词汇和语法的减少:罗曼语中互惠的情况。

IF 1.1 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-04 DOI:10.1007/s11049-025-09681-5
Giada Palmieri, Renato Basso, Júlia Nieto I Bou, Yoad Winter, Joost Zwarts
{"title":"词汇和语法的减少:罗曼语中互惠的情况。","authors":"Giada Palmieri, Renato Basso, Júlia Nieto I Bou, Yoad Winter, Joost Zwarts","doi":"10.1007/s11049-025-09681-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In many languages, reciprocal meanings are expressed either by grammatical means or by using lexical predicates. The grammatical strategy is productive and may involve derivational affixes (Swahili <i>-an</i>) or pronouns (English <i>each other</i>) with transitive forms, whereas lexical reciprocity is expressed by a restricted class of intransitive predicates like English <i>kiss</i> or <i>meet</i>. The situation is more complex in Romance languages, where reciprocal verbal constructions often require a <i>se</i> clitic without a clear separation between transitive and intransitive forms. Addressing this puzzle, we propose that Romance languages involve a grammatical/lexical distinction as in other languages. We show that numerous Romance constructions systematically allow <i>se</i> omission with certain reciprocals, exhibiting parallel properties to those of lexical intransitives in other languages. A similar observation is made in relation to the distinction between grammatical reflexivity (e.g., English <i>oneself</i>) and lexical reflexives (<i>wash, shave</i>). Furthermore, we show that the <i>se</i> requirement may also be relaxed with transitive verbs, when reciprocity or reflexivity is conveyed by an overt reciprocal/reflexive item (e.g., Spanish <i>mutuamente</i> 'mutually'). The emerging theoretical picture supports an analysis of <i>se</i> as a head projection that licenses arity-reduction, though language-specific conditions allow <i>se</i> omission when arity reduction is achieved by a lexical reciprocal item or by another overt reciprocal element.</p>","PeriodicalId":18975,"journal":{"name":"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory","volume":"43 4","pages":"2821-2870"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460508/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lexical and grammatical arity-reduction: The case of reciprocity in Romance languages.\",\"authors\":\"Giada Palmieri, Renato Basso, Júlia Nieto I Bou, Yoad Winter, Joost Zwarts\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11049-025-09681-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In many languages, reciprocal meanings are expressed either by grammatical means or by using lexical predicates. The grammatical strategy is productive and may involve derivational affixes (Swahili <i>-an</i>) or pronouns (English <i>each other</i>) with transitive forms, whereas lexical reciprocity is expressed by a restricted class of intransitive predicates like English <i>kiss</i> or <i>meet</i>. The situation is more complex in Romance languages, where reciprocal verbal constructions often require a <i>se</i> clitic without a clear separation between transitive and intransitive forms. Addressing this puzzle, we propose that Romance languages involve a grammatical/lexical distinction as in other languages. We show that numerous Romance constructions systematically allow <i>se</i> omission with certain reciprocals, exhibiting parallel properties to those of lexical intransitives in other languages. A similar observation is made in relation to the distinction between grammatical reflexivity (e.g., English <i>oneself</i>) and lexical reflexives (<i>wash, shave</i>). Furthermore, we show that the <i>se</i> requirement may also be relaxed with transitive verbs, when reciprocity or reflexivity is conveyed by an overt reciprocal/reflexive item (e.g., Spanish <i>mutuamente</i> 'mutually'). The emerging theoretical picture supports an analysis of <i>se</i> as a head projection that licenses arity-reduction, though language-specific conditions allow <i>se</i> omission when arity reduction is achieved by a lexical reciprocal item or by another overt reciprocal element.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory\",\"volume\":\"43 4\",\"pages\":\"2821-2870\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12460508/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-025-09681-5\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-025-09681-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在许多语言中,相互意义是通过语法手段或使用词汇谓词来表达的。语法策略是富有成效的,可能涉及派生词缀(斯瓦希里语-an)或带有及物形式的代词(英语each other),而词汇互惠是由一类有限的不及物谓词表达的,如英语的kiss或meet。这种情况在罗曼语中更为复杂,在罗曼语中,相互的动词结构通常需要一个没有明确区分及物和不及物形式的形容词。为了解决这个难题,我们提出罗曼语和其他语言一样,也有语法/词汇上的区别。我们表明,许多罗曼语结构系统地允许某些互惠的se省略,表现出与其他语言中的词汇不及物相似的特性。在语法反身性(例如,英语myself)和词汇反身性(wash, shave)之间的区别上也有类似的观察。此外,我们还发现,当互惠性或反身性由一个显性的互惠/反身性项目传达时(例如,西班牙语mutuamente 'mutual '),及物动词也可以放松对自身的要求。新出现的理论图景支持这样一种分析,即语义是一种头部投射,允许词性减少,尽管当词性减少是通过词汇对等项或另一个明显的对等元素实现时,语言特定条件允许省略语义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lexical and grammatical arity-reduction: The case of reciprocity in Romance languages.

In many languages, reciprocal meanings are expressed either by grammatical means or by using lexical predicates. The grammatical strategy is productive and may involve derivational affixes (Swahili -an) or pronouns (English each other) with transitive forms, whereas lexical reciprocity is expressed by a restricted class of intransitive predicates like English kiss or meet. The situation is more complex in Romance languages, where reciprocal verbal constructions often require a se clitic without a clear separation between transitive and intransitive forms. Addressing this puzzle, we propose that Romance languages involve a grammatical/lexical distinction as in other languages. We show that numerous Romance constructions systematically allow se omission with certain reciprocals, exhibiting parallel properties to those of lexical intransitives in other languages. A similar observation is made in relation to the distinction between grammatical reflexivity (e.g., English oneself) and lexical reflexives (wash, shave). Furthermore, we show that the se requirement may also be relaxed with transitive verbs, when reciprocity or reflexivity is conveyed by an overt reciprocal/reflexive item (e.g., Spanish mutuamente 'mutually'). The emerging theoretical picture supports an analysis of se as a head projection that licenses arity-reduction, though language-specific conditions allow se omission when arity reduction is achieved by a lexical reciprocal item or by another overt reciprocal element.

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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Natural Language & Linguistic Theory provides a forum for the discussion of theoretical research that pays close attention to natural language data, offering a channel of communication between researchers of a variety of points of view. The journal actively seeks to bridge the gap between descriptive work and work of a highly theoretical, less empirically oriented nature. In attempting to strike this balance, the journal presents work that makes complex language data accessible to those unfamiliar with the language area being studied and work that makes complex theoretical positions more accessible to those working outside the theoretical framework under review. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory features: generative studies on the syntax, semantics, phonology, morphology, and other aspects of natural language; surveys of recent theoretical developments that facilitate accessibility for a graduate student readership; reactions/replies to recent papers book reviews of important linguistics titles; special topic issues.         Springer fully understands that access to your work is important to you and to the sponsors of your research. We are listed as a green publisher in the SHERPA/RoMEO database, as we allow self-archiving, but most importantly we are fully transparent about your rights. Read more about author''s rights on: http://www.springer.com/gp/open-access/authors-rights
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信