DOCSLIB.ORG

2 SIMPLE SENTENCES This Chapter Will Deal with the Classification of Simple Sentences. Both Linguists and Philosophers of Langua

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2 SIMPLE SENTENCES This Chapter Will Deal with the Classification of Simple Sentences. Both Linguists and Philosophers of Langua 2 SIMPLE SENTENCES 2.0 INTRODUCTION This chapter will deal with the classification of simple sentences. Both linguists and philosophers of language have classified sen- tences: the former according to the formal properties of the syn- tactic system, the latter according to the formal properties of some semantic system(s). While there is general agreement among linguists as to the classification of sentences, there is no such agree- ment among philosophers of language. This lack of agreement on the part of the philosophers is, I believe, due to two factors: the comparative difficulty of their task, and their occasional inability to separate what I will call the "linguistic system" from the "real world". As has been observed by a number of people before me, an utterance must, at one and the same time, conform to two systems: that of linguistics and that of the real world. It is in terms of the linguistic system that we speak of an utterance as being or not being a sentence of a certain type, and as being or not being grammatical. It is in terms of the real world system, or some world imagined by the speaker,1 that we speak of an utterance as being true or false, as making or not making sense, and as describing or not describing some aspect of that real or imagined world. This chapter, then, will discuss both the linguists' and the philoso- 1 For a proposal of how the grammar might treat imagined worlds, see G. Lakoff, "Counterparts, or the Problem of Reference in Transformational Grammar" (L.S.A. paper, summer 1968). SIMPLE SENTENCES 37 phers' classification of simple sentences, particularly from the point of view of the linguistic evidence for the classification proposed by the philosophers; and, since this work deals with complementation, with particular attention to those aspects of the philosophers' classification which sheds some light onto the processes involved in complementation. In other words, then, the purpose of this chapter is to examine how the philosophers' classification of sentence types is related to and reflected in the linguists' classification of sentence types. I hope to show that the relationship between the two clas- sifications is not one-to-one with respect to simple sentences, but is one-to-one with respect to embedded sentences, particularly with respect to complements. Before turning to the main topic of this chapter, I should like to clarify the terminology to be employed here and throughout the rest of this work. For the sake of convenience (i.e. not for any principled reason), I will employ the label "(linguistic) sentence type" for the syntactic classification of sentences by linguists, and the label "description types" for the philosophers' classification of which aspect of the real world an utterance describes. 2.1 SENTENCE TYPES Grammarians usually recognize the following sentence types for simple sentences: declarative performative2 interrogative imperative3 Grammarians say that a sentence "is a" declarative, interrogative, 2 For justification of why performatives constitute a separate type of sentence, see section 2.1.1, below. 3 Some grammarians have added "negation" as a separate sentence type, but it is clear that negations do not constitute a sentence type because they can be applied to at least three of the sentence types listed above; i.e. there are ne- gative statements, negative questions, and negative imperatives. 38 SIMPLE SENTENCES or imperative sentence. From the point of view of philosophy of language (and the real world), however, we cannot speak of sen- tences, but we must speak of declaratives, interrogatives, and imperatives as what the different sentence types of the same label "express". Although the semantic and the grammatical terms are identical, the difference is that sentences are grammatical or un- grammatical, while statements are true or false, questions are an- swerable or not, commands can be carried out or not, and per- formatives are appropriate or not. Austin4 points out that, "it does not make sense to ask whether a sentence is true or false, but only if it is grammatical or not". More important, while a sentence like Today is Tuesday is grammatical at any time, the statement it expresses is true only on Tuesdays. This difference, Austin declares, is due to the fact that "a statement is made, and its making is an historic event... The same sentence is used in making different statements (I say, 'It is mine', and you say, 'It is mine'.) ... We speak of 'the statement that S', but of 'the sentence "S"', not of'the sentence that S"\ 2.1.1 Declarative vs. Performative Sentences Austin5 also shows that it is necessary to separate what he calls "declarative sentences" from "performative sentences", because of their semantic and syntactic differences. With respect to their semantic structure, performatives do not make a statement, but constitute a performance on the part of the speaker. With respect to their syntactic structure, performatives can only have a first person (singular) subject, must be in the present tense, and are not true or false. Statements, on the other hand, can have subjects in any person, and can be in any tense. Statements are also true or false. Thus, a sentence like (1) (a) John ate the meat. 4 See J. Austin, Philosophical Papers (London, Oxford University Press 1961), 86ff. 5 See J. Austin, "Performative Sentences", in Philosophical Papers. SIMPLE SENTENCES 39 is a statement, because it is either true or false. Sentences like6 (2) (a) I (hereby) christen this ship Queen Mary. (b) I (hereby) bet you sixpence that it will rain tomorrow. (c) I (hereby) sentence you to six months in jail. are performatives. Notice that either a change in person, to, e.g. (3) (a) He (*hereby) christens this ship Queen Mary. etc. or a change in tense, to, e.g. (3) (b) I (*hereby) christened this ship Queen Mary. makes the performative sentences into declaratives, because they are now either true or false, and no longer allow the adverb hereby. From these observations it can be concluded that performatives constitute, indeed, a separate sentence type. 2.1.2 A Classification of Sentence Types If we consider the four sentence types under discussion from the point of view of their semantic reading, they can be seen to fall, among others, into two cross-classifying classes, depending on whether only the speaker performs an action, or whether he also requests an action on the part of the addressee, and depending on whether the action(s) are purely verbal or not. Thus, a declarative sentence expresses a purely verbal action on the part of the speaker only, while a performative expresses an action that is not purely verbal. An interrogative expresses the speaker's request for a purely 6 The examples in (2) are adapted from Austin's "Performative Sentences", 222f. Austin also notes that all performatives permit the adverb hereby to be inserted where they are shown in parentheses. It should be pointed out that Austin also differentiates between statements and propositions. For him, propositions are philosophical, mathematical, etc. statements whose truth is not immediately obvious by inspection of the real world, while the truth (or falsity) of statements can be found out immediately by inspecting the real world. For my purposes, however, this distinction is not needed, and I will, therefore, use the term proposition for both Austin's pro- positions and statements. 40 SIMPLE SENTENCES verbal action on the part of the addressee (to answer the question), while an imperative expresses the speaker's request for a non-verbal action on the part of the adressee (to carry out the command or request). These observations can be captured by the (short hand) semantic features (4) [+/—SPEAKER=AGT] [+/—VERBAL] The four sentence types can then be seen to have the following semantic features (among others): (5) (a) declarative: [+SPEAKER=AGT]; [+VERBAL] (b) performative: [+SPEAKER=AGT]; [—VERBAL] (c) interrogative: [—SPEAKER=AGT]; [+VERBAL] (d) imperative: [—SPEAKER=AGT]; [—VERBAL] 2.2 DESCRIPTION TYPES Philosophers of language have classified sentences according to which aspect of the real world they describe and have thus arrived at the following sentence types: proposition event process action state property relationship In this section, I will attempt to establish the defining properties of at least those descriptive types which shed some light on comple- mentation. This means that there are two reasons for ignoring those structures describing a "relationship". In the first place, a relation- ship can hold between any two or more objects, regardless of whether these objects are in any specific grammatical relationship SIMPLE SENTENCES 41 or not. That is, relationships of certain types hold, for example, between the two nouns in the noun phrasjs below: (6) (a) a glass of beer (b) Fred's father (c) the roof of the house and are not confined to sentences. I am, however, dealing with sentential complementation. Second, relationships do not appear to explain complementation in any way. For these reasons, I will not consider relationships in this work. 2.2.1 Propositions It has been noted by philosophers of language that propositions are either true or false, and some of them7 have taken this to be the the defining property of propositions : (A) Propositions are either true or false. This means, of course, that any time a hearer is confronted with a proposition, his question "is it true or false" is appropriate. This question, as was noted above, is appropriate for only one linguistic sentence type; namely, declaratives. That is, in terms of the linguis- tic sentence types discussed in section 2.1, above, only declarative sentences correspond to the philosophers' class of propositions, because the question "is it true or false" is only appropriate for this sentence type, cf.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Study of Three Variants of Gerund Construction from the Contrastive Perspective of Social and Natural Academic Abstracts on Construction Grammar Theory1
    2020 年 6 月 中国应用语言学（英文） Jun. 2020 第 43 卷 第 2 期 Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics Vol. 43 No. 2 A Study of Three Variants of Gerund Construction from the Contrastive Perspective of Social and Natural Academic Abstracts on Construction Grammar Theory1 Yan J IN & Mingtuo YANG Northwest Normal University Abstract English gerund construction is a system composed of 3 variants, including “Gerund + ø”, “Gerund + of + NP”, and “Gerund + NP”. The noun and verb attributes of the 3 variants are recursive, and in theory their frequencies vary regularly in different styles. An abstract is placed before the beginning of an academic papers, which has the basic characteristics of conciseness and generalization, and has special requirements for the use of gerunds. The purpose of this study was to empirically explore the system of gerund construction in abstracts of natural science and social science papers, and to specifically explore the inherent characteristics of noun and verb properties of the 3 variants. For this purpose, two corpora were constructed, one is about abstracts of natural science papers, and the other is about abstracts of social science papers. Finally, the results of chi-square test showed that there was no significant difference in the frequencies of the 3 variants in the abstracts of natural science and social science papers, and the two corpora can be studied as a whole. In the combined corpus, there were significant differences in the frequencies of the 3 gerund variants. The frequencies of these 3 variants and their gerund properties showed a recursive change. Keywords: gerund construction, gerund variants, Construction Grammar, nominalization, gerund system 1 The study was supported by the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Planning Fund of Ministry of Education for Western and Frontier Areas (14XJA740001).
