Unit 2 - 3. Resultative & Path of Motion Constructions

Name: Unit 2 - 3. Resultative & Path of Motion Constructions
Uploaded: 2021-11-12T22:44:48.000Z
Duration: 2 h 52 min 3 s

Understanding Conflation in Language Structures

Overview of Conflation and Its Importance

The discussion focuses on structures derived from conflation, specifically the path of motion construction and the resultative construction. It emphasizes the need to distinguish these constructions based on their derivation processes.

Verb Participation in Constructions

Verbs participating in these constructions do not display their root through merge or incorporation, which are fundamental grammatical processes. This indicates a unique derivational approach for these specific constructions.

Parallel Derivation Phenomenon

The root of verbs appears through a parallel derivation rather than local means, suggesting that completion can be viewed as incorporation across different argument structures. This concept will be examined parametrically between English and Spanish languages.

Path of Motion Construction Examples

Characteristics of Path of Motion in English

Path of motion constructions are highly productive in English and Germanic languages, illustrated by examples like "the doctor walked hastily down the hall" and "Mary shot across the fence." These sentences highlight how verbs take subjects and final locations termed goals rather than objects.

Role of Manner in Change of Location

In English, additional verbs describe how changes in location occur (e.g., manner), showcasing a phenomenon known as minor conflation where figures undergo uncaused or caused changes relative to a ground location. Examples include "Henry waltzed the princess onto the stage."

Comparative Analysis: English vs Spanish

Syntactic Differences Between Languages

The syntactic arrangement for expressing path of motion differs significantly between English and Spanish; direct translations often lead to ungrammatical constructs in Spanish due to its distinct handling of change versus permanence at locations. For instance, "Tom danced into the room" cannot be directly translated without altering meaning.

Semantic Components Retained Across Languages

Linguistic Distinctions Between Language Families

Overview of Language Classification

The discussion begins with a distinction between Germanic languages (like English, German, and Dutch) and Romance languages derived from Latin, noting that this classification is not always clear-cut.

Leonard Talmy's work in the 80s and 90s introduced the concepts of "verb frame" and "satellite frame" languages, where verb frame languages express path information within the verb itself.

Path Information in Languages

In satellite frame languages like English, path information is expressed outside the verb as a satellite. This results in a vacant transitional node for direction when conflation does not occur.

An example illustrates how English combines manner and motion ("Tom danced into the room") differently than Spanish, which separates these events into distinct expressions.

Syntactic Possibilities Across Languages

The syntactic structures available in English allow for conflating minor actions onto primitive predicates expressing change, while Spanish lacks this option.

The construction of uncaused path motion (e.g., "Tom danced into the room") highlights that arguments are selected by construal rather than directly by verbs.

Change of Location vs. Manner

All path motion constructions inherently express changes of location or state; they can involve an external initiator or be uncaused.

Both English ("Tom went into the room") and Spanish demonstrate similar spatial relations but differ in their syntactic representation.

Understanding Verb Constructions

A key question arises regarding how to account for verb formations like "dance," particularly since it cannot stand alone without context indicating spatial relation.

The analysis reveals that there are two constructions: one expressing change of location and another conveying manner simultaneously.

Parallel Projections in Syntax

The concept of parallel projections is introduced to explain simultaneous events occurring within sentences; this involves understanding how different elements relate syntactically.

Diagrams illustrate operations such as conflation (combining elements into one structure), contrasting with incorporation (linking elements without merging).

Lexical Decomposition Insights

By decomposing events within sentences, we see how English allows for complex constructions involving both accusative forms and negative constructs.

Understanding Argument Structures in Language

The Role of Argument Structures

Two simultaneous events in language constructions (Spanish or English) exhibit different argument structures, affecting how arguments relate and receive semantic rules.

Example: In "Tom went into the room," Tom is a theme; in "Tom danced," he is an agent. The former indicates change without volition, while the latter implies manner and agency.

Conflation Processes

Conflation involves merging predicates onto structures, where phonological matrices and encyclopedic associations play crucial roles. This process is lexical-syntactic.

Uncaused path of motion constructions illustrate this concept, as seen in "He wriggled through the gap in the fence," which shows both movement and change without agency.

Representing Motion and Change

All path of motion constructions represent changes; spatial relations are terminal for these constructions, with themes appearing at specifier positions.

The head of spatial relations incorporates prepositions to express these relationships effectively.

Understanding Resultative Constructions

Resultative constructions indicate changes of state rather than location. For example, "I curled into a cramped ball" represents an uncaused change with two arguments.

Changes of state can be viewed as analogous to changes of location within computational systems.

Analyzing Adjectival Changes

In resultative constructions like "I curled into a cramped ball," the achieved state serves as the ground rather than a physical location.

Curling signifies a change of state rather than a negative construction; ergative constructions incorporate grounds differently from accusative ones.

Exploring Uncaused Resultative Constructions

Uncaused resultative constructions express changes of state with conflated predicates. For instance, "My eyes flashed open" illustrates this dynamic.

The final adjectival location indicates a change of state; adjectives can be decomposed into phrases that clarify their derived nature.

Incorporating Negative Verbs

Flashing is characterized as a negative verb related to light emission. It incorporates roots locally to convey causation within transitional relations.

Understanding Ergative Constructions and Resultative States

The Concept of Change in Linguistics

Discussion on terminal chains relating to figures, specifically how "falling" is treated as a change of state rather than an accusative.

Explanation of "falling" as an ergative verb, highlighting its relationship with the logical matrix of verbs and the concept of falling states.

Introduction to uncaused resultative constructions, where changes are expressed through root incorporation into spatial relations.

Resultative Constructions Explained

Overview of combining two changes: one from resultative constructions and another from targeted predicates.

Examples illustrating resultative constructions: "the river froze solid," "the bottle broke open," and "the toast burned black."

Emphasis on semantic coherence between the verb's root and the final state in unaccusative constructions.

Causation in Changes of State

Discussion on encyclopedic knowledge that informs our understanding of changes (e.g., freezing leads to solidity).

Notion that one change can cause another, sharing the same theme argument (e.g., river, bottle, toast).

Introduction to causative alternation where explicit initiators can be added to uncaused events.

External Initiators in Resultant Constructions

Clarification that when external initiators are included, resultative constructions become caused or externally caused.

Mention of ergative verbs participating in resultative constructions; distinction between uncaused and caused instances.

Representation of Ergatives in Resultatives

Example provided for representing ergatives within resultative constructions involving freezing.

Description of incorporating roots into spatial relations leading to phonological realization.

Summary that ergatives express further specifications regarding achieved states during transitions.

Causation Through Motion Constructs

Understanding Causation in Motion Verbs

Theoretical Framework for Motion and Causation

The discussion begins with the need to account for changes in location, specifically how soldiers are depicted as figures moving into a tent, influenced by an external initiator, the general.

The verb "march" is analyzed through lexical decomposition, revealing that it expresses manner of motion and originates from a parallel projection related to the soldiers' actions.

It is emphasized that the general causes the soldiers to march, indicating that this construction involves an externally caused negative verb reflecting motion.

A distinction is made between internal and external initiators within this framework, highlighting how causative constructions depict paths of motion with completion linked to external predicates.

An example illustrates how events can be decomposed: soldiers entering a tent represents an accusative event where directionality and final location are key components.

Exploring Manner of Motion

The concept of negative activity is discussed in relation to marching; it suggests that while marching occurs, it does not directly relate to change but rather to the activity itself.

Soldiers are viewed as agents creating another entity through their action of marching, with the general serving as the initiator behind this movement.

Questions arise about whether the general actively participates in marching or if he merely instigates it; this ambiguity highlights complexities in understanding agency within these constructions.

The light verb "make" serves as a causative element merging at the head of cause projection, reinforcing that it's not just about soldiers marching but being compelled by their leader.

Examples of Caused Path Constructions

Practical examples illustrate caused path constructions: retrieving keys from pockets requires navigating through other items—this reflects complex spatial relations articulated syntactically.

The initial focus should be on identifying arguments involved and their relationships rather than solely on verbs like "dig," which do not fit traditional argument structures associated with direct objects.

Argument Structure Analysis

Two distinct events emerge from analyzing spatial relations among arguments (e.g., keys and pocket), leading to insights about how these elements interact within syntax frameworks.

Three arguments are identified: an initiator causing change (keys leaving pocket), along with manner-of-motion implications tied to digging activities.

Understanding caused path or resultant deconstruction necessitates recognizing ditransitive structures involving three arguments—initiator, figure, and ground—common across various languages including English and Spanish.

Path of Motion and Resultative Constructions

Understanding Path of Motion Constructions

Path of motion constructions involve three arguments that maintain a PI-OC (Path, Initiator, Object, Cause) relation. An example is "I put the keys out of my pocket," illustrating this construction.

When these constructions are uncaused, they represent accusative or telecon accusative telegram constructions. This indicates conflation of different predicates within caused path of motion constructions.

The Role of Themes in Way Constructions

A specific type of caused path of motion construction is the "way" construction, which includes a theme that takes on the lexical category "way." For instance, "the creature began to claw its way to the surface."

In examples like "the creature clawed its way to the surface," the subject ("creature") acts as both an agent and a theme. This dual role complicates traditional interpretations since it suggests agency in a typically unaccusative structure.

Spatial Relations and Projections

The spatial relation in these constructions involves terminal relations between figures and grounds, indicating change through transitional projections while also selecting an initiator (e.g., the creature).

Incorporation occurs onto both transitional projections and verbs like "claw," leading to logical overt expressions in language.

Productivity and Volition in English Constructions

The way construction serves two purposes: depicting paths via nominal ways and allowing subjects to take on roles as agents or initiators. This contrasts with simpler structures where subjects are merely themes.

These constructions often imply volition; for example, when saying someone can talk their way out of a situation, it suggests intentionality behind movement or action.

Static vs Dynamic Spatial Configurations

Some constructions express static spatial configurations rather than changes in location. Examples include phrases like “the brook gurgled its way to a refurbished mill,” where entities do not undergo change but exist along defined paths.

Other examples illustrate how entities can be conceptualized over large areas or circuits without implying movement from one point to another (e.g., “the trump rattled its way down market street”).

Complex Argument Structures

In more complex cases involving multiple prepositional predicates (like up and into), relational elements establish distinct argument structures based on their syntactic roles.

Understanding Caused Path of Motion Constructions

Theoretical Framework of Argument Structures

The discussion begins with the concept of accusative construal, emphasizing how trees can be described in various ways while maintaining a consistent framework for understanding constructions.

It highlights that the theme in spatial relations serves to co-index with the subject and also positions the subject as an initiator, rather than merely a theme.

The speaker introduces different argument structures and theta roles, indicating that changes in location require additional projections to describe these shifts accurately.

Conceptualizing Motion and Location

Verbs like pull, push, kick, and punch are categorized as verbs of surface contact through motion; they are analyzed within locating constructions.

A specific example is provided where "he calls go himself" illustrates a caused path of motion construction involving multiple conflations related to movement into a formal posture.

Each spatial relation corresponds to distinct argument structures; thus, every caused path of motion construction must account for completion within its context.

Examples of Spatial Relations

An example is given: "I pulled myself into the cab of the truck," demonstrating a change in location characterized by integration and possession within locating constructions.

The distinction between location constructions and double object constructions is emphasized due to their incorporation of routes onto primitives.

Resultative Constructions Explained

Another example involves "I pulled my face out of my hands," showcasing terminal spatial relations that are source-oriented rather than goal-oriented.

This segment discusses how transitive nature appears similar to double object constructions but differs due to monotransitive rendering once roots are incorporated onto primitives.

Exploring Resultative Constructions Further

The focus shifts to resultative constructions initiated by external causes, such as "she ran the pavement thing," which includes three arguments: an initiator (she), a theme (the pavement), and a final state expressed adjectivally.

It notes that resultative phrases can be either prepositional or adjectival while discussing lexicalization states associated with both categories.

Resultative Constructions and Argument Structures

Understanding Resultative Constructions

Resultative constructions express locatum or locating events, such as "they pushed the door open," indicating that the action of pushing resulted in the door being opened.

The discussion includes translating these constructions into Spanish, emphasizing semantic equivalence and encouraging reflection on examples for a meeting.

Examples are drawn from various sources, including academic papers and dictionaries, illustrating how actions lead to specific states (e.g., "he pounded the metal flat").

Analyzing Argument Structures

The analysis of "they pushed the door open" reveals three arguments: a terminal spatial relation, incorporation of the root expressing final state (open), and an initiator selected by the cause head.

The argument structure varies based on construction type; representative constructions allow conflation of two simultaneous events into one clause.

Exploring Achievements and Accomplishments

In constructions like "she kicked the door shut," there is an achievement that becomes an accomplishment with an added initiator. This highlights how states can be derived from spatial relations.

Kicking is characterized as a verb of surface contact promotion, which involves kinetic energy impacting another entity.

Negative Predicates in Resultative Constructions

Resultant constructions with negative predicates raise questions about verb nature; verbs like shout or bark may not fit traditional transitive definitions under certain conditions.

Example: "the dog barked the baby awake" illustrates how different arguments change meaning compared to simpler sentences like "the dog barked."

Syntactic Argument Structure Insights

The lexical category 'verb' derives from syntactic argument structures rather than inherent properties of verbs themselves.

Arguments in resultative constructions are influenced by predicates like cause rather than solely by verbs like shout or run.

In Spanish translations, appropriateness depends on factors such as volition present in initiators causing final states.

Understanding Argument Structure in Linguistic Constructions

Volitional vs. Irrigative Constructs

The example of "el pero efferto" illustrates a volitional reading where the subject is seen as the initiator, contrasting with constructions that do not imply an initiator due to their irrigative nature.

In the phrase "Mary loud the baby asleep," it is clarified that "the baby" is not an argument of "love"; instead, Mary, the baby, and "asleep" serve as arguments of cause.

Syntactic Possibilities Across Languages

Different syntactic structures between English and Spanish are highlighted through examples like "the dog barked the baby awake," emphasizing spatial relations in causative constructions.

The phonological realization of adjectives and root incorporation into projections are discussed, showcasing how sound dimensions contribute to sentence structure.

Resultative Constructions Explained

Analyzing sentences like "John jogged himself dizzy," it’s noted that there exists a spatial relation linking reflexive pronouns to resultant states after actions.

Another example provided is “Mary shouted herself hoarse,” demonstrating how excessive action leads to a negative state (hoarseness).

Complex Argument Structures

The construction “screaming myself awake” shows three arguments with a null initiator co-indexed with a verb's argument, illustrating complex relationships within sentences.

This construction also emphasizes spatial relations and minor sound emissions leading to resultative outcomes.

Transitive Events and Surface Contact

A final example discusses transitive constructions involving surface contact verbs, such as “wiping,” which combines multiple arguments into one coherent structure.

Both resultative and path-of-motion constructions are identified as lexically derived through conflation operations within parallel projections in syntax.

Conclusion on Linguistic Analysis Challenges

The discussion concludes by noting that both resultative and path-of-motion constructions present challenges for linguistic analysis due to their complex derivations.