alike (cf. Table, tuo = tuoi 
 and tue, suo = suoi and sue), take on again the full forms t^ioi 
 and suoi for the masculine, not only are the regular tue, sue 
 not adopted for the feminine in all instances, but tuoi, suoi are 
 used for feminine as well as masculine (the same remark applies 
 to niiei; cf. Table, mzei = m/e; tuoi = tue; suoi = sue). We 
 may say then that mio, tuo, suo, are used for mia, tua, sua (and 
 this use includes the largest part of the irregularities) and thus 
 follow this seeming general tendency to adopt masculine for 
 feminine. 
 
 Secondly, the irregularities may have arisen from a desire 
 (on the part of the writer or speaker) to indicate the sex of the 
 possessor by using the masculine or feminine pronoun with 
 regard to the possessor and not to the gender of the object 
 possessed. In DD, where the Aasculine form is so often used 
 for both genders, the desire to differentiate sex may well be the 
 reason for the masculine form, since, with few exceptions, the 
 irregular possessives refer to characters of the male gender 
 (Carduino, Tristano or Lanciel lotto), there being few other per- 
 sonages mentioned. Thus, in speaking of Carduino's mother, 
 the writer uses (p. 12) suo madre, corresponding to English 
 " his mother," whereas, if he had referred to the heroine's 
 mother, he would doubtless have said sua madre, "her mother." 
 — Or, again, such a use might have arisen in constructions such 
 as are found in H, cf. p. 114, di suoi cose, o danari o panni, 
 where the objects implied in the cose {panni and danari) are 
 both masculine and the speaker probably in anticipation of 
 their gender used the masculine suoi. — Again, it would be 
 2 
 
18 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 natural for irregularities to arise where there was a habit oi 
 separating the pronoun from its noun, as may be noted in S : 
 p. 65, guai a chi nel tormento, sua non puo spander voce ; p. 
 82, molto ho oeixato e suo 7ion irovo nome ; p. 83, et tua taci 
 sentenza. 
 
 Thirdly, an explanation that might apply to all irregularities 
 of the kind under discussion would be to take as points of de- 
 parture the remnants of the atonic forms mi', tu\ su\ which are 
 sometimes found in literary productions and are constantly used 
 by the people. We may assume that when a consciousness was 
 aroused of the incorrectness of certain pronominal uses teruiina- 
 tional vowels were added (to mi'', tu\ su'), but the speaker, being 
 unaccustomed to proper grammatical forms, added these vowels 
 at random, and hence the confusion of genders. 
 
 Any one of these suggestions might explain, in a general way, 
 the beginnings of abnormal forms, and once introduced, their 
 use would naturally be extended ; but I think the following 
 statement will account for the origin of the peculiarities under 
 discussion in a more satisfactory way. 
 
 mie = mio and mia ; mio = mia. 
 
 In N, where the examples of per mie' fe were noted, the 
 editor (Parodi) says the mie' is an abbreviation of the ancient 
 *miea. Where mie' is used as masculine, then, it was evidently 
 in the mind of the writer that it was an abbreviation of *mieo. 
 The scholar Carducci had such a form in mind when he wrote 
 the form with the apostrophe (cf. UU). In a discussion of 
 these and other shortened forms one must suppose that the 
 original was with an apostrophe ; to think otherwise would be 
 to become involved in inextricable difficulties. Thus mie' as 
 an abbreviation of mie-o and mie-a would naturally be used 
 for masculine and feminine alike.^ — An explanation of mio 
 (== mia) follows here, for just as the abbreviated form mie' was 
 used for both genders, so, when the regular mio was again 
 
 1 Cf. p. 15. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 19 
 
 adopted for the masculine, the difference in termination was 
 sometimes overlooked, and we find it used occasionally for the 
 feminine also. A speaker who had been accustomed to using 
 miV as an indifferent form for masculine or feminine would 
 be likely to use the regular mio and mia indifferently also ; we 
 find mia used for mio only once, however, and then for the 
 sake of the rhyme (cf. KK). 
 
 tuo = tua; suo = sua. 
 
 I think this use arose from a confusion with tuo', suo\ as 
 representing tuoi, tue, — suoi, sue. We find these forms, tuo', 
 sua' (written as often without as with the apostrophe) used 
 promiscuously for masculine and feminine (tuoe and suoe, 
 written in full, occur in L, P, U and V, — cf. Table). It is 
 easily conceivable how such a form, used thus for three parts 
 of the possessive, — tiie masculine singular and masculine and 
 feminine plural, — should have been adopted for the fourth 
 (the feminine singular). I am convinced that this supposi- 
 tion represents a highly probable mode of development of 
 these abnormal constructions, for we find that in the same 
 texts in which tuo, suo are used for one form of the possessive 
 (the feminine singular, for example) they (tuo, suo) are also 
 used for the other two forms, the masculine and feminine 
 plural [cf. Table. In BB, DD, TT, X, for example, suo is 
 thus equivalent to suoi, sue (under the form siioe) and sua'\. 
 
 sue = suo and sua ; sua = suo. 
 
 These three irregularities are found in one and the same 
 text (X) — a fact which indicates that they were peculiar to 
 this author rather than in general use (contrary to the pecu- 
 liar uses just noted which seem to have been quite widely 
 diffused ; cf. Table). This writer also used mie thus indis- 
 criminately for masculine and feminine, and may have carried 
 its last vowel, -e, to sue, or, since we have suo used for sua 
 and sue, we expect an interchange in the opposite direction, 
 
20 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 where sue is used for sua and suo. — I think any idea tliat this 
 suo was a remnant of suoe was lost with the majority of writers, 
 for we find it in many texts written without an apostrophe 
 before masculine and feminine nouns alike. Thus used, there 
 was evidently no consciousness of any correctness of termina- 
 tion, and one is not surprised to find it employed for all forms, 
 Dor, on the contrary, to see other forms substituted for it. 
 
 I do not claim that these suggestions are more than possi- 
 ble explanations of the beginnings of the irregular forms under 
 discussion. No one would suppose that in the mind of the 
 average speaker there was an idea of the existence of any ety- 
 mological ground for the irregularity he was employing. 
 
 I have offered no phonetical explanation because I cannot 
 conceive of one. The fact that masculine singular forms pre- 
 dominate does not necessarily indicate a disposition toward the 
 use of -o terminations ; for, to prove such a tendency in the 
 language would involve a demonstration that parts of speech 
 other than the singular possessive pronouns terminated thus 
 irregularly in -o, and I do not think that such a phenomenon 
 can be proved for the Italian, In addition to this, although 
 the masculine form is used in the majority of eases yet other 
 forms occur too often to admit of the possibility of such an 
 explanation even for the possessive pronouns. 
 
 a. Irregularities in the Singular have no explanation in com- 
 mon with that for the irregular plurals mia, tua, sua. 
 
 It was observed in the beginning of this essay that I do not 
 believe in any connection between the irregularities in the 
 singular just spoken of, and like ones in the plural — mia, tua, 
 sua, which remain to be discussed. My reasons for this con- 
 clusion are, 
 
 First, if mia, tua, sua are to be explained as extensions from 
 the singular to the plural, it will have to be shown that they 
 were so often used in the singular for the masculine, as well 
 as for the feminine, that they were finally adopted as the 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 21 
 
 geneml forms for both genders and numbers of the possessive 
 pronoun on account of this frequency of usage. But, as shown 
 above (cf. Table), the opposite is the case, the masculine being 
 the form most generally used, and, if such an extension had 
 been carried out, mio, tuo, suo would have been the forms 
 adopted, and not mia, tua, sua. Mia occurs only once for 
 mio (UU) and, in this instance, for rhyme ; sua for suo, only 
 twice (X). Also, because of the infrequency of such occur- 
 rences, it would be very difficult to prove that the irregularity 
 originated in the singular, — a fact which must be established 
 if it is asserted that it was extended from singular to plural. 
 
 Secondly, considering the mixture of forms noted in the 
 Table, it is natural to suppose that, for example, as suo was 
 used for sua, suoi and sue, so sue might be used for suo, sua, 
 suoi, and sua for suo, suoi, sue ; that is, there was a promiscu- 
 ous interchange of forms, and finally, for some reason, sua 
 predominated (and similarly mia predominated over mio, mie, 
 miei, and tua over tuo, tue, tuoi) ; hence these forms as found 
 in so many texts. But the fact that eiFectually annuls such a 
 supposition is, that by comparison of texts where mia, tua, sua 
 (plurals) are found with those where irregularities in the singu- 
 lar occur, we discover that only two of the texts containing the 
 mia, tua, sua forms have any irregularities in the singular (O 
 and II ; cf. Table). In these two authors the plural forms can 
 arise from no mixture with the singular, for the irregularity 
 referred to in the singular is in the use of mie for mio and suo 
 for sua (where in mie, mio, mia is not in question) ; and even if 
 sua was used for suo, there would be no connection between it 
 and sua of the pluraal (= suoi or sue). 
 
 If these two objections just given were not sufficient of them- 
 selves to militate against any supposable analogy of singular 
 and plural irregularities, either by extension from singular to 
 plural, or by crossing of singular and plural, I should still fail 
 to see the necessity of casting about for such an explanation 
 w^ien these forms {mia, tua, sua) can be logically accounted for 
 as plurals. And now, assuming it as pretty well settled that 
 
22 L. EMIL MEXGEE. 
 
 the singular plays no part in the development of such plural 
 forms (^mia, tua, sua), I shall proceed to discuss them. 
 
 3. Notice taken by early grammarians of the irregular 
 plurals, mia, tuxi, sua. 
 
 The first notice of them that I find is in the work of Mutio.^ 
 In discussing the Florentine as a model form of speech the 
 writer says fp. 12) : " Ma per Dio vegcfiamo ancora un poco, 
 quanto sia vera, che essi da' padre e dalle madre piccioli fan- 
 ciulli la buona lingua apprendauo. In quel libro del Tolomei 
 lodansi le piu Toscane citta di Toscano si da loro questo vanto, 
 che parlano, piu che le altre Fiorentinamente. Ft dicesi in 
 Firenze : / versi mia (etc., enumerating a number of similar 
 irregularities j — nelle quali non si serva ne numero, ne genere, 
 ne desinenza, ne forma di diritto parlare." 
 
 Again, a notice of them is found in a work by Beni ; ^ the 
 writer mentions defects of the Florentine speech and says (p. 
 42j : " Sicom anco il dir dua per due ; mia, tua, sua per mie, 
 tue, sue,'' etc. 
 
 4. Explanations offered by later grammarians. 
 
 Among the more modern grammarians we find these peculiar 
 forms first mentioned by Blanc.^ He says (p. 277) : " Statt 
 miei, tuoi, suoi; mie, tue, sue, liebten die Alten, besonders die 
 Florentiner, mia, tua, s'ua." He gives three examples without 
 comment. 
 
 Diez,"* Gram, n, 90, takes no notice of them, except in a 
 footnote referring to the passage in Blanc just quoted. 
 
 Korting ^ does not mention them. 
 
 ^Battaglie di Hieronimo Mutio, per difesa ddVItalica Unffua. Vinegia, 1582. 
 
 * Paolo Beni, L' Anticrxisca overo H Paragone delP Itcdiana Lingua. Padova, 
 1612. 
 
 ^Grammatik der lialianischen Sprache. Halle, 1844. 
 
 * GrammatU: der Eornani^hen Sprachen, 4^* Auflage. Bonn, 1876. 
 
 * Encydop<Mdie und Jleihodologie der romanischen Philologie. Heilbronn, 1886. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 23 
 
 The only writer who has spoken of them at length is 
 d'Ovidio, who in the Archivio Glottologico Italiano (ix, 1886 : 
 footnote, p. 54), says : " Ognun ricorda i plurali ambigeneri 
 mia, tua, sua, del toscano antico e moderno : forme popolari, 
 comparse solo sporadicamente e timidaraente, in tutti i tempi, 
 nella lingua eolta, e pur di vita tenacissima. lo vi ho sempre 
 ricouosciuto una bella continuazione del neutro plurale latino. 
 Una ipotesi, fonetica, potrebbe sorgere a contrastare la nostra 
 spiegazione morfologica dei plurali mia ecc. La grammatica 
 neo-latina, e la dialettologia italiana in ispecie, ci da copiosa 
 messe di -a epitetici oppur sostituentisi ad altre atone finali. 
 Gia finora ne siam venuti dando, a pi^ riprese, parecchi begli 
 essempj, e qui possiam aggiungere il milan. indova {= dove), 
 lad. nua, abruzz. donna (= donde), \eccese fraima {^fratelmo). 
 Or, data questa tendenza alF -a, niente, si potrebbe dire, di 
 piii naturale che i pi. fem. mie, tue ecc. direttamente, e i msch. 
 miei, tuoi ecc. mercd I'apocope dell' -i e la ritrazion dell' accento 
 fattisi mie', tuo' ecc, si riducesser tutti a mia, tua ecc. Seu- 
 nonche, appunto la tendenza all' -a per ogni altro paese e stata 
 dimostrata che per la Toscana ! E se mie' ecc. si fosse per sem- 
 plice vezzo fonetico fatto mia ecc, non si capirebbe come questo 
 vezzo non attaccasse auche le voci del singolare ! L'essere sem- 
 plici plurali quelli, 6 prova che I'origiu loro e schiettamente 
 morfologica." 
 
 a. Further suggestions which are unsatisfactory, mei > mia 
 by analogy to lei >> lia. 
 
 Meyer-Liibke, It. Gr.,^ § 375, afler quoting from this state- 
 ment of d'Ovidio, makes another suggestion to the following 
 effect : out of the shortened forms mie', tuo\ suo\ as used for 
 both genders, the full forms miei, tuoi, suoi were developed and 
 used for both genders (cf. Table). Now, just as these full two- 
 gendered forms originated in the masculine plural, so mia comes 
 from the masculine plural form mei, and then is used for both 
 
 ^Italienische Grammatik. Leipzig, 1890, 
 
 ((UHI7BIISIT. 
 
24 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 genders similarly to miei, tuoi, suoi. (Instances of mei used 
 for the feminine may be found in Crestomazia,^ p. 148, line 119, 
 le mei vertude nd le mei force ; line 120, le mei mani. But 
 occurrences of it have not been noted in Tuscan texts ; the 
 selection from which the examples just given were taken, is in 
 old Venetian). The author's explanation of mia is as follows : 
 " Wie in toskanischen Mundarten lei zu lia wird^ so konnte 
 mia aus mei auf lautlichem Wege entstanden sein, und ware im 
 XIV bis XVI Jahr. auch in die Litterarsprache, wenigstens in 
 die Prosa, gedrungen." — My objection to this theory is: mei 
 and lei as phonetical elements are not analogous, and the -ei in 
 the two words cannot be supposed to have undergone a like 
 development because of the difference in the preceding con- 
 sonants, m and /. In X, fo. &iij, occurs the form glia where 
 I mouille was probably the factor which raised e to i, and the 
 development of lia < lei (no matter at what stage of the lan- 
 guage) always went hand in hand with the pronunciation of I 
 as a mouille element; it is impossible to omit the i in pronuncia- 
 tion in removing the tongue from the mouille to a lower posi- 
 tion.^ — Further proof that ia < ei is due to the preceding / 
 mouille is found in the fact that no example of ei >- ia is noted 
 in other words ; for example, via (:= rei), dia (= dei, DEi), sia 
 (= sei, sex) do not exist.^ [Dialectic sia (2nd. pers. sing. Pres. 
 Subj.) and conditionals in -ria (for -rei) cannot be adduced as 
 established illustrations of the phonetic change under discussion 
 since there is no objection to supposing the former < V. L. 
 
