Cover not available
Part of
The Evidential Basis of Linguistic Argumentation
Edited by András Kertész and Csilla Rákosi
[Studies in Language Companion Series 153] 2014
► pp. 103–132

Chapter 5. Hungarian verbs of natural phenomena with explicit and implicit subject arguments

Their use and occurrence in the light of data

The present chapter has two main aims. First, it attempts to provide a novel account for the occurrence of Hungarian verbs of natural phenomena with subject arguments. The problem which the present chapter wants to resolve is that there is an inconsistency between the previous explanations of the behaviour of verbs of natural phenomena with and without an explicit subject and the data. The previous approaches have considered the Hungarian verbs of natural phenomena subjectless, although data from various direct sources (such as written corpora, intuition, introspection, and spoken discourses) testify to occurrences of verbs of natural phenomena with explicit subjects. To eliminate this inconsistency, the chapter argues for a new, unified approach, according to which Hungarian verbs of natural phenomena have subject arguments in their lexical-semantic representations which can (or even should) be lexically unrealised in some contexts, while in others they can be explicitly expressed and contextual, grammatical as well as lexical-semantic factors together license the implicit or explicit occurrence of subject arguments. Second, applying Kertész & Rákosi’s (this volume, 2012) p-model, the chapter aims to reflect on a metalinguistic level on how the proposed explanation has been reached in the course of the research as well as how the new account can resolve the above mentioned problem.
Published online: 23 April 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.153.05nem
References (41)
References
Bartos, Huba. 2000. Az inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere (The syntactic background of inflectional phenomena). In Stukturális magyar nyelvtan , 3: Morfológia (Structural Hungarian Grammar, 3: Morphology), Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), 653–762. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó,Google Scholar
Bibok, Károly. 2008. Az igék szemantikája és a szintaktikai alternáció (The semantics of verbs and syntactic alternation). In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan , 4: A szótár szerkezete (Structural Hungarian Grammar, 4: Structure of the Lexicon), Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), 23–70. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
. 2009. Az evidencia problémája az elméleti nyelvészetben (The problem of evidence in theoretical linguistics). Talk presented at the conference Kutatócsoportjaink (Our research groups), Szeged.
. 2010. From syntactic alternation to lexical pragmatics. In The Role of Data at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface , Enikő Németh T. & Károly Bibok (eds), 261–304. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bibok, Károly & Németh T., Enikő. 2001. How the lexicon and context interact in the meaning construction of utterances. In Pragmatics and the Flexibility of Word Meaning , Enikő Németh T. & Károly Bibok (eds), 289–320. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred. 1983. Semantische und konzeptuelle Repräsentation lexikalischer Einheiten. In Untersuchungen zur Semantik [Studia Grammatica 22], Rudolf Růžička & Wolfgang Motsch (eds), 61–99. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1996. How much space gets into language? In Language and Space , Paul Bloom, Mary A Peterson, Lynn Nadel & Merrill F. Garrett (eds), 31–76. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cote, Sharon A. 1996. Grammatical and Discourse Properties of Null Arguments in English. Ph.D. dissertation, <[URL]> (20 December 2009).
Dik, Simon C. 1985. Formal and semantic adjustment of derived constructions. In Predicates and Terms in Functional Grammar , A. Machtelt Bolkestein, Casper de Groot & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (eds), 1–28. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2002. The Syntax of Hungarian . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Velasco, Daniel & Portero Muñoz, Carmen. 2002. Understood Objects in Functional Grammar [Working Papers in Functional Grammar 76], Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. Constructions, lexical semantics and the correspondence principle: Accounting for generalizations and subregularities in the realization of arguments. In The Syntax of Aspect , Nomi Erteschik-Shir & Tova Rapoport (eds), 215–236. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groefsema, Marjolein. 1995. Understood arguments: A semantic/pragmatic approach. Lingua 96: 139–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Groot, Casper. 1985. Predicates and features. In Predicates and Terms in Functional Grammar , A. Machtelt Bolkestein, Casper de Groot & J. Lachlan Mackenzie (eds), 71–84. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic Structures . Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kertész, András & Rákosi, Csilla. 2012. Data and Evidence in linguistics. A plausible argumentation model . Cambridge: CUP.DOI logo
. this volume. The p-model of data and evidence in linguistics. Google Scholar
Keszler, Borbála (ed.). 2000. Magyar grammatika (Hungarian Grammar). Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Kocsány, Piroska. 1997. Pro-drop und Textkohärenz: Interagierende Regeln im Gebrauch des Subjektspronomens im Ungarischen. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 44: 385–411.Google Scholar
Komlósy, András. 1994. Complements and adjuncts. In Syntax and Semantics 27, Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds), 91–178. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. A lexikai-funkcionális grammatika mondattanának alapfogalmai [Basic notions in the syntax of lexical-functional grammar]. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Maleczki Márta. 2001. Indefinite arguments in Hungarian. In Argument Structure in Hungarian , István Kenesei (ed), 157–199. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Martí, Luisa. 2006. Unarticulated constituents revisited. Linguistics and Philosophy 29: 135–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagy C., Katalin. 2008. Data in historical pragmatics: A case study on the Catalan periphrastic perfective past. In New Approaches to Linguistic Evidence: Pilot Studies , András Kertész & Csilla Rákosi (eds), 171–197. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Németh T., Enikő. 2000. Occurrence and identification of implicit arguments in Hungarian. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1657–1683. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001. Implicit arguments in Hungarian. In Argument Structure in Hungarian , István Kenesei (ed.), 113–156. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Németh T. Enikő. 2008. Az implicit alanyi és tárgyi argumentumok előfordulásának lexikai-szemantikai jellemzői (The lexical-semantic properties of the occurrence of implicit subject and direct object arguments). In Strukturális magyar nyelvtan , 4: A szótár szerkezete (Structural Hungarian Grammar, 4: Structure of the Lexicon), Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), 71–128. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Németh T., Enikő.. 2010. How lexical-semantic factors influence the verbs’ occurrence with implicit direct object arguments in Hungarian. In The Role of Data at the Semantics--Pragmatics Interface , Enikő Németh T. & Károly Bibok (eds), 305–348. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. & Károly Bibok. 2010. Interaction between grammar and pragmatics: The case of implicit arguments, implicit predicates and co-composition in Hungarian. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 501–524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon . Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1998. Generativity and explanation in semantics: A reply to Fodor and Lepore. Linguistic Inquiry 29: 289–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pusztai, Ferenc (ed.). 2003. Magyar értelmező kéziszótár (Concise Explanatory Dictionary of Hungarian), 2nd rev. edn. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 1997. Syntax: A Minimalist introduction . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Recanati, François. 2007. It is raining (somewhere). Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 123–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas. 1976. Plausible Reasoning . Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Rice, Sally. 1988. Unlikely lexical entries. Berkeley Linguistic Series 14: 202–212.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sárik, Pál. 1998. A határozói igenevek néhány problémája (Some problems of adverbial participles). Magyar Nyelv 94: 423–435.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition , 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Taylor, Kenneth. 2001. Sex, breakfast, and descriptus interruptus. Synthese 128: 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tóth, Ildikó. 2001. Impersonal constructions and null expletives. In Argument Structure in Hungarian , István Kenesei (ed.), 51–78. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 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.