{"title":"对称谓词和互变的语义","authors":"Yoad Winter","doi":"10.3765/SP.11.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reciprocal alternations appear with binary predicates that also have a collective unary form. Many of these binary predicates are symmetric : if A dated B then B dated A. Most symmetric predicates in English show a simple kind of reciprocity: A and B dated means “A dated B”, or equivalently “B dated A”. Similar observations hold for nouns and adjectives like cousin and identical . Non-symmetric predicates like hug , fight and kiss also show reciprocity, but of a more complex kind. For instance, the meaning of A and B hugged differs substantially from “A hugged B and/or B hugged A”. Addressing a wide range of reciprocal predicates, we observe that “plain” reciprocity only appears with symmetric predicates, while other types of reciprocity only appear with non-symmetric predicates. This Reciprocity-Symmetry Generalization motivates a lexical operator that derives symmetric predicates from collective meanings. By contrast, reciprocity with non-symmetric predicates is analyzed using “soft” preferences of predicate concepts. Developing work by Dowty and Rappaport-Hovav & Levin, we introduce a formal semantic notion of protopredicates , which mediates between lexical meanings and concepts. This mechanism explains symmetry and reciprocity as two semantic aspects of one type system at the lexical-conceptual interface. \n \nEARLY ACCESS","PeriodicalId":45550,"journal":{"name":"Semantics & Pragmatics","volume":"11 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Symmetric predicates and the semantics of reciprocal alternations\",\"authors\":\"Yoad Winter\",\"doi\":\"10.3765/SP.11.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reciprocal alternations appear with binary predicates that also have a collective unary form. Many of these binary predicates are symmetric : if A dated B then B dated A. Most symmetric predicates in English show a simple kind of reciprocity: A and B dated means “A dated B”, or equivalently “B dated A”. Similar observations hold for nouns and adjectives like cousin and identical . Non-symmetric predicates like hug , fight and kiss also show reciprocity, but of a more complex kind. For instance, the meaning of A and B hugged differs substantially from “A hugged B and/or B hugged A”. Addressing a wide range of reciprocal predicates, we observe that “plain” reciprocity only appears with symmetric predicates, while other types of reciprocity only appear with non-symmetric predicates. This Reciprocity-Symmetry Generalization motivates a lexical operator that derives symmetric predicates from collective meanings. By contrast, reciprocity with non-symmetric predicates is analyzed using “soft” preferences of predicate concepts. Developing work by Dowty and Rappaport-Hovav & Levin, we introduce a formal semantic notion of protopredicates , which mediates between lexical meanings and concepts. This mechanism explains symmetry and reciprocity as two semantic aspects of one type system at the lexical-conceptual interface. \\n \\nEARLY ACCESS\",\"PeriodicalId\":45550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Semantics & Pragmatics\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Semantics & Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3765/SP.11.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Semantics & Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/SP.11.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Symmetric predicates and the semantics of reciprocal alternations
Reciprocal alternations appear with binary predicates that also have a collective unary form. Many of these binary predicates are symmetric : if A dated B then B dated A. Most symmetric predicates in English show a simple kind of reciprocity: A and B dated means “A dated B”, or equivalently “B dated A”. Similar observations hold for nouns and adjectives like cousin and identical . Non-symmetric predicates like hug , fight and kiss also show reciprocity, but of a more complex kind. For instance, the meaning of A and B hugged differs substantially from “A hugged B and/or B hugged A”. Addressing a wide range of reciprocal predicates, we observe that “plain” reciprocity only appears with symmetric predicates, while other types of reciprocity only appear with non-symmetric predicates. This Reciprocity-Symmetry Generalization motivates a lexical operator that derives symmetric predicates from collective meanings. By contrast, reciprocity with non-symmetric predicates is analyzed using “soft” preferences of predicate concepts. Developing work by Dowty and Rappaport-Hovav & Levin, we introduce a formal semantic notion of protopredicates , which mediates between lexical meanings and concepts. This mechanism explains symmetry and reciprocity as two semantic aspects of one type system at the lexical-conceptual interface.
EARLY ACCESS