Telicity and English Verb Classes and Alternations: An Overview
Telicity and English Verb Classes and Alternations: An Overview
Files
Publication or External Link
Date
1998-10-15
Authors
Olsen, Mari Broman
Advisor
Citation
DRUM DOI
Abstract
This document reports on research conducted for the University of
Maryland Machine Translation (MT) project. The primary focus of this
investigation concerns the lexical aspect feature [+telic] (i.e.,
having an inherent end, as in the verb win, vs. the verb run) and its
relation to the alternations outlined in (Levin, 1993), English verb
classes and alternations. This work is based on the assumption that
lexical aspect features need not be primitive but may be derived from
the same semantic components that potentiate the alternations.
Levin's 86 alternations and constructions are divided into five
classes with respect to telicity: (i) alternations that indicate
telicity (all participating verbs are [+telic] in their basic sense),
(ii) alternations and constructions that add telicity (all
participating verbs are [+telic] in the relevant construction), (iii)
alternations that indicate atelicity (all participating verbs are
[;telic] in their basic sense), (iv) alternations and constructions
that are irrelevant with respect to (a)telicity (some participating
verbs are [+telic] and others [;telic], and their categorization is
not systematically affected by the relevant construction), and, for
completeness, (v) a small number of alternations that cannot be
classified.
For alternations indicating telicity_category (i)_I examine the
semantic components said to potentiate the alternations, and for
alternations and constructions adding telicity_category (ii)_the
semantic components added along with telicity. The results suggest a
composite semantic basis for telicity, related to the notion of change
of state (broadly defined), but not perfectly correlated with it.
Other notions are also relevant, such as contextually typical degree,
reciprocal action, and dynamicity, another lexical aspect feature. In
addition, the study of categories (ii)-(iv) reveals that certain
frames may be used for diagnosing atelicity, despite its generally
variable behavior.
This study also explores the relationship between transitivity and
telicity, following suggestions in the work of Hopper and Thompson
(1980), Tenny (1987; 1989; 1994), and van Hout (to appear), among
others.
(Also cross-referenced as UMIACS-TR-96-15)
The research reported herein was supported, in part, by Army Research
Office contract DAAL03-91-C-0034 through Battelle Corporation, NSF NYI
IRI-9357731, Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellow Award BR3336, and a General
Research Board Semester Award.