Cover not available
Part of
Contrastive Studies in Verbal Valency
Edited by Lars Hellan, Andrej L. Malchukov and Michela Cennamo
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 237] 2017
► pp. 407–430

Semantic constraints on the reflexive/non-reflexive alternation of Romanian unaccusatives

| “Iorgu Iordan – Al. Rosetti” Institute for Linguistics, Romanian Academy & University of Bucharest
| “Iorgu Iordan – Al. Rosetti” Institute for Linguistics, Romanian Academy & University of Bucharest
The paper discusses semantic effects associated with the alternation between the reflexive and the non-reflexive form of a restricted class of 38 Romanian unaccusative verbs. We start by summarizing the values of the Romanian reflexive marker se and then we present the inventory of Romanian unaccusatives which enter the reflexive/non-reflexive alternation. Finally, we tell apart several classes of Romanian alternating unaccusatives on the basis of the factors which dictate the choice of the reflexive or the non-reflexive form, we compare these factors with the ones that are at play for other Romance languages, and we conclude that a unitary semantic analysis of the alternation is not available for Romanian.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Romanian data
    • 2.1The values of Romanian se
      • 2.1.1 Se as a reflexive/reciprocal pronoun
      • 2.1.2 Se as a formative of inherently reflexive predicates
      • 2.1.3Anticausative se
      • 2.1.4Summary
      • 2.1.5 Se as a voice marker
    • 2.2The reflexive/non-reflexive alternation of Romanian unaccusatives
      • 2.2.1Preliminary remarks
      • 2.2.2Inventory of alternating unaccusatives
  • 3.Romanian vs Romance
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.237.13dra
References (31)
References
Alboiu, Gabriela, Barrie, Michael & Frigeni, Chiara. 2004. SE and the unaccusative-unergative paradox. In Curent Studies in Comparative Romance Linguistics [Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 107], Martine Coene, Gretel de Cuyper & Yves d’Hulst (eds), 109–139. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Achard, Michel. 2008. Verbes de rupture simples et réfléchis: Deux constructions intransitives. In Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française, Jacques Durand, Benoît Habert & Bernard Laks (eds), 2377–2388. Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française.Google Scholar
Beavers, John. 2011. On affectedness. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29: 335–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calude, Andreea S. 2007. Light and heavy reflexive marking. The middle domain in Romanian. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 5: 239–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cennamo, Michela. 2012. Aspectual constraints on the (anti)causative alternation in Old Italian. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(3): 394–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cennamo, Michela & Jezek, Elisabetta. 2011. The anticausative alternation in Italian. In Le Interfacce, Giovanna Massariello & Silvana Dal Masi (eds), 809–823. Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
Cornilescu, Alexandra. 1998. Remarks on syntax and the interpretation of Romanian middle passive SE sentences. Revue roumaine de linguistique XLIII(5–6): 317–342.Google Scholar
Cornilescu, Alexandra & Nicolae, Alexandru. 2015. The grammaticalization of a constraint of passive-reflexive constructions in Romanian. In Diachronic Variation in Romanian, Gabriela Pană Dindelegan, Rodica Zafiu, Adina Dragomirescu, Irina Nicula, Alexandru Nicolae & Louise Esher (eds), 309–361. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
DEX = Dicţionarul explicativ al limbii române, 1998, 2nd edn. Bucharest: Univers Enciclopedic.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen. 1998. Impersonal se constructions in Romance and the passivization of unergatives. Linguistic Inquiry 29(3): 399–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Se‑Si type anaphors. SynCom Project. <[URL]>
. The SE-anaphor and its role in argument realization. Ms.
Dragomirescu, Adina. 2010. Ergativitatea: Tipologie, sintaxă, semantică. Bucharest: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
2013. Intransitive verbs. In The Grammar of Romanian, Gabriela Pană Dindelegan (ed.), 72–78. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Forest, Robert. 1988. Sémantisme entéléchnique et affinité descriptive: Pour une réanalyse des verbes symétriques et neutres en français. Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 83: 137–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
GALR 2008 I, II – Gramatica limbii române, Vol. I: Cuvântul; Vol. II: Enunţul, Valeria Guţu Romalo (ed.). Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române.Google Scholar
GBLR 2010 – Gramatica de bază a limbii române, Gabriela Pană Dindelegan (ed.). Bucharest: Univers Enciclopedic Gold.Google Scholar
Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2009. Anticausativization. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27: 77–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labelle, Marie. 1992. Change of state and valency. Journal of Linguistics 28: 375–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labelle, Marie & Doron, Edit. 2010. Anticausative derivations (and other valency alternations) in French. Probus 22: 303–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lekakou, Marika. 2005. In the Middle, Somewhat Elevated. The Semantics of Middles and its Crosslinguistic Realization. PhD dissertation, University of London.Google Scholar
Maldonaldo, Ricardo. 1988. Energetic reflexives in Spanish. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 153–165. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
Manoliu-Manea, Maria. 1993. Inalienabilitate şi topicalitate în limba română. In Gramatică, pragmasemantică şi discurs, Maria Manoliu-Manea, 72–89. Bucharest: Editura Litera.Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2013. Voice and ellipsis. Linguistics Inquiry 44(1): 77–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicolae, Alexandru. 2013. A note on the syntax of Romanian aspectual verbs: Aspectuals and voice. In „Cuvinte potrivite”. Omagiu doamnei Maria Marin la aniversare, Daniela Răuţu, Adrian Rezeanu, Dana-Mihaela Zamfir (eds), 353–371. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, Francisco & Treviño, Esthela. 2011. Impersonals with passive morphology. In Selected Proceedings of the 13th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, Luis A. Ortiz-López (ed.), 314–324. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Pană Dindelegan, Gabriela. 2006. Din nou despre diateză. Consideraţii pe marginea soluţiei din noua gramatică academică, In Studii de gramatică şi de formare a cuvintelor. Omagiu Mioarei Avram, Marius Sala (ed.), 332–339. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya & Siloni, Tal. 2003, Thematic arity operations and parametric variation. OTS Working Papers in Linguistics TL-03-001. Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Rothemberg, Mira. 1974. Les verbes à la fois transitifs et intransitifs en français contemporain. Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Ruwet, Nicolas. 1972. Les constructions pronominales neutres et moyennes. Théorie syntaxique et syntaxe du français. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, Anne. 1987. La réflexivité ergative en français moderne. Le Français Moderne LV: 23–54.Google Scholar