Cover not available
Article published In:
Into adpositions: New formal perspectives on the structure of the PP and its variation
Edited by Víctor Acedo-Matellán, Theresa Biberauer, Jaume Mateu and Anna Pineda
[Linguistic Variation 21:1] 2021
► pp. 214–246

On the encoding of negation by Source prefixes and the satellite-/verb-framed distinction

Evidence from Latin and Spanish

| Universitat de Girona | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
This paper deals with Talmy’s (2000) typological distinction between satellite- and verb-framed systems by comparing the expression of negative meaning through Source prefixes in Latin and Spanish complex verbs. In particular, the claim is made that the different scope relations established between the Source prefixes and the verb root in each language are the reflection of their different typological nature. The core proposal is that Latin Source prefixes lexicalize a Path head that defines a phase, whereas the Path head lexicalized by the Spanish Source prefix is not phase-defining. This has consequences on the timing of Spell-Out as well as on the position in which roots are merged, which naturally accounts for the distinct lexicalization patterns shown by these prefixed constructions in both languages. The negative meaning of Source prefixes, in turn, is derived from the context in which they are embedded.
Keywords: satellite-/verb-framed typology, Source prefixes, negative meaning, Path, phase domains
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The use of Source prefixes to encode negation
    • 2.1In Latin
    • 2.2In Spanish
  • 3.Theoretical framework
    • 3.1Nanosyntax
    • 3.2Decomposing path
    • 3.3Decomposing the VP
    • 3.4Assumptions on roots
  • 4.On the satellite-/verb-framed typology: A syntactic approach
  • 5.The analysis
    • 5.1Latin vs. Spanish Source prefixes
    • 5.2Latin verbs of denial
    • 5.3Spanish negative verbs
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 September 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.00037.gib
References (64)
References
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor. 2006. Prefixes in Latin and Romance and the satellite-/verb-framed distinction. In Actes del VII Congrés de Lingüística General (CD-ROM). Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona. [URL] (March 2018).
. 2010. Argument structure and the syntax-morphology interface. A case study in Latin and other languages. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
. 2016. The morphosyntax of transitions. A case study in Latin and other languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Exoskeletal Versus Endoskeletal Approaches in Morphology. In Mark Aronoff (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Online Publication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor & Jaume Mateu. 2013. Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed Romance: A syntactic approach. Probus 251. 227–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. From syntax to roots: A syntactic approach to root interpretation. In Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer & Florian Schäfer (eds.), The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, 14–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. Works. 1961–1966. Including Categories, De Interpretatione, Prior and Posterior Analytics . Translated under the editorship of W. D. Ross. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bach, Emmon. 1986. The Algebra of Events. Linguistics and Philosophy 91. 5–16.Google Scholar
Bartra, Anna & Jaume Mateu. 2005. Aspecte i prefixació verbal en català antic. Caplletra 391. 85–108. [URL] (March 2018).
Battaner, María Paz. 1996. Características léxico-semánticas de los verbos prefijados con <des-> en DRAE 1992. Boletín de la Real Academia Española LXXVI1. 309–370.Google Scholar
Berro, Ane. 2015. Breaking verbs: from event structure to syntactic categories in Basque. University of the Basque Country dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
Borer, Hagit. 2005. The normal course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brea, Mercedes. 1976. Prefijos formadores de antónimos negativos en español medieval. Verba 31. 319–341. [URL] (August 2018).
. 1994. A propósito del prefijo des-. In B. Pallares, P. Piera & J. Sánchez Lobato (eds.), Homenaje a María Josefa Canellada, 111–124. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.Google Scholar
Caha, Pavel. 2009. The Nanosyntax of case. Tromsø: University of Tromsø dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. & Herbert H. Clark. 1979. When nouns surface as verbs. Language 551. 767–811. [URL] (August 2018).
[CORPES XXI] Real Academina Española. Corpus del Español del Siglo XXI. [URL] (April 2019).
[CREA] Real Academia Española. Corpus de Referencia del Español Actual. [URL] (March 2018).
Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria. 1997. Prefixed verbs and adjunct-identification. In Anna-Maria Di Sciullo (ed.), Projections and interface conditions. Essays on modularity, 52–74. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio. 2016. Las nominalizaciones. Madrid: Visor Libros.Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio & Rafael Marín. 2012. Differentiating eventivity from dynamicity: the Aktionsart of Davidsonian state verbs. LSRL 42. Cedar City, UT: Southern Utah University.Google Scholar
