(Ferenc Kiefer) Hungarian Linguistics

HUNGARIAN LINGUISTICS
LINGUISTIC & LITERARY STUDIES IN EASTERN EUROPE (LLSEE)

The emphasis of this scholarly series is on recent developments in
Linguistic and Literary Research in Eastern Europe; it includes analysis,
translations and syntheses of current research as well as studies in
the history of linguistic and literary scholarship.
Founding Editor: J ohn Odmark
General Editor: Philip A. Luelsdorff
Volume 4
Ferenc Kiefer (ed.)
Hungarian Linguistics
HUNGARIAN LINGUISTICS
edited by
FERENC KIEFER
University of Budapest
J OHN BENJ AMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY
AMSTERDAM / PHILADELPHIA
1982
Copyright 1982 - J ohn Benjamins B.V.
ISSN 0165 7712 / ISBN 90 272 1508 1
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,
microfilm or any other means, without written permission from the publisher.
CONTENTS
I nt r oduct on 1
Mar anne Bakr - Nagy
On t he r econst r uct on of pr ot o- mean ngs 7
I van Fnagy
He s on y | ok ng ( | oke, met aphor and anguage deve op-
ment ) 31
Pt er Ha| d
On t he synt ax of t he negat ve aux ar y n Samoyed. . . 109
Rober t Het zr on
Non- app cab t y as a t est f or cat egor y def n t ons. 131
Sndor Kr o y
I nt r ans t ve- t r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes n Hunga-
r an 185
| nos Ke emen
Lukcs ' s deas on anguage 245
I st vn Kenese
The r e ncar nat on of r a s ng ( or how t o r a se NPs w t h-
out a r a s ng r u e) 269
Fer enc K ef er
The aspect ua syst em of Hungar an. 293
Kat a n E. K ss
Samue Br assa ' s t heor y of t he sent ence 331
Andr s Kom sy
Deep st r uct ur e cases r e nt er pr et ed 351
I ona Mo nar
Ex st ent a r e at ons n "hogy"- sent ences n Hungar an
387
Fer enc Papp
For e gn anguage env r onment and ngu st c change: t wo
examp es 427
Csaba P h
Sub| ect and t op c n Hungar an: some psycho ngu st c
ev dence t o ncr ease t he conf us on 447
Kat a n Rad cs
Af f xed per son- mar k ng par ad gms - a h st or y and t ypo o-
gy 467
Anna Szabo cs
Mode t heor et c semant cs of per f or mat ves 515
Zs gmond Te egd
On t he f or mat on of t he concept of ' ngu st c s gn' and
on St o c anguage doct r ne 537
Rober t Vago
Abst r act / w/ n Hungar an 589
LI ST OF CONTRI BUTORS
Mar anne Bakr - Nagy, I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Acade-
my of Sc ences, 1014 Budapest , Szent hr omsg u. 2.
I van Fnagy, CNRS- Par s , 1, squ. C aude Debussy, 9 2160 Ant ony,
Fr ance and Un ver s t y of Szeged, Hungar y.
Pet er Ha| d, I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
Sc ences, 1014 Budapest , Szent hr omsg u. 2.
Rober t Het zr on, Depar t ment of Ger man c and S av c Languages, Un -
ver s t y of Ca f or n a, Sant a Bar bar a, CAL 93106.
Sandor Kar o y, Depar t ment of Gener a L ngu st cs, Un ver s t y of
Szeged, Hungar y and I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Aca-
demy of Sc ences, 1014 Budapest , Szent hr omsg u. 2.
| anos Ke emen, I nst t ut e of Ph osophy, Hungar an Academy of
Sc ences, 1054 Budapest , Szemer e ut ca 10.
I st vn Kenese , Depar t ment of Eng sh, Un ver s t y of Debr ecen,
Debr ecen.
Fer enc K ef er , I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
Kat a n E. K ss, Depar t ment of Eng sh, Un ver s t y of Budapest ,
1054 Budapest , Pest Bar nabs u. .
Andr s Kom sy, I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
I ona Mo nr , I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
Fer enc Papp, Depar t ment of S av c Languages, Un ver s t y of Deb-
r ecen, Debr ecen, Hungar y.
Csaba P h, Depar t ment of Psycho ogy, Un ver s t y of Budapest ,
1054 Budapest , Pest Bar nabs u. .
Kat a n Rad es, I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
Anna Szabo cs , I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Hungar an Academy of
Zs gmond Te egd , Depar t ment of Gener a L ngu st cs, Un ver s t y
of Budapest , 1054 Budapest , Pest Bar nabs u. .
Rober t Vago, Depar t ment of L ngu st cs, Oueens Co ege, The C t y
Un ver s t y of New Yor k, F ush ng, New Yor k 11367.
I n t r o d u c t o n
Th s vo ume cont a ns paper s on gener a ngu st cs
wr t t en by Hungar an scho ar s. The t er m ' gener a ngu st cs'
s not easy t o def ne. I s a paper on Hungar an at t he same
t me a st udy n gener a ngu st cs? Cer t a n y not . But t
cou d be cons der ed so f t cont a ned some gener a conc u-
s ons concer n ng t he st r uct ur e of anguage. I n gener a , a
st udy n gener a ngu st cs shou d t e us somet h ng nove
about t he st r uct ur e of anguage. Ev dent y, t hen, my pr ma-
r y concer n has been t o se ect paper s wh ch cont a n, beyond
t he descr pt ve aspect , some gener a ngu st c ns ght s as
we . Of cour se, var ous ngu st c schoo s may r equ r e d f -
f er ent degr ees of exp c t ness. Th s s t r ue of Hungar an n-
gu st cs as we . I t shou d not be sur pr s ng t hen t hat t he
gener a ngu st c aspect s ar e not a ways made f u y exp c t
n t he paper s of t he pr esent vo ume.
Gener a ngu st cs does not mean t heor et ca ngu s-
t cs. Not a ngu st c schoo s or t r ends can be sa d t o have
a r eady acqu r ed t he st at us of a t heor y. A t hough t he u t mat e
goa of ngu st c r esear ch s (or shou d be) t he const r uct on
of an appr opr at e t heor y, t h s goa cannot be ach eved but
gr adua y. Pr esent - day gener a ngu st cs nc udes t her ef or e
t heor et ca appr oaches as we as descr pt ve ones. G ven
t h s st at e of t he ar t t does not come as a sur pr se t hat t he
paper s of t he pr esent co ect on show an unequa degr ee of
2 HUNGARI AN GENERAL LI NGUI STI CS
t heor et ca or ent at on. Some of t hemhave been conce ved
of n a mor e descr pt ve sp r t , ot her s have put mor e emphas s
on t heor et ca ssues.
I t s per haps wor t hwh e t o po nt out t hat none of t he
paper s of t h s vo ume r epr esent s Hungar an ngu st c t r ad -
t on, t hat s, g ven t he Hungar an ngu st c cont ext , none of
t hem can be t er med t r ad t ona . I n or der t o pr ov de some back-
gr ound aga nst wh ch t hese paper s shou d be eva uat ed, et me
br ef y evoke some of t he most sa ent f eat ur es of Hungar an
ngu st c t r ad t on. ( Th s t r ad t on was pr edom nant bet ween
t he t wo Wor d War s but f or var ous r easons t was r at her n-
f uent a unt qu t e r ecent y. )
( ) The Neogr ammar an schoo ' s' nf uence on Hungar an
ngu st cs was mor e ast ng t han n t he ne ghbor ng coun-
t r es ( espec a y Czechos ovak a and Ruman a) or n West er n
Eur ope. The st udy of cont empor ar y anguage was a r e at ve y
at e ach evement . Unt r at her r ecent y ( t he at e f f t es) des-
cr pt ve st ud es wer e not cons der ed t o be a wor t hy scho ar y
ent er pr se. Hence no descr pt ve t r ad t on cou d deve op n
Hungar y. Resear ch n ngu st cs f ocused on et ymo ogy, h st o-
r ca phonet cs, mor pho ogy and ( t o a esser ext ent ) on h st o-
r ca synt ax.
( ) L ngu st cs was par t of cu t ur a h st or y. Cu t ur a
h st or y a so nc udes t er at ur e. L ngu st cs and t er at ur e
wer e t hus c ose a es n Hungar an t r ad t on. To st udy t he
anguage of wr t er s and poet s was one of t he f avor t e r esear ch
t op cs. Ever yday anguage was not even env saged ( except f or
d a ect s) as a poss b e sub| ect of nvest gat on.
( ) The descr pt on of t he Hungar an d a ect s was con-
s der ed as one of t he ma n t asks of ngu st c scho ar sh p.
However , t was not t he descr pt ve aspect per se t hat was m-
por t ant s nce d a ect o ogy, t oo, ser ved h st or ca pur poses.
The descr pt on of d a ect s was ut zed f or mak ng nf er ences
about ear er st ages of anguage deve opment ( ' geogr aph c
I NTRODUCTI ON 3
mapp ngs' ) .
( v) I n gr ammar s wh ch, of cour se, ex st ed but wer e
wr t t en most y f or e ement ar y and secondar y educat on, ngu st c
examp es wou d exc us ve y be t aken f r om t er ar y
wor ks. | ohn Lot z whose Hungar an gr ammar was t he f r st descr pt ve
gr ammar of Hungar an conce ved of ' out s de of ' Hungar an
ngu st c t r ad t on ( pub shed n St ockho m n 1938)
had t o po nt out c ear y and r eso ut e y t hat he had nvent ed
a h s examp es but t hese examp es wer e as good Hungar an as
c t ed examp es wou d have been s nce he was a nat ve speaker
of Hungar an. Ot her Hungar an gr ammar s wer e def n t e y pr escr p-
t ve r at her t han descr pt ve.
(v) Fr omwhat has been sa d so f ar t he next f eat ur e of
Hungar an t r ad t ona ngu st cs a r eady f o ows: t was a -
most exc us ve y dat a- or ent ed. I t pr oduced a ser es of mpor -
t ant d ct onar es: et ymo og ca d ct onar es, wr t er s' d ct o-
nar es, exp anat or y d ct onar es, d ct onar es of p ace names,
descr pt ons of d a ect a wor ds, et c.
( v ) Hungar an ngu st cs was not comp et e y f r ee f r om
cer t a n nat ona st c t r a t s. Ther e ar e mu t f ar ous soc a and
po t ca r easons wh ch may exp a n nat ona sm n scho ar sh p
and even | ust f y t t o some ext ent . At t h s p ace, however , I
cannot go nt o t he det a s of t h s quest on. To be sur e, t o
nqu r e nt o t he past of t he Hungar an peop e meant t o f ur t her
nat ona consc uosness. L ngu st cs be ng par t of h st or y had
t o t ake t s shar e n t h s wor k. The h st or ca - cu t ur a t r ad -
t on was soon abe ed Hungar an t r ad t on and ngu st c t r ends
com ng f r omabr oad n moder n t mes wer e a en t o t h s t r ad t on
and t hus t hey wer e ooked upon w t h susp c on. ( Not a bene: Hun-
gar an ngu st cs was qu t e open t o f or e gn nf uence n t he
19t h cent ur y and dur ng t he f r st t wo decades of t he 20t h cen-
t ur y) . Two out st and ng except ons shou d however be r emember ed:
Gyu a Laz cz us and Zo t n Gombocz, pr of essor s at Budapest Un -
ver s t y. Unf or t unat e y, t he r nf uence on Hungar an ngu st cs
r ema ned r at her spor ad c.
( v ) Unt t he at e f f t es Hungar an ngu st c f e
cou d go on accor d ng t o t r ad t on. The Pr ague schoo , n sp t e
of t he geogr aph ca near ness, had pr act ca y no nf uence on
t . De Saussur e' s or H| e ms ev' s wor ks wer e comp et e y unknown.
Psycho og ca t heor es of by- gone t mes have ved a ast ng
and secr et f e n t he v ews of many Hungar an ngu st s. These
v ews t oget her w t h t he a ance w t h h st or y and t er at ur e
meant a def n t e r ef usa of any og ca ( exact , f or ma ) appr oach
t o anguage st udy.
( v ) At t he end of t he f f t es t he s t uat on began t o
change. Descr pt ve st ud es wer e f ur t her ed and appr ec at ed.
One cou d of t en encount er t he names of B oomf e d, Sap r ,
Har r s, and de Saussur e n ngu st c wr t ngs, t hough, of cour se,
t her e was no quest on of a descr pt ve br eakt hr ough. Mat hema-
t ca met hods, t oo, became popu ar and n t he ear y s xt es
sever a r esear cher s wer e wor k ng n t he ar ea of comput at ona
ngu st cs. By t he m d- s xt es t he f r st gener at ve st ud es
on Hungar an appear ed. H st or ca ngu st cs, espec a y Ur a-
st cs, became mor e r ecept ve t o new deas. Ou t e a f ew n-
gu st s got nt er est ed n pr ob ems of t he ph osophy of anguage,
psycho ngu st cs and anguage t ypo ogy. I n sum, Hungar an n-
gu st c f e has became mor e d ver s f ed and mor e nt er nat ona ,
My char act er zat on of Hungar an t r ad t ona ngu st cs
n no way mp es t hat I do not acknow edge t he r esu t s obt a ned
by t h s schoo . Tr ad t ona ngu st cs d d a good dea of m-
por t ant wor k n var ous f e ds. I have a r eady ment oned t he
ar ge number of d ct onar es comp ed wh ch ar e undoubt ed y n-
d spensab e f or most ( nc ud ng, of cour se, descr pt ve) n-
gu st c wor k. The r ecor d ng and t he descr pt on of h st or ca
document s, t oo, wer e mpor t ant ach evement s. But t r ad t ona
ngu st cs was def n t e y one- s ded and b ased n many r es-
pect s and t was t oo ' nat ona ' n t s met hodo ogy and ph o-
sophy.
I NTRODUCTI ON
5
I t shou d be c ear by now why t he paper s n t h s ant ho ogy
ar e not t r ad t ona : t hey ar e not t r ad t ona because ne t her
descr pt ve nor t heor et ca or ent at on be onged t o t r ad t on.
The pr esent ant ho ogy s t hus not meant t o pr ov de a
compr ehens ve over v ew of Hungar an ngu st c f e. L ngust c
wor ks conce ved n t he sp r t of Hungar an t r ad t on have
not been nc uded n t h s vo ume. Ne t her have been wor ks n
t he f e ds of aDp ed and comput at ona ngu st cs. On t he ot her
hand, however , t he pr esent co ect on s meant t o be r epr esen-
t at ve w t h r espect t o Hungar an gener a ngu st cs. Most of
t he appr oaches ar e r epr esent ed n t h s vo ume. Thus, t he paper s
may g ve t he r eader an dea of what k nd of t op cs ar e dea t w t h
n pr esent - day Hungar an gener a ngu st cs. The t op cs nc ude
t he ph osophy of anguage ( | . Ke emen) , psycho ngu st cs (Cs.
P h) , gener at ve synt ax ( I . Kenese ) , h st or ca ngu st cs
( M. Bakr o- Nagy and t o some ext ent F. Papp) , t he h st or y of n-
gu st cs ( Zs. Te egd ) , t he h st or y of Hungar an ngu st cs
( K. E. K ss) , anguage t ypo ogy ( A. Kom sy and K. Rad es) , gener a-
t ve phono ogy ( r epr esent ed her e by a paper by R. Vago who ves
n t he U. S. A. ) , Mont ague gr ammar ( A. Szabo cs ) , mor e or ess t heo-
r et ca y or ent ed descr pt ve st ud es of var ous ngu st c
phenomena as negat on, suf f xat on, aspect , f ocus, ex st ent a
sent ences ( P. Ha| d, R. Het zr on ( U. S. A. ) , I . Mo nr , F. K ef er , S.
Kar o y) and ' nt er d sc p nar y' ( I . Fnagy) . Of cour se, t hese
abe s ar e not exc us ve, sever a ar t c es cou d be c ass f ed
accor d ng t o mor e t han one abe .
As t o t he qua f cat on ' Hungar an' t shou d be not ed
t hat t does not mean ' v ng n Hungar y' . But t cer t a n y
means t hat t he per son' s wor k e t her cent er s ar ound t he Hungar an
anguage or t has c ose t es t o pr esent - day Hungar an ngu s-
t cs, or bot h. The st udy of t he par t cu ar f eat ur es of Hungar an
may pr ov de mpor t ant cont r but ons t o gener a ngu st cs. And
t he abe ' Hungar an gener a ngu st cs' shou d cover t h s as-
pect as we . I n t h s sense Hungar an gener a ngu st cs can
be done anywher e n t he wor d: n Par s and New Yor k, n Sant a
Bar bar a and St ockho m | ust as we as n Hungar y.
Most of t he paper s wer e or g na y wr t t en n Hungar an.
I w sh t o expr ess my gr at t ude t o Far r e Acker man ( Ber ke ey)
who t ook upon h mse f t he abor ous wor k of check ng t he Eng sh
of t he t r ans at ons. W t hout h s he p t h s ant ho ogy wou d con-
t a n even mor e f aws. I hope t hat t he Eng sh r eader w f or -
g ve t he r ema n ng st y st c b under s and c umsy f or mu at ons.
Par s, Sept ember 1979
Fer enc K ef er
ON THE RECONSTRUCTI ON OF PROTO- MEANI NGS
Mar anne Sz. Bakr - Nagy
1. 0. The a mof t h s paper s t o show how component a ana ys s
can be made use of n d achr on c semant c ana ys s,
mor e exact y, n det er m n ng mean ngs of exemes be ong ng
t o a r econst r uct ed pr ot o- anguage, t hat s, pr ot o- mean ngs.
What I amgo ng t o say at t h s p ace w exc us ve y app y
t o unwr t t en anguages and f am es of anguages n par -
t cu ar , t he Ur a c f am y. I n or der t o r econst r uct t he or -
g na ( pr ot o- ) anguage (s) of such f am es, some met hods
t hat wou d poss b y be d scar ded e sewher e may be ca ed f or .
I t ake component a ana ys s t o be one such met hod, f t
f or t he semant c nvest gat on of t he or g na , common wor d
st ock of anguages ack ng wr t t en document s. My r easons f or
t h s ar e as f o ows:
( a) Resear ch n h st or ca semant cs t r es t o t hr ow
ght on r e at ons of known ( document ed) mean ngs. "W t h
wr t t en anguages of d f f er ent eve s scho ar s can check hy-
pot heses n t wo d r ect ons because t hey have document ed ver -
f cat on wh ch pr ov des r e at ve chr ono ogy. Scho ar s who
wor k w t h unwr t t en anguages cannot do t h s n qu t e t he same
way s nce t hey have on y one DOCUMENTED t me- po nt , name y
t he pr esent . " ( Haas 1970: 116) The t ask of r econst r uct on,
t her ef or e, s, by exp or ng common f eat ur es of pr esent - day,
8
HUNGARI AN GENERAL LI NGUI STI CS
known mean ngs, t o t r y t o set up t he or g na , or pr mar y,
mean ng( s) , out of wh ch t he daught er anguage mean ngs can
be deduced.
( b) Accor d ng t o cur r ent pr act ce - at east as f ar as
Ur a st cs s concer ned - mean ngs r econst r uct ed f or t he pr ot o-
anguage ar e g ven n some nat ur a anguage, wh ch s wr ong n
t wo r espect s. On t he one hand, f we t ake our pr ot o- anguage
t o be a hypot het ca , met a ngu st c syst em t hat was never
spoken as a nat ur a anguage n t he f or m we r econst r uct ed t ,
t hen each t em of t h s met a ngu st c syst em s necessar y
met a ngu st c. On t he ot her hand, f we c a m t hat a seman-
t c f eat ur es wh ch we use t o descr be mean ngs n daught er an-
guages ar e t ems of a met a anguage, t hen n post u at ng a pr ot o-
mean ng we cannot ' t r ans at e' a c ust er of t hese f eat ur es , or -
der ed n some h er ar chy, nt o any nat ur a anguage, even f
t her e happens t o be a nat ur a anguage n wh ch t he mean ng
concer ned s abso ut e y dent ca w t h t he r econst r uct ed met a-
ngu st c ( pr ot o- ) mean ng. Mor eover , t s h gh y mpr obab e
t hat a nat ur a anguage cou d be f ound n wh ch f or any exeme
a mean ngs cou d be mat ched exact y, say, w t h t he cor r espon-
d ng pr ot o- mean ngs r econst r uct ed f or Pr ot o- F nno- Ugr c ( hence-
f or t h PFU) ( cf . t he f eat ur es of t he pr ot o- mean ng r econst r uct ed
be ow, e. g. w t h t hose of h t ) .
( c) The nqu r y nt o semant c changes may r evea nt er -
med at e eve s t hat may have ex st ed bet ween t he eve of pr o-
t o- mean ngs and t he eve of pr esent - day mean ngs ( cf . t he
t ab es dep ct ng t he d r ect on of semant c changes be ow) . Con-
sequent y, t her e r ema ns ess poss b t y of exp a n ng changes
n mat t er s and t h ngs by v r t ue of semant c changes .
1. 1. The f r st st ep t owar ds t he r econst r uct on of a pr o-
t o- mean ng s an ana ys s of t he semant c f eat ur es of r e at ed
exemes . As s known, t he on y t ype of mean ng t hat can be ana-
ysed by means of component a ana ys s s denot at ve ( or cog-
n t ve) mean ng. Not ce. t hat t hough an et ymo og st , n set t ng
up mean ng cor r es pondences , has t o cons der a mean ngs of a
ON THE RECONSTRUCTI ON OF PROTO- MEANI NGS 9
par t cu ar wor d at t he beg nn ng, when he s conf r ont ng mean-
ngs n var ous anguages; he can on y wor k w t h one t ype of
mean ng, name y denot at ve mean ng. He f t er s out of t he t o-
t a mean ng at h s d sposa ( r epr esent ng d ver se t ypes of
mean ng) | ust what s dent ca n a nd v dua senses, what
s r e at ve y const ant , t hat s, t he cor e mean ng. Of cour se,
t he nvest gat on of semant c changes s anot her mat t er , s nce
such changes can be nduced by connot at on. I n sum, t hen, we
can st at e t hat n set t ng up semant c cor r espondences we can
on y wor k w t h a t ype of mean ng t hat can be descr bed n t er ms
of semant c f eat ur es.
1. 2. Feat ur e ana ys s may be connect ed w t h cer t a n t ech-
n ca pr ob ems. Let me ment on but one of t hese pr ob ems her e.
I t s we - known, at east f or Ur a st s, t hat our dat a about
Ur a c anguages d f f er w de y bot h f r oma qua t at ve and a
quant t at ve po nt of v ew. Ther e ar e anguages and d a ect s
about wh ch we have p ent y of r e ab e mat er a but t her e ar e
a so some ot her s of wh ch we know qu t e t t e. I n many cases
we have at our d sposa one d ct onar y mean ng on y f or a g ven
ex ca t em. Th s uneven supp y of dat a may make ana ys s and
r econst r uct on uncer t a n. However , Ur a st cs a ways had t o put
up w t h scant y nf or mat on. Our r esu t s can be eas y mod f ed as
soon as new dat a become ava ab e. "But mor e ev dence, or d f -
f er ent ev dence - t he d scover y of a new daugt her anguage, f or
nst ance - can br ng new ns ght s wh ch may at any t me make
t necessar y t o change t he r econst r uct on. . . " ( Haas 1970: 130) .
1. 3. I c a m t hat n ana ys ng mean ng we have t o f r st
def ne t he semant c f e d t o wh ch t he g ven mean ng be ongs
( cf . Bakr 1978: 388) . Th s c a mneeds | ust f cat on. Semant c
f e ds and semant c f eat ur es ar e ver y c ose y nt er r e at ed ( cf .
e. g. A. Lehr er 1974: 66- 72, N da 1975: 174- 193, but cf . a so Lyons:
326 f or t he oppos t e v ew) . Lexemes be ong ng t o t he same f e d
w exh b t some common f eat ur es and whet her cer t a n exemes
be ong t o t he same f e d or not can on y be dec ded on t he ba-
s s of shar ed f eat ur es. Wh ch s pr mar y t hen: t he nvest gat on
of f e d r e at ons or component a ana ys s? ". . . doma ns can-
not be set up w t hout at east a pr e m nar y ana ys s of t he
component a st r uct ur e, and t he r esu t ng component a ana y-
s s r ef ect s t he doma n c ass f cat on. I t s t r ue t hat such
an appr oach r uns t he r sk of c r cu ar r eason ng, but t h s dan-
ger s nher ent n t he ana ys s of any syst em. I t s mposs b e
t o under st and comp et e y t he r e evance of any par t of t he who e
unt t he who e has been ana yzed, and yet one cannot under -
st and t he st r uct ur e of t he who e unt t s par t s have been ana-
yzed. " ( N da et a . 1977: 148) I t wou d ead us f ar f r omour
ma n t op c f we dwe t on t h s pr ob em at mor e engt h - a
I want t o po nt out her e s t hat def n ng t he appr opr at e f e d
seems t o be pr mar y s nce t h s f e d w co nc de t o some ex-
t ent w t h t he r espect ve not ona spher e. Subsequent f eat ur e
ana ys s w set t e t he quest on of whet her t he pr e m nar y
f e d ass gnment was r ght or not .
An nqu r y nt o semant c f e ds exc udes pr e m nar y n-
t er na r econst r uct on, however . Let me g ve some r easons f or
t h s .
Let us assume t hat t her e s a anguage n wh ch a g ven
exeme has t he f o ow ng denot at ve mean ngs: ' h t ' , ' k ' ,
' r esemb e' . I f we d sr egar d what we know wbout Hungar an -
wh ch wou d suggest a connect on bet ween t ' h t ' and meg
' k ' t hr ough agyont ' st r ke dead
1
, and a connect on bet ween
t ' h t ' and hason t ' r esemb e' t hr ough ( ap| r a) t ' t ake af t er
( one' s f at her ) ' - we sha have t o say t hat n t h s case, at
east f r om a synchr on c po nt of v ew, we have t o do w t h ho-
monyms. I t s easy t o see t hat t hese mean ngs be ong t o t hr ee
d f f er ent f e ds: ' h t ' be ongs t o t he f e d wh ch a so cont a ns
' st r ke' , ' s ap' , ' smack' , ' sm t e' , ' beat ' and t he ke;
' k ' t o t he f e d wh ch a so cont a ns ' mur der ' , ' smash t o
deat h' , ' st r ke dead' , ' beat t o deat h' , et c. , wh e ' r esemb e'
t o t he same f e d as ' r em nd' , ' t ake af t er ' and ot her s. Conse-
quent y, ' h t ' , ' k ' and ' r esemb e' can on y be ana ysed w t h-
n t he r own separ at e semant c f e ds. Let us assume f ur t her -
mor e t hat t h s exeme has et ymo og ca cor r espondences n ge-
net ca y r e at ed anguages w t h t he mean ng ' cut
1
. By app y-
ng t he nt er na r econst r uct on of mean ngs f or ' h t ' , ' k '
and ' r esemb e' t he on y common f eat ur e wou d be | Event | . ( ' h t '
and ' k ' have add t ona f eat ur es n common as | Change| ,
| Act v t y| , et c but . t hese do not appear n ' r esemb e' s nce
t h s exeme cont a ns | St at e| , et c. ) I t s qu t e ev dent t hat
t he f eat ur e | Event | s not suf f c ent n or der t o r e at e our
exemes t o ' cut ' . I f , however , we t r eat ' h t ' , ' k ' and ' r e-
semb e' separ at e y by compar ng each of t hemw t h ' cut ' , t can
be seen t hat one get s a sat sf act or y mat ch bet ween ' h t ' and
' cut ' wh e ' k ' and ' r esemb e' can be t r aced back t o ' h t '
as secondar y mean ngs.
I n sum, t hen, I sha set out t o ana yse t he denot at ve
mean ngs of t he cor r espond ng wor ds n each r e at ed anguage
n t er ms of semant c f eat ur es. Next , t hese f eat ur es w be exa-
m ned w t h n t he appr opr at e semant c f e ds.
2. 0. Let me st ar t w t h some pr e m nar y r emar ks.
( 1) I n t he ana ys s be ow I sha not pr esent n t he r ent r et y
t he f e d t o wh ch t he par t cu ar mean ngs under d scuss on be-
ong; t he enumer at on of a t he dat a and a t he sour ces wou d
be a engt hy ent er pr se. But n or der t o | ust f y t he se ect on
of a f eat ur e I sha n each case spec f y wh ch ot her mean ngs
mot vat e t he t ype of oppos t on expr essed n t hat par t cu ar
f eat ur e. I n t he se ect on of f eat ur es, t hat s, n t he set t ng
up of oppos t ons I have t aken Leech ( 1974: 95- 125) as a po nt
of depar t ur e. For t he sake of ust r at on cons der t he f o ow-
ng examp e. Number s ar e used t o f ac t at e r ef er ence.
Vogu ( Nor t her n d a ect s) ' k ck'
Oppos t ons
( 1) | +Event | | - Event | : ( ) | +Ent t y |
( 2) | +Change | | - Change| : ( ) | +St at e|
( 3) | +Act v t y| | - Act v t y| : ( ) | +Pr ocess|
( 4) | +Phys ca act v t y| : ( v)
( v)
( v )
(5) [+Contact] [-Contact] : (vi i ) [+Communication]
( vi i i ) [+Motion]
( x) | +Tr ansf er |
( x) | +Phys o og ca |
( x )
(6) [+Animate] (xi i ) [+I nani mate]
(7) [+Human] [-Human] : ( xi i i ) [+Animal]
(xi v) [+Pl ant]
( 8) | +w t h par t of body| | - w t h par t of body| :
( xv) | +w t h who e body|
( 9) | +w t h f oot | | - w t h f oot | :
( xv )
( 10) | +I nan mat e ob| ect | ( xv ) | +An mat e ob| ect |
( 11) | +D scr et e| | - D scr et e| : ( xv ) | +Cont nuous|
( 12) | +For cef u y| | - For cef u y| : ( x x) | +Sof t y|
Feat ur es ( 1) - ( 12) ar e t he semant c f eat ur es of ' k ck' , wh e
f eat ur es ( ) - ( x x) ar e t he f eat ur es t hat ar e n oppos t on t o
t he f eat ur es ( 1) - ( 12) . Let me ment on a f ew examp es f or f eat ur es
( ) - ( x x) :'
( ) | +St at e| : ' f ee co d' | +Phys ca | ; ' know' | +I nt e ec-
t ua | ; ' f ear ' | +Emot ve| , et c.
( ) | +Pr ocess| : ' f r eeze' | +Phys ca | ; ' t h nk' | +I nt e ec-
t ua | ; ' come t o hat e' | +Emot ona | ; ' see'
| +Sensor y , et c.
( v) | +I nt e ect ua act v t y| : ' ear n' , ' dec de' , et c.
( v) | +Emot ve act v t y| : ' mour n' , et c.
( v ) | +Sensor y act v t y| : ' ook' , ' st en t o' , et c.
( v ) | +Commun cat on| : ' t a k' , ' show' , et c.
( v ) | +Mot on| : ' t ake f ght ' , ' d ve' , et c.
( x) | +Tr ansf er | : ' get ' , ' st ea ' , et c.
( x) | +Phys o og ca | : ' dr nk' , ' eat ' , et c.
( x ) | +Comp ex act v t es| : ' bu d' , ' cook' , et c.
( 6) and ( x ) ar e f eat ur es descr b ng t he agent of t he act v -
t es. Ver bs hav ng an agent | +I nan mat e| cannot be descr bed
by t he f eat ur es | +Pr ocess| or | +Act v t y| . For examp e,
' f r eeze' s | +Pr ocess| when speak ng of humans or an ma s but
+Change | when speak ng of nan mat es ( e. g. wat er ) because n
t he f or mer cases |- (- Process| can be opposed t o somet h ng e se
- | +Act v t y| - but n t he at t er one t cannot be opposed
t o anyt h ng. The same app es t o p ant s t oo ( see be ow) .
( x ) | +An ma | : ' st amp ( hor se) ' , ' swoop ( k t e) ' , et c.
( xv) | +w t h who e body| : ' ean on' , ' kock aga nst ' , ' push' ,
et c.
( xv ) | f w t h ot her par t s of body| : ' gr asp' , ' b t e' , ' t ouch' ,
et c.
( xv ) | +An mat e ob| ect | : a f eat ur e descr b ng t he ob| ect of
t he act v t y, e. g. ' br ng down' , et c.
( xv ) | +Cont nuous| : ' cat ch' , ' smoot h' , ' t r amp e' , et c.
( x x) | +Sof t y| : ' smoot h' , ' t ouch' , et c.
( 2) S nce on y denot at ve mean ngs can be t aken nt o account
n set t ng up cor r espondences, I sha d spense w t h t he pr esent a-
t on of any nondenot at ve mean ng n my dat a.
( 3) I n an et ymo ogy ( whenever poss b e) on y r oot st ems ar e t o
be cons der ed. I n f e d nvest gat on, however , mean ngs of
der vat ves nave t o be t aken nt o cons der at on as we .
2. 1. I n se ect ng my examp e t was not my a mt o f nd
an et ymo ogy nvo v ng many anguages, r evea ng ver y comp -
cat ed semant c r e at ons and ead ng t o a pr ot o- mean ng wh ch
s har d t o r econst r uct . On t he cont r ar y, I have t r ed t o f nd
an examp e wh ch can a so ust r at e t he t heor et ca pr ob ems
r a sed n t he f r st par t of t h s paper ( see a so Bakr 1978) ,
and one wh ch we do not encount er so f r equent y n t he t er a-
t ur e.
PFU * ca3- ' h t '
Mor dv n Er za d a , avo- , Moksha di al , avo- ' hi t ' , ' beat ' ,
' st r i ke/ beat sy dead' ( Er za and Moksha di al s. ) ; ' ki l l ' ( Moksha
di al . ) ~ Cher emi s Mount ai n di al , an e- , Ur umdi al , oe- ,
B ask oe, f er e- ' make a cut ' , ' car pent er a b ockhouse'
( Mount , d a . , Ur umd a . ) ; ' car ve (a cut t ng n) ' ( B ask
d a . ) - Ost yak Vah- Vasyugan d a , o - , Tr emyugan di al .
ok- , Demj anka di al , on , Ni sj am di al , un _, Kasi mdi al .
o Obdor ks di al , so ' ki ck our ( hor se) , ki ck, t r i p sy up,
swoop ( up) on sg, sy ( ki t e) ' ~ Vogul Tavda di al , ak- , Lower -
Losva d a . sanV- , M dd e- Losva d a , sk- , Pe ymd a , sank- ,
Nor t her n d a , san w- ' k ck, k ck out ( hor se) ' .
These cor r espondences wer e f r st set up by L. Hont ( 1978: 370) .
I t may seemcur ous t hat I have chosen an et ymo ogy t hat con-
t a ns t he r econst r uct ed pr ot o- mean ng as we - but at t he end
of t he ana ys s t w be shown why and n what way t h s pr o-
t o- mean ng s n need of cor r ect on.
I n my ana ys s I sha not d st ngu sh bet ween ' semant c
mar ker s' and ' d st ngu sher s' ( cf . Fodor - Kat z 1964: 497) , t hat
s, I subscr be t o We nr e ch' s ( 1971) and B er w sch' s ( 1969)
v ew t hat such a d st nct on s unwar r ant ed.
Nor sha I cat egor ze f eat ur es n any ot her way, cont r ar y
t o e. g. N da' s ( 1975: 32- 87) concept on. I have dr awn ar ge y
on t he paper s by Voy es ( 1973) , F mor e ( 1971) and Gu st ad
( 1974) . Let us pr oceed n t he or der of anguages as g ven n
t he et ymo ogy above. A f eat ur es shou d be t aken t o have t he
spec f cat on ' +' .
Mor dv n
As we saw above, bot h d a ect s shar e t he mean ngs I . ' h t ' , I I .
' st r ke dead' and I I I . ' beat ' , wh e t he Er za d a ect a so has
t he mean ng I V. ' k ' .
I . ' h t '
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
w t h hand/ t oo
Ob| ect
D scr et e
For cef u y
The ver b r ef er s t o a | Phys ca act v t y| , as opposed t o a
ver bs denot ng an nt e ect ua , emot ve and sensor y act v t y.
The agent of t he act on s | Human| as opposed t o act v t es
done by an ma s ( t hough t hese can n many cases co nc de w t h
act ons done by humans) . The f eat ur e | Cont act | opposes t h s
ver b t o ot her mean ngs such as commun cat on, mot on, et c. The
f eat ur e | w t h hand| r ef er s t o t he nst r ument of t he act on.
Th s at t er f eat ur e opposes our ver b t o ot her s hav ng | Cont act |
wh ch have t he f eat ur e | w t h who e body| , ' push' , ' t hr ust ' ,
or wher e t he cont act s car r ed out by some ot her par t of t he
body, e. g. | w t h f oot | : ' t r ead' , ' k ck' ; | w t h f nger | :
' knock' , et c. The f eat ur e | w t h t oo | f gur es opt ona y n
connect on w t h t he f eat ur e | w t h hand| , f or n bot h Mor dv n
d a ect s t her e ar e ot her mean ngs n wh ch | w t h hand| and
| w t h t oo | go t oget her , but we a so f nd mean ngs wher e t h s
s not t he case, f or examp e, when we have t o do w t h t he mean-
ng ' com ng nt o cont act w t h some par t cu ar nst r ument , e. g.
w t h a st ck as n ' st r ke' , ' s ash' , ' st ab' , et c. The f eat ur e
| D scr et e| st ands n cont r ast w t h mean ngs denot ng cont -
nuous act on, e. g. ' pr ess' , ' smoot h' , et c. , t he f eat ur e | For ce-
f u y| s needed n or der t o keep apar t ' h t ' f r om act v t es
nvo v ng compar at ve y esser f or ce, e. g. ' t ouch' , ' f ee ' ,
' st r oke' , et c. F na y, t he f eat ur e | ob| ect | r ef er s t o t he
t h ng wh ch under goes, or s af f ect ed by, t he act on ( t can
be bot h an mat e and nan mat e) .
Ot her f eat ur es come r ead y t o m nd as we , e. g. a f ea-
t ur e spec f y ng t he speed of h t t ng s nce t he semant c f e d
n quest on a so nc udes mean ngs r ef er r ng t o qu ck h t t ng.
On t he ot her hand, t her e ar e no exemes r ef er r ng t o s ow
h t t ng. I t s qu t e poss b e, however , t hat t he neut r a
' h t ' st ands f or s ow h t t ng. S nce, however , we do not want
t o a ow f or f eat ur es t hat ar e used mer e y t o d st ngu sh
t he mean ng of t wo ex ca t ems, t he f eat ur e about speed w
not be nc uded among t he semant c f eat ur es.
Anot her cand dat e s t he sound or oudness of h t t ng:
we can f nd exemes w t h n t he semant c f e d of h t t ng whose
mean ngs can d f f er n t h s r espect {'e.g. sw sh, cr ack,
et c. ) but , once aga n, t her e ar e no exemes r ef er r ng t o ' h t -
t ng w t hout sound' and t wou d seemt hat f r oma semant c
po nt of v ew t he nf or mat on about t he oudness of h t t ng
seems t o be r r e evant f or t he descr pt on of ' h t ' . I t seems
t o be equa y mp aus b e t o post u at e a f eat ur e f or t he r e-
su t of h t t ng n or der t o account f or t he r esu t s of act -
v t es such as t hose denot ed by t he Eng sh ver bs ' st r ke down' ,
' st r ke nt o' , ' st r ke of f ' , ' st r ke t hr ough' , et c.
I I . ' st r ke/ beat dead'
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
w t h hand/ t oo
Human/ An ma
Cont nuous
For cef u y
Cause- not - v ng
The f r st s x f eat ur es ar e t he same as above, t he f eat ur e | Human/
An ma | cont r ast s w t h a mean ngs denot ng an act v t y t hat r e-
f er s t o h t t ng an | I nan mat e ob| ect | or | p ant | , wh e t he
f eat ur e | Cause- not - v ng| st ands n oppos t on t o t he f ea-
t ur e | Cause- v ng| .
As we can see, t wo f eat ur es shar p y d st ngu sh ' h t ' and
' st r ke/ beat dead' f r omeach ot her . The ast f eat ur e spec f es
t he mean ng n quest on s be ong ng t o a separ at e semant c
f e d n t he Er za d a ect .
I I I .
' beat , t hr ash'
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
w t h hand/ t oo
An mat e ob| ect
Cont nuous
For cef u y
Most of t hese f eat ur es ar e t he same as above, t he f eat ur e | An -
mat e ob| ect | cont r ast s w t h t he mean ng of t he ob| ect s of
e. g. ' dest r oy' , ' smash' , et c.
I V. ' k '
Event 1
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
w t h hand/ t oo
An mat e ob| ect
Cont nuous
Cause- not - v ng
The f r st n ne f eat ur es nk up t h s mean ng t o t he pr eced ng
one but I V. be ongs t o a d f f er ent semant c f e d f r om I I I . beca ;
of t he pr esence of t he ast f eat ur e | Cause- not - v ng| . Th s
f eat ur e mp es t hat t he act on can on y af f ect an an mat e
be ng, t cannot have an | I nan mat e ob| ect | . The same f eat ur e
cont r ast s t h s mean ng w t h t hose mean ngs t hat have t he f ea-
t ur e | Cause- v ng| , as e. g. ' bear ' , et c. I t shou d be not ed
t hat | Cause- not - v ng| per m t s, as t he per f or mer of t he act on,
not on y | An mat e| but | nan mat e| as we : a v ng cr eat ur e
can a so get k ed by ght n ng. Th s at t er nt er pr et at on
s, however , exc uded f or I V. because of t he pr esence of t he
f eat ur e | Phys ca act v t y| ( t he at t er nt er pr et at on wou d
on y be compat b e w t h t he f eat ur e | phys ca pr ocess| ) .
Cher em s
Her e we have t o ana yse t hr ee mean ngs: Mean ng V. ' make
a cut ' and Mean ng VI . ' car pent er (a b ockhouse) ' can be f ound
bot h n d a ect s Mount a n and Ur um, Mean ng VI . ca s f or
some comment s. I t seems t o be ev dent t hat t h s mean ng n-
vo ves t he const r uct on of a r ough y car pent er ed wooden bu -
d ng. We know t hat t he Cher em s ved n b ockhouses. These
houses as we as ot her bu d ngs wer e car pent er ed out of
ogs. Not ce t hat Mean ng VI I . n d a ect Mount a n a so
r ef er s t o car pent er ng b ockhouses. Logs wer e f t t ed t oget her
accor d ng t o a cer t a n syst em ( bond) . To make t hem | o n t hey
wer e car ved n t he appr opr at e p aces. Hence we have t o do
w t h t he mean ng ' car ve a cut t ng ( n a og) ' n t h s case.
V. ' make a cut '
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
w t h t oo
Cause- ent er
I nan mat e ob| ect
D scr et e
Aga n, t he f r st s x f eat ur es co nc de w t h t hose of ' h t ' .
The f eat ur e | w t h t oo | cont r ast s t h s mean ng w t h a mean-
ngs n wh ch t he f eat ur e | w t h par t of body| occur s . The f ea-
t ur e | Cause- ent er | can a so appear n t he mean ngs of ' cut ' ,
' s ash' , ' c eave' , ' sever ' , ' pee ' , ' f ay' , ' car ve' , ' pr ck' ,
' st ab' and ot her s.
VI . ' car pent er (a bu d ng) '
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
VI . ' car pent er (a bu d ng) '
The f eat ur e | Comp ex act v t y| s n oppos t on t o t he f ea-
t ur es | Cont act | , | Movement | , et c. , t he f eat ur e | cr eat on| t o
t he f eat ur es | Cook ng| , et c. , t he f eat ur e | Bu d ng| ( descr -
b ng t he r esu t of cr eat on) t o t he f eat ur es | Fur n t ur e| ,
| veh c e| et c.
VI I . ' Car ve (a cut t ng n a og) '
A f eat ur es co nc de w t h t he f eat ur es of mean ng V. ' make
a cut ' except f or t he f eat ur e | Cause- not - cont nuous| . Th s
f eat ur e s opposed t o | Cause- cont nuous| wh ch occur s, f or
examp e, n t he mean ng of ' p ast er up' .
Ost yak
I n Ost yak we encount er f our mean ngs: VI I I . ' k ck out
( hor se) ' , I X. ' k ck' , X. ' t r p sy up' and XI . ' swoop ( k t e) ' .
Th s t me we sha depar t f r omt h s or der of t he mean ngs and
st ar t w t h t he descr pt on of mean ng I X. ' k ck' s nce t h s
w make t he ana ys s of mean ng VI I I . eas er .
I X. ' k ck'
Her e we have t o pos t t he f eat ur e | Human| s nce - at east
as f ar as t he Ost yak mat er a s concer ned - t he agent can
on y be a human be ng. We a so encount er her e t he f eat ur e | Con-
t act | but , un ke n t he case of ' h t ' , t s not assoc at ed
w t h t he f eat ur e | w t h hand| or w t h t he f eat ur e | w t h t oo |
but r at her w t h t he f eat ur e | w t h f oot | . The f eat ur e | D s-
cr et e| opposes t h s mean ng t o mean ngs w t h | cont nuous|
such as ' t r ead' and t he f eat ur e | For cef u y| t o mean ngs con-
t a n ng t he f eat ur e | Sof t y| such as ' smoot h' , ' t ouch' , et c.
I t s easy t o see t hat t he on y mpor t ant f eat ur e of I X. not
shar ed by ' h t ' s | w t h f oot | .
VI I I . ' k ck out ( hor se) '
22
The mean ng VI I I . t hus d f f er s f r omt hat of ' k ck' nsof ar
as t cont a ns t he f eat ur es | Mot on| and | An ma | . On t he
ot her hand, t her e s no need of f ur t her spec f cat ons w t h
r espect t o what k nd of an ma per f or ms t he act on s nce f r om
t he po nt of v ew of semant c descr pt on t s mmat er a
whet her we have know edge of ot her an ma s t hat can k ck out
ke a hor se. The f eat ur e | An ma | s suf f c ent n or der t o
keep apar t t h s mean ng f r om s m ar mean ngs r ef er r ng t o a
| Human| act v t y.
X. ' tr i p sy up'
The f r st seven f eat ur es n X. ar e t he same as n ' k ck' . No-
t ce t hat t he f eat ur e | w t h f oot | must be pos t ed her e because
a per son can be hamper ed n mov ng n ot her ways, w t h ot her
par t s of t he body as we , e. g. | w t h hand| : ' ho d' , ' gr asp' ,
' c ut ch' , et c. , | w t h t oo | : ' b nd' , ' t r ap' , et c. The f ea-
t ur e | Cause- not - move| s necessar y n or der t o cont r ast t h s
mean ng w t h ot her mean ngs cont a n ng t he f eat ur e | Cause- move| ,
e. g. ' t hr ow' , ' shoot ( an ar r ow) ' or ' k ck away' wh ch may, of
cour se, have any one of t he f eat ur es | w t h hand| , w t h
t oo | and | w t h f oot | . One may wonder whet her t r pp ng
somebody n f act st ops h m f r ommov ng. Fr om a semant c po nt
of v ew, however , t s comp et e y r r e evant what happens t o
t he per son who s t r pped.
XI . 'swoop ( ki te) '
The f r st f ve f eat ur es ar e t he same as n t he mean ng of
' k ck' , t he ast t hr ee ar e shar ed by t he mean ng of ' t r p sy
up' . The f eat ur e | w t h who e body| , however , s not pr esent
n t he mean ngs d scussed t husf ar . Ot her w se, t wou d be
super f uous t o spec f y - n t er ms of f eat ur es - whet her t he
k t e r ea y per f or ms t he act on w t h t s who e body or | ust
w t h t s w ngs, t a ons, et c. , s nce t her e ar e no ot her exemes
wh ch wou d d f f er f r omXI . or f r omeach ot her n t h s r espect .
Vogu
We ar e f aced w t h t wo mean ngs her e: Mean ng XI I . ' k ck
out ( hor se) ' and' Mean ng XI I I . ' k ck, keep on k ck ng' . Bot h
mean ngs a so occur among t he mean ngs f ound n Ost yak; nence
t hey need not be ana ysed her e.
24
2. 2. On t he basi s of t he above anal ysi s t he f ol l owi ng seman-
t i c f i el ds emer ge: al l meani ngs bel ong t o t he f i el d of physi -
cal act i vi t y. Wi t hi n t hi s f i el d f our maj or subf i el ds can be
di scer ned: t he f i el d of cont act , t he f i el d of ki l l i ng, t he
f i el d of mot i on and t he f i el d of compl ex act i vi t y ( cr eat i ng i n-
vol ved) . Wi t hi n t he f i el d of cont act f ur t her subf i el ds can be
det er mi ned: hi t t i ng ( ' hi t ' , ' beat ' , ' st r i ke dead' ) , ki cki ng
( ' ki ck' ) , hamper i ng (' tri p UP' , ' swoop' ) and cut t i ng (' make
a cut ' , ' car ve' ) .
2. 3. The next st ep consi st s i n t he sel ect i on of common f ea-
t ur es. The f eat ur es and t he meani ngs di scussed ar e summar i zed
i n Appendi x 1 i n or der t o f aci l i t at e sur vey.
Appendi x 1 cl ear l y shows whi ch f eat ur es occur most f r e-
quent l y i n t he 13 meani ngs. These meani ngs have t he f ol l owi ng
f our common f eat ur es: [ Event ] , [ change] , [ Act i vi t y] , and
[ physi cal J . The f eat ur es [ cont act ] and [ Human ] occur t en
t i mes, t he f eat ur e [ Di scr et e] ni ne t i mes, t he f eat ur e [ For ce-
f ul l y] seven t i mes, t he f eat ur es [ Ani mat e obj ect ] and [ i nani -
mat e obj ect ] si x t i mes. A f eat ur e whi ch descr i bes t he i nst r u-
ment of t he act i on occur s 17 t i mes. I want t o st i pul at e t hat
i t i s f r om t hese f eat ur es t hat t he pr ot o- meani ng shoul d be
const r uct ed.
2. 4. By maki ng use of t he most f r equent f eat ur es i n t he des-
cr i pt i on of t he meani ngs I . - XI I I . , we end up wi t h t he f ol l ow-
i ng speci f i cat i on of t he pr ot o- meani ng at hand:
x
' a physi cal ac-
t i vi t y dur i ng whi ch a per son comes i nt o cont act wi t h somebody
or somet hi ng once, f or cef ul l y, and wi t h some i nst r ument ' . As
can be easi l y seen, t hi s def i ni t i on r oughl y cor r esponds t o
t he meani ng of t he Engl i sh ver b hi t . Hence we ar e ent i t l ed
t o posi t PFU * a3- ' h t ' .
I n an et ymo og ca d ct onar y n wh ch we want t o nc ude
t he ent r e common wor d st ock of a f am y of anguages such
engt hy, nf er r ed def n t ons wou d cer t a n y mpa r nt e -
g b t y. Once we r ea ze, however , t hat (a) pr ot o- mean ngs ar e
not e ement s of a nat ur a anguage but hypot het ca const r uct s
and t hat (b) t he mean ng of a exeme t aken f r om a nat ur a an-
guage, however st r ong y we t r y t o abst r act f r omour know edge
of t hat mean ng, w nf uence our t h nk ng, e m nat ng
such def n t ons does not seemat a exped ent . For not h ng
can assur e us t hat n t he semant c st r uct ur e of t hat hypot het -
ca pr ot o- anguage h t wou d assume t he same pos t on as t does,
f or examp e, n Eng sh. Ther ef or e, we ar e not a owed t o t r ans-
gr ess t he m t s of a met a anguage, f or f we do t hat , t he r e-
su t s of our nvest gat ons become at once dub ous and uncer -
t a n. Consequent y, t s bet t er t o r ep ace t he or g na y r e-
const r uct ed pr ot o- mean ng *' h t ' w t h t he def n t on ( or w t h t he
set of t s component s) pr oposed above.
3. 0. The r e at onsh p bet ween t he r econst r uct ed pr ot o- mean ng
and t he mean ngs n t he daught er anguages, as we as t he pr o-
bab e d r ect on of semant c changes can be seen n t he char t s of
Append x 2.
x
M
1
compr ses t he most f r equent common f eat ur es, t hat s,
t he f eat ur es of t he supposed PFU pr ot o- mean ng,
x
M
2
r ef ect s a
at er eve , r ea zed n t he mean ng ' h t ' t hat can be documen-
t ed n Mor dv n but wh ch r epr esent s a deduc b e nt er med at e
eve on y wh ch s pr or t o document ed mean ngs n Cher em s.
Thr ough t h s eve , abe ed
x
M
2
a Mor dv n and Cher em s
mean ngs can be appr opr at e y der ved. For Ost yak and Vogu , t
s t he mean ng ' k ck' t hat r epr esent s t h s document ed nt er me-
d at e eve . As shown by t he char t s, Mor dv n and Cher em s mea-
n ngs ar e c oser t o each ot her w t h r espect t o t he f eat ur e
| w t h hand| / | w t h t oo | , wher eas Ost yak and Vogu mean ngs
ar e c oser t o each ot her w t h r espect t o t he f eat ur e | w t h f oot |
Th s b f ur cat on of t he pr mar y mean ng s ke y t o have occur -
r ed pr or t o t he des nt egr at on of PFU.
Not ce t hat t he pr ot o- mean ng of t he et ymo ogy at hand
r econst r uct ed by Hont accor d ng t o t r ad t ona compar at ve
met hods, s a so *' h t ' , a f act t hat ends f ur t her suppor t t o
our ana ys s.
APPENDI X 1
I . I I . I I I . I V. V. VI . VI I . VI I I . I X. . XI . XI I . XI I I .
Event
Change
Act i vi t y
Physi cal
Mot i on
Cont act +
Compl ex
act i on
Cr eat i on
Human +
Ani mal
Bi r d
wi t h hand +
wi t h t ool +
wi t h f oot
wi t h body
Ani mat e
obj ect +
I nani mat e
obj ect +
Di scr et e +
Cont i nuous
For cef ul l y +
Cause- not -
move
Cause- not -
l i vi ng
Cause- not -
cont i n.
Cause- ent er
Bui l di ng
+
+
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + 13
+ + + + + + + + + + + 13
+ + + + + + + + + + + 13
+ + + + + +
+
+ + + +
+
+ 13
2
+ + +
+
+
+ + + + + l o
1
1
+ + + + +
+
+ +
+
+
+
+
l o
3
1
+ + 4
+ + + + 6
+ + + +
+
+ + 6
1
+ +
+
+
+
+ + +
+ + +
+ + +
+
+
APPENDI X 2
_
1
Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
Human
An mat e Ob| ect
I nan mat e Ob| .
I nst r ument
D scr et e
For cef u y
Mor dv n
(
X
M
2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
w t h hand
w t h t oo
+
+
- > I I I .
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
- * I I .
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
+ +
Cont nuous +
+ +
Cause- not -
v ng
-> I V.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Cher em s
M

Event
Change
Act v t y
Phys ca
Cont act
+
+
+
+
+
Human + +
An mat e Ob| ect + -
I nan mat e Ob| . + +
I nst r ument w t h hand -
w t h t oo +
D scr et e + +
For cef u y + -
VI I . VI .
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Comp ex
act v t y
Cr eat on
+
Cont nuous
Cause- ent er
Cause- not -
M
l
Event
Change
Act i vi t y
Physi cal
Cont act
Human
Ost yak
. I I I . -
+
+
+
+
+
Vogul
Ani mat e Obj ect
I nani mat e Obj ect +
I nst r ument wi t h f oot
Di scr et e +
For cef ul l y +
> VI I I . XI I .
+
+
+
+
Mot i on
Ani mal
X.
+
+
+
+
+
+
wi t h f oot
+
+
Cause- not
move
> XI .
+
+
+
+
+
Ani mal
Bi r d
+
+
wi t h body
+
+
Ref er ences
Bakr - Nagy, M. ( 1978) , Az al apj el ent s r ekonst r ukci j nak kr d-
sr l (On t he quest i on of pr ot o- meani ng r econst r uct i on) ,
Par t I . Nyel vt udomanyi Kzl emnyek 80: 381- 389.
Bi er wi sch, M. ( 1969) , On cer t ai n pr obl ems of semant i c r epr esent a-
t i on, Foundat i ons of Language 5: 153- 185.
Fi l l mor e, C. J . ( 1971) , Types of l exi cal i nf or mat i on, Semant i cs
( D. D. St ei nber g, L. A. J akobovi t s, eds . ) , London & New Yor k:
Cambr i dge Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 370- 392.
Fodor , J . A. & J . J . Kat z, ( 1964) , The st r uct ur e of a semant i c t heor y,
The St r uct ur e of Language: Readi ngs i n t he Phi l osophy of Lan-
guage , Engl ewood Cl i f f s, N. J . : Pr ent i ce Hal l .
Gul st ad, D. E. ( 1974) , Reconst r uct i on i n synt ax, Hi st or i cal Li n-
gui st i cs ( J . M. Ander son, C. J ones, eds. ) , Amst er dam: Nor t h-
Hol l and Li ngui st i c Ser i es Vol . 12, 117- 158.
Haas, M. R. ( 1970) , Hi st or i cal l i ngui st i cs and t he genet i c r el at i on-
shi p of l anguages, Cur r ent Tr ends i n Li ngui st i cs Vol . 3. ( Th.
Sebeok, ed. ) , Theor et i cal Foundat i ons, The Hague: Mout on,
113- 153.
Hont i , L. ( 1978) , Et i mol ogi ai adal kok ( Et ymol ogi es) , Nyel vt udo-
mnyi Kzl emnyek 80: 370.
Leech, G. N. ( 1974) , Semant i cs, Har mondswor t h: Pengui n.
Lehr er , A. ( 1974) , Semant i c Fi el ds and Lexi cal St r uct ur e, Amst er -
dam: Nor t h- Hol l and Publ i shi ng Co.
Lyons, J . ( 1977) , Semant i cs, London: Cambr i dge Uni ver si t y Pr ess.
Ni da, E. A. ( 1975) , Component i al Anal ysi s of Meani ng, The Hague:
Mout on.
Ni da et al . ( 1977) , Ni da, E. . & J . P. Louw & R. B. Smi t h, Semant i c
domai ns and component i al anal ysi s of meani ng, Cur r ent I ssues
i n Li ngui st i c Theor y ( R. W. Col se, ed. ) , Bl oomi ngt on & London:
I ndi ana Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 139- 167.
Voyl es, J . B. ( 1973) , Account i ng f or semant i c change, Li ngua 31:
95- 124.
Wei nr ei ch, U. ( 1972) , Expl or at i ons i n Semant i c Theor y, The Hague:
Mout on.
HE I S ONLY | OKI NG
( | oke, met aphor and anguage deve opment )
I van Fonagy
I f we do not r egar d ch dr en as t t e adu t s, and f
we acknow edge t he r pr esence n our conver sat ons, we unw -
ng y change our manner of speak ng, and become somewhat mor e
ser ous t han usua . I r ea sed t h s, when, f or t he sake of
ch dr en, I of t en needed t o f o ow my ch d ess f r end' s r e-
mar ks w t h t he comment : "Dont ' wor r y, he s on y | ok ng" , or
"He d dn' t mean t " . Ther e may have been an occas on, when my
t wo year - o d son was n t he m dd e of d nner , f ocus ng h s
at t ent on on a bow of sp nach, t he s gns of wh ch wer e a
over h s hands and f ace. A f r end of our s ar r ved, went
t hr ough t he ch dr en' s r oom and sa d t o my son: "I t ' s a good
t n ng f one f r st put s one' s hand nt o t he sp nach and t hen
w pes t hem on Daddy' s book. L ke t h s ( mak ng t he appr opr at e
gest ur e) . I t wou d make a n ce ust r at on". The book was
act ua y a ha f - f ed d ar y about t he ch dr en' s ver ba and
cogn t ve deve opment cont a n ng a so t he r dr aw ngs. On an-
ot her occas on my f r end L. B. came nt o my r oomwher e I was
at t empt ng t o add t he wor ds t o an ext r eme y ong r ee of
soundpr essur e measur ement s: "You ar e be ng azy aga n" , he
sa d. Our f our year - o d daught er was pr esent , so my w f e
32
added: "Don' t wor r y, unc e L. s on y | ok ng".
The f r st r emar k har d y needs e abor at on. I t r ef er s
t o an o d weakness of m ne f or co ect ng ust r at ons t yp-
ca of t he ch dr en or of t he r age- gr oup, and wh ch at a
at er st age m ght be of nt er est . Of cour se, t never cr ossed
my m nd t o make pr nt of my boy' s d r t y hand. L. B. de ber at e-
y st epped over t he bor der s of r ea t y: he was | ok ng. The
subsequent scene needs some exp cat on. L. B. cons der ed t he
who e bus ness of "sc ent f c" measur ng and my act v t es n
t he f e d of phonet cs as not t oo ser ous, and he be eved
t hat I at t empt ed t o avo d dea ng w t h sub| ect s of gr eat er
mpor t ance or of a mor e per sona nat ur e by spend ng t me do ng
r out ne wor k. Her e my w f e had t o st ep n. (I n t he case of
sp nach t her e was t t e ke hood t hat my son wou d t ake
t he pr of f er ed adv ce ser ous y. )
But | okes a med at t he ch dr en wer e r ea y mor e dan-
ger ous. For examp e, t he cr ude | okes of t he | an t or ' s w f e,
meant t o be educat ona , wer e s mp y f r ght en ng f or t he t wo
year - o d boy: "I f you don' t w pe your f eet on t he mat I '
cut t hemof f ! " , or : "Do you see t hat man?" , po nt ng t o t he
shabb y dr essed r ag- and - bone man car r y ng h s sack, "He
w t ake you away n h s sack f you ar e naught y" . I t was
never her nt ent on t o har mt he ch d. She new ver y we t hat
t he r ag- and- bone man was an except ona y p ac d f e ow, and
t h s made her r emar k st mor e amus ng t o her , because of
t s gr eat er d st ance f r omr ea t y. The ch dr en wer e amused
by t he suggest on about t he sp nach, but t hey wer e not at a
amused by t he t hr eat s of t he | an t or ' s w f e. The f or mu a:
"Don' t wor r y, she d dn' t mean t " had t t e ef f ect n t hese
cases.
We ar e, however , mor e concer ned w t h t he st r uct ur a par t
of t he pr ob em. What have t hese r emar ks n common? What s t he
under y ng pat t er n of t he "f unny r emar ks"? To what ext ent ar e
t hey r e at ed t o t he k nd of | okes we t e and ar e t o d at
33
par t es? Ar e t her e ot her st r uct ur a y s m ar phenomena n
anguage? What s t he cause of t he r popu ar t y and aest het c
power ?
I mp c t | oke mar ks
A f unny r emar k can be r egar ded as a ver ba act mmed -
at y f o owed by t s nva dat on: "I d dn' t mean t , I am
on y | ok ng". Bot h phases may be cont a ned n a s ng e speech
act , and such cases r epr esent t he bas c f or mof t he f unny r e-
mar k: t he asser t on nva dat es t se f t hr ough exagger at on.
Absur d t y f unct ons as an mp c t | oke mar k, a s gna t hat
mp es t he asser t on s not t o be t r eat ed ser ous y. The
pr ocess may be seen as an nver se of euphem sm. I n t he case
of bot h t he f unny r emar k and of euphem sm a sh f t a ong t he
d mens on of decency and soc ab t y accompan es t he change
n nt ens t y ( damp ng vs. amp f cat on) . W t h euphem sm t he
sh f t s f r om ndecent t o mor e decent , wher eas w t h t he f unny
r emar k t he oppos t e sh f t occur s, f r omdecent t o scanda ous
and unsoc a . ( I n t he absence of a qua t at ve, eva uat ve
sh f t , exagger at on wou d s mp y r esu t n hyper bo e, and d m -
nut on wou d g ve r se t o t ot es. )
I n t er ms of Bh er ' s t heor y of anguage ( Spr ach t heor e
1933) , t he asser t on s nva dat ed, s nce t s cont r ad ct ed by
t he s t uat on or t he de ct c f e d wh ch under nor ma c r cum-
st ances wou d ser ve t o comp et e t he message and make t con-
cr et e, act ua and exp c t . The ch d has t o ear n how t o use
t h s de ct c f e d. I n t a y he of t en does t n an nappr o-
pr at e way. He may f a t o r ea se t hat a s mp e " I " or "me"
s much ess ef f ect ve over t he t e ephone t han n nor ma f ace-
t o- f ace commun cat on. The | oker ar t f c a y cr eat es a con-
f ct bet ween t he de ct c f e d and t he ver ba f e d ( Spr ach-
f e d) . H s st at ement s pur pose y cont r ad ct ed by t he s t ua-
t on ( wh ch n t h s case may be br oadened t o nc ude gener a
be ef s and mor a pr nc p es) . Th s ar t f c a conf ct be-
34
t ween t he t wo f i el ds i s t he basi c st r at egy of f unny r emar ks
and par adoxi cal st at ement s i n ever yday l i f e, as wel l as at a
hi gher l i t er ar y l evel :
"I f t her e i s anybody a young Engl i sh gi r l hat es even
mor e t han her mot her , i t i s her el der si st er " ( G. B. Shaw)
The quest i on ar i ses what can be t he pur pose of maki ng
an asser t i on i f i t i s i mmedi at el y deni ed. I t seems, t hat , al -
t hough deni ed, t he st at ement ' on some l evel must st and.
Ver bal st r uct ur e of j okes
The conf l i ct bet ween t he dei ct i c f i el d and ver bal f i el d
whi ch gi ves r i se t o absur di t y i s t he basi c component of al l
ver bal humour . I t i s a necessar y but not a suf f i ci ent condi -
t i on of j okes as ar t i st i c pr oduct s. J okes f ol l ow t he st r at egy
of t he f unny r emar ks, and compl y mor eover wi t h a number of
const r ai nt s oper at i ng on t he l evel of f or m and cont ent .
I n cont r ast t o t he st r uct ur al and f unct i onal di ver si -
t y of j okes t he behavi our al r esponse el i ci t ed i s uni f or m: a
smi l e or l aught er . Var i ous expl anat i ons have been pr of f er ed
over t he year s, t wo, mi l l eni a i n f act , and di f f er ent common
denomi nat or s have been suggest ed. Not wi t hst andi ng r ecent l i n-
gui st i c and semi ot i c appr oaches t o t he subj ect , I t hi nk t hat
t he most adequat e and compr ehensi ve st r uct ur al and f unct i onal
anal ysi s of j okes i s t hat of Fr eud publ i shed i n 1905 ( St and-
ar d Edi t i on Vol . VI I I ) . Thi s appear s t o be t he onl y account i n
For mor e or l ess det ai l ed r evi ews of cl assi cal and moder n
l i t er at ur e see: Fr eud, ( 1905) , Gr ei g, ( 1923) , Gr egor y, ( 1924) ,
Mi l ner , ( 1972) , Fonagy P. ( 1974) , J ohnson, ( 1975) , ( 1976) .
2
A syst emat i c l i ngui st i c anal ysi s of puns has been pr oposed
by Duchaek ( 1970) . Mi l ner ' s semi ot i c t heor y of humour ( 1972)
i s based on t he r ol e of i nver si on i n humour on bot h t he f or mal
and t he soci al l evel , ( f oot not e 2 cont i nued)
HE I S ONLY | OKI NG 35
wh ch causa connect ons bet ween t he f or m and f unct on of
| okes ar e est ab shed and wher e nks ar e made bet ween mech-
an sms r esponsab e f or humour and ot her psycho og ca pr oc-
esses such as t hose nvo ved n dr eam ng, par apr ax s and neu-
r ot c sympt omat o ogy. I n t h s way, t he mechan sm of humour s
p aced w t h n a br oad f r amewor k of psycho og c st r uct ur es,
un t ed by ana ogous or gan sat ona pr nc p es. Fr eud' s t heor y
has w t hst ood t he t est of t me a good dea bet t er t han h s
3
samp e of t ur n- of - t he- cent ur y Aust r o- Hungar an humour .
Fr eud enumer at ed most t ypes of | okes, and upon det a ed
ana ys s f ound t hat economy of ment a expend t ur e p ayed a
cent r a r o e n t he t echn que of | okes. Th s sav ng of ment a
ef f or t f unct ons as an ncent ve ( Ver ockungspr m e) f or f ur -
t her and gr eat er sav ng t hr ough t he r e ease of ener gy devot ed
( f oot not e 2 cont nued) He r ef er s t o Fr eud' s wor k on | okes, t he
syst em of c ass f cat on deve opped by M ner s never t he ess
ncompat b e w t h t he Fr eud an v ew. He d st ngu shes t hr ee
t ypes of r ever sa : synt agmat c, par ad gmat c and par agr ammat c
r ever sa s. Pur e y synt agmat c r ever sa s cannot be v ewed n
t he f r amewor k pr oposed by Fr eud, s nce t he sequent a d spos -
t on a one does not a ow f or sav ng of ment a ef f or t t hr ough
condensat on of d f f er ent , man f est and at ent , messages. | ohn-
son ( 1976) cr t c sed M ner f or t he ar b t r ar ness of h s c as-
s f cat on. I ndeed h s examp es ust r at ng synt act c r ever -
sa s cou d bet t er f t nt o h s par ad gmat c cat egor es. H s
examp e of synt agmat c mor pho og ca r ever sa :
"I assur e you t hat you ar e, s r , my obed ent ser vant "
mp es t he convent ona , somewhat o df ash oned, c os ng of a
et t er , and a so a udes t o t he change of r o es bet ween e ec-
t or and r epr esent at ve n t he per od pr eced ng par ament ar y
e ect ons.
I n an unpub shed manuscr pt M che Mar t ns Ba t ar
at t empt s a det a ed ngu st c c ass f cat on of t he cor pus
of Fr eud' s | okes, wh ch I hope w soon be mor e gener a y
ava ab e.
3
I n t h s paper I r et a ned t he same cu t ur a cont ext f or t he
exam nat on of t he st r uct ur e and f unct on of | okes. I t shou d
be not ed, however , t hat et hnogr aph c st ud es have shown var a-
t ons n humour accr oss soc et es ( cf . Doug as 1968, M ner
1971, 1968, | ohnson 1976) .
36
t o t he suppr ess on of conf ct ng sexua and aggr ess ve con-
t ent .
I n t he chapt er on t he t echn que of | okes, he descr bes
t he mechan sms wh ch nsur e t he sav ng of ment a expend t ur e,
Fo ow ng h s appr oach, but t ak ng nt o account pr esent day
ngu st c and sem ot c concept ua f r amewor k, I w at t empt
t o out ne t he most t yp ca ver ba and og ca st r uct ur es
nvo ved n | okes, and a so t he st r uct ur e of cont ent n | okes.
| okes can be c ass f ed accor d ng t o t he way n wh ch
t he sav ng of expend t ur e has been ach eved. Two f undament a
pr nc p es seem t o be nvo ved: ( a) condensat on of t wo d f f er -
ent , cont r ast ng messages ( b - soc at on accor d ng t o Koest er
( 1964) , super pos t on of t he expect ed and t he unexpect ed n
| anet Ho mes' wor d ng, ( 1973) ; (b) pr eva ence of mor e pr m -
t ve, ess demand ng manner s of pr ocess ng exper ences. The
t wo t endenc es ar e nt mat e y nt er r e at ed.
Doub e mean ng s ach eved ver ba y n d f f er ent ways.
1. The most d r ect but h gh y agr ammat ca pr ocedur e s t he
m x ng up of t wo wor ds be ong ng t o t he t wo cont r ast ng mes-
sages .
( 1) He ne, n t he "Re seb der " nt r oduces t he ot t er y agent
H r sch- Hyac nt h who boast s t o t he poet of h s r e at ons w t h
Bar on Rot sch d: "And, as t r ue as God sha gr ant me a good
t h ngs, Doct or , I sat bes de Sa omon Rot sch d and he t r eat ed
me qu t e as h s equa - qu t e f am ona r e y" ( c t . Fr eud,
SE = St and Ed t on VI I I , 16)
Fr eud g ves a d agr ammat ca p ct ur e of t he compos t e st r uc-
t ur e " f am onna r e y" , f am onr n Ger man:
FAMI LI AR
MI LI ONR
FAMI LI ONAR
The component s ar e key- wor ds of t he t wo oppos t e messages:
R. t r eat ed me qu t e f am r
he t r eat ed me as a M onr
( Fr eud op. c t . 19) .
37
2. Two c r c es of deas can be br ought t oget her by t he same
wor d, mak ng use s mu t aneous y bot h of t s pr mar y and sec-
ondar y mean ng ( use or abuse of po ysemy) . Fr eud ( op. c t .
120) and at er on Koest er ( 1964, 85) compar e t he pr ocedur e
t o shor t - c r cu t ng.
( 2a) I n V enna bef or e t he f r st wor d war , a dash ng young
Aust r an of f cer t r ed t o obt a n t he f avour s of a f ash on-
ab e cour t esan. To shake of f t h s unwant ed su t or , she dec-
ar ed t hat "her hear t was, a as, no onger f r ee". He r ep ed
po t e y: " Mademo se e, I never a med as h gh as t hat " .
Koest er ( op. c t . 36) comment s: "H gh s b - soc at ed w t h a
met aphor ca and a t opogr aph ca cont ext . The coat s t ur ned
f r st met aphor ca y, t hen t er a y".
The ef f ect may be r e nf or ced by a ch asmat c doub e r e-
ver s on :
( 2b) I n V enna, dur ng t he same per od, Mr . and Mr s. X ve
n f a r y gr and st y e. Some peop e t h nk t hat t he husband has
ear ned a ot and so has been ab e t o ay a b t away ("s ch et was
zur ck egen" ) , ot her s aga n t h nk t hat t he w f e has a n back
a b t ("hat s ch et was zur ckge egt ") and so has been ab e t o
ear n a ot ( c t . Fr eud SE VI I I , 33)
A s ght v o at on of a semant c r u e m ght equa y enhance
t he humor ous ef f ect :
( 2c) - Do you ke your Mummy?
- Oh yes!
- Then have some mor e.
A | +human| subst ant ve n t he p ace of an ob| ect pr e-
c udes t he nt er pr et at on ' t o ke eat ng' , espec a y f a
possess ve pr onoun pr ecedes t he subst ant ve.
3. B - va ence may be t he r esu t of an acc dent a f or ma den-
t t y, . e. t he homonymy of t wo expr ess ons:
( 3) Oyst er : a f t n East London ( c t . Ho mes 1973)
The oppos t on of ho st er and oyst er s neut r a sed n
cockney Eng sh. Thus, t he r eader may en| oy at t he same t me
h s soc a super or t y, af t er hav ng en| oyed t he p easur e of
m shand ng anguage ( Ho mes) .
4. Doub e mean ng may be t he consequence of a s mu t aneous
synchr on c and d achr on c ( et ymo og c) ana ys s of an expr es-
s on. The f r st r ead ng s based on t he act ua semant c va ue
of t he expr ess on, t s f o owed by a second r ead ng wh ch
r eeva uat es t he or g na mean ng of t he component s.
( 4) The f r st | ew asks: - Have you t aken a bat h?
The second r ep es ask ng t he ot her n r et ur n:
- Why? s t her e one m ss ng? ( c t . Fr eud SE VI I I , 49)
Fr eud po nt ed out a s mu t aneous sh f t of emphas s: bat h s
st r essed n t he f r st quest on, wh st t he st r ess s sh f t ed
on t aken n t he second (SE VI I I , 50 f . ) .
5. The et ymo og c nt er pr et at on may be ar b t r ar y, f act t ous:
( 5) A young man was nt r oduced nt o a Par s sa on, who was a
r e at ve of | ean- | acques Rousseau and bor e h s name. Mor eover
he was r ed- ha r ed. He behaved so awkwar d y t hat t he host ess
r emar ked cr t ca y t o t he gent eman who nt r oduced h m:
- Vous m' avez f a t conna t r e un | eune homme r oux et sot , ma s
non pas un Rousseau ( c t . Fr eud SE VI I I , 30) .
6. The amb gu t es of gr ammat ca sur f ace st r uct ur e ar e a per -
manent pot ent a sour ce of doub e mean ng pr ov ded t hat t he
cont ext does not exc ude e t her of t he t wo poss b e nt er pr e-
t at ons .
( 6) Once aga n a | oke pr esent ed and ana ysed by Fr eud t akes
us back t o t he f r st decade of t he t went et h cent ur y. A eu-
t enant n t he Aust r o- Hungar an ar my asks a pr vat e;
- Now t e me, , Bachar ach, why shou d a so d er g ad y of f er
up h s f e f or h s k ng?
- You' r e abso ut e y r ght , S r ! Why shou d he? ( Re k, 1929,
10)
The sur f ace st r uct ur e of f er s t wo poss b e moda nt er pr et a-
t ons of t he sent ence, one of wh ch cou d be nt ended ( and
ndeed was meant ) as a r ea wh- quest on; and t he ot her of
wh ch cou d be ( and ndeed has been) nt er pr et ed as a r het o-
r ca quest on, . e. a negat ve asser t on ("I t s cer t a n y
not a p easur e t o of f er h s f e" ) . I n f act , t he eut enant ' s
quest on was much mor e ke a pr of essor a exam nat or y ques-
t on, and consequent y t s pr agmat c mat r x of t he t ype sug-
39
gest ed by Pet er Ladny ( 1965) comes c ose t o t hat of a r he-
t or ca quest on:
Know edge of answer n quest oner
and r esponder
Ouest oner Responder
knows t he answer
Tr ue quest on - +
Exam nat or y quest on + ?( +/ - )
Rhet or ca quest on + +
7. Cer t a n m nor v o at ons of gr ammat ca r u es may r ef ect
nt er f er ence bet ween t wo s mu t aneous and cont r ad ct or y se-
mant c nt er pr et at ons. Thus f or nst ance, He nr ch He ne
f r equent y and succesf u y v o at es t he (as yet unwr t t en)
r u es gover n ng enumer at on.
( 7) I n a passage of t he Har zr e se He ne r emember s t he schoo
n wh ch he had t o put up w t h: "so much Lat n, can ng and
geogr aphy) " ( c t . Fr eud SE VI I I , 69) .
S nce a wr t er s not supposed t o sw t ch dur ng enumer at on
4
f r omone semant c cat egor y t o anot her , we ar e apt t o con-
s der can ng as a r egu ar sub| ect of t he schoo cur r cu um.
I n such cases t s t he sudden f a n t r ans t on pr obab t y
t hat pr ompt s t he r eader t o r econs der h s f r st semant c n-
t er pr et at on .
8. I n ot her examp es ment oned by Fr eud t h s unexpect ed n-
cr ease n nf or mat on s not assoc at ed w t h any v o at on of
gr ammat ca r u es. We ar e s mp y r em nded of anot her , under -
y ng sequence char act er zed by a ver y h gh t r ans t on pr ob-
ab t y .
4
I n pr ev ous paper s I at t empt ed t o def ne semant c cat egor es
t hat must not be t r ansgr essed n d scur s ve enumer at ons, and
ot her r u es gover n ng enumer at on ( Fonagy 1975b, 1975e) .
( 8) " E n | unges Mdchen kaum zwe Moden a t " ( L cht enber g) .
( A g r scar ce y t we ve modes o d. )
The Ger man r eader w aut omat ca y susbt t ue Monde ( moons)
f or Moden ( modes ) , and w nt er pr et " zw f Moden a t ( t we ve
modes o d) " as an a us on t o " zw f Monde a t ( t we ve moons
o d) " , suggest ng t hat t he chang ng f ash on m ght be used as
a met hod of det er m n ng a woman' s age ( Fr eud SE VI I I , 76) .
Moden, s a per f ect anagr am of Monde. The humor ous ef f ect
cou d be d r ect y pr opor t ona t o t he phonet c d st ance:
semant c d st ance
humor ous ef f ect
phonet c d st ance
9. A sent ence w t hout be ng d omat c may have bot h a gen-
er a mean ng and r est r ct ed mean ng, t h s at t er due t o t he
f r equent use of t he sent ence n a t yp ca , r ecur r ent s t ua-
t on ( Fonagy 1971c) . The at ent doub e sense may become
appar ent n | okes p ay ng on t he cont r ast of t he r est r ct ed
and t he gener a mean ng of a st at ement such as I ch kann m ch
n cht bek agen, On peut pas se p a ndr e ( I cannot comp a n) ,
mp y ng e t her t hat one has no r eason t o comp a n ( r est r ct ed
mean ng) or t hat one must not comp a n ( gener a s ens e) .
( 9) An mm gr ant has come t o Fr ance f r om a count r y hav ng a
t ough d ct at or a r eg me. Her e s why he em gr at ed:
- Was t he v ng st andar d so ow?
- No, I cou dn' t comp a n.
- Wer e t he hous nq cond t ons so bad?
- No, I cou dn' t comp a n.
- Was unemp oyment so h gh?
- I cou dn' t comp a n.
- Why d d you come t o Fr ance t hen?
- Because her e I can comp a n.
10. A per f ect y gr ammat ca sent ence can be " out of cont ext "
even w t hout hav ng a spec a r est r ct ed mean ng. The sent ence
spoken n t he nappr opr at e s t uat on evokes t he s t uat on
t o wh ch t be ongs . Thus t wo s t uat ons ar e super mposed much
n t he way an mpr oper t er m evokes t s pr oper cont ext ( cf . 8) .
| anet Ho mes (19 73) nt er pr et s such | okes n t er ms of ncongr u-
ous phys ca set t ng. She quot es t he f o ow ng anecdot e:
( 10) Many peop e ar e eav ng Seat t e t o ve e sewher e be-
cause of t he f nanc a har dsh p due t o cut s n t he space Pr o-
gr amm. Two young bus nessmen er ect ed a huge b boar d on t he
H ghway f or mot or st s head ng out of t he c t y. I t s message
r eads: WI LL THE LAST PERSON LEAVI NG SEATTLE TURN OUT THE LI GHTS
- UPI
Th s s a sent ence t hat we wou d nor ma y f nd as a s gn on
t he wa n a f at p aced t her e by a per son who ef t ear er
t han t he ot her s, and, consequent y, cou d not be r espons b e
f or t ur n ng of f t he ght . As a r esu t , we ar e nc ned t o
conf use t he c t y Seat t e w t h a f at nhab t ed by t hr ee or
f our per sons. Th s sudden shr ve ng of t he t own, due t o a
pr agmat c t r ansf er of a sent ence may g ve r se t o a m d com c
ef f ect .
11. On t he bas s of cont r ar y pr esuppos t ons t he speaker and
t he hear er may nt er pr et t he same unequ voca sent ence n t wo
w de y d f f er ng ways.
( 11) A gover ness t e s her young char ge:
- | ust mag ne, Fr anz , ast n ght , when I st ar t ed home so
at e, t her e was a susp c ous- ook ng man st and ng by t he
house! Oh how I st ar t ed t o r un!
Fr anz :
- We , d d you manage t o cat ch h m?
The pr esuppos t ons wer e obv ous y d f f er ent f or Fr anz and
t he gover ness. The gover ness, pr over b a y an unmar r ed woman
( "Fr u e n", "Mademo se e") m ght be nc ned t o see an ag-
gr essor n any man she shou d happen t o meet n t he dar k, and
t o t h nk "t he wor st " ; Fr anz , as an ado escent , m ght t h nk
qu t e d f f er ent y of t he at t t ude of h s gover ness t owar ds
For a det a ed ana ys s of t he t heor y of pr esuppos t ons, cf .
K ef er 1978. I n t he case of Fr anz and t he gover ness we must
cons der a who e set of pr esuppos t ons const t ut ng t wo d f -
f er ent f r ames of r ef er ence.
men, w t h t he ma ce appr opr at e t o t h s age. As a young
ch d, he wou d pr obab y conce ve of r unn ng as a compet -
t on and a game. I n bot h cases t he pr esuppos t ons of t he
speaker and t he hear er wou d be d amet r ca y opposed, and
t he r esu t wou d necessar y be cont r ast ng nt er pr et at ons
of t he sent ence: "Oh how I r an" .
12. The comp ement ar y message, n f act t he essent a one, may
be "er ased", but suggest ed by t he cont ext and t he s t uat on.
( 12) Fr eud r e at es an anecdot e about a pugnac ous | our na st
n V enna, whose b t ng nvect ve has r epeat ed y ed t o h s
be ng phys ca y ma t r eat ed by t he sub| ect s of h s at t acks.
On one occas on, when a f r esh m sdeed on t he par t of one of
h s hab t ua opponent s was be ng d scussed, somebody exc a m-
ed: - I f X hear s of t h s, he' get h s ear s boxed aga n.
The st or y s nonsens ca w t hout nser t ng: "he' wr t e such
a scat h ng ar t c e on t he man t hat . . . ( Fr eud SE VI I I , 77 f . ) .
13. The cont r ad ct on bet ween t he ver ba message conveyed by
t he sent ence and t he f act ua message conveyed nvo unt ar y
by t he speaker ' s behav our may r esu t n t he condensat on of
cont r ast ng mean ngs.
( 13) Mr X t ur ns t o h s ne ghbour n t he Oper a t o ask h mt o-
war ds t he end of t he t h r d act of Car men: - P ease, cou d you
t e me when t he swan s supposed t o ar r ve?
- The swan? But Car men s on.
- Car men? r ep es Mr X d sappo nt ed, r eady t o eave, Car men?
I know ever y not e by hear t .
The wor d ng of t he ver ba message ("I . know ever y wor d by
hear t ") s t he comp et e oppos t e of t he s mu t aneous behav-
or a message ( t he comp et e gnor ance of bot h p eces) .
The ver ba st r at eg es pr ev ous y r epor t ed ( 1- 12) st r ve
successf u y t owar d t he same goa - t hat of t he sav ng of ment a.
1
expend t ur e t hr ough condensat on of w de y d f f er ent messages.
A bas c assumpt on under y ng t he t heor y of ment a economy was
not st at ed exp c t y by Fr eud. I n or der f or t he t heor y t o be
va d, we must assume t hat pr econsc ous ment a act v t y con-
sumes s gn f cant y ess ener gy t han consc ous one. For t he
t me be ng t h s suppos t on s mposs b e t o ver f y. I t s,
however , cons st ent w t h t he obser vat on t hat t he par aphr as-
ng of a | oke comp et e y e m nat es t s humor ous cont ent .
0
Ther e s exper ment a ev dence t o show t hat t he amount of
par aphr as ng needed t o exp a n a humor ous t em s pos t ve y
7
cor r e at ed w t h " ts humor ous ef f ect .
Dev ant sem ot c st r at eg es
Anecdot es char act er zed at t he psycho og ca eve by
a "d sp acement of accent " ( Fr eud, SE VI I I , 50- 56) a ways
nvo ve a sh f t n sem ot c nt er pr et at on.
( 14) A car dea er boast ng about a new spor t s mode t o a pr os-
pect ve c ent :
- You get nt o t h s car at m dn ght and at 4 o' c ock you
ar e n Gr msby.
The cust omer s nd gnant :
- What shou d I be do ng n t he m dd e of t he n ght n
Gr msby?
( Koest er ' s moder n sed ver s on ( 1964) of Fr eud' s hor se- dea er
| oke (SET VI I I , 54)
Ther e s obv ous y a "sh f t of emphas s f r omt he essent a t o
a det a " ( Fr eud op. c t 50- 56, 156 f . , 165 f . ) . We cou d add,
however , t hat t h s sh f t of emphas s s based on a sem ot c
m s nt er pr et at on of an examp e. Examp es ar e ar b t r ar y cho-
sen ust r at ons um nat ng a st at ement . They ar e mag nar y
phenomena, on y nd r ect y r e at ed t o r ea event s, | ust as
ngu st c s gns ar e. The cust omer put s t he f act and t he ex-
amp e on t he same eve and t hat enab es h mt o cr eat e a causa
| ohn Locke was per haps t he f r st aut hor who compar ed | oke,
met aphor and consc ous t hought f r omt he po nt of v ew of men-
t a economy. | udgement has t o "separ at e car ef u y one f r om
anot her deas wher e n can be f ound t he east d f f er ence" ,
wher eas "no abour of t hought " s r equ r ed n met aphor , a u-
s on and w t ( Essay ( 1960) 1924, 85 f . ) .
Pet er Fnagy (19 74) measur ed t he ext ent of condensat on by
ask ng sub| ect s t o exp a n t he sour ce of humour n var ous
( f oot not e 7 cont nued)
r e at on bet ween t he pur chase of t he car and t he noct ur -
na t r p t o Gr msby ("I f I buy t he car , I w have t o dr ve
t o Gr msby t h s n ght ")
A st mor e st r k ng sem ot c er r or wh ch r ar e y
occur s n nor ma adu t s s t he conf us on bet ween dr eam and
r ea t y.
( 15) A young ady not ces f r omher bed t hat a st r ong y bu t
naked b ack gent eman s c mb ng t hr ough t he w ndow. He
comes c oser and c oser , wher eupon she exc a ms:
- What do you want w t h me?
The st r anger answer s :
- Sor r y, t ' s your dr eam.
The f r ght n ng per secut or appear s concur r ent y at t wo sem ot -
c eve s: n t he dr eam and out s de t he dr eam. He s a char -
act er n t he ady' s dr eam, and a spect at or who comment s on
t he dr eam. I n t he at t er case he assumes a most t he r o e of
t he psychoana yst r em nd ng t he dr eamer t hat t s her f ant asy
wh ch may r epr esent a w sh f u f ment . ( Act ua y, t he f r ght -
en ng per secut or cou d be t he ana yst on a t h r d eve : t hat
of t he at ent dr eamt hought . )
Fau t y t h nk ng as a st r uct ur a pr nc p e
Nonsens ca | okes ar e based e t her on sem ot c er r or s
( ke 13, 14) or on f au t y r eason ng. I n bot h cases economy
of ment a expend t ur e s due t o a mor e pr m t ve pr ocess ng
of human exper ence. I n most of Fr eud' s examp es "f au t y r ea-
son ng can be descr bed as ' aut omat c' " ( Fr eud SE VI I I , 64) .
A human act v t y s ' aut omat c' f t s cont r o ed by a non-
suf f c ent y spec f ed pr ogr amwh ch has not been adapt ed t o
t he concr et e s t uat on a per son w have t o f ace.
( f oot not e 7 cont nued) | okes. A h gh y s gn f cant cor r e a-
t on (r = . 90) was f ound bet ween f unn ness r at ngs and t he
number of wor ds used by sub| ect s t o exp a n a | oke.
45
( 16) When _. _. Lawr ence | o ned t he r anks as pr vat e Shaw, Noe
Cowar d wr ot e a et t er t o h mwh ch began: "Dear 338171 ( may I
ca you 338?) " ( c t . Koest er 1964, 67) .
The f au t y nf er ence under y ng t h s | oke may be par aphr ased
n t he f o ow ng f or m: "I f we may ca Fr eder c s mp y Fr ed,
or Susanna s mp y Sue, we may a so ca t he pr vat e 338171 by
h s f r st 2 or 3 number s n or der t o est ab sh nt macy. The
aut omat c t h nk ng her e s obv ous y meant t o par ody mechan -
sat on of human f e n t he ar my. "I f t s adm ss b e t o ca
a human be ng 338171, we a so have t o accept 338 as a pet
name. " S nce t h s wou d be absur d, t he m t ar y or gan sat on
t hat r educes _. _. Lawr ence t o a s x- p ace number s | ust as
absur d. The appar ent og ca er r or s a condensed ( e pt c)
expr ess on of t he ev dent ar y r u e ca ed apagoge ( deduct o,
r educt o ad absur dum) .
Fa se sy og sm s gr af t ed on aut omat c t h nk ng n a
we - known ant - c er ca anecdot e.
(17) A mour ner commands a f uner a or at on f r om t he pr est .
- I ' 11 de ver an or at on t hat w make even t he gr ave- d gger
weep f or $ 300.
- We , as you see I am a poor man, I don' t car e about t he
gr ave- d gger s.
- O. K. I w make a speech f or $ 200. I t ' move t he mour ner s.
- Sor r y, $ 200 s t oo much. Peop e' s f ee ngs don' t bot her me.
- What ever you ke. I ' de ver one f or $ 100. The f am y
w st weep.
- We have wept enough. I ' g ve you $ 50.
- A r ght , I have an or at on f or $ 50 t oo, but t has a
t ouch of humour n t .
A cor r e at on s mp c t y est ab shed her e bet ween degr ees
of an emot ona and a f nanc a sca e:
Weep ng Laugn ng
1 1/ 2 1/ 4 0 1/ 4 1/ 2 1
300 200 150 100 50 25 0
The sw t ch f r omweep ng t o aught er s har d y appr opr at e;
46
a sca e go ng f r ommax mumweep ng t o zer o weep ng wou d be
mor e r ea st c. Un ess we acknow edge t he under y ng f a se
sy og sm: " f t her e s aught er t hen t her e s no weep ng.
Hence, f t her e s no weep ng, t hen t her e s aught er ". Aga n,
absur d r eason ng s nt ended t o par ody a no ess absur d t hough
gener a y accept ed soc a act , n wh ch a t ot a st r anger r e-
m nds t he mour ner s of t he ext ent of t he r oss, and f or t h s
ser v ce demands a cons der ab e sumf r omt he f am y of t he de-
ceased.
The axness of t he og ca st r uct ur es under y ng n-
gu st c cat egor es f ac t at es f au t y t h nk ng. Thus, f or
nst ance, t he c ass of ad| ect ves compr ses wor ds such as gr een,
good wh ch ar e f unct on names and can f gur e n ngu st c f unc-
t ons of one var ab e, ( x) f ( x) , ( "sp nach s gr een" , "sp n-
ach s good" ) ; wor ds such as gr eener , bet t er cor r espond ng t o
a f unct on of t wo var ab es, ( x, y) f ( x, y) ( "sp nach s bet t er
t han har cot " ) ; wor ds such as equa mp y ng a og ca oper a-
t on, t hat of equ va ence, f =
df
( x) =. ( y) . A number of | okes
s based on t he " og ca homonymy" of t he ad| ect ves.
( 18) A an ma s ar e equa , but some ar e mor e equa t han ot h-
er s ( Or we , An ma Far m)
The wor d equa cor r espond ng t o equ va ence, a symmet r ca
r e at on, f ( x, y) of ( y, x) ( cf . f or t he not at on of og ca
f unct ons Re chenbach 19 47) f gur es n a compar son, an essen-
t a y asymmet r ca r e at on, | ust as ot her ad| ect ves ( gr een,
good) f t f or f gur ng n a compar son. I n t he cont ext of
An ma Far m t he shar p cont r ad ct on nher ent n "mor e equa "
s a h gh y condensed, par od ca f or mof deo og ca cr t c sm.
Fr eud d st ngu shed t wo t ypes of f au t y- t h nk ng | okes:
| okes based on aut omat c t h nk ng, and | okes based on soph s-
t ca r eason ng (SE VI I I , 64) . Hypost as s s, bes des f a se
sy og sm ( cf , 16) , one of t he most r ecur r ent t ypes of er r or .
( 19) I n t he t emp e at Cr acow t he Gr eat Rabb N. was s t t ng
and pr ay ng w t h h s d sc p es. Sudden y he ut t er ed a cr y:
"At t h s ver y moment t he Gr eat Rabb Lw has d ed n Lember g. "
47
"The t echn que of t he nonsens ca | okes wh ch we have so
f ar cons der ed r ea y cons st s. . . n pr esent ng somet h ng
t hat s st up d and nonsens ca , t he sense of wh ch es n
t he r eve at on and demonst r at on of somet h ng e se t hat s
st up d and nonsens ca " ( Fr eud, SE VI I I , 58) . S m ar y, "t he
absur d t y n t he cont ent of t he dr eam t akes p ace of t he
| udgement ' t h s s a p ece of nonsense' n t he dr eam- t hought "
( op. c t . 175) .
The commun t y put on mour n ng f or t he dead man. I n t ne cour se
of t he next days peop e ar r v ng f r omLember g wer e asked how
t he Rabb d ed. They knew not h ng about t , and had ef t h m
n t he best of hea t h. At ast t was est ab shed w t h cer -
t a nt y t hat t he Rabb Low was st a ve. "That makes no
d f f er ence" , r ep ed one of t he d sc p es, "what s essent a
s h s magn f cent Kck ( d st ant ook) f r om Cr acow t o Lember g" .
Th s r eason ng d sconnect s t he second member of an mp ca-
t on _ f g , wher e r epr esent s Rabb N, f r epr esent s
t he pr ed ct ed deat h of Rabb Lw, and g t he t e epat h c power
of Rabb N. Accor d ng t o t h s mp cat on t he t r ut h va ue of g
depends on t hat of f . For t he d sc p e of t he Rabb t he
essent a t h ng s t he "t e epat h c ook" n t se f , whet her
or not Rabb L was st a ve, n t er ms of ngu st c f unc-
t ons: f f g The hypost asi s, sel f - cont ent
t r ut h, i s meant as a par ody of pseudo- sci ent i f i c ar gument a-
t i on whi ch ser ves l i ke camouf l age f or unquest i oni ng f ai t h.
Logi cal er r or s i n j okes ar e i mpl i ci t cr i t i cal st at e-
o
ment s, j ust as def i ci ent ver bal st r at egi es ar e. Thus, f aul t y
t hi nki ng saves ment al expendi t ur e i n t wo di f f er ent ways: by
al l owi ng ment al r egr essi on t o a mor e pr i mi t i ve and l ess demand-
i ng l evel of pr ocessi ng, and t hr ough condensi ng spoken and un-
spoken messages. Thi s i s equal l y t r ue of condensat i on by ot her
ver bal means such as expr essi ve change of wor d or der ( synt agma-
t i c di st or t i on) or of wor d cl asses ( par adi gmat i c di st or t i on) . Com-
muni cat i on by means of meani ngf ul di st or t i on, conveyi ng ' st yl i st i c'
messages, r epr esent s a mor e pr i mi t i ve l evel of ver bal pr ocessi ng.
The st r uct ur e of cont ent
C t ng an aphor smquot ed by Kar F scher :
( 20) Exper ence cons st s of exper enc ng what we do not w sh
t o know ( F scher 1889, 59)
Fr eud compar es unexpect ed ( par adox ca ) st at ement s subst t ut -
ng commonp ace phr ases t o puns. I n bot h cases a dev ance
nduces condensat on of t wo messages. "I shou d ke t o name
t h s pr ocess ' un f cat on' . I t s c ear y ana oguous t o conden-
sat on by compr ess on of t wo wor ds nt o t he same wor d"
(SE VI I I , 66 f . ) .
I n f act , t he cont ent of | okes s a ways st r uct ur ed ac-
cor d ng t o t he pr nc p es gover n ng t he ver ba st r uct ur e of
a punch- ne. The aphor sm ( 19) quot ed as an examp e of un f -
cat on cou d equa y we ser ve as an ust r at on of nver -
s on, t he dent f cat on of oppos t es. One wou d nor ma y con-
s der exper ence as somet h ng t o st r ve f or , t he | oke pr esent s
t , on t he cont r ar y, as "exper enc ng what we do not know" .
I nver s on seems t o be one of t he f undament a st r uct ur a pr n-
c p es of cont ent or gan sat on n | okes ( cf . M ner 1972) , but
t appear s n many d f f er ent f or ms. I f we ook aga n at some
of t he ear er examp es, n | oke (2 a) t he of f cer shows deep
def er ence and addr esses t he cour t san w t h wor ds chosen w t h
gr eat car e t o convey t he basest and most of f ens ve message
poss b e. H s ver ba behav our s a par od st ca m r r or mage
of t he cour t esan' s wor ds who expr essed her r e uct ance n a
v r g na nnocent st y e, t hough t he r easons ar e of t he east
e evat ed f nanc a k nd. Thus, we have n | oke (2 a) t he same
f or mof r ever sa on t he ver ba eve and on t he eve of con-
t ent .
I n | oke (2 b) t he st r uct ur e of t he p ot f o ows t he
same dynam c pat t er n, ch asmus, we a r eady met on t he eve
of expr ess on: f r oma na ve v ewpo nt t he husband has ear ned;
t hr ough honest wor k enough money t o put some as de; f r oma
cyn ca po nt of v ew t he w f e t hr ough ess honest har d wor k
ensur ed t he r e at ve pr osper t y of t he coup e. I n | oke (2 c)
49
a seem ng y po t e nv t at on cont r ast s w t h t he t r ag c r e-
ve at on r em n scent of some cr ue scenes of Gr eek (or Af -
r can) myt ho ogy.
Doub e nver s on, or t he nver s on of nver s on, gov-
er ns t he synt ax of a we known | ew sh anecdot e, espec a y
meant f or sem ot c ans.
( 21) Two bus nessmen met n a War saw r a way st at on. One
wa ked up t o t he ot her and asked:
- Wher e ar e you go ng?
- I amgo ng t o M nsk.
- So, you' r e go ng t o M nsk ( susp c ous y) . You t e
me you' r e go ng t o M nsk because you want me t o
t h nk you' r e go ng t o P nsk. But I happen t o know
t hat you r ea y ar e go ng t o M nsk. So why do you
e?
L e cou d be conce ved of as an nver s on of t r ut h. I n t he
anecdot e t he t r ut h s pr esent ed as a e, s nce a e s con-
s der ed t o be a s mp e st y st c t r ansf or mat on of a t r ue
st at ement . I n t h s f r ame of r ef er ence t he t r ue st at ement ap-
pear s as a doub e t r ansf or mat on ( t r ut h > e >t r ut h) , as
an at t empt t o m sgu de t he hear er by t e ng t he t r ut h.
I t s sur pr s ng t o f nd even mor e comp ex f or ms of
doub e nver s on n t he most popu ar t we f t h and t h r t eent h
cent ur y com c genr e, n Fr ench f ab es ( f ab au- s) .
( 22) The pr est angr y bur st nt o t he peasant ' s house.
- Have you no shame, n br oad day ght , mak ng ove w t hout
even dr aw ng t he cur t a ns.
The peasant n va n exp a ns t hat h s w f e and h mse f wer e
s t t ng at t he t ab e hav ng t he r d ner .
- Then t he f au t must be n t he w ndow, says t he pr est
The peasant want s t o make sur e how t h ngs st and, and f o ow-
ng t he pr est ' s adv ce he c mbs t he t r ee oppos t e t he w n-
dow. Af t er a wh e he r et ur ns t o t he r oommuch sur pr sed.
- Look ng t hr ough t he w ndow t r ea y ooks as f t wo peop e
wer e mak ng ove. ( Du pr est r e k abevet e) .
The super f c a , phys ca ch asmus s t he change of
p aces: f r st t he pr est ooks at t he peasant and h s w f e,
t hen t he peasant obser ves t he amur ous behav our of t he pr est
and h s w f e. At a deeper eve of t he | oke, r ea t y and -
us on ar e cr oss ng over . The peasant and h s w f e ar e n
r ea t y s t t ng at t he t ab e, but t he pr est c a ms t hat
ook ng t hr ough t he w ndow t appear ed as f t hey wer e' mak ng
ove. Subsequent y t he pr est and t he w f e n r ea t y make
ove, but t he peasant accept s t hat t was on y an us on.
I n ot her wor ds, t he pr est suppor t s h s e about t he w ndow
by dece v ng t he husband n f r ont of h s ver y eyes. The un-
der y ng r u e may be put n t hese t er ms: t wo wr ongs make a
r ght , t wo es make a t r ut h, | ust ke doub e negat on has
9
t he same va ue as pos t ve st at ement .
Accor d ng t o t he number of manuscr pt s r eser ved one of
t he most popu ar f ab es based on doub e e, or e on t he
second power , was t he Va r pa ef r o ( The t r out co our ed st a -
on) .
( 23) The husband r et ur n ng home unexpect ed y f ound a t r out -
co our ed st a on n h s cour t yar d and a r ed gar ment n h s
bed. The w f e exp a ned t hat her br ot her of f er ed t o h m t he
r ed gar ment and a so t he st a on. Meanwh e t he h d ncr cav-
a er succeeded n put t ng h s gar ment on, | umped on h s hor se
and r ode away. I n t he mor n ng t he husband asked f or t he r ea
gar ment . "What r ed gar ment ?" asked t he w f e sur pr sed. "The
one I r ece ved as a pr esent ?" "Ar e you a | est er t hat you shou d
be g ven gar ment s?" Then he sear ched f or t he st a on. "What
st a on?" asked t he w f e. "The one I got f r omyour br ot her . "
"My br ot her ?! But you know he has not been her e f or mont hs! "
She t hen sent her husband on a p gr mage t o St . Ar no d, t he
pat r on sa nt of t he nsane, and spent mont hs w t h t he cava er
und st ur bed.
The her o ne of t he f ab e dece ves t he dece ved husband by
of f er ng a f ant ast c nt er pr et at on t o account f or t he pr es-
ence of t he cor pus de ct . I n a second phase, t he s t uat on
The ast r u e pr ov des t he st r uct ur e of a who e ser es of
f ab es ( Tr o s aveug es de Comp egne, De ' enf ant qu f u r em s
au so e , Du pr est r e cr ucef , Du cheva er a r obe ver me -
e, Das t r esces, De a sor set e des est opes, Du v a n de
Ba ue , De a dame qu f st ent endant son mar qu' son| o t ,
Du pr est r e t e nt , Des t r o s dames qu t r ouver ent ' ane , Du
va r pa ef r o ) . Recur r ent doub e dece v ng n f ab es gave r se
t o a spec a t er m: enf ant mer .
51
s r ever sed: t s now t he absence of t he cor pus de ct
t hat bet r ays t he unf a t hf u w f e. Par adox ca y, t he her -
o ne, saves t he s t uat on by dec ar ng t hat t he exp anat on
she her se f gave s obv ous y unt r ue and absur d ( negat on
of negat on) . Rever s ng t he r o es, she at t r but es t he f an-
t ast c st or y a med at dece v ng t he husband t o t he husband
h mse f .
A f ur t her f or mof nver s on f r equent y f ound n f ab es,
and at er on n Eur opean comedy, s t hat of t he decept on of
t he dece ver ( Bor go se d' Or ens, Ben | onson' s Vo pone) .
Fr om t he po nt of v ew of ment a economy, nver s on of
r o es, at t t udes or f act s n | okes or f ab es s compar ab e
t o t he un f cat on of oppos t es on t he ver ba eve ( ant nomy,
semant c nver s on) . On bot h eve s, n sp t e of t he seem ng y
max ma d st ance bet ween t wo t er ms, ant nomy s mer e y a h d-
den f or mof r epet t on: r epet t on concea ed by negat on (a
mu t p cat on by - 1) . S m ar y, t he nver s on of r o es, a
comp et e change ( 180) n t he cour se of event s, s h gh y
sur pr s ng and yet mor e pr ed ct ab e t han a ess r ad ca change.
I nver s on and ant nomy econom se ment a expend t ur e a so n an
ot her way: t he unexpect ed event s super mposed on t he expec-
t ed one, | ust ke t he unexpect ed t er mon t he expect ed t er m,
and t he r eader s pr ompt ed t o cr eat e a nk bet ween bot h t er ms.
Fur t her st r uct ur a pat t er ns char act er s ng t he p ot n
| okes or f ab es r em nd one of ot her ver ba t echn ques. Thus
f or nst ance doub e nt er pr et at on of t he same event - qu pr o
quo - s a k nd of ep ca or dr amat c homonymy ( see a so 20, 22)
Aga n, f ab es of t he t we f t h and t h r t eent h cent ur es of f er a
mor e soph st cat ed var et y of ep ca homonymy: r ever sed homo-
nymy, or pseudo- homonymy.
( 24) The husband happens t o v s t h s f r end at exact y t he
same t me when t he at t er s meet ng h s w f e. The f r end ad-
m t s. t hat he has a ady guest , mor eover he shows her t o h s
f r end cover ng on y her f ace. The husband appr ec at es h s
f r end' s success, and s sor r y t hat he mar r ed t oo ear y.
( Les deux changor s)
52
Homonymy s appar ent dent t y: dent ca f or ms cover -
ng d f f er ent cont ent s. I n f ab e ( 23) t he husband be eves
t hat t he r esemb ance bet ween t he uncover ed f ema e body and
t he body of h s w f e s on y f or t u t ous. He nt er pr et s den-
t t y n t er ms of homonymy. Th s s t he nver se of t he er r or
t hat cons st s n conf ound ng t he w f e of a f r end w t h t he
ega consor t : a mor e bana examp e of t he un f cat on of
d ver se un t s. The cont r ad ct on r eaches t s c max n t he
punch- ne: t he husband becomes env ous of h s own w f e, of
an ob| ect he a r eady possesses. She s cons der ed as a h n-
dr ance pr event ng h m t o possess her .
Ver ba pat t er ns such as r epet t on, var at on, nver s on,
et c. , ca ed "f gur es" n anc ent and moder n r het or c ( ant -
t hes s, ch asmus, epanodos, r edd t o, gr adat o, et c. ) ar e r e-
dundancy r u es app cab e t o a ngu st c eve s nc ud ng
t he par a ngu st c. Roman | akobson conv nc ng y showed n a
ser es of pub cat ons t hat t hese r u es gover n bot h t he or -
gan sat on of expr ess on and cont ent ( | akobson 1966 a, b,
1968, 1970, 1973) .
The ver ba st r uct ur e as act on
Fr eud cons der s t he p easur e of f er ed by t he st r uct ur e
of | okes t o be an ncent ve bonus ( Ver ockungspr m e, Ges.
Wer ke VI , 153) , . e. as a sma amount of p easur e, a f or e-
p easur e (SE VI I I , 137) wh ch comes t o he p n or der t o f t
nt er na nh b t ons and t o r e ease aggr ess ve and sexua
ener g es ( 1. c. ) .
". . . f r om t he st age of t he | est onwar ds, opens new sour ces of
p easur e f or t se f by f t ng nh b t ons. The p easur e n
p ay or p easur e n f t ng nh b t ons, can nvar ab y be
t r aced back t o economy n psych ca expend t ur e. . . " (SE VI I I ,
137 f . ) .
The t r ans t on f r omt he eve of expr ess on t o t he eve
of cont ent s f ac t at ed by a cer t a n somor ph sm bet ween t he
t wo ment a pr ocedur es. I ncr eas ng t ens on and t he sudden r e-
ease of t ens on n t he ast wor ds of t he | oke cou d be nt er -
53
pr et ed as t he ver ba por t r aya of gr adua ncr ease and sudden
r e ease of sexua t ens on ( c max, or gasm) . Koest er ays mor e
emphas s on t he aggr ess ve aspect of t h s t echn que, and com-
par es t he punch- ne t o a sudden exp os on. The t wo nt er pr et a-
t ons ar e by no means exc us ve. Bot h ar e nvo ved n t he Hun-
gar an d omat c expr ess on e s t a v ccet ' he f r ed t he
| oke' , or , n a case of an unsuccessf u at t empt , e ot t e a
v ccet ' he m sf r ed t he | oke' ( r emember ng t he un ver sa sym-
bo sm of guns and shoot ng) .
Fr eud r epeat ed y compar ed | okes w t h a st r pt ease act
( Ent b ssung) , and at t r but es a com ca ef f ect t o a sudden
st r pp ng. Re k ( Le d 1929, 93) r ef er s t o t he exper ence of
t he goddess Demet er who wh st sear ch ng her daught er Per -
sephone who has been abduct ed by Hades, comes t o t he home of
Dysau es and h s w f e Baubo. As she r ef uses f ood and w ne n
her gr eat sor r ow, Baubo sudden y st r ps of f her c ot hes and
makes t he goddess augh. Re k dr aws a par a e bet ween a u-
s on, as an essent a f eat ur e of | oke- mechan sm, and st r p-
t ease, par t a unve ng ( op. c t . 91- 98) . Par t a unve ng
seems t o be mor e ef f ect ve t han nakedness, . e. out spoken t r ut h.
The t er m of m shand ng anguage wh ch has been ass gned
t o ot her , no ess t yp ca , ver ba mechan sms nher ent n | okes
( see Ho mes 1973) c ear y nt er pr et s vo unt ar y gr ammat ca er -
r or s n t er ms of an aggr ess ve man pu at on of t he ver ba sub-
st ance. We ar e r em nded of t he p easur e exper enced by t he
ch d t ak ng p easur e wh e w f u y damag ng h s t oys. I n t he
case of | okes t s t he ver ba t oo t hat s dest r oyed on t he
phonet c, ex ca or synt act c eve . Doct or Bar t o o n Ros-
s n ' s "Bar b er de Sev e" r eact s w t h ev dent annoyance as
count A mav va, d sgu sed as a dr unken of f cer , r epeat ed y
d st or t s h s name ( ca ng h m doct or Ba or do, doct or Bar bar o) .
Rever sa , a st r uct ur a pr nc p e of t he or gan sat on of
| oke cont ent , n t s mu t p e f or ms, as we as a st r uct ur a
f eat ur e of t he ver ba expr ess on, can eas y be t r aced back
t o d ver se f or ms of und sgu sed aggr ess ve act v t es. To t ur n
t h ngs ups de down s obv ous y a subver s ve act v t y, n t he
54
t er a sense of t he t er m. Ch asmus depr ves t he ega owner
of h s pr oper t y ( et us say a subst ant ve of t s usua at t r b-
ut e) wh ch s g ven t o h s opponent ( ass gned t o t he ot her
subst ant ve) . Ther e s a man f est par a e sm n Fr ench med -
eva f ab es bet ween st r uct ur a nver s on and t he expr opr a-
t on of t he pr oper t y of one' s f e owman, nc ud ng t he appr o-
pr at on of h s w f e.
Negat on, t he og ca oper at on under y ng ant t hes s,
s a mor a pr nc p e at t r but ed t o God' s nver se, t he Dev
1 _
( t he ncor por at on of negat on n Madch' s Tr agedy of Man) .
The Ger man wor d ver n cht en ' t o dest r oy' or g na y meant ' t o
negat e' .
A mor e d sgu sed f or mof aggr ess on s t he om ss on of
essent a e ement s of t he sent ence or of t he p ot , a t hough
t he wor ds descr b ng t h s act as a suppr ess on, er as on ar e
e oquent enough. A host e mpu se may be d sp aced, t r ansf er -
r ed f r om t s r ea ob| ect on t o t he ver ba subst ance. An anec-
dot e quot ed by t he Eng sh b ogr apher of Pr oust r evea s t he
emot ona backgr ound of e ps s.
( 25) - Dou you t h nk I amst t he same now af t er f ve year s?
asked Ant o ne B besco h s f r end Pr oust .
- You ar e ess (Tu es mo ns) , answer ed Pr oust .
- Less what ? ess nt e gent ? ess handsome?
- Less, t hat ' s a , answer ed Pr oust r e ent ess y.
( Pa nt er , Pr oust 1966 I , 320)
( cf . a so t he | oke 11. ) I n a case st udy Re k ( 1929, 25- 32) ,
f o ow ng Fr eud (SE I X, 169- 175) cons der s t he compu s ve dea
( Zwangs dee) of a pat ent as a f r agment of a comp ex st at ement
Rever sa and negat on, t he essent a par t cu ar t es of t he
Dev , ar e at t he same t me char act er st c of unconsc ous pr o-
cesses, espec a y of dr eams, as has been po nt ed out by
| ones ( 1931, 184 f . ) . The Dev r epr esent s t he v o ent ber a-
t on of suppr essed sexua and, ch ef y, aggr ess ve mpu ses.
No wonder t hat aught er has somet h ng d abo ca ; t s pr ma-
r y d abo c accor d ng t o Baude a r e 1962, t he expr ess on of
cont r ad ct or y f ee ngs wh ch account s f or t he convu s ve char -
act er of aught er ( op. c t . 249- 251) .
55
made ncompr ehens b e by t he er as on of t he most mpor t ant
par t of t . The om ss on s t r aced back by Re k, n neur os s
and | oke t echn que, t o t he r epr essed t endency t o ann h at e
t he ob| ect "he shou d not be t hought of aga n" ( op. c t . 28) .
Thus, n a cer t a n sense, st y e goes beyond cont ent n
t he r ea sat on of t he r epr essed t hought . On t he eve of con-
t ent , aggr ess ve or er ot c f ant as es ar e mor e or ess c ear y
f or mu at ed, descr bed by means of wor ds. The "manner of ex-
pr ess on" s however r ea act v t y, a par t a r ea sat on of
t he r epr essed mpu ses, t hough t he act ng- out s d sp aced
f r omt he r ea ob| ect t o ver ba act v t y. I t does not t ake
p ace n t he wor d ar ound, but n t he or a cav t y or on a
sheet of paper , st r ong y r em nd ng one of sympat het c mag ca
pr act ce, n| ur ng or dest r oy ng an enemy by n| ur ng or de-
st r oy ng an mage of h m.
Ont ogenet c aspect s of | okes
What was t he | oke ke bef or e t became a | oke? We con-
s der ed t he "f unny r emar ks" as t he bas s of | okes: | okes
w t hout st r uct ur e. Bot h cont a n a "ch d sh" st at ement - a
t hought at once at t r act ve and unaccept ab e; bot h f o ow t he
same st r at egy: nva dat ng t he expr essed ch d sh t hought
t hr ough exagger at on,
The st r uct ur a e ement s of | okes ar e equa y "ch d sh":
t hey can be t r aced back t o ver ba , og ca , sem ot ca oper a-
t ons and at t t udes char act er st c of an ear y phase of ment a
deve opment . Fr eud' s t heor y of | okes s essent a y ont ogenet -
c. Wor d assoc at ons, absur d t es nher ent n | okes ar e r e-
gar ded as at t empt s t o r e- est ab sh o d ber t es w t hout pay-
ng r egar d t o t he compu s on of og c (SE VI I I , 127) . Some
year s bef or e t he pub cat on of Fr eud' s wor k Ber gson ( 1900,
68 f f . ) a r eady ment oned t he nf ant e sour ces of t he com c.
I shou d ke t o ust r at e and concr et se t he par a e s
bet ween | oke t echn ques and t he ver ba and cogn t ve behav our
of ch dr en.
The ch d' s at t t ude t owar ds anguage d f f er s f undamen-
t a y f r omt he adu t ' s. The ch d t akes ver ba s gns much mor e
ser ous y, s nce he s c oser t o t he gr eat event when t he r
appear ance put or der nt o t he pr ever ba chaos ( et us r em nd
our se ves of t he ver ba exper ence of He ene Ke er who r e-
conquer ed anguage at t he age of seven, and w t h anguage
t he f acu t y t o or gan se t he sur r ound ng un ver se, Gesch cht e
me nes Lebens s. d. 20 f f . ) . At t h s st age wor ds ar e st
c ose y nked t o t he ob| ect s t hey denot e and seem t o be en-
dowed w t h mag ca pr oper t es ( Fer encz , Ent w ck ungst uf en
( 1913) , n: Baust e ne 1927, 62- 83) . The unquest on ng f a t h
n anguage exc udes even t he s ght est ngu st c cr t c sm
The phonet c and t he semant c component , t he s gn f cans
and s gn f cat um, f or m an nd v s b e un t n t he ch d' s con-
sc ousness. | akobson' s st at ement about r hymes, "wor ds s m ar
n sound ar e dr awn t oget her n mean ng" ( 1960, 371) s one of
t he ch d' s bas c ngu st c t enet s. Thus, homonyms ar e n-
var ab y conf ounded. I r emember t hat as a f ve year o d ch d
I equat ed t he Hungar an noun g ' sky' w t h t he ver b g ' t
bur ns' . The semant c gap was br dged by t he heat and ght of
t he sun.
( 26) A Hungar an g r , Rat , sa d at t he age of 3; 6
- They ar e go ng t o t he cemet er y t o put f ower s on t he
gr ave ( Hungar an s r / i : r / ' gr ave' ) , now uncl e
Mi chael ( t he dead) won' t weep ( Hungar i an s r / : r /
' he weeps' ) anymor e.
The ch d w be even ess w ng t o keep apar t t he
shades of mean ng of t he same wor d. The semant c d st ance
bet ween or g na , pr mar y "concr et e" mean ng and t he der ved,
secondar y "abst r act " mean ng s gr eat y r educed n t he ch d' s
m nd, f not t ot a y ob t er at ed. The ch d s gener a y un-
w ng t o r enounce t he concr et e sensua nt er pr et at on of a
wor d or d om.
( 27) Books ar e pr nt ed aga n, says Pet er ' s mot her , f ch dr en
ke t hem.
- And f t hey ar e not sweet ? asks Pet er ( 2; 9 year s o d)
"Kr t k der Spr ache" , accor d ng t o t he t er ms of Fr t z Maut h-
ner 1923, and t he pr nc p es ayed down by Locke n h s Essay
n 1690.
( 28) - What do you ke most ?
- I ke most poppy- seed r o s, st or es and Mummy ( St even,
2 ; 8 year s o d) .
The equ va ence of f ood, ent er t a nment and ove r em nds us of
t he s ck humour of | oke (2 c) based on t he mer ger of ov ng
mot her and k ng f ood, deep y r oot ed n t he ear est phase
of psych c deve opment concur r ent w t h br east - f eed ng.
The ch d' s r ef usa of homonymy and po ysemy of f er s an
appr opr at e bas s f or s m ar conf us ons n | okes such as (1 -
4) .
I t s a so h s f a t h n t he ver ac t y of wor ds wh ch
pr ompt s t he ch d t o pr ec ude r andom event s f r om anguage, t o
r ef use nst nct ve y and cat egor ca y t he consequences of t he
ar b t r ar ness of ngu st c s gns.
( 29) Emanue , a Fr ench boy at t he age of 2; 0 t hought t hat h s
I t a an f r end was not n t he sw mm ng poo , s nce he was ca -
ed Pao o, n Fr ench nt er pr et at on / pa o o/ pas au ' eau ' not
n t he wat er ' , and t hat anot her boy, Pasch o was cer t a n y not
war m, pas chaud ' not war m' .
( 30) Eva, a Hungar an g r , f ve year s o d, and a so Pet er at
t he age of t hr ee, wer e ver y upset when gr an' dad was nha ng
. e. t ook a br eat h ng cur e, ( Hungar an nha ' he nha es'
f or a co d; t hey wer e af r a d he m ght d e ( Hungar an ha
' deat h' ) .
( 31) An out st and ng Hungar an sc ent st f e t as a s x- year
o d t her e was some myst er y beh nd t he Hungar an wor d anya-
csavar ' f ema e scr ew' ( anya ' mot her ' , csavar ' scr ew' ) , wh ch
was r em n scent of cer t a n I t abooed wor ds such as anyat e|
' br eat h m k' ( anya ' mot her ' , t e| ' m k' ) , anyamn ( mot her )
womb' . H s be ef s wer e conf r med n h s op n on by t he adu t s'
r eact ons who s gn f cant y sm ed at each ot her as he men-
t oned h s con| ect ur es.
( 32) "Why aszt a ( t ab e) ?" asked Pet er at t he age of t hr ee.
Her e we have f ound, I t h nk, t he sour ce of p ayf u et y-
mo og s ng n | okes ( 5) .
Repr esent at on by t he oppos t e, r ever sa , wh ch occur s
n so many f or ms n | okes and ot her humor ous genr es, can be
t r aced back t o d f f er ent nf ant e f act or s, nt e ect ua as
we as nst nct ua . Ch dr en of 2- 5 year s ( somet mes even
beyond t h s age) eas y conf use ant onyms espec a y ant onym c
adver bs.
( 33) Eva and Pet er at t he age of 2- 3 year s r epeat ed y sub-
st t ut ed t egnap ' yest er day' f or ho nap ' t o- mor r ow' , r egen
' ong ago' f or sokr a ' n a ong t me' , m nd g ' a ways' ,
f or soha ' never ' , kor n ' ear y' f or ksn ' l at e' . Mr j t t l
ol yan kor an, kson? ' Why di d you come so ear l y, l at e? ( Pet er
2; 7) ."
(3 4) The same chi l dr en, al so l ess f r equent l y, conf used mel eg
' hot ' wi t h hi deg ' col d' , mel eg t ' ( he) war ms ( somet hi ng) up'
wi t h hut ( he) cool s ( somet hi ng) down' , and a number of ot her
nomi nal and ver bal ant onyms. Bei ng asked by mot her dur i ng
l unch whet her t he f ood was not t oo hot : - Maj d megmel eg t em
' I ' l l war m i t up' ( Pet er 2: 9) . Maj d ha ki csi l es z , akko( r )
' When he wi l l be l i t t l e u. e. bi g) onl y t hen. ' ( Eva 2; 1) .
I n some cases an ambi val ent at t i t ude may f aci l i t at e or
i nduce t he subst i t ut i on of a wor d unconsci ousl y i nt ended f or
t he t er m consci ousl y chosen:
( 35) Meg akar om pi szkol ni ' I want t o make ( t hem = hi s hands)
di r t y' i nst ead of : Meg akar om mosni ' I want t o cl ean t hem'
( Pet er 2; 6) .
Bot h of t wo mut ual l y excl usi ve at t i t udes may appear si de
by s i de, i n t he same s ent ence, and t he chi l d does not seem
concer ned by or even consci ous of t he i nconsi st ency.
( 36) Nagyon j ol r zem magam, haza szer et nk menni ' I am enj oy-
i ng mysel f ver y much her e, I ' d l i ke t o go home' ( l et t er of an
ei ght - year ol d Hungar i an boy wr i t t en t o hi s par ent s f r om hol i -
day) .
I nver si on, especi al l y doubl e i nver si on, chi as mus , coul d
be consi der ed as a ver bal pr oj ect i on of t ypi cal chi l dhood f an-
t asi es di r ect l y expr essed i n games : " Now I wi l l be Daddy, and
1 2
Daddy wi l l be l i t t l e Pet er " ( Pet er f i ve year s ol d) .
Answer i ng No aut omat i cal l y, or wi t h an ant onym, any
st at ement , especi al l y t hose made by t he par ent s , i s a f r e-
quent , al most nor mal r eact i on of t he chi l d at a cer t ai n age
( 2- 4 year s , at t i mes even at l at er s t ages ) .
( 37) Mot her : V gyz z , me eg! ' Pay at t ent on, t ( t he bat h) s
hot .
Eva ( 1; 10) , bef or e get t ng nt o t he bat h: Nem me eg,
h deg ' I t ' s not war m, t ' s co d' .
I at t empt ed n pr ev ous pub cat ons t o deve op t hese s ugges -
t ons n t he case of ch asmus and ot her f gur es ( 1972, 1975) .
( 38) A t t e g r of t hr ee year s, Chr st na, spat n t he
st r eet . She s r epr oved by her mot her .
- I d dn' t sp t .
The mot her g ves her a s ap. Chr st na sn f f ng:
- I d dn' t sp t , and I d dn' t get a s ap.
We ar e her e not concer ned w t h t he nst nct ua ( ana -
sad st c) bas s of negat on and def ance ( cf . Fr eud, Ana -
char akt er / 1908/ n: SE X 226- 227) . I t s suf f c ent t o st at e
t hat t h s at t t ude s t yp ca at a par t cu ar age ( wh ch | us-
t f es our use of t he t er m ' ch d sh def ance' r ef er r ng t o
t hat of adu t s) , and not e t hat nver s on and r epr esent at on
by t he oppos t e n t he | oke has t he same nst nct ua sour ce
as def ance n t he ch d.
We know t hat t he nst nct ua bas s of st ubbr n s ence
s dent ca t o t hat of negat on. To deny, t o negat e, t o sup-
pr ess f or m a homo ogous ser es. We a r eady cons der ed t he con-
nect on bet ween t he suppr ess on wh ch s par t of a | okes and
aggr ess v t y mp ed by den a and suppr ess on.
E ps s has anot her nf ant e sour ce t hat we d scussed
n r e at on t o t he de ct c f e d. The ch d r e es so heav y
on t he de ct c f e d; as t he r esu t of t s pr o| ect ve t h nk ng
( Fer encz , Ent w ck ungsst uf en / 1913/ , n: Baust e ne 1927) , t s
egocent r c t y ( P aget 1955) , he can har d y mag ne t hat some-
t h ng t hat t o h m s per f ect y c ear m ght not be c ear f or
anot her per son. The e pt c st y e of | okes may be p easur ab e
a so because t eads us back t o t he ch d' s un ver se gover ned
by t he p easur e pr nc p e.
An nver se er r or , a so r e at ed t o t he f au t y use of t he
de ct c f e d, s gnor ng t he t r ansf or mat ona power of t he
de ct c f e d, conver t ng st at ement s be ng n d amet r ca
oppos t on t o t he de ct c f e d nt o "f unny r emar ks" .
( 39) - The weat her s wonder f u , says t he 6- year o d g r
ook ng out of t he w ndow wh ch s comp et e y obscur ed
by r a n.
- Yes, t s a f ne day, echoes n a ser ousness a 4-
year o d boy, r e y ng on t he | udgement of t he b g
s st er , and not know ng t hat a st at ement wh ch shar p y
cont r ast s w t h r ea t y must be conver t ed nt o t s
oppos t e.
Th s na ve at t t ude s adopt ed by t he | oker who s supposed
t o t e t he absur d t es cont a ned n t he | oke n a ser ous-
ness. I n some cases a 2- 4- year o d ch d s pr esent n t he
| oke. He s t he one who nt er pr et s t he sent ence t er a y,
mak ng sur e t hat t he t wo s mu t aneous y ncompat b e nt er pr et a-
t ons of t he sent ence become ev dent .
P ayf u d st or t on of wor ds and sent ences, t he gener a-
t on of nonsense sequences, s t he ear est ver ba p ay, t he
pr ot o- | oke of t he ch d. I t may have w de y d f f er ng mot ves:
r egr ess on t o t he pr ever ba phase of babb ng, par od st c
m t at on of t he adu t s' nonsens ca d scour se, m shand . g
anguage, as t he most nnocent k nd of dest r uct on.
( 40) Pet er , at t he age of 2; 2- 2; 6 r epeat ed y d st or t ed t he
wor d ap ' Daddy' . Th s ver ba p ay a ways e c t ed bur st s of
aught er f r omh m.
Fr eud r et r aces t he absur d t y nher ent n t he st r uct ur e
of | okes t o an nf ant e t ype of ment a act v t y (SE VI I I ,
170) . I t m ght be usef u t o make an exp c t nk bet ween a
number of t yp ca | oke st r uct ur es and cor r espond ng og ca
er r or s of t he ch d. The most common er r or , aut omat c t h nk-
ng ( cf . | oke 16, 17) r esu t s f r om an nsuf f c ent y spec -
f ed pr ogr am.
( 41) Laur ent ( 2; 4) s f r t ng w t h t he ght bu b.
"Wat ch t , t ' s ver y hot " , war ns h s mot her .
Laur ent b ows on t he bu b car er u y, r epeat ed y.
( The pr ogr am under y ng h s pr event at ve act on was appar ent y
t oo gener a : "I f any ob| ect s hot you b ow on t bef or e con-
t act ng t " . )
Many | okes ar e based on t he conf us on of ndependent and
r e at ona f eat ur es ( cf . 18) .
( 42) Our ch dr en bet ween t he ages 3- 5 when asked wh ch of t wo
books or cakes t hey ked best , gener a y answer ed:
"I ke bot h t he best . "
Ther e s exper ment a ev dence t o show t hat t r ue compar at ves,
mor e, ess ar e r egu ar y pr eceded by a non- r e at ona nt er -
pr et at on ( many, f ew, cf . C ar k (19 70) , Dona dson and Wa es
( 1970) ) .
Par ent a r e at ons equa y t end t o be r ea sed as n-
dependent pr oper t es: ( x) f ( x) , nst ead of ( x, y) f ( x, y) ,
For nst ance, a mot her s s mp y a mot her , and not t he mot her
of X.
( 43) Pet er , who at t he aqe of t hr ee had pr ec se under st and ng
of t he pr ocess of mu t p cat on of t he numan spec es, sa d
at t he age of f our t o h s mot her :
"When I was a t t e, ver y t t e boy, you wer e not yet
bor n, on y Daddy. "
The most f r equent f a se sy og sm under y ng er r or s
st y zed by | okes s t he we - known f a se sy og sm: f a. t hen
b; b consequent y a.
( 44) Eva ( f ve- year s o d) ooked env ous y at Pet er who was
dr nk ng h s choco at e, and sa d:
"He s so ucky, he kes choco at e! "
I f somebody kes choco at e ( 1) and has choco at e (c_) t hen he
s happy ( h) : Hence, n or der t o be happy you have
t o ke choco at e, wh ch s ev dent y a f a se conc us on:
but never t he ess a good r eason t o be env ous of
one' s t t e br ot her .
D sp acement of emphas s n | okes ( cf . 13) s based
on sem ot c f a acy wh ch r epr oduces t he ch d' s at t t ude t o-
war ds f ct on or humour . | ust as ver ba expr ess ons ar e a ways
mot vat ed f or t he ch d, f ct on n | okes or on st age s
near t o t he eve of r ea event s. The ch d shout s at t he ac-
t or s, war ns L t t e Red R d ng- Hood about t he appr oach ng dan-
ger . S m ar y, f o ow ng t he punch- ne of | okes he w ask
f or f ur t her det a s concer n ng t he char act er s n t .
Pr ec s ons and cor r ect ons
Fr om sem ot c v ewpo nt t s n gener a t er ms t r ue
t hat t he st r uct ur a e ement s of t he | oke ar e made up of ont o-
genet ca y pr m t ve f or ms. To t h s cat egor y be ong t he n-
f ant e t r eat ment of anguage and og c. As a consequence,
t he ch d, whose way of t h nk ng and whose at t t ude t owar ds
anguage conoc t ut e t he st r uct ur e of | okes, s h mse f "w t h-
out f ee ng f or t he com c" ( Fr eud SE VI I I , 222) . Th s appar -
ent y par adox ca st at ement s f undament a y t r v a . The
ch d obv ous y cannot en| oy a r egr ess on t o h s pr oper age
eve . We must become adu t s n or der t o en| oy ch d sh ver -
ba , sem ot c and og ca st r at eg es.
F r st a m nor qua f cat on: t he ch d s a so ab e t o
en| oy humour , he a so exper ences economy of ment a expend-
t ur e t hr ough homonymy, as soon as he r ecogn zes homonymy and,
at east par t a y, accept s t he pr nc p e of ar b t r ar ness of
ngu st c s gns.
( 45) Eva, at t he age of 1 ; 7 want ed t o have some b scu t s, n
Hungar an keksz / keks/ , f r omEng sh cakes; kekszet ' b scu t s
( acc. ) ' pr onounc ng / keset / nst ead of / kekset / . Keszer / keset /
was nt er pr et ed by her mot her as kezet ' hand ( acc. )
1
. As soon
as Eva r ea zed t hat / keset / cou d mean kezet (' hand ( ace. )
1
)
f or Mummy t hough she meant kekszet ' b scu t s
1
sne bur st
out augh ng.
Such examp es, ne t her f r equent nor except ona , c ear y
show t hat even a 1; 7- year o d ch d s occas ona y ab e t o
not ce homonymy, and t o en| oy t he f r ee y f or t u t ous co nc dence
of t wo wor ds w de y d f f er ng n mean ng.
The | oke does not on y pr eser ve t he shor t com ngs of n-
f ant e cogn t on. W t h n t he cont ent of t he | oke, and a so n
t s st r uct ur e, t he openness and unconvent ona mode of ex-
pr ess on of t he ch d ar e a so ma nt a ned. We may best appr e-
c at e t he mpor t ance of t h s component t hr ough our r eact on.
The genu ne expr ess on of t he ch d' s exper ence has an ef f ect
bor der ng on t he | oke. I f we t ake a c oser ook at some n-
cons st enc es n t he ch d' s st at ement , t appear s t hat t hey
r ef ect ncons st enc es pr esent n r ea t y.
( 46) A t hr ee- year o d boy, St ephen, speak ng about h s t t e
br ot her , conc udes: "I ke t t e M ke ver y much. But I don' t
ke t t hat he ex st s. "
63
Th s st at ement goes beyond t he expr ess on of amb va ent f ee -
ngs. I t separ at es t he, gener a y amus ng, aspect s of t he new-
comer f r omt he f r ust r at ng f act of h s ar r va .
(4 7) Pet er ( at 3; 6) : "Mummy, I can see n your eyes t hat I
was y ng aga n. "
Se f - cont r ad ct on as a f or mof se f - cr t c sm s comb ned
w t h nver s on and condensat on by om ss on. He per ce ves
on y t he r ef ect on of t he e, m r r or ed n t he eyes of t he
mot her . Sever a| nks n a sequence of deas ar e suppr essed
( apos opes s, accor d ng t o c ass ca r het or c) : I was y ng,
you saw t hr ough t , and now you ar e angr y.
The w sh t o demot vat e and nva dat e a st at ement or
act on s pr esent at an ear y age. The nva dat ng spe
"I amon y | ok ng" a so appear s.
( 48) Pet er ( 2; 6 year s o d) : "Huram" ( or a gest ur e, pr et end ng t o
swa ow h s mot her ) "I ameat ng Mummy : " ( t he same gest ur e t o-
war d h s f at her ) "I ameat ng Daddy: "
( 49) Pet er ( 3; 2) : "Daddy s not a owed t o eat my pudd ng. "
(He s r epr oved by Gr an' dad. ) "I was | ust k dd ng. "
Such examp es ust r at e t hat t he phr ases "on y | ok ng",
"| ust k dd ng" so e y ser ves t he pur pose of demot vat on. | oke
s equ va ent t o any pr et ended, nonr ea act v t y.
( 50) Pet er ( 3; 9) st ened t o a pr et end- quar r e r ecor ded f or
pur e y phonet ca , exper ment a pur poses, as h s par ent s
made c ear t o h m:
"I t s f unny, sn' t t ?" he sa d.
Poet r y s a so | ok ng
The put t ng nt o wor ds of an unaccept ab e t hought and
t he mmed at e y f o ow ng nva dat on we encount er ed n
"f unny r emar ks" s t he common f oundat on of | okes and poet c
wor d p ays wh ch ar e r ef er r ed t o as "met aphor ", "met onymy",
and "synecdoche".
I f we r ead poems t o our ch dr en ke t he f o ow ng ex-
t r act f r omt he song of a danc ng bear :
( 51) A f e| e a nn nek The head of t he ady
Eppen | o esz pemsz nek. W make a f ne pa nt - br ush.
( At t a | zsef , Medvet anc - Bear - dance)
64
an apo oget c, exp anat or y r emar k must f o ow mmed at e y:
"The bear s on y | ok ng. He | ust t hought of a br ush as he
ooked at t he ady' s head; she was pr obab y a so ver y t h n ke
t he hand e ot a br ush, and her ha r r em nded t he bear of t he
ha r at t he end of a pa nt - br ush. " Adu t r eader s wou d scar ce y
need any exp anat on. The t ype of poet c st at ement we ca
met aphor c - n t he br oadest , and at t he same t me t he t er -
a sense of t he t er m- f or ms a v o ent and nt ent ona con-
t r ast w t h common sense, t pr ompt s us t o go beyond t he "f ace
va ue" of t he st at ement , and ook f or a so ut on, t hat s, f or
some under y ng st at ement s wh ch may r eso ve t he t ens on cr eat -
ed ( cf . Ander son ( 1964) , Or t ony, Reyno ds, Ar t er ( 1978) ) . Say ng
somet h ng d f f er ent , a egor e n, n or der t o be ab e t o say
mor e ( "Zwe f aches n E ns zu f gen" , n Hege ' s wor ds, 1955,
I I , 3) s a common f eat ur e of t he | oke and t he met aphor . Th s
suggest s t hat t hr ough t he met aphor as we as t hr ough t he | oke,
ment a ener gy s saved. I n t he met aphor s m ar y t o | okes t he
sur f ace mean ng s n Hege ' s t er ms auf gehoben, s mu t aneous y
nva dat ed and pr eser ved. The poet behaves as t he | oker , as-
sum ng t he r espons b t y f or t he ncongr u t y.
Ther e ar e ot her s m ar t es bet ween met aphor and | oke.
The p easur e of r ed scover ng somet h ng wh ch s f am ar t o
us, s, accor d ng t o Fr eud, one of t he f undament a pr ocesses
n | okes (SE VI I I , 120 f f . ) . I t s "eas er t o under st and new
t h ngs, f t hey ar e cast n t er ms of o d" po nt out t he aut hor s
of a r ecent r ev ew paper on met aphor ( Or t ony, Reyno ds and
Ar t er ( 1978, 937) ) . They def ne met aphor as "t ens on- r eso vab e
cont ext ua anoma y" ( op. c t . 9 40) , a v ew wh ch comes c ose
t o Fr eud' s dynam c t heor y of | okes. I n bot h cases, t he demot -
vat ed sent ence of t he sur f ace st r uct ur e appear s t o be c oser
n cont ent t o t he unconsc ous t hought s t han t he mp ed one.
The met aphor and t he | oke: d spar t es
D ss m ar t es ar e, however , even mor e mpor t ant t han
s m ar t es, ot her w se how cou d we exp a n why we ar e
amused by a | oke or a f unny r emar k, and why we do not augh
at a met aphor . A beaut f u met aphor may e c t , occas ona y,
a sm e of sat sf act on.
Laught er s e c t ed by t he sudden d scover y of a h dden
mean ng: t he | oker eaves t he consc ous eve f or a sp t of
a second ( Fr eud SE VI I I , 166) . Re k assoc at es t he Ger man
wor ds W t z ' | oke' w t h B t z ' ght en ng' ( 1929, 69) . | okes
ar e amb guous n t he st r ct sense of t he wor d, t hey have t wo
c ear y def ned mean ngs. The t wo nt er pr et at ons nvo ved
1 3
ar e cont r ast ng, h gh y po ar sed. I n cont r ast t o t he
c ean- cut semant c m t s w t h n t he | oke, t he genu ne met aphor
s " open" , "unset " accor d ng t o Hege ( "n cht geset zt " , 1955,
396) , adm t t ng an un m t ed number of conver gent nt er pr et a-
t ons. The vagueness of met aphor s r r educ b e; met aphor
1 4
cannot be par aphr ased ( Campbe , 1975) . Cont r ad ct or y com-
ment ar es n ex st ence on Ma ar m' s met aphor c ver se- nes
cou d be cons der ed a nat ur a semant c exper ment n vague-
ness. The ext r aor d nar y engt h of t hese comment ar es f ur t her
nd cat es t he h gh semant c dens t y of t he met aphor s ( M chaud
1953, Fonagy 1961) .
The cent r f uga semant c t endenc es nher ent n | okes seem'
t o suppor t I mr e Her mann' s t heor y wh ch post u at es ( on t he bas s
of exper ment s w t h ch dr en and adu t s) a po ar s ng t endency
dom nat ng pr mar y- pr ocess t h nk ng, ( Her mann 1923) ) .
14
I nd v dua | okes and met aphor s d ver ge, of cour se, n t he r
degr ee of vagueness, and t h s s appar ent f r om semant c ex-
per ment s ( Pet er Fnagy ( 1974) , I van Fonagy ( 1975f ) ) . The ob-
t a ned va ues f or t he t wo set s, | okes and met aphor s, how-
ever , ar e not over app ng.
The met aphor moves n an open semant c space. The
openness of t he met aphor cou d be cons der ed a consequence
of t s dynam c char act er . A st at c mode wh ch def nes t he
met aphor n t er ms of par t a over app ng of under y ng con-
cept s ( Pe c 1961, Rub nst e n 1971, Lehmann 1975) or n t er ms
of common semant c f eat ur es ( St er n / 1923/ 1931, 301, B cker t on
1969, Mat t hews 1971, Abr aham 1975) m sses t he most f undament a
aspect of t r ansf er , r ght y emphas zed by c ass ca r het or cs
and Sanscr t poet cs. The t r ansf er accor d ng t o Ou nt an
"conf er s mot on and emot on t o t he sent ence" ( "mot us dat quen-
damet af f ect um", I nst t ut ones or at or ae 2, 13, 9) . Ou nt an
uses t he mode of M r on' s D scbo os: t he unusua , cont or t ed
pos t on mp es a ser es of subsequent gest ur es by t he d scus-
t hr ower . Met aphor s t hus not an mage n t he st r ct sense of
t h s t er m, but r at her a ser es of mages, a mot on- p ct ur e.
( Konr ad Lange ( 1901) , and mor e r ecent y Hank ss ( 1969) ) see met a-
phor as an osc at or y movement bet ween d f f er ent eve s of
nt er pr et at on.
Movement mp es d r ect on. The t wo s des of a mat hemat -
ca equat on ar e nt er changeab e. Th s s cer t a n y not t r ue
f or poet c equat ons under y ng met aphor s, even n cases of
appar ent r ef ex v t y. V ct or Hugo r epeat ed y dent f es snow-
f akes w t h but t er f es, and but t er f es w t h snowf akes, as
t appear s f r omHuguet ' s compr ehens ve ana ys s of V ct or
Hugo' s mages ( 1904- 1905) . Snowf akes chang ng nt o but t er f es,
on t he one hand, and but t er f es chang ng nt o snowf akes, on
t he ot her , evoke ent r e y d f f er ent mages and cr eat e d f f er -
1 5
ent at mospher es.
Few poet c met aphor s comp y w t h t he post u at e of Ar st ot e
who st at es t hat t he met aphor must a ways be r ever s b e ( Rhet -
or cs 1457b, 1407a) . The asymmet r y of met aphor ( and of s m e)
s par t cu ar y ev dent n pe| or at ve, cacophem st c mages,
such as:
67
Met aphor not on y mp es movement : t s t he semant c
movement mp ed. I shou d ke t o ust r at e t h s st at ement
by t he dynam c nt er pr et at on of one of t he synest het c met a-
phor s of t he Hungar an poet Ar pad Tt h ( 1886- 1928) , subm t t ed
pr ev ous y t o a f or ma semant c ana ys s by etf f i ( 1969) .
( 52) . . . es nem t udj a ms,
Hogy csndem j n mi l yen j aj ok gnek.
( . . . and no one may know
What cr i es bur n i n t he ni ght of my si l ence)
Pet f i def i nes an i mage as "any par t of a t ext made up
of at l east t wo synt act i cal l y r el at ed but semant i cal l y i n-
compat i bl e el ement s" ( op. ci t . 191) .
16
Thus i ncompat i bi l i t y
ar i ses i n t he possessi ve const r uct i on _sndern j n ' i n t he
ni ght of my si l ence' , si nce j ' ni ght ' bel ongs ( accor di ng t o
Pet of i ) t o t he vi sual f i el d, and csendem ' my si l ence' t o t he
audi t or y spher e. The t heor y cannot f ul l y account f or t he poet i c
ef f ect of t he met aphor , as t hi s ef f ect woul d be much r educed by
i nver t i ng t he or der of t he t wo t er ms: j emcsndj n ' i n t he si -
l ence of my ni ght ' , and woul d compl et el y vani sh by omi t t i ng t he
possessi ve mor pheme i n j em: az j csndj ben ' i n t he si l ence
of t he ni ght ' . I f we consi der , however , as t he sour ce of t he
ef f ect of t he met aphor t he r el at i on of t wo t er ms whi ch bel ong
t o di f f er ent sensor y domai ns, t he change of or der shoul d not
r educe or abol i sh t he aest het i c ef f ect of t he phr ase.
We may appr oxi mat e mor e cl osel y t he poet i c message i n-
her ent i n t hi s met aphor i f we r egar d i t as t he end r esul t of
a ser i es of successi ve t r ansf or mat i ons. The l ast of t hese
( f oot not e 15 cont i nued) FALSTAFF: Sbl odd, you st ar vel i ng, you
el f - ski n, you dr i ed neat ' s t ongue, you bul l ' s pi zzl e, you
st ock- f i sh ( Henr y I V, par t 1) .
As has been poi nt ed out by Al exander Szal ai ( i n a l et t er ) i t
i s unl i kel y t hat we coul d f i nd i n l i t er at ur e a st ock- f i sh or
a bul l ' s pi zzl e i dent i f i ed as one of t he char act er s of a dr ama.
1 f
Thi s def i ni t i on i s compar abl e t o ( f oot not e 16 cont i nued)
68
t r ansf or mat ons cou d have been t he t r anspos t on:
csndem en n t he n ght of my s ence
| em csnd| n n t he s ence of my n ght
"I n t he s ence of my n ght " cou d be conce ved of as an n-
t egr at on of ( a) " n t he s ence of t he n ght " , and ( b) " t
s my n ght " . The expr ess on "t he s ence of t he n ght " s
a f r ozen gr ammat ca t r ansf er wh ch cor r esponds t o t he " s -
ent n ght " . Bot h nvo ve a f r ozen ex ca met aphor mp y ng
t he per son f cat on of t he n ght . I n "I n t he s ence of t he N ght
we f nd our se ves n t he doma n of t he N ght goddess ( t he con-
cr et zed s ence suggest s such a doma n) . We ar e nduced by
t he poet t o r ev ve t hese f r ozen met aphor s, s nce he r ef er s t o
t hese st r uct ur es n cr eat ng a new, per sona myt h, mak ng a
un ver se out of s ence, wher e n ght and day ar e a t er nat ng,
and wher e t he poet s at pr esent p unged nt o dar kness. Co -
ect ve or per sona myt hs, however , do not f ur n sh us w t h an
exp anat on. I n f act t hey r equ r e one. St r pp ng t he a egor c
st at ement s of t he r myt h ca char act er gener a y nvo ves a
t r ansf or mat on of t he subst ant ve (". . . of my s ence") nt o
a cor r espond ng ver b or ad| ect ve ("...I am s ent " ) . Thus, we
wou d obt a n t he somewhat f at d scur s ve st at ement : "I ams -
ent n t he n ght " .
S nce we f ee t h s nt er pr et at on s unsat sf act or y, we
ar e f or ced t o r et ur n t o t he expr ess on csndem | n ' n t he
n ght of my s ence' f or some r es dua nf or mat on . We ar e
r em nded of t he Ger man r omant c t heor es of t he noct ur na s de
of nat ur e ( d e Nacht se t e der Nat ur ) , nvo v ng t he cr eat ve
( f oot not e 16 cont nued) We nr ch' s v ew who cons der ed a
met aphor any semant c un t cont r ad ct ed by t s cont ext ("e n
Wor t n e nemkont er det er m n er t en Kont ext " , We nr ch 1967) .
deeper ayer s of our consc ousness ( st ud ed by t he doct or
Got t h f He nr ch Schuber t 1808, 1814) . I n Hungar an t he nk
bet ween n ght and dept h s t ght ened by t he phonet c s m ar -
t y of | n / e: | e: n/ ' n t he n ght ( of ) ' and m yn / me: | e: n/
' n t he dept h ( of )
1
, ' at t he bot t om ( of ) ' . Dept h s exp c t -
y nked w t h t he ( per sona ) n ght n t he poem:
S n ent ver godm es nemt ud| a ms,
hogy csndem | n m yen | a| ok gnek.
( And I st r ugg e down be ow, and no one may know
What cr es bur n n t he s ence of my n ght . )
At t he same t me, n ght and s ence ar e t he negat on of day and
of f e. The "bur n ng cr es" ar e ban shed nt o t he poet ' s n ght :
t hey ar e negat ed and r educed t o s ence.
Ther e s a f ur t her r eason wh ch compe s us t o nt er pr et
t he met aphor as a semant c movement . Th s movement , f or n-
st ance, t he cr oss- over movement , t he ch asmus we post u at ed n
t he met aphor of Ar pad Tt h, cou d have a symbo c va ue. The
ch asmat c nver s on m ght be cons der ed a dynam c abst r act
r epr esent at on of t he yr ca "p ot " of t he poem. The t heme of
t he wor k concer ns t he poet ' s d scont ent about t he n| ust ce of
h s pos t on n an ups de down wor d, wher e undeser v ng nobod-
es ar e exa t ed, and he, t he poet , s condemned t o hope ess
st r ugg es, he p essness and so at on. ; The ch asmus ant c pat es
t he change of pos t ons wh ch t he poet evokes n t he ast
st anza.
Such an nt er pr et at on of a concr et e met aphor s neces-
sar y sub| ect ve, I pr esent ed her e my per sona r ead ng of t he
met aphor wh ch pr obab y does not ent r e y co nc de w t h t he
nt er pr et at on of ot her Hungar an r eader s, s nce genu ne met a-
phor s cannot have soc a y agr eed upon mean ngs. Th s s a con-
sequence of t he open, unset nat ur e of met aphor .
I nf ant e sour ces of met aphor
The st r uct ur a char act er st cs of met aphor s have t he r
or g n n nf ant e ver ba and ment a act v t es, n t he same
way as t he f or ma f eat ur es of | okes may be t r aced back t o t he
ver ba and ment a or gan sat on of t he ch d.
Moment ar y cont r o ed r egr ess on pr oduc ng t he met aphor ,
however , may go back much f ur t her nt o t he ont ogenet c past
t han | okes do. The st r uct ur e of | okes p ayf u y r epr oduces
t he ver ba , sem ot ca and og ca b under s of t he 2- 5- year
o d ch d. The met aphor r est or es t he per od wh ch co nc des
w t h t he separ at on of t he se f and t he non- se f ( Fen che
1946, 46) . The met aphor c pr ocess s st ar t ed by t he r e| ect on
of a wor d and t s under y ng concept : by a k nd of vo unt ar y
aphas a. The poet must f r st become an n- f ans, a non- speaker ,
n or der t o pr oduce t he new wor d, t he new, dynam c concept .
The var ous t ypes of semant c t r ansf er s ( t r opes)
can a be t r aced back t o par t cu ar def c t s n t he ch d' s
cogn t ve f unct on ng wh ch ar e char act er st c of ear y st ages.
( Most of t he examp es pr ov ded be ong t o at er per ods, and
ar e on y der vat ves of t he or g na , supposed y r ea and t ot a
conf us ons. )
17
a) I dent f cat on of c ose y connect ed ob| ect s ( met onymy) :
( 53) H da ( 0, 10) t he daught er of C ar a and Gust av St er n used
t he wor d d dda ( der ved f r om t c- t ac) t o r ef er t o t he wat ch
and t he cha n of t he wat ch ( St er n K. w. 1928) .
( 54) St even ( 1 ; 6) ca ed auk ' ho e' t he keyho e as we as t he
key ( Oksaar 1970)
( 55) Eva ( 2; 1) po nt ed t o Gr an' dad' s spect ac es: Szeme Nagy-
papnak "Eyes of Gr an' dad' .
( 56) Laur ent ( 2; 6) want ed t o send t o h s gr andf at her a p ece
of t he cake he was eat ng, wh st he was st en ng t o h mon
t he t e ephone. H s f r st at t empt cons st ed of t r y ng t o put
t he cake nt o t he r ece ver t hr ough wh ch he was st en ng t o
gr andf at her ; but on f nd ng t hat n t h s way he cou d not
hear h m, he r ep aced t he r ece ver at h s ear , and pr oceeded
t o st ck t he cake nt o h s ot her ear . He appar ent y t hought
t hat t h s pr ocedur e was | ust as ef f ect ve as t he f r st one
( and t r ea y was) .
A t hough I r ef er t o t hese shor t com ngs of t he ch d us ng
t he wor d conf us on, c ear y, t h s t er mdoes not accur at e y
por t r ay t he comp ex t y of t he pr ocesses wh ch must be nvo ved
n t hese er r or s. Th s t hor ny pr ob emwh ch needs f ur t her e ab-
or at on emer ged n a d scuss on w t h Pet er ( 26; 8) .
71
b) Conf us on of t he cont ent and t he cont a ner ( met onymy) :
( 57) Eva (1 ; 10) not ced a ho e n her f at her ' s st ock ng:
/ uka/ a: b / Lukas ab ' Ho e n t he f oot ' . - S m ar y,
Edmond ( 3; 0) r ef er r ed t o h s f at her ' s f oot when he meant h s
s pper s: est cass e p ed de Papa ( Gr go r e ( 1947, 225) ) .
c) A par t of t he body s dent f ed w t h t he who e body ( syn-
ecdoche) :
( 58) Mot her ' s b g t oe showed t hr ough her s pper . Pet er ( 2; 7) :
Egy bcs van a badba ' Ther e s a man ( t . : an unc e) n
your f oot ' . 18
d) Conf us on of t he owner and h s pr oper t y ( met onymy) :
( 59) Eva ( 1; 4) on see ng mot her ' s mor n ng gown af t er she ef t :
/ an / / kukuc/ / t / / an / Any ' Mummy' kukucs ' peek- a- boo' t t
' her e' . 19
( 60) Dom n que ( 1; 7) po nt ng t o h s mot her ' s empt y car : Maman.
e) I dent f cat on of t he aut hor and h s wor k ( met onymy) :
( 61) Eva (6 year s o d) asked t o say whet her somet h ng was a ve
or not : "The dog?" - A ve. "The ger an um?" - A ve. "The book?"
- A ve. " Why?" - Because t he man who wr ot e t he book s a ve.
The "synecdoche" s comb ned w t h a "met onymy" ( conf us on of
f oot and s pper ) . The examp e s cont est ab e. The t oe was, of
cour se, not dent f ed w t h t he mot her , but cons der ed as a
sor t of L put an man. Thus, t he conf us on cou d be nt er -
pr et ed n t er ms of s m ar t y as we . Th s seems t o be n a-
gr eement w t h t he doubt s concer n ng t he f r equency of synecdoches
expr essed by Ruwet ( 1975) .
19
I t s not easy, and somet mes ar b t r ar y, t o d f f er ent at e be-
t ween t he d f f er ent k nds of cont gu t y conf us ons. Mot her ' s
mor n ng gown cou d be cons der ed as t he cont a ner of t he mot her
as we ; t he socks ( 57) as a pr oper t y. The r e evant d s-
t nct on bet ween d f f er ent t r opes and t he conf us ons made by
ch dr en seems t o be t he cont gu t y/ s m ar t y oppos t on
( | akobson and Ha e 19 56) .
f ) Conf us on of s m ar ob| ect s:
( 62) / mat a: | / Madr ' b r d' sa d Eva ( 1; 6) see ng a f y.
(6 3) I t t a nap" ' Her e s t he sun' , Pet er at 2; 2 on ook ng at
a whi te l i ght- bul b.
( 64) Eva ( 1; 8) asked f or a t oot hbr ush: / t seuza: t / Cer uzt
' Penc ( acc. ) ' .
g) Po ysemy, go ng f ar beyond t he m t s we ever meet n t he
speech of adu t s, seems t o be a ch d- anguage un ver sa ( Bh er
1929, _. and W. St er n 1929, Scup n 1907, Kaver na 1950, Knyer es 1927)
(6 5) Eva ( 1; 2) , st ar t ng f r om gomb ' but t on
1
, f or med a h gh y
var ab e one- wor d sent ence, bot h at t he eve of expr ess on -
/ momp/ -/ / bomp/ -/ omb/ -/ mompu/ et c. - and at t he eve of
mean ng: t cou d r ef er t o anyt h ng t hat was r ound and/ or cou d
be t aken nt o t he mout h ( among ot her t h ngs t o but t ons) . Dur ng
t he same per od she used t he wor d / powoc/ - / pobos/ -/ poboc/ f r om
dobz ' box' whi ch coul d r ef er t o boxes, t o t he bucket , t he r adi o
t o t he t ape- r ecor der , t o books, and occasi onal l y used t o
r ef er t o t he r ect angul ar waves cont ai ned i n Mar t i n J oos' book
Acoust i c phonet i cs.
( 66) Kar l Abr aham obser ved si mi l ar ver bal behavi our i n a t wo-
year ol d Ger man gi r l . She spent a gr eat deal of t i me at t he
cage of a canar y- bi r d cal l ed " Hans" . She al so r ef er r ed as Hans
t o f eat her s t he bi r d l ost , and l at er t o any f eat her ; t hen l abel -
l ed her Mot her ' s hat whi ch was ador ned wi t h f eat her s Hans, as
wel l as mot her ' s hai r and her own hai r , a sof t cushi on, f i nal l y
anyt hi ng sof t or pl easant t o t ouch became Hans ( Abr aham / 1923/
i n Wer ke I I , 197l ", 189- 193) .
I n f act , t he chi l d per cei ves f ami l i ar obj ect s i n l ess
f ami l i ar ones, emot i onal l y r el evant obj ect s i n emot i onal l y
neut r al ones, di sr egar di ng essent i al di st i nct i ve f eat ur es whi ch
do not concer n hi m at t hat t i me ( cf . Fer enczi / 1919/ , i n:
Baust ei ne I ( 1927, 103) , J ones / 1916/ ( 1961, 87- 144) ) .
Thus, t he f i r st one- wor d sent ences of chi l dr en appear t o
cr eat e a whol e ser i es of met aphor s. I n f act , met aphor gi ves
back some of t he l i ber t i es we f r eel y enj oyed i n t he ver bal
Par adi se l ost ; t hr ough i t we r et ur n t o an ear l y di f f use con-
cept f or mat i on gover ned by t he pl easur e pr i nci pl e. The met a-
phor i c pr ocess l ar gel y di spenses wi t h t he Di ngan- si ch ( Kant ) ,
t he essent i al f eat ur es of r eal obj ect s. The sol e concer n of
t he poet i s t he D ng- f r - m ch: t he ob| ect as t appear s t o h m
n a par t cu ar s t uat on, at a g ven moment . Consequent y,
HE I S ONLY J OKI NG 73
met aphor s show t he same amazi ng var i abi l i t y as t he f i r st one-
wor d sent ences. The same t er m can appl y t o a var i et y of obj ect s
( 70) , and t he same obj ect can be i nt er pr et ed i n hi ghl y di f f er -
ent ways ( 67, 68, 69) . Huguet ' s st udy of Vi ct or Hugo' s i mager y
demonst r at es t hat t he possi bi l i t i es of f er ed by met aphor i n de-
scr i bi ng obj ect s i n t er ms of a var i et y of ot her obj ect s ar e
al most l i mi t l ess, and compar e f avour abl y wi t h t he f i r st one-
wor d sent ences.
( 67) Wor ds nave been r epr esent ed by st ones ( Ri l ke, "Ei n Pr ophet " ) ,
pavi ngst ones ( Baudel ai r e, "Le sol ei l " ) , by wal l s ( Dyl on Thomas,
"Shut t oo i n a t ower of wor ds" ) , met al ( Apol l i nai r e, "L' assassi n")
dagger s ( Hei ne, "Di e Tendenz" ) , st ar s ( Apol l i nai r e, "Les f i an-
ai l l es") , st r awber r i es ( Dzsi da, "Pel yhes pi l l anat ok" ( Downy i n-
st ant s) ) , cl ot s of bl ood ( At t i l a J zsef , "da 5" ) , f i shes ( Vi gny
J
"Le mont des Ol i vi er s" ) , l i ons ( Ar pad Tt h, " Ber zsenyi " ) , bl ack
bi r ds ( Ri l ke, "Di e Sybi l l e" ) , war mbodi es ( I l l ys, "r i zet ben"
( Under ar r est ) ) , et c.
(6 8) Wi t hi n t he same poem of Pet f i t he soul t akes t he f or mof
a book, of an i r on r i ng, a col umn, a r ock, an angr y cl oud, and
t he pr ophet El i j ah ( "Ar ckpemmel " ( Wi t h my por t r ai t ) ) .
( 69) Law "i s t he sun" , "t he wi sdom of t he ol d" , t he "senses of
t he young" , "t he cl ot hes men wear " , "i s Good- mor ni ng and Good-
ni ght " i n Auden' s poem ( "Law") .
( 70) The wor d or concept of r r agr ance st ands f or memor i es ( i n
Hei ne' s "Der St r au ", Ar pd Tt h, "Or gona" ( Li l acs) ) , f or t hought
(i n Dyl an Thomas, "Li ght br eaks" ) , f or t i me (i n Symons' "Moder n
beaut y" ) , et c.
h) The chi l d i nt er pr et s "abst r act ", t hat i s, i nt el l ect ual , mor al ,
soci al phenomena by means of a per cept ual mappi ng.
( 71) I n her dr eam, Eva (9 year s ol d) met Mr s X i n _ t hough she
was v ng n A, and Mr s Y n A t hough she was v ng n B:
- O yan gr bt modt am (' I had such a cr ooked dr eam' ) .
( 72) Gust av L ndner ' s son ( 2; 2) was asked whet her h s mot her
was good. . "Not good, sour . " ( Wer ner 1933, 69) .
( 73) A 2; 9 year o d Hungar an boy who r ecent y r ece ved a
pr esent f r omh s gr an' ma sa d:
- des, p r os Nagymama ' Sweet , r ed Gr anny'
"Concr et e abst r act on" , per cept ona mapp ng of deas
sat sf es bot h t he r ea st c adapt ve needs and t he nst nc-
t ua needs by pr eser v ng t he cont act w t h per cept b e ob| ect s
( t hus y e d ng t o t he nst nct of gr asp ng, post u at ed by
Her mann 19 37) ,
74
) Synaest hes a, t he t r ansf er f r omone moda t y of per cept on
t o anot her , s espec a y f r equent n t he f r st year s of
anguage acqu s t on.
( 74) | o szaga van a cser esznynek, p r os szaga van
' The cher r y has a p easant odour , a r ed odour '
( Em 2; 1 ) .
( 75) "Na da mut e doch d e Augen auf machen, sonst we t e doch
n cht , was ch gesagt hab" ' Open your eyes or you won' t hear
what I amsay ng' ( Scup n 1910, 134) .
Pet er , at t he age of n ne, pr oposed a psycho og c t heor y
of synaest hes a.
( 76) He sa d spont aneous y one even ng:
"B ack s a bad co our , t s f r ght en ng, t he n gnt s
dar k. ( =Red s t he best co our , t has t o be sweet
( cf . 72. 73) ) . : Ye ow s ver y, ver y sour , " (he was not
r ef er r ng t o emons) .
Pet er ' s t heor y seems t o be qu t e r easonab e: sensor y
st mu t r ansm t t ed by d f f er ent sensor y or gans but r e at ed
t o t he same exper ence ar e nt er changeab e. Th s has been con-
f r med n nd v dua cases of synaest hes a wher e t was f ound
t hat t r ef ect ed r epr essed ear y t r aumat c exper ences ( Pf s-
t er ( 1912) , Hug- He mut h ( 1911) ) . Synaest hes a has been t r aced
back t o t he ear est exper ences of t he ch d a r eady by B euer
and Lehman ( 1881) .
| ) Pr o| ect on s t he ear est f or m of t he d scover y of t he
wor d ar ound us ( Fer encz / 1913/ n Baust e ne I ( 1927, 73) ) .
The an mat on of nan mat e ob| ect s, t he per son f cat on of
ob| ect , p ant s and an ma s ar e t he most consp cuous man f est a-
t ons of t he pr o| ect ve d scover y pr ocedur e.
( 77) The f at her : "Leave t now. Put down your t r umpet . "
Pet er ( 2; 9) : "E r r adt aK?" ( Have t hey got t r ed?)
( 78) Pet er ( 4; 1) : "That ' s f ne, b g pa r or pant s. I t may be
f our year s o d, | ust as myse f . No, I am f our year s o d_, but
t he br ef must be f ve year s o d, t ' s t oo b g f or me. "
An mat on of nan mat e ob| ect s may a so under e phob c
f ear of cer t a n ob| ect s.
( 79) At t he age of t hr ee year s Eva r eact ed w t h anx et y t o
t he s ght of an open b ack umbr e a p aced on t he f oor . Her
t t e br ot her , t wo year s at er , at t he same age, deve opped
a s m ar phob c f ear of t he same ob| ect . Eva, some f ve year s
at er , st r emember ed her f ear , and exp a ned t o her par ent s
t hat an open umbr e a r epr esent ed t he w de open mout h of a dev
75
or an ogr e. For Pet er , t was a wo f .
Ther e ar e no shar p bor der s bet ween t he per sona , sub-
| ect ve and t he r ea un ver se wh ch sur r ounds t he ch d.
( 80) Dom n que ( 5; 1) has an ot t s med a
"Maman, cout e mon or e e " ( ' Mummy, st en t o my ear ! ' )
( 81) The f at her : "Don' t you r emember Mr B, he used t o br ng
you choco at e?"
Pet er ( 3; 9) : "Now I r emember , but he does not have a head. "
( For f ur t her examp es, see Gr go r e (194 7, 2 36 f f . ) )
_) The met aphor changes t he wor d and t s d mens ons t o f t
t he ch d' s per spect ve, r egr ess ng t o a per od pr eced ng t he
st ab zat on of s ze const ancy. Her mann He mho t z ( 1856, 623)
r e at ed n one of h s ma| or wor ks t hat as a ch d ook ng
out of t he w ndow he be eved t hat t he peop e wa k ng n t he
st r eet wer e t ny puppet s, and r emember ed ask ng h s mot her t o
g ve h mt he chur ch t ower .
I n V ct or Hugo' s poems, accor d ng t o t he Reg st er of
Huguet ' s Les mt aphor es ( 1904- 1905 I , 15 f f . ) , t he sh p f ar away
on t he sea s a paper - bu t t oy- sh p, t he r oof becomes a hat ,
20
t he r ver a snake wh ch meander s n t he va ey; t he n ght
appear s as a b ack door on wh ch t he set t ng sun s a g ow ng
r ed keyho e ( Nu t s d' h ver I I ) . I n one of Heym' s poems ( "Pr n-
t emps" ) , t he f ar mer who st ands near by s a g ant ead ng t wo
g ant cows n f r ont of h m. I n one of h s ot her poems ("D e
b nden Fr auen" ) , t he b nd woman st abs her hand nt o t he sky.
S m ar y :
( 82) Or mo , bat eau per du. . .
Mo qu t r oua t e c e r ougeoyant comme un mur
( Now I , a boat ost . . .
I who p er ced t he sky r ed ke a wa )
( R mbaud, "Le bat eau vr e")
Respect ng V ct or Hugo' s gen us, Huguet g ves a qu t e d f f er -
ent exp anat on f or t he poet ' s opt ca us ons: Hugo was
such a gr eat man t hat a ob| ect s appear ed qu t e sma t o h m.
I n one of At t a | ozsef ' s poems t he f ne g ass of t he a r
s scr at ched by po nt ed br anches of t r ees ("T | szaka"
( "W nt er n ght ") ) . I n anot her one t he c ouds become war me der -
downs ("Dead count r y" ) .
St r uct ur e and f unct on of met aphor s
The deep r egr ess on mp ed by t he st r uct ur e of t he
met aphor t akes us back t o t he f or mat on of ego boundar es
when t he d v d ng wa separ at ng consc ous and unconsc ous
t hought was st per meab e. Th s may account f or t he par t a
uncover ng of unconsc ous symbo s: bet ween t he t own and t he
2 1
f ema e body:
( 83) I ch b n der Le b vo ausgehh t er Oua ,
I n me nen Achse n r ot es Feuer hngt .
(I amt he body f u of caver nous pa n,
Red fire hangs in my armpits)
t he andscape and t he woman' s body ( Baude a r e, "La gant e" ) ;
bet ween deat h and woman, deat h and t he mot her :
( 84) They ay neat y s de by s de,
W t h open eyes, t he one y or phans,
She who bor e t hem t her e she st ands,
The r r ut h ess mot her , deat h.
( Koszt o ny , "Egygy' nek" ( Na ve song) )
Unconsc ous r epr esent at ons may come t o t he sur f ace because
22
t h s s "on y t he sur f ace" , t he poet s on y | ok ng.
We know, however , t hat on y "sem - met aphor s" ( Br ook-
Rose 1958) cont a n bot h t he r ea ob| ect meant by t he poet
( t he "t enor " accor d ng t o R char d 19 36) and t he f ant ast c
ob| ect wh ch s subst t ut ed f or t he r ea one ( "veh c e" accor d-
ng t o R char d) . Even n t hat case t he t er t um compar at on s
( t he "base" f or R char d) s on y mp ed and may be ent r e y un-
consc ous. Thus, f or nst ance, t he h y andscape s den-
t f ed w t h t he f ema e body n Baude a r e' s "La gant e" . The
21
Cf . Ot t o Rank, UmSt dt e wer ben, . ( 1925, 158 f f . )
22
I at t empt ed t o out ne unconsc ous messages conveyed by
naet aphor n pr ev ous paper s ( Fonagy 1965a, 1965b) .
poet mag nes t hat he s s eep ng, car e ess, under t he h
of her br eat h:
( 85) Dor m r noncha emment ' ombr e de ses se ns,
Comme un hameau pa s b e au p ed d' une mont agne.
We may nf er t hat r emot e memor es of t he dua - un t y ( Dua -
e nhe t , cf . Her mann ( 1936) ) of t he ch d and t he mot her con-
st t ut e t he m ss ng nks bet ween nat ur e and t he f ema e body.
The nf er ence seems t o be suppor t ed by t he unusua d mens on
of t he f ema e body, t hough t h s r ema ns a pur e hypot hes s.
23
"Rea " met aphor s, . st at ement s cont a n ng on y t he ast
nk of a cha n of assoc at ons, t he " veh c e" , t he f ant ast c
ob| ect , eave even mor e r oom f or mor e or ess ar b t r ar y con-
| ect ur es ( cf . a so 52) .
( 86) Let us cons der one of t he most t r anspar ent poems of
Ma ar m, a so t aken f or an occas ona p ece, "The Fan of
Mademo se e Ma ar m" . 24
0 r eveuse, pour que | e p onge
Au pur d ce sans chem n,
Sache, par un subt mensonge,
Gar der mon a e dans t a ma n.
The Fan addr esses h s dr eamy f ema e pr opr et or ( r eveuse) , t he
poet ' s daught er , t o ho d t t ght by t s w ng. The dent f ca-
t on of t he f an w t h a b r d s f ac t at ed t hr ough t he ana ogy
bet ween gent y f ann ng and t he f ut t er of w ngs :
Une f r a cheur de cr puscu e
Te v ent chaque bat t ement
Dont e coup pr sonn er r ecu e
L' hor zon d cat ement .
The mag nar y b r d s he d capt ve, t hus h s ver t g nous f ght
br oaden ng t he hor zon s a so mag nar y.
Chr st ne Br ook- Rose ( 1958) cons der s exp c t dent f ca-
t ons of t ype "a s b" . Dan e e Bouver ot ( 1969) r est r ct s t he
t er m "met aphor " t o mages wh ch cont a n on y t he "veh c e".
I mages of t he t ype "a s b" , or " a, b") . e. equat ons and
appos t ons, ar e ca ed dent f cat ons, and ar e kept apar t .
For a det a ed ana ys s, see M chaud ( 1953) , Fonagy ( n pr e-
par at on) .
Ver t ge! vo c que f r ssonne
L' espace comme un gr and ba ser
Ou , f ou de na t r e pour per sonne
Ne peut | d r n s' apa ser .
Space t r emb es ke a gr eat k ss, t came nt o be ng f or
nobody, t cannot bur st , t cannot be appeased.
Sens- t u e par ad s f ar ouche
A ns qu' un r r e enseve
Se cou er du co n de t a bouche
Au f ond de ' unan me p .
The char m ng young ady ( "unt amed Par ad se" ) eans t he f an
aga nst her ps, and her aught er pour s nt o t he "unan mous
f o d" of t he f an.
Le scept r e des r vages r oses
St agnant s sur es so r s d' or ce ' est ,
Ce b anc vo f er me que t u poses
Cont r e e f eu d' un br ace et .
The young ady c oses now t he f an, st set aga nst her
ps, t he "r ose banks" , t hen she eans t he f an on her br ace-
et .
For Guy M chaud ( 1953, 119 f f . ) t he f an s at t he same
t me t he poem ( supposed t o be wr t t en on t he f an) , and t he
young g r , t he dr eamer , s t he poet h mse f , unw ng t o
g ve f r ee cour se t o poet c mag nat on (to et t he poemsoar
f r ee y) , " e pome se c t sur u - mme" ( op. c t . 120) , t he
poem f or ms a c osed c r cu t .
I n a br oader cont ext , w t h r ef er ence t o Ma ar m' s
ana ogous mages cont a ned n ot her poems, and on t he bas s
of unconsc ous symbo sm, r evea ed n dr eams and myt hs, ot her
r ead ngs ar e equa y poss b e. n P acet f ut Amor ' s w ng s
dent f ed w t h a f an. The t er ms que | e p onge au pur d ce
( I , 1- 2) , ver t ge, f r ssonne equa y f avor a sexua nt er -
pr et at on of t he f qht . p onge evokes at t he same t me t he
poem "P t r e cht " wher e t he over t er a y p unges
nt o t he eye of t he be oved, af t er hav ng t r ansf or med t he eye
nt o a ake. The t r ansf or mat on m ght have been f ac t at ed
by t he unconsc ous dent f cat on of t he eye and t he f ema e
79
gen t a s ( Fr eud, Ges. Wer ke I I / I I I , 364, Fer encz , "Augensym-
bo k" , I n: Baust e ne I I ( 1927, 264) Ta ar d ( 1944, 181 f f . ) ) .
The mag nar y, f ct t ous f ght cou d be nt er pr et ed n t h s
f r amewor k as mag nar y nt er cour se. Th s, of cour se, wou d end
a ver y concr et e and embar ass ng mean ng t o t he f r st st anza.
I n t he same f r ames of r ef er ence t he r vages r oses ( r ose
banks) cou d be nked w t h t he t r ange bouche p e et r ose
of "Une ngr esse" , t he euphem st c met aphor f or t he f ema e
gen t a s. But even f we ho d by t he f r st nt er pr et at on ( r v-
ages r oses : t he ps of t he young g r ) , once we adm t t he sym-
bo c mean ng of scept r e (a t yp ca pha c symbo ) , t he f r st
ne of t he ast st anza w by no means be qu t e nnocuous.
The unan me p seems t o be comp ement ar y t o scept r e, r epr esent -
ng, at t he same unconsc ous eve , t he f ema e gen t a s.
The met aphor , however , f r ee y mov ng bet ween t he d ver se
( or even cont r ad ct or y) r epr esent at ons, r ead y d sc a ms t he
e c t ed nt er pr et at ons. I n cont r ast t o dar ng, b at ant | okes,
met aphor s seemt o be mor e caut ous. The mor e unconsc ous, r e-
gr ess ve mat er a t hey cont a n, t he vaguer , t he haz er t he
mage becomes. I t s a most as f t her e ex st ed a k nd of homeo-
st as s/ a compensat or y mechan smwh ch ensur ed c ear r ep-
r esent at on f or nnocuous, t r v a cont ent , ; and a so ensur ed
amb gu t y and vagueness when unconsc ous, "danger ous" mat er a
was nvo ved. "Homeost as s" m ght be, however , an ar t f act of
t he ncr eas ng r o e p ayed by pr mar y mechan sm of t h nk ng
n met aphor s wh ch expr ess unconsc ous mat er a . The descent
t owar ds deeper eve s mposes a bar r er t o consc ous under -
st and ng of met aphor s.
Vagueness s nher ent n t he st r uct ur e of "r ea " met a-
phor , pr ec ud ng any r ef er ence t o mean ng or t o t he t h ng
meant . Consequent y, n some cases t s not ev dent whet her
a g ven expr ess on s t o be nt er pr et ed met aphor ca y or t aken
t er a y w t hout ook ng f or an under y ng mean ng.
( 87) Thus, Ma ar m' s sonnet , "Sur g de a cr oupe et du bond" ,
descr b ng a r oom, has been nt er pr et ed n d f f er ent ways.
The ver se- ne
Le pur vase d' aucun br euvage ( I I I , 1)
r ef er s t o a ust r e w t hout ght ("sans f eur ") accor d ng t o
Maur on ( 1950, 190, f . ) : t s a met aphor . Chasse( 1954, 13)
t h nks, however , t hat Le pur vase s not a met aphor but an empt y
vase. S m ar y,
Mo , sy phe de ce f r o d p af ond ( I I , 4)
s an mage f or M chaud ( 1953, 65) , t he cur ve descr bed by t he
vase r em n scent of a sy ph " mpa bab e gen e de ' a r ". Accor d ng
t o Chass ( 1954, 139) , t he poet compar es h mse f t o a sy ph
"mur e par es hommes dans un f r o d p af ond". Maur on ( 1950, 190) ,
however , sees a sy ph pa nt on t he ce ng.
Poet c mages ar e r egr ess ve bot h on t he eve of ex-
pr ess on and on t he eve of cont ent . On each eve t hey can
be mor e or ess deep y r egr ess ve. I f we g ve f u cr ed t t o
t he ngu st c f or m, a "r ea " met aphor pr esent ng on y t he
" veh c e" , t he "f ant ast c" or "de us ve" ob| ect , f or nst ance
t he f ema e body n t h nk ng of a t own ( 83) , can be cons der ed
as mor e deep y r egr ess ve t han an mp c t compar son wh ch
t akes t he f or mof a hypot het ca case of se f - decept on ( at -
shadzokti n Sanskr t poet cs) :
( 89) . . . e vo r on d r a t coup sr
Une p er r e de p us dans es p er r es got h ques.
( Musset , "Don Paez" , Par t I I )
or a compar son exp c t y st at ng t he s m ar t y of t wo
not obv ous y s m ar ob| ect s, r e at ng bot h by means of a
copu a such as ke, or a ver b such as r esemb e.
Ther e s of cour se no r ea conf us on bet ween phant asy
and r ea t y n t he poet ' s m nd, and t he "r egr ess veness" of
"r ea " met aphor s on y f or ma . Ther e s, however , a c ear
r e at onsh p bet ween t he f or ma r egr ess veness of mages, and
t he mor e or ess r egr ess ve semant c t r ends nher ent n t he
same mages. I compar ed, on t he bas s of Fr ench and Hungar an
poet r y of t he 19t h and 20t h cent ur y, t wo gr oups of mages,
on t he one hand "r ea " and "ha f " met aphor s ( cf . p. 20) ,
81
mp c t and exp c t compar sons on t he ot her , and I f ound
t hat mages mor e r at ona n st r uct ur e ( compar sons) ar e a so
ess r egr ess ve on t he eve of cont ent ( cf . F gur e 1) . Pr o| ec-
t ve ( aut st c) mages descr b ng an ma s as human be ngs, per -
son f y ng ob| ect s and deas ar e assoc at ed w t h t he f r st
gr oup of mages ( met aphor s) . Rat ona st r uct ur es ( compar sons)
e t her compar e peop e w t h peop e, or r educe mor e comp ex phe-
nomena t o ess comp ex ones : humans t o an ma s, v ng be ngs
t o nan mat e ob| ect s, t hus use t he compar son as a t oo of
ana ys s.
As we know, pur e y ver ba ( st r uct ur a ) f eat ur es ar e
f r equent y r emot vat ed n psychos s. The pat ent genu ne y
conf uses ob| ect s wh ch ar e dent ca on t he ver ba eve . Thus,
he s compe ed t o t ake poet c ver ba | ok ng ser ous y. A f e-
ma e pat ent of B eu er (1911 , 349) r epor t ed r ea anx et es about
be ng bur ned by t he f r e of ove.
The pat ent s r egr ess t o a per od wher e t he r at ona z ng spe of
r esemb es, ke, as f has not yet come nt o be ng. The r e-
d scover y of ke of t en mar ks a t ur n ng po nt n t he pr ocess
of r ecover y.
( 90) A pat ent of Wende Munc e suf f er ed f r om t he de us on
t hat kn ves wer e be ng dr ven nt o h s br a n. He a so f e t
anx et y because "peop e ooked down on h m" . Af t er mpr ovement
he was ab e t o add t he ber at or y as f .
The use of s m e nst ead of met aphor may be cons der ed a
s gn of mpr ovement , suggest s Munc e ( 1937) .
| oke- and and Met aphor a: a t ent at ve synt hes s
St r uct ur e, f unct on and cont ent ar e n per f ect har mony,
n met aphor , | ust as n | okes. A sudden r egr ess on t o t he age-
eve of t he 2- 5 year - o d ch d n | okes showst he wor d un-
d sgu sed, r evea s t he naked t r ut h. P ayf u d scar d ng of
og ca convent ons a ows us t o see t hr ough f a ac ous " se-
The r esu t s ar e d scussed n det a n Fnagy ( 1975 d) .
r ous" ar gument s and at t t udes sanct oned by t r ad t on. The
| oke cast s a shar p ght nt o dar k cor ner s, and dest r oys
abor ous y bu t se f - decept ve soc a const r uct s. The b-
er at ed aggr ess ve and sexua ener g es ar e used n a h gh y,
t hough nd r ect y, const r uct ve manner : f or t he negat on of t he
negat ve e ement s of our cu t ur e. "A | oke. . . s t he most soc a
of a t he ment a f unct ons t hat a m at a y e d of p easur e" ,
wr t es Fr eud (SE VI I I , 179) . "The | oke wor ks on y, as po nt ed
out by Mar y Doug as( 1968, 371) when t m r r or s soc a f or ms;
t ex st s by v r t ue of t s congr uence w t h soc a st r uct ur e" .
She cons der s | oke as an ant - r t e. The aut hor s ( Fr eud, Koest -
er , Fr y, M ner , | ohnson) r ght y cons der | oke as a saf et y
va ve. ( The cour t - | est er , t he k ng' s f oo was nv o ab e and
adm r ed, at t he same t me deep y desp sed: t he cour t cou d
not do w t hout h m, and t hey wer e ashamed of t he need of h m. )
The | oke- st r at egy t se f s essent a y soc a : t he | oke pr e-
supposes t he pr esence of a st ener who s t he one who dec des
whet her t he | oke- wor k has succeeded n t s t ask ( Fr eud, SE
VI I I , 143 f . ) . The | oke t e er s supposed t o w t hho d augh-
t er wa t ng f or h s par t ner ' s r eact on t o t he | oke. On y af t er
t he par t ner gave h s assent br eak ng nt o aught er can We en| oy
f r ee y t he | oke w t h a t s mp cat ons ( Fr eud op. c t . 204,
Re k ( 1929, 83 f f . ) ) .
The f unct ons and st r at eg es of t he met aphor ar e d f -
f er ent . The essent a t ask of t he | oke s t o expr ess f r ee y unex-
pr essab e t hought . The met aphor needs t o go much f ur t her ,
and t e us somet h ng we do not know, what has never been
ver ba zed bef or e. I n r e| ect ng t he convent ona t er m, t he poet
r emoves t he concept ua f r amewor k; he s nvaded by sensa-
t ons com ng f r om ' an unt amed, non- concept ua zed un ver se.
(9 1) Pet er at t he age of f ve dur ng an excur s on st ood on h s
head f or some seconds on t he s de of a h , and was ver y m-
pr essed by t he unusua s ght s t hat h s unusua post ur e ed
h mt o.
"Oh, t ' s r ea y beaut f u ! " he sa d.
83
St and ng on h s f eet aga n, he asked sur pr sed and
d sappo nt ed :
"Wher e has t he sea gone?"
He d scover ed somet h ng t hat was usua y denot ed and
concea ed by t he wor d "sky".
Pet er ' s except ona exper ence was due t o a gymnast c met a-
phor , a r ever sa . The wor d ar ound h m t ur ned ups de down
and became aga n per cept b e. Th s s exact y what t akes
p ace w t h n t he met aphor c pr ocess.
( 92) L' t her , cet ocan, s qu de et s b eu.
( V ct or Hugo, "Au bor d de a mer " )
(9 3) S m ar y, Keat s t r aces a t hor ough par a e bet ween t he
heaven y b ue and t he b ue of t he ocean, t he f e of heaven
and t he f e of wat er s ( B ue! . . . )
The genu ne met aphor a ways mp es a r eor gan sat on of our
un ver se ( B ack 1962) , t he pr oduct on of new mean ng ( Heynes
19 75) . Met aphor s t he most power f u t oo of t he poet c d s-
cover y pr ocess.
The poet ' s eye, n a f ne f r enzy r o ng,
Dot h g ance f r omheaven t o ear t h, f r omear t h t o heaven;
And, as mag nat on bod es f or t h
The f or ms of t h ngs unknown, t he poet ' s pen
Tur ns t hem t o shapes, and g ves t o a r y not h ng
A oca hab t at on and name.
( Shakespear e, "M dsummer - n ght ' s dr eam" , Act 5, scene 1)
The e det c, exp or at or y f unct on of met aphor account s f or
t he f act t hat met aphor gener a y co nc des w t h t he pr ed ca-
t ve e ement of a phr ase or sent ence ( Tab e 1) . I t s cen-
t er ed s gn f cant y mor e of t en on t he pr ed cat e t han on t he
sub| ect , on t he ad| ect ve, t han on t he qua f ed subst ant ve,
mor e of t en concent r at ed n t he adver b t han n t he spec f ed
ver b.
I n or der t o accomp sh t h s h gh y soc a r o e, t he
met aphor must accomp sh a st r at eg c r et r eat t o a pr e- soc a ,
aut st c st age of ment a deve opment . I n cont r ast w t h | oke-
st r at egy t he met aphor c pr ocess does not nvo ve t he pr esence
of t he st ener : t s a so t ar y game wh ch account s f or t he
vagueness nher ent n met aphor .
Mon di scour s est obscur par ceque j e sui s seul
( El uar a, "La vol ont e d' y voi r cl ai r )
The essent i al di f f er ences bet ween t he st r uct ur e of t he
j oke and t he met aphor i c pr ocess ar e made expl i ci t at t he l evel
of cont ent . What happens i n J oke- l and? Fabl es of t he 12t h and
13t h cent ur i es ( 21, 22, 23) coul d be r i ght l y consi der ed as
t he J oke- l and of t hei r t i me. Whi l e i n t he "r oman cour t oi s"
t he kni ght exposes hi msel f t o t he gr eat est danger s (he f i ght s
havi ng t he bel oved l ady' s shi r t t or ar mour ) , accept s year s of
r enouncement i n t he hope t hat t he l ady f or whose name he i s
f i ght i ng wi l l r ewar d hi mwi t h a smi l e. Whi l st i n t he wor l d of
f abl es t he woman i s seduced upon t he ver y gr ave of her husband
( aski ng her l over devout l y t o car ess her t o deat h) / 57%of
t he f abl es ar e about physi cal l ove wi t h st r ong emphasi s on
t echni cal det ai l s; t he l over i n 89%of t he above cases i s a
cl er gyman. 26%of t he f abl es cel ebr at e t he vi ct or y of vi o-
l ence .
Accept i ng t he met aphor i c f i ct i o, we gai n access i nt o
a dr eam- l and. I n Met aphor i a seeds of happi ness gr ow and bl os-
somr oses ( Pet f i , ' ' Bel l s of Eger " ) , moonshi ne changes i nt o
si l ver coi ns ( Koszt ol nyi , "Capr i ci ous passages about t he Moon" ) ,
"a bi g and si l ent snai l - shel l i s bui l t out of humi l i t y" ( Ar pad
Tt h, "Fr i nge of t he f or est " ) : ever yt hi ng i s changeabl e, i n-
const ant , i n t he maki ng, onl y submi t t ed t o t he l aws of f ant asy.
Chi l dr en' s met aphor s
"Ther e i s subst ant i al evi dence ( t hat ) . . . chi l dr en do
not use met aphor s" , wr i t es Hel mer ( 1972, 9 f . ) , at t r i but i ng
chi l dr en' s "met aphor s" t o anachr oni st i c i nt er pr et at i on of
adul t s. He st at es f ur t her t hat "no per son wi t hout capaci t y
f or met al anguage can be sai d t o use met aphor . . . Met aphor i s an
exampl e of met al i ngual compet ence" ( op. ci t . 12) .
Chi l dr en cer t ai nl y have no met al i ngui st i c compet ence of
met aphor j ust as t hey possess no met al i ngui st i c compet ence of
synt act i c r ul es whi ch t hey, of cour se, f ul l y mast er . We must
make a di st i nct i on bet ween pr act i cal and t heor et i cal compe-
HE I S ONLY J OKI NG
85
t ence i n t he use of met aphor .
The exper i ment s of Asch and Ner l ove ( 1960) seemt o i n-
di cat e t hat chi l dr en appl y adj ect i ves such as sweet ,
har d, col d , f i r st t o obj ect s, and even when t hey appl y t hem
t o peopl e t he wor ds have a separ at e meani ng; t he chi l dr en
cannot expl ai n t he connect i on. Revi ewi ng t hi s paper , Or t ony
Reynol ds and Ar t er ( 1978, 926) r i ght l y suggest t hat t hi s
does not j ust i f y t he concl usi on t hat t he met aphor was not un-
der st ood.
What does seem cer t ai n, however , i s t hat chi l dr en easi l y
answer nonsensi cal quest i ons suggest ed by t he met aphor i c t er -
mi nol ogy of anci ent and moder n phonet i cs such as "whi ch of
t he t wo sounds i s dar ker , / i / or / u/ ?" "Whi ch of t he t wo sounds
i s mor e humi d, t he / n/ or t he / / ?" "Whi ch of t he t wo sounds i s
st r onger , / 1/ or / r / ?" Exper i ment s car r i ed out wi t h 25 chi l dr en
under school age show t hat chi l dr en ar e sur pr i si ngl y consi st ent
i n t hei r answer s t o t hese quest i ons ( cf . t he r esul t s cont ai ned
and i nt er pr et ed i n an ear l i er st udy ( Fonagy 1963) ) . Dur i ng an
i nf or mal i nqui r y, one of t he subj ect s, ___, whom I asked whet her
t he sound / / has f a r or b acK na r , answer ed unhes t at -
ng y but somewhat ast on shed, t hat / / was b ond, add ng:
"Why do you ask? You d dn' t know?" Her quest on seems t o mean
t hat she f ound my quest on as nat ur a as f I had asked whet her
her do ' s ha r was b ond or b ack; as f t he quest on d d
not mp y a t r ansf er of mean ng, t he nf r act on of a semant c
r u e. We m ght be t empt ed t o nf er t hat t he ch dr en' s answer s
wer e based on pr mar y conf us on, and not on t he met aphor r e-
p cat ng t he conf us on on a ver ba | oke eve . On a subsequent
occas on I put a d r ect quest on concer n ng ar t cu at or y f ea-
t ur es t o Eva: "I s t he / / n f r ont or beh nd?" She answer ed
aga n pr ompt y: "I n f r ont " , and added somewhat at er : "I sa d
this | ust as I sa d f a r ' ha r ed' ". Her ast comment nd cat ed
that she m ght have f e t t hat t her e was a d f f er ence bet ween
a d r ect quest on and a met aphor c one. S nce we ack ex-
per ment a ev dence concer n ng t he semant c oper at ons wh ch
may under e t he ch d' s answer s t o met aphor c quest ons, et
us suppose t hat t hese answer s ar e based on conf us on n a
f r st per od, f o owed by a gr adua y ncr eas ng d st nct on
bet ween t he ass gnment of pr oper ( d r ect ) and mpr oper ( n-
d r ect ) qua t es.
Th s pr obab y ho ds f or t he case of t he cr eat ve met a-
phor s of t he ch dr en a r eady c t ed ( 53- 55, 62- 66) and con-
s der ed as r ef ect ng pr mar y conf us on (see, however , f n. 17) .
I n some ot her examp es t he conf us on s cer t a n y appar ent .
(9 4) Pet er ( 2; 3) ooked at t he phot o of h mhe f ound n
Gr an' dad' s wa et :
- Pet er t kr be ' Pet er n ( t he) m r r or ' .
(9 5) Pet er , at t he same age, t ur n ng pages and ook ng f or
p ct ur es n t he book:
"Bet k sznak" ' ( The) et t er s ( ar e) sw mm ng' .
( 96) Eva ( 1; 9) at unch, ook ng at t he st uf f ngs, sa d:
"Ez s hgo y" ' Th s s a so a snow- ba ' .
(9 7) Eva ( 1; 8) sucks her t humb, augh ng:
"Eszemu| | amat " ' I eat my f nger ' .
( 98) B a ( 4; 0) , by now a ead ng aut hor t y n a f e d of ex-
per ment a psycho ogy, t r ed t o exp a n t o h s f at her t hat
h s f oot went t o s eep, s nce he d d not know t he met aphor
adu t s use, he had t o nvent a new one:
"I have soda wat er n my f oot . "
Eva at t he age of t wo sever a t mes t ast ed st uf f ng as we
as f r esh snow; she cou d not poss b y conf use t he st uf f ng
w t h a snow- ba ( 96) , nor cou d Pet er conf ound a p ece of
phot ogr aph c paper w t h a m r r or ( 94) . Eva wou d not have
aughed at t he dea t hat she was r ea y swa ow ng her f n-
ger s. Yet , anot her ch d' s met aphor s ar e somet mes cor r ect ed
or r ef used ( aughed at ) by o der ch dr en.
( 99) A t hr ee- year o d g r was ook ng at a phot o of her
dead aunt ;
"I s she st a ve?"
"No, she does not ve anymor e. "
"She d ed nt o t he p ct ur e. " ( Be eha t a kpbe. )
Eva ( seven year s o d) st ens t o t he st or y and comment s augh-
ng:
"L t t e f oo , one d es nt o a cof f n, not nt o a p c-
t ur e . "
87
Chi l dr en seemt o have easi er access t o hi dden anal ogi es
( unconsci ous l i nks) bet ween di f f er ent obj ect s.
( 100) Pet er ( 6; 0) pl ayi ng wi t h hi s si st er :
- The l ocomot i ve i s Daddy. The coach i s Mummy.
The l or r y, t he cyl i nder , t he ambul ance ar e t he
chi l dr en, t hey ar e boys.
Eva ( 8; 3) :
- You l i t t l e si l l y t hi ng, t he ambul ance i s a gi r l . And
t hi s i s cor r ect at t he l evel of unconsci ous dr eam symbol i sm.
Language i s j oki ng
Chi l dr en' s met aphor s such as (9 4- 9 8) ar e, i n t er ms of
cl assi cal r het or i c, exampl es of chat acr esi s, t hat i s, t hey ar e
t r ansf er s ex i nopi a, due t o ver bal penur y. "I n t he absence of
a pr oper t er m one t akes t he near est one" ("non habent i bus nomen
suum accomodat quod i n pr oxi mo est " , Qui nt i l i an 8, 6, 34) . I n
ot her wor ds, met aphor s i nvent ed by chi l dr en have not aest het i c
pr et ent i ons ( do not bel ong t o t he or nat us) , but ar e cl ose-
l y r el at ed t o sci ent i f i c met aphor s, t he pr i nci pl e t ool s of
sci ent i f i c r esear ch at an ear l y st age of i t s devel opment . The
chi l d as wel l as t he sci ent i st t r i es t o consol i dat e a vague
not i on by means of an i mpr oper t er m, or , at an ear l i er phase,
t o appr ehend by means of t he met aphor i c pr ocess a st i l l l ack-
i ng not i on. Gr ammar i ans wi t hout consci ous knowl edge t he
ar t i cul at or y f eat ur es of aspi r at ed pl osi ves cal l ed t hem"r ough"
"hai r y" ( , and t he unaspi r at ed ones " smoot h" , "chauve"
; t hey qual i f i ed pal at al consonant s as "moi st ened" wi t h-
out knowi ng t hat t he sur f ace of cont act bet ween t ongue and
pal at e ( t wo moi st ened bodi es) i s consi der abl y l ar ger i n pr o-
nounci ng / c/ t han / t / , ' t han d, t han / n/ .
Let us add t hat i n t hi s r espect genui ne poet i c t r ansf er s
do not di f f er f r om sci ent i f i c met aphor s: t he poet al so at t empt s
t o gr asp a new, unknown aspect of even t he ver y f ami l i ar ob-
j ect s such as l ady' s hai r , a f l ower , or a l amp. Semant i c t r ans-
f er i s t he onl y vehi cl e whi ch can t ake us beyond consci ous
knowl edge. Met aphor coul d be compar ed t o t he r ope t hat t he
I nd an mag c an t hr ows up nt o t he a r . The r ope seems f r m y
at t ached t o an nv s b e ob| ect , and t he mag c an can now
c mb up t he r ope and r each t .
The m shand ng of anguage by means of | okes and met a-
phor s cannot be r egar ded as somet h ng mposed upon t he an-
guage f r om t he out s de; t he f or ces t hat t r ansf or m anguage
or g nat e w t h n anguage. Th s, of cour se, s a par adox. Lan-
guage s on y | ok ng. How can we conce ve of a gr ammar wh ch
gener at es sent ences t hat ar e n cont r ad ct on t o t he r u es
of t he same gr ammar ? Th s s, however , a par adox gover n ng
ngu st c change, and ngu st c and ment a evo ut on.
Recent cont r over s es concer n ng t he pr nc p es of a
ngu st c ana ys s of t he met aphor r evo ve ar ound cont r a-
d ct ons wh ch ar e most ke y nher ent n t he met aphor c pr o-
cess, Ar e met aphor s "r u e gu des" or ar e t hey r u e br eak ng?
Goodman ( 1968) , who r a sed t he quest on, st at es t hat t he met aphor
s not r r egu ar , no mor e t han a game of poker s, when one of
t he gamb er s has f our aces ( op. c t . He mer ( 1972) ) .
The quest on s not t hat easy t o answer . Dr ange ( 1966)
cons der s met aphor an unt h nkab e pr opos t on. B cker -
t on ( 1969) r ep ed t hat s nce such unt h nkab e phenomena suc-
ceed n get t ng nt o t he anguage, Dr ange' s t heor y of unt h nk-
ab e pr opos t ons s unt h nkab e. B cker t on def ned met aphor
as an ext ens on of t he syst emof at t r but e ass gnment . Such
a semant c ext ens on s on y poss b e, accor d ng t o t he aut hor ,
on t he bas s of spec f c at t r but es ass gned f a r y ar b t r ar -
y t o a par t cu ar s gn. For examp e, t he at t r but e ' har ness'
at t ached t o ' r on' mar ks t he wor d as pot ent a met aphor aa
g ves eave t o ' r on w ' . I n a ot her cases, t he ext ens on
wou d be s mp y dev ant ( f or nst ance, n t he case of a st ee
w ) .
Mat t hews ( 1971) cons der s B cker t on' s ar gument c r cu ar ,
s nce our | udgement of t he mar kedness of r on s based on met a-
phor c expr ess ons such as ' r on w ' .
Accor d ng t o Mat t hews, t he pr ob emof met aphor can be so ved
w t h n t he f r amewor k of gener at ve gr ammar ; "t he pr esence of
a se ect ona r est r ct on v o at on s. . . a necessar y and
suf f c ent cond t on f or d st ngu sh ng met aphor f r omnon-
met aphor " as f ar as t he sent ence was nt ended t o be mean ng-
f u ( op. c t . 242) .
Pr ce ( 1974) , n a cr t ca paper on Mat t hews' cr t ca
appr a sa , wonder s whet her t he speaker ' s nt ent on cou d be
cons der ed a suf f c ent cond t on f or d st ngu sh ng t he met a-
phor f r om agr ammat ca dev ance. He a so expr essed doubt about
t he met aphor be ng successf u y t r eat ed n a gr ammat ca f r ame-
wor k.
I n h s paper on t he degr ees of gr ammat ca ness ( 1962,
r epr nt ed 19 65) Chomsky cons der ed met aphor as sem - gr ammat -
ca . Genu ne met aphor pr esupposes a ngu st c cr eat v t y
wh ch changes t he set of gr ammat ca r u es, as n t he case of
ana og c changes ( Chomsky 1967, 22) . The hear er has t o mpose
h s nt er pr et at on on met aphor c st at ement s, wher eas t her e
s no quest on of such an nt er pr et at on n t he case of we -
f or med sent ences ( Chomsky ( 1965, 112) ) .
Bot h Mat t hews ( 1971) and Lehmann Met apher n (19 75) see n
met aphor an examp e of ngu st c cr eat v t y; accor d ng t o
Mat t hews, met aphor s based on t he "ext ens on of t he syst emof
at t r but e ass gnment " wh ch s f undament a y equ va ent t o
Lehmann' s "f eat ur e de et on" ( Mer kma t gung, op. c t . 105) .
For Ger man, Fr ench or Hungar an speaker s ' har dness' mar ks
st ee as we as r on because vo ont e d' ac er , st h er ner
W e, ac os akar at ar e by now convent ona met aphor s, pr ob-
ab y under t he mpact of genu ne poet c or t er ar y met aphor s
( based on nat ur a , encyc oped c "mar kedness" of st ee and r on
n any anguage) .
Feat ur e de et on, n t a y based on nd v dua compet ence,
s "t he st ar t ng po nt and t he veh c e of r u e- t r ansgr ess on
dynam cs nher ent t o anguage" ( "Ausgangspunkt und Tr ger der
r ege ber schr e t enden Dynam k der Spr ache" , oc. c t . ) . I nd -
v dua compet ence, adds Lehmann, s n t s t ur n a r ef ect on
of t he soc a y- bound ngu st c syst em ( "Ref ex des soz a en
Syst ems der Spr ache" ( oc. c t . ) .
The ngu st c | oke under y ng t he par adox ca st at e-
ment t hat met aphor s a ngu st c r u e about t r ansgr ess ons
of ngu st c r u es ar ses out of t he doub e mean ng of an-
guage ( or Ger man Spr ache) , denot ng bot h t he concept s wh ch
wer e car ef u y d st ngu shed by Saussur e n h s Cour s de n-
gu st que gnr a e ( / 1916/ 1976, 112) : angue and angage.
Langage compr ses bot h t he ngu st c syst em ( angue) and
speech act v t y ( par o e) . Ver ba per f or mance s gover ned, on
t he one hand, by t he r u es const t ut ng t he ngu st c syst em,
and on t he ot her , by anot her set of r u es wh ch t r ansf or m
t he pr oduct s gener at ed by t he angue, or t he gr ammar ( accor d-
ng t o t he gener at ve t r ansf or mat ona concept ua f r amewor k) .
Th s at t er set of r u es oper at es on t he same eve s as n-
gu st c r u es but d f f er s essent a y f r om t hese n d f f er ent
r espect s. The r u es of t he t r ansf or mer ar e " par as t ca " : t hey
app y t o sent ences gener at ed by t he gr ammar ( angue) . They
d st or t t he gr ammat ca sent ences on t he phonet c, synt act c
and ex ca eve s accor d ng t o par a- ngu st c t r ansf or mat on
27
r u es. The gener at or of mean ngf u d st or t ons s nked t o
t he gr ammar n t wo ways: ( a) t oper at es, as a r eady ment oned,
on sent ences gener at ed by t he gr ammar , and ( b) d st or t ons,
when t hey ar e f r equent y r ecur r ng, ar e f ed back t o t he gr am-
mar . Consequent y, t he gr ammar st ar t s t o pr oduce t he d st or -
t ons wh ch w no onger be per ce ved as "sem - gr ammat ca "
dev ances.
I have at t empt ed t o descr be t hese r u es n pr ev ous paper s
( Fnagy ( 1971b, 1978) ) .
D st or t on s on y a spec a , ext r eme case of second-
ar y encod ng n speech. The ngu st c syst em eaves a cer -
t a n mar g n of f r eedom (as n f act a b o og c syst ems do)
n t he r ea sat on of ngu st c un t s. Let us t h nk of t he
ext r eme var et y of concr et e speech sounds r epr esent ng t he
same phoneme. Ther e s a cer t a n p ay w t h n t he ngu st c
syst em. I t s wor t hw e not ng t hat n d f f er ent anguages
t he wor d p ay denot es bot h a ' par t of mechan sm hav ng f r ee
movement ' and ' amus ng onese f ' or ' emp oy ng onese f n a
game' ( Conc se Oxf or d D ct onar y ( 1951) ) w t h a poss b e
met aphor c ext ens on of "sexua game" .
I t s common exper ence t hat non- ngu st c ver ba
commun cat on w t h n t he mar g ns ef t f r ee by ngu st c
29
r u es s mor e p easur ab e t han st r ct obed ence t o n-
gu st c r u es. Ver ba act v t es such as expr ess ve vowe
Hu z nga ( 1938) cons der s t he pr nc pa char act er st cs
of p ay: f r ee act v t y st and ng out s de or d nar y f e, t he
ber t y of cho ce, ndependent of t he st r ugg e f or f e, a
pecu ar or der r e gn ng ns de of t he p aygr ound, t he char ac-
t er of f ct on, vo unt ar y accept ed us on. S mu t aneous
shades of mean ng of po ysem c wor ds as we as et ymo og es
r evea t he r e at onsh p bet ween p ay ng and | ok ng: Lat n
udus ' p ay ng, mock ng' ; Hebr ew s- h- q ' t o p ay, t o augh' ;
Ar ab c a' ba ' p ay ng, t eas ng' ; and bet ween p ay ng and
ove mak ng: Sanscr t kr dat ' t o p ay, t o copu at e' , A gon-
qu n koan ' t o p ay, t o make ove' ; O d H gh Ger man e kan
' t o p ay' cor r espond ng t o Swed sh eka ' coup ng n b r ds' .
29
I pr ef er t o r est r ct t he t er m ' ngu st c' t o what s det er -
m ned by t he angue, wh st ' ver ba ' may cover a br oader ar ea,
compr s ng a anguage ( angage) phenomena, nc ud ng non-
convent ona sh f t s of st r ess, agr . ammat ca pauses, genu ne
t r ansf er s, et c.
92
l engt heni ng, expr essi ve shi f t of st r ess, expr essi ve change
of wor d- or der , "mi shandl i ng" of l anguage i n j okes and genui ne
l exi cal t r ansf er s, al l f i t i nt o t he cat egor y of "ver bal pl ay
wi t hi n t he l i ngui st i c l i mi t s" . The quest i on ar i ses : why i s
i t mor e r ewar di ng t o f ol l ow t he r ul es r ei gni ng on t he
"pl aygr ound" t han t hose const i t ut i ng t he domi nant l i ngui st i c
syst em?
The r easons ar e mul t i pl e and di ver se.
The secondar y message i s cr eat ed t hr ough t he meani ng-
f ul modul at i on or di st or t i on of t he pr i mar y message gener at ed
by t he gr ammar . Thi s secondar y message i s super i mposed upon
t he pr i mar y message, and i s per cei ved as i t s r eal i sat i on, as
one of t he possi bl e ways of pr ovi di ng t he abst r act uni t , pho-
neme, wor d or sent ence. Thus, f or i nst ance, a l ar yngeal st op
pr ecedi ng a vowel (i n l anguages havi ng no l ar yngeal st op pho-
nemes) i s i nt er pr et ed as manner of pr onounci ng t he vowel whi ch
31
r ef l ect s a def i ni t e at t i t ude ( f i r mness, aggr essi vi t y) . Thus,
expr essi ve t r ansf or mat i on necessar i l y i mpl i es condensat i on of
di f f er ent messages, si nce t he pr i mar y message and t he second-
ar y "st yl i st i c" message ar e i nt egr at ed i nt o one act of commu-
ni cat i on. I t saves ment al expendi t ur e.
The t er m ' modul at i on' shoul d cover choi ces made wi t hi n
t he mar gi ns l ef t f r ee by t he l i ngui st i c syst em ( l angue) , t he
t er m ' di st or t i on' t he choi ces whi ch t r ansgr ess t he l i n-
gui st i c r ul es. Bot h modul at i on and di st or t i on ar e gover ned by
t he same r ul es const i t ut i ng t he syst em of secondar y encodi ng,
t he modul at or or di st or t er . The t er m ' modul at or ' i s mor e appr o-
pr i at e, si nce i t may cover bot h modul at i ons and di st or t i ons.
31
I at t empt ed t o out l i ne t he mechani sm of "st yl i st i c encodi ng"
( Fnagy ( 1964, 1971d) ) and t he nat ur e of t he messages conveyed
by secondar y encodi ng ( Fnagy ( 1971b, 1970, 1971a) ) e sewher e.
93
The handl i ng of a "nat ur al " code consi st i ng of mot i -
vat ed r ul es , based on t he i somor phi sm of expr essi on ( si gni f i -
cans) and cont ent ( si gni f i cat um) i s easi er , r equi r es l ess
ment al ener gy. For i nst ance, t he r ul es gover ni ng Engl i sh wor d-
st r ess ( cf . Chomsky and Hal l e ( 1968) , Hal l e and Keyser ( 1971) ,
Vander sl i ce and Ladef oged ( 1971) , Li eber man and Pr i ce ( 1977) ,
Ki par sky ( 1977) , Gui er r e ( 1979) ar e l ess easy t o memor i ze t han
i somor phi c r ul es such as "t he mor e i nt ense t he emot i on, t he
mor e i nt ense t he st r ess" . Rul es gover ni ng wor d- or der i n a
gi ven l anguage ar e l ess easy t o memor i ze t han i somor phi c r ul es
such as "t o expr ess i mpat i ence l et t he mor e i mpor t ant par t of
t he message pr ecede t he l ess i mpor t ant one" .
At t he same t i me, i somor phi c, mot i vat ed r ul es ar e cl oser
t o r eal act i vi t y t han ar bi t r ar y ones. Thus, f or i nst ance,
"mi shandl i ng of l anguage" by means of changes i n wor d or der
( t ear i ng t he sent ence i nt o pi eces) by "di st or t i ng" wor ds, by
i nf r i ngi ng, "vi ol at i ng" gr ammat i cal r ul es i s mor e di r ect l y
r el at ed t o aggr essi ve behavi our , hence mor e r el i evi ng t han a
si mpl e st at ement such as "I amver y angr y". The ver bal t r ans-
f or mat i on of an opponent i nt o an ass, a swi ne i s r emi ni scent
of Kyr ke' s magi c ( t he t r ansf or mat i on of t he compani ons of
Odysseus i nt o ani mal s) , and hence mor e sat i sf act or y t han a be-
l i t t l ement expr essed by means of pr i mar y messages ( "You' re
not i nt el l i gent " , "You' r e i mmor al " ) .
The r ul es of secondar y encodi ng can be r egar ded as t he
3 2
vest i ges of a pr e- l i ngui st i c syst em of communi cat i on.
As we saw above, ver bal oper at i ons we encount er i n met aphor s
and j okes appear ed t o be demot i vat ed er r or s. Thi s was par t i cu-
l ar l y appar ent i n t he case of j okes f al l i ng i nt o t he cat ego-
r i es of cl umsy handl i ng of l anguage ( 2c, 3, 4, 6, 7) , semi ot i c
bl under s ( 13, 14) , l ogi cal er r or s ( 15- 18) . Met aphor s r epl i cat e
32
I have out l i ned t ni s hypot hesi s i n pr evi ous paper s ( especi al l y
i n Fonagy ( 1978) ) .
94
even mor e basi c ver bal and ment al i nadequaci es: l oss of wor ds
and concept s, conf usi on of cont i guous obj ect s ( met onymi es) of
si mi l ar phenomena ( met aphor 67- 70) , l ack of si ze- const ancy,
per soni f i cat i on of i nani mat e obj ect s. The r evi vi ng of pal eo-
l ogi cal ( Ar i et i ( 1971) ) , i nf ant i l e ment al mechani sm, domi nat ed
by t he pl easur e pr i nci pl e account s f or t he gr eat at t r act i ve
f or ce of j okes and met aphor s, and, mor e gener al l y, of
al l f or ms of ver bal pl ay gover ned by t he modi f i er - syst em.
Language coul d di spense wi t h j okes - t hough t he hi gh
number of changes of meani ng or i gi nat i ng i n j okes show t hei r
32
i mpor t ance i n ver bal i nt er act i on - but i t coul d by no means
di spense wi t h met aphor . The l i ngui st i c r el evance of met aphor
has been r epeat edl y st at ed i n t he cour se of r ecent debat es on
met aphor . "A semant i c t heor y must account f or t he pr ocess of
met aphor i cal i nvent i on" ( Bol i nger 1965) . "Any psychol i ngui st i c
t heor y t hat does not handl e met aphor i s i ncompl et e, and any
t hat cannot handl e met aphor i s i nadequat e" ( Or t hony, Reynol d,
32
The vocabul ar y of any l anguage i s a deposi t or y of j okes and met -
aphor s. Pr obabl y t he ol dest j oke we can r econst r uct i s i mpl i ci t l y
cont ai ned i n t he wor d head, Ger man Haupt , Lat i n caput : i t s or i g-
i nal meani ng was pr obabl y ' pot , vessel ' i n t he I ndo- Eur opean di a-
l ect s spoken some 5000- 6000 year s ago ( dat e of t he j oke) , ( Wal de-
Hof mann ( 1938) ) . I t was pr esumabl y not t he f i r st , and cer t ai nl y
not t he l ast t i me t hat t he head of a human bei ng was di scour t ous-
l y compar ed t o a pot or a cup. A si mi l ar j oke was r epeat ed by
Ger man speaker s wi t h some knowl edge of Lat i n who compar ed t he
head of t he par t ner or of a t hi r d per son t o a cup, Lat i n cupa,
Ger man Kopf , bet ween t he 1st and t he 5t h cent ur y A. D. , af t er
Lat i n / u/ changed t o / o/ and bef or e Ger mani c / p/ changed t o
/ pf / . - Let us add t hat l anguage can st or e j okes based on met -
aphor .
95
and Ar t er ( 1978) ) .
Tr ansf er of meani ng i s t he pr i nci pal means of concept ual
r eor gani sat i on on bot h t he l exi cal and t he gr ammat i cal l evel s.
Such a r eor gani sat i on or i gi nat es f r ompl ayf ul , st r at egi c ment al
r egr essi ons. The r ecur r ent met aphor i c excur si ons, r egi st er ed
by t he gr ammar , const i t ut e t he semant i c st r uct ur e of l exi cal
and gr ammat i cal si gns. Semant i c st r uct ur e r ecapi t ul at es t he
33
concept ual evol ut i on due t o cont r ol l ed r egr essi ons. The
st at ement t hat "met aphor i cal meani ngs can no mor e be l i st ed
i n a di ct i onar y t han sent ences" ( Cohen and Mar gal i t ( 1970, 471) )
hol ds onl y f or genui ne met aphor s whi ch cannot and must not be
pr edi ct ed. The i nt egr at i on of r ecur r ent l exi cal and gr ammat i cal
t r ansf er s i s, however , of vi t al i nt er est f or l anguage devel op-
ment . The "r esi dual vagueness" of wor ds ( op. ci t . 484) i s due
bot h t o t he "i nf i ni t e pot ent i al f or new met aphor s" ( op. ci t .
471) and t he hi ghl y compl ex semant i c st r uct ur e of l exi cal and
gr ammat i cal si gns due t o pr ecedi ng t r ansf er s i nt egr at ed i nt o
l anguage ( l angue) .
Language of f er s st i l l ot her exampl es of poet i c r esi dues,
pl ai nl y j ust i f yi ng Emerson' s char act er i sat i on of l anguage as
"f ossi l poet r y". Abst r act nouns, f or i nst ance, ar e pot ent i al
al l egor i es, t he gr ammat i cal cat egor y of abst r act nouns such
as happi ness, dear , super - ego i s a cont ai ner of demot i vat ed,
ossi f i ed myt hs. Poet i c or di dact i c al l egor i es, schi zophr eni c
del usi ons, phobi c f ear s of per soni f i ed qual i t i es ( 101) ar e
occasi onal , i nf ant i l e or pat hol ogi cal r emot i vat i ons of ant i -
quat ed, demot i vat ed mi sconcept i ons i nt egr at ed i nt o l anguage
whi ch coul d not di spense wi t h such cat egor i es.
33
Thus, f or i nst ance, t he pol ysemy of possessi ve const r uc-
t i ons i n Engl i sh, Fr ench, Ger man, Hungar i an, and Tur ki sh can be
i nt er pr et ed i n t er ms of r esi dual ef f ect s ( "pr eci pi t at i ons")
of successi ve gr ammat i cal met aphor s ( Fnagy ( 1975a) ) .
( 101) Anna (2 year s ol d) di scover ed t he wor d and concept of
dar kness :
"Dar kness comes. Don' t come, Dar kness! I sai d ' don' t
come, Dai kness! ' Mummy she sees Dar kness. "
Anna di d not know yet t hat l anguage i s onl y j oki ng. I n one
way or t he ot her adul t s t oo r i sk bei ng t aken i n by l anguage,
t hat i s by pal eol ogi cal t hi nki ng, hypost asi s, hi dden met aphor s,
doubl e meani ng i nher ent i n l anguage. Locke war ned us f r omsuch
an "abuse of wor ds" ( 1924, I I I , ) , ot her phi l osopher s wer e
st i l l mor e passi onat el y cr i t i cal about l anguage ( Schopenhauer ,
Ni et zsche, Maut hner ) .
But even t hese decept i ons, i mper f ect i ons ar e " decept i ve" ,
onl y appar ent . Language i s onl y j oki ng: t he i nt egr at i on of
pr e- l i ngui st i c communi cat i on i nt o l anguage, t he ver bal mappi ng
of pal eol ogi cal ment al cat egor i es, r esul t i n a hi ghl y f l exi bl e,
dynami c communi cat i on syst em, super i or i n expr essi ve as wel l
as i n or gani sat or y power and evol ut i ve capaci t i es t o any ot her
semi ot i c syst em.
Language i s i ncl i ned t o j oke and pl ay pr obabl y because
pl ayi ng i s at t he or i gi n of l anguage. Pl ayf ul per f or mance of
an act i on i mpl i es par t i al demot i vat i on and const i t ut es a f i r st
st ep t owar ds communi cat i on ( semi osi s) . Let us t hi nk of wel l
known exampl es such as t he cackl i ng of a cocker el i mi t at i ng
t he hen as a si gn of submi ssi veness, or t he si mi l ar behavi our
of a young ape pr oduci ng t he f emal e sexual di spl ay i n f r ont
of a hi er ar chi cal l y super i or mal e as an expr essi on of sur -
r ender . The showi ng of t he whi t e of t he t eet h, as an al l usi on
t o t he at t ack, may di spense t he ape t o at t ack r eal l y. Accor d-
i ng t o Hoof f ( 1974) , t he apes' aggr essi ve mi met i c di spl ay i s at
t he or i gi n of l aught er : our j oke r esponse.
H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

P
a
n
t
s

I
n
a
n
.
N
a
t
.

I
d
e
a
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

a
n
m
a
s

I
d
e
a
s

P
a
n
t
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

H
u
m
a
n
s

R
e
a
t
v
e

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

(
n

p
.
c
.
)

o
f

m
e
t
a
p
h
o
r
n
k
s

o
r

"
c
e
n
t
r
e
s
"

n

d
f
f
e
r
e
n
t

s
y
n
t
a
c
t
c

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

9
5
2

m
e
t
a
p
h
o
r
s

n

V
c
t
o
r

H
u
g
o
'
s

C
o
n
t
e
m
p
a
t
o
n

I
-
X
V
,

B
a
u
d
e
r
e
'
s

T
a
b
e
a
u
x

p
a
r
e
n
s
,

a
n
d

n

R
m
b
a
u
d
'
s

B
a
t
e
a
u

v
r
e
.

99
Acknow edgement
Th s paper , wh ch I s gned a one as t he so e per son r espons b e
f or t he st at ement s t cont a ns, s n f act a | o nt pub cat on
w t hout | o nt ab t y. Most of t he mat er a was supp ed
by my ch dr en, Eva and Pet er , at t he ages of 1- 6 year s.
Somewhat at er Pet er , at pr esent ect ur er n t he
Depar t ment of Psycho ogy of t he Un ver s t y of London, as-
s st ed me ver y ef f ect ve y w t h h s cr t ca r emar ks and
suggest ons. I am at t he same t me much nt ebt ed t o M ss
Vanessa! Moor e f or her pr ec ous he p n r ev s ng t he Eng sh
ver s on of my ar t c e.
Ref er ences
Abr aham, K. 1971. Psychoana yt sche St ud en. Fr ankf ur t am
Ma n: F scher .
Abr aham, W. 1975. A L ngu st c Appr oach t o Met aphor . L sse:
De R dder .
Ander son, C. C. 1964. The psycho ogy of t he met aphor . | our na
of Psycho ogy 105. 53- 73.
Ar et , S. 1974. I nt er pr et at on of Sch zophr en a. London,
Cr osby Lockwood St ap es.
Asch, S. and Ner ove, H. 1960. The deve opment of doub e
f unct on t er ms n ch dr en. Per spect ves n Psycho og ca
Theor y, ( ed. by B. Kap an and S. Wagner ) , New Yor k:
I nt er nat ona Un ver s t y Pr ess.
Baude a r e, Ch. 1962. Cur os t s t t r a r es. Par s: Gam er .
Beck, Benda E. 1978. The met aphor as a med at or bet ween
semant c and ana og c modes of t hought . Cur r ent Ant hr opo ogy
19, 83- 98.
Ber gson, H. L. 1900. Le r r e. Essa sur a s gn f cat on du
com que, Par s: A ean.
B cker t on, D. 1969. Pr o ogomena t o a ngu st c t heor y of
met aphor . Foundat ons of Language 5. 34- 52.
B ack, M. 1962. Mode s and Met aphor s. I t haca: Cor ne Un ver -
s t y Pr ess.
B eu er , E. 1961. Dement a pr aecox or t he gr oup of sch zophr en a
( 1911) . C ass cs n Psycho ogy ( ed. Th. Sh p ey) , New Yor k,
Ph osoph ca L br ar y, 417- 463.
B eu er , E. and Lehman, K. 1881. Zwangsmss ge L cht empf ndungen
dur ch Scha und ver wandt e Er sche nungen. Le pz g.
Bo nger , D. 1965. The at om zat on of mean ng. Language 41.
555- 573.
Bouver ot , Dan e e 19 69. Compar a son et mt aphor e. Le Fr ana s
Moder ne 3, 212- 132- 147, 224- 238, 301- 316.
Br ook- Rose, ' Chr st ne 1958. A Gr ammar of Met aphor . London:
Becker and War t bur g.
Bh er , _. 1929. D e ge st ge Ent w ck ung des K ndes. | ena:
F scher .
Bh er , K. 1933. Spr acht heor e. | ena: F scher .
Campbe , P. N. 1975. Met aphor and ngu st c t heor y. Ouar t er y
| our na of Speech 61, 1- 12.
Chasse, Ch. 1954. C ef s de Ma ar m. Par s: Aub er .
Chomsky, . 1967. Cur r ent I ssues i n Li ngui st i c Theor y. The
Hague : Mout on.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspect s of The Theor y of Synt ax. Cambr i dge
( Mass. ) : MI T Pr ess.
Chomsky, N. and Hal l e, M. 1968. Sound Pat t er n of Engl i sh.
The Hague: Mout on.
Cl ar k, H. H. 1970. The pr i mi t i ve nat ur e of chi l dr en' s r el at i onal
concept s. Cogni t i on and t he Devel opment of Language ( ed. J . R.
Hays) , New Yor k, London, Si dney, Tor ont o: Wi l ey, 269- 278.
Cohen. L. J . and Mar gal i t , A. 1970. The r ol e of i nduct i ve
r easoni ng i n t he i nt er pr et at i on of met aphor . Synt hese 21.
469- 487.
Cont r as, Eugeni a 19 72. La st r uct ur e smant que du xme m na
' ma n' . Cah er s de ngu st que t hor que et app que
9. 71- 82.
Van D | k, T. A. 1975. For ma semant cs of met aphor ca d scour se.
Poet cs 4. 173- 198.
Dona dson, Mar gar et , and Wa es, R. 1970. On t he acqu s t on of
some r e at ona t er ms. Cogn t on and The Deve opment of Lan-
guage ( ed. | . R. Hays) , New Yor k, London, S dney, Tor ont o:
W ey, 235- 268.
Doug as, Mar y 1968. The soc a cont r o of cogn t on: some
f act or s n | oke per cept on. Man 3, 361- 376.
Dr ange, Th. 1966. Type Cr oss ng. Cor ne Un ver s t y ( 1963) .
The Hague: Mout on.
Duchacek, 0. 1970. Les | eux de mot s du po nt de vue ngu st que
Be t r ge zur r oman schen Ph o og e 9, 107- 117.
Fen che , 0. 1946. The Psychoana yt c Theor y of Neur os s.
London: Rout edge and Kegan.
Fer e, Ch. 1895. Les gest es mt aphor ques chez es an maux.
Compt es r endus de a Soc t de b o og e. 2 70.
Fer encz , S. 1927. Baust e ne zur Psychoana yse I . W en:
Psychoana yt scher Ver ag.
Fnagy, I . 1961. Commun cat on n poet r y. Wor d 17. 194- 218.
Fonagy, I . 1963. D e Met apher n n der Phonet k. The Hague:
Mout on- ,
Fonagy, I . 1964. L' nf or mat on du st y e ver ba . L ngu st cs 4,
19- 47.
Fnagy, I . 1965 ( a) . . Der Ausdr uck a s I nha t . Mat hemat k und
D cht ung ( ed. by H. Kr euzer and R. Gunzenhuser ) , Mnchen:
Nymphenbur ger , 72- 116.
Fonagy, I . 1965( b) . For m and f unct on of poet c anguage.
D ogenes 51, 72- 110.
Fonagy, I . 1970. Les bases pu s onne es I . Les sons. Revue
Fr ana se de Psychana yse 34, 101- 136.
Fonagy, I . 1971( a) Les bases pu s onne es de a phonat on I I .
La pr osod e, 543- 591.
Fonagy, I . 1971( b) . Doub e cod ng n speech. Sem ot ca 3,
189- 222.
Fnagy, I . 1971( c) . S gne convent onne mot v. L ngu st que
7, 55- 80.
Fnagy, I . 1971( d) . The f unct ons of voca st y e. L t er ar y
St y e ( ed. by S. Chat man) , London: Oxf or d Un ver s t y Pr ess,
159- 174.
Fonagy, I . 19 72( a) Dmot vat on et r mot vat on. Pot que 11,
414- 431.
Fonagy, I . 1972( b) . Ch asmus. V ag r oda m Lex kon, Budapest :
Akadm a K ado, 198- 200.
Fnagy, I . 19 75( a) . La st r uct ur e smant que des const r uct ons
possess ves: S gn f cat on et pr ocessus pr ma r e. Langue,
d scour s, soc t . Pour Em e Benven st e ( ed. by | . Kr st eva,
| - C . M ner , N. Ruwet ) , Par s: Seu , 44- 84.
Fonagy, I . 1975( b) . Fe sor o s ' Enumer at on' . V g r oda m
Lex kon 3. Budapest : Akadm a K ad, 85- 90.
103
Fnagy, I . 1975( c) . For ma. V ag r oda m Lex kon 3. Budapest :
Akadm a K ad, 251- 269.
Fnagy, I . 1975( d) Hason at ' Compar son' . V ag r oda m Lex kon
4. Budapest : Akadm a K ad, 259- 272.
Fnagy, I . 1975( e) . H r r t k ' I nf or mat on' . V ag r oda m
Lex kon 4. Budapest : Akadm a K ad, 491- 502.
Fonagy, I . 19 75( f ) . Hom y ' Vagueness' . V ag r oda m Lex kon
4. Budapest : Akadm a K ad, 563- 571.
Fonagy, I . 19 78. Languages w t h n anguage. Appr oaches t o an-
guages ( ed. by W. McMor ack and S. A. Wur m) , The Hague:
Mout on, 79- 134.
Fonagy, P. 1974. | oke psycho ogy. Mast er t hes s. London
Un ver s t y Co ege. Unpub shed manuscr pt .
Fonagy, P. 1979. An Exper ment a I nvest gat on of Psycho-
ana yt c Symbo sm. Unpub shed PhD d sser t at on. Un ver s t y
of London.
Fonagy, P. 1978. The use of sub m na t echn ques n h gh-
ght ng f unct ona d f f er ences bet ween t he t wo cer ebr a
hem spher es. Paper pr esent ed t o t he Exper ment a Psycho o-
g ca Soc et y, at B r ckbeck Co ege, London.
Fr eud, S. 1940- 1946. Gesamme t e Wer ke. London: I mago 18 vo .
Fr eud, S. 1953- 1966. St andar d ed t on ( SE) of t he comp et e
psycho og ca wor ks of S. F. , ed. by | . St r achey 24 vo .
London: Hogar t h.
Fr y, W. F. 1963. The Sweet Madness. A St udy of Humour . Pao o
A t o: Rout edge.
Goodman, N. 1968. Languages of Ar t : an Appr oach t o t he Theor y
of Symbo s. I nd anapo s: The Bobbs- Mer r .
Gr go r e, A. 19 47. L' appr ent ssage du angage. Geb oux:
Ducu ot .
Gr egor y, C. | . C. 1924. The Nat ur e of Laught er . London:
Kegan Pau .
Gr e g, | . Y. T. 1923. The Psycho ogy of Laught er . London:
A en and Unw n.
Gu er r e, L. 1979. L' accent uat on en ang a s cont empor a n.
Thse de doct or at d' t at . Un ver s t de Par s VI I . Un-
pub shed.
Ha e, M. and Keyser , S. | . 1971. Eng sh St r ess. New Yor k:
Har per and Row.
Hank ss, E. 1969. | zsef At t a komp ex kpe ' comp ex mages
of At t a | ozsef ' . A npda t az abszur d dr m g ' Fr om
t he f o k- song t o t he absur d dr ama' . Budapest : Magvet o, 9- 40.
Har t mann, H. , Kr s, E. and Loewenst e n, R. M. 1946. Comment s
on t he f or mat on of psych c st r uct ur es. Psychoana yt c St udy
of t he Ch d 2, 11- 38.
Hege , G. W. F. 1955. Aest het k ( ed. F. Bassenge) , Ber n:
Auf bau.
He mho t z, H. 1856. Opt k. Le pz g: Voss.
Her mann, I . 1923. Randbevor zugung a s Pr mr vor gang. I nt er na-
t ona e Ze t schr f t f r Psychoana yse 9, 136- 167.
Her mann, I . 19 37. Si ch- Ankl ammer , Auf - Suche- Gehen. I nt er na-
t i onal e Zei t schr i f t f r Psychoana yse 22, 349- 370.
Hest er , M. B. 1967. The Mean ng of Poet c Met aphor . The Hague:
Mout on.
Heynes, R. 19 75. Met aphor as nt er act ve. Educat ona Theor y
25, 272- 277.
Ho mer , | . 1972. Met aphor . L ngu st cs 88, 5- 14.
Ho mes, | anet 19 73. L ngu st c humour : I t ' s not t he way you
t e t ! Te Reo 16, 1- 7.
Hoof f , | . A. R. A. M. van, 1972. Ph ogeny of aught er and
sm ng. Non- ver ba Commun cat on ( ed. R. . Hi nde) , Cambr i dge:
Uni ver si t y Pr ess, 209- 241.
Hug- Hel l mut h, Her mi ne von
/
1911. ber Far benhr en. I mago 1,
228- 264.
Huguet , E. 1904. Les mt aphor es et compar a sons dans ' oeuvr e
de V ct or Hugo I - I I . Par s: Hachet t e.
Hu z nga, | . Homo udens ( 1938) . London: Rout edge & Kegan.
| akobson, R. 1960. L ngu st cs and poet cs. St y e n Language
( ed. T. A. Sebeok) , New Yor k, London: W ey, 350- 377.
105
| akobson, R. 1966( a) . Gr ammat ca par a e sme and t s Russ an
f acet . Language 42, 399- 429.
| akobson, R. 1968. Poet r y of gr ammar and gr ammar of poet r y.
L ngua 21, 597- 609.
| akobson, R. 19 70. On t he ver ba ar t of W am B ake and
ot her poet pa nt er s. L ngu st c I nqu r y 1, 3- 23.
| akobson, R. 1973. "S nost r e v e" . Obser vat ons sur a com-
pos t on & st r uct ur e de mot s dans un sonnet de | oach m Du
Be ay. Ouest on de pot que. Par s: Seu , 319- 355.
| akobson, R. and Ha e, Mor r s 19 56. Fundament a s of Language.
The Hague: Mout on.
| akobson, R. and Va es o, P. 1966. Vocabu ar um const r uct o n
Dant e' s sonnet "Se ved occh m e " . St ud Dant esch 43,
7- 33.
| ohnson, R. 1975. The sem ot c st r uct ur e of | oke and r dd e.
Sem ot ca 14, 142- 174.
| ohnson, R. 1976. Two r ea ms and a | oke: B f ur cat on t heor es
of | ok ng. Sem ot ca 16, 195- 221.
| ones, E. 1961. The t heor y of symbo sm. Paper s on Psycho-
ana ys s. Bost on: Beacon.
| ones, E. 19 31. On N ght mar e. London: Hogar t h.
Kaver na E. K. 1950. 0 r azv t r ec det e| v per vyx dvux et
z zn . Moscow.
Ke y, L. G. 1971. Punn ng and t he ngu st c s gn. L ngu st cs
66, 5- 11.
Kenyer es, E. 1927. Les pr em er s mot s de ' enf ant et ' appar t on
des espces de mot s dans e angage. Ar ch ves de Psycho og e
XXI . 191- 218.
K ef er , F. 1978. Az e of e t evsek e m et e ( The t heor y of
pr esuppos t ons) , Budapest : Akadm a K ad ( t o appear )
K par sky, P. 1977. The r hyt hm c st r uct ur e of Eng sh ver se.
L ngu st c I nqu r y 8, 189- 247.
Koest er , A. 1964. The Act of Cr eat on. London: Hut ch nson.
Kr s, E. 1950. On pr econsc ous ment a pr ocesses. Psychoana yt c
Ouar t er y 19, 540- 560.
Kr s, E. 1952. Psychoana yt c Exp or at ons n Ar t . New Yor k:
I nt er nat ona Un ver s t es Pr ess.
Ladany , P. 1965. "Zur og schen Ana yse der Fr agest ze, "
Act a L ngu st ca. Academ ae Sc ent ar um Hungar cae, Tomus
XV, f asc scu us 1- 2. Budapest , 37- 66.
Lange, _. 1901. Das Wesen der Kunst . Ber n: Gr ot e
Laur et t e, P. 1971. ' Pr ocs mt aphor que' et ' pr ocs mt onym que' .
L ngu st cs 66, 34- 55.
Laut er , P. 1964. Theor es of Comedy. New Yor k: Doub eday.
Le Guer n, M. 1975. Smant que de a mt aphor e et de a mt onym e.
Par s: Seu .
Lehmann, V. 1975. Met apher und semant sche Beschr e bung. G essen:
Schm t z.
L eber mann, M. and Pr ce, A. 1977. On st r ess and ngu st c
r hyt hm. L ngu st c I nqu r y 8, 249- 336.
Locke, | . 1924. An Essay Concer n ng Human Under st and ng ( 1960) .
Oxf or d: C ar endon.
Mat t hews, R. | . 1971. Concer n ng a " ngu st c t heor y" on
met aphor . Foundat ons of Language 7, 413- 425.
Maur on, Ch. 1950. I nt r oduct on a psychana yse de Ma ar m.
Par s: Baconn r e.
Maut hner , F. 1923. Be t r ge zu e ner Kr t k der Spr ache I - I I I .
Le pz g: Fe x Me ner .
M chaud, G. 1953. Ma ar m. Par s: Bo v n.
M ner , G. B. 1968. Pr ob ems of t he St r uct ur e of Concept s n
Samoa. Thes s, Un ver s t y of London.
M ner , G. B. 19 72. Homo r dens: Towar ds a sem ot c t heor y of
humour and aught er . Sem ot ca 5, 1- 30.
Munc e, W. 19 37. The psychopat ho ogy of met aphor . Ar ch ves of
Neur o ogy and Psych at r y 37, 796- 858
Nguyen D nh Hoa. 1955. Doub e puns n V et namese. A case of
" ngu st c p ay". Wor d 11, 237- 244.
Oksaar , E se 19 70. ZumSpr acher wer b des K ndes n zwe -
spr ach ger Umgebung. Fo a L ngu st ca 4, 330- 358.
107
Or t hony, . , Reynol ds, R. and Ar t er , J . 1978. Met aphor :
t heor et i cal and empi r i cal r esear ch. Psychol ogi c Bul l et i n
85, 919- 943.
Pai nt er , G. D. 1966. Mar cel Pr oust . Par i s: Mer cur e de Fr ance.
Pel c, J . 1961. Semant i c f unct i ons as appl i ed t o t he anal ysi s
of t he concept s of met aphor . Poet i cs ( ed. M. R. Mayenowa et
al i i ) , Var sow: Panst wowe Wydawni ct wo Naukowe, 305- 340.
Pet of i , S. J . 1969. St r uct ur al anal ysi s of poet i c i mages.
St udi es i n Synt ax and Semant i cs ( ed. F. Ki ef er ) , Dor dr echt :
Rei del , 187- 230.
Pf i st er , 0. 1912. Di e Ur sachen der Far benbegl ei t ung bei
akust i schen Wahr nehmungen und das Wesen ander er Synst hes en.
I mago 1, 265- 275.
P aget , | . 1955. The Const r uct on of Rea t y n t he Ch d.
London : Rout edge and Kegan.
Pr ce, | . T. 1974. L ngu st c compet ence and met aphor ca use.
Foundat ons of Language 11, 253- 256.
Rank, 0. 1925. Der Knst er und ander e Be t r ge zur Psycho-
ana yse f r d e Ge st esw ssenschaf t en. Le pz g, W en,
Zr ch: I nt er nat ona er Psychoana yt scher Ver ag.
Reddy, M. | . 19 69. A semant c appr oach t o met aphor . Paper s f r om
t he F f t h Reg ona Meet ng of t he Ch cago L ngu st c Soc et y,
200- 250.
Re chenbach, H. 1947. E ement s of Symbo c Log c. New Yor k:
Macm an.
Re k, Th. 1929. Lust und Le d mW t z. W en: I nt er nat ona er
Psychoana yt scher Ver ag.
R char d, I . A. 19 36. The Ph osophy of Rhet or c. New Yor k :
Oxf or d Un ver s t y Pr ess.
Rub nst e n, B. B. 1972. On Met aphor and Re at ed Phenomena. New
Yor k Psychoana ys s and Cont empor ar y Sc ence. New Yor k :
Macm an. London: Ho t and Pet er f r eund.
Radc f f e- Br own, A. R. 1968. On | ok ng Re at onsh ps. St r uct ur e
and Funct on n Pr m t ve Soc et y, London: Cohen and West .
Ruwet , N. 19 75. Synecdoque et mt aphor e. Pot que 23, 371-
388.
Saussur e, F. de, 1976. Cour s de ngu st que gnr a e. Ed t on
cr t que par Tu o de Maur o. Par s: Payot .
Schuber t , G. H. 1818. Ans cht en von der Nacht se t e der Nat ur -
w ssenschaf t . Dr esden: Ar no d.
Schuber t , G. H. 1814. Symbo k des Tr aumes. We mar : R char d.
Scup n, E. and G. 1907. Bub s er st e K ndhe t . Le pz g: Gr ben.
St er n, G. 1931. Mean ng and Change of Mean ng. B oom ngt on:
I nd ana Un ver s t y Pr ess.
St er n, K ar a and W. 1928. D e K nder spr ache. Le pz g: Bar t h.
Te ar d, A. 1944. Tr aumsymbo k. Zr ch: Rascher .
Vander s ce, R. and Ladef oged, P. 1971. B nar y supr asegment a
f eat ur es. UCLA Wor k ng Paper s n Phonet cs 17, 6- 24.
We nr ch, H. 1967. Semant k der Met aphor . Fo a L ngu st ca
1 , 3- 17.
Wer ner , . 1933. E nf hr ung n d e Ent w ck ungspsycho og e.
Le pz g ; Ambr os us.
Wa de, A. and Hof mann, | . B. 19 38. Lat e n sch et ymo og sches
Wr t er buch. I , He de ber g ; W nt er .
ON THE SYNTAX OF THE NEGATI VE AUXI LI ARY I N SAMOYED
Pt er Ha| d
0. At a conf er ence he d n Budapest on The Gr ammar and Semant cs
of t he Ver b, Paavo S r o de ver ed a paper ent t ed "The Synt act c
Const t uent s of t he Negat ve Ver b For ms n F nno- Ugr c Languages"
n wh ch he ana yzed F nn sh ver b f or ms n t he f r st p ace, a -
t hough, n br ef , he a so dea t w t h ot her Ba t o- F nn sh an-
guages ( Est on an and L von an) , w t h anguages of t he Vo ga r e-
g on and w t h Per m an anguages ( S r o 1968) . As t o F nn sh, t he
aut hor po nt s out t hat one of t he bas c f eat ur es of t hat an-
guage s t he occur r ence of a negat ve ver b wh ch s used t o ex-
pr ess negat on. The negat ve ver b has exact y t he same number of
f or ms as t he cor r espond ng pos t ve ver b, t hat s, t he occur r ence
of t he negat ve ver b doub es t he number of ver b f or ms w t h n a
par ad gm. The pos t ve ( af f r mat ve) f or ms of t he F nn sh ver b
ar e e t her s mp e ( e. g. I nd. Pr esent sano- ' I say' = V + Vx ,
I nd. I mper f . sano- i - n ' I sai d' = V + Pr et + Vx, Conj . sano- i si - n
' I woul d say' = V + Mood - ( Tense) + Vx) or compl ex ( e. g. I nd.
Per f . ol e- sano- nut ' I sai d' = Exi st ent i al ver b + Vxl Sg + Mai n
ver b +Par t i c , ol e- mme sano- neet ' we sai d' = Exi st ent i al ver b +
Vxl Pl + Mai n ver b + Par t i c + Pl ur , I nd. Pl usquamper f . ol - i - mme
sano- neet ' we had sai d' = Exi st ent i al ver b + Past + Vxl Pl + Mai n
ver b + Par t i c + Pl ur , Cond. Per f . ol - i si - n sano- nut ' I woul d have
sai d' = Exi st ent i al ver b + Mood +( Tense) + Mai n ver b + Par t i e +
Si ng) . I n t he l at t er case, t he ver bal par adi gm consi st s of t he
f i ni t e f or mof t he exi st ent i al ver b ( ol e- ) whi ch r ecei ves t he
Tense and Mood mar ker s as wel l as t he endi ngs denot i ng Per son
and Number ( Vx) and of t he i nf i ni t e f or mof t he mai n ver b whi ch
can st and ei t her i n si ngul ar or i n pl ur al . The st r uct ur e of t he
compl ex f or ms can t hus be r ender ed by t he f ol l owi ng f or mul a:
Exi st ent i al ver b + Mood + ( Tense) + Per son + Number +
Mai n ver b + Tense + Number
Negat ed ver b f or ms ar e al ways compl ex i n Fi nni sh. Thi s i s t r ue
of bot h si mpl e af f i r mat i ve sent ences and compl ex or compound sen-
t ences. Al l negat i ve f or ms must cont ai n t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y
e- . E. g. , I nd. Pr esent e- ( Sgl ) sano ( r oot ) ' I don' t say' , I nd. I m-
per i . e- sano- nut ( Par t i c) ' I di dn' t say' , I nd. Per f . e- ol e
( r oot ) sano- nut ( par t i e) ' I di dn' t say' , e- mme ( VxPl ur l ) ol e ( r oot )
sano- neet ( Par t i c. Pl ur ) ' we di dn' t say' , I nd. Pl usquamper f . e- mme
( VxPl ur l ) ol l eet ( Exi st ent i al ver b, Par t i ci pl ePl ur ) sano- neet
( Mai n ver b, Par t i ci pl ePl ur ) ' we di dn' t say' . These f or ms t hus
have t he f ol l owi ng gener al st r uct ur e:
The r oot of t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y (e_-) + Per son + Num-
ber ( Vx) ( +Exi st ent i al ver b (+ Par t ( +Pl ur ) ) ) + Mai n
ver b ( r oot ) (+ Par t i e ( + Pl ur ) )
Fur t her i nqui r y i nt o ver bal f or ms shows t hat i n posi t i ve ( af f i r -
mat i ve) sent ences t he ver bal r oot can onl y r ecei ve one Tense or
Mood mar ker . I f a f ur t her mar ker i s needed, t hen anot her ver bal
r oot i s r equi r ed. I n t he l at t er r ol e, as a const ant el ement , we
f i nd t he auxi l i ar y ol e- whi ch r ecei ves t he endi ngs of Per son and
Number ( and event ual l y t hose of Tense and Mood) . The si t uat i on
i s t hus si mi l ar t o what we have i n t he Hungar i an f or ms ment em
vol na ( Cond. Past ) ' I woul d have gone' or ment em vol t ( ar ch. Pl us-
quamper f . ) ' I had gone' . The Hungar i an f or ms di f f er f r omt he
cor r espondi ng Fi nni sh f or ms i n t wo r espect s: ( i ) i n Hungar i an t he
auxi l i ar y f ol l ows t he mai n ver b, i n Fi nni sh t he or der i s t he
opposi t e, ( i i ) ver bal endi ngs ( Vx) ar e at t ached t o t he mai n ver b
THE NEGATI VE AUXI LI ARY I N SAMOYED 111
n Hungar an wher eas t hey ar e assoc at ed w t h t he aux ar y n
F nn sh.
I n negat ve sent ences t he end ngs denot ng Number and Per -
son ar e at t ached t o t he negat ve aux ar y e- , t he Tense and
Mood mar ker s t o t he ma n ver b or , n const r uct ons wher e t her e
s an ex st ent a ver b, t o t he ex st ent a ver b. Ther e s one
not ab e except on: t he mper at ve wher e t he Mood mar ker appear s
on bot h t he aux ar y and t he ma n ver b.
S r o po nt s out t hat Lapp sh has s m ar negat ve const r uc-
t ons. Ot her F nno- Ugr c anguages, however , dev at e mor e or
ess f r omt he F nn sh pat t er n n t h s r espect . Thus, f or examp e,
n Sout her n- Est on an and L von an t he Past Tense mar ker get s
at t ached t o t he negat ve aux ar y. The same ho ds t r ue f or Che-
r em s and t o some ext ent f or Er z| a- Mor dv n as we . Cher em s,
Zyr | en and Vot | ak have a ' per f ect ' negat ve aux ar y s nce t
can r ece ve - n add t on t o t he end ngs of Per son and Number -
Tense mar ker s and n some cases even Mood mar ker s ( cf . S r o, 361-
5) . S r o r emar ks t hat t he Samoyed anguages, t oo, have a nega-
t ve aux ar y, but he does not d scuss t he negat ve const r uct ons
n t hese anguages.
I n t he pr esent paper I w sh t o exam ne t he negat ve con-
st r uct ons of Yur ak n some det a . Yur ak be ongs t o t he Samo-
yed- gr oup of anguages. We sha see t hat | en se| - Samoyed ( Enet s)
and Tawgy ( Nganasan) ar e s m ar y bu t up n t h s r espect . I n
Se kup, on t he ot her hand, negat on s expr essed by sever a ne-
gat ve par t c es. I t shou d a so be not ed t hat a f a r y det a ed
descr pt on of t he f or ms of negat on n Yur ak ( =Nenet s) can be
f ound n A. M. Scer bakova ( 1954) . Th s paper can apt y ser ve as a
bas s f or t heor et ca y or ent ed account s of negat on. Some of
t he examp es used n t he pr esent paper wer e t aken f r omScer ba-
kova ' s wor k.
1. I n Nenet s t he st r uct ur a pat t er n of negat ve sent ences co n-
c des w t h t hat of pos t ve sent ences on y f t he negat ve sense
der i ves f r om t he semant i c cont ent of t he ver b i t sel f . The
ver b i s of cour se used i n i t s posi t i ve f or m i n such cases.
Ver bs used i n posi t i ve f or mbut wi t h a negat i ve meani ng i n-
cl ude, f or exampl e, j rnko ' not t o be avai l abl e' , j Pm
' not t o be abl e t o' , | exer s ' not t o know' , j ar me ' not t o
know' , wi dar ' not t o know, not t o hol d out ' , pupt as ' not t o
meet ' , wol t ' not t o l i ke' , er i de ' not t o l ove' , et c. When
t hese ver bs ar e used, t he st r uct ur e of t he negat i ve sent ence
coi nci des wi t h t hat of t he posi t i ve sent ence:
V' and Pr x can f ur t her be spl i t up as f ol l ows:
V' >
B
( +Der )
Pr x > M + Vx + Nu + Te
The above symbol s shoul d be r ead as f ol l ows: A r anges over ( com-
bi nat i ons of ) Px, Emph- Det and Nu ( t hat i s, N can r ecei ve maxi -
mal l y Px + Emph- Det + Nu) , wher e Px st ands f or possessi ve per -
sonal endi ngs, Emph- Det f or emphat i c and/ or det er mi ni ng el ement s,
and Nu f or number . A i s opt i onal . X and Y st and f or any const r uc-
t i ons ( possi bl y zer o) whi ch ar e dependent on N and V, r espect i -
vel y, i . e. t hey denot e nomi nal and ver bal compl ement s. Pr x de-
si gnat es per f ect i vi zi ng el ement s and var i ous suf f i xes. V' i s
t he ver b base. M st ands f or t he Mood mar ker , Vx f or ver bal suf -
f i xes, Te f or t he Tense mar ker .
E. g. , xar mi j nku ' I mi ss my kni f e, I do not have a kni f e' , paj oc
j ?mdu? ' t hey cannot r each i t ' , ni ar tl i kl ser kad j ar me ' your
f at her does not know of t hi s mat t er ' , et c. At pr esent , however ,
we ar e not concer ned w t h an ana ys s of such ver bs and sent ence
st r uct ur es s nce t hey ar e f or ma y asser t ve sent ences nvo v ng
ver bs whose ex ca mean ngs a r eady nc ude negat on.
2. The nt er na st r uct ur e of VP' s n negat ve sent ences r equ r es
some new r u es:
V st ands f or t he ( f u f or mof t he) negat ve aux ar y,
neg '
V _ denot es t he r oot f or mof t he negat ed ver b. Th s f or m
posBneg
|
s f or ma y dent ca w t h t he 2nd Per son I mper at ve of t he n-
det er m nat e f or mof t he cor r espond ng nt r ans t ve ver b.
As can be seen f r omour r u es, t he negat ed r oot of t he ma n ver b
st ands at t he end of t he sent ence and t he per f ect ve ver ba en-
d ngs ar e at t ached t o t he negat ve aux ar y. Consequent y, t he
ma n d f f er ence bet ween negat ve and pos t ve sent ences s t hat
n t he at t er t he e ement s denot ng Number , Per son, Mood and
Tense ar e at t ached t o t he ma n ver b and come ast n t he sent ence
st r uct ur e, wh e n t he f or mer a t hese e ement s ar e at t ached
t o t he aux ar y and t hus occur n pr ever ba pos t on. Schemat -
ca y we have
2. 1. The r u e
means t hat t he mor phophono og ca r ea zat on of t he negat ve
aux ar y s t he segment n wh ch can, however , r ece ve a pr e-
f x ( Pr ef ) , wu or w_ , whose f unct on s not qu t e c ear ( t s
per haps an emphat c e ement ) . The t wo mor phemes may y e d a
new negat ve exeme: wun or w n . The const t uent Pr ef s g ven
114
i n par ent heses because i t s use i s opt i onal . The mor pheme i s
t he per manent par t of t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y. The symbol ' Der '
i ndi cat es t hat var i ous der i vat i onal suf f i xes can be added t o t he
negat i ve auxi l i ar y. They ar e i nser t ed bet ween and t he ver bal
suf f i xes ( Pr x) . Such der i vat i onal suf f i xes i ncl ude - ne t o f or m
par t i ci pl es, - r xa t o der i ve compar at i ve f or ms, t he di mi nut i ve-
augment at i ve suf f i x - r ka, t he hor t at i ve suf f i x - xV, et c. E. g. ,
ni - r ka- we- dams t osa? ' I was not r eal l y bei ng car ef ul ' , - r axa-
we- n xo ' you can' t have f ound' ( Scer bakova 218, 216) , no- xo- w?
xodoI P' I wi sh I di d not cough~I onl y wi sh I di d not cough' . Some
Mood mar ker s can be consi der ed as der i vat i onal suf f i xes, but t hey
may equal l y wel l be r egar ded as const i t ut i ng a separ at e cl ass. I
t hi nk, however , t hat t hey can be t r eat ed mor e adequat el y wi t hi n
t he cat egor y Pr x ( see 2. 2. ) . As a st r i ki ng anomal y i t shoul d al so
be not ed t hat i n some di al ect s t he i t er at i ve der i vat i onal suf f i x
- set i i s added t o t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y whi l e i n some ot her s i t
goes wi t h t he mai n ver b, cf . Bol ' aj a Zeml j a - set - wa? xar wa?
| ama , Ta| m r n - wa? xar wa- set ? ' we don' t want ( t ) f or ever '
( cf . Ter escenko 1965) .
2. 2. V s f o owed by t he end nas of t he Der f ect ve ver b f or ms
neg -
( Pr x) :
Pr x > M + Vx (+Nu + Te + + Emph- Det )
I n ot her wor ds, on y Mood and Per son ar e ob gat or y mar ked on
t he negat ve aux ar y. The nd cat on of Tense, Number and em-
phat c st r ess s opt ona . Of cour se, t he ob gat or y e ement s
can a so be r ea zed as zer o mor phemes, name y n t he f o ow ng
cases :
Vx3 >
M
nd
- - - - >
That s, n t he case of a 3r d Per son ver ba end ng and n t he
case of t he Mood mar ker f or t he I nd cat ve Mood.
2. 2. 1. The Number mar ker ' Nu' s g ven n par ent heses because t
occur s on y n t he Dua and P ur a . Never t he ess, Vx and Nu ar e
c ose y r e at ed cat egor es ( f or nst ance, n Past Tense f or ms
Nu can on y be nt er pr et ed as a mor phono og ca var ant of t he
Tense mar ker ) , and t her ef or e t he quest on ar ses why t he comp ex
un t Vx + Nu s not denot ed by a common symbo . However , a se-
par at e symbo f or Nu s mot vat ed on t he f o ow ng t wo gr ounds :
( ) Vx3 even n t he Du and P ur f or ms of t he nde-
t er m nat e con| ugat on, wh e n such cases t he Du and P ur mar -
ker s f unct on as ndependent mor phemes f used w t h base f or ms
of nom na s.
( ) The g ot t a st ops of t he Dua and P ur a ver ba en-
d ngs f use w t h t he Past Tense mar ker s and t h s g ves r se
t o a t wof o d mor pho og ca a t er nat on ( depend ng on whet her
t he g ot t a st op r epr esent s t he nasa zed - _? of t he Dua or t he
nonnasa zed - ?? of t he P ur a mor pheme) :
2. 2. 2. Vx ( +Nu) can be r ea zed n a number of ways. The negat ve
aux ar y may t ake ndet er m nat e, det er m nat e or , f or t hat mat t er ,
r ef ex ve ver ba per sona end ngs. The r se ect on depends on
whet her t he ma n ver b s used n ndet er m nat e, det er m nat e or
r ef ex ve f or m n t he ( per haps on y mag nar y) asser t ve sen-
t ence wh ch ser ves as a bas s f or t he der vat on of t he negat ve
sent ence. Th s f act a so shows t hat t he negat ve ver b has no
semant c f eat ur es apar t f r omNegat on. I t f unct ons r at her as
a ' negat ve dummy' wh ch car r es gr ammat ca mor phemes and at
t he same t me t ur ns t he semant c cont ent of t he ma n ver b nt o
negat ve.
Examp es :
I ndet er m nat e con| ugat on: ( Vx Sg ndet ) t at ?
' not I g ve -I don' t g ve' , Vx Sg ndet ) xar wa? ' not I
want ~ I don' t want ' .
Det er mi nat e conj ugat i on: - w( Vxl Det ) amt ? ' not I ( t hat )
hear d ~ I di dn' t hear i t ' , - w ( Vxl Det ) menku ? ' not I ( t hat )
t ake ~ I di dn' t t ake i t ' .
Ref l exi ve conj ugat i on: - ?( Vx3SgRef l ) t ew? ' not he
( hi msel f ) ar r i ve ~ he hi msel f di dn' t ar r i ve' , o- xo( adhor t ) - w?
( Vxl SgRef l ) xodol ? ' not l et me cough ~ I wi sh I di dn' t cough' ,
pi do? ( Pr onPer s3Per son) r i - d ?( Vx3Pl unRef 1) j amdanku ? ' t hey not
t hey( t hemsel ves) set out wi t h t he car avan ~ t hey ar e not set t i ng
out wi t h t he car avan' .
2. 2. 3. I n t he case of negat i ve sent ences, Mood i s usual l y expr ess-
ed i n t he same way as i n t he case of posi t i ve sent ences. Of cour se,
i n negat i ve sent ences t he Mood mar ker s ar e at t ached t o t he nega-
t i ve auxi l i ar y.
(i ) I mper at i ve : ( Pr ef ) - o- , ( nu) o- , ( i ) o- .
E. g. , ( i mp) - r ( Vx2SgDet ) t a? ' not you ( t hat ) br i ng ~
don' t br i ng i t ' , r i nu( i mp) - n( Vx2SgI ndet ) t o? ' not
you come ~ don' t come' , o ( I mp) - da? ( Vx2Pl ur I ndet )
t o enor ? ' not you cr y ~ don' t cr y' , nuno ( I mp) - r ( Vx2
SgDet ) mda?' not you( t hat ) cut ~ don' t cut i t t hr ough' ,
( i i ) Adhor t at i ve : B
2
+ - xV, wher e B
2
st ands f or t he base
f or mo- of t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y.
E. g. wewa ser - t ( Lat - Dat ) o( I mp) - xo( Adhor t ) - naj ( Vxl
Pl ur Det ) xm?' bad t hi ng i n onl y- not we( t hat ) har m~I
wi sh we di dn' t get i nt o bi g t r oubl e' , t ad ner na?j i - t ?
( Dat ) o( I mp) - xo( Adhor t ) - dm( Vxl Sgl ndet ) x? ' i f i n-
t he- f ut ur e wat er - i n not - onl y- I di e ~ I wi sh I woul dn' t
dr own' .
( i i i ) Conj unct i ve I :
B
1
+
wher e ' B
1
' r ef er s t o t he base f or m of t he negat i ve
auxi l i ar y.
E. g. nu i - j e( Conj Sg3I ndet ) x? ' compl et el y not
l eave ~ I wi sh he woul d never l eave' , - j i ( Conj ) -
mda?( Vx3SgRef l i mp) t ar p?' not go out ( f r om t he t ent ) ~
t hat he shoul d not l eave t he t ent ' , i - j ( Conj ) - n
( Vx2SgI ndet ) - a( Past ) padan? ' not . . . wr i t e ~ he
woul d not have wr i t t en' ( er bakova 202) .
( i v) Conj unct i ve I I : B, + - r wa ( i n For est Nenet s: - r me)
E. g. , i - r ( Fr equ) - wa( Par t i c) - xa?( VxDu3I ndet ) naw?
' not . . . eat ~ t hey shoul d eat ' , For est Nenet s i -
r ( Fr equ) - me( Par t i e) =( VxPl ur 3) t - i ? ' not . . . st eal -
onl y ~ i f t hey onl y don' t st eal ' .
Not e: Fr equ + Par t i e make up Conj
( v) Conj unct i ve I I I : Condi t i onal Ger und + Vx ( +Nu) .
E. g. , i - p- ti ? ( Cond. Ger und Du2) manas ? ' i f you- t wo not
l ook ~ i f you don' t see' , - bat ( Cond. Ger undSg2) t umt ?
' i f you not know ~ i f you don' t know' .
( vi ) Pr obabi l i t i vus I : B, + - ek - .
E. g. , - ne ( Par t i c) - ki ?( Pr obab) - _?( Vx3Pl ur I nd) namt or ?
' not pr obabl y l i st en ~ t hey pr obabl y don' t l i st en t o
t hi s' , Kani n t ar em? - ( Par t i e) - ki ( Pr obab) a ? ' so
not pr obabl y i s ~ i t i s pr obabl y not so' .
Not e: Par t i e + Pr obab make up t he cat egor y Aor Pr obab.
( vi i ) Pr obabi l i t i vus I I :
1
+ - w + - k >
1
+ - wek
- we ( Past Par t ) - k . ( Pr obab) ' not been was ~ pr obabl y
i t wasn' t ' .
Not e: Past Par t + Pr obab make up t he cat egor y Past Pr o-
bab ( i . e. Pr obabi l i t i vus I I ) .
( vi i i ) Pr obabi l i t i vus I I I :
1
+ - r xa .
E. g. , For est Nenet s ni - r xa- ?( VxPl ur 3l ndet ) nae? ' not
l i ke ( pr obabl y) t hey ar e ~ pr obabl y t hey r eal l y ar e
not ' , and ni - wc( Der ?) - r xa- m( Vxl SgPet ) si er t ae? ' not -
l i ke- I do ~ I pr obabl y don' t do i t ' .
( i x) Pr obabi l i t i vus I V :
1
+ - wne- (= - wi Par t + ne Cond)
For est Nenet s i - wne( Pr obab) - t ( Vxl Sgl ndet ) kj ? ' not
. . . go ~ of cour se, I woul d go t her e' .
For est Nenet s i - we( Pr obab) t a em n?( nei ) ' not
so i s ( be?) ~ how come t hat i t i sn' t so' .
Not e: t he f or ms gi ven i n Pr obabi l i t i vus I I I and I V ar e
onl y known i n For est Yur ak. Semant i cal l y t her e i s no
di f f er ence bet ween t hese f or ms and Pr obabi l i t i vus I . , I I .
(x) Super pr obabi l i t i vus :
+ - wankab ' e- .
E. g. , xi b' ef i xi be- xer t ( Pr i v. suf f i x) i - wan ( I nf ) - kab ' e
( Pr obab) ' i n?' man( somebody) nobody cer t ai nl y af r ai d ~
one i s cer t ai nl y not af r ai d of anyone' . ( Scer bakova 222)
Not e: I nf and Pr obab yi el ds Super pr obab.
( xi ) Obl i gat i vus I : _ + - bcu- .
E. g. , xa- ba?an( Cond. ger und Sg ) xa- bcum( Ob g) , n - ba?an
n - bcum ' dy ng. . . I d e must , f not not - must - I - I f I d e
I have t o d e, f I don' t d e I don' t have t o' ( pr over b,
er bakova, 2o2) .
( xi i ) Obl i gat i vus I I : B, + - bca- + - ki .
E. g. , ue- koci ( Di m. suf f i x) - d( Px2Pl ) ni - bca( Obl i g) - kl
( Pr obab) - ?_( Vx3Pl I ndet ) xan? ' deer - l i t t l e- your not go
sur el y t hey ~ your l i t t l e r ei ndeer sur el y ( cer t ai nl y)
don' t go away' ( er bakova, 2o2) .
( xi i i ) Audi t i vus : B, + - wonon- .
E. g. , xanese- do?( Px3Pl ) t ana? (i s ? - t ' uku po- xona( Loc)
n - wonon( Aud t ) - do?( Vx3P ) xada ? ' Have t hey got any
pr ey? I have not hear d t hat t hey have got any t h s
year .
2. 2. 4. I n Nenet s t he ways of expr ess ng Tense d f f er f r omt he
t ense st r uct ur e of F nno- Ugr c anguages. I n t h s anguage, Tense
can be mar ked not on y mor pho og ca y: some k nd of r ef er ence
t o Tense s a so nvo ved n t he Akt onsar t of t he ver b. The on y
Tense mar ker s t he mor pheme - s wh ch denot es Past Tense. The
r oot of t he ma n ver b n a negat ve sent ence a so car r es some
t empor a va ue but t he Tense mar ker - s s a ways at t ached t o
t he negat ve aux ar y. I n ot her wor ds, t he poss b t es f or
THE NEGATI VE AUXI LI ARY I N SAMOYED
119
t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y t o i ndi cat e Tense ar e r at her l i mi t ed
and t he t empor al val ue of a negat ed st r uct ur e depends most of
al l on t he Akt i onsar t of t he mai n ver b. The negat i ve auxi l i ar y
whi ch i s bur dened wi t h a number of ot her gr ammat i cal mor phemes
as wel l , can onl y t ake t he Past Tense mar ker - s ( and possi bl y
t he Par t Per f der i vat i onal suf f i x - w ) :
V _ _ r ef er s her e t o t he Der f ect i ve Dr oper t i es of t he mai n
posAper f - ..
ver b ( achi evement , compl et i on or i ns t ant aneous nes s ) .
Exampl es :
( a) ( Sg3I ndet ) x? ' not di e ~ he di dn' t di e'
- dm( Vxl Sgl ndet ) t u ? ' not come~I di dn' t come'
I n bot h cas es : V
pos
+ Per f ( i nst ant enous) = V
posAi mper f
( b) ( Sg3l ndet ) n ? ' not s - he s not ' ,
n - dm( Vx Sg ndet ) t ut ? ' not com ng - I don' t come' .
I n bot h cas es : V
pos
+ I mper f ( cont nuous) = V
posA mper f
( c) - dam( Vxl Sgl ndet ) - s ( Past ) t u ? ' not . . . come ~ I di dn' t
come' , For es t Nenet s - t ( Vxl Sgl ndet ) - s( Past ) amt ?
' not . . . hear ~ I haven' t hear d' .
Not i ce, i nci dent al l y, t hat i n For est Nenet s Vxl Sgl ndet
i s r eal i zed as - t ( cf . Haj du 1959, 225) .
( d) j or ce- ?( Pl ur ) xl ' e- m?( Ace) ni - w ?( Par t +Pl ur =Vx3Pl ur
Past ) xda? ' f i sher s f i sh not cat ch ~ t he f i sher men
had not got any f i sh' , For est Nenet s j mp apej ni -
mej ( Par t Per f =VxSg3Pas t ) n__? ' ong wor m ( =dr agon) not
s - t he dr agon was no onger t her e' .
I n For est Nenet s V + w - yi el ds - mej
neg
The above exampl es suggest t hat t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y wi t h -
or - w ( examp es ( c) and ( d) ) may have t he f unct on of t he P u-
per f ect .
2. 2. 4. 1. I n Nenet s t he Past Tense mor pheme - _ i s a t ypi cal f i nal
posi t i on mor pheme. St i l l , i t i s ver y di f f i cul t t o di st i ngui sh
t he mor pheme f r om i t whi ch, t oo, i s a Past Tense mar ker and
whi ch appear s bet ween t hem st em and Vx i n t he al l omor phi c f or m
- s- :
( a) man ( Pr oni ) ni - s ( Past ) - dm( Vxl Sgl ndet ) na? ' I not i s ~
wasn' t I ?' ( er bakova 2o3) ,
( b) man ( Pr oni ) w n- s ( Past ) - w( Vxl SgDet ) xa j ? ' I not ask ~
I di dn' t as k' ,
( c) p j mba- n( Dat ) wuni - s a( Pas t SgDet ) xonu? ' ni ght dur i ng
not spl eep ~ he di dn' t sl eep dur i ng t he ni ght ' , ( Scer -
bakova 2o3) ,
( d) For est Nenet s man wi i - sea( Past ) - m( Vxl SgDet ) ( =wi - sea- m)
meat or ? ' I not ask ~ I di dn' t ask' ( Cf . Leht i sal o 1956,
7 3b, man wi m meat or ?' I haven' t ask you now' ) ,
( e) For est Nenet s i - sO( Past ) - t u?( Vx3Pl ) amt ? ' not hear ~
you di dn' t hear ' .
How can t hi s pecul i ar phenomenon be account ed f or ? Not i ce, f i r st
of al l , t hat t he i nf i x - s - i s char act er i st i c not so much of t he
above negat i ve const r uct i ons but r at her of sent ences whi ch ex-
pr ess an emphat i c asser t i on ( of t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y) . E. g. ,
( a) man ni neka- n( Pxl SgGen) ? ( Post pos) si d' e- mpo- ne ( Num. Adv
j l ' e? - s ( Past ) - ni ( VxDul ) - m? ( Emph) ' I br ot her - wi t h
t wo- much ( =we t wo) l i ve not ~I di d , l i ve wi t h my el der
br ot her ' ,
( b) suxue ni eka e- ej ( Fi l l i ng el ement ) waj ? ( Gen) ?
( wi t h) t u? ni - s( Past ) - xa( Du3) - m?( Emph) ' suxue uncl e
woman waj - wi t h come not ~ Uncl e Suxue has i ndeed
ar r i ved wi t h hi s waj - woman' ,
(c) man t eew? i - a ( Past ) - w( Vxl SgDet ) - ow?( Emph)
' I know not ~ I di d know' .
Such emphat i c sent ences ar e char act er i zed by i nver t ed wor d or -
der ( see 5. bel ow) . One may wonder i f t hi s ki nd of emphasi s
has mor phol ogi cal consequences as wel l . On cl oser i nspect i on,
we may see t hat j ust as t he or der of t he mai n ver b and t he auxi -
l i ar y i s i nver t ed i n emphat i c sent ences, t he ' conver se wor l d'
of emphat i c asser t i on i s r ef l ect ed by t he i nver t ed or der of
t he Tense mar ker and Vx wi t hi n t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y. The f r e-
quent occur r ence of t he Past Tense i nf i x - - i n emphat i c st r uc-
t ur es cer t ai nl y suggest s t hat t hi s i nf i x coul d or i gi nal l y have
ar i sen i n such st r uct ur es and has subsequent l y spr ead over t o
negat ed st r uct ur es. Thi s woul d not r ul e out t he possi bi l i t y t hat
t he or i gi nal or der of mor phemes i s f ound i n emphat i c st r uct ur es.
The above conj ect ur e i s suppor t ed by t he f act t hat i n ot her Sa-
moyed l anguages t he Past Tense mar ker - - occur s i n pr ef i nal
posi t i on and not i n f i nal posi t i on as i n Nenet s. I n ot her wor ds,
i t usual l y appear s bet ween t he st emand Vx.
2. 2. 5. Pr x may al so cont ai n opt i onal suf f i xes and/ or par t i cl es
t hat have an emphat i c f unct i on:
Up t o now t he mor pheme ( i nf i x) - s- has been i nt er pr et ed di f -
f er ent l y. I n gener al , i t was not consi der ed t o be a Past Tense
mar ker . Scer bakova ( op. ci t . 203) , f or i nst ance, t hi nks t hat - sa-
occur s onl y i n quest i ons and i s t hus an i nt er r ogat i ve par t i cl e.
I n anot her pl ace, however , she ci t es Rozi n' s vi ew accor di ng t o
whi ch - s- f unct i ons as emphat i c asser t i on. Mor phol ogi cal ana-
l ysi s does not suppor t ei t her of t hese vi ews, - - can by no
means be i dent i f i ed wi t h t he i nt er r ogat i ve mor pheme - s and i t s
mai n f unct i on i s t o expr ess Past Tense.
122
Exampl es :
( a) - ( Vx2Sg) - wa ( Par t i c) xa ' not go- out ~don' t go
out ' ( er bakova 202) ,
( b) j md ' i ko- xona ( Loc) j l ' e- b?nana?( Cond. ger undPl l )
xi b' er i - r xa- wa?( VxPl l Pr ed) ni - weca - ne?( Par t i cl e)
na? ' ear t h cot t age- i n l i ve- by man- si mi l ar - ar e- we
not - i s ~ when we wer e l i vi ng i n t he cot t age, we
di d not have, a l i f e l i ke men ( Scer bakova, 205) ,
( c) man i - m( Vxl Sg) - no?( Emph) mai j e? ' I not s ee~I
r eal l y don' t see i t ' ,
( d) m- t a ( Px3Sg) i - no ( Emph) nad ? ' t ent not be- seen ~
hi s t ent r eal l y cannot be seen'
3. I n Nenet s nomi nal phr ases i n pr edi cat i ve f unct i on can be
suppl i ed wi t h i ndet er mi nat e ver bal per sonal endi ngs , as i n man
i am ' I am a f at her ' , pi dar i san ' you ar e a f at her ' , pi da
i sa ' he i s a f at her ' , et c. ( cf . ni sa ' f at her ' ) . Not i ce t hat
t he Past Tense mor pheme - , t oo, can be added t o t hese ver -
bal i zed nomi nal s : pi dar i san- a ' you wer e a f at her ' , pi da
ni a- s ' he was a f at her ' , et c. Negat i on i n such sent ences ex-
hi bi t s t he f ol l owi ng i nt er est i ng pr oper t y. Ver bal i zed nouns
ar e not genui ne ver bs . Thi s i s al so shown by t he f act t hat
2
t hey do not possess al l ver bal qual i t i es . Thus , f or exampl e,
t hey do not have a negat i ve ver b st em. That i s why t he nomi -
nal wi t h a pr edi cat i ve per sonal endi ng i s r et ai ned unchanged.
I t i s f ol l owed by t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y whi ch r ecei ves per -
sonal endi ngs i n agr eement wi t h t he nomi nal and by t he nega-
t i ve st em f or m of t he exi st ent i al ver b ( whi ch can be omi t t ed) .
For exampl e,
pi dar i san n na? or pi dar i san n
' you ar e not a f at her ' , et c.
For mor e det ai l s , see Ha| d 1975a and 1975b.
When sent ences wi t h pr edi cat i ve nomi nal s ar e negat ed, t he
st r uct ur e of t he pr edi cat e appear s i n t he f ol l owi ng shape:
I woul d l i ke t o suggest t hat t hi s par t i cul ar negat i ve f or mof
t he ver bal i zed nomi nal ar i ses out of a f usi on of t wo sent ences,
an asser t i ve st at ement and a negat i on. Consi der
(1) pi dar wesakon ' you ar e ol d' + (2) pi dar n na? ' you ar e
not '
Schemat i cal l y, t he st r uct ur es of t hese t wo sent ences can be
r ender ed as f ol l ows :
(1) N + V + Pr x (2) N + V' + V + Pr x'
neg
pi dar wesako- pi dar na? - - n
A movement t r ansf or mat i on t ur ns (2) i nt o ( 2' ) :
( 2' ) pi dar I n na?
The f us on of (1) and ( 2' ) y e ds ( 3) :
(3) p dar wesakon n ( na?)
The i dent i cal component s of t hese t wo sent ences ar e del et ed.
The el ement Pr x' , however , cannot be del et ed si nce i t makes
t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y per f ect i ve and i t cannot be separ at ed
f r om t he st emn - . On t he ot her hand, Pr x n t he f r st sen-
t ence s not super f uous e t her , s nce t s occur r ence on t he
nom na assur es t he ver ba char act er of t he at t er . Reca
t hat t he ver ba zed noun s a pseudo- ver b, t does not have
a negat ve ver ba st em, t her ef or e t he on y s gn of t s ver ba
nat ur e s t he e ement Pr x. Consequent y, t he sent ence (3)
ar s ng out of t he f us on of (1) and ( 2' ) must nc ude bot h
Pr x and Pr x' . But of t he t wo e ement s V one can eas y be
d spensed w t h. V' cont a ns on y nf or mat on a r eady pr ov ded
by V. Hence V' can be om t t ed.
4. I t s ver y mpor t ant t o not e t hat n Nenet s negat on can
be br ought about not onl y by means of t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y
but al so t hr ough a ver y pecul i ar const r uct i on. I n t hi s con-
st r uct i on t he par t i ci pl e of t he mai n ver b appear s wi t h a mor -
phol ogi cal l y not qui t e cl ear f or mof t he posi t i ve auxi l i ar y
( t he copul a) . Thi s f or mof t he copul a ( exi st ent i al ver b)
cont ai ns, i n addi t i on t o t he st em, t he mor pheme - wna (as
wel l as per sonal endi ngs) . One may wonder whet her t hi s mys-
t er i ous mor pheme coul d be i dent i f i ed as t he mani f est at i on
of Pr obabi l i t i vus I V. I have t o l eave t hi s quest i on unan-
swer ed her e, however . The negat i ve const r uct i on i n quest i on
can be descr i bed by t he f ol l owi ng r ul e:
VP > V + Par t + Cop + - wna- + Vx
pos
For exampl e,
( a) t ' i ki nda t ' I namkeda xar ada ne- wl ( Par t Per f )
ne- wna( Pr obab ) ' t her e somet hi ng was woul d- be ~
not hi ng happened t her e' ,
( b) namke pon? mi mi ne- wna- m? ' by goi ng r at her l ong
i f I wer e ~ I di dn' t go l ong' ,
( c) namke ponj ? nawor m ne- wn - ni ? ' f or a r at her
l ong t i me i t was i f I had eat i ng ~ we have not been
eat i ng f or a l ong t i me' .
I n t hese cases t he exi st ent i al ver b ( copul a) car r i es a negat i ve
val ue: i t s or i gi nal f unct i on i s r ever sed.
5. A si mi l ar pr ocess of i nver si on t akes pl ace i n cases of
r easser t i on, i . e. of t he emphat i c asser t i ve use of t he nega-
t i ve auxi l i ar y. I n af f i r mat i ve uses t he negat i ve auxi l i ar y
al ways f ol l ows t he mai n ver b, occupyi ng t hus t he f i nal po-
si t i on i n t he sent ence. The emphat i c asser t i on cont r adi ct s
a pr evi ous ( somet i mes onl y i magi nar y) st at ement and r easser t s
t he occur r ence of an event or t he exi st ence of a cer t ai n st at e
of af f ai r s.
I n Nenet s emphat i c asser t i on ( r easser t i on) has t he
THE NEGATI VE AUXI LI ARY I N SAMOYED
125
f ol l owi ng st r uct ur e :
V _ + V + Pr x
posBneg neg
For exampl e,
( a) man pi dar bakow na? i - dam?( Vxl Sg) ' I your si st er bei ng
am not ~ I am st i l l your el der si st er ' ,
( b) mat ? t ' u? nI - m?( Vxl Sg) ' t ent come- i n not ~I di d go i n
i nt o t he t ent ' .
Even sent ences wi t h a negat i ve auxi l i ar y, i f used af f i r mat i vel y,
may cont ai n an Emph- Det - el ement at t he end of t he auxi l i ar y.
E. g. ,
( a) p n? t ar p? ni ?- i m? ' out go not ~ he di d cer t ai nl y
go out ' ,
( b) xant ? n- aw? ' but you ar e goi ng away' ,
( c) ma xi - m? ' but t hey ( t wo) di d say i t ' ,
( d) For est Nenet s t aj e mi ? ni - t ( Vxl Sg) - awj ' but I am
her e' ,
( e) For est Nenet s xomt na? Ai - s" ( Past ) - t ( Vxl Sg) - aw?
' but I was good' .
6. The above exampl es suggest t hat an or i gi nal l y posi t i ve ver b
may r ecei ve a negat i ve val ue i n cer t ai n synt act i c const r uct i ons.
Fur t her mor e, i n cases of r easser t i on t he negat i ve copul a al -
ways assumes a posi t i ve and af f i r mat i ve f unct i on. Essent i al l y,
t hi s shi f t i n t he val ue of t he copul a does not di f f er f r om
t he adver sat i ve semant i c f l uct uat i ons one f i nds wi t h ant onyms ,
e. g. , Nenet s mal ' end' and ' begi nni ng' , xebo ' t o be si nf ul '
and ' t o be s ai nt ' , sance ' deep' and ' hi gh' , et c. Thi s si t ua-
t i on may pr ompt t he quest i on as t o whet her t he posi t i ve and
negat i ve copul as i n Nenet s ( or , t o put i t di f f er ent l y, t he
ver b of negat i on and t he exi st ent i al ver b) ar e genet i cal l y
r el at ed. I t hi nk t hat t hi s can be a pl ausi bl e hypot hes i s . I t
woul d mean t hat one coul d t hi nk of t he auxi l i ar i es ' t o be' and
126
' not t o be' n Nenet s as hav ng deve oped f r oma common r oot ,
| ust as d d t he Hungar an ver bs a d ' b ess' and t koz ' damn' ,
or t he F nn sh ver b s unat a ' b ess' and t he Est on an ver b
s unat a ' enchant , bew t ch' . As an ana og ca case we may r e-
f er t o Mongo an and Tunguz, wher e t he r e at onsh p bet ween
t he ver b of negat on and t he ex st ent a ver b can be document ed.
Thus, N. Poppe ( 1955, 286) der ves t he negat ve par t c e *bu n
Mongo an f r om t he mper at ve f or mof t he ex st ent a ver b * b.
I n Mandzhu t he aux ar y a- ' not t o be' s cons der ed t o be
r e at ed t o t he Monqo an ex st ent a ver b a- ' t o be' ( cf .
Ramst edt 1924, 200- 1) .
3
6. 1. Not ce t hat our hypot hes s passes t he t est of h st or ca
phonet cs as we . Compar e t he dat a of t he f o ow ng t ab e
wher e t he r oot s of t he ex st ent a ver bs and t hose of t he ver bs
of negat on n t he Samoyed anguages ar e g ven.
The f o ow ng add t ona r emar ks may be n or der at t h s no nt .
Kor yak, Ker ek and, t o a sma er ext ent , a so Kamchada make use
of negat ve pr ef xes and par t c es n negat ve const r uct ons.
I f , however , Per son and Number ar e t o be nd cat ed n t hese
const r uct ons, t h s s done by means of t he appr opr at e per -
f ect ve f or ms of t he aux ar y be. Cf . ( Kor sakov 1939, 311- 2) ,
( Skor k 1965: 330) , ( Vo od n- Zukova 343- 4) . A somewhat s m ar phe-
nomenon can be obser ved n Chukchee, t oo ( Skor k 1961: 287- 8) .
Reca f ur t her mor e t hat t he ex st ent a ver b assumes a nega-
t ve mean ng n t he f o ow ng Ger man expr ess on: Es se denn,
dass er kr ank st ' un ess he s - pr ov ded he s not ' .
I n pr esent - day Hungar an, t oo, one of t en encount er s emphat c
negat on expr essed by means of asser t ve exc amat ons or ques-
t ons, e. g. Tehet ek n ar r o ? ' AmI t o b ame f or t hat ?' , Szp
s az' ' A pr et t y ket t e of f sh' , Msz nnet ?! ' Get out of her e' .
On t he ot her hand, negat ve nt er r ogat ve sent ences may have an
emphat c asser t ve mean ng, e. g. Hat nemmegmondt am? ' D dn' t I
Nenet s Enet s Nganasan Se knp Kamass n
pos. copu a n__- , na- , n - a- , e- , - , e- , rua- e- -
neg. copu a n - , no- - , ne- , n - , _- , _-
ni-
I n t hese dat a t he wor d n t a nasa e ement s ( - , - ) ar e se-
condar y devel opment s. I n Nor t her n Samoyed a t endency pr evai l ed
(to a var yi ng degr ee, dependi ng on t he l anguage or di al ect i n
quest i on) whi ch r esul t ed i n t he el i mi nat i on of t he vowel s f r om
wor d i ni t i al posi t i on by at t achi ng - t o i ni t i al vel ar vowel s
and n- t o i ni t i al pal at al vowel s. Thi s pr ocess appl i ed t o l oan-
wor ds as wel l . For t hi s r eason, i n Common Samoyed t he copul a can
be r econst r uct ed as * i - ~* - . Per haps, a ongs de of t hese f or ms,
t her e was a so a ve ar var ant * _- . I n Nor t her n Samoyed, t hen,
t he pa at a copu a deve oped nt o a negat ve ver b wher eas t he
ex st ent a ver b ar ose f r omt he ve ar copu a. I n Sout her n Samo-
yed, on t he ot her hand, t he pa at a var ant was r et a ned n t he
pos t ve copu a as we . Desp t e t h s f or ma and f unct ona
sp t , t r aces of t he pa at a / ve ar a t er nat on have sur v ved
and can st be f ound n t he negat ve aux ar y of moder n Ne-
net s. Cf . - ~no- . I t shoul d al so be not ed t hat a si mi l ar al -
t er nat i on exi st s i n t he Ob- Ugr i an l anguages and, t hough i n a
sl i ght l y di f f er ent manner , i n Fi nni sh, t oo ( cf . Rdei 1969, 104) .
The f or ms na- and - i n Nenet s, a- and ne- i n Enet s, nua-
and ni - i n Nganasan bear t he same genet i c r el at i onshi p t o each
( f oot not e cont i nued) t el l you?' , Hov nemmennk ve ed? ' Wher e
wou dn' t I go w t h you?' , et c. F na y, accor d ng t o Rde ' s
account of t he negat ve par t c e nem n Hungar an, t h s par t c e
may be der ved f r om an ndet er m nat e pr onom na st em | ust as
r en n Fr ench ( Rde 1969, 105- 6) .
ot her as t he Nenet s newa, Nganasan nai wua ' head' and Nenet s
nemaj ' br ai n' or t he Nenet s name and ni me and Nganasan i mi
' suck' , or t he Nenet s nai , Nganasan nameaj and Nenet s bi
' t he ot her ' ( cf . al so Enet s ena ~ n___) , et c.
6. 2. F na y, not ce t hat B. Co nder does not r u e out a pos-
s b e genet c r e at onsh p bet ween t he pos t ve and t he negat ve
aux ar es n t he Ur a c anguages e t her ( Co nder 1955: o) .
7. I n Ur a c anguages t he negat ve aux ar y has deve oped n-
t o a par t c e n sever a cases ( Se kup, Hungar an, Vogu , Ost yak,
n one of t he Mor dv n d a ect s, and n Est on an d a ect s) . On
t he ot her hand, t he F nno- Ugr c and t he Samoyed negat ve aux -
ar es have many t h ngs n common. F r st of a , t hey car r y t he
bu k of gr ammat ca nf or mat on. Th s s s m ar t o t he pheno-
menon wher e n comp ex pr ed cat es t he f unct on of t he copu a
s mer e y t o unbur den t he ma n ver b by t ak ng over gr ammat ca
nf or mat on f r om t . The Hungar an const r uct on ment em vo na
' I wou d have gone' , ment emvo t ' I had gone' d f f er s dr ast ca -
y f r om t he f or mer t ype of const r uct on s nce her e t he ma n ver b,
t oo, car r es gr ammat ca nf or mat on. The Hungar an const r uct on
s not on y t ypo og ca y d f f er ent f r omwhat we encount er n
ot her Ur a c anguages but t s genes s, t oo, must be ndependent
5
of t hese anguages.
4
For mor e det a s on t h s po nt , cf . Ha| d 1954.
The pr esent paper s a r ev sed ver s on of Ha| du 1970.
Ref er ences
Co nder , B. ( 1955) Fenno- Ugr c Vocabu ar y, St ockho m: A mqv st
& W kse .
Ha| d, P. ( 1954) D e sekundr en an aut enden Nasa e ( - , - )
i mSamoj edi schen, Act a Li ngui st i ca I V. , 17- 67.
Ha| d, P. ( 1959) A | ur k- syamo| d nye vt an kt kr dsr o (On
t wo pr ob ems of t he gr ammar of Yur ak- Samoyed) , Nye vt udo-
mnyi Kzl emnyek 62, 223- 46.
Ha| d, P. ( 1970) Zur Synt ax der negat ven Ver ba f or men mSa-
mo| ed schen, Abhand ungen der Akadem e der W ssenschaf t en
n Gt t ngen. Ph o og sch- h st or sche K asse 76, 90- 106.
Ha| d, P. ( 1975a) Pr d kat ve Nom na f ex on n den samo| ed -
schen Spr achen, Act a L ngu st ca Hung. XXV, 1- 30.
Ha| d, P. ( 1975b) Samo| edo og sche Schr f t en, St ud a Ur a o-
A t a ca VI , 115- 40.
Kor sakov, G. M. (19 39) Nymy ansko- r ussk | s ovar ' , Moscow: Ucped-
g z .
Leht sa o, T. V. ( 1956) | ur aksamo| ed sches Wr t er buch, He s nk :
Soc et as Fenno- Ugr ca.
Poppe, N. ( 1955) I nt r oduct on t o Mongo an Compar at ve St ud es,
Mmo r es de a Soc t F nno- ougr enne 110, 300 pp.
Ramst edt , G. | . ( 1924) D e Ver ne nung n den a t a schen Spr achen,
Mmo r es de a Soc t F nno- ougr enne 52, 196- 215.
Rde , K. ( 1969) Szf e| t sek ( Et ymo og es) , Nye vt udomny Kz-
emnyek 71, 104- 6.
Scer bakova, A. M. ( 1954) For my ot r can | a v neneckom | azyke,
Ucennye Zap sk Len ngr adskogo Pedagog ceskogo I nst t ut a,
Faku ' t et nar odov Sever a 101, 181- 231.
S r o, P. ( 1968) A f nnugor nye vek t agado gea ak| a nak mondat -
t an sszet evo| e ( The synt act c const t uent s of t he negat ve
ver b f or ms n F nno- Ugr c anguages) , Nye vt udomny Kz e-
mnyek 70, 361- 5.
Skor k, P. | a. ( 1968) Ker eksk | | azyk, | azyk nar odov SSSR V.
Len ngr ad: I zd. Nauka, 310- 33.
Skor i k, P. J a. ( 1961) Gr ammat i ka cukot skogo j azyka I . , Moscow-
Leni ngr ad : I zd. Nauka, 448 pp.
Ter escenko, N. M. ( 1965) Nenecko- r usski j sl ovar ' , Moscow: I zd.
Sovet skaj a Enci kl opedi j a, 942 p.
Vol odi n, A. P. , A. N. Zukova ( 1968) I t el ' menski j j azyk, J azyki
nar odov SSSR V. , Leni ngr ad : I zd. Nauka, 343- 51.
NON- APPLI CABI LI TY AS A TEST FOR CATEGORY DEFI NI TI ONS
Rober t Het zr on
1. I nt r oduct on
When t he ngu st has est ab shed t he nvent or y of
gr ammat ca e ement s n a g ven anguage on t he bas s of
t he mean ngf u f or ma un t s at t est ed, t he next st ep s t o
f nd out t he mean ng of each un t . Of t en, a number of sup-
p ement ar y d st r but ed un t s comb ne nt o set s t o be un-
der st ood as ma| or gr ammat ca cat egor es t hat need t o be
f r st def ned, t hen t he r const t uent un t s can be s t uat ed
w t h n t hem. Such ar e t he case- syst ems composed of cases,
ver ba or pr onom na par ad gms cont a n ng per sons comb ned
w t h number and gender s, t ense and aspect syst ems, et c. The
mean ng of t hese un t s s not t r v a f or t he descr pt on.
I t s mpor t ant t o f nd out why Aspect A s used n one n-
st ance and _ n anot her , why t hey ar e not nt er changeab e
I amgr at ef u t o F. K ef er f or g v ng det a ed comment s on
t he f r st ver s on of t h s paper . I t s c ear t hat our concept
of ' aspect ' s not t he same, but t h s d sagr eement apar t , h s
r emar ks have been r e evant and have been t aken nt o account
n t he f na ver s on. Per t nent obser vat ons by K. E. K ss
he ped me t o weed out some er r or s of nt er pr et at on.
132
i n a gi ven cont ext , or i f t hey ar e, i n what manner t he sub-
st i t ut i on of one f or t he ot her modi f i es t he communi at i ona1
cont ent of t he sent ence or of t hat por t i on of t he di scour se.
Yet , f i ndi ng semant i c def i ni t i ons f or t he cat egor i es t hat
al so have t he expl anat or y power t o answer al l t hese ques-
t i ons may somet i mes be a f r ust r at i ng exer ci se. I t may be r e-
l at i vel y si mpl e ( t hough not necessar i l y wi t hout compl i cat i ons)
t o def i ne t he per sons of a conj ugat i on, but i n ot her si t ua-
t i ons l i ngui st s have cont ent ed t hemsel ves wi t h assi gni ng l a-
bel s such as ' past ' , ' per f ect i ve' , et c. , f or cat egor i es t hat
f ul f i l l much mor e compl i cat ed f unct i ons t han t he l i t er al mean-
i ng of t he l abel s or t hei r ' uni ver sal ' def i ni t i on woul d sug-
gest . Al so, a f or mal cat egor y may cor r espond t o sever al f unc-
2
t i onal cat egor i es, and i t woul d be f ut i l e t o at t r i but e a si n-
gl e super meani ng t o i t . Fi nal l y, f or case- syst ems i n many l an-
guages or f or t he ver bal der i vat i on syst em i n Semi t i c and
Cushi t i c, t aki ng t wo exampl es, i deal i zed semant i c def i ni t i ons
val i d onl y f or a mi nor i t y of t he uses ( t hough pr obabl y or i gi -
nal l y omni - val i d) have been pr oposed wi t h t he pr ovi so t hat
t he maj or i t y of act ual uses ar e l exi cal l y det er mi ned and ar e
t hus devoi d of i ndependent meani ng. However , t he di f f i cul t y
or even i mpossi bi l i t y of at t r i but i ng appr opr i at e semant i c de-
f i ni t i ons t o some f or mal cat egor i es shoul d not det er t he l i n-
gui st f r om t r yi ng t o est abl i sh t hem. What i s not successf ul
f or one t ype of cat egor y may be per f ect l y f easi bl e f or ot her s.
Now, even when t he cat egor y exami ned can be consi der -
ed t o be subj ect t o a si ngl e and al ways val i d semant i c def i ni -
t i on, t he accept abi l i t y of t he act ual def i ni t i on ( whi ch may or
2
For exampl e, Engl i sh Ver b- ed f or ms ar e used as a past i n most
cont ext s, but as a f i ct i t i ous, unr eal pr esent af t er i f or I
wi sh, t he f or mer i n conj unct i on wi t h a cl ause cont ai ni ng a
condi t i onal ver b f or m.
. NON- APPLI CABI LI TY AS A TEST FOR CATEGORY DEFI NI TI ONS 133
may not be cl ear l y f or mal i zabl e) wi l l al so depend on t he
wr i t er ' s ski l l at conci se expr essi on ( whi ch i s an ar t i st i c
concept ) and on t he f r amewor k i n whi ch he chooses t o set hi s
3
def i ni t i on. Her e t he cr uci al quest i on i s whet her t he def i ni -
t i ons ar e t est abl e, ver i f i abl e, whet her t her e exi st cr i t er i a
whi ch, i n addi t i on t o st yl i st i c consi der at i ons l i ke Hj el m-
sl ev' s ' conci seness' pr i nci pl e, al l ow t he l i ngui st t o sel ect
t he best one. One needs a t est t hr ough whi ch wr ong def i ni -
t i ons may be pr oven wr ong and hencef or t h el i mi nat ed. Sever al
f or mul at i ons may sur vi ve such a t est , and t hese may t hen be
j udged al ong st yl i st i c l i nes, or al t er nat i vel y used accor di ng
t o t he need.
I n t hi s st udy, such a t est i s pr oposed. Gi ven Cat egor y
A and Cat egor y t hat const i t ut e t he t wo t er ms of a set , and
gi ven a cont ext i n whi ch t he opposi t i on bet ween A and i s
neut r al i zed ( ei t her onl y one of t hemmay be used: wi t hout i t s
speci al meani ng, or bot h i ndi f f er ent l y, or el se a t hi r d el e-
ment appear s whi ch may f or mal l y be a mi xt ur e of A and ) , -
i f i t f ol l ows f r om t he semant i c def i ni t i on of t hat cont ext
t hat t he semant i c di st i nct i on st at ed bet ween A and i s not
appl i cabl e her e, t her e i s a good chance t hat al l t he semant i c
def i ni t i ons pr oposed, t hat of t he cont ext and t hose of Cat e-
gor i es A and B, ar e cor r ect . Nat ur al l y, t hi s const i t ut es no
unequi vocal pr oof t hat t hey ar e al l cor r ect . Ther e may be
mi sr epr esent at i ons i n al l of t hem, a bi as i n t he same di r ec-
t i on, or t hey may be so br oad t hat t hey accommodat e mor e t han
j ust t he el ement s i nvol ved. Yet t he t est may al so be appl i ed
i n t he opposi t e di r ect i on. I f t he def i ni t i on of t he cont ext
does not expl ai n t he non- appl i cabi l i t y of t he cat egor i es as
def i ned, unl ess some ot her f act or s ar e i nvol ved ( f or mal neu-
t r al i zat i on, et c. ) , at l east one of t he def i ni t i ons i s l i kel y

Because of t hi s, t wo appar ent l y di f f er ent def i ni t i ons may
somet i mes t ur n out t o be essent i al l y t he same.
t o be wr ong.
I n t he ust r at ons be ow Hungar an examp es ar e used.
The cat egor es nvo ved ar e among t he most de cat e and most
d sput ed n Hungar an gr ammar . I n most nst ances, t he pr esent
aut hor ' s own nt er pr et at ons, not necessar y accept ed by ot h-
er s, ar e used t o set up a cha n of r eason ng. Wh e t he nd -
v dua nt er pr et at on and def n t ons on wh ch t he ent r e r ea-
son ng r eposes may be cha enged by ot her s, t he soundness of
t he who e net wor k of ar gument s may be t aken as an ev dence
t hat t he bases ar e so d t hemse ves, n t he sp r t of t he
t est ng met hod pr oposed her e.
Or e se, t hose ot her f act or s w event ua y be f ound. For
examp e, n many anguages, t he t ense syst em of t he negat ve
ver bs s poor er t han t hat of t he af f r mat ve ones. I n Et h o-
p an Sem t c anguages t hat d st ngu sh bet ween a past and
a pr esent per f ect , e. g. , Amhar c, t her e s on y one negat ve
f or m cor r espond ng t o bot h. I n West er n Gur age, a s ng e neg-
at ve nonpast cor r esponds t o a pr esent , a def n t e f ut ur e
and an ndef n t e f ut ur e, t hr ee d f f er ent t enses n af f r ma-
t on. One may t h nk up semant c excuses f or t hese d scr ep-
anc es, such as t he r r e evance of some d st nct ons n r e-
at ng non- occur ences, but t hese ar e not b nd ng. Many an-
guages have separ at e negat ve pr esent per f ect f or ms, nc ud-
ng t he Go| | am d a ect of Amhar c t se f . Her e t he exp ana-
t on s h st or ca : nnovat ed t enses usua y have not deve -
oped t he r negat ve count er par t s as t h s wou d have nvo ved
some mor pho og ca comp cat ons. Yet t he semant c ' excuses'
ar e not ent r e y f ut e her e. They pr ov de an a. post er or
| ust f cat on f or why t hese anguages cou d af f or d not t o
deve op negat ve f or ms her e, and cou d go on us ng t he o der
st ock of negat ve t enses. The d st nct on bet ween ' has not
happened' and ' d d not happen' s poss b e, but not cr uc a .
NON- APPLI CABI LI TY AS A TEST FOR CATEGORY DEFI NI TI ONS 135
2. The t wo Gap- F er s
2. 1. Pr om nent a! cat egor es. I n a anguages, one may con-
st r uct sent ences wh ch cons st of a st r ng of component s t o
be d v ded, accor d ng t o t he gener a st andar ds of par s ng,
nt o ma| or component s such as Sub| ect and Pr ed cat e, each
f ur t her br oken down t o ower eve component s as t he case
may be. On t he ot her hand, anguages have spec a dev ces
f or conf er r ng spec a pr om nence on any ma| or component of
t he sent ence, show ng t s par t cu ar mpor t ance, pr v eged
commun cat ona st at us w t h n t he sent ence. The ex st ence of
such phenomena has ong been r ecogn zed, but not t he f act
t hat t her e s a we - def nab e gr oup of such pr om nent a!
cat egor es, each hav ng t s own | ust f cat on f or be ng s n-
g ed out and e evat ed above t he r est of t he sent ence. I n t he
past , t er ms such as ' ( cont r ast ve) emphas s' , ' t op c( a za-
t on) ' , ' f ocus' , ' f or egr ound ng' , ' h gh ght ng' , et c. have
been somewhat nd scr m nat e y used by some aut hor s f or any
or a of t he cat egor es. C ef t - const r uct ons and what has
been ca ed ' pseudo- c ef t ' have been t he on y ones t o be
g ven spec a t r eat ment , because of t he r f or ma pr oper t es
wh ch made t hemnot ceab e. Yet , r ecent y, t he awar eness of
t he ex st ence of sever a such cat egor es has emer ged. Many
ngu st s d st ngu sh now bet ween ' f ocus' and ' t op c' . I t
has even been r ecogn zed t hat t her e may be d f f er ent k nds
of t op c, so t hat t h s s a c ass of cat egor es, r at her t han
a s ng e one.
The pr esent aut hor d st ngu shes bet ween t wo ma| or
c asses of pr om nent a cat egor es ( . e. cat egor es t he on y
shar ed f eat ur e of wh ch s be ng e evat ed above t he nor ma
eve of t he sent ence as f ar as commun cat ona mpor t ance
s concer ned) : ( A) P scour se- d r ect ona ones such as Top c
(a nk t o t he pr eced ng cont ext ) and Pr esent at ve ( pr epar a-
t on f or t he subsequent cont ext , see Het zr on 1975) , bot h of
wh ch ar e pr mar y expr essed by pos t ona mod f cat on:
sent ence- n t a f or t he f or mer and sent ence- f na f or t he
at t er ( accompan ed or not by ot her mar ker s) . Bot h adm t
var ous degr ees of nt ens t y ( Top c may r epr esent t he con-
t nuat on of pr eced ng t ems or st and n cont r ast w t h t hem,
t he ' As f or ' t ype, et c. ) . They ar e t hus bund es of cat egor es
r at her t han s ng e ones. The second c ass s ( B) Gap- F er s
wher e t he sent ence descr bes an event or f act a r eady known,
pr esupposed, guessab e f r om t he pr eced ng cont ext ( ngu s-
t c or pr agmat c) or mer e y t r v a , - yet one ( or mor e, see
be ow) component of t const t ut es nove , t r u y r e evant n-
f or mat on. I n ot her wor ds, t he st ar t ng po nt s a sent ence
w t h ( at east ) one component ef t unspec f ed, and t s
t hat component t hat s r evea ed by ut t er ng t he sent ence w t h
a spec f c const r uct on, t h s be ng t he ver y r eason f or ut t er -
ng t he sent ence. Thus, t he Gap- F er s t he mpor t ant par t
of t he commun cat on, t he r est s bas ca y a f r ame f or t .
The commun cat ona downp ayedness of t he r est of t he sen-
t ence s t o be v ewed as a c ne f r om t r ue pr esuppos t on ( . e. ,
t s t he ob| ect of ear er know edge) t o nf or mat on t r v-
a by t se f , subor d nat ed t o t he Gap- f er , show ng what
gap t act ua y f s.
2. 2. The t wo Gap- F er s. I n my t heor y, t her e ar e t wo k nds
of Gap- F er s: ( ) Focus wher e t he Focused e ement appear s
The much used concept of ' new nf or mat on' ought t o be de-
f ned ver y car ef u y and has been t he ob| ect of many m sunder -
st and ngs n t he past . I t need not r ef er t o comp et e y new
par t c pant s, t hese may be o d ones t hat have a r eady appear -
ed n t he d scour se, but t he r emer gence n t h s spec f c
cont ext may have spec a mpor t ance as t has not been f or e-
seen ( see ( 3) be ow and cf . Chaf e 1976: 30) . Anot her app ca-
t on of t he concept ' new nf or mat on' t o event s ( ~ Comment )
s t o be d st ngu shed f r omt h s.
i n i t s sl ot i n expl i ci t opposi t i on t o anyt hi ng el se t hat
may r easonabl y appear t her e, and ( i i ) Repl acer wher e t he
Repl aci ve el ement appear s i n expl i ci t opposi t i on t o some-
t hi ng t hat has appear ed i n t hat sl ot ear l i er , ei t her as a
cor r ect i on of a pr evi ous er r oneous st at ement or assumpt i on,
or as an addi t i on t o an ear l i er st at ement or assumpt i on t he
essence of whi ch al so appl i es t o ot her ent i t i es.
6
I n pr i nci pl e, anyt hi ng i s i n opposi t i on wi t h anyt hi ng el se
t hat may occur i n t he same sl ot . What I mean her e i s expl i c-
i t l y mar ked opposi t i on, cal l i ng t he at t ent i on t o t he f act
t hat ot her el ement s coul d occur t her e, but t hey do not .
7
I n my ear l i er publ i cat i ons, I cal l ed t hese ' Emphasi s' and
' Cont r ast ' r espect i vel y. By adopt i ng ' Focus' i nst ead of ' Em-
phasi s' , I have j oi ned t he common pr act i ce i n r ecent wr i t i ngs,
t hough my def i ni t i on of Focus may somewhat di f f er f r omwhat
ot her s under st ood by i t . I ampr oposi ng t he t er m ' Repl acer '
( Repl acement , Repl aci ve) i nst ead of ' Cont r ast ' because t he
l at t er may l ead t o mi sunder st andi ng, whi ch can be i l l ust r at ed
by t he f ol l owi ng.
Bi er wi sch ( 1966: 150- 2) and Ki ef er ( 1969: 97- 8) use t he
t er m ' pr i mar y ( or mai n) st r ess' i n t wo senses. The f i r st one
i s unmar ked, aut omat i c mai n st r ess whi ch, i n t he absence of
a Focus el ement , nor mal l y st r i kes t he l ast wor d of t he sen-
t ence i n l anguages l i ke Ger man, Engl i sh, Moder n Hebr ew ( but
not Hungar i an! ) . The ot her one i s f or mar ki ng t he el ement
t hat cor r esponds t o Focus. Even t hough t hey ar e i n compl e-
ment ar y di st r i but i on, t he non- f unct i onal and t he f unct i onal
uses have t o be di st i ngui shed.
I n deal i ng wi t h t he mai n st r ess, Bi er wi sch r ef er s t o
Ki par sky ( 1966: 89- 92) , but hi s pr esent at i on of t he poi nt s i s
somewhat i nf el i ci t ous. Bi er wi sch ( 1966: 151) of f er s t he ex-
ampl es: Der Ar zt hat den Pat i ent en unt er sucht ' The physi ci an
( f oot not e 7 cont i nued)
( f oot not e 7 cont nued) exam ned t he pat ent ' w t h t he ma n
st r ess on t he ast wor d - our f r st , unmar ked use, and Per
Ar zt hat e nen Pat ent en unt er sucht ' The phys c an exam ned
a pat ent ' wher e t s t he ndef n t e ob| ect t hat at t r act s
t he st r ongest st r ess. He conc udes t hat t h s st r ess s p aced
on t he non- t hemat c, . e. new y nt r oduced e ement . The m-
pr ess on t h s cr eat es s t hat t he ma n st r ess s assoc at ed
w t h t he ndef n t eness of t he noun, and t h s s wr ong as t
st ands. What K par sky ( 1966: 89- 92) act ua y shows s t hat t he
ndef n t e nouns of h s examp es ( t he above one and E n Br ef
kam ' A et t er came' ) ob gat or y at t r act t he ma n st r ess,
and t h s s a phenomenon t o be dea t w t h apar t ( a so n Hun-
gar an, ar t c e- ess non- spec f c sub| ect s ar e ob gat or y
Focused) . Yet , as an a t er nat ve t o t he unmar ked f or m, t he
def n t e noun may a so car r y t he st r ongest st r ess ( Der Ar zt
hat den Pat ent en unt er sucht ) and t h s w per f ect y cor r e-
spond t o Focus. Such nouns ar e not ' new y nt r oduced' , on y
' nove ' or ' unexpect ed' n t hat cont ext n t he r est r ct ed
sense of not e 5.
As can be seen, our Focus cor r esponds t o t he ' ma n
st r ess' - mar ked e ement of B er w sch and K ef er - n t he sec-
ond sense, when t s not aut omat ca y p aced at t he end.
These aut hor s use t he t er m ' Emphas s' f or what I or g na y
ca ed ' Cont r ast ' , now ' Rep acer ' . The t er m ' Cont r ast ' was
used by t hem n a comp et e y d f f er ent sense. Let us t ake
K ef er ' s examp e ( 1969: 97, cf . B er w sch 1966: 151 ( 3) ) :
Pt er Rmban , Pa ped g Becsben.
' Pet er Rome- n ves, Pau on- t he- ot her - hand V enna- n'
Th s wr t t en sent ence may have t hr ee d f f er ent pr osod c
r ead ngs, ( ) W t h M d st r ess on a nouns, t s a neut r a
gapped coor d nat e const r uct on, ( ) What B er w sch and K ef er
ca ' Cont r ast ' s what I wou d ca an ' Enumer at ve const r uc-
t on' . I n t h s Hungar an const r uct on, t he sy ab e Ro- wou d
be cons der ab y ower ed n shar p cont r ast w t h t he subsequent
Ot her w se st at ed, Focus expr esses exp c t oppos t on n
pr nc p e, wher eas Rep ac ng const t ut es concr et e oppos -
t on n t he d scour se. These ar e t he not ona , semant c de-
f n t ons .
On a gener a sca e, t he f or ma d st nct on bet ween
t he t wo s st r onger - t han- nor ma st r ess f or Focus and an even
_
st r onger one f or Rep acement . I n many anguages, c ef t - con-
( f oot not e 7 cont nued) r se of t he comma- nt onat on; Becs-
wou d be r a sed, f o owed by a st eep descent ( n t he cor r e-
spond ng Ger man const r uct on, a t he nouns wou d have t he
pr mar y st r ess, . e. t wo occur ences of such st r ess n each
c ause) . Th s s def n t e y not a case of Gap- F ng, ( )
Th s st r ng may a so cor r ect ear er m sconcept ons, e. g. , t he
be ef t hat Pet er ves n Tur n and Pau n Sa zbur g. I n
t h s s t uat on, t he cor r ect ve e ement s, her e t he p ace- names,
w car r y t he U t r ah gh st r ess ( see not e 11 be ow) : my ear er
' Cont r ast ' , now ' Rep acement ' , B er w sch' s ' Emphas s' . Th s
t ang e of t er m no ogy may on y be r emed ed by pr opos ng new
abe s f or t he cat egor es nvo ved.
_
The f a ur e t o d st ngu sh bet ween t he t wo Gap- F er s has
been t he sour ce of a gr eat dea of conf us on n t he t er a-
t ur e. One shou d heed Bo nger ' s war n ng ( 1965: 103) when he
po nt s out t hat My mt her s com ng mp es ndeed a cont r ast
w t h f at her or s st er (my Rep acement ) , but ' f we f t t he
examp es nt o a d f f er ent cont ext , f or nst ance
Why ar e you n such a hur r y t o get home?
My mt her s com ng.
t he accent on a pr or wor d does not mp y cont r ast . ' Th s
at t er case s what I cons der Focus. One po nt may be added
her e, however : n t he f r st t ype, wher e My mt her s so st r es-
sed as t o d spe m sconcept ons about t he dent t y of t he v s-
t or ( not my f at her , et c. ) , t he p t ch w be h gher t han n
st r uct ons ar e used f or t hat po ar case of Focus wher e t he
downp ayed par t of t he sent ence s t r u y pr esupposed or even
9
pr e- known. Wh e on y one component of a sent ence may be
Focused ( see K ef er 1969: 103 and Hor vat h 1976 f or det a s) ,
sever a e ement s may be Rep aced ( Het zr on 1972) .
2. 2. 1. Gap- F er s n Hungar an. For Hungar an, t he r u e s
t hat t he Focus e ement must d r ect y pr ecede t he t ense- car -
r er ( wh ch may be Focused t se f , n wh ch case t h s wor d
or der r u e s vacuous) , and f t h s one happens t o be a con-
s st ng of a Pr ever b and a Base, t he Pr ever b w be d s-
p aced so as t o a ow d r ect cont act bet ween t he Focus e e-
( f oot not e 8 cont nued) t he s mp e Focus const r uct on. Chaf e
(19 76: 34 and e sewher e) does ndeed r ecogn ze t hat ' cont r ast -
ve sent ences | my Rep acement , RH| ar e qua t at ve y d f f er -
ent f r omt hose wh ch supp y new nf or mat on f r om an un m t ed
set of poss b t es | my Focus, RH | ' , t hough Chaf e' s ' con-
t r ast ' embr aces bot h Rep acement and Enumer at on ( ( ) above) .
9
See now t he ns ght f u st udy of Eng sh c ef t - const r uct ons
by Pr nce ( 1978) wher e some subs d ar y f unct ons ar e a so
po nt ed out . I n par t cu ar , one shou d not e t he I nf or mat ve-
Pr esuppos t ona one (89 8sq) wher e t her e s no t r ue pr esup-
pos t on, on y t he mpr ess on s consc ous y cr eat ed t hat
t he backgr ounded par t s an est ab shed f act t hat ought t o
have been known by t he hear er .
Anot her sour ce of m sunder st and ngs and m s nt er pr et a-
t ons: t he c ef t - const r uct on comb ned w t h a spec a y
st r ong st r ess may a so be opt ona y used t o expr ess Rep ace-
ment . Thus, t her e s n Eng sh a d st nct on bet ween I t was
n t he dr wer t hat I f ound t he money ( af t er hav ng ooked f or
t f or an hour - Focus) and I t was n t he dr Awer t hat I f ound
t he money ( and not n t he saf e wher e t was supposed t o be, -
Rep acement ) , t he at t er w t h a h gher p t ch.
ment and t he t ense- car r yi ng Base. Mor eover , t he Focus el e-
11
ment wi l l have a Hi gh st r ess. See ( 1) f or exampl es of Focus.
For Repl acement , t he f i r st Repl aci ve el ement wi l l occu-
py t he same pr e- t ense posi t i on as t he Focused one, but wi l l
car r y a hi gher : Ul t r ahi gh st r ess. Ther e may be sever al Repl ac-
i ve el ement s i n a sent ence. I n t hat case, each one of t hem
wi l l be mar ked by t he Ul t r ahi gh st r ess and al l of t hemmay be
al i gned i n f r ont of t he t ense- car r i er , or , wi t h t he r est r i c-
t i on t hat at l east one of t hem shoul d occupy t he pr e- t ense
posi t i on, par t or al l of t he r est may be pl aced i n any post -
ver bal posi t i on ( see Het zr on 1972 f or exampl es and det ai l s) .
See ( 2) f or cases of Repl acement .
10
I ammaki ng a t er mi nol ogi cal di st i nct i on bet ween di spl ace-
ment of t he pr ever b and post posi ng t he pr ever b. Wi t h a Focus
el ement , t he pr ever b i s most neut r al l y r i ght af t er t he ver b,
but i t may appear el sewher e as wel l ( see t he second al t er na-
t i ve i n ( 1b) ) , even bef or e t he Focus noun i n a si t uat i on of
Topi cal i zat i on : Be_ csak Sandor dugt a a_ f ej et . ' I n onl y
Al exander t ucked t he head- hi s- Acc. ' . Hence my cal l i ng t hi s
' di spl acement ' . The t er m ' post posi ng' wi l l be r eser ved t o
t he aspect ual phenomenon wher e t he pr ever b has t o appear af -
t er t he ver b ( most of t en di r ect l y af t er i t , but not necessar i -
l y so, yet never i n a posi t i on pr ecedi ng t he ver b, see Sect i on
3 bel ow) .
11
I amusi ng bel ow a t onol ogi cal not at i on as pr oposed i n
M H
Het zr on, f or t hcomi ng: f or Mi d, t he unmar ked st r ess; f or
Hi gh, t he Focus- st r ess; f or Ul t r ahi gh, t he Repl acement
0
st r ess, f or zer o, mar ked onl y wher e t he st r ess has been
r educed t o ni l ( but not when i t i s zer o t o begi n wi t h) . A
f ur t her l evel , f or Low, t he st r ess of non- i ni t i al wor ds i n
a composi t e Noun Phr ase, i s not needed i n t he pr esent di s-
cussi on ( see ( 25) bel ow) . Thi s not at i on i s t onemi c. Expr es-
A M d- st r essed wor d w ose t s st r ess f t f o ows
a H gh or U t r ah gh- st r essed one ( and w be mar ked
) .
I n t he f o ow ng ust r at ons, I ampr ov d ng a m n-
ma cont ext t o make t he d st nct on bet ween Focus vs. Rep ace-
ment r easonab y c ear . I n ( 1) , t he open ng of t he door makes
t pr obab e t hat someone ( or somet h ng, as n ( d- e) ) s about
t o ent er t he scene. I t s t he dent t y of t he newcomer t hat
const t ut es t he nove , t r u y r e evant nf or mat on n ( 1b) . I n
( 2) a wr ong assumpt on s cor r ect ed. I f t he wr ongness of a
pr eced ng assumpt on s a r eady known at t he t me of t s ut t e-
r ance, t he e ement t o be Rep aced may car r y an ant c pat or y
U t r ah gh st r ess, but H gh s a so accept ab e: ( 2a) :
( 1) FOCUS
( a)
' Out - opened t he door and A exander n- t hr ust t he
head- h s- Acc. '
(' The door opened and A exander ooked n' , - her e
A. has a r eady been pr esent on t he scene, t h s s
a neut r a const r uct on)
( b)
( Her e t he pr ever b be- has been d sp aced. The sub-
| ect , A exander , s under Focus, e t her f or be ng
a new par t c pant or t o expr ess t he dea of ' he
of a peop e who cou d have done t hat ' , . e. a
cer t a n degr ee of unexpect edness, a so compat b e
w t h a s t uat on wher e A. had a r eady been on t he
scene)
( c)
' Out - opened t he door and t he ht - h s- Acc. t hr ust
( f oot not e 11 cont nued) s ve nt onat on, downdr f t and ot her
secondar y phenomena ar e not mar ked.
NON-APPLICABILITY AS A TEST FOR CATEGORY DEFINITIONS 143
n someone'
( ' The door opened and someone st uck h s hat n' ,
her e t he gr ammat ca ob| ect s under Focus)
( d)
M
K ny t az
M
a| t s
M
egt e t a
M
szoba
M
napf nnye .
1 2
' Out - opened t he door and " up" - was- f ed t he
r oom sun ght - w t h'
( ' The door opened and t he r oom became f ed w t h
sun ght ' , a neut r a const r uct on. The door may
have been opened pr ec se y t o et t he ght n)
(
e
)
M
K ny t a z
M
a| t o es
H
napf ennye

t e t
M
meg a
M
szoba.
' Out - opened t he door and sun ght - w t h was- f ed
" up" t he r oom'
( The Focus s on ' sun ght ' . The cent r a event s
t he appear ance of t he sun ght . When t he door
opened, t he r oom cou d have been f ed w t h t he
sme of gar c, w t h t he sound of t he chat t er ng
of ch dr en p ay ng out s de, but of a t h ngs ,
t he sun ght s what appear ed)
( 2) REPLACEMENT
( a) F pr e szm t ot t am, de
U
Sndor t

p an-
M M
t ot t am meg az a| t oban.
' PHI LI P- ont o
I - count ed but ALEXANDER- Acc. I - g mpsed
" up" t he door - n'
(' I count ed on Ph p, but t was A exnder whose
s ght I caught st and ng n t he door f r ame' )
1 2
The Hungar an pr ever b meg- , et ymo og ca y ' t o beh nd' but
hav ng ost t h s s ens e, s mposs b e t o t r ans at e ( see Per r ot
1966 f or a det a ed t r eat ment of t s f unct ons , a so K ef er
1979) . Her e I ar b t r ar y use " up" wh ch somet mes t r ans at es
t n Eng sh. The doub e quot es ar e necessar y t o d st ngu sh
t f r om f e - , t he pr ever b t hat act ua y means ' up( war d) ' .
144
HUNGARIAN GENERAL LINGUISTICS
H M
( b) A says: F p | t t be az
M
a| t on.
' Ph p came n t he door - on | =t hr ough| '
( Sub| ect - Focus)
_ r ep es : Nem! Tveds ! Sandor | t t
M
be az
M
a| t n.
' No! Your - ar e- m st aken! ALEXANDER came
n t he door - on'
( C)
U
Sndor

| | tt
M
be s

nem
U
Fu p ( or es_
U
nem
F p) .
' ALEXANDER came n and not PHI LI P'
( d)
U
Sandor

| t t
M
be
U
F ppe .
' ALEXANDER came n PHI LI P- w t h' ( and not | OHN w t h
| I M)
I n ( 1a) and ( 1d) , neut r a const r uct ons f t t ng nt o an
even sequence of event s ar e cont r ast ed w t h Focus- cont a n ng
ones: ( 1b) and ( 1e) wher e t he newcomer s g ven spec a pr om -
nence. The H gh st r ess n ( 1b- c- e) and t he U t r ah gh one n
( 2) ar e phonet ca y c ear y d st nct . ( 2c) ust r at es t hat
t he pr act ce n t he t er at ur e of add ng ' and not ' phr ases t o
Focus const r uct ons s adv sed. Such negat on, a r eady
mp ed when t he asser t on s ut t er ed and t s ut t er ed t o be
cor r ect ve, aut omat ca y makes t an nst ance of Rep acement ,
not Focus. ( 2d) s a case of t wo Rep acer s n t he same sen-
t ence .
F na y, s nce t he examp es n ( 1) and ( 2) cont a n ver bs
of emer gence and t he r Focused noun s new on t he scene by de-
f n t on, n or der not t o cr eat e t he wr ong mpr ess on, t s
necessar y t o pr esent anot her ust r at on nvo v ng anot her
k nd of ver b:
( 3) ( a)
M
NY vanva o vo t , hog Sandor el ol t ot t a a
M
vi l -
l anyt .
' Obvi ous was t hat Al exander away- ext i ngui shed t he
el ect r i ci t y- Acc. '
( b)
M
Ny vnva vo t , hogy
H
Sandor

o t ot t a
M
e a
M
v -
anyt .
(c)

Nyi l vnval vol t, hogy
M
Sndor
H
el ol totta a
0
vi l l anyt.
( __) s a neut r a const r uct on: ' I t was obv ous t hat A exander
had t ur ned of f t he ght ' . I t s t he r ea t y of t he ent r e
happen ng t hat s dec ar ed t o be obv ous. I n ( 3b) , wher e t he
pr ever b e - ' away' appear s af t er t he ver b, t he ght had a -
r eady been f ound t ur ned of f ' , and ' obv ous' r ef er s t o ' A ex-
ander ' : ' I t was obv ous t hat t was A exander who had t ur ned
of f t he ght ' - of a peop e who cou d have done t hat . F -
na y, n ( 3c) we f nd Ver b- Focus, w t h t he pr ever b n t s
bas c pos t on, mar ked on y by pr osody. The t r ans at on s
' I t was obv ous t hat A exander hd t ur ned of f t he ght ' ,
doubt s about whet her t d d happen or not ar e d spe ed her e.
2. 3. Tot a zer s. Ther e ar e synt act c r easons f or set t ng up
a cat egor y of ' Tot a zer s' n Hungar an: f or Noun or Adver b -
a Phr ases cont a n ng ( a) an e ement m nd- or equ va ent ,
mean ng ' a ' , ' ever y' , ' ent r e' , or ( b) s ' a so' , ( c) f or
some adver bs ke ' a r eady' , ' st ' , ' a most ' , et c. , and ( d)
f or adver bs expr ess ng h gh degr ee of per f or mance, ke |
' we ' , gyor san ' f ast ' ( wh ch may a so be used as non- Tot a -
zer s) , see Het zr on 1964. The semant c f eat ur e t hat char ac-
t er zes t hem s t hat t hey r ef er t o comp et e, c osed set s of
e ement s. Th s s ver y c ear f or t he f r st t ype. I n ( b) w t h
' a so' , an ar b t r ar y comp et eness s est ab shed t hr ough t he
add t on of a new e ement mar ked by ' a so' . The semant c m-
por t s t hat an ear er st at ement or assumpt on wou d not be
comp et e w t hout nc ud ng t he e ement as we . For t he t h r d
t ype ( c) , suf f ce t t o say her e t hat a ( 1) " t ype component s
ar e of t en used n t he r f or mat on n Eng sh; Fr ench has t ou-
| our s ' a ways' f or ' st ' a so. The semant c | ust f cat on
f or t h s wou d deser ve a onger t r eat ment , ( d) r ef er s t o t o-
t a r ea zat on of an act on.
The spec a synt act c pr oper t es of sent ences cont a n ng
Tot a zer s have a r eady at t r act ed t he at t ent on of Hungar an
146 HUNGARIAN GENERAL LINGUISTICS
ngu st s ( who used t he t er m sszef og a mondat ok ' summar z-
ng s ent ences ' ) . The st r k ng f act s t hat a Focused Tot a -
zer does not r equ r e, or even a ow, t he d sp acement of a
pr ever b f r om t s neut r a pr e- ver b base pos t on:
( 4) ( a)
H
M ndenk

be| t t / *
| t t
M
be .
1 3
' Ever yone n- came/ * came n'
( b)
H
Sandor s

be| t t / * | t t
M
be.
' A exander a so n- came/ * came n'
( c)
M
Sandor
H
ma dnem
Hae| t t / *
| t t
M
be.
' A exander most n- came/ *" came n'
( d)
M
Sandor
H
gyor san

_e| t t .
M
Sandor
H
gyor san

| t t
be.
' A exander r p d y n- came' ' A exander r p d y came
n'
( 4c) means t hat t he ke yhood of A' s com ng was h gh, yet he
d d not show up af t er a . Focused gyor san means ' qu ck y,
soon, w t hout de ay' n t he f r st , Tot a zer const r uct on of
( 4d) , wher eas n t he second, non- Tot a zer use t means ' f ast '
r ef er r ng t o t he ga t or manner of ocomot on.
Fur t her mor e, un ke n t he case of usua Focus , t her e
may be mor e t han one Focused Tot a zer s :
( 5) ( a)
H
M ndenk
H
m nd g

be| t t .
' ver yone ways n- came'
( b)
H
Tegnap s
H
m ndenk
H
mg s

__| t t .
' Yest er day a so ever yone never t he ess n- came'
I n ( 5) each one of t he st acked Tot a zer s car r es t he
H gh s t r es s . Yet on y t he f r st one s bound t o have t , t he
ot her s may have 0, but t hey ar e st under st ood t o be Focused
n t hat pos t on. Thus , ( 5a) w t h M- H- 0 wou d have Focus on
' a ways' on y, but H- - s doub e Focus ke H- H- 0; ( 5b) may
a so be st r essed H- H- - or H- - H- wh e a t hr ee Tot a zer s
13 Th s s nt t o be conf used w t h
M
M ndenk
M
| t t
M
be. ' Ever y-
body was com ng n' wher e t her e s aspect ua pr ever b- pos t -
pos ng, See Sect on 3.
ar e under Focus. No c ear d f f er ence n mean ng bet ween H- or
0- st r essed non- n t a Tot a zer s cou d be det ect ed t hough,
obv ous y, H g ves t he e ement mor e nd v dua t y. A c ue s
pr ov ded by t he f o ow ng:
( 6) ( a)
( b)
The mposs b t y of 0- st r ess on a non- n t a ' a so' Phr ase
suggest s t hat t he use of t he H gh st r ess conveys a st r onger
mpr ess on of nove t y or unexpect edness/ sur pr se, and t he
' a so' Phr ase, as t a ways mp es nove t y and add t on, s
b ocked f r om0 wh ch wou d de- emphas ze t hat . Yet t h s r ema ns
t o be exam ned f ur t her .
F na y, a f ur t her non- Tot a zer Focus e ement , st r essed
H or 0, may be nser t ed bet ween Focused Tot a zer s and t he
ver b, caus ng a pr ever b- d sp acement : ( 7b) . The ver b t se f
may be Focused n such cond t ons, w t h no pr ever b- d sp ace-
ment : ( 7c) ( not e t he subsequent st r ess) :
( 7)
' Ever yone ways n- came t he t heat er nt o' ( t r p e
Focus; cf . ( c) n . 31)
t he subst i t ut i on of Ul t r ahi gh t o Hi gh i n Tot al i zer s wi l l not
make much di f f er ence. I t may make t he expr essi on somewhat mor e
i nsi st ent , an expr essi ve f unct i on, but t he cont ext woul d be
t he s ame:
( 8) ( a)
' I bel i eved t hat I coul d count on t he gi r l s onl y, but
ver yone showed up'
' They announced a meet i ng f or t he eveni ng and
ver ybody showed up'
On a gener al scal e, ( 8a) l ooks l i ke a Repl acement ( t he
' count i ng on t he gi r l s onl y' cr eat es a cont ext f or cor r ect i on)
and ( 8b) has a cont ext el i ci t i ng Focus onl y. Yet bot h t he Hi gh
and t he Ul t r ahi gh st r esses may be used i n each, t he l at t er i n-
di cat es sur pr i se or pr i de of t he speaker about t he f act t hat
not one was mi ssi ng, t he boys came as wel l . Thus, t her e i s
onl y a di f f er ence of expr essi ve val ue, not t he usual di st i nc-
t i on bet ween Focus and Repl acement . Consequent l y, wi t h a Tot al -
i zer t he Focus/ Repl acement di chot omy as expr essed by t he di s-
t i nct f unct i ons of t he Hi gh and t he Ul t r ahi gh st r esses, i s
neut r al i zed.
Thi s l eads us t o t he mai n poi nt . The t wo Gap- Fi l l er ca-
t egor i es have been def i ned as expl i ci t opposi t i on t o anyt hi ng
f or Focus and t o somet hi ng f or Repl acement . Thi s i s i nappl i -
cabl e i n t he case of Tot al i zer s. ' Al l ' i s opposed onl y t o i t s
1 4
own par t s. I f t he ' al l ' Phr ase i s meani ngf ul and r ef er s t o
a gr oup known t o t he i nt er l ocut or s, any por t i on of t hat gr oup
i s aut omat i cal l y par t of t hat knowl edge. Thus, a pr omi nent i al -
i zed Tot al i zer i s al ways opposed t o somet hi ng i t i ncl udes,
whi ch i s bot h somet hi ng as i t i s r ef er ent i al by i mpl i cat i on
bei ng par t of t he gr oup whi ch i s subj ect of ear l i er knowl edge,
but i t i s al so anyt hi ng wi t hi n t hat t ot al i t y, an ad hoc del i m-
i t ed uni ver se.
I n summar y, we f i nd t hat t he f or mal di st i nct i on bet ween
Focus and Repl acement i s neut r al i zed i n t he case of Tot al i zer s
whi ch t hen can appear onl y i n a si ngl e t ype of Gap- Fi l l i ng t he
1 4
On specul at i ve gr ounds, one mi ght t hi nk t hat t he opposi t e
of ' ever yt hi ng' i s ' not hi ng*. I n t hese exampl es of pr omi -
nent i al i zed Tot al i zer s, i t i s cl ear t hat t he opposi t e i s
' par t ' r at her t han ' none' .
f or ma pr oper t es of wh ch const t ut e a separ at e set ( r esem-
b ng, but not dent ca w t h, t hose of Rep acement ) . Th s
s n agr eement w t h t he f act t hat t he semant c def n t ons
pr oposed: exp c t oppos t on t o somet h ng f or Rep acement
and exp c t oppos t on t o anyt h ng f or Focus, ar e vo d when
app ed t o ' ever yt h ng' . Thus, one m ght conc ude t hat t he
f or ma neut r a zat on s a d r ect consequence of t he semant c
cat egor es nvo ved, hence t he semant c def n t ons pr oposed
have a good chance t o be cor r ect .
2. 4. Pr onom na quest ons and t he r answer s. S m ar cons der -
at ons ar e va d f or t he nt er r ogat ve ( wh- ) pr onouns and t o
t he wor ds t hat r ep ace t hem n t he answer ( cf . Chaf e 1976: 36) .
Her e ar e t he f or ma f act s :
( 9) Ouest on:
Answer :
nap) .
' Yst er day I - ar r ved " up" ' ( or ' Yest er day' )
Her e aga n, t he d st nct on bet ween H and U be ongs t o t he
doma n of expr ess v t y. The at t er nd cat es mor e nt er est
f or t he quest on and mor e per suas ve power f or t he answer ,
but not h ng ke t he d st nct on bet ween Focus and Rep ace-
ment s f ound her e. The nt er r ogat ve pr onoun and t he answer
wor d a ways have t o be bef or e t he t ense- car r er n Hungar an,
ead ng t o t he d sp acement of t he pr ever b.
Un ke f or Focus, t her e may be sever a nt er r ogat ve
pr onouns n one sent ence:
( 10) ( a)
( b)
' When how you- ar r ved " up" ?'
Not e t hat w t h n one quest on bot h nt er r ogat ve pr onouns have
t he same st r ess. As shown n Het zr on, f or t hcom ng, ( 10a) s a
doub e quest on w t h t wo unknowns asked about . ( 10b) , on t he
ot her hand, s a ' comb nat or y' quest on wher e sever a t mes
and sever a manner s of ar r va ar e known t o t he asker and t he
scope of t he quest on s how t hey ar e t o be comb ned, wh ch
manner was used at wh ch t me. Now, ( 10a) s not ent r e y ' de-
v ant ' . A so n Focus, one may have a Con| o ned Phr ase con-
1 5
nect ed by ' and' , each car r y ng t he H gh st r ess. ( 10b) , w t h
t s ack of ' and' s, on t he ot her hand, unpar a e ed n Fo-
cus, but s f ound n Rep acement .
Nor ma y no Focus and Rep acement may cooccur n t he
same sent ence. Yet , an nt er r ogat ve pr onoun s ndeed com-
pat b e w t h a Rep acer , wh ch w e t her pr ecede t he pr onoun
or be sent ence- f na . The nt er r ogat ve pr onoun w t hen ose
t s st r ess ( and t he ver b w r ema n st r ess ess) :
( 11) ( a)
( b)
' ( And) when came n t he BOY?'
(' And t he boy, when d d he_ come n?' )
Her e t he d scont nu t y n ( 11b) wou d par a e t he Rep acement
( 2d) , but not t he f act t hat t he nt er r ogat ve pr onoun s un-
st r essed.
Th s s, aga n, a behav or pat t er n c ose y r esemb ng
Rep acement , yet d f f er ent f r om t n some r espect s, and no
d st nct on s made bet ween Focus and Rep acement .
I nt er r ogat ve pr onouns expr ess gnor ance as t o one com-
ponent of t he nf or mat on cont a ned n t he sent ence. Now,
t ak ng ' when' f or ust r at on, one may say t hat ' when' s
1 5
Nat ur a y, a cr uc a d f f er ence s t hat t he con| o ned
phr ases cont a n t he same par t of speech n a st r ct er sense,
wher eas what s con| o ned her e s a t me- adver b and a manner -
adver b.
opposed t o any poss b e t me when t he event may have t aken
p ace s nce t s an open non- spec f cat on ( Focus) , but ,
on t he ot her hand, t can a so be sa d t o be opposed t o some
t me, t o a t me assumed t o be spec f c by t he asker yet not
known t o h m, and hoped t o be known t o t he askee ( ~Rep ace-
ment ) . Mor eover , one may a so say t hat t he answer wor d, her e
' yest er day' , s n exp c t oppos t on t o any ot her t me when
t he event may have occur r ed ( ~Focus) , but t s a so n ac-
t ua oppos t on t o somet h ng n t he d scour se: t o t he ' I don' t
know t me' expr essed by ' when' . Consequent y, t he answer s
a so a cor r ect on/ comp et on of a pr ev ous y ut t er ed sent ence:
t he quest on ( ~Rep acement ) .
Th s s t hus anot her const r uct on wher e t he d st nct on
bet ween Focus and Rep acement s f or ma y neut r a zed ( and
some nd v dua f eat ur es appear ) , and t h s s | ust f ed by
t he vacuousness of t he semant c d st nct on bet ween t he t wo
n t h s cont ext . Her e s a bound d scour se s t uat on wh ch
evokes Rep acement , but t s a so compat b e w t h t he dea
of oppos t on t o anyt h ng (as t comp et es mor e t han cor r ect s) ,
mean ng Focus.
3. Aspect n Hungar an
Ther e s no doubt t hat t he cat egor es of Hungar an ver -
ba mor pho ogy a so nc ude aspect . Yet no sat sf act or y de-
scr pt on of Hungar an aspect has been h t her t o of f er ed. Th s
must be at t r but ed t o t wo r easons.
One s t hat t he pr ever bs, wh ch p ay a cr uc a r o e n
aspect ua a t er nat ons, a most a ways car r y a f ur t her ex ca
mean ng of t he r own, def nab e w t h r e at on t o t he ver bs
The st at ement by Sauvageot ( 1951: 258) : ' L' aspect n' af f eur e
| ama s ' t at pur ' r ef ect s t h s pr ob em, but t cannot be
ent r e y accept ed. As shown be ow, t her e ex st ndeed pur e y
aspect ua oppos t ons.
t hey ar e at t ached t o ( n t hat t he r mean ng s not ent r e y
aut onomous n most cases, see be ow) . Mor eover , most ver bs
t ake mor e t han one pr ever b, a ow ng f or mod f cat on of t he
bas c mean ng n sever a d r ect ons.
The second r eason s d sagr eement about what s t o be
under st ood as aspect n Hungar an. My gener a def n t on of
t he cat egor y s t he f o ow ng: aspect s a cat egor y bot h t er ms
of wh ch may be app ed at t he t me of t he ut t er ance t o ex-
act y t he same event . The cho ce bet ween t he t wo va ues de-
pends on t he needs of t he cont ext and r epr esent t he d f f er ent
per spect ves adopt ed when v ew ng t hat event . Consequent y,
t he oppos t on bet ween ugr k ' | ump' and ugr ' bounce' s not
aspect ua because t he mean ngs of t he t wo ar e not coext ens ve
as f ar as t he r ea t y cover ed s concer ned. The f or mer de-
scr bes a s ng e act on, t he at t er a r epeat ed per f or mance.
The second mp es t he f r st , but not v ce ver sa. Th s t ype
of cor r e at on has t r ad t ona y be r ecogn zed t o be d st nct
f r om aspect and has been ca ed Akt onsar t or ' made/ manner of
act on' . The pr esent wr t er goes f ar t her and suggest s t hat
t he same s t r ue of pa r s ke r / meg r ' wr t e/ wr t e com-
p et e y ~cr eat e a wr t t en document ' wher e t he second member
of t he cor r e at on mp es t he f r st one, but not v ce ver sa:
t he commun cat on about wr t ng does not say about whet her
t he t ask was ach eved and t he document cr eat ed or not . Thus
1 7
t he t wo cannot a ways be used t o r ef er t o t he same event .
A t t e comp cat on ar ses when t hese t wo ar e used n a
quot at ve const r uct on: r t a, hogy | n ' he- wr ot e t hat he- comes'
means ' he wr ot e t hat he wou d come' , he sent a message by wr t -
ng, wher eas meg r t a, hogy | n ' he- "up"- wr ot e t hat he- comes'
mp es t hat h s pr o| ect ed com ng I s a r eady known, but now he
even put t n a et t er . Her e one can see t hat sameness has t o
be nt er pr et ed qu t e st r ct y, even ' nf or mby wr t ng' and
What comp cat es t he mat t er , however , s t hat t he t wo member s
of t h s cor r e at on do ndeed be ong t o t wo aspect s. My c a m
s t hat t h s s not t he on y d f f er ence bet ween t hem, t hey do
not const t ut e an aspect ua m n ma pa r . Examp es ( 13) - ( 15)
be ow w f or ma y subst ant at e t h s c a m: t he per f ect ve
ver b exh b t s t he aspect ua d chot omy by t se f . I amt hus
suggest ng t hat per f ect v t y, as expr essed by t he add t on of
a pr ever b ( most y meg- , somet mes e - ' away' ) s a non- aspec-
t ua cat egor y, | ust ke t he d r ect ona and ot her mod f ca-
t or y mean ngs of ot her pr ever bs ( or of meg- and e - n ot her
cases) . The essence of Hungar an aspect must e out s de of
1 8
per f ect v t y.
( f oot not e 17 cont nued) ' put nf or mat on on paper ' ar e not
dent ca n cover age. Th s can a so be pr oved by t he t est s
pr oposed be ow.
1 8
Comr e ( 1976: 3) def nes aspect s n gener a as ' d f f er ent
ways of v ew ng t he nt er na t empor a const t uency of a s t ua-
t on' . K ef er ( 1979, 2. 3. ) pr oposed t he f o ow ng: ' By aspect
we sha under st and t he nt er na t me st r uct ur e of t he s t ua-
t on' and f ur t her adds ' Aspect s t hus a pr oper t y of s t ua-
t ons' . For h m, ' s t uat on' means ' t he var ous ver ba expr es-
s ons of t he same st at e of af f a r s' . These def n t ons ar e not
n cont r ad ct on w t h m ne. They a so mp y t he sub| ect v t y
of ' aspect ' ( cf . Comr e 1976: 4) as aga nst t he ob| ect v t y of
' t ense' and ' Akt onsar t ' . Yet I f nd t unnecessar y t o m t
t he aspect t o nt er na t me, . e. whet her t he act on s con-
ce ved as of d v dab e dur at on or not . I n some cases, such
as ( 16) , d v dab t y does not seem t o be t he r e evant cr -
t er um. I n 3. 3. I sha pr opose a def n t on f or Hungar an
aspect s us ng d scour se as t he pr oper f r ame f or t . The n-
vo v ng of ' t me' makes t he def n t on pseudo- aut onomous, ex-
pr ess b e w t h n t he boundar es of a sent ence, wh e t h s s
not t he case,
3. 1. The mean ng of pr ever bs. The semant c cont r but on of
t he pr ever bs s t he most t r anspar ent , even aut onomous, w t h
ver bs of mot on, such as megy ' go' wh ch, by t se f , r epr e-
sent s one aspect , wher eas t he ex ca f or ms of t s comb na-
t ons w t h pr ever bs st and f or t he ot her aspect , e. g. bemegy
' go n' k megy ' go out ' , f e megy ' go up' , emegy ' go down' ,
e megy ' go away' , kr megy ' go ar ound' , trnegy ' go t hr ough,
over , acr oss' , et c. I n add t on t o meg r ' wr t e comp et e y'
ment oned above ( a so ' nf or mby wr t ng of a f act a r eady
known' , cf . not e 17) , r ' wr t e' may be f t t ed w t h any of
t he above pr ever bs, w t h a sense nsp r ed by t he ' t er a '
mean ng of t he pr ever b, but not necessar y pr ed ct ab e f r om
t : be r ' wr t e n, r eg st er , enr o ( = nser t n a document )
1
,
k r ' wr t e n a pub c p ace f or ever yone' s at t ent on ( ~post ) '
or ' spe out ( n et t er s) ' or ' copy out ' or even ' gr ant s ck-
eave' ( put on t he ' out ' st ) , f e r ' wr t e down, not e' or
' wr t e on a consp cuous h gh p ace' or ' make a c t at on ( po-
ce) ' , e r ' wr t e down' or ' descr be' , e r ' make a m st ake
n wr t ng' , kr r ' pr phr ase, say n c r cum ocut on' , t -
r ' t r anscr be' or ' r ewr t e' or ' copy over ' , et c. Th s st
s f ar f r ombe ng exhaust ve and not a t he mean ngs have
been g ven, but t suf f ces t o show t he enor mous r ches of
1 9
expr ess on t he man pu at on of pr ever bs may cr eat e. I t s
c ear t hat f or an dea aspect syst em, one expect s t o f nd
cor r e at ve m n ma pa r s wher e no added mean ngs cont r but ed
by t he pr ever b may be det ect ed.
Nat ur a y, n t he gr ammar of a spec f c anguage, one
may choose t o use t he t er m ' aspect ' accor d ng t o t he need. I n
S av c, ' aspect ' s used f or mor pho og ca pa r s of ver bs,
wher e t he mean ng d f f er ences may nvo ve sever a cat egor es:
per f ect v t y most gener a y, but a so t ypes of Akt onsar t .
19
As t he g osses show, t h s s by no means un que t o Hungar an.
I f t he semant c cont r but on of t he pr ever bs s t hat
mpor t ant , t wou d be har d t o mag ne t hat t he pr ever b-
mod f ed ver b s doomed t o appear n one aspect on y, w t h
no d r ect count er par t n t he ot her one n most cases. And
ndeed, Hungar an does have a dev ce f or pr oduc ng t he aspec-
t ua d chot omy w t hout dr opp ng t he pr ever b. The f r st aspect
of ver bs w t h mean ngf u pr ever bs may be f or med by means of
an nver s on, t he post pos ng of t he pr ever b af t er t he ver b
base ( nor ma y r ght af t er t ) . The pr osod c pat t er n of such
post pos ng w be M d st r ess bot h on t he ver b base and t he
pr ever b ( un ke n t he case of Focus- t r gger ed d sp acement
wher e t he ver b oses t s st r ess, see Sauvageot ( 1951: 260, 297) ,
cf . not es 10 and 13 above) . Compar e:
( 12) ( a) ( F r st aspect )
' The boy went t he r oom- nt o' (' The boy was go ng t o
( war d) t he r oom' )
( b) ( Second aspect )
' The boy n- went t he r oom- nt o' ( ' . . . ent er ed/ went
nt o. . . ' )
( c) ( F r st aspect )
' The boy went n t he r oom- nt o' (' . . . was ent er ng/ on
h s way t o. . . ' )
( 12a) has a neut r a ' go ng' w t h t he t ar get spec f ed. ( 12b)
st at es t hat t he ent er ng has t aken p ace. ( 12c) s mor e t e c
( goa - or ent ed) t han ( 12a) . Th s s not mer e go ng, but go ng
w t h a pur pose, yet , un ke n ( 12b) , t s not yet comp et ed.
Fur t her mor e, t he ver b of ( 12c) , but not of ( 12a) , makes t he
comm t ment t hat t he t ar get s t o be spec f ed as t he ns de
of somet h ng. I n many cases of such post pos ng, nser t ng an
adver b ppen ' | ust ' ( pr ever ba y n a neut r a const r uct on)
may make t he expr ess on sound mor e nat ur a ( see end of 4. 3. 3.
f or ppen) . F na y, t he d r ect ona pr ever b may her e be
augment ed by an e ement - f e e ' - war d' , bf e e ' nwar d' n
( 12c) , t o make t he pr ogr ess ve r ead ng mor e exp c t .
For per f ect ve ver bs f or med w t h t he pr ever b meg- , t he
cr eat on of t he f r st aspect t hr ough t he post pos ng of t he
pr ever b may nvo ve some d f f cu t es f or pr agmat c r eas ons :
t hese ought t o be non- comp et ed act ons wher e t he dea of
comp et on s oom ng about . Th s can be p aus b y done n
somewhat unusua s t uat ons :
( 13) ( a)
' The d r ect or a r eady wr ot e a so wou d t he et t er -
Acc. , but m nd- h s- nt o came. . . ' ( F r st aspect )
( b)
' The d r ect or a r eady " up" a so wr ot e wou d. . . '
( Second aspect )
( c)
' . . . a r eady wr ot e a so wou d " up" . . . ' ( F r st aspect )
( 14) ( a) ( F r st aspect )
' The cat | ust at e t he soup- my- Acc. '
( b) ( Second aspect )
' The cat " up" - at e t he soup- my- Acc. '
( c) ( F r st
aspect )
' The cat | ust at e " up" t he soup- my- Acc. '
( 15) ( a)
( F r st aspect )
' The women | ust cooked t he ( shoe- ) so e- ___. d nner -
ont o| =f or |
( b)
( Second aspect )
' The woman " up" - cooked t he ( shoe- ) so e- ___. d nner -
ont o '
( c)
r a. ( F r st aspect )
' The woman | ust cooked " up" t he ( shoe- ) so e- ___.
d nner - ont o'
The ( a) and ( c) examp es ought t o be t r ans at ed by t he
Pr ogr ess ve n Eng sh ( cf . not e 24) . I n ( 13) , a who e ar se-
na of dev ces s used t o make ( c) p aus b e: mar ' a r eady' ,
s ' a so' : her e appr ox mat e y ' ndeed' , and t he cond t ona
mood. The mean ng of a t he t hr ee sent ences of ( 13) may be
r ender ed by ' The d r ect or was a r eady w ng/ about t o wr t e
t he et t er , but t hen t occur r ed t o h m. . . ' . ( 13b) means t hat
he was w ng t o compose t he et t er , wh e ( 13a) and ( 13c)
make t a most v sua zab e: he was | ust about t o gr ab t he
pen and. . . Now, ( 13c) s a mor e ef f c ent expr ess on when
what occur r ed t o h mwas a r eason aga nst wr t ng t he et t er ,
wher eas ( 13a) s mor e neut r a n t h s r espect : what occur ed
t o h mmay have mer e y been t hat he had an ur gent appo nt ment ,
t hough he d d not ob| ect t o t he et t er . I n ot her wor ds, ( 13c)
s mor e t e c, t s t he cr eat on of t he et t er t hat p ays a
mor e mpor t ant r o e, wh e ( 13a) has t he act v t y n f ocus.
( 13b) and ( 13c) ar e bot h t e c, but wh e t he f or mer commun -
cat es w ngness on y, t he at t er f ur t her mp es t hat he was
| ust about t o st ar t wor k ng on t ( w t h t he nt ent on t o f n-
sh t , wh ch s unmar ked n ( 13a) ) .
I n ( 14) , t he cat ' s br each of et quet t e cr eat es t he spe-
c a s t uat on. ( 14b) commun cat es a f a t accomp : ' The cat
had eat en my soup' . Bot h ( 14a) and ( 14c) r ef er t o t he act n
pr ogr ess, but ( 14c) s mor e f or cef u because t put s mor e
emphas s on t he expr opr at on t h s means. ( 14a) may be | ust
t ast ng, but n ( 14c) t he cat seems t o have t aken possess on
of t he soup and was about t o eat t a up. Not e t hat t h s
pr agmat c pecu ar t y a so appear s n Eng sh: as aga nst
* I was eat ng up my soup, t he Pr ogr ess ve and t he Per f ect ve
ar e compat b e, n an expr opr at or y accept at on, n The cat
was eat ng up my soup.
F na y, n ( 15) , t he ment on of t he pur pose ( ' d nner ' ) ,
as t he t ar get of t he absur d ob| ect of cook ng, t he so e of a
shoe, make t he const r uct on | ust f ab e. ( 15b) goes t oo f ar
158
HUNGARIAN GENERAL LINGUISTICS
by st at i ng t hat t he sol e of t he shoe had act ual l y been pr e-
par ed f or consumpt i on. ( 15a) i s a neut r al st at ement about
t he sol e of a shoe bei ng boi l ed f or l at er consumpt i on. The
most ef f ect i ve expr essi on of t he absur di t y i s ( 15c) whi ch
shows t he woman i n t he mi ddl e of her wor k, i t does not cl ai m
she had been successf ul as ( 15b) , but i t says cl ear l y, unl i ke
( 15a) whi ch i s neut r al i n t hat r espect , t hat t he woman expect s
t he sol e of a shoe t o be ser ved as f ood f or di nner , agai n t he
t el i c i mpl i cat i on.
We can see t hat i n t he ( c) exampl es of ( 13) - ( 14) - ( 15)
t he per f ect i ve meani ng i s pr eser ved i n t he f i r st aspect : even
t hough t he act i on i s st i l l i n pr ogr ess, i t s compl et i on, i t s
expect ed r esul t does pl ay a communi cat i onal r ol e, i t i s bei ng
done wi t h f ul l i nt ent i on t o f i ni sh i t . Thi s l eads t o t he con-
cl usi on al r eady announced above t hat t he per f ect i ve meani ng
of meg- has t he st at us of a l exi cal cont r i but i on whi ch can
sur vi ve al so i n t he f i r st aspect and i s t her ef or e not i den-
t i cal wi t h aspect .
As a wor ki ng hypot hesi s i n agr eement wi t h t he i nt ui t i on
of Hungar i an l i ngui st s, we have adopt ed t he vi ew t hat t he Pr e-
ver b- Ver b gr oup r epr esent s t he second aspect , wher eas bot h
M M
t he pr ever b- l ess Ver b and t he ' Ver b Pr ever b' gr oup expr ess
t he f i r st one. However , i n t he cases hi t her t o t r eat ed and i n
most act ual i nst ances, t he di f f er ence bet ween a Ver b, and a
cor r espondi ng Pr ever b- Ver b
gr oup wi l l not consi st of one as-

pect vs. t he ot her onl y, but addi t i onal semant i c cont r i but i ons,
speci f i abl e i n t he l exi con, ar e al so i nvol ved. On t he ot her
hand, t he cont r ast bet ween Pr ever b. - Ver b. and er b. Pr ever b.
gr oup wi l l i ndeed const i t ut e a pur el y and excl usi vel y aspect u-
al opposi t i on, and est abl i shi ng t he meani ng of aspect i n Hun-
gar i an shoul d be pr i mar i l y based on t hese exampl es.
I t f ol l ows f r om t hi s t hat i f any pur el y aspect ual Ver b. /
Pr ever b- Ver b. pai r s exi st at al l i n Hungar i an, t hey shoul d be
r ecogni zed by t he f act t hat t he post posi ng of t he pr ever b
w e t her be ungr ammat ca or t s pr esence w have no
semant ca y nt er pr et ab e consequences, s nce n a pos -
t on wher e t cannot f u f t s aspect ua f unct on t w
possess no f unct on at a ( see ( 22) be ow f or anot her t est
f or pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs) . And such pa r s do ex st ,
t est ab e n t he manner | ust descr bed, and a ong w t h pa r s
ke ( b) and ( c) n ( 1 2 ) - ( 1 5) , , t hey w a so pr ov de a c ue
t o t he r ea mean ng of Hungar an aspect .
3. 2. Some pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs
3. 2. 1. St at c adver bs. I n Hungar an, ver bs of spat a r ef er -
ence: st ay ng, ex st ence, emer gence, mot on, act ons t ak ng
p ace n space, et c. may be pr eceded by ocat ve adver bs
cor ef er ent a w t h Locat ve Phr ases cooccur r ng n t he same
sent ence. The ver bs ar e unst r essed, | ust ke af t er ot her
pr ever bs. These const r uct ons have been t r eat ed n det a n
Het zr on 19 66. Her e ar e some examp es:
M MM
( 16) ( a) A ny t a szobban. ( F r st aspect )
' The g r sat t he r oom- n'
( b) A
M
benn t a
20
( Second aspect )
' The g r t her e/ ns de sat t he r oom- n'
( c) A t a . ( Second aspect )
' The r oom- n t her e sat t he g r '
20
The c a m s her e t hat t hese st at c pr ever bs have no nde-
pendent semant c cont r but on, a c a m t hat s appar ent y
be ed by t he f act t hat t he adver bs benn ' ns de' or f enn
' up( st a r s) ' may be used her e, nd cat ng t hat t he r oom s
v ewed f r omout s de or f r ombe ow. However , even t hough t he
cho ce of t he adver b does cont r but e t o commun cat on n pr act ce,
and pr ov des ext r a nf or mat on t o t he hear er , - f r omt he
speaker ' s po nt of v ew t h s s an agr eement w t h r ea t y, t he
nt r oduct on of an ext r a dat um, r at her t han a mod f cat on of
t he mean ng of t he ver b.
160 HUNGARIAN GENERAL LI NGUI STI CS
M M M M M 21 M
(d) *A lny lt ott/ mindig' a szob-
ban.
21 1
' The g r sat t her e/ ns de a ways t he r oom- n'
Bot h ( 16a) and ( 16b) may be t r ans at ed as ' The g r was s t t ng
n t he r oom' . To show t he d f f er ence bet ween t hem, ( 16b)
may be par aphr ased as ' Ther e was t he g r , s t t ng n t he
r oom' . Conver se y, ( 16c) may be r ender ed w t h some f r eedom
as ' S t t ng n t he r oom, t her e was t he g r ' . As I have shown
n Het zr on 1975, ( 16b- c) ar e pr esent at ve const r uct ons ( . e.
pr epar at ons f or t he subsequent d scour se) . ( 16b) makes t he
scene, t he ' r oom' , a mor e mpor t ant e ement , t o be r emember ed
at er , wher eas ( 16c) makes t he g r ' s appear ance on t he scene
t he essent a nk t o t he next por t on of d scour se. Not e t hat
t h s may be compar ed w t h t he ef f ect of pr ever bs n t r ans t ve
ver bs t hat of t en make t he r ob| ect commun cat ona y mor e mpor t ant
t han n t he cor r espond ng pr ever b ess const r uct on
( what has been ca ed ' t e c' above, cf . ( 13) - ( 14) - ( 15) . As a
consequence of t he ob gat or y coex st ence of t he pr esent at ve
f unct on, t he ' t her e+Ver b' gr oup may never be sent ence- f na .
A pr esent at ve NP must st and at t he end.
I n t h s t ype of const r uct on, t he ver b may a so be dynam c.
By subst t ut ng | r k t ' was wa k ng about ' t o t
' sat ' , we obt a n bas ca y t he same r esu t s. Fur t her mor e,
even ver bs w t h no d r ect spat a r ef er ence but r ef er r ng t o
an act on or event t ak ng p ace n space may appear n t h s
const r uct on: ver bs ke r t ' was wr t ng' or bsu t ' was sad' .
I n f act , t s t h s const r uct on t hat y e ds t he on y d r ect
21
The nser t on of an ext r a e ement , most conven ent y a t meor
manner - adver b, s needed her e t o pr event a poss b e m sunder st and ng.
W t hout m nd g, ( 16d) wou d be accept ab e, w t h
ot t or benn be ng par t of t he Locat ve Phr ase: ' t her e n t he
r oom' . I n ot her wor ds, ' . . . sat | t her e n t he r oom' s cor r ect ,
wher eas ' . . . sat t her e | n t he r oom' s not . The nser t ed e ement
assur es t hat t he const r uct on w not be m s nt er pr et ed
( cf . Het zr on 1966: 39- 40) .
second aspect count er par t s ( w t h no f ur t her mean ngs added)
of t hese ver bs n f r ames ke ( b) and ( c) , convey ng t he dea
of not c ng t he sub| ect n t he pr ocess of wr t ng or n a
st at e of sadness.
S nce t he pr ever b does not sur v ve post pos ng n ( 16d) ,
we must assume t hat t he d f f er ence bet ween t he expr ess ons
( 16a) on t he one hand, and ( 16b- c) on t he ot her , s pur e y
aspect ua . The f act t hat f or t he second aspect t her e ar e t wo
a t er nat ves on y goes t o pr ove t hat aspect s bas ca y a
d scour se phenomenon ( cf . Hopper - Thompson, f or t hcom ng) . Pr e-
sent at veness and t he second aspect seem t o be nt er woven,
us ng t he same exponent s. Yet , , t hough d f f er ent accor d ng t o
t he cont ext , bot h ( 16b) and ( 16c) w f t nt o t he same de-
f n t on as f ar as aspect s concer ned. See f ur t her t he f r st
par agr aph of 3. 2. 3.
3. 2. 2. Pr ever bs w t h no add t ona mean ng. Ther e ar e a so
some ver bs t hat t ake ' t r ad t ona ' pr ever bs wh ch f u f an
22
aspect ua f unct on on y. Her e ar e t wo such ver bs f or us-
t r at on: a punct ua one ndu ' st ar t mov ng' and one neut r a
n t hat r espect : k n ' of f er somet h ng t o be par t aken of (as
a s gn of f r endsh p or hosp t a t y) , say "p ease have some. . . "'
( 17) ( a) A
M
vonat
M
ndu t . or
M
ndu t a
M
vonat .
23
( F r st aspect )
22
I t s not c ear whet her t hese ver bs const t ut e a nat ur a
c ass or a number of nat ur a c asses, - or t hey ar e s mp y
t hose t hat , acc dent a y or f or pr agmat c r easons, d d not
deve op added mean ngs f or t he Pr ever b- Ver b gr oup. I suspect
t he at t er t o be t r ue, but t h s deser ves a onger nvest gat on.
A f ew f ur t her ver bs of t h s t ype: gr / meg gr ' pr om se'
( f or t h s and f or k n , see Per r ot 1966: 14) , sz et k/ meg-
sz et k ' be bor n' ( b d. 32) , / meg ' k ' ( see ( 22c) and
( 23) w t h det a s be ow) , et c.
23
The at t er wor d or der s t he unmar ked one. ( f oot not e 2 3 con-
t nued) .
' The t r a n st ar t ed' or ' St ar t ed t he t r a n'
M M
( b) A vonat meg ndu t . ( Second aspect )
' The t r a n " up" - st ar t ed'
* M M M
( _) A vonat ndu t meg. ( Second aspect )
' The t r a n st ar t ed/ was st ar t ng " up" '
M , M
( 18) ( a) A f
M
ndu t az sko aba. ( F r st aspect )
' The boy st ar t ed t he schoo - nt o' ( ' . . . set out f or
schoo ' )
M M M
( k) A f u e ndu t az sko aba. ( Second aspect )
' The boy away- st ar t ed t he schoo - nt o' ( ' . . . ef t f or
schoo ' )
M > M M M M
( ) .
f u
( eppen) ndu t ( e _) r egge az sko aba.
( F r st aspect )
' The boy ( | ust ) st ar t ed ( away) n- t he- mor n ng t he
schoo - nt o'
M M M
( 19) ( a) A haz asszony bar ackpa nkava k n t a a vendge-
ket . ( F r st aspect )
' The ady- of - t he- house apr cot - br andy- w t h of f er ed
t he guest s- Ace. '
( b) A haz asszony mecr k na t a a vendegeket bar ackpa-
nkava . ( Second aspect )
' The ady- of - t he- house " up" - of f er ed t he guest s- Ace.
apr . - br andy- w t h'
( c) A haz asszony ( eppen) k ma t a ? ( meg) a vendege-
ket . . .
' The ady- of - t he house ( | ust ) of f er ed ? ( "up") t he
guest s- Ace. . . '
( f oot not e 23 cont nued) The Ver b- Sub| ect or der s t yp ca y
used when t he nd v dua t y of t he sub| ect s downp ayed and
on y t he event mat t er s , e. g. n met eor o og ca st at ement Fu|
a sz ' B ows t he w nd' . Nat ur a y, Hungar an wor d or der can
be r eshuf f ed a gr eat dea and, f t he cont ext r equ r es , ( 17b)
may a so have t he Ver b- Sub| ect sequence.
( 17a) s neut r a commun cat on of an event . ( 17b) concent r at es
on t he change nvo ved: t he t r a n t hat has | ust now been st a- t onar y
f na y st ar t s mov ng. *( 17c) s ungr ammat ca , ost ens b y
because t he d f f er ence bet ween ( 17a) and ( 17b) s mer e y
aspect ua , wh ch makes post posed meg- super f uous. Thus, t he
cor r ect def n t on of t he d f f er ence bet ween ( 17a) and ( 17b)
s one app cat on of t he gener a def n t on of Hungar an as-
pect .
( 18) cont a ns t he same ver b, w t h a human sub| ect and
w t h spec f cat on of t he t ar get . Though t he aspect ua pr ever b
cou d be meg- or e - f or e t her ( 17) or ( 18) , what s pr esent -
ed her e s f e t t o be t he mor e f e c t ous use. I n ( 18c) , un-
ke n * ( 17c) , t he pr ever b s a owed t o r ema n, but t s pr es-
ence or absence makes abso ut e y no d f f er ence. Except f or t he
spec f cat on ' n t he mor n ng' ( see not e 21) and f or t he adver b
' | ust ' wh ch cou d a so appear w t h ( 18a) , ( 18c) has exact y
t he same mean ng as ( 18a) .
The wor d or der d f f er ence bet ween ( 19a) and ( 19b) s not
r e evant f or our d scuss on. Ot her wor d or der s ar e poss b e,
t hese ar e t he most neut r a ones. ( 19a) s a descr pt ve st at e-
ment . Of t s t wo r ead ngs: t er at ve and punct ua ( e. g. w t h
t me adver b a s ke ' f or t wo hour s' vs. ' at 5 o' c ock' ) , on y
t he at t er s cons der ed her e. Th s s what wou d be used n a
r epor t ng of t he scene obser ved. I t may be f o owed by a sen-
t ence r ef er r ng t o t he r eact on of t he guest s: accept ance or
r ef usa . Th s s a so poss b e af t er ( 19b) , but t h s one s
mor e appr opr at e when t he next sent ence speaks of anot her ,
subsequent event , not necessar y r e at ed t o t h s man f est a-
t on of hosp t a t y. ( 19b) mer e y says t hat t h s act on d d
t ake p ace. The ast wor d, ' apr cot br andy' , may a so be pr es-
ent at ve, . e. p ay a r o e n t he subsequent d scour se ( e. g.
' The guest s st ar t ed t o s p t ' . ) ( 19c) s mpeccab e w t hout
meg- . W t h meg- t s not ent r e y ungr ammat ca , but st r ong-
y nf e c t ous ( some of my nf or mant s dec ar ed t t o smack
of uneducat ed speech) . Wi t h or wi t hout i t , ( 19c) i s equi v-
al ent t o ( 19a) .
To sumup, t he ( a) sent ences may al l be f ai r l y wel l
2 4
r ender ed by t he Engl i sh Pr ogr essi ve f or m ( l ess so f or ( 19a) )
and r ef er t o event s as t hey ar e t aki ng pl ace. The ( b) sen-
t ences, on t he ot her hand, r at her concent r at e on t he f act
t hat t he event s di d t ake pl ace and t he nar r at i ve can go on
t o t he next event . I n ( 18b) , t he school as a t ar get may be
mor e i mpor t ant f or t he subsequent di scour se t han i n ( 18a) . I n
( 19b) we l ear n t hat t he l ady of t he house has done her dut y
as a gr aci ous host ess. The ( c) sent ences ar e pr obl emat i c.
( 17c) i s ungr ammat i cal , ( 18c) i s accept abl e wi t h t he pr ever b,
( 19c) i s of doubt f ul accept abi l i t y wi t h meg- . Yet t hey do not
di f f er i n meani ng f r omt he cor r espondi ng ( a) sent ences, t hei r
pr ever b may be omi t t ed wi t h no consequences.
See ( 23) bel ow f or anot her pur el y aspect ual pr ever b.
3. 2. 3. Monoaspect ual ver bs. I n t he begi nni ng of 3. 1. , I have
shown t hat t he ver bs megy ' go' or r ' wr i t e' wi l l al ways have
t hei r meani ng modi f i ed i f a pr ever b i s added. Yet t hese ver bs
24
A cont r ast i ve st udy of t ext s shoul d show t o what ext ent t he
Engl i sh Pr ogr essi ve and t he Hungar i an f i r st aspect ar e t o be
equat ed. I t i s cer t ai n t hat t her e i s no compl et e equi val ence
bet ween t hem. The ungr ammat i cal i t y of *he i s knowi ng i s qui t e
wel l j ust i f i ed i n t he f r amewor k of Engl i sh. The Pr ogr essi ve
aspect i s t ypi cal l y used f or act i ons or si t uat i ons t he dur a-
t i on of whi ch i ncl udes t he dur at i on or happeni ng of anot her
event , and know i s not associ at ed wi t h dur at i on ( t hough t he
const r ai nt i s par t l y l exi cal i zed, as, i n pr i nci pl e, one coul d
f i nd j ust i f i cat i on f or *When I was knowi ng how t o swi m; on
t he ot her hand, even f or st at es t he Pr ogr essi ve i s al l owed
i f t hey ar e supposed t o have l i mi t ed dur at i on: You ar e bei ng
si l l y) . I n Hungar i an, on t he cont r ar y, t ud ' know' may appear
onl y i n t he f i r st aspect , consi st ent l y wi t h t he gener al aspect ual
syst emof Hungar i an ( see 3. 2. 3. ) .
may al so have t hei r mi ni mal count er par t i n t he second aspect
by means of t he pr esent at i ve const r uct i on descr i bed i n 3. 2. 1. :
ot t megy and ot t r wi t h ot t ' t her e' . The t wo const r ai nt s: t he
r equi r ement of t he cooccur r ence of anot her Locat i ve Phr ase i n
t he same sent ence and t he concomi t ant pr esence of t he pr esent -
at i ve f unct i on, ar e qui t e si gni f i cant . They show t hat st at i c
or dur at i ve act i ons/ si t uat i on' s may be r epr esent ed as mer e
f act s ( di vest ed of t hei r dur at i ve i mpl i cat i on) when t hey ar e
shown t o be obser ved i n space. The pr esent at i ve f unct i on as-
sur es t hat t he di scour se shoul d go on t o t he next st ep, j ust
l i ke i n ot her second aspect const r uct i ons.
On t he ot her hand, st at i c ver bs wi t h no spat i al r ef er ence,
t he denot at um of whi ch cannot be vi sual i zed, do not
ent er i nt o t hi s const r uct i on and ar e i nexor abl y associ at ed
wi t h t he f i r st aspect onl y. Such ar e ver bs l i ke t ud ' know'
wher e t he addi t i on of t he pr ever b meg- woul d cr eat e an i nchoat i ve
megt ud ' l ear n, come t o know' ( cf . Ki ef er ( 1979: 6. 3) .
Ther e i n no *ot t t ud.
Conver sel y, some ver bs may occur i n t he second aspect
2 5
onl y, such as f el f og ' gr asp, under st and' , megcsvl ' make
25
These def i ni t i ons ar e i n agr eement wi t h, and t o a gr eat
ext ent i nspi r ed by, Per r ot ' s i nvest i gat i on of t he pr ever b meg-
i n Hungar i an. One of t he f unct i ons of meg- i s, accor di ng t o
Per r ot ( 1966: 11) , opposi ng act i on or act i vi t y ( csel ekves, an
i ndef i ni t e concept ) and act ( csel ekedet , wel l - def i ned and de-
l i mi t ed) , e. g. cs p/ megcs p ' st i ng' , t he f or mer ei t her f or t he
pot ent i al of bees, net t l e, et c. or f or t he l ast i ng sensat i on
t hei r st i ngi ng causes, and t he l at t er f or denot i ng a si ngl e
event , a pi nchi ng. I n my opi ni on, or r at her accor di ng t o my
cr i t er i a, t hi s i s not an aspect ual mi ni mal pai r , t he punc-
t ual i t y of t he l at t er const i t ut es an added meani ng, but t he
di st i nct i on f or mul at ed by Per r ot i s usef ul i n gener al . El se-
wher e ( p. 52) he opposes pr ocess ( f ol yamat ) cor r espondi ng t o
a s ng e wag ( e. g. a dog w t h t s t a ) ' . No
*M
ppen
M
f og| a
M
f e /
M
csva | a
M
meg s conce vab e f or a f r st aspect . These
ar e moment ar y ver bs wh ch cannot be v ewed as a pr ocess.
' Gr asp' s a sw t ch f r omnon- under st and ng t o under st and ng,
t oo r ap d t o be caught . For ' wag' t her e s t he ver b csva ,
and megcsova says t hat t her e was one wagg ng on y ( K ef er
1979, ( 52) ( 53) ) .
S nce not a t he st at c and dur at ve ver bs ar e b ocked
f r omadopt ng t he second aspect and not a punct ua / moment ar y
ver bs ar e exc uded f r om t he f r st aspect ( e. g. ( 17a) ) ,
one mor e f act or must be nvo ved n t he r monoaspect ua t y.
Th s seems t o be ' non- obser vab t y' t hr ough v s on or ot her
senses. Th s s c ear f or t he st at c or dur at ve ver bs ke
t ud ' know' and f or a punct ua ver b ke f e f og ' gr asp' , bot h
r ef er r ng t o ment a pr ocesses. For ' make a s ng e wag' , t he
wagg ng t se f s obser vab e n pr nc p e, but a s ng e wag
obser ved does not a ow t he pr ed ct on t hat t w r ema n
t he on y one, hence on y csv s t r u y obser vab e, what
makes megcsOv d f f er ent s not per ce vab e by senses wh e
st n pr ogr ess.
3. 3. Fact ua vs. Descr pt ve aspect . At t h s st age, we ar e
pr epar ed t o at t empt t o pr opose a def n t on f or t he Hungar an
aspect s, based on t he pa r s ( 12c/ b) , ( 13c/ b) , ( 14c/ b) , ( 15c/ b) ,
( 16a/ b- c) , ( 17a/ b) , ( 18a- c/ b) and ( 19a/ b) , and many ot her pa r s
cons der ed but not r epr oduced her e, - a def n t on t hat must be
compat b e w t h t hose cases wher e a pr ever b ess ver b s con-
t r ast ed w t h one w t h a pr ever b t hat a so mod f es t s mean ng
( 12a/ b) , ( 14a/ b) , ( 15a/ b) , et c. , and f ur t her cons st ent w t h
( f oot not e 25 cont nued) ' act on' , and esemny; event as t he
punct ua memor y of a happen ng w t h dur at on, cor r espond ng
t o what I mean by ' f act ' . For t he mean ng of meg- Per r ot a so
uses t he t er mef f ect ve, wh ch was used f or t he second aspect
n Hungar an n Het zr on ( 1966) ( on t he bas s of an ear er
synops s of h s st udy by Per r ot ) .
t he r esu t s at t a ned n 3. 2. 3. wher e t s shown t hat st at c
ver bs may not appear n t he second aspect un ess t hey may be
r epr esent ed as punct ua zed obser vat ons n space and some
punct ua ver bs may not appear n t he f r st aspect .
The common denom nat or of a t he occur ences of t he
f r st aspect seems t o be t he f act t hat t he sent ences cont a n ng
t hem commun cat e event s, act ons, happen ngs or
st at es per se as t hey ar e t ak ng p ace or ar e go ng on be ng
t r ue. We sha abe t h s t he Descr pt ve aspect . As shown
above, t he f or ma expr ess on of t h s aspect s e t her a pr e-
ver b ess ver b or a M d- st r essed ver b w t h t s pr ever b post -
posed, r emoved f r om t s ex ca y pr e- ver ba pos t on. On
t he ot her hand, t he second aspect , f or ma y char act er zed by
t he pr esence of a pr ever b d r ect y pr eced ng t he ver b base
and const t ut ng one wor d w t h t , po nt s t o t he f act t hat
t he event does/ d d ndeed t ake p ace. I t s mor e dynam c and
put s t he emphas s on t he change t hat t he act on or event occass ons,
on t he mod f cat on of t he s t uat on, on t he ach evement .
Hence t s of t en connect ed w t h t he pr esent at ve ( as
def ned n Het zr on ( 1975) ) , . e. t he denot at um of t he f na wor d
of such a sent ence may p ay a r o e n t he next sent ence. The
essent a commun cat ona cont r but on of t he sent ence may t h s
be out s de of t he act on pr oper expr essed by t he ver b. We can
ca t h s t he Fact ua aspect . The Fact ua aspect s t he d s-
cour se- cha n aspect par exce ence ( cf . Hopper - Thompson, f or t h-
com ng) . The concat enat on of a sequence of event s nt o a nar -
r at ve s r ea zed t hr ough t he Fact ua aspect , wher eas t he De-
scr pt ve aspect nger s on t he act ons, event s or st at es t hem-
se ves, t akes t he r dur at on nt o account , descr bes t hemmor e
v v d y.
The f unct on ng of t he aspect ua d chot omy may a so be
ust r at ed by deve opment s n t he co oqu a anguage, wher e
a number of ver bs under went a spont aneous add t on of pr ever bs,
e. g. ekz ' down- pub sh' on t he bas s of kz ' pub sh' .
However condemned by nor mat v st s, t hese co oqu a ext ens ons
have t he r deep r oot s n t he aspect ua syst em and f t
nt o t he gr ammat ca pat t er n of Hungar an per f ect y. ' Pub sh ng'
means mak ng some mat er a ava ab e t o t he pub c
t hr ough pr nt ng n a c r cu at ed document , - and not keep ng
t ava ab e. The moment ar y- nchoat ve assoc at on at t ached
t o t h s mean ng war r ant s t he use of t he pr ever b t o cr eat e t he
appr opr at e second aspect . The co oqu a has now an aspect ua
pa r kz / ekz cor r espond ng t o t he descr pt ve/ f act ua
d chot omy ( st b ur r ed by t he f act t hat t he nor mat v st
appr ove of kz on y and pr opose no f act ua f or m t o be used
n a cont ext t hat r equ r es t ) .
F na y, t s wor t h wh e r et ur n ng t o t he par t c e
ppen ' | ust ' t hat has been used above n sever a examp es of
t he descr pt ve aspect . Th s s not an adver b w t h aspect ua
f unct ons. Ou t e on t he cont r ar y, ke t s Eng sh g oss, t
s st r ong y aspect - sens t ve. W t h t he descr pt ve aspect ,
t s r ead ng s ' r ght at t h s moment , n pr ogr ess' , but w t h
t he f act ua aspect t may be used t o expr ess mmed at e y pr e-
ced ng comp et on of t en t r ans at ab e as ' has/ had | ust f n sh-
ed do ng' . See ( 20) be ow f or some aspect ua y const r a ned
adver bs.
3. 4. Aspect and Gap- F er s. The def n t on of t he Gap- F -
er s, as pr oposed above, s: a Pr om nent a e ement wh ch s
cont r ast ed w t h some/ anyt h ng e se t hat may r easonab y appear /
has appear ed n t he same s ot , - w t h n a sent ence t he r est of
wh ch s pr ev ous y known, pr esupposed, f o ows f r om t he pr e-
v ous cont ext , guessab e or t r v a . I t s t hus c ear t hat
when non- Ver b Gap- F ng s pr esent , t he nf or mat on con-
veyed s not t he event , t he act on expr essed by t he sent ence,
not t he pr ocess nvo ved, nor t he r esu t , t he ach evement m-
p ed, but t he f act t hat of a poss b e compar ab e e ement s
t s pr ec se y t he Gap- F er t hat f gur es n t hat spec f c
s ot . The f u sent ence st ands t her e mer e y as a f r ame f or
NON-APPLI CABI LI TY AS A TEST FOR CATEGORY DEFI NI TI ONS 169
t he Gap- F er e ement , a r em nder of what t he s ot t f s
s r ea y about . I n br ef , t s t he dent t y of t he Gap- F er
e ement t hat const t ut es t he on y t r u y r e evant nf or mat on.
I t f o ows f r omt h s r eason ng t hat non- Ver b Gap- F ng
and aspect ua a t er nat on must be ncompat b e n Hungar an.
The f unct on of Gap- F ng s t o d st r act t he at t ent on f r om
t he happen ng t se f , ever yt h ng but t he Gap- F er s pushed
back n t he backgr ound. Ther ef or e, n t he pr esence of a Gap-
F er , ne t her t he pr ocess or st at e nor t he f act ar e r ea y
commun cat ed, and t he d st nct on bet ween t he t wo aspect s be-
comes f unct ona y super f uous.
I t s t he t hes s of t he pr esent wr t er t hat ver ba as-
pect s neut r a zed n Hungar an n t he pr esence of a Gap-
F er . Th s has not been not ced by Hungar an ngu st s be-
cause t he pr ever bs ar e not dr opped when Gap- F ng occur s,
t hey ar e on y d sp aced. Th s s ma n y due t o t he add t ona
semant c cont r but on of most of t hem, wh ch makes t heman nd spensab e
component of t he sent ence. We sha see be ow t hat
even t he mean ng ess, pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs may st ay on,
but t he r pr esence or absence w make abso ut e y no d f f er ence
as f ar as t he nf or mat ona cont ent s concer ned. They
may p ay a st y st c r o e n t he r hyt hmof t he sent ence, but
no mor e.
I n t he f o ow ng, examp es of Focus w be used f or
26
See Hopper ( 1978) f or t ypes of nt er act on bet ween aspect and
f ocus. I n Ma ay, t he f ocus par t c e - ah s at t ached t o t he
ver b t o mar k ' k net ca y new event s' - what wou d cor r espond
t o t he Hungar an Fact ua aspect . Th s means n pr act ce t hat ,
s nce on y one - ah per sent ence s a owed, Noun- Focus may
not coex st w t h t he aspect ua y nt er pr et ab e Ver b- Focus - a
s t uat on qu t e par a e t o Hungar an, see 3. 5. be ow. I n
Russ an, t he mper f ect ve aspect ' s t yp ca y used when one
of t he const t uent s r ece ves a one t he cent r a f ocus of
170
ust r at on, but t shou d be r emember ed t hat t he ot her Gap-
F er : Rep acer w a so be under st ood t o be sub| ect t o t he
same r u es and same r est r ct ons.
To demonst r at e our t hes s , et us t ake an aspect ua
d st nct on, cont r ast ng a Pr ever b- Ver b gr oup w t h a Ver b
Pr ever b sequence wher e bot h have t he M d st r ess. The r espect ve
sent ences a so cont a n an adver b wh ch can cooccur w t h
one aspect on y: h r t e en ' sudden y' qua f es a f act ua ver b
on y, wher eas | O sok g ' f or a ong t me' ( t . : ' good f or +
ong+t me- unt ' ) s on y compat b e w t h t he descr pt ve aspect .
( 20) ( a)
M
H r t e en
M
k nzet t az
M
ab akon. ( Fact ua aspect )
' Sudden y he- out - ooked t he w ndow- on'
( ' Sudden y he ooked out of t he w ndow' )
( b) | O
M
sok g
M
nzet t
M
k az
M
ab akon. ( Descr pt ve asp. )
' Good ong- t me he- ooked out t he w ndow- on'
(' He was ook ng out of t he w ndow f or a ong t me' )
( c) *| O
M
sok g
M
k nzet t az
M
ab akon. ( Fact ua )
' For a ong t me he ooked out of t he w ndow'
( d)
* M
H r t e en
M
nzet t
M
k az
M
ab akon. ( Descr pt ve)
' Sudden y he was ook ng out of t he w ndow'
Examp es ( 20 c- d) ust r at e t he ncompat b t y bet ween a
dur at ve adver b and t he Fact ua aspect and bet ween a punct ua
27
adver b and t he Descr pt ve . Now cons der t he f o ow ng:
( f oot not e 26 cont nued) nf or mat on' , cf . 3. 5. be ow f or t he
under y ng s m ar t y of t h s w t h t he s t uat on n Hungar an.
27
One may act ua y obt a n a st r ng qu t e s m ar t o * ( 20d) ,
M M
but w t h t he adver b unst r essed: Most meg h r t e en nezet t k
M
az ab akon ( ' Now and sudden y. . . ' ) f or ' And now, sudden y,
he was | obser ved/ not ced| ook ng out of t he w ndow' wher e
t he adver b qua f es t he per cept on mp ed.
( 21) ( a)
H
H r t e en

nzet t
M
k az
M
ab akon. ( Pr ever b post -
posed)
(' He ooked out of t he w ndow sudden y' )
( b) |
H
sok g

nzet t
M
k az
M
ab akon.
(' He was ook ng out of t he w ndow f or a oong t me' )
( c) Az
H
ab akon

nzet t
M
k
M
h r t e en.
( ' Sudden y he ooked out of t he w ndow' )
( d) z
H
abl akon

nzet t
M
k |
M
sok g.
(' I t was t hr ough t he w ndow t hat he ooked out f or
a ong t me' )
Her e bot h adver bs appear n t he same const r uct on cont a n ng
Focus, t hey may be Focused t hemse ves ( 21a- b) or anot her e e-
ment may be under Focus: ( 21e- d) . S nce t he adver bs t hemse ves
do go on car r y ng t he r or g na r ead ng, t he aspect ua d st nct on
s pr eser ved t hr ough t hem. Yet not h ng nd cat es t
n t he ver b. The mer e expr ess on Az
H
ab akon

nzet t
M
k . r epr esent s
a neut r a zat on bet ween t he Fact ua and t he Descr pt ve
r ead ngs, t may be t he Focused count er par t of e t her
M
K nzet t az
M
ab akon. ' He ooked out of t he w ndow' ( Fact ua )
o r M
Nzet t
M
k az ab akon. ' He was ook ng out of t he w ndow'
( Descr pt ve) .
Th s has been a case of a ver b w t h a pr ever b t hat has
a c ear semant c cont r but on ndependent y of aspect . Ther e-
f or e t cannot be om t t ed w t hout subst ant a y a t er ng t he
mean ng. Pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs, on t he ot her hand, need
not be pr eser ved when aspect s neut r a zed. However , Hungar an
a ows t he r post posed appear ance even w t h a Focus e ement ,
but t hey w have no act ua f unct on at a and may be om t t ed
w t h no consequence.
Th s f act const t ut es t he best t est f or ver f y ng whet her
t he pr ever b s mer e y aspect ua or a so cont r but es t o t he ex-
ca nt er pr et at on, and, mor eover , f or p npo nt ng t hat cont r -
but on. When, n a Focus- cont a n ng sent ence, t he pr esence or
absence of t he pr ever b does not a t er t he mean ng, t h s pr e-
ver b s pur e y aspect ua . On t he ot her hand, when t he a - over
mean ng s mod f ed and t he sent ence w t h t he pr ever b s not a
per f ect equ va ent of t he sent ence w t hout t he pr ever b, t hat
mod f cat on nt er pr et ed n semant c t er ms w const t ut e t he
cont r but on of t he pr ever b t o t he sense of t he Pr ever b- Ver b
gr oup as opposed t o t he mer e Ver b.
28
Her e ar e some examp es of
mean ng ess pr ever bs wh ch ar e om ss b e and have st y st c
f unct ons at bes t :
( 22) ( a) A
H
any

t (
M
ot t )
M
m nd g a
M
szobban. ( cf . ( 16) )
' The g r sat ( t her e) a ways t he r oom- n' ( Sub| ect -
Focus)
( b) Az
H
sko ba

ndu t (
M
e ) a
M
f . ( cf . ( 18) )
' The scho - nt o st ar t ed ( away) t he boy' ( Comp ement - Focus)
( c) Csak a gyer ekeket

(
M
meg) ez a
M
et egsg. ( cf .
23) )
' On y t he ch dr en- __c k s ( "up") t h s t he d sease'
( ' Th s d sease on y k s ch dr en' ) ( Ob| ect - Focus)
( d) Bar ackp nkva

k n t a (
M
meg) a
M
hz asszony a
M
vendgeket . ( cf . ( 19) )
' Apr cot br andy- w t h of f er ed ( "up") t he host ess t he
guest s- Ace. '
( ' The ady of t he house of f er ed/ ser ved pr cot
2 8
For examp e, t h s s how I r ea zed t hat t he f o ow ng pa r
s not pur e y aspect ua . Compar e:
( a) Az
H
oszt yt r sa t

ver t e a
M
f .
' The c assmat es- h s- Acc. beat t he boy'
Az
H
oszt yt r sa t

ver t e
M
meg a
M
f . ( w t h " up" )
( a) and ( b) ar e not equ va ent , ( a) r ef er s t o what was t ak ng
p ace, a f ght n pr ogr es s ; ( b) means t hat t he boy managed t o
beat up( ! ) h s opponent s. Her e ( b) s per f ect ve wh ch, n my
op n on, s not an aspect ua cat egor y n Hungar an.
br andy t o t he guest s' or ' I t was apr cot br andy
t hat t he ady. . . ' )
W t h Ver b- Focus, on t he ot her hand, t he aspect s ar e
not neut r a zed. The d chot omy of f act ua t y/ descr pt v t y s
st f unct ona when t s ocus co nc des w t h t he ocus of
t he Gap- F er , so t hat t he ver b s not demot ed commun cat on-
a y:
( 23) ( a)
H
a

gyer ekeket ez a
M
et egsg! ( Descr pt ve aspect )
' K s t he ch dr en- ___. t h s t he d sease'
( b)
H
Meg a.

gyer ekeket ez a
M
bet egseg! ( Fact ua as-
pect )
' "Up"- k s t he ch dr en- ___. t h s t he d sease'
Aspect - w se, t he f r st sent ence conveys t he dea t hat a k -
ng d sease r ages among t he ch dr en. ( 23b) , as aga nst t h s,
means t hat any ch d cont r act ng t h s d sease s ke y t o
d e. Thus, ( 23a) s a t r ag c happen ng, wher eas ( 23b) speaks
of t he f at e of t he ch dr en. The add t ona Focus makes t h s
sent ence pr act ca y exc amat or y. An appr ox mat e r ender ng of
t he t wo s ( 23a) : ' Th s d sease s k ng t he ch dr en' vs.
( 23b) ' Th s d sease does k ( or k s) t he ch dr en' .
I t shou d be po nt ed out t hat t he aspect ua oppos t on
s neut r a zed n t he pr esence of mean ngf u ( nonver ba )
Focus on y, mot vat ed by commun _at ona cons der at ons. I n
Hungar an, t he negat ve wor d nem ' not ' and t he nt er r ogat ve
pr onouns ( see ( 25b- c) be ow f or sent ence quest ons) have ob gat or y
Focus n t he event t hat no ot her , d scour se- mot vat ed
Focused e ement s f ound n t he sent ence. The ob gat or y Focused
cat egor es nvo ve no neut r a zat on of t he aspect s.
Compare :
(24) (a) A
M
btym a
M
sz nhzban vol t. (Descri pti ve aspect)
'The brother-my the theater- i n was'
(b) A
M
btym
M
benn vol t a
M
sznhzban. (Factual aspect)
' The br ot her - my ns de was t he t heat er - n'
( c) A
H
bt ym vo t (
M
benn) a
M
sz nhzban. ( Sub| ect -
Focus )
' The br t her - my was ( ns de) t he t heat er - n'
( d) A
H
sz nhzban vo t (
M
benn) a
M
bt ym. ( Comp ement -
Focus)
' The t hat er - n was ( ns de) t he br ot her - my'
( e) A
M
sz nhzban
H
nem vo t a
M
bt ym. ( Descr pt ve -
Negat ve)
' The t heat er - n not was t he br ot her - my'
( f ) A
M
sz nhzban nemvo t
M
benn a.
M
bt ym. ( Fact ua -
Negat ve)
' The t heat er - n not was ns de t he br ot her - my'
( g)
H
M kor vo t a
M
sz nhzban a
M
pt ym? ( Descr pt ve -
I nt er r ogat ve)
' When was t he t heat er - n t he br ot her - my'
( h)
H
M kor vo t benn a
M
sz nhzban a bt ym? ( Fact ua -
I nt er r ogat ve)
' When was ns de t he t heat er - n t he br ot her - my'
( 24a) s a s mp e st at ement about my ( e der ) br ot her ' s wher e-
about s, name y h s be ng at t he t heat er ( n t he bu d ng,
whet her wat ch ng a per f or mance or n anot her qua t y) . ( 24b) ,
t he Fact ua aspect st at ement , on t he ot her hand, expr esses
t hat he was ndeed t her e. Th s wou d be an appr opr at e expr ess on
when he was f ound t her e af t er hav ng been ooked f or
e sewher e; when he s known t o go t her e r r egu ar y, and t h s
s one of t hose days when he happens t o be n; or when h s
v s t ng t he t heat er has spec a mpor t ance, he had some commun cat ona y
r e evant bus ness t her e ( t he pr esent at ve
mean ng, cf . Het zr on 1975) , et c. I n summar y, t he ' t heat er ' as
t he ' med um' of my br ot her ' s pr esence s not | ust a casua
t h ng as n ( 24a) , but somet h ng of s gn f cance. ( 24a) may
set t he scene f or f ur t her event s, ( 24b) s an event by t se f
on t he same f oot ng as t he ot her s.
Now, i n ( 24c- d) t he above di st i nct i on i s not f ound.
The st at i c pr ever b benn ' i nsi de' i s t ol er at ed, but i t s omi ssi on
does not modi f y t he meani ng. I n t he pr esence of Focus,
t he aspect s ar e neut r al i zed. But t hi s i s not so i n t he negat i ve
sent ences ( 24e- f ) and t he i nt er r ogat i ve ones ( 24g- h) .
29
( 24f ) negat es t he expect at i on t hat my br ot her ought t o be
f ound i n t he t heat er , t he negat i ve count er par t of ( 24b) , wher eas
( 24e) si mpl y st at es t hat he was not t her e, negat i ng ( 24a) .
I n t hese t wo exampl es, t he Locat i ve Phr ase i s i ni t i al , but t he
Subj ect - Neg. - Ver b- Loc. or der i s al so possi bl e, wi t h essent i al -
l y t he same di st i nct i on: ( 24f ) i n ei t her or der expr essi ng t hat
he never showed up t her e, or was not f ound t her e when l ooked
f or . The di st i nct i on i s t he same i n ( 24g) and ( 24h) , whi ch al -
so have t he pot ent i al f or ot her wor d or der s. ( 24g) i s a neu-
t r al i nqui r y about my br ot her ' s past t i me t abl e, whi l e ( 24h)
i s asked i n or der t o f i nd out when he made hi s pl anned vi si t ,
or when he ' honor ed' t he t heat er wi t h hi s pr esence.
Thus, aut omat i c Focus i n negat i on and i nt er r ogat i on does
not l ead t o a neut r al i zat i on of t he aspect s. Thi s f ol l ows
f r om t he f act t hat t her e i s not hi ng wr ong wi t h t he di st i nct i on
bet ween negat i ng f act ual i t y, denyi ng t hat a speci al event t ook
pl ace, and negat i ng por cess or st at e, t hat a cer t ai n si t uat i on
29
( 24g- h) ar e exampl es of pr onomi nal i nt er r ogat i on, but t he
same i s t r ue of sent ence- quest i ons, see ( 25b- c) bel ow.
30
Never t hel ess, t he aspect s ar e neut r al i zed i n t he answer s
whi ch al so obl i gat or i l y cont ai n a Focus el ement , t he one t hat
r epl aces t he i nt er r ogat i ve pr onoun, or t he pr edi cat e i n an-
swer t o a sent ence quest i on. Her e t he compul sor y Focus i s not
i mposed by t he i nher ent f eat ur es of t he el ement i nvol ved, but
by t he cont ext , t he pr ecedi ng quest i on. Ther ef or e, Focus i s
f unct i onal i n t hi s cont ext .
ex st ed n a g ven t me. L kew se, one may nqu r e about a
pr esupposed def n t e event t hr ough t he Fact ua aspect , or ,
us ng t he Descr pt ve aspect , about t he occur ence of a poss b e
s t uat on. W t h some s mp f cat on, one may r ender
negat ed or nt er r ogat ve Descr pt ve sent ences n Eng sh by
add ng ' at a ' , wher eas t h s s not poss b e f or t he Fact ua
ones. Her e aga n, t he semant c def n t ons of t he cat egor es
exp a n t he f act s.
Now, t he examp es of ( 24) be ong t o t he cat egor y wher e
pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs ar e used. I n t he most f r equent s t uat ons,
wher e t he pr ever b s t he car r er of add t ona mean ng
and cannot be de et ed, on t he ot her hand, t he aspect s ar e
neut r a zed a so n negat on and pr onom na nt er r ogat on -
f or f or ma r easons: t he pr ever b s a ways n a post - ver ba
pos t on t he ver b s unst r essed because of t he pr eced ng
H gh st r essed Neg. or Wh- e ement , so t hat t her e ar e no f or ma
means t o d st ngu sh bet ween t he aspect s. I n ( 24e- f - g- h) t he
absence or pr esence of t he pr ever b expr esses aspect . Her e,
w t h t he pr ever b a ways pr esent and a ways post - ver ba , one
cannot t e whet her t he pr ever b was dr ven out f r om t s pr ever ba
pos t on by t he H gh- st r essed e ement on y, or t
had a r eady moved t her e, vo unt ar y, t o expr ess t he Descr pt ve
aspect . I n sent ence- quest ons, on t he cont r ar y, t her e s
no pr ever b- d sp acement , and t he pos t on ng of t he pr ever b
s st ava ab e as an exponent of aspect ua d st nct ons:
( 25) ( a) Az
M
r eg
L
nn kk
H
nem
nzt ek
M
k az
M
ab akon.
' The o d aunt es not ooked out t he w ndow- on'
(' The t t e o d ad es d d not ook | f r om nem+
k nzt ek | / wer e not ook ng | f r om nem+ nzt ek
M
k | out of t he w ndow' - a d st nct on n Eng sh
wh ch, be ng a t ype of abso ut e neut r a zat on,
cannot be cons der ed va d n Hungar an) , but
( b) Az
M
r eg
L
nn kk
H
nzt ek- e

k az
M
ab akon?
( Descr pt ve aspect )
' The o d aunt es ooked- O out t he w ndow- on'
(' Were t he t t e o d ad es ook ng out of t he
w ndow?' )
( c) Az
M
r eg
L
nn kk
H
k nzt ek- e az

ab akon. ( Fact ua )
I n Hungar an sent ence- quest ons, n t he absence of d scour se- mot vat ed
Focus, t he t ense- car r er t akes t he Focus
st r ess. I n add t on, t he t ense- car r er s e t her f o owed by
a par t c e - e wh ch, t h s be ng t he s mp er const r uct on, s
pr esent ed above, or t he ast t wo sy ab es of t he quest on
have a U t r ah gh- M d pr osody. The at t er cr eat es an nt er -
f er ence w t h t he H gh st r ess on t he pr ed cat e, w t h phonet c
comp cat ons t hat do not be ong n t he pr esent st udy ( see
Het zr on, f or t hcom ng) .
3. 5. Exp anat or y power . The exp anat on g ven above f or t he
neut r a zat on of t he aspect s af t er a Focus ( or Rep acer ) was
semant c: t he def n t ons of t he t wo aspect s ar e napp cab e
when a Gap- F er s pr esent . On t he ot her hand, wh e n ne-
gat on such a neut r a zat on s not expect ed and not f ound
w t h pur e y aspect ua pr ever bs: ( 24d- e) , w t h mean ngf u pr e-
ver bs t he neut r a zat on does occur - f or f or ma r easons:
s nce t he pr ever b s non- de et ab e and has t o be d sp aced
anyhow, no dev ce s ef t f or t he aspect ua d chot omy t o
man f est t se f . One t hen may a so suggest t hat t he neut r a -
zat on of aspect af t er Focus s due n gener a not t o se-
mant cs, but t o t he f or ma behav or of Focus expr ess ons wh ch
r equ r e t he d sp acement of t he pr ever b aut omat ca y, t her eby
cr pp ng t an an expr essor of t he aspect . The pr e- ver ba po-
s t on, t he f or ma exponent of t he Fact ua aspect , s den ed
t o t w t h a non- Tot a zer Gap- F er pr esent . Pur e y aspec-
t ua pr ever bs wou d t hen f o ow by ana ogy.
Yet , one must appr oach t h s pr ob em f r om t he oppos t e
s de, and t hat w pr ov de st r ong suppor t t o t he semant c
mot vat on exp anat on. Ther e s no a. pr or r eason f or why
t he pr ever b shou d be d sp aced af t er a Focus e ement . I n
178
pr nc p e, t he Focus e ement cou d pr ecede an und st ur bed
Pr ever b- Ver b gr oup w t h equa ef f c ency and c ar t y as t
ndeed does when t he Focus e ement s a Tot a zer ( see 2. 3.
above) . I n f act , t he d sp acement may be v ewed as t he r esu t ,
not t he cause, of t he neut r a zat on. S nce no aspect ua d -
chot omy s expect ed t o ex st af t er a Focus e ement , t he pr e-
ver b s def used as an aspect - mar ker and, r emoved f r om t s
bound pos t on wher e t appear s n t he ex con, t s t r ans-
f er r ed t o a neut r a p ace wher e t can per f or m t s ot her du-
t es, t hose of semant c mod f cat on. But one may even go one
st ep f ur t her and adduce a bet t er | ust f cat on. The d sp ace-
ment of t he pr ever b af t er nor ma Focus r esemb es t he post -
pos ng of t he pr ever b f or t he Descr pt ve aspect . One may t hus
st at e t hat wh e t her e s f or ma and semant c neut r a zat on,
t he ext er na man f est at on of t he aspect - neut r a ver b ser v ng
a Focus e ement s ke t he Descr pt ve f or m. Th s s poss b y
not acc dent a . I n t he t heor y pr oposed by Hopper and Thompson
( f or t hcom ng) , Fact ua aspect r epr esent s f or egr ound ng, . e.
const t ut es t he po es over wh ch t he w r es car r y ng t he f ow
of d scour se ar e st r et ched, wher eas t he Descr pt ve aspect or
t he Eng sh Pr ogr ess ve or t he Fr ench I mper f ect , et c. ar e a
backgr ound ng dev ces. Now, n a Focus- cont a n ng sent ence,
t he non- Focus por t on s a so backgr ounded, even mor e r ad -
ca y t han n t he above cases. Consequent y, t her e s some
s m ar t y, and ana ogy may oper at e. The den a of t he pr e-
- ver ba pos t on t o t he pr ever b may be v ewed as a gener a
backgr ound ng dev ce, ser v ng her e t wo d f f er ent k nds of
backgr ound ng ( cf . not e 26 f or a compar ab e s t uat on n Rus-
s an) .
Conver se y, t s t o be not ed t hat t he Hungar an syst em
s u t mat e y not un ke t hat of Ma ay ( not e 26) . Bot h t he
Fact ua aspect and Focus mean f or egr ound ng ( Hopper 1978: 18) .
Even t hough gr ammat ca y on y a component of a sent ence, t he
Focus e ement st ands out n t he cha n of d scour se on t he same
eve as a sent ence cont a n ng t he Fact ua aspect . A t he
ot her e ement s or sent ences r ema n n t he backgr ound. I t s
t h s ana ogy t hat was exp o t ed, as shown by Hopper , by Ma ay
wher e a Focus- mar ker was t aken over t o mar k what cor r esponds
t o our Fact ua aspect . The end r esu t s t he same n bot h an-
guages: t he f or egr ounded Phr ase, t he Focus e ement , and t he
f or egr ounded event - nd cat or , t he Fact ua aspect , ar e n com-
p ement ar y d st r but on s nce t hey f u f t he same d scour se
f unct on.
One quest on st r ema ns: why s t hen t he pr ever b kept
n t s pr e- ver ba pos t on af t er a Gap- F ng Tot a zer ( 2. 3. ) .
Her e I amof f er ng a t ent at ve exp anat on. The Fact ua aspect
commun cat es t he f act t hat t he event has/ w have t aken p ace.
A sent ence w t h a Gap- F ng Tot a zer commun cat es t he f act
t hat what s sa d s t r ue not on y f or par t of a gr oup, but
t o t s ent r et y. Wh e nor ma Focus usua y r ef er s t o a s ng e
event and s compat b e w t h t he dea of pr ocess, st at e or
f act equa y we ( . e. t does not mat t er whet her t he sen-
t ence n wh ch a gap s f ed t t o be v ewed as a st at e or
pr ocess or as a f act ) , Tot a zer s t yp ca y pr esuppose mu t -
p e st at es or happen ngs and what s commun cat ed s t he f act
t hat each one of t he poss b e cand dat es f or par t c pat on s
nc uded n t hem, no mat t er exact y when and how. Thus, as f or
t he Fact ua aspect n gener a , t he mean ng s bas ca y r esu t -
at ve, t he pr ocess of t he event s d sr egar ded. Th s s why
t he ext er na f eat ur e of t he Fact ua aspect , t he pr eposed pr e-
31
ver b, s adopt ed ( or pr eser ved) af t er a Focused Tot a zer .
31
Anot her ssue s : what s used when a Gap- F ng Tot a zer
and a ver b w t h a pur e y aspect ua pr ever b ar e comb ned? L m-
t at ons of space pr event me f r om t r eat ng t h s n det a .
Suf f ce t t o say t hat t he gener a r u e s t hat such a pr ever b
s pr oscr bed f t her e s anot her non- spec f c NP n t he sen-
4. Summar y
The f o ow ng def n t ons have been pr oposed her e: Gap-
F er s : e ement s t hat come t o f or g na y unspec f ed
s ot s n sent ences pr esupposed or of m t ed commun cat ona
mpor t ance by t hemse ves. Focus : a Gap- F er t hat s n exp c t
oppos t on w t h anyt h ng t hat cou d appear n t he same
s ot . Rep acer : a Gap- F er n exp c t oppos t on w t h some-
( f oot not e 31 cont nued) t ence: ( a) ; ob gat or y when t her e s
no ot her NP or t her e s a spec f c one ( car r y ng a def n t e or
ndef n t e ar t c e) : ( b) . Appar ent count er examp es, wher e t he
ot her NP s not spec f c yet t her e s no pr ever b, can be shown
t o be cases of add t ona Pr ed cat e- Focus ( s nce af t er a Gap-
F ng Tot a zer one mor e Focus s st a owed, cf . ( 7) ) :
( a)
H
M nden

szemt dombon

kap r g
M
cs r ke.
' Ever y gar bage- heap- on scr at ches- about ch cken'
( b)
H
M nden

szemt dombon

ot t kap r g egy/ a cs r ke.
' Ever y gar bage- heap- on t her e scr at ches- about a/ t he
ch cken'
( c)
H
M nden

szemt dombon

kap r g a
M
cs r ke.
( a) and ( b) ar e mor e or ess equ va ent gener c st at ement s
about t he pr esence of at east one ch cken on ever y gar bage-
heap nspect ed, pr obab y as a s gn of good pou t r y r a s ng
cu t ur e, ( c) says t hat t he nst nct of a ch cken ( gener c as
we ) s t o st ar t scr at ch ng about as soon as t get s t o a
gar bage- heap. ' Does scr at ch' s a r easonab y adequat e r ender ng.
Not e, however , t hat t he Focused ver b car r es zer o st r ess
as n ( 7c) yet t he subsequent st r ess s not r educed f r omM d
t o zer o, un ke n ( 7c) and ( 3c) / ( 23) r espect ve y.
The exp anat on f or t he d scr epancy bet ween ( a) and ( b)
s t hat on y a spec f c NP qua f es f or t he pr esent at ve
f unct on, wh ch ot t can f u f her e w t hout any concom t ant
aspect .
t h ng t hat has appear ed n t he same s ot n a pr ev ous ut -
t er ance or n an assumpt on. Fact ua aspect : wher e t he f act
of hav ng t aken p ace, ach evement s, t he mod f cat ons t he
event occas ons ar e t he r e evant nf or mat on, vs. Descr pt ve
aspect : wher e t he st at e or happen ng t se f , n t s dur at on,
s commun cat ed.
The cont r ast bet ween Focus and Rep acer s neut r a zed
w t h Tot a zer s because t he oppos t e of ' a ' s ' par t ' , and
t he d st nct on bet ween ' any' and ' some' s vo d n t h s con-
| unct ur e. The same s t r ue of nt er r ogat ve pr onouns wh ch
ar e not n t r ue oppos t on w t h anyt h ng, but expr ess ack of
nf or mat on n one r espect , and of t he answer wor ds t hat r e-
p ace t hem, wh ch ar e n oppos t on w t h t hese pr onouns.
The cont r ast bet ween t he Fact ua and Descr pt ve aspect s
s neut r a zed n t he pr esence of nonver ba Gap- F er s, because
t he sent ences cont a n ng Gap- F er s pr mar y commun cat e
t he dent t y of t he ent t y t hat comes t o f t he gap,
and t he r est of t he sent ence s backgr ounded t o t he ext ent
t hat t does not mat t er whet her t hey ar e t o be v ewed as f act s
or descr pt ons. The Fact ua aspect means f or egr ound ng and
her e we nev t ab y have backgr ound ng. The essence of t he com-
mun cat on s not t he event , but a component t her eof .
The f act t hat t he semant c def n t ons pr oposed account
f or t he synt act c phenomena obser ved n a compact and p aus -
b e manner makes t h gh y ke y t hat t he def n t ons ar e n-
deed cor r ect .
Ref er ences
B er w sch, Manf r ed. 1966. ' Rege n f r d e I nt onat on deut -
scher St ze' , St ud a Gr ammat ca. VI I . Unt er suchungen ber
Akzent und I nt onat on mDeut schen. 99- 201.
Bo nger , Dw ght L. 19 65. ' Cont r ast ve accent and cont r ast ve
st r ess' , n D. L. Bo nger , For ms of Eng sh, Cambr dge,
Mass. : Har var d UP, 101- 116 ( or g na y Language 37. 83- 96
( 1961) ) .
Chaf e, Wa ace L. 1976. ' G venness, cont r ast veness, sub| ect
and t op cs' , n Char es L , ed. Sub| ect and t op c. New Yor k:
Academ c Pr ess. 27- 55.
Comr e, Ber nar d. 1976. Aspect . Cambr dge: Cambr dge UP.
Het zr on, Rober t . 1964. ' Les synt agmes t ot a sat eur du hon-
gr o s' , Wor d 20. 55- 71.
Het zr on, Rober t . 1966. ' L' adver be exp t f ot t et ' aspect
hongr o s' , L ngu st cs 5. 99- 113.
Het zr on, Rober t . 1972. ' D s| o n ng con| o ned st r uct ur es' , Pa-
per s n L ngu st cs 5. 99- 113.
Het zr on, Rober t . 19 75. ' The pr esent at ve movement , or why t he
dea wor d or der s V. S. O. P. ' , n Char es L , ed. Wor d
or der and wor d or der change. Aust n: Un ver s t y of Texas
Pr ess. 347- 88.
Het zr on, Rober t . For t hcom ng. ' I ze t o a magyar t onosz nt ak-
sz sbo ' .
Hopper , Pau | . 19 78. ' Some obser vat ons on t he t ypo ogy of
f ocus and aspect n nar r at ve anguage' , NUSA, L ngu st c
St ud es n I ndones an and Languages of I ndones a, 4. 14- 25.
Hopper , Pau | . and Sandr a A. Thompson. For t hcom ng. ' The
d scour se bas s of Tr ans t v t y' .
Hor vat h, | u a. 1976. ' Focus n Hungar an and t he X not at on' ,
L ngu st c Ana ys s, 2. 175- 97.
K ef er , Fer enc. 1969. ' Az emf z s kr dshez' , Magyar Nyel vr ,
93. 97- 115.
Ki ef er , Fer enc. 1979. ' The aspect ual syst em i n Hungar i an' . I n
t hi s vol ume.
Ki par sky, Paul . 1966. ' ber den deut schen Akzent ' , St udi a
Gr ammat i ca, 7. 69- 98.
Per r ot , J ean. 1966. Adal kok a meg i gekt f unkci j nak
vi zsgl at hoz a mai magyar nyel vben. Budapest : Akademi ai
Ki ad.
Pr i nce, El l en F. 1978. ' The compar i son of wh- cl ef t s and i t -
cl ef t s i n di scour se' , Language, 54. 883- 906.
Sauvageot , Aur l i en. 1951. Esqui sse de l a l angue hongr oi se.
Par i s: Kl i ncksi eck,
I NTRANSI TI VE- TRANSI TI VE DERI VATI ONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARI AN
Sndor Kr o y
"Ver bor um Ungar cor um et am
e usdem r ad c s t ant a est
f oecund t as, ut summa ad-
m r at one d gna v deat ur . "
Gyr gy Komr om Ts pks
1. 1. Hungar an ver b f or ms ar e ext r eme y r ch n expr ess ve
power . Apar t f r omt ense and mood mar ker s and t he per sona end ngs
of t he det er m nat e con| ugat on, t he synt het c char act er
of t he anguage and t s power t o condense synt agms s due t o
t he comp ex syst emof ver ba der vat ona suf f xes. The Hungar an
dever ba der vat ona suf f xes can be gr ouped nt o
t hr ee c asses: suf f xes of t er at ve- f r equent at ve ver bs, suf f xes
of t r ans t vent r ans t ve ver bs, and t he suf f x - hat ,
- het wh ch s used t o f or mver ba pot ent a e. On t he bas s of
t he ex ca mean ng and t he synt act c f unct on of t he r der va-
t ona suf f xes and w t h r espect t o t he r pos t on n t he sys-
t emof Hungar an ver ba par ad gms, t he ver bs of t hese c asses
const t ut e separ at e homogeneous un t s, . e. subsyst ems. I n t he
r e evant t er at ur e one may of t en f nd t hat ver bs and ver ba
der vat ona suf f xes ar e c ass f ed w t h no at t ent on pa d
t o t hese cr t er a. As a consequence t he subset s of ver b c as-
ses est ab shed on t he bas s of var ous cr t er a get m xed up
1
ec ect ca y.
The above t hr ee c asses of ver ba der vat ona suf f xes
const t ut e t hr ee c ass f cat or y cr t er a f or ver bs. The f r st
t wo r ough y cor r espond t o t he ver b cat egor es known as ' v d'
and ' za og' n t he per t nent Russ an t er at ur e. They may be
r ender ed r ough y as ' aspect ' and ' vo ce' n Eng sh. Aspect
or v d nc udes t er at ve and nst ant aneous der vat ona suf -
f xes, wh e vo ce or za og cover s r ef ex ve, pass ve and
causat ve der vat ona suf f xes, . e. suf f xes t hat f or mt r an-
Ec ect c c ass f cat on s w t hout any homogeneous bas s.
S. U mann, f or examp e, r egar ds Car noy' s c ass f cat on of se-
mant c change as ec ect c because "Car noy' s scheme acks t he
com et eness, homogeneousness and f undament um pecu ar t o sc -
ent f c c ass f cat ons" ( U mann 1957: 244) .
A s m ar m st ake s made by t hose who c ass f y Hungar an
dever ba der vat ona suf f xes nt o t he f o ow ng gr oups: t er a-
t ves, nst ant aneous ver bs, nchoat ves, causat ves, pass ves,
r ef ex ves, and ver ba pot ent a e. Such c ass f cat on s er r oneous,
because t s based on t hr ee d st nct cr t er a: f r st , t he der va-
t ona suf f x expr esses t he dur at on or nst ant aneous char ac-
t er of t he act on ( t er at ve, nst ant aneous and nchoat ve
ver bs) ; second, t he suf f x shows how t he act on s r e at ed t o
t he sub| ect and t he ob| ect of t he act on ( causat ve, f act t ve,
pass ve and r ef ex ve ver bs) ; and t h r d t he der vat ona suf -
f x may expr ess t he poss b t y or ab t y of t he act on
( ver ba pot ent a e) .
I nst ead of bas ng ver b c ass f cat on on der vat ona
suf f xes, t s mor e appr opr at e t o c ass f y ver bs
on t he bas s of ndependent cr t er a, f or examp e, on t he
bas s of t he mean ng of t he ver bs. I n or der t o do | ust ce t o
ngu st c f act s, t s necessar y t o ass gn bot h der ved and
nonder ved ver bs t o a common c ass whenever t hey be ong t o
t he same semant c c ass. The same semant c c ass s char ac-
I NTRANSI TI VE- TRANSI TI VE DERI VATI ONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARI AN 187
( f oot not e 1 cont nued) t er sed by homogeneous synt act c be-
hav our . Not ce, f ur t her mor e, t hat any c ass f cat on a m ng
at comp et eness shou d wor k w t h comp ement ar y c asses. The
comp ement ar y c ass of moda s s t he c ass of nonmoda s; t he
t wo c asses cover exhaust ve y t he who e r ange of ver bs.
I w sh t o c a m t hat ver bs can be c ass f ed on t he
f o ow ng gr ounds : C ass 1 s def ned on t he bas s of whet her
t he mean ng of t he ver b s dur at ve or nst ant aneous ( aspect ) ;
C ass 2 s est ab shed on t he bas s of t he r e at onsh p be-
t ween act on and agent and bet ween act on and ob| ect ( vo ce) ;
C ass 3 s based on t he poss b t y or ab t y of t he act on
( moda ver b f or ms) . Th s c ass f cat on meet s t he r equ r ement s
of c ass f cat on d scussed above, name y, t has homogeneous
def n ng cr t er a and t cont a ns d st nct subset s. ( One and
t he same ver b cannot expr ess dur at ve and nst ant aneous, causa-
t ve and r ef ex ve or poss b e and mposs b e act on at t he
same t me. ) To pr ov de a | ust f cat on f or t he above t hr ee
def n ng cr t er a n a st r uct ur a f r amewor k es out s de t he
scope of t he pr esent paper .
The quest on now s how t h s c ass f cat on scheme r e-
at es t o t he c ass f cat on of ver bs nt o t r ans t ve and n-
t r ans t ve. Does t he at t er d chot omy r epr esent a sepa-
r at e c ass f cat or y cr t er on? Let us assume f or a moment
t hat t does. Let us now f r st c ass f y ver bs accor d ng t o
vo ce t ypes, say, nt o t he c asses t hat ar e f am ar f r om
Hungar an gr ammar s; act ve, pass ve, causat ve and r ef ex ve
ver bs. Act ve ver bs shou d f ur t her be d v ded nt o act ve
t r ans t ve and act ve nt r ans t ve ver bs, because t h s guar an-
t ees t he un t y of t he def n ng cr t er on ( r e at onsh p of t he
act on t o t s agent and t s ob| ect ) and because t r ans t ve
and nt r ans t ve ver bs bear d st nct r e at ons t o t he r est
of ver bs. The c ass f cat on s now based on t he synt act c
cr t er on of whet her t he ver b can cooccur w t h an ob| ect n
t he accusat ve case or not . I t s c ear t hat t h s cr t er on
188
s t ve or nt r ans t ve ver bs. The f unct on of t he ver ba
pot ent a e s of a moda - pr agmat c char act er . Essent a y t he
above cat egor es ar e equa y va d f or Hungar an.
1. 2. A synchr on c st udy of ver ba der vat ona suf f xes n-
vo ves t he f o ow ng t asks.
1. 2. 1. Gr ammat ca ana ys s w compr se ( a) t he sor t ng out
t he der vat ona suf f xes t hat ar e c ose y r e at ed; ( b) t he
ana ys s of t he subsyst ems ( ) d st r but ona y, by exam n ng
t he cont ext s n wh ch t he der ved and nonder ved f or ms occur ,
( f oot not e 1 cont nued) w y e d sub- c asses t hat never n-
t er sect ( vo ce t ypes) . Pass ve and r ef ex ve ver bs ar e a ways
nt r ans t ve, causat ves ar e a ways t r ans t ve. I t s t hus
r easonab e t o c ass f y ver bs accor d ng t o bot h t he cr t er a
I have suggest ed and t he t r ans t vent r ans t ve d st nct on.
The c ass f cat or y cr t er on t hat s based on t he cat e-
gor y of vo ce can be def ned f o ow ng Guxman ( 1964: 8) who
speaks of cent r f uga and cent r pet a oppos t ons. I n t he f r st
case, t he act on s d r ect ed out war d f r omt he sub| ect ( t r an-
s t v t y) , n t he second case f r omout s de t owar ds t he ob| ect
( pass ve mean ng) . The t er m no ogy nd cat es t he r e at onsh p
on wh ch t he c ass f cat on s based. We sha r et ur n t o t h s
r e at onsh p at er on.
2
The t er m ' vo ce' "r ef er s t o t he act ve and pass ve ' f or ms'
of t he ver b ( The t r ad t ona Lat n t er m f or t h s. . . sense was
spec es or genus . . . ) The t r ad t ona Gr eek t er m f or ' vo ce'
as a cat egor y of t he ver b was d at hes s ' st at e' , ' d spos t on' ,
' f unct on' , et c. , and some ngu st s pr ef er t o use ' d at hes s' ,
r at her t han ' vo ce' , n t h s sense of t he t er m. " ( Lyons 1968:
372. )
3
The ver ba der vat ona suf f xes of Hungar an wer e f r st
t r eat ed by Ma| t nska| a ( 1959: 243- 8) as par t of a compr e-
hens ve ana ys s of t he who e syst em of wor d der vat on.
( ) t r ansf or mat ona y, by ana ys ng t he synonymy r e at ons
t hat obt a n bet ween t he der ved and t he cor r espond ng non-
der ved f or ms, and ( ) mor phophonem ca y; ( c) t he ana ys s
of t he nt er r e at on bet ween t he var ous subsyst ems, t he
near comb nat or y poss b t es of t he var ous der vat ona
suf f xes and t he r or der ; t he exam nat on of t he mor pho og ca
pr oper t es ar s ng f r omt he comb nat on of suf f xes.
Ear y Hungar an gr ammar ans, f r om I st van Ge e| Kat ona ( 1645)
t o M k s Rva ( 1803- 6) , nt er pr et ed anguage n a f ar mor e
gener at ve way t han at er gr ammar ans have done n t he sense
t hat t hey d d not m t t he r nqu r es t o f nd ng out what
was g ven by cor por a but sought t o d scover poss b e f or ms as
we . They set up an e abor at e comb nat or y syst em f or der va-
t ona suf f xes. For examp e, Gyr gy Komr om Ts pks ( 1655)
est ab shed as many as 80 ver b f or ms by means of a syst emat c
comb nat on of s x der vat ona suf f xes (- hat, - het , causat ve,
pass ve, med a , r ef ex ve and t er at ve suf f xes) , t hough he
d d not cons der var at ons n per son, t ense and mood. Rva
est ab shed 17 bas c t ypes out of t er at ve, nst ant aneous,
r ef ex ve and denom na der vat ona suf f xes, w t h each t ype
hav ng f ve f ur t her der vat ons by means of causat ve, pot ent a ,
pass ve, causat ve + pot ent a , and pass ve + pot ent a
der vat ona suf f xes. Th s amount ed t o 105 ver b f or ms a t o-
get her . However , t s cer t a n y an exagger at on t o r egar d
t he syst em of Hungar an ver b der vat on as r evea ng such a
h gh eve of gr ammat ca t y. The f o ow ng po nt s shou d be
not ed. ( 1) Ver ba der vat ona suf f xes show a much h gher
degr ee of gr ammat ca r egu ar t y and pr oduct v t y t han what
one wou d gat her f r omThe Exp anat or y D ct onar y of t he Hun-
gar an Language. I n t h s d ct onar y t he se ect on of ex ca
ent r es was based on f r equency cons der at ons, hence der ved
f or ms such as t r omb t a - t at ( f act . ) ' et t r umpet ' , da| k - t at
( f act . ) ' vt . nur se' wh ch ar e r ar e but ent r e y r egu ar and
usab e f or ms, wer e exc uded; ( 2) t he t hr ee gr oups of ver ba
der vat ona suf f xes ment oned above act ua y do f u f
gr ammat ca r o es, t hough t he pr oduct v t y of cer t a n der va-
t ona suf f xes s m t ed. As r egar ds gr ammat ca pr oduc-
t v t y, - HAT, - AT and - GAT ar e ent r e y r egu ar der vat ona
suf f xes, - ATI K s pass ng out of use but cont nues t o be
ent r e y pr oduct ve and - ODI K s on t he r se.
1. 2. 2. Semant c ana ys s. I n connect on w t h der ved wor ds,
t s a ways mpor t ant t o f nd out whet her a g ven der va-
t ona suf f x has any spec f c mean ng wh ch wou d br ng
about a change of mean ng of t he who e der ved wor d. By means
of t h s change of mean ng t he der ved wor d emer ges as a new
ex ca t em. I n t he pr esent st udy we sha not be concer ned
w t h t h s pr ob em, however .
1. 2. 3. St y st c ana ys s. Bot h gr ammat ca and semant c ana -
ys s of der vat ona suf f xes w ead t o a syst emat c pr es-
ent at on of semant c d f f er ences n d st r but on and f unct on
wh ch obt a n bet ween der ved wor ds and t he cor r espond ng
synt agms, bet ween sent ences w t h der ved wor ds and t hose w t h
no such wor ds, and bet ween der ved and nonder ved wor ds.
2. 1. Tr ans t ve and nt r ans t ve ver bs can be or der ed accor d-
4
ng t o degr ees of t r ans t v t y. ( See Append x I . ) F r st n
The expr ess on "degr ees of t r ans t v t y" s of cour se not
nt ended t o mean var ous degr ees t o wh ch t he ver b may t ake
an ob| ect n t he accusat ve case. The concept s wh ch I have
n m nd her e can per haps bet t er be expr essed by t he t er ms
' cent r pet a ' and ' cent r f uga ' . The st ages t er med ' t r ans t ve
ver bs' , ver bs w t h semant c ob| ect s and ver bs of out war d
d r ect on r ef ect , n t h s or der , an ncr eas ng y w der , mor e
gener a nt er pr et at on of t he t r ans t ve, cent r f uga char -
act er of ver bs. Not ce f ur t her mor e t hat phr ases ke gondo
va am t ' t h nk sg' , and gondo va am r e ' t h nk of sg' ar e
or der s t he pass ve ver b wh ch s char act er zed by a t ot a
ack of t r ans t v t y, wh e on t he ot her end we f nd pur e y
t r ans t ve ver bs. One gr oup can be t r ansf or med nt o t he ot her :
Er zs mossa a r uht ' E s e washes t he dr ess' (*) A r uha mosat k
Er zs a t a ' The dr ess s washed by E s e' . ( The pass ve ver b
f or m, wh ch s a ways a der ved f or m, s now becom ng obso et e,
hence sent ences cont a n ng such pass ve ver b f or ms ar e accept -
ed by Hungar an speaker s w t h r e uct ance on y; t h s s what
t he ast er sk s meant t o nd cat e. ) The r est of t he ver b f or ms
bet ween pass ve and pur e y t r ans t ve ver b f or ms can be ar -
r anged h er ar ch ca y w t h b nar y d v s ons. Thus, pass ve
( f oot not e 4 cont nued) r e at ed w t h r espect t o cent r f uga t y.
R ed ( 1864) a so not c ng t h s out war d d r ect on, ca ed
such ver bs ' ob| ect ver bs' . I amnot awar e of any ot her
at t empt t o c ass f y ver bs n t er ms of t h s d chot omy,
however .
The t er m' nwar d d r ect on ' ( Hung. bennhat ) was used
t o r ef er t o a sub- c ass of nt r ans t ve ver bs n t he wor k A
magyar nye v r endszer e |' The Syst em of t he Hungar an Language' | ,
pub shed n 1846, and n | ozsef Szvor ny ' s gr ammar ( 1864) .
The t er ms ' act ve, act ng, act on' wer e used by A ber t Szencz
Mo nar , ( 1610) , M k os Rva ( 1803- 6) and Szende R ed ( 1864)
w t h r espect t o t r ans t ve ver bs.
5
On t he ef t - hand s de we f nd a ver b c ass t o wh ch a gr oup
of ver b c asses cor r esponds on t he r ght - hand s de. Th s gr oup
s t hen f ur t her sub- c ass f ed. The nt er dependence of t he
cat egor es s nd cat ed by t he ar r ows on t he ef t - hand s de
of Append x I .
Ruong (19 43) at t empt ed t o or gan ze nt r ans t ve- t r an-
s t ve der vat ona suf f xes w t hout us ng h er ar ch c b nar y
d v s ons. He a ocat ed t he cat egor es of ' vo ce' and ' as-
pect ' a ong t he same d mens on.
ver b f or ms can be cont r ast ed wi t h nonpassi ve f or ms. These
f or ms can be spl i t up i nt o a mi ddl e ( medi o- passi ve) and an
act i ve gr oup. The maj or i t y of mi ddl e ver bs ar e der i ved; t her e
i s onl y a handf ul of nonder i ved f or ms such as f agy ' f r eeze
1
o r
h z- i k ' gr ow i n wei ght ' wi t h t he endi ng - i k. The der i ved
ver bs ar e ei t her denomi nal such as sar g- ul ' become yel l ow' ,
dombor - odi k ' vi . bul ge' or dever bal , e. g. , csavar - odi k ' vi .
t ur n' , bemocskol - di k ' vi . soi l ' . Qui t e a f ew ver bs ar e
der i ved di r ect l y f r om r oot s, e. g. , f akad ' vi . spr i ng ( f or t h) ' ,
szor - ul ' be squeezed i nt o' . Thi s cat egor y cl osel y r esembl es
t he cat egor y of passi ves, but i n t he f or mer act i on i s concei ved
of as occur r i ng wi t hout an agent . ( Cf . Komr omi ' s r emar k on
ver - dm ' beat agai nst sg' : "ver ber or si ne ver ber ant e ext er -
no" . ) The passi ve char act er of mi ddl e ver bs i s al so shown by
t he f act t hat t hey can near l y al ways cooccur wi t h an adver b
endi ng i n - t l ' by' . The cat egor y at hand i ncl udes ver bs wher e
t he r el at i on bet ween t he st em and t he suf f i x cont ai ns some
passi ve el ement , e. g. , bemocskol - di k ' vi . soi l ' , t hat i s, some-
t hi ng i s bei ng made di r t y, and ver bs wher e t he act i on i s not
i ni t i at ed by some ext er nal agent but comes about by i t sel f .
Not i ce, however , t hat t hese ver bs ar e not genui ne r ef l exi ve
ver bs, cf . f or exampl e r egener l - di k ' vi . r egener at e' . Thi s
l at t er gr oup cont ai ns f ewer ver bs, however . Act i ve ver bs can
be ver bs of i nwar d di r ect i on ( cf . ( 3) ) and ver bs wi t h a no-
t i onal obj ect . Ver bs of i nwar d di r ect i on ( Hung, bennhat o
i gk) do not have semant i c obj ect . Nat ur al l y, t hese ver bs
cannot have an accusat i ve obj ect ei t her . Ver bs of i nwar d
di r ect i on ar e ei t her nonder i ved, f or i nst ance, st l ' wal k' ,
mozog ' move' ; or der i ved. I f der i ved t hey can be ei t her de-
nomi nal , eg. gyes- kedi k ' show onesel f t o be cl ever , f ukar -
kodi k ' be mi ser l y' , gyvd- eskedi k ' be a l awyer' , or dever bal .
The l at t er i ncl ude ei t her ver bs di r ect ed at some ext er nal
obj ect , e. g. , hur col - kodi k ' vi . move' , r akodi k ' l oad' , pi t -
kezi k ' vi . have a house bui l t ' , l ocsol - kodi k ' vi . spr i nkl e' ,
r ul - kodi k ' pl ay t he i nf or mer ' , or t hose wi t h a r ef l exi ve el e-
I NTRANSI TI VE- TRANSI TI VE DERI VATI ONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARI AN 19 3
ment , e. g. , be op- dzkod k ' st ea s h mse f n' , von- akod k
' r ef use t o do sg' , f ur - akod k ' push' , a ka maz- kod k accom-
modat e onese f ' . Ther e s no adver b wh ch wou d exh b t a co-
occur ence r e at on w t h ver bs of t ype ( 3) . Ver bs wh ch cont a n
semant c ob| ect s expr ess t he f act t hat t he act on s d r ect ed
at some ob| ect . I n t he case of r ef ex ve ver bs ( cf . ( 4) ) t h s
ob| ect s dent ca w t h t he sub| ect of t he act on t se f . Hun-
gar an has r e at ve y f ew genu ne r ef ex ve ver bs, her e be ong
mos- akod k ' wash onese f ' , f s - kd k ' comb onese f ' , vd- ekez k
' def end onese f ' , a z- kod k ' hum at e onese f ' . The der vat ona
mor pheme s usua y equ va ent t o t he r ef ex ve pr onoun magt
' onese f ' . Fer enc Ver seghy ( 1818) and Szende R ed ( 1864)
wou d cons der t r ans t ve ver bs w t h r ef ex ve pr onouns such
as szer et magt ' he kes h mse f ' , | r z magt ' he f ee s
qu t e we ' t o be r ef ex ve ver bs. The r ema n ng ver bs w t h se-
mant c ob| ect s ar e made up of ver bs of out war d d r ect on,
. e. wher e t he act on s or ent ed at some ext er na ob| ect .
Th s f eat ur e s not man f est yet n t s pur e f or m n t he case
of r ec pr oca ver bs ( cf . ( 5) ) , wh ch expr ess t he mut ua char ac-
t er of t he act on. These ver b f or ms ar e s t uat ed ha f way, as
t wer e, bet ween pass ve and t r ans t ve ver b f or ms because
t he act on denot ed s d r ect ed at an ext er na ob| ect and at
t he same t me at t he ( ext er na ) agent t se f . They cooccur
w t h adver bs end ng n - va , - ve ' w t h' or t hey can be com-
p ement ed w t h t he pr onoun egymst ' each ot her ' , e. g. , mar -
akod k ' quar r e ' , pof oz- kod k ' box one anot her on t he ear ' ,
smer - ked k ' make acqua nt ances' , ver - eked k ' f ght ' , per -
eked k ' t gat e' va ak ve ' w t h sy' . They ar e a der ved
wor ds and r e at ve y f ew n number . The r est of t he ver bs
expr ess pur e out war d d r ect on. They can be t r ans t ve ver bs,
t hat s ver bs w t h an ob| ect n t he accusat ve case and n-
t r ans t ve ver bs w t h out war d or ent at on ( cf . ( 6) ) . W t h such
ver bs t he accusat ve case s r ep aced by some adver b a n-
19 4 HUNGARI AN GENERAL LI NGUI STI CS
f ect ona suf f x, e. g. , gondo - kod k va am n ' specu at e on
sg' , csod - kod k va am n ' wonder at sg' , seg- t va ak n
' he p sy' em k- sz k va am r e ' r emember sg' . Tr ans t ve ver bs
can be subd v ded accor d ng t o whet her t he act on s d r ect ed
at t he ob| ect d r ect y or not . I f t he ob| ect s nd r ect y
nvo ved, t hat s, f t he sub| ect of t he sent ence get s t he
act on done by somebody e se, t hen we have t o do w t h f act t ve
ver bs ( cf . ( 7) ) . Her e t he ob| ect can be e t her act ve or pas-
s ve depend ng on whet her t he ver b s der ved f r om a t r ans t ve
or an nt r ans t ve ver b, f or examp e, h z- a ( caus. ) - t at
( f act . ) ' et f at t en' , st - t at ( caus. ) - t at ( f act . ) ' et t ake
out f or a wa k' and a so r - at ( f act . ) ' have wr t t en sg' . I f
t he ob| ect s d r ect y nvo ved, t can be act ve or pass ve.
An act ve and d r ect y nvo ved ob| ect cor r esponds t o t he
sub| ect of an act ve sent ence. Th s f eat ur e char act er zes
causat ve ver bs ( cf . ( 8) ) . Pur e t r ans t ve ver bs have pass ve,
d r ect y nvo ved ob| ect s ( cf . ( 9) ) . Sent ences cont a n ng a
pur e t r ans t ve ver b can be t r ansf or med nt o pass ve sent ences:
t r ans t ve ver bs t hus may become pass ve ver bs.
2. 2. The n ne cat egor es st ed above behave d f f er ent y as
r egar ds t r ansf or mat ona der vat on as we . The n t a sen-
t ence cont a ns a ver b w t hout any der vat ona mor phemes, t he
at t er be ng added n t he cour se of t r ansf or mat ons. The t r ans-
f or mat ons ar e who y synt act ca n char act er s nce on y
r e at ona e ement s under go changes and cont ent wor ds ar e
never de et ed. A t hough t he n t a sent ence under y ng f ac-
t t ve ver bs wou d gener a y cont a n expr ess ons such as
The t r ansf or mat ona r u es g ven be ow have been set up ac-
cor d ng t o t he f o ow ng pr nc p es: ( 1) we t ake sent ence
st r uct ur e; ( 2) t h s sent ence st r uct ur e cons st s of e e-
ment ar y c ass symbo s connect ed w t h r e at ona symbo s; (3)
e ement ar y c ass symbo s ( N, V) cor r espond t o bas c par t s of
speech, wh e r e at ona symbo s r epr esent nf ect ona
suf f xes ( t , n, va et c. , . e. case suf f xes) or der vat ona
mor phemes ( V; at , kod k, et c. ) . ( f oot not e 6 cont nued)
par ancsr a ' on sb' s or der ' , f eI s6l i t asar a ' on sb' s demand' ,
megb zsb ' on sb' s aut hor t y' , meghagysbo ' on beha f of
sb' and t he sent ence under y ng causat ve ver bs expr ess ons
such as kzr emkdsve ' by t he agency of sb' , seg t sgve
' w t h h s he p' , hat sr a ' under h s nf uence' or wor ds wh ch
can somet mes be r ep aced by t he nf ect ona end ng - t o ,
- t o ' by' or t he post pos t on a t a ' by' wh ch ar e a de et ed
n t he cour se of t r ansf or mat ons, t hese e ement s or expr ess ons
may be conce ved of as per f or m ng pur e y gr ammat ca f unct ons.
The semant c spec a zat on of t he der ved wor d const t ut es
an add t ona pr ocess.
Tr ansf or mat ons
1 2
9 > : N + V + N > Er zsi mossa a r uhat >
' El si e washes t he dr ess'
( x) A r uha mosat i k ( Er zsi ai -
t ai )
' The dr ess i s washed by El si e'
( f oot not e 6 cont i nued) Fol l owi ng Ur i el Wei nr ei ch ( 1963; 116) ,
symbol s denot i ng basi c par t s of speech can be cal l ed des-
i gnat or s ( cl asses of cont ent wor ds) and t hose denot i ng r el a-
t i onal el ement s f or mat or s. Synt act i c f or mat or s al ways i ndi cat e
a r el at i on bet ween t wo desi gnat or s ( synt agmat i c r el at i on) . - ( 4)
The oper at i on of t r ansf or mat i ons i s subj ect t o t he f ol l owi ng
condi t i ons: ( a) any gi ven st r uct ur e i s changed wi t hout t he des-
i gnat or s under goi ng any change. ( b) For mat or s do under go
changes ( del et i on, subst i t ut i on, per mut at i on) . ( c) I t i s
r equi r ed t hat i f t wo desi gnat or s ar e r el at ed i n t he i ni t i al
st r uct ur e, t hey must al so be r el at ed i n t he r esul t i ng t r ans-
f or med st r uct ur e, t hat i s, t hey must be connect ed by f or mat or s.
( d) The way f or mat or s can change st r uct ur es i s al so det er mi ned.
Whenever necessar y, f or mat or s may be r ewr i t t en as f r ee mor -
phemes or zer o mor phemes. I n or der t o si mpl i f y not at i on t he
f or mat or s of t he subj ect and t he pr edi cat e have been ommi t t ed
196
1 2
92 : + V + sar bemocskol j a a r unt >
' The mud makes d r t y t he dr ess'
A r uha bemocsko - d k (a sr t )
' The dr ess s made d r t y by t he
mud'
2-38:
1
+ V +
2
> Pt er f ogy a f r dst l >
t l
' Pet er l oses wei ght by bat hi ng'
N
1
+ VV' +
2
f r ds f ogyaszt | a Pt er t
' Bat h makes Pet er ose we ght '
81 : N
1
+ VV'
t at
+ N
2
t
> Az apa st - t at | a a f at >
Fat her makes h s son wa k'
( x) A f st - t at - t at k
(az ap| a a t a )
' The son s made wa k by h s
f at her '
9>7 : N
1
+ V + N
2
t
+ N
3
K l ri mossa az ednyt az anyj a
par.
par ancsr a
' C ar e washes up t he d shes on
t he or der of her mot her '
3
N + VV' + N
2
+
1
Az anya mosat j a az edenyt
at t val
K r va
' The mot her makes C ar e wash up
t he d shes'
8>7: N
1
+ VV' + N
2
+ N
3
> Panna h z- a | a a d sznt a szom-
a t megb
szd megb zsbo >
' Ann e f at t ens t he por c on beha f
of t he ne ghbour '
N
3
+ VV' V' + N
2
+
1
A szomszd hi z- l al - t at j a a
l al t at t val
di sznt Pannval
' The nei ghbour l et s f at t en t he
por e by Anni e'
9>3 : N
1
+ V + vmi t / vki t > A cssz gyal z val ami t / val aki t
' The par k- keeper abuses sg ( sy) '
N
1
+ VV' + A c s s z gya zkod k
kod k
' The par k- keeper uses abus ve
anguage'
9 4:
1
+ V + magt A vd ot t vd magt
' The accused def ends h mse f '
1
+ VV' + vadl ot t ved- ekezi k
kodi k
' The accused def ends hi msel f '
95: N
1
+ N
2
+ VV' + egymst Pt er s P ver egymst
' Pet er and Pau ar e beat ng each
ot her '
1
N + N
2
+ VV' Pt er s P ver - ekednek
kod- nak
' Pet er and Pau ar e beat ng
each ot her up'
95: N
1
+ V + N
2
t
Pt er ver Pa t
' Pet er s beat ng Pau '
N
2
+ V + N
1
t
P ver Pt er t
' Pau s beat ng Pet er '
N
1
+ VV'
kod k
+
2
val
Pt er ver - eked k P a
' Pet er s f ght ng w t h Pau '
N
2
+ VV' +
1
P ver - eked k Pet er r e
kod k va
' Pau s f ght ng w t h Pet er '
1 2
96 : N + V + N
t
Az or vos szn| a a bet eget
' The doct or p t es t he pat ent '
1 2
N + VV' + N Az or vos szn- akoz k a bet egen
kod k on
' The doct or f ee s p t y f or t he
pat ent '
As t o t he use of symbo s: N = noun; V = ver b; V' = ver ba
der vat ona suf f x; ( x) denot es a sent ence wh ch s not gen-
er a y accept ed. I t shou d a so be not ed t hat one suf f xa f or m
has been chosen t o r epr esent a ot her f or ms w t h n a g ven gr oup,
t hus - at. r epr esent s - aszt , - kod k, - koz k, et c. , as we .
For t he sake of s mp c t y, par t s of speech cat egor es ar e on y
r epr esent ed by t he r e at ve or der of t he const t uent s.
At t h s po nt t seems t o be wor t hwh e t o comment on
t he van - va, - ve const r uct on. We sha abst a n f r om a pr ec se
f or mu at on of t he r e evant r u es, however and sha be con-
t ent w t h some examp es. Not ce t hat cont ent wor ds can be n-
t er pr et ed as st and ng f or wor d c asses.
1. Meg r t k a eve et . A eve meg van r va.
Type 9 ' The et t er has been wr t t en. '
2. Megnzt k a eve et .
X
A ev meg van nzve.
' The et t er has been r egar ded. '
Type 2 3. A r uha bemocsko dot t . A r uha be van mocsko dva.
' The dr ess was made d r t y. ' ' The dr ess s d r t y. '
The r e evant t r ansf or mat ona r u es can be def ned n t he f o -
ow ng way: The adver b a par t c p e can be der ved f r omType
9 ( pur e t r ans t ve) ver bs as we as f r omm dd e ver bs ( Type 2) .
I t shou d be made c ear , however , t hat t h s der vat on s
poss b e on y f t he sub| ect of t he ver b of Type 9 s n-
def n t e, f t he ver bs ar e per f ect ve and f t he mean ng of
t he ver b makes t c ear t hat t he act on has br ought about a
change n t he st at e of t he ob| ect . Th s ast const r a nt
suggest s t hat t he t r ad t ona d v s on of ob| ect s nt o ob| ect s
of r esu t and d r ect ona ob| ect s s not suf f c ent . D r ec-
t ona ob| ect s must f ur t her be d v ded nt o ob| ect s under go ng
change and unchang ng ob| ect s. I n ne w t h t he t hr eef o d
d v s on of ob| ect s, t r ans t ve ver bs t oo, can be d v ded
nt o cr eat ve, change- caus ng and d r ect ona ver bs. On y t he
f r st t wo t ypes p ay a r e n t he der vat on of t he adver b a
par t c p e, t hat s, on y ob| ect s of r esu t and ob| ect s under -
go ng change ar e nvo ved n t h s pr ocess.
The t r ansf or mat ons adduced above c ear y show t hat var ous
ver b c asses ar e def ned on t he bas s of t he r e at onsh p
bet ween ver b and sub| ect and ver b and ob| ect . I t s mpor t ant
t o emphas ze t h s po nt because one of t en encount er s def n -
t ons of ver b c asses n wh ch t her e s a comp et e ack of r e-
f er ence t o t he r o e of sub| ect s and/ or ob| ect s.
2. 3. The n ne ver b cat egor es st ed above ar e not on a par
7
I n t he pr esent paper we ar e not concer ned w t h t he quest on
of how t he pa r s of t r ansf or mat ons st ed above have been
r ep aced by each ot her n t he cour se of t he h st or y of t he
anguage.
w t h r espect t o pr oduct v t y. The cat egor es 91 , 97, as
we as 28 and 38 ar e f u y pr oduct ve, t hat s, t hey can
w t h f ew m t at ons be der ved f r om any sent ence cont a n ng
t he base wor d. Concer n ng t he der vat on of t he r ema n ng
nt r ans t ve cat egor es, t her e s no gener a r u e cover ng
ever y ver b; t hus, f r omt he sent ence Pt er f s magt
' Pet er combs h mse f ' one can der ve Pet er f s kd k ' dem'
(N + V + magt + VV' ) , but f r om t he sent ence Pt er
t r nt r
nz magt ' Pet er ooks at h mse f ' no sent ence Pet er nze-
ked k or t he ke can be f or med w t hout cr eat ng nonsense
sent ences. ( The sent ence Pt er t r omb t - 1- t at | a | nost
' Pet er et r umpet | ohn' s at most unusua but s qu t e
sens b e. ) The same app es t o t he t r ansf or mat ons 9 3 ,
95 and 96. The der vat ona suf f x - d k of cat egor y
92 s cur r ent y t ur n ng nt o a f u - f edged pr oduct ve
suf f x, as n mechan z - d k ' s mechan zed' , akk mat z -
d k ' get acc mat zed' . I n t he ess pr oduct ve cat egor es
semant c spec a sat on s t he r u e. I n such cases t he d f -
f er ence n mean ng bet ween t he sent ence cont a n ng t he base
wor d and t he one w t h t he der ved wor d cannot be expr essed
by a t r ansf or mat ona r u e a one, because t her e ar e ot her
semant c d f f er ences bet ween t hem as we . The d f f er ence
bet ween p t ' bu d' ( houses) and p t - kez k ' have a house
bu d' s not on y t hat t he at t er s nt r ans t ve but a so
t hat t he der ved wor d r ef er s t o a bu d ng act v t y of a
ar ger sca e st r et ch ng over a onger per od of t me. Hun-
gar an nt r ans t ve dever ba ver bs t end t o t ake on a mor e
or ess spec a sed shade of mean ng, e. g. r u - kod k ' p ay
t he nf or mer ' ver sus ( e ) r u ' bet r ay' . Th s examp e s n-
t er est ng f r omqu t e a f ew po nt s of v ew . ( 1) The ear er
1 2
semant c d f f er ence ( po semy) bet ween r u ' se ' and r u
' bet r ay' d sappear ed, t he at t er mean ng has been t aken over
by t he pr ever b. ( Ear er phr ases such as ha r a r u , t er a -
y ' bet r ay sy t o deat h' , and mar h| t e r u | a ' he se s h s
ox' wer e qu t e cur r ent ) ( 2) The f or m r u - kod k ' p ay t he n-
2
f or mer ' can be der ved f r om r u ' bet r ay' on y. ( 3) Once
t he semant c d f f er ence bet ween r u kod k and e - or ber u
must have been of a pur e y gr ammat ca char act er ( cf . H s-
t or ca D ct onar y of Hungar an) , wher eas t oday t he mean ng
of r u - kod k cont a ns some m t gat ng e ement ( t denot es
an act on t hat f a s under a mor e en ent mor a eva uat on) .
( 4) The der vat ona suf f xes whose r o e s pr edom nant y
gr ammat ca ar e not un f or m y pr oduct ve e t her as r egar ds
t he par t cu ar mean ngs of a po semous wor d. Ar u
1
' se '
s cur r ent y n a t r ans t or y st age bet ween f u use and ob-
so escence, be ng ncr eas ng y r ep aced by r us- t ( suf f .
ver ba ) ; t s der ved f or ms r u - ( suf f . nom na ) , and r u -
s ( suf f . nom na ) ar e n a f ur t her st age of t h s deve op-
ment : t hey most y occur w t h t he mean ng ' bet r ay' , wh e
t he r use w t h t he mean ng ' se ' s r ep aced by t he f or ms
ar u- s ( suf f . nom na ) and r us- t ( suf f . ver ba ) - as ( suf f .
nom na ) . Th s examp e s par t cu ar y we su t ed t o show
t he mpor t ance of d osyncr at c deve opment s.
I t s by no means acc dent a t hat n Hungar an t he spec a s-
ng r o e of t r ans t ve dever ba suf f xes s f ar mor e m t ed
t han t hat of t r ans t ve suf f xes. Hungar an, w t h a ex ca
base wh ch t ends t owar d nt r ans t v t y ( see be ow) , s mor e
pr oduct ve n t he nt r ans t vet r ans t ve d r ect on t han t he
ot her way ar ound bot h as r egar ds gr ammat ca f unct on and
mor pho og ca st r uct ur e ( causat on s expr essed most y by a
der vat ona suf f x cont a n ng t) . Th s f act po nt s t o a mor e
gener a r u e: The h gher gr ammat ca pr oduct v t y a g ven
der vat ona suf f x has, t he ess t w exh b t semant c
spec a sat on and v ce ver sa. That s why t he spec a s ng
r e of t r ans t ve ( causat ve) der vat ona suf f xes s much
ess mar ked t han t hat of nt r ans t ve suf f xes. Somet mes
t he t wo uses ex st s de by s de: Ta cskt t o at a f va
. -
' He makes t he boy shove a bar r ow' A mozdony t o at ' The eng ne
shunt s' .
Append x I I sums up t he var ous f or ms of t he der vat on
of vo ce t ypes n a syst emat c way. Thr ee t ypes of nes
(, - . - , - - ) r ef er t o t hr ee t ypes of t r ansf or mat on. To
make t he d scr m nat on of t r ansf or mat ona t ypes mor e acces-
s b e t h s append x a so cont a ns a s mp f ed f or m of t he
t r ansf or mat ona r u es . Nouns occur r ng n t he sent ences ar e
dent f ed w t h nd ces on N.
2. 4. When t r eat ng der vat ona suf f xes of vo ce t ypes Hun-
gar an gr ammar ans t end t o comm t t he f o ow ng t wo m s t akes .
( 1) They b ur t he d st nct ons bet ween t hr ee d f f er ent der va-
t ona suf f xes ( moda , aspect ua and vo ce suf f xes) wh ch
st and n oppos t on t o each ot her , and t hey f a t o g ve a
st r uct ur a ana ys s of t he f eat ur es wh ch d st ngu sh t hem.
( 2) When pos t ng subcat egor es t hey do not d st ngu sh bet -
ween pr oduct ve gr ammat ca cat egor es and semant c spec a za-
t on.
2. 4. 1. A m st ake of t he f r st k nd s a so comm t t ed when one
f a s t o r ea se t he c ose nt er connect on bet ween t he t r an-
s t vent r ans t ve oppos t on and t he cat egor y of vo ce. The
t r ans t vent r ans t ve oppos t on and t he cat egor es of
vo ce t ype ( act ve, pas s ve, causat ve, et c. ) ar e act ua y not
ndependent char act er st cs of t he ver b but , as a car ef u
st udy of t he st r uct ur e of t he anguage r evea s , t r ans t v t y
r at her const t ut es an essent a def n ng pr oper t y of t he
cat egor y of vo ce. Th s s how t was ooked upon by ear y
Hungar an gr ammar ans , who, when pos t ng t he t hr ee cat e-
gor es : act ve, m dd e and pas s ve, assoc at ed act ve ver bs
w t h t r ans t v t y, m dd e ver bs w t h nt r ans t v t y and cons -
der ed pass ve ver bs as const t ut ng a t h r d cat egor y ( ev dend y
on t he bas s of Gr eek gr ammar s ) .
Not ce t hat t h s o d concept on amount s t o a t r ansf or mat ona
appr oach t o ver b c ass f cat on n so f ar as pass ve s r e-
gar ded as der ved f r om act ve, wh e t he m dd e or neut r a
f or m s def ned by t he f act t hat t cannot have a pass ve
f or m. ( Cf . A ber t Szencz Mo nar ' s gr ammar ( 1610) ) . Fr om A ber t
Mo nar t o Szende R ed and | zsef Szvor ny ( 1864) , ver bs wer e
c ass f ed n t er ms of act v t y, m dd eness and pass v t y. I t
shou d be po nt ed out , however , t hat t hese cat egor es wer e
of t en comp ement ed by t he cat egor es t er at ve, nst ant aneous
and moda ( ver ba pot ent a e) w t hout any f ur t her qua f cat on.
Never t he ess, as r egar ds vo ce t ypes, t he r appr oach was
bas ca y sound. As shown n Append x I , n accor dance w t h
t h s t r ad t on, I t oo cons der pass ve and t r ans t ve ver bs
as t he t wo ext r eme po nt s bet ween wh ch t he var ous t ypes of
nt r ans t ve ver bs ar e s t uat ed. The appr oach t aken by Zs g-
mond S mony ( 1869) and | zsef Sz nnye , ( 1896) , pr esumab y
under t he nf uence of Ger man, br ought about a r ad ca t ur n
n t he c ass f cat on of ver b t ypes s nce, as we sha see
shor t y, t h s change amount ed t o t he adopt on of t he appr oach
of Ger man gr ammar ans. Fr om t h s t me onwar ds t he nt r ans -
t ve, m dd e or neut r a cat egor y was r ef er r ed t o as "r ef ex-
ve" , t hat s, gr ammar ans emp oyed a cat egor y abe wh ch
had been a subcat egor y n ear er t r ad t on. Th s t er m no og -
ca change af f ect ed t he who e concept on: nt r ans t ve der ved
ver bs wer e c ass f ed n t er ms of r ef ex v t y w t h t he r esu t
t hat a new cat egor y, t hat of pseudo- r ef ex v t y, had t o be
cr eat ed.
Th s t er m no og ca change y e ded an r on c consequence:
t he ma| or t y of r ef ex ve ver bs had t o be down- gr aded t o pseudo-
r ef ex ves, consequent y t he def n ng t er mwh ch gave name t o t he
who e cat egor y app ed on y t o a ng geab e number of ver bs be-
ong ng t o t hat c ass. Th s new concept on has had a negat ve
nf uence on Hungar an gr ammat ca wr t ng ever s nce, f or t
g ves a d st or t ed p ct ur e of t he ex st ng r e at ons n t he
anguage. I n Ger man nt r ans t ve ver bs ar e der ved w t h t he
he p of t he r ef ex ve pr onoun s ch, t her ef or e t hese ver bs
ar e a ways mor e or ess r e at ed t o r ef ex ve ver bs, a t hough,
of cour se, t he ma| or t y of t he nt r ans t ve ver bs der ved
w t h "s ch" do not expr ess ' genu ne' r ef ex v t y. S ch has
t wo f unct ons n Ger man: t s a genu ne r ef ex ve pr onoun
as n I ch sehe m ch and t s a synt act c mar ker f or nt r an-
s t ve ver bs as n I ch f r eue m ch/ I ch bewege m ch. ( Cf . M. M.
Guxman 1964 : 207- 14. )
The s t uat on s s m ar a t hough not exact y t he same, n
Russ an. I t shou d be made c ear t hat t he Hungar an nt r an-
s t ve der vat ona suf f xes have a f unct on wh ch can har d y
be r e at ed t o r ef ex ve ver bs because t hey expr ess pur e n-
t r ans t v t y and, n cat egor es 3 and 6, cover t and over t
out war d d r ect on, r espect ve y. Even n cat egor y 2 t her e
s some at ent pass v t y nvo ved n t he ma| or t y of cases,
t hat s, r at her t han be ng d r ect ed at t se f f r omw t h n,
t he act on s br ought about by some ext er na f act or . H st o-
r ca y, t he quest on s mor e comp cat ed because t he va-
r ous f unct ons of nt r ans t ve ver bs cou d ar se nd r ect -
y f r om t he r ef ex ve f unct on t hr ough mu t p e ana og es.
And, s nce n Hungar an t he pass ve ver b f or mdeve oped not
f r om t he r ef ex ve but f r om t he f act t ve, t he med o- pass ve
or m dd e- f or m ( Tyne 2) need not der ved f r om t he r ef ex ve
e t her .
2. 4. 2. Fa ur e t o d st ngu sh gr ammat ca f unct on f r om
spec a zat on eads t o spur ous ass gnment s of subt ypes.
The n ne ver b t ypes pr esent ed n Append x I d f f er f r om each
ot her n t he r synt act c env r onment as we as n der va-
t ona h st or y. At t he same t me, however , t he d f f er ence
bet ween t he base wor d and t he der ved wor d n t he case of
t hese t ypes does not necessar y nvo ve any semant c spec a -
zat on. I n ot her wor ds, f r om t he mean ng of t he base wor d and
t he t r ansf or mat ona r u e we w aut omat ca y know t he mean-
ng of t he der ved wor d and t s use n t he sent ence. I f t he
d f f er ence bet ween t he base and der ved wor ds nvo ves some-
t h ng n add t on t o t h s gr ammat ca d f f er ence, t hen t
shou d be at t r but ed t o spec a zat on. Even f f ound w t h
sever a der vat ona suf f xes, t h s spec a zat on cannot
204
y e d cat egor es wh ch wou d be on an equa eve w t h t he n ne
sub- t ypes.
Much conf us on sur r ounds t he "pseudo- f act t ve" and
"pseudo- r ef ex ve" ver b t ypes. I n h s Hungar an Compar at ve
Gr ammar Sz nnye d st ngu shes t wo t ypes of pseudo- f act t ves:
t hose w t h a mean ng nvo v ng per m ss on f or t he act on t o
t ake p ace such as k cssz- t at ' vt . s p / out / ' , r szed- et
' et dece ve' , sz d- at ' et ch de' , and t hose wh ch ar e r epor t s
of an act on e. g. f | d- t ' comp a n of pa n n sg. ' , ha - at
' vt . d e' . These cat egor es and examp es ar e t aken over by t he
gr ammar . I n The Syst em of . Pr esent - Day Hungar an on y t he ast t wo
examp es ar e r ep aced by h baz- t at ' b ame' and szar maz- t at ' vt .
or g nat e' , r espect ve y. I t s c ear t hat t hese examp es wer e
ass gned t o d f f er ent gr oups because t hey nvo ve some spe-
c a zed mean ng, but t hey be ong t o one of t he ver b cat egor -
es of 19, name y, k csusz- t at t o 2 8, sz d- at t o 9 7 ,
h bz- t at t o 38 et c. To r ema n w t h Sz nnye ' s wor k, t he
aut hor d st ngu shes t he f o ow ng sub- t ypes w t h n pseudo-
r ef ex ves: ( 1) pseudo- pass ves e ad- od k ' s so d' ; ( 2) ( a)
ver bs expr ess ng mut ua t y ver - eked k ' f ght ' ; ( b) t er at on,
dur at on dob - dz k ' keep t hr ow ng' , b z- akod k ' have con-
f dence n' ; ( c) nchoat v t y ehever - ed k ' e down at f u
engt h' , megf | d- u ' beg n t o hur t ' ; ( d) nst ant aneous act on
f or d- u ' t ur n' . Hence t s an ext r aor d nar y het er ogeneous
gr oup. I t nc udes our gr oups 92 ( e ad- d k) , 95 ( ver -
eked k) , 93 ( dob - dz k) and d sper sed nt o t hr ee gr oups
we f nd t r ans t ve ver bs whose base s nt r ans t ve ( b z-
akod k , megf | d- u ) or ver bs wh ch ar e der ved f r om a r oot :
f or d- u . The "pseudo" - char act er of t he f or mer s t er m no og -
ca y mot vat ed, as we saw ear er , wh e t he at t er do not
f or m a separ at e c ass. I n t he case of t er at ve, nchoat ve
and nst ant aneous ver bs t he der vat ona suf f xes mar k of f a
sub- t ype of t he cat egor y of aspect . They shou d be r egar ded
as under ved wor ds, hence t hey be ong t o t he nt r ans t ve
cat egor es of 2 or 3. The r eason f or t h s conf us on s t hat
cat egor es ke causat on, r ef ex v t y wer e nt er pr et ed ac-
cor d ng t o t he et ymo og ca mean ng of causat on, r ef ex v t y
and not as t hey shou d be, . e. as gr ammat ca cat egor es es-
t ab shed on t he bas s of t he st r uct ur a behav our of t he
e ement s t hey nc ude. Recent st r uct ur a ana ys s t hus shows
c oser af f at on w t h t he v ews of ear y gr ammar ans t han
w t h subsequent t r ad t ons.
3. The r est of t h s paper w be devot ed t o quest ons concer n-
ng t he h st or y of t r ans t vent r ans t ve der vat ona suf -
f xes. I sha at t empt t o set down t he t endenc es t hat ar e sug-
gest ed by t he h st or ca ev dences ava ab e on t he Hungar an
anguage. Some compar son w be made w t h cer t a n Ur a c an-
guages as we . Our d scuss on w be f ar f r omexhaust ve f or
t hat per od f or wh ch t her e s ext ant document at on. Concer n-
ng t he t me wh ch pr ecedes documant at on we w of cour se
have t o conf ne our se ves t o mer e hypot heses.
3. 1. The pr esent vo ce t ypes most y exh b t a s ng e par ad gm,
t hat s t o say, a t r ans t ve and nt r ans t ve der vat ona
suf f xes occupy t he same pos t on n t he mor pho og ca st r uct ur e
of ver bs. Th s s s m ar t o t he behav our of per sona end ngs or
mood mar ker s: t hey can be r ep aced by each ot her , but t hey cannot
f o ow each ot her . ( Cf . A Gr ammar of t he V enna Codex, 20) The
qua f cat on "most y" was used because somet mes one comes
acr oss t ypes 87 and 81 as we , e. g. , f ogyaszt - ( caus. )
- at ( f act . ) , st - t at ( caus. ) - t at k ( pass. ) . I n f or mer
t mes t wo or mor e par ad gms wer e mor e f r equent : h z- a ( caus. ) -
t at ( f act . ) - t at k( pass. ) ' et t o be f at t ened' , f ogyat ( caus. ) -
koz( nt r . ) - t at ( caus. ) ' use up' , csa - at ( caus. ) - koz- ( nt r . ) - t at
( caus. ) ' make suf f er d sappo nt ment ' , va t oz- t at ( caus. ) - t at k
( pass. ) ' et t o be changed' ; f or denom na ver bs cf . a ka mat -
an- kod( nt r . ) - t at ( f act . ) ' et nconven ence' , zes- ( nt r . -
- t et ( caus. ) - t et k( pass. ) ' et t o be sweet ened' . Somet mes
der vat ona suf f xes of oppos t e mean ngs ( t r ans t ve and
nt r ans t ve) neut r a se each ot her , as n f ogy ' essen' =
= f ogyat ( caus. ) - koz k( nt r . ) ' essen' , f ogyaszt ' use up' =
= f ogyat ( caus. ) - koz( nt r . ) - t at ( caus. ) ' use up' . Wor ds whose
synt act c st r uct ur e s d f f er ent but wh ch essent a y have
t he same mean ng const t ut e one of t he sour ces f or synonyms
( f ogy f ogyat ( caus . ) - koz k( nt r . ) , ar ch, v t and v t - oz
( nt r . ) - t at ( caus. ) but t hey can a so g ve r s e, t hr ough
semant c d f f er ent at on, t o new wor ds , t hough per haps on y
n t he case of cer t a n der vat ons, cf . mod, va t ' vt . change'
and v t - oz( nt r . ) - t at ( caus. ) ' vt . change' , v k ' separ at e
( f r om) ' and v - t ( caus. ) - oz k( nt r . ) ' v . change' , f ogys
and f ogyat ( caus. ) - koz( nt r . ) - as ' shor t com ng/ f au t ' ( cf .
a so ho df ogyat kozs ' unar ec ps e' ) .
The pr ocess of d m n sh ng par ad gm syst ems squar es
we w t h t he gener a t endency r ef ect ed by t he d m n sh ng
use of der vat ona suf f xes n gener a .
1. The most pr eva ent pr esent - day syst em of vo ce t ype par ad gms
( 1) St em
+ ( der . suf f .
caus.
) st + ( t at )
( 2) St em
t r
+ ( der . suf f .
f act .
) r + ( at )
( 3) St em
t r
+ ( der . suf f .
) mocsko +
( 4) Root + der . suf f .
. f ak + ad
tr
. + ( der . s uf f .
f ac t .
) f ak + aszt + ( at )
2. The vo ce t ype par ad gms f or mer y n us e:
( 1) St em
+ ( der . suf f . ) st + ( t at )
caus.
( 2) St em
+ s t + |
( 3) St em. + set a +
( 4) St em
t r
+ kapar +
+ ( der . suf f .
caus
) f ak + ad + ( t at )
1. and 2. ar e dep ct ed n Append x I I I .
3. 2. Hungar an be ongs t o t he so- ca ed doub e ( t r ans t ve
and nt r ans t ve) base anguages, t hat s, t has a f u y
deve eoped der vat ona syst em n bot h d r ect ons. Th s f ea-
t ur e s par t cu ar y ev dent n ver bs f or med f r om common
r oot s ( r ep- ' v . f y' ~ r ep- t ' vt . et f y' ) , ( f akad ' v .
spr ng ( f or t h) ' ~ f ak- aszt ' vt . cause t o spr ng ( f or t h) ' ) and
w t h denom na ver bs, such as szp- ' v . gr ow mor e beaut f u ' ~
szp- t ' vt . beaut f y' , bt or - od k ' v . t ake cour age' ~ bt or -
t ' vt . encour age' , f ehr - ed k ' v . wh t en' ~ f ehr - ' v .
wh t en' ~ f ehr - t ' vt . wh t en' . W t h r espect t o t he t r ans t ve-
nt r ans t ve d st nct on denom na ver bs shou d be r egar ded
as r oot s because t hey ar e neut r a w t h r espect t o t h s d st nc-
o
t on n t he same way as ver ba r oot s ar e.
8
Doub e base ver b st ems f or med f r om common r oot s / r ep- ' f y' ~
~ r ep- t ' et f y' / ar ose on t he ana ogy of pr oduct ve der ved
ver bs w t h st ems such as f or r ' hea ( over ) ' : f or r - ad ' hea ( over ) '
~ f or r - aszt ' so der ' ; ' ve' : - ed ' v . r ev ve' ~ e - eszt
' vt . r ev ve' , d was or g na y an t er at ve suf f x and so was
pr obab y . T n t he t r ans t ve pa r s s an anc ent F nno-
Ugr c causat ve suf f x t hat can a r eady be abundant y encount er ed
n t he ear est Hungar an t ext s, e. g. , t er em- t ' cr eat e' ,
men- t ' save' , g- et ' vt . bur n' ke - t ' wake / up/ ' , ar ch, az- t
' vt . soak' , sz - et ' bear ' , ar ch, m - et ' g ve suck' , - et
' concer n / sy sg/ ' . Sz_ was pr obab y an t er at ve suf f x wh ch
was most y used t o f or moppos t on such as nyug- osz k ' v . r est ' ,
sr - esz k ' be n| ur ed' , t - osz k' s pr oh b t ed' , a - sz k
' s eep' , f eksz k ' e' w t h causat ve suf f xes nyug- t at ' vt .
( f oot not e 8 cont nued) r est ' - ar ch, nyug- at ' dem' , sr - t
' n| ur e' , t - t ' pr oh b t ' , a - t at ' make s eep' , f ek- t et
' put / t o bed / ' -ar ch. f eket , a t hough somet mes t can be
added t o sz, as n nyug- oszt ' vt . r est ' , v g- aszt ' make mer r y' .
Fur t her mor e, t seems p aus b e t o assume t hat t he end ng szt
or g na y ar ose on t he ana ogy of wor ds end ng n sz t ak ng
t he suf f x szt , wher eby t he t er at ve suf f xes or d wer e
used t o der ve nt r ans t ve f or ms: osz- t ' vt . d v de' - osz- o
' get d v ded' , f osz- t ' vt . st r p' f osz- o ' v . f r ay' ; t he
f or mat on of szt as a s ng e der vat ona suf f x was per haps
f ac t at ed by ver bs whose nt r ans t ve f or mwas der ved by
means of t he suf f x d. I n such cases t he oppos t on bet ween
d and t was phonet ca y not d st nct enough, e. g. e - ed ' v .
r ev ve' : - et ' vt . r ev ve' ; f akad ' v . spr ng / f or t h / ' :
f akat ' cause t o spr ng / f or t h / ' ; ar - ad ' v . f ood' : r - at
' vt . f ood' ; szr - ad ' v . dr y' : szr - at ' vt . dr y' . As a con-
sequence n sever a phonet c pos t ons t he d f f er ence bet ween
t he t wo f or ms was b ur r ed, e. g. , bef or e - n_ , - va, - ve, - na,
- ne, - nak, - nek, t he past t ense suf f x t and even n cases
wher e comp et e ass m at on d d not t ake p ace.
Bes des - szt , ot her der vat ona suf f xes cou d a so
be used t o ma nt a n t he or g na d st nct on; causat ve suf -
f xes nc uded - | t , - a and - t at . Wher e bot h - at and - aszt
ex st s de by s de - at s of t en t he o der f or m cf . f ogyat
' use up' and f ogyaszt ' dem' . The var et y of causat ve suf -
f xes a so gave r se t o synonyms and wor ds w t h new mean ngs,
cf f ogat ' have sy cat ch sg' and f og- a Occupy' , - eszt
' vt . r ev ve' and - t et ' keep a ve' . Ther ef or e t he or g na y
t er at ve suf f xes d and 1 comb ned w t h some var ant of t he
causat ve t a so assumed t he f unct on of t he t r ans t ve- n-
t r ans t ve oppos t on and const t ut ed a sour ce f or a gr eat
number of new wor ds, of t en w t h onomat opoet c st ems. As
r egar ds ad| ect ves, t he suf f xes - od and -u_ st and n oppos -
t on t o - t wh ch st ems f r om - t . The t r ans t vent r ans t ve
The doub e base w t h common r oot s pr ov des equa poss b t es
f or bot h t r ans t ve and nt r ans t ve ver bs. Th s s par t cu-
ar y t r ue of denom na der vat ons, wh ch, ke dever ba ver bs,
be ong t o t he syst em of t r ans t vent r ans t ve ver bs. Th s
h gh degr ee of gr ammat ca zat on of denom na ver bs s an n-
t er est ng f eat ur e of Hungar an, wh ch assur es t he conc se ( syn-
t het c) char act er of t he anguage. Cf . , e. g. , pa r s such as sz-
p : szp- t , and pa r s of nt r ans t ve ver bs such as okos- od k
' become pr udent
1
: okos- kod k ' r eason' . A most a ad| ect ves
denot ng ment a pr ocesses or char act er f eat ur es have t wo cor -
r espond ng nt r ans t ve ver ba f or ms, one r epr esent ng Type
2, t he ot her Type 3. I n add t on, denom na ver bs have become
comp et e y pr oduct ve n Cat egor y 3 w t h r espect t o a cer t a n
semant c f e d, e. g. gyvdesked k ' pr act se aw' , t anar - os-
kod k ' t each ( n schoo ) . A t hese f eat ur es show t he pr om -
nence of ver bs n Hungar an and t he doub e base - char act er
of t he anguage. We have t o do w t h a t r ans t ve base f ,
nst ead of hav ng t he poss b t y of par a e der vat ons
ke gazdag- u : gazdag- od k ' become r ch' , t he nom na r oot
g ves r se t o a t r ans t ve ver b f r omwh ch t hen an nt r ans t ve
ver b s f or med, e. g. Russ an obogascat ' ' vt . enr ch' obogaat ' -
sj a ' vi . get r i ch' or i f t he i nt r ansi t i ve ver b i s der i ved anal -
yt i cal l y: Ger man ber e cher n s ch ber e cher n.
( f oot not e 8 cont nued) oppos t on has become t he most gr amma-
t ca y r egu ar and pr oduct ve oppos t on w t h ad| ect ves.
That s why oppos t ons ke - ad. : - asz ; - u : t , et c. , once
became est ab shed. I t s t hus ncor r ect t o cons der nt r an-
s t ve suf f xes as t er at ve suf f xes as most Hungar an gr am-
mar s do. The f act t hat nt r ans t v t y s n a way r e at ed t o
t er at on s a d f f er ent mat t er , wh ch w be d scussed be ow.
Her e we ar e dea ng w t h a secondar y, accompany ng f eat ur e
of nt r ans t ve suf f xes on y.
Apar t f r om t he case of par a e der vat ons f r oma
common r oot , such ver bs can best be g ven n t he f or m of a
st f or t hey can no onger be r egar ded as pr oduct ve, t her e
ar e ot her cases wh ch po nt t o a doub e base. Ther e ar e nt r ans t ve
ver ba r oot s t o wh ch a t r ans t ve der vat ona
suf f x can be added, and t r ans t ve r oot s w t h nt r ans t ve
suf f xes, as we saw above. Par t cu ar y nt er est ng f eat ur es
of t h s doub e base can be obser ved w t h cases wher e t he same
concept s expr essed n t wo ways, by an nt r ans t ve r oot or
by t he comb nat on of a t r ans t ve r oot and an nt r ans t ve
suf f x. Cons der t he f o ow ng examp es: hu ' f a ' = szr -
d k ' v . spr nk e' , szr ' vt . spr nk e' = hu - a| t ' et sg
f a ' , kop k ' v . wear of f ' = nyv- od k ' s wor n down' , nyu
' wear down' = kop- t at ' vt . wear of f ' , | ut ' come ( t o) ' = ad-
at k ' s g ven' , ad ' g ve' = | ut - t at ' get ( sg) t o' , somet mes
such cor r espondences ar e ncomp et e, eg. g. v sz ' car r y' =
sz - t ' car r y' but sz ' f y' has no cor r espond ng f or m
der ved f r omv sz ' car r y' except n ver y m t ed cont ext s,
esz k ' eat ' = f ogyaszt ' use up' but f ogy ' essen' evdi k
' i s eat en' . Cases i nvol vi ng ver bs der i ved f r omr oot s al so i ncl ude
nyel ' swal l ow' = csusz- t at ' l et sl i p' , csuszi k ' vi . sl i p' =
nyel - odi k ' i s swal l owed' , nt ' pour ' = f ol y- at ' l et f l ow' ,
f ol yi k ' f l ow' = m- l i k ' f l ow' , t esz ' do, make' = al l - i t ' vt .
st and' , nyom' pr ess' = ht r al - t at ' hi nder ' , kl d ' send' = meneszt
' l et go' , szr ' pr i ck' = l yuk- aszt ' vt . make a hol e' ,
szr - di k ' i s pr i cked' = l yuk- ad ' vi . get hol ed' , dob ' t hr ow' =
r ep- i t ' vt . l et f l y' , vet - odi k ' t hr ow onesel f ' = r ep- l ' vi .
f l y' , st ' shi nes ( sun) ' = mel eg- t ' war m' . As i t appear s f r om
t hese exampl es, one of t he member s of t en car r i es a f i gur at i ve
meani ng. I t i s of t en t he case t hat par al l el expr essi ons evi dence
semant i c di f f er ent i at i on.
The cor r espondences l i st ed above ar e par t i cul ar cases
of doubl e base. They t hr ow l i ght on an i nt er est i ng f eat ur e of
wor d meani ng: t he act i on denot ed by t he ver bal r oot br eaks
down i n t o t wo component s as r egar ds t r ansi t i vi t y. Accor di ng-
9
l y, t he ver b can be gener at ed f r omt wo ot her el ement s. The
doubl e base mani f est s i t sel f di f f er ent l y when one par t of t he
vocabul ar y has a t r ansi t i ve base wher eas anot her par t has an
i nt r ansi t i ve base, cf . zavar ' di st ur b' : zavar - odi k ' become
t ur bi d' , csuk ' vt . cl ose' : csuk- di k ' vi . cl ose' ver sus f
' vi . cook' : f - z ' vt . cook' , bj i k ' hi de onesel f ' : bj - t at
' hi de' , szi k ' vi . swi m' : sz- t at ' vt . swi m' r ' wr i t e' : r -
at ' have wr i t t en sg' . Fr om among t he most wi despr ead Eur opean
l anguages Ger man, Fr ench and Russi an ar e l anguages wi t h a
t r ansi t i ve base because t hey usual l y f or mt hei r i nt r ansi t i ve
wor ds f r omt r ansi t i ve r oot s by means of i nt r ansi t i ve der i va-
t i onal suf f i xes ( or cor r espondi ng wor ds, especi al l y gr ammat i cal i sed
pr onouns) cf . Hung, ny l i k ' open' : Ger m, si ch+f f nen :
Fr . s' +ouvr i r : Russ. ot kr yvat ' +sj a.
Whi l e Hungar i an i s a doubl e base l anguage, i t s i nt r ansi t i ve
base i s pr edomi nant . Thi s i s shown by t he f ol l owi ng f act s: ( a)
t he use of t r ansi t i ve der i vat i onal suf f i xes i s mor e r egul ar ,
mor e gr ammat i cal i sed, as was poi nt ed out above; (b) t he f or ms
of t he t r ansi t i ve der i vat i onal suf f i xes ar e ol der , mor e bal anc-
ed and uni f or m, most l y consi st i ng of j ust - t , whi l e i nt r ansi t i ve
suf f i xes ar e mor e var i ed; f ur t her mor e i n t hi s r l e t hey
ar e not of Fi nno- Ugr i c or i gi n, t hey ar e t he r esul t of secondar y
devel opment ; ( c) passi ve der i vat i onal suf f i xes ar e f or med wi t h
t he hel p of t he t r ansi t i ve suf f i x: - at + i k; (d) t he number of
r oot wor ds whi ch can be expr essed t hr ough a combi nat i on of
r oot + t r ansi t i ve suf f i x i s much hi gher t han t hose whi ch can
be expr essed by means of r oot s + i nt r ansi t i ve suf f i xes. I n
Russi an, whi ch has a t r ansi t i ve base, t he si t uat i on i s j ust
Cf . kauzi r ovat ' + i met ' dat ' |' to cause' +' t o have' ' t o g ve'
( op. c t . , p. 105) . Th s wou d cor r espond t o t he f o ow ng der -
vat on: ad = b r + at ( cause t o have) .
t he oppos t e: (a) nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes ar e gr am-
mat ca n char act er , t r ans t v t y be ng expr essed n Russ an
by means of per phr ast c const r uct ons; (b) as t o t he r f or m
nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes ar e homogeneous : - s| a;
pass ve ver b f or ms, t oo, ar e f or med by means of t h s suf f x;
( c) qu t e a f ew Hungar an wor ds w t h t he st r uct ur e ' nt r ans t ve
r oot + t r ans t ve der vat ona suf f x' have a cor r es-
pond ng s mp e t r ans t ve r oot n Russ an and v ce ver sa: an
nt r ans t ve Hungar an r oot cor r esponds t o a ' t r ans t ve r oot
+ an nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f x' , e. g. , b| - t at ' h de' =
pr | at at ' , b| k ' h de onese f ' = pr | at at ' + s| a; kop- t at ' vt .
wear of f ' = znas vat ' , kop k ' v . wear of f ' = zna vat ' +
s| a.
The nt r ans t ve ( Hungar an) base n wh ch cou d be t aken as
r epr esent ng an o der st age n anguage deve opment , shows
c ear y t hat nst ead of ook ng f or some at ent r ef ex ve
der vat ona suf f x n t he nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes,
one shou d r at her account f or r ef ex v t y n t er ms of
a secondar y f unct on of t he t er at ve der vat ona suf f x.
The nt r ans t ve f unct on of t er at ve der vat ona suf f xes
was br ought nt o be ng by t he end ng - k. To be sur e, t oc-
cur s on y n t he t h r d per son not ce, however , t hat ( 1) n
speech t he use of t h r d per son f or us s pr edom nant , ( 2) n
t he anguage of t he cod ces nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes
wer e a r eady f or ma y d st nct f r om t er at ve der vat ona
suf f xes ( cf . f or der vat ona suf f xes, cf . The Gr ammar of
t he V enna Codex Kar o y ( 1965) ) . The end ng -ik spr ead f r om
t he pass ve use, t he nt r ans t ve ver b cat egor y par exce ence ,
t owar ds ot her nt r ans t ve uses and accor d ng t o
t he most cr ed t ab e account s t he r pass ve use must have
or g nat ed f r om t he causat ve. To count er ba ance t he t endency
of t er at ve der vat ona suf f xes t ak ng on nt r ans t ve
f unct ons, t he need f or genu ne t r ans t ve t er at ve ver bs
ar ose, espec a y s nce t he mean ng of nt r ans t ve ver bs
usua y car r ed some t er at ve e ement . To expr ess t r ans t ve
t er at on t he der vat ona suf f x - gat / - get was
deve oped out of t he t er at ve suf f x - g and t he causat ve
-t and t h s new suf f x became ncr eas ng y pr om nent unt t
became t he on y suf f x expr ess ng t h s f unct on. Sz nnye
emp oys an exce ent met hod t o account f or t he ana og ca
r se of t h s der vat ona suf f x. He ana yzes mor pho og ca
oppos t ons such as hbor - og ' gr umb e' : hbor - gat ' vt . d st ur b' ,
hbor - gat : hbor - t ' vt . d st ur b' ; pat t og ' v . spar k e' :
pat t ogat ' vt . puf f ' , pat t ogat : pat t a- nt ' vt . cr ack' ; f or og
' v . t ur n' : f or g- at ' vt . t ur n' ; f or g- at : f or - du ' v . t ur n' ;
f or - d t ' vt . t ur n' . Sz nnye ' s exp anat on f or t he f or mof t he
der vat ona suf f x s mpeccab e. But t s nadequat e as an
exp anat on of t he h st or y of t he ngu st c f or ms at hand
s nce t f a s t o g ve an answer t o t he quest on why a g ven
e ement beg ns t o spr ead and how t comes nt o gener a use.
Fr om t he po nt of v ew of anguage use and t he "ant hr opocent r c
appr oach" t o anguage t h s quest on s of at east t he same
mpor t ance as t he quest on of t he pr econd t ons f or t he r se
of one ngu st c f or mout of anot her . The change n t he sys-
t emof t r ans t vent r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes d scussed
above, t hat s, t he sh f t of t er at ve suf f xes t owar ds an n-
t r ans t ve f unct on and t he subsequent need f or t r ans t ve-
t er at ve der vat ona suf f xes pr ov des, no doubt , t he exp at on
r equ r ed. To f t h s r o e t he causat ve der vat ona
suf f x - gat / - get , u t mat e y of t r ans t ve or g n, pr oved
most su t ab e. The end ng - t of t he suf f x showed t s r e at on
t o t r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes, t s who e f or mhad
a p easant r ng phonet ca y, be ng n har mony w t h t he r hyt hm c
pat t er n of Hungar an wor ds. I t a so had t he advant age
over ot her t er at ve suf f xes t hat t d d not end n z or 1,
as do most of t he ver bs n Hungar an, and t hus t he phonet c
body of t he ver bs cont a n ng t became mor e var ed.
At t h s p ace t may be wor t h wh e t o po nt out t hat ,
because of t he pr edom nant y t r ans t ve use of t he der va-
t ona suf f x - gat / - get , Hungar an a so shows an oppos t on,
t hough spor ad ca y, wh ch s qu t e syst emat c n Nenet s (a
Samoyed anguage) : The same r oot may t ake bot h a t r ans t ve
and an nt r ans t ve t er at ve suf f x ( t he nt r ans t ve ver bs
cor r espond t o Cat egor y 3 w t h mor e or ess spec a sed mean-
ng) , cf . dob- - gat ' t hr ow one af t er t he ot her ' : dob- dz k
' keep t hr ow ng' , ad- ogat ' keep g v ng' : ad- akoz k ' cont r but e
t o char t y' , p t - get ' vt . bu d gr adua y' : p t - kez k ' v .
have a house bu t ' , csoda - gat ' vt . wonder , at engt h ' :
csod - koz k ' v . wonder at ' , ver - eget ' beat ( gent y) ' : ver -
eked k ' f ght ' , t - get ' keep h t t ng' t - kz k ' v . knock
nt o' et c.
The adopt on of t he end ng - k as t he mar k of nt r an-
s t v t y, t he w despr ead use of t he pass ve der vat ona suf -
f x - at k n med aeva t er at ur e and t s sur v va n of f c a
anguage up t o t he 20t h cent ur y as we as t he ncr eas ng
pr oduct v t y of t he suf f x - d k n r ecent t mes pr ov de ev -
dence f or t he t endency t owar ds a st r onger t r ans t ve base n
Hungar an. Th s phenomenon s anot her examp e wher e Hungar an
conf or ms t o ot her Eur opean anguages, a t endency wh ch can be
obser ved n ot her ar eas of t he anguage as we .
Languages can be c ass f ed accor d ng t o t he st r engt h
of t he t r ans t ve or nt r ans t ve base. I n add t on t o t he
t hr ee t ypes d scussed above ( t r ans t ve, nt r ans t ve and
doub e base) t her e s a so a f our t h t ype: one n wh ch wor ds
can be used e t her t r ans t ve y or nt r ans t ve y w t hout any
f or ma d st nct on. Eng sh s a t yp ca examp e of t h s t ype
wh e Hungar an exh b t s on y one or t wo ver bs of t h s t ype, e.
g. t ar t ' as n Az I r oszvet sg gyl st t ar t ot t ' The wr i t er s'
associ at i on hel d a meet i ng' ( Type 9) and t ar t i n A gyl s
egszen est i g t ar t ot t ' The meet i ng l ast ed unt i l eveni ng' ( Type
2 i n t r ansi t i on t owar ds Type 1) . I n Engl i sh, on t he ot her hand,
t s qu t e common t o expr ess t r ans t ve or nt r ans t ve uses
of t he same ex ca mean ng by means of t he same st em, e. g.
1 2 1
hush , ' t o become qu et ' and hush ' t o qu et ' , hur r y ' t o move
2
w t h hast e' and hur r y ' t o cause t o move w t h speed' .
The var ous t ypes of ex ca base ar e summed up n Append x
I V.
3. 3. I n t he f o ow ng sect ons I sha summar se my f nd ngs
w t h r espect t o t he deve opment of t he f or mand f unct on of
der vat ona suf f xes n Hungar an.
3. 3. 1. The Hungar an causat ve and f act t ve der vat ona suf -
f x be ongs t o t he o dest and most pr oduct ve der vat ona
suf f xes. The causat ve f unct on seems t o appear f r st ( cf .
R. Er n Baboss ( 1938) ) . The ear est dat a a r eady document
t h s f unct on: t er em- t ' cr eat e' , - eszt ' vt . r ev ve' ( Ha ot t
Beszd ' Funer a Ser mon' ( 1200) ) ; - et ' concer n (sy s g) ' ,
m - et ' g ve suck' , - t et ' g ve ( sy) t o eat ' ( Kn gsber g
Tr edk ' The Kn gsber g Fr agment ' ( 1350) ) ; v - aszt ' choose'
( Mar a S r a om ' Mar an Lament ' ( 1300) ) . The Becs Kodex ' V enna
Codex' ( 1450) , t oo, cont a ns much mor e causat ve ver bs t han
f act t ves. The f act t ve f unct on s f r st document ed n t he
| ka codex n t he f or m r - t at ( = r at ) ' have wr t t en sg' .
3. 3. 2. One gener a y der ves pass ve ver bs f r om f act t ves,
wh ch s | ust f ed by a common pr oper t y of t hese t wo f or ms:
t he sub| ect of t he sent ence s not dent ca w t h t he agent .
However , t he par t cu ar exp anat ons pr oposed f or t h s der va-
t on ar e not a ways conv nc ng.
I t s st r k ng t hat wh e t he Lat n Funer a Ser mon con-
t a ns sever a pass ve ver b f or ms, t hese ar e ack ng n t s Hun-
gar an count er par t . For examp e, "cu us cor puscu um hod e
sepu t ur e t r ad t ur = k nec ez nopun t er t et t umet vc". Lat er
on, however , Lat n t ext s came t o be t r ans at ed on ar ge sca e
wh ch r esu t ed n an ncr eas ng use of t he pass ve ver b f or m.
The r ecent dec ne of t he pass ve ver b f or m s f ur t her
r e nf or ced by t he r se of ver bs der ved by means of t he der va-
t ona suf f x - od k. These ver bs par t y exh b t Funct on 2
( med o- pass ve) but have ga ned cur r ency n some d a ect s as
genu ne pass ve ver bs w t h Funct on 1.
3. 3. 3. The f o ow ng changes can be r eg st er ed n t he use of
t he Hungar an nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes. ( 1) The
suf f x - od k / - od k was n o der t mes of t en used t o r ender
t he Lat n deponent ae, e. g. f on- d k: comp ect or , f or g- d k:
ver sor , kr - di k: r umi nor . The cat egor y of deponent i ae i n
Lat i n i s a pr edomi nant l y mor phol ogi cal cat egor y wi t hout any
par t i cul ar f unct i on and may cor r espond t o any of our i nt r an-
si t i ve ver bs, especi al l y t o Types 3, 6 but al so t o Type 9.
However , t he der i vat i onal suf f i x - odi k was al so f r equent i n
Funct i on 2, 3 and 4, as i n ber ekeszt - di k ' get l ocked' , be-
zabl l - di k ' vi . st uf f ( onesel f ) , dor gl - di k ' i s scol ded' .
Mor e r ecent l y, - odi k, has come t o be used excl usi vel y i n Func-
t i on 2 and as such has become qui t e pr oduct i ve. Not i ce, how-
ever , t hat t he f unct i on of - odi k i s not t hat of t he passi ve:
a passi ve act i on i s vi ewed as t aki ng pl ace by i t sel f ( wi t hout
an agent ) , as i t wer e.
The di f f er ences bet ween Cat egor i es 1 ( passi ve) , 2 ( medi opassi ve)
and 3 ( ver bs of i nwar d di r ect i on) ar e wel l i l l ust r at ed
by t he sequence i nt z- t et i k ' i s ar r anged' , i nt z- odi k
' t ake car e of i t sel f ' , and i nt z- kedi k ar r ange f or doi ng sg'
or neki t - t et i k ' i s dashed' , neki t - di k ' vi . bump' and neki t -
kzi k ' vi . i mpact wi t h' . I n st andar d wr i t t en l anguage Funct i on
1 i s not expr essed by passi ve ver b f or ms but r at her , j ust
l i ke once i n t he r emot e past , by means of sent ences cont ai n-
i ng an i ndef i ni t e subj ect : i nt zt k ' t hey have ar r anged' ,
neki t t t k ' t hey have dashed' .
( 2) The der i vat i onal suf f i xes - kodi k, - kozi k, - odzi k, - ozi k,
- odi k have been used i n Cat egor i es 3, 4, 5 and 6 t hr oughout
t he document ed hi st or y of Hungar i an. The choi ce bet ween t hose
f or ms was not acci dent al but was det er mi ned by t he phonet i c
char act er of t he st emendi ng, namel y, - kodi k f ol l owed z, szt
and 1; - kozi k f ol l owed t , at and 1; - dzi k came af t er - gat ,
whi l e - ozi k occur r ed most f r equent l y af t er j t and l t ; - di k
was t he pr ef er r ed suf f i x af t er - kal and - dos. The di st r i but i on
of t he par t i cul ar der i vat i onal suf f i xes i s mot i vat ed by t he
need f or appr opr i at e var i et y i n phoni c st r uct ur e and t he
r hyt hmi c pat t er n of t he wor ds.
( 3) Fr om among t he denomi nal der i vat i onal suf f i xes - ul had a
hi gher f r equency at t he expense of - odi k: gonosz- ul ' become
evi l ' , bt or - ul ' vi . t ake cour age' , maghazas- ul ' mar r y' ar e
al l used wi t h - odi k t oday. On t he ot her hand, t her e ar e much
f ewer exampl es f or a change i n t he opposi t e di r ect i on. ( One
may r easonabl y assume t hat - ul , ar chai c - ol , i s a r ef l exi ve
der i vat i onal suf f i x and f or t hi s r eason i t does not occur
wi t h t he endi ng - i k. ) The dnomi nal - kodi k, - l kodi k was mor e
f r equent i n ol der t i mes, t oday - skodi k i s t he gener al endi ng
wi t h noun st ems, cf . ar ch. akadl y- kodi k ' f i nd f aul t ' , babonl -
kodi k ' be super st i t i ous' , di cs- l kdi k ' vi . boast ' , daj k- l kodi k
' vi . be a nur se' . Cur r ent l y der i vat i ons l i ke gyvd- eskedi k
' pr act i se l aw' , mr nk- skdi k ' be an engi neer ' , t ur i st - skodi k
' be a t our i st ' et c. ar e ent i r el y pr oduct i ve.
The di st r i but i on of i ndi vi dual der i vat i onal suf f i xes as
t o f or m and f unct i on and t he hi st or i cal changes obser ved above
ar e i l l ust r at ed i n Appendi x V. Appendi x VI shows how Ur al i c
l anguages di f f er i n t hei r f unct i onal di st r i but i on of der i va-
t i onal suf f i xes. Capi t al i zat i on of t he der i vat i onal suf f i xes
i s meant t o i ndi cat e t hat no f or mal var i ant s ar e gi ven.
3. 4. The syst em of t r ansi t i ve and i nt r ansi t i ve der i vat i onal
suf f i xes of a l anguage do not onl y ser ve t o br i ng about cer -
t ai n gr ammat i cal changes i n t he wor d and t o modi f y t he synt ac-
t i c r ol e of t he wor d. These der i vat i onal mor phemes ar e al so
used t o cr eat e new wor ds and l exi cal meani ngs.
3. 4. 1. I t of t en happens t hat Hungar an der ves a new wor d
w t h a t r ans t ve suf f x, t he mean ng of wh ch can be ex-
pr essed n ot her anguages by separ at e wor ds. For examp e,
f r omt he wor d menek ( ar ch. men- k) ' f ee' , men- t ' save'
can be f or med by means of a der vat ona suf f x, wh e n
Russ an t her e ar e separ at e wor ds f or t hese mean ngs: bezat
1
and spast . I n Ger man t he der vat on s r ever sed: r et t en
s ch r et t en. To t ake anot her examp e, n Hungar an one can
f or m et et ' g ve ( sy) t o eat ' f r om esz k ' eat ' , wh e n
Russ an t hey ar e r ender ed by est ' and kor m t ' . I n a number
of cases t he connect on bet ween t he t r ans t ve and nt r an-
s t ve ver b s not so ev dent , f or examp e, t s by no means
compe ng t o der ve t er em- t ' cr eat e' f r omt er em ' bear , pr o-
duce' and - eszt ' f t ( t o, nt o) ' f r om k ' f t ( sg) ' ,
cf . Ger man gede hen and schaf f en. The der ved wor d of t en
acqu r es a spec a sed mean ng, e. g. t o at ( shunt ) , f ut t at
( f avour s) , hgat ( mat es) , t et ( p ant s, f ower s) , et c.
3. 4. 2. I nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes ar e f r equent y
used t o cr eat e new wor ds. Th s s qu t e under st andab e n
v ew of t he f act t hat Hungar an nt r ans t ve suf f xes ar e
ess pr oduct ve. Reca t hat t he h gher gr ammat ca r o e and
r egu ar t y a der vat ona suf f x has, t he ess t he semant c
spec a zat on w be and v ce ver sa.
Among Hungar an ver bs f or med w t h nt r ans t ve der va-
t ona suf f xes, semant c spec a zat on s qu t e w despr ead,
e. g. ada- koz k ( t o g ve sg. f r ee and r epeat ed y) , p t - kez k
( t o car r y out a ar ge sca e const r uct on) , r akod k ( oad
sg. engt h y or r ear r ange t h ngs) . I nt r ans t ve der vat ona
suf f xes ar e used espec a y of t en t o f or m act ve ver bs of
Type 3, wh ch become member s of Cat egor y 3 t hr ough Cat egor y
4. The der vat ona suf f x has a met aphor c r ef ex ve mean ng
( Cat egor y 4) , as t wer e. I n such cases r ef ex v t y s a
f aded nner mot vat on under y ng t he der ved wor d. These
ver bs nc ude a gr eat number of mot on ver bs such as
l op- dzkodi k, l op- akodi k ' go st eal t hi l y' , l i t . ' st eal onesel f
somewher e' , ar ch, t akar - odi k ' cover s, gat her s, dr i ves one-
sel f ' , t r - ekedi k ' br eaks onesel f ' , ar ch, csavar - odi k ' wr i ngs
i t sel f ' , ar ch, hor doz- kodi k l i t . ' car r i es onesel f ' , r ug- asz-
kodi k l i t . ' spr i ngs onesel f ' , beszur - odi k ' i nf i l t r at es i t -
sel f ' and bei v- di k ' absor bs i t sel f ' .
The di f f er ence bet ween t he base and t he der i ved wor d
i s based on t he met aphor i c use wi t hout t he i nt er medi ar y r e-
f l exi ve el ement : skl - di k ' i nt r i gue' , ker eskedi k ' t r ade' ,
kt z- kdi k ' pr ovoke' . One cannot speak of speci al i zat i on i f
t he der i ved wor d cor r esponds t o a meani ng of t he base wor d
as i n A f i u vonzza t ' The boy at t r act s her ' vonz- di k a
f i hoz ' She f eel s at t r act ed by t he boy' but A mgnes vonzza a
vasat ' Magnet at t r act s r on' * A vas vonz- d k a mgneshez
' I r on f ee s at t r act ed by magnet ' .
3. 4. 3. I nt r ans t ve der vat ona suf f xes can be added t o
nt r ans t ve ver b st ems as we . I n such cases t he t er at ve
char act er becomes mor e pr om nent and | ust f cat on t o c ass -
f y t he suf f x nt r ans t ve - wh ch can be open t o doubt - s
pr ov ded mer e y by t he end ng - k_. Semant c spec a zat on
of t en t akes p ace her e, t oo: ksz - od k ' get r eady f or ' ,
bcs- z- kod k ' t ake eave of ' , gy - ekez k ' assemb e' / s r -
nkoz k ' ament ' .
4. I n t he body of t he paper I have at t empt ed t o pr ove, by
means of ngu st c dat a, t he t heses put f or war d n Sect on
1. I have a so nt ended t o show t hat a syst emat c and un-
pr e| ud ced st udy of ngu st c dat a a ways y e ds new r esu t s.
D st r but on and t r ansf or mat on be ong t o t he most gener a
met hods of est ab sh ng ngu st c st r uct ur es wh ch ar e east
nf uenced by sub| ect ve cons der at ons. These t wo met hods
cor r e at e w t h t he var ous f unct ons of ngu st c e ement s.
U t mat e y, t hese f unct ons cu m nat e n t he commun cat ve
f unct on of anguage wh ch const t ut es t he dec s ve
| ust f cat on f or any ngu st c ana ys s . I t may ead ngu st cs
t o a bet t er under st and ng of t he use of t he anguage, t hat s ,
t o a st udy of man as a r at ona soc a be ng. Any par t cu ar
st udy, nc ud ng t he pr esent one, s | ust f ed on y n t h s
per s pect ve.
Ref er ences
Baboss, R. Er n ( 1938) A causat i v i gekpzs. Budapest : Aka-
demi ai K ad.
Ge e| Kat ona, I st vn ( 1645) Magyar Gr amat kat ska. Gyu af ehr -
vr : Cor pus Gr ammat cor um L nguae Hungar cae. Ed. by F.
To dy. Pest : Eggenber ger .
Guxman, M. M. ( 196 4) Razv t e za ogovyx pr ot vopost av en | v
ger mansk x | azykax. Moscow: Akadem | a Nauk SSSR.
Kar o y, Sandor ( 1965) A Bcs Kodex Nye vt ana I . Budapest :
Akadm a K ad.
Komr om Ts pks, Gyr gy (16 65) Hungar a I ust r at a. Cor pus
Gr ammat cor um L nguae Hungar cae. Ed. by F. To dy. Pest :
Eggenber ger .
Lyons, | ohn (19 68) I nt r oduct on t o Theor et ca L ngu st cs.
Cambr dge: Cambr dge Un ver s t y Pr ess.
Ma| t nska| a, K. | e. ( 1959) Venger sk | | azyk. I I . Moscow:
Akadem | a Nauk SSSR.
Rva , M k s ( 1806) E abor at or Gr ammat ca Hungar ca. I . , I I .
Pest : Tr at t ner .
R ed , Szende ( 1864) Magyar Nye vt an. Pest : Pf e f er .
Ruong, I sr ae ( 1943) Lapp sche Ver ba ab e t ung dar gest e t
auf Gr und age des P t e app schen. Uppsa a: A mqv st &
W kse .
S mony , Zs gmond ( 1869) A v sszahat gnek egy k nsebb
haszn at a. Magyar Nye vor . 7. 489.
Szencz Mo nar , A ber t ( 1610) Novae Gr ammat cae Ungar cae.
Cor pus Gr ammat cor um L nguae Hungar cae. Ed. by F. To dy.
Pest : Eggenber ger .
Sz nnye , | zsef ( 1902) Magyar Nye vhason t s. 2. ed.
Budapest : Hor nynszky.
Szvor ny , | zsef ( 1864) Magyar Nye vt an. 2. ed. Pest :
Heckenast .
Tompa, | zsef , Ed. ( 1961) A ma magyar nye v r endszer e. I .
Budapest : Akadm a K ad.
U mann, St ephen ( 1957) The Pr nc p es of Semant cs. G asgow-
Oxf or d: | ackson- B ackwe .
Ver seghy, Fer encz ( 1818) Magyar Gr ammat ka. Buda: K r a y
Magyar Un ver s t as.
We nr e ch, Ur e ( 1963) On t he Semant c St r uct ur e of Lan-
guage. I n: Un ver sa s of Language. ed. by | oseph H. Gr eenber g,
Cambr dge: The M. I . T. Pr ess.
Append x I I .
Gener at on of vo ce t ypes
Append x I I I .
Pr esent - day and o d par ad gms of vo ce t ypes
r oot st em suf f
caus
suf f
f act
suf f
nt r

t r t r t r
i
Append x I V.
Typo ogy accor d ng t o t he ex ca base
1. I nt r ans t ve base
I NTRANSI TI VE-RANSI TI VE DERIVATIONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARIAN 227
Appendi x V.
For mal di f f er ent i at i on
Accor di ng t o Accor di ng t o t he f or m
t he f unct i on of t he st em
d e v e r b a l verbs
ol d. contemp.
- ODI K 2- 6 2( 3) f r d k KAL- , DOS r ugdosod k
R. bet akar d k
- KODI K 3- 6 3- 6 f ur akod k Z- , SzT- , L- r agaszkod k
- KOZI K 3- 6 3- 6 bocst koz k T- , AT- , L- t kz k
- 0( D) I K 3- 6 3- 6 bet akar dz k GAT- ha gat dz k
- OZI K 3- 6 3- 6 k t oz k | T- , LT- r e| t ez k
d e n o m i n a l verbs
ol d. contemp.
hevesked k, R. akad ykod k
but skod k, M. gyvdesked k
bszk ked k, R. babon kod k
hevesed k, R. bsod k
szp , R. behr t ysu , R. begyep ,
R. bt or u , R. meghzasu , R. megdhs ,
R. bokr osu
Oppos t on of t r ans t ve and nt r ans t ve ver bs
KODIK 3 3
SKODIK (3) 3
LKODIK 3 3
ODIK 2 2
UL 2 (2
228
Append x VI .
Ur a c syst em of der vat ona suf f xes and t he nt r ans t ve -
t r ans t ve f unct on
D st r but on of t r ans t v t y accor d ng t o cent ur es ( Wor ds
beg nn ng w t h et t er g)
15- 16. cent . 16- 18. cent . 18- 19. cent 20. cent .
2
2- 9
3
4
5
6
9
7: 40
5: 30
5: 30
6: 7
9 : 10
35: 41
1 : 1
36: 41
29: 9, 5
43: 14, 5
122: 41
5: 1, 5
101: 33, 5
12: 9
22: 17
45: 34
6: 4
47: 36
.
! 17 88 300 132
Hungar an Vogu Ost yak Vot yak Zyr an
1, 7, 8 - TAT
2 - OD
3- 6 - KOD
- KOZ
1 - V
2- 6 - ___
- AXT
7 - L, -
8 -
1 - J
2- 6 - S
- ANT
5 - S
7 -
8 - PT
1 - S' _
2- 6 - SK
1 - S'
2- 6 - S'
- Z'
7 - T
8 - D
Cher em s Mor dv n F nn sh Samoyed
1- 6 - LT
7- 8 - T, - D
1- 6 - V
7 - VT
8 - T
1, 7, 8, -
2- 6 - U
4 - __
3, 6 - NG
4 - U
7 - DA
G ossar y
ad
ad- akoz k
adat k
ad- ogat
akad y
akad y- kod k
akk mat z
akk mat z - d k
a
a - z
a - z- kod k
a ka om
a ka m- at an
a ka m- at an- kod k
+al kal m-atl an-kod-tat
al kal m-az
a ka m- az- kod k

- t
a sz k
a - t at
1
r
r - ad
r - aszt
r
2
ar
r -
r - u- 1
r u- 1- kod k
s
s- k
s- ka - od k
z k
+ z- t
g ve
cont r but e t o char t y
s g ven
keep g v ng
obst ac e
f nd f au t
vt . acc mat ze
get acc mat zed
under
hum at e
hum at e onese f
occas on
unadapt ed f or
v . nconven ence
et nconven ence
app y
accomodat e onese f
v . st and
vt . st and
s eep
make s eep
f ood
v . f ood
vt . f ood
pr ce
ar t c e
se
p ay t he nf or mer
d g
d g r epeat ed y
nt r gue
v . soak
vt . soak
230 HUNGARIAN GENERAL LI NGUI STI CS
az - t at
babona
babon - l kodi k
b tor
b t or - t
b tor - kodi k
b tor - odi k
bt or - ul
be
be- r ul
gyep
+begyep- l
h r tya
h r tys
+behr t y- s- ul
i sz i k
be- i v- odi k
kvet
be- kvet - kezi k
l op
be- l op- dzi k
be- l op- dz- kodi k
mocsok
be- mocsk- ol
be- mocsk- ol - di k
r ekeszt
be- r ekeszt - di k
szur
be- szr - di k
t akar
+be- t akar - di k
be- t akar - dzi k
vt . soak
super st i t i on
be super st i t i ous
cour ageous
vt . encour age
vi . dar e
vi . t ake cour age
vi . t ake cour age
pr ever b i nt o
denounce
gr ass
become over gr own wi t h gr ass
pel l i ci e
pel l i cul ar
become pel l i cul ar
dr i nk
be absor ved i nt o
vt . f ol l ow
ensue
vt . st eal
vi . st eal i nt o
vi . st eal i nt o
di r t
vt . soi l
vi . soi l
vt . cl ose
vi . cl ose
vt . f i l t r at e
i nf i l t r at e
vt . cover up
i s cover ed up
vi . cover onesel f up
INTRANSITIVE-TRANSITIVE DERIVATIONAL SUFFIXES IN HUNGARIAN 231
zabl
+be- zabl - odi k
b zi k
bi z- akodi k
bocst
bocst- kozi k
bokor
bokr- os
bokr- os- ul
bcs
bcs- zi k
bcs- z- kodi k
bj i k
bj - tat
bus
+bs-odi k
buta
but- s- kodi k
bszke
bszk- l kedi k
cf ol
1
cfol
2
csal
csal - at
csal - at- kozi k
csa - at - koz- t at
csavar
csavar - od k
esoda
csod- 1
csod- 1- gat
+csod- - kod k
gobb e up
v . st uf f onese f
v . have conf dence n
have conf dence n
vt . a ow
v . ent er nt o
bush
bushy
become bushy
l eave (- taki ng)
take l eave of
take l eave of
h de onese f
h de
sor r owf u
become sor r owf u
f oo sh
v . behave f oo sh y
pr oud
v . be pr oud of
v . f out
vt . f out
cheat
cheat
v . be d sappo nt ed
make suf f er d sappo nt ment
vt . t ur n
v . t ur n
wonder
vt . wonder at
vt . wonder at engt hy
v . wonder at
csod- 1- kozi k
csuk
csuk- di k
csszi k
cssz- t at
daj ka
daj ka- 1
+daj k- l - kodi k
daj k- 1- t at
di cs
+di cs- l - kdi k
dob
dob- l
dob- l - gat
dob- l - dzi k
dombor
dombor-odi k
dorgl
+dor g - d k
g
g- et
e
e - ad
e - ad- d k
2
r
r -
r - u- 1
e - r u

- ed
- eszt
v . wonder at
vt . c ose
v . c ose
v . s p
et s p
nur se
vt . nur se
v . be a nur se
vt . nur se
g or ous
v . boast
t hr ow
t r ow one af t er t he ot her
t hr ow one af t er t he ot her
keep t hr ow ng
bu g ng
v . bu ge
vt . sco d
s sco ded
v . bur n
vt . bur n
preverb away
se
s sou d
pr ce
ar t c e
se
bet r ay
ve
v . r ev ve
vt . r ev ve
I NTRANSI TI VE-TRANSI TI VE DERIVATIONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARIAN 2 33
- t et
eme
eme - get
em k
em k- ez k
p
ep- t
p- t - get
p- t - kez k
p-
r ( - ) ed
er ( - ) eszt
r nt
r nt - get
esz k
e( - ) t et
+zes
+zes-
+zes- - t et
+zes- - t et k
+zes- - t et - t et k
fagy
f j
f j - d t
f j - dul
f ak(- )ad
fak (-) aszt
f ehr
f ehr- edi k
f ehr - t
f ehr- l
f ekszi k
keep al i ve
l i f t
keep f t ng
souven r
r emember
who e
vt . bu d
vt . bu d gr adua y
v . have a house bu d
v . be bu t
spr ng f r om
pour out
t ouch
t ouch r epeat ed y
eat
vt . g ve sy t o eat
sweet
become sweet
vt . sweet en
s sweet ened
s sweet ened
v . f r eeze
hur t
comp a n of a pa n n sg
beg n t o hur t
v . spr ng f or t h
vt . cause t o spr ng f or t h
wh t e
v . wh t en
vt . wh t en
v . wh t en
e
f ek (- )tet
+f ek( - ) et
f esu
f s- 1
+f s- - od k
f s- 1- kd k
f og
f ogat
f og- a
f ogy
f ogyaszt
+f ogyat
f ogyat - koz k
f ogyat - koz- t at
f o y k
f o y- at
f or ( - ) d t
f or ( - ) du
f or ( - ) gat
f or ( - ) og
f or r
f or r - ad
f or r - aszt
f osz- k
f osz (-)t
f
f o- z
f ukar
f ukar - kodi k
f r
f ur - akodi k
f r - di k
f ut
f ut - t at
1
f ut - t at
2
put t o bed
put t o bed
comb
vt . comb
vi . comb
vi . comb
cat ch
have sy cat ch sg
occupy
l essen
use up
use up
l essen
use up
f l ow
l et f l ow
vt . t ur n
vi . t ur n
vt . r evol ve
vi . r evol ve
heal over
heal over
sol der
vi . f r ay
vt . st r i p
vi . cook
vt . cook
mi ser l y
be mi ser l y
bor e
push
bur y i t sel f i n
r un
make sy r un
vt . r un a candi dat e
I NTRANSI TI VE-TRANSI TI VE DERIVAT
gazdag
gazdag- odi k
+gazdag- ul
gondol
gondol - kodi k
gonosz
+gonosz- ul
gyal z
gyal z- kodi k
gyl i k
gyl - ekezi k
hbor( - ) gat
hbor ( - ) t
habor (-) og
hg
hgat
hal
+hal - at
hal l gat
hal l gat - dzi k
ht r a
ht r - 1
ht r - 1- t at
heves
heves- edi k
heves- kedi k
hi ba
hi b- z ( i k )
hi b- z - t at
h z i k
hi z - l al
hi z - l al - t at
)NAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARIAN 2 35
r i ch
become r i ch
become r i ch
thi nk
thi nk about
ev i l
become evi l
vt . abuse
v i . use abusi ve l anguage
assembl e
assembl e
vt . di st ur b
vt . di st ur b
vi . be di scont ent ed
cover
have cover ed
vi . di e
vt . di e
l i st en t o
keep l i st eni ng
back/ war ds/
vi . back
hi nder
vi ol ent
become vi ol ent
be hot - t emper ed
mi st ake
make a mi st ake
bl ame
gr ow
f at t en
l et f at t en
h z- a - t at k
h z- a - t at - t at k
hor d
hor d- oz
+hor d- oz- kod k
hu
hu - a| t
hur co
hur co - kod k
hz
huz- at
1
huz- at
2
k
( - ) eszt
- et
+ m k
+ m et
nt z
nt z- ked k
nt z- od k
nt z- t et k
r
r - at
r - at k
smer
smer - ked k
| ut
| ut - t at
kapar
ke
ke - t
ker es
s f at t ened
s f at t ened
car r y
keep car r y ng
v . dr ag
f a
et sg f a
vt . dr ag
v . move
dr aw
have sg dr awn
get sy p ay an a r
f t sg
vt . f t t o
concer n sy sg
suck
g ve suck
ar r ange
ar r ange f or do ng sg
t ake car e of t se f
s ar r anged
wr t e
have wr t t en sg
s wr t t en
know
make acqua nt ances
come t o/ get t o
get sg t o
scr at ch
r se
wake up
ook f or
I NTRANSI TI VE-TRANSI TI VE DERIVATIONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARIAN 237
ker eskedi k
ks z l
kszl - di k
ki l t
ki l t - ozi k
ki
ki - csszi k
ki - cssz- t at
kopi k
kop- t at
kt
kt - z
kt - z- kdi k
kl d
l t
l t - ogat
l e
l e- hever
l e- hever - edi k
l ocsol
l ocsol - kodi k
l op
l op- akodi k
l op- dz- kodi k
l yuk
l yuk- ad
l yuk- aszt
mar
mar - akodi k
mechani zl
mechani zl - di k
meg
t r ade
get r eady f or
get r eady f or
shout
shout
pr ever b out
vi . sl i p out
vt . sl i p out
vi . wear of f
vt . wear of f
bi nd
bi nd up
pr ovoke
send
see
vi si t
pr ever b down
l i e down
l i e down at f ul l l engt h
vt . spr i nkl e
vi . spr i nkl e
st eal
go st eal t hi l y
vi . st eal
hol e
vi . get hol ed
vt . make a hol e
bi t e
quar r el
mechani ze
i s mechani zed
pr ever b f or per f ect i ve aspect
of t he ver b
meg-buki k
dh
dh- s
+megdhs- l
fj
meg- f j - dul
hz
hz- as
meg- hz- as- ul
hi
meg- hi sul
meg- nz
meg- zkken
mel eg
me l eg- t
+meni k
menekl
men( - ) eszt
men (-)t
mer l
mer l - t et i k
mr nk
mr nk- s- kdi k
mos
mos- akodi k
mosat i k
mos- ogat
mozog
mvel
mvel - t et
neki
t
neki - t
neki - t - kzi k
neki - t - di k
f ai l
f ur y
f ur i ous
become f ur i ous
vi . hur t
begi n t o hur t
house
mar r i ed
mar r y
vai n
f ai l
r egar d
j ol t
war m
vt . war m
go
f l ee
l et go
save
di ve
di ve
engi neer
be an engi neer
wash
have a wash
i s washed
wash up
move
do, act
l et do, l et act
pr ever b t o hi m
st r i ke, hi t
dash
vi . i mpact wi t h
vi . bump
I NTRANSI TI VE-TRANSI TI VE DERIVATIONAL SUFFI XES I N HUNGARIAN 2 39
nek i - t - t et i k
nz
+nz- eked k
nye
nyel - di k
nyi l i k
nyom
nyug( o) szi k
nyugo( - ) szt
ny
nyv- di k
okos
okos- kodi k
okos- odi k
osz( - ) ol
osz (-)t
m( - ) l i k
n( - ) t
pat t ( - ) an
pat t ( - ) an- t
pat t ( - ) og
pat t ( - ) ogat
per
per - el
per - eskedi k
per - 1- ekedi k
pof oz
pof oz- kodi k
r agaszt
r agasz- kodi k
, r ak
r akodi k
r
i s dashed
l ook
vi . l ook ar ound
swal l ow
i s swal l owed
vi . open
pr ess
vi . r est
vt . r est
wear down
i s wor n down
cl ever
r eason
become pr udent
vi . get di vi ded
vt . di vi de
f l ow
pour
vi . cr ack
vt . cr ack
vi . cr ack
vt . make cr ack
act i on at l aw
t ake act i on
l i t i gat e
l i t i gat e
sl ap i n t he f ace
box one anot her on t he ear
vt . st i ck
vi . st i ck t o
put
l oad
C pr ever b) on
240
r - szed
r - szed- et
r egener
r egener - d k
r e| t
r e| t - ez k
r ep( - )
r ep( - ) t
r g
r ug- asz- kod k
r ug- dos
r ug- dos- d k
sar ga
sr g- u
seg t
seg t - kez k
+sr sz k
sr ( - ) t
st
st - t at
st - t at - t at
st - t at - t at k
s r
s r ( - ) nkoz k
s( - )
s( - ) t
s( - ) t - t et
szak ( - ) ad
szak (-) aszt
szn
szn- akoz k
sz
dece ve
et dece ve
vt . r egener at e
v . r egener at e
vt . h de
v . h de
v . f y
vt . et f y
k ck
dar t at
vt . keep on k ck ng
v . keep on k ck ng
ye ow
become ye ow
vt . he p
v . he p
be n| ur ed
n| ur e
wa k
t ake out f or a wa k
et t ake out f or a wa k
s t aken out f or a wa k
cr y
ament
v . bake
vt . bake
have sg baked
v . t ear
vt . t ear
vt . p t y
v . p t y
f y
I NTRANSI TI VE-TRANSI TI VE DERIVATIONAL SUFFI XES IN HUNGARIAN 241
sz - t
szar ( - ) ad
szr ( - ) aszt
+szr ( - ) at
szr maz k
szr maz- t at
sz
sz - ed
+sz - et
sz - eszt
szp
szp- t
szp-
szer et
sz d
sz d- at
szr ( - ) t
szor ( - ) u
szr
szr - d k
szr
szr - od k
sz
sz - et k
t akar
t akar - od k
t anr
t anr - kod k
+t anr - oskod k
t ar t
1
t ar t
2
ternet
t er em
t er em- t
car r y
v . dr y
vt . dr y
vt . dr y
v . or g nat e
vt . or g nat e
edge
v . d sper se
vt . d sper se
vt . d sper se
beaut f u
vt . beaut f y
v . gr ow mor e beaut f u
ove
ch de
et ch de
pr ess
be squeezed nt o
vt . spr nk e
v . spr nk e
pr ck
s pr cked
bear
be bor n
cover
v . assemb e
t eacher
t each n schoo
t each n schoo
v . ast
vt . ho d
bur y
bear , pr oduce
cr eat
t esz
+t osz k
t ( - ) t
t o
t o - at
t r
t r - eked k
t r omb t a
t r omb t - 1
trombi t-1-tat
t ud
+t ud- akoz
t ud- akoz- d k
t ur st a
t ur st - skod k
sz k
sz- t at
gyes
gyes-kedi k
gyvd
gyvd-eskedik

