The GET constructions of Modern Irish and Irish English: GET-passive and GET-recipient variations

Abstract

In this paper we explore from a synchronic perspective the GET construction of Modern Irish and the GET construction in the contact language Irish English. These productive GET constructions have two core senses ('HAVE' and 'BECOME'). There are no morphosyntactic indicators to identify either sense yet a language user of Irish or Irish English will have no difficulty unpacking the correct meaning. There is a constructional indicator. One sense is that of a simple recipient construction (non-passive) whereas the other is more passivelike in that the subject=undergoer of the construction undergoes a change of state. A result state is an outcome of the verbal action but it is not always expressed with a resultative adjective. The state is elaborated by the second argument of the verb. In functional models of grammar we expect the verb to project an argument structure and reflect an associated semantics based on the verb's lexical entry but we provide instances where a constructional perspective seems best to explain the behavior of this particular GET verb and its meaning in a clausal construction. We claim that the GET construction of Irish English and the GET construction of Modern Irish are related within a synchronic perspective, reflecting a unique cognitive perspective on bilingual lexicon architecture and the role of constructions. We provide an account of both language constructions and argue that a characterization grounded within functional account (Van Valin 2005) with a robust lexical constructional perspective (Goldberg 1995;Michaelis 2006; Van Valin 2005;Nolan 2011c), that mediates the relationship between lexicon and construction, best explains the relationship between these constructions across the two languages.

Language contact in Shetland Scots and Southern Irish English

“…As with the study by O'Keeffe and Moreno, the author argues (among other points) that these constructions in S.I.E. are borrowings from Gaelic based on the existence of nearly identical forms in Gaelic and the prolonged contact of Gaelic and English in Ireland (Nolan, 2012: 1111, 1113). Examples 2 and 3 illustrate the basic forms of these two structurally identical constructions in Gaelic and S.I.E 10…”

“…Example 3: Passive GET construction (Nolan, 2012: 1143) Fuair sé é féin fliuch Get-PST 3SG.M 3SG.M.ACC RFX wet:Adj‘He got himself wet’.As with Norn and Shetland Scots, we have seen grammatical features that originated in Gaelic occurring in S.I.E., and given the prolonged contact between the two languages the best explanation for this parallelism is contact-induced borrowing. In the process, we have shown that borrowing is not restricted to lexical items, although there has certainly been much lexical borrowing from Gaelic into S.I.E.…”

“…Example 3: Passive GET construction (Nolan, 2012(Nolan, : 1143 Fuair sé é féin fliuch Get-PST 3SG.M 3SG.M.ACC RFX wet:Adj 'He got himself wet'.…”

“…+ N (O) + part.-VIS- I AFTER THE NEWSPAPER READING‘I've just read the paper’ She is after spilling the milk ‘She has just spilled the milk’A second study deals with the syntax and semantics of what the author terms the GET constructions of Gaelic and S.I.E. (Nolan, 2012). The GET constructions consist of two polysemic forms of the verb get ( faigh in Gaelic) (Nolan, 2012: 1115), one of which indicates that the construction contains a change of state and the other of which indicates that the construction contains a recipient (Nolan, 2012: 1111, 1114).…”

“…(Nolan, 2012). The GET constructions consist of two polysemic forms of the verb get ( faigh in Gaelic) (Nolan, 2012: 1115), one of which indicates that the construction contains a change of state and the other of which indicates that the construction contains a recipient (Nolan, 2012: 1111, 1114). As with the study by O'Keeffe and Moreno, the author argues (among other points) that these constructions in S.I.E.…”