Volume 24, Fall 2002

Permanent URI for this collection

https://prism.ucalgary.ca/handle/1880/100056

Browse

Browsing Volume 24, Fall 2002 by Subject "Morphology"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 24, Fall 2002
    (University of Calgary, 2002-09) Dobrovolsky, Michael; Edwards, Jodi
    The editors of this volume, Jodi Edwards and Michael Dobrovolsky are pleased to present the twenty-fourth issue of the Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics published by the Department of Linguistics at the University of Calgary. The papers contained in this volume represent works in progress and as such should not be considered in any way final or definitive.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    On a systematic component of meaning in idioms
    (University of Calgary, 2002-09) McGinnis, Martha
    It has traditionally been assumed that the meaning of some or all phrasal idioms is non-compositional. However, I argue here that the aspectual meaning of idioms is completely systematic: there are no special aspectual restrictions on idioms, and moreover, the aspectual properties of an idiom are compositional, combining the aspectual properties of its syntactic constituents in the usual way. I show that this observation supports the theory of Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1994).
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Resultatives, particles, prefixes and argument structure
    (University of Calgary, 2002-09) Mezhevich, Ilana
    In this paper, I discuss the argument status of postverbal DPs in English resultative constructions, English verb-particle constructions and Russian prefixed verbs. I argue that postverbal DPs in English resultative constructions on the one hand and verb-particle constructions and Russian prefixed verbs on the other hand have different argument status. As shown by various studies, English resultatives are syntactically derived constructions (Carrier and Randall 1992; Neeleman and Weerman 1993; Levin and Rappaport Hovav 1995, among others), whereas Russian prefixed verbs are lexically derived (Townsend 1975; Brecht 1985, Zaliznjak and Shmelev 1997, among others). I assume that lexical derivation as opposed to syntactic derivation is less productive and may change a verb's meaning in an unpredictable way. As a result, Russian prefixed verbs and English verb-particle constructions often have different meaning from their base verbs and may have different arguments.