|
The construction level
In order to examine adverbs in the context of the constructions in which they occur and compare them to attributive and predicative adjectives in the same condition, the constructional-typological approach (Koch 2012) was introduced in chapter 4. Construc- tions allow us a broader comparison, with more encoding to take into account. The results, presented in chapter 7, fall out quite differently from those of the root and lexeme levels, since more complex encoding implies more variation, making overlaps less likely. An overlap at the construction level tends to imply the same overlap, or a larger one, also at the lexeme and root levels, although this is not always the case (see discussion of [attr adv] overlaps below). The most common construction-level overlap is the partial
overlap of pred and adv, attested in almost a fourth of the sample languages (13/60).
Partial overlaps here mean that the constructions used in
pred
and adv structurally
only differ in terms of what kind of verb that is required. In pred, the verb slot is re- stricted to a copula or some other verb with fairly little lexical meaning, or alternatively, a few different such verbs. In adv, the verb slot can be filled with any of a rather large
number of verbs. In addition to the partial overlap of pred and adv, nine languages
have a construction that is intermediate between pred and adv, which also illustrates the affinity of these two functions. While such constructions do not instantiate typical examples of neither pred nor adv, they illustrate the fact that less typical instances of these two functions may blur the distinction between them. Partial overlaps of pred and adv show that property predication and property modification within predicating expres- sions can be quite closely related. Constructions that are intermediate between pred and adv show that the two functions cannot be distinguished in certain peripheral instances. While such affinity may be observed also without explicit analysis on the construction level, the constructional-typological approach is a tool that both simplifies and clarifies the comparison.
The second most common constructional overlap is that of attr and pred. In this overlap, identical encoding is found for attr and pred. The pattern is attested in a dozen of the sample languages (12/60). This overlap reconfirms the tendency of attr and pred as being the two functions in which adjectives are often attested, and as conceptually close. However, overlaps of attr and pred must necessarily be regarded as local or occasional. The overlap does not remain when this type of construction is expanded.
The overlap of attr and adv on the construction level is only attested in a few sample languages. But the fact that two languages show clear overlaps here is important for understanding modification as a function. Tagalog illustrates that attr and adv do the same type of work as modifiers in the form of identical constructions. The examples from Tagalog also show that lexemes are not necessarily involved in overlapping encoding, since there is no class of lexemes associated with attr and adv, but any suitable lexeme can be inserted. Maltese has a total overlap of attr and adv attested in specific examples. Even though these examples are few, they illustrate that attr and adv cannot really be distinguished in certain contexts. The results from Tagalog and Maltese show, in very different ways, that attr and adv are instances of the same general function of modification, and that this is reflected in their encoding in specific languages.
Since classifications based on constructions are common in typological research, one might question the need for an approach which is based or inspired by a specific theoret- ical framework. Still, here I have employed the constructional-typological approach. In chapter 4, this choice of approach was based on the mere acknowledgement of construc- tions as being able to carry meaning. It is a method that clearly defines and motivates the scope of comparison, and provides an appropriate notation for doing so. As such, the constructional-typological approach is able to fill a need for a straightforward method, admittedly not as the only option, but as a clear and transparent one. For the purpose of the present study, the constructional analyses provide several insights into the nature of adverbs and how they are affected by the constructions in which they occur. These insights could only be glimpsed at the root and lexeme levels.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
