Biblioteca Digital Curt Nimuendajú

Disponível originalmente em
http://www.sil.org/americas/brasil/PUBLCNS/LING/JAVerb.pdf

Membros do site podem adicionar comentários sobre os recursos aqui reunidos. Para tornar-se um membro, clique aqui. Para corrigir eventuais erros nesta ou outras páginas de Etnolinguistica.Org, preencha o formulário disponível aqui. Para sugerir novas teses, dissertações ou monografias, bem como outros recursos disponíveis online, clique aqui.

This is a study of three argument structure alternations in Jarawara, a South American Indian language, roughly corresponding to the following English alternations: (1) the locative alternation ( Jack sprayed paint on the wall vs. Jack sprayed the wall with paint ); (2) the unspecified object alternation ( Mike ate the cake vs. Mike ate ); and (3) the causative alternation ( the log rolled vs. Brian rolled the log ).

Dixon (1999b) includes an analysis of these phenomena of Jarawara verbs based on a functional-typological perspective. The approach in this dissertation is based on a lexical semantics informed by generative grammar, and takes its inspiration especially from Pinker (1989), Levin (1993), and Levin and Rappaport Hovav (1995). According to this approach, argument structure alternations are sensitive to syntactic and/or semantic features of verbs, and are thus helpful in determining verb classes. No attempt is made to establish formal classes for Jarawara verbs, but the three alternations studied are shown to be sensitive to broad semantic features. In addition to generalizations and discussions of theory, a list is provided of the verbs which participate in each alternation, divided into tentative subclasses, with detailed data for each alternating verb in an appendix. This study, like Dixon's, relied on texts and spontaneous utterances rather than on elicited data.

Disponível originalmente em
http://www.sil.org/americas/brasil/PUBLCNS/LING/JAVerb.pdf

Use o formulário abaixo para enviar-nos sugestões sobre este item, comunicar-nos problemas técnicos (por exemplo, ilegibilidade ou falta de páginas, links desatualizados, etc.) ou objeções quanto a sua inclusão. Itens marcados com um asterisco (*) são de preenchimento obrigatório.