33 |
(1)
…el grupo se lanzó al ataque
(CdE:19-F, “El domingo fusilan a Januar...”)
the group CL.3rd threw.3rd to.the attack
‘The group went on the attack’
(2)
…echó su caballo a correr
(CdE:19-F, “Cuentos de muerte y de sang...”)
threw his horse to run
‘S/he made her/his horse run’
I will argue that (1) can be understood as moving to a place of attack. A continuum
exists from the
meaning of moving to a place, moving to an activity, and beginning an
activity. This last meaning is salient in (2). Even though most
DIRECTIONALS
provide a
semantic
function, it is possible to view these phrases with grammatical function as
extensions of meaning and usage. This is in line with Brugman (2001:552) who states that it
is best to view grammatical function as continuous to semantic function, rather than opposed
to it. The examples are given here to show that phrases such as
al ataque
‘to the attack’ and
a
correr
‘to run’ are included in
DIRECTIONALS
.
See §4.3.5 for a full analysis of these cases.
Though there are differences in the terminology and possibly the definition of each
argument, several previous researchers have posited these same
three participants as core
arguments of (caused) motion verbs in general (Subirats 2004, Morante et al. 1998, Morimoto
2001) and of verbs that mean ‘to throw’ in particular (Levin 2008, ADESSE, Spanish
FrameNet).
The three roles can be seen quite clearly in the following sentence.
INITIATOR
VERB
MOVANT
DIRECTIONAL
(3) Bert
arroja
piedras
a su barquito
(CdE:19-F, Adam Birner)
‘Bert
throws
stones
at his little boat’
Bert is the thrower, the source of energy and the
INITIATOR
. The noun
piedras
‘stones’
represents the element that moves; it is the
MOVANT
. Finally, the phrase
a su barquito
‘at his
little boat’ describes the trajectory of the stones. This last element is the
DIRECTIONAL
.
It will become clear that the terms
INITIATOR
,
MOVANT
and
DIRECTIONAL
are meant to
be abstract, and cover a somewhat wide range of semantic participants. Conflating various
senses of a verb into a single category for the purpose of annotation does not mean that I
consider the meanings to be the same. It is a method for exploring
how differences in verb
meaning correspond to differences (or not) in the types of arguments expressed.
I begin by describing the 400-sentence corpus study (§3.1). I describe how the data
was collected and annotated and the statistical tools used to explore the results (§3.1.1). Next,
I describe a collostructional analysis (§3.2). It is a method for measuring the attraction of
34 |
each verb to frequently occurring nouns. I explain the theoretical
background for this study
and the statistical tools that are employed. Finally, I will detail the execution of a
questionnaire in Juticalpa, Honduras (§3.3). Within this
section I specify how the
questionnaire was constructed (§3.3.1) and a general overview of the respondents (§3.3.2). I
end by noting the statistical tests used in this final study (§3.3.3).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: