Cover not available
Part of
Grammaticalization – Theory and Data
Edited by Sylvie Hancil and Ekkehard König
[Studies in Language Companion Series 162] 2014
► pp. 109–128

Grammaticalization of Polish mental predicate prefixes

ORCID logo
This article presents insights into grammaticalization mechanisms in an attempt to elucidate the status of the aspectual prefixes in Polish as semantically ‘heavy’ or semantically ‘light’. The verb myśleć ‘to think’ and its ten prefixes constitute the subject of investigation. The study employs corpus linguistics as a method and applies a number of tests, also proposing a new one, for identifying the degree of grammaticalization of the individual prefixes. The new test consists in analyzing collocation patterns of the transitive verb in its imperfective form and its perfective counterparts. It shows that the sets of collocates differ between the imperfective and perfective forms with a varying degree of overlap. A higher overlap ratio is interpreted to indicate a higher degree of grammaticalization.
Published online: 24 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.162.07kok
References (52)
References
Agrell, Sigurd. 1908. Aspektänderung und Aktionsartbildung beim polnischen Zeitworte: ein Beitrag zum Studium der indogermanischen Präverbia und ihrer Bedeutungsfunktionen. Lund: Ohlsson.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin. 1997. I think – an English modal particle. In Modality in German Languages, Toril Swan & Olaf Jansen (eds), 1-47. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bacz, Barbara. 2002. On the image-schema proposals for the preposition po in Polish. Glossos 3. [URL] (30 September 2009)Google Scholar
Boryś, Wiesław. 2005. Słownik Etymologiczny Języka Polskiego. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie.Google Scholar
Brückner, Aleksander. 1927. Słownik Etymologiczny Języka Polskiego. Kraków: Krakowska Spółka Wydawnicza.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: The role of frequency. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Joseph Brian & Richard Janda (eds), 602-623. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christensen, Jason Heath. 2011. The prefix PO- and aspect in Russian and Polish: A cognitive grammar account. [URL] > (30 December 2012)Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan J. 1989. Spatial Cognition and the Semantics of Prepositions in English, Polish and Russian. Munich: Sagner.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Danielewiczowa, Magdalena. 2002. Wiedza i Niewiedza: Studium Polskich Czasowników Epistemicznych (Knowing and Not Knowing: A study of Polish Epistemic Predicates). Warszawa: Katedra Lingwistyki Formalnej UW.Google Scholar
Dickey, Stephen M. 2000. Parameters of Slavic Aspect: A Cognitive Approach. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
. 2005. S-/Z- and the grammaticalization of aspect in Slavic. Slovene Linguistic Studies 5: 3-55.Google Scholar
. 2009. Subjectification and the East-West aspect division. In 9th Slavic Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Prague, The Czech Republic. 16 October 2009. Department of Czech Language and Theory of Communication of the Faculty of Arts, Charles University,Google Scholar
. Subjectification and the Russian perfective. Ms.
Dickey, Stephen M. & Hutcheson, Julie. 2003. Delimitative verbs in Russian, Czech and Slavic. In American contributions to the Thirteenth International Congress of Slavists, Robert A. Maguire & Alan Timberlake (eds.), 23-36. Columbus OH: Ohio Slavca.Google Scholar
Doroszewski, Witold. (ed.). 2006. Słownik Języka Polskiego (Dictionary of the Polish Language). Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Fabiszak, Małgorzata & Kokorniak, Iwona. In preparation. Collocation analysis as a means of measuring the grammaticalization of aspectual prefixes in Polish.