 ^Creslomazia lialiana del Primi Secoli. Per Ernesto Monaci. Fascicolo 
 Primo. Citta di Castello, 1889. 
 
 ^An example of such a lia may be seen in Crestomazia, p. 22, line 114. 
 
 ^ It will probably be objected to this that the process was the reverse of what 
 I have indicated and that / did not become I mouille until after e had become 
 i. If this is true, i is the factor that developed I mouille, not I mouille the 
 one which developed i. The question cannot be decided until something 
 more definite is known as to the history of this peculiar form lia. 
 
 *0n p. 38 will be found an example of dia= dei (debes), which would 
 be a closer analogy for mei than lei is. But it probably owes its existence to 
 a confusion with the Subjunctive Present dia-< dea< deva. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 25 
 
 SEAS, and the latter had its origin in Imperfects in -ea.] A 
 further objection to mia < met is evident in tiia, sua, unless 
 these forms be regarded as analogical to mia; but I can scarcely 
 believe that forms of the second and third possessive pronoun 
 are developed by analogy with a like form of the first person. 
 
 6. Result of position in stress-group. 
 
 Again, I have taken as my norm the precept of Neumann : ' 
 "AVir miissen stets einen Satz im Auge behalten : ein Wort 
 entwickelt sich nie an sich, sondern stets nur gemass der Stel- 
 lung, die es im Satzzusammenhang einnimmt. So kaun ein 
 Wort, resp. die Silbe eines Wortes in verschiedenem Satzzu- 
 sammenhange oft ganz verschiedene Betonung haben, es kann 
 einmal den Hochton, ein ander Mai Nebenton oder gar keinen 
 accent haben, -svodurch naturgemass eine verschiedene Lautent- 
 wicklung bedingt ist." I have tried to apply this principle in 
 accounting for the development of mia, tua, sua; for example, 
 in MM, where such numbers of these irregular pronominal 
 forms occur, of the Avhole number of mia combinations found 
 (in masc. plu.) one hundred and thirty are before the noun, 
 twenty-seven after it. Of the feminine plurals (mia) six are 
 before the noun, two after it; of tua (masc. plu.) three are 
 before the noun, four after it; of sua (masc. plu.) thirty-six 
 are before the noun, fifteen after it; of sua (fern, plu.) the 
 three forms found are after nouns. But these proportional 
 uses show nothing, since the occurrence of more irregular 
 forms before than after the noun simply agrees with the con- 
 struction of the regular forms. — By glancing at the Table (p. 
 16) it will be observed that while the number of poets who 
 employ these peculiar forms is greater than that of the prose 
 writers, yet the use of them is so limited that no conclusion 
 can be drawn from a study of the metre, rhyme, etc. It is 
 evident, therefore, that the position of mia, tua, sua in the 
 sentence does not assist in discovering their origin. 
 
 ^ Literaiurblait, iii, 467. 
 
26 L. EMIL MENGEE. 
 
 c. Phonetical reductions. 
 
 The phonetical development of these forms, as mentioned 
 by d'Ovidio (cf. p. 23) was not satisfactory to him, since he 
 saw at once the inconsistency of positing that for the plnral, 
 rmV, tud', suo' were reduced to mia, tua, sua, but the singular 
 forms, mio, tuo, suo, remained unaffected. I think if such a 
 reduction had taken place, the reduced forms would have been 
 mi, tu, su, and not with an -a borrowed elsewhere, — that is, 
 reduction would have induced a shortening of the forms, not 
 merely a change of final -e to -a. There is such a mi found. 
 In O (p. 56, line 10, note) the editor (Prof Nicola Arnone) 
 says : " II mi non e che un' abbreviazione di mie'; " the sen- 
 tence in which the mi, spoken of by him, occurred was " da 11 
 occhi mi[e'] passo, etc." — Such a reduction of me'> mia will 
 be still more difficult to prove, when the examples of an oppo- 
 site reduction on p. 36 are considered ; we there observe many 
 instances of the first and third person present Subjunctive sia 
 reduced to sie; so that mie, as used in the feminine singular 
 for mia, might have been originally a reduction of the latter;^ 
 but for the opposite mie'y- mia the only analogy found is that 
 of die DiES> dia, but in this case the change is due to rhyme. 
 
 d. Mia adopted from a confusion of mie^= miei and mie'^ 
 
 mia (Sing.). 
 
 The form mie' {= *miea ?) noted above (cf. Table) might 
 have had some influence in producing the irregular mia. On 
 the supposition that it [mie') existed by the side of the short- 
 ened form of the masculine plural (mie') there might have 
 arisen in the minds of the people using them a confusion as 
 to the difference of gender and number of the two. Thus, on 
 analogy to the masculine meus a mea was formed out of which 
 developed *miea, while out of the regular mea a mia also 
 existed. We would then have : 
 
 1 Cf. p. 18. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 
 
 27 
 
 Masc. Plu. miei — mie', 
 
 Fern. Sing. *miea — wuV — mia. 
 
 Now, when mie' (fern.) ceased to be nsed and mia was the 
 only form existing, the masculine plural mie' {= same as femi- 
 nine 7nie' which is supposed to be used no more, but is replaced 
 by mia) might also have been changed to mia on account of 
 this confusion of mie' (fem. sing.) and mie' (masc. plu.). This 
 explanation I would regard as preferable to that of a phoneti- 
 cal reduction of mie' to mia, since in the latter case the -a has 
 to be explained (a thing not satisfactorily done up to the 
 present), whereas on my supposition there is a crossing of two 
 forms, one of which already had the -a. Given this analogi- 
 cal eifect as a starting point, might not subsequent speakers, 
 having lost sight of its origin (as a crossing with feminine 
 singular mia) have looked upon this mia (= mie' masc. plu.) 
 as a feminine also used indifferently for the masculine plural? 
 Then tua, sua, feminine singulars of the second and third per- 
 sons were adopted in the same manner for masculine plurals? 
 The extension of the use (of mia, tua, sua) from masculine to 
 feminine plural would be rendered all the easier from the fact 
 that so many feminine plurals also ended in -a (from the Latin 
 Neuters). The objection might be raised to this supposition 
 that these forms, mia, tua, sua, are not also extended to the 
 singular mio, tuo, suo, but the analogical development sug- 
 gested above is sufficient answer to this ; I changed the -e of 
 mie' (miei) to -a from the crossing of this form with an original 
 -a (mia); and tua, sua followed by analogy to this. Hence it 
 would be inappropriate to ask of me why tuo (sing.) does not 
 go into tua as well as tuo' (tuoi). — This development would 
 also have the merit of being evidently an early one, and there- 
 fore capable of accounting for an early appearance of mia, 
 tua, sua. 
 
 Though I hold this explanation of the phenomena before 
 us to be more plausible than those offered up to the present, 
 yet it is unsatisfactory also to me, for while it explains mia, 
 
28 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 it does not explain tua, sua, which have to be supposed as 
 analogous to mia: the latter supposition is contrary to my 
 assumption (cf. p. 25) that analogy plays no perceptible part 
 in the development of the forms under discussion. 
 
 Resume of unsatisfactory explanatioTis. 
 
 After this brief review of opinions touching the development 
 of the forms under discussion, I hold that the following explana- 
 tions of mia, tua, sua are unsatisfactory for the reasons given 
 above. 
 
 1. That they are extensions of irregularities in the singular. 
 
 2. That mia was developed from mei and then used for both 
 genders as miei, tuoi, suoi once were so used. (This I consider 
 as the strongest phonetical explanation suggested, but the pho- 
 netic improbabilities that led me to reject it strengthens more 
 firmly my confidence in the explanation given below.) 
 
 3. That the irregularities may have developed by virtue of 
 their position in the sentence, as tonic or atonic, before or after 
 the noun (or otherwise). 
 
 4. That mie\ tuo\ suo\ (= miei, tuoi, suoi) were reduced 
 phonetically to mia, tua, sua. 
 
 5. That on account of a confusion in the use of mie' (miei) 
 and mie' {^miea ?), when mia was adopted as the only form of 
 the feminine singular, mie' of the masculine plural was likewise 
 reduced to mia. 
 
 5. Mia, tua, sua are remnants of the Latin Neuter Plural. 
 
 What explanation, then, remains? A phonetical develop- 
 ment is doubted ; analogy is not admitted ; therefore, the origin 
 must be morphological, and the only morphological explana- 
 tion tenable is that mia, tua, sua rest on the old Latin Neuter 
 Plural. Strengthening such a supposition is the fact that we 
 find many remnants of the old Latin Neuter in the noun 
 present in the texts examined ; for example, in H, pp. 86, 98, 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 29 
 
 101, casteUa; T, ossa; V, Ameio, p. 56, le sua corna; p. 57, 
 le labra sua; EE, p. 21, dua ciglia ; GG, fo. q 2, dita braccia; 
 fo. d, ^e ^wa mura; II, fo. fq 6, /e sua alia; J J, p. 372, le 
 membra mia ; LL, p. 38, ossa mia ; MM, i, 390, mia lenzuola. 
 In F, p. 23, occurs tucta chotai chose. — Neuter plurals of the 
 Latin were preserved in Italian as feminine plurals when they 
 had collective significations,^ and it may be seen from the ex- 
 amples just cited that mia, tua, sua are found before such nouns. 
 I think that the existence of the irregular sua in Dante (Purg. 
 IX, 13, le sua braccia), where it has this collective signification, 
 settles beyond doubt the origin of the form as a Latin Neuter 
 Plural. What strengthens the supposition that this is a Latin 
 form is, that Dante employs the Latin sui also.^ — Now, from 
 their (mia, tua, sua) use before original Latin neuters with 
 collective meaning, they were next employed with words, not 
 derived from Latin neuters, but yet having a dual significa- 
 tion ; for example, in AA, iii, 179, mia par-enti; J J, p. 70, 
 occhi mia; MM, i, 310, mia piedi; mia (due) giovani, etc. 
 Many of the forms noted in MM were used in connection 
 with dua; in fact I think there must have been a strong 
 analogy between these pronominal forms and dua, since as 
 neuters they would often have a dual signification, and in 
 addition to this here is a word (dua) whose formation is quite 
 like that of tua, sua. Dua is used in O, GG, II, JJ, LL, 
 MM and NN, and it is to be noted that in all of these texts 
 the irregular mia, tua, sua occur, and especially that dua does 
 not occur earlier than these forms do, but they (dua, mia, etc.) 
 seem to appear together and to be used side by side, and that 
 in the same texts Latin neuter plurals of nouns are pre- 
 served. Thus all these phenomena (dua; mia, tua, sua; and 
 the nouns) appear as a revival of the Latin Neuter under the 
 influence of which all these forms seem to have arisen about 
 the same time; the other forms parallel to mia, tua, sua 
 
 iCf. Meyer-Liibke, It. Gr., ?^329 and 341. 
 
 * Cf. Zehle, Laut- und Flexionslehre in Dante's Divina Commedia. Marburg, 
 1886, p. 13 : " Neben tuoi, mioi stehen bei Dante die Latinismen stri und tui." 
 
30 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 strengthen the supposition that these (mia, tua, sua) too are 
 neuter plurals and not mere isolated examples. — Lastly, from 
 the use of these pronouns before original neuters with collec- 
 tive signification ; then before nouns, not neuters but having 
 such signification, they were used indiscriminately before sub- 
 stantives of all kinds, regardless of their meaning. 
 
 a. Time of appearance ; originated among the people ; extent 
 of employ ; conclusion. 
 
 As may be seen from the Table (p. 16) the forms under dis- 
 cussion are found in texts before Dante ; from the nature of 
 their origin (as Neuter Plurals) we would naturally expect a 
 line of direct transmission from the Latin; the fact, therefore, 
 of their occurrence in the oldest texts is further proof of their 
 oriirin from the neuter. Diez ^ remarks : " Von einem Alti- 
 talienischen im Sinne des Altfranzdsischen kann keine Rede 
 sein ; die Sprache des xiii Jh. unterscheidet sich nur durch 
 einzelne, namentlich volksmassige Formen undWorter, nicht 
 durch gram matischen Ban, von der Spatern." The same 
 applies to mia, tua, sua; they were first used by the early 
 writers who employed them conscientiously as neuter plurals; 
 from these neuter forms their use was extended by the people, 
 with whom the forms have been in vogue ever since, appear- 
 ing from time to time in literary productions. 
 
 Did these forms originate with the writers, and were they 
 carried from them to the people, or was the reverse the case ? 
 Castelvetro, speaking of other words,^ says : " Conciosia cosa 
 che i popoli non prendano i vocaboli da poeti & spetialraente 
 da simili a Dante & al Petrarca & a tali quali ha poeti la lingua 
 nostra, che a pena sono letti & intesi degli 'ntendenti huomini 
 con molto studio. — Non trassero dunque i nostri poeti le pre- 
 dette parole da volumi de provenzali, ma della commune usanza 
 del parlare italiano." I think these remarks apply also to 
 
 > Gram, i, 79. 
 
 '^ Gorretione dalcune cose del dialogo delle lingue di Varchi, et una giunta al 
 primo libro delle -prone di M. Pietro Bemho. Basilaea, 1572 ; p. 175. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 31 
 
 mia, tua, sua, and for two reasons : first, their existence in the 
 Latin, and appearance later in early Italian necessarily indi- 
 cates their preservation by the people during the time for 
 which we have no texts; and secondly, because, as may be 
 seen from the Table, they were used most frequently by 
 popular writers. 
 
 Extent of employ. The proportion in MM, where the great- 
 est number of these irregular pronouns was found, is as follows : 
 
 miei, 54 times. 
 
 mia ( miei). 
 
 157 times 
 
 tuoi, 8 
 
 
 tua ( — tuoi), 
 
 7 " 
 
 suoi, 68 
 
 
 sua ( suoi). 
 
 51 " 
 
 mie, 189 
 
 
 mia ( mie), 
 
 8 " 
 
 tue, 1 7 
 
 
 
 
 sue, 145 
 
 
 sua ( — sue), 
 
 3 " 
 
 I have marked both regular and irregular forms through- 
 out my reading, and I may give those of V as an example of 
 the small proportion of irregular to regular constructions. In 
 this author we find the regular 
 
 miei, 211 times; mie, 144 times. 
 
 tuoi, 96 " tue, 57 " 
 
 suoi, 461 " sue, 244 " 
 
 (Irregular forms from V have been given above, p. 10.) A 
 like enumeration for the other texts would show a similar 
 proportion. 
 
 Meyer-Liibke, after making his suggestion as to the develop- 
 ment of mia (cf. p. 23) remarks : ^ " Genaue Untersuchungen 
 iiber die Verbreitung von mia in alter und neuer Zeit werden 
 dariiber Auskunft geben." He and all other writers on the 
 subject treat this irregularity as specifically Florentine. I 
 have made the research he asked for, and among Florentine 
 writers of four centuries, with the results indicated above 
 
 1 It. Or. I 375. 
 
32 L. EMIL MENGEE. 
 
 Chapter II. 
 
