Verbal prefixation, construction grammar, and semantic compatibility: Evidence from the locative alternation in Polish

Wojciech Lewandowski

doi:10.1515/flin-2016-0006

Artikel

Verbal prefixation, construction grammar, and semantic compatibility: Evidence from the locative alternation in Polish

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 3. Mai 2016

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen Erkunden Sie dieses Fachgebiet

Aus der Zeitschrift Folia Linguistica Band 50 Heft 1

Abstract

This paper aims to analyze the interaction between prefixes, verbs, and abstract argument structure constructions, using as a testing ground the locative alternation. It has been assumed that in order to participate in the locative alternation, a verb must specify a manner of motion from which a change of state can be obtained (see, for instance, Steven Pinker’s Learnability and cognition, 1989). However, this generalization does not take into account the argument structure effects involved in verbal prefixation in Slavic where some change-of-location verbs can appear in the change-of-state variant, when headed by a resultative prefix. In Olbishevska’s generative-derivational analysis of the locative alternation in Russian, it is claimed that resultative prefixes are derivational morphemes subcategorizing for a location argument. While I agree that it is the resultative prefix that makes the alternation possible, I propose that it is not the case that a new verb with a different argument structure is derived by means of prefixation, but rather that it is the verb that integrates into the prefixed change-of-state variant. I analyze the change-of-state variant in the spirit of Goldberg’s Construction Grammar and Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar approach and show that resultative prefixes are not abstract syntactic features, but rather that each prefixed change-of-state construction is based on a specific configuration between the locatum and the location. I demonstrate that the interaction between resultative prefixes, alternating verbs, and the more abstract change-of-state variant is driven by semantic coherence.

Keywords: resultative prefixes; construction grammar; semantic coherence; locative alternation; Polish

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank two anonymous reviewers and the editors, especially Prof. Hubert Cuyckens, for their very helpful feedback. I am also deeply grateful to the research group CLEAR (Cognitive Linguistics: Empirical Approaches to Russian) for instigating me to work on verbal prefix semantics during my 6-months research stay at the University of Tromsø. Any errors remain my own. I acknowledge the funding support of the Danish Council for Independent Research (DFF – 4180-00216).

Abbreviations

acc=accusative; gen=genitive; ins=instrumental; ipfv=imperfective; pfv=perfective.

References

Anderson, Stephen. 1971. On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language 4. 387–396.Suche in Google Scholar

Barcelona, Antonio. 2002. Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within Cognitive Linguistics: An update. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (Cognitive Linguistics Research 20), 207–278. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar

Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2006. Construction-specific properties of syntactic subjects in Icelandic and German. Cognitive Linguistics 17(1). 39–106.10.1515/COG.2006.002Suche in Google Scholar

Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2008. Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.8Suche in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction morphology. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1). 1–13.Suche in Google Scholar

Brinkmann, Ursula. 1997. The locative alternation in German: Its structure and acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lald.15Suche in Google Scholar

Broccias, Cristiano. 2003. The English change network: Forcing changes into schemas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110901207Suche in Google Scholar

Christensen, Jason. 2011. The prefix po- and aspect in Russian and Polish: A Cognitive Grammar account. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas PhD dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2003. Lexical rules vs. constructions: A false dichotomy. In Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, René Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Motivation in language: Studies in honour of Günter Radden, 49–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.243.07croSuche in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2007. Construction grammar. In Dirk Geeraerts & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics, 463–509. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Davis, Anthony. 2001. Linking by types in the hierarchical lexicon. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 1996. The linguistic structuring of events: A study of Polish perfectivizing prefixes. In René Dirven & Martin Putz (eds.), The construal of space in language and thought, 467–490. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2009. Words as constructions. In Vyvyan Evans & Stéphanie Pourcel (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics, 201–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.24.16dabSuche in Google Scholar

Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.10.1353/lan.1991.0021Suche in Google Scholar

Farrell, Patrick. 1993. The locative alternation and multistratalism. Linguistics 32. 5–45.10.1515/ling.1994.32.1.5Suche in Google Scholar

