mirjam fried czech academy of sciences, prague constructional and lexical semantic approaches to...

Mirjam Fried

Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague

Constructional and Lexical Semantic Approaches to Russian

March 24-26, 2011, St. Petersburg, Russia

IntroductionIntroductionClassification of relative clauses

semantics: restrictiveness vs. non-restrictiveness

function: attributive vs. non-attributiveformation types:

RC coding strategies (relative position; nominalization, etc.)coding of head N’s function in RC (cf. Comrie 1981)

internally headed RC pronoun-retention (aka ‘echoing’/ ‘resumptive’ pronoun in RC) relative pronoun no overt indication

2

IntroductionIntroductionClassification of relative clauses

semantics: restrictiveness vs. non-restrictiveness

function: attributive vs. non-attributiveformation types:

RC coding strategies (relative position; nominalization, etc.)coding of head N’s function in RC (cf. Comrie 1981)

internally headed RC pronoun-retention (aka ‘echoing’/ ‘resumptive’ pronoun in RC) relative pronoun no overt indication

3

Slavic RCsrelative pronoun strategy (frequent in European lgs):

e.g. kotoryj (R) & its equivalents in other languages

absolutive relativizer + personal pronoun (frequent in non-

European lgs):e.g. deto (Blg), što (Mac), ki (Slovene), ieže (OCS)

što (BR, R?)

co (Cz, P?), kiž/kenž (U/LSorb)

-- not well described or incorporated in RC family4

In this talk…In this talk…Summarize the absolutive pattern in Czech:

(based on qualitative & frequency-based quantitative evidence, Fried 2011)

corpus-based description of its properties & distributionrelationship to který-RCs within the same functional

space, capturing the dynamic/fluid aspects of the pattern

Sketch a (sample) constructional analysis (e.g. Fillmore 1989, Fried & Östman 2004)

Revisit questions for investigating the absolutive patterns in other Slavic languages

5

BackgroundBackgroundRelative clauses with který ‘which’:

restrictive/non-restrictiveno obligatory marking of (non-)restrictivenessagreement in number/gender with head Nstylistically neutral (in terms of register, genre, text-type)typologically:

relatively low on accessibility hierarchy relatively less explicit

can be organized in a semantic & functional taxonomy

6

A. restrictive

RCs with relative pronoun RCs with relative pronoun kterkterýý

RC meaning/function

I. determinative II. non-determinative

B. non-restrictive (5)

1. category 2. kind individuating

3. identification 4. characterization

A. explicative (6)

B. Continuative (7)

(TEN) (TEN)

(TEN) *TEN

*TEN

[TEN proper N] [proper N]*TEN

(synthesis of Grepl & Karlík 1998 and Svoboda 1972)

7

RCs with absolutive RCs with absolutive coco(8) ta paní, co u nás bydlí, je moc hezká

that woman CO at us lives is much pretty

‘the woman [CO] lives with us is very pretty’

(9) Ten člověk, co jste ho za mnou kdysi poslal,

that man CO AUX.2PL 3SG.ACC after me once sent

{viděl jste ho ještě někdy potom?}

‘The man [CO] you sent [him] to me a while back, {did you ever see him again}?

8

A “non-standard” variant of A “non-standard” variant of relative pronounrelative pronoun????

Relative clauses with co:

absolutive, non-declineable relativizer copersonal pronoun to indicate head N’s grammatical

function in RC; agrees with head N in number/genderoften interchangeable with kterýtypologically (‘pronoun retention pattern’, Comrie 1981):

relatively high on accessibility hierarchy relatively more explicit

lots of unanswered questions about their properties in Slavic…

9

Existing analysesExisting analysesonly restrictive meaning no usage of type II

strongly deictic (also their hypothesized origin) collocates with TEN ‘that’ on head N

head N cannot be a bare proper noun

resumptive (‘echoing’, ‘anaphoric’) pronoun:no pronoun in NOM, i.e. SUB function (ex. 8)optional in ACC (ex. 9a vs. 9b)obligatory elsewhere

10

Existing analyses in relativization spaceExisting analyses in relativization spaceRC meaning/function


A. restrictive B. non-restrictive (5)


3. identification 4. characterization

A. Explicative (6)

B. Continuative (7)

(TEN) (TEN)

(TEN) *TEN

*TEN


CO *CO

11

kter-kter- constructionconstruction

12

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat prorel.

role head role modifiercase [ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

morph.

lxm KTER-

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]

sem frame […]FE #1 [ ]

val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

RC

RC modification

#1


13

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.



num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

morph.

lxm KTER-

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

RC

RC modification

#1


14

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.



num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

morph.

lxm KTER-

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

RC

RC modification

#1

coco RC RC construction ??construction ??

15

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

RC

Absolutive RC modification

#1

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

cat propers.

#1

coco RC RC construction ??construction ??

16

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

RC


#1

coco RC construction: SUB function in RC RC construction: SUB function in RC

17

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case NOM] }

RC


#1

coco RC construction: OBL function in RC RC construction: OBL function in RC

18

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

RC


#1

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

cat propers.

#1

gf obl

Remaining problemsRemaining problems

‘optionality’ of resumptive pronoun in ACC

additional, special patterns (cf. Fried, In press):temporal RCsquantifying RCs

19

ACC pronoun in RCACC pronoun in RC(9) a. Ten člověk, co jste ho za mnou kdysi poslal,

that man CO AUX.2PL 3SG.ACC after me once sent

{viděl jste ho ještě někdy potom?}

‘The man [CO] you sent [him] to me a while back, {did you ever see him again later}?

b. {Připravil jsem si tu pro každého z vás tisíc korun}

za tu práci, co jste ___ se mnou měli

for that work CO AUX.2PL ACC with me had

‘{For each of you, I have ready a thousand crowns here} for the work [CO] you had with me’

20

coco RC construction: animate OBJRC construction: animate OBJ

21

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ gf obj ]]}

RC


#1

case ACC

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

cat propers.

#1sem [anim +]

coco RC construction: inanim. OBJRC construction: inanim. OBJ

22

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]



RC


#1

sem [anim -]

sem restrictive

coco RC construction: inanim. OBJRC construction: inanim. OBJ

23

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]



RC


#1

case ACC

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

cat propers.

#1sem [anim -]

sem ‘explicative’ (= type II-A)

Special patternsSpecial patterns(10) Temporal… od doby, co nám na Národní zavřeli Klub spisovatelů … ‘… from the time [CO] our Writers’ Club on Národní has

been closed down on us …’

(11) Quantifying{Byl to nuzák […]; pomyslné vlastnictví lodí však vydalo}

za všechny drachmy, co jich bylo v Helladě.

for all drachmas.ACC CO 3PL.GEN was in Hellada

‘{He was a pauper […]; but the imaginary ownership of ships was equivalent} to all the drachmas [CO] were [of them] in Greece.’

24

coco RC construction: OBL function in RC RC construction: OBL function in RC

25

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.


num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

lxm CO

syn

max [ ]lex [ ]


val {#1 [ case #4[ ] ] }

RC


#1

case #4[ ]

num. #2[ ]

gnd. #3[ ]

morph.

cat propers.

#1

gf obl

coco RC construction: quantifying RC RC construction: quantifying RC

cat n

cat n

cat vfin.

cat vfin.cat ??.

role modifier

case [ ]

num. pl.

gnd. [ ]

lxm CO

synmax [ ]

lex [ ]

sem …

val {#1 [ ] }

RC


#1

case GEN

num. pl.

morph.

cat propers.

