http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/individuo/prodotto/ID112964

On the event structure of Italian verbs with predicative complement (Comunicazione a convegno)

Type

Prodotto della ricerca (Classe)
Comunicazione a convegno (Classe)

Label

On the event structure of Italian verbs with predicative complement (Comunicazione a convegno) (literal)

Anno

2010-01-01T00:00:00+01:00 (literal)

Alternative label

Strik Lievers F. (2010)
On the event structure of Italian verbs with predicative complement
in Representation of Events, Paris
(literal)

Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#autori

Strik Lievers F. (literal)

Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#note

In: Representation of Events (Paris, 28-30 September 2010). (literal)

Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#descrizioneSinteticaDelProdotto

Subeventual analysis of events has proven to be useful in accounting for a number of phenomena, e.g., the scope of some adverbials (Pustejovsky 1995), or the properties of interlexical relations between verbs (Engelberg 2004). Here we show the advantages of adopting (sub)eventual analysis (based on the Generative Lexicon model, Pustejovsky 1995), taking as a case study a specific class of verbs in Italian: intransitive (e.g., diventare, 'become') and transitive (e.g., considerare, 'consider') verbs obligatorily requiring a predicative complement (pred. compl.) to form a 'complete' event, e.g. Marco è diventato ricco, 'Marco became rich' (*Marco è diventato). These verbs can be interpreted as the realization of an analytical strategy to code events: the 'skeleton' of the event structure already emerges at the expression level. The \"verb + pred. compl.\" complex can be interpreted as a single event composed by two subevents, e1 and e2: e1 is lexicalized by the verb, e2 is lexicalized by the pred. compl. The proposed analysis can be exemplified considering the verb rimanere, 'remain'. At a first glance, it may appear as the 'prototypical' stative verb, thus characterized by the simplest event structure. However: 1) Both a stative sense (È rimasta bellissima 'She remained very beautiful') and a 'dynamic' sense occur (È rimasto intrappolato 'He remained trapped'), depending on the type of pred. compl. Corpus analysis shows that the 'dynamic' sense occurs with some stage-level Adjs, and with Resultant-State (Parsons 1990) past participles. It is here proposed to analyse this sense as a right- headed transition (where e1 is a process, preceding the state e2 coded by the pred. compl.), that introduces an opposition (cf. Pustejovsky 2000) modifying a property of the subject from ¬P to P. 2) The stative sense is itself complex. How do we account, for instance, for the difference between Luca è il miglior alunno ('Luca is the best pupil') and Luca rimane il miglior alunno ('Luc (literal)

Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#affiliazioni