Facoltà di Lingue e Letterature Straniere - PDF

Facoltà di Lingue e Letterature Straniere Corso di Laurea Specialistica in Scienze del Linguaggio Tesi di Laurea TOWARDS SOURCE OF MOTION IN ROMANIAN Relatore Laureanda Prof. Guglielmo Cinque Iulia-Georgiana

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 35
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.


Publish on:

Views: 11 | Pages: 35

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Facoltà di Lingue e Letterature Straniere Corso di Laurea Specialistica in Scienze del Linguaggio Tesi di Laurea TOWARDS SOURCE OF MOTION IN ROMANIAN Relatore Laureanda Prof. Guglielmo Cinque Iulia-Georgiana Zegrean Correlatore Matricola Prof.ssa Giuliana Giusti Anno Accademico CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 4 CHAPTER 1 GENERAL OVERVIEW ON SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS 1.1. PREPOSITIONS: LEXICAL OR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES Basic notions: Parts of Speech The X Theory Prepositions: lexical or functional categories? 1.2. SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS GENERAL DESCRIPTION Locative and directional prepositions: classification. Relevant notions: Figure, Landmark object, Place, Path Locative prepositions Directional prepositions Goal, Source and Route motion Spatial prepositions and Complement selection 1.3. SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS AND EVENT MODIFICATION Verbs of motion and spatial semantics Decomposing the event Adding telicity The for/in test 1.4. OTHER PROPERTIES AND USES OF SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS Fictive motion Non-locative readings of spatial prepositions Idioms and figurative uses The orientation of spatial prepositions 1.5. INTERMEDIARY CONCLUSIONS CHAPTER 2 THE SYNTAX AND MORPHOLOGY OF DIRECTIONAL PREPOSITIONS 2.1. EARLY AND RECENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF DIRECTIONAL PREPOSITIONS LOCATIVE PREPOSITIONS IN ROMANIAN The semantic features of locative PPs În in and pe on, la at : static and directional Are in and on purely locative or ambiguous? 2.3. SATELLITE-FRAMED AND VERB-FRAMED LANGUAGES English versus Romanian Classes of verbs of motion and modification by spatial prepositions Obligatory Goal of motion interpretation in Romanian Accomplishment prepositions 2.4. LEXICAL AND FUNCTIONAL STRUCTURE OF SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS The structure of spatial prepositions. Evidence from Greek Null Place 2.5. INTERMEDIARY CONCLUSIONS.. 62 CHAPTER 3 SOURCE DIRECTIONALITY IN ROMANIAN 3.1. EVENT COMPOSITION The structure of the events modified by Goal pf motion PPs in Romanian 2 Other evidence in favour of the proposal 3.2. SOURCE OF MOTION PREPOSITIONS IN ROMANIAN The Vector Space Semantics Path formal description Lexicalization of Goal and Source PPs English Source of motion PPs: empirical data and analysis Romanian Source PPs: analysis Deriving Source PPs The semantics of Source PPs. The role of de Other occurrences of de 3.3. THE SYNTACTIC ASYMMETRY BETWEEN GOAL AND SOURCE DIRECTIONAL PREPOSITIONS An early proposal Syntactic evidence for the asymmetry Availability of ambiguous readings Prepositional (Pseudo) Passives Dislocation an scrambling Preposition incorporation Adverbial modification Satellites lexicalizing Goal and Source Base positions for Goal and Source PPs 3.4. INTERMEDIARY CONCLUSIONS.. 94 CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES INTRODUCTION The present study is centred around the notions of space, location, direction, and path, all concepts employed in the semantic description of spatial prepositions. My goal is to characterize from a semantic and syntactic perspective the process of the formation of source of motion (complex) prepositions in Romanian, and then provide a tentative analysis of the internal structure of these prepositions. At first sight it seems that the data the phonological form of those directional prepositions that have a source of motion reading in Romanian differs from the data collected in any other language that I am aware of (or that the works that I have consulted while preparing the background for my study failed to mention). In fact, it was this simple observation on my native language that lead me in directing towards source of motion in Romanian. Until the past decade, directional prepositions passed almost unnoticed in linguistic research; most works were dedicated to static, locative prepositions. Moreover, to my knowledge, there is no study which deals mainly with spatial prepositions in Romanian, which is still a vast and unexplored field in the syntax and semantics of this language. My hope is that the present paper could shed some light on a few issues related to locative and directional prepositions in Romanian. The paper is organized in three chapters: General Overview on Spatial Prepositions, The Syntax and Morphology of Directional Prepositions, and Source Directionality in Romanian. Each chapter goes further and further into the analysis of spatial prepositions, constantly bearing in mind the introductory notions that will be put forth in the first sections of the paper. Without going into pure semantics, I will try to account for the data regarding opposite directional interpretations of spatial prepositions in Romanian. 4 Acknowledgements First of all, a grateful thank-you to Professor Guglielmo Cinque, for insightful comments and all the patience during the months of elaboration of my thesis. I am also deeply indebted with Professor Giuliana Giusti, who has supervised almost all my (extra)curricular activities, guided and helped me both during my Erasmus period in Venice and as a regular student of laurea specialistica (and also now as a laureanda ) at Ca Foscari. Looking back in time to my student years at the University of Bucharest, I cannot help feeling fortunate to have benefited from attending Professor Cornilescu s introductory classes on Concepts of Modern Grammar, which every semester transformed into more and more advanced classes on generative syntax. I would also like to thank the audience at the 9 th Annual Conference of the English Department, University of Bucharest for their comments on the paper that I presented there and which then became part of this thesis. 5 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions CHAPTER ONE GENERAL OVERVIEW ON SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS 1.1. PREPOSITIONS : LEXICAL OR FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES Basic notions: Parts of Speech Within generative grammar (but also in traditional grammar), a distinction is always made between lexical and functional categories. This categorisation goes even further than merely establishing an opposition between elements that have or do not have semantic content in a language; it deals with the consequences of being a lexical or a functional item in the syntactic behaviour of categories, ranging from their distribution to the selection of complement phrases, projected by heads, with which a certain category can or must combine. Lexical categories are those elements that share the following property in all languages: they can be freely created, that is, there is a very large number of these elements in a language and this number is presumably in continuous growth new words can be coined either by borrowing terms, or by internal mechanisms of word formation. These elements thus form open classes. Universally, Nouns (N), Verbs (V) and Adjectives (and Adverbs) (A) constitute lexical categories. Nouns dog, hand, rain, etc.; Verbs to see, to laugh, to fear, etc.; Adjectives beautiful, red, big, etc.; 6 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions Functional categories on the other hand include strictly grammatical elements, void of semantic contents. Their number is significantly smaller than that of lexical elements, and, importantly, they form closed classes. Creating new members is an extremely rare or absent phenomenon in all languages. They can be viewed as lexeme-gluers, as their function is, by and large, to contribute in assembling together lexical elements present in the numeration in order to render constructions grammatical. Let me give an example (the items in italics are functional elements): (1) a. dog sit on floor b. The dog sits on the floor. c. Dogs were (past, plural) sitting on the floor. Functional categories include: Determiners (articles) a, the, etc.; Prepositions of, at, etc. Inflection present, past, etc.; Complementizers that, for, etc. Wh-elements what, how, etc. I will follow the major trend in the literature in considering prepositions to be a functional category throughout the paper. I will dedicate, however, the next two sections to a brief description of some opposite views The X Theory In the sense of Chomsky (1970), Emonds (1976) and Stowell (1981), all three lexical categories (N, V and A) project at intermediary and maximal level. At the X level the Complement of the head (Xº) is selected. A Specifier position is present as sister to the XP. The selection of the Specifier and Complement phrases takes place in 7 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions accordance to the argument structure of the head of the phrase. The standard structure of a maximal projection is represented below: (2) XP Specifier X (ZP) Xº Complement (YP) Chomsky (1986) extends the X schema to the categories of Inflection and Complemetizer. With Pollock (1989) Agreement and Tense are realized as separate functional heads which can also project a maximal phrase. In the nominal domain, Hale and Keyser (1991) proposed a head for Case (KP). We thus see that both lexical and functional categories project. Zwarts (1992) claims that there is a parallel functional structure common to the three lexical categories and the prepositions. He basically adds to the already large list of functional categories (which included Inflection (I), Determiner (D), Degree (Deg), etc.) the category of R-pronouns (R) 1 as the functional projection for PPs, thus arguing that the syntax and semantics of the four major phrases can be unified. The functional head (responsible for the referential or quantificational force of the phrases) selects the lexical complement, which provides the descriptive content. (3) a. IP b. DP c. DegP d. RP I VP D NP Deg AP R PP 1 The R-pronouns were first identified as a natural class of words by Van Riemsdijk (1978). The denomination for this class is due to the fact that all elements contain the consonant r. Moreover, Van Riemsdijk observed that the r-words could stand for prepositional phrases in the same way as nominal pronouns could stand for noun phrases. 