Verbs, nouns and affixation∗∗∗
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
What explains the rich patterns of deverbal nominalization? Why do some nouns have argument structure, while others do not? We seek a solution in which properties of deverbal nouns are composed from properties of verbs, properties of nouns, and properties of the morphemes that relate them. The theory of each plus the theory of how they combine, should give the explanation. In exploring this, we investigate properties of two theories of nominalization. In one, the verb-like properties of deverbal nouns result from verbal syntactic structure (a “structural model”). See, for example, van Hout & Roeper 1998, Fu, Roeper and Borer 1993, 2001, to appear, Alexiadou 2001, to appear). According to the structural hypothesis, some nouns contain VPs and/or verbal functional layers. In the other theory, the verbal properties of deverbal nouns result from the event structure and argument structure of the DPs that they head. By “event structure” we mean a representation of the elements and structure of a linguistic event, not a representation of the world. We refer to this view as the “event model”. According to the event model hypothesis, all derived nouns are represented with the same syntactic structure, the difference lying in argument structure – which in turn is critically related to event structure, in the way sketched in Grimshaw (1990), Siloni (1997) among others.1 In pursuing these lines of analysis, and at least to some extent disentangling their properties, we reach the conclusion that, with respect to a core set of phenomena, the two theories are remarkably similar – specifically, they achieve success with the same problems, and must resort to the same stipulations to address the remaining issues that we discuss (although the stipulations are couched in different forms).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Henry Laycock (2006). Variables, Generality and Existence. In Paulo Valore (ed.), Topics on General and Formal Ontology. Polimetrica 27.
Nino Cocchiarella (2009). Mass Nouns in a Logic of Classes as Many. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (3):343-361.
Roger Schwarzschild, Stubborn Distributivity, Multiparticipant Nouns and the Count/Mass Distinction.
Bo Mou (1999). The Structure of the Chinese Language and Ontological Insights: A Collective-Noun Hypothesis. Philosophy East and West 49 (1):45-62.
Jeffrey C. King (2001). Remarks on the Syntax and Semantics of Day Designators. Noûs 35 (s15):291 - 333.
David Nicolas (2004). The Semantics of Nouns Derived From Gradable Adjectives. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 8. 197-207.
Henry Laycock (2005). Mass Nouns, Count Nouns and Non-Count Nouns. In Alex Barber (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Elsevier
David Nicolas (2004). Is There Anything Characteristic About the Meaning of a Count Noun? Revue de la Lexicologie 18.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #196,980 of 1,907,654 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #463,516 of 1,907,654 )
How can I increase my downloads?