Selected Aspects of the Semantics and Syntax of De-verbal Nominalizations in English, Polish and Irish

Maria Bloch-Trojnar
{"title":"Selected Aspects of the Semantics and Syntax of De-verbal Nominalizations in English, Polish and Irish","authors":"Maria Bloch-Trojnar","doi":"10.54586/hwti8720","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bearing in mind the formal and functional complexity of the category of verbal nouns in Irish (henceforth VNs), it is not surprising that it continues to be the subject of intensive research. Much has been written on the syntax of VNs proper, i.e. verbal nouns employed in participle and infinitive constructions, and linguists are so absorbed in the debate about whether to regard them as nouns or verbs (e.g. McCloskey (1983) and Duffield (1995) are representatives of the two opposing views), that the area of de-verbal nominalizations has been neglected. This paper is meant as a modest attempt to amend this situation and present some aspects of their syntax, semantics and formal derivation. In the course of our discussion we will raise the following issues. First, we will concentrate on their argument taking properties. We will try to find out whether the binary distinction process vs. result nominals (which is considered in all studies of nominalizations) can be found in nominals derived from transitive and intransitive verbs alike. Most studies of nominalizations (Rozwadowska (1997) being a notable exception) disregard or openly exclude intransitives from the scope of their interest. Secondly, we will also consider two alternative views on the process of nominalization i.e. whether to treat result nominals as products of semantic drift (as does e.g. Malicka-Kleparska (1988)) or as products of a separate derivational process producing countable nominalizations (cf. a similar analysis proposed for English in Bloch-Trojnar (2007)). The syntactic and semantic properties of nominalizations in Irish will be compared to their Polish and English opposite numbers. Finally, we will also consider their morphophonological exponents and argue that the model of LMBM developed by Beard (1995), which separates the formal and syntactico-semantic facets of derivation, is best equipped to account for the data in question.","PeriodicalId":370965,"journal":{"name":"Studia Celto-Slavica","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Celto-Slavica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54586/hwti8720","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bearing in mind the formal and functional complexity of the category of verbal nouns in Irish (henceforth VNs), it is not surprising that it continues to be the subject of intensive research. Much has been written on the syntax of VNs proper, i.e. verbal nouns employed in participle and infinitive constructions, and linguists are so absorbed in the debate about whether to regard them as nouns or verbs (e.g. McCloskey (1983) and Duffield (1995) are representatives of the two opposing views), that the area of de-verbal nominalizations has been neglected. This paper is meant as a modest attempt to amend this situation and present some aspects of their syntax, semantics and formal derivation. In the course of our discussion we will raise the following issues. First, we will concentrate on their argument taking properties. We will try to find out whether the binary distinction process vs. result nominals (which is considered in all studies of nominalizations) can be found in nominals derived from transitive and intransitive verbs alike. Most studies of nominalizations (Rozwadowska (1997) being a notable exception) disregard or openly exclude intransitives from the scope of their interest. Secondly, we will also consider two alternative views on the process of nominalization i.e. whether to treat result nominals as products of semantic drift (as does e.g. Malicka-Kleparska (1988)) or as products of a separate derivational process producing countable nominalizations (cf. a similar analysis proposed for English in Bloch-Trojnar (2007)). The syntactic and semantic properties of nominalizations in Irish will be compared to their Polish and English opposite numbers. Finally, we will also consider their morphophonological exponents and argue that the model of LMBM developed by Beard (1995), which separates the formal and syntactico-semantic facets of derivation, is best equipped to account for the data in question.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英语、波兰语和爱尔兰语中去语化名词化的语义和句法选择
考虑到爱尔兰语动名词类别(以下简称VNs)在形式和功能上的复杂性,它继续成为深入研究的主题就不足为奇了。关于VNs固有的语法,即在分词和不定式结构中使用的动名词,已经写了很多,语言学家们如此专注于将它们视为名词还是动词的争论(例如McCloskey(1983)和Duffield(1995)是两种对立观点的代表),以至于去动名词化的领域被忽视了。本文试图从语法、语义和形式推导等方面对这一现状进行修正。在我们讨论的过程中,我们将提出以下问题。首先,我们将集中讨论他们的论点的性质。我们将试图找出是否可以在及物动词和不及物动词衍生的名词中发现二元区分过程和结果(在所有的名词化研究中都考虑到这一点)。大多数对名词化的研究(Rozwadowska(1997)是一个明显的例外)忽视或公开将不及物排除在他们感兴趣的范围之外。其次,我们还将考虑关于名词化过程的两种可供选择的观点,即是否将结果名词视为语义漂移的产物(如Malicka-Kleparska(1988)),还是将结果名词视为产生可数名词化的单独衍生过程的产物(参见Bloch-Trojnar(2007)对英语提出的类似分析)。将爱尔兰语的名词化的句法和语义特性与波兰语和英语的名词化进行比较。最后,我们还将考虑它们的语音学指数,并认为由Beard(1995)开发的LMBM模型将派生的形式和句法语义方面分开,最适合解释所讨论的数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Oral Literature in Brittany: A Short History of Breton Collections and Collectors From Kings to Dukes: Brittany between the 5th and the 12th Century 100 Years of Literature in the Breton Language (1920-2020) From Palaeolithic Caves to Roman Villas: Brittany's Distant Past La Villemarque's Barzaz-Breiz (1839-1845-1867): A Romantic Fiction to Reinvent Oneself
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1