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

Results found: 3

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
PL
Konstrukcje z czasownikami funkcyjnymi (LVC, „light verb constructions”) stanowią szczególną kategorię w ramach systemu konstrukcji czasownikowych posiadających znaczenia metaforyczne, ponieważ ich semantyka jest przede wszystkim zdeterminowana nie przez czasownik, ale przez jego argument rzeczownikowy, która na ogół funkcjonuje jako dopełnienie. Jednakże kategoria LVC jest daleka od jednorodności. Cel niniejszej pracy jest dwojaki. Po pierwsze, staram się odpowiedzieć na pytanie o zróżnicowanie, które znajdujemy w kategorii LVC. Po drugie, analizuję strukturę semantyczną węgierskiego czasownika köt ‘wiązać’, aby dowiedzieć się, jak LVC z udziałem tego czasownika mogą być włączone do systemu konstrukcji czasownikowych o znaczeniu metaforycznym. Poprzez badanie sprawdzonych, rzeczywistych przykładów staram się również podkreślić fakt, że (w przeciwieństwie do popularnego założenia w literaturze specjalistycznej) elementy czasownikowe LVC nie mogą być uważane za elementy „bez znaczenia”. Choć ich znaczenie jest w mniejszym lub większym stopniu abstrakcyjne, nie są one bynajmniej semantycznie „puste”; co więcej, ich znaczenie nie jest koniecznie i wyłącznie „gramatyczne”.
EN
Light verb constructions (henceforth LVCs) constitute a peculiar category within the system of verbal constructions having metaphorical meanings, as their semantics is primarily determined not by the verb but rather by its nominal dependent, which generally functions as an object. However, the category of LVCs is far from being homogeneous. The goal of the present paper is twofold. Firstly, I attempt to account for the variability we find within the category of LVCs. Secondly, I analyse the semantic structure of the Hungarian verb köt ‘tie, bind’ in order to find out how LVCs involving this verb can be integrated into the system of verbal constructions with metaphorical meanings. By the study of attested, real-world examples, I also aim to highlight the fact that (contrary to a popular assumption in the specialized literature) the verbal components of LVCs cannot be considered “meaningless” elements. While their meaning is abstract to a lesser or higher degree, they are by no means semantically “empty”; moreover, their meaning is not necessarily and exclusively “grammatical”.
EN
Light verb constructions are typically interpreted as idiom-like, fixed patterns in the literature (see e.g. Forgács 2015). However, corpus data suggest that such constructions may also display variability, potentially inviting a study in terms of synonymy. For instance, this is the case with barátságot köt [lit. ‘tie a friendship’] ~ barátságot sző [lit. ‘weave a friendship’] ~ barátságot épít [lit. ‘build a friendship’], all meaning ‘make friends’. In the present case study, I explore patterns of the structure N-ba/be ‘into N’ + V, in particular feledésbe V ‘become forgotten’ (where feledésbe means ‘into oblivion’), homályba V ‘become obscure’ (where homályba means ‘into obscurity’) and sötétségbe V ‘become dark’ (where sötétségbe means ‘into darkness’). More specifically, I examine variants of these LVCs (e.g. homályba vész [lit. ‘be lost into obscurity’] ~ homályba szürkül [‘fade into oblivion’]), yielding synonym groups. Primarily using corpus data from the Hungarian National Corpus, I seek to find out how these three synonym groups are related semantically, and how their similarities and differences can be described by studying i. central and marginal patterns within them and ii. verbal lexemes (elfelejtődik ‘become forgotten’, elhomályosul ‘become obscure’ and elsötétedik ‘become dark’, respectively) with which they are synonymous.
EN
The point of departure of this paper is the hypothesis that, by examining the various labels used for the verbal expressions (also) known as light verb constructions (e.g., periphrastic constructions, pleonastic expressions, semi-compositional constructions), it is possible to pinpoint the features that the various approaches dealing with that particular category and that phenomenon interpret as definitive, essential specificities of the linguistic units in question (cf. 2.1). In addition, the exploration of the differences across categories referred to by terms that are synonymous (at least in some of their uses) might contribute to outlining the features of prototypical and non-prototypical light verb constructions, and refining the systematization of the above-mentioned expressions. In this article, I will first review the general characteristics of denomination (2.1), and those of terminology formation (2.2). After that, I will briefly sketch the approaches typically connected to the terms that are occasionally used synonymously with the term light verb construction (3). Then, on the basis of the intersection of the different approaches, I will outline a definition of light verb constructions that can currently be regarded as being the most general and accepted (4). Finally, combining several views found in the literature, I will attempt a prototype-based approach to the construction type under discussion and determine the features of prototypical light verb constructions (5).
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.