8 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions Prepositions: lexical or functional categories? In order to give a fair analysis to Prepositions, some important points need to be made. One very influential study on prepositions as a strict functional category was that of Grimshaw (1991). Sometimes, however, one may find mentioned in the literature a distinction between lexical and functional prepositions. Going into the classification of prepositions (see below), it seems reasonable to make such a distinction along the lexical vs. functional dimension. What is usually labelled as Prepositions actually includes (at least) five different types of elements. In fact, prepositions are a subcategory of adpositions, together with postpositions and circumpositions. The preference for the technical term prepositions is due to the need to avoid ambiguities when abbreviations are being used: A stands for Adjectives (and Adverbs), P (for Prepositions) stands for Adpositions in general. Moreover, there are many languages in which only prepositions exist, thus it is more rare to encounter languages which display all three types of adpositions 2. The five types of elements collected under the label P are the following: Adpositions (prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions); Particles go out, get off, etc.; Adverb-like prepositions downward, upward, etc.; Case morphemes of; Verbal prefixes. English morphology is extremely poor, so it comes as no surprise that very few members of the last two categories can be found in this language. Romanian, the language which the present study will mostly concentrate on, is a synthetic language 2 Dutch is one such language and surely one of the most intensely studied from this perspective. 9 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions and has a variety of Genitive/Dative case morphemes, while Slavonic languages are rich in verbal prefixes (see Svenonius (2003) for examples and discussions). Grimshaw (1991), Baker (2003) and others favour the view that all Ps are functional elements. A somewhat opposite view is the one entertained by den Dikken (2003, 2006), Svenonius (2004), to mention just a few relevant studies, in which the authors argue, on the basis of the existence of locative (also named static ) and directional Ps, and with evidence from English, German and Dutch, that spatial Ps are lexical heads to which a number of functional projections may associate. This line of research goes along the analyses of verbal and nominal categories, which have long been decomposed into a lexical layer and several (functional) projections. Van Riemsdijk (1990, 1998) considers spatial Ps as semi-functional, but I will leave this view aside. Campos (1991), for instance, utilizes claims of Plann (1985) who considers Spanish locatives +N neutralized categories. Plann notices (as reported in Terzi (2006)) similarities that locatives share with both nouns and adjectives, and since the common property of these two lexical categories is the binary distinctive feature [+N] (Chomsky 1970), she concludes that they are specified for +N, but only for +N, hence, the term +N neutralized categories. Spatial prepositions (locative and directional prepositions) are those elements that clearly have a semantic content up to a relevant extent. Opposite meanings can be rendered in a minimal pair of clauses in which the direction of the change in the position of one or more entities engaged in an event of movement is determined by the preposition selected by the verb. Employing a different preposition which is able to render the opposite way along the horizontal axis of movement along a direction (consider (4.a) versus (4.b)), we notice that the same syntactic element (the object) either delimits the event in terms of its final point (4.a) or in terms of its initial point (4.b): (4) a. John ran to school. b. John ran from school. 10 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions There are some other opposite pairs of spatial prepositions in English: in / out, inside / outside, up / down, in front of / behind, towards / away from, etc., to give just a few examples. These spatial expressions exist in all languages, so the phenomenon should not be neglected. However, most of the work so far on spatial PPs has been dedicated to locative prepositions only (see the next section for the distinction among types of spatial prepositions), while directionals were left more often than not in the shadow. Undoubtedly, there are occurrences of items belonging to the category of Ps where these elements do not bring any semantic contribution. In the following chapters I will look at the Romanian prepositions de and pe, trying to figure out if the same element has different behaviours (it sometimes seems to be a functional preposition, in some other cases it seems to bring changes in the semantics of the PP and of the event, and de even seems to occur as a complementizer), or if what we are dealing with is mere homophony. What seems beyond any doubt is the following: locative and directional prepositions certainly pose serious problems to any viewpoint that sympathises with the strict functional character of prepositions SPATIAL PREPOSITIONS GENERAL DESCRIPTION Locative and directional prepositions: classification. Relevant notions: Figure, Landmark object, Place, Path In the context of lexical vs. functional items, it seems to be a difficult task to pin down the exact status of spatial prepositions. This is, in fact, a recurrent point in the literature. While there is a major tendency to consider spatial prepositions as lexical elements (Jackendoff (1983, 1990)), it cannot be denied that they also have a functional role in clause structure. I will follow the lines of some researchers 11 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions (Koopman (1997) and subsequent work, Terzi (2006), Den Dikken (2006), and others) in proposing (in Chapter ) a complex structure which can account for both the lexical and the functional properties of locatives. There is little agreement on the labeling of the prepositions which express location and change in location. I will follow Koopman (1997), Den Dikken (2006) and others in using the term spatial prepositions ; locative and directional prepositions are the two major subclasses of spatial prepositions. Some linguists use different labels to define spatial prepositions. Nam (1995, 2000), for instance, uses the label locative for all spatial PPs, and differentiates the two subclasses in terms of the [± stative] feature. Tortora (2005 and other works) calls locative prepositions PLACE PPs, which are to be distinguished from PATH or directional PPs, and the list can go on. Moreover, linguists are also divided with respect to defining spatial prepositions (and the numerous labels used by various authors testify in this respect), an issue that has given rise to many debates and unanswered questions. All controversies are caused by the certain ambiguities that are encountered in many languages between static/locative and directional interpretation of certain prepositions. I will follow Gerhke (2004) (contra Huybergts and van Riemsdijk (2002)) in interpreting apparently lexically ambiguous prepositions as static only, in the sense that directionality is always added by some other element or operation 3. I will turn to this issue throughout the paper. 3 Just to give a hint about what will be more thoroughly looked at later, for instance, if a nondirectional P is selected by a (certain type of) verb of motion it will derive a goal directional reading in Romanian (and not only). The same verb in English combined with the same preposition might not render directionality. The question is how much of the responsibility of deriving a motion event can be assigned to the verb and how much to the preposition in the respective languages. 12 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions Locative prepositions From a semantic point of view, locative, non-directional spatial prepositions (also referred to in the literature as static locatives) denote the position of one or more entities, which remain in the respective location or configuration (if more than one object or entity are involved) throughout the event time. The key notions adopted for locatives are that of figure, place (or region) and landmark object (also named reference object or ground) 4. Let us consider the following clause: (5) Dracula is in the castle. The figure is the entity whose position in space is given in the predication. The interpretation of (5) is that Dracula is in the castle, namely that the place occupied by Dracula is (entirely) included in the place occupied by the landmark object, which is the syntactic object of the predication. The function of these prepositions is to locate a (movable) object/entity of small dimensions of unknown position (the figure) with respect to a generally larger and more stable object (the landmark) whose position in space is known. The Figure ( Dracula in (5)) is usually mapped into the subject position, while the landmark object is the direct object of the clause. Subject of spatial relation = Figure Object of spatial relation = Landmark object Observe the example below: (5 ) a. Dracula is in front of the castle. b.?? The castle is behind Dracula. 4 I will adopt the more widely-used notions of figure, place and landmark object throughout the paper, as in Koopman (1997). 13 Chapter 1 General Overview on Spatial Prepositions Sentence (5.b) is grammatically acceptable, but interpretably odd. It is ok to locate a person in space by its position with respect to a castle, but the inverse is not really pragmatically felicitous. Let me provide another example for the sake of clarity: (5 ) a. The pen is on the table. b.?? The table is under the pen. Again, if one does not remember where he left his pen and wanted to find it, a piece of information such as the one in (5.a) is a valuable one, but at the same time no one would try to describe the location of a table in the
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks