Polysemy and Apparent Polyfunctionality of the Sakhalin Ainu Prefixes e- and ko-

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-244
Author(s):  
Elia Dal Corso
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Verbal Prefixes ◽  
Compositional Approach

Abstract The present study focuses on the polysemous verbal prefixes e- and ko- of Sakhalin Ainu and proposes their analysis as markers of high transitivity. The author takes a compositional approach to argument structure and event structure in order to account for the main use of e- and ko- as applicative markers as well as for their less common use as markers of resultative-completive and intensive aspect. Ultimately, the analysis shows that the apparent polyfunctionality of e- and ko- arises from two separate applications at the syntax-semantics level of one same underlying function of the prefixes. The author also comments on how the Sakhalin Ainu case fits in with other cases of valence-aspect conceptual overlapping cross-linguistically and on the implications of his findings for Ainu studies specifically.

On the Event Structural Properties of the English Get-Passive

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-74
Author(s):  
Alison Biggs ◽  
David Embick
Keyword(s):  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Structural Properties ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Event Structures ◽  
Structural Differences ◽  
Responsible Party

An important ongoing discussion in theories of argument structure concerns the explanatory division of labor between thematic properties and event structure. In this context, the English get-passive provides an interesting test case. Much previous work has analyzed get-passives as differing thematically from be-passives. Yet many get-passive properties remain poorly understood. We present an analysis of the get-passive centered on the proposal that it contains additional event structure (realized as get) relative to its be counterpart. We employ by-adjuncts to identify the event structures in passive types, and demonstrate that the behavior of this and other diagnostics support the conclusion that get- and be-passives differ systematically in ways that accord with our analysis. Further discussion considers the prominent proposal from previous studies that get-passives differ thematically from be-passives in (sometimes) assigning an Agent role to their surface subjects. We show that there is no evidence for such an analysis. Instead, intuitions about the interpretation of the get-passive surface subject arise from how an event’s Responsible Party is identified: contrasts between get and be on this dimension are a consequence of event structural differences between the two. The overall result is a unified analysis of the get-passive, one that has implications for the role of event structure in understanding the syntax and interpretation of arguments.

Changes in the argument and event structure of psych verbs in the history of Spanish

2019 ◽  
pp. 249-270
Author(s):  
Montserrat Batllori ◽  
Elisabeth Gibert-Sotelo ◽  
Isabel Pujol
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Psych Verbs ◽  
History Of

This chapter offers a detailed study of changes affecting the argument structure of Spanish psych verbs that appear with a dative experiencer (EXP). After proposing a three-way classification of these verbs based on their etymological origin, the chapter traces two parallel, but interconnected, diachronic paths: the first one involves the development from transitive (or pronominal) to unaccusative constructions with a dative EXP, whereas the second one concerns the evolution from dynamic to stative events. The use and decrease of the passive in Classical Spanish is also shown to play a role in this change: to wit, passive and unaccusative structures with a dative EXP are structurally similar, as the prepositional agent phrase and the dative EXP originate in the same position.

scholarly journals Verbal prefixation and realizations of antipassive alternations in Polish

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 169-186
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Mroczyńska
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Sentence Structure ◽  
Verbal Prefixes ◽  
Argument Realization ◽  
Polish Language ◽  
The Subject ◽  
National Corpus

Various works on transitivity suggest that aspectual notions may constitute semantic determinants of argument realization. Observations included in these works prompted theories implying that argument realization may be aspectually driven. Following this line of thought, this article presents the results of corpus-based studies on antipassive structure in the Polish language and makes an attempt at confirming the fact that aspectual notion may determine argument realization. The article consists of three main sections. The first one focuses on notions of aspect and various aspectual propositions distinguished in the literature on the subject, regarding the Polish language in particular. The second section, illustrated with examples extracted from the National Corpus of Polish (NKJP) and the corpus of Wielki Słownik Języka Polskiego (KWSJP), gives an overview of Polish perfectivizing verbal prefixes, i.e. a roz‑, na-, o-/ob- and u-prefix, and deals with the effect they may have on sentence structure and semantics. It also shows how the prefixed verbs combine with the marker się, which flags antipassive, i.e. is a recurring marker attested in antipassive constructions in the Polish language. In section three, an attempt is made at analyzing the interrelations between aspect and antipassive reading of a structure. As it seems that a perfective prefix used with a verb imposes certain requirements on the argument structure of the verb it combines with, we also offer a possible explanation to different aspectual requirements of verbs occurring in antipassive structures, assuming that projections coded in a verb may play a role here.

scholarly journals Time and the event: The semantics of Russian prefixes

Nordlyd ◽  
10.7557/12.72 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Ramchand
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Temporal Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Temporal Domain ◽  
Structure Level ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Basic Distinction ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
Structure Domain

In this paper, I draw on data from prefixation in Russian to argue for a basic distinction between event structure and temporal struc- ture. I present a linguistic semantics of verb and argument structure interpretation on the one hand, and a formal semantic implementa- tion of 'telicity' on the other, which makes sense of the generalisations apparently common to both domains. I will claim that the temporal domain embeds the event structure domain, and that the latter con- strains the former. At the same time, the different formal primitives that operate at the levels proposed form the basis for a principled linguistic distinction between the two tiers of composition: the event structure level encodes subevental relations and predicational rela- tions within those subevents; the temporal structure level introduces a t variable explicitly and relates it to the structure built up by the event level. Whether the event structure is homogenous or not will have an impact on whether the temporal variable chosen will be 'def- inite' or 'indefinite.' This latter claim then forms the basis for a new conception of the difference between perfective and imperfective verb forms in Russian.

scholarly journals Verb aspect, alternations and quantification

2015 ◽  
pp. 125-134
Author(s):  
Svetla Koeva
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Verb Phrase ◽  
Verb Aspect ◽  
Complex Problems ◽  
Verbal Prefixes

Verb aspect, alternations and quantificationIn this paper we are briefly discuss the nature of Bulgarian verb aspect and argue that the verb aspect pairs are different lexical units with different (although related) meaning, different argument structure (reflecting categories, explicitness and referential status of arguments) and different sets of semantic and syntactic alternations. The verb prefixes resulting in perfective verbs derivation in some cases can be interpreted as lexical quantifiers as well. Thus the Bulgarian verb aspect is related (in different way) both with the potential for the generation of alternations and with the prefixal lexical quantification. It is shown that the scope of the lexical quantification by means of verbal prefixes is the quantified verb phrase and the scope remains constant in all derived alternations. The paper concerns the basic issues of these complex problems, while the detailed description of the conditions satisfying particular alternation or particular lexical quantification are subject of a more detailed study.

The Verbal Domain

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Cutting Edge ◽  
External Argument ◽  
Structural Units ◽  
Contemporary Debate ◽  
The Third ◽  
Inner Aspect ◽  
One To One ◽  
The One

The structure of the VP, its complexity, its semantics, its function, and the universality of the heads that it contains are a fascinating puzzle. A lot of progress has been made: this volume features cutting-edge research on the verbal domain, while tackling the problem of the nature and structure of the vP-VP domain. It includes some chapters based on papers presented at the “Little v” workshop which was held at Leiden University on October 25–26, 2013. The volume is divided into three main sections, representing the areas in which contemporary debate on the verbal domain is most active. The first part, entitled Root and Verbalizer, includes four chapters discussing the setup of verbal roots, their syntax, and their combination with other functional heads like Voice and v. This part focuses on the V head. The second section, Voice, discusses the content and necessity of a Voice head in the structure of a clause, and whether Voice is different from v. Voice was originally intended as the head hosting the external argument in its specifier, as well as transitivity. This section explores its relationship with “syntactic” voice, intended as the alternation between actives and passives. The third section, Event and Argument Structure, is dedicated to event structure, inner aspect, and Aktionsart. The main issues it tackles are the one-to-one relation between argument structure and event structure, and whether there can be minimal structural units at the basis of the derivation of any sort of XP, including the VP.

Event Structure and Verbal Decomposition

2019 ◽  
pp. 313-341
Author(s):  
Gillian Ramchand
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Semantic Representations ◽  
Structural Interpretation ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter explores the relationship between constrained semantic representations of events, and structured syntactic representations that express them. I show that these representations track each other systematically, and that argument structure generalizations emerge in lock-step with these structures. I therefore propose a system in which those generalizations follow from the following general principles of structural interpretation: (i) embedding corresponds to the cause/leads to relation; (ii) each subevental structure is related potentially to a participant NP; (iii) event-recursion is limited to structures with at most one dynamic predication per event phase. The maximal subevental structure consists of a stative predication embedding a dynamic one, and the dynamic one in turn embedding a stative one. This structure and its proper subsets exhaust the event types built by the grammar. These principles ensure the relative prominence of the different argument positions as well as specific entailments for the different positions.

On the nature of Bulgarian prefixes: Ordering and modification in multiple prefixation

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelina Markova
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Morphological Evidence ◽  
Functional Projection ◽  
Verbal Prefixes ◽  
Morphological Differences ◽  
Mirror Principle ◽  
Basic Intuition

The paper deals with multiple prefixation in Bulgarian and the linearization of the Bulgarian verbal prefixes. Following the basic intuition behind Baker's (1985) ‘Mirror Principle’, according to which syntax reflects morphology and vice versa, I propose that the linearization of the Bulgarian prefixes is syntactically driven. More precisely, and in order to describe the principles according to which prefixes are merged in syntax, I defend the existence of a universal hierarchy of functional projections, as in Cinque (1999) , according to which affixes are merged in order to check their features. Consequently, whenever a prefix bears some aspectual (Aktionsart) content, it is merged within this hierarchy of aspectual features as a head of the corresponding functional projection. In this way, the attested prefix orderings are correctly accounted for. With these assumptions in mind, I present syntactic, semantic and morphological evidence for establishing three types of prefixes in Bulgarian: lexical (idiosyncratic), inner (argument-structure related) and outer (adverbial), and show that the surface order is always [outer [inner [lexical]]]. Moreover, I show that the different syntactic derivations of these prefixes are responsible for the observed semantic and morphological differences together with the linearization patterns and hierarchical dependencies attested within the three prefix groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document