Zero-derived nouns and deverbal nominalization: An empirically-oriented perspective

本项目旨在研究动词性零派生名词（以下简称ZN：例如，climb - a climb-climb）作为一种非动词名词化，通过观察两个主要方面：i）它们的形态句法和解释如何受到基础动词的词汇语义和事件结构属性的影响; ii）如果有的话，它们的零后缀climb使它们在多大程度上不同于基于后缀的名词化（SN：例如，攀登）。 许多讨论ZN的生成文献认为，与SN不同，英语中的ZN在语义上是独特的，在形态句法上是简单的，这表明它们不能从SN通常接收的那种基础动词中得到成分分析，特别是当这些实现论点时（例如，约翰打碎了玻璃。这一观点得到了ZN中言语论证的非系统实现的支持（例如，（约翰打碎了玻璃）。因此，ZN被视为特殊的形成或“创造性的创造”。然而，各种经验事实对这种分析提出了挑战：例如，一些ZN可以实现论点。他攀登--基利曼哈罗峰）。此外，特质的索赔是基于零星的数据，特别是因为零派生的文献通常集中在更有效的名动词，而不是ZN。 该项目带来了这场辩论的一个重大贡献，提供了一个综合性的研究的词汇类和形态句法模式的ZN，丰富的语料库数据很容易访问今天和以前的深刻的研究在英语动词类的指导下。该项目开始的假设，像SN，ZN接收组成和特质的读数。为了确定两者之间的相互作用，它的目的是回答以下三个问题，这也将导致第一次深入了解的理论建模的形态句法和语义的ZN：1。 不同的语义动词类别如何与成分性和特质性ZN相关？2. 哪些动词类派生出实现动词论元的ZN？3. ZN在语义和形态上与SN有何不同（如果有的话）？ 重点是英语，其ZN特别富有成效，并提供了丰富的经验基础。为了进一步描绘ZN的轮廓，从一种语言的可能干扰的类型学特性，英语的研究将补充从罗曼语的见解，特别是从意大利语-它提供了两种模式的ZN-和罗马尼亚语-没有生产ZN。这种比较将有助于确定i）通常跨语言派生ZN的特定动词类别，以及ii）英语中ZN的更广泛含义域如何在ZN使用受限的语言中得到补偿，特别是通过使用SN。

This project aims to investigate deverbal zero-derived nouns (henceforth, ZNs: e.g., to climb – a climb-Ø) as a type of deverbal nominalization, by looking at two main aspects: i) how their morphosyntax and interpretation are influenced by the lexical semantics and event structure properties of the base verb and ii) to what extent, if at all, their zero-suffix Ø makes them different from suffix-based nominals (SNs: e.g., the climbing). Much of the generative literature that discusses ZNs argues that, unlike SNs, ZNs in English are semantically idiosyncratic and morphosyntactically plain, which suggests that they cannot be given a compositional analysis derived from the base verb of the kind that SNs usually receive, especially when these realize arguments (e.g., John’s breaking of the glass < John broke the glass). This view is supported, among others, by the unsystematic realization of verbal arguments in ZNs (e.g., *John’s break-Ø of the glass). ZNs have thus been treated as idiosyncratic formations or ‘creative coinages’. Various empirical facts, however, challenge this analysis: for instance, some ZNs can realize arguments (cf. his climb-Ø of Kilimanjaro). Moreover, the idiosyncrasy claims are based on sporadic data, especially since the literature on zero derivation has usually focused on the more productive denominal verbs rather than on ZNs. This project brings a major contribution to this debate by offering an integrative study of the lexical classes and morphosyntactic patterns of ZNs, guided by the rich corpus data easily accessible today and by previous insightful studies on verb classes in English. The project starts with the assumption that, like SNs, ZNs receive both compositional and idiosyncratic readings. To determine the interplay between the two, it aims to answer the following three questions, which will also lead to the first insights into the theoretical modeling of the morphosyntax and semantics of ZNs: 1. How do different semantic verb classes correlate with compositional and idiosyncratic ZNs? 2. Which verb classes derive ZNs that realize verbal arguments? 3. How do ZNs semantically and morphologically differ from SNs (if at all)? The focus is English, whose ZNs are especially productive and offer a rich empirical basis. To further delineate the profile of ZNs from possibly interfering typological properties of one language, the study of English will be complemented by insights from Romance languages, especially from Italian – which offers two patterns of ZNs – and Romanian – which has no productive ZNs. This comparison will help to determine i) the specific verb classes that typically derive ZNs across languages and ii) how the broader meaning domain of ZNs in English is compensated for in languages with a restricted use of ZNs, especially via the use of SNs.