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Verbs in Italian
    Particle Verbs in Italian Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades des Doktors der Philosophie an der Universit¨at Konstanz Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft vorgelegt von Quaglia, Stefano Tag der m ¨undlichen Pr ¨ufung: 23 Juni 2015 Referent: Professor Christoph Schwarze Referentin: Professorin Miriam Butt Referent: Professor Nigel Vincent Konstanzer Online-Publikations-System (KOPS) URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-0-376213 3 Zusammenfassung Die vorliegende Dissertation befasst sich mit italienischen Partikelverben (PV), d.h. Kon- struktionen die aus einem Verb und einer (meist r¨aumlicher) Partikel, wie andare fuori ‘hinaus-gehen’ oder buttare via ‘weg-schmeißen’. Solche komplexe Ausdr¨ucke sind in manchen Hinsichten interessant, erstmal sprachvergleichend, denn sie instantiieren eine morpho-syntaktische Struktur, die in germanischen Sprachen (wie Deutsch, Englisch, Schwedisch und Holl¨andisch) pervasiv ist, aber in den romanischen Sprachen nicht der- maßen ausgebaut ist. Da germanische Partikelverben Eingenschaften aufweisen, die zum Teil f¨ur die Morphologie, zum teil f¨ur die Syntax typisch sind, ist ihr Status in formalen Grammatiktheorien bestritten: werden PV im Lexikon oder in der Syntax gebaut? Dieselbe Frage stellt sich nat¨urlich auch in Bezug auf die italienischen Partikelverben, und anhand der Ergebnisse meiner Forschung komme ich zum Schluss, dass sie syntaktisch, und nicht morphologisch, zusammengestellt werden. Die Forschungsfragen aber die in Bezug auf das grammatische Verhalten italienischer Partikelverben von besonderem Interesse sind, betreffen auch Probleme der italienischen Syntax. In meiner Arbeit habe ich folgende Forschungsfragen betrachtet: (i) Kategorie und Klassifikation Italienischer Partikeln, (ii) deren Interaktion mit Verben auf argument- struktureller Ebene, (iii) strukturelle Koh¨asion zwischen Verb und Partikel und deren Repr¨asentation.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Background: an Outline of English Syntax
    Allen 1995: Chapter 2 - An Outline of English Syntax Allen 1995 : Natural Language Understanding Contents Preface Introduction previous Part I Part II Part III - Context / World next chapter chapter Knowledge Syntactic Processing Semantic Interpretation Appendices Bibliography Index Summaries Further Readings Exercises Chapter 2: Linguistic Background: An Outline of English Syntax 2.1 Words 2.2 The Elements of Simple Noun Phrases 2.3 Verb Phrases and Simple Sentences 2.4 Noun Phrases Revisited 2.5 Adjective Phrases 2.6 Adverbial Phrases Summary Related Work and Further Readings Exercises for Chapter 2 [Allen 1995: Linguistic Background: An Outline of English Syntax 23] http://www.uni-giessen.de/~g91062/Seminare/gk-cl/Allen95/al199502.htm (1 / 23) [2002-2-26 21:16:11] Allen 1995: Chapter 2 - An Outline of English Syntax This chapter provides background material on the basic structure of English syntax for those who have not taken any linguistics courses. It reviews the major phrase categories and identifies their most important subparts. Along the way all the basic word categories used in the book are introduced. While the only structures discussed are those for English, much of what is said applies to nearly all other European languages as well. The reader who has some background in linguistics can quickly skim this chapter, as it does not address any computational issues. You will probably want to use this chapter as a reference source as you work through the rest of the chapters in Part I. Section 2.1 describes issues related to words and word classes. Section 2.2 describes simple noun phrases, which are then used in Section 2.3 to describe simple verb phrases.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does the Copula Do? Kunio Nishiyama Cornell University, [email protected]
    University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 4 | Issue 2 Article 15 1-1-1997 What Does the Copula Do? Kunio Nishiyama Cornell University, [email protected] This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/iss2/15 For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Does the Copula Do? This working paper is available in University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics: http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol4/ iss2/15 What Does the Copula Do?* Kunio Nishiyama 1. Introduction It is widely assumed in the literature on the copula that there are at least two kinds of copula (cf. Higgins 1973): (1) a. John is a boy. (predicative) b. Dr. Jekyll is Mr. Hyde. (equative) It is controversial whether these different usages should be treated differently or can be given a unified account, and this is not my concern here. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the syntactic structure of predicative copular sentences like (1a) from a crosslinguistic perspective. Since Bach (1967), it has often been claimed that the copula is a tense-supporter.1 For example, Rapoport (1987: 152ff) notes the following contrast: (2) a. I consider [Xeli a nut]. b. Xeli *(is) a nut. In a small clause structure like (2a), no copula is necessary, even though there seems to be a predication relation between Xeli and a nut. In the matrix sentence, however, the copula is necessary (2b). Since (2a) shows that the copula is not necessary for predication, Rapoport (1987: 157) claims that “[b]e is inserted to support the feature of INFL, in the cases above [2b] the features of tense ([- past]) and agreement.” According to this hypothesis, (3) is analyzed as (4): (3) Sal was strong.
    [Show full text]
  • Contrasting the Polysemy of Prepositions in English and Albanian
    UNIVERSITAT JAUME I Contrasting the Polysemy of Prepositions in English and Albanian P.h. D. Dissertation presented by: Ardian Fera Supervised by: Professor Titular. Ignasi Navarro i Ferrando Castelló de la Plana, November, 2019 Doctoral Program in Applied Languages, Literature and Translation University Jaume I Doctoral School Contrasting the Polysemy of Prepositions in English and Albanian Report submitted by Ardian Fera in order to be eligible for a doctoral degree awarded by the Universitat Jaume I Doctoral Student Supervisor Ardian Fera Ignasi Navarro i Ferrando Castelló de la Plana, November, 2019 This is a Self-Funding Doctorate Thesis DEDICATION TO MY BELOVED PARENTS RESTING IN PEACE AND TO MY TWO LITTLE DAUGHTERS, ESTREA AND NEJMIA WHOM I LOVE SO MUCH This paper intentionally left blank Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the prodigious, incomparable, heuristic and great help of my supervisor, Professor Titular. Ignasi Navarro i Ferrando, who stood close to me every step, whenever I needed, and provided everything necessary for the progress of my thesis. Many thanks go, too, to Renata Geld, Head of the English Department at the Faculty of Foreign Languages, Zagreb, Croatia, who, very conventionally conduced promising facilities during my Research Stay, there. Certainly, there’s also a place here to thank the head of the English Department and many of my colleagues at the Faculty of Foreign Languages, Tirana, Albania, who willingly shared with me very useful scientific knowledge throughout the days while at work. I would also like to thank the representatives of the University departments of Jaume I, who were always ready in fulfilling and replying many of my queries while working on my dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Shift in Gerundive Nominalizations Bachelor ’SDiplomaThesis Supervisor:Mgr.JanChovanec,Ph.D. 2008
    Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Helena Jezdinská Nominalizations in English: Particle Shift in Gerundive Nominalizations Bachelor ’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Jan Chovanec, Ph.D. 2008 Ideclare that Ihaveworkedonthisthesisindependently, usingonly the primary andsecondary sourceslistedinthebibliography. ........................................................... HelenaJezdinská Acknowledgement Aboveall,I wouldlike tothankprofessorPetrKarlíkforall hisadvice,including recommendationofthe sources,valuableandinterestingdiscussionsand moralsupport. Iwouldalsolike tothankdr.JanChovanecfor beingmysupervisorandhelpingmeto copewiththeinadequaciesofthethesis.Last,butnotleast,I thankdr.Jarmila Fictumová,HonzaandJanafortheirhelpingmetoworkwiththeBNC. Table of Contents LISTOF ABBREVIATIONS ...........................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................2 1.NOMINALIZATION INCONTEMPORARY ENGLISH GRAMMARS ..................4 1.1. ENGLISH GRAMMAR BOOKS ..........................................................................4 1.1.1.QUIRK ............................................................................................................5 1.1.1.1.NOMINALIZATION ...............................................................................5 1.1.1.2.–ing CLAUSES ........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Interference in the Processing of Adjunct Control
