The Blackwell Companion to Syntax

This paper presents an analysis of bare nominals unmarked for number (BNs) occurring in object position in Spanish and Catalan, on which the BN is a syntactic complement to the verb, but not a semantic argument. After describing the properties that distinguish BNs from other indefinite expressions (bare plurals, indefinite singulars preceded by un 'a', and bare mass terms), we argue that these BNs occur in a monadic syntactic configuration in the sense of Hale & Keyser (1998), that they denote first-order properties, and that they are combined with the verb via a modified version of Dayal's ( 2003 ) semantics for pseudo-incorporation. Specifically, the proposal consists of a lexical rule that generates the class of verbs that productively accept BN objects, plus a composition rule that treats the BN as modifier of the verb. We point out the advantages of this analysis over three other well-known semantic analyses for combining verbs with property-type nominals. Finally, we show how the analysis can be naturally extended to existential sentences, which combine with BNs although, prima facie, they do not appear to meet the lexical conditions for doing so.

/pdf/bare-nominals-and-incorporating-verbs-in-spanish-and-catalan-1hclwyhp5p.pdf

Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan

In this paper, we argue that by making a careful distinction between the notions of inchoativity and telicity, we can gain new insight into how changes of state can be expressed in natural language. Our argument is based on an analysis of Spanish reflexive psychological verbs (SRPVs) such as aburrirse ‘to be/become bored’ and enfadarse ‘to become angry.’ We present diagnostics that clearly support the claim that while these verbs are inchoative, they are not telic, nor do they denote changes of state. Additional tests indicate that these verbs are not dynamic, either; however, we show that they lack dynamicity for different reasons: aburrirse verbs, because they are stative; enfadarse verbs, because they denote truly punctual eventualities. We present a formal semantic analysis using the event ontology proposed in Pinon (1997). This analysis allows us to capture very naturally the similarities and differences between the two subclasses of SRPVs, to characterize their inchoativity, and to distinguish it from telicity. In addition, it supports a view of the Vendlerian aspectual classes on which the achievement class describes truly punctual eventualities and excludes certain predicates commonly (if not universally) assumed to belong to this class, such as the so-called degree achievement verbs.

/pdf/inchoativity-change-of-state-and-telicity-evidence-from-4p60sk91wk.pdf

Inchoativity, change of state, and telicity: evidence from Spanish reflexive psychological verbs

How do children develop bilingual competence? Do bilingual children develop language in the same way as monolinguals? Set in the context of findings on language development, this book examines the acquisition of English and Spanish by two brothers in the first six years of their lives. Based on in-depth and meticulous analyses of naturalistic data, it explores how the systems of both languages affect each other as the children develop, and how different levels of exposure to each language influence the nature of acquisition. The author demonstrates that the children's grammars and lexicons follow a developmental path similar to that of monolinguals, but that cross-linguistic interactions affecting lexical, semantic and discourse-pragmatic aspects arise in Spanish when exposure to it diminishes around the age of four. The first of its kind, this original study is a must-read for students and researchers in bilingualism, child development, language acquisition and language contact.

Bilingual Language Acquisition: Spanish and English in the First Six Years

Part I. Preliminaries: 1. Introduction 2. Terminology and methodology: 2.1 Terminology 2.2 Methodology Part II. Data: 3. Event/result nominalizations: 3.1 Previous claims 3.2 Nineteen questions 3.3 Adding it all up 4. Nominalizations as a derivational ecosystem: 4.1 The derivational ecosystem 4.2 Forms and readings 4.3 Inanimate patient nouns 4.4 Conclusion Part III. Nominalization within the LSF: 5. A lexical semantic approach to nominalization: the basics: 5.1 Recap of the LSF 5.2 E versus R skeletons: a first pass 6. The eventive reading: 6.1 ATK nominalizations with the eventive reading 6.2 -ing nominalizations 6.3 Conversion nouns 6.4 A note on simplex nouns 6.5 Conclusion 7. Referential readings: 7.1 Basic skeletons 7.2 Referential readings for ATK, -ing, and conversion Ns 7.3 Personal and participant nominalizations 7.4 Abstract nominalizations 7.5 Collectives 7.6 Underpopulated habitats 7.7 Modal and evaluative elements of affixal meaning 7.8 Conclusion 8. Nominalizations and compounding in the LSF: 8.1 Claims 8.2 The corpus data 8.3 The LSF analysis 8.4 Conclusions and loose ends 9. Nouns in the wild.

English Nouns: The Ecology of Nominalization

Most of the literature devoted to the study of deverbal nominalizations concentrates on the complex event reading (e.g. La concentracion de particulas tiene lugar a temperatura ambiente ‘The concentration of particles takes place at room temperature’) and the object reading (e.g. El paciente tenia concentraciones de calcio en el hombro ‘The patient had calcium concentrations in the shoulder’), while nominalizations denoting states (e.g. La concentracion de Sherlock Holmes duro cinco horas ‘Sherlock Holmes’ concentration lasted five hours') have remained, in general, understudied. In this paper we present their empirical properties and argue that, despite the empirical differences, state nominalizations and event nominalizations can receive a unified account. We show that in Spanish, Catalan, French, English and German the question of whether a deverbal nominalization denotes a state or an event, or is ambiguous between both readings depends on independent properties of the verbal base, allowing us to propose a unified account of both classes of nominalizations: the productive nominalizers in these languages can only denote the aspectual notions contained in the base's Aktionsart. We further argue that other languages, like Slovenian, have productive nominalizers that can operate over the external aspect of the predicate; in these cases, the nominalization can denote aspectual notions not contained in the base's Aktionsart.

/pdf/the-role-of-aktionsart-in-deverbal-nouns-state-265zaojqgy.pdf

The role of aktionsart in deverbal nouns: State nominalizations across languages

Aspectual notions, although displayed most clearly in verbs, manifest across categories, with notions like (un)boundedness manifesting themselves in several instantiations which are sometimes specific of individual grammatical categories. This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on how aspectual notions emerge in different categorial domains by an analysis of subjectexperiencer and object-experiencer psychological predicates (SEPVs and OEPVs, respectively). We review the evidence that SEPVs denote individual level (IL) states, and provide new facts –taken from the behaviour of participles– in favour of that diagnostic; we also argue that OEPVs should be classified as states of the stage level (SL) class. We argue that OEPVs denote states with an onset, which corresponds to the denotation of SLs. SEPVs simply denote states without boundaries, which we argue to correspond to IL predicates. Finally, we show how these two denotations follow without further assumptions from the structures proposed for SEPVs and OEPVs in previous work, specially Pesetsky (1995), making it unnecessary to postulate that the distinction is of lexical nature. 1. Aspect, structure and the nature of psychological predicates In the last years, it has become clear that the aspectual properties of predicates cross-cut categorial boundaries, and are defined through a shared vocabulary of primitives –like boundedness– which is not exclusive to verbs. Since the seminal work of Bach (1976) and Mourelatos (1978), a number of authors have pointed out that adjectives, nouns, verbs and prepositions are sensitive to the same kind of aspectual distinctions (Jackendoff 1991, Hale and Keyser 2002, Mateu 2002, Rothstein 2004, Borer 2005), with notions like (noun) (un)countability relating closely to (verbal) (a)telicity or the (adjectival) (un)closedness of a scale. The idea that aspectual notions are not inherent to a specific grammatical category suggests that aspect is built through the interaction of primitive notions. A system where aspect is part of the lexical entry of individual categories, or a set of features depending on specific categories, would not straightforwardly make the prediction that aspect is found across categories. The obvious alternative is to associate aspect to the syntactic configurations that heads produce when they combine with each other or, along the same lines, to interpretative rules that transform those structures into semantic notions at the ConceptualIntentional Interface (as done in Ramchand 2008 or MacDonald 2008). This last option is the one that we will argue for in this paper: the structural configuration of a lexical category –in our case, verbs– defines crucial aspectual properties and allows us to derive, rather than postulate, the aspectual behaviour of verbs whose argument structure is known. Inherent to this enterprise are the cases where aspectual properties are preserved across categories, as it is observed for psychological predicates. The empirical core of this paper is the generalization that subject-experiencer psychological verbs (henceforth