On inchoative states. Evidence from modification of Polish perfective psych verbs by degree quantifiers

Ewa Willim 1
  • 1 Jagiellonian University Institute of English Studies Al. Mickiewicza 9, 31-120 Kraków, Poland

Abstract

The special properties that psych(ological) verbs manifest cross-linguistically have given rise to on-going debates in syntactic and semantic theorizing. Regarding their lexical aspect classification, while verbal psych predicates with the Experiencer argument mapped onto the subject (SE psych predicates) have generally been analyzed as stative, there is little agreement on what kinds of eventualities object Experiencer (OE) psych predicates describe. On the stative reading, OE psych predicates have been classified as atelic causative states. On the (non-agentive) eventive reading, they have been widely analyzed as telic change of state predicates and classified as achievements or as accomplishments. Based on Polish, Rozwadowska (2003, 2012) argues that nonagentive eventive OE psych predicates in the perfective aspect denote an onset of a state and that they are atelic rather than telic. This paper offers further support for the view that Polish perfective psych verbs do not denote a change of state, i.e., a transition from α to ¬α. The evidence is drawn from verbal comparison and the distribution of the comparative degree quantifier jeszcze bardziej ‘even more’ in perfective psych predicates. It is argued here that in contexts including jeszcze bardziej ‘even more’, the perfective predication denotes an onset of a state whose degree of intensity exceeds the comparative standard. While a degree quantifier attached to the VP in the syntax contributes a differential measure function that returns a (vague) value representing the degree to which the intensity of the Experiencer’s state exceeds the comparative standard in the event, it does not affect the event structure of the perfective verb and it does not provide the VP denotation it modifies with a final endpoint. As the perfective picks the onset of an upper open state, perfective psych predicates typically give rise to an atelic interpretation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Alexiadou, A. and Iordăchioaia, G. (2014). The psych causative alternation. Lingua, 148, 53-79.

  • Arad, M. (1999). What counts as a class? The case of psych verbs. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 35, 1-23.

  • Biały, A. (2005). Polish psychological verbs at the lexicon-syntax interface in cross-linguistic perspective. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

  • Croft, W. (2012). Verbs: Aspect and argument structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Doetjes, J. (2008). Adjectives and degree modification. In L. McNally and C. Kennedy (Eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse (pp. 123-155). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547-619.

  • Filip, H. (1996). Psychological verbs and the syntax-semantics interface. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language (pp. 131-147). Stanford, CA: CSLI.

  • Gawron, M. (2006). Paths and scalar change. (Manuscript). San Diego State University. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~gawron/new_scales_paper.pdf

  • Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Jackendoff, R. (2009). Language, consciousness, culture. Essays on mental structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Katz, J. J. (2008). Manner modification of state verbs. In L. McNally and C. Kennedy (Eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse (pp. 220-248). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Kennedy, C. (2007). Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 1-45.

  • Kennedy, C. and Levin, B. (2008). Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements. In L. McNally and C. Kennedy (Eds.), Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse (pp. 156-182). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Kennedy, C. and McNally, L. (2005). Scale structure and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language, 81, 345-381.

  • Klein, E. (1980). A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 1-46.

  • Landau, I. (2010). The Locative syntax of experiencers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Levin, B. and Rappaport Hovav, M. (2005). Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Levin, B. and Grafmiller, J. (2013). Do you always fear what frightens you? In T. H. King and V. de Paiva (Eds.), From quirky case to representing space: Papers in honor of Annie Zaenen (pp. 21-32). Stanford, CA: CSLI Online Publications.

  • Marín, R. and McNally, L. (2011). Inchoativity, change of state and telicity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 29, 467-502.

  • Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Piñón, C. (1997). Achievements in an event semantics. In A. Lawson and E. Cho (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT VII (pp. 273-296). Cornell University, Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

  • Piñón, C. (2000). Happening gradually. In L. J. Conathan, J. Good, D. Kavitskaya, A. B. Wulf, and A. C. L. Yu (Eds.), Proceedings of twenty-sixth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (pp. 445-456). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistic Society.

  • Pustejovsky, J. (1991). The syntax of event structure. Cognition, 41, 47-81.

  • Ramchand, G. (2004). Time and the event: The semantics of Russian prefixes. Nordlyd, 32, 323-361.

  • Rothmayr, A. (2009). The structure of stative verbs. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Rothstein, S. (2008). Two puzzles for a theory of lexical aspect: semelfactives and degree chievements. In J. Dölling, T. Heyde-Zybatow, and M. Schäfer (Eds.), Event structure in linguistic form and interpretation (pp. 175-198). Berlin: Mouton-De Gruyter.

  • Rozwadowska, B. (2003). Initial boundary and telicity in the semantics of perfectivity. In P. Kosta, J. Błaszczak, J. Frasek, L. Geist, and M. Żygis (Eds.), Investigations into formal Slavic linguistics (pp. 859-872). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

  • Rozwadowska, B. (2012). On the onset of psych eventualities. In E. Cyran, H. Kardela, and B. Szymanek (Eds.), Sound structure and sense (pp. 533-554). Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.

  • Toledo, A. and Sassoon, G. (2011). Absolute vs. relative adjectives - variance within vs. between individuals. In N. Ashton, A. Chereches, and D. Lutz (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 21 (pp. 135-154). Linguistic Society of America, Conference Proceedings. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Vendler, Z. (1967). Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

  • Van Voorst, J. (1992). The aspectual semantics of psychological verbs. Linguistics and Philosophy, 15, 65-92.

  • Wellwood, A., Hacquard, V., and Pancheva, R. (2012). Measuring and comparing individuals and events. Journal of Semantics, 29, 207-228.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search