VALENCE Flashcards
What is valence?
> Borrowed from chemistry.
Capacity of elements to bond with each other chemically.
IN LINGUISTICS
The number of arguments that can combine with a verb.
> I.e. elements bonding with each other linguistically.
> Valence refers to core arguments.
Adjuncts do not modify the valence.
Oblique/indirect objects neither, strictly speaking.
a. I am sleeping = Valence of 1
b. I took the newspaper = Valence of 2
c. I gave my friends the lecture notes = Valence of 3
Distinction between transitivity and valence.
> Authors differ.
»We will be talking about valence.
What is Argument structure
also called: argument mapping
The particular arguments a predicate imposes.
> And their semantic roles.
> Often takes oblique/indirect object into account.
NOT the same as the valence.
I saw a shooting star.
A V O
Exp Stimulus
He broke my bike.
A V O
Agent Patient
Valence-changing devices
In most languages, verbs have a default valence.
»In some languages it is lexically set.
» Remember Bininj Gun-wok (Gunwinyguan, NPN, Australia)
All languages have devices that license modified valence.
» Compared to default/base of the verb.
- Decrease.
- Increase.
-otherwise modify the argument structure.
= A typology of operations
Different FORMAL ways to do it: 1. ANALYTICAL strategies (using word order). >>> Aka PERIPHRASTIC. 2. MORPHOLOGICAL strategies (affixes). >>> Aka SYNTHETIC. 3. Both in tandem.
Valence-decreasing operations
>Passives >Antipassives >Reflexives >Anticausatives > reciprocals
Valence-increasing operations
> Applicatives (promotes oblique arg > core arg of verb)
> Causatives
Argument pattern modification
> Dative shift
John gave [NP a book] [PP to Mary].
John gave [NP Mary] [NP a book]. (mary now core)
Voice alternations
Passives
Valence-decreasing operation
FROM TO active ----> passive divalent ----> monovalent A (Agent) ----> Ø/INST (Agent) O (Patient) ----> S (Patient)
Syntactic subject (A) is demoted.
»No longer a core argument.
» Can be expressed as an adjunct, or omitted.
Object (O) is promoted to subject (S)
Construction can be analytical/periphrastic like in English:
(1) A lion killed the zebra.
(2) The zebra was killed (by a lion).
Or morphological/synthetic
EG K’ekchi (Penutian, Guatemala)
> many but not majority langs have them
WALS: 162 / 373
Ergative languages often do not have passives.
Passive Functions
FUNCTIONS:
Discourse
>In coordinated clauses
>For omission of co-referential arguments.
> pivot: S/S or S/A in accusative languages
My sister (S) was crossing the street and Ø(S) fell over. My sister(S) was crossing the street and Ø(A) saw a motorbike.
> In accusative langs S cannot not be coreferential with O.
*My sister(S) was crossing the street and a motorbike hit Ø(O).
Change O to S with a passive construction, and u have correct pivot: My sister(S) was crossing the street and Ø(S) got hit by a motorbike.
FUNCTIONS:
> Make a Patient more prominent in discourse by promoting to S
Oh, your sister broke her arm?
- Yes, she got hit by a motorbike the other day
Anticausatives
Valence-decreasing operation
FROM TO active ----> anticausative divalent ----> monovalent A (Agent) ----> Ø O (Patient) ----> S (Patient)
Causative: a valence-increasing operation which adds an A > Anticausitives remove the A >Therefore produce monovalent clauses. >> With Patient (former O) as S. EG SWAHILI
> Nearly the same as a passive.
But some languages have both markers
The semantics is typically stative.
RELATIVELY RARE.
Antipassives
Valence-decreasing operation
FROM TO active ----> antipassive divalent ----> monovalent A ----> S O ----> absent or non-core
The original clause is divalent. > O is demoted. > Option 1: O no longer expressed in the sentence (English). > Option 2: O = adjunct (Greenlandic). > 1: A becomes O. OR 2: A becomes S > Because the clause becomes monovalent.
Option 1: english
(1) He was smoking a cigarette.
(2) He was smoking.
Semantics:
>Refers to habits rather than specific events.
> Object is vague, less defined.
Option 2: west greenlandic
(1) he killed the people
(2) He killed people
>Not as well identified and understood than passives. Other labels: ‘depatientive’ ‘de-objective’ ‘implicit transitivity’
> Historically seen as an ergative-language phenomenon.
But this has been invalidated (Polinsky 2005, Janic 2016).
More frequent in ergative than accusative languages.
> But attested in many accusative languages.
Antipassives function
Discourse:
> In ergative languages it serves in coordination.
> In accusative languages passives turn O into S.
»Which helps because S/O is not a valid pivot.
In ergative languages the pivot is S/O.
>Passives are not that useful.
» But, an operation is needed in order to coordinate S with A.
»The antipassive construction does this.
Reciprocals
Valence-decreasing operation
FROM TO
divalent —-> monovalent
A —-> S
O —-> S
Divalent becomes monovalent.
> A and O merge with each other.
>They collectively become S.
» Since the clause becomes monovalent.
(1) The children called the other children.
(2) The children called each other.
> Reciprocally-marked verbs can remain divalent.
Rare but attested.
SEMANTICS:
- SYMMETRIC mutual, simultaneous (e.g. kiss each other).
- ASYMMETRIC: pile up the books on top of each other.
- TRANSITIVE: the children are chasing each other.
- DISTRIBUTIVE: the guests (a group) talk to each other.
analytic/periphrastic:
>invariable free markers (english)
> adverbs (eg. reciprocally)
Synthetic:
>reciprocal pronouns (Hausa)
> predicate marking (mundari, nepal)
Lexical reciprocals:
They kissed.
They fought.
We argued.
Reflexives
Valence-decreasing operation
FROM TO
divalent —-> monovalent
A —-> S
O —-> S
More analytical:
>reflexive pronouns
(sometimes analyses as leaving valence unchanged)
EG He is watching himself.
More synthetic:
>Predicate markers.
>Usually decrease the valence.
Lexicalized reflexives:
The barber shaved him.
He shaved.
Reflexives and reciprocals
In many languages, a single construction for both. E.g. German Sie hassen sich. they hate REFL/RECP ‘They hate each other.’ Or ‘They hate themselves.’
Applicatives
Valence-increasing operation
including benefactives and comitatives
FROM TO
standard ----> applicative
monovalent ---> divalent
S ----> A
\+O
Aka ‘applied constructions’.
> A term for all the constructions that add an O argument.
> can apply to divalent clauses
> applied O replaces former O (no core argument really added)
> subcategorization pattern modified
diverse semantics, often O = beneficiary EG Chamorro
BENEFACTIVE APPLICATIVES:
FROM TO standard ----> applicative divalent ---> divalent A (agent) ----> A (agent) O(theme) ----> OBL (theme) adjunct (benef)----> O (benef)
sometimes O = "with" EG Dalabon
COMITATIVE APPLICATIVES:
FROM TO
standard ----> applicative
monovalent ---> divalent
S ----> A
\+O (beneficiary)
