Abstract

AbstractLanguages differ with respect to the morphological structure of their verbal inventory: some languages predominantly derive intransitive experiencer-subject verbs from more basic transitive experiencer-object verbs by morphosyntactic operations such as stative passivization (e.g., German, English), reflexivization (e.g., German, Spanish), or mediopassive voice (e.g., Greek, Icelandic). Other languages apply transitivizing operations of causativization to intransitive basic forms, e.g., via causative affixes (e.g., Turkish, Japanese, Yucatec Maya) or embedding under causative predicates (e.g., Korean, Chinese). Yet other languages derive both alternants from a common base (e.g., Hungarian, Cabécar). This classification is especially pertinent when applied to psych verbs, given that variable linking is a widely recognized characteristic of this domain. The valence orientation profile of a language’s psych domain has recently been linked to the presence or absence of noncanonical syntax, another well-known property of psych predicates. This article reports results from an ongoing study which aims to test this observation on a larger typological scale, presenting comparative empirical data on the interplay of morphology and syntax in the psych domains of Icelandic, Spanish, Korean, Chinese, Yucatec Maya, Finnish, Turkish, and Bété.

Highlights

  • Languages differ with respect to the morphological structure of their verbal inventory: some languages predominantly derive intransitive experiencer-subject verbs from more basic transitive experiencer-object verbs by morphosyntactic operations such as stative passivization (e.g., German, English), reflexivization (e.g., German, Spanish), or mediopassive voice (e.g., Greek, Icelandic)

  • For the languages in our sample which do conform to (7), the geographic patterns of the predominant strategies are in line with Nichols et al.’s (2004) observation for valence orientation in general

  • We have put forward evidence that the morphosyntactic behavior of psych verbs is subject to typological variation with parameters that intersect with well-established factors such as valence orientation in the sense of Nichols et al (2004) and areality, but whose unique patterns merit further investigation in their own right

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Languages differ with respect to the morphological structure of their verbal inventory: some languages predominantly derive intransitive experiencer-subject verbs from more basic transitive experiencer-object verbs by morphosyntactic operations such as stative passivization (e.g., German, English), reflexivization (e.g., German, Spanish), or mediopassive voice (e.g., Greek, Icelandic). The domain of psych verbs ( called “experiencer verbs” or “mental verbs”) is one of the most pertinent semantic domains to participate in structural alternations resembling the causative alternation (Haspelmath 1993, Levin and Hovav 1995, Nichols et al 2004, Alexiadou et al 2006, Alexiadou and Iordăchioaia 2014), which is illustrated below:. In psych verbs, this manifests as derivationally related structures in which the subject position is alternately filled by either the stimulus argument or the experiencer argument:. It has been observed that different experiential subdomains differ in their crosslinguistic propensity to encode a stimulus, which is taken to reflect its involvement in the given emotion (Verhoeven 2007: 66):

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call