Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Ke dvojznačnosti kvantovacích sloves a recipročních výrazů v konstrukcích s násobnými číslovkami

100%
Veselý V.
Naše řeč (Our Speech)
|
2023
|
vol. 106
|
issue 4
195-226
EN
The paper presents an analysis of two types of syntactic constructions: constructions with a quantized verb like zaklepat ‘knock’ and a quantifier like dvakrát ‘twice’ on the one hand and constructions with reciprocals like navštívit se (vzájemně) ‘visit each other’ and a quantifier like dvakrát ‘twice.’ Both of these syntactic construction types display a similar ambiguity: for instance, dvakrát zaklepat ‘to knock twice’ means either ‘to make two knocks’ or ‘to make two series of knocks’ while dvakrát se vzájemně navštívit means either ‘to make two visits’ or ‘to make four visits (two and two),’ with the former senses being instances of “internal” quantification (what is quantified is part of the meaning of the quantized verb and the reciprocal, but it cannot be directly expressed with it). Through this analysis a group of conditions has been identified which arguably have to be met so that the ambiguity could arise: 1. The denotation of the predicate can be divided into separate actions. If reciprocals like navštívit se (vzájemně) ‘to visit (each other)’ are considered autonomous verbs (i.e. not syntactic constructions), then it is the case that: 2. The separate actions can be expressed with a verb which is a base for the respective quantized verb or the reciprocal verb in a derivational sense; 3. The verb is syntactically intransitive. A general condition for the observed ambiguity is an interaction of two quantifiers. It can be assumed that when an “external” quantification is opted for, i.e., sets of events are counted, the quantification carried out by the quantized verb or by the reciprocal usually happens before the quantification related to a quantifier like dvakrát ‘twice.’
2
Content available remote

Ke zpracování některých významových druhů číslovek ve výkladovém slovníku

100%
Veselý V.
Naše řeč (Our Speech)
|
2016
|
vol. 99
|
issue 3
113-131
EN
The paper deals with the semantics of numerals with kind, set, summative and multiplicative meanings (e.g. čtverý ‘four kinds’, čtvery ‘four sets’, čtvero ‘four elements altogether’, čtyřikrát ‘four times’, respectively). The kind meaning is based on a division of the denoted item into elements and their sets. However, in combination with some abstract nouns, kind numerals do not express a number of kinds, but rather, a number of single elements, e.g. dvojím způsobem ‘in two ways’. Multiplicative numerals primarily express a number of repetitions of a process or a resulting state. Numerals formed with the component -krát quantify not only absolutely, but also relatively, comparing an amount of some quality or a number of elements in two situations, e.g. Petr je dvakrát starší než Jan ‘Peter is twice as old as John’.
3
Content available remote

K slovotvorné funkci reflexivních morfémů se, si

100%
Veselý V.
Naše řeč (Our Speech)
|
2018
|
vol. 101
|
issue 3
138-157
EN
The paper assumes the premise that the reflexive elements se, si that form the so-called proper reflexive verbs have the status of derivational morphemes. The aim of the paper is to describe the consequences of the adoption of the given premise for the interpretation of various types of reflexive verbs. It can be assumed that different groups of reflexive verbs represent derivational types which are distinctive and clearly defined to varying degrees. The more obviously the reflexive verb and the non-reflexive verb differ in terms of (a) semantic valency, (b) syntactic and semantic transitivity, the more distinctive the derivational function of the reflexive morpheme is. A distinctive, easy to define derivational type is represented by reflexive verbs (derived from transitive verbs) which are both syntactically and semantically intransitive (verbs of the type hnát se, rozbít se). A less distinctive derivational type comprises verbs which are syntactically intransitive but retain a certain degree of semantic transitivity (proper reflexive verbs formed with the morpheme se). The least distinctive derivational type is represented by verbs which are transitive in both the syntactic and semantic senses (some types of reflexive verbs formed with morpheme si).
4
Content available remote

K presupozici předchozího (stejného/podobného) děje u prefigátů s při- a pře-

63%
Veselý L., Veselý V.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2021
|
vol. 82
|
issue 3
232-248
EN
The study deals with prefixed verbs with při- and pře- which imply a preceding action, namely one identical or similar to the action denoted by a given verb (přisladit čaj ‘sweeten tea (a little more)’; převážit rybu ‘reweigh a fish’). The paper addresses these questions: 1) What factors cause the implication of a preceding action to be perceived with varying strength for different verbs? 2) Does the meaning of a preceding action belong to the realm of semantics or pragmatics? The following findings are formulated: 1) Strength of the implication is affected by the amount of resemblance of the implied action to the action directly denoted: if two identical actions with identical result are concerned (přeočkovat dítě ‘revaccinate a child’) the implication is strong. If the verb expresses a change of state (přeformulovat text ‘reformulate a text’) the implication is weaker. 2) The character of the implied meaning is also a factor: if the implication is strongly determined by pragmatics (přisolit ‘add (more) salt’) it is merely loosely associated with the verb. If the implication is not dependent on pragmatics (převážit kapra ‘reweigh a carp’) it seems to be part of the lexical meaning and is strong.
5
Content available remote

Negative-mutational verbs and presupposition in Czech

63%
Veselý L., Veselý V.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2019
|
vol. 80
|
issue 4
265-284
EN
The aim of this contribution is to analyze the meaning of the Czech verbs zůstat ‘stay, remain’, nechat ‘keep, leave, let’ and zapomenout ‘forget’. We will argue they are mutational verbs sui generis: their positive forms express a denial that a mutational action has been carried out, whereas the negative forms express the carrying out of a mutation. Since such behaviour is contrary to prototypically mutational verbs, we call zůstat, nechat and zapomenout negative-mutational verbs. This construal makes it possible to maintain the assumption that a presupposition of an initial situation is a sufficient condition for the mutational meaning. If combined with an infinitive complement, the verbs zůstat, nechat, zapomenout belong to the class of implicative verbs (zapomenout is negative-implicative). In this use, the given verbs retain the status of negative-mutational verbs provided certain conditions imposed on the infinitive are fulfilled.
CS
Cílem příspěvku je analýza významu českých sloves zůstat, nechat a zapomenout. Ukážeme, že jde o mutační slovesa sui generis: svými pozitivními tvary popírají provedení mutační akce, zatímco svými negativními tvary vyjadřují provedení mutace. Jelikož chování prototypicky mutačních sloves je právě opačné, interpretujeme zůstat, nechat a zapomenout jako slovesa negativně mutační. Uvedené pojetí umožňuje zachování předpokladu, že presupozice výchozí situace je postačující podmínkou pro mutační význam slovesa. Kombinují-li se slovesa zůstat, nechat a zapomenout s infinitivem, patří do třídy sloves implikativních (zapomenout je negativně implikativní). Stále jde o slovesa negativně mutační, pokud tomu nebrání sémantika infinitivu.
6
Content available remote

K významu substantiv s převahou plurálových tvarů

63%
Michalec V., Veselý V.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2016
|
vol. 77
|
issue 3
163-184
EN
The paper shows that a predominance of plural forms of a noun over its singular forms often indicates a semantic distinction between them. We argue that, in the case of nouns whose plural forms express collective meaning and nouns whose plural forms tend to be interpreted as mass names, this semantic distinction is of a grammatico-lexical nature. Plural forms expressing collective meaning may be semantically specified with a phrase containing a categorial noun (jedny cigarety = jedna krabička cigaret ‘one pack of cigarettes’). Due to their semantic relationship to plural forms with a non-collective meaning, the opposition between singular and plural morphology is not fully neutralized (as in the case of pluralia tantum), but only partially so. The close relationship between plural forms inclined toward a mass interpretation (maliny ‘raspberries’; piliny ‘sawdust’) and proper mass nouns is proven by the fact that they are combined with the same type of quantifiers and measure phrases. The paper also shows how the semantics of nouns with predominantly plural morphology is reflected in the Academic Dictionary of Contemporary Czech (Akademický slovník současné češtiny or ASSČ) which is currently being compiled.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.