- t et
t
t - kz k
t - get
v ( - ) aszt
v k
v ( - ) t
v ( - ) t - oz k
v ( - ) t - oz- t at
v ( - ) t - oz- t at k
do, make
s pr oh b t ed
pr oh b t
shove
shunt
br eak
endeavour
. t r umpet
vi . t r umpet
l et t r umpet
know
vt . ask af t er
vi . ask af t er
t our i st
be a t our i st
vi . swi m
vt . swi m
cl ever
show onesel f t o be cl ever
l awyer
pr act i se l aw
si t
pl ant
vt . knock
vi . knock i nt o
vt . keep hi t t i ng
vt . separ at e
vi . separ at e f r om
vt . change
vi . change
vt . change
vi . i s changed
v ( - ) t - oz- t at - t at k
vd
vd- ekez k
ver
ver - eget
ver - eked k
ver - et
vet
vet - od k
v g
+v g- asz k
+v g- at
+v g- aszt
v sz
von
von- akod k
von (-)z
von( - ) z- d k
v . s changed
vt . def end
v . def end
beat
beat gent y
f ght
et beat
t hr ow
t hr ow onese f
mer r y
make mer r y onese f
make mer r y
make mer r y
car r y
dr aw
r ef use t o do sg
at t r act
f ee at t r act ed by sy
zavar d st ur b
zavar - od k become t ur b d
Not at on: + = obso et e wor d
- = t he m t bet ween t wo mor phemes
(-)= t he m t bet ween t wo mor phemes s b ur r ed
v . = ver b nt r ans t ve
vt . = ver b t r ans t ve
LUKACS' S I DEAS ON LANGUAGE
| anos Ke emen
West er n ph osophy cher shed f or decades t he us on
t hat t he pr ob ems of man man f est ed n t he unanswer ab e
' met aphys ca quest ons or g nat e n anguage. The st r ongest
t r end of t he ph osophy of t h s cent ur y owes t s ex st ence
t o t hat us on, s nce t he r ecogn t on of t he cause of t he
t r oub e was f o owed n due cour se by t he d scover y of t he
r emedy: t he ana ys s of anguage. The neopos t v st s, who
car r ed out t he " ngu st c t ur n" of ph osophy, wer e mbued
w t h t he r ef or m ng sp r t of en ght enment : t hey f r m y be-
eved t hat t he r ecogn t on of a f ew s mp e t r ut hs and,
equ va ent y, a r ef or m of anguage wou d put human m nds r ght .
When t he us ons had me t ed away, wh ch was ar ge y due t o
W t t genst e n' s pr of ound and sever e cr t c sm, mor e r ea st c
concept ons emer ged. The ana yt ca ph osopher s f o ow ng
W t t genst e n accept ed and exam ned anguage n t s r ea
nat ur e, n t s nor ma and or d nar y use. Even f t hey abandoned
r ef or m ng anguage, t h s of t y dr eamof a og ca y t r anspar ent
and cr yst a - c ear dea anguage, t hey d d not cease t o r egar d
ph osophy as t her apeut c: t he ana ys s of wor ds was t o become
t he on y met hod of d scuss ng t he t r ad t ona pr ob ems of
ph osophy and t he r on y f or m of so ut on was sought n r e-
duc ng t hose pr ob ems t o r u es of t he use of wor ds.
However , ont o og ca pr ob ems do not w t her away f
pushed as de as pseudo- pr ob ems. I f ph osophy s t o f u f
t s egacy, t s a so bound t o say somet h ng about man and
t he wor d he ves n. Th s s se f - ev dent f or Mar x sm,
s nce t cou d not ot her w se endeavor t o become t he means f or
t he pr act ca t r ansf or mat on of t he wor d. Th s s why t he
t r ad t ona "gr eat met aphys ca syst ems" wer e ab e t o sur v ve
af t er t he sem cent enn a dom nat on of neopos t v sm and ana-
yt ca ph osophy. At t he same t me, t s not by pur e n-
c dent t hat ngu st c r ef ect ons assumed such an mpor t ant
p ace n He degger ' s monument a met aphys ca and ont o og ca
syst em, one of t he most mpr ess ve ef f or t s of t h s cent ur y.
He degger ' s wor d- ana yses ar e we - known; a most r em n scent
of t he pr ocedur es of ana yt ca ph osophy, t hey ar e nvoked
t o shed ght upon one or anot her ph osoph ca pr ob em.
However , w t h h m anguage appear s n anot her mean ng as we :
not on y and not n t he f r st p ace as a med um of ana ys s
but a so and n t he f r st p ace as somet h ng g ven f or our
be ng, as an ont o og ca cat egor y.
I n t he t echn ca anguage of ph osophy t s not qu t e
unf ounded t o say t hat t her e ar e t wo ma| or t r ends n t he 20t h
cent ur y: t he ana yt cs of anguage ( W t t genst e n and t he
neopos t v st s) and t he her meneut cs of anguage ( He degger and
phenomeno ogy on t he one hand, and t he Fr ench Schoo r epr esent ed
by R coeur , Foucau t and Lacan, on t he ot her ) .
Nowadays t s nat ur a t o ask t he quest on whet her
t he pr ob em of anguage has any p ace n Mar x sm. Th s s
equ va ent t o t he quest on whet her t he pr ob em of anguage s
a ph osoph ca pr ob em f or Mar x sm, and f so wher e t s
p ace s t o be sought w t h n t he syst em of quest ons r a sed
by Mar x sm. Does Mar x sm pr ov de an a t er nat ve t o t he ana-
t cs and her meneut cs of anguage?
Gyr gy Lukcs was per haps t he f r st t o not ce ( t hough
n t he f or mof par ent het ca not es on y) t hat t he f r st
LUKACS' S I DEAS ON LANGUAGE 247
quest on can be answer ed n t he af f r mat ve t hr ough a c ose
r ead ng of Mar x' s wor ks. Even f he never speaks of t he
ph osophy of anguage n h s ext ens ve oeuvr e, nor does he
of cour se e abor at e as a wat er t ght d sc p ne some ph o-
sophy of anguage, Lukcs does d scuss anguage n a ph o-
soph ca manner . Now t hat h s unf n shed Ont o ogy s be-
com ng ava ab e, t s out nes ar e beg nn ng t o t ake shape
n f r ont of our eyes and t he t me has come f or a syst emat c
and compr ehens ve st udy of Lukcs' s wor k, t s wor t hw e
t o ponder what k nd of answer s Lukcs has t o of f er t o t he
above quest ons. I n t he pr esent paper I w sh t o cont r but e,
on t he bas s of but a sma number of wor ks, t o t he r econ-
st r uct on or t he t heor et ca cons der at ons of anguage
mp c t n Lukcs' s nvest gat ons.
When exam n ng t he var ous f or ms of appear ance of
r e f cat on n h s H st or y and c ass consc ousness, Lukcs
quot es a passage f r omGer man deo ogy n wh ch Mar x st at es
t hat "pr vat e pr oper t y a enat es not on y t he nd v dua t y
of men, but a so of t h ngs" , and r ef er s t o Mar x' s subsequent
r emar ks: "Mar x goes on t o make a number of ver y f ne ob-
ser vat ons about t he ef f ect s of r e f cat on upon anguage.
A ph o og ca st udy f r omt he st andpo nt of h st or ca mat e-
1
r a sm cou d pr of t ab y beg n her e. "
I n t he passage r ef er r ed t o, Mar x ana yses t he mean ng
of cer t a n wor ds and shows t hat t hese wor ds ar e used n
bot h "mer cant e" and " nd v dua " senses: f or nst ance,
"pr opr t ", "E gent um" and " E genschaf t " ; "pr oper t y",
"E gent um" and "E gent m chke t "; "va eur ", "va ue", "Wer t "
et c. I t s not use ess t o quot e her e Mar x' s gener a comment
bef or e t he examp es | ust c t ed: "Der Bour geo s hat es umso
Geor g Lukcs: H st or y and c ass consc ousness. St ud es n
Mar x st D a ect cs. Cambr dge, Massachuset t s: The MI T Pr ess
1971, p. 209.
248
e cht er , aus se ner Spr ache d e I dent t t mer kant scher
und nd v due er oder auch a geme n mensch cher Bez e-
hungen zu bewe sen, a s d ese Spr ache se bst e n Pr odukt
der Bour geo s e st und daher w e n der W r k chke t , so
n der Spr ache d e Ver h t n sse des Schacher s zur Gr und age
2
a er ander n gemacht wor den s nd. "
Lukcs' s nt er pr et at on s pr ec se: Mar x ndeed says
t hat t he st r uct ur es of r e f cat on penet r at e nt o anguage
t oo, t hey ext end t o ngu st c st r uct ur es as we . What s
mor e, he conc udes t hat t h s anguage s a bour geo s an-
guage, t s "t he pr oduct of t he bour geo s e" . Th s r emar k
cont a ns t he out nes of a cr t que of anguage of a r ad ca -
y new t ype as aga nst t he r at ona st concept ons of t he
Moder n Age, wh ch we ghed t he advant ages and " mper f ect ons"
of anguage f r omt he po nt of v ew of un ver sa r at ona t y.
He does not hes t at e t o say t hat c ass r e at ons and c ass
deo og es ar e anchor ed n anguage and n t he manner of
anguage use. I f we w sh t o pr ov de a gr ammat ca nt er pr et a-
t on f or h s examp es, t s easy t o see t hat t hey w be
semant c: t hey can be t r ans at ed nt o our pr esent concept s
n t he f o ow ng way: soc a r e at ons and deo og es ar e
man f est ed n t he f or mof spec a semant c subcodes on t he
eve of t he f or ma or gan sat on of anguage as we .
A t hat s a f ur t her act ua zat on of Mar x' s concep-
t ons as r egar ds t he nher ent y soc a nat ur e of anguage.
The pr ob em of t he soc a nat ur e of anguage s not exhaust ed
n t hat "d e Spr ache ent st eht , w e das Bewut se n, er st aus
demBedr f n s, der Not dur f t des Ver kehr s m t ander en Menschen" ,
2
Mar x- Enge s: ber Spr ache, St und ber set zung. Ber n:
D et z Ver ag, 1974, p. 123.
3
Mar x- Enge s: ber Spr ache, St und ber set zung, p. 43.
t hat s, t const t ut es not on y one aspect of t he soc a
nat ur e of man n gener a , but t a so nc udes t he above
connect ons, t he nt r us on of t he h st or ca y concr et e
soc a st r uct ur es and deo og es nt o t he f or ma char act er s-
t cs of anguage. The bour geo s can "pr ove f r omh s anguage"
t he dent t y of "mer cant e" and "gener a human aspect s" , he
can c a mt hat t he pr oper t es of t he bour geo s nd v dua
ar e t he human pr oper t es n gener a , because t he deo ogy
dec ar ng t h s came t o f or m, as t wer e, par t of t he ngu s-
t c code, and t he ngu st c code t se f makes one accept
t he concept ua schemes anchor ed n t w t h a spont aneous
nat ur a ness. I f t s added t o t he above t hat "d e I deen
4
ex st er en n cht get r ennt von der Spr ache" , and t hat "d e
Gedanken der her r schenden K asse s nd n | eder Epoche d e
her r schenden Gedanken, " t hen t s not w t hout f oundat on
t hat we at t r but e t o Mar x t he v ew t hat t he nt e ect ua
power of t he r u ng c ass const t ut es ngu st c power as
we . Th s s t he og ca p ace f or a cr t que of anguage
and a ph osoph ca ana ys s of anguage w t h n Mar x sm. A
cr t c sm of deo og es necessar y nvo ves a ngu st c
demyst f cat on based upon t he compr ehens on of t he connec-
t ons bet ween deo og es and anguage.
When Lukcs t ook heed of t hese deas of Mar x' s, he
pr oceeded t o f or mu at e a h gh y mpor t ant sc ent f c pr o-
gr amme - we ahead of h s t me. The pr ob ems quot ed have
n t he meant me been ncor por at ed nt o t he ob| ect ves of
t he d sc p nes concer ned w t h anguage ( sem ot cs, soc o-
ngu st cs, et c. ) , but what s ca ed by Lukcs "a ph o-
og ca ana ys s n t he manner of a h st or ca mat er a sm"
and what ought t o be under st ood as t he h st or ca nvest ga-
t on of t he r e at onsh p bet ween t he dom nant deas of t he
var ous ages and t he r ngu st c expr ess on r ema ns even
t oday most y a pr ogr amme f or Mar x sm.
4
Mar x- Enge s : ber Spr ache, St und ber set zung, p. 82.
5
Mar x- Enge s: ber Spr ache, St und ber set zung. p. 94.
I t s eas y d scer n b e t hat t her e s a mor e or ess
e abor at e concept on of anguage cont r but ng t o t he t heor e-
t ca f oundat ons of Lukacs' s Aest het cs, and by v r t ue of
t s ver y r o e t c a ms t o be mor e gener a and t o gr asp
compr ehens ve t endenc es of human anguage. At t he same t me,
t h s concept on r ef ect s a r ad ca change n Lukacs' s sc en-
t f c and ph osoph ca or ent at on.
I t s an acc dent of h st or y t hat t he st at ement s con-
cer n ng anguage n Mar x st ph osophy wer e f or decades n-
f uenced pr edom nant y by a s ng e d sc p ne: Pav ov an
phys o ogy and psycho ogy. Th s nev t ab y nvo ved t heor e-
t ca dogmat sm even f t he r g d app cat on of cer t a n
concept s n Pav ov had not by t se f br ought a ong nat ur a -
st c t r a t s nt o t he nt er pr et at on of ngu st c phenomena,
s nce t he one- s ded or ent at on t o phys o ogy exc uded not
on y a gener a zat on of t he ach evement s of t he ot her r e e-
vant d sc p nes, such as ngu st cs, but a so an nvest ga-
t on nt o t he og co- concept ua f acet of t he pr ob em of an-
guage. Even Lukcs cou d not he p conf or m ng t o t he cont empo-
r ar y s t uat on of Mar x sm. That s why t he concept on of
anguage n h s Aest het cs d sp ays as one of t s most sub-
st ant a const t uent s of Pav ov' s doct r ne, wh ch was de-
ve oped nt o t he hypot hes s of "pr mar y s gna syst em".
The unwar y obser ver may have t he mpr ess on t hat
nsof ar as Lukcs r e es exc us ve y upon a s ng e phys o og-
ca doct r ne wh e d scuss ng t he pr ob em of anguage he
comes t o be opposed t o not on y h s pr ev ous concept on of
t he soc a nat ur e of anguage but a so t o t he who e of h s
ph osoph ca and aest het c deas, n whose cor e es Mar x' s
concept on of t he soc o- h st or ca nat ur e of man. Th s s
f ar f r om t he t r ut h as s best shown by t he f act t hat a t hough
Lukcs accept s w t hout r eser vat on Pav ov' s phys o og ca
t heor y, he at t he ver y out set sub| ect s t o cr t c sm t he
t endency t o exam ne t he pr ob ems of t he secondar y s gna
syst em as abst r act ed f r om t he w der mp cat ons of soc a
pr act ce and t o t ake t as t he bas s of t he nt er pr et at on
of anguage: "Pav ov' s st at ement s must of cour se be a ways
under st ood and nt er pr et ed n t he sense of d a ect ca
mat er a sm. For however essent a Pav ov' s secondar y s gna
syst emmay be f r om t he po nt of v ew of d scr m nat ng
bet ween man and an ma , t s t r ue sense, and t s h gh y
f r u t f u s gn f cance w be man f est on y f , ke Enge s,
we suf f c ent y st r ess t he s mu t aneous r se of abour and
anguage, t he r ob| ect ve nsepar ab t y. Man' s " message" ,
wh ch s beyond t he spher e of t he an ma k ngdom, or g nat es
d r ect y n abour and unf o ds - d r ect y or nd r ect y, and
at er t hr ough a good dea of med at on - n cor r espondence
w t h t he deve opment of abour . " Fr om a cr t ca po nt of
v ew even mor e unamb guous s t he r emar k wh ch demur s aga nst
t he conf us on of psych c phenomena n man and an ma ( n f act ,
mage and concept n an ma s) : "Our ob| ect on, or r at her ,
our supp ement ar y pr oposa can be summar zed as f o ows:
"Fr e ch mssen d e Fest st e ungen Paw ows st et s mS nne
des d a ekt schen Mat er a smus auf gef asst und ausge egt
wer den. Denn so f undament a dessen zwe t es S gna syst em der
Spr ache f r d ese Abgr enzung zw schen Mensch und T er se n
mag, se nen w r k chen S nn und se ne ausg eb ge Fr ucht bar ke t
er h t es er st , wenn, w e be Enge s, auf das s mu t ane Ent -
st ehen, auf d e sach che Unt r ennbar ke t von Ar be t und
Spr ache das nt ge Gew cht ge egt w r d. Dass der Mensch
' et was zu sagen' hat , was | ense t s des Geb et s des T e-
r schen egt , ent st ammt d r ekt der Ar be t und ent f a t et
s ch - d r ekt und nd r ekt , spt er of t dur ch sehr v e e
Ver m t t ungen - n Zusammenhang m t der Ent w ck ung der
Ar be t . " ( Geor g Lukcs: Wer ke, Band 11. st het k, Te I .
D e E genar t des st het schen, 1, Ha bband. Neuw ed amRhe n:
Samm ung Lucht er hand, 196 3, p. 38. )
Pav ov s n t he r ght when st at ng t hat t he secondar y s g-
na syst em and act ua t hought n t er ms of concept s ar e n-
separ ab y nt er r e at ed, upon wh ch a sc ent f c t hought
s based. But he does not even h nt at t he nt er r e at on of
t he secondar y s gna syst em, speech, and abour . Pav ov s
never concer ned w t h h st or ca and genet c quest ons. He
s cont ent t o st at e t he nt er r e at on of t he deve opment of
man and speech. | . . . 1 The ack of t he genet c nk bet ween
abour and speech, s nce t s a ver y mpor t ant r r e a-
t on, b ur s t o some ext ent t he f act t hat t he secondar y
s gna syst em s a spec a human manner of appr ehens on and
7
expr ess on.
Lukcs' s ob| ect on s a t he mor e eg t mat e s nce
by exp or ng t he mechan sm of r ef ex act v t y Pav ov not
on y endeavour s t o exp a n t he phys o og ca component s of
speech and t hought , but he a so be eves t o have gr asped t he r
spec f c essence.
Kur z zusammengef asst sst s ch unser E nwand, besser gesagt
unser Er gnzungsvor sch ag, so f or mu er en: Paw ow st at u er t
r cht g den un sbar en Zusammenhang zw schen S gna syst em2
und Denken me gent chen, begr f f chen S nne a s Gr und age
e nes | eden w ssenschaf t chen Denkens. Es f eh t | edoch be
hm | ede Andeut ung dar ber , dass das S gna syst em 2, d e
Spr ache, m t der Ar be t zusammenhngt . Fr e ch geht Paw ow
n r gends auf Fr agen h st or sch- genet scher Ar t e n. Er be-
gngt s ch dam t , d e Tat sache des Zusammenhangs zw schen
Auf t r et en des Menschen und der Spr ache f est zust e en.
Das Feh en der genet schen Ver b ndung zw schen Ar be t una
Spr ache br ngt | edoch be der W cht gke t d eses Zusammenhangs
n d e Best mmung des S gna syst ems 2 a s spez f sch mensch-
che Auf f assungs- und Ausdr uckswe se e ne gew sse Ver schwom-
menhe t h ne n. " ( Geor g Lukcs: D e E genar t des st het schen.
2. Ha bband. p. 21. )
However , when exp a n ng t he nat ur e of t hese phenomena t
must be t aken nt o account t hat t hey ar e t he nt er or za-
t ons of t he spec f c human act v t y t hat const t ut es t he r
bas s bot h n a h st or co- genet c and n a st r uct ur a sense.
I n accor dance w t h t h s v ew, when descr b ng t he
essent a f eat ur es of anguage (as we as when d scuss ng
t he aest het c spher e as a who e) , Lukcs makes use of t he
pr nc p e t hat a phenomenon can be under st ood n t s ent r e
dept h on y f we cons der t he genes s and t he t endenc es of
deve opment of t he t ot a t y t o wh ch t he phenomenon n ques-
t on spec f ca y be ongs. That s why t her e ar e so numer ous
r ef er ences t o et hnogr aphy on t he pages devot ed t o t he d s-
cuss on of t he essent a f eat ur es of anguage. The r emar ks
on "pr m t ve anguages" ar e nt ended t o ust r at e t he dea
t hat t he pr oper t y t hat , accor d ng t o Lukcs, count s as t he
essent a f eat ur e of anguage and wh ch s some k nd of
"t wof o d mot on" , t hat s, "over com ng t he m t s of t he
act ua mmed acy by means of gener a zat on and t he r et r ans-
f or mat on of t he r esu t t hus ach eved nt o a new, mor e com-
pr ehens ve mmed acy of h gher power and bet t er d f f er ent a-
o
t on" , s at t he same t me t he aw of r ea h st or y, of t he
r ea deve opment of anguage. Thus t he pr ob emwh ch
submer ged w t h Pav ov ont o a mer e phys o og ca eve as-
cends nt o h st or ca d mens ons, not w t hst and ng t he f act t hat
t he dat a Lukcs c t es f r omLevy- Br uh and ot her s can har d y
be nt er pr et ed unamb guos y. "I f we obser ve t he anguage of
a pr m t ve peop e chosen at d scr et on, we sha r ea se
t hat t he r der vat on of wor ds s ncompar ab y c oser t o
O
"das dur ch Ver a geme ner ung er r e cht e ber w nden der
Schr anken der | ewe gen Unm t t e bar ke t und das Rck-
ver wande n des so Er r e cht en n e ne neue Unm t t e bar ke t
hher er Pot enz" ( Geor g Lukcs: D e E genar t des st het schen.
1. Ha bband p. 88. )
per cept on and f ar t her f r om concept t han our s, "
9
st at es
Lukcs on t he assumpt on t hat pr m t ve anguages ar e
capab e of nam ng sensua y concr et e ob| ect s on y and have
no means t o expr ess t he concept of genus. Now t he cons der a-
t ons t hat st ar t out f r om t he assumpt on t hat pr m t ve an-
guages have no concept s f or genus ascr be an exagger at ed
s gn f cance t o a s ng e aspect of anguage. To put t mor e
exact y, t hey compar e "c v zed" and "pr m t ve" anguages
f r om a s ng e aspect : on t he bas s of ex ca char act er s-
t cs. I t s doubt f u whet her t h s eads t o a cor r ect t ypo o-
gy. I nc dent a y, cons der at ons ke t he ones ment oned
above ser ved f or Lvy- Br uh as ar gument s f or t he | ust f cat on
of t he ex st ence of some "pr e og ca " pr m t ve ment a t y,
wh ch, as t wer e, shou d cor r espond t o an nf ant e eve
of t hought . Th s concept on quer es t he un ver sa t y of t he
bas c cour se of human t hought ( pr eva ent even among t he
var ous k nds of t he concr et e soc oh st or ca char act er st cs)
and, n t he ast ana ys s, t he un f or m t y of t he human spe-
c es, wh ch cont r but ed gr eat y t o t he eg t mat e cr t c sm
1 0
of st r uct ur a and f unct ona et hno ogy n t h s connect on.
As r egar ds our bas c pr ob em t s, however , f ar mor e m-
por t ant t o not e t hat t he f act s descr bed by Levy- Br uh do not
const t ut e conc us ve ev dence. Boas was a r eady ab e t o de-
monst r at e t hat t he examp es used t o ust r at e t hat t he
"concr et e" nat ur e of t he "pr m t ve anguages" r ad ca y
d f f er ent f r omEur opean anguages ar e not gener a y va d:
t her e ex st pr m t ve anguages wh ch, n sp t e of our
9
"Bet r acht et man d e Spr ache e nes be eb gen pr m t ven Vo ks,
so s eht man, dass hr e Wor t b dung unver g e ch ch wahr -
nehmungsnher , begr f f sf er ner st , a s d e unser e. " ( G. L. :
D e E genar t des st het schen. 1. Ha bband. p. 57. )
10
C1. Lv - St r auss: La sc ence du concr et . I n: La Pense
Sauvage. Par s: P on, 1962, pp. 4- 47.
LUKACS ' S I DEAS ON LANGUAGE 255
sc ent f c super st t ons, abound n abst r act t er ms wh ch
1 1
ar e a so used as expr ess ons of concept s f or genus.
Th s may we r a se doubt as t o t he we - f oundedness
of some of t he t heor et ca st at ement s on anguage n
Aest het cs but t does not exer t a f at a ef f ect on t he
eva uat on of t he subst ant a par t of Lukcs' s pos t on,
nor does t h nder , n some degr ee, t he acknow edgement of
t he concr et e ngu st c r e evance of t hese ver y st at ement s.
I n sum, Lukcs r egar ds t as t he gener a t r end n t he
deve opment of anguage t hat " ngu st c f or ms r ef ect ng
concr et e ob| ect s gr adua y d sappear f r om anguage and ar e
r ep aced by much mor e gener a common nouns. " He cont nues
t o say t hat f r omt h s t does not f o ow t hat " anguage oses
t he ab t y t o concr et e y des gnat e ever y concr et e ob| ect " ,
s nce " n our r e at on t o t he wor d sent ences acqu r e an
ncr eas ng s gn f cance" | , . | "t he comp cat ed synt act c
r e at ons of t he wor ds det er m ne t he r senses mor e and mor e
n t he concr et e cont ext s of t he r app cat on" , and "by
v r t ue of t he r e at ons of t he wor ds ar r anged n sent ences
mor e and mor e soph st cat ed ngu st c dev ces come nt o
be ng f or t he pur pose of demonst r at ng concr et e ob| ect ve
1 2
r e at ons. " M n ma y one of t he pr esuppos t ons of t hese
1 1
Fr . Boas: Handbook of Amer can I nd an Languages. Par t 1.
Bu et n 40, Wash ngt on, D. C. : Bur eau of Amer can Et hno ogy,
1911, p. 657.
1 2
". . . dass der ar t ge, Konkr et he t en w eder sp ege nde Spr ach-
f or men mmer mehr aus der Spr ache ver schw nden, um den v e
a geme ner en Gat t ungswr t er n den P at z zu ber assen. " ( G. L. :
D e E genar t des st het schen 1. Ha bband p. 88. ) "Muss aber
dadur ch d e Fh gke t der Spr ache, | eden konkr et en Gegenst and
konkr et zu beze chnen, unm ssver st nd ch zu machen, ver or en
gehen?" ( p. 89. ) "Man ver gesse aber n cht , dass n unser er
spr ach chen Bez ehung zur W r k chke t der Sat z e ne mmer
gr sser e Bedeut ung er h t , dass komp z er t e synt akt sche
Ver b ndungen der Wor t e mmer st r ker ( f oot not e 12 cont nued)
st at ement s s f a se, v z. , t hat at t he ear er st ages of
anguage deve opment , t hus n pr m t ve anguages, sent ences
had ess s gn f cance and t hey t ur ned nt o be ng a mor e and
mor e essent a e ement of ngu st c act v t y ' as t wer e'
s mu t aneous y w t h t he ec pse of t he wor ds hav ng concr et e
mean ng.
Anot her po nt on wh ch I d sagr ee w t h Lukcs s t hat
t he ab t y t o concr et e y des gnat e ob| ect s was pr ev ous y
based on t he semant c pr oper t es of wor ds (on t he concr et e
per cept ua nat ur e of t he r mean ng) . I n h s po em c w t h
Locke, Le bn z ( whom, nc dent a y, Lukcs h mse f c t es)
demonst r at ed t hat wor ds can a pr or be not h ng but gener a .
"Gener a expr ess ons" ar e not nc dent a f act s of anguage
or f act s occur r ng mer e y at cer t a n st ages of h st or ca
deve opment , or - as Le bn z put s t - "ser ve not on y f or
t he per f ect on of anguage, but t hey ar e nd spensab e f or
t s essent a st r uct ur e. " I t s t hus og ca y mposs b e
f or wor ds t aken n t hemse ves t o r e at e t o nd v dua s.
I n Le bn z' s par ance "par t cu ar t h ngs" can be spoken of
on t h s eve on y f "spec es ( og ca y) nf mas" ar e
1 3
under st ood by t hem. At t he same t me, t shou d be made
c ear t hat sent ence const r uct on s an a pr or pr oper t y of
ngu st c avt v t y: man speaks n sent ences at what ever
st age of deve opment . Gr ant ng t hat anguage has a gener a
t r end of deve opment , t h s comes t o t he f or e not n t he
( f oot not e 12 cont nued) hr en S nn mkonkr et en Anwendungs-
zusammenhang best mmt , dass s ch mmer ver f e ner t e Spr ach-
m t t e ausb den, umkonkr et e Gegenst andsbez ehungen dur ch
das Ver h t n s der Wor t e zue nander mSat ze s nnf g
zu machen. " ( p. 89. )
13
"Les t er mes gnr aux ne ser vent pas seu ement a per f ec-
t on des angues, ma s meme s sont ncessa r es pour eur
const t ut on essent e e. " ( Le bn z: Nouveaux Essa s sur
1' ent endement huma n. I I I . 1. 3. God. Gu . Le bn t Oper a
Ph osoph ca. Par s Pr or . Ed. | . E. Er dmann. MDCCCXL. p. 297. )
ncr ease of t he s gn f cance of sent ences but n t he n-
cr eas ng comp cat on of sent ence st r uct ur e, and Lukcs' s
st at ement s quot ed above can be accept ed on y f t h s s
meant by t hem. A t hat s, however , a psycho og ca r at her
t han a ngu st c pr ob em.
Desp t e t he r pr ob emat c nat ur e, n a r oundabout way
Lukcs' s st at ement s ar e mean ngf u and t hat s why t hey do
have sc ent f c r e evance. Not e t hat what Lukcs t ack es s
t he pr ob em of r ef er ence and s ngu ar descr pt on. I n t h s
connect on he at t a ns, w t h t he nf or ma means of ph oso-
ph ca ana ys s, t he same r esu t s wh ch can be ach eved
t hr ough a og ca and gr ammat ca ana ys s of ngu st c
st r uct ur es. On h s v ew r ef er ence ( t he f unct on of des gnat -
ng concr et e ob| ect s) s not a separ at e r e at onsh p bet ween
t he s gn and t he s gn f ed but a f unct on of t he r e at ons
w t h n t he sent ence. A t hough expr ess ons ar e a pr or gen-
er a , nd v dua ob| ect s can be gr asped by ngu st c means,
wh ch ar e pr ov ded f or by synt ax: among t he cond t ons of
s ngu ar descr pt on we f nd r u es wh ch ar e c ear y synt act c.
To put t mor e gener a : t he r e at onsh p of concr et e r ea t y
and anguage s not on y a semant c but a so a synt act c
pr ob em. "On y an advanced synt ax can des gnat e nd v dua t y
1 4
by means of t he ngu st c r epr oduct on of ost ens on, "
c a ms Lukcs n h s Ont o ogy.
I t s t r v a , t hough per haps not need ess, t o r eca
t hat t he t heor y of anguage n Aest het cs s r e at ed t o t he
t heor y of ever yday t h nk ng. Lukcs h mse f ca s at t ent on
t o t he nher ent r e at onsh p bet ween t he t wo pr ob ems: "The
pecu ar t es of ever yday t h nk ng cou d per haps be expr essed
1 4
"Er st d e ent w cke t e Synt ax st mst ande, d e E nze he t
n der spr ach chen Repr odukt on des s nn chen H nwe ses
zu beze chnen. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e des gese schaf t chen
Se ns. Repr odukt on. Manuskr pt , p. 87. Ar ch v Lukcs, Buda-
pest )
most successf u y f speech wer e sub| ect ed t o a
1 5
t hor ough ana ys s f r omt h s spec f c ang e. " The cent r a
cor e of t he pr ob ems of Aest het cs s t hus occup ed by
or d nar y anguage and t h s s an mpor t ant f act . I f a ph oso-
phy of anguage s v ab e at a t can set t s f oot at
not h ng but or d nar y anguage, f or - as s shown by Lukcs
h mse f - t he s gn syst ems car r y ng h gher ment a ob| ect v za-
t ons emer ge f r om t he t endenc es ext ant n or d nar y anguage;
s m ar y, t hese h gher ment a ob| ect v zat ons ar e t hemse ves
bu t upon t he gener a f oundat on of ever yday f e and ever y-
day t h nk ng n or der t o const ant y enr ch t h s f oundat on
w t h t he r r esu t s.
I f by abst r act on we cons der so e y t he sub| ect of
t he d scuss on, p ac ng or d nar y anguage n such a cent r a
pos t on may r e at e Lukcs' s t heor y of anguage t o or d nar y
anguage ph osophy, even f ot her w se Lukcs s opposed t o
t hose v ews of t he ana yt ca ph osopher s t hat m t t he
poss b t es and ob| ect ves as r egar ds t he "We t anschauung"
of ph osophy. Not ce t hat t he pos t on of ana yt ca ph oso-
pher s, accor d ng t o wh ch mpor t ant og ca d st nct ons can
be d scover ed by exp or ng t he r u es of t he use of wor ds and
by do ng t h s we may get c oser t o under st and ng t he con-
cept ua f r ames det er m n ng t hought , has ed t o t he e abor at on
of pr ocedur es t hat cannot be neg ect ed by Mar x sm e t her .
However , Lukcs' s examp e n t h s connect on s a war n ng t o
t he ef f ect t hat wh e most of t he ana yt ca ph osopher s
st op shor t of t he descr pt on of t he use of nd v dua wor ds
or t he og ca r e at ons of nd v dua ngu st c sect or s
and accept t hese as et er na y f xed and g ven, as t he u t -
mat e and una t er ab e f r ame of our f e and t hought , Mar x sm
1 5
"V e e cht amp ast schst en kme d e E genar t des A t ags-
denkens zumAusdr uck, wenn man d e Spr ache von d esembe-
sonder en St andpunkt e ner e ngehenden Ana yse unt er wor f en
wr de. " ( G. L. : D e E genar t des st h. 1. Ha bband. p. 57. )
LUKACS'S I DEAS ON LANGUAGE 259
cannot d spense w t h t he nt er pr et at on of anguage as an
ent r et y n h st or ca pr ocess or t he st udy of t he comp -
cat ed med at ng syst em of ot her f or ms of expr ess on based
upon or d nar y anguage. Or d nar y anguage s t he st ar t ng
po nt of t he nvest gat on, but t s on y a st ar t ng po nt .
I t s wor t h wh e t o pay heed t o a f ew po nt s w t h n
Lukcs' s descr pt on of or d nar y anguage, espec a y t o t he
d a ect ca cont r ad ct on wh ch, accor d ng t o Aest het cs, s
t he cent r a or gan z ng pr nc p e of t he pr ob ems ar s ng her e.
One of t he aspect s of t h s cont r ad ct on s t hat wh e an-
guage s t he subst ant a pr oper t y of m nd ("the pr act ca
m nd t se f " ) , as r egar ds t s f unct on ng, t he movement of
t s st r uct ur es, t s unconsc ous. Th s po nt s expr essed by
Lukcs n anot her way: by means of t he cat egor y of " med at on" ,
but ow ng pr ec se y t o t h s cat egor y he goes beyond a s mp e
descr pt on of t he par adox n quest on: "peop e necessar y
r e at e t o speech mmed at e y, t hough as r egar ds t s nat ur e t
1 fl
s a syst em of mor e and mor e comp cat ed med at ons. " Thr ough
such an app cat on of t he cat egor y of med at on t he pr ob em
of anguage s p aced n t he ght of t he compr ehens ve pr oper -
t es of human f e act v t y. Accor d ng t o t h s, any new ach ev-
ement nvo ves a h gher comp cat on of det er m nat ons and a
f ur t her ar t cu at on of t he soc a cond t ons of f e, and
at t he same t me t becomes a " nat ur a " , spont aneous y man f est
e ement of act v t y and t hought ext r eme y s mp f y ng t he
r e at ons of peop e t o t he wor d and one anot her . I t s her e
t hat t he sour ce of t he f ur t her aspect s of t he d a ect ca
cont r ad ct on st r essed by Lukcs es: t s t he spont aneous
". . . s e s ch zur Spr ache - obwoh d ese hr emWesen nach
e n Syst emvon mmer komp z er t er en Ver m t t ungen st - not -
wend g unm t t e bar ver ha t en. " ( G. L. : D e E genar t des
st het schen. 1. Ha bband. p. 59. )
nat ur a ness of anguage t hat makes ava ab e a t hat s not
mmed at e y g ven t o us, and t he ver y same spont aneous
ava ab t y hamper s t he "unb assed t ake- n" of t he wor d.
Th s ast r emar k r ef er s t o a pr ob emwh ch s not exam ned
by Lukcs n det a , but t o wh ch he undoubt ed y ascr bes due
s gn f cance. I t can be summar zed as f o ows: t he st r uct ur es
of anguage nf uence t he cour se of cogn t on n a def n t e
d r ect on. Anot her moment um or r at her consequence of t he same
cont r ad ct on s t he t wo cont r ar y t endenc es nf uenc ng t he
who e dynam cs of or d nar y anguage, wh ch ar e ca ed by
Lukcs, n a met aphor ca phr ase, t hough r at her accur at e y,
"t he t endenc es t owar ds r g d t y and p ast c t y. "
Ment on ng t hese t wo t endenc es uncover s a compr ehens ve
set of pr ob ems t hat be ong t o t he spher e of var ous d s-
c p nes and de neat e t he cor e of a ph osoph ca t heor y of
anguage. The f o ow ng quest on ar ses at t h s po nt : nso-
f ar as t hought ndeed pr esupposes anguage and nsof ar as
t he st r uct ur es of t he d f f er ent human anguages ndeed det er -
m ne t hought , how s t he un ver sa t y of cogn t on poss b e?
I n answer ng t he quest on much can be ga ned f r om a st udy of
ngu st c pr oduct v t y. Lukcs s not concer ned w t h t he
ngu st c or t echn ca s de of t he quest on but t amount s
t o no exagger at on t o say t hat t he s gn f cance of t he con-
cept on of anguage n Aest het cs cons st s n st r ess ng t he
t endenc es ment oned above. And gr asp ng t hese t endenc es
f xes a t e bet ween t he pr ob ems of or d nar y anguage, on t he
one hand, and t hose of t he s gn syst ems car r y ng h gher ob-
| ect v zat ons: sc ent f c and ar t st c anguage, on t he
ot her . I t s t o be expect ed on t he bas s of t he d scuss on
out ned n t he f or ego ng t hat a number of mpor t ant cat e-
gor es n Lukcs' s Aest het cs ar e connect ed t o cons der at ons
of t he t heor y of anguage and t hat - conver se y - cer t a n
cat egor es w nduce quest ons concer n ng t he t heor y of
anguage. For examp e, t h s s t he case w t h t he d f f er ent a-
t on bet ween "who e man" and "t he who e of man" ("Das
Menschenganze") or w t h t he nt er pr et at on of "unconsc ous".
However , w t h n t he pr ob ems of t he t heor y of anguage n
Aest het cs, t he cent r a p ace s undoubt ed y occup ed by t he
hypot hes s of t he "pr mar y s gna syst em".
I nc dent a y, | udg ng f r omt he v ewpo nt of psycho ogy
t he hypot hes s s r at her doubt f u . Thus, t he on y sens b e
quest on t o ask s what pr ob ems t he nt r oduct on of t he con-
cept of t he pr mar y s gna syst emwou d have been evoked
t o so ve and whet her t he phenomena Lukcs w shes t o account
f or by means of t h s concept ar e ndeed mpor t ant f r om t he
po nt of v ew of our gener a pr ob em of anguage. I n t h s case,
Lukcs' s hypot hes s must by a means be r egar ded as a bas s
f or d scuss on and a concept on wor t hy of f ur t her cont emp a-
t on even f ot her w se t ought t o be d scar ded as a sc ent f c
exp anat on. I t s r easonab e t o assume t hat at er on Lukcs
. h mse f cons der ed h s deas about t he pr mar y s gna syst em
n a s m ar way. I n t he chapt er on r epr oduct on n Ont o ogy
we f nd t he f o ow ng: "Subt et y ncr eases n speech and n
st en ng, and n my Aest het cs I ca ed t t he spher e of t he
know edge of man ( t he cor r ect know edge of t he nd v dua
par t ner ) and I used t he expr ess on ' pr mar y s gna syst em
1
1 7
t o denot e t s or gan. " Thus not even Lukcs c a ms t hat t h s
concept descr bes some k nd of psych c r ea t y, r at her he
ho ds t t o be t he name of a pr ob em, a met aphor ca c r cum-
ocut on of a set of phenomena.
Par adox ca y, as ear y as n Aest het cs t he hypot hes s
of t he pr mar y s gna syst em s expounded n a way wh ch
goes beyond a s mp e e abor at on of Pav ov' s doct r nes.
1 7
"Es ent st eht auch mSpr echen und Zuhr en e ne zunehmende
Nuanc er ung, d e ch n me ner Aest het k a s Geb et der
Menschenkennt n s ( r cht ge Kennt n s des nd v due en Par t -
ner s) beschr eben und a s der en Or gan ch dor t das S gna -
syst em 1' beze chnet habe. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e. . . p. 92)
Mor eover , t hough Lukcs modest y speaks of a "supp ement ar y
pr oposa " , he c ear y st ar t s f r om t he r ecogn t on of t he
weakness of t he exp anat or y power of Pav ov' s r ef ex t heor y
w t h r espect t o t he phenomena he was ma n y nt er est ed n.
For t he d v s on accor d ng t o, t he pa r ed cat egor es of t he
pr mar y and t he secondar y s gna syst ems cannot compr se t he
t ot a t y of spec f c human ut t er ances. Accor d ng t o t he
og c of t h s d v s on, any r esponse t hat cannot at a or
can on y def ect ve y be ver ba zed count s as a s mp e con-
d t oned r ef ex; consequent y, t he spec f c human nat ur e of
t he spec f c psych c qua t y nher ent n t hese r esponses
w become nappr ehens b e. The f act t hat t he pr mar y
s gna syst em s cr eat ed t o f n t hat b ank space
s best ev denced by Lukcs' s uc d cr t ca comment s, one
of wh ch w be quot ed be ow. Pav ov r ecount s a case of
aphas a, a pat ent who comp et e y ost h s ab t y t o speak
af t er a f t of ep epsy but cou d make h mse f under st ood
by means of dr aw ngs. Pav ov | udges t he case t o be an examp e
of a poss b e separ at on of t he pr mar y s gna syst em
f r omt he secondar y. The assessment shows t hat Pav ov cons der s
nonver ba messages as t he oper at on of t he pr mar y s gna
syst em. He seems t o assume a so t hat t he secondar y s gna
syst em s s mp y added t o t he f r st n man, t hat s, he
does not ook upon t he t wo p anes of s gna s as an or gan c
who e w t h n wh ch t he ower p ane s r ender ed under t he
h gher one and under goes a subst ant a st r uct ur a change
compar ed t o t he r ef ex act v t y n an ma s. Lukcs unequ -
voca y asser t s t he doubt f u ness of t h s v ew: "The dr aw ng
of an ob| ect - n cont r ad ct on t o Pav ov - can n no w se
be conce ved as cond t oned r ef ex. I f t he wor d ' t r ee' must
be nt er pr et ed as a s gna of s gna s, t hen t he t r ee dr awn
n t he same manner cont a ns t he gener a z ng appr ehens on of
t he t r ee mmed at e y per ce ved wh ch n t s mmed acy e c t s
263
uncond t oned or cond t oned r ef exes. "
I t shou d be c ear f r omt he examp es t hat Lukcs' s
hypot hes s had a number of | ust f ab e mot ves and t he con-
s der at ons under y ng t have cont r but ed t o an over a
spec f cat on of t he pr ob em of anguage . Th s spec f cat on
t akes nt o account not on y a f ew consp cuous f or ms of n-
gu st c act v t y but s based on a compr ehens ve v ew of t he
r e evant phenomena. Today, however , t hese phenomena can be
account ed f or f ar mor e successf u y by means of t he concep-
t ua appar at us of ngu st cs ( f or nst ance, by demonst r at ng
t he cod ng of par a ngu st c e ement s) , t he dev ces of com-
mun cat on t heor y, psycho- and soc o ngu st cs, or t he
cr eat on of a gener a sem ot c f r amewor k.
Wh e ana ys ng t he d a ect cs of t he consc ous and un-
consc ous, Lukcs po nt s out t hat n t he dynam c st r uct ur e
of or d nar y anguage t he most gener a char act er st cs of
1 9
human pr act ce and soc a deve opment ar e expr essed. I n
t h s r espect anguage s not on y a syst em of s gns, an ex-
t er na med at or of nt er na psych c cont ent s but s t he
cat egor y of pr act ce n a def n t e sense.
Mar x st wor ks on anguage have not yet r a sed t he
quest on t o what ext ent t h s nf uences t he f or ma r epr esen-
t at on of anguage. W t h no r espect t o whet her and t o what
ext ent Lukcs' s ana yses can be made t o cor r espond t o t he
f or ma mode s of anguage, t he t heor et ca connect on bet ween
1 8
"Das Ze chen e nes Gegenst andes kann - mGegensat z zu
Paw ow - unt er ke nen Umst nden a s e nf acher bed ngt er Ref ex
auf gef asst wer den. Wenn das Wor t Baum a s S gna von S gna en
ausge egt wer den muss, so ent h t e n geze chnet er Baum ebenso
e ne ver a geme ner nde Fassung des unm t t e bar wahr genommenen
Baums, der n se ner Unm t t e bar ke t e nen unbed ngt en or der
bed ngt en Ref ex aus st . " ( G. L. : D e E genar t des st he-
t schen. 2. Ha bband p. 85. )
1 9
G. L. : D e E genar t des st het schen. 1. Ha bband, p. 61.
anguage and pr act ce mar ks t he po nt wh ch separ at es t he
Mar x st concept on of anguage f r om a t r ad t ona pos -
t ons. Th s s wher e Ont o ogy t akes up t he t hr ead of ana -
ys s: "Such an ana ys s of t he cont nu t y of soc a ex st ence
w necessar y ead us t o anguage as an mpor t ant comp ex
20
deve oped w t h n t h s comp ex of soc a ex st ence. " Thus,
t he pr ob em of anguage s r a sed by t he ana ys s of soc a
ex st ence t se f , and anguage as such must be const r ued as
a comp ex w t h n soc a ex st ence, one connect ed t o t he spher e
of soc a ex st ence. Th s g ves r se t o t he most gener a def n -
t on of anguage: " | anguage s | t he or gan and med um of t he
21
cont nu t y r ea zed n soc a ex st ence. " However s mp e
and se f - ev dent t h s def n t on may be, assum ng t s cent r a
pos t on n t he t heor y sheds new ght upon t he who e pr ob em
of anguage. For t he t r ad t on of ngu st cs and ph osophy
has p aced t he def n t on of anguage as t he nst r ument of
t hought and commun cat on n t he cent r e. Th s def n t on, no
doubt , s cor r ect , t hough t needs f ur t her e abor at on s nce
t does not cont a n, not even n an abst r act manner , r ef er -
ences t o soc a needs deve oped t hr ough h st or y wh ch an-
guage must n t he f r st p ace sat sf y. Now, n Lukacs' s op n on,
ever y k nd of exp anat on f or anguage pr esupposes t he know-
edge of t hese needs, wh ch emer ged f r om t he most gener a
st r uct ur e of soc a ex st ence. Log ca y, t he cat egor y of
r epr oduct on a ows f or a det a ed account of t hese pr ob ems.
20
"D ese Ana yse der Kont nu t t mgese schaf t chen Se n
f hr t not wend g zur Spr ache a s zu e nemw cht gen Komp ex
nner ha b d eser Komp ex t t des gese schaf t chen Se ns. "
( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 79. )
21
"Or gan und Med um der Kont nu t t m gese schaf t chen
Se n" ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 80. )
265
Such a change n t he og c of t he quest on has t he
consequence t hat t he t heor y of t he nat ur e and genes s of an-
guage must f or m a un f ed t heor y at east on t he most gener a
eve , and t h s must be t hought of as a gener a sem ot c
f r amewor k wh ch pr ov des an out ook on t he pr ob ems of an ma
commun cat on a ongs de w t h human commun cat on.
What was sa d n t he f or ego ng a so makes t poss b e
f or t he s gn f cance of t he r e at onsh p of abour and an-
guage t o be pr esent ed n a mor e compr ehens ve way. Labour s
not on y t he dr v ng f or ce of t he genes s of anguage but a so
t he exp anat or y pr nc p e f or t he st r uct ur a char act er st cs
of anguage. I n ot her wor ds, what shou d be not ed n Lukcs' s
wor k s not s mp y t hat t he h st or ca occur r ence of abour
account s f or t he h st or ca occur r ence of anguage but t hat
t he st r uct ur es of anguage cont nua y embed nt o t he st r uc-
t ur a r e at ons of t he abour pr ocess. Not e n t h s connec-
t on Lukcs' s r emar k t hat t he t endency t owar ds "spec es be ng"
( "Gat t ungswesen") , wh ch ob| ect ve y emer ges f r om t he st r uc-
t ur e of abour , "deve ops f ur t her " n anguage. That s, s nce
"t he most or d nar y wor ds expr ess t he gener a t y of t he ob| ect ,
t he genus or t he spec es, and not t he nd v dua nst ance,
. . . t he obj ect i ve i nt ent i on of l anguage i s di r ect ed ab ovo
t o t he r egul ar i t y of t he subj ect , t o t he obj ect i vi t y of t he
22
obj ect desi gnat ed by i t . " I nci dent al l y, i t i s wor t h not i ci ng
t hat cont r ar y t o some of hi s ear l i er r emar ks Lukcs r egar ds
t he st r v ng f or gener a t y and t he ob| ect v t y of t he ob| ect
as an ab ovo t endency of anguage. That " t s ngu st ca -
y mposs b e t o f nd a wor d t hat def nes unamb guous y t he
22
". . . | edes e nf achst e, a t g chst e Wor t st et s d e A ge-
me nhe t des Gegenst andes ausdr ckt , d e Gat t ung, d e Ar t ,
n cht das E nze exemp ar . . . "; ". . . st n der Spr ache von
Anf ang an e ne ob| ekt ve I nt ent on auf d e Geset zmss gke t
des Sub| ekt s, auf d e Ob| ekt v t t mvon hr beze chnet en
Gegenst and w r ksam. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 87. )
nd v dua t y of some ob| ect " s t ant amount t o say ng
t hat t s a og ca pr oper t y of anguage ndependent of
f act ua and h st or ca c r cumst ances. Accor d ng t o Le bn z' s
account , nd v dua t y can be appr oached but cannot be
at t a ned t hr ough t he most concr et e poss b e des gnat on of
t he spec es. Thus par t cu ar t y w ser ve as t he spec a
spher e of t he ngu st c expr ess on endeavour ng t o gr asp
nd v dua t y. As has been shown, t he act of r ef er r ng, n
wh ch concr et e ob| ect s ar e r ef er r ed t o and wh ch nvo ves
t he app cat on of pr oper names or s ngu ar descr pt ons, s
a f unct on not of t he concr et eness of mean ngs but of "ad-
vanced synt ax".
The connect on of t he st r uct ur a char act er st cs of
anguage and t he bas c st r uct ur e of abour s w t h Lukcs
not equ va ent t o st at ng some k nd of somor ph c cor r es-
pondence. Th s must be made c ear , s nce n t he r ecent t -
er at ur e of sem ot cs one s ke y t o come acr oss cer t a n
t r ends t o "shor t c r cu t ng" t he r e at onsh p of abour and
anguage: t hey subsume even t he concr et e cat egor es of n-
gu st cs under t he po t co- econom c cat egor y of abour ,
wh ch may we ead t o " abour " ef t as a met aphor exp a n ng
ever yt h ng and not h ng at t he same t me. However , bes des
t he st r uct ur a nt er r e at ons shown n t h s cont ext , Lukcs
st r esses a so t he aut onomy of anguage, wh ch s expr essed
( n t he phr aseo ogy of h s cat egor es) by st at ng t he
essent a d f f er ence bet ween abour and anguage w t h r espect
t o t he or ent at on t owar ds "spec es be ng" as we as es-
t ab sh ng t he r e at onsh p of t he nd v dua and t he gener a .
The bas s of t he necessar y gener a t y of anguage s t he f act
t hat pr or t o any act of cogn t on abour s t se f an ob-
| ect ve pr ocess of gener a zat on. I n abour , however , what ever
23
". . . | a dass es spr ach ch e nf ach unmg ch st , f r d e
E nze he t r gende nes Gegenst andes e n d eses e ndeut g
best mmendes Wor t zu f nden. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 87. )
267
s mer e y par t cu ar s e m nat ed so t hat t he "ob| ect ve y
opt ma " , t he "spec es be ng" shou d have pr ef er ence, wher eas,
accor d ng t o t he above, anguage must have t he t endency t o
nd v dua zat on bes des ( and on t he st r engt h of ) gener a za-
t on. Mor eover , "t he mor e t he or g na commun t y of pur e y
par t cu ar nd v dua s changes t o a commun t y of per sona -
t es, t he mor e ngu st c expr ess on must t end t o nd v dua -
24
ze.
When comment ng on t h s st at ement , we can ca at t en-
t on t o an nt er est ng met hodo og ca pr nc p e. Lukcs c a-
r f es t he og ca pr oper t es of anguage, such as t he ab t y
t o expr ess t he gener a and t he nd v dua , st ar t ng f r omt he
soc a r e at ons of peop e and t he r commun t es, t hus he s
not cont ent t o emphas ze mer e y cogn t ve aspect s. Anot her
po nt of mpor t ance as r egar ds t he pr ob em t ouched upon her e
s t hat t he st r uct ur a det er m nat on of anguage by abour ,
on t he one hand, and t he aut onomy of t he og ca st r uct ur e
of anguage, on t he ot her , can be under st ood f r om t he t e e-
o ogy of abour .
Yet t h s s not t ant amount t o exp a n ng t he nat ur e
and genes s of anguage on t he bas s of t e eo ogy. A t hat
s at st ake her e s mer e y t hat t he ob| ect ve t e eo og ca
st r uct ur e nher ent n abour , wh ch s a so t he bas s of
a sub| ect ve t e eo ogy, cr eat es t he "commun cat ve cont ent "
f or man. | ust as abour and t he d v s on of abour ar e a
pr or s mu t aneous ( t hat s, t he d v s on of t he act v t y
s genet ca y f xed) , so ar e t he cr eat on of a r ea
t e eo og ca r e at ons and t he ar t cu at on of t he g oba
24
"| e mehr s ch d e ur spr ng che Geme nschaf t aus b oss
par t ku ar en E nze nen s ch zu der von I nd v dua t t en, von
Per sn chke t en ent w cke t , dest o mehr muss der spr ach che
Ausdr uck auch se ner se t s auf I nd v dua s er ung ger cht et
wer den. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 9 2. )
ob| ect ve of t he t ot a act v t y s mu t aneous. Th s s how
t he pr oper t y of a an ma spec es d s nt egr at es t he pr op-
er t y t hat t he member s of a spec es a "know" t he same, or ,
n Lukacs' s wor ds, t he r epr oduct on of t he spec es t akes
p ace w t h n a wor d "known" n t he same way. The ar t cu a-
t on of t he ob| ect ves ent a s t he at t a nab t y of t he
u t mat e and g oba ob| ect ve of co ect ve act v t y on y
t hr ough t he consc ous or unconsc ous nt er act on of peop e.
That s what t he f o ow ng def n t on means: "Or gn a y
anguage s a means t o ef f ect cer t a n t e eo og ca suppos -
t ons ( "t e eo og sche Set zungen") whose a m s t o nduce
25
ot her peop e t o make cer t a n t e eo og ca suppos t ons. "
Reca t hat t does not f o ow f r omLukacs' s t hes s t hat
t e eo ogy becomes abso ut e, or t s s gn f cance exagger at ed
n an dea st manner . For h s st at ement s do not nc ude t he
c a m t hat anguage as t he pr oduct of t he t e eo ogy of abour
and t he means of t he execut on of t he t e eo ogy of abour s
n any sense a r esu t of consc ous cr eat on and a pr or
set t ng of ob| ect ves. As was shown above, t he who e of Lukacs' s
exp anat on of anguage s f oot ed on d f f er ent gr ounds. The
most mpor t ant of t s mor a s t he necess t y t o under st and
anguage as a cat egor y of ex st ence bef or e any nt er pr et at on
of t as a cat egor y of soc a and nd v dua consc ousness.
Even f Lukacs' s ana yses do not suppor t our wor k n t he
gr ammat co- og ca descr pt on of t he f or ma char act er st cs
of anguage and even f some of t he det a s of Lukacs' s
t heor y may we be cr t c zed n t he ght of ant hr opo ogy
and f or ma t heor es of anguage, t he above st at ement can be
over ooked by noone who nt ends t o f nd a p ace f or t he ssue
of anguage among t he pr ob ems of Mar x sm.
25
"s e st ur spr ng ch das gese schaf t che I nst r ument ,
| ene t e eo og schen Set zungen zur Ge t ung zu br ngen, d e
das Z e haben, ander e Menschen zu best mmt en t e eo og schen
Zet zungen anzu e t en. " ( G. L. : Zur Ont o og e . . . p. 90. )
THE REI NCARNATI ON OF RAI SI NG
(or how t o r a se NPs w t hout a r a s ng r u e)
I st van Kenese
0. For some t has been cons der ed an und sput ed f act
t hat t r ace t heor y s ncompat b e w t h Sub| ect - t o- Ob| ect
r a s ng r u es. Ev dence n suppor t of Ra s ng has been c a m-
ed t o quer y t he t enab t y of t r ace t heor y on t he one hand,
and, on t he ot her , t r ace t heor st s have ar gued f r omt he be-
g nn ng t hat t her e ar e met at heor et ca as we as emp r ca
r easons why Ra s ng shou d be ann h at ed. However , r ecent
mod f cat ons n t r ace t heor y have had cons der ab e mpact
on t he or g na ar gument s aga nst Ra s ng; t h s paper w
t r y t o show t hat Sub| ect - t o- Ob| ect Ra s ng s now r ead y r e-
conc ab e w t h t r ace t heor y s nce t he ar gument at on used t o
r ef ut e t has co apsed ow ng t o mod f cat ons by t s ver y
pr oponent s n t he meant me.
1. Tr ace t heor y made t s f r st appear ance n t he cont ext of
ef f or t s t o show t he un ver sa t y of cer t a n const r a nt s on
*Th s s a s ght y r ev sed sect on f r ommy d sser t at on Tr ace
t heor y and r e at ve c auses ( 1978) , wher e t he pr oposa s men-
t oned her e, such as t hose concer n ng wh Movement and f t er s,
ar e d scussed and cr t c zed at some engt h.
t he app cat on of t r ansf or m. at ons ( Chomsky 1973) . Ther e wer e
t hr ee t r ansf or mat ons nvo ved: NP Movement , wh Movement , and
each Movement , and t he doma n of t he r oper at on was t he cy-
c c nodes . Of t he t hr ee t r ansf or mat ons each Movement w
be t he east nt er est ng s nce t has been dr opped f r om t he
gr ammar . Th s r u e was meant t o br ng nt o cor r e at on sen-
t ences of t he t ype of ( 1- 2) :
( 1) ( a) They each ke t he ot her s.
( b) They each appear ed t o | ohn t o ke t he ot her s.
( 2) ( a) They ke each ot her .
( b) They appear ed t o | ohn t o ke each ot her ,
wh ch wer e r egar ded as synonymous pa r w se.
But t was mor e n accor dance w t h t he gener a out ne
of t he t heor y t o const r ue each ot her as base gener at ed ( ke
r ef ex ves, wh ch show an amaz ng synt act c s m ar t y t o
each ot her ) , and t was a so demonst r at ed t hat t he r u e of
nt er pr et at on app y ng t o ot her ( s) s not par t of sent ence
gr ammar ( cf . Chomsky 19 73: 254; Chomsky 1976: 18f f ; Dougher t y
1974) .
NP Movement s an oper at on mov ng t he const t uent s of
a noun phr ase of a pr oper f act or zat on nt o anot her NP node
f ed by e_, t he t er m na dent t y e ement ( . e. Emonds ' 1970
dummy node on one nt er pr et at on; f or t he ot her see be ow) .
Th s t r ansf or mat on pr ov des f or Pass ve ( n bot h sent ences
and noun phr ases) and var ous k nds of pr omot on r u es or
Ra s ng. To ust r at e t he ef f ect of NP Movement cons der ( 3)
and ( 4) :
( 3) ( _) _ e seems J ohn I t o know t he secr et
( b) J ohnl seems [
Np
e 1 t o know t he secr et 1
wher e el i n ( 3b) i s t he t r ace of t he moved NP J ohn. ( To
Not e t hat t he synt act i cal i dent i t y of dummy NPs and t r ace i s
t he devi ce whi ch makes i t possi bl e f or NP Pr eposi ng t o appl y
i n passi vi zat i on.
THE REI NCARNATI ON OF RAI SI NG 271
avo d conf us on NP w be used f or t he dummy NP and n gen-
er a t he cat egor a symbo f or t he dummy cat egor y, and t f or
t r aces. )
( 4) ( a) NP s t ough f or us |- f or | |g PRO t o beat
John
NP ] ]
( b) | ohn s t ough f or us k | f or | | PRO t o beat t | |
wher e t_ s t he t r ace of t he NP | ohn and PRO s best t o con-
s der f or t he t me be ng as a pr onom na e ement nser t ed n-
t o deep st r uct ur e and ass gned cont r o by r u es of nt er pr et a-
t on.
The t h r d ma| or t r ansf or mat on, wh Movement , af f ect s
quest on wor ds and r e at ve pr onouns or phr ases cont a n ng
t hem ( n shor t , wh- phr as es ) , and moves t hem nt o c ause- n -
t a pos t on, . e. , nt o t he COMP node, as s shown n ( 5)
and ( 6) :
( 5) ( a) | ohn wonder ed L |
COM
p
N P +WH
| |
s
Pet er k ssed who| |
( b) | ohn wonder ed |
____
wn o
+WH| | Pet er k ssed t | |
( 6) ( a) |
Np
t he g r |
^
0
NP - WH ] ^Pet er ki ssed who ] ] ]
( b) [
Np
t he gi r l [
g
[
COMp
who - W^ f e Pet er ki ssed t ] ] ]
wher e t he f eat ur e +WH] di f f er ent i at es ( embedded) quest i ons
f r om r el at i ve cl auses. I n mai n cl auses t he same devi ce i s used
t o der i ve quest i ons as i n ( 7) :
( 7) ( a) [- [
COMp
NP +WH] [
S
Pet er ki ssed who ] ]
(b)
[s[COMP
who +WH
] [s
P et er k i ssed
t 1]
f r om whi ch t he r oot t r ansf or mat i on Subj ect - Auxi l i ar y I nver si on
wi l l f or m t he gr ammat i cal sur f ace st r i ng ( 7c) :
( 7) ( c) who di d Pet er ki ss t
2. 1. The st r uct ur es and t r ansf or mat i ons shown i n ( 3) t o ( 7)
compl y wi t h gener al l y accept ed vi ews of t r ansf or mat i onal gr am-
mar as modi f i ed accor di ng t o t he r equi r ement s of t r ace t heor y
and by Emonds ' ( 1970) and Br esnan' s ( 1970) pr oposal s concer n-
i ng t he st r uct ur e pr eser vi ng hypot hesi s and t he node Compl e-
ment i z er , r espect i vel y. One anal ysi s mi ght , however , l ook
sur pr i si ng.
I t used t o be sel f - evi dent t o suppose t hat ver bs and
adj ect i ves of t he t ype seem, appear , l i kel y, cer t ai n,
et c. , whi ch al l ow Subj ect - t o- Subj ect Rai si ng i n t he pr e- t r ace-
t heor et i cal j ar gon, have an i nf i ni t i val subj ect ( Rosenbaum' s
1967 anal ys i s , cf . ( 8a) ) , or have a sent ent i al compl ement i n
deep st r uct ur e wi t h a dummy i t_ as subj ect ( Emonds' anal ys i s ,
cf . ( 8b) ) . Except f or t hi s di f f er ence, t he der i vat i ons wer e
essent i al l y t he same:
( 8) ( a) [ [ i t [ f or J ohn t o l i ke Mar y] ] seems]
( b) i t seems f or J ohn t o l i ke Mar y] ]
( c) _ | ohn seems f or t o l i ke Mar y] ]
( d) J ohn seems t o l i ke Mar y.
The move t o r epl ace deep st r uct ur es l i ke ( 8a) or ( 8b)
by ones l i ke ( 3a) , whi ch cont ai ns t he embedded sent ence as
a compl ement t o t he ver b, and t o pr epose t he embedded sub-
j ect i nt o t he mat r i x subj ect posi t i on di r ect l y was pr obabl y
t he r esul t of var i ous , t hough not unr el at ed, r easons.
Fi r st of al l , t he number and t ypes of t r ansf or mat i ons
can be r educed by el i mi nat i ng one r ul e of Rai si ng, as we
shal l see i mmedi at el y. Secondl y, t he r emai ni ng r ul e of Rai s -
i ng can be i ncor por at ed i nt o NP Movement , whi ch i s t hen
much easi er t o st at e as a gener al r ul e of movement . Fi nal l y,
' i n consequence of t he el i mi nat i on of t he t r ansf or mat i onal
i nt r oduct i on of compl ement i zer s ( t he Br esnan cont r a Rosenbaum
ar gument ) , t her e i s no l onger a common t r ansf or mat i onal pat h
f or t ensed sent ences and i nf i ni t i val const r uct i ons - i n addi -
t i on t o t he nomi nal compl ement const r uct i ons separ at ed f r om
t he r est bef or ehand. Thi s move i s i ndependent l y appr oved of
by t he X- Bar Theor y of base r ul es. Thus t he f our st r uct ur es
( 9a- b- c- d) now each go back t o a di f f er ent deep st r uct ur e
( 10a- b- c- d) , r espect i vel y:
( 9) ( a) Pet er bel i eves t hat J ohn i s qui et ,
( b) Pet er bel i eves J ohn t o be qui et .
( c) | ohn s be eved t o be qu et .
( d) Pet er ' s be ef t hat | ohn s qu et .
( 10) ( a) | Pet er be eves | t hat | ohn s qu et | |
( b) | Pet er be eves | | ohn t o be qu et | |
( c) | NP be eves | | ohn t o be qu et | |
( d) | Pet er ' s | be ef | t hat | ohn s qu et | | |
However , t he t r ad t ona d st nct on bet ween ' t r ans t ve'
and ' r a s ng' ver bs s not ob t er at ed, s nce on y n ( 11a) ,
but not n ( 11b) , can t he NP | ohn be t he d r ect ob| ect of t he
mat r x ver b n deep s t r uct ur e, cf . ( 12a- b) :
( 11) ( a) | ohn was f or ced t o be qu et ,
( b) | ohn was be eved t o be qu et .
( 12) ( a) NP f or ced | ohn | PRO t o be qu et |
( b) NP be eved | | ohn t o be qu et |
C ear y, t he t r ansf or mat on mov ng t he embedded sub| ect | ohn
nt o mat r x sub| ect pos t on n ( 12b) s t he same as t he one
wh ch app ed t o ( 3a) .
2. 2. When t h s was put f or war d n Chomsky ( 1973) , t a r eady
nd cat ed t he shap ng of a new, goa - or ent ed pr nc p e, wh ch
was mor e f u y e abor at ed n Chomsky and Lasn k ( 1977) :
" One wou d assume t hat per f or mance syst ems wou d ' pr ef er ' a
gr ammar n wh ch t he r e at on bet ween deep and sur f ace st r uc-
t ur e s as c ose as poss b e t o be b un que. " ( 462)
The pr ob em of st r uct ur es ke ( 10b) s , however , not
one of met at heor et ca pr nc p es , but of a t r u y emp r ca
k nd. That was why Pau Pos t a , hav ng had access t o a pr e m-
nar y ver s on of Chomsky ( 1973) , wr ot e a vo um nous book on
t he so e quest on whet her or not t her e ar e r u es of Ra s ng.
Obser ve t hat Chomsky has never den ed t hat t he NP moves ,
as t wer e, f r om sub| ect t o sub| ect n case of , f or examp e,
( 3) , so t he ar gument s and count er ar gument s ar e nt er est ng t o
us nsof ar as t hey ar e concer ned w t h Sub| ect - t o- Ob| ect Ra s -
ng .
3. I f one want ed t o eva uat e t he ar gument s aga nst Ra s ng
( 1 4 ) (a)
(b)
( 1 5 ) ( a)
(b)
( her eaf t er Rai si ng i s al ways meant as Subj ect - t o- Obj ect Rai -
si ng unl ess ot her wi se st at ed) i n Chomsky' s "Condi t i ons on
Tr ansf or mat i ons" , he woul d have t o f ace qui t e a di f f i cul t
t ask. One of t he ar gument s i s based on t he f act or i zat i on of
t he Passi ve t r ansf or mat i on ( whi ch i s l at er t o become NP Move-
ment ) gi ven as ( 13) :
( 13) X, N, V, NP, Y.
Now t hi s woul d i ncl ude i n i t s domai n not onl y ( 14a) , but al so
( 15a) , whi ch i n t ur n under l i es an ungr ammat i cal sent ence,
( 15b) :
NP bel i eve L [ t he dog] t o be hungr y]
The dog i s bel i eved t o be hungr y.
NP bel i eve

t he dog] i s hungr y]
*The dog i s bel i eved i s hungr y.
But "i t woul d r equi r e an ext r a condi t i on on t he t r ansf or mat i on
t o excl ude [14a] f r om t he domai n of Passi ve wi t h t he st r uct ur -
al condi t i on [ l 5a] " ( 237) . Ther ef or e, i t i s mor e expedi ent t o
add t he uni ver sal const r ai nt ( 16) , of whi ch an i nt er i m f or mul a-
t i on i s quot ed her e:
( 16) The Tensed Sent ence Condi t i on
"No r ul e can i nvol ve , i n t he st r uct ur e
. . . X | . . . Z_ . . . - WYV . . . | . . .
wher e Y s not n COMP and oC s a t ensed S. " ( 244)
The TSC ( f or shor t ) of ( 16) w pr ec ude t he ext r act on
of NP f r om ( 15a) but w a ow ext r act on f r om ( 14a) .
3. 1. The un ver sa t y of t he TSC was soon r ef ut ed by Bach and
Hor n ( 1976) , who c t ed a sent ence f r omAmhar c as a count er -
examp e. I f t he TSC s cor r ect , ( 17) shou d be ungr ammat ca ,
wh ch t s def n t e y not , say _ and H:
( 17) Yohann s nen habt am naw _1_.
| ohn me r ch s sa d
' | ohn sa d I was r ch. '
"By any def n t on we can t h nk of t he nt er na c ause of t h s
sent ence s t ensed: naw s t he t h r d per son mascu ne s ngu ar
f or mof t he ver b mean ng ' t o be' . The f or m nen s mar ked w t h
t he def n t e ob| ect mar ker . _ |
__
<_ most obv ous | ana ys s
f or sent ences ke ( 17) | s t hat t her e s a r u e of r a s ng
nt o ob| ect pos t on t hat can app y t o t he sub| ect of t he em-
bedded sent ence. _. . .1
"But even f we adopt t he _. . .| Chomskyan ana ys s of
| 17 | and say t hat no r a s ng has t aken p ace, t he Tensed Sen-
t ence Cond t on must f a . For on t he one hand ' mor pho og ca
mat er a ' ( n t he f or mof t he def n t e ob| ect mar ker - n on
nen) has been nt r oduced n a t ensed c ause. |. . .1 And, on
t he ot her hand, _. . .1 Pass ve can app y t o st r uct ur es mmed -
at e y under y ng | 7| . " ( Bach and Hor n 1976: 288)
3. 2. Even f t he TSC s depr ved of t s un ver sa t y, t cou d
st be a va d obser vat on as f ar as Eng sh s concer ned.
But t hat depends par t y on t he dent f cat on ( n t he r e evant
r espect s) of t he st r uct ur es of ( 14a) and ( 15a) .
Now f or t he sake of ar gument suppose t hat t he st r uct ur e
under y ng sent ences wh ch cont a n ver bs of t he be eve t ype
s not as g ven n ( 14a) but somet h ng ke t he one n ( 18a) ,
t o wh ch NP Movement can app y w t h t he r esu t as shown n
( 18b) :
( 18) ( a) Pet er be eves NP |g COMP |
g
_ | ohn! t o be qu et | |
( b) Pet er be eves _ | ohn| |- COMP _ t t o qu et | |
I n ef f ect , t h s ana ys s st at es m n ma y t hat Ra s ng s not
a st r uct ur e- bu d ng r u e, t does not ' const r uct ' new nodes,
but comp es t o Emonds' t ypo ogy of t r ansf or mat ons. The r u es
gener at ng st r uct ur es ke ( 18a) , wh ch s g ven be ow n t he
f or mof a t r ee- d agr am ( 19) , have ndependent mot vat on n
v ew of sent ences such as ( 20a- b) .
( 19)
COMP
( 20) ( a) | ohn f or ced Pet er | COMP PRO t o eave|
( b) | ohn per suaded Pet er | cOMP PRO t o eave|
As s we - known, a empt y nodes must be mot vat ed nde-
pendent y of t he t r ansf or mat on/ s/ wh ch ut ze t hem, ac-
cor d ng t o t he bas c t enet s of Emonds' d sser t at on ( 1970:
37f f ) . They r equ r e t hat t her e be a phr ase st r uct ur e r u e
t hat , n t h s case, gener at es t he st r ng V- NP- S. And t s
beyond a doubt t hat t he r e evant phr ase st r uct ur e r u e
does cont a n t he sequence n quest on:
, V NP S *
( 21) VP >
Then ver bs ke f or ce, per suade, as we as be eve, expect ,
2
et c. wou d a be spec f ed f or cont ext s _ _ s . The ndepend-
ent y needed t r ansf or mat on NP Movement w move t he sub| ect
NP of t he embedded sent ence t o any appr opr at e ( empt y) NP n
t he mat r x sent ence:
( 22) ( a) | ohn expect ed NP | cOMP | Pet er | t o eave|
( b) | ohn expect ed _ Pet er | | cOMP t t o eave|
Fur t her subcat egor zat on of t he ver bs wou d cont a n f eat ur es
spec f y ng what comp ement zer s and what ot her cont ext s t hey
can cooccur w t h.
The t r ansf or mat i on cannot have moved any ot her NP because of
t he Speci f i ed Subj ect Condi t i on ( see bel ow i n ( 55) ) , and i f
t he r ul e wer e t o move t he embedded subj ect di r ect l y i nt o t he
mat r i x subj ect posi t i on, as i n ( 23a- b) , t he r esul t i ng st r uc-
t ur e woul d be mar ked as ungr ammat i cal on account of i t s con-
t ai ni ng an empt y node.
( 23) ( a) NP expect ed NP [ COMP [ J ohn] t o l eave]
( b) J ohn] was expect ed NP [ COMP t t o l eave]
I f , f i nal l y, al l NP sl ot s ar e l exi cal l y f i l l ed i n deep st r uc-
t ur e, as i n ( 24) , r ul es of i nt er pr et at i on wi l l ast er i sk t he
st r uct ur e, j ust l i ke t hey do i n t he case of st r uct ur es con-
t ai ni ng t he ver bs s __mor per suade when a s ot s ar e f ed,
cf . ( 25a- b)
( 24) | ohn be eves Mar y | cOMP Pet er t o be qu et |
( 25) ( a) | ohn seems | COMP Mar y t o have ef t |
( b) | ohn per suaded Mar y | COMP Pet er t o eave|
Such a so ut on s, however , out of t he quest on f or
t r ace t heor y as deve oped so f ar f or what m ght be t er med
met at heor et ca r easons. Chomsky h mse f , as we as a number
of h s f o ower s, have r emar ked t hat Ra s ng s ob| ect onab e
because t does not change t he or der of e ement s but on y r e-
ar r anges const t uent st r uct ur e:
Ra s ng " s a r u e wh ch n any event does not mod f y t he
f or mof t he t er m na st r ng | and s nce| t her e s no necess t y
f or a r u e r a s ng t he sub| ect of an embedded sent ence t o t he
ob| ect pos t on of t he mat r x sent ence | ow ng t o TSC, one|
m ght t hen r a se t he quest on whet her cyc c t r ansf or mat ons
shou d not be const r a ned so as t o f or b d oper at ons t hat
never change t he t er m na st r ng of a phr ase mar ker but on y
t s st r uct ur e, as n t he or g na f or mu at ons of sub| ect r a -
s ng t o ob| ect pos t on. " ( Chomsky 1973: 254; cf . a so L ght -
f oot 1976)
However , n a not e appended t o t he r ef ut at on of t he r u e, L ght -
f oot g ves a count er examp e t o t he above pr oposa , wh ch s
based on t o cont r act i on. Whenever t_o Cont r act i on may appl y,
i t i s a r ul e t hat does not change t he t er mi nal st r i ng but
onl y const i t uent st r uct ur e as i s cl ear f r omBr esnan' s f or -
mul at i on :
(
26
) [
s
X Y,
to
Y ] *- [
s
X V + to V Y ]
But l et us suppose wi t h Li ght f oot t hat al l cl i t i ci zat i on
r ul es ( of whi ch ( 26) i s one) ar e except ed f r om t he scope of
t he pr i nci pl e, and exami ne whet her Rai si ng as f or mul at ed her e
st ands up t o scr ut i ny - at l east as wel l as ot her r ul es pr o-
posed by Chomsky or hi s col l abor at or s.
Sur e enough, Rai si ng as descr i bed i n ( 18a- b) i s si mpl y
not a di st i nct r ul e of t he gr ammar , but one subcase of t he
gener al r ul e NP Movement .
3. 3. The quest i on now i s whet her or not Rai si ng changes t he
or der of el ement s i n t he t er mi nal st r i ng under t hese ci r cum-
st ances, and i f not , whet her i t i s i n gener al possi bl e t o
al l ow r ul es whi ch do not meet Chomsky' s pr oposed const r ai nt .
The answer t o t he f i r st hal f of t he quest i on depends
cr uci al l y on how we const r ue t he node Compl ement i zer . When
Chomsky f or mul at ed t he const r ai nt t o pr ohi bi t , among ot her s,
t he i ncl usi on of Rai si ng i n t he gr ammar , he assumed t her e was
no COMP node i n t he i nf i ni t i val compl ement s t o bel i eve- ver bs.
Obvi ousl y, i t was i mpossi bl e f or Rai si ng t o r ear r ange t he
or der of el ement s. However , i n Chomsky and Lasni k ( 1977) we
f i nd t he f ol l owi ng base r ul es:
( 27) ( a) s" - COMP S ( t he r ( 46a) )
_ VIE)
( b) COMP | f or ( t he r ( 84a) )
l~J
Not e t hat t he nu comp ement zer ( 0) , n wh ch we ar e now
nt er est ed, s not a zer o const t uent ; t s mor pho og ca y
on a par w t h any ot her const t uent . Bes des, t cannot be
nu s mp y because no phr ase st r uct ur e r u e s a owed t o
have a zer o out come ( cf . Chomsky' s 1965 def n t on of r e-
wr t ng r u es) . What s mor e, n ne t her of t he a t er nat ve
so ut ons _ and L d scuss s t he r e evant COMP node mor pho -
og ca y nu : "we wou d t ake ' over t comp ement zer ' t o mean
any comp ement zer mor pheme gener at ed n t he base, whet her t
s phonet ca y r ea zed or not " ( 477; emphas s supp ed) .
That s t ant amount t o say ng t hat Ra s ng does r ear r ange or -
der .
Now suppose t hat Chomsky' s pr oposed const r a nt s r e-
p aced by a much st r ct er one, wh ch r equ r es t hat r u es
change t he or der of what ar e t o become phonet ca y r ea zed
e ement s. Apar t f r om t he near - mposs b t y of st at ng such
a const r a nt ( wh ch wou d anyway be suspect of be ng a g oba
r u e) , t wou d f at a y dest r oy anot her gener a r u e n t r ace
t heor y: wh Movement .
3. 4. I n answer t o t he second ha f of our quest on ( whet her t
s poss b e t o a ow r u es t hat do not r ear r ange or der ) , we
may r eca t he t r ansf or mat on wh Movement , wh ch p aces ( con-
st t uent s cont a n ng) quest on wor ds or r e at ve pr onouns,
. e. wh- phr ases, nt o t he COMP node ( cf . ( 5- 6- 7) ) .
When, however , a wh- phr ase s t he sub| ect of t he sen-
t ence n t he doma n of wh Movement , t w under go t he op-
er at on as shown be ow n ( 28- 29) :
( 28) ( a) |
g
|
__
NP +WH| |
g
who saw | ohn| |
( b) _ g Fwho +WH| | t saw | ohn| |
( 29) ( a) | -
Np
t he man t |
COMp
NP - WH| |
g
who saw | ohn| | |
( b) _ t he man _ _ who - WH | t saw | ohn| | |
Need ess t o say, ne t her t he or g na nor t he st r ct ver s on
of Chomsky' s pr oposed const r a nt wou d a ow st r uct ur es ke
( 28b) or ( 29b) t o be gener at ed. Of cour se ar gument s of t h s
k nd ar e un nt er est ng, s nce wh Movement s a s ng e r u e
and s t o be ver f ed or r ef ut ed as such. But so s NP Move-
ment n a r e evant r espect s. We can conc ude t hen t hat bot h
t he c a m aga nst t he un ver sa t y of Ra s ng and t he met a-
t heor et ca ar gument s t o oust t f r om t he gr ammar ar e un-
subst ant at ed.
4. Let us now see ar gument s of a mor e emp r ca nat ur e. G ven
t he some f our hundr ed pages of Post a ' s On Ra s ng, devot ed
so e y t o cons der at ons of t h s k nd, and t he r e| o nder s n
L ngu st c I nqu r y t wou d be har d t o say t her e s t oo t t e
t o dr aw on.
4. 1. The at t acks Post a makes upon Chomsky' s v ew of t he non-
ex st ence of Ra s ng ar e, accor d ng t o L ght f oot ( 1976) , t wo-
pr onged: one t ype of ar gument s s used t o pr ove t hat t he se-
quence NP- t o- VP s not one const t uent ( r eca t hat t s dom-
nat ed by S n t r ace t heor y) , and anot her set of ar gument s
shows t hat some r u es app y t o der ved sub| ect s but not t o
der ved ob| ect s, wh e ot her s t o der ved ob| ect s but not t o
der ved sub| ect s, and a of t he at t er ( but none of t he f or -
mer ) ar e app cab e t o ' r a sed' NPs, wh ch must t hen be con-
s der ed as ob| ect NPs of t he mat r x ver b.
Bef or e I out ne Post a ' s r eason ng, t seems necessar y
t o eva uat e t he r at her unusua d sput e Post a ' s book nduced.
I n t he par agr aph above we showed how L ght f oot ana yzes t he
t ypes of ar gument s Post a makes use of . Br esnan ( 1976) , how-
ever , spar es no ef f or t t o show n what way Post a ' s ob| ec-
t ons ar e, or ar e not , capab e of dest r oy ng Chomsky' s con-
cept ons, but at t acks Post a ' s ar gument s one by one c t ng
what she means t o be examp es of t he f or ce of count er ar gument s,
but what n ef f ect ar e count er examp es at t he r best , or even
except ons. That such a d st nct on s ver y much n or der s a
consequence of Chomsky' s own pos t on n t h s ssue:
"To f nd ev dence t o suppor t or t o r ef ut e a pr oposed cond t on
on r u es, t does not suf f ce t o st unexp a ned phenomena;
r at her , t s necessar y t o pr esent r u es, . e. , t o pr esent a
f r agment of gr ammar . The conf r mat on or r ef ut at on w be as
conv nc ng as t he f r agment of r u es pr esent ed. |* | The st at us
of cond t ons on r u es s emp r ca , but ev dence can on y
be nd r ect and t he ar gument , one way or anot her , s neces-
sar y r at her abst r act and ' t heor y bound' . " ( Chomsky 1977:
74; emphas s added)
On t he assumpt on t hat t he above st at ement can be app ed not
on y t o cond t ons on r u es but a so t o r u es pr oper I w
r ef er t o t h s quot at on as Chomsky' s pr nc p e of gr ammat ca
ar gument .
Now Br esnan c a ms Post a ( 1974) s sub| ect t o s m ar
cr t c sm n t hat t set s up no r u es at a t o account f or
t he dat a he pr esent s. But Post a ( 1977) n answer t o Br esnan
r emar ks t hat t he r u e of Ra s ng s se f - exp anat or y on t he
one hand, and, on t he ot her , t s Br esnan her se f who g ves
"abso ut e y none" of t he f or ma zat ons she b ames Post a f or
f a ng t o supp y.
I t m ght be d scer ned f r om t he f or ego ng t hat t hese
mut ua accusat ons ar e on y mpor t ant nsof ar as t hey po nt
at t he def ect s of bot h Post a ' s and Br esnan' s appr oaches,
s nce our own pr oposed r u e of Ra s ng s par t of t he gener a
syst em of r u es and obser ves a t he r e evant cond t ons n
t he sp r t of Chomsky' s pr nc p e of gr ammat ca ar gument . By
be ng unab e, or s mp y neg ect ng, t o show how t he edge of
Post a ' s ar gument s can be b unt ed, Br esnan comm t s t he er r or
of eav ng Post a ' s c a ms unanswer ed; so t s f u y eg t -
mat e f or us t o use t hem as poss b e count er ar gument s aga nst
a non- r a s ng gr ammar .
4. 2. Hav ng now mor e or ess c ar f ed t he st at us of Br es-
nan' s ob| ect ons, et us t ake a c oser ook at Post a ' s book.
Aga n r eca t hat n t r ace t heor y be eve- ver bs t ake t he con-
t ext S, wher e S can be bot h NP- t - VP and t hat - S, om t t ng
comp ement zer s f or t he moment . The sequence NP- t o- VP s sup-
posed y a s ng e const t uent ( w t h or w t hout t he comp ement -
zer ) dom nat ed by an S node, so, accor d ng t o Post a , t
shou d under go a t he oper at ons whose doma n nc udes an S
282
node. The r esu t undoubt ed y suppor t s Post a ' s case.
For examp e, t her e s a we - known t r ansf or mat on,
n cknamed R ght Node Ra s ng ( RNR) , wh ch can be r ough y
descr bed as "g ven cer t a n pa r ed sequences of dent ca
const t uent s n d st nct c auses, RNR p aces t he doub e of
t he sequence on t he r ght by Chomsky ad| unct on, and de-
et es a or g na occur r ences. " ( Post a 1974: 126) Then,
f o ow ng Post a , t he sent ence ( 30) s der ved f r om ( 31a)
t hr ough RNR and Equ - de et on as n ( 31b) :
( 30) | ack may be - and Tony cer t a n y s - a wer ewo f .
( 31) ( a)
| ack may be |a wer ewo f | Tony cer t a n y s |a wer ewo f |
0 0
What ever t he f or ma der vat on may be, some t r ansf or mat on
ke RNR s oper at ve a so n case of f u comp ement sen-
t ences, e. g. n ( 32) :
( 32) ( a) Henr y c a med t hat Tom s d shonest , but nobody
has so f ar pr oved t hat Tom s d shonest .
( b) Henr y c a med - but nobody has so f ar pr oved -
t hat Tom s d shonest .
However , not h ng of t he k nd seems t o be ava ab e f or NP-
t o- VP sequences, cf .
( 33) ( a) Henr y c a med Tom t o be d shonest , but nobody
has so f ar pr oved Tom t o be d shonest ,
( b) *Henr y c a med - but nobody has so f ar pr oved
- Tom t o be d shonest .
Br esnan' s ob| ect on t o t h s r eason ng seems t o have t t e
f or ce f any. She c t es ( 34) as a count er examp e:
( 34) I f nd t har d t o be eve - but | oan f nds t easy
t o be eve - Tom s d shonest .
and c a ms t hat "RNR s a suf f c ent but not necessar y t est
f or const t uency, . . . Fr om t he f act t hat A cannot be a
r ght node t does not f o ow t hat A cannot be a const t uent "
( Br esnan 1976: 493) , but Tom s d shonest s a const t uent .
That s t r ue; however , Br esnan' s f a ur e t o account f or how
st r uct ur es ke ( 32b) ar e gener at ed, wh e ( 33b) and ( 34) ar e
b ocked, sur e y d sr egar ds, f not v o at es, Chomsky' s pr nc -
p e of gr ammat ca ar gument . For ( 34) s not der ved by f r st
de et ng t he comp ement zer t hat and t hen mov ng t he r est of
t he S by means of RNR, but r at her v ce ver sa. No s m ar pr o-
cedur e s ava ab e f or ( 33a- b) s nce not h ng has been de et ed.
Ther ef or e t he exp anat on must be sought e sewher e, and unt
t s f ound, Post a ' s ar gument st ands t o r eason.
The ar gument f r om RNR was | ust one among t hose d r ect ed
aga nst cont emp at ng t he sur f ace st r ng NP- t o- VP as a s ng e
const t uent .
4. 3. The ot her t ype of ar gument s ser ves t o show t hat t he NP
of t he sequence NP- t o- VP s a sur f ace ob| ect r at her t han
sub| ect . One r u e nd cat ve of t hat s t he Comp es NP Sh f t ,
wh ch moves ' heavy' ob| ect s f r omt he r or g na pos t on t o
t he r ght of t he c ause t hey ar e n ( accor d ng t o Ross 1967) ,
cf .
( 35) ( a) I showed t he cook es t o | ack.
( b) ' I showed t o | ack t he cook es.
( c) I showed t o | ack a t he cof f ee gr ound and
et t uce cook es.
The same oper at on s napp cab e n case of e t her a t hat -
- c ause or a f or +S cons t r uct on, even f t he embedded sub| ect
NP s ext r eme y heavy; cf .
( 36) ( a) A en showed t hat t hose t eacher s who cont nua y
gave h m poor gr ades wer e Mar t ans ,
( b) * A en showed t hat wer e Mar t ans t hose t eacher s
who cont nua y gave h m poor gr ades .
( 37) ( a) I t wou d be t r ag c f or a t he g r s who got
pr egnant t o have abor t ons .
( b) * I t wou d be t r ag c ( f or ) t o have abor t ons a
3
t he g r s who got pr egnant .
But Comp ex NP Sh f t wor ks a r ght on NP- t o- VP const r uc-
t ons , cf .
( 38) ( a) A en showed t hose t eacher s who cont nua y gave
h m poor gr ades t o be Mar t ans ,
( b) A en showed t o be Mar t ans t hose t eacher s who
cont nua y gave h m poor gr ades.
4. 4. A t h r d t ype of ar gument wh ch s ut zed by Post a
but over ooked bot h n Br esnan ( 1976) and L ght f oot ( 1976)
s per haps mor e nt er est ng t han t hose r ev ewed above. I t s
absence f r om bot h cr t c sms of Post a was pr obab y due t o
t he f act t hat t he sect on n wh ch t was pub shed was en-
t t ed ' Pot ent a ar gument s ' , as t wer e, et t ng ever yone
under r at e t s cont ent s. One of t he ar gument s n t h s gr oup
nvo ves t he scope of quant f er s and dr aws on t he var ous
poss b t es of nt er pr et at on sent ences cont a n ng quant -
f er s can of f er .
I n t h s cas e, f or cannot be moved w t h t he NP; t he r u e pr e-
c udes t h s poss b t y by be ng spec f ca y st at ed as n-
vo v ng NPs .
Post a f ound t hat sent ences ke ( 39) ar e amb guous
depend ng on whet her t he quant f er has a ' nar r ow' or a
' w de' s cope, and can be par aphr ased r ough y as t he ( 1) and
( 2) r ead ngs , r espect ve y, n ( 40) :
( 39) ( a) I be eve t hat someone nsu t ed Ar t hur .
( b) The FBI pr oved t hat f ew st udent s wer e sp es.
( c) Me v n showed t hat none of t he f or mu as wer e
t heor ems.
( 40) ( a1) I be eve t hat t her e s someone who nsu t ed
Ar t hur .
( a2) Ther e s someone who I be eve nsu t ed Ar t hur .
( ) The FBI pr oved t hat t her e wer e f ew st udent s who
wer e s p es .
( b2) Ther e wer e f ew st udent s who t he FBI pr oved wer e
sp es.
( c1) Me v n showed t hat t her e wer e no f or mu as wh ch
wer e t heor ems.
( c2) Ther e wer e no f or mu as wh ch Me v n showed wer e
t heor ems .
However , f t he NPs cont a n ng t he quant f er s ar e par t of
t he V- NP- t o- VP s equence, t he nar r ow scope ( 1) r ead ngs van sh
and we ar e ef t on y w t h t he w de scope ( 2) nt er pr et at on -
sma wonder f we accept a r a s ng ana ys s ( or t s equ v-
a ent ) , but ncompat b e w t h t he V- S ana ys s of Chomsky' s
ver s on of t r ace t heor y; cf .
( 41) ( a) I be eve someone t o have nsu t ed Ar t hur .
( b) The FBI pr oved f ew st udent s t o be sp es.
( c) Me v n showed none of t he f or mu as t o be t heor ems.
Such a d f f er ence bet ween what wer e a eged t o be dent ca
st r uct ur es w t h r espect t o semant c nt er pr et at on s un| us -
t f ed and nexp cab e n t he f r amewor k of a non- r a s ng ana -
. 4
ys s .
4
The pr oposed pr nc p e of sur f ace st r uct ur e nt er pr et at on
s of no he p her e f or t he non- r a s ng ana ys s , s nce t he
5. I f we now want ed t o exami ne t he genui ne empi r i cal ar gu-
ment s agai nst Rai si ng put f or war d by t he pr oponent s of
t r ace t heor y, i t wi l l come as a sur pr i se t hat ei t her t hey
wer e t oo weak f r om t he begi nni ng or t he cont ext i n whi ch
t hey wer e f or mul at ed has si nce been f ound i l l - concei ved and
has been al t er ed by t he ver y peopl e who advanced t hem, t her e-
by di squal i f yi ng t hei r own ar gument s.
5. . One such gr oup of ar gument s i nvol ved each Movement , but
I wi l l r ef r ai n f r omdi scussi ng t hem si nce each Movement has
pr oved t o be a nonexi st ent t r ansf or mat i on.
5. 2. The onl y ot her t r ul y empi r i cal ar gument I have f ound i s
based on t ough Movement , i t sel f a r at her i l l - under st ood phe-
nomenon. I t s mai n poi nt i s t hat NPs t hat ar e t he t r ue obj ect s
of ver bs embedded under t ough- pr ed _at es can under go t ough
Movement , but NPs wh ch ar e not cannot ; cf .
( 42) ( a) NP was easy f or | ones | f or PRO t o f or ce Sm t h
| PRO t o r ecover | |
( b) Sm t h was easy f or | ones t o f or ce t o r ecover .
( 43) ( a) NP was easy f or | ones | f or PRO t o expect
| Sm t h t o r ecover | |
( b) * Sm t h was easy f or | ones t o expect t o r ecover .
The V- S ana ys s n ( 42a- 43a) ndeed shows why t her e can be
no Ra s ng n t he cont ext of be eve- ver bs.
A t hough Post a t r ed t o f end of f t he f at a ef f ect s of
t h s ar gument by po nt ng out t hat Ra s ng s accept ab e n
case of pr ed cat ve ad| ect ves ( e. g. | ones s har d t o cons der
compet ent . ) , he f a ed t o g ve any nd cat on of how ( 43b)
cou d be b ocked. So t h s s t he on y ar gument t hat st ays a-
f oat and pr ov des ev dence aga nst Ra s ng. However , n v ew
of dat a wh ch showed t hat t ough Movement v o at es t he Spec -
f ed Sub| ect Cond t on ( see be ow n ( 55) ) , Chomsky ( 1977)
( f oot not e 4 cont nued) w de- scope r ead ng s not ava ab e f or
an embedded quant f er under any c r cumst ances.
Some f act s of t he scope and nt er pr et at on of quant f er s ar e
obscur e n t h s cont ext , espec a y t hose connect ed w t h t he use
of t he ndef n t e ar t c e as a ( f oot not e 4 cont nued)
subst ant i al l y r evi sed t ough/ easy + compl ement const r uct i ons,
wi t h t he si de ef f ect of weakeni ng hi s own ar gument agai nst
Rai si ng.
Accor di ng t o t hi s r evi si on, t he gener al r ul e wh Movement
swal l ows up a number of var i ous t r ansf or mat i ons i ncl udi ng
t ough Movement . The new anal ysi s of t ough Movement phenomena
posi t s ( 44a) as under l yi ng ( 44b) , whi ch i s der i ved t hr ough wh
Movement i nt o COMP :
( 44) ( a) J ohn i s easy ( f or us)
CO
MP
NP
~
WH f or
]
P R 0 t 0
pl ease who]
( b) J ohn i s easy ( f or us) |"= | who f or PRO t o p ease t. |
The st r uct ur e ( 44b) w t hen under go wh- and f or - de et on
y e d ng t he f am ar sent ence:
( 45) | ohn s easy ( f or us) t o p ease.
Now f t h s r eana ys s s app ed t o ( 42) - ( 43) , t he t r ansf or ma-
t on wh Movement w change t he deep st r uct ur es ( 46a) and
( 47a) nt o t he nt er med ar y st r uct ur es ( 46b) and ( 47b) , r espec-
t ve y :
( 46) ( a) Sm t h was easy f or | ones 1"=f or PRO t o f or ce who
fg PRO t o r ecover | |
( b) Sm t h was easy f or | ones f e who f or PRO t o f or ce
f"g PRO t o r ecover | |
( 47) ( a) Sm t h was easy f or | ones |=f or PRO t o expect
|"who t o r ecover | !
( b) Sm t h was easy f or | ones _- who f or PRO t o expect
_ t. t o r ecover | |
I n or der t o account f or t he ungr ammat ca t y of ( 43b) , ( 47b)
must be b ocked, t hat s, wh Movement n t he embedded sen-
t ence must be pr oh b t ed. However , t he sent ences n ( 48) show
t hat wh Movement s per f ect y poss b e n t he r e evant con-
t ext s :
( f oot not e 4 cont nued) quant f er / cf . Bach 19 77/ . But t he
syst emat c behav our of t he quant f er s n / 39- 41/ must be
account ed f or by any ana ys s and r a s ng gr ammar s meet t he
cha enge w t h. ease.
( 48) ( a) Who do you expect t o r ecover ?
( b) The man ( who) I expect t o r ecover
The on y so ut on Chomsky' s f r amewor k a ows wou d f o ow
f r om t he r equ r ement t hat "t he under y ng st r uct ur e must
cont a n an embedded S as comp ement t o easy, w t h an ob -
gat or y PRO sub| ect . " ( Chomsky 1977: 103) That r est r ct on s
necessar y t o b ock t he occur ence of wh- phr ases n sub| ect
pos t on, t hus pr event ng ungr ammat ca sent ences such as
( 49b) f r ombe ng gener at ed:
( 49) (a) | ohn s easy | f or who t o t a k|
( b) *| ohn s easy t o t a k.
Th s s s mp y a new way of st at ng t he f am ar r est r ct on
on t he t r ansf or mat on t ough Movement , v z. t hat t s not
per m t t ed t o oper at e on embedded sub| ect s. Suppose t hat we
ext end t h s r est r ct on t o sub| ect s n ' ower ' sent ences say-
ng t hat however deep y embedded t he sub| ect s, t cannot be
moved f t s a wh- phr ase n t he comp ement t o t ough- pr ed -
cat es. ( Not e t hat t can on y be car r ed out n a non- r a s ng
gr ammar . ) Put t ng as de a poss b e r eser vat ons wh ch may
ar se f r om f or mu at ng t he const r a nt and conced ng t hat t
wou d hand e one t ype of r r egu ar t y, et us now see anot her
t hat no const r a nt ment on ng sub| ect s cou d dea w t h. Ne -
t her of t he pa r of sent ences ( 50a- b) seems t o go t hr ough, a -
t hough bot h of ( 50c- d) ar e gr ammat ca :
( 50) ( a) * The po ce ar e easy t o ar r est us.
( b) *The po ce ar e easy f or us t o be ar r est ed by.
( c) I t s easy f or t he po ce t o ar r est us.
( d) I t s easy f or us t o be ar r est ed by t he po ce.
A t hough a pr oposed ana yses of t he const r uct ons n ques-
t on can b ock ( 50a) , none of t hem ( nc ud ng Chomsky' s) can
pr event ( 50b) .
One poss b e exp anat on we can env sage wou d r e y on
r ef er r ng t o t he nf or mat on ' deep agent ' , s nce n t he cases
of ( 43b) , ( 49b) , and ( 50b) t s appar ent y t he deep agent of
some one of t he embedded sent ences n t he comp ement t o easy
t hat cannot be assoc at ed w t h t he sur f ace sub| ect of easy.
Ow ng t o t s neut r a t y w t h r espect t o t he ex st ence of
Ra s ng, t h s so ut on w , nc dent a y, depr ve ( 42- 43)
of t he r va ue as a count er examp e t o Ra s ng.
6. I t must by now be ev dent t hat t her e ar e n f act no gen-
u ne emp r ca ar gument s aga nst Ra s ng, or r at her , aga nst
Ra s ng as ncor por at ed nt o NP Movement . The ana yses t hat
have been br ought up aga nst Ra s ng depend cr uc a y on t he
f r amewor k t hey have been f or mu at ed n. And, as f r amewor ks
- a as - of t en change, t he f or ce of t he ar gument s wanes.
But bef or e we dr aw any f na conc us on et us now r e-
t ur n t o t he pr ob em of NP Movement , . e. Pass ve, n ( 14) and
( 15) , r epeat ed her e somewhat s mp f ed as ( 51) and ( 52) ,
wh ch so f ar have not been accor ded any r easonab e exp ana-
t on n our concept on of Ra s ng:
( 51) ( a) NP be eve | t he dog t o be hungr y|
( b) The dog s be eved t o be hungr y.
( 52) ( a) NP be eve | t he dog s hungr y 1
( b) *The dog s be eved s hungr y.
I f t he f act or zat on of NP Movement as g ven n ( 13) s ac-
cept ab e, wh ch we have no r eason t o doubt , t s now neces-
sar y t o account f or t he ungr ammat ca t y of ( 52b) . However ,
r ecent r ev s ons of t r ace t heor y have r ender ed t h s t ask
super f uous. Chomsky and Lasn k ( 1977) post u at e a f r amewor k
n wh ch no de et on t r ansf or mat on pr ecedes any movement
t r ansf or mat on. C ear y, f or ( 52a) t o ar se t hat de et on
must have app ed on t he st r uct ur e mmed at e y under y ng t .
But once a de et on t r ansf or mat on has wor ked on a st r uct ur e,
no movement s poss b e, so ( 52b) s mp y cannot be der ved.
I f , n t ur n, t he f act or zat on of NP Movement wer e mod -
Ther e was yet anot her ar gument aga nst Ra s ng, f r om t he
so- ca ed p ct ur e- nom na s. But t h s cont ext was aga n
equ voca y t r eat ed, and has r ema ned a nebu ous ar ea ( cf .
Chomsky 1973: 249f , 1977; Bach and Hor n 1976) .
f i ed t o al l ow f or t he non- cont i gui t y of V and NP, whi ch i n-
st ead of or i n addi t i on t o ( 52b) woul d per mi t st r uct ur es l i ke
( 53) t o be gener at ed:
( 53) *The dog i s bel i eved t hat i s hungr y.
Chomsky and Lasni k' s f i l t er ( 68) - quot ed her e as ( 54) -
woul d mar k t he r esul t i ng st r uct ur es ungr ammat i cal .
( 54) * - t hat el . . . ] , unl ess S or i t s t r ace i s i n
t he cont ext : NP . . . ]
wher e e_ st ands f or t r ace. The f i l t er ( 54) al l ows cont i guous
sequences of t hat and a ver b onl y i n r el at i ve cl auses, t hus
excl udi ng NP Movement f r om t he subj ect posi t i ons of t ensed
cl auses. As f or ext r act i on of NPs f r ompost i i ons ot her t han
subj ect i n embedded sent ences, t hi s oper at i on i s bl ocked by
t he Speci f i ed Subj ect Condi t i on ( 55) :
( 55) "No r ul e can i nvol ve , i n t he st r uct ur e
. . . X . . . [
a
. . . Z_ . . . WYV . . . ] . . .
wher e Z_ i s t he speci f i ed subj ect of WYV i n oC. "
( Chomsky 19 73: 239)
( For a mor e r ecent f or mul at i on, see Chomsky 1977: 78) . Needl ess
t o say t he same condi t i on ( 55) wi l l see t o i t t hat , af t er t he
embedded subj ect has been "r ai sed" as i n ( 56- b) , i t s t r ace,
whi ch has t he st at us of a speci f i ed subj ect , be used t o bl ock
t he pr omot i on of any NP f r om t he embedded sent ence.
7. I n t hi s paper I have t r i ed t o show why i t was necessar y
t o r ef use t he i ncl usi on of Rai si ng i n t he f i r st ver si on of
t he Revi sed Ext ended St andar d ( i . e. t r ace) Theor y of synt ax,
how t he met at heor et i cal ar gument s agai nst Rai si ng wer e r en-
der ed i r r el evant i n consequence of new devel opment s i n t he
t heor y, and what empi r i cal evi dence t her e i s f or t he r evi val
of Rai si ng i n i t s new shape. As i t st ands, Rai si ng has i ndeed
no chance of sur vi val ; but t he f ai r l y gener al r ul e of NP Move-
ment cannot avoi d i ncor por at i ng i t , pr eci sel y because of i t s
compr ehensi veness. I n ot her wor ds, Rai si ng wi l l no l onger be
r egar ded as a separ at e r ul e (a posi t i on ar dent l y suppor t ed by
Post al ) , but wi l l be subsumed under NP Movement - aut omat i cal -
l y, as i t wer e.
THE REI NCARNATI ON OF RAI SI NG
291
Ref er ences
Bach, Emmon ( 1977) , "Revi ew of Post al [ 1974] , " Lg. 53. ,
621- 654.
Bach, Emmon, and Geor ge G. Hor n ( 1976) , "Remar ks on ' Condi -
t i ons on t r ansf or mat i ons' , " LI 7. , 265- 299.
Br esnan, J oan ( 1970) , "On compl ement i zer s: t owar d a synt act i c
t heor y of compl ement t ypes, " FL 6.
( 1976) , "Nonar gument s f or Rai si ng, "LI 7, , 485- 502.
Chomsky, Noam ( 1965) , Aspect s of t he t heor y of synt ax, Cam-
br i dge: Pr ess.
( 1973) , "Condi t i ons on t r ansf or mat i ons, " I n: S. Ander son
and P. Ki par sky ( eds. ) , Fest schr i f t f or Mor r i s Hal l e, New
Yor k: Hol t , pp. 232- 286.
( 1976) , "Condi t i ons on r ul es of gr ammar , " Li ngAn. 2. ,
303- 351.
( 1977) , "On wh- movement , " I n: Cul i cover et al . pp. 71- 132.
Chomsky, Noam, and Howar d Lasni k ( 1977) , "Fi l t er s and cont r ol , "
LI 8. , 425- 504.
Cul i cover , Pet er W. , Thomas Wasow, Adr i an Akmaj i an ( eds. )
( 1977) , For mal synt ax, New Yor k: Academi c Pr ess.
Dougher t y, Ray C. ( 1974) , "The synt ax and semant i cs of each
ot her const r uct i ons, " FL 12.
Empnds, J oseph ( 1970) , Root and st r uct ur e pr eser vi ng t r ans-
f or mat i ons , unpubl i shed Doct or al di sser t at i on, M. I . T. ,
Cambr i dge.
Li ght f oot , Davi d ( 1976) , "The t heor et i cal i mpor t ance of sub-
j ect r ai si ng, " FL 14.
Post al , Paul M. ( 1974) , On Rai si ng: one r ul e of Engl i sh gr am-
mar and i t s t heor et i cal i mpl i cat i ons, Cambr i dge: MI T Pr ess.
( 1977) , "About a ' nonar gument ' f or Rai si ng, " LI 8. ,
141- 154.
Rosenbaum, Pet er S. ( 1967) , The gr ammar of Engl i sh pr edi cat e
compl ement const r uct i ons, Cambr i dge: MI T Pr ess.
THE ASPECTUAL SYSTEM OF HUNGARI AN*
Fer ene K ef er
1. The a mof t h s paper s t o def ne var ous aspect ua cat e-
gor es and t hen exam ne how t he def ned aspect ua syst em can
be used t o descr be cer t a n phenomena n Hungar an. I n par t cu-
ar , we sha be concer ned w t h t he quest on wh ch pr ed ct ons
can be made as t o t he mean ng of pr ef xes n Hungar an. These
pr ed ct ons w t hen be checked on t he c ass of ver bs wh ch
may be pr ef xed w t h meg- . A t hough Hungar an s n gener a
not cons der ed t o be a par exce ence aspect ua anguage t
w be shown t hat t he mean ng of pr ef xes can ar ge y be de-
t er m ned by means of aspect ua cat egor es . The descr pt ve
appar at us t o be used w cont a n cer t a n nove f eat ur es wh ch
m ght pr ove usef u n t he d scuss on of t he aspect ua syst em
of ot her anguages as we .
* I w sh t o expr ess my gr at t ude f or comment ng on an ear er
ver s on of t h s paper t o t he f o ow ng per sons: I ona Mo nar ,
Kat a n Rad es, Rober t Het zr on and | u us Mor avcs k.
By def n ng t he not on of aspect ua anguage one gener a y
t akes nt o cons der at on ex ca y g ven aspect ua oppos t ons
on y. I t goes w t hout say ng t hat t her e s no par exce ence
aspect ua anguage f aspect s conce ved of as be ong ng t o
t he over a st r uct ur e of sent ences.
2. Bef or e embar ki ng on t he di scussi on of t he var i ous aspec-
t ual cat egor i es, I shal l have t o make some gener al r emar ks .
2. 1. The f i r st r emar k concer ns t he cat egor y of t i me. To be
s ur e, t i me i s a compl ex cat egor y. I n t he pr esent cont ext ,
however , i t wi l l suf f i ce t o make some el ement ar y di st i nct i ons.
Fi r st of al l , i t i s evi dent t hat sent ences may exhi bi t t wo
di f f er ent t ypes of t empor al cat egor i es. The f i r st t ype si t u-
at es t he sent ence wi t h r espect t o ut t er ance t i me. Accor di ng
t o Rei chenbach, t empor al speci f i cat i on i nvol ves t hr ee not i ons
of t i me: Speech Ti me, Ref er ence Ti me and Event Ti me whi ch we
2
may denot e by S
t
, R
t
and , r espect i vel y . Speech Ti me i s
t he t i me at whi ch a gi ven sent ence i s ut t er ed, t hat i s , t he
moment of ut t er ance ( =ut t er ance t i me) . Ref er ence Ti me i s t he
t i me i ndi cat ed by t he sent ence whi ch, of cour s e, need not be
t he same as Speech Ti me.
Consi der
( 1) I see you.
( 2) I saw you yest er day.
I n ( 1) S
t
abd R
t
ar e i dent i cal , i n ( 2) , on t he ot her hand,
R
t
, i s pr i or t o S . Event Ti me r ef er s t o t he moment at whi ch
3
t he r el evant event or st at e occur s . Not i ce t hat E
t
i s i den-
t i cal t o R
t
i n bot h ( 1) and ( 2) but not i n ( 3) :
( 3) I had al r eady seen you l ast week.
I n t hi s sent ence, S
t
i s t he moment when ( 3) i s ut t er ed, R
t
i s
gi ven by t he t empor al expr essi on ' l ast week' and E
t
i s an un-
2
Cf . Rei chenbach 19 47. We do not have t o bot her wi t h t he var i -
ous possi bl e r ef i nement s of Rei chenbach' s syst em, si nce we ar e
not concer ned her e wi t h t he det ai l s of dei ct i c t i me.
3
One shoul d per haps al r eady at t hi s poi nt di st i ngui sh bet ween
event s , s t at es , ci r cums t ances , pr oces s es , et c. ( Cf . Vendi er
1967 f or an i l l umi nat i ng di scussi on of t hese di st i nct i ons. )
For our pr esent pur poses i t i s suf f i ci ent , however , i f we use
t he cover t er m ' event t i me' f or al l t hese cat egor i es .
THE ASPECTUAL SYSTEM OF HUNGARI AN 295
speci f i ed t i me pr i or t o l ast week.
I n or der t o under st and t he t empor al speci f i cat i on of
a sent ence, one must know t he val ues of S , R
t
and , and
t hei r r el at i ons t o each ot her . S
t
i s t he most i mpor t ant par t
of t he t empor al syst em si nce R
t
i s al ways or i ent ed t o i t .
Pr esent Ti me means t hat R
t
i s si mul t aneous wi t h S , Past Ti me
means t hat R
t
pr ecedes S
t
and Fut ur e Ti me means t hat R
t
, f ol -
l ows S . E
t
i s gener al l y gi ven i n r el at i on t o R
t
i f t he t wo
t i mes di f f er .
The t i me speci f i cat i on we have been t al ki ng about i s
cl ear l y dei ct i c: hencef or t h we shal l r ef er t o i t as ext er nal
t i me speci f i cat i on.
I n cont r ast t o t he ext er nal t i me speci f i cat i on, t he
second t ype of t empor al cat egor i es does not si t uat e t he event
at hand wi t h r espect t o t he t i me of ut t er ance, i t r at her de-
4
scr i bes t he t i me dur i ng whi ch t hi s event t akes pl ace . These
t empor al cat egor i es bel ong t o t he i nt er nal speci f i cat i on of
event s, and t hey wi l l be r ef er r ed t o as i nt er nal t empor al cat e-
gor i es and t he speci f i cat i on t hey pr ovi de as i nt er nal t i me
speci f i cat i on. I nt er nal t i me speci f i cat i on pl ays an essent i al
r ol e i n t he descr i pt i on of t he di f f er ence bet ween Si mpl e Pr es-
ent and Pr esent Cont i nuous:
( 4) J ohn wr i t es l et t er s.
( 5) J ohn i s wr i t i ng l et t er s.
I n f act , i nt er nal t i me i s one of t he key not i ons i n t he de-
f i ni t i on of as pect , as we shal l see pr esent l y.
2. 2. The second r emar k concer ns t i me adver bi al s. Ther e ar e
t i me adver bi al s whi ch ar e most l y used t o i ndi cat e ext er nal
t i me and t i me adver bi al s whi ch ar e gener al l y used t o expr ess
i nt er nal t i me.
Ti me adver bi al s whi ch ar e used t o expr ess ext er nal t i me
ar e: yes t er day, now, s oon, t omor r ow, t wo year s ago, i n a
4
That i s , we have t o do her e wi t h t he i nt er nal st r uct ur e of
coup e of weeks, et c.
T me adver b a s or adver b a expr ess ons wh ch ar e used
t o nd cat e nt er na t me ar e: dur ng h s ness, who e day,
s nce he f e s ck, when | ohn ar r ved, f or many hour s et c.
Some t me adver b a s expr ess nt er na t me de m t ed
by ext er na t me- boundar es, e. g. s nce yest er day, n an hour ,
dur ng next week.
T me adver b a s expr ess ng nt er na t me can of t en be
used t o det er m ne t he nt er na t me st r uct ur e of sent ences.
By append ng such a t me adver b a A t o a sent ence S we get
a we - f or med sent ence S' f and on y f t he nt er na t me
st r uct ur e of S s compat b e w t h t he nt er na t me nd cat ed
by A.
For examp e, a sent ence w t h moment ar y nt er na t me
cannot be comb ned w t h a dur at ve adver b a (*He st ar t ed
r ead ng f or t hr ee hour s) . S m ar compat b t y or noncompat -
b t y r e at ons can be f or mu at ed f or ot her aspect ua cat e-
gor es as we .
2. 3. The t h r d r emar k, t oo, s meant t o pr epar e t he def n -
t on of aspect . A t hough aspect s not r est r ct ed t o de-
c ar at ves, we sha make her e t he s mp f y ng assumpt on
t hat we on y have t o do w t h dec ar at ve sent ences . Thus,
when we w be t a k ng about sent ences we sha a ways have
dec ar at ve sent ences n m nd. Now, sent ences ar e sa d t o
descr be st at es of af f a r s. St at es of af f a r s ar e ob| ect ve
ent t es wh ch ex st ndependent y of whet her we per ce ve
t hem or not , or whet her we speak about t hem or not . I mag ne
now t he f o ow ng st at e of af f a r s. A per son ca ed | ohn s
s t t ng n h s st udy and s engaged n wr t ng a et t er .
Th s ver y st at e of af f a r s may be expr essed by t he speaker
Not ce, however , t hat t wou d not be t oo d f f cu t t o ex-
t end t he pr esent ana ys s t o nondec ar at ves as we . For t h s
pur pose one cou d s mp y adapt one of t he met hods used n
og c f or t he t r ut hf unct ona ana ys s of nondec ar at ves.
THE ASPECTUAL SYSTEM OF HUNGARI AN
297
n var ous ways . E t her one of t he f o ow ng sent ences wou d
cor r ect y expr ess t he st at e of af f a r s at hand.
( 6) ( a) | anos eve et r .
appr ox. ' | ohn s do ng et t er wr t ng'
( b) | anos r egy eve et .
' | ohn s wr t ng a et t er '
( c) | anos r | a a eve et .
' | ohn s wr t ng t he et t er '
( d) | anos r .
' | ohn s wr t ng'
The sent ences ( 6) ( a) - ( d) expr ess t he var ous ways n wh ch
t he speaker v ews t he st at e of af f a r s at hand: He may be
mor e or ess spec f c; and t h s need not have t o do w t h
d f f er ences n know edge. He may know exact y what | ohn s
wr t ng. But depend ng on h s commun cat ve nt ent on he
may | ust say ( 6) ( d) , . e. t he east spec f c st at ement , or
( 6) ( c) , . e. t he mos t spec f c st at ement . Sent ences ( 6) ( a) -
( d) ar e not on y d f f er ent w t h r espect t o t he degr ee of
spec f c t y, however . They a so expr ess var ous as pect s , as
we sha see mmed at e y. We sha say t hat t he var ous
ver ba expr ess ons of t he same st at e of af f a r s r epr esent
var ous s t uat ons. Thus , n br ef , ( 6) ( a) - ( d) ar e sa d t o
expr ess or t o r epr esent var ous s t uat ons.
Par aphr as ng B. Comr e, we may now def ne t he not on of
7
aspect n t he f o ow ng f ash on .
By aspect we sha under st and t he nt er na t me st r uc-
t ur e of a s t uat on.
Lyons ( op. c t . p. 483) uses t he t er m s t uat on as a cover
t er m f or s t at es , event s , pr ocesses and act ons.
7
Cf . Comr e 1976 f or t he def n t on of aspect ( p. 3. ) and
f or an nsp r ng d scuss on of t he var ous aspect ua oppo-
s t ons. Cf . a so Lyons 1977. I t shou d be not ed, nc dent a -
y, t hat one may s mp y use t he t er m ' sent ence' nst ead of
' s t uat on' n t he def n t on of aspect .
Aspect s t hus a pr oper t y of s t uat ons. S t uat ons
ar e expr essed by sent ences. Hence aspect s a pr oper t y of
sent ences and not of ver bs . I n t he pr esent f r amewor k t does
not even make sense t o speak of t he aspect of ver bs . Ther e
ar e var ous f act or s wh ch cont r but e t o t he aspect of t he
sent ence, t he f or m of t he ver b s on y one of t hem. I n add -
t on t o t he f or m of t he ver b at east t he f o ow ng e ement s
may cont r but e n an essent a way t o t he aspect of t he sen-
t ence: t me adver b a s , p ace adver b a s , t he f or m of noun
phr ases ( def n t e, ndef n t e, zer o ar t c e) , and t he va en-
cy ( or case) st r uct ur e of t he pr ed cat e.
I n a cer t a n s ens e, however , we may speak of t he aspect
of ver bs . I nf or ma y, one may, f or examp e, def ne t n t he
f o ow ng way: The aspect of a ver b s t s cont r but on t o
t he aspect of t he sent ence. Th s cont r but on may be ex ca -
y det er m ned - as n t he case of pa r s such as r ( mp. ) -
meg r ( per f . ) ' wr t e' , or t may be t he r esu t of t he Mood,
Tens e, et c. spec f cat on of t he ver b.
We ar e now n a pos t on t o embar k on t he d scuss on
of t he var ous aspect ua cat egor es wh ch ar e essent a f or
t he descr pt on of t he Hungar an aspect ua syst em- .
3. Mos t of t he d st nct ons t o be made n t h s sect on ar e
we - known f r om t he t er at ur e. We s ha , however , d ver ge
f r om t r ad t on at sever a po nt s , as w be seen d r ect y.
3. 1. St at c and dynam c s t uat ons
Our nt u t ve under st and ng of t hese t er ms s t h s : st at c
s t uat ons descr be s t at es , dynam c s t uat ons descr be pr o-
cesses, event s or act v t es. I n gener a , a sent ence de-
scr b ng a st at c s t uat on wou d cont a n a st at ve pr ed -
8
cat e .
I n t he sense of Lakof f 1966.
299
St at i c si t uat i ons can be di st i ngui shed f r om dynami c si t ua-
t i ons by means of var i ous t est s. Thus , f or exampl e, onl y
sent ences descr i bi ng dynami c si t uat i ons can be answer s t o
quest i ons of t ype ( 7) .
( 7) What does do?
Thus , sent ences ( 8) ( a) - ( c) expr ess dynami c si t uat i ons, wher e-
as sent ences ( 9) ( a) - ( c) expr ess st at i c si t uat i ons.
( 8) ( a) J ohn i s eat i ng.
( b) The car i s movi ng.
( c) Mar y i s bui l di ng a hous e.
( 9) ( a) The book bel ongs t o J ohn.
( b) The bi g box cont ai ns cakes.
( c) J ohn knows t hat Mar y i s cl ever .
The f act t hat somet hi ng i s bei ng done can be expr essed
by t he pr edi cat e f eat ur e DO ( x, y) . Dynami c si t uat i ons such
as ( 8) ( a) - ( b) coul d t hus be gi ven a schemat i c semant i c r ep-
r esent at i on ( 10) .
( 10) D0( x, y) & A( x) & B( y)
The var i abl es and y may t ake var i ous val ues , e. g. may be
' J ohn' and y ' eat i ng' , or may be ' car ' and y ' movi ng' , et c.
As f or st at i c s i t uat i ons , one may st i pul at e - anal o-
gousl y t o ( 10) - t he f ol l owi ng schemat i c r epr esent at i on:
( 11) STATE( x, y) & A( x) & B( y)
wher e STATE( x, y) means t hat i s i n t he st at e y.
3. 2. I mper f ect i ve and per f ect i ve si t uat i ons
I f t he i nt er nal t i me st r uct ur e of a sent ence can be spl i t
up i nt o di scr et e t i me poi nt s , t he sent ence descr i bes an i m-
per f ect i ve s i t uat i on, i f t hi s i s not t he cas e, we have t o
do wi t h a per f ect i ve si t uat i on. I n ot her wor ds , t he i nt er nal
t i me st r uct ur e of a per f ect i ve si t uat i on i s vi ewed as an un-
di vi si bl e whol e.
Thi s di f f er ence i n i nt er nal t i me st r uct ur e can cl ear -
l y be seen f r om t he f ol l owi ng exampl es :
300
( 12) ( a) Am kor Anna r | a a ecket , nem szabad ot za-
var n .
' When Ann pr epar es her homewor k, she mus t not
be d st ur bed'
( b) * Am kor Anna meg r | a a ecket , nem szabad ot
zavar n .
( Of cour s e, am kor ' when' has t o be nt er pr et ed her e as r e-
f er r ng t o t he nt er na t me of t he ' pr epar ng of t he home-
wor k' . ) ( 12) ( b) d f f er s f r om ( 12) ( a) on y n t hat t he ad-
ver b a c ause cont a ns a per f ect ve pr ed cat e ( . e. a pr e-
d cat e wh ch may br ng about a per f ect ve s t uat on) . ' To
pr epar e t he homewor k' n t he mper f ect ve sense has an n-
t er na t me st r uct ur e w t h var ous d scr et e t me po nt s :
dur ng t he t me of Ann' s homewor k wr t ng sever a ot her
t h ngs may happen: somebody may w sh t o t a k t o her or t o
p ay w t h her , et c. I f , on t he ot her hand, ' t o pr epar e t he
homewor k' s t aken n t he per f ect ve s ens e, t h s s not pos -
s b e. Th s does not mean, however , t hat per f ect ve s t ua-
t ons cannot be ext ended n t me, n f act , t hey ver y of t en
can, as we sha see pr esent y.
I n Hungar an we of t en f nd mper f ect ve- per f ect ve ver b
9
pa r s . Cons der
Sent ences such as ( 13) ( a) - ( b) can, n f act , be used as t es t s ,
. e. , f or dec d ng whet her we have t o do w t h genu ne per f ec-
t ve- mper f ect ve ver b pa r s . The f o ow ng sent ences ar e,
f or examp e, ungr ammat ca .
( a) * Pt er nemcsak t | a, hanem meg s t | a Annat .
' Pet er does not on y see Ann, but he a so cat ches
s ght of her '
( b) * Anna nemcsak f ut , hanem e s f ut az z et be.
' Ann s not on y r unn ng, she s r unn ng nt o
t he shop'
( 13) ( a) Pet er nemcsak o vassa, hanem e s o vassa a
knyvet .
' Pet er w not on y r ead t he book, but he w
a so r ead t t o t he end'
( b) Anna nemcsak s zp t , hanem meg s szep t .
' Ann has not on y become pr et t er , she has
become pr et t y'
I n t hese sent ences we f nd t he mper f ect ve- per f ect ve ver b
pa r s o vas - e o vas , szep - megs zep . Each sent ence
cont a ns an mper f ect ve s t uat on and a per f ect ve s t ua-
t on wh ch ar e cont r ast ed w t h each ot her . Th s cont r ast
can be par aphr ased as f o ows: act on ver sus comp et ed ac-
t on.
Ther e ar e per f ect ve ver bs t hat do not have mper f ec-
t ve count er par t s.
( 14) ( a) Anna nagyap| a t egnap megha t .
' Ann' s gr andf at her d ed yest er day'
( b) A szekr eny megmozdu t .
' The war dr obe moved ( =made a movement ) '
( c) Pet er e kezdet t t anu n .
' Pet er st ar t ed ear n ng'
But her e, t oo, t he per f ect ve s t uat on expr esses an event
whose t me st r uct ur e s an nd v s b e who e. Th s f o ows
n t he pr esent case qu t e nat ur a y f r om t he f act t hat ( 14)
( a) - ( c) descr be moment ar y event s .
Not ce, nc dent a y, t hat t he ver bs n ( 15) ( a) - ( c)
can a so occur w t hout pr ef xes : ha , moz du , kezd. These ver bs ,
t oo, ar e per f ect ve t hough on y t he ast one can r ep ace t s
pr ef xed f or m: ( 15) ( c) s f u y equ va ent w t h ( 14) ( c) . As
t o t he ot her t wo ver bs t may be not ed t hat ha s d s t r bu-
t ona y d f f er ent f r om megha and occur s ma n y n expr es -
s ons such as ( 15) ( a) . I n cont r ast t o megmozdu t he ver b moz -
du r equ r es an ob| ect , t hat s , we have t o say somet h ng
ke ( 15) ( b) .
( 15) ( a) Anna nagyapj a hsi ha t ha t .
' Ann' s gr andf at her d ed n t he war ( t . d ed
a her o' s deat h) '
( b) A szekr eny mozdu t egyet .
t . ' The war dr obe made a movement '
( c) Pet er kezdet t t anu n .
Sent ences ( 14) ( b) and ( 15) ( b) ar e not f u y equ va ent ,
t hough. We sha r et ur n t o t h s quest on pr esent y.
Per f ect ve s t uat ons t hus d f f er f r om ot her dynam c
s t uat ons n t hat t hat t hey have an nd v s b e nt er na t -
me st r uct ur e. Schemat ca y:
( 16) DO( x, y) & A( x) & B( y)
Cond t on: E nd v s b e
S t uat ons t hat expr ess moment ar y event s wh ch br ng about a
change of st at e ( cf . ( 14) ( a) and ( 14) ( c) ) ar e assoc at ed w t h
1 _
t he pr esuppos t on ( 17) ( a) and t he ent a ment ( 17) ( b)
( 17) ( a) At t
1
<
t
i s i n st at e S.
( b) At t
2
> E
t
x i s i n st at e S
?
and S
1
i s t he negat i on of S
2
For ( 14) ( a) S
1
= Ann' s gr andf at her i s al i ve, S = Ann' s gr and-
f at her i s dead, f or ( 14) ( c) S
1
= Pet er was not l ear ni ng, S =
Pet er was l ear ni ng.
As t o i mper f ect i ve s i t uat i ons , t he onl y t hi ng we have
t o do i s t o al t er t he condi t i on i n ( 16) . For i mper f ect i ve
si t uat i ons,
t
wi l l be di vi si bl e.
So f ar we have onl y consi der ed dynami c i mper f ect i ve
si t uat i ons. Does i t make sense t o speak of st at i c i mper f ec-
t i ve si t uat i ons? The answer depends on whet her t he i nt er nal
t i me st r uct ur e of st at i c si t uat i ons i s ( or can be) di vi si bl e.
10
I n t he case of moment ar y event s , i t does not make any
sense t o say t hat t he event di dn' t t ake pl ace at t
1
and i t
di d t ake pl ace at t
2
. I n f act , t her e i s no t
2
i ndi st i ngui sha-
bl e f r om E . ( 17) ( a) - ( b) wi l l al so be t he pr oper t y of a f ur -
t her cl ass of per f ect i ve s i t uat i ons , however , t o be di scussed
l at er on.
I t s easy t o see t hat st at c s t uat ons do not have a d v s b e
nt er na t me st r uct ur e. One cannot say * Am kor | nos t | a Annt ,
ez es ez t r t n k ' When | ohn sees Ann, t h s and t h s happens ' .
When- c auses n t he nt ended mean ng ar e mposs b e w t h st at c
s t uat ons. Th s does not mean, however , t hat st at c s t uat ons
have an nd v s b e nt er na t me st r uct ur e. I t wou d seem t hat
st at c s t uat ons do not have any nt er na t me st r uct ur e at a ,
t he r t me st r uct ur e s unspec f ed and t hey ar e a most t me ess.
3. 3. Dur at ve and nondur at ve s t uat ons
Dur at ve s t uat ons ar e ext ended n t me, nondur at ve s t ua-
t ons ar e not . These t wo s t uat ons can of t en be d st ngu shed
by means of adver b a s. Not ce t hat adver b a s can a so be
c ass f ed accor d ng t o whet her t hey expr ess ext ens on n t me
or punct ua t y. Th s c ass f cat on cut s acr oss t he c ass f ca-
t on g ven n Sect on 2. , wher e we d scussed t he c asses of n-
t er na and ext er na t me expr es s ons .
Dur at ve adver b a s ar e, f or examp e, who e n ght , dur -
ng t wo days , f or f ve hour s
7
et c.
Punct ua adver b a s ar e, f or examp e, at 8 o' c ock, at
t he beg nn ng of t h s mont h, n 1956, bef or e, af t er , et c.
Dur at ve s t uat ons , n gener a , adm t bot h dur at ve
and nondur at ve adver b a s, wher eas nondur at ve s t uat ons do
not adm t dur at ve adver b a s. Cons der
( 18) ( a) | ohn s wor k ng on h s t hes s t he who e n ght .
( b) | ohn s wor k ng on h s t hes s at 8 o' c ock.
( c) * | ohn st ar t ed wor k ng t he who e n ght .
Compar e a so t he Hungar an sent ences n ( 19) .
( 19) ( a) A ker ek t r a hosszat moz got t .
' The whee has been mov ng f or f ve hour s '
( b) *A ker ek t r a hos s zat megmozdu t .
' The whee has made a movement f or f ve hour s '
I n or der t o char act er ze dur at ve s t uat ons we have t o as-
sume t hat E does not mean a s ng e t me po nt but r at her an
nt er va ( t ' , t ' ) such t hat ( 10) ho ds f or any t . wh ch
f a s nt o t h s nt er va . Thus, dynam c dur at ve s t uat ons
ar e spec f ed by ( 20) ( a) and dynam c nondur at ve s t uat ons
by ( 20) ( b) .
( 20) ( a) D0( x, y) f or any t . of a t me nt er va ( t ' , t ' ' )
( b) D0( x, y) f or a s ng e t me po nt t (=E )
The oppos t on dur at ve - nondur at ve does not make any sense n
t he case of st at c s t uat ons, s nce t hese ar e ne t her dur at ve
nor nondur at ve. Not ce a so t hat one cannot say ( 21) :
( 21) | anos t r g t | a Annt .
' | ohn s see ng Ann f or f ve hour s'
I mper f ect ve s t uat ons ar e c ear y a ways dur at ve,
s nce d v s b t y of t me mp es dur at on. As t o per f ect ve
s t uat ons, however , we ar e at a oss s nce per f ect ve s t ua-
t ons ( sent ences) ar e never compat b e w t h dur at ve adver b -
a s. Not on y ( 19) ( b) s a bad sent ence ( wh ch cont a ns t he
moment ar y ver b megmozdu t ) but a so t he sent ences n ( 22) :
( 22) ( a) *Pet er t or a hosszat r t a meg a eve et .
' Pet er has wr t t en ( per f . ) t he et t er f or f ve
hour s'
( b) *Anna egesz nap f ozt e meg az ebedet .
' Ann has pr epar ed ( per f . ) t he d nner who e
day'
Yet t her e seems t o be a c ear d f f er ence bet ween moment ar y
event s and s t uat ons descr b ng act v t es such as ' wr t ng
( up) a et t er ' or ' pr epar ng a d nner ' . I n a way, ( 22) ( a) - ( b)
r epr esent dur at ve s t uat ons. I n or der t o be ab e t o
d st ngu sh bet ween dur at ve and nondur at ve per f ect ve s t ua-
t ons, we have f r st t o pr oceed and d scuss a f ur t her t ype of
aspect ua oppos t on, name y t he oppos t on t e c- at e c. Be-
f or e do ng t h s, however , we sha have t o make some f ur t her
r emar ks on per f ect ve s t uat ons.
I n some cases t wou d seem t hat nondur at ve s t uat ons
do adm t dur at ve adver b a s. Cons der
( 23) ( a) A f k kt nap a at t e r t k a hegycsucsot .
' The boys have r eached t he t op of t he moun-
t a n n t wo days '
( b) Pet er nhny or a a at t r a| t t a mego dsr a.
' Pet er has d scover ed t he so ut on n a
coup e of hour s '
( c) Anna nagyap| a t or a a at t megha t .
' Ann' s gr andf at her d ed n f ve hour s '
Not ce, however , t hat n t hese sent ences t he pr epos t on
a at t means ' ( w t h) n' r at her t han ' dur ng' . E s n a
t hese cases | ust a s ng e t me po nt and not an nt er va .
The nt er va nd cat ed by t he t me adver b a s t he t me
wh ch was needed n or der t o r each t he event descr bed by
t he s t uat on. Consequent y, t s st t r ue t hat nondur a-
t ve s t uat ons n gener a do not adm t dur at ve adver b a s.
Cf . t he examp es ( 18) and ( 19) . Not ce f ur t her mor e t hat t he
examp es ( 23) ( a) - ( c) wou d be ungr ammat ca f t he pr epos -
t on a at t wer e r ep aced by t he pr epos t on at. mean ng ' dur -
ng' wh ch s used t o const r uct dur at ve adver b a s.
( 24) *A f k kt napon t r t k e a hegycs ucs ot .
Ther e seems t o be on y one except on t o t he above r u e. I n
some cases dur at ve adver b a s may g ve r se t o an t er at ve
nt er pr et at on. I n t h s way, t he cont r ad ct on bet ween t he
dur at v t y of t he adver b a and t he nondur at v t y of t he or -
g na s t uat on s r eso ved. Cons der
( 25) ( a) Pt er t bb napon t nyer t .
' Pet er won dur ng sever a days '
( b) Anna t bb napon t kapot t eve et Pet er t o .
' Ann has r ece ved et t er s f r om Pet er dur ng
sever a days '
The s t uat ons w t hout t he t me adver b a ar e c ear y non-
dur at ve. St t hey adm t t he nondur at ve adver b a t bb na-
pon t . ( 25) ( a) can, however , on y be nt er pr et ed t er at ve y:
Pet er won sever a t mes dur ng t he g ven nt er va . S m ar y
( 25) ( b) : Ann r ece ved sever a et t er s f r om Pet er dur ng t he
g ven t me nt er va . I n cases when t he t er at ve nt er pr et a-
t on s not pos s b e, t he use of dur at ve t me adver b a r e-
su t s n an unaccept ab e sent ence.
I t wou d t hus seem t hat ' dur at ve adver b a + nondur a-
t ve s t uat on' may g ve r se t o an t er at ve ( or dur at ve)
nt er pr et at on. Whet her t h s s poss b e or not ( or whet her
t he nt er pr et at on s dur at ve r at her t han t er at ve) w
depend on sever a f act or s : on t he mean ng of t he ver b, on
1 1
t he f or m of t he ob| ect , et c.
3. 4. Te c and at e c s t uat ons
A t e c s t uat on cont a ns a goa , t owar ds wh ch t s d -
r ect ed. At e c s t uat ons ar e not d r ect ed t owar ds a goa .
I n t he case of t e c s t uat ons, f t he goa has not been
r eached t he s t uat on s ncomp et e, t he pr ocess or act v t y
has been nt er r upt ed n some way. I n t he case of at e c s t ua-
t ons , on t he ot her hand, t he s t uat on s comp et e at what -
ever t me po nt t t er m nat es. Sent ences n ( 26) exemp f y
t e c s t uat ons, t hose n ( 27) at e c s t uat ons.
(26) (a) Anna egy l eve l et i r .
' Ann s wr t ng a et t er '
( b) | anos egy hzat p t .
' | ohn s bu d ng a hous e'
( 27) ( a) Pet er | t sz k.
' Pet er s p ay ng'
( b) | anos f ut .
' | ohn s r unn ng'
I f t he pr ocess or act v t y descr bed by sent ences ( 27) ( a) - ( b)
1
( 25) ( a) - ( b) ar e exampl es f or t he i t er at i ve i nt er pr et at i on.
The dur at i ve i nt er pr et at i on pr evai l s i n cases such as
( a) Tbb napon at eset t az eso.
' I t was r a n ng dur ng sever a days '
( b) Pet er egsz het en at nem vot t .
' Pet er d dn' t dr nk dur ng t he who e week'
i s i nt er r upt ed, one may st i l l say t hat ' Pet er was pl ayi ng'
' J ohn was r unni ng' but , of cour se, one cannot say t hat ' Ann
1 2
wr ot e a l et t er ' or ' J ohn bui l t a house' . Sent ences such
as ( 27) ( a) - ( b) seem t o have an i mpl i cat i on not shar ed by sen-
t ences of t ype ( 26) ( a) - ( b) . We shal l r ef er t o t hi s i mpl i ca-
t i on as at el i c ent ai l ment . Some schol ar s have st i pul at ed t hat
t he at el i c ent ai l ment coul d be used as a t est i n or der t o
di st i ngui sh bet ween t el i c and at el i c si t uat i ons: onl y at el i c
1 3
si t uat i ons exhi bi t at el i c ent ai l ment s . Unf or t unat el y, how-
ever , t he t est br eaks down i f one consi der s a f ul l er r ange
1 4
of sent ence st r uct ur es, as we shal l see i mmedi at el y
I t i s an i nt er est i ng f eat ur e of Hungar i an t hat sen-
t ences wi t h zer o ar t i cl e cor r espondi ng t o ( 26) ( a) - ( b) de-
scr i be at el i c si t uat i ons.
( 28) ( a) Anna l evel et i r .
( b) J anos hzat p t .
Ther e i s no goal t owar d whi ch t he act i vi t i es descr i bed her e
1 5
woul d be di r ect ed
1 2
I t i s not al ways easy t o gi ve t he cor r ect Engl i sh t r ansl a-
t i ons of t he Hungar i an sent ences. The ent ai l ment s gi ven her e
seem t o be ambi guous bet ween a t el i c and an at el i c r eadi ng
wher eas t he Hungar i an count er par t s woul d be unambi guousl y t el -
i c.
1 3
Cf . Comr i e 1976: 44- 48. I don' t know wi t h whom t he i dea of
at el i c ent ai l ment or i gi nat es. At any r at e, i t i s al so men-
t i oned i n Kl ei n 1974.
1 4
A cr i t i ci sm of at el i c ent ai l ment can al so be f ound i n Dahl
1978.
Const r uct i ons such as ( 28) ( a) - ( b) bel ong t o t he par t i c-
ul ar i t i es of Hungar i an. The obj ect s ar e i n a way i ncor -
por at ed i nt o t he meani ng of t he ver bs. What one pr edi -
cat es i n ( 28) ( a) of ' Anna' i s ' l et t er - wr i t i ng' . Si mi -
l ar l y, t he pr edi cat e i n ( 28) ( b) i s ' house- bui l di ng' . I f one
308
Ther e s a so an essent a d f f er ence bet ween sent ences
w t h ndef n t e ob| ect s and sent ences w t h def n t e ob| ect s .
Cons der
( 29) ( a) Anna r | a a eve et .
' Anna s wr t ng t he et t er '
( b) | anos ep t a hazat .
' | ohn s bu d ng t he house'
Now t he nt er est ng t h ng about t hese sent ences s t hat t hey
seem t o have at e c ent a ment s nsp t e of t he f act t hat t hey
ar e nt u t ve y f e t t o be c ear y descr b ng goa or ent ed
act v t es. One may nt er r upt t hese act v t es and st say
t hat ' Ann was wr t ng t he et t er ' or ' | ohn was bu d ng t he
hous e' . I t s a so ev dent t hat f t he act v t es n ( 29) ( a) -
( b) ar e f u y comp et ed, t hen t her e w be a et t er and a
house wher eas such a t h ng cannot be sa d of t he s t uat ons
descr bed by ( 26) ( a) - ( b) . Th s can c ear y be seen by con-
t r ast ng ( 30) ( a) and ( b)
1 6
.
( 30) ( a) Pet er p t egy haz at , de sosem kesz e ve e.
' Pet er s bu d ng a hous e, but he w never
f n sh t '
( b) * Pet er ep t a haz at , de sosem ks z e ve e.
' Pet er s bu d ng t he hous e, but he w never
f n sh t '
( f oot not e 15 cont nued) wer e t o use t he ndef n t e ar t c e
n t hese s ent ences , one wou d aut omat ca y t ur n t hem nt o
descr pt ons of t e c s t uat ons .
1 6
I t was po nt ed out t o me by R. Het zr on t hat wor d or der and
emphas s may change t he s t uat on. Cf .
( a) * Pt er egy szket cs na , de sosem kesz e
ve e .
nst ead of ( 30) ( a) , and
( b) Pet er csak cs n | a a s z ket , de sosem kesz
e ve e.
t . ' Pet er s | ust mak ng t he cha r but he w
never f n sh t '
Th s s, however , not t he who e st or y. Ther e s a so a d f -
f er ence bet ween ' ef f ect ed ob| ect s' ( ' ob| ect s of r esu t ' )
and ' af f ect ed ob| ect s' .
( 31) ( a) Pet er o vas egy u| sagot .
' Pet er s r ead ng a newspaper '
( b) Pet er o vassa az u| sagot .
Pet er s r ead ng t he newspaper '
Sent ences ( 31) ( a) - ( b) cont a n ' af f ect ed ob| ect s' : t hey seem
bot h t o expr ess at e c s t uat ons. Not h ng nd cat es t hat t he
act v t y of r ead ng has as t s goa t he r ead ng of t he news-
paper f r omt he beg nn ng t o t he end or t he comp et on of t he
r ead ng of t h ngs wh ch one gener a y r eads n a news-
paper .
Let us cont r ast next t he f o ow ng sent ences :
( 32) (a) Pet er p t et t egy hazat .
' Pet er has bu t a house'
( b) Pt er p t et t e a hzat .
t . ' Pet er has been bu d ng on t he house'
C ear y, on y ( 32) ( a) ent a s t hat t her e s a house. I n or der
t o d st ngu sh bet ween t hese t wo t e c s t uat ons ( cf . a so
( 26) ( a) - ( c) and ( 29( a) - ( c) ) we sha say t hat s t uat ons
whose ngu st c expr ess ons cont a n an ndef n t e ob| ect of
r esu t ar e r esu t at ve wher eas s t uat ons whose ngu st c
expr ess ons cont a n def n t e ob| ect s of r esu t ar e nonr esu t -
at ve. Resu t at v t y t hus d st ngu shes bet ween t wo t e c
s t uat ons. At e c ent a ment s ar e char act er st c of nonr e-
su t at ve but not of r esu t at ve s t uat ons.
Nonr esu t at ve s t uat ons can, however , eas y be
t ur ned nt o r esu t at ve s t uat ons: t hey have t o be ooked
upon f r om a per f ect ve po nt of v ew. To put t d f f er ent y,
t hey have t o be ' per f ect v zed' . That s, t he f o ow ng
s t uat ons ar e a r eady r esu t at ve:
( 33) ( a) Anna meg r | a a eve et .
( b) | anos megp t a hzat .
Not ce f ur t her mor e t hat t he per f ect ve f or m of t he ver b cs -
n ' do' , . e. megcs na , f used nst ead of t he mper f ec-
t ve f or m n ( 32) ( a) , wou d not change anyt h ng on t he as-
pect ua st r uct ur e of t he sent ence.
( 34) Pet er megep t et t egy hazat .
Now, what ever t he d f f er ence bet ween ( 32) ( a) and ( 34) may be,
t cer t a n y does not concer n t he t e c or per f ect ve char ac-
t er of t he s t uat on at hand. Consequent y, t seems r eason-
ab e t o assume t hat ( 32) ( a) s not on y t e c but a so per f ec-
t ve. I f , however , one uses t he Pr esent Tense f or ms of t he
ver bs p t - megep t , t he s t uat ons descr bed w be d f -
f er ent . ( 35) ( a) s t e c but not per f ect ve, ( 35) ( b) s bot h
t e c and per f ect ve.
( 35) ( a) Pet er p t egy hzat .
' Pet er s bu d ng a house'
( b) Pet er megp t egy hzat .
Th s seems t o nd cat e t hat t her e s an nt r cat e nt er p ay
bet ween r ef er ence t me and t he nt er na t me st r uct ur e of t he
s t uat on. I n Hungar an some of t he aspect ua oppos t ons
seem t o be neut r a zed n Past Tense, as we saw above. We
sha have t o say no mor e about t h s t op c her e, however .
The quest on s now how t e c s t uat ons can be char ac-
t er zed mor e f or ma y. Let us f r st t r y t o answer t he ques-
t on of what goa or ent ed act v t y means. Reca t hat bot h
t e c and at e c s t uat ons ar e dur at ve s t uat ons. Conse-
quent y, bot h s t uat ons t ake p ace n a t me nt er va ( t ' ,
t ' ' ) . I n t he case of at e c s t uat ons any phase of t he ac-
t v t y or pr ocess n quest on s t he same, . e. f or any t . ,
t . ( t ' , t
1
' ) and t
i
. t
j
. t he cor r espondi ng phases ar e i den-
t i cal . I f J ohn i s r unni ng dur i ng t he i nt er val ( t ' , t ' ' ) , hi s
r unni ng at t i me poi nt t . ( phase f . ) cannot be di st i ngui shed
f r omhi s r unni ng at t i me poi nt t . ( phase f . ) wher e t
i
. , t
j
.
( t ' , t ' ' ) . I t i s di f f er ent wi t h t el i c si t uat i ons, however .
I f we have a t el i c si t uat i on, t hen at l east some of t he
phases of t he act i vi t y or pr ocess i n quest i on must not be
i dent i cal . One cannot bui l d a house by r epeat i ng al l t he
t i me exact l y t he same act i vi t y. Nor mal l y each phase br i ngs
us cl oser t o what can be consi der ed t o be t he goal : t o f i n-
i sh t he house, t o compl et e t he si ngi ng of a song, t o dr i nk
up al l t he wi ne, et c. Typi cal l y, t he goal i s gi ven by t he
di r ect obj ect of t he ver b but t hi s need not be so. I t woul d
seemt hat t el i c si t uat i ons r epr esent quant i f i abl e pr ocesses
or act i vi t i es. Thi s i s cor r obor at ed by t he f act t hat one may
ask a quest i on such as
( 36) How f ar has come wi t h y?
onl y i n t he case of t el i c si t uat i ons. As possi bl e answer s we
may get ' He i s al most r eady' , ' I t i s al most f i ni shed' , ' i t
has made a gr eat pr ogr ess' , et c. Tel i c si t uat i ons may t hus
be gi ven t he f ol l owi ng r epr esent at i on:
( 37) Mor eDO( x, y) & A( x) & _( _)
( 37) s assoc at ed w t h t he f o ow ng cond t on:
( 38) Ther e ar e at east t wo t me po nt s t . , t .
( t ' , t ' ' ) , wher e ( t ' , t ' ' ) i s t he t i me i nt er val
dur i ng whi ch t he si t uat i on at hand t akes pl ace,
such t hat t he act i vi t y or pr ocess descr i bed by
t he si t uat i on i s cl oser t o i t s goal at t
j
. t han
at t
j
. ( t
j
. > t
i
. ) .
I t goes wi t hout sayi ng t hat t el i c si t uat i ons ar e aut o-
mat i cal l y dur at i ve and dynami c but t hey ar e al so i mper f ect i ve
si nce t i s di vi si bl e.
At el i c si t uat i ons ar e r epr esent abl e as dynami c si t ua-
t i ons. They ar e al ways dur at i ve, dynami c and i mper f ect i ve.
Bef or e concl udi ng t hi s sect i on l et us have a l ook at
a f ur t her t ype of t el i c si t uat i on r epr esent ed by ( 39) ( a) - ( b) .
( 39) ( a) Anna szp .
' Ann s get t ng pr et t er '
( b) Pet er csunyu .
' Pet er s get t ng ug er '
These pr ocesses ar e cl ear l y goal - or i ent ed. Not i ce f ur t her mor e
t hat ( 39) ( a) - ( b) ar e associ at ed wi t h at el i c ent ai l ment s: af -
t er t he per t i nent pr ocesses have set i n, i ndependent l y of at
whi ch poi nt t hey t er mi nat e ( t hey may be i nt er r upt ed at any
poi nt ) one may al ways say t hat ' Ann has become pr et t i er ' or
' Pet er has become ugl i er ' . That i s, wi t h ( 39) ( a) - ( b) we have
a f ur t her case wher e t el i c si t uat i ons br i ng about at el i c en-
t ai l ment s .
I f t he si t uat i ons ( 39) ( a) - ( b) ar e per f ect i vi zed we get
( 40) ( a) Anna megszpl .
(b) Pet er megcsunyul .
For ( 40) ( a) - ( b) t he pr esupposi t i on ( 17) ( a) and t he ent ai l ment
( 17) ( b) obt ai n.
I n gener al , we shal l say t hat a si t uat i on i s i nchoat i ve
i f and onl y i f t he si t uat i on i s associ at ed wi t h ( 17) ( a) - ( b) .
I nchoat i ve si t uat i ons t hus const i t ut e a subgr oup of per f ec-
t i ve si t uat i ons.
Not i ce, i nci dent al l y, t hat one mi ght t hi nk of al l per -
f ect i ve si t uat i ons, except nondur at i ve and noni nchoat i ve per -
f ect i ve si t uat i ons, as bei ng associ at ed wi t h somet hi ng l i ke
( 17) ( a) - ( b) . I f Pet er i s bui l di ng a house, t hen, when t hi s
act i vi t y has been compl et ed, t her e wi l l be a house, and t hi s
r epr esent s a new st at e. Thi s new st at e di d not exi st bef or e
t he compl et i on of t he act i on. Thus vi ewed t he pr esupposi t i on
and ent ai l ment associ at ed wi t h i nchoat i ve si t uat i ons woul d
1 7
onl y be a speci al case of a mor e gener al phenomenon
I n sum, t hen, per f ect i vi t y has t wo sour ces, one i s t he
st r uct ur e ( 37) , t he ot her t he st r uct ur e ( 10) wi t h condi t i on
( 20) ( b) . Onl y i n t he f or mer case can per f ect i vi t y be i nt er -
pr et ed as ' compl et ed act i on' , ' achi evement of t he goal ' , et c.
1 7
I di scuss var i ous aspect s of i nchoat i vi t y i n Ki ef er ( f or t h-
comi ng) . Ther e I al so make an at t empt t o def i ne i nchoat i vi t y
mor e pr eci sel y and t hus del i mi t i t vi s- - vi s ot her per f ect i ve
si t uat i ons.
Per f ect i ve si t uat i ons whi ch ar e nondur at i ve ( moment ar y) can-
not be i nt er pr et ed i n t hi s way.
Recal l now t hat we have not as yet def i ned what shoul d
be under st ood by a dur at i ve per f ect i ve si t uat i on. We may now
st i pul at e t hat per f ect i ve si t uat i ons whi ch r esul t f r om t el i c
si t uat i ons be consi der ed dur at i ve and per f ect i ve si t uat i ons
whi ch have ot her sour ces be consi der ed nondur at i ve.
3. 5. Summar y of t he aspect ual opposi t i ons
I n di scussi ng t he aspect ual st r uct ur e of si t uat i ons we have
encount er ed t he f ol l owi ng t ypes of i nt er nal t i me st r uct ur e:
( 41) ( a) E
t
i s di vi si bl e
i . e. E
t
can be spl i t up i nt o di scr et e t i me
poi nt s
( b) E
t
i s i ndi vi si bl e
i . e. E
t
cannot be spl i t up i nt o di scr et e t i me
poi nt s
( e) E
t
i s dur at i ve
i . e. E
t
l ast s f or some t i me
( d) E i s moment ar y
i . e. E
t
cannot l ast
( e) E
t
i s unspeci f i ed
i . e. E
t
has pr act i cal l y no i nt er nal t i me
st r uct ur e
These ar e t he el ement s of our t i me l ogi c. Thi s t i me l ogi c
shoul d be abl e t o account f or t he f act t hat i f E
t
i s momen-
t ar y i t i s al so i ndi vi si bl e and i f E
t
i s di vi si bl e i t i s al so
dur at i ve.
Let us denot e t he t i me speci f i cat i ons of ( 4 ) ( a) - ( e) by
t
d'
t
i d'
t
du'
t
m
and t
us'
r espect i vel y. Fur t her mor e, l et us
assume t hat t i me speci f i cat i on i s par t of t he char act er i za-
t i on of pr edi cat es. We get
( 42) ( a) DO( x, y, t
m
) _ DO( x, y, t
d
)
( b) DO( x, y, t
d
) D DO( x, y, t
du
)
Let us r epr esent t he t me st r uct ur e of dynam c s t uat ons by t
t can be e t her one of t
d
, t
d
, t
du
, t
m
.
The var ous aspect ua s t uat ons can schemat ca y be
r epr esent ed as f o ows.
( 43) ( a) St at c s t uat ons
STATE( x, y, t
d
) & A( x) & B( y)
( b) Dynam c s t uat ons
DO( x, y, t
us
) & A( x) & B( y)
( c) Dur at ve s t uat ons
P RED( x , y , t
d u
) & A( x) & B( y)
( d) Nondur at ve s t uat ons
DO( x, y, t
m
) & A( x) & B( y)
( e) Te c s t uat ons
Mor eDO( x, y, t
d
, ) & A( x) & B( y)
( f ) At e c s t uat ons
DO( x, y, t
d
) & A( x) & B( y)
( g) Per f ect ve s t uat ons
DO( x, y, t
d
) & A( x) & B( y)
Mor eDO( x, y, t
d
) & A( x) & B( y)
( h) I mper f ect ve s t uat ons
PRED( x, y, t
d
) & A( x) & B( y)
Fr om t hese spec f cat ons we may r ead of f t he f o ow ng r e a-
t ons :
( 44) ( a) St at c s t uat ons ar e opposed t o dynam c
s t uat ons but t hey do not ent er nt o
t he oppos t ons dur at ve - nondur at ve,
per f ect ve - mper f ect ve and t e c -
at e c.
( b) Nondur at ve s t uat ons ar e per f ect ve. For ma y
| - dur at ve| | +per f ect ve|
( c) Bot h t e c and at e c s t uat ons ar e a ways
mper f ect ve, dur at ve and dynam c. For ma y
- per f ect ve|
+dur at ve
- st at c
I t s ev dent t hat f r om among t he f our oppos t ons
d scussed t he oppos t on st at c- dynam c s t he most bas c
one s nce t y e ds a d chot omy of a s t uat ons. The oppo-
s t ons dur at ve- nondur at ve and per f ect ve- mper f ect ve
c ass f y dynam c s t uat ons on y. The oppos t on t e c- at e c
pr ov des a par t t on ng of dur at ve s t uat ons. To t hese we
may add t he oppos t on nchoat ve- non nchoat ve wh ch g ves
a subc ass f cat on of per f ect ve s t uat ons. Let us r est r ct
our se ves t o t he oppos t ons st at c- dynam c, dur at ve- nondur a-
t ve, per f ect ve- mper f ect ve f or a moment . For s mp c t y' s
sake we sha r ef er t o t hese by means of t he b nar y f eat ur es
. These f eat ur es g ve us t he f o ow ng
comb nat ons :
Fr om t hese we can e m nat e t he ast mat r x s nce t cont a ns
t he nadm ss b e f eat ur e comb nat on:
| - dur at ve| , | - per f ect ve |
Reca t hat a nondur at ve s t uat ons ar e aut omat ca y per -
f ect ve. Af t er t he app cat on of t he r edundancy r u es ( 44) ( a) -
(b) we get t he f o ow ng mat r ces:
I f we now want t o t ake nt o account t he t e c- at e c oppos t on
as we , t hen t he on y t h ng we have t o do s t o subd v de t he
mat r x ( 45) ( c) . On t he ot her hand, f we want t o nc ude t he
oppos t on nchoat ve- non nchoat ve, t h s can be done by sub-
d v d ng t he mat r ces ( 45) ( b) and ( d) . I n what f o ows we sha
cons der t he subd v s on of ( 45) ( c) on y. We t hus end up w t h
t he f o ow ng c ass f cat on:
e. g. megszp ' s becom ng pr et t y
or pr et t er ' , e but u ' s becom ng
st up d' , meg r | a a ecket ' s wr t -
ng t he homewor k' , meg ssza a bor t
' s dr nk ng up t he w ne'
e. g. f ut ' s r unn ng' , neke ' s
s ng ng' , set a ' s mak ng a pr o-
menade '
e. g. r | a a ecket ' s wr t ng t he
homewor k' , ssza a bor t ' s dr nk-
ng t he w ne' , cs n egy szket
' s mak ng a cha r '
e. g. e kezd ' beg ns' , megha ' d es' ,
megmozdu ' makes a move' , e ndu
' st ar t go ng'
By ook ng at t he s t uat ons ( 43) ( a) - ( h) t s easy t o see
t hat not a aspect ua oppos t ons nvo ve d f f er ent nt er na
t me st r uct ur es. Take, f or examp e, ( 43) ( a) - ( b) . Ther e s no
oppos t on as t o nt er na t me st r uct ur e bet ween st at c and
dynam c s t uat ons s nce, pr oper y speak ng, st at c s t uat ons
do not have any nt er na t me st r uct ur e. S m ar y, t he oppo-
s t on ( 41) ( e) - ( f ) has not h ng t o do w t h nt er na t me st r uc-
t ur e e t her , bot h t e c and at e c s t uat ons have t he t me
st r uct ur e t . . Thus, st r ct y speak ng, ( 43) ( a) - ( b) and ( 43) ( e) -
(f ) cannot be cons der ed as aspect ua oppos t ons. What makes
up t he oppos t on n t he case of ( 43) ( a) - ( b) s t he f act t hat
one s t uat on descr bes st at es and t he ot her pr ocesses, act v-
t es, et c. The oppos t on ( 43) ( e) - ( f ) , on t he ot her hand, s
based on t he f act t hat one t ype of s t uat on s goa or ent ed
wher eas t he ot her s not . These d f f er ences do not nvo ve a d f -
f er ence n nt er na t me st r uct ur e t hough t hey may have some
bear ng on t h s st r uct ur e. Thus, as we saw above, on y goa -
or ent ed act v t es or pr ocesses may g ve r se t o per f ect ve
s t uat ons f or on y dynam c s t uat ons can be non-
dur at i ve et c. The di f f er ences bet ween st at es and pr ocesses,
on t he one hand, and goal or i ent ed pr ocesses and non- goal
or i ent ed pr ocesses, on t he ot her , expr ess t he way i n whi ch
t he pr ocess t akes pl ace. We may r ef er t o such t ypes of oppo-
si t i ons i nf or mal l y as opposi t i ons of Akt i onsar t . We ar e, t hen,
l ef t wi t h t he genui ne aspect ual opposi t i ons dur at i ve- nondur a-
t i ve, per f ect i ve- nonper f ect i ve.
On t he basi s of t he di st i nct i on bet ween aspect and Ak-
t i onsar t pr oposed above one can easi l y assi gn some f ur t her
t ypes of si t uat i ons t o ei t her aspect or Akt i onsar t . I ncho-
at i ve si t uat i ons, as we saw, const i t ut e a subcl ass of per f ec-
t i ve si t uat i ons. I nchoat i ve si t uat i ons may be ei t her dur at i ve
or nondur at i ve. The same hol ds f or noni nchoat i ve si t uat i ons.
The opposi t i on bet ween i nchoat i ve and noni nchoat i ve si t ua-
t i ons t hus does not seem t o i nvol ve di f f er ences i n i nt er nal
t i me st r uct ur e and one may conj ect ur e t hat t hi s opposi t i on,
t oo, i s one of Akt i onsar t r at her t han one of aspect .
Ther e i s cer t ai nl y much mor e t o say about t hi s t opi c,
1 8
unf or t unat el y, however , we cannot pur sue i t any f ur t her
1 9
4. Some r emar ks on t he pr ef i xai syst emof Hungar i an
We ar e now pr epar ed t o have a l ook at t he quest i on i n whi ch
way pr ef i xes cont r i but e t o t he st r uct ur e of si t uat i ons. To
si mpl i f y exposi t i on, we shal l somet i mes speak of t he st at i c,
dynami c, dur at i ve, et c. meani ng of ver bs.
1 8
One may specul at e on t he st at us of ot her aspect ual opposi -
t i ons, f or exampl e, on whet her i t er at i vi t y i s a cat egor y of
aspect or of Akt i onsar t . I woul d conj ect ur e t hat i t er at i vi t y,
t oo, bel ongs t o Akt i onsar t r at her t han t o aspect . I shal l not
di scuss t hi s quest i on her e, however .
19
For a descr i pt i on of t he Hungar i an pr ef i x syst em, cf .
Sol t sz ( 1959) , Per r ot ( 1966) and t he r ef er ence gr ammar of Hun-
gar i an, A Mai Magyar Nyel v Rendszer e, 1970.
One of t he most i mpor t ant f unct i ons of Hungar i an pr e-
f i xes i s undoubt edl y per f ect i vi zat i on. I n t he case of t he
pr ef i x meg t hi s seems t o be t he onl y f unct i on. I n ot her cases,
f or exampl e, i n t he case of f el ' up' , l e ' down' , el ' away' ,
t he pr ef i x may al so det er mi ne t he di r ect i on of t he movement .
Thus, t he pr i mar y f unct i on of t hese pr ef i xes i s t o br i ng
about t el i c si t uat i ons ( goal - or i ent ed act i vi t i es, movement s,
et c. ) . Dependi ng on f ur t her condi t i ons, t hey may al so per f ec-
t i vi ze but t hi s need not be t he case.
The per f ect i vi zi ng f unct i on can, r oughl y, be put i n
t hi s way: ' make t he i nt er nal t i me st r uct ur e of t he si t uat i on
i ndi vi si bl e' .
4. 1. St at i c ver bs
The cl ass of st at i c ver bs compr i ses, among ot her s, t he ver bs
van ' be' , l et ezi k ' exi st ' , t ar t al maz ' cont ai n' , t ar t ozi k ' be-
l ong' , t ud ' know' , i smer ' know' ( cf . Ger man kennen, Fr ench
conna t r e) , l t ' see' hal l ' hear ' , szer et ' l ove' r l ' be
happy' , har agszi k ' be angr y' . St at i c si t uat i ons, as we saw
above, cannot be per f ect i ve. Never t hel ess, some of t he st at i c
ver bs ment i oned above seem t o have per f ect i ve f or ms: megt ud,
megi smer , megl t , megnal l , megszer et , megr l , meghar agszi k.
Not i ce, however , t hat al l t hese ver bs seem t o be r el at ed i n
a r at her st r ai ght f or war d way: t hey al l expr ess t he begi nni ng
20
of a cogni t i ve or emot i onal st at e . I n ot her wor ds, st at i c
ver bs i n Hungar i an f al l i nt o t wo gr oups: ( a) ver bs expr essi ng
exi st ence, appur t enance, possessi on, et c. and ( b) ver bs ex-
pr essi ng cogni t i ve or emot i onal st at es. Now, t he per f ect i ve
pr ef i x meg can onl y occur wi t h t hi s l at t er gr oup and t he
meani ng of t he ver b ' meg + cogni t i ve or emot i onal st at e' i s
al ways ' t he begi nni ng or set t i ng i n of a cogni t i ve or emo-
20
One not abl e except i on t o t hi s gener al i zat i on i s t he f or m
megvan f r omvan ' be' . Megvan may mean ' we have f ound i t , i t
i s r eady' , i . e. t he begi nni ng of some ki nd of ' subj ect i ve'
exi st ence. ( R. Het zr on, per sonal communi cat i on)
319
t i onal st at e' . Thi s means t hat i t i s not t he st at i c si t ua-
t i on t hat i s made per f ect i ve, i t i s r at her t he case t hat t he
per f ect i ve pr ef i x meg i s used t o der i ve new ver b meani ngs i n
a syst emat i c way.
Taki ng t oget her t he meani ng of meg and t he meani ng of
emot i onal or cogni t i ve s t at e, t he r esul t i ng appar ent cont r a-
di ct i on can onl y be r esol ved i f t he r esul t i ng pr ef i xed ver b
i s i nt er pr et ed as meani ng ei t her t he ( sudden) begi nni ng or
t he ( sudden) end of a st at e. St at es can never be dynami c,
hence per f ect i ve. I t i s now an i nt er est i ng f act about Hun-
gar i an t hat t he end of st at es never occur s as t he meani ng of
st at i c ver bs pr ef i xed wi t h meg. Thi s mus t t hus be account ed
f or i n t he gr ammar of Hungar i an r at her t han i n l i ngui st i c
t heor y.
4. 2. Nondur at i ve si t uat i ons
Si nce nondur at i ve si t uat i ons ar e al so per f ect i ve and nondur a-
t i ve ver bs cannot i n gener al be der i ved f r om dur at i ve ver bs
we may have t hr ee di f f er ent cas es : ( a) t he nondur at i ve ver b
i s pr ef i xed, t he cor r espondi ng nonpr ef i xed ver b has a meani ng
whi ch i s not r el at abl e i n any syst emat i c way t o t he meani ng
of t he pr ef i xed ver b, ( b) t he nondur at i ve ver b i s pr ef i xed
and t her e i s no cor r espondi ng unpr ef i xed ver b and, f i nal l y,
( c) t he nondur at i ve ver b can be ei t her pr ef i xed or unpr e-
f i xed, t he t wo ver bs do not exhi bi t any aspect ual di f f er ence.
Exampl es f or ( a) ar e megpi l l ant ' cat ch si ght of sb' ( pi l l ant
' l ook' ) , abbahagy ' i nt er r upt ' ( hagy ' l eave' ) , r j on ' r eal i ze'
21
One coul d t r y t o separ at e t he t wo gr oups of st at i ve pr e-
di cat es by means of t he f ol l owi ng t est . I t i s possi bl e t o say
' x begi ns t o y' wi t h t he second but not wi t h t he f i r st gr oup
of ver bs. Thus, ( a) i s qui t e possi bl e wher eas ( b) i s ungr am-
mat i cal .
( a) Anna el kezd r l ni .
' Ann st ar t s t o be happy'
( b) +A doboz kezdi t ar t al mazni cer uzt .
' The box begi ns t o cont ai n t he pen'
( | n ' come' ) , f e f edez ' d scover ' ( f edez ' pr ot ect ' ) , et c.
Case ( b) can be exemp f ed by bef e| ez ' f n sh' ( ?f e| ez) ,
e er ' r each' ( ?er ) and case ( c) by kezd- e kezd ' beg n' , ha -
me gh a 1 ' d e' . I t can never be t he case t hat t he pr ef xed ver b
s nondur at ve and t he unpr ef xed ver b s dur at ve and t he
t wo ver bs d f f er f r omeach ot her w t h r espect t o t he per f ec-
t ve- mper f ect ve oppos t on on y.
4. 3. Te c and at e c s t uat ons
Bot h t e c and at e c s t uat ons cont a n unpr ef xed ver bs, as
expect ed.
4. 4. Per f ect ve and mper f ect ve s t uat ons
One may expect per f ect ve - mper f ect ve ver b pa r s n t hose
cases on y when t h s oppos t on appear s w t h n a g ven aspec-
t ua cat egor y. St at c s t uat ons cannot be per f ect ve hence
no per f ect ve - mper f ect ve ver b pa r s w appear w t h n
st at c s t uat ons. Nondur at ve s t uat ons cannot be mper f ec-
t ve, hence t hey cannot g ve r se t o mper f ect ve - per f ec-
t ve ver b pa r s e t her . Dur at ve s t uat ons can be bot h per -
f ect ve and mper f ect ve, t hey ar e, however , f ur t her subd -
v ded nt o t e c and at e c s t uat ons. At e c s t uat ons can
on y be mper f ect ve, and t hey cannot be t ur ned nt o per f ec-
t ve s t uat ons . Te c s t uat ons, on t he ot her hand,
can be ' per f ect v zed' . Consequent y, we may expect t o f nd
per f ect ve - mper f ect ve ver b pa r s n t he case of ver bs
w t h t he st r uct ur e Mor eDO( x, y) . Thus, t he f o ow ng pa r s
ar e genu ne mper f ect ve- per f ect ve- pa r s : r ' wr t e' , meg r ,
o vas ' r ead' - e o vas, neke ' s ng- e neke , szep ' t o be-
come pr et t er ' - megszp , no ' gr ow' - megno, et c. Ver bs wh ch
ar e t yp ca f or at e c s t uat ons may somet mes get t he per -
f ect ve pr ef x but t hen we get a new mean ng f or t he ver b
wh ch s n no syst emat c r e at on t o t he or g na mean ng:
besz ' t a k' - megbesze ' d scuss' , mond ' say' - e mond ( wh ch
s f act ve) , | t sz k ' p ay' - meg| at sz k ' pr et end' , et c.
I f a per f ect ve s t uat on s expr essed by an unpr ef xed
ver b, t he pr ef xed ver b w not br ng about any change n
t he s t uat on.
For examp e,
( 47) ( a) Pet er p t et t egy hzat .
( b) Pt er megep t et t egy hzat .
( 48) ( a) Anna t r akor kezdet t do gozn .
' Ann st ar t ed wor k ng at 5 o' c ock'
( b) Anna t r akor kezdet t e do gozn .
5. The r e at on bet ween per f ect ve - mper f ect ve s t uat ons
and ocat ve expr ess ons
I t has of t en been obser ved t hat mper f ect ve s t uat ons
ar e compat b e w t h p ace adver b a s but not w t h d r ect ona
adver b a s wher eas per f ect ve s t uat ons behave n t he oppo-
22
s t e way . St at c s t uat ons t hus cannot cont a n d r ect ona
adver b a s.
( 49) ( a) | ohn s st and ng n f r ont of t he door ,
( b) *| ohn s st and ng nt o t he house.
At e c s t uat ons ar e on y compat b e w t h p ace adver b a s,
t e c s t uat ons w t h d r ect ona adver b a s :
( 50) ( a) | ohn s r unn ng n t he gar den,
( b) | ohn s r unn ng nt o t he gar den.
( 50) ( a) descr bes an at e c s t uat on and ( 50) ( b) a t e c
s t uat on. I t s c ear why t h s s so: t he d r ect ona oca-
t ve nt o t he gar den t ur ns t he pr ocess of r unn ng nt o a goa -
or ent ed act v t y. To t ur n now t o Hungar an examp es, not ce
f r st t hat t he pr ef xes wh ch nd cat e d r ect on st and f or
d r ect ona adver b a s, t hey have t he same f unct on as such
adver b a s. I t does not come as a sur pr se, t her ef or e, t hat
t he f o ow ng s t uat ons ar e t e c:
( 51) ( a) Pt er k | n.
' Pet er s com ng out '
( b) Pet er be| n.
' Pet er s com ng n'
Cf . Comr e (19 77: 98- 106) and Ander son ( 1973) .
( c) Pet er j n ki .
( d) Pet er j n be.
I n addi t i on, ( 51) ( a) - ( b) ar e per f ect i ve and ( 51) ( c) - ( d) i m-
23
per f ect i ve
6. Ar e pr ef i xes pr edi ct abl e?
I t i s qui t e nat ur al t hat one woul d l i ke t o pr edi ct bot h t he
meani ng of a pr ef i x and i t s occur r ence. The pr ecedi ng di s cus -
si on mi ght gi ve us some hope t hat t hi s i s not a compl et el y
i mpossi bl e ent er pr i se. I n what f ol l ows we shal l r est r i ct our -
sel ves t o t he pr ef i x meg. Now, i n or der t o answer our ques -
t i on we shoul d be abl e t o show t hat t he meani ng of meg i s
pr edi ct abl e, on t he one hand, and t hat t he si t uat i ons i n
whi ch we may expect meg t o occur , t oo, ar e pr edi ct abl e, on
t he ot her . We shal l cl ai m t hat meg has onl y one meani ng: i t
makes a si t uat i on per f ect i ve. Or , t o put i t di f f er ent l y, i t
has a per f ect i vi zi ng f unct i on. The Hungar i an Expl anat or y Di c-
t i onar y ( Magyar Er t el mez Kzi s zt r , hencef or t h EKsz) men-
24
t i ones 11 uses of meg
I n sent ences ( 51) ( c) - ( d) t he ver b r ecei ves mai n st r ess and
t he pr ef i x has t o be pr onounced wi t h mi ddl e hi gh s t r es s , i . e.
t hese sent ences mus t be di st i ngui shed f r om t he sent ences i n
whi ch ' Pet er ' i s emphat i c.
Not i ce, by t he way, t hat t hi s t ype of mi ddl e st r essed pos t -
ver bal posi t i on of t he pr ef i x i s not al ways possi bl e. I t seems
t o be r est r i ct ed t o di r ect i onal pr ef i xes . But t he si t uat i on i s
anyt hi ng but cl ear and much f ur t her r esear ch i s needed i n or -
der t o see exact l y what i s goi ng on her e.
2 4
Cf . EKsz: 89 7. I t shoul d be made cl ear t hat t he di ct i onar y
ment i ons 11 uses and not 11 meani ngs . Gr ammat i cal t r adi t i on
has i n gener al acknowl edged t he f act t hat meg has onl y one
meani ng and t hat t hi s meani ng has t o do wi t h per f ect i vi t y.
The not i on of per f ect i vi t y has , however , been i nt er pr et ed i n
( f oot not e 2 4 cont i nued)
6. 1. I f t he ver b i s t el i c, but not i nchoat i ve i t can al ways
be per f ect i vi zed and t he r esul t i s "t he expr essi on of t he
successf ul compl et i on of t he act i vi t y or pr ocess" ( EKsz: 897) .
g megi r ' wr i t e
1
, megt anul ' l ear n' , megcs n ' make
1
, megf oz
' cook' , et c.
6. 2. I f t he ver b s t e c and nchoat ve, t can a ways be
per f ect v zed and t he r esu t s "t he expr ess on of t he par -
t a or comp et e accomp shment of t he pr ocess or act v t y".
E. g, megszp ' become pr et t er or pr et t y' , megokosod k ' be-
come c ever er or c ever ' , megr egsz k ' become o d' , megf eke-
t ed k ' become b ack' , megbet egsz k ' become
1
, et c.
These t wo gr oups make up t he ma| or t y of ver bs w t h
25
t he pr ef x meg . As we saw | ust now t he mean ng d f f er ence
bet ween t he t wo gr oups has not h ng t o do w t h meg : t depends
so e y on t he oppos t on nchoat ve - non nchoat ve.
6. 3. I f t he ver b descr bes a cogn t ve, emot ve st at e or pr o-
t r act ed per cept on ( . e. a st at c s t uat on w t h cer t a n se-
mant c pr oper t es) , t can be per f ect v zed and t he pr ef xed
ver b w mean t he beg nn ng of t h s cogn t ve or emot ve
st at e, or , of t he pr ot r act ed per cept on. The s t uat on t se f
cannot be made per f ect ve, t he beg nn ng of a st at c s t ua-
t on, however , | s per f ect ve. E. g. megt ud ' get t o know' meg-
smer ' get t o know' , meg at cat ch s ght of sb' , megha ' hear ' ,
megszer et ' st ar t t o ove' , meggyu ' st ar t t o hat e' , et c.
6. 4. Ther e s a c ass of nondur at ve ver bs n Hungar an wh ch
ar e of t en r ef er r ed t o as moment ar y ver bs ( "mozzanat os gk" ) .
( f oot not e 24 cont nued) a way wh ch s qu t e d f f er ent f r om
t he one g ven n t h s paper . Cf . a so t he cr t ca r emar ks
on t he t r ad t ona nt er pr et at on of t he f unct on of meg n
Per r ot ( 1966: 48- 55) .
25
Ther e ar e appr ox mat e y 1000 ver bs w t h t he pr ef x meg
st ed n EKsz. Mor e t han ha f of t hembe ong t o t he t e c-
per f ect ve cat egor y, near y 40%t o t he nondur at ve- per f ect ve
cat egor y.
Not ce, however , t hat t he moment ar y aspect n t he mean ng
of t hese ver bs s not due t o t he pr ef x meg but r at her t o t he
pr esence of a cer t a n suf f x be ong ng t o a ar ger c ass of
suf f xes wh ch ar e used t o der ve ver bs w t h moment ar y mean-
ng. These suf f xes cont r but e n t wo d f f er ent ways t o t he
moment ar y mean ng: ( a) t hey may be used t o der ve ver bs ex-
pr ess ng one s ng e and abr upt act v t y or pr ocess and ( b)
t hey may ead t o ver bs wh ch expr ess t he set t ng n of a
pr ocess. To ( a) be ong t he f o ow ng suf f xes: - en, - an,
- nt , - ant , - ent , - t , - am k, - em k, - a , - e and t o ( b)
t he suf f xes: - . ad, - ed, - amod k, - emed k, - od ( k) , - ed ( k) ,
- du , - d , - d t . Thus, t he ver b mocean ' make a sudden move
1
t se f expr esses a r eady a moment ar y act v t y, t hat s, t her e
s no d f f er ence n t h s r espect bet ween mocean and megmoccan:
bot h ver bs expr ess moment ar y, abr upt act v t es, wh ch means
t hat bot h ar e nondur at ve, hence per f ect ve. The t wo ver bs
have d f f er ent d st r but ona pr oper t es, however . Cons der ,
f or examp e, moccant egyet ' has made a sudden move' but +meg-
moccant egyet and nagyot moccant ' has made a b g and sudden
move' but +nagyot moccant meg, +nagyot megmoccant . These d f -
f er ences may have deeper r easons but at pr esent I cannot say
mor e about t hem
Let us have now a ook at a ver b wh ch expr esses t he
set t ng n of a pr ocess or act v t y. Lend s such a ver b.
I t s poss b e t hat mocean- megmoccan, mozdu - megmozdu ar e
examp es of a f ur t her aspect ua d st nct on not account ed f or
n t he pr esent paper . I t goes w t hout say ng t hat bot h ( a)
and ( b) r epr esent per f ect ve s t uat ons:
( a) A szk mozdu t egyet .
t . ' The cha r made a move'
( b) A szk megmozdu t .
A so, bot h ( a) and ( b) expr ess moment ar y event s. Yet t he t wo
s t uat ons ar e by no means dent ca , ( a) v zua zes t he move,
( Cf . t he above st of suf f xes. ) But t he same mean ng s
a so expr essed by meg end : bot h have t he mean ng ' st ar t
sw ng ng' . Bot h ver bs ar e nondur at ve and per f ect ve. And
t hey show t he same d st r but ona d f f er ences as mocean and
megmoccan.
We may t hus conc ude t hat meg cannot be used t o ex-
pr ess moment ar ness n any of t he t wo senses d scussed a-
bove. I f , however , an unpr ef xed ver b has t h s mean ng, t
can be pr ef xed w t h meg w t hout af f ect ng t her eby t he aspec-
t ua s t uat on.
6. 5. Accor d ng t o EKSz t he pr ef x meg can a so be used
t o expr ess s ng e event s. Of cour se, n some sense a per -
f ect ve s t uat ons expr ess s ng e event s . But what seems t o
be at st ake her e s t h s : some ver bs seem t o be ab e t o ex-
pr ess hab t ua or t er at ve mean ng n v r t ue of t he r ex -
ca pot ent a . E. g. csko ' k ss' , csov ' wag' , d eser
' pr a se' , dr zs ' r ub' , har ap ' b t e' , kapar ' scr at ch' , kos -
t o ' t ast e' , at ogat ' v s t ' , et c. Cons der now t he f o ow ng
s t uat ons :
( 52) ( a) A kut ya csv | a a f ar kat .
' The dog s wav ng w t h h s t a '
( b) Pet er csoko | a Kat t .
' Pet er s k ss ng Kat '
( c) A kut ya har ap.
' The dog b t es '
( d) Anna kst o | a a evest .
' Ann t ast es t he soup'
( e) | anos Mar t t ogat | a.
' | ohn v s t s Mar y'
I n a t hese cases we have t o t o w t h hab t ua or t er at ve
mean ng. As soon as t hese s t uat ons ar e t ur ned per f ect ve,
however , t he hab t ua or t er at ve mean ng d sappear s and
( f oot not e 26 cont nued) t expr esses mmed at e per cept on
wher eas ( b) s mor e ke a f act ua st at ement . ( I am gr at e-
f u t o R. Het zr on f or t h s obser vat on)
what s ef t s t he mean ng r ef er r ed t o as " s ng e event " .
( 53) ( a) A kut ya megcsv | a a f ar kat .
( b) Pet er megcsko | a Kat t .
( c) A kut ya meghar ap.
( d) Anna megkst o | a a evest .
( e) | nos meg t ogat | a Mar t .
We may t hus conc ude t hat whenever a ver b can expr ess ( or
does gener a y expr ess) hab t ua or t er at ve mean ng, per -
f ect v zat on s poss b e n sp t e of t he f act t hat we may
27
have t o do w t h an at e c s t uat on . The r esu t of per -
f ect v zat on s t he nt er pr et at on of a s ng e event .
6. 6. Apar t f r om t he case d scussed n t he pr ev ous sect on
at e c s t uat ons cannot be per f ect v zed. I f we never t he-
ess f nd t yp ca at e c ver bs w t h t he pr ef x meg, t he
mean ng of t he new ver b w not necessar y be per f ect ve
or , at east , t w not be r e at ab e t o t he or g na mean-
ng n any syst emat c way. Ther e ar e numer ous examp es f or
t h s case: meggondo ' we gh ( t he dea) ' f r om gondo ' t h nk' ,
megf ut ' f ee' f r om f ut ' r un' , meges k ' happen' f r om es k
' f a ' , mege ' ear n one' s v ng' f r om e ' ve' , megf ogad
' p edge' f r om f ogad ' bet ' , et c. We cannot account f or t he
mean ngs of t hese cases n any syst emat c way but we may
pr ed ct t hat t h s s what we may expect .
6. 7. The pr ef x meg can a so occur w t h denom na ver bs . The
mean ng of t he noun may a r eady nd cat e t hat what we may
expect s a per f ect ve s t uat on. I f t h s s s o, t hen t her e
shou d not be any unpr ef xed ver b der vab e f r om t he noun.
Some examp es w suf f ce t o ust r at e t h s po nt : megf me-
s t ' make a f m of sg' f r om f m ( +f mes t ) , megbosszu
' avenge' f r om bossz ' vengeance' , megboszor knyoz ' enchant ,
bew t ch' f r om boszor kny ' w t ch' , megkor onz ' cr own' f r om
kor ona ' cr own' , et c.
27
I t er at v t y, t oo, can be t est ed by means of adver b a s ,
cf . Fabr c us- Hansen ( 1975: 51) .
6. 8. I t has of t en been po nt ed out t hat pr ef xed ver bs of t en
r equ r e an ob| ect wher eas t he cor r espond ng unpr ef xed ver bs
2 8
t ake opt ona y an ob| ect . Once aga n, t h s has not h ng t o
do w t h t he mean ng of meg, t s r at her a st r a ght f or war d
consequence of t he f act t hat per f ect ve s t uat ons ar e ver y
of t en der ved f r omt e c s t uat ons. Te c s t uat ons ar e
goa or ent ed and t he goa s of t en pr ov ded by t he d r ect
ob| ect .
6. 9. I f a ver b has sever a mean ngs and some of t hem expr ess
t e c s t uat ons and ot her s at e c s t uat ons, t hen, - as
expect ed - on y t e c mean ngs can be per f ect v zed. Thus, f or
examp e, among t he mean ngs of er eszt ( EKSz: 328) we f nd t he
at e c mean ngs ( a) "t o et out gas, qu d, a r " , e. g. , v zet
er eszt ' t o et out wat er ' , er eszt az e so ker k ' t he f r ont
t r e eaks' , et c. , and (b) ' t o be n a cer t a n mood or emo-
t ona st at e' , e. g. , bunak er eszt a f e| t ' f ee gr ef at sg'
and ( c) " et sb come near " . I t s t hus not at a sur pr s ng
t hat we cannot f nd t he cor r espond ng mean ngs among t he mean-
ngs of t he ver b meger eszt .
I n t h s way mor e t han 90%of t he ver bs w t h t he pr ef x
meg can be account ed f or . I n sum, meg has on y one mean ng:
t makes a s t uat on per f ect ve. Th s can be done n var ous
ways depend ng on t he ' nput ' s t uat on. By know ng what t h s
nput s t uat on s and by know ng what per f ect v zat on means
we can der ve t he mean ng of t he r esu t ng s t uat on n t he
vast ma| or t y of cases.
The aspect ua syst em d scussed n some det a n t he
f r st par t of my paper has t hus pr oved usef u n t he ana ys s
of Hungar an. The success of t h s ana ys s s, of cour se, not
yet comp et e. Meg s on y one of t he pr ef xes n Hungar an.
I t s hoped, however , t hat t he pr esent ana ys s can eas y
be ext ended t o cover t he ot her pr ef xes as we . Th s hope s
| ust f ed: meg seems t o be mor e comp cat ed t han t he ot her
Cf . , f or examp e, Per r ot ( 1966: 56- 57) .
pr ef xes n var ous ways. I n par t cu ar , meg does not seem
t o car r y any ex ca mean ng apar t f r om t s per f ect v z ng
f unct on. A t he ot her pr ef xes, on t he ot her hand, have a
c ear ex ca mean ng and ar e r e at ed n a syst emat c way
t o adver b a s f r omwh ch t hey have been der ved d achr on ca -
y.
The f act t hat t he aspect ua oppos t ons put f or war d n
t h s paper cou d successf u y be app ed n t he ana ys s of Hun-
gar an s an nd cat on of t he v ab t y of t he t heor et ca
appr oach wh ch I have been advocat ng n t he pr esent paper . I t
goes w t hout say ng t hat t her e r ema n qu t e a f ew unso ved
pr ob ems n t he r ea m of aspect . The d scuss on pr esent ed
her e s by no means comp et e and t s ev dent y n many r e-
spect s not suf f c ent y exact . However , t he c ar f cat on of
t he oose ends as we as t he nt r oduct on of f ur t her aspec-
t ua d st nct ons a ong t he nes sket ched n t h s st udy have
t o be r e egat ed t o subsequent r esear ch.
Ref er ences
A Mai Magyar Nyel v Rendszer e ( The Syst em of t he Hungar i an
Language) , Vol . I . - I I . , Budapest : Akademi ai Ki ad, ( 1970) .
Ander son, J . ( 197 3) An Essay Concer ni ng Aspect , The Hague:
Mout on.
Comr i e, B. ( 1976) Aspect , Cambr i dge : Cambr i dge Uni ver si t y
Pr ess.
Dahl , . ( 1978) "On t he Def i ni t i on of t he Tel i c/ At el i c
( Bounded/ Non- Bounded) Di st i nct i on" , Got henbur g Paper s
i n Theor et i cal Li ngui st i cs 36.
Fabr i ci us- Hansen, C. ( 1975) Tr ansf or mat i ve, i nt r ansf or mat i ve
und kur si ve Ver ben, Tbi ngen: Ni emeyer .
Ki ef er , F. ( f or t hcomi ng) Az el f el t evesek el mel et e ( The Theor y
of Pr esupposi t i ons) , Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad.
Kl ei n, H. G. ( 1974) Tempus, Aspekt , Akt i onsar t , Tbi ngen:
Ni emeyer .
Lakof f , G. ( 1966) "St at i ve Adj ect i ves and Ver bs i n Engl i sh" ,
NSF- Repor t 17, Cambr i dge . Har var d Uni ver si t y.
Lyons, J . ( 1977) Semant i cs, Vol . I . - I I . , Cambr i dge : Cambr i dge
Uni ver si t y Pr ess.
Magyar Er t el mezo Kezi szot ar ( Hungar i an Expl anat or y Di ct i onar y) ,
Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad ( 1972) .
Per r ot , J . ( 1966) "Adal kok a meg i gekt o f unkci j nak vi zs-
gl at hoz a mai magyar nyel vben" ( On t he f unct i ons of t he
Pr ef i x meg i n Cont empor ar y Hungar i an) , Nyel vt ud. Er t . 52. sz.
Rei chenbach, H. ( 1947) El ement s of Symbol i c Logi c, Ber kel ey:
Uni ver si t y of Cal i f or ni a Pr ess.
J . Sol t sz, K. ( 1959) Az osi magyar i gekt ok ( The Ol d Hungar i an
Pr ef i xes) , Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad.
Vendl er , Z. ( 1967) Li ngui st i cs i n Phi l osophy, I t haca : Cor nel l
Uni ver si t y Pr ess.
SAMUEL BRASSAI ' S THEORY OF THE SENTENCE
Kat a n E. K ss
1. The a mof t h s ar t c e s t o ca at t ent on t o t he
f act t hat t he dea of t he so- ca ed commun cat ve, or
" act ua " , sent ence ar t cu at on f r st appear ed n t he sen-
t ence t heor y of a 19t h cent ur y Hungar an ngu st , Samue
Br assa ( 1789- 1889) . The synt act c t heor y of Br assa ,
unknown abr oad und ong f or got t en n Hungar y, deser ves t obe
r ev ewed not on y because of t s h st or ca nt er est - a -
t hough t he gener a be ef t hat t was Geor g von der Gabe ent z
who d scover ed commun cat ve sent ence st r uct ur e a so has t o
be r ect f ed - but a so because of t he cur r ent r e evance of
t s r esu t s, wh ch ar e wor t h cons der ng and check ng f ur -
t her even t oday.
