كليدواژه :
تناوب مكاني , دستورنقش وارجاع , موضوع مكاني , موضوع انتقالي , ساخت مستقيم , ساخت معكوس
چكيده لاتين :
1-Introduction
Locative alternation is a type of multiple argument realization of three-argument
transitive verbs involving variable syntactic expression of the arguments. The
present paper is, then, an attempt to find an account for this kind of alternation in
Persian placement verb based upon the theory of Role and Reference Grammar
(RRG) and tries to introduce an account involving semantic macro roles. Moreover,
the roles of primary and secondary objects as well as of incorporation are examined.
Locative alternation in Persian as well as in English is realized in two variants:
location variant and locatum one. To elaborate more, an example from Persian as
well as its parallel structure in English comes below:
(1) a.Kârgar-hâ mive râ tuye kâmiyun bâr
worker.PL.NOM hay-DO OBJ-marker PREP truck.OBL load.PAST-
zad-and
PL.3SG
'The workers loaded the hay into the truck.'
(DO: theme location variant~ straight construction)
b. Kârgar-hâ kâmiyun râ mive bâr zad–and
Worker .PL.NOM truck.DO OBJ.marker hay.DO load.PAST-PL.3SG
'The workers loaded the trucks with hay.'
(DO: location locatum variant~ inverted construction
Comparing the Persian example with its English translation suggests that locative
alternation in Persian is not usually the same as what we have in English. In English,
one of the argument is realized immediately after verb and the other comes as an
oblique. In the first sentence, the argument denoting a location is realized as an
oblique and the argument denoting a moved entity as the direct object; the syntactic
functions of the two arguments are the other way round in another variant: The
argument bearing the thematic relation location appears as direct object, the moved
entity as an oblique. It is generally assumed that the first construction is "straight"
and the second is "inverted" (Kailuweit, 2008). In Persian, however, the theme is followed by /râ/ in one variant and comes before
the verb in the other one while the location is realized as oblique on one variant and
followed by / râ/ in the other (Karimi Dustan, & Safari, 2011).
2- Theoretical Framework
Role and Reference Grammar is a functional theory relying on three underlying
representation which provides a typological approach to linguistic description and
greatly concerns with the interplay of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Following
Dowty's representational scheme (1979), state and activity are two main
classifications of verb from which the other verb classes are derived. Thus, the state
verbs have solely bare predicates in their logical structure while activities,
achievements and accomplishments add do', INGR and BECOME, respectively.
Semantic roles are examined in three levels in RRG: Verb-specific semantic roles
like runner or speaker, thematic relations as agent or patient, and generalized
semantic roles or semantic macro-roles that are actor and undergoer.
3- Methodology
Some data involving the locative alternation in placement verb are gathered from TV
programs, lectures, novels, daily conversations or any other sources providing
authentic data in Persian; theses data are, then, analyzed based on RRG theoretical
framework. Focusing on the aktionsart the verbal predicates presented, the logical
structures of the relevant data are, therefore, provided and undergoers are chosen
according to the positions the arguments have in the actor-undergoer hierarchy.
4- Results and Discussion
(1)Locative alternation is regarded as a marked undergoer choice in Role and
Reference Grammar in which x in Pred' (x) is the marked choice of undergoer (Van
Valin & Lapolla, 1997). Then, the logical structure reveals the location as the
undergoer. For instance, the logical structure of the following sentence is α=
[do'(kimiâ, ∅)] CAUSE [BECOME (β=be-loc' (divâr,rang))] in which Kimia is the
actor and divâr is the undergoer.
(2) Kimiâ rang=râ be divâr pâšid-Ø
Kimia.PN paint=OM PREP wall spray.PST-3sg
Kimia sprayed the paint on the wall
Role and Reference Grammar is a functional, context-based theory; therefore,
context plays a significant role in the logical structures of the sentences in this
grammar. If the theme is a specific and referential argument, its logical structure is
like (3) while when it is a non-referential or mass noun, incorporation gets involved
and the logical structures turn into (4).
(3) α=[do'(kimiâ,∅)] CAUSE [BECOME (β = 𝐛𝐞 − 𝐥𝐨𝐜
′
(divâr, rang))]
.rang pâšid (kimiyâ, divâr) In such two-place argument, only one argument can be selected as the undergoer and
that is " divâr". The bare noun before verb in inverted construction of locative
alternation in Persian is realized in two forms depending on the relevant context.
Such noun is either a secondary object and comes in core or it is realized as a nonreferential noun in incorporating verb and is regarded as predicate which comes in
nucleus layer. The logical structure of the marked/ inverted construction in locative
alternation is as (3) with different argument realizations. Such structure has an
entailment of holistic interpretation which can be banned depending on encyclopedic
knowledge or the context involved. The claim by Kailuweit (2008) can, then, be
modified into (3):
Semantic effect of marked Undergoer choice:
"If an argument is a marked choice for undergoer in a given LS, it is interpreted as a
prototypical undergoer' i.e. as having at least one of the properties "causally
affected", "change of state", "incremental/ extensional theme". " Kailuweit
(2008:350) This can be solely realized if the encyclopedic knowledge or the context
in which the sentence is uttered do not ban its realization.
The marked undergoer choice of location in inverted construction of locative
alternation may enjoy a holistic interpretation in some particular context as having
at least one of the properties "causally affected", "change of state", "incremental/
extensional theme".
5- Conclusions and Suggestions
Giving some examples of locative alternarion in Persian, the present study concluded
that two arguments- theme and location- are competing to receive the macrorole of
undergoer. Then, "marked-undergoer- choice-rule" is imposed to choose the location
argument as undergoer in the inverted constructions; however, this is not working
when incorporation is involved; in that case, there is only one core argument in the
construction that is selected as undergoer.
