Advertisement

Interaction of Telicity and Degree Gradation in Change of State Verbs

  • Jens Fleischhauer
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy book series (SLAP, volume 93)

Abstract

The paper discusses the degree gradation of verbs in German by the adverb sehr (very, very much). The main focus of the paper is on the gradation of change of state verbs and the interaction of degree gradation and telicity. It is argued that the gradability of telic change of state verbs supports the distinction between a standard and a maximum telos based on the analysis of Kearns 2007. A maximum telos is identical to a maximal scale value, while a standard telos marks a non-maximal degree. The general assumption is that a telos can be analyzed as a specified standard value. To maintain the analysis, additional data from Russian and French are provided which show that the gradability of change of state verbs depends on the kind of telos of the respective verb.

Keywords

State Verb Maximal Scale Comparative Result State Substance Emission Homomorphic Mapping 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research for this paper was supported by the German Science Foundation (DGF) grant FOR 600, Research Unit “Functional Concepts and Frames.” I would like to thank Adrian Czardybon, Thomas Gamerschlag, Wilhelm Geuder, Sebastian Löbner, Stefanie Schulze, the participants of the “Workshop on the Subatomic Semantics of Event Predicates” in Barcelona and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and Aurélien Jarry, Anja Latrouite, Nikolaj Skorolupov, Pavel Sirotkin and Anselm Terhalle for their help with the French and Russian data.

References

  1. Bierwisch, Manfred. 1989. The semantics of gradation. In Dimensional adjectives, eds. Manfred Bierwisch, and Ewald Lang, 71–216. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bitextina, G.A. 1975. On the use of očen’ and related adverbs. The Slavic and East European Journal 19(2):205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. Degree words. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  4. Borer, Hagit. 2005. Some notes on the syntax of quantity. In Aspectual inquiries, eds. Paula Marie Kempchinsky, and Roumyana Slabakova, 41–68. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borik, Olga. 2006. Aspect and reference time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breindl, Eva. 2009. Intensitätspartikel. In Handbuch der deutschen Wortarten, ed. Ludger Hoffmann, 397–422. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  7. Caudal, Patrick. 2005. Degree scales and aspect. In Crosslinguistic views on tense, aspect and modality. Cahiers Chronos 13, eds. Bart Hollebrandse, Angeliek van Hout, and Co Vet, 103–118. Amsterdam/Paris/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  8. Caudal, Patrick, and Nicolas, David. 2005. Types of degrees and types of event structure. In Event arguments: foundations and applications, eds. Claudia Maienborn, and Angelika Wöllstein, 277–299. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  9. Doetjes, Jenny. 1997. Quantifiers and selection. Dordrecht: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.Google Scholar
  10. Doetjes, Jenny. 2008. Adjectives and degree modification. In Adjectives and adverbs, eds. Louise McNally, and Christopher Kennedy, 123–155. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dowty, David. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Filip, Hana. 2000. The quantization puzzle. In Events as grammatical objects, eds. Carol Tenny, and James Pustejovsky, 39–93. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Filip, Hana. 2007. Events and maximalization: the case of telicity and perfectivity. In Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect, ed. Susan Rothstein, 217–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  14. Forsyth, J. 1970. A grammar of aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gerber, Monika. 1984. Zur Graduierbarkeit russischer Verben. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Pädagogischen Hochschule Clara Zetkin Leipzig 1:43–46.Google Scholar
  16. Kearns, Kate. 2007. Telic senses of deadjectival verbs. Lingua 117:26–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kennedy, Christopher. 1999. Projecting the adjective. Garland: New York.Google Scholar
  18. Kennedy, Christopher, and Beth Levin. 2008. Measure of change: the adjectival core of degree achievements. In Adjectives and adverbs, eds. Louise McNally, and Christopher Kennedy, 156–182. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kennedy, Christopher, and Louise McNally. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 82(2):345–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kirschbaum, Ilja. 2002. Schrecklich nett und voll verrückt - Muster der Adjektiv-Intensivierung im Deutschen. Dissertation Heinrich-Heine Universität Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
  21. Krifka, Manfred. 1989. Nominalreferenz und Zeitkonstitution. Zur Semantik von Massentermen, Individualtermen, Aspektklassen. München: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
  22. Krifka, Manfred. 1998. The origins of telicity. In Events and grammar, ed. Rothstein, Susan, 197–235. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Löbner, Sebastian. 1986. Quantification as a major modul of natural language semantics. In Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers, eds. Jeroen Groenendijk, Dick de Jeroen, and Martin Stokhof, 53–86. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  25. Löbner, Sebastian. 1990. Wahr neben Falsch. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Löbner, Sebastian. forthcoming. Subcompositionality. In The oxford handbook of compositionality, eds. Wolfram Hinzen, Edouard Machery, and Markus Werning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Löbner, Sebastian. in press. Dual oppositions in lexical meaning. In Semantics: an international handbook of natural language meaning (HSK), eds. Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  28. Obenauer, Hans-Georg. 1984. On the identification of empty categories. The Linguistic Review 4:153–202.Google Scholar
  29. Partee, Barbara, Alice ter Meulen, and Robert E. Wall. 1990. Mathematical methods in linguistics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Piñón, Christopher. 2005. Adverbs of completion in an event semantics. In Perspectives on aspect, eds. Henk Verkuyl, Henriette de Swart, and Angeliek van Hout, 146–166. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Piñón, Christopher. 2008. Aspectual composition with degrees. In Adjectives and Adverbs, eds. Louise McNally, and Christopher Kennedy, 183–219. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 2008. Lexicalized meaning and the internal temporal structure of events. In Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect, ed. Rothstein, Susan, 13–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  33. Rappaport Hovav, Malka, and Beth Levin. 2010. Reflection on manner/result complementarity. In Lexical semantics, syntax, and event structure, eds. Malka Rappaport Hovav, Edit Doron, and Ivy Sichel, 21–38. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ropertz, Ruth. 2001. Das wort sehr als Modifikator deutscher Adjektive und Verben. Magisterarbeit Universität Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
  35. Stiebels, Barbara. 1996. Lexikalische argumente and adjunkte. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
  36. Tenny, Carol. 1994. Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tsujimura, Natsuko. 2001. Degree words in Japanese. Lingua 111:29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Verbs and times. In Linguistics in philosophy, ed. Zeno Vendler, 97–121. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of General Linguistics, Institute of Language and InformationHeinrich-Heine Universität DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations