CONTRASTING INTRANSITIVE MOTION IN ENGLISH AND SERBIAN: HOW DO WE BUILD ’SOUND’ EVENTS?

Nataša Milivojević

DOI Number
10.22190/FULL1602147M
First page
147
Last page
159

Abstract


The paper addresses intransitive motion constructions in English and Serbian with the initial aim of identifying and explaining the structural (construction) templates, which are available in the two languages for intransitive motion encoding. The analysis is based on the well-known proposal by Leonard Talmy (1975, 1985, 1991, 2000) that languages fall into two main types as to how they encode motion events. Special attention is devoted to English and Serbian verbs of emission (VE) (specifically verbs of sound and verbs of light emission), regarding their potential to surface as verbs of motion and combine with directional phrases within motion event constructions.

The analysis aims at contrasting both verbal sub-subclasses in English and Serbian for the purpose of identifying the relevant points of similarities and divergences between the two language systems being analysed. The theoretical claims of the analysis are empirically supported by a contrastive sentential corpus which further promotes the claim that the potential of VE is wider in scope than was initially proposed by Levin (1993).


Keywords

intransitive motion, verbs of sound emission, verbs of light emission, path of motion, satellite framed languages

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arsenijević, B., (2006), Inner aspect and telicity: the decompositional and the quantificational nature of eventualities at the syntax-semantics interface. Utrecht: LOT Publications.

Arsenijević, B., (2007), “Slavic verb prefixes are resultative.”, Cahiers Chronos 17, pp. 197-213.

Arsenijević, B. and N. Milivojević, (2009), “Sound emission and directioanl phrases in Serbo-Croatian“, Paper presented at SLG 4 & SinFonIJA II (Sarajevo Linguistic Gathering 4 and SinFonIJA 2 Conference), Sarajevo, BiH.

Beavers, J., B. Levin, S.W. Tham, (2009), “The Typology of Motion Expressions Revisited”, Journal of Linguistics 46. 2, pp. 1-82.

Croft, W. Et al., (2010), “Revising Talmy's typological classification of complex events”, In Boas, H. (ed.) Contrastive construction grammar, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 201 – 235.

Folli, R., and G. Ramchand, (2005), “Prepositions and Results in Italian and English: an Analysis from Event Decomposition“, In Verkyul, H., van Hout H., and de Swart H. (eds.) Perspectives on Aspect. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 81-105.

Folli, R., and H. Harley, (2007), “Teleology and Animacy in Extrenal Arguments“, Lingua 118.2, pp. 190-202.

Gehrke, B., (2008), Ps in Motion: On the Semantics and Syntax of P Elements and Motion Events. LOT Dissertation Series 184. Utrecht: LOT Publications.

Goldberg, A., (1995), Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Goldberg, A., and R. Jackendoff, (2004), “The English Resultative as a Family of Constructions“, Language 80.3: pp. 532-568.

Hay, J., and C. Kennedy, B. Levin, (1999), “Scalar Structure Underlies Telicity in Degree Achievements”, In Mathews, T. and D. Strolovitch (eds.) SALT IX.Ithaca: CLC Publications: pp. 127-144.

Jackendoff, R., (2005), Simpler Syntax. Oxford University Press.

Krifka, M. (1998). The origins of telicity. In: Rothstein, S. (ed.) Events and Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 197–235.

Levin, B., (1993), English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Levin, B. and M. Rappaport Hovav, (1997), “Lexical Semantics and Syntactic Structure“, In Lappin, S. (ed.) The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers: pp. 487-509.

Levin, B. (2000), “Aspect, Lexical Semantic Properties and Argument Ecpression”. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Aspect, pp. 413-429.

Milivojević, N., (2007), „Telične partikule u engleskom i perfektivni prefiksi u srpskom jeziku - glagolski vid ili tip glagolske situacije?“, Godišnjak Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, Vol. XXXII: pp. 397- 407.

Milivojević, N., (2011), “Lexical Specification and Argument structure of English and Serbian Sound Emission Verbs”. B.A.S. British and American Studies, 17, pp. 235-246.

Milivojević, N., (2016a), “Revisiting verbs of emission: an update on some relevant theoretical accounts of lexical specification and argument structure of emission verbs”. Logos&Littera: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Approaches to text, 3, vol.1, pp. 25-45.

Novakov, P. (2005), Glagolski vid i tip glagolske situacije u engleskom i srpskom jeziku, Novi Sad: Futura publikacije.

Milivojević, N., (2016b), Konstrukcioni idiomi u engleskom i srpskom jeziku. Edisertacija, Knjiga 10. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet. http://digitalna.ff.uns.ac.rs/sadrzaj/2016/978-86-6065-384-2

Perlmutter, D. M., (1978), “Impersonal passives and the Unaccusative Hypothessis”. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (BLS) 4, pp. 157-189.

Talmy, L., (1975), “Semantics and syntax of motion“. In Kimball J. P. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics vol 4. New York: Academic Press, pp.181–238.

Talmy, L., (1985), „Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms“. In Shopen T. (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description Vol. 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-149.

Talmy, L., (1991), “Path to realization - via aspect and result“. In Proceedings of BLS 17: pp. 480–519.

Talmy, L., (2000), Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Tortora, C. (1998), “Verbs of Inherently Directed Motion are Compatible with Regulative Phrases”, Linguistic Inquiry 29:2, pp. 338-345.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/FULL1602147M

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 0354-4702 (Print)

ISSN 2406-0518 (Online)