Lesson 8 SYNTAGMATIG RELATIONS ILI “Tntroduction. ik ge Teighie ming INTRODUCTION i (aves cfuiedtiy ra temnence. peices ciated 1s as follows Om the other hand factitive, the participant role defined by Fillmore as E the case ofthe objector being resulting fromthe action or state identified by the verb, or understood as part of the meaning of the verb is also identified fis patient Fillmore gives the following example fora factive (patent) case John cooked a delicious meal a, John repaired his bicycle in the garage. b. John put his bicycle in the garage. ications of functional roles or the status of complement are the ‘They occur as subject, direct object or indirect object of verb ‘missing’ element must be recovered . Classification of participant roles jore(1968) defined this role as the ease of the typically ani instigator ofthe action identified by the er, However, other —_—, ——u7 SEMANTICS DATIVE also called EXPERIENCER is the case of the anim: fiscted by the state or action identified by the very da Carmen heard the choir singing The choir enchanted Carmen Mary saw the smoke John felt ill Fillmore does not identify this case separately from the dative. Cruse instead suggests another variation distinguishing between experiencer and benefactive also called beneficiary by other authors such as Saced, erect role is defined as the entity for whose benefit the action William filled in the form for his grandmother He baked me a cake Robert received a gift of flowers LOCATIVE is the case which identifies the locati i orientation of the state or action identified by the verb. 4 The witch was hiding in the woods The pianist played in the stage Mary vaulted the wall John put his finger on the button Again, Cruse makes various dynamic subdivisions. The first is static ation or the place in which something is situated or takes place. Source, ‘and goal are variations of this locative case. 1 source is the entity from which something move, either literally or phorically. ; ‘The plane came back from Paris We got the idea from a French magazine The lamp emits heat Path. This case i not always recognized separately from a general She crossed the street {goal is the entity towards which something moves, r eas 1g moves, either literally or —, SYNTAGMATIC RELATIONS IL 179 We finally reached the summit Peter handed his licence to the policeman Pat told the joke to his friends However, since there are many more borderline cases, more criteria fare needed. Cruse suggests that any proposed subdivision of a participant tole should have grammatical consequences, and he also adds that the best approach may be to characterize the prototypical cases only. ‘The approach taken in this book follows this line and characterizes only prototypical cases. 8.2.3. Functional roles and grammatical characterizations ‘There has always been a link between functional roles and grammatical characterizations such as subject and object. Traditionally, the subject Is the ‘doer’ and the object is the ‘done to’ (in the active voice), but there an frequent situations when this is not so. Fillmore proposed an activity hierarchy as follows: AGENTIVE > INSTRUMENTAL > EXPERIENCER > LOCATIVE » OBJECTIVE ‘This means that in English, a subject is obligatory so, if there is only one noun phrase in a sentence, it automatically becomes the subjects Although these issues are still under debate, Fillmore's proposal seems to be fairly well accepted by most semanticists and syntacticians. 8.3. SENTENCE SEMANTICS. SPEECH ACTS Part of speaking or understanding a language is knowing whether we have been asked a question, given an order or requested to do something. in that particular language. That is the part of the meaning of a sentence that is communicated by its illocutionary force. Following Austin (1975), Cruse (2000:331; 2004:346) explains how communication is not just a matter of expressing propositions. Nor is it the logical understanding of the elements involved in a predication. To communicate, he adds, we must express propositions with a particular illocutionary force, andl int 80 doing we perform particular kinds of action such as stating, ‘warning, and so on, which have come180 SEMANTICS to be called speech acts. So it is important to distinguish between three sorts of things that one is doing in the course of produeing an utterance. These are usually called locutionary acts, perlocutionary acts and illocutionary acts. The first, locutionary acts, refer to the physical act of speaking, that is, producing a certain type of noise, conforming the grammar of some language and including the speaker's intentions. Perlocutionary acts are acts performed by means of a language, using language as a tool; persuading someone to do something is an example of perlocutionary acts. That is, the elements which define the act are external to the locutionary act. The important thing is not the act of saying, certain things but the effects the act of saying has. According to Cruse, the act of cheering someone up performed by using language is a perlocutionary act, but this act does not consist in saying certain things in a certain way, but rather in having a certain effect (the addressee being in a better mood), which in principle could have been produced in some other way. Finally, illocutionary acts are acts which are internal to the locutionary act. For example, if someone says to another person I promise to buy you a ring, they have, by simply saying these words, performed the act of promising. In lesson 4 we learned how there are a group of verbs, performative verbs, whose main function is to encode illocutionary force. These are: promise, beg, thank, command etc. 8.4, SENTENCE MEANING AND SPEAKER'S ATTITUDE. MODALITY ‘Tense, aspect, and modality should also be studied as semantic systems which allow us to organize the descriptions of situations dealt with in previous lessons. They are all elements that have something to do with the string of words that make up sentences. That is to say, these elements operate at a syntagmatic level, which is why we need to revise these concepts in the context of syntagmatic relations. Modality can be defined as a device used by speakers to express their particular attitude towards a given proposition or situation, For example modality in English is expressed by the words can, could, may might, etc. Modality can be deontic (when it expresses obligation or jon) and epistemic (When the speaker expresses degrees However, —_, /NTAGMATIN there are cases where the ‘verb can express a deontic or an epistemic meaning. For example, “you can drive this car” can be interpreted as a permission or as possibility. Evidentiality is connected with epistemic modality in the sense that it is the term used to refer to the speaker's attitude to the source of information. In English this is achieved by means of a separate clause or by parenthetical adverbials. EXERCISES AND ACTIVITIES 1. What participant roles are represented by the italicized items in the following expressions? (Adapted from Cruse, 2004), a. Mary watched the film. \b. John put the cup on the table. c. You can taste the wine (two possible answers). . We followed the river for three miles. ce. John drilled a hole in the wall, then filled it with plaster, f, They left London yesterday. g. The storm had ripped the roof off. h, Mary brought John a tie. 2. Modal verbs convey epistemic modality. Explain the speaker's attitude as codified by the modal verb in each of the following sentences (adapted from Saeed, 2001: 135). a) This could he my job now. b) They would be very sad if they knew you had failed your exam. ) You must be my cousin. 4) He should buy some flowers for his girlfriend. ¢) It might rain tonight. 3. Write three sentences for each of the following cases: 1a) three sentences which express epistemic modality. b) three sentences which express deontic modality. ©) three sentences which express evidentiality. - =SUGGESTED READINGS , — For an overview of speech acts see Cruse (2000: chapter 16; 2004; chapter 17) and Saced (2001; 2003: chapter 8). — For an analysis of modality and evidentiality see Cruse (2000: 286- 289) and Saced (2001: 125-133; 2003: 135-143). — Foran easy view of modality, see Kreidler (1998: 239-245), GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY ALLAN, K, 1986, Linguistic Meaning. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Dowry, D. 1986. The effects of aspectual class on the temporal structure of discourse: Semantics or pragmatics? Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 37-61 Dowry, D. 1989. On the Semantic Content of the Notion of “Thematic Role”. In Chierchia, G. etal. (eds.), Properties, Types, and Meanings. Volume 2. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers Dowry, D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67, 547- 619. Fiore, C. 1968. The case for case. In Bach and Harms (eds.). Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. GWON, T. 1990. Syntax. A Functional Typological Introduction. Vol 2. Amsterdam John Benjamins. KuwipieR, C. R, 1998. Introducing English Semantics. London and New York: Routledge. ‘Van Vauin, R. D. and Larouia, R. J. 1997. Syntax. Structure, Meaning, and Function, UK: Cambridge University Press.