词根分词:日耳曼词根构型中的指令分词、委托分词、表达分词和代表分词

Dennis Wegner
{"title":"词根分词:日耳曼词根构型中的指令分词、委托分词、表达分词和代表分词","authors":"Dennis Wegner","doi":"10.1007/s10828-024-09152-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The present paper investigates participial root configurations, i.e. participial clauses that are grammatically independent of a host clause. Unlike previous work, which has focussed on either directive or (non-directive) performative uses of so-called past participles (i.e. participles that have passive and/or perfect(ive) interpretations), the present paper establishes a typology of ‘root participles’ in Germanic and contrasts the properties of four main types: (1) directive (RP<sup>dir</sup>), (2) expressive (RP<sup>exp</sup>), (3) commissive (RP<sup>com</sup>), (4) representative root participles (RP<sup>rep</sup>). The main claim with respect to the properties of these distinct types is that they differ in terms of whether they include a verbal or an adjectival (passive) participle. In fact, arguments based on argument structure, orientation, aspect, and adverbial modification are presented to substantiate the claim that types (1) and (2) are formed with verbal and types (3) and (4) with adjectival participles. Additionally, the distinct types will be shown to differ in their status of either being non-sentential (i.e. structurally different from potential clausal counterparts) or merely elliptical (just phonologically reduced): types (1) and (3) can be shown to be non-sentential and hence receive a dedicated syntactic analysis, where special attention is paid to the contribution of the (imperative vs. declarative) left periphery.</p>","PeriodicalId":75059,"journal":{"name":"The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics","volume":"92 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Root participles: directive, commissive, expressive and representative participles in Germanic root configurations\",\"authors\":\"Dennis Wegner\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10828-024-09152-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The present paper investigates participial root configurations, i.e. participial clauses that are grammatically independent of a host clause. Unlike previous work, which has focussed on either directive or (non-directive) performative uses of so-called past participles (i.e. participles that have passive and/or perfect(ive) interpretations), the present paper establishes a typology of ‘root participles’ in Germanic and contrasts the properties of four main types: (1) directive (RP<sup>dir</sup>), (2) expressive (RP<sup>exp</sup>), (3) commissive (RP<sup>com</sup>), (4) representative root participles (RP<sup>rep</sup>). The main claim with respect to the properties of these distinct types is that they differ in terms of whether they include a verbal or an adjectival (passive) participle. In fact, arguments based on argument structure, orientation, aspect, and adverbial modification are presented to substantiate the claim that types (1) and (2) are formed with verbal and types (3) and (4) with adjectival participles. Additionally, the distinct types will be shown to differ in their status of either being non-sentential (i.e. structurally different from potential clausal counterparts) or merely elliptical (just phonologically reduced): types (1) and (3) can be shown to be non-sentential and hence receive a dedicated syntactic analysis, where special attention is paid to the contribution of the (imperative vs. declarative) left periphery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics\",\"volume\":\"92 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-024-09152-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of comparative Germanic linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-024-09152-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究的是分词词根配置,即在语法上独立于主句的分词从句。以往的研究侧重于所谓过去分词(即具有被动和/或完成时解释的分词)的指令性或(非指令性)执行性用法,而本文则不同,它建立了日耳曼语中 "根分词 "的类型学,并对比了四种主要类型的特性:(1) 指令性(RPdir),(2) 执行性(RPexp),(3) 委托性(RPcom),(4) 代表性根分词(RPrep)。关于这些不同类型的性质,主要说法是它们在包含动词分词还是形容词(被动)分词方面有所不同。事实上,基于论据结构、方位、方面和副词修饰的论证证明了(1)和(2)类型由动词分词构成,(3)和(4)类型由形容词分词构成。此外,我们还将证明这些不同类型的不同之处,即它们要么是非谓语(即在结构上不同于潜在的分词),要么只是省略(只是语音上的缩减):类型(1)和(3)可以证明是非谓语,因此可以进行专门的句法分析,其中特别关注(祈使句与陈述句)左边缘的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Root participles: directive, commissive, expressive and representative participles in Germanic root configurations

Root participles: directive, commissive, expressive and representative participles in Germanic root configurations

The present paper investigates participial root configurations, i.e. participial clauses that are grammatically independent of a host clause. Unlike previous work, which has focussed on either directive or (non-directive) performative uses of so-called past participles (i.e. participles that have passive and/or perfect(ive) interpretations), the present paper establishes a typology of ‘root participles’ in Germanic and contrasts the properties of four main types: (1) directive (RPdir), (2) expressive (RPexp), (3) commissive (RPcom), (4) representative root participles (RPrep). The main claim with respect to the properties of these distinct types is that they differ in terms of whether they include a verbal or an adjectival (passive) participle. In fact, arguments based on argument structure, orientation, aspect, and adverbial modification are presented to substantiate the claim that types (1) and (2) are formed with verbal and types (3) and (4) with adjectival participles. Additionally, the distinct types will be shown to differ in their status of either being non-sentential (i.e. structurally different from potential clausal counterparts) or merely elliptical (just phonologically reduced): types (1) and (3) can be shown to be non-sentential and hence receive a dedicated syntactic analysis, where special attention is paid to the contribution of the (imperative vs. declarative) left periphery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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