DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 3 Non-Propositional Evidentiality*

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 3 Non-Propositional Evidentiality* 1 Chapter 3 Non-propositional evidentiality* Guillaume Jacques 1 Introduction In most languages of the world where evidentiality is grammaticalized, it is expressed either by verbal morphology, sentential markers or adverbs, which have scope over the entire proposition. A minority of languages have evidential-like distinctions on markers (mainly deictic, see Aikhenvald 2004: 130) whose scope is limited to a noun phrase. The present study focuses on these non-propositional evidential markers. Evidential markers present in relative clauses embedded within noun phrases are not considered in this study: although some languages have restrictions on the use of evidential markers in relative clauses and other non-main clauses,1 many languages allow evidential markers on the verb in relative clauses (Aikhenvald 2004: 253-6; see for instance Nivaclé in section 7). Such evidential markers, although their scope is limited to the noun phrase that includes the relative clause are not strictly non-propositional, since they also at the same time have scope over the entire relative clause. Excluded from this survey are likewise clitic evidential markers that can combine with nouns phonologically, but have scope over the whole sentence, such as the reportative –si in Quechua (on which see for instance Faller 2002). This paper is divided into eight sections. First, I present the different types of non- propositional evidential markers, including demonstrative pronouns and adverbs, 2 determiners or various types of affixes. Second, I show how non-propositional evidential markers can encode morphosyntactic parameters such as case or topicality in addition to evidentiality. Third, I describe the different types of non-propositional sensory evidentials attested in the world’s languages. Fourth, I briefly mention a few rare cases of nonpropositional non-sensory evidentials. Fifth, I discuss how non-propositional _________________________ *I am grateful to Alexandra Aikhenvald, Benjamin Brosig, Gong Xun, Zev Handel, Annie Montaut, Amos Teo and Alice Vittrant for useful comments on previous versions of this paper. 1For instance in Japhug Gyalrong, the inferential cannot be used in relative clauses with a finite verb (Jacques to appear). 3 evidentiality and nominal tense can interact in some languages. Finally, I present some general observations on propositional and non-propositional evidential systems. 2 Subtypes of non-propositional evidentials In languages with evidential marking on demonstratives, the nonpropositional evidential sub-systems may be embedded within the proximal / distal system. This is particularly common in the case of sensory evidentials, especially those marking visibility, as exemplified by Lillooet (Salish) in Table 1 and Tsou (Austronesian) in Table 3 (Tung 1964, Yang 2000 and discussion below; see also sections 4.1.1, 4.2 and 4). Some languages combine visible / invisible and proximal / distal with other contrasts, such as elevation (Schapper 2014). Table 1: Demonstrative pronouns in Lillooet (van Eijk 1997: 168-9) visible invisible PROX MID DIST PROX MID DIST SG cʔa tiʔ tʔu kʷʔa niʔ kʷuʔ PL ʔizá ʔiz’ ʔizú kʷɬa nəɬ kʷɬ Lillooet determiners, on the other hand, have a much more fine-grained system, which encodes two degrees of sensory evidential distinctions, but lacks the proximal/distal distinction. Table 2 presents van Eijk (1997)’s analysis of the system. 4 Table 2: Articles in Lillooet (van Eijk 1997: 192) known unknown present absent present absent SG ti…a ni…a kʷu…a kʷu PL ʔi…a nəɬ…a kʷɬ…a kʷɬ The determiner ‘present, known’ ti...a or its plural form is used to refer to person or things visible to the speaker at utterance time (as in 1), or in specific cases to entities that the speaker saw in the past at an unspecified moment (van Eijk 1997: 193).2 ________________________ 2For glossing =a, I adopt Matthewson (1998)’s analysis as an ‘assertion of evidence’. 5 (1) pún-ɬkan ti=n-ɬk’ʷál’us=a find-1SG.A DET:VIS=1SG.POSS-basket=ASSERTION.OF.EXISTENCE I found my basket (when just mentioning the fact, or when showing the basket to the addressee) The determiners ‘unknown, present’ (kʷu...a and kʷɬ...a) on the other hand is used for entities that are not visible but perceptible through another sense, in particular audition or smell (van Eijk 1997: 195), as in example 2.3 (2) cʔas lákʷʔa ɬlákʷu come N.VIS there:N.VIS kʷu=sƛʼaɬáləm=a DET:N.VIS.SENS=grizzly=ASSERTION.OF.EXISTENCE There is a grizzly coming from there (used by a person who hears a grizzly). The other determiners ni...a and kʷu are used for referents that are not perceptible. In some languages, noun modifiers can be derived from demonstrative adverbs by means of a nominalizing morpheme. In such systems, demonstrative determiners and demonstrative adverbs are completely parallel and show the same evidential contrasts. For instance, in Khaling (Sino-Tibetan, Kiranti, Nepal), the demonstrative determiner/pronoun tiki-̂m ‘this (audible)’ is derived from the demonstrative adverb tikí ‘there (audible)’ by means of the all-purpose nominalizer –m .4 Cases of languages where nouns can directly take the same set of evidential markers as verbs (with semantic scope on the noun phrase) are extremely rare; Jarawara (Arawá; Aikhenvald 2004: 88, ex 3.19) however offers such an example, as in (3) where 6 the noun phrase Banawaa batori ‘the mouth of the Banawá’ takes the reported evidential suffix –mone. (3) Banawaa batori-tee-mone jaa faja otaa Banawá mouth-CUSTOMARY-REPORTED.F at then 1NSG.EXCL.S ka-waha-ro APPL-become.dawn-REMOTE.PST.FIRSTHAND-F otaa-ke 1NSG-DECLARATIVE.F ‘Then the day dawned on us (firsthand) (lit. we with-dawned) at the place reported to be (customarily) the mouth of the Banawá river’ _____________________ 3On the meaning of the propositional evidential marker lákʷʔa , see Matthewson (2010). 4See Bickel (1999) on this type of nominalizers and their various uses in the syntax of most Sino-Tibetan languages. 7 3 Non-propositional evidentials and other morphosyntactic parameters Non-propositional evidential markers can be combined with case marking and topicalization. The Tsou data in Table (3) illustrate markers encoding both evidentiality and case. Note that the case markers in Tsou are portmanteau morphemes: it is not possible to decompose them into two morphemes (evidential marker and case marker), at least synchronically. Table 3: Tsou case markers, adapted from Yang (2000: 54) case markers nominative oblique proximal ’e ta visual medial si ta distal ta ta non-visual sensory co nca/ninca hearsay ’o to belief / inference na no In other languages where case and evidential markers interact, such as Dyirbal, morphological boundaries are more transparent. Note however that even in Dyirbal the case paradigms of the evidential demonstratives are not completely predictable (see Dixon 2014). 8 Aside from proximal / distal distinction and case, a third parameter has been shown to interact with non-propositional evidentiality: topicality. For instance, the Chadic language Maaka has three evidential markers –mú ‘eye-witnessed’, –diỳ à ‘joint- perception’, –kà ‘assumption’ occurring on noun phrases (see section 4.3). They can be used with referents which are ‘hardly core participants, but rather topicalized peripheral participants that motivate an action or event’ (Storch & Coly 2014: 195-7). Non-propositional evidential system display a considerable diversity in terms of morphology, and it would not be surprising if future fieldwork brings to light previously unknown types of evidential markers in noun phrases. 4 Sensory evidentials Nearly all non-propositional evidential systems described in the literature involve sensory evidential meanings, rather than other types of evidential such as hearsay or inferential. This section first discusses the visual vs non-visual contrast, which has been described for almost all languages with non-propositional evidentials. 9 Secondly, it addresses the issue of non-visual sensory or auditory evidentials, which are considerably rarer. Thirdly, it mentions the existence of evidential markers encoding joint perception of speaker and addressee. Finally, it discusses the time frame of sensory perception, in particular the distinction between utterance time sensory evidentials vs lifespan sensory evidentials. 4.1 Visual evidential The first type of non-propositional evidential distinction to have been described is that between visible and non-visible demonstratives in Kwak’wala (Boas 1911: 527-531). System of demonstratives encoding a visible / invisible contrast are not particularly rare cross-linguistically, and are found on all continents. In the Sino-Tibetan family alone, for instance, visible / invisible contrasts on demonstratives have been reported for Kham (Watters 2002), some varieties of Wu Chinese (Yue 2003: 89) and Darma (Willis Oko 2015). The present paper does not attempt to systematically survey all systems of this type, but will mention some of their most conspicuous features. 4.1.1 Proximal / distal and visual evidentials While in Kwak’wala (as well as other Wakashan and Salishan languages), the visual / non-visual contrast is independent of the proximal / distal distinction, it is not the case of some languages with non-propositional evidentials. For instance, in Dyirbal (Dixon 1972: 45, Dixon 2014) we find three series of demonstratives ya– ‘here and visible’, ba– ‘there and visible’ and ŋa– ‘not visible’. In this system, the proximal / distal contrast is neutralized for non-visible referents.5 The 10 non-visible ŋa–
