Faulhaber Verb Valency Patterns

A Challenge for Semantics-Based Accounts
1. Auflage 2011
ISBN: 978-3-11-024078-8
Verlag: De Gruyter
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 372 Seiten

Reihe: ISSN

Taking as its point of departure the general assumption that meaning is crucial in accounting for verb complementation, this volume presents the results of an empirical study of verb complementation patterns of semantically similar English verbs. The semantic parallels of the verbs selected are based on their coverage in dictionaries - first and foremost the Valency Dictionary of English (Herbst, Heath, Roe and Götz 2004) - as well as corpus research and native speaker assessments. It is demonstrated that despite obvious similarities in complementation between such verbs, there are still a significant number of syntactic discrepancies which cannot be accounted for on the basis of meaning alone and that semantic factors - such as selection restrictions and aspectual properties - do not sufficiently correlate with the verbs' syntactic properties and consequently do not have sufficient explanatory power. Thus the results rigorously challenge so-called projectionist approaches which assume the position that complementation is determined by semantic properties and thus ought to be predictable on this basis. In the light of a general trend towards placing greater emphasis on semantic aspects, in the fields of construction grammar and cognitive grammar too, the number of idiosyncratic phenomena on the level of single complements as well as whole patterns clearly underlines the importance of storage phenomena as opposed to rule-based generation. As such it stresses the necessity of finding ways to systematically account for item-specific properties of verbs in any grammatical theory of the English language. The book is targeted at all linguists interested in the relationship between semantics and syntax, which is one of the prevalent questions in modern linguistics, also in the field of construction grammar and cognitive grammar. Since the data is presented in a way which is compatible with various theories of complementation, the target group is clearly not restricted to any specific linguistic school. Because of the large amount of item-specific information presented, this book is also a valuable source for grammarians and lexicographers.

Zielgruppe

Linguists interested in the Study of English, the Relationship be

Autoren/Hrsg.