. 2017. On non-dynamic eventive verbs in Spanish. Linguistics 55(3). 451–488. DOI logoGoogle 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. 2017a. Asymmetries between Goal and Source prefixes in Spanish: A structural account from a diachronic perspective. In Silvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi (eds.), Space in Diachrony, 241–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017b. Source and negative prefixes: On the syntax-lexicon interface and the encoding of spatial relations. Girona: Universitat de Girona dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
Gibert-Sotelo, Elisabeth & Isabel Pujol-Payet. 2015. Semantic approaches to the study of denominal parasynthetic verbs in Spanish. Morphology 25(4). 439–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth & Samuel J. Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, Heidi. 2013. External arguments and the Mirror Principle: On the distinctness of Voice and v. Lingua 1251. 34–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. [1989] 2001. A natural history of negation. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labelle, Marie. 2000. The semantic representation of denominal verbs. In Peter Coopmans, Martin B. H. Everaert & Jane Grimshaw (eds.), Lexical specification and insertion, 215–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakusta, Laura & Barbara Landau. 2005. Starting at the end: The importance of goals in spatial language. Cognition 961. 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larson, Richard K. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 191. 335–91.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1983. Latin preverbs and cases. In Harm Pinkster (ed.), Latin linguistics and linguistic theory, 145–161. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 2007. On Davidsonian and Kimian states. In Ileana Comorovski & Klaus von Heusinger (eds), Existence: Semantics and syntax, 107–130. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. Penn Linguistics Colloquium (PLC) 211. 201–225.Google Scholar
. 2007. Phases and words. In Sook-Hee Choe (ed.), Phases in the theory of grammar, 191–222. Seoul: Dong In.Google Scholar
Martín García, Josefa. 2007. Las palabras prefijadas con des-. Boletín de la Real Academia Española LXXXVII (CCXCV). 5–27.Google Scholar
Mateu, Jaume. 2001. Locative and locatum verbs revisited. Evidence from Romance. In Yves D’Hulst, Johan Rooryck & Jan Schroten (eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 1999, 223–244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
[NGLE] Real Academia Española. 2009. Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Pantcheva, Marina. 2010. The syntactic structure of Locations, Goals and Sources. Linguistics 481: 1043–1082. DOI logo (March 2018).Google Scholar
. 2011. Decomposing Path: The Nanosyntax of directional expressions. Tromsø: University of Tromsø dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
[Perseus] Crane, Gregory R. (ed.). Perseus Digital Library. University of Tufts. [URL] (March 2018).
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Puigdollers, Cristina. 2013. Lexicalization by phase: The role of prepositions in argument structure and its cross-linguistic variation. Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
Rodríguez Rosique, Susana. 2011. Morphology and pragmatics of affixal negation. Evidence from Spanish des-. In José Luis Cifuentes Honrubia & Susana Rodríguez Rosique (eds.), Spanish word formation and lexical creation, 145–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. 2004. The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology and the expres-sion of motion events. In Sven Strömqvist & Ludo Verhoeven (eds), Relating events in narrative, vol. 2: Typological and contextual perspectives, 219–257. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal. 2009. A short primer to a new approach to language. Nordlyd 36(1). 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Towards elegant parameters: Language variation reduces to the size of lexically stored trees. In M. Carme Picallo (ed.), Linguistic variation in the Minimalist Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svenonius, Peter (ed.). 2004. Nordlyd 32 (2): Special issue on Slavic prefixes. Tromsø: University of Tromsø. [URL] (August 2018).
. 2006. The emergence of Axial Parts. Nordlyd 33(1). 49–77. Tromsø: University of Tromsø. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Spatial P in English. In Guglielmo Cinque & Luigi Rizzi (eds.), Mapping spatial PPs: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 6, 127–160. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1991. Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Linguistic Society (BLS) 171. 480–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: Mit Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Emma. 2001. On the expression of directional movement in English. Essex Graduate Student Papers in Language and Linguistics 41. 87–104.Google Scholar
. 2003. Manner-specificity as a factor in the acceptance of in and on in directional contexts. Essex Graduate Student Papers in Language and Linguistics 51. 117–146.Google Scholar
Tungseth, Mai. 2006. Verbal prepositions in Norwegian: Paths, Places and Possession. Tromsø: University of Tromsø dissertation. [URL] (March 2018).
Varela, Soledad & Josefa Martín García. 1999. La prefijación. In Ignacio Bosque & Violeta Demonte (dirs.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, 4993–5040. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Gibert-Sotelo, Elisabeth
2022. Chapter 13. Cyclical change in affixal negation. In Points of Convergence in Romance Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 360], ► pp. 226 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.