Discourse orientedness and the lack of aspect – the role of verbal

particles in HungarianDIGSXII, 14 July 2010, Cambridge

Márta Dóra Peredy

(RIL Hungarian Academy of Science) – mperedy@nytud.huEdith Kádár

(Babeş–Bolyai University) – ekadar@flash.ro

1 Main goals1. Information structural account of the position

of verbal particles in Present-day Standard Hungarian (SH) and in Old Hungarian (OH) instead of an aspectual account.

2. Diacronically a gradual spread of preverbal pattern of particles can be observed across different construction types, that we presume to be governed by the discourse status of the culmination of the telic event expressed by the verbal particle.

2 Our main synchronic claims

2.2 The presence of verbal particles is indeed the result of the grammaticalisation (lexicalisation) of situation aspect. (Most of the) verbal particles express the result state of telic events, i.e., mark telicity.

2.1 The position of the verbal particle does not encode aspectual information directly.

2.4 (Im)perfectivity is a secondary effect, this is only expressed if this is the main information of the sentence.

2.3 The position of the verbal particle is determined by information structure.

3 Diachronic facts – OH compared SH

3.2 The category of verbal particles The category of verbal particles appeared at the beginning of the OH period and developped throughout this period. (1) Matthew 1/24a. MünchK: tőn mikent parancsola öneki Urnak angyala 1416 did as commanded.3SG him God-GEN angel-POSS3SG

b. JordK: vg then, myntvr Istennek angala meg paranczola 1516 so did as-Lord God-GEN angel-POSS Prt commanded.3SG ‘He proceeded as it has been commanded by the angel of God.’

3.1 Tense-aspect system OH has a rich morphosyntactic tense-aspect system: -a: [+/-past]; -t: [+/-perf] similar to Present-day EnglishSH has only one tense morpheme resulting from the reinterpretation of OH -t, while -a has disappeared.

3.3 Information structure

Proto-Hungarian was an SOV language with a default preverbal focus position. Although the basic word order changed to SVO as the result of rightward topicalization of definite objects, the focus position remained preverbal and can be filled by any constituent.

3.4 The gradual spread of preverbal pattern of particles In SH, verbal particles occur in preverbal position more often than in OH. The position of the particle varies through construction types.

3 Diachronic facts – OH compared SH

Table 1: Particle position in different constructions containing telic events(+: immediately preverbal particle; −: other)

OH SHA perfective episodic event + +B presentational − +C quick sequence of events no data + (-)D postverbal focus − doesn’t exist (+)E habitual +,morphosyntactically +,AdvF iterative +,morphosyntactically +,AdvG proximative +,morphosyntactically +,AdvH progressive doesn’t exist −I preverbal focus − −J imperative − − K negation − −

3 Diachronic facts – OH compared SH

4 Main claim about diachronic change

The spread of the preverbal position of verbal particles across constructions is determined by the information status of the result state expressed by the verbal particle. For example, verbal particles appear preverbally when culmination is the main assertion already in OH, but verbal particles can never occupy the immediately preverbal slot if the reaching of the result state is negated.

5 Aspect and information structure in SHStandard assumption: Aspect and information structure are two independent components.

Counterarguments:

5.1.1 Aspect cannot be expressed morphosyntactically in focussed sentences (14) MARI mászott fel a fára, amikor megjöttem.

focus verb PRT

a. perfectie meaning: It was Mary who climbed up the tree, when I arrived.b. progressive: It was Mary who was just climbing up the tree, when I arrived.

5.1 Viewpoint aspect can be expressed only in neutral sentences

5.1.2 Aspect cannot be negated morphosyntactically (15) Mari nem mászott fel a fára.

not verb PRT

a. culmination is negated: Mary started climbing up to the tree but didn’t manage to reach the top.

b. whole event is negated: Mary didn’t even try to climb up.

Standard assumption: Aspect and information structure are two independent components.

Counterarguments:

5.2 Progressive telic sentences cannot be negated

(16) a. Fütyörésztem, amikor megláttam Pétert. - atelic whistled-1SG when Prtperf-saw-1SG Peter-ACC ‘I was whistling when I noticed Peter.’b. Nem fütyörésztem, amikor megláttam Pétert. not whistled-1SG when Prtperf -saw-1SG Peter-ACC ‘I wasn’t whistling when I noticed Peter.’

(17) a. Mentem át a zebrán, amikor megláttam Pétert. - telic went-1SG Prtacross the zebra when Prtperf -saw-1SG Peter-ACC ‘I was crossing the zebra when I noticed Peter.’b. *Nem mentem át a zebrán, amikor megláttam Pétert. not went-1SG Prtacross the zebra when Prtperf -saw-1SG Peter-ACC ‘*I wasn’t crossing the zebra when I noticed Peter.’

5 Aspect and information structure in SH

Standard assumption: Aspect and information structure are two independent components.

Counterarguments:

5.3 Atelic (i.e., particleless) events can be perfectivised by focusing their duration

→ perfectivity is a secondary effect of focusing

(18) a. Péter tegnap két órán át (csak) várt Mátéra. Peter yesterday two hour across (just) waited.3G matthew-for

‘Yesterday Peter was just waiting for Matthew for two hours.’ → maybe even longer

b. Péter tegnap KÉT ÓRÁN ÁT várt Mátéra. ‘Yesterday Peter was waiting for Matthew for two hours.’

→ maybe even longer

5 Aspect and information structure in SH

Standard assumption: Aspect and information structure are two independent components.

Counterarguments:

5.4 Locative particles of atelic events/states are preverbal in neutral sentences, too

→ the preverbal particle does not encode telicity/perfectivity by all means (19) Ott állt a kocsi egész délelőtt a ház előtt.

there stood.3SG the car all morning the house before‘The car was standing in front of the house the whole morning.’

Summary: Viewpoint aspect and information structure have complementary distribution → they may be encoded in the same way

5 Aspect and information structure in SH

6 The order of the verb and the verbal particle

6.1 The diachronic assumption of the literature (Wacha 1995)

In OH • verbal particles behaved as adverbs in being able to

appear either pre- or postverbally, • both the verbal particle – verb and verb – verbal

particle word order expressed perfective events. • free variation

6.2 Our hypothesis6 The order of the verb and the verbal particle

→ These complexes tend to appear in this sequence even if the meaning of the whole construction contradicts the culmination of an episodic event. The intended meaning (e.g., proximative) can be gained either by morphosyntactic aspect marking (in OH) or by adverbial modification (in SH).

… → The locus of new information is the immediatelly preverbal position. → Verbal particles referring to the culmination of the event appear in this position

in neutral sentences when the main assertion of the sentence is the culmination of the event.

→ Perfectivity can be associated with the preverbal position of the particle in these sentences.

→ The telicity of the event will be associated with the presence of a telic particle, particleless telic events will have a particle following this pattern. And as the class of the verbal particles becomes richer there emerge more and more non-compositional (lexicalised) verbal particle – verb complexes.

→ As there are fewer and fewer constructions containing verbal particle where the verb carries the main stress, stress on the verb becomes associated with a specialised meaning: that of progressive.→ ...

6.3.1 Statistics of Codex Jókai

The ratio of verb – verbal particle word order is 16%, and even lower, 5%, in declarative sentences: this does not seem to be free variation.

verbal particle sumverb + verbal

particle

verbal particle +

verbmeg orig. 'back' 370 54 316el orig. 'away' 117 29 88le 'down' 21 1 20fel 'up' 51 2 49ki 'out' 36 5 31bel 'in' 29 4 25által 'by' 7 3 4

sum 631 98 533

6 The order of the verb and the verbal particle6.3 Agruments for the hypothesis

6.3.2 Standard Hungarian In SH• if the culmination of the telic event is asserted by the

sentence, then the verbal particle can always occupy the preverbal position,

• if the culmination is presupposed or negated, then the particle is postverbal.

Exception: adverbial modification, e.g., proximative

6 The order of the verb and the verbal particle6.3 Agruments for the hypothesis

6.3.3.1 Information status hierarchy

The discourse function of information encoded by a certain expression can be...

