Separability of Light Verb Constructions in Persian*

More documents

Recommendations

Info

*f. ʔin ʔanja:m-ra: Ali (ʔaz) (be) ka:r-aš da:d. this performing-DOM Ali (of ) (to) work-his give-past ‘Ali did his work.’ (5) a. Ali be ra:dyo guš- kard Ali to radio ear do-past ‘Ali listened to the radio.’ *b. Ali be ra:dyo guš-e xubi kard Ali to radio ear-Ez. good do-past ‘Ali listened to the radio well.’ *c. Ali ?in guš-ra: be ra:dyo kard Ali this ear-DOM to radio do-Past ‘Ali did this listening to the radio.’ *d. guš-i ke Ali be ra:dyo kard va:zeh nabud. ear-Indef. Art. that Ali to radio do-past clear wasn’t ‘The listening that Ali did to the radio was not clear.’ *e. Ali če guš-i be ra:dyo kard? Ali what ear- Indef.Art. to radio do-past ‘What listening did Ali do to the radio?’ *f. ʔin guš-ra: Ali be ra:dyo kard this ear-DOM Ali to radio do-past ‘Ali did this listening to the radio.’ In the present work, it is shown that different behaviors of PVs and the (in)separability of LVCs is related to the fact that nominal PVs are of three different types: Verbal Nouns (VN), predicative nouns and non-predicative nouns. It will be illustrated that only the predicative noun PVs, as in (3), are able to be developed into DPs which can be separated in the syntax, while the other two groups of PVs, such as VN preverbs in (4) and non-predicative nouns in (5), are unable to be augmented into DPs due to their semantic and morphosyntactic properties. Thus, they cannot be separated in the syntax as in (4) and (5). This issue is explained in detail in section {3.2}. It is demonstrated that the (in)separability of LVCs can be accounted for in the light of the semantic and morphosyntactic properties of PVs and the (in)separability of LVCs in cases like (3-5) cannot necessarily mean that LVCs are formed at two different levels of representation, i.e. the lexicon and the syntax. The data in (1-5) can raise some questions. Why are all LVCs uniformly separable by some morphological and syntactic elements (1-2), while they behave differently in (3- 5)? Can the contrasts in (3-5) indicate that LVCs are formed at different levels, e.g. 4
lexicon or syntax and the internal structure of cases like (4) and (5) is not visible to the syntax? How do some PVs sometimes function as parts of predicates (3a) and sometimes as DP arguments playing the role of direct object? We have introduced the significant data and issues related to this work present section. The general properties of LVCs in Persian are presented in section {2}. In section {3}, the components of LVCs and their characteristics are explained. The (in)separability of LVCs is particularly focused on in section {4}. The concluding theoretical remarks of the paper are summarized in section {5}. 2. Light Verb Constructions Persian LVCs have attracted a number of researchers (Mohammad and Karimi, 1992; Vahedi-Langroudi, 1996; Karimi, 1987; Karimi Doostan, 1997; Dabir-Moghadam, 1995). More recently, Megerdoomian (2001) and Folli, Harley and Karimi (2005) have mainly focused on event structure and aspectual properties of Persian LVCs; while in Megerdoomian (2001) the LVs, in Folli, Harley and Karimi (2005) the VNs play an important role in determining the aspectual properties of LVCs. Both approaches claim that Persian LVCs can be accounted for syntactically and find it difficult to consider these complex verbs as lexical units. They attempt to explain the internal structure of Persian LVCs in the light of Hale and Keyser's (1993, 2002) lexical-syntax approach to verb formation. A considerable number of complex predicates including those focused on in this work are taken into consideration in both works and they take the position that the LVs are responsible for agentive arguments. Goldberg (2003) argues that Persian LVC is a zero level verb (V0) by default and whether LVC is expressed as a zero level verb or as a phrasal entity is determined by independently motivated constructions. Default V0 status accounts for the CP’s zero level properties including its resistance to separation 5
Page 1 and 2: Separability of Light Verb Construc
Page 3: c. tegarg-e diruz ʔin latme-ra: be
Page 7 and 8: (6) a. PP+V az dast + dâdan (of ha
Page 9 and 10: 3.1.1. Light Verbs vs. Heavy Verbs
Page 11 and 12: arguments as in (15), when it funct
Page 13 and 14: illustrated in sections {3.2.1} and
Page 15 and 16: . ʔa:qa:z-e ka:r-e Ali start-Ez. w
Page 17 and 18: Among the three groups of nominal P
Page 19 and 20: accepted that only stressed zero-le
Page 21 and 22: (31) a. tegarg be ba:q-e man latme
Page 23 and 24: (35) a. tegarg be ba:q-e-man latme
Page 25 and 26: they have N features as in normal n
Page 27 and 28: Neither can the LV itself predicate
Page 29 and 30: Francis and L. Machaelis (eds.), mi

Separability of Light Verb Constructions in Persian*

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?