Chapter published in:
The Semantics of Dynamic Space in French: Descriptive, experimental and formal studies on motion expression
Edited by Michel Aurnague and Dejan Stosic
[Human Cognitive Processing 66] 2019
► pp. 180–215

Motion verbs and evaluative morphology

| CLLE-ERSS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS & UT2J, France
| STL-Savoirs Textes Langage, Université de Lille, CNRS & U. Lille, France
This chapter addresses the issue of the interaction between evaluative morphology and the semantics of dynamic space in French by exploring the possibilities of constructing evaluative verbs from motion verbs. Previous research has suggested that motion verbs are relatively reluctant to serve as bases for evaluative affixation. Our aim is both to test the accuracy of this hypothesis and to account for the specificities of those French motion verbs that do allow evaluation. In doing so, we offer new insights into how evaluative morphology can contribute to the encoding of manner of motion. The empirical data on which the semantic and morphological analyses are based are extracted from extensive modern lexicographic resources and corpora.
Keywords: evaluative morphology, manner of motion, French, pluractionality, affixation
Published online: 29 July 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.66.05sto
References

References

Amiot, D.
(2004) Haut degré et préfixation. Travaux linguistiques du Cerlico, 17, 91–104.Google Scholar
(2012) De la localisation à l’évaluation: des verbes préfixés évaluatifs au sens bien particulier. CORELA, HS–12, http://​corela​.revues​.org​/2775. Crossref.
Amiot, D., & Stosic, D.
(2011)  Sautiller, voleter, dansoter: évaluation, pluriactionnalité, aspect. In E. Arjoca-Ieremia, C. Avezard-Roger, J. Goes, E. Moline, & A. Tihu (Eds.), Temps, aspect et classes de mots: études théoriques et didactiques (pp. 277–297). Arras: Artois Presses Université.Google Scholar
(2014) When evaluative morphology, pluractionality and aspect get tangled up: a case study of French suffixed verbs. In Z. Gavriilidou, & A. Revithiadou (Eds.), Mélanges offerts à Anna Anastassiades-Syméonides à l’occasion de sa retraite (pp. 16–33). Kavala: Editions Saita.Google Scholar
(2015) Morphologie évaluative et aspectuelle en français et en serbe. Lexique, 22, 111–142.Google Scholar
Aurnague, M.
(2011) How motion verbs are spatial: The spatial foundations of intransitive motion verbs in French. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 34(1), 1–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) De l’espace à l’aspect: les bases ontologiques des procès de déplacement. CORELA, HS-12 , http://​corela​.revues​.org​/2846. Crossref.
Bauer, L.
(1983) English Word-Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beavers, J., Levin, B., & Wei Tham, S.
(2010) The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46, 331–377.Google Scholar
Collins, C.
(2001) Aspects of plurality in ǂHoan. Language, 77, 456–476. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1985) Causative verb formation and other verb-deriving morphology. In Shopen, T. (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (pp. 309–348). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corbin, D., & Temple, M.
(1994) Le monde des mots et des sens construits: catégories sémantiques, catégories référentielles. Cahiers de lexicologie, 65(2), 5–28.Google Scholar
Crystal, D.
(2000) Investigating nonceness: lexical innovation and lexicographic coverage. In R. Boenig, & K. Davis (Eds.), Manuscript, narrative and lexicon: essays on literary and cultural transmission in honor of Whitney F Bolton (pp. 218–231). Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press / London: Associated University Presses.Google Scholar
Cusic, D.
(1981) Verbal Plurality and Aspect. PhD dissertation: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Dal, G.
(1994) Un exemple de traitement associatif du lexique construit: analyse unificatrice des mots suffixés par -et(te). PhD dissertation: Lille 3 University.Google Scholar
