John M. Anderson
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199297078
- eISBN:
- 9780191711404
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199297078.003.0008
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Semantics and Pragmatics
This chapter identifies semantic relations as members of a functional category, functor, like finiteness and determination. Each of these functional categories may be manifested as an independent ...
More
This chapter identifies semantic relations as members of a functional category, functor, like finiteness and determination. Each of these functional categories may be manifested as an independent item, or morphologically, or positionally. They contrast with lexical categories, which are realized as independent items only. A representational system is presented that allows for the diversity in expression of functional categories and provides, in the case of the functor, for the co-occurrence of different representations of the same category (as in Latin In Graeciam pervēnit; ‘In Greece:ACC s/he arrived’ - preposition + case), a problem identified by Kurylowicz. Case and adpositions often express more than a semantic relation but also various dimensionalities, which is illustrated by Hjelmslev’s analysis of the complex case system of Tabassaran, which is paralleled by many adpositional systems, and represented by dimensional nominals as part of the case complex.Less
This chapter identifies semantic relations as members of a functional category, functor, like finiteness and determination. Each of these functional categories may be manifested as an independent item, or morphologically, or positionally. They contrast with lexical categories, which are realized as independent items only. A representational system is presented that allows for the diversity in expression of functional categories and provides, in the case of the functor, for the co-occurrence of different representations of the same category (as in Latin In Graeciam pervēnit; ‘In Greece:ACC s/he arrived’ - preposition + case), a problem identified by Kurylowicz. Case and adpositions often express more than a semantic relation but also various dimensionalities, which is illustrated by Hjelmslev’s analysis of the complex case system of Tabassaran, which is paralleled by many adpositional systems, and represented by dimensional nominals as part of the case complex.
John M. Anderson
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199608317
- eISBN:
- 9780191732034
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608317.003.0004
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Phonetics / Phonology
The notional grammar described here accepts the extralinguistic groundedness of both syntactic categories and the structures that they project in terms of their valency/subcategorization. The ...
More
The notional grammar described here accepts the extralinguistic groundedness of both syntactic categories and the structures that they project in terms of their valency/subcategorization. The structures are built up by the application of re‐representation via the introduction of a structural dimension associated with a particular substance: cognitive salience, perception of temporality, perception of sound. Cognitive salience is grammaticalized in terms of dependency structures involving both adjunction, where head and dependent are separately linearized, and subjunction, where dependency is internal to a particular word. Primary and secondary categories are recognized, and among the former functional vs. lexical. Primary categories determine the basic distribution of a word, and secondary, which are notionally appropriate to the primary they are associated with, and may be morphologically expressed (e.g. tense, gender), give a ‘fine‐tuning’ to this distribution. The functional category functor (adpositions, case) is given a localist interpretation. And it is shown to be crucial to the erection of complex structures, especially those including argument‐sharing in ‘raising’ structures.Less
The notional grammar described here accepts the extralinguistic groundedness of both syntactic categories and the structures that they project in terms of their valency/subcategorization. The structures are built up by the application of re‐representation via the introduction of a structural dimension associated with a particular substance: cognitive salience, perception of temporality, perception of sound. Cognitive salience is grammaticalized in terms of dependency structures involving both adjunction, where head and dependent are separately linearized, and subjunction, where dependency is internal to a particular word. Primary and secondary categories are recognized, and among the former functional vs. lexical. Primary categories determine the basic distribution of a word, and secondary, which are notionally appropriate to the primary they are associated with, and may be morphologically expressed (e.g. tense, gender), give a ‘fine‐tuning’ to this distribution. The functional category functor (adpositions, case) is given a localist interpretation. And it is shown to be crucial to the erection of complex structures, especially those including argument‐sharing in ‘raising’ structures.
Andrew Spencer
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199679928
- eISBN:
- 9780191761508
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679928.003.0002
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Theoretical Linguistics
In this chapter, the lexeme is characterized as an entry in a relational database defined in terms of four attributes: FORM, SYNTAX, SEMANTICS, and a LEXEMIC INDEX, which functions as a kind of ...