 Eegular Forms of the Possessive Pronouns. 
 
 A. Tonic e and i in hiatus; mio; miei. 
 
 1. Pi-evious treatment oj hiatus e. 
 
 This subject has been treated, according to my knowledge, 
 as follows : Meyer-Liibke says:^ "Im Hiatus steht fiir e vor 
 i der Diphthong ie, vor den anderen Vokalen i ohne Riick- 
 sicht darauf ob e, e oder i zu Grunde liege : mio, mia, mie : 
 miei, clio, rio, di und dia, zio, sia, pria, via, io, cria. A Is 
 Buchworter sind reo bei Brunetto und Dante, We, rea bei 
 Dante zu betrachten. — Beachtenswerth sind ven.-pad. pria 
 rxeh^n piera (petra), drio Cort." — Again :^ " Vortonvokale 
 im Hiatus sind selten, meist sind i, e und u in dieser Stellung 
 schon im Vulgarlateinischen zu i, n geworden, daher furs Itali- 
 enische, Konsonanten. In Buchw5rtern oder bei sekundiirem 
 Hiatus bleibt meist der Vokal unveriindert, doch zeigt e vor 
 o and e Neigung zu i zu werden : Hone, niente aber reina." — 
 Further, d'Ovidio : ^ " i im lateinischem Hiat beharrt als i 
 oder wird wieder zu i : via, sia, pria, d% vom arch, die, dia. 
 (Indirekt gehort auch 6rio hierher, das von brioso ebriosus 
 abstrahiert wurde)." — Again :* " Es giebt eine Reihe Worter, 
 die den Diphthongen nicht haben und die doch nur volkstiim- 
 lich sein konnen : sei Verb, sei Zahlwort, e est. — Sei Verb, 
 welches es ist mit vorgeschlagenem s von sono, lautete einst 
 siei ; das erste i wurde ausgestossen durch Dissimilation und 
 auch in Folge hilufiger proclitischer Stellung des Wortes ; das- 
 selbe gilt von sei sex, obschon es ein tosc. siei nicht giebt. Die 
 Proclisis erkliirt auch ^ est." — Also : ^ " Eine eigene Gruppe 
 
 1 Jif. Cr. I 96. ^Ihid.^\^\. 
 
 ^ In Grundriss der Romanischen Philologie. Herausg. von Gustav Grober. 
 Strassburg, 1888. i, 503, § 15. 
 
 ^Grundriss, i, 512, § 26. ^Orundriss, i, 514, § 29. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 33 
 
 bilden die Worter. in denen e im Hiat steht : dies wiirde zuerst 
 zu ie iind vereiiffte sich dann unter dem Einfluss des Hiats zu 
 i: dio=^'^dico deus, arch, rio REUM, arch, cria great, mio, 
 mia, mie meus, io *eo. Gelehrt oder halbgelehrt sind dagegen : 
 dea. dei, reo, crm. In miei mei behaiiptete sich ie = e unter 
 dem Einfluss des Schkissvokals." — Finally Caix remarks: 
 " Tiitto questo c'induce a concludere che nella prima lingua 
 poetica Ie forme con e dovettero essere di gran lunga Ie piii 
 frequenti. — Ma nel Toscano fin dai piii antichi documenti non 
 s'incontrano che forme con /. Dante scrisse Deo solo in rima 
 e il Petrarca rarameute meo. — Da notare e solo qnanto a REUS 
 che rio e del verso, e reo della prosa." 
 
 These quotations include many words which will come up 
 for discussion in the present division of this monograph ; their 
 occurrence, as well as other forms to be considered, is repre- 
 sented as follows in the texts consulted : 
 
 to,— A20,=' B133, C rule,-^ Do, E20, F rule, Gl, H4, 111, 
 JllO, K161, L4, N rule, 026, P rule, Q rule, Rl, S16 ; rule 
 in T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, EE, FF, GG, HH, JJ, 
 KK, MM, NN, OO, PP, QQ, RE, SS. 
 
 eo,— A57, B26, E75, Fl, LI 4, 04, SI, XI. 
 
 mio—AU, B59, C rule, E6, F rule, Gl, 12, J15, K46, 
 L4, N rule, 05 ; rule in P, Q, S(7), T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, 
 AA, BB, CC, DD(19), EE, FF, GG, HH, JJ, KK, LL, 
 MM, NX, OO, PP, QQ, RR, SS, TT(8). 
 
 meo— ASS, B32, E76, L2, CCl, XI. 
 
 mia,— Bl 26, C rule, E48, F rule, 13, Jll, K21, O rule, P 
 rule, Q rule, Rl, SI, Tl ; rule in U, V, X, Z, AA, BB(32), 
 DD(13), EE, FF, GG, HH, KK, MM, PP, TT. 
 
 mea, — El, X2. 
 
 ^Orioivi della Linijua Poetica Italiana. Firenze, 1880. § 14. 
 
 * The numeral following a capital letter represents the number of times 
 a form occurs in the given author. 
 
 * ' Rule ' indicates that a given form is found to the exclusion of variants 
 of the same. 
 
34 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 mie. 
 
 3— B5, Gl, J2, K3, M2, Rl, T12, U2, V144, X rule, 
 Y2, Z7, AA16, BBl, CC5, DDl, EE25, FF13, GG34, JJ24, 
 LL8, MM189, SS20, TT3. 
 
 dio—Kl, B20, C rule, D2, E2, F rule, Gl, H14, 19, J42, 
 K153, L4, M30, N rule, P31, Q rule, R2, S2 ; rule in T, U, 
 V, W, X(10), Y, Z, A A, BB, DD(4), EE, FF, HH, JJ, KK 
 (51), LL, MM, NN(135), PP, SS. 
 
 deo—A.12, BIO, E4, Lll, Pl,^ XI. 
 
 diet {= fem. of d/o),— Xl,2 FFl.^ 
 
 dee {= fem. plu. of dio),— P2,* V4,^ Y rule, LL2. 
 
 Ho,— B3, El, F rule, K2, N rule, P2, SI, V2, X14, Z rule, 
 AA rule, BB2, CCl, FF2, GG7, HH rule, JJ5, KKIO, MM 
 rule, NN44, PP rule, SS5, TT2. 
 
 reo,— A2, B12, Nl, P7, V8, X14, FF6, GG6, 114, JJl, 
 NN4, SS4. 
 
 ria,—QA, F rule, HI, K2, N rule, P5, SI, VI, X3, AA 
 rule, BBl, FFl, GG3, HH rule, JJ3, KKll, MM rule, 
 NN37, PP rule, SS4, TTl. 
 
 rm,— El, N2, PI, V13, X9, BB2, CCl, FF2, GG5, III, 
 KK1,NN26, SS13. 
 
 rie,—F rule, Hi, Kl, N3, NN3. 
 
 ree—M.1, N2, PI, NN4. 
 
 >,— B5, El, Ol, XI. 
 
 feo—Bl,' HI. 
 
 pz'o, — O, T, V, SS. 
 
 jpia, — V. 
 
 mei, — All examples of this have been given above (cf. 
 Table, p. 16). 
 
 m/ei,— A2, B4, C rule, F rule, J4, K4, L3, M9, N22, OlO, 
 Rl, SI, V211, X rule, Y8, Z8, AA44, BB7, CCll, DDl, 
 
 ^ Purg. XVI, 35 : veo : feo. * fo. hiij : profecia : maria. 
 
 'p. 184: Singular mia madonna ed alma dia. These are the only exam- 
 ples found of clia; in all other cases the Latin dea is preserved. 
 *Purg. XXXII, 3 ; Par. xxviii, 41. 
 ^Ameto, pp. 11, 65, 86. «p. 121: reo: feo. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 35 
 
 EE26, FF15, GG28, HH rule, JJ70, KK35, LL8, MM54, 
 NN44, PP rule, SS28, TT5. 
 
 dei,—J.4, P4, Xll, Y6, BBl, LL6, NNIO, SS rule. 
 
 dn,—K2, PI/ T71, V124,2 X2, Yl, BB5, EEl, OO. 
 
 rei—BS, 14, K2, LI, Ml, Tl, V rule, X6, FF4, TTl. 
 
 riei, — F9. 
 
 rii—Fl.^ 
 
 lei,—B[, CI, F rule, LI, O rule, T, X rule. 
 
 liei—Gl,' Jl,= K2, Ll,« Nl,^ TT4.« 
 
 sei (=ES),— CI, P, Fl, V rule, X, Y rule, Zl, II rule, 
 LL3, SSrule, FFl. 
 
 siei (=sei, Es), — Jl.^ 
 
 piedi {= pedes), — H, 14, U rule, X. 
 
 piei—R2, J2, K3, X3, TT rule. 
 
 pel, — XL 
 
 dei (= DEBES),— C5, F112, Ml, N2, 01, P, T3, V rule, 
 X3, Z rule, GG4,i» llj^ sg4_ 
 
 diei (= dei, debes), — K6." 
 
 se' {=sei, ES),— F20, Nl,^^ Ol, P, SI, Zll, BBl, CCl, 
 FFl, GG, LL, TTl. 
 
 see (= set:),— N3.^^ 
 
 sie {=sei)—FS,'' P2,^^V1,^« TT2.^7 
 
 1 Also pii (plu. of pio) : Purg. XXI, 24; Par. IX, 26. 
 
 '^ dei occurs also in V. 'Inf. xxii, 22: desii: rii: partii. 
 
 *p. 35. *p. 41. 6 p. 198. 'p. 3. 
 
 ^pp. 56, 59, 80 {liei: miei), 109. In this author occur also, p. 76, costiei: 
 piei; p. 78, costiei: miei; p. 82, coliei. 
 
 '*Cf. Creslomazia, p. 161, line 10. Same line, utiei. 
 
 ^"Here also debi; cf. fo. b 3. 
 
 " First example is on p. 28. Occurrences of giudei, sei (sex), bei (bevi) 
 have been noted, but they do not occur in any of the texts examined, under 
 diphthongized forms. 
 
 '2 p. 267. '3pp_69, 215. 
 
 '* First ex. p. 5. '^ Purg. xxv, 11. 
 
 >' Decam. fo. Bb : tu sie il ben venuto. 
 
 "p. 86 : tu, sie la ben trovata; p. 87 : sa' che tu, sie si crudel. 
 
 
 *-»3r 
 
36 L. EMU. MEXGER. 
 
 sie {= 1st pers. Subj. Pres.) — TTl/ Pl.^ 
 
 sie (= 2nd pers. Siibj. Pres.) — P3,^ V5/ 112; TT4.« 
 
 sie {= 3rd pers. Subj. Pres.),— PI / V3.« 
 
 sia{=sm), — Pl.^ 
 
 §ii(=sei, ES)— V2/''Z1." 
 
 dia {= 3d. pers. Subj. Pres. of dare),— C rule, Fl, HI, J7, 
 Kl, Nl, Rl, T rule, DDS, KK6, TTl. 
 
 dea (= 3d. pers. Subj. Pres. of dare),— BS, Dl, MS,^^ X2,^* 
 P2," YQ.'' 
 
 dii (= 2nd. pers. Subj. Pres. of dare), — Yl.^® 
 
 die (= 3d. pers. Subj. Pres. of dare), — DDl.^^ 
 
 ^ p. 55 : d'onorar un tal giomo non sie ingrato. 
 
 *Purg. XX, 14: prima clie {io) sie morto. 
 
 ^Purg. XVI, 5 : Guarda, che da me tu non sie mozzo ; Par. xv, 16 : bene- 
 delto sie lu; Par. xxix, 22: sie {tu) certo. 
 
 * Decam. fo. C (twice) ; fo. Lb; fo. Miij ; fo. Y. 
 
 = fo. ez: fa {tu) che non sie polaco ne tedesco; fo. fq. 8: Fiolo mio, sie 
 vago du dire cosa ecc. 
 
 ^p. 58: che tu non sie veduto; p. 78: che tu s/e nostra; vogliam che tu 
 sie la nostra dama ; p. 86 : che tu sie benedetta. 
 
 ' Purg. XXX, 36 : Perche sie colpa. Sie is the reading of three of the 
 Mss., sia that of one. 
 
 ^Decani, fos. Cij ; Cbj6; Xiij. 
 
 ^ Purg. XX, 4 ; one Ms. here reads : maladetta sia tu, the three others sie. 
 
 '^"Decani, fo. Obj 2: quanto tu sii da me amata ; Amelo, p. 78: tu sola sii 
 donna di me. 
 
 '^ tu sii la ben tornata. Cf. here // Torto e il Diriito del non si Pud, dato in 
 giudicio sopra molie regole della lingua Italiana. Esaminato da Ferrante Lon- 
 gobardi. Roma, 1655, p. 77: Tu sii e tu sia si dice ugualmente bene ne 
 tempi che cotal terminatione ricevono. E simile delle altre maniere de' 
 verbi che '1 soffrono ; avegna che alcuni scrittori e infra gli altri il Boccaccio 
 habbiano piu volentieri finiti cosi fatti tempi delle seconde persone in i 
 che in a. 
 
 '«pp. 25, 35. 13 pp. 50, 457. 
 
 '*Inf. XXXIII, 42: Innanzi ch'Atropos mossa le dea; Purg. xxi, 5: Dio 
 vi dea pace. 
 
 ^^Decani. fo. Jbj 8, 9: Dio gli dea il buon anno ; Dio mi dea la gratia sua ; 
 fo. Hjv : se Dio ti dea buona ventura, etc. 
 
 ^^Ameto, p. 50: innanzi che tu dii materia di turbamento. 
 
 " Dio ti die grazia. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 37 
 
 deano {= 3d. pers. Plu. Subj. Pres. of dare), — VI. ^ 
 
 stia (= 3d. pers. Pres. Subj. of .store),— Bl, II, Kl, Rl, Ti. 
 
 stea {= 3d. pers. Pres. Subj. of stare),— B2, M2,2 PS,^ VlO," 
 
 stii (= 2nd. pers. Subj. Pres. of store),— BBl.'' 
 steano (=3rd. pers. Plu. Subj. Pres. of store), — VI. ^ 
 
 deve,—C2, SI, T4, SS3. 
 
 dee {=deve),—B2, C7, D9, E2, F6, H3, 116, M3, N30, 
 P, R4, S7, Tl, Vrule, XI, AA2, FFl, GG4, KK6, LL6, 
 SS5. 
 
 de {= deve),—B7, C5, Dl, F68, H6, Nl, P, S6, T5, U rule, 
 XI, Z8. 
 
 de {=dei, debes), — F28, Zl.^ 
 
 di (= deve), — N.^ 
 
 die {= deve),— G rule,'' J7, K12,ii N3,^=^ S2, T9, EEl.^^ 
 
 ^Deeam. fo. Dbj 2. 
 
 ^ pp. 10, 13 : non piaccia clie I'anima s<ea in prigione. 
 ^ Inf. XXXIII, 41 : Come il mio corpo slea ; Purg. ix, 48, Quando a cantar 
 con organi si stea ; Purg. xvii, 28 : Se i pie si stanno, non slea tuo sermone ; 
 Par. II, 33 : Fa che * * * ti slea un lume ; Par. xxxi, 15 : E spera gia ridir 
 com' ello stea. 
 
