Reciprocal verbs and symmetry

Siloni, Tal

doi:10.1007/s11049-011-9144-2

Cited by 43 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Suvremeni opisi prijedlo`ne skupine s + instrumental u kroatisti~koj literaturi vezani su uz zna~enja instrumentala, opis prijedloga ili druga pitanja (npr. Dimitriadis 2004, Rákosi 2003, Siloni 2012. 1 U literaturi o slavenskim jezicima (Potebnja 1958: 434ff, Stani{eva 1958: 41ff, Mrázek 1964 navodi se da se u praslavenskom, a tako i starijim razdobljima slavenskih jezika socijativ izra`avao besprijedlo`nim instrumentalom, u vezi s ~im Ivi} (1954: 211ff) izra`ava sumnju.…”

Section: Uvodunclassified

“…Imenska skupina ozna~ena nominativom ima ulogu agensa, dok se u literaturi (npr. Givón 2001, Dimitriadis 2004, Rákosi 2003, Stolz, Stroh i Urdze 2006, Siloni 2012) raspravlja o tome koja je uloga pridru`ena prijedlo`noj skupini s + instrumental. Budu}i da se uloga dru{tva ili socijativa obi~no shva}a kao dodatak, a ne dopuna, problem je kako odrediti tu ulogu prijedlo`ne skupine s + instrumental s obzirom na to da je rije~ o dopuni.…”

Section: Prijedlo`na Skupina S + Instrumental Kao Dopuna S Ulogom Ageunclassified

“…Budu}i da je rije~ o uzajamnoj radnji, sudionik ozna~en nominativom i onaj prijedlo`nom skupinom s + instrumental mogu se shvatiti u isto vrijeme i kao vr{itelj radnje i kao trpitelj radnje, odnosno kao agens i kao tema. Siloni (2012), koja razlikuje jednovalentne i dvovalentne uzajamne glagole, 4 navodi da je subjektu u obama slu~ajevima pridru`ena uloga agens-teme, koja je nastala zdru`ivanjem (engl. bundling) 5 , 4 Reinhart i Siloni (2005) i Siloni (2012) smatraju da povratni glagoli nastaju univerzalnom operacijom redukcije dopune prijelaznoga glagola (engl.…”

Section: Prijedlo`na Skupina S + Instrumental Kao Dopuna S Ulogom Ageunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

The prepositional phrases ‘with’ + instrumental in Croatian

Brač¹

2018

suvlin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Uvodunclassified

Section: Prijedlo`na Skupina S + Instrumental Kao Dopuna S Ulogom Ageunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

The prepositional phrases ‘with’ + instrumental in Croatian

Brač¹

2018

suvlin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is just one of a number of specifically reciprocal properties which, while frequently found with reciprocals in genetically unrelated languages, are not found with all reciprocals. Other parametrically varying properties include: whether the reciprocal predicate is formed via a pronominal or quantificational argument with reciprocal meaning, or via an argument structure operation on the verb; if the latter, whether the argument structure operation occurs productively "in the syntax", or "in the lexicon" (Reinhart 2000, Siloni 2001); scope and scope-like effects: small clauses, derived predicates/ECM, dependent-pronoun readings, or true longdistance binding (Heim et al 1991, Dalrymple et al 2004, Dimitriadis 1999, Siloni 2001; whether it shows polysemy with reflexive, collective, or other meanings (Lichtenberk 1985, Kemmer 1993, Frajzyngier 1999; and (keeping in mind that we are characterizing constructions, not languages), whether this construction is the primary means of expressing reciprocal semant These properties raise the issue of classification of reciprocal constructions. Typologically we may speak of identifying reciprocal types and implicational relationships, while formally one must look for a set of representations, corresponding to existing reciprocal types, which can account for the observed clusterings of reciprocal properties.…”

Section: Alexis Dimitriadismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of different principled schemes for the classification of reciprocal constructions have been proposed. Morphologically, we can distinguish whether a reciprocal predicate is formed via a pronominal or quantificational argument with reciprocal meaning, or via an argument structure operation on the verb; and if the latter, whether the argument structure operation occurs productively "in the syntax", or "in the lexicon" (Reinhart 2000, Siloni 2001, Plank 2002). …”

Section: The Discontinuous Reciprocalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some argument-structure properties of ‘give’ in the languages of Europe and Northern and Central Asia

Comrie

2012

Studies in Language Companion Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Haspelmath (forthcoming) provides a typology of the expression of the object arguments of the verb 'give' using three basic types, according to whether the recipient, the gift, or neither is overtly marked differently from patients of monotransitive verbs: indirect object, e.g. 'Mary gives the book to John' primary object, e.g. 'Mary gives John with the book' double object, e.g. 'Mary gives John the book'In addition, he allows a mixed type for languages that permit more than one of these types, such as English, which has both indirect object and double object constructions. A quick glance at the map accompanying his text shows that Europe and Northern and Central Asia are dominated by the indirect object type, with exceptions being largely geographically peripheral or, as in the case of Ket, in a language that is otherwise typologically unusual for its location: For instance, the primary object type is found in Nivkh, the double object construction in Ainu and Ket, and the mixed type in English (and in some other neighboring Germanic languages not included in Haspelmath's sample).While not challenging Haspelmath's basic finding, and indeed in part following up on passing observations made by Haspelmath, this paper aims to show that consideration of a broader range of morphosyntactic features than just the overt marking of recipient and gift leads to a more differentiated picture of argument-structure properties of 'give' in what otherwise seems a very homogeneous area. In particular, many languages show features that indicate a less marked, morphosyntactically more central status of the recipient. Properties to be discussed include the following: a) Differences between full noun phrases and pronouns as object arguments of 'give', as when Maltese has the double object construction with pronoun objects, alongside the indirect object construction elsewhere. b) Verb-object agreement, including the use of resumptive pronouns, which often gives preference to resumptive dative pronouns agreeing with the recipient over resumptive accusative pronouns agreeing with the gift, as in Spanish. c) Passive verb forms, which may give preference to promotion-to-subject of the recipient rather than of the theme, in the indirect object construction (e.g. Japanese) and in the double object construction (e.g. English). d) Constituent order, with the possibility of having the recipient rather than the gift closer to the verb in the double object construction (e.g. English, Mandarin Chinese) and perhaps even in the indirect object construction. e) Stem suppletion according to features of the recipient rather than of the gift, as in Old Basque, Tsez (East Caucasian family), Yukaghir, and Japanese. 12 PATTERNS OF ASYMMETRY IN ARGUMENT STRUCTURE ACROSS LANGUAGES: SOME PRINCIPLES AND PUZZLES JOHN A. HAWKINS University of Southern California & Max Planck Institute for Evolutionarly Anthropology LeipzigMany cross-linguistic generalizations reveal asymmetries between the different arguments of multiargument predicates. The asymmetries are vi...

show abstract

Plurals

Winter¹,

Scha²

2015

The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reciprocal verbs and symmetry

Cited by 43 publications

References 35 publications

The prepositional phrases ‘with’ + instrumental in Croatian

The prepositional phrases ‘with’ + instrumental in Croatian

Some argument-structure properties of ‘give’ in the languages of Europe and Northern and Central Asia

Plurals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About