Farrell, Patrick. 2009. The preposition with in role and reference grammar. In Lilián Guerrero, Sergio Ibáñéz & Valeria Belloro (eds.), Studies in role and reference grammar, 179–202. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).Suche in Google Scholar

Filip, Hana. 2003. Prefixes and the delimitation of events. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 11(1). 55–101.Suche in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles. 1985. Syntactic intrusions and the notion of grammatical construction. In Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 11. 73–86.10.3765/bls.v11i0.1913Suche in Google Scholar

Fillmore, Charles, Paul Kay & Mary K. O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64. 501–538.10.2307/414531Suche in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele. 2002. Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics 13(4). 327–356.10.1515/cogl.2002.022Suche in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalizations in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.003.0002Suche in Google Scholar

Gropen, Jess, Steven Pinker, Michelle Hollander & Richard Goldberg. 1991. Affectedness and direct objects: The role of lexical semantics in the acquisition of verb argument structure. Cognition 41. 153–195.10.1016/0010-0277(91)90035-3Suche in Google Scholar

Hampe, Beate (ed). 2005. From perception to meaning: Image-schemas in cognitive linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197532Suche in Google Scholar

Iwata, Seizi. 2005. Locative alternation and the two levels of verb meaning. Cognitive Linguistics 16(2). 355–407.10.1515/cogl.2005.16.2.355Suche in Google Scholar

Iwata, Seizi. 2008. Locative alternation: A lexical-constructional approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.6Suche in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Janda, Laura. 1986. A semantic analysis of the Russian verbal prefixes ZA-, PERE-, DO-, and OT-. (Slavistische Beiträge 192). München: Verlag Otto Sagner.10.3726/b13088Suche in Google Scholar

Janda, Laura. 2007. Aspectual clusters of Russian verbs. Studies in Language 31. 607– 648.10.1075/sl.31.3.04janSuche in Google Scholar

Johnson, Mark. 1987. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Kailuweit, Rolf. 2008. A RRG description of locative alternation verbs in English, French, German and Italian. In Rolf Kailuweit, Björn Wiemer, Eva Staudinger & Ranko Matasović (eds.), New applications of role and reference grammar, 328– 355. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Suche in Google Scholar

Kay, Paul & Charles Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The what’s X doing Y? construction. Language 75. 1–34.10.2307/417472Suche in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltan. 2002. Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Kövecses, Zoltan & Günter Radden. 1998. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9. 37–77.10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37Suche in Google Scholar

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The Chicago University Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1, Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2, Descriptive application. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 2004. Grammar as image: The case of voice. In Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & Alina Kwiatowska (eds.), Imagery in language: Festschrift in honour of Professor Ronald W. Langacker, 63–114. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Suche in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald. 2008. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Lewandowski, Wojciech. 2014. La alternancia locativa en castellano y polaco: Un análisis tipológico-construccional [The locative alternation in Spanish and Polish: A typological-constructional analysis]. Bellaterra: Autonomous University of Barcelona PhD dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Lewandowski, Wojciech & Jaume Mateu. 2014. A constructional analysis of unselected objects in Polish: The case of prze-. Linguistics 52(5). 1195–1236.10.1515/ling-2014-0020Suche in Google Scholar

Łaziński, Marek. 2008. The prefix za- in contemporary Polish against the Slavic background. Paper presented at the Third International Conference “Perspectives on Slavistics”, Hamburg, 28–31 August.Suche in Google Scholar

Michaelis, Laura & Josef Ruppenhofer. 2000. Valence creation and the German applicative: The inherent semantics of linking patterns. Journal of Semantics 17. 335–395.10.1093/jos/17.4.335Suche in Google Scholar

Olbishevska, Olesya. 2005. Locative alternation in Slavic: The role of prefixes. In Marie-Odile Junker, Martha McGinnis & Yves Roberge (eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 Canadian Linguistics Association Annual Conference, 12 pages. Available at http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2004/Olbishevska-CLA-2004.pdfSuche in Google Scholar

Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda Thornburg. 1999. The potentiality for actuality metonymy in English and Hungarian. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought, 337–357. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.4Suche in Google Scholar

Peña Cervel, María Sandra. 2009. Constraints on subsumption in the caused-motion construction. Language Sciences 31. 740–765.10.1016/j.langsci.2009.05.003Suche in Google Scholar

Pinker, Steven. 1989. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Pustejovsky, James. 1991. The syntax of event structure. Cognition 41. 47–81.10.1016/0010-0277(91)90032-YSuche in Google Scholar

Rappaport, Malka Hovav & Beth Levin. 1988. What to do with theta-roles. In Wilkins, Wendy (ed.), Syntax and semantics: Thematic relations, Vol. 21, 7–36. San Diego: Academic Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Rosen, Sara. 1996. Events and verb classification. Linguistics 34. 191–223.10.1515/ling.1996.34.2.191Suche in Google Scholar

Russell, Pamela. 1985. Aspectual properties of the Russian prefix na‐. In Alan Timberlake & Michael Flier (eds.), The scope of Slavic aspect, 59–75. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica.Suche in Google Scholar

Sokolova, Svetlana. 2012. Asymmetries in linguistic construal: Russian prefixes and the locative alternation. Tromsø: University of Tromsø PhD dissertation. Available at: http://www.ub.uit.no:8080/munin/bitstream/handle/10037/4483/thesis.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y.Suche in Google Scholar

Sokolova, Svetlana, Laura Janda & Olga Lyashevskaya. 2012. The locative alternation and the Russian “empty” prefixes: A case study of the verb gruzit’ ‘load’. In Dagmar Divjak & Stefan Gries (eds.), Frequency effects in language representation, 51–86. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110274073.51Suche in Google Scholar

Sokolova, Svetlana & Wojciech Lewandowski. 2010. Constructional profile of the verbal prefix za-: A comparative study of Russian and Polish. Oslo Studies in Language 2(2). 365–391.10.5617/osla.126Suche in Google Scholar

Śmiech, Witold. 1986. Derywacja prefiksalna czasowników polskich [The prefix derivation of Polish verbs]. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy Im. Ossolinskich.Suche in Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew & Marina Zaretskaya. 1998. Verb prefixation in Russian as lexical subordination. Linguistics 36. 1–39.10.1515/ling.1998.36.1.1Suche in Google Scholar

Tabakowska, Elżbieta. 2003. Space and time in Polish: The preposition za and the verbal prefix za-. In Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, René Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds.), Motivation in language, 153–177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.243.12tabSuche in Google Scholar

Talmy, Leonard. 1991. Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 17. 480–519.10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620Suche in Google Scholar

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Towards a cognitive semantics II: Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/6848.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Timyam, Napasri & Benjamin Bergen. 2010. A contrastive study of the caused-motion and ditransitive constructions in English and Thai: Semantic and pragmatic constraints. In Hans Boas (ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar, 137–168. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.10.07timSuche in Google Scholar

Torre, Enrico. 2012. Symmetry and asymmetry in Italian caused-motion constructions. An embodied construction grammar approach. Constructions 2012. 1–52.Suche in Google Scholar

Twardzisz, Piotr. 1994. The semantics of the Polish verbal prefix ob(e)-: A prototype approach. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference of the Polish Association for the Study of English.Suche in Google Scholar

Voßhagen, Christian. 1999. Opposition as a metonymic principle. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought, 289–309. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.4.17vosSuche in Google Scholar

Weinsberg, Adam. 1973. Przyimki przestrzenne w języku polskim, niemieckim i rumuńskim [Spatial prepositions in Polish, German and Romanian]. Wrocław: Ossolineum.Suche in Google Scholar

Wróbel, Henryk. 1984. Słowotwórstwo czasowników [Verb formation]. In Renata Grzegorczykowa, Roman Laskowski & Henryk Wróbel (eds.), Gramatyka współczesnego języka polskiego: Morfologia [A Grammar of contemporary Polish: Morphology], 467–512. Warszawa: PWN.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2014-3-15

Revised: 2015-6-2

Revised: 2015-6-28

Accepted: 2015-8-14

Published Online: 2016-5-3

Published in Print: 2016-5-1

Sie haben derzeit keinen Zugang zu diesem Inhalt.

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2016-0006

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

resultative prefixes; construction grammar; semantic coherence; locative alternation; Polish