More
In this chapter, the lexeme is characterized as an entry in a relational database defined in terms of four attributes: FORM, SYNTAX, SEMANTICS, and a LEXEMIC INDEX, which functions as a kind of database key. The SEMANTICS (SEM) attribute defines basic meaning in terms of ontological classes of events, things, properties, and relations. The FORM attribute defines the inflected word forms of a lexeme. The SYNTAX (SYN) attribute includes an argument structure representation which includes a ‘semantic function role’: the E (Event) for role for verbs, the R (Referent) role for nouns, and an innovation, the A* role, which mediates the grammatical function of attributive modifier. It is argued that the semantic function roles can replace traditional syntactic category labels ‘N’, ‘V’, ‘A’, and that this will provide a way of solving notorious problems with ‘mixed categories’.Less
In this chapter, the lexeme is characterized as an entry in a relational database defined in terms of four attributes: FORM, SYNTAX, SEMANTICS, and a LEXEMIC INDEX, which functions as a kind of database key. The SEMANTICS (SEM) attribute defines basic meaning in terms of ontological classes of events, things, properties, and relations. The FORM attribute defines the inflected word forms of a lexeme. The SYNTAX (SYN) attribute includes an argument structure representation which includes a ‘semantic function role’: the E (Event) for role for verbs, the R (Referent) role for nouns, and an innovation, the A* role, which mediates the grammatical function of attributive modifier. It is argued that the semantic function roles can replace traditional syntactic category labels ‘N’, ‘V’, ‘A’, and that this will provide a way of solving notorious problems with ‘mixed categories’.
John R Taylor
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199290802
- eISBN:
- 9780191741388
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199290802.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Psycholinguistics / Neurolinguistics / Cognitive Linguistics
The generative model requires that words are assigned to lexical categories and that members of a category are of equal status vis-à‐vis syntactic rules. On the basis of several examples, it is ...
More
The generative model requires that words are assigned to lexical categories and that members of a category are of equal status vis-à‐vis syntactic rules. On the basis of several examples, it is shown, on the contrary, that the distribution of a word cannot be predicted from its membership in a lexical category. Many words have a unique distribution, which has to be learned.Less
The generative model requires that words are assigned to lexical categories and that members of a category are of equal status vis-à‐vis syntactic rules. On the basis of several examples, it is shown, on the contrary, that the distribution of a word cannot be predicted from its membership in a lexical category. Many words have a unique distribution, which has to be learned.
Pieter Muysken
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- May 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780262027892
- eISBN:
- 9780262320351
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027892.003.0005
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Sociolinguistics / Anthropological Linguistics
This chapter explores mismatches between syntactic and lexical categories, adducing evidence from Creole land Amerindian languages, with a case study of Popoloca de Mezontla. Core lexical features ...
More
This chapter explores mismatches between syntactic and lexical categories, adducing evidence from Creole land Amerindian languages, with a case study of Popoloca de Mezontla. Core lexical features may not have a grammatical role and grammatical features may not have a representation in the lexicon. The case study of Popoloca shows that borrowed content words have a quite specific distribution, depending on the topic of the text they occur in. In contrast, the number of function words borrowed (in tokens) is almost comparable to that of content words. The borrowing process itself is partly constrained by lexical, and partly by syntactic feature configurations. The presence or absence of a noun/verb distinction in different languages may itself be a case of mismatch between the lexicon and the syntax.Less
This chapter explores mismatches between syntactic and lexical categories, adducing evidence from Creole land Amerindian languages, with a case study of Popoloca de Mezontla. Core lexical features may not have a grammatical role and grammatical features may not have a representation in the lexicon. The case study of Popoloca shows that borrowed content words have a quite specific distribution, depending on the topic of the text they occur in. In contrast, the number of function words borrowed (in tokens) is almost comparable to that of content words. The borrowing process itself is partly constrained by lexical, and partly by syntactic feature configurations. The presence or absence of a noun/verb distinction in different languages may itself be a case of mismatch between the lexicon and the syntax.
Itamar Francez and Andrew Koontz-Garboden
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- April 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198744580
- eISBN:
- 9780191805837
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198744580.003.0005
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Semantics and Pragmatics, Syntax and Morphology
Taking the Lexical Semantic Variation Hypothesis and the well-known fact that property concept lexemes vary in lexical category as the points of departure, it is considered whether there is any ...
More
Taking the Lexical Semantic Variation Hypothesis and the well-known fact that property concept lexemes vary in lexical category as the points of departure, it is considered whether there is any correlation between the meaning of a property concept lexeme and its lexical category. A novel observation is made about a lexical gap: while nouns across languages can denote qualities as well as sets of individuals, adjectives can never denote qualities. A derivation of this gap is proposed from the assumption that lexical adjectives must be able to affect non-trivial subsective modification.Less
Taking the Lexical Semantic Variation Hypothesis and the well-known fact that property concept lexemes vary in lexical category as the points of departure, it is considered whether there is any correlation between the meaning of a property concept lexeme and its lexical category. A novel observation is made about a lexical gap: while nouns across languages can denote qualities as well as sets of individuals, adjectives can never denote qualities. A derivation of this gap is proposed from the assumption that lexical adjectives must be able to affect non-trivial subsective modification.
Itamar Francez and Andrew Koontz-Garboden
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- April 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198744580
- eISBN:
- 9780191805837
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198744580.001.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Semantics and Pragmatics, Syntax and Morphology
Systematic variation in form between semantic equivalents across languages is a key explanandum of linguistic theory. Two contrasting views of the role of lexical semantics in the analysis of such ...
More
Systematic variation in form between semantic equivalents across languages is a key explanandum of linguistic theory. Two contrasting views of the role of lexical semantics in the analysis of such variation can be found in the literature: (1) uniformity, whereby lexical meaning is universal, and morphosyntactic variation arises from idiosyncratic differences in the inventory and phonological shape of language-particular functional material, and (2) transparency, whereby systematic variation in form arises from systematic variation in the meaning of basic lexical items. This volume contrasts these views as applied to the empirical domain of property concept sentences—sentences expressing adjectival predication and their translational equivalents across languages. Demonstrating that property concept sentences vary systematically between possessive and predicative form, the authors propose a transparentist analysis of this variation that links it to the lexical denotations of basic property concept lexemes. At the heart of the analysis are qualities: mass-like model-theoretic objects that closely resemble scales. The authors contrast their transparentist analysis with uniformitarian alternatives, demonstrating its theoretical and empirical advantages. They then show that the proposed theory of qualities can account for interesting and novel observations in two central domains of grammatical theory: the theory of lexical categories, and the theory of mass nouns. The overall results highlight the importance of the lexicon as a locus of generalizations about the limits of crosslinguistic variation.Less
Systematic variation in form between semantic equivalents across languages is a key explanandum of linguistic theory. Two contrasting views of the role of lexical semantics in the analysis of such variation can be found in the literature: (1) uniformity, whereby lexical meaning is universal, and morphosyntactic variation arises from idiosyncratic differences in the inventory and phonological shape of language-particular functional material, and (2) transparency, whereby systematic variation in form arises from systematic variation in the meaning of basic lexical items. This volume contrasts these views as applied to the empirical domain of property concept sentences—sentences expressing adjectival predication and their translational equivalents across languages. Demonstrating that property concept sentences vary systematically between possessive and predicative form, the authors propose a transparentist analysis of this variation that links it to the lexical denotations of basic property concept lexemes. At the heart of the analysis are qualities: mass-like model-theoretic objects that closely resemble scales. The authors contrast their transparentist analysis with uniformitarian alternatives, demonstrating its theoretical and empirical advantages. They then show that the proposed theory of qualities can account for interesting and novel observations in two central domains of grammatical theory: the theory of lexical categories, and the theory of mass nouns. The overall results highlight the importance of the lexicon as a locus of generalizations about the limits of crosslinguistic variation.
Jan Don and Eva van Lier
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- September 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199668441
- eISBN:
- 9780191748707
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668441.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Language Families
Don and Van Lier focus on Evans and Osada’s criterion of semantic compositionality: What is the interpretation of formally identical lexemes in different syntactic contexts, and what implications ...