 *Ameto, p. 39 : che seguer i suoi piacer, convien che stea 
 A tal dover con I'animo suggetto, 
 Che quel che se non vuole, altrui non dea. 
 
 ibid. p. 43 : voi dovete imaginare come egli stea. ibid. p. 61 : 
 
 Et di quel caldo tal frutto si crea 
 Che se ne acquista il conoscere iddio 
 Et come vada, & venga, & dove stea. 
 
 ibid. p. 77 : sia adunque * * * et dea al vero efFetto. Decam. fo. Hbj 4 : luna 
 qui si stea dentro ; also fos. Pbj 2, Qbj, Xiij, Yb, Aaiij, Aabj 9. 
 
 * XXIX, 26. ^ p. 8 : non vo' che iu stii. 
 
 ''i)eca?n. fo. Xiij. ^p. 61. 
 
 ^p. 24: vostra fine non di' essare. There is a note to this as follows 
 Intendi, di' per die, o dee, o de'. Come qui presso ed altrove: de' essare. 
 
 '" deve, dee and de' do not occur in this text. 
 
 ^^ First example, p. 36. 
 
 '*p. 12: si die pensare; p. 34: gli porti '1 censo che gli die dare; p. 37 : 
 uomo die morire. ''che die venire. 
 
38 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 die (= dei), — K4.^ 
 
 dea{=deva),—Sl, FF2.2 
 
 dia {= deva), — S4.^ 
 
 dia{=dei),—Tl.' 
 
 dei {= deve), — F7/ 
 
 deono {= devono),—J)l, H4, J3, Nl, V rule, Z2. 
 
 diano (= devono), — Ll/ 
 
 dieno (= devono), — PI 7 
 
 dia {= dies),— DD2.« 
 
 Die {= Dio, Deus),— DD1,« TTl. 
 
 leone—1, Ml, N3, 01, P5, T8, X, Y, BB rule, GG22, 
 SS3, LL5. 
 
 lione,—Elb, PI, Tl, CC], GG51. 
 
 leoni,—Ml, Nl, T3, GG2, SSI. 
 
 lioni,—N\^, GG5. 
 
 leale,—A\, Bl, El, M rule, N49, S rule, FF rule. 
 
 ^An evident contraction of diei. 
 
 *p. 100: dea: Citerea; p. 120: come dea far chi vuol prender dottrina. 
 
 ' The variants of different Mss. of the canzoni of this author read alter- 
 nately dee, die, dia and dea. The two latter are equivalent to deve in mean- 
 ing, but the -a shows that they must be substitutions of Subjunctive for 
 Indicative. 
 
 * priego che tu mandi colui die tu dia mandare. 
 
 ^p. 9: parolle non dei usare chi, etc. p. 12: ti dei muovere; p. 66: s'ella 
 si fae si come non dei ; p. 66: (egli) non dei curare. — Aside from any pho- 
 netic reason that may be assigned for this form, a reasonable explanation 
 may be found in the indiscriminate use of dei for both second and third 
 person singular. On the same page occurs a direct admonition: "tu non 
 dei, ecc," and immediately afterward follows an indefinite statement: "egli 
 non dei, ecc." 
 
 *p. 200 : le gioie che d'amore diano venire. 
 
 ' Purg. XIII, 7 : Esser dieii sempre li tuoi raggi duci. — In various texts 
 occur the forms beo (bevo), creo (credo), veo (veggio). In N are many examples 
 of bee, bea (of. pp. 158, 471) which are always printed with the circumflex 
 accent, hie, bea, as is also die. 
 
 * p. 5 : dia : mia ; p. 31 : dia : partia ; die also occurs in a few cases. 
 ® p. 15 : Die ti mantenga. 
 
 lOp. 72: che Z)ie gli dia. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 39 
 
 Hale— hi, N26. 
 leali—^U. 
 liali,— ^10. 
 Ieanza—B1,C\,E1,^4. 
 
 lianza, — N6. 
 
 reale— rule in H, I, N(3), T, BB, FF, SS. 
 
 reame,— CI, H rule, JIO, M4, Nl, rule in T, V, X, Z. 
 
 torneamento, — N35, PI. 
 
 torniamento, — N22, PI . 
 
 neuno,—F rule, 17, J27, K9, L2, M3, N14, VI, Z13. 
 
 nmno,—C\, H28, 127, M18, NlOO, T16, V4, Zl, EE, II 
 
 rule. 
 
 nexma,—F rule, 14, J13, K7, L4, N32, Z3. 
 
 wmna,— H8, 124, MS, N102, F5, EE rule.^ 
 
 neente,—C\, K3, M15, S3, Z15. 
 
 niente,-Q, H3, 18, K5, SIO, rule inV, X(2), Y, Z(20), FF, 
 II, LL(1). 
 
 The examples given above (pp. 33-39) will now be used 
 in the consideration of three questions which arise in a study 
 of hiatus E : 
 
 Does hiatus prevent the development of i> ef 
 
 Does hiatus close e, thus making it i f 
 
 Does hiatus prevent the development of E> ief 
 
 2. Does hiatus prevent the development ofi>ef 
 
 Where i is found alike in a Latin and Italian word, has it 
 been preserved in the latter directly from its Latin form, or 
 has it first developed into e (as it does in positions other than 
 hiatus) and then been raised again to i ? In a treatment of 
 this question, the following words must be considered : brio, 
 dia and die, pio, pria, quia, sia, stria, via. 
 
 1 The proportional use in the Bandi Lucchesi del sec. XIV. Bologna, 1863, 
 is: neuno, 42, neuna, 118. 
 niuno, 9, niuna, 3. 
 
40 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 brio (< EBRio, — aee).^ 
 
 This word does not occur as breo, 
 
 dia and die {= diem). 
 
 That this word passed through an e- stage (*cZe, *c?ea) is 
 hardly probable ; a comparison with other Romance languages 
 indicates that it did not thus develope in a part of the field, at 
 least; for it is found preserved in Sardinian {die), Proven§al 
 {dis, dia), Old French [die) and Spanish {dio). 
 
 pio (= Pius). 
 
 Corresponding to this is jjio, Span.,2)m-s Prov., and no pre- 
 ceding e- stage is to be supposed for either of these languages. 
 
 pria (= pria). 
 
 This Avord exists only in Italian, and no preceding *prea 
 has been noted for it. 
 
 quia (=: quia). 
 
 It is hardly to be questioned that quia is a preservation of 
 the Latin form. 
 
 sia {= SIM and sit). 
 
 In this set of Tuscan texts examined by me, no form sea 
 occurs. It is remarkable that authors who use dia and dea 
 [dare), stia and stea (stare)^ should seem to recognize sia as 
 the only form for this verb ; the fact that dea and stea are 
 found in the earliest texts and as late as Bojardo, while sea 
 does not so occur, seems to indicate that, for the Tuscan, sea 
 never existed. The parallelism does not appear between the 
 Tuscan and northern dialects, such as will be noted in the case 
 of hiatus tj.^ The latter developed o in both of the territories 
 just indicated but e out of hiatus i is found only in the North.* 
 
 lAscoli, Archil: Qlot. Itai, in, 455. ^ cf. p. 36. 3 Cf. p. 61. 
 
 * Examples of sea may be found in the Ch-estomazia : pp. 86, 1. 44 ; 102, 1. 
 20; 105,1. 147; 112,1. 113; 113,1. 134; 135,1. 15; 137,1.28; 141, 1.87; 
 145, 1. 14, 20; 146, 1. 41, 48, 55; 147, 1. 65, 66.— A statement as to the dis- 
 like of the Tuscan for the e-forms is found in Ampliatione delLa lingua volgare 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 
 
 41 
 
 This word should not be included in the examples given by 
 Meyer-Liibke/ for from his rule we are to understand that 
 all words mentioned there passed through an g-stage. The 
 explanation of the word as given in § 448 contradicts this sup- 
 position, however, and seems to imply that the i is supposed 
 to have remained: " Der Konjunktiv sia erkliirt sich aus 
 jilterem SiM durch Anfiigung des Konjunktiv -a." 
 
 stria (= stria). 
 
 The I is kept here also in Fr. strie,~ Span, estria. 
 
 via {== viam). 
 
 Via and sia are parallel in their development. Fr. voie, 
 soil leave no room for doubt that for this language there was 
 a preceding vea, seat (later veie, seit > voie, soit). But for 
 the Tuscan no vea is found. 
 
 These examples show that in Tuscan no e-stage is to be 
 supposed for words which have lived on with primary hiatus i. 
 
 To this list must be added words that have originally Latin 
 i, which is retained in both primary and secondary hiatus : zio 
 (*thiltm), stio (aestIvum), vie (vIve), rio (poetic form of nvo 
 < rivum). 
 
 Also to be added are sio (botanical), ghio (maritime), trio, 
 dia ('divine,' Par xiv, 11 ; xxiii, 36 ; xxvi, 3), spio and /o. 
 The germanic/e^M gave in Italian /zo and /<?m(/o, and the e in 
 the example o^feo (cited above, p. 34) was probably introduced 
 from analogy to feudo. 
 
 Thus, the answer to our first question (Does hiatus prevent 
 the development of i>e?) must be given in the affirmative; 
 
 by M. Vitale Papazzoni. Venetia, 1587, p. 5 : " Dea per dia dal Verbo dare, 
 usano alcuni moderni contra '1 commun' uso degli altri, & non so perche. 
 Ke io per me lascierei il niio i^L- degli altri solito dia, salvo se non volessi 
 parer piu tosto Napolitano die Toscano o Lombardo ragionevole." 
 
 1 It. Gr. I 96. Kule quoted above, p. 32. 
 
 * cf. Scheler, Dictionnaire d' Etymologie Frangaise. 3me Ed. Paris et Brux- 
 eUes, 1888. p. 476. 
 
42 
 
 L. EMIL MENGEE. 
 
 the Tuscan treats alike i and i in hiatus, since it preserves 
 both of them.^ 
 
 3. Does hiatus close E, thiis making it if 
 
 This question has been considered by d'Ovidio/ and his 
 conchision is (p. 37) : '^ Nessun certo esempio, adunque, ci 
 occorre di e da e lat., o di e romanza qualunque, che si chiuda 
 in i per I'iato." A difficulty arises here because of the lack of 
 examples of original Latin hiatus e, the rule being, as given 
 by Seelmann :^ "Kiirzung von vocalen konnte erfolgen, wenn 
 denselben direct andere folgten." There is one case, however, 
 of e in secondary hiatus before e, with the result that it was 
 raised to i; this e (afterward i) was also long, and hence could 
 not have been diphthongized (>ie) and reduced later to i. 
 This example is die (== dee = deve, cf. p. 37). It is treated 
 by d'Ovidio, but the only example of its occurrence which he 
 found was that from "un antico testo/orsefiorentino." Caix* 
 mentions "die, dia-no accanto a dea, forma del conjiuntivo che 
 in Guittone vale anche per Findicativo," and again (p. 220) 
 " in Barberino tanto dea, quanto dia e dieno occorrono piii 
 volte." The examples gathered from our texts show a more 
 extended use of the forms than these quotations would indi- 
 cate. For die there can be but one explanation ; its Latin 
 original was debet and hence the tonic e never diphthong- 
 ized ; the immediate predecessor of the present form was dee^ 
 and the hiatus position of e is the only cause which suggests 
 itself for the raising of this e to i. — Similarly in the plural, 
 
 ^None of the words thus far treated are covered by Meyer-Liibke's rule 
 (/if. Gr. I 96) since the beginning of the rule — "Im Hiatus steht fiir e" — 
 implies that all words mentioned under it were either originally E or e < i ; 
 in either case, he supposed an e-stage to have preceded any later change. 
 The rule would even seem to imply that the i in *thium developed *zeOy 
 then 210, as this example is found among those given under the rubric. 
 
 "^Arch. Glot. It. IX, 35-37. 
 
 ^ Die Aussprache des Latein. Heilbronn, 1885, p. 79. 
 
 * Origini, p. 219, § 215. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PEONOUNS. 43 
 
 apart from the variants of the ending -ono; as, -ano or -eno,^ 
 the change of e> i is due to hiatus position." The form cW 
 (z=z dee) as found in N in the construction dVessare might seem 
 to have developed in pretonic position (in which position every 
 E > r;^ as, misura < mensuram, sicuro < securum), and if 
 die is understood to have thus developed, hiatus would not 
 enter here into consideration. But the tendency for pretonic 
 E to become i was a popular one, and if the e in dee had thus 
 become i, the resultant form that would have been used most 
 frequently and been preserved, would be die, not dee, just as 
 we have misura, sicuro and many similar words with i, not e. 
 The fact that dee has always been the more common form 
 indicates, therefore, that die is not a development due to pre- 
 tonic position, but that the word developed independently, 
 the first e becoming i because of its hiatus position. 
 
 Bea, stea (< dare, stare) may have developed later into dia, 
 stia through the closure of e > i in hiatus, but these words 
 cannot be adduced as reliable examples of such a change, since 
 it is probable that they became dia, stia, by analogy to sia ; * 
 reciprocal influences of dare, stare and essere forms con- 
 stantly occur in the Romance languages. 
 
 a. Further proof of e > i in hiatus : conditionals in -ria. 
 
 We must here consider conditionals in -ria instead of -m,* 
 the former being < the Infinitive with Imperfect otavere; the 
 latter (-rei) offers nothing for consideration in connection with 
 the present topic (of e being raised to i by hiatus). The suc- 
 cessive stages of development of this -ria formation may be 
 
 ^ And in F deuno is found. 
 
 ■^ Dieno is not to be supposed as analogical to forms like sieno or condi- 
 tionals like sarieiw, for in these cases the preceding stage was siano, sariano; 
 the point to be noted in dieno is not the ending -eno but the fact that e>i 
 before this ending, however the latter may have originated. (Cf. Gruiidriss, 
 I, 540, § 94 : 1st ea in von einem konsonanten gefolgt, so ensteht daraus ie 
 also avia, avieno, etc.") 
 
 »Cf. Meyer-Liibke, It. Gr. § 123. 
 
 * Cf. Meyer-Liibke, It. Gr., ^ 461. * Ibid., U -103, 404. 
 