    W&M ScholarWorks Arts & Sciences Articles Arts and Sciences 2015 Interference in the processing of adjunct control Dan Parker College of William and Mary Sol Lago Colin Phillips Colin Phillips Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/aspubs Recommended Citation Parker, D., Lago, S., & Phillips, C. (2015). Interference in the processing of adjunct control. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1346. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts and Sciences at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Articles by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 08 September 2015 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01346 Interference in the processing of adjunct control Dan Parker1*, Sol Lago2 and Colin Phillips2,3 1 Linguistics Program, Department of English, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA, 2 Department of Linguistics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA, 3 Language Science Center, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA Recent research on the memory operations used in language comprehension has revealed a selective profile of interference effects during memory retrieval. Dependencies such as subject–verb agreement show strong facilitatory interference effects from structurally inappropriate but feature-matching distractors, leading to illusions of grammaticality (Pearlmutter et al., 1999; Wagers et al., 2009; Dillon et al., 2013). In contrast, dependencies involving reflexive anaphors are generally immune to interference effects (Sturt, 2003; Xiang et al., 2009; Dillon et al., 2013). This contrast has led to the proposal that all anaphors that are subject to structural constraints are immune to facilitatory interference.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nominal Roles of Gerunds and Infinitives
    PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning ISSN 2457-0648 Hussaina Ibrahim, 2019 Volume 3 Issue 1, pp. 181-188 Date of Publication: 10th April 2019 DOI-https://dx.doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2019.31.181188 This paper can be cited as: Ibrahim, H., (2019). The Nominal Roles of Gerunds and Infinitives. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 3(1), 181-188. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. THE NOMINAL ROLES OF GERUNDS AND INFINITIVES Hussaina Ibrahim Department of English, Faculty of Humanities, Sule Lamido University, P.M.B. 048, Kafin Hausa- Jigawa State, Nigeria [email protected] Abstract The theory of the nominal roles of gerundives and infinitives in the production of language has been a subject of researched for nearly a century. Recently, this theory has made serious comeback into the literature with significant a number of published studies. It has been demonstrated that grammatical structures, such as the present tense, future tense, reduce phonologically and morphologically to the point where the lexical items, once viewed as separate entities, have been reanalyzed and have become grammatically cohabited units in which the individual parts are difficult to distinguish and furthermore, this process occurs across languages including English. This paper presents on the nominalization of grammatical processes, in which expressions that are semantically associated with properties are transformed into noun-like expressions.
    [Show full text]
  • Gerund and Gerundive Handout
    LAT 102: Elementary Latin Spring 2019 GERUNDS AND GERUNDIVES I. The Gerund A. The Gerund is a neuter singular noun (always active in meaning). The infinitive of the verb supplies the nominative case: Legere est difficile = To read is difficult. The other cases are formed by adding -nd- to the present stem of the verb (-iend- to 3io and 4th conjugation verbs), plus the neuter singular endings of the 2nd declension. There is no plural. [Nom. legere to read] Gen. legendī of reading Dat. legendō to/for reading Acc. legendum reading (d.o.) Abl. legendō by (etc.) reading Legendum amō. = I love reading. B. Gerund as a simple noun: The Gerund functions like any other noun; but as a verbal noun it can also take an object or be modified by an adverb. Cupidus legendī est. He is desirous of money. (obj. gen.) Librōs legendō cognoscimus. We learn by reading books. (abl. of means) Ducī piē pārendō*, fortiōrēs erunt. By obeying the leader loyally, they will become stronger. (abl. of means.) *Note that verbs that take the dative case will continue to do so in the gerund form. C. Gerund with ad to express purpose: Ad legendum venit. He comes for the purpose of reading (to read). *Where a direct object is used, Latin prefers this construction with the gerundive (see below). D. Gerund with causā or gratiā to express purpose: The genitive of the gerund followed by causā or gratiā (in the ablative) shows purpose: Legendī causā venit. He comes for the sake of reading (to read). *Where a direct object is used, Latin prefers this construction with the gerundive (see below).
