1 / 74

POLYFUNCTIONALITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF REFLEXIVE VERBS IN LATVIA N

POLYFUNCTIONALITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF REFLEXIVE VERBS IN LATVIA N. Andra Kalnača , Ilze Lokmane D epartment of Latvian and General Linguistics University of Latvia. The presentation is supported by ERAF project 2010/0202/2DP/2.1.1.2.0/10/APIA/VIAA/013.

gwyn
Télécharger la présentation

POLYFUNCTIONALITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF REFLEXIVE VERBS IN LATVIA N

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. POLYFUNCTIONALITY AND DISTRIBUTION OF REFLEXIVE VERBS IN LATVIAN Andra Kalnača, Ilze Lokmane Department of Latvian and General Linguistics University of Latvia

  2. Thepresentationissupportedby ERAF project 2010/0202/2DP/2.1.1.2.0/10/APIA/VIAA/013

  3. The aim of the current presentation is to analyze Latvian reflexive verbs from the point of view of their polyfunctionality, namely, different meanings and distribution of the same reflexive verb.

  4. KRĀSOTIE-S ‘to make up’, ‘to paint [oneself]’ Es krāsojo-s katru dienu I.NOM make_up.PRS.1SG-REFL every.ACC day.ACC ‘I do my make up every day’ Debesis krāsoja-s sarkanas sky.NOM.PL turn.PRS.3-REFL red.NOM.PL ‘The sky turns red’

  5. Outline of description: 1) a brief insight into the research methods; 2) overview of the semantic groups of reflexive verbs; 3) analysis of the Latvian data samples; 4) main conclusions about the semantics of reflexive verbs and their distribution.

  6. The classification of Latvian reflexive verbs is based on the relationship between semantic roles and syntactic structure, as described in Kalnača, Lokmane 2012. The approach of describing the voice system and reflexive verbs in the context of semantic roles has been widely used in modern linguistics (see, e.g., Shibatani 1988, Klaiman 1991, Kemmer 1993, Plungjan 2000 and 2011, Haspelmath 2002, Knjazev 2007 etc.).

  7. The theoretical framework and classification of reflexive verbs is mainly based on Geniušienė 1983 and 1987, developed further by Kemmer 1993, Wierzbicka 1996, Enger & Nesset 1999, Plungian 2000and 2011, Holvoet 2001, Haspelmath 2002, Knjazev 2007.

  8. For the present study the following semantic roles are relevant – agent, patient and experiencer. (Palmer 1994, Saeed 1997, see also Plungian 2000 and 2011, Knjazev 2007).

  9. Geniušienėhas discussed polysemy and overlapping of semantic classes of reflexives, these specific features are discussed also in Kemmer 1993 in connection with emotion and some other reflexive verbs (see Geniušienė1987, 137-141; Kemmer 1993).

  10. However, polyfunctionality of Latvian reflexive verbs is described chiefly in dictionaries of Latvian, but never in connection withdistribution. Traditionally not all meanings of reflexive verbs used in Colloquial Latvian are reflected in dictionaries in spite of the fact that they are widespread (e. g., object and impersonal reflexives). Also Latvian grammars do not present analysis of either polyfunctionality or colloquial usage of reflexive verbs.

  11. The data are taken from the Corpus of Latvian (Latviešuvalodastekstukorpuss, www.korpuss.lv). Materials from explanatory dictionary of Latvian are used as well (Latviešu valodas vārdnīca. 30 000 pamatvārdu un to skaidrojumu. Rīga: Avots, 2006).

  12. It should be mentioned that the description of Latvian reflexive verbs has always raised problems for grammarians. Traditionally, reflexive verbs in Latvian have been described in the context of the meanings of the category of voice, especially – the middle voice.

  13. We assume that Latvian reflexive verbs constitute a distinct semantic group that should be described independently, i.e. without referring to the category of voice. In Kalnača, Lokmane 2012 we have proposedthat reflexive verbs should be viewed as lexemes that through lexical derivation have been derived from non-reflexive verbs.

  14. As Haspelmath argues, in the case of reflexive verbs “the agent and the patient are co-referential and can hence be thought of as occupying a single syntactic function” (Haspelmath 2002, 213).

  15. The relations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments can be represented as follows:

  16. According to Wierzbicka, this model can be related to the prototypical or primary meaning of reflexiveness (Wierzbicka 1999, 60-64, see also Schladt 2000, König & Siemund & Töpper 2008) which is the so-called middle, or neuter meaning in its traditional sense.

  17. Examples of Latvian reflexive verbs with the prototypical meaning: ietīties‘to wrap oneself up (in), to tuck oneself up’ atjaunoties‘to be renewed’ mainīties‘to change oneself’

  18. The groups of reflexive verbs in Latvian: 1) SUBJECT REFLEXIVE VERBS – the agent and patient are fully or partly co-referential; the agent is the syntactic subject of the sentence –mazgāties‘to wash [oneself]’;celties‘to get [oneself] up’;ķemmēties‘to comb [one’s] hair’;slaucīties‘to wipe [oneself] dry’;ģērbties‘to dress [oneself]’ Es mazgājosdušākatrurītu I.NOM wash.PRS.1SG.REFL shower.LOC every.ACC morning.ACC ‘I take a shower every morning’

  19. The previously mentioned schema, where the agent is co-referential with the patient and in the surface syntax appears as the subject, should be modified accordingly to include the changes in the meanings of reflexive verbs. The agent loses its outstanding position of the syntactic subject where, as the result, the position of subject gets occupied by the patient.

  20. 2) OBJECT REFLEXIVE VERBS – the agent and patient are not co-referential; the patient is the syntactic subject of the sentence– glabāties‘to be kept’, krāties‘to accrue’, šūties‘to be sewn’ Naudaglabājasbankā money.NOM keep.PRS.3.REFL bank.LOC ‘Money is kept in the bank’

  21. 3) IMPERSONAL REFLEXIVE VERBS –instead of an agent there is an experiencer (typically in the Dative case) –iesāpēties‘to feel a sudden pain’, iesmelgties‘to begin aching’ Man iesāpējāsvēderā I.DAT ache.PST.3.REFLstomach.LOC ‘I felt a sudden pain in my stomach’

  22. Latvian allows for certain constructions where one and the same reflexive verb depending on the context represents different semantic roles (agent, patient, experiencer) and consequently appears in different distribution.

  23. Depending on their distribution, many Latvian reflexive verbs can be both subject and object (or impersonal) verbs. Object and impersonal verbs usually have specific semantics (e. g., assessive, iterative, semantics of unintentionality).

  24. 1. REFLEXIVE VERB – SUBJECT VERB / OBJECT VERB MAZGĀTIES ‘to wash’ • subject reflexive verb Es mazgājosdušā I.NOM wash. PRS.1SG.REFL shower.LOC ‘I take a shower’

  25. The relations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments

  26. b. object reflexive verb + assessivemeaning Audumslabimazgājas material.NOM well wash.PRS.3.REFL ‘Laundry washes well’

  27. The relations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments

  28. Plungian (2011) points out that assessive (modal) meanings arise from the context where the identity of the agent is not important and the emphasis is laid on the event itself or the result involving the object. As the consequence of this the modal meaning of possibility or impossibility arises, that is the object’s ability to participate or not participate in the event is assessed (Plungian 2011, 269-270).

  29. This meaning peculiarity can be attested in the analysis of Latvian reflexive verbs – the example above shows reading of the verb mazgāties ‘to wash oneself’ as the subject verb without assessive meaning while in the object function the event is assessed as a positive event.

  30. The same can be observed in the distribution of the reflexive verb staipīties‘to stretch out’ although this verb allows for polyfunctionality in its function as the subject verb – in specific contexts it can encode iterative, that is – aspectual meaning.

  31. STAIPĪTIES ‘to stretch out’ a. subject reflexive verb Kaķēnspēcmiegastaipās kitten.NOMafter sleep.GENstretch_out.PRS.3.REFL ‘After waking up the kitten stretches out’

  32. STAIPĪTIES ‘to stretch out’ a1. subject reflexive verb + aspectual (iterative) meaning Es staiposarmaisiem I.NOMcarry.PRS.1.REFLwith sack.INSTR.PL ‘I am carrying sacks’

  33. The relations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments

  34. STAIPĪTIES ‘to stretch out’ b. object reflexive verb + assessive meaning Vecagumijasliktistaipās old elastic.NOM badly stretch.PRS.3.REFL un plīst andbreak.PRS.3 ‘An old elastic does stretch badly and breaks easily’

  35. The relations between semantic roles and syntactic arguments

  36. It is not always possible to interpret the meaning of reflexive verbs based on their distribution and mark clearly the borderline between the subject and object meanings. Interpretation of meaning largely depends on the lexical meaning of the agent – whether the agent is animate or via personification we can also include agents that typically are not characterized as possessing volition and which either perform an action or the action occurs by itself.

  37. SMĒRĒTIES ‘to get dirty’ a. subject reflexive verb Man negribējāssmērētiesardubļiem I.DAT NOT.want.PST.3.REFLget_dirty.INF.REFL with mud.INSTR.PL ‘I did not want to get dirty with mud’

  38. SMĒRĒTIES ‘to get dirty’ b. object reflexive verb + assessive meaning Smērējasvisuveidu get_dirty.PRS.3.REFL all.GEN.PL type.GEN.PL plastmasaslogi plastic.GEN window.NOM.PL ‘All types of plastic windows tend to get dirty’

  39. In this group of reflexive verbs, the semantic structure can be interpreted variously (also on this, see Plungian 2000, 215). Consider the example about windows: 1) some animate agent is making the windows dirty; 2) windows get dirty by way of dust, rain etc. without participation of an animate agent;in this case the reflexive verb in Smērējasvisuveiduplastmasaslogi‘All types of plastic windows tend to get dirty’ can be analyzed as the subject verb.

  40. Also, in the example Skrpostutušanavnoturīga un smērējas‘Mascara is not long-lasting; it smears’ there are two possible interpretations – mascara can either be smeared with the help of fingers or mascara itself under certain conditions (water, rain, heat etc.) smears around the eyes.

  41. RAUTIES ‘to pull’ a. subject reflexive verb Bērnsraujas no mātesrokām child.NOM pull.PRS.3.REFL from mother.GEN arm.DAT.PL ‘The child is pulling away from his mother’s arms’

  42. RAUTIES ‘to pull’ a1. subject reflexive verb (reciprocal) Rausimies, kuršstiprāks! wrestle.IMP.1PL.REFL who.NOM stronger.NOM ‘Let’s wrestle and see who is stronger!’

  43. RAUTIES ‘to pull’ a2. subject reflexive verb + aspectual (iterative) meaning Mēsrāvāmiesdārzāvisudienu we work.PST.1PL.REFL garden.LOC all.ACC day.ACC ‘We were working hard in the garden all day’

  44. RAUTIES ‘to pull’ b. object reflexive verb Linaaudumsmazgājotraujas linen.GEN fabric.NOM wash.PTCPshrink.PRS.3.REFL ‘Linen fabrics tend to shrink after washing’

  45. The verb rauties ‘pull away’ in the object function is semantically similar to the above discussed verb smērēties ‘to get dirty’ in the object function. The reflexive verb in the example Dienasraujasīsākas ‘Days are getting shorter’ most probably is interpreted as the subject verb where dienas ‘days’ is a personified agent.

  46. ZVANĪTIES ‘to call’ a. subject reflexive verb Māte katru dienu man mother.NOM every.ACC day.ACC I.DAT zvanās un uztraucas call.PRS.3.REFLand worry. PRS.3.REFL ‘My mother is calling every day and gets anxious’

  47. ZVANĪTIES ‘to call’ a1. subject reflexive verb (reciprocal) Mūsuklientisavstarpēji our client.NOM.PL mutually zvanāsļotiizdevīgi call.PRS.3.REFL very gainfully ‘Our clients call one another at very reasonable rates’

  48. ZVANĪTIES ‘to call’ b. object reflexive verb Telefons man visu laiku phone.NOM I.DAT all.ACC time.ACC zvanās kabatā, call.PRS.3.REFL pocket.LOC laikamnejaušisaspiedies perhaps accidentally press.PRS.3.REFL ‘The phone keeps ringing in the pocket – perhaps the buttons have been pressed accidentally’

  49. 2. REFLEXIVE VERB – SUBJECT VERB / IMPERSONAL VERB ŠŪPOTIES ‘to sway’ • subject reflexive verb Es šūpojosšūpolēs. I.NOM swing.PRS.1SG.REFL swing.LOC.PL ‘I am swinging’

  50. ŠŪPOTIES ‘to sway’ b. impersonal reflexive verb Lai jumslabišūpojasLieldienās! part you [pl].DAT well swing.PRS.3.REFL Easter.LOC.PL ‘May you swing well!’ (a traditional Latvian Easter greeting)

More Related