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Grammatical Gender and Grammatical Stems
    Grammatical gender and grammatical stems How many grammatical genders exist in Czech? How can we tell the grammatical gender of a noun? What is a grammatical stem and how do we determine it? Why is knowing the grammatical stem important? How does the ending of a noun help us to know whether it is a hard- or soft-stem noun? Like other European languages (German, French, Spanish) but unlike English, Czech nouns are marked for grammatical gender. Czech has three grammatical genders: Masculine (M), Feminine (F), and Neuter (N). M and F partly overlap with the natural gender of human beings, so we have učitel for a male teacher and učitelka for a female teacher, sportovec for a male athlete and sportovkyně for a female athlete… But grammatical gender is a feature of all nouns (names of inanimate things, places, abstractions…), and it plays an important role in how Czech grammar works. To determine the grammatical gender of a noun (Maskulinum, femininum nebo neutrum?), we look at the ending—the last consonant or vowel—of the word in the Nominative singular (the basic or dictionary form of the word). 1. The great majority of nouns that end in a consonant are Masculine: profesor (professor), hrad (castle), stůl (table), pes (dog), autobus (bus), počítač (computer), čaj (tea), sešit (workbook), mobil (cell-phone)… Masculine nouns can be further divided into animate nouns (people and animals) and inanimate nouns (things, places, abstractions). 2. The great majority of nouns that end in -a are Feminine: profesorka (professor), lampa (lamp), kočka (cat), kniha (book), ryba (fish), fotka (photo), třída (classroom), podlaha (floor), budova (building)… 3.
    [Show full text]
  • (2012) Perspectival Discourse Referents for Indexicals* Maria
    To appear in Proceedings of SULA 7 (2012) Perspectival discourse referents for indexicals* Maria Bittner Rutgers University 0. Introduction By definition, the reference of an indexical depends on the context of utterance. For ex- ample, what proposition is expressed by saying I am hungry depends on who says this and when. Since Kaplan (1978), context dependence has been analyzed in terms of two parameters: an utterance context, which determines the reference of indexicals, and a formally unrelated assignment function, which determines the reference of anaphors (rep- resented as variables). This STATIC VIEW of indexicals, as pure context dependence, is still widely accepted. With varying details, it is implemented by current theories of indexicali- ty not only in static frameworks, which ignore context change (e.g. Schlenker 2003, Anand and Nevins 2004), but also in the otherwise dynamic framework of DRT. In DRT, context change is only relevant for anaphors, which refer to current values of variables. In contrast, indexicals refer to static contextual anchors (see Kamp 1985, Zeevat 1999). This SEMI-STATIC VIEW reconstructs the traditional indexical-anaphor dichotomy in DRT. An alternative DYNAMIC VIEW of indexicality is implicit in the ‘commonplace ef- fect’ of Stalnaker (1978) and is formally explicated in Bittner (2007, 2011). The basic idea is that indexical reference is a species of discourse reference, just like anaphora. In particular, both varieties of discourse reference involve not only context dependence, but also context change. The act of speaking up focuses attention and thereby makes this very speech event available for discourse reference by indexicals. Mentioning something likewise focuses attention, making the mentioned entity available for subsequent dis- course reference by anaphors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Term Declension, the Three Basic Qualities of Latin Nouns, That
    Chapter 2: First Declension Chapter 2 covers the following: the term declension, the three basic qualities of Latin nouns, that is, case, number and gender, basic sentence structure, subject, verb, direct object and so on, the six cases of Latin nouns and the uses of those cases, the formation of the different cases in Latin, and the way adjectives agree with nouns. At the end of this lesson we’ll review the vocabulary you should memorize in this chapter. Declension. As with conjugation, the term declension has two meanings in Latin. It means, first, the process of joining a case ending onto a noun base. Second, it is a term used to refer to one of the five categories of nouns distinguished by the sound ending the noun base: /a/, /ŏ/ or /ŭ/, a consonant or /ĭ/, /ū/, /ē/. First, let’s look at the three basic characteristics of every Latin noun: case, number and gender. All Latin nouns and adjectives have these three grammatical qualities. First, case: how the noun functions in a sentence, that is, is it the subject, the direct object, the object of a preposition or any of many other uses? Second, number: singular or plural. And third, gender: masculine, feminine or neuter. Every noun in Latin will have one case, one number and one gender, and only one of each of these qualities. In other words, a noun in a sentence cannot be both singular and plural, or masculine and feminine. Whenever asked ─ and I will ask ─ you should be able to give the correct answer for all three qualities.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosodic Focus∗
    Prosodic Focus∗ Michael Wagner March 10, 2020 Abstract This chapter provides an introduction to the phenomenon of prosodic focus, as well as to the theory of Alternative Semantics. Alternative Semantics provides an insightful account of what prosodic focus means, and gives us a notation that can help with better characterizing focus-related phenomena and the terminology used to describe them. We can also translate theoretical ideas about focus and givenness into this notation to facilitate a comparison between frameworks. The discussion will partly be structured by an evaluation of the theories of Givenness, the theory of Relative Givenness, and Unalternative Semantics, but we will cover a range of other ideas and proposals in the process. The chapter concludes with a discussion of phonological issues, and of association with focus. Keywords: focus, givenness, topic, contrast, prominence, intonation, givenness, context, discourse Cite as: Wagner, Michael (2020). Prosodic Focus. In: Gutzmann, D., Matthewson, L., Meier, C., Rullmann, H., and Zimmermann, T. E., editors. The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics. Wiley{Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781118788516.sem133 ∗Thanks to the audiences at the semantics colloquium in 2014 in Frankfurt, as well as the participants in classes taught at the DGFS Summer School in T¨ubingen2016, at McGill in the fall of 2016, at the Creteling Summer School in Rethymnos in the summer of 2018, and at the Summer School on Intonation and Word Order in Graz in the fall of 2018 (lectures published on OSF: Wagner, 2018). Thanks also for in-depth comments on an earlier version of this chapter by Dan Goodhue and Lisa Matthewson, and two reviewers; I am also indebted to several discussions of focus issues with Aron Hirsch, Bernhard Schwarz, and Ede Zimmermann (who frequently wanted coffee) over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • Against Logical Form
    Against logical form Zolta´n Gendler Szabo´ Conceptions of logical form are stranded between extremes. On one side are those who think the logical form of a sentence has little to do with logic; on the other, those who think it has little to do with the sentence. Most of us would prefer a conception that strikes a balance: logical form that is an objective feature of a sentence and captures its logical character. I will argue that we cannot get what we want. What are these extreme conceptions? In linguistics, logical form is typically con- ceived of as a level of representation where ambiguities have been resolved. According to one highly developed view—Chomsky’s minimalism—logical form is one of the outputs of the derivation of a sentence. The derivation begins with a set of lexical items and after initial mergers it splits into two: on one branch phonological operations are applied without semantic effect; on the other are semantic operations without phono- logical realization. At the end of the first branch is phonological form, the input to the articulatory–perceptual system; and at the end of the second is logical form, the input to the conceptual–intentional system.1 Thus conceived, logical form encompasses all and only information required for interpretation. But semantic and logical information do not fully overlap. The connectives “and” and “but” are surely not synonyms, but the difference in meaning probably does not concern logic. On the other hand, it is of utmost logical importance whether “finitely many” or “equinumerous” are logical constants even though it is hard to see how this information could be essential for their interpretation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian Evidential System Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin
    Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian evidential system Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin This paper provides an account of the Bulgarian admirative construction andits place within the Bulgarian evidential system based on (i) new observations on the morphological, temporal, and evidential properties of the admirative, (ii) a criti- cal reexamination of existing approaches to the Bulgarian evidential system, and (iii) insights from a similar mirative construction in Spanish. I argue in particular that admirative sentences are assertions based on evidence of some sort (reporta- tive, inferential, or direct) which are contrasted against the set of beliefs held by the speaker up to the point of receiving the evidence; the speaker’s past beliefs entail a proposition that clashes with the assertion, triggering belief revision and resulting in a sense of surprise. I suggest an analysis of the admirative in terms of a mirative operator that captures the evidential, temporal, aspectual, and modal properties of the construction in a compositional fashion. The analysis suggests that although mirativity and evidentiality can be seen as separate semantic cate- gories, the Bulgarian admirative represents a cross-linguistically relevant case of a mirative extension of evidential verbal forms. Keywords: mirativity, evidentiality, fake past 1 Introduction The Bulgarian evidential system is an ongoing topic of discussion both withre- spect to its interpretation and its morphological buildup. In this paper, I focus on the currently poorly understood admirative construction. The analysis I present is based on largely unacknowledged observations and data involving the mor- phological structure, the syntactic environment, and the evidential meaning of the admirative. Elena Karagjosova.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2106.08037V1 [Cs.CL] 15 Jun 2021 Alternative Ways the World Could Be
    The Possible, the Plausible, and the Desirable: Event-Based Modality Detection for Language Processing Valentina Pyatkin∗ Shoval Sadde∗ Aynat Rubinstein Bar Ilan University Bar Ilan University Hebrew University of Jerusalem [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Paul Portner Reut Tsarfaty Georgetown University Bar Ilan University [email protected] [email protected] Abstract (1) a. We presented a paper at ACL’19. Modality is the linguistic ability to describe b. We did not present a paper at ACL’20. events with added information such as how de- sirable, plausible, or feasible they are. Modal- The propositional content p =“present a paper at ity is important for many NLP downstream ACL’X” can be easily verified for sentences (1a)- tasks such as the detection of hedging, uncer- (1b) by looking up the proceedings of the confer- tainty, speculation, and more. Previous studies ence to (dis)prove the existence of the relevant pub- that address modality detection in NLP often p restrict modal expressions to a closed syntac- lication. The same proposition is still referred to tic class, and the modal sense labels are vastly in sentences (2a)–(2d), but now in each one, p is different across different studies, lacking an ac- described from a different perspective: cepted standard. Furthermore, these senses are often analyzed independently of the events that (2) a. We aim to present a paper at ACL’21. they modify. This work builds on the theoreti- b. We want to present a paper at ACL’21. cal foundations of the Georgetown Gradable Modal Expressions (GME) work by Rubin- c.
    [Show full text]
  • Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: a Case Study from Koro
    Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro By Jessica Cleary-Kemp A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair Assistant Professor Peter S. Jenks Professor William F. Hanks Summer 2015 © Copyright by Jessica Cleary-Kemp All Rights Reserved Abstract Serial Verb Constructions Revisited: A Case Study from Koro by Jessica Cleary-Kemp Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics University of California, Berkeley Associate Professor Lev D. Michael, Chair In this dissertation a methodology for identifying and analyzing serial verb constructions (SVCs) is developed, and its application is exemplified through an analysis of SVCs in Koro, an Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea. SVCs involve two main verbs that form a single predicate and share at least one of their arguments. In addition, they have shared values for tense, aspect, and mood, and they denote a single event. The unique syntactic and semantic properties of SVCs present a number of theoretical challenges, and thus they have invited great interest from syntacticians and typologists alike. But characterizing the nature of SVCs and making generalizations about the typology of serializing languages has proven difficult. There is still debate about both the surface properties of SVCs and their underlying syntactic structure. The current work addresses some of these issues by approaching serialization from two angles: the typological and the language-specific. On the typological front, it refines the definition of ‘SVC’ and develops a principled set of cross-linguistically applicable diagnostics.