44 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 traced in our texts. First, in 1j, we find the Imperfect alone 
 used for the Conditional (p. 203) : " chesso dicea quelli ke 
 fugera delabatallia non fugera dalicani, ke le sue carne facia 
 alimastini magiare ; " — (p. 208) : " el medico di Pirro venue 
 a Fabritio celatamente e disseli ke selli livolea dare cotanto 
 avere chelli ucidea Pirro." The next step was -rea, which is 
 found represented in the same text (L) in forms such as mecta- 
 rea (p. 200), piaccierea (p. 202), averea (p. 211), sirea (p. 212). 
 The last stage was -7-ia. This form is found as follows : ^ 
 All, B77, C44, E29, K2, L9, N42, 012, P69, S24, T15,V74, 
 X7, Y8, Z24, BB7, CC2, DD4, EEl, FFl, GG34, 116, LL8, 
 SS21, TT5. Is this an example of hiatus e {-rea) raised to i 
 {-ria) ? If we accept the testimony of Castelvetro we must 
 answer in tlie negative. In his work cited (p. 30) p. 190 he 
 is discussing a number of words which, according to Bembo, 
 Petrarch took from the Proven9al, among them havia, solia, 
 credia ; of these he observes : " Niuno nega, che non sia uso 
 della Provenza il dire havia, solia, credia, ma cio non basta a 
 provar lo 'ntendimento del Bembo. Adunque bisognerebbe 
 che egli potesse negare con verita, che fosse o fosse stato uso 
 d'una buona parte d'ltalia mai, & spetialmente della patria 
 mia, nella quale non solo si dice havia, solia, credia, ma anchora 
 haviva, soliva, crediva, doude e non di Provenza I'hauno prese 
 <fe il Petrarca & Dante & gli altri poeti Italiani." If the Im- 
 perfect was in this form — ia (-iva) — at the time of its junction 
 with the Infinitive to form the Conditional, there would be no 
 further explanation necessary for the -rm.^ But an observance 
 of imperfects occurring in our texts shows that forms in -ia 
 were exceptional ; if the latter had been the prevalent form 
 (instead of -ea) his explanation would have been accepted and 
 numerous subsequent discussions avoided. Nor is it to be sup- 
 
 ^ The numerals to the right of author mentioned refer, as usual, to the 
 number of times this form occurs in the given author. 
 
 ''And Castelvetro in his Conditional gives Infinitive with -ibam, etc. Cf. 
 Modern Language Notes, vii, 243 : " Lebrija and the Romance Future Tense " 
 (A. M. E). 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 45 
 
 posed that avea, etc., when joined to the Infinitive, became 
 avia, etc., by analogy to Imperfects of the fourth Conjugation 
 (in -ia), for the number of verbs in the latter is too small, as 
 compared with those in the other conjugations, to have exer- 
 cised such an influence. D'Ovidio suggests ^ that aveva being 
 a "voce servile" when joined to the Infinitive might have 
 undergone an alteration (> {av)ia) which it did not suffer when 
 used alone ; in this connection it is to be remarked that the 
 majority of words found under this form of the conditional 
 {-ria) in our texts are words frequently used ; such as, saria, 
 potria, avria, vorria, dovria, andena,faria, vema, etc., which 
 would support his suggestion ; for, naturally, words most fre- 
 quently used are the first to be affected by phonetic changes, 
 and the change from -rea to -ria may have begun with these 
 vocables. If we admit that the change thus took place, the 
 cause of the variation is still a question ; and until a better 
 reason is offered the phenomenon may well be attributed to 
 the raising of e to i by hiatus. Why then did not the e in the 
 syncopated imperfects, such as avea, dovea, facea, vedea, etc., 
 also become i? The following is offered as a possible explana- 
 tion (which, as far as I know, has not hitherto been suggested) 
 for this anomaly, and also helps to establish the probability of 
 the raising of e to i in the Conditional : in searching for like 
 developments where e > i, our attention is attracted to a cer- 
 tain set of words, now definitely fixed in form, which represent 
 the lost stage of growth preceding the final development. These 
 words had originally e + Vowel, but they now have i -f Vowel, 
 and for this reason their development may be compared with 
 that of the Conditional {-rea > -ria) : Hone (leonem), niimo 
 (NEC + unum), niente (nec +*entem), and similar. Here 
 the regular products are represented by neiente (B13, El, 
 F14), beiendo (N), beiamo (II), leiale, (R), Tarpeia (P). Such 
 variants [that is, those with an i betAveen e and o (m)] do not 
 occur for Hone, niuno. Does this not show a difference 
 
 ^Arch. Glot. It., IX, 35. 
 
46 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 between the quality of the e (i) before o and u and that of 
 the e before a and e, or that there was an uncertainty in the 
 latter case (evidenced by the wa'iting ei) which was not felt 
 in the former? If so, is not the following suggestion as to 
 these words justifiable? Before o and u (leone, neuno) e passes 
 directly to i, all traces of the intervening consonant (c) in the 
 latter word being lost ; before a and e uncertainty prevails 
 as to the pronunciation before the adoption of the i ; this un- 
 certainty is represented by the writing of both vowels, ei (neiente, 
 leiale, beiamo). Now where the intervening consonant definitely 
 drops, the e brought before e, a, developes into i (niente, Hale) ; 
 where it sometimes disappears (beanio), again does not (bevamo), 
 the consciousness of use of the consonant prevents the develop- 
 ment of e > t in the cases where it is dropped [hence we have 
 beo (bevo), creo [credo), veo [veggio], etc.]. — Now, if we apply 
 this to the development of the Imperfect (aveva) and the Con- 
 ditional (avria), the v of the former is never forgotten, and a 
 collection of comparative uses of -eva and -ea terminations in 
 our texts shows the two side by side, no author employing the 
 -ea to the exclusion of the -eva form. It was not to be expected 
 that e in the latter (-era) should develope i, the only case in 
 which it might be expected to do so being when the v drops; 
 but the V does not drop leaving -ea as the only foim, so that 
 even when -ea is used, the consciousness of the -eva is never 
 absent from the mind of the speaker and prevents the develop- 
 ment of -ea > -ia otherwise to be expected, since the speech- 
 consciousness with reference to -ea was exactly the same as that 
 of -eva. It is therefore no argument against this theory (namely, 
 hiatus raises e > /) that avea, dovea, etc., do not develop avia, 
 dovia, etc. But if this v was present to prevent said change 
 (-ea > -ia) in the Imperfect when used alone, the condition was 
 altered when the same Imperfect, avea, was joined to the In- 
 finitive to form the Conditional. No Tuscan text shows the 
 form dovreva. A few dialects may show such forms,^ but they 
 
 ^ Cf. Grundriss. i, 544, ? 103 : " Dialekte bewahren i Sg. noch rein : bresc. 
 bol. portai-eve." 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS, 47 
 
 were at no time the rule, nor was it natural that they should 
 be, for such a form was cumbersome and liable to reduction. 
 It is not claimed, however, that such Conditionals (in -via) 
 originated in the Tuscan ; whatever may be their source, the 
 fact still remains that they are found in Tuscan only as -rea 
 and -ria; whenever they were introduced they were subject to 
 phonetic tendencies already existing in Tuscan, and the })ho- 
 netic trend that may explain -rea > -ria is the raising of hiatus 
 e to i ; no traces of the (once) intervening v are preserved ; our 
 consciousness of its presence, if it existed, has been lost. — As 
 a resume we have : Conditionals in -ria are examples of the 
 raising of hiatus e {-rea) to i {-ria) ; the diflerence between its 
 development (> ia) and that of similar forms with an original 
 intervening v {-eva, -evo, etc.) being, that in the Conditional the 
 V was dropped early and definitely, in the other cases it has 
 been preserved up to the present time. Even when it was 
 dropped, the consciousness of its presence in the form allied to 
 it (with v) prevented the usual hiatus development of e > i. 
 The fact, therefore, that in our texts words which, for the most 
 part, have preserved their v do sometimes (after the fall of the 
 v) develope e > / is a strong proof of the phonetic tendency 
 just noted ; such words are die {= dee = deve) and imperfects 
 like eredia, avia (A), volia (J), paria (Purg. ii, 18), solia (S), 
 tenia, rompia, paria (T), tenia, sapia (X), prendia, rendia, volia, 
 avia (DD), avia, facia, eredia, riprendia (FF),faeia, dicia, avia 
 (GG), etc. ; in these instances, in spite of the corresponding 
 forms aveva, credeva, etc., avea, credea, etc., show the tendency 
 to raise the e> iin hiatus and develope avia, eredia, etc. 
 
 Our second question (Does hiatus cause e to become i) is, 
 then, answered in the affirmative, except for the cases to be 
 considered in our next question. 
 
 4. Does hiatus prevent the development of E^ie? 
 
 There is no doubt as to this development of e when found 
 before i: miei, riei, liei, costiei, siei (es), diet (debes). The 
 
 K 1*' "i 
 
 I7BRSlTvl 
 
48 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 last example (diei) which is < del (from debes), with an origi- 
 nal long E, seems to indicate that all e's when brought before 
 i could be treated as open and diphthongize. In the next 
 following section of this essay the same phenomenon will be 
 met with in respect to hiatus p < u, which diphthongizes before 
 i (nqi'^nuoi, soi'^suoi); it appears, therefore, that for the 
 Italian no exception to hiatus rules need be made for these 
 words, but examples show that in this language o and e are 
 treated as o and e when before i.^ Here, then, the Italian 
 offers a divergence from tlie general rule for such v^owels : 
 " Des voyelles qui ne furent en contact qu' a la suite de lois 
 phon6tiques propres au latin vulgaire conserv&rent la nuance 
 en rapport avec leur ancienne quantite ; ainsi on eut lUS de — 
 ivus, siAT de sit, eo de ego," ^ — the divergence being that 
 when an i directly follows o or e these vowels may become 
 open, though they were originally long. 
 
 a. Does meus > mieo f 
 
 Is e before o, g, o, diphthongized as is the case before it 
 The Tuscan texts show no certain example of such pro- 
 cedure. D'Ovidio (1. c.) supposes diphthongization in these 
 cases, and remarks that io^ mio, dio, etc., are reductions 
 from ^ieo, ^niieo, *dieo, etc. As a confirmation of this 
 supposition he finds several parallel cases ; namely, pria 
 
 < *priea <^ piera <Cpietra; arria ■< *arriea << arrieri ; hue 
 
 < huoe < BOVEM. The first two examples are not taken 
 from Tuscan texts, and it is to be questioned whether the 
 last one is not analogical. In treating mio, hue, as reductions 
 of *mieo*buoe, it must be asked why the plural miei, buoi re- 
 tained its full form and was not reduced to mii, bui; and if 
 these two, mii, bui (which do occur), are such reductions, why 
 was the full form also retained for the plural and only the re- 
 
 "Cf. p. 57. 
 
 ^ Grammaire des Langues Romanes, par W. Meyer-Liibke. Paris, 1890, i, 
 246, § 276. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 49 
 
 duced form for the singular? No explanation for this fact has 
 been offered, as fiir as I am aware, and no parallel phenomenon 
 exists in the language. If *m/eo,*6woe ever existed, the plurals 
 miei, huoi would certainly have a tendency to keep them on 
 account of similarity in form, just as mii, dii, rii, etc., are formed 
 according to mio, dio, rio, etc. This crossing of forms is a 
 strong principle in the language and has its weight in a dis- 
 cussion of the present question (of the existence of a *mieo) ; 
 for example, in the present tense of esser-e, we find siete built 
 up according to siei; siemo, according to siete ;^ in the nouns, 
 we find the plural uomi formed on uomo, and the singular 
 uomine on uominV On this principle, then, of crossing or 
 assimilation of singular and plural forms one expects mii formed 
 on m;io and such a form is found. On the other hand, one 
 ■expects also "^mieo formed on miei. But the fact that no such 
 form (*mieo), if it ever existed, remained, although it had this 
 principle of form association (similarity to miei) to preserve it, 
 is strong evidence of the non-existence of *mieo at any period 
 of the Tuscan. 
 
 5. Do the texts examined contain siificient material for 
 
 explanations of all forms studied loitJiout 
 
 recourse to constructive forms f 
 
 If the statement of the non-existence of a given form be 
 characterized as untenable since the texts examined begin only 
 with the middle of the thirteenth century leaving unrepre- 
 sented the products of the language of the several preceding 
 centuries when the language was in its formative state, it may 
 be urged in reply : I believe it is better to accept the expla- 
 nation of a given phenomenon with what proof for it may be 
 found in existing products, than to cast about for uncertain 
 explanations based on uncertain (constructive) forms. Besides, 
 it is claimed in this essay that the language of the texts exara- 
 
 1 Cf. Meyer-Liibke, It. Or., | 447. 'Ibid., I 339. 
 
 4 
 
60 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 ined contains sufficient material for the explanation of all the 
 forms studied ; if this material agrees with that which proba- 
 bly existed in the postulated language of the three or four 
 centuries preceding these texts^ so much the better ; if not, it 
 must be accepted as our norm until more is known regarding 
 the possible developments of said postulated speech. It is a 
 fact that where a number of varying forms of one and the 
 same word has been iound, it has been possible, for the most 
 part, to establish a logical connection between these different 
 forms, to discover which was the oldest, which the intermediate 
 growth that preceded the final resultant form now found in the 
 modern language. Thus, for the Conditional we have avea 
 -avrea -avria, for the explanation of which {avria) there is no 
 need of an intermediate borrowed form ; in the next section 
 I shall show that the texts indicate like conclusions for the 
 second possessive pronoun, Tui -toi -tuoi, where the last form 
 is the outgrowth of the first two ; similarly, in products where 
 only two stages are represented it is reasonable to explain for 
 the most part the second as the outgrowth of the first. 
 
 Applying these remarks to the case in hand, we find eo, io; 
 meo, mio ; deo, dio ; reo, rio — mea, mia ; mee, mie, etc, with no 
 probable intermediate stage ^ to indicate that they ever existed 
 as diphthongized forms in the Tuscan. Under our second 
 question it was show^n to be probable that hiatus can raise e > 
 i ; we find here forms with e, again with i, and the conclusion 
 naturally follows that these words also are illustrations of the 
 principle of hiatus e > i; thus understood, there is no necessity 
 
 ^ The form miV has been noted as occurring in the Tavola Rhonda in the- 
 expression per mie^fe, where it was supposed to be equivalent to an old ^iniea. 
 It is a curious fact that the same locution occurs several times in Cellini. 
 Now it is not to be supposed that the latter had any idea of an old ^miea 
 when he used mie', for two hundred and fifty years had elapsed since the 
 writing of the Tavola and the form had disappeared in the meantime. But 
 there is a fact that may account for its use by both, without supposing it 
 equivalent to *miea ; that is, both were French imitations. Cellini often 
 uses French expressions; why these authors supposed this mie' (= mia) to be- 
 the Italian equivalent of the French possessive, however, is not apparent. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 51 
 
 for supposing an Intermediate "^mieo, or any similar constructive 
 form. It was stated above that the Tuscan dislikes such a form 
 as *mieo (cf. p. 49). If the pronoun is supposed to have ex- 
 isted under this form, it constitutes an exception to the develop- 
 ment to be expected, for the e in meum in Vulg. Lat. is long.^ 
 But if mio is taken as from meo, it agrees with the development 
 of dee (debet) > die, described above, and no exception need 
 be made for it, nor for the similar dio, rio, etc. 
 
 The answer to the third question (Does hiatus prevent the 
 development of e > ie) is represented in resume by the follow- 
 ing statement : When the e is before i it diphthongizes even 
 if from an original e ; but before a, e, o, the treatment is the 
 same as that noted under 3 (p. 42), that is e > i. 
 
 6. Conclusions. 
 
 1. Latin i and i occurring in Tuscan in hiatus position are 
 both retained ; no example where the latter (i) has given e has 
 been found in hiatus : *THiUM>2io; PlUM>j3io. 
 
 2. e and e in Tuscan, before i give the same result, -ie, the 
 e being treated as e in hiatus before this vowel (i) ; both are 
 diphthongized : debes > del > diei; mei > miei. 
 
 3. e before the other vowels {a, e, o) is close and hence 
 never diphthongizes, but is raised to i in hiatus : dee > die; 
 meo > mio. 
 
