By Henk J. Verkuyl
Sentences might pertain to states or methods or occasions. they could show boundedness, period, repetition, frequency, and plenty of other kinds of temporality. How do they do that? Henk Verkuyl provides the following a thought approximately aspectual homes of sentences in traditional languages. A concept of Aspectuality brings jointly the fruit of his considering at the topic over the last two decades, and may curiosity all these engaged on element and the semantics of noun words. It delivers to be a tremendous contribution to our realizing of the topic.
Read Online or Download A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Atemporal Structure PDF
Best semantics books
This ebook provides a wealth of knowledge on probably the most attention-grabbing languages on the earth, such a lot of them little-known within the linguistics literature. the prestigious staff of authors have every one tested ''valency-changing mechanisms'' (phenomena together with passives and causatives) in languages starting from Amazonian Tariana to Alaskan Eskimo, from Australian Ngan'gityemerri to Tsez from the Caucasus.
Semantic Leaps explores how humans mix wisdom from diversified domain names which will comprehend and convey new rules. focusing on dynamic features of online which means building, Coulson identifies similar units of tactics: frame-shifting and conceptual mixing. by means of addressing linguistic phenomena frequently neglected in conventional which means study, Coulson explains how tactics of cross-domain mapping, frame-shifting, and conceptual mixing improve the explanatory adequacy of conventional frame-based structures for common language processing.
On Conditionals offers the 1st significant cross-disciplinary account of conditional (if-then) structures. Conditional sentences at once mirror the language user's skill to cause approximately choices, uncertainties, and unrealised contingencies. An figuring out of the conceptual and behavioural supplier concerned with the development and interpretation of those sorts of sentences accordingly presents primary insights into the inferential innovations and the cognitive and linguistic procedures of people.
The pioneering linguist Benjamin Whorf (1897--1941) grasped the dating among human language and human considering: how language can form our innermost suggestions. His easy thesis is that our belief of the realm and our methods of brooding about it are deeply motivated via the constitution of the languages we converse.
- Crosslinguistic Views on Tense, Aspect and Modality
- A Systemic Functional Grammar of French: From Grammar to Discourse
- By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective
- Metaphor and Discourse
Additional info for A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Atemporal Structure
1 don't believe it that John has been here in weeks. (46) a. " b. " English in weeks is a polarity sensitive item that needs negation to license it, as does Hindi hhii. This is shown by the fact that the adjoined CP's in (45a) and (46a) are ungrammatical as root clauses. The sentences also become unacceptable when matrix negation is deleted. Note now that negation in these sentences is crucially interpreted in the embedded clause, enabling PSI licensing to take place. 21 The question then becomes why neg-raising is blocked by the presence of a pronominal in (45b) and (46b).
2 non-finite complements, being gerunds, are not of the right category for wh expressions to take scope over them. They are, however, appropriate scope domains for quantifiers. This is shown in (47): (47) a. " b. " The universal cannot take scope over the existential in (47a). This shows that QR of har laRkaa "every boy" to the matrix is blocked, and further, that QR to the complement is possible. This contrasts with (4 7b) which has a direct question interpretation, showing movement of wh from embedded position to matrix Spec.
THE SCOPE OF HINDI WH 19 posItIon, specifically to spec of CP. (1 b) appears to lack such movement but Huang (1982) argued that, in fact, Chinese and English do not differ in that respect. As he pointed out, wh expressions in any language would have to move to spec of CP in order to ensure interpretation since they are quantificational expressions. While this occurs at S-structure in English it happens at LF in Chinese. The difference between English and Chinese, then, is not in the presence or absence of wh movement but in the level at which such movement takes place.
A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Atemporal Structure by Henk J. Verkuyl