Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Volume I: Clause Structure, Second edition
participants (as we shall see below, English is one such language). As we saw
Download 1.59 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
Lgg Typology, Synt Description v. I - Clause structure
participants (as we shall see below, English is one such language). As we saw above, an intransitive verb can take only one np marked for perspective, the choice being determined by semantics: a [ +a] actor for unergative verbs like swim or run, and a [ −a] undergoer for unaccusative verbs like fall or happen. There is a very small set of simultaneously unergative/unaccusative verbs like roll which take either a [ +a] or [−a] participant, to be discussed further below. np s which are specified either [ +a] or [−a] by their governing verb are called core arguments; those which are not so specified are oblique. Oblique nps must be governed by their own specific predicator, be it an adposition, case affix or 370 William A. Foley enclitic, or serial verb. Consider the following example: (26) Harry sprayed the wall with paint The meaning of this sentence can be schematically represented in terms of the meaning of the conceptual event of the verb spray – (27) spray: someone propels a liquid through the air which causes the liquid to be on a surface – which in the context of (26) means: (28) Harry propels paint through the air causing the paint to be on the wall Since spray is lexically specified as a transitive verb in English, it takes both a [ +a] and [−a] participant. The [+a] is straightforward, as the controlling and initiating participant Harry is the only candidate, but the [ −a] is more complex. Both paint and the wall are potential candidates, as both are affected by the action of this event; the paint undergoes movement through the air and goes from the sprayer to the wall, while the wall goes from being unpainted to painted. Note both also answer the question ‘What happened to X?’: ‘What happened to the paint?’ ‘We sprayed it on the wall’; ‘What happened to the wall?’ ‘We sprayed paint on it’. Both participants have the semantic specification for [ −a] undergoer status, but both cannot function as undergoers, i.e. in syntactic object function, because spray is lexically specified as a simple transitive verb, i.e. it allows a single syntactic object or [ −a] undergoer. This is quite unlike true ditransitive verbs like English give which do allow multiple objects or [ −a] undergoers. In (26) it is the wall which has been chosen as undergoer. This forces paint to be oblique and thus governed by the preposition with, which has a lexical meaning like ‘something that someone uses/moves’. Note that the meaning of with is compatible with the overall meaning of spray, so that (26) is a coherent clause. If a preposition with a radically different meaning were selected, like at, a clash of meanings between it and spray might result, yielding an incoherent clause: (29) ?Harry sprayed the wall at paint 1.2 Parameters governing actor choices The actor or [ +a] participant is prototypically the causing, controlling, initiator of the action. In most cases the identification of the [ +a] np is clear, but not always. Sometimes there are two potential causers of the action as in (30): (30) (a) John opened the safe with the key (b) *The key opened the safe with John A typology of information packaging 371 Thus, while both John and the key are causing, performing participants of the actions, i.e. John causes the key to cause the safe to become open, only John is eligible to be [ +a], the key being consigned to oblique status. Note that if John is absent in the sentence, the key can easily assume the [ +a] function: (31) The key opened the safe This demonstrates the need for an explicit statement of accessibility of par- ticipant types for the [ +a] function, with some types outranking others (see Foley and Van Valin (1984), and also Dowty (1991)). The strongest parameter for [ +a] status, outranking all others, is volitional causation or initiation of the action. This accounts for why John outranks the key in (31). In some languages like Acehnese (Durie (1985)), a participant can normally only function as [ +a] when it is a volitional performer. In Acehnese the [ +a] np is marked by a verbal proclitic: (32) (a) Si Ali ji-timbak si Mat title np 3sg[ +a]-shoot title pn ‘Ali shot Mat (deliberately)’ (b) asee nyan ka ji-poh dog that perf 3sg[ +a]-beat ‘He beat that dog’ Many languages are less restrictive than Acehnese and allow any causing or initiating person, instrument or force to be assigned [ +a], although, of course, they remain outranked by controlling volitional causers, as in (30). Both English and Yimas are like this: (33) English (a) The key opened the door (b) An earthquake levelled the city (c) Malaria killed John (d) Smoke blackened the roof (34) Yimas (the Roman numerals indicate noun class assignment) ikn antki ya-n-tal-urkpwica-t smoke.v.sg thatch.iv.pl iv.pl[ −a]-v.sg[+a]-caus-blacken-perf ‘Smoke blackened the roof’ Of course, these are weaker choices for [ +a], so, not surprisingly, alternatives in which they are not [ +a], but oblique nps, are possible: (35) (a) John died from malaria [compare (33c)] (b) ikn-an antki ya-urkpwica-t [compare (34)] smoke.v.sg-obliq thatch.iv.pl iv.pl[ −a]-blacken-perf ‘The roof got blackened from the smoke’ 372 William A. Foley Now consider a situation in which Patrick has a phobia of snakes, which could be described either as (36a) or (36b): (36) (a) Patrick fears snakes (b) Snakes scare Patrick Note that the identification of snakes as [ +a] in (36b) is straightforward – ‘What do snakes do to Patrick?’ ‘They scare the hell out of him’ – but this is not the case with (36a): ‘What does Patrick do?’ *‘He fears snakes’. Another difference between the two sentences is that fear is a stative verb while scare is dynamic, hence the former fails to occur in the progressive or imperative: *Patrick is fearing snakes, *Fear snakes!; The snakes are scaring Patrick, scare the snakes! These data demonstrate that while snakes in (36b) are indeed the responsible causers and controllers of the event – in a word, [ +a] participants – this is not the case with Patrick in (36a). Thus, while Patrick has the same formal syntactic properties as snakes, i.e. those of subjects of formally transitive verbs, it is not a true or prototypical [ +a] participant. This claim is further buttressed by the fact that it cannot function as the object of the preposition by in a corresponding passive, a diagnostic property of all [ +a] participants of transitive or ditransitive verbs: *snakes are feared by Patrick. Patrick in (36a) illustrates the semantic role of experiencer, a sentient par- ticipant having a sensory experience of a perceptual, cognitive, emotional or bodily event or state. While experiencers are commonly realized like [ +a] par- ticipants, i.e. as subjects of transitive verbs, they are not true prototypical [ +a] Download 1.59 Mb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling