Cognitive Aspects of the Grammaticalization of Medieval Welsh Prepositions
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Cognitive Aspects of the Grammaticalization of Medieval Welsh Prepositions by Heather Rose Jones B.S. (University of California, Davis) 1980 M.A. (University of California, Berkeley) 1995 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: Professor Eve E. Sweetser (chair) Professor Gary B. Holland Professor George P. Lakoff Professor Daniel F. Melia Fall 2003 Cognitive Aspects of the Grammaticalization of Medieval Welsh Prepositions Copyright 2003 by Heather Rose Jones Abstract Cognitive Aspects of the Grammaticalization of Medieval Welsh Prepositions by Heather Rose Jones Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics University of California, Berkeley Professor Eve E. Sweetser, Chair Prepositions are one of the tools languages can use to mark and distinguish roles associated with particular semantic frames or grammatical functions. This work studies this phenomenon in Medieval Welsh texts from two angles: a catalog of the functions of prepositions, especially of their more abstract uses, and the cognitive mechanisms by which they are extended to those uses; and an analysis of the variety of motivations for preposition choice, especially when marking significant roles associated with particular verbs or particular semantic frames, and how they compete when multiple motivations are present. What we find is a systematic hierarchy of motivations: • Choice dictated by the abstract structure of the scenario, for example identifying a participant as part of a dual or multiplex constituent. • Choice dictated by a relatively grammaticalized use of the preposition, typically based on syntactic rather than semantic function, for example identifying a syntactic 1 agent. • Choice dictated by the morphology of the verb, typically arising historically from a semantic motivation, as with the use of a co-locational marker with morphologically mutual verbs. • Choice expressing an ad hoc metaphoric expression of the scenario. • A conventional lexical association of a preposition with a particular verb, typically deriving from one of the other motivations but generalized beyond its original scope. • Choice driven by some prototypical semantics of the frame, arising via metaphor but determined by the nature of the metaphoric target domain. • Choice driven by a generalize conventional metaphor (e.g. Event Structure) and determined by the nature of the metaphoric source domain. Beyond the usefulness of such a study in understanding the structures of a particular language, a comparison of studies of this type can contribute to a cross- linguistic understanding of cognitive universals. Adpositional language is typically quite variable in how it bundles groups of spatial meaning, even among closely related languages, making it possible to distinguish significant patterns at a more finely-grained level between languages than within a single language. Finding the commonalties in the metaphoric and grammaticalized extensions of spatial language can help identify universal elements among more complex metaphors. 2 This work is dedicated first and foremost to my parents, Walter D. Jones and Phyllis G. Jones, whose support of every type has been endless, even if their patience hasn’t always been so. To my brothers, who have understood because they have Been There and Done That. And to all the friends who have seen me through the last decade ... even when they haven’t seen me very much. To all of you, I say: Nunc finem feci. Da mihi quod merui. Omnibus est notum quod multum deligo potum. (anonymous 14th century Welsh scribe, in Ellis 1924) i Table of Contents 1. Introduction . 1 1.1 Why Medieval Welsh? . 2 1.1.1 The Celtic Language Family . 2 1.1.2 The Diachronic Context . 4 1.1.3 Phonological Processes . 7 1.1.4 Brythonic and Goedelic Contrasts . 9 1.1.5 The Textual Sources . 10 1.2 The Metaphoric Structure of Language and Cognition . 13 1.2.1 The Bodily Basis of Cognition . 14 1.2.2 Categorization . 16 1.2.3 Metonymy . 17 1.2.4 Metaphor . 19 1.2.5 "Primary" Metaphor . 21 1.2.6 Spatial Cognition in Primary Metaphor . 23 1.2.7 The Event Structure Metaphor . 26 1.3 The Nature of Polysemy . 28 1.4 Grammaticalization . 32 1.5 Verb-Adposition Constructions . 37 1.5.1 Grammaticalization and Renewal of Spatial Elements Associated with Verbs38 1.5.2 Verb-Adposition Constructions and Phrasal Verbs . 40 1.5.3 General Correlations in the Grammaticalization of Adpositions . 43 2. The Medieval Welsh Inventory of Prepositions . 46 2.1 The Linguistic Background of Welsh Prepositions . 46 2.1.1 Standardized Reference Forms Used in this Work . 46 2.1.2 Syntax . 52 2.1.3 Mutation . 55 2.2 Evidence for the Chronological Development of Medieval Welsh Prepositions 56 2.2.1 Distribution of Cognates . 56 2.2.2 Evidence of Personal Forms of Prepositions . 62 2.2.3 Prepositional Chronology and the Range of Semantic Extensions . 67 2.3 Catalog of Medieval Welsh Prepositions: Etymology and Semantics . 68 2.3.1 Simple Prepositions . 74 2.3.1.1 Source . 75 2.3.1.1.1 A . 75 2.3.1.1.2 HON . 76 2.3.1.1.3 O . 76 2.3.1.1.4 Y, DI . 84 ii 2.3.1.2 Goal . 85 2.3.1.2.1 PY . 86 2.3.1.2.2 I . 86 2.3.1.2.3 AT and AR . 94 2.3.1.3 Vertical Position . 98 2.3.1.3.1 AR . 98 2.3.1.3.2 UCH . 105 2.3.1.3.3 IS . 106 2.3.1.3.4 TAN, GUO- . 107 2.3.1.4 General Co-location . 110 2.3.1.4.1 CYM- . 110 2.3.1.4.2 CYD . 111 2.3.1.4.3 AC . 112 2.3.1.4.4 GAN . 117 2.3.1.4.5 WRTH . 122 2.3.1.4.6 WNG . 127 2.3.1.4.7 ACH . 128 2.3.1.5 Front . 128 2.3.1.5.1 RHAG . 129 2.3.1.5.2 The ER Group . 131 2.3.1.5.2.1 ER . 131 2.3.1.5.2.2 ERBYN . 135 2.3.1.5.2.3 GER . 137 2.3.1.5.2.4 HERWYDD . 138 2.3.1.6 In . 139 2.3.1.6.1 YN . 139 2.3.1.6.2 ITHR . 150 2.3.1.6.3 RHWNG . 150 2.3.1.7 Out and About . 154 2.3.1.7.1 ALL- . 154 2.3.1.7.2 ECH, EITHR . 155 2.3.1.7.3 HEB . ..