Aspectual features in Role and Reference Grammar
A layered proposal
The kernel of the semantic representation of a predicate in Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) is based on its characterization in terms of an Aktionsart typology based on Vendler’s (1957) classes plus some additional elements from Smith (1997) and Dowty (1979). This means that event structures are mainly considered a lexical phenomenon pertaining to predicates, and only occasionally higher predicational structures are considered in event construction. Even though this approach is adequate to a great extent, there are still some problems in the approach taken in RRG. The most significant drawback is that non-lexical aspects appear intermingled with predicate-only features, which leads to misinterpretations and misclassifications of predicates. Consequently, it sees more sensible to bring a functional model of grammar like RRG to a compromise position and, thus, consider in what ways different units identified as belonging to the different layers in RRG’s syntactic projections ‘conspire’ in the final aspectual characterization of events. In this line, this paper will propose a classification of aspectual features in terms of the levels found in the functional projection of the clause as devised in RRG, namely the Predicate Level (the domain of Aktionsart typology), the Nucleus (where morphological aspect has scope) and the Core (the locus for what will be described as ‘aspectuality’ features).
References (65)
Albertuz, F.J
(
1995)
En torno a la fundamentación lingüística de la Aktionsart.
Verba: Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, 221, 285–337.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Borer, H
(
1994)
The projection of arguments. In
E. Benedicto &
J. Runner (Eds.),
Functional projections. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers, 171, 60–111.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Borer, H
(
2005)
Structuring sense. Vol. 1: In name only and Vol. 2: The normal course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cappelle, B., & Declerck, R
(
2005)
Spatial and temporal boundedness in English motion events.
Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 889–917.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Comrie, B
(
1976)
Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cortés, F.J., González, C., & Jiménez, R
(
2012)
Las clases léxicas: Revisión de la tipología de predicados verbales. In
R. Mairal,
L. Guerrero &
C. González (Eds.),
El funcionalismo en la teoría lingüística: La Gramática del Papel y la Referencia. Introducción, avances y aplicaciones (pp. 59–84). Madrid: Akal.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Croft, W.A
(
2001)
Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davidson, D
(
1967)
The logical form of action sentences. In
N. Rescher (Ed.),
The logic of decision and action (pp. 81–120). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Demonte, V
(
2006)
Qué es sintáctico y qué es léxico en la interficie entre sintaxis y léxico-semántica
.
Signo y seña, 151, 17–42.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dik, S.C
(
1997)
The theory of functional grammar. Part 1: The structure of the clause. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dowty, D.R
(
1979)
Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dowty, D.R
(
1991)
Thematic proto-roles and argument selection.
Language, 671, 547–619.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filip. H
(
1999)
Aspect, eventuality types and noun phrase semantics. New York: Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filip, H
(
2011)
Aspectual class and Aktionsart. In
C. Maienborn,
K. von Heusinger &
P. Portner (Eds.),
Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning (pp. 1186–1217). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fillmore, C., & Kay, P
(
1997)
The formal architecture of Construction Grammar. Unpublished. University of California, Berkeley.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldberg, A.E
(
1995)
Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hale, H., & Keyser, J
(
1993)
On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In
K. Hale &
J. Keyser (Eds.),
The view from building 20: Essays in honor of Sylvan Bromberger (pp. 53–109). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hale, H., & Keyser, J
(
1998)
The basic elements of argument structure.
MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 321, 73–118.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hale, H., & Keyser, J
(
2000)
Conflation. In
A. Bravo,
C. Luján &
I. Pérez (Eds.),
Cuadernos de Lingüística VII1 (pp. 39–76). Madrid: Instituto Universitario Ortega y Gasset.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hay, J., Kennedy, C., & Levin, B
(
1999)
Scalar structure underlies telicity in ‘degree achievements’. In
T. Matthews &
D. Strolovitch (Eds.),
Proceedings of SALT 9
(pp. 127–144). Ithaca: CLC Publications.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Higginbotham, J
(
2000)
On events in linguistic semantics. In
J. Higginbotham,
F. Pianesi &
A.C. Varzi (Eds.),
Speaking of events (pp. 49–79).Oxford University Press, Oxford.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Isacenko, A.V
(
1962)
Die russische Sprache der Gegenwart. Teil 1: Formenlehre. Halle (Saale): Niemeyer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackendoff, R
(
1990)
Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kamp, H
(
1979)
Events, instants and temporal reference. In
R. Bäuerle,
U. Egli &
A. von Stechow (Eds.),
Semantics from different points of view (pp. 376–417). Berlin: Springer.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krifka, M
(
1989)
Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In
R. Bartsch,
J. van Benthem &
P. van Emde Boas (Eds.),
Semantics and contextual expressions (pp. 75–115). Dordrecht: Foris.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krifka, M
(
1992)
Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In
I. Sag &
A. Szabolcsi (Eds.),
Lexical matters (pp. 29–53). Stanford: CSLI.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krifka, M
(
1998)
The origins of telicity. In
S. Rothstein (Ed.),
Events and grammar (pp. 197–235). Dordrecht. Kluwer Academic Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Landman, F
(
1992)
The progressive.