    [Show full text]
  • The “Person” Category in the Zamuco Languages. a Diachronic Perspective
    On rare typological features of the Zamucoan languages, in the framework of the Chaco linguistic area Pier Marco Bertinetto Luca Ciucci Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa The Zamucoan family Ayoreo ca. 4500 speakers Old Zamuco (a.k.a. Ancient Zamuco) spoken in the XVIII century, extinct Chamacoco (Ɨbɨtoso, Tomarâho) ca. 1800 speakers The Zamucoan family The first stable contact with Zamucoan populations took place in the early 18th century in the reduction of San Ignacio de Samuco. The Jesuit Ignace Chomé wrote a grammar of Old Zamuco (Arte de la lengua zamuca). The Chamacoco established friendly relationships by the end of the 19th century. The Ayoreos surrended rather late (towards the middle of the last century); there are still a few nomadic small bands in Northern Paraguay. The Zamucoan family Main typological features -Fusional structure -Word order features: - SVO - Genitive+Noun - Noun + Adjective Zamucoan typologically rare features Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition All Zamucoan languages present a morphological tripartition in their nominals. The base-form (BF) is typically used for predication. The singular-BF is (Ayoreo & Old Zamuco) or used to be (Cham.) the basis for any morphological operation. The full-form (FF) occurs in argumental position.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Linguistics the Meanings of Focus
    Journal of Linguistics http://journals.cambridge.org/LIN Additional services for Journal of Linguistics: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation­based category in cross­linguistic analysis DEJAN MATIĆ and DANIEL WEDGWOOD Journal of Linguistics / FirstView Article / January 2006, pp 1 ­ 37 DOI: 10.1017/S0022226712000345, Published online: 31 October 2012 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0022226712000345 How to cite this article: DEJAN MATIĆ and DANIEL WEDGWOOD The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation­based category in cross­linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics, Available on CJO 2012 doi:10.1017/S0022226712000345 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/LIN, IP address: 192.87.79.51 on 13 Nov 2012 J. Linguistics, Page 1 of 37. f Cambridge University Press 2012 doi:10.1017/S0022226712000345 The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis1 DEJAN MATIC´ Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen DANIEL WEDGWOOD (Received 16 March 2011; revised 23 August 2012) Focus is regularly treated as a cross-linguistically stable category that is merely manifested by different structural means in different languages, such that a common focus feature may be realised through, for example, a morpheme in one language and syntactic movement in another. We demonstrate this conception of focus to be unsustainable on both theoretical and empirical grounds, invoking fundamental argumentation regarding the notions of focus and linguistic category, alongside data from a wide range of languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Types of Serial Verb Constructions in Korean: Subject-Sharing and Index-Sharing
    Two Types of Serial Verb Constructions in Korean: Subject-Sharing and Index-Sharing Juwon Lee The University of Texas at Austin Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar University at Buffalo Stefan Muller¨ (Editor) 2014 CSLI Publications pages 135–155 http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2014 Lee, Juwon. 2014. Two Types of Serial Verb Constructions in Korean: Subject- Sharing and Index-Sharing. In Muller,¨ Stefan (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st In- ternational Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, University at Buffalo, 135–155. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Abstract In this paper I present an account for the lexical passive Serial Verb Constructions (SVCs) in Korean. Regarding the issue of how the arguments of an SVC are realized, I propose two hypotheses: i) Korean SVCs are broadly classified into two types, subject-sharing SVCs where the subject is structure-shared by the verbs and index- sharing SVCs where only indices of semantic arguments are structure-shared by the verbs, and ii) a semantic argument sharing is a general requirement of SVCs in Korean. I also argue that an argument composition analysis can accommodate such the new data as the lexical passive SVCs in a simple manner compared to other alternative derivational analyses. 1. Introduction* Serial verb construction (SVC) is a structure consisting of more than two component verbs but denotes what is conceptualized as a single event, and it is an important part of the study of complex predicates. A central issue of SVC is how the arguments of the component verbs of an SVC are realized in a sentence.
    [Show full text]
  • 30. Tense Aspect Mood 615
    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615 Richards, Ivor Armstrong 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rockwell, Patricia 2007 Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycho- linguistic Research 36: 361−369. Rosenblum, Doron 5. March 2004 Smart he is not. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/smart-he-is-not- 1.115908. Searle, John 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seddiq, Mirriam N. A. Why I don’t want to talk to you. http://notguiltynoway.com/2004/09/why-i-dont-want- to-talk-to-you.html. Singh, Onkar 17. December 2002 Parliament attack convicts fight in court. http://www.rediff.com/news/ 2002/dec/17parl2.htm [Accessed 24 July 2013]. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Voegele, Jason N. A. http://www.jvoegele.com/literarysf/cyberpunk.html Voyer, Daniel and Cheryl Techentin 2010 Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol 25: 1−16. Ward, Gregory 1983 A pragmatic analysis of epitomization. Papers in Linguistics 17: 145−161. Ward, Gregory and Betty J. Birner 2006 Information structure. In: B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.), Handbook of English Lin- guistics, 291−317. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv, (Israel) 30. Tense Aspect Mood 1. Introduction 2. Metaphor: EVENTS ARE (PHYSICAL) OBJECTS 3. Polysemy, construal, profiling, and coercion 4. Interactions of tense, aspect, and mood 5. Conclusion 6. References 1. Introduction In the framework of cognitive linguistics we approach the grammatical categories of tense, aspect, and mood from the perspective of general cognitive strategies.
    [Show full text]