Modistae - Grammarian Philosophy

THE MODISTAE

The modistae was derived from seeking to explain the modi significant “modes of signification” of the parts of speech, grammatical constrictions, concord and government.

Wishing to know about grammar, we insist that it is first of all necessary to know its principles, which are the modes of signifying (Modi significandi) (Thomas of Erfurt, 1972:134[1]).

On the other hand, the modistae were much less concerned with surface grammar; but only concerned with forms as it indicates a contrast in meaning, therefore they had no attention to “letters” or to regular and irregular morphology. Consequently, they ignore the morphology of case when defining nouns and verbs. They were students of grammar not of Latin therefore were interested in what was called “underlying structure” after 1964, though their conception was different.

Read more: COSMOLOGY: Modistae

The modistae started in Northern Europe where grammar studied as a key to Latin classical literature or the Bible, and become “speculative”. The term speculative is based on Latin speculum “mirror; image” because speculative grammars sought to mirror reality.

Grammarians adopted the Aristotelian belief (quoted at the head of this chapter) that the word is the same for all human beings and that language reflects that world. Therefore grammar was looked upon by the modistae depending on structure of reality and rules of grammar are independent on the structure of the language in which they are expressed (Bursill-Hall, 1971:35).

The basis of grammar is God’s world as it is in the human mind, so that grammar becomes study of the formulation of concepts and their impressibility in well-formed sentences and component structures. The modistic view of grammar led the speculative grammarians to concentrate on the universal properties of grammar instead of grammar of individual languages. In speculative grammar the parts of speech are motivated by idealized language speakers and not just found in meta- language of the grammarian. If the modistic reasoning is accepted this gives speculative grammar greater explanatory than any earlier grammars and later ones as well.

A pars orationis (part of speech, lexical class/category, henceforth PARS, Plural PARTES) consist of:

• The res “thing, referent”
• The modus intelligendi “mode of understanding”.
• The vox “expression, utterance” and
• The modus significandi “mode of signifying”.

The properties of the referent constitute a modus assendi “mode of being” (assendi is superiordinate to ‘ens’ and ‘ess’ so is relevant to all parts of speech). The modus essendi is apprehended by modus intelligendi, leading to modus signand “mode of signaling” which convert the Vox into the form of adictio “word” combininbg form and meaning. The modus signandi gives rise to modus consignificandi, which converts the vox into a PARS. Therefore in sintax modus consignificand “mode of signification” add syntactic function to the PARS. In speculative grammar, every PARS correlates with a res (referent).

There are active and passive modes of understanding. Signaling and signifying. That the mind has to be in an active mode to perceive modus intelligendi actives and linking to the next step in the process, the modus signandi actives. The signaling process leaves off unless the resulting modus signandi passives links to the modus significandi actives. The process intelligendi passives, modus signandi activus, modus signandi passives, modus significandi activus, modus significandi passivus.

The modus significandi passivus represents the functional or class meaning of the referent, where the active mode reveals the property of the formal expression (vox significative) giving rise to the ratio consignificandi “the means of achieving consignificandi” and further a ratio signandi “signaling potential as the ratio of significandi creates lexical meaning that determines the ability of a PARS to be constructed with other PARTIES (Thomas of Erfurt, 1972:134[1]).

Within the system a single ‘res’ may have different modi essendi; for example a human may be of either masculine or feminine gender. Thomas of Erfurt 1971:212[46] compares and contrasts different species of nouns having the same modus entis such as albedo “whiteness’ and albus “white” against the related verb dealbo the same modus fluxus. Each of these words has a distinct modus significandi.

The modus ens and modus esse are subdivided into matter versus form. Yield to two more parts of speech as in table 8.1.

Table 8.1. modi ens and esse matter and form.

MODUS EN	MODUS ES
MATTER Noun	Verb
FORM Pronoun	Participle

The noun denotes substance and determine quality. The pronoun signifies substance without quality, because the quality is ignored (Boethius of Decia 1961:239f). in human languages reference to something unreal is just as possible as reference to something real, the criterion that a nominal must name something with a modus ens raises the question of how the speculative grammar is to account for “frigmenta” (fictions) such as “negationes” (negations).

However, in the two modus esse PARTIES, the verb and participle. The verb has the modus of essendi and modus significandi of being/becoming/location, and by the modus distantia it is separated from the nominal with which it is a concord its supposition. The modus essendi is material and shared with the participle while the modus esse implies the passing of time, succession; but for modistae, tense does not derive from the essence of the verb; it is an accidental mode either signifying or consignifying tense.

The declinable PARTIES – noun, pronoun, verb and participle – were referred to by Siger de Courtrai, 1977 as ‘magis principales’. The PARTIES therefore, have one of three basic essence being (ens) becoming (esse) or ordered distribution i.e. entering a certain syntactic relationship with other PARTIES. Whereas classed as grammatical words with fewer modes of meaning than declinable. Unless there are few innovations in the modistic discussion of adverbs, conjunctions prepositions and interjections. Also distinguished prepositions from prefixes on the basis that a preposition signifies a relationship between modus ens and modus esse. ‘The preposition was infact invented on behalf of case forms not just any, only accusative and ablative” (Ibid 262[80]). In fact, a preposition is “the part of speech signifying by means of the mode of adjacency to some case form, linking it and referring it back to the act (ibid 264[8]).