View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Düsseldorf University Press (d|u|p) Degree Gradation of Verbs Jens Fleischhauer Hana Filip, Peter Indefrey, Laura Kallmeyer, Sebastian Löbner, Gerhard Schurz & Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. (eds.) Dissertations in Language and Cognition 2 Jens Fleischhauer 2016 Degree Gradation of Verbs Bibliograsche Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen National- bibliograe; detaillierte bibliograsche Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de abruf- bar. D 61 © düsseldorf university press, Düsseldorf 2016 http://www.dupress.de Einbandgestaltung: Doris Gerland, Christian Horn, Albert Ortmann Satz: Jens Fleischhauer, LATEX Herstellung: docupoint GmbH, Barleben Gesetzt aus der Linux Libertine ISBN 978-3-95758-025-2 Für Angela und Jannes Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Gradation and degree expressions 11 2.1 Gradation............................ 12 2.2 Scales.............................. 25 2.3 Degreeexpressions . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... 36 2.4 Cross-categorical distribution of degree expressions . 45 2.4.1 Degree expression continuum . 45 2.4.2 Cross-linguistic distribution of degree expressions 50 2.5 Conclusion........................... 59 3 Verb classication 61 3.1 Semanticverbclasses . 62 3.2 Eventstructure ........................ 66 3.2.1 Aktionsart....................... 67 3.2.2 Predicatedecomposition . 77 3.3 Manner/resultcomplementarity . 83 3.4 Degreeverbs.......................... 92 3.4.1 Tenny (2000) on ‘measure adverbs’ . 93 3.4.2 Tsujimura’s (2001) analysis of Japanese degree verbs 96 3.5 Conclusion........................... 101 4 Syntax of verb gradation 103 4.1 Syntactic analysis of adverbial beaucoup .......... 104 4.1.1 Doetjes(1997).. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... 105 4.1.2 Vecchiato(1997). 108 4.1.3 Preliminary observations of the syntactic ambigu- ity of beaucoup .................... 112 4.2 Role&ReferenceGrammar. 115 4.3 Scoperelationships . 123 4.3.1 Grammatical aspect in German, French, and Russian 124 4.3.2 Grammaticalaspectandverbgradation . 129 4.4 Syntacticanalysisofdegreeexpressions. 133 4.4.1 Syntacticanalysisofverbgradation. 133 4.4.2 Syntax of adnominal degree expressions . 137 4.5 Conclusion........................... 143 5 Gradable predicates and intensiers 145 5.1 Gradableadjectives .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .. 145 5.1.1 Kennedy & McNally (2005a) . 146 5.1.2 Löbner(1990) ..................... 151 5.2 Semantictypeofdegreeexpressions. 155 5.2.1 Quanticationvs.modication . 156 5.2.2 Classication of degree expressions . 160 5.3 Semanticsofintensiers . 164 5.4 Degrees,scales,andverbs. 170 5.5 Conclusion........................... 178 6 Change of state verbs 179 6.1 Changeofstateverbs–ageneralperspective. 179 6.2 Argumentrealization . 186 6.3 Scalarchangesandthelexicalizationofscales . 192 6.4 Scalaranalysisoftelicity . 200 6.5 Degreegradationofchangeofstateverbs. 207 6.5.1 Degreegradationofdegreeachievements . 207 6.5.2 Degreegradationofaccomplishments . 214 6.6 Degreegradationandtelicity. 219 6.7 Conclusion........................... 225 7 Verbs of emission 227 7.1 Emissionverbs–ageneralperspective . 227 7.2 Degreegradationofverbsofsmellemission . 235 7.3 Degreegradationofverbsoflightemission . 242 7.4 Degreegradationofverbsofsoundemission . 245 7.5 Degreegradationofverbsofsubstanceemission . 251 7.6 Conclusion........................... 261 8 Experiencer verbs 263 8.1 Experiencerverbs–ageneraloverview . 264 8.2 Typesofexperiencerverbs . 267 8.2.1 Subject-experiencerverbs . 268 8.2.2 Object-experiencerverbs. 271 8.3 Degreegradationofexperiencerverbs. 276 8.3.1 Degree gradationof subject-experiencerverbs . 277 8.3.2 Degreegradationof object-experiencerverbs . 280 8.4 Conclusion........................... 285 9 Gradation, aspect, and telicity 287 9.1 Compositionalpatterns . 287 9.1.1 Changes,emissions,andexperiences . 287 9.1.2 Verbs expressing divergence & similarity . 289 9.1.3 Erraticverbs...................... 293 9.1.4 Gradableactionverbs . 296 9.1.5 Similaritiesinthecompositionalpatterns . 297 9.2 Subcompositionalityofverbaldegreegradation . 299 9.3 Event-dependent degree gradation . 304 9.4 Conclusion........................... 313 10 General conclusions 315 Appendix: Language data 325 References 345 Index 372 List of Figures 1 Scalepartitioningbydegreeexpressions . 43 2 Partialclassicationofadverbs. 44 3 ConstituentandoperatorstructureinRRG . 116 4 Aspecttypology........................ 124 5 Syntacticrepresentationof degreegradationin German . 135 6 Syntacticrepresentationof extentgradationinGerman . 135 7 SyntacticrepresentationofdegreegradationinFrench . 136 8 Syntactic representationof extent gradationin French . 