#1

sem quantity

univ. scope

marker‘EVER’

univ. quant.‘ALL’

‘property expressed by RC applies to all instances of head N; quantity is judged unusually high’

sem


27

RestrictivenessRestrictivenessonly restrictive meaning no usage of type II

Hierarchy of semantic preferences:

identification (type I-A-3)> characterization (I-A-4)

> explicative (II-A) [ex. (11), (12)]

> kind-of (I-A-2)> non-restr. determinative (I-B)

> category (type I-A-1)> *continuative (II-B)

28


strongly deictic head N collocates with TEN ‘that’

29

DeixisDeixisonly restrictive meaning no usage of type II

strongly deictic head N collocates with TEN ‘that’

Hierarchy of deictic contexts (TEN N, co), cf. Fried 2011:

N = Anim. sg > Inanim. sg > Anim. pl > Inanim. pl

in %: 68 65 35 32

Individuation issue, rather than simply deixis:

highly individuated/referential > less individuated

30



resumptive (‘echoing’, ‘anaphoric’) pronoun:no pronoun in NOM, i.e. SUB function (ex. 8)in ACC (exs. 9, 10) “more common” with inanimate head

Ns and only “optional” with animate head Ns

31

Resumptive pronoun & animacyResumptive pronoun & animacyresumptive pronoun is (almost) obligatory with

animate Ns in OBJ function (animate Ns less expected to be non-subjects, therefore marked; for discussion cf. Fried 2010)

resumptive pronoun is dispreferred with inanimate Ns; presence/absence depends on semantic type of RC – explicative vs. restrictive

32



resumptive (‘echoing’, ‘anaphoric’) pronoun:no pronoun in NOM, i.e. SUB function (ex. 8)in ACC (exs. 9, 10) “more common” with inanimate head

Ns and only “optional” with animate head Ns

co-clauses are not part of standard language

33

Stylistic register of absolutive Stylistic register of absolutive coco

non-determinative uses (type II) – tend to be used in emotional, expressive speech, but not exclusively so

special, formulaic patterns (quantifying, temporal) are register-neutral

rest is mixed

34

SynthesisSynthesisMost robustly attested RC with absolutive co:

Function: determinative restrictiveSemantics: individuation of head referentHead N: concrete, animate, singular entitySyntax: mix of pronoun-retention

& no overt marking strategies

Non-random distribution of additional functions:spread from identification to non-restrictive contexts

35

Two relativization strategies in existing accounts:Two relativization strategies in existing accounts:RC meaning/function


A. restrictive B. non-restrictive


3. identification 4. characteriz.

A. explicative

B. continuative

(TEN) (TEN)

(TEN) *TEN

*TEN


CO *CO

36

Two relativization strategies in corpus sample:Two relativization strategies in corpus sample:RC meaning/function


A. restrictive B. non-restrictive

1. category 2. kind individuatingindividuating

3. identification3. identification4. characteriz.

A. explicative

B. continuative

(TEN) (TEN)

(TEN) *TEN

*TEN


( CO )

*CO

temporaltemporal

quantif.quantif.

CO

37

What to do next?What to do next?Absolutive relativization in Slavic

e.g. deto (Blg), što (Mac), ki (Slovene), ieže (OCS)

što (BR, R?)

co (Cz, P?), kiž/kenž (U/LSorb)

existing commentary: colloquial/non-standard; resumptive pronoun “optional” in non-NOM function,

BUT: szczęśliwy ten wojak, co on domu przyjdzie ‘happy is the soldier thatCO [he] comes

home’ (Rospond 1971)

38

What to do next?What to do next?Absolutive relativization in Slavic

What are its actual properties and distribution?In what sense is the resumptive pronoun

“optional”, and what determines its use?Why is this strategy ‘missing’ in some

languages? (or is it??)

39

Thank you!

40

mirjam fried czech academy of sciences, prague constructional and lexical semantic approaches to...

Documents

rc rc modification

rc relative pronoun

rc absolutive rc modification

rc construction

rc family

head n head n

cat n cat v fin

headed rc pronounretention