Faulhaber, Susen

Fachgebiete

• Geisteswissenschaften Sprachwissenschaft Semantik & Pragmatik
• Geisteswissenschaften Sprachwissenschaft Sprachwissenschaften Theoretische Linguistik
• Geisteswissenschaften Sprachwissenschaft Grammatik, Syntax, Morphologie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Preface;6
2;Contents;8
3;Figures;11
4;Tables;13
5;Abbreviations;16
6;1 Introduction;18
6.1;1.1 Major questions;18
6.2;1.2 The model of analysis – overview and important concepts;20
6.2.1;1.2.1 Valency models – a brief overview;20
6.2.2;1.2.2 Valency carriers, complements and adjuncts, and different types of valency;21
6.2.3;1.2.3 Valency patterns;23
6.2.4;1.2.4 Optionality of complements;25
6.2.5;1.2.5 Subject complement unit (SCU) and predicate complement units (PCUs);27
6.2.6;1.2.6 Levels of valency and the use of semantic roles;28
6.2.7;1.2.7 Valency constructions;32
6.2.8;1.2.8 Complement types;33
6.2.9;1.2.9 Participant roles;34
6.3;1.3 Design of the study;37
7;2 The meaning of complements;40
7.1;2.1 Complement types as part of a verb’s valency structure;40
7.1.1;2.1.1 Overview;40
7.1.2;2.1.2 Complement types;40
7.1.3;2.1.3 Valency structures – introducing the model used;46
7.2;2.2 Alternative realizations of participants;49
7.2.1;2.2.1 Semantic specialization vs. synonymy of complement types;49
7.2.1.1;2.2.1.1 AGENT + talk + TOPIC;49
7.2.1.2;2.2.1.2 AGENT + agree + TOPIC/REFERENCE;53
7.2.1.3;2.2.1.3 AGENT + forget + ÆFFECTED;64
7.2.2;2.2.2 Polysemous complement types;66
7.2.2.1;2.2.2.1 AGENT + cheat + REFERENCE;66
7.2.2.2;2.2.2.2 AGENT + argue + TOPIC/REFERENCE;72
7.2.2.3;2.2.2.3 AGENT + inform + TOPIC;77
7.2.3;2.2.3 Blocked patterns;81
7.3;2.3 Conclusion;84
7.3.1;2.3.1 No stable semantic properties;85
7.3.2;2.3.2 Synonymous and polysemous complement types;95
8;3 Pattern choice and verb meaning;99
8.1;3.1 Assessing the role of verb meaning – theoretical assumptions;99
8.2;3.2 A comparison of semantically similar verbs;103
8.2.1;3.2.1 The database – introduction and description of methodology;103
8.2.2;3.2.2 Semantically similar verbs and their pattern inventories;109
8.2.3;3.2.3 Results of the analysis – quantitative evaluation;131
8.3;3.3 Phenomena identified in the analysis;141
8.3.1;3.3.1 Complementation options in a valency framework – an overview;141
8.3.2;3.3.2 Same valency pattern but different participant pattern;145
8.3.3;3.3.3 Same pattern restricted to a very specific context;151
8.3.4;3.3.4 Different formal realizations of the same participant;158
8.3.4.1;3.3.4.1 Differences in optionality;158
8.3.4.2;3.3.4.2 Different formal realizations of the same participant – an overview;162
8.3.4.3;3.3.4.3 Different formal realizations of BENREC;172
8.3.4.4;3.3.4.4 Different formal realizations of PREDICATIVE;176
8.3.4.5;3.3.4.5 Different formal realizations of TOPIC;182
8.3.4.6;3.3.4.6 Different formal realizations of ÆFFECTED;187
8.3.4.7;3.3.4.7 Different formal realizations of PREFERENCE and AIM;206
8.3.4.8;3.3.4.8 Conclusion;208
8.3.5;3.3.5 Different flexibility in the combination of participants;210
8.3.6;3.3.6 Frequency-based differences in the choice of complements;213
8.3.7;3.3.7 Formal similarity between verbs of opposite meaning;224
8.4;3.4 Different aspects of verb meaning and pattern choice;225
8.4.1;3.4.1 The participant inventory;226
8.4.2;3.4.2 Selection restrictions;229
8.4.3;3.4.3 The situation type of the verb;240
8.5;3.5 Implications;252
9;4 The meaning of patterns;266
9.1;4.1 The pattern as an additional entity;266
9.1.1;4.1.1 Complement type-independent pattern restrictions;266
9.1.2;4.1.2 Participant mergers;271
9.1.3;4.1.3 Instability of complement-participant correlation;273
9.1.4;4.1.4 Realization of participants dependent on the overall pattern;278
9.1.5;4.1.5 Conclusion;280
9.2;4.2 The relationship between pattern and meaning;281
9.2.1;4.2.1 Same valency pattern – same participant pattern?;281
9.2.1.1;4.2.1.1 Theoretical background: assumptions of construction grammar;281
9.2.1.2;4.2.1.2 The pattern [NP + verb + NP + NP];284
9.2.1.3;4.2.1.3 The pattern [NP + verb + for_NP];289
9.2.2;4.2.2 Same valency pattern – similar verb meaning?;295
9.2.2.1;4.2.2.1 Verb class studies – a brief review;296
9.2.2.2;4.2.2.2 Semantic verb groups based on pattern groups;301
10;5 Conclusion;309
10.1;5.1 Different approaches towards the syntax-semantics interface – an assessment in the light of empirical findings;309
10.2;5.2 Summary of the results;316
10.2.1;5.2.1 Lexical aspect, selection restrictions, and participant inventories;316
10.2.2;5.2.2 Competition with other lexical units of the same lexeme;319
10.2.3;5.2.3 No stable complement type or pattern meaning;321
10.2.4;5.2.4 Verb meaning not predictable from pattern choice;325
10.2.5;5.2.5 Accounting for alternative valency constructions;326
10.2.6;5.2.6 Idiomaticity in complementation;330
10.3;5.3 Implications for a theory of complementation;334
11;Appendix 1;344
12;References;346
13;Index;368

Über Autor(innen)

Susen Faulhaber, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany.