Cover not available
Part of
Space in Diachrony
Edited by Silvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina and Chiara Zanchi
[Studies in Language Companion Series 188] 2017
► pp. 241–280

Asymmetries between Goal and Source prefixes in Spanish

A structural account from a diachronic perspective

| Universitat de Girona

An asymmetry is observed in Spanish between the Goal prefixes a- and en- and the Source prefix des-: while the former are not productively adjoined to verbal bases, the latter felicitously attaches to verbs in order to encode Source-oriented transition events. From a diachronic standpoint, it is shown that this asymmetry was not present in Latin, and that it was triggered by the evolution from a satellite-framed system (rich in prefixed verbs able to encode a Manner Co-event in the verbal root) to a verb-framed one (whose prefixed verbs can only encode an abstract Ground in the root of the verb). The different behaviour of a- and en-, on the one hand, and des-, on the other, can be accounted for by taking into consideration the different conceptual and structural complexity of Goal paths and Source paths. The present study offers a nanosyntactic analysis of the observed asymmetry which, in addition, fits the Goal bias and naturally explains the linear order in which Spanish directional prefixes appear in multi-prefixed verbs.

Keywords: directional prefixes, typology of motion events, diachronic evolution, Goal–Source asymmetry.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology and empirical basis
    • 2.1 Collection of the data
    • 2.2 Theoretical framework
      • 2.2.1Talmy’s typology of motion events
      • 2.2.2 Nanosyntax
  • 3.From Latin to Spanish
    • 3.1 Latin prefixed verbs
    • 3.2 Spanish parasynthetic verbs
    • 3.3 Prefixed verbs in Late Latin and Old Spanish: A typological change
  • 4.Goal prefixes a- and en- vs. Source prefix des- in Spanish
    • 4.1 The asymmetry
    • 4.2The high productivity of des- as a consequence of its Source-orientation
  • 5.A structural account
    • 5.1 Syntactic structure of paths and motion events
    • 5.2 Inherent syntactic structure of a-, en- and des- prefixed verbs
  • 6.Conclusions and future challenges
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 August 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.188.09sot
References
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor
2006a Una aproximació sintàctica als verbs prefixats en català. Estudios Catalanes 4: 41–78.Google Scholar
2006b Prefixes in Latin and Romance and the satellite-/verb-framed distinction. Actes del VII Congrés de Lingüística General (CD-ROM). Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
2010 Argument Structure and the Syntax-morphology Interface. A Case Study in Latin and Other Languages. PhD dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona.
2016a The Morphosyntax of Transitions. A Case Study in Latin and Other Languages. Oxford: OUP.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016b Preverbs llatins: Aspectes morfosintàtics i semàntics. In Cuestiones de morfología léxica, Cristina Buenafuentes, Glòria Clavería & Isabel Pujol (eds), 63–99. Madrid & Frankfurt: Iberoamericana & Vervuert.Google Scholar
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor & Mateu, Jaume
2009 L’expressió dels esdeveniments de canvi: Del llatí al català. In Diachronic Linguistics, Joan Rafel (ed.), 473–496. Girona: Documenta Universitaria.Google Scholar
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor & Mateu Jaume
2013 Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed Romance: A syntactic approach. Probus, International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 25: 227–265.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M.
1971 The Grammar of Case: Towards a Localistic Theory. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Bartra, Anna & Mateu, Jaume
2005 Aspecte i prefixació verbal en català antic. Caplletra 39: 85–108.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J.
1977 Case Marking in Australian Languages [Linguistic Series 23]. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Bye, Patrik & Svenonius, Peter
2012 Non-concatenative morphology as an epiphenomenon. In The Morphology and Phonology of Exponence: The State of the Art, Jochen Trommer (ed.), 427–495. Oxford: OUP.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clancy, Patricia M.
1985 The acquisition of Japanese. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vol.1, Dan I. Slobin (ed), 373–524. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Clave 2012 Diccionario Clave. Diccionario de uso del español actual. Ediciones SM. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Cole, Peter
1985 Imbabura Quechua. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
CORDE Real Academia Española. Corpus Diacrónico del Español. 〈[URL]〉
CREA Real Academia Española. Corpus de Referencia del Español Actual. 〈[URL]〉
