TESIS DOCTORAL Verbs of pure chande of state in English projection, constructions and event structure Beatriz Martínez Fernández TESIS DOCTORAL Verbs of pure chande of state in English projection, constructions and event structure Beatriz Martínez Fernández Universidad de La Rioja Servicio de Publicaciones 2004 Esta tesis doctoral, dirigida por el doctor D. Javier Martín Arista, fue leída el 25 de julio de 2007, y obtuvo la calificación de Sobresaliente Cum Laude Unanimidad © Beatriz Martínez Fernández Edita: Universidad de La Rioja Servicio de Publicaciones ISBN 978-84-691-1311-0 Verbs of pure change of state in English: projection, constructions and event structure Beatriz Martínez Fernández Doctoral thesis supervised by Dr Javier Martín Arista Department of Modern Languages University of La Rioja CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1 Research aims 1 1.2 Rationale 3 1.3 Working hypotheses 4 1.4 Chapter outline 5 Chapter 2. Literature Review 2.0 Introduction 11 2.1 Different approaches to lexical representation 12 2.1.1 Levin and Rappaport Hovav (2005) 13 2.1.2 Alsina (1999) 18 2.1.3 Lieber (2004) 20 2.1.4 Faber and Mairal (1999), Van Valin and Mairal (2001), Mairal and Ruiz de Mendoza (forthcoming 2007), Ruiz de Mendoza and Mairal (forthcoming 2007) 23 2.1.5 Pustejovsky’s generative lexicon 27 2.1.5.a Introduction: aims of the GL 27 2.1.5.b The generative lexicon: structure 28 2.1.5.c Event structure 29 2.1.6 Role and reference grammar 34 2.1.6.a The RRG’s system of lexical representation 34 2.1.6.b RRG’s event structure in comparison to GL’s event structure 40 2.2 Conclusions 43 iii Chapter 3. Methodology 3.0 Introduction 45 3.1 Structure of the analysis 46 3.1.1 Paradigmatic and syntagmatic analysis 46 3.1.2 Type and token analysis 47 3.2 The corpus: main characteristics and compilation process 52 3.3 Verbs under study 55 3.4 WordNet 57 3.5 Sections of the analysis: word structure, argument structure and event structure 65 3.5.1 Word structure 65 3.5.1.a Lexical derivation 65 3.5.1.b Semantic relationships 67 3.5.2 Argument structure (qualitative and quantitative analysis) 83 3.5.2.a Syntactic and semantic valence 83 3.5.2.b Argument-adjuncts 85 3.5.2.c Periphery 85 3.5.2.d Entity type 88 3.5.2.e Nominal aspect 91 3.5.2.f Reference 92 3.5.3 Event structure (syntactic analysis) 93 3.5.3a Subeventual structure 96 3.5.3.b Causal sequence 98 3.5.3.c Temporal relation 99 3.5.3.d Type coercion 99 iv 3.6 Conclusions 103 Chapter 4. Description and Results of the Analysis 4.0 Introduction 105 4.1 Word structure 106 4.1.1 Lexical derivation 106 4.1.1.a Distribution of prefixes and suffixes 106 4.1.1.b Changes in grammatical category 110 4.1.1.c The origin of verbs: Romance vs. Germanic verbs 120 4.1.2 Semantic relations 120 4.1.2.a Antonymy 120 4.1.2.b Synonymy 123 4.1.2.c Hyponymy and Hyperonymy 131 4.1.2.d Polysemy 134 4.1.3 Summary 149 4.2 The corpus: prototypical, less-prototypical and non-prototypical examples 150 4.2.1 Prototypical examples 154 4.2.1.1 Argument structure 154 4.2.1.1.a Syntactic valence 154 4.2.1.1.b. Semantic valence 164 4.2.1.1.c. Argument-adjuncts 168 4.2.1.1.d Periphery 173 4.2.1.1.e Entity type 185 4.2.1.1.f Nominal aspect 189 4.2.1.1.g Reference 216 v 4.2.1.2 Event structure 223 4.2.1.2.a Subeventual structure 223 4.2.1.2.b Headedness 225 4.2.1.2.c Causal sequence 229 4.2.1.2.d Temporal relation 230 4.2.1.2.e Type coercion 232 4.2.1.2.f Merge: one special case 232 4.2.1.3 Summary 250 4.2.2 Less-prototypical and non-prototypical examples 258 4.2.2.1 Definition 258 4.2.2.2 Differences between the groups of less-prototypical and non- prototypical examples 273 4.2.2.2.a Less-prototypical examples 273 4.2.2.2.b Non-prototypical examples 277 4.3 Conclusions 282 Chapter 5. Conclusions 285 Chapter 6. Lines of Future Research 6.0 Introduction 297 6.1 Broad lines of future research 297 6.2 More specific lines of future research 299 Bibiliography 305 Appendix: Sample of the Corpus – Prototypical Examples 329 Contents, Summaries and Conclusions in Spanish 359 vi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research aims Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) is a theory of clausal relations whose stronghold is typological validity. It aims to capture the relationship that exists between syntax and semantics – and pragmatics – from a communicative perspective. Part of its attractiveness is due to its eclecticism: RRG manages to successfully integrate ideas from a number of theories such as Rikhoff’s theory of noun phrase structure from Functional