Are manner of speaking verbs truly manner?

Irina Stoica
{"title":"Are manner of speaking verbs truly manner?","authors":"Irina Stoica","doi":"10.31178/BWPL.22.1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Manner of speaking verbs (MoS) are said to induce strong island effects, in contrast with verbs of communication, which allow extraction. The main studies which tried to account for this distinction focused either on the existence of a manner component, of an added layer of meaning, or on that of a nominal element, corresponding to the resulting emitted noise. However, these intuitions according to which they simultaneously denote both manner and result would induce a violation of the Manner Result Complementarity (Levin & Rappaport 2011). What’s more, a closer look at the data shows that there are at least some cases where extraction out of the complement of MoS verbs is actually allowed. The goal of this paper is to put forth an analysis which first of all accounts for the ban on extraction, but also for the variable behaviour that these verbs evince. By postulating two structurally distinct subclasses of MoS verbs, I not only manage to reconcile the two intuitions present in the literature without violating the MRC, but also explain the syntactic behaviour of these verbs with respect to extraction from the post-verbal clause.","PeriodicalId":30451,"journal":{"name":"Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31178/BWPL.22.1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Manner of speaking verbs (MoS) are said to induce strong island effects, in contrast with verbs of communication, which allow extraction. The main studies which tried to account for this distinction focused either on the existence of a manner component, of an added layer of meaning, or on that of a nominal element, corresponding to the resulting emitted noise. However, these intuitions according to which they simultaneously denote both manner and result would induce a violation of the Manner Result Complementarity (Levin & Rappaport 2011). What’s more, a closer look at the data shows that there are at least some cases where extraction out of the complement of MoS verbs is actually allowed. The goal of this paper is to put forth an analysis which first of all accounts for the ban on extraction, but also for the variable behaviour that these verbs evince. By postulating two structurally distinct subclasses of MoS verbs, I not only manage to reconcile the two intuitions present in the literature without violating the MRC, but also explain the syntactic behaviour of these verbs with respect to extraction from the post-verbal clause.
动词的说话方式是真正的方式吗?
说话方式动词(MoS)被认为会引起强烈的岛屿效应,而交流动词则允许提取。试图解释这一区别的主要研究要么集中在方式成分的存在上,一个附加的意义层,要么集中在一个名义元素的存在上,对应于由此产生的发出的噪音。然而,根据这些直觉,他们同时表示方式和结果会导致违反方式结果互补性(Levin & Rappaport 2011)。更重要的是,仔细观察数据就会发现,至少在某些情况下,从mo动词的补语中提取是允许的。本文的目的是提出一个分析,首先说明了禁止提取,同时也说明了这些动词所表现出的可变行为。通过假设两个结构上不同的动词子类,我不仅设法在不违反MRC的情况下调和了文献中存在的两种直觉,而且还解释了这些动词在从动词后分句提取方面的句法行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信