EXPLORING ENGLISH VERBS OF MOTION AT THE SYNTAXSEMANTICS INTERFACE (AN ANALYTICAL OVERVIEW)

Author(s):  
Nataliya Gontarenko ◽  

This article provides an overview of research papers which explore English verbs of motion at the syntax-semantics interface. Among the issues addressed are controversial aspects of motion verb semantics. It is argued that the theoretical principles of construction grammar help to determine whether the meaning of motion is attributed to the verb or the syntactic construction.

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 213-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
INNA K. TOLSKAYA

At first glance, the variety of possible denotations of a given prefix in Russian might appear a chaotic set of idiomatic meanings, e.g. the prefix za- may refer to the beginning of an action, movement to a position behind an object, a brief deviation from a path, or completion of an action. I propose a unified analysis of Russian prefixes, where the differences in meaning are claimed to arise from different syntactic positions, while the lexical entry of a prefix remains the same. The main focus is on the verbs of motion due to the consistent duality displayed by the prefix meanings when added to directional and non-directional motion verbs. It turns out that prefixes modify path when added onto a directional motion verb and refer to movement in time with non-directional motion verbs. This semantic distinction corresponds to distinct sets of syntactic properties, characteristic of the lexical and superlexical prefixes. Furthermore, a tripartite division emerges in each set of prefixes, corresponding to goal, source and route of motion (TO, FROM, VIA, respectively) for lexical prefixes and to beginning, completion and duration for superlexical prefixes. This leads to the suggestion that the same prefix with a consistent conceptual meaning, shared with the corresponding preposition receives part of its denotation from its position in the syntactic representation. The separation of conceptual meaning from the structural meaning allows the polysemy to arise from position, rather than from arbitrary homophony. Thus, conceptual structure is unified with syntax.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-320
Author(s):  
Katrien Beuls ◽  
Yana Knight ◽  
Michael Spranger

Abstract Russian boasts a highly complex aspectual system which can appear irregular and difficult to learn. It has recently been suggested that motion verbs, which are normally seen as exceptional in their nature, may in fact be at the core of this system, motivating aspectual behavior based on stem directionality. This suggests that analyzing motion verbs may help understand the Russian aspectual system as a whole. The present work demonstrates how Russian motion verbs and their aspectual partners can be implemented and processed successfully with Fluid Constructional Grammar. The study presents an example of language processing in both production and comprehension in operation and highlights the flexibility and power of this formalism, despite the challenges that this complex aspectual system poses.


2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 721-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam Fried

In a usage-based analysis of four syntactic reflexives in Czech, this paper examines the question of representing speakers’ knowledge of polyfunctional grammatical categories. I argue that the reflexives form a prototype-based network of partially overlapping grammatical patterns, organized by the pragmatic concept of unexpected referential status in agent–patient relations. This concept is manifested in four distinct communicative functions: marking referential identity between agent and patient roles; distancing discourse participants from their involvement in the reported event; recasting a transitive event as a spontaneous change of state; expressing an attitude toward the reported event. Each function is shown to conventionally co-occur with a set of properties involving various combinations of the following: preferences in aspect and transitivity; semantic and/or pragmatic constraints on agents and patients; verb semantics; shifts in modality and pragmatic force; morphosyntactic constraints. Overall, the analysis supports the view that grammatical categories cannot be properly defined outside of broader grammatical context, thus arguing for a constructional approach to linguistic structure and for re-interpreting the principle of isomorphism in terms of ‘constructions’ in the sense of Construction Grammar.


