Lexical Mapping Theory Research Articles

Analyzing the Impact of Verb Extensions on Semantic Role Variability in Kiha

The research analyzes the impact of verb extensions on semantic role variability in Kiha. In doing so, the study explores how verb extensions affect the semantic roles of arguments in a sentence, spotting trends and patterns in the usage of verb extensions, and the differences in their corresponding semantic roles. Verb extensions on semantic role variability are linguistic aspects that scholars did not find particularly fascinating to research. This study is interested in examining how verb extensions affect semantic role variability. Due to their proficiency in both writing and speaking Kiha, two informants who are native speakers, aged 83 and 73, were selected for the data collection process using the qualitative approach and elicitation technique. Data is presented using the fragmentation method, and coding is applied to ensure that the study is consistent with other studies that were cited in the literature. Lexical Mapping Theory is the framework for examining the data. The study concludes that the applicative verb extension has four semantic roles: beneficiary, recipient, reason/cause, and locative. Likewise, causative verb extension has two semantic roles: causee and instrument. Reciprocal and passive verb extensions have shared participant semantic roles.

Portmanteau manifestations of <i>-j-</i> and <i>-k-</i> morphs of verb extension in Hangaza

This study investigates the portmanteau manifestations-j- and -k-verb morphs in Hangaza language spoken in Tanzania. The study was motivated by the language’s peculiarities in its post-radical semantic elasticity; especially the way the -j- and -k- morph behave. Lexical Mapping Theory was the tool of analysis used to explain the-j- and -k- implications. The study employed a case study design and its data were collected from the Hangaza area. Focus group discussion and documentary analysis were used in the collection of data. The collected data were represented basing on the Leipzig Glossing Rules. It was found that the -j- and -k- morphs have portmanteau senses. Thus, -k- can serve as causative or a stative while -j- can serve as an applicative or a causative. That is to say, the same form can be productive or non-productive. Lexical Mapping Theory’s theoretical apparatus explain well the -j- and -k- argument structure together with their semantics. Generally, Hangaza’s lexical peculiarities, including the nature of its prosodic features, attract further investigation into the way how polymorphic morphs are ordered and the way they function.

Is instrumental causee available in Azerbaijani?

This paper focuses on the availability of instrumental PPs in the ditransitive and causative of ditransitive verbs. While base ditransitive verbs only allow PPs to be marked with inanimate NPs, causative of ditransitive base verbs also accept animate NPs. The aim of this paper is to investigate whether these animate NPs marked with instrumental PPs can be the causee of the causative of ditransitive sentences, and to give an argument structure analysis within the Lexical Mapping Theory.

The Mapping of Thematic Roles to Grammatical Functions in Mandarin BA Construction Denoting Causation: From the Perspective of Lexical Mapping Theory

NP1 in the position of the subject of the mandarin BA construction denoting causation is usually occupied by patientlike roles and NP2 immediately following BA is usually occupied by agentlike roles. The causative relation between NP1 and NP2, with the former being the Cause, and the latter the Affectee, derives from the word BA, which triggers in the lexicon the morpholexical operation of causativization when it unites with the predicate. The operation involves either assignment of causative roles Cause and Affectee to the existent thematic roles or insertion of a new role Cause to the thematic structure, with the prominence of Cause or the thematic role assigned Cause always being over the other roles. Having undergone this morpholexical operation, the thematic structure correctly maps to and generates the grammatical functional structure according to the general principles and conditions stipulated by the Lexical Mapping Theory (LMT). The result of this research shows that even for a construction as unique as the mandarin BA construction denoting causation compared with any other languages, LMT is still well applicable in explaining its role-function mapping.

Passive constructions in Setswana

The paper analyses passive constructions in Setswana from morpho-syntactic view point, showing that the suffixation of a passive morpheme to the verb reduces the argument structure of the verb. Previous studies carried out in Setswana verbal suffixes have confined their investigations to these morphemes as elements of morphology but have failed to observe that these affixes overlap into syntax. Chebanne (1996) observes that in Setswana, verbal extensions can combine with a single verbal base but fail to observe the overlap into syntax. Further, the studies do not give any insight in the features that Setswana shares with other Bantu languages. The passive construction in Setswana, like in other Bantu languages, is a bit complex in the sense that the verbal extension –iw brings into effect the dropping of the subject, and the object becomes the grammatical subject, thus rendering the transitive verb, such as, apaya ‘cook’ intransitive. Conversely, other derivational suffixes, such as applicative and causative, increase the verb’s arguments by two. For instance, the suffixation of the verbal suffix –el suggests an entity carrying out the action and somebody benefiting. The paper also compares passive with other verbal extensions such as neuter, applicative, causatives and reciprocals. It shows that while the passive occurs with most verbs and other verbal extensions, such as, applicative or causative suffixes, the neuter is rigid in occurring with other verbal extensions. The paper also appeals to Lexical Mapping Theory, whose role is to constrain mapping relations between thematic roles, such as an agent or patient and the corresponding grammatical functions, such as the subject, patient and oblique that have been subcategorized for by predicates

Mapping theory without argument structure

Asudeh and Giorgolo (2012) offer an analysis of optional and derived arguments that does away with argument structure as a separate level of representation within the architecture of Lexical Functional Grammar in favour of encoding much of this information in a connected semantic structure. This simplifies the architecture in many ways, but leaves open the question of the mapping between thematic roles, arguments, and grammatical functions (traditionally explored under the umbrella of Lexical Mapping Theory (LMT: Bresnan and Kanerva 1989)). In this paper, I offer some attempt to formalise these mapping relations, drawing on a modern reanalysis of traditional LMT (Kibort 2007), while also continuing Asudeh and Giorgolo’s (2012) quest to evacuate as much information as possible out of individual lexical entries and into cross-categorising templates (Dalrymple et al. 2004; Crouch et al. 2012).

Ditransitive predicates and dative arguments in Maltese

This paper is concerned with the syntactic expression of three argument (ditransitive) predicates in Maltese. We provide the first detailed description of the ditransitive constructions found in Maltese, which have been largely ignored in the substantial literature on ditransitive predicates, and show that the primary means of expression for these predicates uses a canonical dative construction. We argue that the canonical dative construction (with ditransitive predicates) is distinct from both a double object construction and a prepositional oblique construction in terms of the mapping of arguments to surface grammatical functions. We provide an analysis of Maltese ditransitives in the Lexical Mapping Theory of Lexical Functional Grammar.

A LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR REPRESENTATION OF INDONESIAN VERBAL SENTENCES

This paper presents a Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG) description of Indonesian structures with a verbal predicate. The similarity of Indonesian and English in this type of construction has enabled the application of the original patterns of LFG for the English structures on its Indonesian counterparts. However, some adjustment has to be made in the description of the constituent structure (c-structure). The Indonesian constituent structure here is unique in that whilst it is organized endocentrically, it uses lexocentric means of function identification. Another different feature description that distinguishes the Indonesian LFG representation from the English one is the absence of the features for tense and agreement in the feature structure (f-structure) due to the fact that Indonesian structures are not subject to tense and number agreement. The number feature, however, appears in the c-structure merely to show the status of the subject in terms of singularity or plurality. In addition to the distinctive descriptions above, some constraints and thematic arguments based on the Lexical Mapping Theory have to be applied in the phrase structure rules to accommodate some peculiar characteristics of Indonesian verbal structures, such as those dealing with the position of adjuncts and oblique objects.

