Verbs of caused motion to Goal in Bashkir
Ovsyannikova M. A. Glagoly kauzatsii
peremeshcheniyak tseli v bashkirskom yazyke. Acta Linguistica
Petropolitana. 179.
The paper is concerned with the encoding
of arguments of Bashkir verbs denoting the causation of motion of a
Theme (T) to a Goal (G), e. g., ‘load’, ‘hit’, ‘cover’. With the
verbs of this semantic class, three major strategies of argument
encoding are attested, which are called indirective (T is encoded
as direct object, G is in the Dative case), secundative (G is
encoded as direct object, T is marked by the instrumental
postposition menän), and tripartite (G is in the Dative case, T is
marked by the postposition menän). To unearth the semantic factors
that determine the usage of these three strategies, their
distribution among verbs and the patterns of choice in cases of
variation were analyzed. The study shows that the indirective
encoding is used when, as a result of motion, the Theme takes the
final position in the Goal (‘spread’, ‘wind’); the secundative
encoding is associated with the high affectedness and the change of
state of the Goal-participant (‘cut’, ‘wound’); the tripartite
strategy is attested with the verbs that denote events in which the
final position of the Theme is not specified (and usually different
from G) and the Goal does not necessarily undergo the change of
state (‘hit’, ‘shoot’). Based on the spread of these three
strategies among verbs, it is hypothesized that for Bashkir verbs
of caused motion to Goal, the spatial configuration of the event is
reflected in the encoding of arguments more consistently than the
affectedness of the participants.
Keywords
References
К. З. Ахмеров, Т. Г. Баишев, Г. Р.
Каримова, А. А. Юлдашев (ред.). Башкирско-русский словарь. М.:
Государственное изд-во иностранных и национальных словарей,
1958.
А. А. Бонч-Осмоловская. Семантика
актантных дериваций // Е. А. Лютикова, К. И. Казенин, В. Д.
Соловьев, С. Г. Татевосов (ред.). Мишарский диалект татарского
языка: Очерки по синтаксису и семантике. Казань: Магариф, 2007. C.
143–191.
А. В. Выдрина. Понижающие актантные
деривации. Доклад, представленный в экспедиции в дер. Рахметово
Абзелиловского р-на респ. Башкортостан 11 июля 2011 г.
Е. В. Падучева. Динамические модели в
семантике лексики. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2004.
З. Г. Ураксин. Русско-башкирский
словарь. Уфа: Б. и., 2005.
А. А. Юлдашев (отв. ред.). Грамматика
современного башкирского литературного языка. М.: Наука,
1981.
B. Bickel. Alignment typology
revisited: ditransitives in general and in Southeastern Kiranti.
Paper presented at Conference on Ditransitive Constructions,
Leipzig, 23–25 November 2007.
B. Bickel, M. Rai, N. G. Banjade, T.
N. Bhatta, M. Gaenszle, E. Lieven, I. P. Rai, N. Rai, S. Stoll. The
syntax of three-argument verbs in Chintang and Belhare
(Southeastern Kiranti) // A. Malchukov, M. Haspelmath, B. Comrie
(eds.). Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative
Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2010. P. 382–408.
B. Bickel, J. Nichols. Case marking
and alignment // A. Malchukov, A. Spencer (eds.). The Oxford
Handbook of Case. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. P.
304–321.
B. Comrie. The syntax of causative
constructions: Crosslanguage similarities and divergences // M.
Shibatani (ed.). Syntax and Semantics 6. The Grammar of Causative
Constructions. San Diego — London: Academic Press, 1976. P.
261–312.
B. Comrie. Some argument-structure
properties of ‘give’ in the languages of Europe and Northern and
Central Asia // P. Suihkonen, B. Comrie, V. D. Solovyev (eds.).
Argument Structure and Grammatical Relations: A Crosslinguistic
Typology. Amsterdam — Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company, 2012. P. 17–35.
Questionnaire on ditransitive
constructions // A. Malchukov, M. Haspelmath, B. Comrie (eds.).
Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative Handbook.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2010. P. 65–73.
W. Croft. Comparing categories and
constructions crosslinguistically (again): The diversity of
ditransitives // Linguistic Typology 18(3), 2014. P. 533–551.
D. Dowty. Thematic proto-roles and
argument selection // Language 67(3), 1991. P. 547–619.
W. A. Foley, R. D. Van Valin Jr.
Information packaging in the clause // T. Shopen (ed.). Language
Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. 1. Clause structure.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. P. 282–364.
A. E. Goldberg. Constructions: A
Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1995.
J. Gropen, S. Pinker, M. Hollander,
R. Goldberg. Affectedness and direct objects: The role of lexical
semantics in the acquisition of verb argument structure //
Cognition 41, 1991. P. 153–195.
I. Hartmann, M. Haspelmath, B. Taylor
(eds.). Valency Patterns Leipzig. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for
Evolutionary Anthropology (http://valpal.info). Accessed on
2016-06-10.
M. Haspelmath. Argument marking in
ditransitive alignment types // Linguistic Discovery 3(1), 2005. P.
1–21.
M. Haspelmath. On S, A, P, T and R as
comparative concepts for alignment typology // Linguistic Typology
15(3), 2011. P. 535–567.
M. Haspelmath. Ditransitive
constructions: The verb ‘give’ // M. S. Dryer, M. Haspelmath
(eds.). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max
Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 2013
(http://wals.info/chapter/105). Accessed on 2016-04-21.
M. Haspelmath, T. Müller-Bardey.
Valency change // G. Booij, Ch. Lehmann, J. Mugdan (eds.).
Morphology: A Handbook on Inflection and Word Formation. Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2004. P. 1130–1145.
S. Kemmer. Middle Voice. Amsterdam —
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1993.
S. Kemmer, A. Verhagen. The grammar
of causatives and the conceptual structure of events // Cognitive
Linguistics 5(2), 1994. P. 115–156.
L. Kulikov. Causative constructions
in Tuvinian: Towards a typology of transitivity // L. Johanson
(ed.). The Mainz Meeting: Proceedings of the Seventh International
Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag,
1998. P. 258–264.
L. Kulikov. Causatives // M.
Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher, W. Raible (eds.). Language
Typology and Language Universals. An International Handbook. Vol.
2. Berlin — New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2001. P. 886–989.
A. Letuchiy. Case marking, possession
and syntactic hierarchies in Khakas causative constructions // L.
Kulikov, A. Malchukov, P. de Swart (eds.). Case, Valency and
Transitivity. Amsterdam — Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company, 2006. P. 417–439.
B. Levin. English Verb Classes and
Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1993.
E. Lyutikova, A. Bonch-Osmolovskaya.
A very active passive: Functional similarities between passive and
causative in Balkar // L. Kulikov, A. Malchukov, P. de Swart
(eds.). Case, Valency and Transitivity. Amsterdam — Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2006. P. 393–416.
A. Malchukov. Alignment preferences
in basic and derived ditransitives // D. Bakker, M. Haspelmath
(eds.). Languages Across Boundaries. Studies in Memory of Anna
Siewierska. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2013. P. 263–291.
Malchukov et al. 2010
A. Malchukov, M. Haspelmath, B.
Comrie. Ditransitive constructions: A typological overview // A.
Malchukov, M. Haspelmath, B. Comrie (eds.). Studies in Ditransitive
Constructions: A Comparative Handbook. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,
2010. P. 1–64.
A. Margetts, P. K. Austin. Three
participant events in the languages of the world: Towards a
crosslinguistic typology // Linguistics 45, 2007. P. 393–451.
V. P. Nedjalkov. Polysemy of
reciprocal markers // V. P. Nedjalkov (ed.). Reciprocal
Constructions. Amsterdam — Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company, 2007. P. 231–333.
J. Newman. Three-place predicates: A
cognitive linguistic perspective // Language Sciences 27, 2005. P.
145–163.
M. Shibatani, P. Pardeshi. The
causative continuum // M. Shibatani (ed.). The Grammar of Causation
and Interpersonal Manipulation. Amsterdam — Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 2002. P. 85–126.
E. H. van Lier. Referential effects
on the expression of three-participant events across languages: An
introduction in memory of Anna Siewierska // Linguistic Discovery
10 (3), 2012. P. 1–16.