 It was my original intention to give here all words in the 
 language in which hiatus e or / occurs, in positions other than 
 those considered above. Such has been done for hiatus o and 
 u (cf. p. 65) ; but the number of these words amounts to nearly 
 four thousand, and lack of space does not permit their being 
 printed here. My plan was to arrange them according to the 
 system followed for hiatus u and o (p. 65) : those with i cor- 
 responding to the latter in u, those with e corresponding to 
 
 ' Cf. Meyer-Liibke, Gr. d. Langues Rom., I, § 276 : " Ie singulier meus se 
 regie sur Ie pluriel mei." 
 
62 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 the latter in o. As u + Vowel is the rule, so is i + Vowel in 
 all positions, and the proportional relations of the two sets 
 are — e -|- Vowel : i-f Vowel = o+ Vowel : u -|- Vowel. Words 
 with e + Vowel are mostly " mots savants " or borrowed. The 
 list of this set (e + Vowel) is swelled by numbers of terms that 
 belong to special professions ; as, medicine or law, or special 
 sciences. These terms, of course, never underwent popular 
 phonetic development. — Opportunity may offer to publish 
 these lists at some time in the future. 
 
 B. Tonic U in HIA.tds; tuo ; tuoi; suo; suoi. 
 
 1. Previous explonations. 
 
 Several explanations have been offered as to the develo{)ment 
 of tuoi, suoi. One is that quoted (p. 58) from Meyer-Liibke:* 
 " duoi et suoi * * * * pourraient reposer sur duos, suos." 
 Phonetically this would be regular, according to the principle 
 announced by d'Ovidio : ^ " Im Auslaute verstummt s, ent- 
 wickelt aber nach betonten Vokalen ein i: dai, assai, noi, poi." 
 But there are two grave objections to tuoi < tdos, suoi < suos. 
 The first is, that to suppose the Italian forms derived from the 
 Latin accusative is contrary to the law of preservation of the 
 Latin accusative plural in other instances, notably in nouns. 
 Cf. Meyer-Liibke : ^ " Der Nominativ pluralis der ersten uud 
 zweiten lateinischen Deklination ist geblieben : -e kann nur auf 
 
 ^CrT. d. Lang. Rom., I, ^ 276. 
 
 ^Gi-undriss, I, 532, ? 7.4. Cf. Meyer-Lubke, It. Gr., ? 270. 
 
 ^II. Or., § 321. I have taken the liberty here of correcting this section as 
 it reads in Meyer-Liibke' s Grammatik ; it stands there : " -e kann nur auf -ae, 
 -i auf -A zuriickgehen, da -AS zu -e, -OS zu -o geworden ware." " -;' auf -A " is 
 incorrect since the Nom. Plu. of the second Lat. Decl. in -i is referred to, and 
 the meaning is evident : just as -ae (of the first Decl.) >-e, so -i (of the second 
 Decl.) >-!•; " da -as zu -e " evidently does not express the author's meaning, 
 for if -AE > -e and -as > -e this would not show in itself whether the Ace. or 
 Nom. of the Latin was preserved in Italian. But -as >-t regularly ; cf. Hid., 
 I 106, AMAS>-es>-i. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 68 
 
 -AE, -i aiif -I zuriickgehen, da -AS zii i, -OS zu -o geworden 
 ware. In den andern Klassen sind Norainativ nnd Accusativ 
 gleichlautend, komraen also niclit weiter in Betracht." Tuus, 
 suus were declined according to the second Lat. Decl., and here, 
 as with nouns, we expect the Latin Nominative Plural — tui, 
 sui — to be preserved in Italian, and not the Accusative tuos, 
 suos. — Again, a fact points still more strongly against the 
 derivation of tuoi, suoi from the Latin Accusative in that the 
 possessive pronoun of the first person (miei) can come only 
 from the Latin Nominative Plural mei; meus was likewise 
 declined according to the second Latin declension, and it would 
 be inconsistent to maintain that met was preserved in one case, 
 while TUOS, suos were kept in the other. — We have another 
 objection in that the derivation of tuoi, suoi from tuos, suos 
 would make triphthongs of the Italian forms, the i < s count- 
 ing as a syllable (cf. assai, piui- plus). Khymes gathered 
 from any Italian poet would prove this to be impossible, 
 since tuoi, suoi always count as two syllables, and, if they 
 were triphthongs, they could not be made to rhyme with 
 noi, voi, etc., which rhymes are of frequent occurrence. For 
 example, in Cino da Pistoja, in the strophe preceding that 
 quoted (p. 57) are the lines : 
 
 " In quelle parti, che furon gia suoi, 
 Quando trova il Signor parlar di voi." 
 
 P. D. Bartoli observes with reference to vuo'^=vuoi:^ "Questo 
 vuo' per vuoi cui non v'e chi contradica come mal accorciato, 
 mi ricorda I'insegnarsi da alcuni vuoi, suoi, tuoi, miei, esser 
 Trittonghi ; il che se fosse, come potrebbono accorciarsi piu 
 de' Dittonghi, de' quali confessano non potersi? E pur tutto 
 di scriviamo, e bene, tu vuo\ i suo', a' mie\ Oltre di cio, se 
 fosser trittonghi, non potrebbon farsi due sillabe come pur gli 
 ha tante volte il Petrarca in rima con noi, voi, poi: e miei eon 
 lei, dei, vorrd. — Ben puo il verso restrignere le lor due sillabe 
 
 ^ DdP Ortografia Ilaliana. Koma, 1670, p. 101. 
 
54 r.. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 in una, ma senza pregiudicio del poterle usare ancora per quelle 
 due sillabe che pur sono : e se due sillabe adunque non un 
 trittongo." 
 
 A second explanation of tuoi, suoi is that given by Diez : ^ 
 *' Der diphthongierte plural miei weckte den Diphthong auch 
 in iuoi, suoi, der eigentlich nicht regelrecht ist." Just above 
 this he observes : " Die nach mio geformten tio und do finden 
 sich." — If the singular, formed on mio, is tio, sio, would not 
 the plural formed on miei be similarly tiei, sieif 
 
 We have a third explanation by Korting : ^ "Abnorm sind 
 die Pluralbildungen tuoi, suoi; vermuthlich sind sie aus Sg. 
 tuo, suo, durch Anfiigung eines i nach Analogic der substan- 
 tivischen Plurale auf -i enstanden." — An analogy such as is 
 here noted is impossible, since the plural of masculine sub- 
 stantives in -0 is formed by replacing the -o by an -i. One 
 does not decline amico — ^amicoi, but amico — amid. On the 
 same principle a plural formed on the singular tuo, suo, would 
 be tui, sui ; the latter forms do occur and are possibly con- 
 structed in this way. Furthermore, if such an explanation 
 as this were accepted, we should have to explain also why 
 mio did not give *mioi just as tuo >• tuoi. 
 
 An explanation of tuoi, suoi which is based on a study of 
 the history of hiatus u will now be attempted. 
 
 2. Uses in texts consulted. 
 
 • 
 We find in Latin Tin, sui ; in Italian tui, sui; toi, soi; tuoi, 
 
 suoi. The first two {tui, sui ; toi, soi) are used only sporadi- 
 cally, the last {tuoi, suoi) prevail as the regular developments 
 from the Latin. If we consider the three difiPerent forms, what 
 were the successive stages of development that culminated in 
 tuoi, suoi f 
 
 In our texts we observe the following uses : ^ 
 
 1 Qram. \\\ 90. * Encyc. iii, 652. 
 
 '<Mo', sMo'; i\iot, suae are given above (p. 16). 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 55 
 
 tuoi, suoi: A, B, C, D, F, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, R, S, 
 T, U, V, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, II, LL, 
 
 eg 'p'p 
 
 L, sue: B, C, F, G. H, I, J, K, M, N, O, P, T,V, X, Y, 
 Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, II, LL, SS, TT. 
 duoi: L, N, T,V, EE, GG, LL, OO. 
 due: B, F, G, H, 1, J, K, M, N, O, T,V, X, BB, EE, GG, 
 
 LL, oo. 
 
 soi: G, I, J, L, O, P, T,V, X, GG, NN. 
 
 toi: P, T,V, X, LL, MM. 
 
 doi: L, N, T, X, EE, LL, SS. 
 
 sui: C, K, N, O, P,V, X, FF, KK, NN, SS. 
 
 tui: P,V, FF, GG. 
 
 dui: 1, N, T,V, X, Y, BB, KK, LL, SS. 
 
 muoi (== Mc3vEs) : P. 
 
 puoi {= POTES) : F, I, J, K, O, P, S, V, W, X, Z, CC, EE, 
 
 FF, GG, LL, SS. 
 
 puoi (= POST) : G, J, K, P, T, V. 
 
 ^uoi {= VOLES) : P, S, T, Y, W, X, Z, BB, EE, FF, LL, 
 
 SS 
 
 buoi (= BOVES) : H, P, V, X, GG. 
 
 nuoi (= Nos) : P, V. 
 
 vuoi {= vos) : P, EE, GG. 
 
 moi {= moves) : P. 
 
 poi(= POTES): P,T,V,X,IL 
 
 vol (= VOLES) : P, I, V, X, EE, GG, II, LL. 
 
 boi 1= BOVEs) : P, T, X. 
 
 nui (= NOS) : C, P, V, GG, LL, NN, SS. 
 
 ^i (= vos) : C, O, P, T, X, LL, NN, SS. 
 
 bui (= b6ves) : X, BB, KK. 
 
 toa, soa : P, T, X. 
 toe: V. 
 
 soe: T,V, X, GG. 
 ■doe: L, T. 
 
66 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 3. Development of toi, soi. 
 
 The latter part of Meyer-Liibke's rule quoted (p. 32) is of 
 no assistance here : " Ebenso haben wir nur u und uo bei den 
 velaren Vokalen : fui, cui, grue, due, tuo, tua, tuoi, hue, altrui." 
 — Caix observes : ^ " u (tonico) diviene o come nell' uso gen- 
 erale romanzo : eroce, giovane, sopra. Ma grande divergenza 
 e nei riflessi dei bisillabi suus, tuus, duo, fui. Da una parte 
 la tendenza al suono chiuso da tuo, due, — in corrispondenza con 
 mio, dio ; dalP altra la preferanza pel suono aperto da ^o (too), 
 so (sod), doe,foi, — in corrispondenza con meo, deo, eo. Dove 
 cioe prevale la formula e"' si preferisce o", e dove prevale i" si 
 preferisce u". Anche qui e da avvertire che le due formule 
 erano largamente diffuse, ma che la formula con o pare essere 
 stata la piu generale. — Ma nel siciliano, e nella gran maggio- 
 ranza dei mss. toscani la formula con u e la sola in uso. 
 Tantoche si dice, per la stessa tendenza non solo suo, tuo, ecc, 
 ma anche bue (== bove)." 
 
 We thus have in toi, soi '' la preferanza pel suono aperto." 
 This phenomenon is encountered in Proven9al,^ where we 
 know it is directly from tui, sui, for the oblique forms, tens, 
 seus ( < Tuos, suos) also exist. 
 
 As to how this toi, soi developed from tui, sui, a compari- 
 son with the corresponding forms in French may give us some 
 light. Neumann remarks with reference to o:^ "Im Latein- 
 ischen existirt neben einander novus und D:fiNuo (aus denovo) 
 ersteres die betonte, — nuo in letzerem die in unbetontem Zu- 
 stande entwickelte Form desselbeu Wortes. Auch fur das Pron. 
 poss. (tuum und suum) wird es im Lat. zwei verschiedene For- 
 men, je nachdem es betont oder unbetont war, gegeben haben. 
 Nach dem Klass. Lat. Muster novus — d6nuo werden die- 
 selben gewesen sein *t6vum, *s6vum, tuum, suum."^ — This 
 
 ' Origini, § 55. * Grundriss, I, 626, ^ 65. 
 
 3 Literaturblatt, 1882, col. 468. 
 
 *Cf. Schwan, Grammatik des Altframosischen. 2te Aufl. Leipzig, 1893. 
 U 21, 2 ; 33, 2 and 409, 3. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 57 
 
 observation is made in explanation of the Old French tuen, 
 suen, where the 6 before u (by fall of the r) > o and diph- 
 thongizes. Might not Italian toi, soi have similarly derived 
 from *TOVi, *s6vi? A seeming corroboration of this suppo- 
 sition is the fact that in T bovi and boi exist side by side. 
 
 Whether it was through the medium of a *tovi, *sovi or not, 
 the development of u > o in hiatus as well as before conso- 
 nants is not difficult of comprehension, for the use of the two 
 [u and o) by the early poets shows that there must have been 
 a marked resemblance in the phonetic value of these vowels. 
 On this point is the testimony of Celso Cittadini who observes 
 in regard to u > o : ^ " Non essendo veramente u altro che un 
 o, o si pur simigliantissimo ad esso, la onde appo i nostri antichi 
 rimatori era fatto rimar con o, facendo, per caso, risponder lui 
 a voi, lume a nome; e simili altri come in particolar leggiamo 
 appo Dante Alighieri nel sonetto che incomincia ' L'anima 
 
 mia :' 
 
 " Dicendo : io voglio Amor cio che tu i>uoi, 
 E piange entro quell'hor, pregando lui." * 
 
 E cosi nel sonetto ' Piet^ e raerce' fa rimar: colui: voi: poi, 
 E Guido Cavalcanti nella sua nobil Canzone d'Amore: come: 
 nome: costume." — Similar rhymes may be found in GG, fo. h : 
 lui : fui : suoi. 
 
 4. before i > p and diphthongizes. 
 
 Were tuoi, suoi developed directly from toi, soif The ex- 
 amples, as given above, go to show this to be the case. Such 
 a statement, of course, seems directly contrary to acknowledged 
 hiatus laws, because in toi, sqi the o is close and as such could 
 not diphthongize, and Meyer-Liibke ^ regards this vowel de- 
 velopment as an exception, since after giving the law [e + i >- 
 
 ^ Origini delta volgar Toscana favella Siena, 1604, p. 16. 
 ' I had noted the same example in C, where it is placed among the rhymes 
 of Cino da Pistoja. 
 
 3 Gr. d. Lang. Rom. I, § 276. 
 
58 L. EMIL MENaER. 
 
 €, H-A>e; 6 + u>p, +A, i>o (w)] he observes : " Mais 
 ces lois ont ete troubl^es deja dans le Latin vulgaire : le singu- 
 lier MEUS se regie siir le pluriel MEi, et le pluriel soi sur le 
 singulier sous." From this remark one might suppose that 
 the writer holds suoi to be < soi, but he evidently does not 
 consider the form thus developed, since (1. c. § 279) he remarks: 
 " Nous avons pour u du latin vulgaire DUAS, SUAS, ital. due, 
 sua; duoi et suoi sont douteux puisqu'ils pourraient reposer 
 sur DUOS, suos." But this exception for toi, soi does not cover 
 all the words which we have noted with uo before i, notably 
 nuoi, vuoi {= noi, voi = nos, vos) ; and the fact seems to be 
 that when o occurs before i, whether after the fall of a V 
 (*TOVi, *sovr) or not (noi, voi), it becomes open and diph- 
 thongizes.^ A safer statement than this one would be: nuoi 
 and vuoi are exceptional forms, and, after accepting the expla- 
 nation of the p in soi as given above, we have all words in this 
 category with an o, — soi, toi (analogically) ; ppi (potes), poi 
 (post), voi (voles), boi (hdves) have original p; nothing, there- 
 fore, hinders here the diphthongization. Perhaps the writers 
 who used nuoi, vuoi, employed them along with noi, voi, just 
 as they did toi, tuoi; soi, suoi. While such explanations of the 
 irregularity (-o > -uo) may be safer, yet it is claimed in this 
 monograph that there is sufficient evidence to make it very 
 probable that p and e before i diphthongize regularly. 
 
 5. Influence of v element. 
 
 What part did v play in the development of the words in- 
 dicated ; and where o -f- v + i occurred, did the O diphthongize 
 before or after the fall of the v? On this point evidence 'seems 
 to be contradictory. D'Ovidio observes : ^ " Auch im Hiat 
 blieb der betonte Vokal nicht unverandert. Die Yergleichung 
 mit anderen romanischen Sprachen und ital. Dialekten lehrt, 
 
 ^Cf. above p. 48, where the example of diei (= dei = Df^BEs) seems to 
 indicate that e also (before i) becomes open and diphthongizes. 
 * Grundriss, I, 525, § 52. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 59 
 
 das mio, hue einst *mieo, *buoe lauteten. Jene schon vulgar- 
 lateinisclien *mieo, *buoe erlitten nun die verschiedensten 
 Schicksale; bald wurden beide vereinfacht, wie im Toskan- 
 ischen, jedoch nur im Singular." 
 
 Did not the -ilo develop from bove >*buove >*buoe > 
 buef To suppose that the v fell and the o > i* on account of 
 hiatus would be contrary to what we find in Old French buef, 
 Spanish huey, Proven9al buous. Similarly in the plural, Was 
 not the development boves > bovi > buovi > buoi f Such a 
 form, buovi, is recorded.^ If the v fell before this develo])ment 
 of -O (> -uo), the latter (according to hiatus law quoted above, 
 p. 58) would become o, and we would not expect it to diph- 
 thongize. But on the supposition that the diphthongization of 
 noi, vgi > nuoi, vuoi is original (not analogical to tuoi, suoi), there 
 is no reason why boi should not have a similar development. 
 
 If now a V- stage may be supposed for all the -words under 
 consideration the toi, soi, boi can be treated as further reduc- 
 tions : thus *t6vi > *TUOVi > tuoi > toi (and soi, boi in like 
 manner). But this supposition is untenable ; the word puoi < 
 poi < POST shows the contrary to be the case ; there is no pos- 
 sibility that any phonetic element was ever introduced between 
 the and i iiere ; the o = original o. Of the two forms poi and 
 puoi there is no question as to the po?' being the original one 
 and this seems to point to a similar development of tuoi, suoi < 
 toi, soi (not < *TUOVi, *suovi).^ The conclusion, then, as to 
 V is : There is evidence of the development of 6 > mo before 
 v and that the V afterward fell {buovi > buoi) ; but, taking this 
 word, the form boi cannot be supposed as a further reduction 
 from buoi because a comparison with puoi < poi < post, where 
 poi is the immediate background of puoi, shows that boi also 
 probably preceded buoi. Again : buovi occurs^ and cannot be 
 
 ^Zeitschrift fiir Rom. Phil., ix, 542. 
 
 »In FF, p. 125, is found suoli (soles) ; in BB, pp. 34 and 60, occurs toi 
 (tolles) — these forms are mentioned for comparison. 
 
 3 Cf. in P voli (voles) Inf. xxix, 34 ; suoli (soles) Inf. iv, 6 ; duoli (doles) 
 Inf. XXI, 44. 
 
60 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 disregarded ; we must, then, if we maintain the priority of boi 
 and acknowledging buovi, admit a parallel development of two 
 forms from the Latin, both resulting in the same product {buoi) 
 
 in Italian. Thus boves > bovi > .^* > > buoi. 
 
 ' boi ) 
 
 6. o before a, e, o "^ u. 
 
 How does the development of the singular bue compare with 
 
 that of the plural just described ? Is the process here: bovem 
 
 oitovs I Olios I 
 
 > bove < r > /, s /■ > buef Another question arises 
 
 boe } {boe) J 
 
 here : Does o before e diphthongize [boey- *buoe) after the fall of 
 
 the V (both forms *buoe<^*buove and *buoe<^boe being reduced 
 
 afterward to bue), or is the o raised to u by hiatus before e f 
 
 This is difficult to answer from the fact that examples of buove 
 
 and boe have not been found.^ But there is no reason why bove 
 
 should not have given "^buove ^*buoe^ bue, so that we have to 
 
 consider only bue < boe. From a comparison with words of 
 
 similar development we observe the following : boa, canoa, eroe 
 
 have kept o ; bua, jprua have developed o > w. Boa is a 
 
 zoological term; canoa is spoken of by Scheler^ as follows: 
 
 " Les mots esp. et it. canoa, angl. canoe sont tires de candoa 
 
 de la langue des Caraibes ; " eroe is < heroem ; bua is < b5o 
 
 — are ; ^ prua is < *prodam.* The appropriate form here is 
 
 bua < BO-, and it furnishes a parallel for the raising of o > u 
 
 in hiatus. For boe ^*buoe there is no parallel. Examples of 
 
 tuoe, suoe have been given above,^ but they are easily explained 
 
 as analogous to the masculine tuoi, suoi; that is, a full feminine 
 
 form tuoe, suoe was constructed to correspond to the masculine 
 
 ^bue occurs in T, X, GG, II, LL; bove in T, X; 60 in LL (p. 184: che 
 come il bo la notte voi facciate). 
 
 ^Dict. d'Et. Fr., p. 86: canot. 
 
 ^Korting, Lateinisch-romanisches Worterbuch. Paderborn, 1891. col. 127, 
 no. 1288. 
 
 *And is Genoese. Meyer-Liibke, It. Or., p. 42, ? 59. 
 
 s Cf. p. 16. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 61 
 
 tuoi, suoi. For the singular, therefore, as for the plural, bue 
 may be the result of two forms, *buoe or boe ; bf)ve > > > 
 
 uUOS 1 
 
 {boe) J 
 
 The final application of this example to the development 
 of tuoi, suoi is as follows : First, it shows the varying treat- 
 ment of o according as it occurs before i or e, giving -uo {buoi) 
 in the first case, being raised to u (bue) in the second ; secondly, 
 it shows that toi, soi must have preceded tuoi, suoi, just as boi, 
 poi preceded buoi, puoi ; the form puoi < poi < post where 
 no product like *puovi is possible, shows that the development 
 of tuoi < toi and of suoi < soi may be independent of *tovi, 
 *s6vi ; the non-occurrence of iuovi, suovi indicates the same 
 thing. The development of nqi, vgi > nuoi, vuoi from a close 
 vowel (o) evidences a strong tendency to diphthongization when 
 o occurred before i, so that the preferable development of tuoi, 
 suoi would seem to be : tui > toi > tuoi ; stri > soi > suoi. 
 The forms toi, soi as existing to-day in dialects of North Italy 
 have morphologically a close o, whether they come directly 
 from TUI, sui, or from *t6vi, *s6vi,^ so that for their further 
 development into -uo in Tuscan it may be necessary to accept 
 the exception noted above (p. 58) " le pluriel soi se regie sur 
 le singulier sous." 
 
 a. tui, bui, nui, etc. 
 
 All of this points very clearly toward tOi > toi > tuoi, and 
 this development destroys the likelihood that toi is a reduction 
 of tuoi, a suggestion by d'Ovidio : ^ " il tai, soi in quanto si trovi 
 in testi italiaui, di qualunque regione, e proprio certo che metta 
 capo a tui, o non piuttosto a tuoi tuos? " The forms poi — 
 
 ^In N (p. 2) occurs Id due {=la dove). Here the process was probablj 
 dove > doe > due. 
 
 * For in the latter case, after the fall of the v, the 6 > o. Cf. Hiatus law, 
 p. 58. 
 
 ^ Archiv. Glot. ltd., IX, 44, note 1. 
 
 OP a: 
 
62 L. EMIL MENGER, 
 
 puoi cited above show which was the original ; also according 
 to the development ^ of *buoe > bue, a reduced form of tuoi 
 would be tui. This leads to the question as to what these 
 forms, tui, sui, dui, nui, vui, bui, are. The quotation cited from 
 Zehle (p. 29) was to the effect that tui, sui are Latinisms in 
 Dante ; again a suggestion has been made that they are plurals 
 formed on the singular tuo, suo by changing -o > -i, the usual 
 manner of forming plurals of substantives in -o (p. 54). 
 D'Ovidio remarks : ^ " In tui, sui, ace. a tuoi, suoi = Tv6s, suos, 
 non so se s'abbiano a vedere degli assottigliamenti fonetici, o 
 delle coutinuazioni populari delle forme nominativali latine, 
 o meri latinismi, o mere formazioni fatte sui sing, tuo, ecc, 
 com' e mii." The six words just mentioned (tui, sui, nui, bui, 
 vui, dui) have been treated under other forms (as toi, tuoi, voi, 
 vuoi, etc.) as parallels in development ; this would indicate that 
 in their treatment under this form (-ui) all should in like 
 manner be classed together, and if they are thus considered, 
 no one of the explanations suggested up to the present time 
 will account for all these forms, but only for tui, sui, dui. 
 Nui, vui, bui cannot be latinisms, they cannot be plurals formed 
 on a singular *7iuo, *vuo, "^buo ; it is hardly probable that by 
 a phonetic reduction from tuoi, etc., the unaccented vowel u 
 should have been preserved, nor would this explain 7iui, vui, 
 since nuoi, vuoi are rare forms. Granted the explanation as 
 noted below for such products, they all fall under a like treat- 
 ment and also agree with the development of their fuller forms, 
 tuoi, etc. According to the law for hiatus (cf. p. 58), 6 + i 
 > or 11 ; in looking upon the u in tui, bui, etc., as a variation 
 of p [tui > toi {tuiy\, we have a logical explanation for the 
 whole set. What renders this still more probable is the fact, 
 that words with an original p — 2^^^ (puSt), poi, (potes), voi 
 (voles) — do not occur under the forms inii, vui. (Excepting 
 an isolated example of 'piue in FF, p. 98 ; and put occurs in 
 C a few times for the sake of rhyme). 
 
 * Which was suggested by d'Ovidio, cf. p. 59. 
 "^Arch. Glol. It., IX, 40, note 2. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 63 
 
 As a result of the preceding (Hscussion it appears that the 
 three forms — tui, toi, tuoi — arc to be explained as follows : tui 
 is not a latinism, nor a reduction < tuoi, nor formed on tlie 
 singular tuo, but a variant of toi; — toi is not a reduction of 
 tuoi, but from Ttji directly or through the medium of *Tovi, in 
 either case with an o ; — tuoi is not < TUOS, but < toi, tOi. 
 The differentiation of the Italian from the other Romance 
 Languages consists in the development of this g^uo before i, 
 for by the side of words for which analogy can be found (soi : 
 sous) exist noi, vgi > nuoi, vuoi with no such supposable anal- 
 ogy. All the forms : toi, soi, doi, hoi were originally with g, 
 for the u in the variant tui, etc., could not be from an p. Either 
 nuoi, vuoi must be analogous to tuoi, suoi, or words like pgi, 
 vgi, POST, v5les with an original o must have influenced other 
 words in -pi because of the similarity in form of pgi, vgi, etc., 
 with the words in -pi {toi, soi, etc.), so that all were diphthong- 
 ized alike; this seems the preferable explanation, if it is not 
 considered that g may become g before i and then diphthongize. 
 
 b. tuo, suo ; tue, sue, etc. 
 
 The feminine forms toe, soe, doe, etc., have a development 
 parallel, up to a certain point, with that of the masculines ; 
 that is, they may be taken as directly from tuae, or from 
 *tovae.^ Out of toe, etc., develops tue,^ etc., just as hue is < 
 l)oe. — Similarly in the singular too, toa; soo, soa first developed 
 <*t6vum, *t6vam ; *s6vuM, *s6vam ;^ then the o in too, toa; 
 soo, soa was raised to u by hiatus before o and a and the forms 
 became tuo, tua; suo, sua. Or too, toa; soo, soa came directly 
 from TUUM, TUAM ; suuM, SUAM, which is more probable, it 
 having been shown (p. 61) that a v-stage is unnecessary. 
 
 ^For AE>e, cf. Meyer-Lubke, J<. Gr. ? 106: "ae [atonic] wird e; le aus 
 
 ILLAE, etc." 
 
 *0r one might easily see here a feminine phiral formed on the singular tua. 
 3 Cf, C'/ esiomasia, p. 126, line 234, where one Ms. reads sovopio, another suo. 
 
64 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 C. Tonic u in hiatus. 
 
 Having thus disposed of hiatus u, it is not difficult to formu- 
 late a law for the words in which u occurs, for these (as well 
 as those with tj) are few ; their occurrence in the list of texts 
 examined proves that, for the Tuscan, u in hiatus remains u : 
 cui, fui, lui, costui, grua} These words never give in Tuscan 
 coi,^ foi, loi, costoi, groa ; such forms are avoided, for instance 
 in C (p. 28) occur the rhymes alirui: lui: vui: pui ; p. 74, 
 vui: alirui: sui: fui; p. 116, colui: vui: lui: sui ; p. 119, 
 j)ui : lui, where original voi, poi, soi are changed to vui, pui, 
 sui in order to rhyme with fui, lui, instead of changing the 
 latter to *foi, ^loi to rhyme with voi, poi, soi, which indicates 
 a strong tendency to preserve the u. 
 
 Co7iclusions. 
 
 From all the discussion given above the following points 
 may be postulated : 
 
 1. All words with tonic o -\- i diphthongize (soi>s?m); 
 noi >■ nuoi, etc.) ; other forms {lui, fui, cui, etc.) do not diph- 
 thongize ; therefore, before diphthongization takes place, an o- 
 stage is to be supposed. This o- stage (toi, soi, etc.) appears in 
 Tuscan ; it is a logical explanation, therefore, to derive tuoi, 
 suoi, etc., from it. 
 
 2. There must be reason why other words {lui, fui, etc.) do 
 not pass through this o- stage; this cause is attributed to the 
 
 ^ Perhaps also frid fructus should be mentioned here ; it occurs in P, 
 Par. XIX, 1, rhyming with cui: lui. — One exception to the rule just given is 
 found; in FF occurs /woi: p. 118: non so si fuoi portato o s'io sognai; p. 
 127: io fuoi falconier del re; p. 127: di Capouana fuoi; p. 129: i' fuoi 
 Sanese ; p. 130: i' fuoi quel Baldassare ; p. 131 : i' fuoi bon soldata, etc., pp. 
 133, 135, 136, 138, 145, 161. But /oi does not occur here or elsewhere, and 
 fuoi must be considered as analogical to vuoi (voles), puoi (potes), which 
 are of frequent occurrence in this author. 
 
 ^Does this not prove, so far as Italian can show, that u in cui is long? 
 of. Korting, Wlb. no. 6570. 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 
 
 65 
 
 varying quantity of the original I^atin vowel, it being long in 
 lui, fui, etc. Hence, in Tuscan, Latin iJ in hiatus remains 
 unchanged. 
 
