Presentation on theme: "Anne Tamm anne.tamm AT unifi.it University of Florence Research Institute of Linguistics,Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest International Workshop."— Presentation transcript:
Anne Tamm anne.tamm AT unifi.it University of Florence Research Institute of Linguistics,Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest International Workshop on Semantic Roles Pavia, 19-20 May 2010 - Aula Scarpa
Do verbs instantiate semantic roles? What is the relationship between semantic roles and grammatical categories such as aspect, evidentiality, or modality?
Semantic role is a relation between a predicate and an argument. The relationship is encoded by a form with semantic and categorially specified content. The encoding may be done by case. The category that ”has” case may be a predicate. Many Uralic categories are between nouns and verbs. These mostly infinitival case forms are arguments of predicates that are itself predicates. So verbs can instantiate a semantic role, but how?
Ma lähe-n Pavia-sse/Tallinna. I[nom] go-1sg P-illative T.illative ‘I am going to Pavia/Tallinn.’
Ma lähe-n uju-ma. I[nom] go-1sg swim-m_illative ‘I am going swimming, I am going to swim.’ (# I’m gonna swim.)
Ma olen Pavia-s. I[nom] be-1sg P-inessive ‘I am in Pavia.’
Ma olen uju-mas. I[nom] be-1s swim-m_inessive ‘I am off swimming.’ (# I am swimming – progressive)
Ma tule-n Pavia-st. I[nom] come-1s P-elative ‘I am coming from Pavia.’
Ma tule-n uju-mast. I[nom] come-1s swim-m_elative ‘I am coming from swimming.’ (# Je viens de nager – I have just swum.)
Ma ole-n pileti-ta. I[nom] be-1s ticket-abessive ‘I don’t have a/the ticket, I am without a/the ticket.’
Ma ole-n uju-mata. I[nom] be-1s swim-m_abessive ‘I have not swum.’
The Uralic languages The role of case Cross-categorial case Non-finites as arguments and as predicates The transfer of the meaning of semantic roles of non-finites as arguments > TAM categories
Uralic languages are typically characterized by rich case systems with approximately 10 members, and many have case systems of approximately 15 or 20 cases. In WALS, there are 24 languages with more than 10 cases. The following languages have more than 10 cases in WALS: Awa Pit, Basque, Brahui, Chukchi, Epena Pedee, Estonian, Evenki, Finnish, Gooniyandi, Hamtai, Hungarian, Hunzib, Ingush, Kayardild, Ket, Lak, Lezgian, Martuthunira, Mordvin (Erzya), Nez Perce, Nunggubuyu, Pitjantjatjara, Toda, Udmurt. Five of those listed are Uralic (Erzya Mordvin, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, and Udmurt).
Languages with many non-finite forms tend to have rich case systems. The regularity can only partly be attributed to areal linguistic contacts, since it is observable, for instance, in the geographically distant Caucasian and Australian languages. There is no reason to assume a generalization with the strength of a language universal. Non-finite forms frequently originate from case- marked non-finite verb forms, which are complements originally but develop further into base predicates of larger predicate complexes. These complexes develop case-related semantics and modal meanings.