Passive, locative inversion in Ndebele and the unaccusative hypothesis

This article discusses the Ndebele passive derivation using the Lexical Mapping Theory (henceforth LMT). Using LMT the article discusses the syntactic properties of the passive sentence in Ndebele. The article demonstrates that the architecture of LMT is largely applicable to the Ndebele language. The article further demonstrates that Ndebele is unique by allowing active transitive verbs to undergo locative inversion. It is this uniqueness in the violation of the thematic hierarchy that persuades us to agree with Harford's (1990) proposal that locative inversion may be formulated without any contextual restriction at all. Blevins' (2003) argument is also tested, and it is our conclusion that Ndebele data presents a fresh challenge to the Unaccusative Hypothesis (henceforth UH) even after Blevins' (2003) attempt to sharpen the distinction between passives and impersonals. In brief, the article demonstrates that whereas LMT is a theory that is largely applicable to and can account for the syntactic properties of the passive sentence in Ndebele, Ndebele data presents complications for the theory due to the theory's restrictive nature.

Applicative Constructions in Setswana in LMT Theory

Previous studies carried out on Setswana verbal affixes have confined their investigations to these morphemes as elements of morphology but have failed to observe that these affixes overlap into syntax. Yet current debates on the treatment of such Bantu languages morphemes are focused on the nature of the relation between syntax and morphology. (Sesotho: Machobane 1989); Chichewa: (Baker 1988), Alsina and Mchombo (1993); Chishona: Harford (1993); Kinyarwanda: Kimenyi (1990); Kiswahili: (Bresnan and Moshi 1993:47). Further, the studies do not give any theoretical insight in the analysis of the verbal extension in relation to argument structure Setswana. Therefore, certain features that Setswana shares with other Bantu language are prejudiced. This paper approaches the analysis of applicative verbal extension –el from a morpho-syntactic view point and shows that the applicative verbal extension -el is capable of bringing into effect morphological and syntactic marking to the sentence. In particular, this paper examines the applicative constructions and argues that the suffixation of the verbal suffix –el suggests an entity carrying out the action and somebody benefiting. This information is encoded in the constituent structure. The analyses of data in this paper will be based on Lexical Mapping theory (Bresnan and Kanerva (1989).

Feature-based argument mapping and animacy optimization in impersonal passives

Analysis of the alternation between impersonal reflexives and reflexive passives in Spanish shows that higher animacy makes an argument less marked as an object. This generalization supports Hopper and Thompson's (Transitivity in grammar and discourse, 1981) “transitivity hypothesis”, since it is entailed by their claim that objects tend to be highly individuated. The article proposes an optimality-theoretic implementation of the analysis, using a feature-based approach to argument realization modeled on Bresnan and Kanerva's (Linguistic Inquiry 20: 1–50, 1989) lexical mapping theory . The proposal highlights a contradiction between the transitivity hypothesis and the approaches to animacy that follow Silverstein's (Hierarchy of features and ergativity, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, 1976) analysis of split ergative languages, for which alternatives are suggested.

Argument-function mismatches in Mandarin resultatives: A lexical mapping account

This paper seeks to account for the argument-function mismatches observed in Mandarin resultative compound verbs. The account is formulated within a revised Lexical Mapping Theory (LMT) which incorporates a unified mapping principle. Under the simplest and also the strictest interpretation of this mapping principle (or the θ-Criterion), a composite role, formed by two composing roles, receives syntactic assignment via one composing role only; the second composing role is thus suppressed. Argument-function mismatches are due to the competition between composing roles for syntactic assignment. This LMT account also facilitates a natural explanation of markedness among the competing syntactic structures.

Optimality-Theoretic Lexical Mapping Theory

Locative inversion verbs seem to share the same argument structure and grammatical function assignment (i.e., ) cross-linguistically. This article discusses the nature of argument-function linking in LFG and demonstrates how the Lexical Mapping Theory (LMT) rendered in Optimality-Theoretic (OT) terms, where argument-function linking is governed by universal violable constraints that consistently favor the unmarked function, accounts for locative inversion straightforwardly. Within this OT-LMT, locative inversion is due to a universal morphosyntactic constraint, and language variation in locative inversion is due to the difference in its relative ranking. This account also offers a potential explanation for the markedness of the locative inversion construction.

Lexical-Functional Grammar: An Introduction to Parallel Constraint-Based Syntax (review)

Reviewed by: Lexical-functional grammar: An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax by Yehuda N. Falk Mark Miller Lexical-functional grammar: An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax. By Yehuda N. Falk. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2001. Pp. 237. ISBN 1575863405. $22. In this textbook on lexical-functional grammar (LFG), Falk addresses students already familiar with elementary generative syntactic theory (including transformational theory) and wishes ‘to motivate the concepts and formalisms of LFG in relation to derivational approaches’ (xi). His purpose in doing so ‘is to argue that LFG provides a better model of syntax’ (3) than derivational theories like government/binding theory and the minimalist program in its typological plausibility, its ease of conformity to what is known about the computation of language, and its ‘well-developed formalism’ (29). Throughout the book, F focuses on English, citing the pedagogical value of using a language already familiar to students and of providing a more cohesive treatment of the theory. F’s introductory chapter, ‘Welcome to lexical functional grammar’ (1–32), identifies LFG as ‘a variety of generative grammar’ though not of transformational theory (2). F shows how LFG is ‘lexical’ in that it obeys the lexical integrity principle (LIP) which claims that ‘syntax cannot see the internal structure of words’ (5). In contrast to derivational approaches, LFG is monotonic (in that information cannot be changed or deleted), is constraint-based, and has just one level of constituent structure. LFG is ‘functional’ in claiming that grammatical functions are independent of constituent structure configurations. It models a ‘parallel architecture’ (23) with three kinds of information existing simultaneously: c(onstituent) structure, f(unctional) structure, and a(rgument) structure. These layers of c-structure, f-structure, and a-structure are discussed in Chs. 2, 3, and 4, respectively. In Chs. 2(33–55), F explains how LFG, unlike transformationalist theories, prohibits nonfunctional empty categories and defines well-formed c-structures according to language-specific phrase structure rules. Ch. 3 (57–91), on f-structure, introduces the basic grammatical functions and demonstrates the formal mapping procedure from c-structure to f-structure. For F, ‘this mapping is the heart of the descriptive power of LFG, since it deals with the relationship between overt syntactic elements and the features they represent’ (64). The ‘mathematical relations of correspondence’ (66) involved in such mapping may prove formidable for some students, however, in the degree of abstraction involved, such as the use of metavariables in functional annotations to c-structure nodes. In Ch. 4 (93–120), F shows how a-structure mediates the mapping between thematic roles and grammatical functions, using lexical mapping theory (LMT) to analyze passives, unergatives, and unaccusatives. The remainder of the book analyzes several English constructions based on LFG formalisms: Ch. 5 on control (equi and raising constructions) (121–48); Ch. 6 on long distance dependencies such as islands and pied piping (149–72); and Ch. 7 on anaphora (173–91). Throughout these chapters, F uses empirical arguments to show how LFG better explains the facts of these constructions than does a transformationally based theory of syntax. For example, he notes that, because transformational theory forces an anaphoric analysis for equi constructions, the theory ‘cannot account for the properties of function-controlled equi’ (144) whereas LFG can. Features that should make this book useful to students include: exercises after every chapter, a glossary of technical terms (Appendix A), and a ‘Minigrammar of English’ (Appendix B) which represents the ‘final versions of all the rules and lexical entries’ developed in the preceding chapters (209). This textbook on LFG provides the student already trained in basic generative syntax with an alternative model to the standard transformational framework. For students unaccustomed to the conventions and precision of mathematical models, the LFG formalism may prove challenging. However, F demonstrates (usually convincingly) that, compared with a derivational approach, LFG offers a superior empirical, descriptive account of the facts of English and other languages. Mark Miller University of Texas, Arlington Copyright © 2003 Linguistic Society of America

Argument Realization (review)

Reviewed by: Argument realization ed. by Miriam Butt, and Tracy H. King Leonid Kulikov Argument realization. Ed. by Miriam Butt and Tracy H. King. (Studies in constraint-based lexicalism.) Stanford: CSLI Publications, 2000. Pp. x, 244. ISBN 1575862662. $25. This volume contains articles unified both by subject (surface realization of arguments in the clause) and framework (lexical-functional grammar, LFG). Within LFG, the focus is foremost on lexical mapping theory (LMT), which pays particular attention to valency alternations, describing them in terms of mapping from arguments to grammatical functions, mediated by the level of abstract features. The book opens with an editors’ ‘Introduction’ (1–13) which offers a good survey of the recent developments [End Page 832] in LFG and the contribution of LMT, placing this framework in a general perspective with some other modern syntactic theories. The papers fall into three thematic sections. Section 1, ‘Morphology vs. syntax’, opens with an important article by Kersti Börjars and Nigel Vincent, ‘Multiple case and the “wimpiness” of morphology’ (15–40). The authors’ main claim is that the morphology is an active determinant. Their argumentation rests upon evidence from languages that exhibit multiple case marking, as in Kayardild (Australia), where the noun phrase this woman in with this woman’s good net receives both genitive and instrumental marking: maku-karra-nguni ‘woman-gen-instr’. Alongside such clear instances of ‘case stacking’, the authors see the traces of multiple case in overriding (‘case attraction’), in particular, in Classical Armenian: The dependent noun phrase borrows the case from the element on which it depends (by the king’s(gen) wife(abl) → by the king’s(abl) wife(abl)). The authors have overlooked an important theoretical issue, however: how to prove that case attraction results indeed from a multiple case marking, not from the secondary replacement of the initial case relation in the surface syntactic structure (gen→abl). The authors propose a useful classification of types of multiple case marking in terms of several parameters (agglutinative/fusional type of language, stacking/overriding, independent/agreement case). However, their (intuition-based?) claims regarding the impossibility of some combinations seem unfounded. In particular, case stacking in a fusional language (considered impossible by the authors) might be exemplified by possessive pronouns. At least in some languages, on the one hand, they are marked for genitive, and, on the other, take agreement case (cf. Russian ixnij ‘their’, prohibited in the literary language but common in colloquial ‘low’ speech; ix is the genitive form of oni ‘they’, which ‘illegally’ takes the adjectival agreement case: ixnij ‘they.gen+nom.sg.m’, etc.). Rachel Nordlinger’s article (41–71) also deals with multiple case marking. Nordlinger offers an interesting LFG-based theoretical framework, the constructive case model. She argues that in many Australian languages case morphology not only marks the grammatical function of a nominal (subject, object, etc.) but also carries information about its larger syntactic context (tense/aspect/mood). Louisa Sadler discusses the properties and morphosyntax of noun phrases in Welsh (73–109). Section 2 is dedicated to a favorite topic of LFG, complex predicates. George A. Broadwell (‘Choctaw directionals and the syntax of complex predication’, 111–33) claims that in some languages directionals (forms expressing the orientation of motion) are to be treated as forming complex predicates with several verbs. This leads the author to an important lexicological issue: Which verbs can be combined with directionals and thus can be conceived as oriented? Broadwell argues that these are verbs that contain the predicate go in their lexical structure. In spite of appealing to the Whorfian theory of linguistic relativity, this solution appears to be ad hoc for verbs of perception or emotion, which thus should be decomposed, for instance, as ‘gaze goes from X to Y’ (for to see) or ‘thought goes from X to Y’ (for to be said about). Yo Matsumoto (135–69) discusses the Japanese morphological causatives in -(s)ase. He argues that, alongside causatives that are biclausal at both the level of argument structure and functional structure (permissives and persuasive causatives) or at least at a-structure (coercive causatives: make someone do . . .), there are causatives...

Modern Greek deverbal nominals: an LMT approach

This paper argues that there are Modern Greek (MG) deverbal nominal predicates which take syntactic arguments. A mechanism for the derivation of these nominals requiring the existence of an ‘internal’ ([ — r]) argument is proposed which has broader coverage than the mechanism proposed in Grimshaw (1990). A small set of simple, unification-based operations is employed to model the relation between the argument structure of verb predicates and that of the corresponding deverbal nominals with an ‘ eventive’ reading. The Lexical Mapping Theory of LFG (LMT) is the theoretical framework of the present discussion.