SEPV) (1) behave as Individual-Level predicates (IL, Carlson 1977), while object-experiencer psychological verbs (OEPV) (2) behave as StageLevel predicates (SL). (1) amar ‘love’; adorar ‘adore’; admirar ‘admire’; envidiar ‘envy’; temer ‘fear’; odiar ‘hate’; detestar ‘detest’; lamentar ‘regret’; sentir ‘feel’; esperar ‘hope’; aborrecer ‘loathe’; disfrutar ‘enjoy’; gozar ‘take delight’; sufrir ‘suffer’; ansiar ‘long for’; ambicionar ‘have an ambition’; tolerar ‘bear’; padecer ‘suffer’; arrostrar ‘face up to’; sobrellevar ‘bear’; resistir ‘resist’; anhelar ‘long for’; venerar ‘worship’; estimar ‘appreciate’; codiciar ‘covet’; desear ‘wish’; querer ‘want’; confiar ‘trust’; desconfiar ‘mistrust’; recelar ‘mistrust’; abominar ‘abhor’; apreciar ‘appreciate’; despreciar ‘scorn’; execrar ‘scorn’; deplorar ‘regret deeply’. (2) aliviar ‘soothe’; asombrar ‘amaze’; asustar ‘frighten’; atemorizar ‘frighten’; aterrorizar ‘frighten’; contrariar ‘upset’; (des)motivar ‘(de)motivate’; entretener ‘entertain’; espantar ‘scare’; excitar ‘agitate’; fastidiar ‘bother’; molestar ‘bother’; perturbar ‘unsettle’; sorprender ‘surprise’; aburrir ‘bore’; acongojar ‘distress’; afligir ‘afflict’; angustiar ‘distress’; anonadar ‘bewilder’; apasionar ‘fascinate’; apenar ‘sadden’; apesadumbrar ‘sadden’; cabrear ‘piss off’; compungir ‘to cause remorse’; conmocionar ‘stun’; consternar ‘dismay’; deprimir ‘depress’; desesperar ‘exasperate’; disgustar ‘upset’; enfadar ‘upset’; enfurecer ‘to infuriate’; enojar ‘upset’; enorgullecer ‘fill with pride’; entristecer ‘sadden’; entusiasmar ‘fill with enthusiasm’; fascinar ‘fascinate’; (des)ilusionar ‘(dis)illusion’; indignar ‘anger’; interesar ‘interest’; mosquear ‘piss off’; obnubilar ‘daze’; obsesionar ‘obsess’; ofuscar ‘dazzle’; preocupar ‘worry’. The first part of the generalization has already been proposed in the literature (most notably in Kratzer 1995); the second part of the generalization, to the best of our knowledge, is new. 1 This strong claim will let us dig deeper into the nature of the IL/SL contrast in grammar, and more specifically, into how the two kinds of states denoted by these predicates should be differentiated. We will argue that IL predicates are pure states, without boundaries, while SL predicates include –or at least presuppose– a (left) boundary (Pinon, 1997). Finally, we will show that this distinction between SEPVs and OEPVs does not need to be postulated lexically: it can derive from common assumptions and previous proposals about the distinct syntactic structure of these two classes of psychological predicates. The core claims of this paper can be summarized as follows. First, we will argue that there is a core involved in all formal psych verbs (3a): a mental state which relates the experiencer with the entity towards which this state is targeted. This simply corresponds to the structure of a SEPV. OEPVs are built over this core by adding an additional layer codifying causation, but without any dynamic part involved in the event structure –that is, there is no process– (3b). Several predictions diagnosing a higher structural complexity for OEPVs are shown to support this proposal.

/pdf/deriving-individual-level-and-stage-level-psych-verbs-in-698jdt77uu.pdf

Deriving individual-level and stage-level psych verbs in Spanish

The present paper reexamines the relationship between the two Spanish copulas ser “be” and estar “be. locative ” and the i-level/s-level contrast. It is shown that the compatibility with the copulas does not yield an adequate classification of adjectives as i-level or s-level, if this distinction is defined in terms of boundedness. Additional criteria for boundedness have to be taken into account, namely the compatibility (i) with certain pseudo-copular verbs, (ii) with adjunct predicates and (iii) with absolute constructions. Adjectives like enfermo (‘ill’), which in addition to their compatibility with estar can appear in all these contexts, can be properly considered bounded. Among so-called ambivalent adjectives at least two types can distinguished: nervioso (‘nervous’) type adjectives are compatible with ser and are also allowed in any of the other s-level-contexts, while viejo (‘old’) type adjectives allow ser and estar , but do not pass any of the other tests for boundedness.

Spanish adjectives within bounds

Entre ser y estar

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

We encountered an error while loading the panel. Please try refreshing the page.

Something went wrong

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

Anyone with the link can view this chat. You can switch it back to private anytime.

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Rafael Marín

Author Tools

Chat about Author