On (Non-)Compositionality of Prefixed Verbs

This monograph is concerned with prepositional elements in Slavic languages, prepositions, verbal prefixes and functional elements of prepositional nature. It argues that verbal prefixes are incorporated prepositions projecting its argument structure in the complement position of the verbal root. The meaning of prefixes is based on the two-argument meaning of prepositions, which is enriched with the CAUSE operator, which conjoins the state denoted by the prepositional phrase and the event expressed by the verbal root. This accounts for various effects of prefixation. The book investigates idiomaticity in the realm of prefixed verbs and proposes a novel analysis of non-compositional prefixed verbs. The non-compositional interpretation arises inter alia because of the fact that either the meaning of the verbal part or the meaning of the prepositional part is shifted by means of Nunberg’s (1995) predicate transfer in the course of the derivation. This study also offers a uniform analysis of cases: prepositional as well as non-prepositional cases are treated as a reflection of the operation Agree between Tense-features and phi-features. It presents a new model of prepositional case assignment, in which the type of prepositional case is determined by semantic properties of particular heads of the decomposed preposition. Furthermore, it investigates prepositional movement from diachronic perspective. It is shown that prepositions can be grammaticalised as a functional element of the higher clausal structure.

2010

The empirical base of this paper is the system of verb prefixes in Slavic languages, with a focus on Serbo-Croatian (SC). The paper especially targets the asymmetries between the so-called external and internal (or superlexical and lexical) prefixes, but it eventually proposes a general analysis for the verbal prefixation in SC.

Tense, mood and aspect: theoretical and …, 2007

Linguistics, 1998

We argue that a large class of Russian prefixed verbs has essentially the same semantic structure as resultative constructions in English of the type paint the door green. We analyze both phenomena as instances of lexical subordination: although it is syntactically a secondary predicator, green expresses the primary ("core") semantic predication, while paint is a secondary subordinated semantic predicate. The expression therefore means 'cause to become green by painting. In the Russian vyteret' stol 'wipe down the table' (literally Out-wipe table'), the prefix vy-is semantically primary and the verb stem is subordinated. By virtue of this shared semantic structure, Russian prefixation can only access internal arguments (objects, or subjects of unaccusatives) and Russian prefixed verbs may support "fake" or unselected object constructions, akin to English resultatives such as drink the pub dry or sing oneself hoarse. From pisat' 'write' we have ispisat' rucku Out-write pen, 'to run out of ink (of a pen) 1 , in which the direct object 'pen is not selected by pisat' 'write'. Since these unselected objects are arguments of the prefixed verb complex, we conclude (with Goldberg 1995, against Levin and Rappaport Hovav 1995) that unselected objects in English resultatives are also arguments (of the construction). We extend our analysis to the steal/rob alternation and offering an explanation of why in some languages, verbs of manner of motion (e.g. run,) behave like unergative verbs while the same verbs with directional complementsjadjuncts (e.g. run into the room) behave like unaccusative verbs. We discuss the repercussions for the interpretation of notions such as " complex predicate" and "construction."

Russian Linguistics, 2021

This study tests the morphological gradience theory on Russian prefixed verbs. With the help of a specially designed experiment, in which participants were asked to evaluate the semantic transparency of a prefixed nonse verb given in minimal context, as well as to semanticise it by suggesting an existing Russian verb with the same prefix, we offer evidence that these verbs can be analysed as constructional schemas and that the degree of their morphological decomposition depends upon the different levels of activation of their sequential and lexical links. We prove that speakers of Russian are very sensitive to the etymological connection between verb prefixes and the prepositions they are related to. Thus, prefix-stem constructions with prefixes that correspond to prepositions are more likely to be morphologically decomposed, while prefix-stem constructions with prefixes that do not relate to prepositions tend to be regarded as single lexical units. Moreover, the general, highly abstract semantics of Russian prefix-stem constructions, especially of those that retain their 'prepositional' meaning, is undoubtedly accessible to language users, which is confirmed by the fact that the interpretability of these constructions is affected by priming.

Russian Language Journal , 1987

The aim of this paper is to analyze the nature of the relationship between grammatical aspect, lexical verb semantics and the semantics of prepositions in encoding resultativity in the domain of motion predicates in Polish. UnlikeSpencer and Zaretskaya (1998), I take a bounded PP combining with a prefixed directed motion predicate to be an argument of the verb rather than an adjunct and further, I argue that their analysis of spatial prefixes combining with motion verbs as uniformly encoding static (result) location is too general. Contrary to Svenonius (2004a), I argue that it is not necessary to implicate verbal prefixes in mediating the (secondary) subject-predicate relation via a dedicated functional projection in the syntax. If the semantic relation of (secondary) predication can be encoded without a dedicated functional head in syntax, prefixation can be taken to be morphological (lexical) rather than syntactic, paving up the way for a much simpler syntactic representation of prefixed directed motion predicates than the representation assumed in lexical-syntactic decomposition models.

Proceedings of ESSLLI workshop on Formal Semantics and Cross-Linguistic Data, ed. H. de Hoop & J. Zwarts, 47-56 , 2005

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, I will apply the framework of prepositional aspect, proposed by Zwarts (to appear) for English locative and directional prepositions, to the semantics of Russian and Czech prefixes on motion verbs. Furthermore, I will extend the account of measure phrase modification with locative PPs provided by and to directional PPs. I will show that an apparent aspectual asymmetry between Czech goal-and source-oriented prefixes addressed in , namely that only the latter but not the former can be modified by measure phrases, is more fine-grained in that it follows from the semantics of spatial expressions rather than from an aspectual opposition between these two types of prefixes. Specifically, I will show that there is, in fact, no aspectual difference: both types are telic.