1,720,973 research outputs found
Verbal multi-word expressions in corpus languages: data, methodology, and analysis
No full textDatasets by contributors to the volume
Between lexicon and grammar?
Get PDFSynopsis:
This volume brings together corpora that span more than 3,000 years of the history of the Greek language, from Ittzés' chapter on the proto-language to Giouli's chapter on the modern language. The authors take wider or narrower approaches with regard to the form and function
of the type of construction that they include in the group of support-verb constructions: while all would agree that English to take initiative is a support-verb construction, opinions differ on English to take wing. The chapters reflect a fascinating diversity of approaches to support-verb constructions, including Natural Language Processing, Comparative Philology, New Testament Exegesis, Coptology, and General Linguistics. The volume is structured along the three interfaces that support-verb constructions sit on, the syntax-lexicon, the syntax-semantics, and the syntax-pragmatics interfaces. We finish with four concrete avenues for further research. Faced with the diversity of approaches and the magnitude of disagreements arising from them when working with as internally diverse a group of constructions as support-verb constructions, we strive for in varietate unitas
Support-verb constructions in the corpora of Greek: between lexicon and grammar?
Get PDFThis volume brings together corpora that span more than 3,000 years of the history of the Greek language, from Ittzés' chapter on the proto-language to Giouli's chapter on the modern language. The authors take wider or narrower approaches with regard to the form and function
of the type of construction that they include in the group of support-verb constructions: while all would agree that English to take initiative is a support-verb construction, opinions differ on English to take wing. The chapters reflect a fascinating diversity of approaches to support-verb constructions, including Natural Language Processing, Comparative Philology, New Testament Exegesis, Coptology, and General Linguistics. The volume is structured along the three interfaces that support-verb constructions sit on, the syntax-lexicon, the syntax-semantics, and the syntax-pragmatics interfaces. We finish with four concrete avenues for further research. Faced with the diversity of approaches and the magnitude of disagreements arising from them when working with as internally diverse a group of constructions as support-verb constructions, we strive for in varietate unitas
Analytical and synthetic verbs. The lightness degree of ποιέω poiéō
Get PDFQuesto capitolo è incentrato sull’alternanza tra costruzioni analitiche, come παῖδας ποιοῦμαι paîdas poioûmai ‘generare figli’, e forme sintetiche equivalenti, come παιδοποιέω paidopoiéō ‘generare figli’. Le forme sintetiche sono qui considerate incorporazioni del nome in sincronia, in quanto il secondo elemento del composto è un verbo che può occorrere anche in forma libera. L’analisi dei dati (dal sec. V a.C. all’inizio del II d. C.) mostra che l’alternanza tra forme analitiche e sintetiche è determinata i) da ragioni semantiche, ossia dalla specificità del nome, nonché ii) da ragioni testuali di instaurazione del referente nel discorso, strettamente legate alla distribuzione dell’informazione. L’area di sovrapposizione tra costruzioni a verbo
supporto e incorporazioni, inoltre, riguarda solo i cosiddetti simple-event nominals, mentre i complex-event nominals, pienamente eventivi, non risultano mai incorporati. Le costruzioni analitiche che equivalgono a incorporazioni di nomi non eventivi non sono, invece, costruzioni a verbo supporto.This chapter focuses on the alternation between analytic constructions (e.g., παῖδας ποιοῦμαι paîdas poioûmai ‘to beget children’) and equivalent synthetic verbs (e.g., παιδοποιέω paidopoiéō ‘to beget children’). The synthetic forms are considered here as noun incorporations in synchrony, as the second element of the compound is a verb that can also occur as a free form. The analysis of data (from the 5th c. BC to the beginning of the 2nd c. AD) shows that the selection of either analytic or synthetic forms is made for (i) semantic reasons, i.e., the specificity of the noun, and (ii) textual reasons, i.e., the establishment of the
referent in the discourse, closely related to the information structure. Moreover, the overlapping between support-verb constructions and incorporations only concerns so-called simple-event nominals, whereas complex-event nominals, which are fully predicative, cannot be incorporated. Analytic constructions
equivalent to non-eventive noun incorporations are usually not support-verb constructions
‘I haven’t got a clue!’ Assessing negation in classical Greek support-verb constructions
Get PDFSupport-verb constructions are combinations of a verb and a noun that act as the predicate, as ‘made the suggestion’ in I made the suggestion that she join. They are frequent, variable, and ambiguous across texts, as well as language-specific in their lexical and syntactic properties. The article examines patterns of negation with δίκην δίδωμι ‘to pay the price for one’s actions’, ὅπλα ἔχω ‘to be armed’, and συμμαχίαν ποιέομαι ‘to ally up’ in classical literary Attic. Syntactically and lexically, support-verb constructions can behave like a word or like a syntagm. A word does not have an internal syntax but only an external one; a syntagm has an internal syntax. Negation in support-verb constructions can be achieved either morpho-syntactically or lexically as long as the syntagm character has not faded. Morpho-syntactically, support-verb constructions can be negated by drawing on their external or their internal syntax. Lexical negation can be achieved by means of negative verbs of realisation indicating a zero-degree of multiplication. If available for a support-verb construction, lexical negation appears to add a nuance of intensity; morpho-syntactic negation appears primarily in contrastive contexts
Celebrating diversity: the origins and pathways of three support-verb constructions
Get PDFSupport-verb constructions are combinations of a verb and a noun that fill the predicate slot of a sentence, such as to make a suggestion in I made the suggestion that she join us. While qualifying as semantic-lexemic phrasemes (collocations and idioms) in Mel’čuk’s Sens-Texte framework, they sit at the lexicon-syntax interface. They qualify as verbal multi-word expressions lexically speaking and form complex predicates syntactically. In classical and post-classical Greek, support-verb constructions form an internally heterogenous group of constructions, yet one that has existed since the earliest records of the language and survives into the modern variety. The present chapter capitalises on the over 2000 years of continuous written history of Greek, and the internal heterogeneity of the group of support-verb constructions, in that it investigates the origins and pathways of three members of this group in the literary (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae) and documentary (Duke Database of Documentary Papyri) corpora of Greek. The bulk of documentary texts dates from the 3rd c. BC onwards, whereas the earliest literary texts date from around the 8th c. BC. The variety of sources allows us to trace the three structures of interest through the centuries in varying environments and thus to trace traditions and independent developments. δίκην δίδωμι dikēn didōmi existed as a collocation ‘to give judgement(s)’ from archaic times and into the medieval period, in classical times, the idiom δίκην δίδωμι dikēn didōmi ‘to pay the price for one’s actions’ arose and became indexed for the technical and higher registers. In χάριν ἀπολαμβάνω kharin apolambanō ‘to receive a favour’, the prototypical compound ἀπολαμβάνω apolambanō seems to be diatopically and subsequently diastratically indexed but retreats into the higher registers after the classical period; the canonical simplex verb λαμβάνω lambanō predates it in early classical verse and postdates it. προσέχω τὸν νοῦν prosekhō ton noun exists as an idiom especially in medical discourse from at least classical times onwards but in parallel also as a pragmateme from archaic times onwards. Support-verb constructions are a pattern that is considered near universal in languages, such that especially the methodological tool of the support-verb-construction field developed and drawn upon in this chapter is transferable beyond Greek
‘To do or not to do’: Semi-lexical affixes in (post)classical Greek
Get PDFThe support verbs ποιέομαι poieomai ‘to do’ and τίθημι tithēmi ‘to put’ exist in bound and unbound forms from classical into medieval times, ποιέομαι poieomai as ποιέομαι poieomai and -ποιέομαι -poieomai, τίθημι tithēmi as τίθημι tithēmi and -θετέω -theteō. They differ from auxiliaries, in that they are semi-lexical as they contribute to the event structure of the verb phrase. The article draws on the literary corpus of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae and the documentary corpus of the Duke Database of Documentary Papyri to answer three research questions: (i) Are support verbs the unbound alternative of bound affixes? (ii) How do semi-lexical support verbs become semi-grammatical affixes? (iii) Why did -ποιέομαι -poieomai ‘to do’ and -θετέω - theteō ‘to put’ not become productive? It finds that the bound and unbound forms of the support verb differ in the semantics of the lexical unit and its pragmatic embedding. Through the univerbation of leader words and their subsequent reanalysis, a new word-formation pattern emerges, which never becomes productive but is available as a creative option especially in technical registers (akin to English readable alongside established legible) from the Ptolemaic/Roman periods onwards. This new word-formation pattern involves a semi-lexical affix, just like the unbound support verb
Bilingual letter writers: the verbs γράφω, οἶδα, and θαυμάζω in formulae, idioms, and collocations
Get PDFSupport‐verb constructions with objects: Greek‐Coptic interference in the documentary papyri?
Get PDFSupport-verb constructions are combinations of a verb and a noun that fill the predicate slot, for example, to make a suggestion in I made the suggestion yesterday. The article examines direct-object structures with support-verb constructions in Greek documentary papyri from fourth- to mid-seventh-century Egypt. By the fourth century, Greek and Egyptian (at this stage called Coptic) had co-existed in Egypt for about a millennium and the latter was gaining ground. The article focusses on the support-verb-construction families surrounding ἐξουσίαν exousian ‘power’ and ἐγγύην egguēn ‘surety’ as well as on a selection of structures with ποιέομαι poieomai ‘to do’. The article finds that direct-object structures in the data sample have differing explanations. Direct-object patterns are a marginal pattern in classical Greek already, such that some patterns can be explained by inheritance or the extension of a pattern to new contexts. However, some writers either idiolectally or sociolectally applied object patterns more widely based on the Coptic parallel. The syntax of support-verb constructions in Greek does not run counter to the verbal syntax otherwise, which may aid the fact that they do not introduce systemic changes
Do good or suffer evil: syntactic nominalisations in verbal multi-word expressions in the PARSEME GRC corpus
No full textThe PARSEME GRC guidelines distinguish between Light-Verb Constructions, such as to make a suggestion, and Verbal Idioms, such as to kick the bucket. Light-Verb Constructions need to contain a nominal element that is abstract and predicative. Verbal Idioms are lexically, morphologically, morphosyntactically, and syntactically inflexible. Syntactic nominalisations as the nominal element are usually disregarded especially in Light-Verb Constructions due to their structural and functional ambiguity. (Post)classical Greek has productive morpho-syntactic means for the nominalisation of any part of speech which are not restricted e.g. diatopically or distratically, whereas lexical nominalisation by means of derivational morphology is more restricted. This makes the exclusion of syntactic nominalisations seem artificial. When considering the eventiveness of the nominal component the crucial characteristic it emerges that non-deverbal and underived event nouns, including syntactic nominalisations, can in fact be predicative nouns in verbal multi-word expressions. Syntactic nominalisations can appear as predicative nouns in Light-Verb Constructions along with forming part of Verbal Idioms. Synchronically, verbal multi-word expressions containing a syntactic nominalisation can be gap fillers, indexical alternatives, or semantico-pragmatic alternatives to structures with a lexical nominalisation. The study is primarily based on the PARSEME GRC and ECF Leverhulme Sketch Engine corpora of literary classical Attic philosophical prose, historiography, and oratory
- …