More
Don and Van Lier focus on Evans and Osada’s criterion of semantic compositionality: What is the interpretation of formally identical lexemes in different syntactic contexts, and what implications does this have for categorial distinctions in individual languages? Data of three candidates for ‘flexible languages’—Kharia (Munda, India), Tagalog (Malayo-Polynesian, Philippines), and Samoan (Oceanic, Samoa)—are compared with Dutch, a ‘differentiated language’ with distinct lexical classes of verbs and nouns. Compositional and non-compositional semantic shifts are found in all four languages. The difference between ‘flexible’ and ‘differentiated’ languages resides in the fact that lexical and syntactic categorization are part of a single operation in languages of the latter type, whereas they are distinct operations in a flexible language. Specifically, while roots in differentiated languages combine with a categorial label before they are further processed by the morphology and syntax, flexible languages can (zero-)derive and combine roots without affecting their distributional freedom.Less
Don and Van Lier focus on Evans and Osada’s criterion of semantic compositionality: What is the interpretation of formally identical lexemes in different syntactic contexts, and what implications does this have for categorial distinctions in individual languages? Data of three candidates for ‘flexible languages’—Kharia (Munda, India), Tagalog (Malayo-Polynesian, Philippines), and Samoan (Oceanic, Samoa)—are compared with Dutch, a ‘differentiated language’ with distinct lexical classes of verbs and nouns. Compositional and non-compositional semantic shifts are found in all four languages. The difference between ‘flexible’ and ‘differentiated’ languages resides in the fact that lexical and syntactic categorization are part of a single operation in languages of the latter type, whereas they are distinct operations in a flexible language. Specifically, while roots in differentiated languages combine with a categorial label before they are further processed by the morphology and syntax, flexible languages can (zero-)derive and combine roots without affecting their distributional freedom.
Tallerman Maggie, Newmeyer Frederick, Bickerton Derek, Bouchard Denis, Kaan Edith, and Rizzi Luigi
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262013567
- eISBN:
- 9780262258586
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262013567.003.0007
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Sociolinguistics / Anthropological Linguistics
This chapter focuses on research dealing with syntactic phenomena as well as the biological foundations and origin of syntax. It first outlines the main building blocks of syntax, starting with ...
More
This chapter focuses on research dealing with syntactic phenomena as well as the biological foundations and origin of syntax. It first outlines the main building blocks of syntax, starting with lexical categories and functional categories. It then considers hierarchical structure and recursion and discusses a typology of dependencies between syntactic elements, along with the relationship between such dependencies and the needs of the human parser. It also describes various kinds of syntactic universals, their treatment within different grammatical traditions, and possible responses to exceptional constructions. The chapter also explores the development of creoles from pidgins, the diachronic processes involved in language change, and the ontogenetic development of language in infants.Less
This chapter focuses on research dealing with syntactic phenomena as well as the biological foundations and origin of syntax. It first outlines the main building blocks of syntax, starting with lexical categories and functional categories. It then considers hierarchical structure and recursion and discusses a typology of dependencies between syntactic elements, along with the relationship between such dependencies and the needs of the human parser. It also describes various kinds of syntactic universals, their treatment within different grammatical traditions, and possible responses to exceptional constructions. The chapter also explores the development of creoles from pidgins, the diachronic processes involved in language change, and the ontogenetic development of language in infants.
Jessica Coon
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- September 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199858743
- eISBN:
- 9780199367672
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199858743.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter begins with an investigation into Chol's Split-S system, where it observes that stems that subcategorize for internal complements (transitives, unaccusatives, and passives) may inflect ...
More
This chapter begins with an investigation into Chol's Split-S system, where it observes that stems that subcategorize for internal complements (transitives, unaccusatives, and passives) may inflect directly as predicates, while those that do not (unergatives and antipassives) must surface as nominals. It shows that this has consequences for the grammar as a whole and in particular for the system of aspectual splits. The chapter then discusses the consequences of Chol's system for theories of lexical categories and predication more generally.Less
This chapter begins with an investigation into Chol's Split-S system, where it observes that stems that subcategorize for internal complements (transitives, unaccusatives, and passives) may inflect directly as predicates, while those that do not (unergatives and antipassives) must surface as nominals. It shows that this has consequences for the grammar as a whole and in particular for the system of aspectual splits. The chapter then discusses the consequences of Chol's system for theories of lexical categories and predication more generally.
Itamar Francez and Andrew Koontz-Garboden
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- April 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198744580
- eISBN:
- 9780191805837
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198744580.003.0007
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Semantics and Pragmatics, Syntax and Morphology
This concluding chapter highlighting outstanding issues related to its main topics, among these the notion of translational equivalence; the uniformity/transparency debate in the explanation of ...