    [Show full text]
  • Animacy in Sentence Processing Across Languages: an Information-Theoretic Prospective
    ANIMACY IN SENTENCE PROCESSING ACROSS LANGUAGES: AN INFORMATION-THEORETIC PROSPECTIVE A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Zhong Chen August 2014 c 2014 Zhong Chen ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ANIMACY IN SENTENCE PROCESSING ACROSS LANGUAGES: AN INFORMATION-THEORETIC PROSPECTIVE Zhong Chen, Ph.D. Cornell University August 2014 This dissertation is concerned with different sources of information that affect human sentence comprehension. It focuses on the way that syntactic rules in- teract with non-syntactic cues in real-time processing. It develops the idea first introduced in the Competition Model of MacWhinney in the late 1980s such that the weight of a linguistic cue varies among languages. The dissertation addresses this problem from an information-theoretic prospective. The proposed Entropy Reduction metric (Hale, 2003) combines corpus-retrieved attestation frequencies with linguistically-motivated gram- mars. It derives a processing asymmetry called the Subject Advantage that has been observed across languages (Keenan & Comrie, 1977). The modeling re- sults are consistent with the intuitive structural expectation idea, namely that subject relative clauses, as a frequent structure, are easier to comprehend. How- ever, the present research takes this proposal one step further by illustrating how the comprehension difficulty profile reflects uncertainty over different ini- tial substrings. It highlights particular disambiguation
    [Show full text]
  • A Note on Converbs in Egyptian and Coptic
    1 A Note on Converbs in Egyptian and Coptic Ariel Shisha-Halevy, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (1) The term and its diffusion. The converb, in its vaguest and least critical, also least specific resolution - cf. the notorious conceptual muddle involving -ing forms and constructions in English - is used as meaning “adverbial verb form”, or “verbal adverb”; see the subtitle of Haspelmath and König (eds.) 1995.; mostly and for long it has been known as “gerund” 1. Definitions reveal the underlying blurredness: Haspelmath (1995:3ff.): “Non-finite verb-form whole main function is to mark adverbial subordination” 2; Nedjalkov’s (in Nedialkov 1995) is more sophisticated: “a verb-form which depends syntactically on another verb-form but is not its syntactic actant, that is does not realize its semantic valences”: this is surely unsatisfactory, for the converb is arguably actantial in cases like “start walking”. Probably the worst is the definition in Himmelmann and Schultze-Berndt (eds.), 2005:60 “we use the term converb for ‘participles’ which are used primarily as adjuncts”. As Grønbech 1979:35 says of Turkic postpositions and gerundial forms, the converbs are “fluid and hard to hold on to”, which, for a “cross-linguistically valid category” (the title of Haspelmath and König (eds.) 1995, in which see Haspelmath’s and König’s own contributions), is not an ideal condition. And indeed, one detects symptoms of terminological or descriptive insecurity or malaise in 1 Historically a misnomer, for some reason especially widespread in English writing, more or less corresponding to the French “gérondif” (English “gerundive” must be a gallicism).
    [Show full text]
  • Supines, Gerunds, Gerundives, Periphrastics
    Horribile Dictu! Supines, Gerunds, Gerundives, and Periphrastics GERUNDS: Gerunds are verbal nouns, and they only show up in four forms. (Latin uses the infinitive for a nominative verbal noun, so the gerund doesn’t exist in the nominative.) They have no nominative, and they have no plurals. They are always neuter and are translated as “__ing”. Gerunds inspire more fear than they deserve. In fact, the only really fancy thing a Gerund can do is express purpose when in the accusative and paired with “ad”: ad audiendum aderant, “They were there for the purpose of listening,” or in better English, “they were there to listen.” The rest of the time, translate a gerund as you would any noun in its case. Summary of the uses of gerunds in their cases: - Accusative: The accusative of a gerund often follows a preposition, usually ad, usually expressing purpose. - Ablative: The ablative either follows a preposition taking the ablative, or else it expresses instrument or cause, like any noun in the ablative. - Dative: The dative works like any dative noun: Par est disserendo, he is equal to arguing. - Genitive: The genitive often describes abstract nouns, i.e., ars scribendi, the art of writing. GERUNDIVES: Gerundives are really future passive participles. They decline like “bonus.” They are verbal adjectives, always passive in meaning. They show necessity, obligation, or propriety. If you put the gerundive with a form of sum, you get the meaning of “ought to be …,” and this construction gets its own name, the dreaded “Passive Periphrastic Construction.” All this means is that it is a gerundive with a form of sum, and it expresses obligation.
    [Show full text]