Advertisement

Building complex events

The case of Sicilian Doubly Inflected Construction
  • Fabio Del PreteEmail author
  • Giuseppina Todaro
Article
  • 139 Downloads

Abstract

We examine the Doubly Inflected Construction of Sicilian (DIC; Cardinaletti and Giusti 2001, 2003; Cruschina 2013), in which a motion verb V1 from a restricted set is followed by an event verb V2 and both verbs are inflected for the same person and tense features. The interpretation of DIC involves a complex event which behaves as a single, integrated event by linguistic tests. Based on data drawn from different sources, we argue that DIC is an asymmetrical serial verb construction (Aikhenvald 2006). We propose an analysis of DIC in which V1 and V2 enter the semantic composition as lexical verbs, with V1 contributing a motion event and projecting a theme and a goal argument which are identified, respectively, with an agent and a location argument projected by V2. A morphosyntactic mechanism of feature-spread requires that the person and tense features be realized both on V1 and on V2, while, semantically, these features are interpreted only once, in a position from which they take scope over the complex predicate resulting from the combination of V1 and V2. The semantic analysis is based on an operation of event concatenation, defined over spatio-temporally contiguous events which share specific participants, and is implemented in a neo-Davidsonian framework (Parsons 1990).

Keywords

Doubly Inflected Construction Serial verb constructions Motion verbs Inflectional features Thematic structure Event semantics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank five anonymous NLLT reviewers for their helpful comments and the participants in CIDSM11 (Cambridge Italian Dialect Syntax-Morphology Meeting) in Vienna, in the workshop The profile of event delimitation at the 2016 SLE conference in Naples, and in an Institut Jean Nicod language seminar in Paris for invaluable feedback on previous versions of this work. We are grateful to Marta Abrusan, Patrícia Amaral, Valentina Aristodemo, Michel Aurnague, John Beavers, Basilio Calderone, Laura Caponetto, Vincenzo di Caro, Lucas Champollion, Silvio Cruschina, Carlo Geraci, Giuliana Giusti, Tatiana Nikitina, Philippe Schlenker, Jesse Tseng and Sandro Zucchi for discussion of specific aspects of our analysis and/or assessment of the empirical data.

