Instruments as agents: on the nature of semantic relations

Schlesinger, Izchak M.

doi:10.1017/s0022226700012147

Cited by 75 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In (14), the use of a handle classifier was not acceptable in any context, according to the deaf informants. Following Schlesinger (1989), although instruments are not prototypical agents, they are the 'proximate causes of action ' (p. 193). Quite understandably, an instrument can be an extension of an agent, a 'co-causer' of an event, besides the volitional agent per se.…”

Section: Causative Predicates Involving Instruments and Natural Forcementioning

confidence: 99%

Events of motion and causation in Hong Kong Sign Language

Tang

2007

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Causative Predicates Involving Instruments and Natural Forcementioning

confidence: 99%

Events of motion and causation in Hong Kong Sign Language

Tang

2007

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This property represents a departure from Dowty in that when instigation is entailed for an argument, it is only in relation to the event, not to any other argument, in contrast with the property 'causing an event or change of state in another participant'. This definition builds on discussions in Cruse (1973), Kearns (2000), Naess (2007) and Schlesinger (1989). Motion: Motion is entailed by a predicate just in case an argument is required to be in motion, which is most obviously the case with verbs of motion, such as come, descend, go or move, but also with verbs such as carry and take, or verbs of manner of motion such as run and walk.…”

Section: Participant Semanticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantics of case

Grimm

2010

Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a framework which connects case assignment with the semantics of argument realization. Broad notions of agency and affectedness are decomposed into more fine-grained semantic properties, loosely based on Dowty's Proto-Role theory, but conceived in terms of privative opposition and organized into a lattice. This lattice provides a semantic space of participant properties and supports defining hierarchical relations among participant types, interpreted as semantic prominence, as well as topological relations such as 'closeness', interpreted as semantic similarity between participant types. Cases are defined as connected regions of this space, relating a given case to a structured set of semantic properties. A case system is represented as a semantic system, which embodies oppositions and contrasts, and operates against the backdrop of the general semantics of argument realization, where one can define notions such as maximal agents and maximal patients and represent generalizations from the research on transitivity. Core case markers (e.g. ergative, accusative) are represented as subspaces of the lattice spreading outwards from the maximal agent and maximal patient nodes of the lattice. Case alternations arise when the subspace of the lattice delimited by a predicate's entailments for an argument is partitioned by different cases, exemplified with the genitive/accusative alternation in Russian occurring with direct objects of certain intensional predicates. This method also provides a treatment of case polysemy, viz. a single case subsuming multiple uses, by relating the diverse uses at the more abstract semantic level of the case's region on the lattice, demonstrated with non-canonical uses of the dative.

show abstract

“…14 The argument linked to the e subevent introduced by -ish is assigned a general thematic role that subsumes both agents, causees, and instruments (Schlesinger 1989, Van Valin & Wilkins 1996, Croft 1991, Dowty 1991a, Rissman 2011. Following this work, I adopt a generalized thematic role (notationally: ag) as the label that subsumes agents, causers, and instruments.…”

Section: Caused Change-of-state Verbsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The causative–instrumental syncretism

Jerro

2017

J. Ling.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(Received [PRE PUBLICATION DRAFT])Causative and applicative morphemes have been central in work on the morphosyntax of argument structure. However, several genetically unrelated languages use a single, syncretic form for both functions, which complicates the traditional view that a causative adds a new subject and an applicative adds a new object. In this paper, I propose an analysis of a morphological syncretism found in the Bantu language Kinyarwanda where the morphological causative and instrumental applicative are both encoded with the morpheme -ish. I argue for Kinyarwanda that both causation and the introduction of an instrument are analyzable as two outgrowths of the same semantic notion of introducing a new link into the causal chain described by the verb. The different causative and instrumental readings derive from underspecification of the position of the new link in the causal chain, though its placement is restricted via general constraints on possible event types as well as constraints on verb meaning and argument realization. This analysis provides an explanation for the presence of the causative-instrumental syncretism as well as provides insight into the interface between verb meaning and valency-changing morphology.

show abstract

Instruments as agents: on the nature of semantic relations

Cited by 75 publications

References 12 publications

Events of motion and causation in Hong Kong Sign Language

Events of motion and causation in Hong Kong Sign Language

Semantics of case

The causative–instrumental syncretism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About