(1999) Suffixation par–et (te) et bases verbales. In D. Corbin, G. Dal, B. Fradin, B. Habert, F. Kerleroux, M. Plénat & Roché, M. (Eds.), La morphologie des dérivés évaluatifs, Silexicales, 2, 37–47.Google Scholar
Dal, G., & Namer, F.
(2018) Playful nonce-formations in French: Creativity and productivity In S. Arndt-Lappe, A. Braun, C. Moulin, Esme Winter-Froemel (Eds.), Expanding the Lexicon: Linguistic Innovation, Morphological Productivity, and Ludicity (pp. 203–228). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. Crossref. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Delhay, C.
(1999) “Diminutifs” et niveaux de catégorisation. Faits de langue, 14, 79–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doucouré, S.
In preparation. La réduplication verbale en mànìngàxáŋ du Dantila. PhD Dissertation. Université de Lille.
Dressler, W. U.
(2007) Introduction. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, 112, 3–9.Google Scholar
Dressler, W. U., & Karpf, A.
(1995) The theoretical relevance of pre- and protomorphology in language acquisition. In G. E. Booij, & van Marle, J. (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1994 (pp. 99–124). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Dressler, W. U., & Merlini Barbaresi, L.
(1994) Morphopragmatics: diminutives and intensifiers in Italian, German, and other languages. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foley, W. A., & Van Valin, R. D.
(1984) Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fradin, B.
(2003) Le traitement de la suffixation en -et , Langages, 152, 51–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) La variante et le double. In F. Villoing, S. David, & Leroy, S. (Eds.). Foisonnements morphologiques. Études en hommage à Françoise Kerleroux (pp. 109–147). Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Ouest.Google Scholar
Fradin, B. & Montermini, F.
(2009) La morphologie évaluative. In B. Fradin, F. Kerleroux, & M. Plénat (Eds.). Aperçus de morphologie du français (pp. 231–266). Vincennes: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.Google Scholar
Grandi, N.
(2002) Morfologie in contatto. Le costruzioni valutative nelle lingue del Mediterraneo. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
(2009) Restrictions on Italian Verbal Evaluative Suffixes: The Role of Aspect and Actionality. York Papers in Linguistics Series, 2(10), 46–66.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Y.
(2010) Event Internal Pluractionality in Modern Hebrew: A Semantic Analysis of One Verbal Reduplication Pattern. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 2(1), 119–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kiefer, F.
(2001) Morphology and pragmatics. In A. Zwicky, & Spencer, A. (Eds.), A Handbook of Morphology (pp. 272–281). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Körtvélyessy, L.
(2015) Evaluative morphology from a cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Lasersohn, P.
(1995) Plurality, Conjunction and Events. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lefer, M. A., & Grabar, N.
(2014) Evaluative prefixes in translation: From automatic alignment to semantic categorization. LiLT (Linguistic Issues in Language Technology), 11(6), 169–187.Google Scholar
Levin, B.
(2009) The Root: A Key Ingredient in Verb Meaning. Austin, TX: Department of Linguistics, University of Texas.Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, I.
(1994) Cours de morphologie générale (théorique et descriptive), vol. 2. Montréal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal / Paris: CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar
Merlini Barbaresi, L.
(2006) Morphopragmatics. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. 2nd Edition (pp. 332–335). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newman, P.
(1990) Nominal and verbal plurality in Chadic. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Roché, M.
(2002) Aux origines du suffixe –ouille(r) . In M. Aurnague, & M. Roché (Eds.), Romania et Vasconia. Hommage à Jacques Allières (pp. 561–572). Biarritz: Atlantica.Google Scholar