References

  1. Accattoli, Matilde, and Giuseppina Todaro. 2017. Verbes de mouvement et grammaticalisation: le cas du sicilien vaffazzu. In Normes et grammaticalisation: Le cas des langues romanes, ed. Malinka Velinova, 187–210. Sofia: CU “Romanistika”. Google Scholar
  2. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2011. Multi-verb constructions: Setting the scene. In Multi-verb constructions: A view from the Americas, eds. Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and Pieter C. Muyske, 1–26. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar
  3. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2006. Serial verb constructions in a typological perspective. In Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology, eds. Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald and R. M. W. Dixon, 1–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  4. Ascoli, Graziadio I. 1896. Un problema di sintassi comparata dialettale. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 14: 453–468. Google Scholar
  5. Aurnague, Michel. 2011. How motion verbs are spatial: The spatial foundation of intransitive motion verbs in French. Lingvisticae Investigationes 34(1): 1–34. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker, Mark C. 1989. Object sharing and projection in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 20(4): 513–553. Google Scholar
  7. Bamgbose, Ayo. 1974. On serial verbs and verbal status. Journal of West African Languages 9(1): 17–48. Google Scholar
  8. Beaver, David, and Brady Z. Clark. 2008. Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. Explorations in semantics. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bertinetto, Pier Marco. 1989/1990. Le perifrasi verbali italiane: Saggio di analisi descrittiva e contrastiva. Quaderni Patavini Di Linguistica 8–9: 27–64. Google Scholar
  10. Bohnemeyer, Jürgen, Nick Enfield, James Essegbey, Iraide Ibarretxe, Sotaro Kita, Friederike Lüpke, and Felix K. Ameka. 2007. Principles of event encoding: The case of motion events. Language 83(3): 495–532. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bohnemeyer, Jürgen, Nick Enfield, James Essegbey, and Sotaro Kita. 2011. The macro-event property: The segmentation of causal chains. In Event representation in language and cognition, eds. Jürgen Bohnemeyer and Eric Pederson, 43–67. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  12. Cardinaletti, Anna, and Giuliana Giusti. 2001. ‘Semi-lexical’ motion verbs in Romance and Germanic. In Semi-lexical categories: The function of content words and the content of function words. eds. Norbert Corver and Henk van Riemsdijk, 371–414. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  13. Cardinaletti, Anna, and Giuliana Giusti. 2003. Motion verbs as functional heads. In The syntax of Italian dialects, ed. Christina Tortora, 31–49. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  14. Champollion, Lucas. 2015. The interaction of compositional semantics and event semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 38: 31–66. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: a cross-linguistic perspective. London: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  16. Collins, Chris. 1997. Agreement sharing in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 28(3): 461–497. Google Scholar
  17. Condoravdi, Cleo. 2002. Temporal interpretation of modals. In The construction of meaning, eds. David Beaver, Stefan Kaufmann, Brady Clark, and Luis Casillas Martínez. Palo Alto: CSLI Publications. Google Scholar
  18. Condoravdi, Cleo. 2003. Moods and modalities for Will and Would. Handout of a talk presented at the Amsterdam Colloquium 2003. Google Scholar
  19. Cormack, Annabel, and Neil V. Smith. 1996. Checking theory: features, functional heads, and checking-parameters. In UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 8, 1–40. Google Scholar
  20. Cruschina, Silvio. 2013. Beyond the stem and inflectional morphology: An irregular pattern at the level of periphrasis. In The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives, eds. Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden, and John C. Smith, 262–283. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Del Prete, Fabio. 2013. Imperfectivity and habituality in Italian. In Genericity, ed. Alda Mari, Claire Beyssade, and Fabio Del Prete, 222–249. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  22. Del Prete, Fabio, and Sandro Zucchi. 2017. A unified non monstrous semantics for third person pronouns. Semantics and Pragmatics 10: Article 10. Google Scholar
  23. Deo, Ashwini. 2010. Unifying the imperfective and the progressive: Partitions as quantificational domains. Linguistics and Philosophy 32 (5): 475–521. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Di Caro Vincenzo, N. 2014. Syntactic constructions with motion verbs in some Sicilian dialects: A comparative analysis, Master’s thesis, Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia. Google Scholar
  25. Di Caro Vincenzo, N., and Giuliana Giusti. 2015. A protocol for the inflected construction in Sicilian dialects. Annali di Ca’ Foscari: Serie Occidentale 49: 393–421. Google Scholar
  26. Dowty, David. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ernst, Thomas. 2016. Modification of stative predicates. Language 92: 237–274. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hacquard, Valentine. 2006, Aspects of modality, Ph.D. thesis, MIT. Google Scholar
  29. Heim, Irene. 1994. Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In Ellipsis, tense and questions, ed. Hans Kamp. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press. Google Scholar
  30. Heim, Irene, and Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar
  31. Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  32. Jaeggli, Osvaldo A., and Nina M. Hyams. 1993. On the independence and interdependence of syntactic and morphological properties: English aspectual come and go. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11: 313–346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kaplan, David. 1989. Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals. In Themes from Kaplan, eds. Joseph Almog, John Perry, and Howard Wettstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  34. Kratzer, Angelika. 2015. Creating a family: transfer of possession. Handout of a talk at the workshop modality across categories. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Google Scholar
  35. Krifka, Manfred. 1998. The origins of telicity. In Events and grammar, ed. Susan Rothstein. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Google Scholar
  36. Lee, Sook-Hee. 1992. The syntax and semantics of serial verb constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle. Google Scholar
  37. Lehmann, Christian. 2002. Thoughts on grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität. Google Scholar
  38. Leone, Alfonso. 1995. Profilo di sintassi Siciliana. Materiali e ricerche dell’Atlante linguistico della Sicilia, 3. Palermo: CSFLS. Google Scholar
  39. Magri, Giorgio. 2009. A theory of individual-level predicates based on blind mandatory scalar implicatures. Natural Language Semantics 17: 245–297. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Maiden, Martin. 2004. When lexemes become allomorphs: On the genesis of suppletion. Folia Linguistica 38: 227–256. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maienborn, Claudia. 2008. On Davidsonian and Kimian states. In Existence: Semantics and syntax. eds. Ileana Comorovski and Klaus von Heusinger, 107–130. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Manzini, Maria R., and Leonardo M. Savoia. 2005. I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso. Google Scholar
  43. Matsumoto, Yo. 1996. Complex predicates in Japanese: A syntactic and semantic study of the notion ‘word’. Stanford/Tokyo: CSLI Publications/Kurosio Publishers. Google Scholar
  44. Moltmann, Friederike. 2013. On the distinction between abstract states, concrete states, and tropes. In Genericity, eds. Alda Mari, Claire Beyssade, and Fabio Del Prete, 293–311. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  45. Nicolle, Steve. 2007. The grammaticalization of tense markers: A pragmatic reanalysis. Cahiers Chronos 17: 47–65. Google Scholar
  46. Parsons, Terence. 1990. Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  47. Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1994. Checking theory and bare verbs. In Paths towards universal grammar. Studies in honor of Richard S. Kayne, eds. Guglielmo Cinque, Jan Koster, Jean-Yves Pollock, Luigi Rizzi, and Raffaella Zanuttini, 293–310. Washington: Georgetown University Press. Google Scholar
  48. Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. A restructuring rule in Italian syntax. In Recent transformational studies in European languages, ed. J. Keyser, 113–158. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  49. Rohlfs, Gerhard. 1969. Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. vol. 3: Sintassi e formazione delle parole. Torino: Einaudi. Google Scholar
  50. Ross, John R. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT. Google Scholar
  51. Schächter, Paul. 1974. A non-transformational account of serial verb constructions. Studies in African Linguistics, Supplement 5: 153–271. Google Scholar
  52. Sebba, Mark. 1987. The syntax of serial verbs. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Shopen, Timothy. 1971. Caught in the act. In Papers from the seventh regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 254–263. Google Scholar
  54. Sornicola, Rosanna. 1976. Vado a dire, vaiu a ddicu: problema sintattico o problema semantico? Lingua Nostra 37(3): 65–74. Google Scholar
  55. Sorrento, Luigi. 1950. Sintassi romanza: Ricerche e prospettive. Milano: Cisalpino. Google Scholar
  56. von Stechow, Arnim. 1995. On the proper treatment of tense. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 5, eds. M. Simons and Teresa Galloway, 362–386. Google Scholar
  57. Sudo, Yasutada. 2012. On the semantics of Phi features on pronouns. Ph.D. diss., MIT. Google Scholar
  58. Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Todaro, Giuseppina, and Fabio Del Prete. 2019. The morphosyntax-semantics interface and the Sicilian doubly inflected construction. In Italian dialectology at the interfaces, ed. Silvio Cruschina, Ledgeway Adam, and Eva-Maria Remberger, 131–154. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar
  60. Wilder, C. 1997. Some properties of ellipsis in coordination. In Studies on universal grammar and typological variation, eds. Artemis Alexiadou and T. Alan Hall, 59–106. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNRS laboratory CLLE-ERSSToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations