The Middle Voice

Kemmer, Suzanne

doi:10.1075/tsl.23

Cited by 741 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A semantic map model has been developed by such as Anderson (1982), Kemmer (1993), Haspelmath (1997Haspelmath ( , 2003, and Croft (2001Croft ( , 2003, so as to provide "a representation of both language universals and language-specific grammatical knowledge" (Croft 2003: 133). The semantic map model gives us significant benefits to approaching language universals in that it makes cross-linguistic comparison possible, helps us to reveal universal semantic (or functional) structure, and leads us to find implicational universals as a side effect (Haspelmath 2003: 230).…”

Section: Semantic Map Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desideratives and Person: Constructing a Semantic Map

Sugawara¹

2005

J. Univers. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the implications of grammatical person for desiderative constructions from a cross-linguistic perspective. It is widely known that some grammatical systems in a language, such as pronoun systems, number distinction, and case marking systems, are sensitive to person differences. In this study, in addition to such grammatical systems, it was found that grammatical person also affects the form of desiderative constructions in several languages. In languages such as Japanese, Korean, Hua, and Cocopa, the form of desiderative construction with third person subject is somewhat differently constructed from that with first/second person subject. Also, in Samoan, the first and second person singular clitics are treated differently from the other person/ number clitics in desiderative constructions. In addition, it was found in Tagalog that the third person pronoun shows a different pattern regarding the use * I would like to thank Terry Janzen for his invaluable comments, advice, and suggestions throughout this study. I would also like to thank Christoph Wolfart and Lorna MacDonald for their invaluable comments.118 Desideratives and Person: Constructing a Semantic Map of enclitic sana from lexical nouns and other person pronouns. In order to capture the phenomena found in these languages, then, a semantic map model is adopted in this study, and a conceptual space is proposed for desideratives within which the distinctions found in this study are represented.

show abstract

Section: Semantic Map Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desideratives and Person: Constructing a Semantic Map

Sugawara¹

2005

J. Univers. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This limitation goes unnoticed in König and Vezzosi's (2004) detailed recent analysis of the syntax and (perhaps somewhat too strictly defined) semantics of reciprocity in Standard German. Owing to the rather limited exploitation of the relevant formal contrast, it is a somewhat academic question whether (spoken) German, in any of its varieties, is a "two-form reciprocal language" in the sense of Kemmer (1993: 109-119, building on Haiman 1983, where a "light" reciprocal (coinciding with the reflexive) expresses simultaneous instantiations of a relation (e.g., washing, embrac- As seen from the translation, in English the reciprocal does occur as a genitive (not so the reflexive, though, for whatever reason). 12 In German, standard and regional and register varieties, it is again only in combination with a preposition that reciprocal einander can become an attributive (6b).…”

Section: Durch-à(rà)nand(à)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Thoughts on the origin, progress, and pronominal status of reciprocal forms in Germanic, occasioned by those of Bavarian

Plank¹

2017

Linguistic Typology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grammaticalised reciprocal markers in Germanic derive from combinations of a quantifier and the alterity word 'other', elaborating on a minimalist strategy of identical NP repetition suggesting rather than expressing reciprocity ('earl[s] hated earl[s]'). Subserved by quantifier floating, they develop from free to tighter syntactic combinations and eventually into morphological units, tending towards complete inflectional deactivation. Sooner or later in all Germanic languages, the quantifier part of the reciprocal gets inside prepositional phrases ('earls fought each/one with other' > 'earls fought with each/one other'). German continues this fusional theme by combining the reciprocal with prepositions in compounds; and in Bavarian it eventually gets reduced further to a bound stem limited to (partly lexicalised) combinations with a preposition, thus being barred from the direct object relation, unlike the reflexive. In tracing this overall diachronic scenario, the question is raised of the pronominality (or pro-NP-hood) of reciprocals in Germanic. It is argued that, regardless of their nominal and referential source, reciprocals here strongly incline towards becoming adverbs of attenuated, situational rather than personal reference, highlighting the relational (role reversal) rather than the (co-)referential component of reciprocity, as is common also elsewhere.

show abstract

“…Recognizing that these verbs have middle diathesis is the key to a simple, coherent view which pulls together the various strands of the semantic domain of u-verbs, also containing ne-verbs. Vihman (2002) uses Suzanne Kemmer's (1993) cross-linguistic analysis of the semantics of the middle domain for looking at the Estonian u-verbs (see also Croft et al, 1987, andCroft, 1994). Here, a brief overview will be given in order to pave the ground for new data from discourse analysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estonian Middle Semantics with Evidence from Discourse

Vihman

2004

NLY

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents arguments for recognizing a middle voice in Estonian. The claim that the semantics of middle-marked verbs differs in a substantial way from the semantics of other intransitive constructions leads to the examination of the discourse pragmatics of these constructions, and the relationship between discourse patterns and their valency and argument properties. Various topicality measures show that the argument participant in middle clauses lies between that of the sole participant (S) in intransitive clauses and the O of active transitive clauses. The results regarding the discourse behaviour of middle arguments constitute new evidence for the view that middle constructions differ from ordinary intransitive verbs, despite structural similarities, and mark a unique range on the scale of transitivity exhibited by verbs in Estonian.

show abstract

The Middle Voice

Cited by 741 publications

References 0 publications

Desideratives and Person: Constructing a Semantic Map

Desideratives and Person: Constructing a Semantic Map

Thoughts on the origin, progress, and pronominal status of reciprocal forms in Germanic, occasioned by those of Bavarian

Estonian Middle Semantics with Evidence from Discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About