Cover not available
Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 14:2 (2016) ► pp.498–521

Revisiting Aktionsart types for lexical classes

| Universidad de La Laguna

A good number of lexical and grammatical models make use of systems of meaning representation which are based on a theory of event structure. Theories of event structure quite often take aspectual features as the backbone for the semantic representation of symbolic units, i.e predicates and constructions. One of the most comprehensive and detailed proposals for the aspectual characterization of both lexical units and argumental constructions can be found in the Lexical Constructional Model, which in turn is based on the system for semantic representations from Role and Reference Grammar. However, such a system presents some drawbacks, which stem mainly from not establishing a neat distinction between what is properly lexical and what is contributed by higher constructional units in the denotation of specific events. Taking such a distinction as a basic premise for a sound characterization of events, in this paper a reassessment of the typology of aspectual classes from these models is made; this critical revision is followed by a hierarchical reorganization of such aspectual classes.

Keywords: Aktionsart, Role and Reference Grammar, Lexical Constructional Model, constructions, lexical classes
Published online: 10 January 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.14.2.09cor
References
Bach, E
(1986) The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy, 91, 5–16.Google Scholar
Boas, H.C
(2005) Semantic frames as interlingual representations for multilingual lexical databases. International Journal of Lexicography, 18(4), 445–478. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) A frame-semantic approach to identifying syntactically relevant elements of meaning. In P. Steiner, H.C. Boas, & S. Schierholz (Eds.), Contrastive studies and valency: Studies in honor of Hans Ulrich Boas (pp. 119–149). Franfurkt/New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2014) Lexical and phrasal approaches to argument structure: Two sides of the same coin. Theoretical Linguistics, 40(1–2), 89–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borer, H
(2003) Exo-skeletal vs. endo-skeletal explanations: Syntactic projections and the lexicon. In J. Moore & M. Polinsky (Eds.), The nature of explanation in linguistic theory (pp. 31–67). Chicago: CSLI/University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Structuring sense (Vols. 1 & 21). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortés-Rodríguez, F.J
(2014) Aspectual features in role and reference grammar: A layered proposal. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 27(1), 23–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortés-Rodríguez, F.J., González, C., & Jiménez, R
(2012) Las clases léxicas: Revisión de la tipología de predicados verbales. In R. Mairal, L. Guerrero, & C. González Vergara (Eds.), El funcionalismo en la teoría lingüística: La Gramática del Papel y la Referencia (pp. 59–84). Madrid: Akal.Google Scholar
De Miguel, E
(1999) El aspecto léxico. In I. Bosque & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (Vol. 21, pp. 2977–3060). Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Dik, S.C
(1997) The theory of functional grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Filip, H
(2014) Weak and strong telicity via maximization. Workshop on identification and delimitation of events . Université Paris 7, March 7, 2014. [URL].
Goddard, C., & Wierzbicka, A
(2002) Meaning and universal grammar: Theory and empirical findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A.E
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Iwata, S
(2006) Argument resultatives and adjunct resultatives in a lexical constructional account: The case of resultatives with adjectival result phrases. Language Sciences, 28(5), 449–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Locative alternation: A lexical-constructional approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M
(1989) Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem, & P. von Emde Boas (Eds.), Semantics and contextual expressions (pp. 75–115). Dordrecht: Foris.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998) The origins of telicity. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and grammar (pp. 197–235). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport, M
(2005) Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mairal Usón, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J
(2008) New challenges for lexical representation within the lexical-constructional model. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 571, 137–158.Google Scholar
(2009) Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In C. Butler & J. Martín Arista (Eds.), Deconstructing constructions (pp. 53–198). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mel’cuk, I
(1989) Semantic primitives from the viewpoint of the meaning-text linguistic theory. Quaderni di Semantica, 10(1), 65–102.Google Scholar
Mel’cuk, I., & Wanner, L
(1996) Lexical functions and lexical inheritance for emotion lexemes in German. In L. Wanner (Ed.), Recent trends in Meaning-Text Theory (pp. 209–227). 
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, L
(2003) Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven, & J. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (pp. 163–210). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Type shifting in construction grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(1), 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) Entity and event coercion in a symbolic theory of syntax. In J.-O. Östman & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 45–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Stative by construction. Linguistics, 49(6), 1359–1399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavey, E
(2010) The structure of language: An introduction to grammatical analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, J
(1991) The syntax of event structure. In B. Levin & S. Pinker (Eds.), Lexical and conceptual structure (pp. 33–60). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1995) The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, G
(2008) Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rappaport, M., & Levin, B
(1998) Building verb meanings. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and syntactic constraints (pp. 97–134). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Rothstein, S
(2001) Predicates and their subjects. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
(2008a). Two puzzles for a theory of lexical aspect: The case of semelfactives and degree adverbials. In J. Dölling, T. Heyde-Zybatow, & M. Schäfer (Eds.), Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation (pp.175–198). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008b) Telicity, atomicity and the Vendler classification of verbs. In S. Rothstein
 (Ed.), Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect (pp. 43–77). 
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J
(2013) Meaning construction, meaning interpretation and formal expression in the lexical constructional model. In B. Nolan & E. Diedrichsen (Eds.), Linking constructions into functional linguistics (pp. 231–270). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J., & Mairal Usón, R
(2007) Levels of semantic representation: Where lexicon and grammar meet. Interlingüística, 171, 26–47.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J., & Galera Masegosa, A
(2014) Cognitive modeling: A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.S
(1997) The parameter of aspect (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, R.D. Jr
(2005) Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Some questions concerning accomplishments. Invited talk at the International symposium on verbs, clauses and constructions . University of La Rioja, October 2014.
Van Valin, R.D. Jr., & LaPolla, R.J
(1997) Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Z
(1967)[1957] Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verkuyl, H.J
(1993) A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A
(1996) Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M.L., & Oh, E
(2007) On the syntactic composition of manner and motion. 
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zucchi, S
(1998) Aspect shift. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Events and grammar (pp. 349–370). 
Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Martín-Padrón, Federico José
2023. The semantics of clause linkage: analysis of the finite complex complementation types in the English complain verbs . Complutense Journal of English Studies 31 ► pp. e88739 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.