Affiliation:
1. Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Abstract
This paper examines the distribution of Modern Hebrew semantic drifts across four diatheses (voices): transitives, unaccusatives (anticausatives), adjectival (stative) passives, and verbal (eventive) passives. A quantitative survey of dictionaries reveals a discrepancy between these diatheses: Only transitives, unaccusatives, and adjectival passives can give rise to unique semantic drifts, unshared with their related root counterparts, while verbal passives cannot. A corpus- based study shows that frequency is unable to account for this finding; nor can approaches demarcating a syntactic domain for special meanings. I propose that semantic drifts are stored as subentries of the entries from which they evolved, as long as the drift’s frequency remains smaller than or equal to that of the original entry. Once the drift’s frequency greatly surpasses that of the original entry, it is stored as an independent lexical entry. In light of that, I suggest that predicates giving rise to unique semantic drifts have to constitute lexical entries. It thus follows that transitives, unaccusatives, and adjectival passives are formed and listed in the lexicon, while verbal passives are not. Consequently, the lexicon is argued to function as an active (operational) component of the grammar, contra syntacticocentric approaches.
Publisher
Open Library of the Humanities
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference90 articles.
1. Adger, David. 1994. Functional heads and interpretation. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh dissertation.
2. Instrument subjects are agents or causers;Alexiadou, ArtemisSchäfer, FlorianBaumer, DonaldMontero, DavidScanlon, Michael,2006
3. Historical and Comparative Linguistics
4. locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs;Arad, Maya;Natural Language & Linguistic Theory,2003