|
Semantic types and prototypicality
As with adjectives (cf. Dixon 1982 [1977], 2004), there are semantic types among adverbs, as discussed in chapter 8. The clearest core type for adverbs is speed, attested in 38 out of 41 languages with adverbs. value, noise, and care are further peripheral semantic
types for adverbs, and they are found among the simple adverbs of far fewer languages. However, these languages are geographically distant and genealogically unrelated. For general modifiers, value is a core semantic type, followed by speed, noise and care as increasingly more peripheral types. The same core and peripheral semantic types are attested in different languages where adverbs are in the process of becoming lexicalized. Moreover, there are languages that have neither adverbs nor lexicalization tendencies of this kind, but that have adverbial affixes. The same semantic types are again encountered among these adverbial affixes, with speed as the most common type, and value and care as less common types. Thus, just as there are prototypically adjectival concepts (i.e. property words that are unmarked when used as adjectives), there are prototypically adverbial concepts such as speed (i.e. property words that are unmarked when used as
adverbs). Furthermore, there are less prototypical concepts such as
noise
and
care,
that are still predominantly adverbial. Concepts such as value appear to be as likely to be found as adjectives and adverbs, and are commonly attested among general modifiers (cf. tables 9.3 and 9.4 in section 9.4).
The discussion of semantic types of adverbs in comparison to semantic types of ad- jectives showed important implications in terms of semantic shift (in the non-diachronic sense of the term, cf. section 9.3). First, there are a number of cases where no semantic shift usually takes place. This applies to certain semantic types that are core to adjectives, and have a limited adverbial use. This is the case, e.g., with color, which has a limited use in adv (e.g. gleam redly ), although this naturally varies across languages. This ab- sence of shift also applies to some types that are peripheral to adjectives, such as human propensity (a happy person vs. laugh happily ). There are also semantic types that are core to adverbs, but which can be used adjectivally too, i.e. speed as in (run fast vs. a fast car ). Yet another type is attested both among adjectives and adverbs, and is core to general modifiers, i.e. value. This semantic type has a self-evident constant meaning across uses (a good book vs. dance well ). Second, a number of semantic types that are either core or peripheral to adjectives tend to shift semantically when used as adverbs. These shifts are either towards a property that is prototypically adverbial, or towards a type which is not a property at all, but rather describes some aspect of an action. In this way, items that are originally dimension words such as great may be used in the sense of intensification (e.g. doubt greatly ). In fact, even semantic types that are core
to adverbs may shift in their adverb uses towards a less property-like meaning. speed
words such as quickly may in this way shift towards a time meaning, e.g. answer quickly meaning ‘answer soon’ (cf. Plungian & Rakhilina 2013). These semantic shift give further insights to the nature of adverbs. Property words have a wider usage as adjectives, i.e. modifiers within referring expressions. As modifiers within predicating expressions, they are much more limited, and only a small number of semantic types of property words pertain to events specifically. Many property words thus tend to shift meaning when they are used as adverbs, and the shift is then towards some characteristic of events. Events are complex, and it is only natural that there are many different characteristics that a modifier may target. In this way, some of the heterogeneous semantics of adverbs can be explained.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
