JUST HOW LIGHT ARE CROATIAN LIGHT VERBS?
Abstract
Grounded in the constructionist approach to language, as principally represented in works by Goldberg (1996) and Jackendoff (2010), this article examines some important features of the so-called light verb constructions (Butt 2003). Following a short overview of certain observations made by various theoreticians, ranging from those aligned with contemporary Anglo-American schools of linguistic thought (GradečakErdeljić & Brdar 2012, Wittenberg et al. 2014) to those belonging to the South Slavic structuralist tradition (Radovanović 1990, Silić & Pranjković 2005), the present paper proceeds to provide a preliminary analysis of a selection of results obtained through a psycholinguistic experiment on Croatian light verb constructions. Confronted with a formal written elicitation task, a total of 60 subjects, all of whom were speakers of Croatian, were, inter alia, asked to a) match, if deemed possible, a series of light verb constructions (as well as a series of filler constructions) with their monolexemic verbal counterparts b) to rate the degree of equivalence between the matched units and c) to rate them on scale of abstractness and concreteness. The data presented is accompanied by a short discussion and is intended to serve as the basis for subsequent practical and theoretical research on light verb constructions.
Downloads
References
2. Butt, Miriam. 2003. The light verb jungle. u: Harvard Working Papers in
Linguistics, ur. G. Aygen, C. Bowern i C. Quinn. 1-49. Vol. 9, Papers from
the GSAS/Dudley House Workshop on Light Verbs.
3. Cetnarowska, Bożena. 2012. On English verbo-nominal constructions
and different construals of situations. u: Image, imagery, imagination in
contemporary English studies, ur. Bożena Cetnarowska and Olga Glebova,
189-207. Częstochowa: Wydawnictwo AJD, 2012.
4. Family, Neiloufar. 2006. Explorations of semantic space: The case of
light verb constructions in Persian. Doktorska disertacija. École des Hautes
Études en Sciences: Paris.
5. Fillmore, Charles J. 1977. The case for case reopened. u: Grammatical
Relations (Syntax and Semantics 8), ur. Cole, Peter i Jerrold Sadock, 59–
82. New York: Academic Press.
6. Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1:
Theoretical prerequisites, 144-145. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
7. Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2:
Descriptive application, 23-25. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
8. Gradečak-Erdeljić, Tanja, Mario Brdar. 2012. Constructional meaning of
verbo-nominal construction in English and Croatian. Suvremena lingvistika
38/73: 29–46.
9. Gradečak-Erdeljić, Tanja. 2009. Iconicity of the verbal expression – The
case of “light verbs”. u: Brdar, Mario, Marija Omazić, Višnja Pavičić Takač
(ur.) Cognitive Approaches to English: Fundamental, Methodological,
Interdisciplinary and Applied Aspects. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing, 3–26.
10. Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
11. Gross, Gaston. 1989. Les constructions converses du français. GeneveParis: Librairie Droz.
12. Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The Architecture of the Language Faculty
[Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 28]. Cambridge: MIT Press.
13. Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning,
Grammar, Evolution. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Jackendoff, Ray. 2010. Meaning and the Lexicon: The Parallel Architecture 1975–2010. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Jespersen, Otto. 1954. A Modern English Grammar on Historical
Principles. London: Allen & Unwin and Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard.
16. Kuna, Branko. 2012. Predikatna i vanjska posvojnost u hrvatskome
jeziku. Osijek: Filozofski fakultet u Osijeku.
17. Nespital, Helmut. 1989. Verbal Aspects and Lexical Semantics in IndoAryan Languages: The Typology of of Verbal Expression (“Compound
Verbs”) and their Relation to Simple Verbs. Studien zur Indologie und
Iranistik 15: 159-195.
18. Nickel, Gerhard. 1968. Complex Verbal Structures in English.
International Review of Applied Linguistics 6, 1-21.
19. Opačić, Nives. 2009. Reci mi to kratko i jasno. Zagreb: Novi Liber. ž
20. Peti-Stantić, Anita, Marin Kežić, Hrvoje Japirko. (u tisku) Specifične
glagolsko-imenske konstrukcije: povijest proučavanja i ispitivanje uporabe
u hrvatskom jeziku. Suvremena lingvistika.
21. Piñango, Maria M., Jennifer Mack, Ray Jackendoff. 2006. Semantic
combinatorial processes in argument structure: Evidence from light
verbs. Proceedings of the thirdy-second annual meeting of the Berkeley
Linguistics Society: 573–583.
22. Radovanović, Milorad. 1977. Dekomponovanje predikata (na primerima
iz srpskohrvatskog jezika). Južnoslovenski filolog 33: 53–80.
23. Radovanović, Milorad. 1990. Spisi iz sintakse i semantike. Novi Sad:
Dobra vest; Sremski Karlovci: Izdavačka knjižarnica Zorana
Stojanovića, 53–73.
24. Raffaelli, Ida, Barbara Kerovec. 2008. Morfosemantička polja u leksiku
hrvatskog leksika. Jezikoslovlje. 1-2, 141-169
25. Rassi, Amanda i dr. 2014. The fuzzy boundaries of operator verb and
support verb constructions with dar "give" and ter "have" in Brazilian
Portuguese. Proceedings of the Workshop on Lexical and Grammatical
Resources for Language Processing 39, 92-101
26. Silić, Josip, Ivo Pranjković. 2005. Gramatika hrvatskoga jezika za
gimnazije i visoka učilišta. Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 188–190, 291–293.
27. Tafra, Branka. 2007. Pregršt jezičnih zrnaca. Nova mehanizacija
šumarstva 28/1: 49–93.
28. Willer-Gold, Boban Arsenijević, Mia Batinić, Nermina Čordalija,
Marijana Kresić, Nedžad Leko, Lanko Marušič, Tanja Miličev, Nataša Miličević, Ivana Mitić, Andrew Nevins, Anita Peti-Stantić, Branimir
Stanković, Tina Šuligoj, Jelena Tušek. 2016. Conjunct Agreement and
Gender in South Slavic: From Theory to Experiments to Theory. Journal of
Slavic Linguistics. 24(1):187-224.
Philological studies © 2019. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License
