|
contra los animales
…
a rooster throws his cock-a-doodle-doo strident against the animals
‘
A rooster
LAUNCHES
his strident cock-a-doodle-doo
against the animals
’
It is not the case that the noun decides on its own whether the LVC contains a
DIRECTIONAL
or not. It is still possible for the verb itself to coerce a
DIRECTIONAL
. For
example, a cock-a-doodle-doo is normally associated with one participant, the rooster who
produces the sound. Yet, the example LVC in (6) shows that the sound can be directed
towards another. In this case, the fact that
throw-
verbs normally have a
DIRECTIONAL
allows
this position to be expressed in the LVC.
The constructional schema should also describe the semantics associated with the
LVC. Previous analyses have suggested that the verb in LVCs provides little information
semantically, that its function is mostly grammatical (Alonso Ramos 2004:18, Fernández-
Soriano & Rigau 2009:141). Note, for example, that a single verb that is morphologically
related to the nominal in the LVC can express a similar situation as that expressed by the
LVC (Alonso Ramos 2004:24). Compare (7) (repeated from (3) above) and (8).
(7) …Mónica
me
ECHÓ
una mirada…
(CdE:19-F, El emisario)
‘Monica
THREW
me
a look’
(8) Monica me
MIRÓ
‘Monica
LOOKED
at me’
There is a semantic similarity between (7) and (8); if a speaker were asked to
paraphrase an LVC (7) the best choice would probably be to use the morphologically related
142 |
verb (8) (Alonso Ramos 2004:38-39). Examples (7) and (8) are functionally synonymous.
Though (7) and (8) are certainly not identical in meaning
33
, there is a morphological and
semantic similarity between the two sentences: they both describe a situation where Monica
looks at another individual. This similarity can be used to justify the view that the verb in the
LVC, in this case
echar
, adds little information semantically.
I would argue that examples (7) and (8) in fact show that the LVC verb does provide
semantics, even if very abstract. Both sentences can express the same event, hence their
functional synonymy, but they differ in the details. An important function of an LVC is that it
distributes the verbal meaning across more elements (Brugman 2001:556, citing Hopper
1991). What
miró
‘(s/he) looked’
expresses in a single word form,
echó una mirada
‘(s/he)
threw a look’ expresses in three word forms. This distribution highlights the concept of
transitiveness. An LVC expresses that there is a transitive action which originates in one
place and travels (metaphorically or literally) to another.
34
Specifically, the verb
echar
adds
the notion that there is an action that begins at the
INITIATOR
and moves in a direction (either
away from the
INITIATOR
or towards another entity). The nature of the action being performed
is specified by the
MOVANT
.
Previous researchers have also claimed that the verb adds abstract meaning. Brugman
(2001) argues that a verb maintains basic force-dynamic properties when used in an LVC.
Brugman (2001:563) also claims that the verbs in LVCs impose certain characteristics on the
type of subject. Stevenson et al. (2004) claim that the verb in the LVC maintains a subset of
the semantic features it has in non-LVC environments.
Broadly speaking, we can say that the semantics associated with the noun are
maintained in the LVC, while the semantics of the verb are more abstract and generic when
in the LVC. The overall semantic relation between the component parts (verb and noun) and
the composite structure (light verb construction) is shown in Figure 3. When the verb is
incorporated into the LVC it has a more abstract meaning compared to its more “normal”
uses. It maintains a general notion of motion, but it is a very abstract and metaphorical
meaning. It also for the most part maintains its participant roles.
33
One important difference is in telicity: (7) is telic and (8) is atelic. Sometimes (though not always) the LVCs
and the single verb differ in telicity. The issue of telicity is not addressed in this study, but is certainly a factor
that can be taken into account. Future research could explore the telicity of the
throw
-verbs.
34
The same notion of transitiveness is present in the simplex verb, but it is backgrounded.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
