17.393, Review: Typology: Krhakovskij (1997)

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-17-393. Mon Feb 06 2006. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 17.393, Review: Typology: Krhakovskij (1997)

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Dooley, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Lindsay Butler <lindsay at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our 
Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and 
interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially 
invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book 
discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available 
for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooley at linguistlist.org. 

===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 02-Feb-2006
From: Carmen Conti Jiménez < carmenconti at hotmail.com >
Subject: Typology of Iterative Constructions 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:41:08
From: Carmen Conti Jiménez < carmenconti at hotmail.com >
Subject: Typology of Iterative Constructions 
 

EDITOR: Khrakovskij, Viktor S. 
TITLE: Typology of iterative constructions 
SERIES: Lincom Studies in Theoretical Linguistics
PUBLISHER: Lincom GmbH
YEAR: 1997
Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/13/13-3113.html 

Carmen Conti Jiménez, Department of Spanish, Universidad de Jaén

[Although this book was published nearly ten years ago, we agreed to 
solicit a review for it when we received it late last year because of its 
enduring intrerest.  The reviewer is in no way responsible for the 
delay! -- Eds.]

SYNOPSIS

This book is divided into three parts. 
Part 1, which consists of the theoretical aspects of the investigation on 
iterative constructions, focuses on the semantic classification of 
situational plurality. 
Part 2 is divided into four subparts describing situational plurality in 
several languages: 
part A analyses languages with specialized grammatical means to 
express multiplicative, distributive, and iterative (in particular, Aleut, 
Evenki, Itelmen, Chamalal, Klamath, Asiatic Eskimo, and Nivkh); 
part B focuses on the analysis of languages with grammatical means 
to express the iterative (Ewe, Turkic languages, Lithuanian, Russian 
and other Slavic languages, Hausa, Modern Literary Arabic, English, 
and Chukchee); 
part C studies those languages where tense plus iterative adverbials 
express the iterative (French, German, Modern Literary East 
Armenian, Hindi and Urdu, and Japanese); and 
part D is dedicated to the employment of adverbials as iterative 
expressions (as occurs in Indonesian, Cambodian, Vietnamese, and 
Chinese). 
Lastly, part 3 is dedicated to the study of alternative interpretations of 
the plurality (in particular, of plurality and verbal quantification). In 
addition to the bibliographical references, the book contains several 
indexes listing authors, subjects, and languages.

This collective monograph, which has been prepared by the 
Language Workshop of the Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of 
Linguistics, focuses on the study of situational plurality across 
languages. (Reference to ''Author'' below is to the collective 
authorship.) In particular, the aim of the book is to reveal the system of 
the sub-meanings of situational plurality, in particular, the indefinite 
plurality of situations. One of the most relevant theoretical 
assumptions of the book, which is treated in detail in Chapter 1, is 
that situational plurality can be coded by all possible means (which 
seem to conform a functional/semantic field consisting of lexical, 
grammatical, and contextual factors, according to Khrakvsky), but 
does not form an integral system. Besides, it is assumed that 
situational plurality is favored by certain semantic and grammatical 
conditions. For instance, it is argued that certain semantic classes of 
verbs (denoting non-homogeneous processes), some adverbials (like 
adverbials of cyclicity, interval, etc.), the imperfective aspect, the 
participation of plural actants, and extra-clause factors (such as 
compound sentences with double conjunctions, converbs, etc.) 
facilitate the plural interpretation of the situation. 

According to the author, the verbs most freely combining with the 
meanings of plurality are those denoting non-homogeneous 
(terminative) processes (e. g. 'to build'), whilst temporary states and 
homogeneous processes are less natural to express plural actions. 
On the opposite, verbs denoting permanent properties and relations 
do not combine with the meanings of plurality (like verbs denoting the 
properties of objects or types of objects, e. g. 'this elevator takes five 
persons', and stable mental or emotional states, like ''speak'', ''hate 
(music)'', ''respect'', etc.).

Chapter 1 also offers a classification of semantic types of situational 
plurality. This classification, which constitutes one of the theoretical 
bases of the book, is systematically employed in Part 2. The author 
describes the typology of situational plurality according to two 
attributes: 
(i) the way in which the plural situations take place on time 
(a) a plurality of situations occurs at one period of time; 
(b) each of the repeated situations belonging to the plurality exists at a 
separate period of time, and 
(ii) the identity amongst the actants of the situation, 
(a) identical sets of actants take part in each of the repeated situations 
belonging to the plurality, 
(b) the sets of actants taking part in each of the repeated situations 
are not completely identical. 
The combination of these attributes gives rise to the following types of 
situational pluralities, according to the author: 
multiplicative (combining attributes ia, iia) (e. g. 'The boy tapped at the 
window for several minutes'), 
distributive (terminal) (with attributes ia, iib) (e. g. 'In a week's time the 
fox carried away all the neighbor's chicks one by one'), and
iterative (non-terminal) (with attributes ib, iia) (e. g. 'The boy visits his 
granny every year', 'the patient coughs at night').

The author also examines the coding of multiplicative, distributive and 
iterative verbs in the languages of the sample (Part 2). Regarding 
multiplicative and semelfactive verbs, two ways of coding are 
proposed: lexical forms and grammatical means. According to the 
author, multiplicative verbs are universally onomatopoeic (like 
Arabic ''qa'qa'a'' 'crackle'). On the other hand, grammatical 
semelfactives can be formed by adding affixes to lexical 
multiplicatives, and vice versa (e. g. ''tunkidi'' 'push once', tunki-
tunkidi 'push many times', in Chamalal; in Uzbek ''vov'' 'woof', ''vov 
qili'' 'bark once', ''vov-vov-qil'' 'bark many times'). It is also noticed that 
quite often multiplicative verbs express a multidirectional motion, such 
as ''ners-u-durs anel'' 'come in and go out' in Armenian, or ''gnal 
gal'' 'walk to and from'. These verbs are called alternatives. 
Alternatives may be coded grammatically by means of verb derivation 
or by adverbial expressions. 

The distributive meaning may be marked by means of several types of 
plural markers, according to the author. The markers may hold both 
on the verb (the plurality of situations) and on the noun phrase (the 
plurality of the individuals), as in Russian (verb prefix+plural noun); 
just on the verb, like in Eskimo (by a special verb suffix); or just on 
noun phrases, as in Vietnamese (i.e. noun reduplication). In Indo-
European languages, like German, French, there are means like 'one 
by one', 'each one', etc. From a cross-linguistic perspective, 
distributives are usually verbs of specific physical action and movement 
in space. From a morphological perspective, distributive verbs may be 
either non-derivative (lexical, e. g. ''distribute'', ''hand'', etc.) or 
derivative (reduplication, affixation). Distribution may be also 
expressed by means of reciprocals (like in Turkic languages). The 
author also points out that even completed action can express 
distribution (mostly, a distributive object, rather than the subject).

The iterative meaning is expressed by lexical, word-formational and 
grammatical means. Among the lexical means, the most important role 
belongs to adverbials of cyclicity (like ''every minute'', ''annually'', etc.), 
interval (like ''seldom'', ''very seldom'', ''sometimes'', etc.) and 
habituality (like ''usually'' and ''habitually''). In addition to adverbials, 
there are other means of expressing iterativity, like reduplication, 
iterative verb suffixes, analytical aspect constructions and forms of 
unreal moods, amongst others. The author also distinguishes between 
two different semantic types of intervals in iterative situations: intervals 
that are larger than normal, on the one hand, and intervals that are 
shorter or smaller than normal. The former type gives rise to what is 
called a discontinuative meaning, whilst the latter is referred to as 
frequentative. The coding of both meanings is basically based on 
verbal markers and adverbials (like ''from time to time'', ''often'', etc.). 

EVALUATION

This book is an invaluable contribution to the cross-linguistic study of 
situational plurality. The most important contribution of the book is the 
attempt of establishing a set of semantic and formal criteria both to 

classify situational plurality across languages and to relate these 
semantic contents with grammatical coding. In sum, this book satisfies 
the methodological premises of modern typology, such as the 
combination of descriptive data and theory. Here, I would like to 
suggest some comments. 

Comments on Part 1

Part 1 would have required a more general state of affairs, 
considering works on plural events and aspect within both formal 
semantics and lexical-semantics (Henk J. Verkuyl, James Pustejovsky, 
Beth Levin Hovav, etc.). 

Sometimes, the notion of situational plurality is confusing. In effect, the 
label ''situation'' seems to refer to several grammatical and semantic 
units, like verb, predicate, and event. It might be useful the 
employment of different labels to differ at least between plural 
predicates (more related to Aktionsart or lexical aspect) and plural 
events (more related to the number of actions and the number of 
actants).

On the other hand, I would have expected at least a brief explanation 
on certain assertions. For instance, the author says that ''temporary 
states and homogeneous processes are less natural to express plural 
actions'', but there is not a theoretical or an empirical argumentation to 
demonstrate it. In another part, the author claims that multiplicative verbs 
are universally onomatopoeic, but I wonder if it might be just the 
opposite, that is, that onomatopoeic verbs tend to be multiplicative.

On page 13, it is said: ''the verb has no grammatical category which 
would play the role as the category of number in nouns by regularly 
expressing the meanings of the singularity vs. the plurality of 
situations''. A recent work by Corbett (2000) has demonstrated that 
there are indeed languages with this category. 

On page 18, it is said: ''the most representative characteristic of 
distribution is that the number of situations making up a plurality is 
equal to the number of individual representatives of the combined 
actant'', but, as was argued in Langendoen (1978), distribution does 
not always involve a one-by-one relation between the number of 
individuals and the number of events (for instance, in a sentence 
like ''His classmates had to bake a cake for the party'', it is not only 
true a situation in which each classmate had to bake one cake, but 
also a situation where several sets of two or more than two 
classmates baked each one a cake).

Khrakvsky claims that another important feature of distribution is that 
situations repeated during a period of time can in reality occur either 
in succession, i. e. in different moments of the same period, or 
simultaneously. But it seems to me that this faculty is also possible in 
the collective reading. For instance, a sentence like ''John and Mary 
wrote this book'' is true in a situation in which John wrote part of the 
book during a period of time x and Mary did it during a period of time 
y. 


Lastly, I would like to make some comments on the examples in Part 1. 
The examples are not always glossed morpheme by morpheme, and 
then it is difficult to contrast the English translation with the analysis of 
the original language. As a consequence, the reader has to assume 
that the analysis of the example is correct.

Comments on Part 2

I have just a few comments on Part 2. First, I have noticed that the 
languages in Part 2 are not always treated in the same way. 
Regarding bibliographical sources, for instance, there are 
considerable asymmetries between Slavic languages and other Indo-
European languages treated in the book, such as English, French, 
and German. I suspect that iterative constructions have been studied 
in detail in those languages. In relation to Chinese, it is not said what 
is meant by the term Chinese, that is, if it refers to Mandarin Chinese, 
Jinyu Chinese, etc.  

REFERENCES

Corbett, G. G. (2000) ''Number''. Cambridge: Cambridge University 
Press.

Langendoen, D. T. (1978) The Logic of Reciprocity. ''Linguistic 
Inquiry'' 9:2, 177-197. 

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Carmen Conti is assistant professor of the department of Spanish at 
the University of Jaén (Spain). She is the author of a book on 
semantic roles from a cross-linguistic viewpoint (Ediciones de la 
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid). Nowadays, her research is 
focused on lexical and morphological ditransitivity across languages.





-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-17-393