12.1389, Sum: Event Structure

[The LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-12-1389. Mon May 21 2001. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 12.1389, Sum: Event Structure

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, EMU
	Lydia Grebenyova, EMU		Jody Huellmantel, WSU
	James Yuells, WSU		Michael Appleby, EMU
	Marie Klopfenstein, WSU		Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U.
	Heather Taylor-Loring, EMU	Dina Kapetangianni, EMU

Software: John Remmers, E. Michigan U. <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
          Gayathri Sriram, E. Michigan U. <gayatri at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  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: Lydia Grebenyova <lydia at linguistlist.org>

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

1)
Date:  Fri, 18 May 2001 19:25:57 +0200
From:  Andrea Schalley <andrea at cis.uni-muenchen.de>
Subject:  Event Structure "holen"/"fetch"

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 18 May 2001 19:25:57 +0200
From:  Andrea Schalley <andrea at cis.uni-muenchen.de>
Subject:  Event Structure "holen"/"fetch"

For Query: Linguist 11.2243

Dear linguists,

sorry for my late reaction. On October 17th I posed the following question:

- ---------------------------------------------------
I am interested in a comparison of event structures. As an
example, I would like to consider English "to fetch" or
German "holen". I am especially wondering how
different languages express this concept - please let me
know.

And I'd like to know whether native speakers would say that
the event structure of "to fetch" / "holen" etc. -
if the language uses only one word to express the
concept - consists of three subevents: 1) going to some
place, 2) taking something,  and 3) coming (to the deictic
center). Would you say that these three subevents are on an
equal level or is one or are two of them prominent? Could
you even say that two of them form a subevent themselves (so
that "to fetch" consists of two subevents with one subevent
being composed of two subevents itself)?

I would appreciate it very much to also get information on:

(i) Verb serialising languages - do they depict the event
structure overtly as respective occurrences  of verbs
describe the subevents?

(ii) Are there languages that split one from the other two
subevents, e.g. via literally saying "go take-come" or
"go-take come"?
- ----------------------------------------------


Below are the answers that were sent to me - in alphabetical order. I'd like
to thank all the contributors for their help!!


Hans C. Boas:
- --------
hinsichtlich unterschiedlichen Konzeptionen von "event structure" sind -
meines Erachtens - folgende Werke von Interesse.

1. Zahlreiche Artikel und Buecher von Beth Levin und Malka Rappaport
Hovav. Auf der webpage von Beth Levin an der Stanford University ist eine
ausfuehrliche Literaturliste zu finden.

2. Arbeiten von Len Talmy ueber lexicalization patterns. Gerade
herausgekommen ist Talmy (2000) Cognitive Semantics, bei MIT Press. sehr
viele Hinweise ueber event structure und wie sie in unterschiedlichen
Sprachen ausgedrueckt werden.

3. Mehr formalistisch - und leider hinsichtlich der Daten nur minimal -
die Arbeiten von S. Winkler (1997), Focus and Secondary Predication, De
Gruyter, und S. Rapp (1997), Partizipien und semantische Struktur.

4. Ein, meiner Ansicht nach, sehr interessanter Artikel von der
typologischen Seite her, ist Pawley, A. (1987), Encoding Events in Kalam
and English: Different Logics for Reporting Experience, in: Tomlin,
I. (ed.), Coherence and grounding in
discourse. Philadelphia: Benjamins. pp. 329-360.

AND IN A SECOND MAIL:
Was mir gerade einfaellt hinsichtlich event structure sind auch die
Arbeiten von William Croft, U of Manchester. Das letzte was ein Artikel
von ihm, der im Band "The Projection of Arguments" von M. Butt
u. W. Geuder bei CSLI 1998 herausgekommen ist. Ausserdem hat er gerade
zwei sehr interessante ARbeiten fertiggestellt, zumindest in
Manuskriptform.

1. Radical Construction Grammar.

2. Verbs: Aspect and argument structure. (seven chapters on
causal-aspectual relations).


Jean-Charles Khalifa:
- --------------
>(ii) Are there languages that split one from the other two
>subevents, e.g. via literally saying "go take-come" or
>"go-take come"?

French is one such language (and the translation of "fetch" from English
into French has consequently always sounded awkward to me!). The only way
you can word it is "aller chercher", literally "go search", where of course,
"chercher" again only windows (to use Talmy's approach) one portion of the
whole event.

AND IN A SECOND MAIL:
>Or would you say that the semantics of
>"chercher" prototypically includes a kind of a 'take-event'? Otherwise the
>semantics of "to fetch" - "aller chercher" in French would not include
>taking something and bringing it?!

it raises an even more interesting point indeed! supposing we might admit
that, through some sort of metaphorical extension, a finding event would be
construed as including the taking, or appropriating by the finder of the
object found, this would be even more difficult to admit when we're ONLY
windowing the "looking for" event. In which case, we'd have to admit, at
first glance, that French only windows the initial sub-event, something like:

ONSET - GO - SEARCH - [FIND - TAKE - BRING BACK]

How does that sound?? Actually, I never thought about that point before,
but it looks promising to me. It'd have to be backed up by comparing data
in many different languages, along the lines of, e.g. Slobin & Talmy for
verbs of motion.


Max Louwerse:
- ---------
You might want to try
*William Frawley (1992) Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale, Erlbaum.
*Bob Carpenter (1997) Type-Logical Semantics. Cambridge, MIT.


Francisco Martín Miguel:
- ----------------
That there are three subevents (no matter how you arrange them, i.e.,
either 3 or as 2 events, one of them further subdivided) in verbs like
"fetch" can be defended cross-linguistically  if we analyse how this
verb can be translated into Spanish. Two translations are possible: "ir
a coger" and "traer" (fetch the book: "vete a coger el libro" or "trae
el libro").

In "ir a coger", Spanish verbalises events 1 and 2 (going to some place,
and take something) and leaves event 3 implicit (come back); in "traer",
it verbalises events 2 and 3 and leaves event 1 implicit.


Michael Swan:
- ---------
I don't really know anything about this, but just a thought: both English
and French have a tendency to break down the notion of fetching into two
components: English 'go and fetch' or 'go to fetch' (not uncommon), and
French 'aller chercher' (very common).

Ton van der Wouden:
- --------------
In Dutch, "halen" `holen' is very often supported by "gaan" `gehen':

         Ik zal het gaan halen
         I will it go get

And in English, there's the construction "I'll go and get it."

- -----------------------------------------------------


I'd be lucky to go on discussing this question, especially if there is anyone
who can give me facts on other languages!

Best regards,
Andrea Schalley


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-12-1389