Fischer, Olga. 2011. Grammaticalization as analogically driven change? In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 31-42. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Grzegorczykowa, Renata, Laskowski, Roman & Wróbel, Henryk (eds). 1998. Gramatyka Współczesnego Języka Polskiego: Morfologia (The Grammar of Contemporary Polish Language). Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1998. Does grammaticalization need reanalysis? Studies in Language 22: 315-51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd 2003. Grammaticalization. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Brian Joseph & Richard Janda (eds), 575-601. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. In Grammaticalization, 2 Vols, Paul Hopper & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), 17-35. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Isačenko, Aleksandr Vasil’evič. 1960. Grammatičeskij Stroj Russkogo Jazyka v Sopostavlenii s Slovackim . Morfologija. [Grammatical System in Russian in Comparison to Slovak. Morphology]. Bratislava: Academy of Sciences Publishing Press.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura A. 1986. A Semantic Analysis of the Russian Verbal Prefixes za-, pere-, do- and ot-. Munich: Sagner.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura A. & Lyashevskaya, Olga. 2011. Aspectual pairs in the Russian National Corpus. Scando-Slavica 54 [URL] (15 January 2013).Google Scholar
Joseph, Brian. 2011. Grammaticalization: A general critique. In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 193-205. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Karčevski, Serge. 1927. Système du Verbe Russe: Essai de Linguistique Synchronique, I. Prague: Plamja.Google Scholar
Kochańska, Agata. 2007. Conflicting epistemic meanings of the Polish aspectual variants in past and future uses: Are they a vagary of grammar? In Cognitive Paths into the Slavic Domain, Divjak, Dagmar & Agata Kochańska (eds), 149-180. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krawczak, Karolina & Glynn, Dylan. 2012. Context and cognition: A corpus-driven approach to parenthetical uses of mental predicates. In Cognitive Processes in Language, Krysztof Kosecki & Janusz Badio (eds), 87-98. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1965. The evolution of grammatical categories. Diogenes 13(51): 55-71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2001. The English present tense. English Language and Linguistics 5(2): 251-272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Grammaticalization and Cognitive Grammar. In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 79-91. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1991. On the gradualness of grammaticalization. In Approaches to Grammaticalization,1 [Typological Studies in Language 19], Bernd Heine & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), 37-80. Amsterdam: John Bejamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linde-Usiekniewicz, Jadwiga (ed.). 2008. Wielki Słownik Angielsko-Polski PWN-Oxford (The PWN-Oxford Great English-Polish Dictionary). Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Lindner, Susan Jean. 1983. A Lexico-Semantic Analysis of English Verb Particle Constructions. Trier: Linguistic Agency University of Trier.Google Scholar
Łaziński, Marek. 2011. Polish aspectual prefixes, their order and functions: A study based on the National Corpus of Polish. Word Structure 4: 231-243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1912. L’évolution des formes grammaticales. Scientia 12(6): 384-400.Google Scholar
Pasich-Piasecka, Agnieszka. 1993. Polysemy of the Polish verbal prefix prze- . In Images from the Cognitive Scene, Elzbieta Górska (ed.), 11-26. Kraków: Universitas.Google Scholar
Pęzik, Piotr. 2012. Wyszukiwarka PELCRA dla danych NKJP (PELCRA search engine for the NCPL data). In Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego, Adam Przepiórkowski, Miroslaw Bańko, Rafał Górski & Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds), 253-274. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
Piernikarski, Cezar. 1969. Typy Opozycji Aspektowych Czasownika Polskiego na tle Słowiańskim. [Types of aspectual oppositions of the Polish verb in the context of Slavic] Warszawa: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
. 1975. Czasowniki z Prefiksem po- w Języku Polskim i Czeskim: Na Tle Rodzajów Akcji w Językach Słowiańskich (Verbs with the po- prefix in Polish and Czech: In the background of Aktionsarten in Slavic languages). Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
Przepiórkowski, Adam, Bańko, Mirosław, Górski, Rafał L. & Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara (eds). 2012. Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego (The National Corpus of the Polish Language). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
Przybylska, Renata. 2002. Polisemia Przyimków Polskich w Świetle Semantyki Kognitywnej (The polysemy of Polish prefixes from the cognitive semantic perspective). Kraków: Univesitas.Google Scholar
. 2006. Schematy Wyobrażeniowe a Semantyka Polskich Prefiksów Czasownikowych do-, od-, prze-, roz-, u- (Image Schemata and the Semantics of Polish Verb Prefixes do-, od-, prze-, roz-, u-). Kraków: Universitas.Google Scholar
Radden, Gunter & Dirven, René. 2007. Cognitive English Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlesinger, Izchak M. 1998. Cognitive Space and Linguistic Case: Semantic and Syntactic Categories in English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Shinzato, Rumilo. 2004. Some observations concerning mental verbs and speech act verbs. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 861-882. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Śmiech, Witold. 1986. Derywacja Prefiksalna Czasowników Polskich (Prefix Derivation of Polish Verbs). Wrocław: Ossolineum.Google Scholar
Tabakowska, Elżbieta. 2003. Space and time in Polish: The preposition za and the verbal prefix za- . In Motivation in Language. Studies in Honor of Günter Radden [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 243], Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, René Dirven & Klaus-Uwe Panther (eds), 153-177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2011. Grammaticalization and mechanisms of change. In The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 19-28. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Bernd Heine. 1991. Introduction. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, 2:Focus on Types of Grammatical Markers [Typological Studies in Language 19], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 1-14. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1996. Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar