Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 47:3 (2023) ► pp.571–598

A hitherto unnoticed type of verb-framed construction in Lithuanian and the typology of event conflation

ORCID logo | Vilnius University
The article starts out from a Lithuanian construction denoting achievement of an excessive value of some parameter of an incremental event. It is verb-framed, that is, the main-clause verb denotes motion along a path towards a normative value of the parameter involved. Its implications for our understanding of the Talmyan typology of event conflation are discussed. Event conflation in the domains of spatial motion and change of state has received most attention in the literature; differences in saliency and elaboration, and the importance of constraints on the lexicalization of path (result) and manner, have been pointed out. The Lithuanian verb-framed constructions discussed here are, however, similar to those in the domain of ‘temporal contouring’ in that they involve an incremental path superimposed on the path-to-result lexicalized in the embedded predicate. This extension beyond the core domains of spatial motion and change of state represents another dimension of the Talmyan typology, largely overlooked until now.
Keywords: event conflation, verb-framed construction, satellite-framed construction, incremental path, Lithuanian, implicative verbs
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The main features of the ‘excessive-degree’ construction
    • 2.1The lexical input
    • 2.2Clausal and nominal complements
  • 3.Verb-framed and satellite-framed constructions
  • 4.Paths based on paths: Temporal contouring and other verb-framed constructions
  • 5.Parallels in verb-framed languages
  • 6.Diachrony
  • 7.Some discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • Electronic resources
  • References
Published online: 21 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.21082.hol
References (34)
Electronic resources
CCLL = Corpus of the Contemporary Lithuanian Language at [URL]
LKŽ = Lietuvių kalbos žodynas, the Academic Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language at [URL]
RNC = Russian National Corpus at [URL]
References
Acedo-Matellán, Víctor & Jaume Mateu. 2013. Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed Romance: A syntactic approach. Probus: International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 25(2). 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambrazas, Vytautas. 1981. Zur Geschichte einer indogermanischen Konstruktion (Dativus cum infinitivo im Baltischen). Kalbotyra 32(3). 12–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. Die indogermanische Grundlage des Dativus und Nominativus cum infinitivo im Baltischen. Indogermanische Forschungen 921. 203–219.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter M. 2011. Aspect and actionality in Lithuanian on a typological background. In Daniel Petit, Claire Le Feuvre & Henri Menantaud (eds.), Langues baltiques, langues slaves, 61–92. Paris: Editions CNRS.Google Scholar
Beavers, John, Beth Levin & Shiao Wei Tham. 2010. The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics 46(2). 331–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Östen Dahl. 1989. The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13(1). 51–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William, Jóhanna Barðdal, Willem Hollmann, Violeta Sotirova & Chiaki Taoka. 2010. Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In Hans C. Boas (ed.), Contrastive studies in Construction Grammar, 210–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1981. On the definition of the telic-atelic (bounded-nonbounded) distinction. In Philip Tedeschi & Annie Zaenen (eds.), Tense and aspect (= Syntax and Semantics 14), 79–90. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1989. From purposive to infinitive – a universal path of grammaticalization. Folia Linguistica Historica 10(1–2). 287–310.Google Scholar
Holvoet, Axel, Anna Daugavet & Vaiva Žeimantienė. 2021. Perfective presents in Lithuanian. Baltic Linguistics 121 (thematic issue Studies in the TAME Domain in Baltic and Its Neighbours). 249–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iacobini, Claudio, Luisa Corona, Noemi De Pasquale & Alfonsina Buoniconto. 2017. How should a ‘classical’ satellite-framed language behave? Path encoding asymmetries in Ancient Greek and Latin. In Silvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi (eds.), Space in diachrony, 95–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri. 1971. Implicative verbs. Language 47(2). 340–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kozhanov, Kirill. 2016. Verbal prefixation and argument structure in Lithuanian. In Axel Holvoet & Nicole Nau (eds.), Argument structure in Baltic, 363–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1991. Wiping the slate clean: A lexical semantic exploration. Cognition 411. 123–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Lexicalization patterns. In Robert Truswell (ed.), The Oxford handbook of event structure, 395–425. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko. 2003. Typologies of lexicalization patterns and event integration: Clarifications and reformulations. In Shuji Chiba & Yoshiko Matsumoto (eds.), Empirical and theoretical investigations into language: A festschrift for Masaru Kajita, 403–418. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Beth Levin. 1998. Building verb meanings. In Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments. Lexical and compositional factors, 97–134. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Riaubienė, Benita. 2015. Resultative secondary predicates in the Baltic languages. In Axel Holvoet & Nicole Nau (eds.), Argument realization in Baltic, 403–425. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. 1996. Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, 195–219. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
2006. What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In Maya Hickman & Stéphane Robert (eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories, 59–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speed, Traci. 2015. Manner/path typology of Bulgarian motion verbs. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 23(1). 51–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stolova, Natalya I. 2008. From satellite-framed Latin to verb-framed Romance: Late Latin as an intermediate stage. In Roger Wright (ed.), Latin vulgaire―latin tardif VIII: Actes du VIIIe Colloque International sur le Latin Vulgaire et Tardif, 253–262. Hildesheim: Georg OlmsGoogle Scholar
Sugiyama, Yukiko. 2005. Not all verb-framed languages are created equal: The case of Japanese. Berkeley Linguistics Society 311. 299–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 31: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 36–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1991. Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Berkeley Linguistics Society 171. 480–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. A typology of event integration. Chapter 3 in Leonard Talmy, Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 21, 213–288. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Lexical typologies. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 31: Grammatical categories and the lexicon. 2nd edn., 66–168. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2008. Grammaticalization, constructions and the incremental development of language: Suggestions from the development of degree modifiers in English. In Regine Eckardt, Gerhard Jäger & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Variation, selection, development. Probing the evolutionary model of language change, 219–250. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uchiyama, Kiyoko & Shun Ishizaki. 2003. A disambiguation method for Japanese compound verbs. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Multiword Expressions: Analysis, Acquisition and Treatment. Vol. 181, 81–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ulvydas, Kazys, ed. 1976. Lietuvių kalbos gramatika. III. Sintaksė [Lithuanian grammar III. Syntax]. Vilnius: Mokslas.Google Scholar
Wienold, Götz. 1995. Lexical and conceptual structures in expressions for movement and space, with reference to Japanese, Korean, Thai, and Indonesian as compared to English and German. In Urs Egli, Peter E. Pause, Christoph Schwarze, Arnim von Stechow & Götz Wienold (eds.), Lexical knowledge in the organization of language, 301–340. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar