The Interplay of Synonymy and Polysemy

a
/en]
ACTION

---

127 | 
schema has a preference self-agentive action, hence the preference for reflexive clitics. Non-
reflexive forms such as (196) are not common, but they are possible. 
The schema in figure 19 includes two options for the preposition, either 
a 
‘at/to’ or 
en 
‘in/on’. The first of these is bolded in order to show that it is the preferred preposition. The 
DIRECTIONAL 
also includes a noun phrase that refers to an action. This is the first type of 
inchoative phrase seen mostly with 
lanzar
.
The literature has normally focused on inchoative phrases that include an infinitival 
verb as a second element, which in our study mostly occur with 
echar
. Verbal periphrasis 
(Lamiroy 1991) consisting of a motion verb plus the preposition 
a 
‘at/to’ followed by an 
infinitival verb are in fact quite common in Spanish. They are termed phasal periphrases 
(Quesada 1993, NGRAE §28.2d) since they focus on different time lapses of an action. A 
subtype of phasal periphrasis is the inchoative phrase, such as those seen with 
echar, 
which 
focus on the initial part of the process (Quesada 1993, NGRAE §28.2d, Fogsgaard 2001). 
Since the second element is an infinitival verb I will term these verbal inchoative phrases.
Echar
normally combines with verbs referring to (emotional) expressions and to 
bodily motion (Fogsgaard 2001): 
(197) Todos se
ECHARON
a reír. 
(CdE:19-F, El último vuelo del pájaro...) 
everyone CL.3
rd
throw.3
rd
.pl to laugh.inf
‘Everyone started to laugh’ 
(198) …el prudente animal 
ECHÓ
a correr… 
(CdE:19-F, Eme) 
the prudent animal throw.3
rd
to run.inf 
‘The sensible animal started to run.’ 
(199) …el niño 
ECHA
a andar… 
(CdE:19-F, La reindivicación del conde...) 
the boy throw to go/walk 
‘The boy got going’
There are 24 examples of this construction with 
echar
. It takes up almost a quarter of 
the sentences in the 400-sentence corpus for this verb. Note that unlike 
lanzar
which appears 
with 
se
-form clitics in most cases, 
echar
in the inchoative construction can sometimes appear 
with a clitic (197) and sometimes without (198-199). In general, the verbs that refer to 
emotional expression (
reír 
‘laugh’ and 
llorar 
‘cry’) appear with a clitic, while verbs refering 
to motion appear without a clitic (including 
andar 
‘go/walk’
, correr 
‘run’), though there are 
exceptions. 
Here, the appearance (or not) of the clitic is closer to that of a pronominal verb 
analysis. The inchoative periphrasis referring to laughing or crying cannot be causative. That 

---

128 | 
is, I cannot *
echarlo a llorar 
‘start him crying’. The clitic, then, does seem to be turning a 
normally causative verb (
echar
) into an inchoative one. 
The cases without clitics are also interesting. The combination of 
echar 
with motion 
verbs such as 
andar 
‘go/walk’
, correr 
‘run’
, caminar 
‘walk’ and even others such as 
funcionar
‘function/work’ can be causative: you can cause another object to begin running. 
The causative sentences have a direct object that is beginning the action (200). But even 
when the action is not causative, when the subject itself begins the action, there is no clitic 
(201). Compare the following sentences.
(200) …
ECHÓ
su caballo a correr… 
(CdE:19-F, Cuentos de muerte y de sang...) 
threw his horse to run.inf 
‘He made his horse run.’ 
(CdE:19-F, Kensington Gardens) 
(201) … 
ECHÓ
a correr por el parque. 
threw to run.inf by the park 
‘He started running through the park’ 
Neither example includes a clitic. Notice that in (200) the verbal action is causative: a 
person is causing another entity (a horse in this case) to begin running. In (201), in contrast, 
there is no causation: the individual himself is beginning to run. Yet, there is no syntactic 
element that marks a change from causative to non-causative. If there is a direct object (200) 
the verbal periphrasis is causative; if there is no direct object (201) then it is not causative.
This is the first case, I believe, where the behavior of a verb does not line up in a 
somewhat predictable way to the 
THROWING 
schema. If we assume that 
a correr 
‘to run’ is a 
DIRECTIONAL
as I have up to this point, the sentences in (200) and (201) line up differently 
with the 
THROWING 
schema. Take the following adaptations of examples (200) and (201): 
(202) 
INITIATOR 
VERB
MOVANT
DIRECTIONAL
Él 
echó 
su caballo 
a correr 
(203) 
MOVANT
VERB
DIRECTIONAL
Él 
echó
a correr 
If 
echar 
were determining the behavior of the participant roles, we should see a 
consistent pattern that lines up with the causative 
THROWING 
schema. In all the previous 
schemas discussed in this paper, there has always been an 
INITIATOR
, related however 
abstractly to the 
THROWING 
schema. This does not seem to be the case in the verbal 
inchoative phrases, especially those such as (203). 

---

129 | 
Verbal inchoative periphrases are common to the language. The preferable analysis 
would be to state that there is a (family of) general inchoative schema(s) that applies to a 
wide variety of verbs. The verb 
echar
is incorporated into this general inchoative schema. 
The verb does not maintain all its participant roles, nor does the verb itself determine when 
clitics will be utilized. In general, the use of a clitic seems to correspond to the appearance of 
specific infinitival verbs: verbs of emotion use clitics, while verbs of motion do not.
Echar
is partially grammaticalized in the verbal inchoative construction
28
. Where the 
inchoative constructions with 
lanzar
still evoke a sense of motion, of throwing oneself, this 
notion seems less apparent with 
echar
. Where 
lanzar
in general keeps its participant roles, 
and the semantic structure does not change considerably from a “normal” non-inchoative 
sentence, 
echar
’s inchoative sentences show a slightly different structure. 
Of course this does not mean that 
echar
is completely devoid of meaning in these 
inchoative phrases. Quesada (1993:102) argues that the fact that a verb can be sensitive to the 
choice of infinitival verb means that the semantics of the initial verb are maintained. In our 
case, 
echar
does seem to limit the types of aspectual 
DIRECTIONALS
it can combine with. 
Though the majority of the semantic weight of 
echar 
is lost in these inchoative constructions 
(e.g. it does not mean ‘to throw’ and it does not maintain all its participant roles), some 
aspects of the verb’s meaning and behavior are maintained in the inchoative phrases.
I have maintained throughout that these aspectual phrases are extensions from the 
DIRECTIONAL
. In the case of the time period aspectuals seen with 
arrojar
and the nominal 
action aspectuals with 
lanzar
this seems to be correct. In each case, time and actions are 
conceived as places that one can move to.
(CdE:19-F, Salón de Té Volvoreta) 
(204) Y ambos se 
ARROJAN