 3. Latin for hiatus position develops in Tuscan into o, 
 just as it does in other positions : tuam > tpa; TtJl > toi, etc. 
 Both this n < fi and original o {noi nOs) before i may diph- 
 thongize, since, in Tuscan, e and o are treated as e and o before 
 this vowel (i). If such a development (o > no) is looked upon 
 as doubtful, toi, soi, etc., may be considered to have developed 
 by analogy to poi < p6st, voi > voles, etc., words exactly 
 similar in form and with original o; the analogy having 
 worked, all alike give -uo: puoi, vuoi, tuol, suoi. 
 
 Before a {tua), e {tue, bue < boe), o (tuo), o is raised to u. 
 
 The following lists show the relative proportion in the use 
 of hiatus u or o in words not treated in the preceding pages. 
 a indicates any vowel. The dash ( — ) is used to indicate syl- 
 lal)les that follow or precede the accent. 
 
 lid — 
 
 babbuino 
 
 conlribuire 
 
 abituale 
 
 baluardo 
 
 conventuale 
 
 abituare 
 
 belzuino 
 
 cuccumo 
 
 aceentuale 
 
 bezzuarro 
 
 defluire 
 
 accenluare 
 
 bruire, 
 
 deostruire 
 
 adduare 
 
 buaccio 
 
 desliluire 
 
 affettuare 
 
 buessa 
 
 desiruente 
 
 affettiwso 
 
 huino 
 
 diluire 
 
 affiiuale 
 
 casuale 
 
 diminuire 
 
 affluema 
 
 censuule 
 
 distribxdre 
 
 afflaire 
 
 censiudo 
 
 duale 
 
 aggraduirsi 
 
 circomfiuenza 
 
 duello 
 
 alituoso 
 
 circuire 
 
 duino 
 
 amminuire 
 
 confluente 
 
 eccetuare 
 
 annuale 
 
 confluenza 
 
 effetUide 
 
 annuire 
 
 congj-uente 
 
 effetuare 
 
 aitenua7-e 
 
 congruenza 
 
 estenuare 
 
 attxicde 
 
 const ilu ire 
 
 evacuate 
 
 aiiuare 
 
 construirt 
 
 erentuale 
 
 5 
 
 
 
66 
 
 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 fiuire 
 
 proventimle 
 
 oa 
 
 fluttuare 
 
 pruina 
 
 
 fruire 
 
 puntuale 
 
 benzoafo 
 
 fruttuare 
 
 quatlriduano 
 
 bemoino 
 
 frvtluoso 
 
 questware 
 
 boaro 
 
 genuino 
 
 residuare 
 
 boato 
 
 (jesuita 
 
 residuale 
 
 doana 
 
 graduare 
 
 restituire 
 
 eroessa 
 
 graduire 
 
 retribuire 
 
 eroina 
 
 gi-adwile 
 
 rituale 
 
 eraismo 
 
 gratuire 
 
 ruina 
 
 gioire 
 
 gruale 
 
 ruire 
 
 incoata 
 
 gruino 
 
 sensuale 
 
 moine 
 
 imhuire 
 
 siriuoso 
 
 oboista 
 
 impetvMSO 
 
 situare 
 
 piroetla 
 
 iviportuoso 
 
 sentuoso 
 
 poetna 
 
 incestuare 
 
 sostituire 
 
 poeta 
 
 incestuoso 
 
 apirituale 
 
 pToavo 
 
 incruenlo 
 
 statuare 
 
 roano 
 
 individuale 
 
 slatuale 
 
 soatto 
 
 individuare 
 
 statuino 
 
 strettoitio 
 
 induare 
 
 statuetta 
 
 
 infafuare 
 
 sfatuista 
 
 HO, — 
 
 influenza 
 
 siatuire 
 
 
 influire 
 
 stenuare 
 
 ubituatezza 
 
 insiritiare 
 
 strelluale 
 
 accuorare 
 
 iiistituire 
 
 stribuire 
 
 annualmente 
 
 instruire 
 
 suino 
 
 arduamente 
 
 intellettuale 
 
 suismo 
 
 asiiiduamente 
 
 intuire 
 
 taceuino 
 
 attualniente 
 
 intuarsi 
 
 tatuaggio 
 
 buacciolo 
 
 irruema 
 
 tatuarsi 
 
 casualmente 
 
 lutlunso 
 
 testucde 
 
 congruamente 
 
 manuale 
 
 tortuoso 
 
 dimlnuimenlo 
 
 menstruale 
 
 triduano 
 
 dbitribuitare 
 
 mensuale 
 
 tumulluare 
 
 druidessa 
 
 minuale 
 
 tumuUuoso 
 
 dualismo 
 
 minufre 
 
 untuoso 
 
 duellare 
 
 montuoso 
 
 vacuare 
 
 eccettuativo 
 
 mutiianle 
 
 vacuetto 
 
 effellualmente 
 
 ostruire 
 
 inrtuale 
 
 estenuativo 
 
 perpetuate 
 
 virtuoso 
 
 fluitare 
 
 perpeluare 
 
 visucde 
 
 gettuitajo 
 
 perpeluanza 
 
 volutuono 
 
 ge.milare 
 
 prOHtUuire 
 
 
 ge.'^-uitesita 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 
 
 67 
 
 gradualmenU 
 
 ineroicuix 
 
 (juestudzione 
 
 illuiare 
 
 introilare 
 
 siluazione 
 
 indivldualismo 
 
 ioideo 
 
 sontuosamente 
 
 individuidmeate 
 
 masloideo 
 
 spiritualizzare 
 
 influitore 
 
 metalloidale 
 
 stenuazione 
 
 intellettualmente 
 
 morroidcUe 
 
 tortuosamenle 
 
 intuitivo 
 
 ortoepia 
 
 tumultuosamente 
 
 manualmente 
 
 poemetlo 
 
 vacuuzione 
 
 melifluamente 
 
 poesia 
 
 voluttuosamente 
 
 mutuamente 
 
 poetare 
 
 
 perpeiiLalmente 
 
 poetire 
 
 oa - 
 
 pituitaso 
 
 poetino 
 
 
 precipuamente 
 
 romboidale 
 
 alcoolizzare 
 
 pruinoso 
 
 salamojare 
 
 eroicamente 
 
 puntualmente 
 
 sojare 
 
 eroicizzare 
 
 restituimento 
 
 stoicisnu) 
 
 moineria 
 
 restribuimento 
 
 tifoideo 
 
 moiniere 
 
 ritualismo 
 
 
 poelizzare 
 
 ritual ista 
 
 ua 
 
 proemiale 
 
 riiiuilmente 
 
 
 proemiare 
 
 ruinare 
 
 affettuosamente 
 
 proemizzare 
 
 sensualismo 
 
 attemiazLone 
 
 stoicamcnt£ 
 
 sensualista 
 
 attualitaie 
 
 
 sensualmente 
 
 attuazione 
 
 \m 
 
 sostituitore 
 
 circuizione 
 
 
 spiritualismo 
 
 duellatnre 
 
 affetuevole 
 
 spirititalista 
 
 eccettuazione 
 
 affituario 
 
 spiritualmente 
 
 effettuazione 
 
 annuario 
 
 statualmente 
 
 effettuosamente 
 
 attuario 
 
 slenualivo 
 
 estenuazione 
 
 buaggine 
 
 strenuamenle 
 
 fluttuazione 
 
 censuario 
 
 superfluamente 
 
 fortuiiamente 
 
 diminuibile 
 
 tenuemente 
 
 fruizione 
 
 druidico 
 
 virtualmente 
 
 graduatamente 
 
 eleUuario 
 
 
 (jraduazwne 
 
 gesuilico 
 
 oa ' 
 
 impetuosamente 
 
 insinwabUe 
 
 
 incestuosamente 
 
 pecuaria 
 
 boarima 
 
 individuazione 
 
 residuario 
 
 coitaso 
 
 insinuazione 
 
 saniuaria 
 
 concoidale 
 
 intuizione 
 
 statuaria 
 
 conoidale 
 
 luUuoitamenle 
 
 tumultuarw 
 
 convoitoso 
 
 menstruazione 
 
 usufruUuario 
 
 emorroidcUe 
 
 mostruosamente 
 
 usuario 
 
 epizoozia 
 
 mutuazione 
 
 voluttiiario 
 
 incoativo 
 
 paniuazione 
 
 
 /!^\.' 
 
 £^-jr 
 
 ni 
 
68 
 
 L. EMIL MENGER. 
 
 oa- 
 
 cloetico 
 
 doario 
 
 noetico 
 
 poetico 
 
 proavolo 
 
 proemio 
 
 zedoaria 
 
 ua — 
 
 duellario 
 
 graduatorio 
 
 mutuaiario 
 
 piluitario 
 
 vacuatorio 
 
 oa— 
 
 emorroidai'io 
 
 ua '-- 
 
 gesidticamente 
 
 gesuitofobia 
 
 isluitivamente 
 
 santuariamente 
 
 spiritualizzamento 
 
 tumuUtMriamente 
 
 ua- 
 
 affluere 
 
 cercuito 
 
 druido 
 
 fortuito 
 
 gratuito 
 
 intuito 
 
 pituita 
 
 mere 
 
 androide 
 
 aracnoide 
 
 asteroide 
 
 aMroite 
 
 benzoico 
 
 cissoide 
 
 coito 
 
 cometoide 
 
 concoide 
 
 conoide 
 
 coliloide 
 
 emorroidi 
 
 eroico 
 
 eroide 
 
 introito 
 
 ioide 
 
 jaloide 
 
 lombricoide 
 
 metalloide 
 
 morroidi 
 
 oasi 
 
 odontoide 
 
 romboide 
 
 sesamoide 
 
 sferoide 
 
 stoico 
 
 trapezoide 
 
 zoilo 
 
 oa 
 
 allantoide 
 
 addirizzatqjo 
 
 beveratojo 
 
 pastoja 
 
 pensalojo 
 
 riserbatqjo 
 
 ritenitqjo 
 
 salamoja 
 
 saldatqjo 
 
 salitojo 
 
 scaldatojo 
 
 scalzatojo 
 
 scannatojo 
 
 scappatoja 
 
 scaricdtojo 
 
 scaltalojo 
 
 sehifanqja 
 
 schizzatojo 
 
 scoccatojo 
 
 scolatqjo 
 
 scorcitojo 
 
 scorificatojo 
 
 scorsqjo 
 
 scorticatojo 
 
 scolitojo 
 
 scrittojo 
 
 seccatqjo 
 
 segnatqjo 
 
 serbatqjo 
 
 sferratoja 
 
 soja 
 
 sonatqjo 
 
 spandHojo 
 
 spazzatqjo 
 
 spegnitojo 
 
 spianalqjo 
 
 spicciatqjo 
 
 spogliatqjo 
 
 stoja 
 
 squartatyo 
 
 stenditqjo 
 
 strettqja 
 
 strozattqjo 
 
 svegiiatqjo 
 
 svenatqjo 
 
 svernatojo 
 
 tagliatqjo 
 
 temperatqjo 
 
 tenitqjo 
 
 tettoja 
 
 tiratqjo 
 
 toccalojo 
 
 torcitojo 
 
 trapanatcjo 
 
 trebblatqjo 
 
 ucellatoio 
 
 varatojo 
 
 vassqjo 
 
 volgUqjo 
 
 voltojo 
 
ITALIAN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS. 
 
 69 
 
 / . ^ 
 
 vacuo 
 
 imptttMsitd, 
 
 -^ ua 
 
 > «/v 
 
 iviportuositcL 
 
 annuo 
 
 00, 
 
 individualitd 
 
 arduo 
 
 alcool 
 
 intellettuaiitd 
 
 assiduo 
 
 aloe 
 
 manualitd 
 
 congruo 
 
 protonoe 
 
 montuositd 
 
 cospicuo 
 
 
 mostruositd 
 
 fatuo 
 
 ua, -^ 
 
 perpetualild 
 
 individuo 
 
 
 promiscuositd, 
 
 ingenuo 
 
 arduitd 
 
 puntualitd 
 
 lituo 
 
 assiduiid 
 
 sensual ltd 
 
 mellijiuo 
 
 congruiid 
 
 sinuositd 
 
 menstruo 
 
 cospicuitd 
 
 sontuosiid 
 
 nottua 
 
 fatuitd. 
 
 splrllualitti 
 
 pei-peluo 
 
 gratuitd 
 
 tortuosild 
 
 perspicuo 
 
 ingenuitd 
 
 untuositd 
 
 precipuo 
 
 perpetuitd 
 
 ventuositd 
 
 proficuo 
 
 perspicuitd, 
 
 virtualitd 
 
 promiscuo 
 
 strenuitd 
 
 voluttuositd 
 
 queslua 
 
 tenuitd 
 
 
 residvA) 
 
 vacuitd 
 
 ua — 
 
 sperpetua 
 
 veduitd 
 
 
 statua 
 
 
 insinuabilitd 
 
 strenuo 
 
 ua ^ 
 
 
 saperfluo 
 
 
 
 tenue 
 
 casualitd 
 
 
 lonitruo 
 
 dualita. 
 
 evoe 
 
 treguo 
 
 eventualitd 
 
 oboe 
 
 triduo 
 
 fruttuositd 
 
 sUoe. 
 
 oe 
 
LIFE 
 
 I was born in Clinton, Miss., June 29, 1871. I was graduated from 
 Mississippi College with the degree of A.. B. in June, 1888. The two 
 following years I was Instructor in Latin and C4erman in the Mary Le 
 Grande Institute ^female) of Vicksburg. In October, 1890, 1 entered the 
 Johns Hopkins University, choosing for ray major subject the Romance 
 Languages. I followed the lectures of Professor A. Marshall Elliott, 
 Doctor H. A. Todd, and Doctor F. M. Warren. To Professor Elliott I 
 shall always feel indebted for his unvarying kindness and accessibility; 
 especially do I now appreciate my first year's work with him, when he 
 united the skill of an experienced instructor with the kindly solicitude of a 
 friend. As a minor subject I studied History under the instruction of 
 Professor H. B. Adams; my examination in this subject was on the Renais- 
 sance in Italy. The Summer of 1891 I spent in the French quarter of New 
 Orleans, La., to acquire a speaking knowledge of the French language ; 
 I there pursued a course of private lessons in French with Professor Alc^e 
 Fortier, of the Tulane I'niversity. The last two years of my course I was 
 under the instruction of Professor Elliott and Doctor .John Ernst Matzke. 
 It is a pleasure to record the interest which Doctor Matzke has never failed 
 to manifest in my work. May to October of 1892 I spent in Paris, engaged 
 in studies in Modern French and in the preparation of my thesis (cf. p. 3). 
 I spent two weeks also in London, examining in the British Museum the 
 Ms. of an old French poem connected with the work of the Romance 
 Seminary. Since June, 1892, I have held a Fellowship in the Romance 
 Department at the .Johns Hopkins I'niverity. 
 
 Louis Emil Menoer. 
 
 6A.LTIHOKE, MABYI.AND, 
 
 May 1, IS9S. 
 
 >' or iHs^' 
 
 riTBRSITr 
 
V 
 
YC 00670 
 
 r~ 
 
 ^99^^ 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY