05.08.2013 Views

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

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.

3. INTERPRETATION OF PVC TYPES 249<br />

Ihypothesized that all <strong>language</strong>s with a complementation system use<br />

at least two di erent types of PVCs (Hypothesis I). These di erent<br />

complement types are assigned either an event <strong>in</strong>terpretation or a<br />

propositional read<strong>in</strong>g. One PVC type is exclusively event denot<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(Hypothesis II) and at least one PVC type is proposition denot<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

In certa<strong>in</strong> contexts it cannot be excluded that proposition<br />

denot<strong>in</strong>g PVC types can also be event denot<strong>in</strong>g (Hypothesis III).<br />

(1) Hypothesis I<br />

Provided that at least one PV <strong>in</strong> a <strong>language</strong> has a cognitive<br />

mean<strong>in</strong>g, all <strong>language</strong>s with a complementation system use at<br />

least two di erent types of PVC, one to express events and<br />

one to denote propositions.<br />

(2) Hypothesis II<br />

At least one PVC type is exclusively event denot<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

(3) Hypothesis III<br />

PVC types that are primarily proposition denot<strong>in</strong>g can under<br />

special conditions also be event denot<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The results showed that <strong>in</strong> English, NI-PVCs, <strong>in</strong>g-PVCs, and PNOMs<br />

are exclusively event denot<strong>in</strong>g, to-PVCs are exclusively proposition<br />

denot<strong>in</strong>g, and that-PVCs are primarily proposition denot<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and under special conditions additionally event denot<strong>in</strong>g. English<br />

that-PVCs are basically proposition denot<strong>in</strong>g and are listed as such<br />

<strong>in</strong> the typological considerations below. Their structural and semantic<br />

exibility, however, enables that-PVCs to also encode events provided<br />

that the restrictions put on event denot<strong>in</strong>g complement types<br />

are all met. These special conditions are ma<strong>in</strong>ly semantic <strong>in</strong> nature:<br />

temporal simultaneity, perceptible process predicates, no negation, no<br />

modal modi cation. The structural and semantic description of type1<br />

and type2 PVCs <strong>in</strong> <strong>Akatek</strong> accord<strong>in</strong>g to the criteria established for the<br />

analysis of English PVC types <strong>in</strong> chapter 3 con rmed Hypothesis II: at<br />

least one PVC type is exclusively event denot<strong>in</strong>g, as well as Hypothesis<br />

III: PVC types that are primarily proposition denot<strong>in</strong>g can under<br />

special conditions also be event denot<strong>in</strong>g. The results also con rm<br />

Hypothesis I: all <strong>language</strong>s with complementation systems have two<br />

di erent PVCtypes, one of which is used to express events and the<br />

other to denote propositions.<br />

The comparison of type1 PVCs <strong>in</strong> <strong>Akatek</strong> with that-PVCs <strong>in</strong> English<br />

on the one hand and of type2 PVCs <strong>in</strong> <strong>Akatek</strong> with PNOMs <strong>in</strong><br />

English on the other showed a high degree of similarity regard<strong>in</strong>g their<br />

structural and the semantic characteristics. In Table 1, the distribution

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!