Lexical Aspect in Persian Denominal Complex Predicates

زبانشناسی و گویش های خراسان

Article 7, Volume 13, Issue 2 - Serial Number 25, March 2022, Pages 167-194   

Document Type: Original Article

DOI: 10.22067/jlkd.2022.74192.1079

Authors

Hassan Barzegar¹; Mahinnaz Mirdehghan Farashah^{* 2}; Gholamhossein Karimidoostan³

¹Shahid Beheshti University

²Department of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

³Department of Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The study of Lexical Aspect in Persian Complex Predicates has been a controversial topic in recent years. As far as telicity is concerned, there are two contrasting approaches in this field: one in which the “Preverbal elements”, including nouns, adjectives, and prepositional phrases, are considered to be determinant of telicity; and the other, in which “Light Verbs” are considered to be determinant. The present research is aimed to study the aspectual properties of Persian Denominal Complex predicates, and the role and contribution of its constituents in the aspectual properties of theses verbs. For this purpose, the First Phase Syntax is been used to divide the eventive nominal preverbs into two main classes, including process and achievement nouns. Evidences have been provided showing that telicity in eventive denominal CPrs is determined by the event structure of the nominal preverb. Therefore, CPrs which benefit from a process preverb are all atelic, due to the non-bounded nature of the nominal, while those with achievement nominals are all telic, due to the bounded event structure of their preverbal element. The result of this study illustrates that light verbs are neutral in determining the telicity of Persian Complex Predicates. Moreover, it shows that some CPrs with eventive nominals are atelic.

Keywords

Lexical Aspect; Telicity; Complex Predicates; First Phase Syntax

References

برزگر, حسن و کریمی‌دوستان، غلامحسین  (1396). نمود واژگانی در افعال مرکب مشتق از صفت در زبان فارسی؛ پژوهش‌های زبانی، دوره 8(1)، ص 41-57.

2 - دبیرمقدم، محمد (1376)، فعل مرکب در زبان فارسی، مجلة زبانشناسی، سال 12، ش 1و2، ص 2-46.

3 - صادقی، علی اشرف (1372)، «شیوه‌‌ها و امکانات واژه‌سازی در زبان فارسی معاصر»، نشر دانش، سال سیزدهم، شماره 1، ص 12-18.

4- Alexiadou, A. (2001). Functional structure in nominals: nominalization and ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

5- Alexiadou, A. (2007). "Argument structure in nominals". In Noun Phrase in the Generative Perspective, Artemis Alexiadou et al. (eds.), 477–546. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

6- Bailyn, J.F. and Bailyn, J.F. (2012). The syntax of Russian. Cambridge University Press.

Bašić, M. (2010). On the morphological make-up of nominalizations in Serbian. In. Alexiadou, A. and Rathert, M. Ed. The Syntax of Nominalizations across Languages and Frameworks. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 39-66.

7- Borer, H., (2005). Structuring sense: Volume 1: In name only (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

8- Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

9- Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

10- Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.

11- Fabregas, A., and R. Marin. (2012).” The role of Aktionsart in deverbal nouns: State nominalizations across languages”. Journal of Semantics: 48: 35–70.

12- Fassi Fehri, A. (1993). Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and words. Vol. 29 of Studies in natural language and linguistic theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

13- Folli, R., H. Harley, S. Karimi. (2005). 'Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates', Lingua, 115:1365-1401.

14- Glanville, P. J. (2018). The Lexical Semantics of the Arabic Verb. OxfordUniversityPress.https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198792734.001.0001

15 - Harley, H. (2009). The morphology of nominalizations and the syntax of vP. In Quantification, Definiteness, and Nominalization, Anastasia Giannakidou and Monika Ratherteds (Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

16 - Harley, H. (2017). The bundling hypothesis and the disparate functions of little v. In. The verbal domain, Roberta D’Alessandro, Irene Franco, and Angel J. Gallego (eds.), 3–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

17- Hay, J., Ch. Kennedy, B. Levin. (1999). Scalar structure underlies telicity in degree achievements. In: Mathews, T., Strolovitch, D., (eds.), Proceedings of SALT IX. CLC Publications, Ithaca, pp. 127-144.

18 - Jackendoff, R. (1996). The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps even quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 14(2): 305–354.

19- Karimi, S. (1997). Persian complex verbs: Idiomatic or compositional. Lexicology, 3 (2): 273–318.

20- Karimi-Doostan, Gh. (1997). Light Verb Constructions in Persian. PhD Dissertation, University of Essex.

21- Karimi-Doostan, Gh. (2005). Light Verbs and Structural Case. Lingua 115:1737-1756.

22- Karimi-Doostan, Gh. (2008). "Event Structure of Verbal Nouns and Light verbs", in Karimi, Samiian, and Stilo (eds.) Aspects of Iranian Languages. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. 209-226.

23- Kennedy, Ch. and B. Levin. (2008). Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements. In L. MacNally and C. Kennedy, eds., Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics, and Discourse, Pp.  156–182. Oxford University Press.

24- Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In: Dimitriadis, A., Siegel, L. (eds.), University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics, 4(2), p.14.

25- Marantz, A. (2013). “Verbal argument structure “Lingua 130: 152-168.

Megerdoomian, K. (2001). Event Structure and Complex Predicates in Persian. In Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 46(1/2):97-125.

26- Megerdoomian, K. (2002). Beyond Words and Phrases: A Unified Theory of Predicate Composition. Doctoral dissertation: University of Southern California.

27- Pantcheva, M., (2009). “First phase syntax of Persian complex predicates: Argument structure and telicity”. Journal of South Asian Linguistics, 2.

28- Pustejovsky, J. (1991). “The syntax of event structure”, Cognition, 41: 47–81.

29 - Ramchand, G. (2008). Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax (Vol. 116).  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

30 - Rappaport Hovav, M. (2008). Lexicalized meaning and the internal temporal structure of events. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect (pp. 13–42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

31- Rothstein, S. (2004). Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect. Oxford: Blackwell.

32- Sleeman, P. & A. M. Brito. (2010a). “Nominalization, Event, Aspect, and Argument Structure: a Syntactic approach”. In M. Duguine, S. Huidobro & N. Madariaga (eds.), Argument Structure from a Crosslinguistic Perspective, 113-129. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

33- Sleeman, P. & Brito, A.M. (2010b). Aspect and argument structure of deverbal nominalizations: a split vP analysis. In A. Alexiadou & M. Rathert (eds.), Syntax of Nominalizations across Languages and Frameworks, 191-209. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

34- Tenny, C. 1987. Grammaticalizing aspect and affectedness. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.

35- Vahedi-Langrudi, M.M. (1996). The Syntax, Semantics and Argument Structure of Complex Predicates in Modern Farsi. Doctoral Dissertation: University of Ottawa.

36- Van Valin, R., and R. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

37- Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and Times. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 66, No. 2. (Apr., 1957), pp. 143-160.

38- Verkuyl, H. J. (1972). On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

39- Verkuyl, H.J. (1989). Aspectual classes and aspectual composition. Linguistics and philosophy, pp.39-94.

40- Verkuyl, H. J. (1993). A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.