AU G ' 11990

306 Pages·2008·18.67 MB·English

SLAVIC ASPECT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
by
PETER FRANCIS KIPKA
B.A.(Hons.), The University of Melbourne
(1986)
B.Sc., The University of Melbourne
(1986)
Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
September 1990
@ Peter F. Kipka 1990
The author hereby grants permission to M.I.T. to
reproduce and to distribute copies of this thesis document in
whole or in part.
Signature of Author
Department -fL inguistics and Philosophy
/ .. July 1990
-
Certified by
i
Kenneth Hale
Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by
I.A. Wayne O'Neil
AOFS TSEACHCNHOIUNd U ST.SI~Ja n, Departmental Committee
AU G' 11990
LIBRARIES
|,Y"' itI it], JŽ' ("
SLAVIC ASPECT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
by
PETER FRANCIS KIPKA
submitted to the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy
on July 2, 1990 in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics
ABSTRACT
The goal of this thesis is to explore a new theory of verbal
aspect. The theory is motivated primarily by a consideration of
morphological and syntactico-semantic data from Slavic, but as a
module of Universal Grammar it can be shown to be of much more
general applicability. Thus Slavic aspect is contrasted with what
can be found in a variety of other languages. The proposed system of
representation is derivational in character: Final aspectual
structures are built up by a small number of operations from lexical
representations. The theory posits only two aspectual primitives
(the point and the box, yielding perfectivity and imperfectivity in
Slavic in a direct fashion).
Chapter One begins with an overview of much of the relevant data
from the Slavic language Polish. Morphological and
syntactico-semantic reflexes of aspect are identified and
correlated. This leads directly to a formulation of the theory. The
workings of the latter are demonstrated with respect to Polish verbs
of motion. Its applicability to other languages (including English)
is also discussed; one of the key factors contributing to language
differences is different means of lexical Luderspecification of
aspectual structures.
Chapter Two examines further data from Slavic. It is shown how
double-aspect phenomena, inherent perfectivity, and habituals can be
construed as providing support for a theory of the type envisaged
here. The proposed theory (its primitives, operations, and
conditions) is summarised in this chapter.
Chapter Three is an exploration of the connection between aspect
and prepositional notions. Core prepositions (or their equivalents)
are taken to be interaction-denoting categories, a view that is
contrasted with locationist hypotheses. Some aspectual consequences
of this view are developed.
Finally, chapter Four continues the study of extra-Slavic and prima
facie extra-aspectual implications of the theory here proposed. The
-2-
dative alternation in English is examined, as are the English
locative alternation, Georgian medial verbs, and restrictions on
English 're-' prefixation. Light is shed on these phenomena, which
at the same time provide empirical support for such theoretical
devices as aspectual zerohood, box-layering, and lexical
underspec if ication.
Supervisor: Kenneth Hale
Title: Ferrari P. Ward Professor of Modern Languages
and Linguistics
TO THE READER
One of the principal objects
of theoretical research in any department
of knowledge is to find the point of view
from which the subject appears in its
greatest simplicity.
J.W.G.
One should be wary, I think, of works that begin by announcing an
examination of the complex phenomenon X in language Y. To invoke
complexity is to say basically that one does not understand a certain
phenomenon (to a certain level of satisfaction), while simultaneously
implicating its properties as a kind of rationalisation. Part of the
reason (matters of partial fulfillment aside) for my presenting the
research that follows to the reader is that I consider many aspectual
matters to be rather simple when viewed from a certain perspective.
That perspective is the proposed theory.
The reader should be aware of the following conventions. In the
body of the text, non-English linguistic data appear in double
quotes; glosses are given in single quotes or in brackets. For
emphasis, certain words (e.g. technical terms) are capitalised.
This device is also used to highlight certain morphemes. Polish
material is presented in Polish orthography. Georgian data are given
in transliteration; the apostrophe signals glottalisation. '+', 'I',
and some '-' boundaries are from the cited sources, while any added
morpheme boundaries are indicated with hyphens. Following the
convention of my sources, capital letters are not used in Georgian
transliterations (the present-day Georgian alphabet does not use
capitals). References typically appear in the A(y:p) format (where A
= author, y = year of publication/copyright, p = page number).
Abbreviations such as NOM. or ACC. for Cases should be
transparent. Foreign language quotations have been translated into
English by me; however, in order to avoid an avoidable extra layer of
translation-induced approximation, I have left French glosses of
Georgian material in French. The major subdivisions of chapters are
referred to as sections. Modulo quotations, Australian orthography
is used throughout.
In a few places I assume familiarity with the results of research
into phonology and syntax. References are provided, but since these
discussions are fairly short the reader who is unfamiliar with the
technicalities should be able to proceed to subsequent paragraphs
without too much difficulty. Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 1.2 contain
-4-
(inter alia) a discussion of lists of lexical items - this material
can be skimmed on a first reading.
I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the members of
my thesis committee, K. Hale, D. Pesetsky and K. Wexler, for their
interest, their time, their suggestions and their encouragement.
More generally, I must mention the stimulating research environment
created at M.I.T. by faculty and visitors as well as students. My
personal thanks to those students who entered the department in 1986,
but also to many others.
I acknowledge financial support (crucial in this day and age) from
the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy as well as from the
Fulbright programme. For support of numerous kinds (particularly the
intangible kind so crucial in any day and age) I say to my family:
Bdg zaplad.
Finally, I dedicate whatever is of value in the pages that follow
ad maiorem Dei gloriam.
P.F.K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction.............. . *...................... 8
Chapter 1
A THEORY OF ASPECT ...... *......... ..... .... *..... 13
1.1 The aspectual morphemes of Polish.......... 14
1.2 On multi-prefixation....................... 31
1.3 Syntax and semantics of aspect............. 37
1.4 Verbs of Motion................ ....... ... 46
1.5 The theory................................. 53
1.6 Excursus on prefix interpretation.......... 62
1.7 Aspect and tense.................... ........ 73
1.8 Remarks on English and other languages..... 84
Chapter 2
FURTHER SLAVIC ISSUES............................. 99
2.1 The double aspect phenomenon............... 100
2.2 Inherent perfectivity..................... 119
2.3 The rules of the game...................... 138
2.4 Further justification...................... 159
2.5 Contra an alternative...................... 165
2.6 Summary........1........ ... ........ ...... 171
-6-
Chapter 5
PREPOSITIONAL NOTIONS AND ASPECT.................. 172
5.1 Some core prepositions..................... 175
35.2 Connections with aspect ................... 184
5.53 More on location................ .......... 189
3.4 Extensions.............................. 201
3.5 Aspect revisited .......................... 208
Chapter 4
APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS..................... 220
4.1 The dative alternation..................... 220
4.2 A note on tht locative alternation......... 259
4.3 Georgian............ .. .......... ....... ... 267
4.4 Re re .............. .. ... ..... ....... . 286
Concluding thoughts............................... 295
-7-
INTRODUCTION
It has been said of aspect that there are almost as many definitions
of the notion as there are linguists working on the topic.
Accordingly I will spare the reader yet another definition. Nor will
I begin with a typology or classificatory schema, although after a
while a typology of sorts will emerge. Rather, my main goal is to
propose and defend a theory of aspect. Ultimately then the answer to
the question 'What is aspect?' will be that which the theory is
about. My notation will be somewhat novel, but as might be expected,
along the way we will encounter many a traditional insight and see a
version of it encoded or represented in the theory formulated here.
In the end, any approach of this type is to be evaluated largely on
the basis of its fruitfulness as a tool for further research, and of
the amount of understanding it brings to those who study linguistic
phenomena. However preliminary justification for embarking on the
course that ensues is not hard to find. Consider the physicist
studying sub-atomic particles. He could begin with definitions of
'elementary particle', 'quark', and 'lepton' (possibly together with a
classificatory scheme). Alternatively he could set out to explore
-8-
structured theories from which some notion of 'quark' or 'lepton'
naturally emerges (or into which they must be put as initial
conditions, and hence as promissory notes to be dealt with in
subsequent research). The former approach has its place - it can be
found in textbooks and compendia dealing with fields that are thought
to be relatively well understood. The latter approach is more suited
to areas under active investigation; it is thus the path taken here.
A lot of the data I will use to build up and justify my theory of
aspect come from Slavic. Hence the first half of the thesis title.
The Slavic focus is natural given the well-known fact that this
language family has a well-developed morphological system encoding
aspectual notions. It has been said (Chomsky, class lectures 1988-89)
that what one finds overtly in one language one will find at least
covertly in others. The reasoning behind this dictum is that if
language A has feature x, it has it for a reason. Therefore one might
expect language B to have x for the same reason, even if x is not
immediately visible in B. (This approach is natural in a framework
that prizes economy.) Of course, the above dictum is not so much a
law as a guideline for research, there being differences among
languages. However, I will take it quite seriously, and I will look
for earmarks of an aspectual theory based on overt Slavic morphology
in a number of other language families. Data from Slavic will enable
us to get this process underway.
A research programme of the nature sketched above crucially relies
on the claim that one can learn something about one language by
-9-
studying another. This makes sense to the extent that one posits an
overarching theory, encompassing the individual grammars of what are
called individual languages. The work reported here thus partakes of
a well established research tradition into Universal Grammar (UG). It
will explore what I will call the aspect module of UG. The second half
of the thesis title will serve to remind the reader that this module
is expected to have extra-Slavic implications.
At this point I should introduce some terminology which I will
utilise throughout. First and foremost, one has the distinction
between PERFECTIVITY and IMPERFECTIVITY. The term 'perfective' must
not be confused with the term 'perfect' (which characterises, for
instance, English verb forms with auxiliary 'have'). The notion of
(im)perfectivity pervades Slavic, and I will introduce the relevant
morphology and semantics gradually in the course of chapter 1. For
something of an initial idea of the distinction, I call the reader's
attention to the Romance language family. Here, restricted to the
past tense, one finds the distinction between imperfectivity and
perfectivity expressed, for instance, by the French "imparfait" and
"passe compose", respectively:
imperfective: Je mangeais une pomme.
(I was eating an apple.)
perfective: J'ai mang6 une pomme.
(I ate an apple.)
Parallel examples from Latin, Italian, Spanish, etc. can easily be
constructed.
- 10 -