Author(s):  
Andra Kalnača

The status of constructions of the type non-prefixed verb + adverb with regard to expressing aspectuality (iet iekšā ‘to go in’, vērt vaļā ‘to open up’ etc.) is one of the most interesting problems in Latvian aspectology. However, too little attention has been paid in Latvian linguistics to the use of such constructions in sentences, as well as to the lexical (spatial) meanings of adverbs and their syntactic functions. This study aims to fill that gap, taking a closer look at the ways in which constructions of the type non-prefixed verb + adverb are used in sentences, as well as at the semantics of adverbs and their role in expressing verbal aspect.Whether a verb tends to bind with an adverbial modifier of place (a spatial adverb) when used in actual sentences is determined by verb semantics, resp. telicity, and does not have any direct bearing on the imperfective vs. perfective aspect of the verb or vice versa. Besides, adverbs are non-obligatory. The main conclusion of this study then is that the concept ‘construction of the type non-prefixed verb + adverb’ should be used with extreme caution with regard to verb–adverb bindings in sentences. It can, perhaps, be applied, in a very broad sense, to verbs of motion (and other telic verbs), but not to the use of all Latvian verbs in general.Kokkuvõte. Andra Kalnača: Konstruktsioon prefiksita verb + kohamäärsõna läti keeles. Üks läti keele aspektoloogia huvitavamaid küsimusi on konstruktsioonide prefiksita verb + adverb staatus aspekti väljendamisel (nt iet iekšā ‘sisse minema’, celt pāri ‘üle tõstma’). Siiski pole läti keeleteaduses pööratud piisavalt tähelepanu selle konstruktsiooni kasutamisele lauses ega adverbi leksikaalsele, s.o lokaalsele tähendusele ja süntaktilistele funktsioonidele. Tähtis on rõhutada, et lokaalse tähendusega adverbi lausesse liitmise tingib verbi semantika, s.o teelisus. Verbi imperfektiivsusel/perfektiivsusel pole sellega otsest seost, vrd skriet prom – aizskriet prom ‘minema jooksma’. Sealjuures pole adverbi kasutamine koos verbiga kohustuslik; samuti võib adverb liituda prefiksiga verbile. Sellepärast tuleb mõistet “konstruktsioon prefiksita verb + kohamäärsõna” kasutada väga ettevaatlikult, kui juttu on verbi ja adverbi liitumisest lauses. Üldjoontes võib seda mõistet kasutada liikumis verbide (ja teiste teeliste verbide) kohta, aga mitte kõigi läti keele verbide kohta, sest läti keele verbide ja adverbide kasutamine lauses ei ole grammatiseerunud ei konstruktsioonide ega eraldiseisvate vormidena.Märksõnad: verbi aspekt; teelisus; adverb; liikumisverb; prefiksita/prefiksiga verb


2010 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 164-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Sambre ◽  
Cornelia Wermuth

This paper explores the linguistic patterns of instrumentality in the titles of English medical research papers, at the interface between conceptual and linguistic structure, and offers a contribution to the little studied interrelationships between static and dynamic conceptual relations in medical ontology and LSP terminology. It is demonstrated how causal cues constitute the conceptual background against which instrumentals are profiled in the causal chain of the medical model. Taking inspiration from Talmy, frame semantics and construction grammar, the linguistic patterns in which causal and instrumental frame elements are co-activated are transcribed as complex patterns with partial morphological, syntactic and lexical marking of the conceptual relations under study. The paper offers an exploratory typology of causal cues for instrumentals and describes how multiple instruments can appear in medical LSP. The findings are relevant for those interested in the nexus between ontology, constructional aspects of expert language and frame semantics


Nordlyd ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inna Tolskaya

This paper is an attempt to unify the polysemous verbal prefixes and prepositions in Russian. At first glance, the variety of possible denotations of a given prefix might appear a chaotic set of idiomatic meanings, e.g., the prefix <em>za-</em> may refer to beginning of an action, movement to a position behind an object, a brief deviation from a path, completion of an action, while the corresponding preposition <em>za</em> can mean ‘behind,’ ‘after,’ ‘for,’ ‘in’ (like in ‘in an hour’), ‘at’ (like in ‘at the table’). I will propose a unified analysis, where the differences in meaning are claimed to arise from different syntactic positions, while the lexical entry of a prefix remains the same. The main focus is on the verbs of motion due to the consistent duality displayed by the prefix meanings when added to directional and non-directional motion verbs. It will turn out that many prefixes appear to modify path when added onto a directional motion verb and to refer to movement in time with non-directional motion verbs. This semantic distinction corresponds to distinct sets of syntactic properties, specific for each set of prefixes. These two classes of prefixes correspond to the lexical versus superlexical distinction. However, a tripartite division will emerge in each set, corresponding to source, path, and goal of motion (FROM, VIA and TO) for lexical prefixes and to initiation, process and result for superlexical prefixes. This leads to the suggestion that the syntactic representation of a VP contains at least six distinct nodes for the Russian verbal prefixes, each characterized by predictable semantic and syntactic properties. The same prefix with a consistent meaning, shared with the corresponding preposition, will receive part of its denotation from the syntactic head it attaches to, thus allowing the polysemy to arise from position, rather than from arbitrary homophony. Thus, conceptual structure will be unified with syntax.


Diachronica ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Nesset ◽  
Julia Kuznetsova

This article reports on a corpus study of ongoing language change in Russian, whereby genitive-governing verbs like bojat’sja “fear” combine with objects in the accusative in addition to the traditionally normative genitive. While the use of the accusative is still not very frequent in Contemporary Standard Russian, we demonstrate that it is increasing and that a number of factors such as individuation (animacy), grammatical voice, frequency and verb semantics (intensionality and directionality) promote the use of the accusative. Our analysis is couched in Construction Grammar, and we show that the shift from genitive to accusative objects in Russian provides empirical support for Construction Grammar as a theory applicable to language change.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document