137 9 SyntacticrepresentationofcomplexNP . 142 10 Representationofphasequantiers . 153 11 Typesofdegreeexpressions . 161 12 Scale partitioningby sehr ................... 165 13 Relationship between unfolding events and increasing de- grees .............................. 306 List of Tables 1 Classicationofdegreeexpressions . 41 2 Degree expression continuum for French and German . 49 3 Degree expression continuum for Persian . 50 4 Possibledistributionofadverbialdegreeexpressions . 51 5 Cross-linguistic distribution of degree expressions used for verbgradation......................... 52 6 Cross-categorical distribution of ‘d’- and ‘e’-adverbials . 54 7 Cross-categoricaldistributionof‘d/e’-adverbials . 55 8 Cross-categorical distribution of degree expressions in ‘Swahili-type’languages . 58 9 Featurematrixofaktionsartproperties . 68 10 Scaletypeandverbclassrelationship . 91 11 AdjectivedeclensioninGerman . 140 12 Deadjectival degree achievements and their corresponding adjectivalbases ........................ 185 13 Typologyofscalar(under)specication . 196 14 Extendedtypologyofscalar(under)specication . 198 15 Typesofpredicatesandtheirassociatedtypesoftelos . 224 16 Classesofverbsandtheirassociatedtypesofscales . 288 List of Abbreviations abl Ablative neg Negation abs Absolutive nom Nominative acc Accusative npst Non-past add Additive connective nsub Non-subject ade Adessive obj Object adj Adjective par Partitive am Assertive marker parc Participle asp Aspect part Particle aux Auxiliary pf Perfective av Actor voice pl Plural cau Causative prep Preposition cl Clitic proc Process cla Classier prog Progressive com Completive prs Present comp Comparative pst Past con Converb real Realis dat Dative refl Reexive dec Declarative rempst Remote past def Deniteness res Result distr Distributive sg Singular dpst Distant past sj Subject case ds Dierent subject sub Subject e Exclusive sup Superlative erg Ergative tns Default tense gen Genitive top Topic ill Illative uv Undergoer voice incep Inceptive = Clitization ine Inessive ints Intensier ips Impersonal lnk Linker loc Locative nc Noun class 1 Introduction Gradation is usually considered to be a property of adjectives. Gradable adjectives such as tall can be used in comparative constructions such as (1a) and license degree expressions such as, for example, very (1c), while ungradable ones like dead neither allow comparison (1b) nor license degree expressions (1d) without coercing the graded predicate. (1) English (Germanic < Indo-European) a. Peter is taller than Mary. b. #Peter is deader than Mary. c. Peter is very tall. d. #Peter is very dead. Gradation is often taken to be a prototypical property of adjectives. But it is not limited to adjectives and even if a language does not have a dis- tinct class of adjectives, gradation can be expressed. This can be seen in Choctaw (2), which uses verbs for what other languages express by means of adjectives. (2) Choctaw (Muskogean; Broadwell 2006, 317) Alta chito-fûhna-h-o ikbi-ttook. altar big-very-tns-parc.ds make-dpst ‘He made a very big altar.’ Gradation of verbs is not restricted to languages that do not have a distinct lexical class of adjectives but is also possible in English (3a) and German (3b). Examples such as (3a) and (b) have received considerably less atten- tion in the linguistic literature than cases like those in (1). (3) a. He loves his mother very much. b. Sie bewundert Thomas Mann sehr. she admires Thomas Mann very ‘She admires Thomas Mann very much.’ 1 1 Introduction The aim of my thesis is to discuss the notion of verbal degree gradation in more detail. Verbal degree gradation is of particular interest as it inter- acts on the one hand with the grammatical as well as the lexical aspect, especially telicity, and on the other hand, it raises questions regarding the notion of‘compositionality’and the lexicalsemanticsvs. conceptual know- ledge distinction. Two central claims of the thesis are: (i) verbal degree gra- dation is a subcompositional phenomenon (following Löbner 2012b) and (ii) most gradable verbs are not lexically scalar but the gradation scale is re- trieved from the conceptual knowledge associated with the gradable verb. Subcompositionality means that the interpretation of a single morpho- syntactic construction like ‘intensier + verb’ cannot be accounted for by a single compositional rule. Rather each semantic class of gradable verbs displays an irreducible compositional pattern of verbal degree gradation. The thesis presents a detailed study of subcompositionality by exploring the degree gradation of three semantic classes of verbs (change of state verbs, verbs of emission, and experiencer verbs) in detail. Related to subcompositionality is the fact that neither verbs of emis- sion nor experiencer