The definite articles of western Romance languages have developed definite articles where Classical and Ecclesiastical Latin have none. All the modern Romance definite articles are derivatives of the pronoun ille, "that one". ille refers to a definite object completely distinguished from the self. Cf. le/la in French, el/la in Spanish, il/la in Italian.
The alternate use of definite articles as pronouns and vice versa is well established in other classical Indo-European languages. Both Classical and Koine Greek merge these two grammatical forms matter-of-factly. Greek can use the definite pronoun to emphasize words, i.e. ὁ θεὸς [ho theos] (God, the deity of Hebrew Scripture and God the Father of the New Testament.) The ὁ [ho] indicates the definitive nature of God, where the indefinite θεὸς [theos] alone would merely indicate an unspecified male deity. Whereas in Latin one has to follow what declension the qui is in to determine the relative clause, in Greek one need only pay attention to the the definite article and the progression of its similar pronominal form in a relative clause.
Let's say that the vulgar Latin to Romance spectrum never decided to use Latin pronominal forms as definite articles, OR decided to morph into the Greek system of definite article/pronoun merging. Would modern Romance languages retain a declensional system or a semi-declensional system to distinguish definite and indefinite nouns? How would relative clauses work without definite articles? Would a stronger Hellenistic Greek influence in the Western Empire create different articular/pronominal systems in the vulgar Latin to Romance spectrum?
The alternate use of definite articles as pronouns and vice versa is well established in other classical Indo-European languages. Both Classical and Koine Greek merge these two grammatical forms matter-of-factly. Greek can use the definite pronoun to emphasize words, i.e. ὁ θεὸς [ho theos] (God, the deity of Hebrew Scripture and God the Father of the New Testament.) The ὁ [ho] indicates the definitive nature of God, where the indefinite θεὸς [theos] alone would merely indicate an unspecified male deity. Whereas in Latin one has to follow what declension the qui is in to determine the relative clause, in Greek one need only pay attention to the the definite article and the progression of its similar pronominal form in a relative clause.
Let's say that the vulgar Latin to Romance spectrum never decided to use Latin pronominal forms as definite articles, OR decided to morph into the Greek system of definite article/pronoun merging. Would modern Romance languages retain a declensional system or a semi-declensional system to distinguish definite and indefinite nouns? How would relative clauses work without definite articles? Would a stronger Hellenistic Greek influence in the Western Empire create different articular/pronominal systems in the vulgar Latin to Romance spectrum?