Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs

Standard

Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. / Say, Sergey.

Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions. ed. / Katarzyna Janic; Alena Witzlack-Makarevich. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2021. p. 177-212 (Typological Studies in Language; Vol. 130).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Say, S 2021, Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. in K Janic & A Witzlack-Makarevich (eds), Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions. Typological Studies in Language, vol. 130, John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 177-212. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.130.06say

APA

Say, S. (2021). Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. In K. Janic, & A. Witzlack-Makarevich (Eds.), Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions (pp. 177-212). (Typological Studies in Language; Vol. 130). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.130.06say

Vancouver

Say S. Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. In Janic K, Witzlack-Makarevich A, editors, Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2021. p. 177-212. (Typological Studies in Language). https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.130.06say

Author

Say, Sergey. / Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs. Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions. editor / Katarzyna Janic ; Alena Witzlack-Makarevich. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2021. pp. 177-212 (Typological Studies in Language).

BibTeX

@inbook{4cf5c9cbd0ef439e80d812a7eafaec91,

title = "Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs",

abstract = "Descriptions of antipassive constructions in individual languages show that these constructions are often compatible with only a subset of transitive verbs. There are significant typological similarities between the sets of verbs that allow antipassivization. The following properties are typical of these verbs: (1) agentive A, (2) specification of the manner component in the verb meaning, (3) lack of inherent telicity (the transitive use can be compositionally transitive, but this is cancelled under antipassivization), (4) narrow class of potential Ps, and (5) affectedness of A. Verbs with all of the properties in (1)-(5), such as 'eat', constitute the core of {"}natural antipassives{"}, whereas verbs with only some of these properties are at the periphery of this class. Apart from being especially prone to enter antipassive constructions, the fuzzy class of natural antipassives is relevant for a number of phenomena. First, polyfunctional valency-related markers or constructions tend to yield antipassive reading when applied to natural antipassives. Second, natural antipassives tend to choose the less marked construction in languages with two antipassive constructions. Third, lexicalization of antipassives is more likely for verbs that lack natural antipassive properties, and a typical scenario of lexicalization involves coercion of some of these properties. Ultimately, I conjecture that it is the relevance of the P-argument for the meaning of the verb which accounts for the rarity of lexically unrestricted and semantically uniform antipassive constructions in the world's languages. c 2021 John Benjamins Publishing Company.",

keywords = "Affectedness, Agentivity, Antipassive, Lexical meaning, Lexicalization, Manner and result verbs, Productivity",

author = "Sergey Say",

year = "2021",

month = mar,

day = "15",

doi = "10.1075/tsl.130.06say",

language = "English",

series = "Typological Studies in Language",

publisher = "John Benjamins Publishing Company",

pages = "177--212",

editor = "Katarzyna Janic and Alena Witzlack-Makarevich",

booktitle = "Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions",

address = "Netherlands",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Antipassive and the lexical meaning of verbs

AU - Say, Sergey

PY - 2021/3/15

Y1 - 2021/3/15

N2 - Descriptions of antipassive constructions in individual languages show that these constructions are often compatible with only a subset of transitive verbs. There are significant typological similarities between the sets of verbs that allow antipassivization. The following properties are typical of these verbs: (1) agentive A, (2) specification of the manner component in the verb meaning, (3) lack of inherent telicity (the transitive use can be compositionally transitive, but this is cancelled under antipassivization), (4) narrow class of potential Ps, and (5) affectedness of A. Verbs with all of the properties in (1)-(5), such as 'eat', constitute the core of "natural antipassives", whereas verbs with only some of these properties are at the periphery of this class. Apart from being especially prone to enter antipassive constructions, the fuzzy class of natural antipassives is relevant for a number of phenomena. First, polyfunctional valency-related markers or constructions tend to yield antipassive reading when applied to natural antipassives. Second, natural antipassives tend to choose the less marked construction in languages with two antipassive constructions. Third, lexicalization of antipassives is more likely for verbs that lack natural antipassive properties, and a typical scenario of lexicalization involves coercion of some of these properties. Ultimately, I conjecture that it is the relevance of the P-argument for the meaning of the verb which accounts for the rarity of lexically unrestricted and semantically uniform antipassive constructions in the world's languages. c 2021 John Benjamins Publishing Company.

AB - Descriptions of antipassive constructions in individual languages show that these constructions are often compatible with only a subset of transitive verbs. There are significant typological similarities between the sets of verbs that allow antipassivization. The following properties are typical of these verbs: (1) agentive A, (2) specification of the manner component in the verb meaning, (3) lack of inherent telicity (the transitive use can be compositionally transitive, but this is cancelled under antipassivization), (4) narrow class of potential Ps, and (5) affectedness of A. Verbs with all of the properties in (1)-(5), such as 'eat', constitute the core of "natural antipassives", whereas verbs with only some of these properties are at the periphery of this class. Apart from being especially prone to enter antipassive constructions, the fuzzy class of natural antipassives is relevant for a number of phenomena. First, polyfunctional valency-related markers or constructions tend to yield antipassive reading when applied to natural antipassives. Second, natural antipassives tend to choose the less marked construction in languages with two antipassive constructions. Third, lexicalization of antipassives is more likely for verbs that lack natural antipassive properties, and a typical scenario of lexicalization involves coercion of some of these properties. Ultimately, I conjecture that it is the relevance of the P-argument for the meaning of the verb which accounts for the rarity of lexically unrestricted and semantically uniform antipassive constructions in the world's languages. c 2021 John Benjamins Publishing Company.

KW - Affectedness

KW - Agentivity

KW - Antipassive

KW - Lexical meaning

KW - Lexicalization

KW - Manner and result verbs

KW - Productivity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102999374&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/628f9dd1-94d4-3c59-a81b-a86f07597e1d/

U2 - 10.1075/tsl.130.06say

DO - 10.1075/tsl.130.06say

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85102999374

T3 - Typological Studies in Language

SP - 177

EP - 212

BT - Antipassive. Typology, diachrony, and related constructions

A2 - Janic, Katarzyna

A2 - Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena

PB - John Benjamins Publishing Company

ER -

ID: 75584616