(2008) Quelques exemples de morphologie non conventionnelle dans les formations construites à partir d’un mot en -ouiller . In B. Fradin (Ed.), La raison morphologique (pp. 215–238). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: J. Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sajous, F., & Hathout, N.
(2015)  GLAWI, a free XML-encoded Machine-Readable Dictionary built from the French Wiktionary. In I. Kosem, M. Jakubíček, J. Kallas, & Krek, S. (Eds.), Electronic lexicography in the 21st century: linking lexical data in the digital age (pp. 405–426). Ljubljana & Brighton: Trojina, Institute for Applied Slovene Studies/Lexical Computing Ltd.Google Scholar
Savickienė, I., Wolfgang, U. D., Barcza, V., Bodor, P., Ketrez, N., Korecky-Kröll, K., Palmović, M., Stephany, U., & Thomadaki, E.
(2007) Diminutives as pioneers of derivational and inflectional development – a cross-linguistic perspective. Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, 112, 81–92.Google Scholar
Scalise, S.
(1986) Generative morphology. Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stosic, D.
(2013) Manner of motion, evaluative and pluractional morphology. Oslo Studies in Language, 5(1), 61–89.Google Scholar
Stosic, D., & Amiot, D.
(2010) Évaluation et pluriactionnalité: une mise au point qui s’impose. Colloque international de morphologie – Décembrettes 7 . Université de Toulouse 2, Toulouse (2–3 décembre 2010) (poster)Google Scholar
(2011) Quand la morphologie fait des manières: les verbes évaluatifs et l’expression de la manière en français. In D. Amiot, W. De Mulder, E. Moline, & D. Stosic (Eds.), Ars Grammatica. Hommages à Nelly Flaux (pp. 403–430). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Stosic, D., & Aurnague, M.
(2017) DinaVmouv: Description, INventaire, Analyse des Verbes de MOUVement. An annotated lexicon of motion verbs in French. Freely available at: http://​redac​.univ​-tlse2​.fr​/lexiques​/dinaVmouv​/dinaVmouvBrowser/.
Stump, G.
(1993) How peculiar is evaluative morphology? Journal of Linguistics, 29, 1–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L.
(2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tanguy, L.
(2012)  Complexification des données et des techniques en linguistique: contributions du TAL aux solutions et aux problèmes . Mémoire d’Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches. Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail: Toulouse.Google Scholar
Tovena, L., & Kihm, A.
(2008) Event internal pluractional verbs in some Romance languages. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes, 37, 9–30. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Geenhoven, V.
(2004)  For-Adverbials, Frequentative Aspect, and Pluractionality. Natural Language Semantics, 12, 135–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Atelicity, Pluractionality, and Adverbial Quantification. In H. Verkuyl, H. de Swart, & van Hout, A. (Eds.), Perspectives on Aspect. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wienold, G.
(1995) Lexical and conceptual structures in expressions for movement and space: With reference to Japanese, Korean, Thai, and Indonesian as compared to English and German. In U. Egli, P. Pause, C. Schwartz, A. von Stechow, & G. Wienold (Eds.), Lexical Knowledge in the Organization of Language (pp. 301–340). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A.
(1994) Semantic primitives across languages: a critical review. In C. Goddard & A. Wierzbicka (Eds.), Semantics and Lexical Universals: theory and empirical finding (pp. 445–500). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wood, E. J.
(2007) The semantic typology of pluractionality, Unpublished Ph.D. Berkeley: UC.Google Scholar

Sources

DISC
 – Sabatini, F. & Coletti, V. 1997 Dizionario italiano Sabatini Coletti. Giunti: Firenze.Google Scholar
GLAWI
 – Sajous, F., Hathout, N. & Calderone, B., French Machine-Readable Dictionary (http://​redac​.univ​-tlse2​.fr​/lexiques​/glawi​_en​.html).
GRADIT
 – De Mauro, T. 1999–2000 Grande dizionario italiano dell’uso. UTET: Torino.Google Scholar
OED
–Oxford English Dictionary (http://​www​.oed​.com/)
SER
 – Simić, M. 2005 Srpski elektronski rečnik (CD–ROM).Google Scholar
TLFi
 – Trésor de la langue française informatisé (http://​atilf​.atilf​.fr​/tlf​.htm).