More
This concluding chapter highlighting outstanding issues related to its main topics, among these the notion of translational equivalence; the uniformity/transparency debate in the explanation of morphosyntactic variation; the lexical semantics of lexical categories; and the nature of mass nouns. The book closes by situating the main issues against the broader issues of key import in the field, particularly the issue of linguistic diversity, and the various modes of explaining it.Less
This concluding chapter highlighting outstanding issues related to its main topics, among these the notion of translational equivalence; the uniformity/transparency debate in the explanation of morphosyntactic variation; the lexical semantics of lexical categories; and the nature of mass nouns. The book closes by situating the main issues against the broader issues of key import in the field, particularly the issue of linguistic diversity, and the various modes of explaining it.
Lauren Fonteyn
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- April 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780190917579
- eISBN:
- 9780190917609
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190917579.003.0002
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Historical Linguistics, English Language
This chapter discusses the literature dealing with the formal and functional features of the major grammatical categories noun and verb, focusing on the so-called “mixed” or “hybrid” structures known ...
More
This chapter discusses the literature dealing with the formal and functional features of the major grammatical categories noun and verb, focusing on the so-called “mixed” or “hybrid” structures known as deverbal nominalizations. It is argued that, to understand the peculiarities of these much-discussed constructions and, more generally, to investigate whether abstract linguistic concepts such as “noun” and “verb” are—as suggested in functionalist and cognitive linguistics—to a certain extent “iconic,” we should adopt an approach that devotes attention to structural as well as functional-semantic properties. The discussion will lead to the presentation of a theoretical model of functional-semantic nominality and verbality/clausality, which will serve as the core for further investigation of the functional-semantic organization of the English gerundive system.Less
This chapter discusses the literature dealing with the formal and functional features of the major grammatical categories noun and verb, focusing on the so-called “mixed” or “hybrid” structures known as deverbal nominalizations. It is argued that, to understand the peculiarities of these much-discussed constructions and, more generally, to investigate whether abstract linguistic concepts such as “noun” and “verb” are—as suggested in functionalist and cognitive linguistics—to a certain extent “iconic,” we should adopt an approach that devotes attention to structural as well as functional-semantic properties. The discussion will lead to the presentation of a theoretical model of functional-semantic nominality and verbality/clausality, which will serve as the core for further investigation of the functional-semantic organization of the English gerundive system.
John Bowers
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- August 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780262014311
- eISBN:
- 9780262289252
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262014311.001.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Sociolinguistics / Anthropological Linguistics
This book proposes a radically new approach to argument structure that has the potential to unify data from a wide range of different language types in terms of a simple and universal syntactic ...
More
This book proposes a radically new approach to argument structure that has the potential to unify data from a wide range of different language types in terms of a simple and universal syntactic structure. In many ways, the proposed theory is the natural extension of three leading ideas in the literature: The minimalist approach to Case theory (particularly Noam Chomsky’s idea that Case is assigned under the Agree function relation); the idea of introducing arguments in specifiers of functional categories rather than in projections of lexical categories; and the neo-Davidsonian approach to argument structure represented in the work of Parsons and others. The book pulls together these strands in the literature and shapes them into a unified theory. These ideas, together with certain basic assumptions—notably the idea that the initial order of merge of the three basic argument categories of Agent, Theme, and Affectee is just the opposite of what has been almost universally assumed in the literature—lead to a fundamental rethinking of argument structure. The book argues that every argument is merged as the specifier of a particular type of light verb category and that these functional argument categories merge in bottom-to-top fashion in accordance with a fixed Universal Order of Merge. In the hierarchical structures that result from these operations, Affectee arguments will be highest, Theme arguments next highest, and Agent arguments lowest—exactly the opposite of the usual assumption.Less
This book proposes a radically new approach to argument structure that has the potential to unify data from a wide range of different language types in terms of a simple and universal syntactic structure. In many ways, the proposed theory is the natural extension of three leading ideas in the literature: The minimalist approach to Case theory (particularly Noam Chomsky’s idea that Case is assigned under the Agree function relation); the idea of introducing arguments in specifiers of functional categories rather than in projections of lexical categories; and the neo-Davidsonian approach to argument structure represented in the work of Parsons and others. The book pulls together these strands in the literature and shapes them into a unified theory. These ideas, together with certain basic assumptions—notably the idea that the initial order of merge of the three basic argument categories of Agent, Theme, and Affectee is just the opposite of what has been almost universally assumed in the literature—lead to a fundamental rethinking of argument structure. The book argues that every argument is merged as the specifier of a particular type of light verb category and that these functional argument categories merge in bottom-to-top fashion in accordance with a fixed Universal Order of Merge. In the hierarchical structures that result from these operations, Affectee arguments will be highest, Theme arguments next highest, and Agent arguments lowest—exactly the opposite of the usual assumption.
Sebastian Nordhoff
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- September 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199668441
- eISBN:
- 9780191748707
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199668441.003.0009
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Language Families
Nordhoff’s chapter presents the parts-of-speech system of Sri Lanka Malay, which consists of verbs, nouns, and adjectives, and argues that the latter are fully flexible parts of speech, which can be ...
More
Nordhoff’s chapter presents the parts-of-speech system of Sri Lanka Malay, which consists of verbs, nouns, and adjectives, and argues that the latter are fully flexible parts of speech, which can be used for any discourse function without further measures being taken. The presence of the additional lexical categories of noun and verb distinguishes the Sri Lanka Malay system from other languages with maximally flexible parts of speech, which are monocategorial.Nouns and verbs are recent innovations in Sri Lanka Malay due to influence from the adstrates Sinhala and Tamil, which have rigid parts-of-speech systems. This influence triggered the closer association of object-denoting lexemes with the act of reference, and action-denoting lexemes with the act of predication. This was assisted by already existing derivational processes to restrict discourse functions. Comparing Sri Lanka Malay to other languages, the forerunners of specialized parts of speech appear to be derived lexemes.Less
Nordhoff’s chapter presents the parts-of-speech system of Sri Lanka Malay, which consists of verbs, nouns, and adjectives, and argues that the latter are fully flexible parts of speech, which can be used for any discourse function without further measures being taken. The presence of the additional lexical categories of noun and verb distinguishes the Sri Lanka Malay system from other languages with maximally flexible parts of speech, which are monocategorial.Nouns and verbs are recent innovations in Sri Lanka Malay due to influence from the adstrates Sinhala and Tamil, which have rigid parts-of-speech systems. This influence triggered the closer association of object-denoting lexemes with the act of reference, and action-denoting lexemes with the act of predication. This was assisted by already existing derivational processes to restrict discourse functions. Comparing Sri Lanka Malay to other languages, the forerunners of specialized parts of speech appear to be derived lexemes.
Isabelle Roy
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- May 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199543540
- eISBN:
- 9780191747151
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543540.003.0008
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter presents the conclusion, summarizing the proposal that nonverbal predicates in direct predicative uses exhibit a three-way distinction between dense, non-dense, and maximal predicates. ...
More
This chapter presents the conclusion, summarizing the proposal that nonverbal predicates in direct predicative uses exhibit a three-way distinction between dense, non-dense, and maximal predicates. The three-way distinction, based on the maximality and density criteria, is not a lexical distinction but originates structurally from within the extended projection of nonverbal predicates: maximality being associated with the projection of a NumP and density with the ClP. Finally, the chapter offers a brief discussion of the role of lexical categories in bringing about the three predicate interpretations, leading to open questions for future research.Less
This chapter presents the conclusion, summarizing the proposal that nonverbal predicates in direct predicative uses exhibit a three-way distinction between dense, non-dense, and maximal predicates. The three-way distinction, based on the maximality and density criteria, is not a lexical distinction but originates structurally from within the extended projection of nonverbal predicates: maximality being associated with the projection of a NumP and density with the ClP. Finally, the chapter offers a brief discussion of the role of lexical categories in bringing about the three predicate interpretations, leading to open questions for future research.
Oliver Bond and Marina Chumakina
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- October 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780198747291
- eISBN:
- 9780191809705
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747291.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology, Language Families
There are two distinct syntactic agreement domains in Archi, the noun phrase and the clause, each presenting different challenges for an account of the mechanisms underlying their behaviour. Within ...
More
There are two distinct syntactic agreement domains in Archi, the noun phrase and the clause, each presenting different challenges for an account of the mechanisms underlying their behaviour. Within the noun phrase, modifiers can exhibit the potential for agreement with multiple controllers in different domains. Agreement controllers can also exhibit duplicitous behaviour, with different values of the same feature simultaneously being relevant in two different agreement domains. Within the clause, agreement appears straightforward at first glance, since all possible targets agree with the absolutive argument of their immediate clause. Less simple is the issue of defining a possible target; this depends on the lexical category of the target, its morphological type or sometimes the properties of individual cells in its morphological paradigm.Less
There are two distinct syntactic agreement domains in Archi, the noun phrase and the clause, each presenting different challenges for an account of the mechanisms underlying their behaviour. Within the noun phrase, modifiers can exhibit the potential for agreement with multiple controllers in different domains. Agreement controllers can also exhibit duplicitous behaviour, with different values of the same feature simultaneously being relevant in two different agreement domains. Within the clause, agreement appears straightforward at first glance, since all possible targets agree with the absolutive argument of their immediate clause. Less simple is the issue of defining a possible target; this depends on the lexical category of the target, its morphological type or sometimes the properties of individual cells in its morphological paradigm.
Isabelle Roy
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- May 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199543540
- eISBN:
- 9780191747151
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543540.003.0006
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter extends to Spanish the conclusions drawn from French and Russian, and proposes a novel view on the distribution of the two copulas ser/estar based on categorical selection, rather than ...
More
This chapter extends to Spanish the conclusions drawn from French and Russian, and proposes a novel view on the distribution of the two copulas ser/estar based on categorical selection, rather than semantics of the predicates (although both are ultimately related in this system). The two forms of the copula are allomorphs of a single copula, devoid of any semantic contribution. What determines the spell-out form is the categorical nature of the predicative complement: estar appears with every lexical category except nominals, while ser takes nominals only. The Spanish facts further emphasize that a three-way distinction between dense/non-dense/maximal predicates is warranted in order to account for the distribution of both the copula and the (optional) indefinite article.Less
This chapter extends to Spanish the conclusions drawn from French and Russian, and proposes a novel view on the distribution of the two copulas ser/estar based on categorical selection, rather than semantics of the predicates (although both are ultimately related in this system). The two forms of the copula are allomorphs of a single copula, devoid of any semantic contribution. What determines the spell-out form is the categorical nature of the predicative complement: estar appears with every lexical category except nominals, while ser takes nominals only. The Spanish facts further emphasize that a three-way distinction between dense/non-dense/maximal predicates is warranted in order to account for the distribution of both the copula and the (optional) indefinite article.
Isabelle Roy
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- May 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199543540
- eISBN:
- 9780191747151
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543540.003.0005
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This chapter shows how the proposed analysis can account for apparently unrelated phenomena in Russian, namely the morphological (short or long) form of the predicate and case assignment with respect ...
More
This chapter shows how the proposed analysis can account for apparently unrelated phenomena in Russian, namely the morphological (short or long) form of the predicate and case assignment with respect to the alternation between nominative and instrumental marking. It shows that short-form adjectives must be treated as dense predicates; while long forms are either non-dense (and then marked instrumental) or maximal (and then marked nominative). Russian confirms that a three-way partition is warranted, as it clearly grammaticalizes a double contrast between dense/other predicates (by morphology) on the one hand and non-dense/maximal on the other (by case). It finally shows that lexical categories have a different status in predication, and specifically that whereas nominals can never occur in a situation-descriptive predication (and hence be interpreted as dense), only nominals are allowed as non-dense and maximal predicates.Less
This chapter shows how the proposed analysis can account for apparently unrelated phenomena in Russian, namely the morphological (short or long) form of the predicate and case assignment with respect to the alternation between nominative and instrumental marking. It shows that short-form adjectives must be treated as dense predicates; while long forms are either non-dense (and then marked instrumental) or maximal (and then marked nominative). Russian confirms that a three-way partition is warranted, as it clearly grammaticalizes a double contrast between dense/other predicates (by morphology) on the one hand and non-dense/maximal on the other (by case). It finally shows that lexical categories have a different status in predication, and specifically that whereas nominals can never occur in a situation-descriptive predication (and hence be interpreted as dense), only nominals are allowed as non-dense and maximal predicates.