Covarrubias, Sebastián de
1611 Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española. Madrid.Google Scholar
Crocco Galèas, Grazia & Iacobini, Claudio
1993 Parasintesi e doppio stadio derivativo nella formazione verbale del latino. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 78: 167–199.Google Scholar
DHLE Real Academia Española 1960–1996 Diccionario histórico de la lengua española. Madrid.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria
1997 Prefixed verbs and adjunct-identification. In Projections and Interface Conditions. Essays on Modularity, Anna-Maria Di Sciullo (ed.), 52–74. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
DRAE Real Academia Española 2014 Diccionaro de la lengua española. Madrid: RAE-Espasa Calpe. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Dufresne, Monique, Depuis, Fernande & Longtin, Catherine-Marie
2001 Un changement dans la diachronie du français: La perte de la préfixation aspectuelle en a-. Revue Québécoise de Linguistique 30: 33–54.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dufresne, Monique, Dupuis, Fernande & Tremblay, Mireille
2003 Preverbs and particles in Old French. In Yearbook of morphology, Geert Booij (ed), 30–60. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Efthymiou, Angelik
2015 Modern Greek parasynthetic verbs. A hierarchical relationship between prefixes and suffixes? In Affix Ordering across Languages and Frameworks, Stela Manova (ed), 82–107. Oxford: OUP.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio
2007 The Exhaustive Lexicalization Principle. Tromsø Working Papers on Language and Linguistics: Nordlyd 34(2): 165–199. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
2010 On Spanish prepositional prefixes and the cartography of prepositions. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 9: 55–77. 〈[URL]〉 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaffiot, Félix
1934 Dictionnaire Latin-Français. Paris: Hachette. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
García Hernández, Benjamín
1980 Semántica estructural y lexemática del verbo. Tarragona: Avesta.Google Scholar
Gehrke, Berit
2008 Ps in Motion: On the Semantics and Syntax of P Elements and Motion Events [LOT Dissertation Series 184]. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
Gibert Sotelo, Elisabeth
In preparation. Source and Negative Prefixes. On the Syntax-lexicon Interface and the Encoding of Spatial Relations. PhD dissertation, Universitat de Girona.
Gibert Sotelo, Elisabeth & Pujol Payet, Isabel
2015 Semantic approaches to the study of denominal parasynthetic verbs in Spanish. Morphology 25: 439–472.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grossmann, Maria
1994 Opposizioni direzionali e prefissazione: Analisi morfologica e semantica dei verbi egressivi prefissati con des- e es- in catalano. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey S.
1965 Studies in Lexical Relations. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Haverling, Gerd
2000 On Sco-verbs, Prefixes and Semantic Functions. A Study in the Development of Prefixed and Unprefixed Verbs from Early to Late Latin. Gŏteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R.
1988 Morphology, pragmatics and the un-verb. In ESCOL (5th Eastern State Conference on Linguistics), 210–233.
2002 Uncovering the un-word: A study in lexical pragmatics. Sophia Linguistica 49: 1–64.Google Scholar
Iacobini, Claudio
2010 Les verbes parasynthétiques: De l‘expression de l‘espace à l‘expression de l‘action. De Lingua Latina 3. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Ikegami, Yoshihiko
 1982 Source vs. Goal: A case of linguistic dissymmetry. In Language and Cognitive Styles [Neurolinguistics 11], Richard Hoops & Yvan Lebrun (eds), 292–308. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray
1983 Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1990 Semantic Structures. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jake, Janice L.
1985 Grammatical Relationships in Imbabura Quechua. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Keresztes, Laszlo
1998 Mansi. In The Uralic Languages [Routledge Language Family Descriptions], Daniel Abandolo (ed), 387–427. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kopecka, Anetta
2006 The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: Typological perspectives. In Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories, Maya Hickmann & Stéphane Robert (eds.), 83–101. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, Laura & Landau, Barbara
2005 Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition 96: 1–33.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, Laura, Wagner, Laura, O’Hearn, Kirsten & Landau, Barbara
2007 Conceptual foundations of spatial language: Evidence for a goal bias in infants. Language Learning and Development 3(3): 179–197.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian
1983 Latin preverbs and cases. In Latin Linguistics and Linguistic Theory [Studies in Language Companion Series 12], Harm Pinkster (ed), 145–161. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lestrade, Sander
2010 The Space of Case. PhD disseration, Radboud University.
Levin, Beth
1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewandowsky, Wojciech
2014 La alternancia locativa en castellano y polaco: un análisis tipológico-construccional. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Lewis, Charlton T. & Charles Short
1879 A Latin Dictionary: Founded on Andrews’ Edition of Freund’s Latin Dictionary: Revised, Enlarged, and in Great Part Rewritten by Charlton T. Lewis, Ph.D. 〈[URL]〉Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle
2010 Introducing Morphology. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
1977 Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Magomedbekova, Zagidad
1971 Karatinskii iazyk: Grammaticheskii analiz, teksty, slovar (The Karata Language: Grammar Analysis, Texts, Glossary). Tbilisi: Metsniereba.Google Scholar
Mulugeta, Seyoum
2008 A Grammar of Dime. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.
de Nebrija Antonio
1495 Dictionarium hispanum latinum o Vocabulario español-latino. Madrid: RAE (facsimile of the first edition, 1989).Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
1994 Ingush. In North East Caucasian Languages, Vol. 4: The Indigenous Languages of the Caucasus, Part 2, Rieks Smeets (ed), 79–145. Delmar NY: Caravan Books.Google Scholar
Pantcheva, Marina
2011 Decomposing Path: The Nanosyntax of Directional Expressions. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.
Papafragou, Anna, Massey, Christine & Gleitman, Lila
2006 When English proposes what Greek presupposes: The cross-linguistic encoding of motion events. Cognition 98: B75–B87.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papanastassiou, Georgios
2011 The preverb apo- in Ancient Greek. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Greek Linguistics, 29–31 October 2009, Chatzopoulou, Katerina, Alexandra Ioannidou & Suwon Yoon (eds), 97–111. Chicago, IL. 〈[URL]〉
Pashov, Petâr
1999 Bǔlgarska Gramatika (A Grammar of Bulgarian). Plovdiv: Hermes.Google Scholar
Perseus Digital Library
University of Tufts. 〈[URL]〉
Plag, Ingo
1999 Morphological Productivity. Structural Constraints in English Derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian
2008 Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez Rosique, Susana
2013 El valor aspectual de los verbos reversativos: Claves pragmáticas para un proceso de verbalización. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 54: 99–129. 〈[URL]〉 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scalise, Sergio
1986 Generative Morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serrano-Dolader, David
1995 Las formaciones parasintéticas en español. Madrid: Arco Libros.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal
2009 Nanosyntax: A short primer to a new approach to language. Nordlyd, 36(1): 1–6. 〈[URL]〉
Svenonius, Peter
2010 Spatial P in English. In The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 6Cinque, Guglielmo, Luigi Rizzi & Giorgos Spathas (eds), 127–160. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2007 Adpositions, particles and the arguments they introduce. In Argument Structure [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today] Reuland, Eric, Tanmoy Bhattacharya & Giorgos Spathas (eds), 63–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter, Gillian Ramchand, Michal Starke & Tarald Taraldsen
(eds) 2009 Nordlyd 36(1).Special issue on Nanosyntax, Tromsø: Septentrio Academic Publishing. 〈[URL]〉 Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard
1975 Semantics and syntax of motion. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, John P. Kimbal (ed), 181–238. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1985 Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, Timothry Shopen (ed), 57–149. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
1991 Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Linguistic Society (BLS) 17: 480–519.Google Scholar
2000 Toward a Cognitve Semantics. Cambridge MA: The Mit Press.Google Scholar
Torres Martínez, Marta
2006 Sobre el valor intensivo del prefijo des- en la lexicografía académica española. In El diccionario de la Real Academia Española: Ayer y hoy. Anexos de Revista de Lexicografía. Campos Souto, Mar & José Ignacio Pérez Pascual (eds), 237–249.Google Scholar
Vellard, Jahen A.
1967 Contribución al estudio de la lengua Uru. Buenos Aires: Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Gibert-Sotelo, Elisabeth
2021. On the encoding of negation by Source prefixes and the satellite-/verb-framed distinction. Linguistic Variation 21:1 ► pp. 214 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 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.