Coding causal–noncausal verb alternations: A form–frequency correspondence explanation1
Coding causal–noncausal verb alternations: A form–frequency correspondence explanation1
复制标题
编码因果-非因果动词交替：形式-频率对应解释1
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
1.1
通讯作者：
Elif Bamyacı
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Martin Haspelmath;Andreea S. Calude;M. Spagnol;H. Narrog;Elif Bamyacı
我们提出并提供了基于语料库的支持，基于使用的解释跨语言的趋势，在编码的cause非因果动词对，如提高/上升，打破（tr.）/ break（intr.）.虽然英语大多使用相同的动词形式来表达因果和非因果意义（不稳定编码），但大多数语言对因果动词（使役编码）和/或非因果动词（反使役编码）都有额外的编码。使役和反使役编码不是随机分布的（Haspelmath 1993）：一些动词的意义，如“冻结”，“干燥”和“融化”，往往被编码为使役，而其他的，如“打破”，“打开”和“分裂”，往往被编码为反使役。我们提出了一个解释这些编码倾向的基础上的形式频率对应原则，这是一个一般的效率原则，是负责许多语法不对称性，最终接地在可预测性的频繁表达的意义。在七种语言的语料库数据中，我们发现，非因果成员更频繁的动词对往往被编码为反使役，而因果成员更频繁的动词对往往被编码为使役。我们的方法意味着，语言学家不应该依赖于形式意义的平行时，试图解释跨语言或语言特定模式在这一领域。
We propose, and provide corpus-based support for, a usage-based explanation for cross-linguistic trends in the coding of causal–noncausal verb pairs, such as raise/rise, break (tr.)/break (intr.). While English mostly uses the same verb form both for the causal and the noncausal sense (labile coding), most languages have extra coding for the causal verb (causative coding) and/or for the noncausal verb (anticausative coding). Causative and anticausative coding is not randomly distributed (Haspelmath 1993): Some verb meanings, such as ‘freeze’, ‘dry’ and ‘melt’, tend to be coded as causatives, while others, such as ‘break’, ‘open’ and ‘split’, tend to be coded as anticausatives. We propose an explanation of these coding tendencies on the basis of the form–frequency correspondence principle, which is a general efficiency principle that is responsible for many grammatical asymmetries, ultimately grounded in predictability of frequently expressed meanings. In corpus data from seven languages, we find that verb pairs for which the noncausal member is more frequent tend to be coded as anticausatives, while verb pairs for which the causal member is more frequent tend to be coded as causatives. Our approach implies that linguists should not rely on form–meaning parallelism when trying to explain cross-linguistic or language-particular patterns in this domain.