Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Description of Lexical Relations in a ...
Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Description of Lexical Relations in a ...
Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Description of Lexical Relations in a ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
—<strong>Chapter</strong> <strong>18</strong>. <strong>Lexical</strong> <strong>Functions</strong>— 77<br />
NB: What has just been said should by no means be construed as a claim to the effect that it is always or even<br />
fairly <strong>of</strong>ten possible to state the semantic conditions for the distribution <strong>of</strong> LF shared values. Quite on the<br />
contrary, I th<strong>in</strong>k that, as a general rule, such description is unfeasible—because <strong>of</strong> a very high degree <strong>of</strong><br />
idiosyncrasy <strong>in</strong> lexical cooccurrence. However, some regularities or tendencies exist beyond any doubt, and<br />
it is worth the researcher’s effort to capture them.<br />
5.3. Ellipsis <strong>of</strong> the keyword <strong>of</strong> an LF<br />
In texts, sentences are <strong>of</strong>ten seen <strong>in</strong> which the keyword <strong>of</strong> an LF has been elided, while the<br />
LF’s expression, i.e., an element <strong>of</strong> its value, is present. For <strong>in</strong>stance, sentence (12) is quite clear:<br />
(12) 1.10$ a liter and climb<strong>in</strong>g [ a newspaper title].<br />
It is about the donate blood, gasol<strong>in</strong>e price; but how is the verb CLIMB selected if the noun PRICE<br />
is not <strong>in</strong> the sentence? To produce (12), its DSyntS must conta<strong>in</strong> the LU PRICE, which will<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>e the correct choice <strong>of</strong> the element for the LF IncepPredPlus:<br />
IncepPredPlus<br />
I<br />
PRICE<br />
!<br />
CLIMB<br />
subjectival<br />
PRICE<br />
Only when the proper element <strong>of</strong> the value <strong>of</strong> the LF is <strong>in</strong> the SSyntS can the ellipsis take place.<br />
As one sees, such ellipses do not create any additional difficultes for the use <strong>of</strong> LFs.<br />
6 L<strong>in</strong>guistic Nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lexical</strong> <strong>Functions</strong><br />
To characterize the l<strong>in</strong>guistic nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lexical</strong> <strong>Functions</strong> <strong>in</strong> a more pr<strong>of</strong>ound way, I will<br />
discuss now the semantic aspect <strong>of</strong> LFs, their phraseological aspect, their place <strong>in</strong> utterance<br />
representations, and their universality.<br />
6.1 Semantic Aspect <strong>of</strong> <strong>Lexical</strong> <strong>Functions</strong><br />
Under this head<strong>in</strong>g, five po<strong>in</strong>ts have to be made:<br />
• an LF is by no means a semantic unit;<br />
• an LF can have several semantic subtypes;<br />
• an LF can return semantically different sets <strong>of</strong> elements <strong>of</strong> its value cont<strong>in</strong>gent on different<br />
semantic ‘facets’ <strong>of</strong> the keyword;<br />
• some syntagmatic LFs have to be related to some components <strong>in</strong> the def<strong>in</strong>itions <strong>of</strong> their<br />
keyword;<br />
• LFs are Deep <strong>Lexical</strong> Units.