Grammar, the notion of constructional template adapted from Construction Grammar, Lambrecht’s theory of information structure, Pustejovsky’s theory of nominal qualia, the pragmatic analysis of pronominalization of Kuno, and Jackendoff’s idea about reflexivization, to mention just a few (Van Valin and LaPolla 1997: 640).1 However, there are some weaknesses in its structure. To be precise, although the system of lexical representation of RRG succeeds in accounting for the semantics of verbs as displayed in the lexicon, it also fails to satisfactorily explain the semantics of those structures that extend beyond the basic meaning of the verb, like resultative constructions or other expressions of event composition. Thus, this dissertation can be considered as a contribution to the development of the system of lexical representation of RRG. Following Mairal and Van Valin (2001), who already foresee the need to progress in that direction, I turn to Pustejovsky’s (1995a) Generative Lexicon (GL), a theory that is less ambitious in its general goals but more fine-grained in its achievements. Granted this is true, one could imagine that the inclusion of some of those more fine-grained distinctions of the GL into the RRG might lead to a higher 1 For further information, see Butler et al. (1999). 1 refinement of the latter. The question is how. In RRG, lexical information is split into the different components of logical structures. GL, by contrast, captures lexical meaning by splitting lexical information into the four different levels of representation of a highly comprehensive lexicon, namely argument structure, qualia structure, event structure and lexical inheritance structure. My view is that its strength lies here. Therefore, I expect that the close analysis of those levels of representation will provide the necessary input to strengthen RRG’s system of lexical representation. The 1997 RRG model already incorporates Pustejovsky’s qualia structure for the characterization of the nominal phrase; consequently, in this work I focus on the other three: word structure, argument structure, and event structure. Furthermore, I will also draw from other lexical-semantic theories like Levin and Rappaport Hovav’s (1995, 2005) which, being less projectionist than RRG, expand their scope beyond the predicate. The analysis of the three levels of representation will not be carried out in a broad, abstract fashion. Rather, I have selected a number of concrete – more tangible – variables that define each level. Furthermore, I take an empirical approach in the analysis; in other words, far from dealing with purely theoretical notions, I will carry out the analysis of word, argument and event structures using a corpus of actual language use. Given the extension of the English lexicon, it is not possible to study all its verbs. Hence I have selected a verbal class big enough to offer significant data but small enough to be easily handled, and whose syntactic and semantic characteristics are sufficiently complex to set up a good starting point for the research: verbs of pure change of state. The fact that the verbs under analysis are verbs of pure change of state has some implications for the analysis. There is generally agreement on the idea that time is understood in terms of the more simple notion of space. However, here I sustain that 2 time is understood in terms of changes throughout a universal flow: timely things are perceived because the change undergone by beings can be perceived. Thus, my analysis assumes that changes have duration and, consequently, all processes have duration. In short, this dissertation attempts to offer a close semantic analysis of the system of lexical representation of RRG (henceforth RRG) that leads to a more comprehensive picture of the lexicon. This general aim involves the following more specific aims: 1. to follow the line of work undertaken by Mairal and Van Valin (2001) that points at Pustejovsky’s (1995a) work to extend logical structures beyond the limits imposed by the meaning of predicates; 2. to compile a corpus that is quantitatively representative and qualitatively reliable, and based on real uses of language; and 3. to carry out a systematic and thorough analysis of verbs of change of state that examines all their senses and combinations with adverbs and prepositions, thus accounting for the polysemic character of this verbal class. 1.2 Rationale The need for a study of lexical representation along the lines that I have just mentioned is justified for the following four reasons: 1.