“On the evolution of Latin motion verbs. A view from Vindolanda”,

The aim of this paper is an interpretation of the diachronic development of Latin motion verbs based on data from a survey of the Vindolanda tablets and other non-literary texts. While previous analyses have shown how these documents display features of non-classical language (e.g., with reference to the use of cases and prepositions for the expression of goal; see Adams 1995:110; 2003:551; Mackay 1999; Halla-Aho 2009; see also Cabrillana 1997; Van Laer 2019), the focus of my survey is a comparison with the general picture of motion verbs in classical literary texts with respect to aspectual and deictic features (e.g. telic venio vs. non-telic eo; or a centrifugal vs. centripetal orientation; see Hofmann & Szantyr 1965:301-303; Ricca 1993; Nuti 2016). At first sight, a peculiarity of the tablets is the overwhelming higher frequency of venio compared to other motion verbs, whose occurrence is considerably limited. This phenomenon, which can be compared to an analogous growing tendency in Cicero’s letters, does not seem to fully match later trends in Late Latin and Romance, where venio continues to be used complementarily alongside a number of other verbs (i.e., not only eo, but also vado, ambulo, etc.). I will therefore evaluate the impact of textual requirements specific to epistolary texts that might be relevant for explaining the use of motion verbs shown in the Vindolanda letters. At the same time, I will try to account for the state-of-affairs displayed in Vindolanda within a framework that includes also secondary typological developments apparently not foregrounded in typological descriptions and which, however, may be relevant factors in the diachronic drift of Latin motion verbs towards a configuration centered around a deictic principle (i.e. centripetal or “itive” eo - centrifugal or “ventive” venio; cf. go vs. come; see Wilkins & Hill 1995; Goddard 2007).