Natural Language Semantics, 1(1), 1–32.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Landman, F
(
2004)
Indefinites and the type of sets. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, B., & Rappaport, M
(
1995)
Unaccusativity at the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, B., & Rappaport, M
(
2005)
Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lieber, R
(
2004)
Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lyons, J
(
1977)
Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mairal, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J
(
2008)
New challenges for lexical representation within the Lexical-Constructional Model (LCM).
Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 571, 137–158.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mairal, R., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J
Marín Gálvez, R
(
1999)
Una propuesta para el tratamiento de la información aspectual en HPSG.
Procesamiento del lenguaje natural, 241, 70–82.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mateu, J
(
1999)
Universals of semantic construal for lexical syntactic relations. Paper presented at the 1999 GLOW Workshop: Sources of universals
. University of Postdam, Postdam. Available in
[URL].
Mateu, J
(
2002)
Argument structure: Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. Ph.D. Dissertation. Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mendikoetexea, A
(
2007)
En busca de los primitivos léxicos y su realización sintáctica: Del léxico a la sintaxis y viceversa. In
T. Cabré (Ed.),
Lingüística teòrica: Anàlisi i perspectives II (pp. 55–102). Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la UAB.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pustejovsky, J
(
1995)
The generative lexicon, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ramchand, G
(
2008)
Verb meaning and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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/Stanford University.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rijkhoff, J
(
1992)
The noun phrase: A typological study of its form and structure. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Amsterdam.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ritter, E., & Rosen, S.T
(
1998)
Delimiting events in syntax. In
M. Butt &
W. Geuder (Eds.),
The projection of arguments (pp. 135–164). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothstein, S
(
2001)
Predicates and their subjects. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothstein, S
(
2004)
Structuring events: A study in the semantics of lexical aspect. Oxford: Blackwell.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothstein, S
(
2008)
Two puzzles for a theory of lexical aspect: The case of semelfactives and degree adverbials. In
J. Dölling,
T. Heyde-Zybatow &
M. Shaefer (Eds.),
Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation (pp. 175–198). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothstein, S
(
2012)
Another look at accomplishments and incrementality. In
V. Demonte &
L. McNally (Eds.),
Telicity, change and state (pp. 60–102). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J., & Mairal, R
(
2007a)
Levels of semantic representation: Where lexicon and grammar meet.
Interlingüística, 171, 26–47.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ruiz de Mendoza, F.J., & Mairal, R
(
2007b)
The LCM: The general architecture of the model. Available at
[URL] [URL].
Smith, C.S
(
1997)
The parameter of aspect (2nd edition). Dordrecht: Reidel.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D., & LaPolla, R
(
1997)
Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Valin, R.D
(
2004).
Lexical representation, co-composition, and linking syntax and semantics. Unpublished manuscript available at: [
[URL]].
Van Valin, R.D
(
2005)
Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vendler, Z
(
1957)[1967]
Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verkuyl, H
(
1989)
Aspectual classes and aspectual composition.
Linguistics and Philosophy, 121, 39–94.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verkuyl, H.J
(
1993)
A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verkuyl, H.J
(
1999)
Aspectual issues: Structuring time and quantity. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zubizarreta, M.L., & Oh, E
(
2007)
On the syntactic composition of manner and motion. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zucchi, S
(
1999)
Incomplete events, intensionality and imperfective aspect.
Natural Language Semantics, 71, 179–215.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zwarts, J
(
2005)
Prepositional aspect and the algebra of paths.
Linguistics and Philosophy, 281, 739–779.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Cortés-Rodriguez, Francisco J.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 june 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.