Attaches to nouns, and in languages with adjective-noun agreement, to adjectives Attaches to verbs Attaches to verbs with a nominalizing suffix Attaches to verbs with a nominalizing suffix, forming infinitives and in- between forms
Verb stems (Udmurt V+abessive) Nominalizations (Udmurt cases V+m+case, V+n+case) Parts of non-finites (Finnic, the case formants are part of a morpheme of a non-finite verb) Selkup infinitive marker: V+translative
1. Nominative book raamat 2. Genitive of a book raamatu 3. Partitive (of) a book raamatu-t 4. Illative into the book raamatu-sse 5. Inessive in a book raamatu-s 6. Elative from (inside) a bookraamatu-st 7. Allative onto a bookraamatu-le 8. Adessive on a bookraamatu-l 9. Ablative from the bookraamatu-lt 10. Translative in(to), as a bookraamatu-ks 11. Terminative until a bookraamatu-ni 12. Essive as a bookraamatu-na 13. Abessive without a bookraamatu-ta 14. Comitative with a bookraamatu-ga
productivepartitiveprtcpl-vat-vat-infinitive productive...-da -t-infinitive Historicalinstructive-da... Gerundive Historical, productive-s, inessive-da-desGerundive Historical, productive-ta, abessive-ma-mataAbessive of the m-infinitive Artificial, productive-ks, translative-ma-maksTranslative of the m-infinitive Dialectal, Finnish-Livonian-lt, ablative-ma(-malt)Ablative of the m-infinitive Dialectal-l(a), adessive-ma-mallaAdessive of the m-infinitive Coast dialectal-le, allative-ma-malleAllative of the m-infinitive Historical, productive-st, elative-ma-mastElative of the m-infinitive Historical, productive-s, inessive-ma-masInessive of the m-infinitive Historical, productive-, illative-ma Illative of the m-infinitive (supine) Diachronic statusCaseRelated form FormName
Uju-ma, uju-mas, uju-mast instantiate a different category from noun They are between verbs and nouns, infinitives and nominalizations (action nouns) They cannot be modified by an adjective, showing case agreement They cannot be pluralized But there are slight changes in the encoding of the argument NPs
Ta läks koju mütsi-ta ja salli-ta. She went home hat-abe and shawl-abe ‘She went home without a hat and a shawl.’ Ta läks koju mütsi-Ø ja salli-ta. She went home hat-Ø and shawl-abe ‘She went home without a hat and a shawl.’
Ta läks koju jooksmata ja kiirustamata. She went home run-m_abe and hurry-m_abe ‘She went home without running and hurrying.’ *Ta läks koju jooksma-Ø ja kiirustamata. She went home run-m-Ø and hurry-m_abe ‘She went home without running and hurrying.’
Having the same distribution with certain NPs ‘marked with the same case’ and instantiating the same semantic roles illative: goal, inessive: location, elative: source partitive: theme/patient The semantic role provides the semantic basis for the shift in the categorial status of the case marker
Perfective -- telic (push x to garage, give x to Mary) Imperfective – atelic (hear, see, believe x, push x to garage, give x to Mary) NO PARTITIVE PARTITIVE
Mari kuulisteda Maryheardhim/her.part koju tulevat. homecome-pers.pres.ptcp.partitive ‘Mary heard him/her come home.’
Mari nägi Jürit MarysawJ.part kojutule-mas. homecome-m_inessive ‘Mary saw George coming home.’
Mari tule-vat. M.nom come.pers.pres.participle.part ‘Allegedly/reportedly, Mary will come.’ Mari tuleb. M.nom come.3.sg ‘Mary will come.’
FULL EVIDENCE Incomplete EVIDENCE NO PARTITIVE EVIDENTIAL PARTITIVE EVIDENTIAL
When non-finites are case-marked, they can instantiate semantic roles. When non-finites are case-marked, they can instantiate semantic roles. This brings about the broadening of the meaning of the case and the rise of grammatical meanings. This brings about the broadening of the meaning of the case and the rise of grammatical meanings. The transfer of the meaning of cross-categorial case from an argument to the predicate or utterance domain retains elements of the meaning of the semantic role. The transfer of the meaning of cross-categorial case from an argument to the predicate or utterance domain retains elements of the meaning of the semantic role. I presented the parallels in the Source, Location, Goal, and Incremental Theme roles of case marked nouns and non- finites. I presented the parallels in the Source, Location, Goal, and Incremental Theme roles of case marked nouns and non- finites. I showed how the semantics of the incremental theme role transfers to the categories of aspect, epistemic modality and evidentiality I showed how the semantics of the incremental theme role transfers to the categories of aspect, epistemic modality and evidentiality