Modistic grammar versus Sanctian grammar: two conflicting conceptions of linguistic analysis

Abstract

The grammatical theory of the modistae has always been considered to be a clear precedent of the grammatical theory of Sanctius. It is evident that both theories share the same objective of linguistic universality. However, both doctrines seek to achieve that single theoretical objective through very different methodological patterns. In fact, the grammar of the modistae, from the late Middle Ages, and that of Franciscus Sanctius Brocensis (Francisco Sánchez de las Brozas) are separated, as we analyse in our study, by a conflicting conception of linguistic analysis with respect to the figurative discourse, which determines the systematic exclusion of the same in Modistic grammar compared to its rational and systematic study in Sanctian grammar. And this conflicting conception of linguistic analysis has not been highlighted nor emphasised sufficiently, despite being key to properly interpreting these two decisive and transcendental grammatical systems, each providing essential contributions to Western linguistics.