24.02.2013 Views

Proceedings of the LFG 02 Conference National Technical - CSLI ...

Proceedings of the LFG 02 Conference National Technical - CSLI ...

Proceedings of the LFG 02 Conference National Technical - CSLI ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

instance by Grimshaw 1994), how can we derive <strong>the</strong> inverted syntactic con-<br />

figuration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> preocupar verbs from <strong>the</strong>ir semantic characteristics?<br />

2 A reformulation <strong>of</strong> Dowty’s proto-role <strong>the</strong>ory<br />

2.1 A new pair <strong>of</strong> proto-role properties<br />

The answers to <strong>the</strong>se two questions have to be <strong>of</strong> a very different nature. The ex-<br />

planation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> difference between <strong>the</strong> temer and <strong>the</strong> gustar verbs is essentially<br />

non-semantic. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> difference between <strong>the</strong> preocupar and temer<br />

classes <strong>of</strong> verbs seems to be triggered by a semantic distinction. The correspon-<br />

dence between semantic roles and grammatical functions is <strong>the</strong> object <strong>of</strong> study<br />

<strong>of</strong> different kinds <strong>of</strong> “mapping <strong>the</strong>ories”, both inside and outside <strong>the</strong> framework<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>LFG</strong>. As is explained in Butt and Holloway King (2000), different approaches<br />

were developed within <strong>LFG</strong>, Lexical Mapping Theory being one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most pop-<br />

ular (Bresnan and Kanerva 1989, Bresnan 2001). O<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>ories were developed<br />

outside <strong>LFG</strong> (Joppen and Wunderlich 1995, Wechsler 1995) or from a perspective<br />

which is relatively neutral as to <strong>the</strong> syntactic <strong>the</strong>ory one adopts (Ackerman and<br />

Moore 2001). In this paper, I will primarily follow Lexical Mapping Theory. The<br />

first step in my analysis is to integrate <strong>the</strong> aspectual difference between <strong>the</strong>se two<br />

types <strong>of</strong> verbs into <strong>the</strong> mapping <strong>the</strong>ory. Therefore, I take as a starting-point <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>-<br />

matic <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> Dowty (1991). 3 Dowty distinguishes two lists <strong>of</strong> properties, which<br />

can be used to characterize <strong>the</strong> two <strong>the</strong>matic roles (“proto-roles”) he distinguishes:<br />

(4) Contributing properties for <strong>the</strong> Agent Proto-Role:<br />

a. volitional involvement in <strong>the</strong> event or state<br />

b. sentence [sic] (and/or perception)<br />

c. causing an event or change <strong>of</strong> state in ano<strong>the</strong>r participant<br />

d. movement (relative to <strong>the</strong> position <strong>of</strong> ano<strong>the</strong>r participant)<br />

3 Several o<strong>the</strong>r authors working within an <strong>LFG</strong> framework also use Dowty’s <strong>the</strong>ory as <strong>the</strong> basis for<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir mapping <strong>the</strong>ories: Ackerman and Moore (1999), Alsina (1996), Kelling (20<strong>02</strong>), Zaenen (1993).<br />

However, <strong>the</strong> proposal presented here is different in several respects from <strong>the</strong> approaches developed<br />

by <strong>the</strong>se authors.<br />

376

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!