• the main assertion of the sentence: it is true, it conveys new information, it is highlighted by sentential stress;

• asserted by the sentence: it is true, it conveys new information, but it isn’t highlighted by sentential stress;

• presupposed by the sentence: it is true and known in the context• neither asserted, nor negated: neither its truth, nor its falsity is

asserted or entailed by the sentence• its negation is presupposed by the sentence: it is false, but known

in the context• negated: it is false and its falsity is new information

6.3.3 The gradual spread of the preverbal pattern of verbal particles in different constructions

Table 3: Relation between the discourse function and the position of verbal particles in different constructions containing telic events

Discourse function OH SHof the verbal particle

B presentational asserted − +

C quick sequence of events asserted no data + (-)

D postverbal focus asserted − doesn’t exist (+)

E habitual asserted +,morphosyn +,Adv

F iterative asserted +,morphosyn +,AdvG proximative negated +,morphosyn +,Adv

H progressive neither asserted doesn’t exist −nor negated

I preverbal focus presupposed − −

J imperative negation presupposed − −

K negation negated − −

A perfective episodic event main assertion + +

Table 4: An archaic dialect - Csángó

Old Hungarian Standard Hungarian

A perfective episodic event + +

B presentational − +

C quick sequence of events no data + (-)

D postverbal focus − doesn’t exist (+)

E habitual +,morphosyn +,Adv

F iterative +,morphosyn +,Adv

G proximative +,morphosyn +,Adv

H progressive doesn’t exist −

I preverbal focus − −

J imperative − −

K negation − −

Table 4: An archaic dialect - Csángó

Old Hungarian Csángó Standard Hungarian

A perfective episodic event + + +

B presentational − + +

C quick sequence of events no data − (+) + (-)

D postverbal focus − − doesn’t exist (+)

E habitual +,morphosyn − / +,Adv (+morphosyn) +,Adv

F iterative +,morphosyn − / +,Adv (+morphosyn) +,Adv

G proximative +,morphosyn − / +,Adv +,Adv

H progressive doesn’t exist − −

I preverbal focus − − −

J imperative − − −

K negation − − −

i. Presentational construction with verb–verbal particle order exists only in Early Old Hungarian (cf. Codex Jókai)

ii. Postverbal focus can still be found in Middle Hungarian.

6.3.3 The gradual spread of the preverbal pattern of verbal particles in different constructions

6.3.3.3 Graduality

iii. Quick sequence of events can be expressed by postverbal particles even in SH but its use is very restricted (e.g., outside broadcast), while this is the preferred form in Csángó.

iv. Iterative and habitual: After the disappearance of morphosyntactic aspect marking, one would assume that the preverbal position of the particle cannot refer to the iterative/habitual superevent since the episodic event is expressed in the same way. And indeed, adverbial modification is needed in SH, while the possibility of the use of postverbal particles can also be found in the Csángó dialect.

Claim: The spread of the preverbal position of verbal particles depends on the discourse status of culmination in a certain construction. The higher position on the information status hierarchy it occupies the faster the preverbal pattern appears.

6.3.3 The gradual spread of the preverbal pattern of verbal particles in different constructions

7 Analysis in a nutshell

OH: TP SH:

T AspP TP spec,AspP Asp’ spec,TP T’

Asp VP T VP

i. TP projection disappeared, AspP has been reinterpreted as TP (É. Kiss 2006a).

7 Analysis in a nutshell

iii. Our analysis works with a single feature (+/-information focus) instead of three (+/-pred, +/-perfective, +/-focus). The expression carrying an [ifocus] feature will move to Spec,TP, if it is a full XP.

ii. Focus position is determined by the tense bearing element of the sentence, this position is assumed to be the Spec,TP (cf. Kádár 2006).

iv. Diachronic change: the gradual spread of the preverbal pattern of particles, construction by construction, can be observed (cf. Westergaard 2009). This change means that gradually the [ifocus] feature gets associated with the verbal particle instead of the verb.

i. The verbal particles contribute to situation aspect in Hungarian.

ii. In SH telic events can mainly be expressed by verbal particle – verb complexes.

iii. Diachronicaly a gradual spread of preverbal pattern of particles can be observed across different construction types.

vi. This can be accounted for as a shift of the [ifocus] feature of the event from the verb to the verbal particle.

iv. The spread is determined by the discourse function of the culmination of the telic event.

v. This proccess is parallel to the lexicalization of verbal particles.

8 Conclusion

Why?