As w be shown, Br assa ' s ngen ous un ver sa f r ame-
wor k of sent ence descr pt on a so r ender ed t poss b e f or
h mt o out ne t he on y Hungar an synt ax up unt ver y
r ecent y t hat does not cont ent t se f w t h st at ng t hat
Hungar an s a f r ee wor d or der anguage, but pr ov des r u es
f or t he synt hes s, . e. gener at on of Hungar an sent ences.
That desp t e a t he r mer t s, Br assa ' s deas sank
nt o ob v on, can be at t r but ed t o var ous f act s. Abr oad,
t hey necessar y r ema ned unknown s nce t hey wer e pub shed
n Hungar an. As f or Hungar y, h s deas may have been t oo
new t o f t nt o t he syst em of ngu st c t hought of t he
day. Bes des, Br assa , a pr of essor of mat hemat cs, an ac-
t ve r esear cher of bot any and sever a ot her br anches of
nat ur a sc ence, an exper t n Sanskr t , a mus co og st , an
aut hor of st ud es on ph osophy, og c, aest het cs, eco-
nom cs, et c. , was ooked upon not so much as a ngu st
but as a po yh st or , so h s ngu st c t heor y may s mp y
not have been cons der ed ser ous y enough by h s cont em-
por ar es. However , t m ght we have been t he case t hat
t he secr et of h s or g na t y, of h s be ng ahead of h s
t me by about 100 year s, ay pr ec se y n h s "amat eur sh
1
st at us; he was not nf uenced by pr econcept ons and pr e-
| ud ces .
2. Br assa f r st f or mu at ed h s t heor y n a ect ur e en-
t t ed "Tapogat dzsok a magyar nye v kr " ' Exp or ng t he
Hungar an anguage' he d at t he Hungar an Academy of Sc -
ences ( Br assa 1852) , but t he most comp et e e abor at on of
t was n h s st udy A magyar mondat ' The Hungar an sent ence'
pub shed bet ween 1860- 65 ( Br assa 1860, 1863- 65) .
I n t he m dd e of t he 19t h cent ur y, when t he bas c
un t of bot h compar at ve and descr pt ve ngu st c r esear ch
was t he wor d - when, accor d ng t o a say ng at t r but ed t o
| akob Gr mm, synt ax came on y ha f w t h n t he not on of
gr ammar - t was cons der ed a nove t y, ahead of t he t me,
t hat Br assa put t he sent ence nt o t he f ocus of h s nves-
t gat ons concer n ng t he r u es of Hungar an. "The char ac-
t er st cs of a anguage dwe n t he char act er st cs of t he
sent ence, " he wr ot e ( 1860: 304) , so not on y descr pt ve
r esear ch but a so h st or ca and compar at ve nvest gat on
shou d cent er on synt ax.
The met hodo ogy and st r uct ur e of Br assa ' s ar gument a-
t on a so cont a n some r emar kab y moder n e ement s - espe-
c a y n ( Br assa 1860, 1863- 65) . Br assa cons der s n-
SAMUEL BRASSAI ' S THEORY OF THE SENTENCE 333
gu st cs a nat ur a sc ence, t he t ask of wh ch s t o set up
aws and syst ems nduct ve y t hr ough t he obser vat on of
ngu st c f act s, and t hen t o app y t hese aws and syst ems
t o t he descr pt on of emp r ca phenomena - | ust as n, e. g. ,
phys cs or bot any. Accor d ng y, when he set s out t o de-
scr be t he Hungar an sent ence, n ( Br assa 1860, 1863- 65) ,
he f r st est ab shes t he un ver sa and t yp ca char act er -
st cs of t he sent ence as such on t he bas s of such r emot e
anguages as, e. g. , Fr ench, C ass ca Gr eek, Hebr ew, T bet an,
Tur k sh, and Hungar an, and t hen, n t he second par t of t he
st udy, he ana yzes t he Hungar an anguage f r om t he po nt
of v ew of t hose synt act c aspect s wh ch have t ur ned out
t o be un ver sa y r e evant and on t he bas s of t he sent ence
pat t er n wh ch has t ur ned out t o be un ver sa y va d.
The f r st par t of t he st udy, cont r ast ng, f r oma syn-
t act c po nt of v ew, anguages of var ous or g n s ac-
t ua y an ear y examp e of t ypo og ca r esear ch. Br assa
h mse f was awar e of t s nove t y: "I have out ned a new,
synt act c t ype of anguage compar son, " he wr ot e. "The
nd v dua synt act c f eat ur es or t he gr oups of t hem of t en
nd cat e ngu st c r e at onsh ps wh ch ar e qu t e d f f er ent
f r om t he et ymo og ca ones. Say ng t h s, I by no means w sh
t o under r at e t he mpor t ance of t he at t er , ne t her do I
w sh t he so d r esu t s ga ned f r om t he at t er t o be d s-
car ded f or t he f or mer . . . As et ymo ogy est ab shes t he not on
of phys ca r e at onsh ps, synt ax est ab shes t hat of sp r t -
ua r e at onsh ps" ( 1860: 397- 398) .
3. Look ng f or t he un ver sa char act er st cs of t he sen-
t ence, Br assa comes t o t he conc us on t hat t he sent ence -
except f or t he set of sent ences cont a n ng a copu a and
expr ess ng a og ca | udgement - s not bu t on t he d chot -
omy of t he sub| ect and t he pr ed cat e, but on y has a s ng e
suppor t ng- p ar : t he ver b. I t s on y under t he nf uence
of og c, by ana ogy w t h og ca | udgement s, and a so
because ngu st s base t he r supposed y un ver sa st at e-
ment s on t he t t e gr oup of I ndo- Eur opean anguages of
West - Eur ope t hat t hey ass gn t o t he sub| ect such an out -
st and ng r o e. I f t he sub| ect s, ndeed, an nd spensab e
bas c un t of t he sent ence, why can t so of t en be om t t ed
e. g. n Hungar an or Lat n? Act ua y t her e s no ngu st c
nt er pr et at on of t he sub| ect by means of wh ch t wou d be
poss b e t o det er m ne t n ever y sent ence. I f we r egar d
t hat par t of t he sent ence about wh ch t he pr ed cat e s as-
ser t ed as t he sub| ect , t hen n t he f o ow ng sent ence t he
dat ve s t o be dent f ed as t he sub| ect .
( 1) Ennek a f a unak cskken a akossga.
' To t h s v age decr eases t he popu at on. '
I f t he sub| ect s def ned as t he noun n t he nom nat ve, t
cannot be d st ngu shed f r omt he ob| ect e. g. n Eng sh
and n Fr ench, . e. n anguages w t h no dec ens on. For
t hese anguages, t wou d not be suf f c ent t o def ne t he
sub| ect as t he noun at t he head of t he sent ence, e t her ,
s nce t h s wou d mean t hat on y t he ana ys s of sent ences
was poss b e, but not t he synt hes s of t hem, as we wou d
not know wh ch wor d t o put at t he head of t he sent ence.
The def n t on of t he sub| ect as t hat wh ch n t he case
of an act ve ver b act s, n t he case of a pass ve ver b un-
der goes t he act on, wh e n t he case of a m dd e ver b s
n t he st at e or n t he cour se of t he event expr essed by
t he ver b, wou d not be of much use, e t her , s nce e. g. n
T bet an t he agent of a t r ans t ve ver b s n t he nst r u-
ment a . I f n t he sent ences of t he d f f er ent anguages t he
sub| ect had common semant c or concept ua f eat ur es, t cou d
not happen t hat what s t he sub| ect n one anguage ( I ch
habe) s expr essed by a dat ve n anot her ( nekemvan ' t o
me s ' ) . These f act s nd cat e t hat nst ead of f or c ng t he
t er m sub| ect , bor r owed f r om og c on t he synt act c st r uc-
t ur e of sent ences, t s bet t er s mp y t o speak about t he
nom nat ve, and t her e s no r eason not t o cons der t he
nom nat ve t o be of t he same r ank as t he ot her comp ement s
of t he ver b.
Semant c cons der at ons a so ead Br assa t o be eve
t hat t he cent r a and most mpor t ant const t uent of sent ence
st r uct ur e s t he ver b and on y t he ver b. Language was bor n
f or t he coor d nat on of co ect ve human act v t es, and
ser ves pr mar y f or t he denom nat on of event s, act ons,
happen ngs, so t s t he ver b, expr ess ng t he act on or
happen ng, t hat must p ay t he cent r a r o e n t . The case-
mar ked nouns and adver bs ar e mer e y subor d nat e comp ement s
( n Br assa ' s t er m no ogy, det er m ner s) of t he ver b, s nce
t hey on y "suppor t t ; exp cat e, exp a n, expand, r est r ct
t s mean ng; denot e c r cumst ances be ong ng t o t " ( 186 3- 65:
185) - Br assa c a ms, ant c pat ng t he t heor y of F mor e
and ot her s.
Nat ur a y, t he assumed un ver sa , "deep" sent ence st r uc-
t ur e, cons st ng of a ver b and t s comp ement s subor d nat ed
t o t , has var ous r ea zat ons n t he d f f er ent anguages.
The char act er zat on of t he sent ence st r uct ur e of a g ven
anguage must spec f y at east t he f o ow ng aspect s:
The "qua t y" of comp ement s, . e. t he pr esence or
ack and d st r but on of case- mar ked, pr epos t ona and
post pos t ona nouns.
The number of t he d f f er ent k nds of comp ement .
Wor d or der , nc ud ng bot h t he or der of t he comp ement s
and t he ver b, and t he nner or der of t he comp ement s. (A
nove t y, s nce wor d or der was ver y much neg ect ed n t he
synt act c descr pt ons of t he day. )
The qua t y and number of t enses and moods. ( Br assa
set s up an abst r act t ense syst em, and exam nes wh ch con-
cept s of t h s syst em ar e mar ked n t he g ven anguage. )
The var ous non- f n t e ver b f or ms.
The syst em of pr onouns; t he pr esence or ack of
c t c zat on.
The ar t c e.
The use of con| unct ons; t he d st r but on of coor d na-
t on and subor d nat on.
et c.
4. Of t he chapt er nvest gat ng t he un ver sa and t yp ca
f eat ur es of t he sent ence, t he sect on dea ng w t h wor d
or der cont a ns t he most f u y va d and ngen ous y nove
deas, some of wh ch ar e r eve at ons even t oday. Seek ng an
answer t o t he quest on as t o whet her t her e s some common
f eat ur e wh ch may be gener a zed nduct ve y n t he d f f er -
ent sent ence t ypes of t he known anguages, Br assa r eaches
a pos t ve conc us on: bot h t he f xed and t he f r ee wor d
or der anguages d sp ay a sent ence st r uct ur e wh ch beg ns
w t h one or mor e comp ement s car r y ng nf or mat on a r eady
known. These comp ement s "pr act ca y ay a bas s f or t he
mean ng of t he sent ence n t he st ener ' s m nd, . e. t hey
ar e ca ng at t ent on, and po nt ng f or war d, connect ng
t he ment a act v t y of t he st ener w t h t hat of t he speak-
er " ( 1860: 341) . He ca s t h s n t a par t of t he sent ence
sub| ect n a d f f er ent sense of t he wor d ( Br assa 1852) ,
nchoat vum ( 1860, 1863- 65) , nt r oduct on ( 1874) , f na y,
pr epar at or y par t ( 1885) . The second par t of t he sent ence,
nc ud ng t he ver b, s t he pr ed cat e ( 1852) , or bu k ( Hun-
gar an zm) ( 1860, 1863- 65) , or message ( 1874) , or pr nc pa
par t ( 1885) . The f unct on of t h s second par t s "t he com-
mun cat on of an act on, or a c r cumst ance of an act on t hat
t he speaker supposes t o be unknown t o t he st ener " ( 1874:
72) . Bes des t he new deas, t he known ones t hat wer e not
t hought necessar y t o be set of f as an nt r oduct on ar e a so
t o be f ound n t he bu k. The bu k, wh ch s mor e mpor t ant
by v r t ue of t s nf or mat ve va ue, s pr esent n ever y
sent ence; t he nchoat vum, however , may a so be m ss ng.
I t can be om t t ed ( ) f t he speaker does not t h nk t
necessar y t o pr epar e t he st ener f or t he compr ehens on of
t he bu k; or ( ) f t he pr epar at or y dea has been mp c-
t e y or exp c t e y nc uded n t he pr eced ngs; or ( )
f t he speaker s n such a hur r y t o commun cat e h s message
t hat he f or get s t o pr epar e t he st ener f or t . So not ever y
sent ence n t a const t uent s an nchoat vum; sent ence
n t a pos t on can a so have an emphas z ng ef f ect , e. g.
n Fr ench n t he case of t he f r ont ng of t he phr ases va n-
ment , en va n, pe ne, souvent , r ar ement .
The sent ence st r uct ur e cons st ng of nchoat vum and
bu k seems t o be a un ver sa char act er st c of anguages.
Wh ch comp ement s can ser ve as nchoat vum, on t he ot her
hand, s spec f c t o a g ven anguage. E. g. n t he Sem t c
anguages and n Hungar an ever y k nd of comp ement can
f unct on as nchoat vum, wh e n t he Romance anguages t he
nchoat vum s usua y t he nom nat ve. I n Ger man t he n-
choat vum a ways cons st s of a s ng e comp ement . wh e n
Hungar an t can a so cons st of t wo or mor e. I t m ght
a so be char act er st c of a anguage f t s sent ences neces-
sar y, of t en, or r ar e y beg n w t h an nchoat vum.
5. I t s a gener a sur m se n ngu st cs t hat t he f r st
nt u t on concer n ng t h s k nd of " commun cat ve" , or
"act ua " sent ence st r uct ur e appear ed n a st udy of Henr
We n 1844; wh e t he f r st e abor at on of t he dea as
we as t he nt r oduct on of t he t er ms psycho og ca sub| ect
and psycho og ca pr ed cat e ar e due t o Geor g von der
Gabe ent z ( 1869, 1875) . Br assa came t o know t he ar t c es
of Gabe ent z, and he ded cat ed a who e st udy t o show ng
t hat Gabe ent z' s t heor y s not on y at er t han h s own, but
s a so nf er or t o t bot h n r espect of c ar t y and
coher ence ( Br assa 1885) . Gabe ent z cou d not cut comp et e y
f r ee f r om t he t r ad t ona sub| ect - pr ed cat e ar t cu at on of
og ca or g n. E. g. , he def nes t he psycho og ca sub| ect
as "about wh ch we asser t somet h ng", a t hough t h s def n -
t on does not n t he east su t t he n t a e ement
of t he f o ow ng sent ence, e. g. :
( 2) Tegnape t t t t amegy egnykt az ut cn.
' The day bef or e yest er day I - saw a add e n
t he st r eet . '
Br assa r a ses t he f o ow ng ma| or ob| ect ons t o
Gabe ent z' s t heor y:
( ) Gabe ent z does not answer t he quest on of whet her
t he psycho og ca sub| ect and pr ed cat e ar e equa y nd s-
pensab e or whet her one of t hem can be om t t ed n cer t a n
cases. I n Br assa ' s ( 1860, 1863- 65) st udy, on t he ot her hand,
t s c ear t hat on y t he bu k s a f undament a par t of t he
sent ence; t he nchoat vum s ess mpor t ant and can a so be
m ss ng.
( ) Gabe ent z does not say whet her or not t her e s a
d v d ng ne bet ween t he psycho og ca sub| ect and t he
pr ed cat e, and f t her e s a d v d ng ne, how t s r ea -
zed n t he d f f er ent anguages. Fr omBr assa ' s st udy, on
t he ot her hand, we ear n t hat t he t wo par t s ar e separ at ed
f r om one anot her by means spec f c t o a g ven anguage: e. g. ,
n Hungar an t he d v s on s nd cat ed by t he sent ence
st r ess on t he f r st sy ab e of t he bu k, wh e n Fr ench
and Ger man, t he wor d or der mar ks t .
( ) Gabe ent z does not c ear y spec f y t he r def n-
ng f eat ur es. Br assa ' s synt act c and semant c char act er za-
t on of t he nchoat vum- bu k st r uct ur e, on t he ot her hand,
accor d ng t o wh ch t he nchoat vum s a ( sequence of ) com-
p ement ( s) n sent ence n t a pos t on, hav ng a pr epar a-
t or y f unct on, and car r y ng known nf or mat on, wh e t he
bu k s t he r est of t he sent ence, nc ud ng t he ver b, and
par t y or f u y convey ng new nf or mat on, s cons der ed
bas ca y cor r ect even t oday.
W t h Gabe ent z, t he psycho og ca sub| ect a ways con-
s st s of a s ng e const t uent of t he sent ence, wh e w t h
Br assa , t can cons st of sever a const t uent s, or , f or
nst ance, a so of a subor d nat e c ause. Br assa a so men-
t ons t hat Gabe ent z on y nvest gat es so at ed sent ences;
he does not not ce t he t ext - cr eat ng r o e of t he psycho og-
ca sub| ect - pr ed cat e st r uct ur e, a t hough "speech never
ser ves t o expr ess mer e y s ng e t hought s, but sequences of
t hem, and | ust as ever y wor d, ever y f or mhas a cer t a n
wor d or der va ue, ever y sent ence, ever y st r uct ur e of t hought
has a g ven sent ence or der va ue" ( 1885, 30- 31) : Br assa
a so cor r ect s such m nor m st akes of Gabe ent z' s as c a m ng
t hat compounds ar e put t oget her accor d ng t o t he same pr n-
c p es as synt agms, or as ma nt a n ng t hat a quest on and
an answer t oget her const t ut e a s ng e psycho og ca sub| ect -
psycho og ca pr ed cat e st r uct ur e, t he quest on r epr esent ng
t he f or mer , t he answer , t he at t er .
I t a so annoys Br assa - w t h good r eason - t hat
Gabe ent z c a ms t o per f or m et hnopsycho og ca anguage
compar son as opposed t o t he usua anguage compar son of
genea og ca pur pose. Br assa ment ons t hat , on t he one hand,
t he so- ca ed genea og ca anguage compar son does not a -
ways g ve a c ue t o t he genea ogy of peop es, and, on t he
ot her hand, t hat t he so- ca ed et hnopsycho ogy ( V ker psycho-
og e) s t oo obscur e a not on t o be adm t t ed t o sc ence,
s nce t her e can be gr eat er d f f er ences bet ween t he ment a -
t es of t wo Ger mans t han bet ween t hose of say, a Ger man
and a Fr enchman. Bot h Gabe ent z and Br assa per f or msyn-
t act c anguage compar son, wh ch shou d a so have a r o e
n t he compar at ve ngu st c r esear ch of "genea og ca
pur pose" .
6. Br assa ' s t heor y exce s not on y Gabe ent z' s st udy n
c ar t y and coher ence, but a so a cons der ab e par t of
t he who e t er at ur e of "act ua " or "commun cat ve" sen-
t ence ar t cu at on. Th s t er at ur e has gr own out of
Gabe ent z' s t heor y; t was h s nexact y and nt u t ve y
def ned not ons t hat became mp ant ed n nt er nat ona
ngu st cs, and have cont nued t o deve op - somet mes n
d ver se d r ect ons. The act ua sent ence ar t cu at on has
been nvest gat ed by H. Pau , and W. Wundt , among ot her s, and
s nce t he 19 30s pr mar y by t he Czech Schoo : Mat hes us,
at er Danes, F r bas, Sga , Ha| cov, Benesov, et c. The
t er ms psycho og ca sub| ect and pr ed cat e have been r ep aced
by t heme- r eme, t hen t op c- comment , or n t he pr esent - day
t er m no ogy of t he Czech Schoo , by t op c- f ocus, but t her e
ar e ot her cur r ent des gnat ons, t oo, e. g. , t heme- pr opos t on
( E ekf 1968) , or, n t he Sov et Un on, og ca sub| ect - pr e-
d cat e ( cf . Danes 1974) . Ther e ar e not on y var ous t er ms,
but a so var ous def n t ons n use. A gr oup of def n t ons
ar e based on t he d v s on of t he sent ence nt o par t s car r y-
ng known and new nf or mat on ( e. g. ear y Czech Schoo ) .
I n ot her cases Gabe ent z' s def n t on sur v ves: about whom
or about what somet h ng s asser t ed ver sus what s asser t ed
about h m or about t ( Sga 1967, 1974, Kuno 1972) . Some
t heor es ( e. g. Ha day 1967, Dr ess er 1974, K ef er 1977)
d st ngu sh bot h sent ence st r uct ur es. Enr ched by cer t a n
synt act c, semant c, and phono og ca aspect s, t he f or mer
nt er pr et at on, based on t he known- unknown char act er of t he
nf or mat on car r ed by t he sent ence par t s, has become n-
dependent , and has acqu r ed a r o e n t r ansf or mat ona
gener at ve gr ammar as t he pr esuppos t on- f ocus d chot omy
( cf . Chomsky 1970, | ackendof f 1972) . I t has a so r ecent y
been shown about t he at t er t ype of sent ence ar t cu at on
t hat - as Br assa po nt ed out as ear y as 1860 - t ser ves
not on y t o cr eat e t ext coher ence and t o expr ess semant c
nuances and emphas s, but a so has a - somet mes dec s ve -
r o e n t he synt act c st r uct ur e of sent ences, wh ch s
spec f c t o a g ven anguage, and t hus const t ut es a poss b e
basis f or synt act c t ypo ogy. These f nd ngs ar e ma n y
due t o t he d scover y t hat cer t a n anguages, e. g. , | apanese,
Kor ean, t he Bur mese Lahu and L su, unamb guous y mar k t he
t op c ( . e. Br assa ' s nchoat vum) by a mor pheme, so on
t he bas s of t hese anguages t he def n ng f eat ur es of t he
t op c can be det er m ned exact y. The t op c f eat ur es est ab-
shed n t h s way pr act ca y co nc de w t h t he def n ng
f eat ur es as dent f ed by Br assa : ( ) sent ence n t a
pos t on, ( ) a par t cu ar mor pheme, or st r ess and nt o-
nat on pat t er n, or r e at ve wor d or der pos t on, or a
comb nat on of t hese, ( ) t he g ven, known char act er of
t he nf or mat on conveyed. I t has a so been pr oved aga n
t hat t he t op c s not an nd spensab e par t of t he sent ence;
t her e ar e a so sent ences cons st ng of a mer e comment . A
st udy by L and Thompson ( 1976) , t ypo og z ng t he anguages
of t he wor d on t he bas s of whet her t s t he sub| ect or
t he t op c t hat p ays a mor e dec s ve r o e n t he synt act c
st r uct ur e of t he r sent ences, a so cor r obor at ed anot her
c a m of Br assa ' s, accor d ng t o wh ch t he t op c- comment
( . e. nchoat vum- bu k) st r uct ur e s common t o a human
anguages, even t hough t s r ea zed n var ous ways n
t hem. I n a par t cu ar r espect Br assa ' s t heor y even sur -
passes t hat of L and Thompson. I n t he so- ca ed sub| ect -
pr om nent anguages, L and Thompson r egar d on y cer t a n
r ar e, h gh y mar ked sent ence t ypes as t op c- comment st r uc-
t ur es, e. g. n Eng sh, t he st r uct ur es der ved by Lef t
D s ocat on and Top ca zat on ( e. g. As f or | ohn, I hat e h m;
| ohn, I hat e) - so t hey do not r ea ze t hat t he unmar ked
t op c- comment st r uct ur e can be f ound n t hese anguages,
t oo, on y t usua y co nc des w t h t he sub| ect - pr ed cat e
st r uct ur e. That s, t he t op c- pr om nent and sub| ect - pr om -
nent anguages d f f er n t he r espect t hat wh e n t he f or mer
any sent ence const t uent can f unct on as t op c, n t he at t er
t he t op c must be dent ca w t h t he sub| ect . The sub| ect ,
however , need not a ways be a t op c n t he at t er t ype of
anguages, e t her ; t can be st r essed, n wh ch case t he sen-
t ence beg nn ng w t h t has no t op c at a . Br assa ob-
ser ved as ear y as 1860 t hat "t her e s a s ght d f f er ence
n qua t y bet ween t he nchoat vums of t he Sem t c and t he
Romance anguage f am es. Name y, n t he f or mer , t he n-
ch oat vum can nc ude a k nds of cases, wh e n t he
at t er , t usua y appear s n a case ess, . e. nom nat ve
f or m. . . " ( 1860: 345) ; t hat s, "t he sub| ect s, . e. nom nat ves,
of t he West - Eur opean anguages ( such as t he Romance f am y,
t he new Ger man f am y, Eng sh) cor r espond t o t he not on of
' nchoat vum
1
and f u f t s r o e" ( 1860: 342) .
7. Br assa ' s act ua Hungar an synt ax ( wor ked out most f u y
n t he second par t of ( 1860, 1863- 65) ) , t he pr oper , sc en-
t f c so ut on of wh ch r epr esent ed t he mot vat on f or t he
e abor at on of h s gener a t heor y, was not ess p oneer ng
n char act er t han t he gener a f r amewor k t se f .
Br assa was t he f r st , and, up unt ver y r ecent y,
t he on y per son n t he h st or y of Hungar an ngu st cs t o
dent f y an nvar ant st r uct ur e n Hungar an sent ences,
wh ch ar e gener a y cons der ed t o have an d osyncr at c,
"f r ee" wor d or der , . e. sur f ace st r uct ur e. Th s nvar ant
st r uct ur e s as f o ows : Hungar an sent ences f a nt o t wo
ma n un t s: t he nchoat vum and t he bu k. The r or der cannot
be r ever sed, but t he nchoat vum can be m ss ng, . e. t he
sent ence can cons st mer e y of bu k. The t wo un t s ar e sepa-
r at ed f or ma y by st r ess and nt onat on: t he nchoat vum s
not st r essed, wh e t he bu k beg ns w t h t he h ghest st r ess
n t he sent ence and a h gh f a . The nchoat vum s r ep-
r esent ed by one or mor e comp ement s of t he ver b t hat car r y
known nf or mat on. As f or t he bu k, t s most h gh y st r essed
f r st pos t on s r eser ved f or t he const t uent r epr esent ng
t he most emphat c e ement of t he semant c cont ent s of t he
SAMUEL BRASSAI ' S THEORY OF THE SENTENCE 34 3
sent ence, " wh ch we assume t he speaker or st ener wou d
ask about " ( 1863- 65: 19 7) . ( The par t of t he sent ence car r y-
ng new nf or mat on, . e. t he f ocus , s dent f ed n gene-
r at ve gr ammar and n t he Czech Schoo by a quest on t est
even t oday. ) Th s f r st pos t on of t he bu k s usua y
f ed n by a comp ement , or r ar e y, by t he ver b t se f .
I n t he f or mer cas e, t he ver b occup es t he second s ot of t he
bu k. The comp ement st and ng bef or e t he ver b and car r y ng
t he sent ence st r ess s ca ed by Br assa at t r but e, s nce " t
bear s pr act ca y t he same r e at onsh p t o t he ver b as t he
ad| ect ve t o t he noun" ( 186 3- 65: 201) . I n bot h cas es , t he
at t r but e and t he head const t ut e a semant c un t ; t he at t r -
but e mmed at e y pr ecedes t he head; and t he at t r but e s
st r essed, wh e t he head s not . An at t r but e + ver b con-
st r uct on can a ways be t ur ned nt o an at t r but e + noun st r uc-
t ur e :
( 3) a r g f t y - a r g f t y se
' t he t hr ush s ngs' ' t he t hr ush' s s ng ng'
( 4) szpen r - szp r as
' beaut f u y wr t es ' ' beaut f u wr t ng'
I n t he ght of t he X t heor y ( cf . , e. g. , Chomsky 1971) Br assa ' s
use of t he t er m at t r but e no onger seems as b zar r e as t
used t o. Name y, t he pos t on of t he at t r but e s most t yp ca -
y f ed n by a comp ement of r educed ndependence, r epr esent -
ed by a mer e N or Adv, e. g.
( 5) Moz ba ment .
' To c nema went - he. '
( 6) Knyvet o vas .
' Book+acc r eads- he. '
( 7) E ment . (- t r ad t ona y spe t as E ment . )
' Away went - he. '
Th s r educed comp ement , const t ut ng a c ose synt act c,
phonet c and semant c un t w t h t he ver b, seems t o f unct on
as a comp ement of t he V w t h n V, so t , ndeed, f a s
t oget her w t h n t he X t heor y w t h t he ad| ect ve, wh ch s
a comp ement of N w t h n N.
I f t s t he ver b t hat conveys t he most mpor t ant
par t of t he message n t he s ent ence, t he ver b w st and
f r st n t he bu k and w bear t he sent ence st r ess.
Comp ement s can a so st and beh nd t he ver b: t hey ar e
ca ed supp ement s ( ' egesz t venyek' ) . I f a supp ement conveys
new nf or mat on, t w have secondar y st r ess; f t expr es -
ses a known dea, . e. t cou d | ust as we have been f r ont -
ed as an nchoat vum, t s unst r essed.
So Br assa ' s mode of t he Hungar an sent ence s as
f o ows :
( 8) a. sent ence = ( nchoat vum) + bu k
b. bu k = ( at t r but e) + ver b + ( supp ement s)
E. g.
( 9) a. sent ence = A t an t o + meg d csr t e a gyer meket .
' The t eacher up pr a sed t he ch d. '
( nchoat vum) ( bu k)
b. bu k = meg + d csr t e + a gyer meket
( at t r but e) ( ver b) ( supp ement )
Br assa dent f es t h s st r uct ur e not on y n nd cat ve
sent ences but n t he var ous k nds of nt er r ogat ve and m-
per at ve s ent ences , t oo. What s mor e, he f or mu at es h s f nd-
ngs not on y n t he f or m of a pr ocedur e f or t he ana ys s of
Hungar an sent ences, but a so n t he f or m of an ' a gor h t hm'
f or t he pr oduct on, gener at on of t hem. H s a m s t o es t ab-
sh a set of r u es on t he bas s of wh ch a f or e gner can
a so ear n how t o pr oduce Hungar an s ent ences , and, on t he
ot her hand, on t he bas s of wh ch t can be ob| ect ve y
dec ded f a sent ence s good or bad. So h s appr oach ant -
c pat es n a cer t a n r espect t he pr ogr amme of gener at ve
gr ammar . No wonder t hat t he at t empt at out n ng a Hungar an
gener at ve synt ax pr act ca y ead t o t he r ed scover y of
Br assa ' s ong f or got t en r esu t s ( see E. K ss 1977, and
f or t hcom ng) .
8. The st r uct ur e t h s gener at ve synt ax ass gns t o Hungar an
sent ences d f f er s f r omBr assa ' s n a s ng e m nor r espect :
n t t he un t cor r espond ng t o Br assa ' s at t r but e s not
a s st er of t he ver b and t he post ver ba comp ement s but
t he s st er - node of a node S' dom nat ng t he ver b and t he
post ver ba comp ement s :
= an arbi trary number of
comp ement s, . e. max ma
ma| or cat egor es)
Tr ans at ng t he r u es nt o a t r ee, and nam ng t he m-
med at e y dom nat ed by S" t op c, and t he X mmed at e y
dom nat ed by S' f ocus r ender s t even mor e obv ous t hat t he
t op c cor r esponds t o Br assa ' s nchoat vum, t he S' , t o
Br assa ' s bu k, wh e t he f ocus, t o Br assa ' s at t r but e:
I t s assumed t hat t he t op c and f ocus s ot s ar e gene-
r at ed as empt y pos t ons n t he deep st r uct ur e, and ar e
f ed out opt ona y, by t he ef t war d movement , . e. t he
Focus ng and Top ca zat on, of max ma ma| or cat egor es f o -
ow ng t he ver b n S :
I t s f ur t her mor e assumed t hat a st r ess r u e ass gns sen-
t ence st r ess (to be denot ed be ow by an accent mar k) t o t he
f r st ma| or cat egor y n S' .
Thus, a Hungar an speaker has t he f o ow ng opt ons
n or gan z ng a ver b w t h t wo comp ement s, e. g. esz Pt er
az a mat ' eat s Pet er t he app e+acc' , nt o a sent ence:
( ) He does not per f or m e t her Focus ng or Top ca zat on,
n wh ch case t he st r ess w f a on t he ver b:
( 11) Esz Pet er az a mat .
or : Esz az a mat Pt er . ( The or der of max ma
ma| or cat egor es s
f r ee n S. )
( ) He per f or ms Focus ng, but no Top ca zat on:
( 12) Pt er esz az a mat .
or : Az a mat esz Pt er ,
( ) He per f or ms Top ca zat on, but no Focus ng:
( 13) Pt er esz az a mat .
or : Az a mat esz Pt er .
or : Pet er az a mat esz .
( v) He per f or ms bot h Focus ng and Top ca zat on:
( 14) Pt er az a mat esz .
or : Az a mat Pet er esz .
These wou d be t he var ant s pr oduced by Br assa ' s
a gor h t hm, t oo. Fr omt he who e t er at ur e of Hungar an
t r ad t ona ngu st cs, Br assa ' s f or got t en t heor y has come
c osest t o t he dea of gener at ng a and on y t he gr ammat ca
per mut at ons of a ver b and t s comp ement s.
Ref er ences
Br assa , Samue ( 1852) Tapogat dzasok a magyar nye v kr
| Exp or ng t he Hungar an Language 1 Pest Nap 1852: no.
802, 803; 1853: no. 861, 862, 865, 876, 877, 878, 885.
Br assa , Smue ( 1860) A magyar mondat I . | The Hungar an
Sent ence| Magyar Akadm a Er t es t . A Nyel v- es Szp-
t udomny Oszt y Kz nye 1, 279- 399.
Br assa , Samue ( 1863- 65) A magyar mondat r I I - I I I . | About
t he Hungar an Sent ence 1 Magyar Akadm a Er t es t . A
Nye v- es Szpt udomny Oszt y Kz nye 3, 3- 128, 173-
409.
Br assa , Samue ( 1874) Lae us. Hogyan ke es hogyan nem
ke magyar zn az sko ban a at n aukt or okat ? LaeL us.
How t o exp a n and how not t o exp a n t he Lat n aut hor s
at schoo ?| Ko ozsvr , St e n.
Br assa , Samue ( 1885) A mondat dua smusa | The Dua sm of
t he Sent ence | Er t ekezsek a Magyar Tudomnyos Akadem a
Nye v- es Szpt udomny Oszt ya Kr b 12.
Chomsky, Noam ( 1970) Deep St r uct ur e, Sur f ace St r uct ur e and
Semant c I nt er pr et at on, n R. | akobson and S. Kawamot o
( eds. ) St ud es n Gener a and Or ent a L ngu st cs,
Tokyo: TEC Cor por at on f or Language Resear ch.
Chomsky, Noam ( 1971) Remar ks on Nom na zat on, n: R. A.
| acobs and P. S. Rosenbaum ( eds. ) Read ngs n Eng sh
Tr ansf or mat ona Gr ammar , Wa t ham, Massachuset t s, G nn
And Company.
Danes, Fr ant sek et a . ( 1974) Zur Ter m no og e der f unk-
t ona en Sat zper spekt ve, n: Danes ( ed. ) Paper s on
Funct ona Sent ence Per spect ve, Pr ague: Academ a.
Dr ess er , Wo f gang ( 1974) Funkt one e Sat zper spekt ve und
Text t heor e, n: Danes ( ed. ) Paper s on Funct ona Sen-
t ence Per spect ve, Pr ague: Academ a.
E ekf , Lasz o( 1968) Mondat f or mak es mondat hangsu yok f onet -
ka vet et e The Phonet i c Ref l ect i on of Sent ence For ms
and Sent ence St r esses| Nye vt udomny Kz emnyek 70,
329- 370.
F mor e, Char es | . ( 1968) The Case f or Case, n: E. Bach
and R. T. Har ms ( eds. ) Un ver sa s n L ngu st c Theor y,
New Yor k: Ho t , R nehar t and W nst on.
F r bas, | an ( 1974) Some Aspect s of t he Czechos ovak Appr oach
t o Pr ob ems of Funct ona Sent ence Per spect ve, n: Danes
( ed. ) Paper s on Funct ona Sent ence Per spect ve, Pr ague:
Academ a.
Gabe ent z, Geor g von der ( 1869) I deen zu e ner ver g e chenden
Synt ax - Wor t und Sat zst e ung, Ze t schr f t f r V ker -
psycho og e und Spr achw ssenschaf t 6, 376- 384.
Gabe ent z, Geor g von der ( 1875) We t er es zur ver g e chenden
Synt ax, Ze t schr f t f r V ker psycho og e und Spr ach-
w ssenschaf t 8, 129- 165.
Ha day, M chae A. K. ( 1967) Not es on Tr ans t v t y and
Theme n Eng sh I I , | our na of L ngu st cs 3, 199- 244.
| ackendof f , Ray S. ( 1972) Semant c I nt er pr et at on n
Gener at ve Gr ammar , Cambr dge, Massachuset t s, The M. I . T.
Pr ess.
K ef er , Fer ene ( 1977) Funct ona Sent ence Per spect ve and
Pr esuppos t ons, Act a L ngu st ca Hung. 27/ 1- 2, 83- 109.
E. K ss, Kat a n ( 1977) Top c and Focus n Hungar an Synt ax,
Mont r ea Wor k ng Paper s n L ngu st cs 8, May, 1- 42.
. K ss, Kat a n ( f or t hcom ng) Synt act c Re at ons n Hun-
gar an, t o appear n L ngu st c I nqu r y.
Kuno, Susumu ( 1972) The Cat egor a and t he Thet c | udgement :
Ev dence f r om| apanese Synt ax, Foundat ons of Language
9, 153- 185.
L , Char es N. and Sandr a Thompson ( 1976) Sub| ect and Top c:
A New Typo ogy of Languages, n L ( ed. ) Sub| ect and Top c,
New Yor k: Academ c Pr ess.
Mat hes us, V. ( 1929) Zur Sat zper spekt ve mmoder nen Eng sch,
Ar ch v f r d e neuer en Spr achen und L t er at ur en 155, 202- 210.
Sgal l , Pet r ( 1967) Funct i onal Sent ence Per spect i ve i n
Gener at i ve Descr i pt i on, Pr ague St udi es i n Mat hemat i cal
Li ngui st i cs 2, 203- 225.
Sgal l , Pet r , Eva Haj i ov and Eva Benesov ( 1973) Topi c/ Focus
and Gener at i ve Semant i cs, Kr onber g- Taunus, Scr i pt or Ver l ag.
Wei l , Henr i ( 1844) De l ' or dr e des mot s dans l es l angues an-
ci ennes compar es aux l angues moder nes, Par i s.
DEEP STRUCTURE CASES REI NTERPRETED
Andr s Kom sy
1. I n t he F mor ean gener at ve mode deep st r uct ur es f or
sent ences cons st n t he un t y of t he pr ed cat e and t he ( n
f act , unor der ed) set of NPs r e at ed t o t ; f ur t her mor e, NPs
ar e dom nat ed by t he t ype of r o e t hey p ay n t he act on
dent f ed by t he pr ed cat e. These f unct on t ypes ar e r e-
gar ded by F mor e as deep st r uct ur e cases, and t he r con-
t ent s ar e g ven a ver ba char act er zat on ( F mor e ( 1968a) ) :
Agent ve ( A) : t he case of t he t yp ca y an mat e per -
ce ved nst gat or of t he act on dent f ed by t he ver b
I nst r ument a ( I ) : t he case of t he nan mat e f or ce or
ob| ect causa y nvo ved n t he act on or st at e den-
t f ed by t he ver b
Dat ve ( D) : t he case of t he an mat e be ng af f ect ed by
t he st at e or act on dent f ed by t he ver b
Ob| ect ve ( 0) : . . . t h ngs wh ch ar e af f ect ed by t he
act on or st at e dent f ed by t he ver b. (...)
and so f or t h
I n h s at er wor ks F mor e has h mse f a so a t er ed
t he above syst emby nt r oduc ng new cat egor es and e m nat -
ng t he cat egor y of Dat ve, whose cont ent has been absor bed
e t her by t he Ob| ect or by t he new y cr eat ed cat egor es
( Goa , Exper encer ) ; but t he bas c pr nc p es of cat egor za-
t on have r ema ned una t er ed ( F mor e ( 1968b) and ( 1971) ) .
However , t he obser vance of t he nher ent pr oper t es of
t he nouns n def n ng cases seems t o be a mat t er of ncons st -
ency n F mor e' s syst em: t s my mpr ess on t hat , n h s
or g na nt ent on, cases shou d denot e t ypes of r e at ons,
t hat s, t hey wou d cor r espond t o r o es p ayed by t he act ua
NPs n r e at on t o d f f er ent ver bs.
I f one st cks t o t h s dea cons st ent y, t w become
obv ous t hat t he pr oper t es of t he NP p ay ng a cer t a n r o e
shou d be ong t o t he char act er zat on of t he "p ayer of t he
r o e" r at her t han t hat of t he " r o e" . Th s r ema ns unchanged
by t he f act t hat some of t hose r o es can be most y f u f ed
by NPs hav ng cer t a n pr oper t es on y. I n or der t o make my
po nt c ear er , et us compar e t he f o ow ng t wo sent ences:
Pet er t hr ew t he sack nt o t he r ver .
Pet er t hr ew Pau nt o t he r ver .
The r o es of Pau and t he sack n t he act on ar e den-
t ca , and t he f act t hat Pau but not t he sack s an mat e
seems t o be r r e evant n det er m n ng t h s r o e.
Ther ef or e, a t hough t he pr agmat c pr obab t y of occur -
r ence n cer t a n r o es obv ous y depends on t he nher ent pr op-
er t es of t he NP t o a gr eat ext ent , I assume t hat t he t ype of
case s exc us ve y det er m ned by t he f unct on p ayed n t he
act on; t hat s, t he nher ent f eat ur es of t he NP ar e r r e e-
vant f r omt h s po nt of v ew. ( They become r e evant , of
cour se, n connect on w t h ot her gr ammat ca oper at ons, wh ch
do not concer n us at pr esent . )
2. One of t he pur poses of my paper s t o show t hat , on t he one
hand, nher ent f eat ur es of NPs ar e not needed f or det er m n-
ng deep st r uct ur e cases, and, on t he ot her hand, t hat at
east some of t he deep st r uct ur e cases can be det er m ned by
us ng f unct ona f eat ur es on y. I n show ng t h s I sha r e y
on t he synt act c pr oper t es of var ous anguages, pr mar y
DEEP STRUCTURE CASES REI NTERPRETED 353
on t hose of t he so- ca ed er gat ve anguages.
Fur t her mor e, I sha at t empt t o show t hat t he syst em
of f unct ona f eat ur es char act er z ng subt ypes of A and 0
can be assumed t o be un ver sa , so t hat char act er st c syn-
t act c st r uct ur es f or anguages of var ous synt act c t ypes
1
( accusat ve , er gat ve, act ve et c. ) can be deduced f r om t ,
and t he r ange of use of t hose st r uct ur es n any anguage can
be account ed f or by s mp e neut r a zat on pr ocesses.
My at t ent on w be pr mar y d r ect ed t owar ds syn-
t act c st r uct ur es w t h ver bs whose case- f r ame does not n-
c ude any cat egor es ot her t han A and 0: t hat s, n F -
mor e' s not at on, t hey have a case- f r ame
These ver bs w be r ef er r ed t o as ' t he c ass of
ver bs' . Th s abe s nt ended t o r ef er t o t he
f act t hat ver bs w t h "abst r act " mean ngs ( expr ess ng ment a
or psych c st at es, phenomena; r e at ons, possess on, et c. ) ,
wh ch usua y a so nc ude an E( xper encer ) n t he r case
f r ames, do not f a nt o t h s set . Ver bs mar ked
whose synt act c st r uct ur es ar e r ad ca y d f f er ent f r om
t hose of ver bs n t he anguages nvest gat ed,
w be cons der ed on y per t angent em.
1. 1. I n some anguages, e. g. , Eur opean I ndo- Eur opean and
a so Hungar an, sur f ace st r uct ur es of act ve sent ences
w t h pr ed cat es hav ng an case- f r ame w t yp ca y
appear as f o ows: t he sub| ect of t he sent ence s t he Agent n
unmar ked f or m ( nom nat ve) ; t he ob| ect of t he sent ence s t he
Ob| ect n t he mar ked f or m ( accusat ve) . Fr omnow on I sha ca
'
I n t h s paper I t er m anguages common y ca ed ' nom nat ve'
as ' accusat ve' , because ( ) t he ot her t ypes ar e a so named
af t er t he mar ked case ( ' er gat ve' and ' act ve' ) , and ( )
I w r eser ve t he t er m ' nom nat ve' f or t he case of s mp e
nam ng n a anguages, and, t her ef or e, t h s t er m s not
suf f c ent f or t he nt ended d st nct on.
t hi s const r uct i on of t r ansi t i ve sent ences an o' bj ect ) - mar k-
i ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n' ; l anguages or subsyst ems of l anguages
wi t h t hi s t ype of t r ansi t i ve sent ence const r uct i on wi l l be
cal l ed ' 0( bj ect ) - mar ki ng l anguages and syst ems' , r espect i vel y.
I n many l anguages, e. g. , many Amer i ndi an, Caucasi an, et c. ,
l anguages, t he t ypi cal pat t er n f or sent ences wi t h pr edi cat es
havi ng an A, 0 1 case- f r ame i s j ust t he r ever se of t he
f or mer : t he Obj ect i s t he mor phol ogi cal l y unmar ked cat egor y
( expr essed by casus r ect us i n l anguages wi t h nomi nal decl en-
si on) , and t he Agent i s mar ked. Thi s const r uct i on of t r ansi -
t i ve sent ences wi l l be cal l ed an ' A( gent ) - mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve
pat t er n' .
Unt i l r ecent l y i t was common t o consi der t hat t he whol e
set of l anguages wi t h an - mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n r epr e-
sent s a uni f or m synt act i c t ype opposed t o t he t ype of 0- mar k-
i ng ( "accusat i ve" or "nomi nat i ve") l anguages. Ther e ar e di f -
f er ent names i n use f or t he gr ammat i cal cases expr essi ng t he
Agent ; most wi despr ead ar e t er ms l i ke ' er gat i ve' and al so
' act i ve' and ' agent i ve' . Consequent l y, t hese l anguages ar e
usual l y cal l ed ' er gat i ve l anguages' or ' act i ve' or ' agent i ve
l anguages' . For t he t i me bei ng, I amgoi ng t o use t he l east
common t er m, t hat i s, t he gr ammat i cal case expr essi ng t he
Agent of t he - mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n wi l l be cal l ed
' agent i ve' ( r egar dl ess of what ot her sent ence- t ypes and what
ot her f unct i ons t hi s f or m ser ves t o f ul f i l i n t he gi ven l an-
guages) . However , I suggest t hat t hi s t er mwi l l onl y ser ve
Not e t hat nei t her of t he i nt er pr et at i ons of 0- mar ki ng and A-
mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er ns i s r est r i ct ed t o l anguages wi t h
nomi nal decl ensi on. Ref er ence t o nomi nal cases her e onl y
ser ves t o make t he ar gument at i on easi er t o under st and. The
di st i nct i on of ' mar ked' and ' unmar ked f or ms' i n t he def i ni -
t i on may be appl i ed t o any ki nd of mor phol ogi cal r eal i zat i on.
The unmar ked f or m i s i n gener al i dent i cal t o t he f or mex-
pr essi ng t he Obj ect of i nt r ansi t i ve st at i ve ver bs.
as an auxi l i ar y not i on f or t he expl i cat i on of t he f ol l owi ng,
and wi l l gi ve way l at er t o ot her t er ms. For t he sake of
si mpl i ci t y, t he gr ammat i cal case expr essi ng t he Obj ect of
t he - mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n wi l l be cal l ed nomi nat i ve
f or t he moment . For t he sake of symmet r y i n t er mi nol ogy,
t hose l anguages and syst ems i n whi ch t r ansi t i ve sent ences
ar e t ypi cal l y - mar ki ng wi l l be cal l ed ' - mar ki ng l anguages
and syst ems' .
Di f f er ences bet ween O- mar ki ng and - mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve
pat t er ns can be i l l ust r at ed by t he f ol l owi ng exampl e:
O- mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n ( Hungar i an) :
besi de t he wal l "
3
- mar ki ng t r ansi t i ve pat t er n ( Geor gi an ) :
besi de t he wal l . "
Sent ences wi t h pr edi cat es havi ng an case-
f r ame do not pose di f f i cul t i es concer ni ng t he cat egor i es
cat egor i es A and 0 ei t her i n - mar ki ng or i n O- mar ki ng sys-
t ems, si nce i n bot h pat t er ns Agent and Obj ect ar e assi gned
Geor gi an i s not a pur el y - mar ki ng l anguage; i t depends on
t ense whet her t he sent ence i s - mar ki ng or O- mar ki ng.
di f f er ent suf f i xes i n an unambi guous manner ( O- mar ki ng: A-
nom, O- acc; - mar ki ng: A- ag, O- nom) .
We ar r i ve at a mor e compl ex pi ct ur e i f i nt r ansi t i ve
ver bs ar e al so i nvol ved. - mar ki ng l anguages show a ver y
het er ogeneous pi ct ur e f r omt he poi nt of vi ew of sent ence
const r uct i ons wi t h [ - abst r act J i nt r ansi t i ve ver bs.
1. 2. 1. The si mpl est i nsi ght i s gi ven by t hat gr oup of A-
mar ki ng l anguages i n whi ch al l sent ences wi t h [ - abst r act J
i nt r ansi t i ve ver bs ar e const r uct ed accor di ng t o one and t he
same pat t er n as f ol l ows: t he sur f ace r eal i zat i on of t he onl y
deep st r uct ur e case r el at ed t o t hese ver bs i s al ways ( i . e. ,
i ndependent l y of whet her i t i s an A or an 0) i dent i cal t o
t he f or mat i on of t he Obj ect of ver bs havi ng an I A, 0]
case- f r ame; t hat i s, t hey ar e expr essed by t he nomi nat i ve i n
l anguages wi t h nomi nal decl ensi on. Al l t hi s can be demon-
st r at ed by t he f ol l owi ng Avar sent ences :
Avar :
Vasa - s ( A) st akan ( 0) bekana
boy-ag glass(nom) broke
"The boy br oke t he gl ass"
st akan ( o bekana
gl ass( nom) br oke
"The gl ass br oke"
vas ( A) ana
boy( nom) went
"The boy went "
I t i s t hese l anguages t hat Fi l l mor e cal l s ' er gat i ve- t ype l an-
guages
1
; t he di st r i but i on of sur f ace f or ms as out l i ned above
4
i s r epr esent ed by hi mas f ol l ows :
Thi s f i gur e and al l t he ot her s at t r i but ed t o Fi l l mor e come
f r omFi l l mor e ( 196 8a) .
DEEP STRUCTURE CASES REI NTERPRETED
357
F i g. I
Thi s i s t he i deal pat t er n of l anguages r ef er r ed t o as ' l an-
guages wi t h er gat i ve const r uct i on' by Sovi et Caucaseol ogi st s.
Fol l owi ng t hi s t r adi t i on, I wi l l cal l t hi s subt ype of A- mar k-
i ng l anguages ' er gat i ve l anguages' .
I f t hi s syst emwer e shar ed by al l - mar ki ng l anguages,
a si mpl e expl anat i on f or t he di st r i but i on of t he sur f ace
f or ms coul d be gi ven ( as, i n f act , i t has t r adi t i onal l y been
gi ven i n t he l i t er at ur e on er gat i ve l anguages) i n t er ms of
t r ansi t i vi t y and i nt r ansi t i vi t y. However , t he si t uat i on i s
not t hi s si mpl e i n al l - mar ki ng l anguages.
1. 2. 2. I n Geor gi an, t he subj ect of sent ences wi t h i nt r ansi t i ve
pr edi cat es does not have a uni f or m sur f ace r eal i zat i on i n t he
aor i st gr oup of t enses, wher e t he t r ansi t i ve pat t er n i s A-
mar ki ng. On t he basi s of mor phol ogi cal and synt act i c char ac-
t er i st i cs Geor gi an gr ammar s di st i ngui sh bet ween t wo gr oups of
i nt r ansi t i ve ver bs t hat of t he medi o- act i ve and t hat of t he
medi o- passi ve ones.
I n a sent ence wi t h a medi o- act i ve pr edi cat e i n one of
t he aor i st t enses, t he subj ect appear s i n t he agent i ve ( t he
commonl y used t er m i s ' er gat i ve' ) case, t hat i s, i n t he f or m
of t he Agent of a t r ansi t i ve sent ence:
' wo subt ypes of er gat i ve l anguages can be di st i ngui shed on
t he basi s of whet her t he Agent of t r ansi t i ve sent ences i s
mar ked i n case t he Obj ect i s unspeci f i ed or i t i s unmar ked
as i f t he ver b wer e i nt r ansi t i ve, cf . 3.
The sub| ect of a med o- pass ve pr ed cat e s a ways
r ea zed n t he nom nat ve ( . e. t he f or m of t he Ob| ect n
t r ans t ve sent ences) :
"The p at e f e / has f a en"
The per sona af f xes ar e t he same n bot h gr oups of
ver bs, . e. t hey ar e ndependent of whet her t hey r e at e t o a
sub| ect n t he nom nat ve or t o one n t he agent ve.
The sub| ect of most med o- act ves s t yp ca y Agent
and t hat of most med o- pass ves s t yp ca y Ob| ect ; never -
t he ess, t her e ar e sever a count er - examp es, as s shown by
t he d ver s t y of t he gr oups be ow. The gr oup of med o- act ve
ver bs nc udes among ot her s du s_ ' bo ' , gor avs ' r o ' , t r s
' weep' , cur avs ' sw m, f oat ' , cvet s ' dr p' ; t hat of t he med o-
pass ves dgas ' st and' , m d s ' go' , cevs ' e, r ec ne' , hsor avs
1
move of f ' .
I n v r t ue of t hese dat a t wou d be an over s mp f ca-
t on t o say t hat agent ve sub| ect s a ways expr ess under y ng
Agent s, wh e t he nom nat ve case s a r e ab e s gna f or
t he sub| ect ' s be ng an under y ng Ob| ect or Exper encer . Even
f we wer e t o d sr egar d t h s pr ob em, t he mer e f act t hat n
t h s anguage t her e ar e t wo f or ms f or expr ess ng t he sub| ect
of an nt r ans t ve sent ence such t hat t he one of t hem s
dent ca w t h t he sur f ace r ea zat on of t he Agent , t he
ot her w t h t hat of t he Ob| ect of t r ans t ve sent ences, neces-
sar y dr aws our at t ent on t o a t heor et ca pr ob em ( wh ch
cou d on y be passed over n t he case of t he anguages of
t he f or mer gr oup) : what ar e t he cr t er a on t he bas s of
wh ch t he t ype of t he s ng e case- r e at on of an nt r ans t ve
DEEP STRUCTURE CASES REINTERPRETED 359
ver b cou d at a be det er m ned?
Ther e s a ar ge number of nt r ans t ve ver bs f or
wh ch our nt u t on a so wou d be at a oss n dec d ng
whet her t he r on y NPs ar e Agent s or Ob| ect s. I t seems r at h-
er obv ous t hat t he NP of t he nt r ans t ve ver b wa k can
on y p ay t he r o e of an Agent and anyt h ng t hat br eaks s
an Ob| ect , but t s not much mor e doubt f u e t her t hat t he
sub| ect of a ver b ke sp n or f y can r epr esent e t her an
under y ng Agent or a deep st r uct ur e Ob| ect . ( E. g. , The danc-
er ( A) s sp nn ng on t he st age; The humm ng- t op ( 0) s sp n-
n ng on t he f oor ; The st or k ( A) was f y ng t owar ds t he pond;
The st one ( 0) was f y ng t owar ds t he pond. )
Ver bs of t he at t er sor t show t hat any at t empt
t o dent f y t he t ype of t he case- r e at on n any g ven n-
st ance so e y on t he gr ound of t he mean ng of t he ver b wou d
be og ca y wr ong. The po nt s t hat f any mean ng d f f er -
ence can be post u at ed bet ween t he t wo uses of ver bs ke
sp n ( one w t h an Agent , t he ot her w t h an Ob| ect ) , t he en-
t r e d f f er ence wou d cons st pr ec se y n t he ver b' s hav ng
an Agent n one case nst ead of an Ob| ect n t he ot her - so
t h s exp anat on wou d be necessar y c r cu ar .
I t s because of a s m ar c r cu ar t y t hat t s not
adv sab e t o base a gener a def n t on of deep cases on t he
semant c f eat ur es of t he ver bs e t her : f t he chang ng of
t he case- f r ame of a ver b can t se f cause a change n t he
mean ng of t hat ver b, t hen t he mean ngs of t he ver bs depend
on t he def n t ons of t he cases n gener a . Ther ef or e, t he
at t er have t o be ndependent of t he mean ngs of t he ver bs.
( I f , on t he ot her hand, a change n t he case- f r ame never
changed t he mean ng of t he ver b t se f , t hen - t hough ver ba
mean ngs wou d obv ous y be ndependent of t he def n t ons of
t he cases - t wou d be even mor e ev dent t hat case- r e at ons
may not be det er m ned n t er ms of ver ba mean ngs. )
Th s s not meant t o say t hat t he set ( f oot not e 6 cont nued)
I t has al r eady been ment i oned t hat i nher ent f eat ur es
of t he NP char act er i ze t he " pl ayer " NP r at her t han t he t ype
of t he case- r el at i on; i t f ol l ows t hen t hat t he def i ni t i ons
of t he deep st r uct ur e case- r el at i ons have t o be i ndependent
of t he f eat ur es of bot h t he ver b and t he NP at t ached t o i t .
Taki ng al l t hi s f or gr ant ed, t her e ar e at l east t wo
mor e cl osel y r el at ed quest i ons l ef t :
1) Ar e t he case- r el at i ons unanal yzabl e ent i t i es , i . e.
pr i mi t i ve t er ms , needi ng no def i ni t i ons?
2) What ar e t he pr i mi t i ve t er ms on whi ch t he def i ni -
t i ons of t he case- r el at i ons depend i f t hey ar e not t he pr i m-
i t i ve t er ms t hemsel ves?
1. 2. 3. The cl ue t o t he sol ut i on of t he l ast quest i on i s
pr obabl y of f er ed by a t hi r d gr oup of - mar ki ng l anguages
wher e t her e i s a possi bi l i t y of const r uct i ng t wo di f f er ent
sur f ace st r uct ur e sent ences out of t he same i nt r ansi t i ve ver b
and t he same NP:
I n sent ences ( l a) and ( 2a) t he subj ect has a f or mi dent i -
cal t o t he sur f ace r eal i zat i on of t he Agent of t r ansi t i ve sen-
t ences, wher eas t he f or m of t he subj ect ( l b) and ( 2b) i s t he
same as t he sur f ace r eal i zat i on of t he Obj ect i n a t r ansi t i ve
sent ence.
( f oot not e 6 cont i nued) of case- f r ames ( Fi l l mor e' s ' f r ame
f eat ur e' i n ( 1968a) 27) of t he ver b woul d al so be i ndependent
of i t s semant i c f eat ur es but r at her on t he cont r ar y: seman-
t i c f eat ur es of t he ver b pr obabl y uni quel y det er mi ne i t .
7
Al l t he Bat s exampl es and t hei r i nt er pr et at i ons ar e based
on Deser i ev ( 1953) .
The mean ngs of t hese sent ences ar e a so d f f er ent .
E. g. , t he mean ng of sent ence ( a) nc udes t hat t s on y
myse f who s t o b ame f or my f a ng down, . e. t hat t he
agent of t he event was me - at east n t he sense t hat t
t ook p ace as a consequence of my act s exc us ve y, as no-
body pushed me nor d d t he ear t h g ve way under me; on t he
ot her hand, n ( b) I cou d not be t he agent myse f , and
s m ar y f or ( 2a- b) .
I t seems t o me t hat t he d f f er ences ( n f or m as we
as n mean ng) bet ween t he member s of t he above sent ence-
pa r s have t o be account ed f or by t he NPs bear ng an A- r e a-
t on t o t he ver b n sent ences (a) and an O- r e at on n sen-
t ences ( b) . I n any case, t s on y t he t ype of case- r e a-
t ons wh ch can be supposed t o be d f f er ent n t he deep
st r uct ur e, s nce t he cont r ast ed sent ences can be bu t up
out of t he same nvent or y of ex ca t ems and have dent -
ca st r uct ur es n t er ms of sub| ect and pr ed cat e as we as
t op c and comment .
Syst ems t hat ar e s m ar t o Geor g an and Bat s ar e com-
mon y ca ed ' act ve' , as opposed t o ' er gat ve' . Such a anguage
s Dakot a, whose syst emof oppos t ons s ust r at ed by F -
mor e as f o ows :
F g. I I
Never t he ess, t seems t o me t hat t h s f gur e r at her
cor r esponds t o syst ems n wh ch t he a t er nat on demonst r at ed
by t he Bat s examp es s ext ended, at east n pr nc p e, t o
a | - at r act | nt r ans t ve ver bs, t hat s, wher e sur f ace
f or m s a d r ect f unct on of t he deep st r uct ur e case.
The descr pt ons ava ab e t o me ( Boas ( 1911) , Boas and
De or a ( 1932) ) , seem t o suggest t hat , n add t on t o t he
f act t hat Dakot a does not r epr esent t h s " dea " pat t er n,
t her e s not even a m t ed number of Dakot a ver bs bes des
wh ch sur f ace st r uct ur e wou d be d r ect y det er m ned by t he
act ua r o e of t he NP. Dakot a r at her seems t o f a nt o t he
same t ype as Geor g an. Th s t ype may be ca ed t he ex ca -
zed var ant of t he above ( I I ) syst em. The r eason s t hat n-
t r ans t ve ver bs d v de nt o t wo gr oups bot h n Geor g an and
Dakot a ( t he gr oup af act ve, or dynam c and t he gr oup of n-
act ve, or st at ve ver bs) and t he sur f ace f or m s det er m ned
by t he t yp ca , and not t he act ua , r o e of t he NP; n ot her
wor ds, sur f ace f or m s det er m ned by t he f act t hat t he ver b
be ongs t o t he one gr oup or t he ot her . Th s syst emmay be
ust r at ed as f o ows:
F g. I I I
The d f f er ences bet ween syst ems n F g. I I and F g. I I I
seemt o be f undament a enough t o me t o r ender t hem t o d st nct
t ypes, even t hough I know of no anguage r epr esent ng t ype I I
n a pur e f or m. Bat s s bas ca y ke Dakot a, t oo, and t he
agent ve/ nom nat ve a t er nat on has on y been r ecor ded f or
a f ew ver bs. Never t he ess, t he pr nc p e man f est ng t se f
n t h s a t er nat on necess t at es t he post u at on of t ype I I .
Fr omnow on I w r eser ve t he t er m ' act ve' f or t h s dea sys-
t em, and t ype I I I w be ca ed ' t he ex ca zed var ant of
t he act ve t ype' .
1. 2. 4. Sent ences wi t h [ +abst r act ] pr edi cat es may al so show
a cont r ast par al l el t o what we f ound i n t he Bat s exampl es
( l a- b) and ( 2a- b) above.
Most - mar ki ng l anguages have a speci al sur f ace pat -
t er n f or t hese sent ences, whi ch i s di f f er ent f r omt hat of
sent ences wi t h [ - abst r act ] pr edi cat es. I n such l anguages wi t h
nomi nal decl ensi on, t he nor mal way of expr essi ng t he Exper i -
encer of t hese pr edi cat es i s t o put i t i n t he dat i ve case.
I n some cases, however , i t i s possi bl e t o const r uct a
par al l el sent ence by put t i ng t he onl y NP of t he same [ +ab-
st r act ] ver b i nt o t he agent i ve case ( t hi s may or may not be
accompani ed by a change i n t he ver b f or m, dependi ng on l an-
guage) . The di f f er ence bet ween t he meani ngs of such sent ence
pai r s i s si mi l ar t o what we f ound i n cases of agent i ve/ nomi -
nat i ve al t er nat i on besi des one and t he same ver b i n t he Bat s
exampl es anal yzed above. Not e t hat such dat i ve/ agent i ve pai r s
occur i n Geor gi an as wel l al t hough agent i ve/ nomi nat i ve al t er -
nat i on i s unknown. Consi der t he f ol l owi ng Geor gi an sent ences:
I n most cont ext s, t he member s or each pai r can be i n-
t er changed qui t e f r eel y, wi t hout t he nat i ve speaker ' s not i c-
i ng any change i n t he meani ng. I t i s never t hel ess i mpossi bl e
_
The nt er pr et at ons of t he examp es come f r om nf or mant s.
"he/ she( dat ) f e as eep" "he/ she( ag) f e as eep"
"he/ she( dat ) awoke" "he/ she( ag) awoke"
"he/ she( dat ) sm ed" "he/ she( ag) sm ed"
"he/ she( dat ) was g ad" "he/ she( ag) was g ad"
( un ess t he pur pose s t o m s ead t he hear er ) t o use, e. g. ,
man da na ( he/ she f e as eep) f t he speaker knows t hat
t he per son r ef er r ed t o f e as eep as a consequence of hav-
ng dr unk some dr ug s pped nt o h s/ her g ass by somebody
e se n secr et . Accor d ng y, t wou d be wr ong t o use man
ga v a ( he/ she awoke) f one knows t hat t he awaken ng was
br ought about by a oud no se n t he m dd e of t he n ght .
The same k nd of r e at on can a so ho d f t he sen-
t ences have, n add t on, a deep st r uct ur e Ob| ect . I t ap-
pear s n bot h sent ences n t he nom nat ve case, but t w
on y be t he sub| ect n t he sent ence w t h t he Exper encer n
t he dat ve case ( sent ences ( a) be ow) . S nce t he Exper encer -
NP n t he dat ve s an nd r ect ob| ect , t h s member of t he
pa r s nt r ans t ve.
Subst t ut ng t he dat ve case f or mof t h s nt r ans -
t ve pat t er n f or an agent ve, we ar r ve at t he t yp ca t r an-
s t ve pat t er n of - mar ki ng l anguages. The second member of
t he pai r i s, t her ef or e, a si mpl e t r ansi t i ve sent ence wi t h
t he subj ect i n an agent i ve case f or m ( t he deep Exper i encer of
t he f or mer sent ences) and a di r ect obj ect ( r epr esent i ng t he
deep st r uct ur e Obj ect ) i n t he nomi nat i ve case:
Bat s
( l a) Mi t u- i n h o gu (b) Mi t o- s h o gu
"Mi t o sees you" "Mi t o sees you"
( 2a) Sandr u- i n j eci no Moskowa (b) Sandr o- s j eci no Moskowa
"Sandr o l i ked Moscow" "Sandr o l i ked Moscow"
Geor gi an
( l a)
"Pet er l i ked t he deci si on"
( l b) Pet r e- m mo i con - a gadacqvet i l eba
"Pet er assent ed t o t he deci si on"
( 2a)
"Pet er t hought Paul was a cl ever man"
( 2b)
"Pet er f ound out a new game"
Agai n, i t seems t o me t hat t he di f f er ences ( bot h i n
f or m and meani ng) have t o be account ed f or by t he sent ences'
havi ng di f f er ent case- r el at i ons i n t hei r deep st r uct ur e: an
- r el at i on i n t he one of t hem and an A- r el at i on i n t he ot her .
2. 1. I t i s i nt ui t i vel y qui t e obvi ous t hat some concept of
act i vi t y has t o be i nvol ved i n any char act er i zat i on of t hat
r ol e whi ch i s t o be mat ched by t he cat egor y ' Agent i ve' . On
t he ot her hand, i t i s f ar l ess obvi ous t o our i nt ui t i on what
9
"act i vi t y" exact l y must mean i n t hi s cont ext .
We have al r eady ment i oned t hat t her e seems t o be no
di f f er ence i n t he deep st r uct ur e of t he sent ences compar ed
i n sect i ons 1. 2. 3. and 1. 2. 4. ot her t han t hat of t he t ype of
t he case- r el at i ons. We can t her ef or e assume t hat t he meani ng
r
di f f er ences bet ween t he sent ences st r ai ght f or war dl y r epr esent
t he di f f er ences bet ween t he case- r el at i ons i nvol ved. The dat a
of sect i ons 1. 2. 3. and 1. 2. 4. t hen show t hat t he meani ng of
Fi l l mor e uses t he pr oper t y "i nst i gat i ng t he act i on i dent i -
f i ed by t he ver b" . But i nst i gat i ng a t r ansi t i ve act i on i nevi -
t abl y i ncl udes exer t i ng some i nf l uence on anot her NP ( i t i s
i mpossi bl e t o i nst i gat e a t r ansi t i ve act i on wi t hout t hi s) ,
whi ch, on t he ot her hand, i s excl uded i f t he act i on i s i n-
t r ansi t i ve. The phr ase "i nst i gat i ng t he act i on" , t her ef or e,
an A- r el at i on can di f f er f r omt he meani ng of an O- r el at i on
i n t he same way as i t does f r omt hat of an - r el at i on. Thi s
can onl y be expl ai ned i f case- r el at i ons ar e not pr i mi t i ve
t er ms but def i ned i n t er ms of di st i nct i ve f eat ur es.
I t seems, i n f act , ver y pr obabl e t hat i t i s t he pr es-
ence i n t he Agent i ve r el at i ons ( and t he absence i n t he ot her
t wo) of one of t hose f eat ur es whi ch under l i es t he meani ng
di f f er ences i n our exampl es. Si nce t he meani ng di f f er ence
i t sel f cl ear l y consi st s i n t hat t he NPs i n t he agent i ve case
ar e i n some sense "mor e act i ve" t han t he same NPs i n t he nom-
i nat i ve or dat i ve case i n t he par al l el const r uct i ons, I wi l l
cal l t hi s f eat ur e t he f eat ur e of "act i vi t y".
On t he basi s of our dat a, t he f ol l owi ng i nt er pr et at i on
shoul d be gi ven t o t hi s f eat ur e: t he act i vi t y of an NP means
t hat i t s mot i on, change et c. i dent i f i ed by t he pr edi cat e i s
not br ought about by ext er nal ( causal ) ef f ect s. Thi s i nt er -
pr et at i on of t he f eat ur e [ +act i ve] makes t he f eat ur e [ +ani -
mat e] super f l uous i n def i ni ng t he case- r el at i onshi p and, at
t he same t i me, i t gi ves t he oppor t uni t y t o di st i ngui sh t he
di f f er ent case- r el at i ons i n sent ences l i ke Pet er ( A) i s spi n-
ni ng (as he want s t o) and Pet er ( 0) i s spi nni ng ( because Paul
i s spi nni ng hi m ar ound) .
2. 2. Let us now r et ur n t o t he [ - abst ract ] ver bs and t r y t o
char act er i ze t he r ol es of t hei r NPs.
The ver bs wi t h t he f eat ur e [ - abst r act ] ar e t he pr edi -
cat es of t hose sent ences whi ch r ef er t o "chai ns of causa-
t i ons" of t he physi cal r eal i t y: some obj ect exer t s some
i nf l uence upon anot her , t hi s has an ef f ect on a t hi r d, and
so on. I n a ver y si mpl e way, we can schemat i cal l y r epr esent
chai ns of causat i ons by usi ng ci r cl es f or t hei r el ement s
( t he obj ect s) and ar r ows f or t he ef f ect s t hey have on t he
( f oot not e 9 cont i nued) obvi ousl y r ef er s t o di f f er ent r ol es
i n r el at i on t o t r ansi t i ve ver bs, on t he one hand, and i n-
t r ansi t i ves, on t he ot her .
next as f o ows:
0 0 _
0 0
0 ( "cha n of zer o degr ee" or "a s ng e
e ement cha n")
Accor d ng t o t he f unct ons t hey p ay n t he cha n we
can st at e t hr ee t ypes of e ement s ( st ar t ng, nt er med at e,
c os ng) wh ch can be char act er zed by t wo pr oper t es and
t he r negat ons :
st ar t ng: af f ect ng, non- af f ect ed
nt er med at e: af f ect ng, af f ect ed
c os ng: non- af f ect ng, af f ect ed
The f our t h t ype s r epr esent ed by t he on y member of t he s n-
g e e ement cha n:
s ng e: non- af f ect ng, non- af f ect ed
I n add t on t o t h s, e ement s can d f f er accor d ng t o
whet her t he nf uence s t aken over and passed on by t hem n
an ner t manner or mer e y has t he r o e of a st mu us t o t hem
t hat evokes t he r own act v t y. Th s d f f er ence s ent r e y
par a e t o t he pr esence or absence of t he f eat ur e of act v-
t y, descr bed above. I f we at t empt t o use cor r espond ng
f eat ur es n char act er z ng t he deep case- r e at ons of sen-
t ences r ef er r ng t o cha ns of causat ons, we come t o t he f o -
ow ng syst em:
act ve af f ect ng af f ect ed
+ + + Pet er makes Pau wr t e t he et -
t er
+ + - Pet er s wr t ng a et t er .
Pet er makes Pau | ump.
+ - + Pet er makes Pau | ump.
+ - - Pet er s | ump ng. Pet er s f a -
ng, ( cf . t he Bat s sent ence as
voze)
+ + Pet er i s wr i t i ng wi t h a penci l .
10
+ The wi nd banged t he door .
+ Pet er i s wr i t i ng t he l et t er .
Pet er i s pushi ng Paul .
- Pet er i s t al l . Pet er i s f al l i ng
( cf . t he Bat s sent ence so voze)
The f eat ur es have been est abl i shed on t he basi s, and
f or t he expl anat i on, of synt act i c ( i . e. f or mal ) di f f er ences
and ar e t her ef or e synt act i c f eat ur es. Never t hel ess, t hey can
be gi ven i nt er pr et at i ons as f ol l ows :
+ act i ve] : t he i mmedi at e sour ce of t he mot i on, change,
st at e, r el at i on et c. ( hence: mot i on) of t he NP i s t he
NP i t sel f . I n ot her wor ds: i t s mot i on cannot be r egar d-
ed as a mechani cal r esul t of some ext er nal ef f ect .
[*+ af f ect i ng] : t he mot i on of t he NP i ncl udes i t s exer t i ng
some i nf l uence upon, or passi ng ( some of t he) i nf l uence
exer t ed upon i t t o anot her NP. Thi s by no means i mpl i es
t hat t he mot i on of t he second NP shoul d be a mechani cal
consequence of t hi s i nf l uence: t hi s i nf l uence can f unc-
t i on as a mer e st i mul us whi ch t r i gger s i t s own act i vi -
t y.
+ af f ect ed] : t he NP i s i nf l uenced by some ext er nal f or ce.
2. 3. Si nce t hese f eat ur es ar e pr i mi t i ve t er ms, t he above char -
act er i zat i ons ar e t hei r i nt er pr et at i ons r at her t han def i ni -
t i ons. The f eat ur es t hemsel ves ar e met al i ngui st i c t er ms; i . e.
t hey by no means r ef er t o r eal phenomena i n t he out er wor l d.
They char act er i ze and di st i ngui sh some of t hose, pr esumabl y
uni ver sal , synt act i c cat egor i es ( case- r el at i ons) t hat can
have expr essi on i n nat ur al l anguage.
Af t er al l , t he f eat ur es i nvol ved i n t he deep st r uct ur e
of ever y concr et e sent ence char act er i ze t hose r ol es t hat ar e
at t r i but ed t o t he obj ect s or per sons r ef er r ed t o by t he NPs
See f oot not e 12 .
by t he user of t he sent ence.
Theor et i cal l y, t hi s has not hi ng t o do wi t h t he i nher -
ent f eat ur es, t o whi ch cer t ai n set s of cat egor i es can onl y be
r el at ed i n st yl i st i cal l y unmar ked sent ences even i n pr act i ce.
I n t he Hungar i an f ol kt al e t he por k cheese t hat st ar t s wander -
i ng pl ays t he r ol e of an agent t hr ough t he whol e t al e and t he
st yl i st i c val ue of t he t al e der i ves ( at l east par t i al l y) f r om
t he ver y f act t hat t hi s r ol e i s out of keepi ng wi t h t he i n-
her ent f eat ur es of t he por k cheese.
I bel i eve t hat t he i nt er pr et at i ons of t he f i r st f our
combi nat i ons of f eat ur es char act er i zi ng f our ( sub) t ypes of
A- r el at i ons need no f ur t her expl anat i on. I t al so goes wi t hout
sayi ng t hat t he Obj ect of a t r ansi t i ve act i on has t he f eat ur e
- act i ve , - af f ect i ng, + af f ect ed 1 , t he Obj ect of an i n-
t r ansi t i ve act i on t he f eat ur es - act i ve, - af f ect i ng, - af -
f ect ed , and t he I st r ument i s t ypi cal l y char act er i zed by t he
f eat ur es [- act i ve, + af f ect i ng, + af f ect ed! .
I t i s somewhat mor e di f f i cul t t o f i nd a pl ausi bl e i nt er -
pr et at i on f or t he r emai ni ng combi nat i on of f eat ur es - act i ve,
+ af f ect i ng, - af f ect ed 1 . I cannot pr opose a f ul l y sat i sf ac-
t or y sol ut i on at pr esent ; never t hel ess, t hi s pr obl embei ng of
r at her secondar y i mpor t ance f r omt he poi nt of vi ew of t he
quest i ons I amdi scussi ng her e, I may r ef r ai n f r om goi ng i nt o
det ai l s at t hi s poi nt . I t may be not ed t hough t hat t hi s combi -
nat i on may per haps be cor r el at ed t o t he r ol e pl ayed by embedded
sent ences ( and nomi nal i zat i ons der i ved f r om t hem) i n t he pl ace
Each combi nat i on of f eat ur es cor r esponds t o a par t i cul ar
r ol e and t her ef or e mi ght be i ndi vi dual l y named. Si nce how-
ever t hei r gr oups cl osel y cor r espond t o t he t r adi t i onal cat e-
gor i es of A, 0, and I , I wi l l mai nt ai n t hese l at t er t er ms and
whenever a par t i cul ar subt ype needs speci f i cat i on, I wi l l
gi ve t he appr opr i at e combi nat i on of f eat ur es.
1 2
of x i n r el at i ons of t he t ype causes y.
3. Let us put t he above syst em of f eat ur es asi de f or t he mo-
ment and r et ur n t o t he var i ous t ypes of - mar ki ng l anguages.
I t i s common t o al l - mar ki ng l anguages t hat t he Agent
of t r ansi t i ve sent ences i s expr essed by a mar ked f or m ( i n
case t he obj ect i s speci f i ed, cf . f oot not e 5) and i t s Obj ect
12
Sent ences may not pr esumabl y have t he f eat ur e [ +act i ve I ,
never t hel ess, t he si t uat i on descr i bed by a sent ence may br i ng
about anot her si t uat i on and t hus sent ences may be [ +af f ect i ngl
and +af f ect edl , e. g. [ The l i on i s gr owl i ng 1. causes
[ Tr ees ar e t r embl i ng 1
c
wher e
S. i s [ - act i ve, +af f ect i ng, - af f ect ed] and
S i s [ - act i ve, - af f ect i ng, +af f ect ed"| .
The subj ect of S
?
i s non- af f ect ed and t her ef or e i n accusat i ve
l anguages i t i s i n t he nomi nat i ve as l ong as t he el ement cause
i s not bui l t i nt o t he ver b of S. The bui l di ng of cause i nt o
t he ver b ( i . e. t r ansi t i vi zat i on of t he ver b) t r ansf er s af f ect -
edness f r om S~ ont o i t s subj ect , whi ch t her ef or e becomes an
af f ect ed Obj ect and i s r eal i zed on t he sur f ace i n t he accusa-
t i ve ( The gr owl i ng of t he l i on makes t he t r ees ( t hem! ) t r em-
bl e) . The meani ng of cause may, however , al so r emai n out si de
of S
2
and be at t ached t o t he nomi nal i zat i on of S- i n t he f or m
of a nomi nal af f i x ( Fr omt he gr owl i ng of t he l i on t r ees ar e
t r embl i ng) . Fr om t hi s poi nt of vi ew, "nat ur al f or ces" behave
l i ke sent ences, e. g. The wi nd ( f l ood, t hunder st or m, et c. )
caused [ t he house col l apsed "1 and The wi nd ( f l ood, t hunder -
st or m, et c. ) made t he house col l apse or The house col l apsed
f r om t he wi nd ( f l ood, t hunder st or m, et c. ) . Thi s suggest s t hat
t he combi nat i on [ - act i ve, +af f ect i ng, - af f ect ed J cor r esponds
t o t he subt ype of I nst r ument Fi l l mor e assi gns t o nat ur al
i s i n an unmar ked f or m. We have seen t hat t he sur f ace case of
t he Obj ect i s gener al l y al so unmar ked besi des i nt r ansi t i ve
ver bs
However , we have f ound consi der abl e di ver si t y i n t he
sur f ace st r uct ur es of sent ences i n whi ch t he "act i veness" of
t he NP f al l s bet ween t he t wo ext r emi t i es. ( The wor d "act i ve-
ness" her e and i n t he f ol l owi ng passages does not cor r espond
t o t he f eat ur e [ +act i ve] as def i ned i n 2. 2. - t hat i s, i t i s
not a t echni cal t er m, as i ndi cat ed by t he quot at i on mar ks. )
The Agent of t r ansi t i ve sent ences i s obvi ousl y t he "most ac-
t i ve" NP - si nce i t exer t s an i nf l uence upon anot her NP wi t h
i t s own ener gy - , wher eas t he Obj ect i s t he "l east act i ve" -
i t has no ener gy ( or i f i t has, t hat does not come t o pl ay
i n t he si t uat i on) , and i t does not even pass t he ener gy i t
r ecei ves t o anot her NP ( as opposed t o t he I nst r ument , whi ch
does) .
( f oot not e 12 cont i nued) f or ces. I t seems t o be a common
pr oper t y of such NPs t hat t hey may onl y be subj ect s of sur -
f ace sent ences i n whi ch t he ver b can be i nt er pr et ed as a
caused i nt r ansi t i ve, e. g. The wi nd pai nt ed t he door .
1 3
Ther e ar e, however , - mar ki ng syst ems i n whi ch subj ect s of
al l i nt r ansi t i ve ver bs ( shoul d t hey be an A or an 0) ar e ex-
pr essed by t he same mar ked f or mas t he Agent of t r ansi t i ve
sent ences, and i t i s onl y t he Obj ect of t r ansi t i ve sent ences
whi ch i s unmar ked. I wi l l cal l t hi s syst em, whi ch i s t he
"negat i ve" of accusat i ve syst ems, a ' subj ect - mar ki ng' syst em.
The aor i st t ense gr oup of t he cl osest r el at i ve of Geor gi an,
i . e. Megr el i an bel ongs her e, f or i nst ance, wher e, pr obabl y
st ar t i ng f r om a st at e si mi l ar t o pr esent - day Geor gi an, t he
use of t he agent i ve has been ext ended t o al l i nt r ansi t i ve
ver bs. Mai du seems t o be a pur e subj ect - mar ki ng l anguage ( see
Di xon ( 1911) ) .
Among - mar ki ng l anguages we f i nd ones i n whi ch t he NPs
at t ached t o i nt r ansi t i ve ver bs may be i n t he agent i ve, but
al so ones i n whi ch t he Agent of t r ansi t i ve ver bs i s al so un-
mar ked i n case t he obj ect of t he act i on i s not speci f i ed i n
t he sent ence. Dat a of I ber o- Caucasi an l anguages suggest , howe-
ver , t hat t he r ange of uses of agent i ve f or ms i s by no means
acci dent al . Al t hough t he degr ees of "act i veness" demandi ng
t he use of t he agent i ve ar e di f f er ent i n t hose l anguages,
t hose degr ees al ways mar k a boundar y: t he l anguage wi l l em-
pl oy t he nomi nat i ve case i f t he "act i veness" of t he NP i s
bel ow t hat degr ee wher eas i t wi l l empl oy t he agent i ve case
i f t he "act i veness" of t he NP r eaches or sur passes i t .
1 4
Let us consi der t he f ol l owi ng t ypes of sent ences:
1. V [ A, 0 , , o] : Pet er i s wr i t i ng t he l et t er
2. V [ A, 0 , A ] : Pet er i s wr i t i ng
3. V [ A (/ 0) , A] : Pet er i s wal ki ng, Pet er i s f al l i ng-
4. V ( A/ ) 0 , O] : Pet er i s i l l , Pet er i s f al l i ng
2
Pet er ' s "act i veness" i s evi dent l y decr easi ng i n t he a-
bove or der of t he sent ences. The f i r st sent ence expr esses t hat
Pet er af f ect s a cer t ai n obj ect . The second sent ence ( si mi l ar l y
t o t he t hi r d) onl y asser t s t hat Pet er i s engaged i n a cer t ai n
act i vi t y, never t hel ess, t hat act i vi t y i s necessar i l y r eal i zed
i n af f ect i ng some obj ect even i f t hat poi nt i s i r r el evant f or
t he ut t er ance. Ther e i s no such af f ect i ng i n t he t hi r d sen-
t ence, and i n t he f our t h Pet er i s unambi guousl y i nact i ve.
1 4
Besi des t he case- f r ame you f i nd t he compl ement s r eal i zed
i n t he sent ence.
I n t ypes 3 and 4 I uni t ed t wo case- f r ames, t he one of
whi ch i n bot h cases i s [
A
/ ] Thi s not at i on i ndi cat es
t hat A and 0 ar e i n compl ement ar y di st r i but i on besi des t he
ver b ( see ear l i er exampl es l i ke f l y, spi n, f al l ) . Thi s case-
f r ame i s uni t ed wi t h [ A] i n t ype 3 and wi t h [ O] i n
t ype 4.
Even a qu ck g ance at t hese dat a w r evea t hat out
of t he poss b e var at ons of sur f ace f or ms t hese anguages
on y emp oy t hose n wh ch ( n t he above or der of sent ence
t ypes) agent ve f or ms f o ow one anot her n one b ock un nt er -
r upt ed, and ar e t hen f o owed, s m ar y n one b ock, by t he
nom nat ves. Ther ef or e whenever one of t he f our sent ence t ypes
cont a ns an agent ve NP n a anguage, a t he ot her sent ence
t ypes w t h sma er number s w cont a n an agent ve NP n t hat
anguage.
The same gener a pr nc p e s r ea zed n t he ex ca -
zed var ant of t he act ve t ype as we ( V) , but , as a r esu t
Not a t he subsyst ems of t he* anguages n t he examp es be-
ong t o t he t ype nd cat ed.
Dakot a and Ma du have no nom na dec ens on, t hus my
c a m does not ho d f or t hem n t er ms of agent ve/ nom nat ve,
but s r ea zed n t wo par ad gms of per sona af f xes.
Not e t hat accusat ve, er gat ve ( bot h) , act ve ( bot h) and
sub| ect - mar k ng syst ems may be def ned as syst ems mar k ng on y
comp ement s w t h t he f eat ur es | +af f ect ed| , | +af f ect ng| , | +act -
ve| and | - af f ect ed| , r espect ve y. Cf . 4. 2.
16
Cf . f oot not e 13.
The case of Pet er n t he above sent ences s r ea zed
n d f f er ent anguages as f o ows:
I I I I I I I V V VI
1. nom ag ag ag ag ag
2. nom nom ag ag ag ag
3. nom nom nom a g a g
4. nom nom nom nom ag
The co umns cor r espond t o t he f o ow ng t ypes :
I O- mar k ng ( accusat ve) : e. g. , Eng sh, Hungar an
I I
I I I
I V
V
VI
I I I I I I I V V VI
1.
2.
3.
4.
nom
nom
nom
nom
ag
nom
nom
nom
ag
ag
nom
nom
ag
ag
ag
nom
ag
ag
ag
ag
ag
ag
of ex ca zat on, t he boundar y bet ween t he uses of agent ve
and nom nat ve f or ms s not exact y bet ween t he above sen-
t ence t ypes 3 and 4 but r at her bet ween sent ences w t h dynam c
or st at ve ver bs (as exp a ned ear er ) .
4. 1. I n t h s sect on I w make an at t empt at f or mu at ng a
hypot hes s concer n ng t he set of a human anguages by us ng
pur e y deduct ve ar gument s. My po nt of depar t ur e w be t he
nt er pr et at on of F mor e' s Agent and Ob| ect as mod f ed
above.
We have seen t hat nat ur a anguages emp oy sever a d f -
f er ent syst ems f or t he sur f ace r ea zat on of Agent and Ob-
| ect occur r ng n t r ans t ve and/ or nt r ans t ve sent ences.
I have a r eady g ven a sket ch of t he syst ems char act er st c
of accusat ve, er gat ve, and act ve anguages; we have not ex-
haust ed a poss b t es by t hese, however , as s shown by,
among ot her s, Sap r ' s descr pt on of t he pr onom na syst ems
of some Amer can I nd an anguages.
Sap r used t he f o ow ng char t t o char act er ze t he op-
pos t ons of "pr onom na f or ms" n f ve Amer can I nd an an-
guages, as occur r ng n t he sent ence t ypes d scussed so f ar
( nt r ans t ve sent ences w t h an Agent , t r ans t ve sent ences
w t h bot h Agent and Ob| ect , and nt r ans t ve sent ences w t h
1 7
an Ob| ect ) .
Sap r ( 1917) . I do not know what t he ( f oot not e 17 cont nued)
The pr oper t es of t hese syst ems ar e per sp cuous y -
ust r at ed n F mor e' s p ct or a r epr esent at on of t he d s-
t r but on of per sona pr onom na f or ms. F mor e ass gns
comp ement s w t h t he same sur f ace r ea zat on t o t he same
set . Thus t he pr oper t es of t he syst ems d scussed by Sap r
ar e r epr esent ed as f o ows:
( a) Dakot a ( b) Take ma ( c) Ch nook
Out of t hese syst ems ( d) s t yp ca of accusat ve and " sub-
| ect - mar k ng" , ( a) of act ve, and ( c) of er gat ve anguages.
S nce t he above c ass f cat on s based on t he obser va-
t on of a m t ed number of anguages, one cannot exc ude
t he poss b t y t hat nat ur a anguages may emp oy f ur t her
syst ems of oppos t ons as we . I t seems qu t e pr obab e
t hough t hat t he vast ma| or t y of anguages act ua y emp oys
one of t hese f ve syst ems, s nce t hey do not on y exhaust
t he poss b t es r ea zed n accusat ve, act ve, and er ga-
t ve anguages but a so nc ude a syst em unknown n any
( f oot not e 17 cont nued) s t uat on s n Pa ut e and Yana, but
t he ot her t hr ee anguages have no nom na dec ens on and
what Sap r ca s ' pr onom na f or ms' ar e not ndependent pr o-
nouns but per sona suf f xes on t he ver b.
of t hose t hr ee ( name y, ( b) ) .
Mor e nt er est ng s t he quest on why, out of t he 15
t heor et ca y poss b e syst ems of oppos t ons ( see be ow) ,
anguages seemt o pr ef er t hese f ve ( and per haps one or t wo
f ur t her ones) oppos t ons.
4. 2. The most nat ur a way of exp anat on seems t o be t o t ake
t he oppos t on of t he f unct ons of Agent and Ob| ect as a
po nt of depar t ur e. As ong as we use F mor e' s own def n -
t ons, however , we can on y account f or syst ems ( a) and ( e) :
( a) r ef ect s t he d f f er ence of t he r f unct ons wher eas ( e)
neut r a zes t . As ong as t he cont ent s of Agent and Ob| ect
ar e opposed t o each ot her as unana yzab e un t s, we cannot
account f or e t her of t hose syst ems n wh ch Agent or Ob| ect
has some par t cu ar sur f ace r ea zat on n t he one t ype of
sent ence wher eas n t he ot her t ype of sent ences t s r ea -
zed dent ca y t o t he ot her cat egor y ( n t he ver y same
anguage) . Such pr ob ems ar se n connect on w t h t he t wo
d f f er ent r ea zat ons of Agent n ( c) , of Ob| ect n ( d) ,
and of bot h Agent and Ob| ect n ( b) .
I f however we do not r egar d t he cont ent s of t hese cat e-
gor es as unana yzab e un t s but r at her char act er ze t hem
w t h t he absence or pr esence of t he same e ement ar y pr oper -
t es, t hen t he number of neut r a zat ona poss b t es con-
s der ab y ncr eases s nce n t hat case even e ement ar y pr op-
er t es ( or gr oups of t hem) may be neut r a zed.
I f subt ypes of Agent and Ob| ect ar e char act er zed w t h
t he comb nat ons of f eat ur es nt r oduced above ( 2. 2. ) , we
shou d speak of f our , r at her t han t wo, cat egor es n t he sen-
t ence t ypes cons der ed by F mor e. Each of t he f our cat e-
gor es s def ned by t he absence or pr esence of t he same
t hr ee f eat ur es:
A
[+ - - ]
A 0
[
+ +
-] [- - +]
O
[- - -]
(We on y nd cat e whet her t he cat egor y n quest on s ac-
t ve, af f ect ng and af f ect ed, r espect ve y. )
The above d scussed f ve syst ems of sur f ace r ea za-
t ons of t hese cat egor es can now be exp a ned as f o ows :
18
( 1) I n syst em ( e) a d f f er ences ar e neut r a zed.
( 2) I n syst em ( a) t he on y f eat ur e r e evant n t he cho ce
of t he sur f ace case s | act ve| .
( 3) I n syst em ( c) t he on y r e evant f eat ur e s | af f ect ng| .
( 4) I n syst em ( d) t he on y r e evant f eat ur e s | af f ect ed| .
( 5) I n syst em ( b) bot h t he r e evant f eat ur e of ( c) and t he
r e evant f eat ur e of ( d) ar e r e evant . I t s t o be not ed
t hat out of t he t hr ee f eat ur es t hese t wo mut ua y pr e-
suppose each ot her ( n t he sense t hat f a sent ence con-
t a ns a comp ement wh ch s | af f ect ng | t hen t a so
has a p ace f or anot her comp ement wh ch s _+ af f ect ed| ,
and v ce ver sa) .
The t yp ca pr nc p e gover n ng sur f ace r ea zat on
seems t o be t he f o ow ng: f t he r e evant f eat ur e s nega-
t ve f or a cat egor y t hen t s r ea zed n an unmar ked f or m,
wher eas f t he r e evant f eat ur e s pos t ve f or a cat egor y
1 8
I t appear s of cour se ver y pr obab e t hat n anguages n
wh ch t hese f our cat egor es ar e mor pho og ca y nd st n-
gu shab e, d f f er ences ar e expr essed by wor d or der oppos -
t ons. I have not nvest gat ed t h s aspect of t he pr ob em,
however .
1 9
t hen t s r ea zed n a mar ked f or m. Thus f t he anguage
has nom na nf ect on at a , t hen n
act ve anguages ( a) : a | - act ve| comp ement s n
er gat ve ( c) : a |- af f ect ng| comp ement s n | casus
accusat ve ( d) : a |- af f ect ed| comp ement s n | r ect us
wher eas n t he same anguages
( a) : a | + act ve| comp ement s n casus act vus,
( _) : a | + af f ect ng| comp ement s n casus er gat vus,
( d) : a | + af f ect ed| comp ement s n casus accusat vus.
I n accor dance w t h t h s we may we assume t hat n syst em ( b)
|- af f ect ng, - af f ect ed 1 comp ement s ( . e. t he Agent and
t he Ob| ect of nt r ans t ve sent ences) ar e unmar ked.
Common t o a t he f ve syst ems s t he pr oper t y t hat f
t hese cat egor es ar e d st ngu shed at a t hen t he d st nct on
s based e t her on a s ng e f eat ur e or on t he nt er dependent
f eat ur es | af f ect ng| and | af f ect ed| . Th s a so means t hat
whenever at east t wo cat egor es ar e r ea zed dent ca y,
t hen t he dent ca y r ea zed cat egor es shar e at east one
such f eat ur e wh ch ne t her of t he d f f er ent y r ea zed cat e-
gor es have ( except f or t he case of comp et e neut r a zat on,
of cour se) . The shar ed f eat ur es n our examp es ar e:
syst em ( a) : |+ act ve| and |- af f ect ed| ;
|- act ve| and |- af f ect ng|
syst em ( b) : |- af f ect ng| and |- af f ect ed|
syst em ( c) : |- af f ect ng|
syst em ( d) : _- af f ect ed |
4. 3. What has been sa d so f ar may a so exp a n why t hese
f ve sur f ace syst ems ar e t he most w despr ead ( f not t he
on y poss b e) out of t he 15 t heor et ca poss b t es. I n
a t he r ema n ng cases not on y neut r a zat ona pr ocesses
wou d be much mor e comp cat ed but t m ght a so happen t hat
1 9
A t hough t he r ever se may a so occur , as w t nessed by
' sub| ect - mar k ng' anguages.
wh e cat egor es w t hout any shar ed f eat ur e get dent ca
r ea zat on, s m ar f unct ons get r ea zed n d f f er ent
sur f ace f or ms. I t seems h gh y mpr obab e, however , t hat
t her e m ght ex st a syst em n wh ch dent ca y r ea zed
cat egor es do not shar e a s ng e f eat ur e wh ch s exc us ve-
y char act er st c of t hem.
Let us now exam ne t he r ema n ng t en poss b t es
f r omt h s po nt of v ew.
We can cer t a n y exc ude a t he comb nat ons n wh ch
t he |+ + - | Agent and t he |- - +| Ob| ect ( wh ch shar e no
common f eat ur e) get such an dent ca sur f ace r ea zat on
t hat s at t he same t me n oppos t on t o some ot her sur f ace
f or m. The on y syst emwe know about n wh ch t hese t wo cat e-
gor es ar e r ea zed dent ca y s ( e) - not e, however , t hat
n ( e) t he oppos t ons ar e neut r a zed. Cases n I ar e t her e-
f or e r u ed out .
We can a so exc ude comb nat ons n wh ch t he who e set
of f eat ur es shar ed by t he dent ca y r ea zed cat egor es
t ur ns up i n one ( or mor e) di f f er ent l y r eal i zed cat egor y. On
t hi s basi s we can excl ude t he possi bi l i t i es i n whi ch t he
sur f ace r eal i zat i on of t he [+ - - ] Agent i s i dent i cal t o
t hat of t he [- - +] Obj ect al one, and/ or t he sur f ace r eal -
i zat i on of t he [++ - ] Agent i s i dent i cal t o t hat of t he
- - - ] Obj ect al one. Cases i n I I ar e t hus r ul ed out .
Ther e ar e t hr ee possi bi l i t i es l ef t over ( 13, 14 and 15) .
None of t hem can be excl uded on t he basi s of t he above ar -
gument at i on, si nce t he whol e set of f eat ur es shar ed by i den-
t i cal l y r eal i zed cat egor i es i s not char act er i st i c of any ot h-
er cat egor y. Never t hel ess, pr act i cal l y i t i s not t oo pr obabl e
t hat t hey may exi st si nce some of t hei r di st i nct i ons woul d be
super f l uous. We may not i gnor e t he f act t hat whenever t he
mor phol ogi cal r eal i zat i on of Agent i s di f f er ent f r om t hat of
t he Obj ect ( as i n syst em ( a) ) , t hen t he quest i on as t o whi ch
of t hei r subt ypes occur i n a gi ven sent ence i s al r eady un-
ambi guousl y det er mi ned by t he t r ansi t i vi t y or i nt r ansi t i vi t y
of t he sent ence. Ther ef or e a syst em i n whi ch not onl y Agent
and Obj ect ar e di st i ngui shed but t he t wo subt ypes of ei t her
of t hem ar e al so mor phol ogi cal l y di f f er ent woul d be uneco-
nomi cal l y r edundant . That t hi s cl ai mhol ds i s even mor e
st r ongl y suppor t ed by t he f act t hat t he obser ved l anguages
show t hat i t i s not necessar y f or each of t he f our subt ypes
t o be di st i ngui shabl e on t he basi s of sur f ace st r uct ur e.
Thi s act ual l y onl y happens i n t hat si ngl e syst em ( a) whi ch
13, 14 and 15 can be r egar ded as f ur t her r ef i nement s of . On
t he ot her hand, none of t he ot her obser ved syst ems makes i t
possi bl e t o di st i ngui sh bet ween Agent and Obj ect i n i nt r an-
si t i ve sent ences.
4. 4. We have so f ar exami ned t he t heor et i cal l y possi bl e sys-
t ems of t he sur f ace r eal i zat i on of Agent and Obj ect and si n-
gl ed out t hose syst ems whose f unct i oni ng can be descr i bed on
t he basi s of our modi f i cat i on of t he not i ons of Agent and
Obj ect . For a mor e exact i nt er pr et at i on of my poi nt s of vi ew
wi t h r espect t o t he cl assi f i cat i on at hand t he f ol l owi ng
r emar ks shoul d be bor ne i n mi nd:
( 1) We assume our concl usi on t o hol d f or any ki nd of
mor phol ogi cal di st i nct i ons of subt ypes of Agent and Obj ect .
The ki nd of mor phol ogi cal di st i nct i on i s ar bi t r ar y: i t may
be r eal i zed by case suf f i xes of t he noun, or per sonal suf -
f i xes and/ or cl ass- mar ker s of t he ver b ( i n l anguages wi t hout
nomi nal i nf l ect i on) , or by bot h si mul t aneousl y, or i n any
ot her way.
( 2) We di scussed t ypes of t he sur f ace r eal i zat i on of
Agent and Obj ect , whi ch does not yi el d a t ypol ogy of l an-
guages i n any st r ai ght f or war d way. I t i s not necessar y f or a
l anguage t o empl oy onl y one of t hose s ys t ems , and some l an-
guages may act ual l y r ef l ect t he st at e of t r ansi t i on f r om one
t ype i nt o anot her .
( 3) The t ypes of sent ences we consi der ed ar e ( i ) i n-
t r ansi t i ve s ent ences , wi t h pr edi cat e and Agent , ( i i ) t r ans i -
t i ve s ent ences , wi t h bot h Agent and Obj ect besi des t he pr ed-
i cat e, and ( i i i ) i nt r ansi t i ve sent ences wi t h pr edi cat e and
Obj ect . St r i ct l y speaki ng, our cl assi f i cat i on i s ai r t i ght i n
" pur e" cases of t hese t ypes onl y. Spel l i ng out t hi s r est r i c-
t i on i n det ai l , our cl assi f i cat i on i s i nt ended f or sent ences
whose pr edi cat e i s - abs t r act ] ( t hat i s , i t does not
expr ess some psychol ogi cal or i nt el l ect ual pr ocess or s t at e,
or pos s es s i on, or a r el at i on, et c . ) ,
whose ver b i n t ype ( i ) i s t r ul y i nt r ansi t i ve ( t hat i s , i t
i s not a t r ansi t i ve ver b used i nt r ans i t i vel y) ,
whose Obj ect i n t ype ( i i ) i s def i ni t e and i s not de-
l et ed. The const r uct i on of sent ences not sat i sf yi ng t he above
r equi r ement s may be di f f er ent f r om t hat of t he " pur e" t ypes .
For i ns t ance, i f t he Obj ect i s unspeci f i ed, i ndef i ni t e or de-
l et ed i n a t r ansi t i ve s ent ence, t hen t he mor phol ogi cal f or m of
Agent may be i dent i cal t o t hat of t he Agent of i nt r ansi t i ve
s ent ences , et c.
4. 5. I f t happens t hat out of a r at her m t ed number of
mat hemat ca y poss b e r ea zat ons of a cer t a n phenomenon
on y a sma subset s obser vab e n about t hr ee t housand
nat ur a anguages, t hen t wou d be un| ust f ed t o r egar d
t he act ua y r ea zed poss b t es as mat t er s of mer e chance.
Never t he ess, t he quest on as t o wh ch poss b t es ar e act u-
a y r ea zed can on y be dec ded by emp r ca r esear ch. G ven
t hat at t he pr esent st age of our know edge about anguage
t her e s no phenomenon such t hat we know how t s r ea zed
n a nat ur a anguages ( as de f r omsome ver y gener a con-
st r a nt s) , t he poss b t y t hat f ur t her r esear ch may d scover
new var ant s r ema ns a ways open.
New var ant s d scover ed by emp r ca r esear ch a ways
pr ov de f ur t her cr t er a f or measur ng t he accept ab t y of
pr ev ous t heor et ca exp anat ons : t heor es t hat have pr e-
d ct ed t he occur ence of t hose var ant s ga n we ght , wher eas
t heor es t hat have exc uded t hose var ant s ose cr ed t . Never -
t he ess, new y d scover ed dat a do not ncr ease t he pr obab -
t es of a t heor es compat b e w t h t hem t o t he same ext ent .
Among r va hypot heses t hat ar e equa y compat b e w t h t hose
new dat a, t s t he one t hat a ows t he sma est number of
poss b t es ( whose const r a nt s ar e t he st r ongest ) t hat w
ga n mor e we ght f r omt hose dat a. The r eason s t hat n case
emp r ca r esear ch on y happens t o d scover f act s compat b e
w t h t h s hypot hes s t hen t s r va s t ur n out t o be t oo weak
s nce t hey a so a ow poss b t es t hat ar e not obser vab e
n r ea t y.
Our hypot hes s concer n ng t he poss b e syst ems of r ea -
zat on of Agent and Ob| ect n t r ans t ve and nt r ans t ve
sent ences can pr esumab y be r egar ded as a r at her st r ong hypo-
t hes s. The r eason f or t h s c a m s t hat a t he poss b -
t es t exc udes ( shou d t hey get r ea zed n sp t e of t he
f act t hat our hypot hes s exc udes t hem) m ght f unct on | ust
as we as any of t he obser ved var ant s. None of t hemwou d
cause gr eat t r oub es n commun cat on, as s shown by t he
f act t hat comp et e neut r a zat on s among t he obser ved
var ant s. Ther ef or e, our hypot hes s ga ns emp r ca suppor t
f r om a new y d scover ed syst ems cor r espond ng t o one of
t he var ant s t he hypot hes s a ows. At t he same t me, our
hypot hes s wou d of cour se ose cons der ab e cr ed t f t
can be pr oved t hat any of t he var ant s 6- 12 does n f act
f unct on n some nat ur a anguage I n ot her wor ds, our hypo-
t hes s pr ov des us w t h t he poss b t y of | ust f y ng or d s-
car d ng on t he bas s of emp r ca dat a t he use of deep st r uc-
t ur e cat egor es char act er zed by f unct ona f eat ur es n gr am-
mat ca descr pt on.
384
Ref er ences
Abi t ov, M. L. , et al . ( 1957) . Gr ammat i ka kabar di no- cer kesskogo
l i t er at ur nogo j azyka, Moscow.
Boas, F. ( 1911) . Chi nook Handbook of Amer i can I ndi an Languages
Par t 1. F. Boas ( ed. ) , Washi ngt on D. C. , pp. 559- 677.
Boas, F. , and E. Del or i a ( 1932) . "Not es on t he Dakot a. Tet on
di al ect " , UAL Vol . VI I . No. 3- 4. 97- 121.
Boas, F. , and J . R. Swant on ( 1911) . Si ouan. Dakot a ( Tet on and
Sant ee di al ect s) , Handbook of Amer i can I ndi an Languages
Par t 1. F. Boas ( ed. ) , Washi ngt on 875- 975.
Bokar ev, A. A. ( 1949) . Si nt aksi s avar skogo j azyka, Moscow-
Leni ngr ad .
Bokar ev, E. A. , et al . ( eds. ) ( 1967) . J azyki nar odov SSSR I V.
I ber i j sko- kavkazski e j azyki , Moscow.
Deser i ev, J u. D. ( 1953) . Bacbi j ski j j azyk, Moscow.
Di xon, R. B. ( 1911) . Mai du, Handbook of Amer i can I ndi an Lan-
guages Par t 1. F. Boas ( ed. ) , Washi ngt on D. C. , pp. 679- 734.
Fi l l mor e, Ch. J . ( 1968a) The Case f or Case, I n: Uni ver sal s i n
Li ngui st i c Theor y, E. Bach and R. T. Har ms ( eds. ) , New Yor k
pp. 1- 88.
Fi l l mor e, Ch. J . ( 1968b) . Types of Lexi cal I nf or mat i on, Wor ki ng
Paper s i n Li ngui st i cs 2. 65- 10 3. Ohi o St at e Uni ver si t y,
Comput er and I nf or mat i on Resear ch Cent er .
Fi l l mor e, Ch. J . ( 1971) . Some Pr obl ems f or Case Gr ammar ,
Wor ki ng Paper s i n Li ngui st i cs 10. 245- 265. Ohi o St at e
Uni ver si t y Comput er and I nf or mat i on Resear ch Cent er .
J akovl ev, N. F. ( 1948) . Gr ammat i ka l i t er at ur nogo kabar di no-
cer kesskogo j azyka, Moscow- Leni ngr ad.
J akovl ev, N. F. and D. A. Asxamaf ( 1941) . Gr ammat i ka adygej -
skogo j azyka, Moscow- Leni ngr ad.
Kl i mov, G. A. ( 1973) . Ocer k obscej t eor i i er gat i vnost i , Moscow.
Magomet ov, A. A. ( 1970) . Agul ski j j azyk, Tbi l i si .
Mescani nov, I . I . ( 1967) . Er gat i vnaj a konst r ukci j a pr edl oze-
ni j a v j azykax r azl i cnyx t i pov, Leni ngr ad.
Pancv e, VI . ( 1974) . Udur en s gr amat ku ana z ( Gr amma-
t ca Ana ys s of t he Ud Language) , Tb s .
Rudenko, B. T. (19 40) . Gr ammat ka gr uz nskogo | azyka, Moscow-
Len ngr ad .
San 3e, A. ( 1953) . Kar t u gr amat k s sapuv eb I . Mor po-
og a. | Fundament a s of Geor g an Gr ammar I . Mor pho ogy| ,
Tb s .
Sap r , E. ( 1917) . C. C. Uh enbeck: Het Pass eve Kar akt er van
het Ver bumTr ans t vum of van het Ver bumAct on s n Ta en
van Noor d- Amer ka UAL 1, 82- 86.
Sap r , E. ( 1922) . The Take ma Language of Sout h- West er n Or egon.
I n: Handbook of Amer can I nd an Languages Par t 2.
F. Boas ( ed. ) , Wash ngt on D. C. , pp. 1- 297.
i r munski j , V. M. , et al . ( eds. ) ( 1960) . Vopr osy gr ammat i ki .
Sbor ni k st at ej _ 75- et | u Akadem ka I . I . Mescan nova,
Moscow- Len ngr ad.
Z r munsk | , V. M. , et a . ( eds. ) ( 1967) . Er gat vna| a konst r uk-
c | a pr ed ozen | a j azykax r azl i cnyx t i pov, Leni ngr ad .
EXI STENTI AL RELATI ONS I N ' HOGY' - SENTENCES ( SENTENCES CON-
TAI NI NG A THAT- CLAUSE) I N HUNGARI AN
I ona Mo nar
1. By way of nt r oduct on t may be usef u t o make c ear
t hat t he use of we - known semant c or og ca concept s
n t he f o ow ng ar gument s and d scuss ons s not meant
as adher ence t o any of t he cur r ent d r ect ons n semant c
t heor z ng. Ne t her s t meant t o s gna an nt ent on t o
cr t c ze, or pr opose f ur t her deve opment s n, any pr o-
pagat ed semant c t heor y. The syst em t o be pr esent ed - or ,
r at her , t o be skeched - be ow r e es on a synt act o- semant c
c ass f cat on of Hungar an comp ex sent ences const r uct ed
w t h t he connect ve ' hogy' ( t r ans at ab e n most cases by
' t hat ' ) / wh ch I d scussed n det a n sever a of my ear -
er st ud es. Th s c ass f cat on dev at es f r om appr oaches
cons der ed as t r ad t ona n Hungar an ngu st cs. Mor e-
over , t does not f o ow any of t he cont empor ar y appr oaches
e t her . However , I have made use of a number of t heses and
concept s put f or war d by t hese appr oaches. At t h s po nt I
For a summar y, see Mo nar , I ona, Semant c st r uct ur e of
Hungar an comp ex sent ences w t h ' hogy' . Act a L ngu st ca
( Budapest ) , t o appear .
f ee ob gat ed t o enumer at e a number of wor ks wh ch w
mp c t y nf or m t he d scuss on wh ch ensues. The t r ad -
t on of r esear ch assoc at ed w t h t he name of Zs gmond
S mony as we as wor ks on Hungar an gr ammar by Lasz
Hadr ov cs and | nos Zs ka have had some nf uence on my
wor k. The pr ob ems t o be d scussed ar e a so r e at ed t o
f act v t y as f or mu at ed by P. and C. K par sky and L.
Kar t t unen and t he t heor y of pr esuppos t ons app ed t o
Hungar an mat er a by Fer ene K ef er . My nvest gat ons bear
mpr ess ons of numer ous ot her aut hor s and ar e r e at ed t o
var ous f ur t her spec f c t op cs. These nc ude, among ot her
t h ngs, U. We nr e ch' s semant c t heor y, ngu st c aspect s
of moda t y. The ar gument s t o be pr esent ed cou d not have
been const r ued w t hout t ak ng nt o cons der at on cer t a n
f nd ngs n f e ds out s de t he boundar es of ngu st cs
as we . Espec a y cer t a n assumpt ons of ep st emo og ca
or psycho og ca nat ur e seemwor t h ment on ng n t h s con-
nect on .
At t he same t me, t s hoped t hat t he appr oach ad-
vocat ed n t h s paper can shed some ght on aspect s of
sent ence st r uct ur e t hat have escaped at t ent on t hus f ar .
I t goes w t hout say ng t hat t her e ar e sever a ways t o ex-
p a n t he st r uct ur e of sent ences w t h t he connect ve ' hogy' .
The t r ad t ona pr nc p e of ' par s ng out f unct ona const -
t uent s' ( mak ng d st nct ons among sub| ect c auses, ob| ect
c auses, and t he ke) has, n my op n on, not ost a of
t s r e evance even f a syst embu t mer e y upon t has n
many r espect s become out dat ed. A so, gr eat mpor t ance w
be at t r but ed t o cont empor ar y ana yses f ocuss ng on t he
t r ut h va ue of t he pr opos t ons expr essed by subor d nat e
c auses. Anot her ser v ceab e t oo f or pr ob ng nt o sent ences
w t h ' hogy' seems t o be t he s gn comb nat ons ( nk ng,
nest ng) pr oposed by We nr e ch. I t s hoped t hat t he r e a-
t ons t o be d scussed n t h s ar t c e w pr ove usef u
EXI STENTI AL RELATI ONS I N ' HOGY' - SENTENCES 389
f or t he descr pt on of sent ences w t h ' hogy' as we , s nce
t hey m ght be par t cu ar y su t ab e t o expr ess t he cogn t ve
cont ent commun cat ed by t he ngu st c med um ( f or t h s as-
pect of semant cs, see, nt er a a, Le Ny ( 1975) ; Vas ' ev
( 1974) ) .
2. I w pr esent a br ef char act er zat on of t he ma n t ypes
of ' hogy' - const r uct ons. I n add t on, I w descr be t he
met hodo ogy emp oyed n t h s paper .
2. 1. Ear er ana yses wer e based ma n y on t he hypot hes s
t hat each subor d nat e c ause w t h t he connect ve ' hogy'
cou d be ass gned a noun, most y of abst r act r ef er ence,
appear ng n t he ma n c ause and nam ng t he s t uat on or
quas - s t uat on dep ct ed n t he subor d nat e c ause. Such a
noun cou d a so per f or m t he f unct on of r e at ng t he s t ua-
t on or quas - s t uat on t o semant c cat egor es ke ' f act ' ,
' s t uat on' , ' st at e' , ' event ' , ' act ( on) ' , ' dea' , ' f ee ng' ,
' message' , ' sent ence' , t o ment on on y t he most f r equent
ones. A t oken of s m ar nouns ( wh ch hencef or t h w be
ca ed ' sent ent a nouns' ) can appear n ever yday sent ences
( 1) as we :
( 1) Pet er ben f e mer t az a gondo at , hogy
Pet er - n emer ged t hat t he dea t hat
| ness ve | pr onom.
suf f x| cor r e at e|
r egy eve et .
wr t e a et t er acc.
suf f x
' Pet er came t o t he dea t o wr t e a et t er ' .
I n ot her cases no sent ent a noun appear s, but such a noun
can be nser t ed nt o t he sent ences w t hout any oss of
accept ab t y ( par a e t o t he way t he noun ' f act ' can be
nser t ed as a t est of f act v t y) . Cf . ( 2) , ( 3) :
( 2) Pt er ha| ando ar r a ( a cs e ekvs r e) , hogy
Pet er w ng t hat - t he act on + super ess. t hat
| pr onom. suf f x
cor r e at e
+ super ess. 1
r | on egy eve et .
wr t e + con| . a et t er + acc.
suf f x
' Pet er s w ng t o wr t e a et t er ' .
( 3) Pet er azt ( a mondat ot ) mondt a, hogy r ma| d egy eve et .
' Pet er sa d ( t he sent ence) t hat he wou d wr t e a et t er ' .
I have exam ned a ar ge number of sent ences w t h r espect t o
sent ent a nouns . On t he bas s of my nvest gat on t seems
t hat t he most s gn f cant cat egor es among sent ent a nouns
ar e: ( r ea ) s t uat on, event , act ( on) , psych ca act v t es
and commun cat on ( speak ng, ges t ur es ) . I n or der t o det er m ne
t he sent ent a noun cat egor es I have made use of var ous
ph osoph ca and semant c cr t er a. I sha not d scuss
t hese cr t er a her e, however . I t shou d be made c ear t hat
by means of t hese cr t er a t was poss b e t o avo d c r -
cu ar t y.
2. 2. Apar t f r om t he synt act c comp ex made up of a sent ent a
noun and t he subor d nat e ( comp ement ) c ause, sent ences cont a n,
n a number of cases, an add t ona pr ed cat e ( or occas ona -
y sever a pr ed cat es ) . Cf . t he pr ed cat es ' f e mer ' ' emer ges' ,
' ha| ando' ' s r eady' or ' s w ng' and, at east f or ma y,
' mond' ' says' n t he above examp es . Fur t her mor e, I have exam ned
t he r e at ons bet ween t he sent ent a noun - comp ement c ause
comp ex and t he pr ed cat es w t h wh ch t hey cooccur f r om t he
po nt of v ew of mut ua det er m nat on. The nqu r y suggest ed
a d v s on nt o t hr ee sent ence t ypes symbo zed by ( A) , ( B( 1) ) ,
and ( B( 2) ) , r espect ve y ( see be ow) .
2 3. Type ( A) . The r e at on bet ween t he semant c component s
n quest on s unr est r ct ed, . e. , component s do not exer t
mut ua de m t at ve nf uence on each ot her ( cf . ( 4) ) .
( 4) Pet er megebede t azut n ( az ut n az esemny ut n) ,
hogy meg r t a a eve et .
' Pet er had h s d nner af t er ( t he event of )
hav ng wr t t en t he et t er . '
Env r onment s of t he component s ' t he event of hav ng d nner '
and ' t he event of wr t ng ( t he) et t er ' cou d be f ed by
a most any ot her event n t h s st r uct ur e ( pr ov ded t hat t
s compat b e w t h t he t empor a r e at onsh p expr essed n
t he sent ence) . Cf . ( 5) , ( 6) :
( 5) Pet er br ndokba mer u t azut n, hogy meg r t a a eve et .
' Pet er gave h mse f up ent r e y t o h s daydr eams af t er
hav ng wr t t en t he et t er . '
( 6) Pt er meg r t a a eve et azut n, hogy ecs apodot t a
v har .
' Pet er wr ot e ( f n shed) t he et t er af t er t he st or mhad
ca med down. '
Unr est r ct edness of Type ( A) seems t o char act er ze t he sen-
t ences w t h ' hogy' n wh ch t he subor d nat e c ause does not
const t ut e an ar gument of t he pr ed cat e n t he ma n c ause.
I n ot her wor ds, t he subor d nat e c ause n t hese sent ences
s a f r ee const t uent or , synt act ca y speak ng, a c r cumst an-
t a adver b a phr ase ( ke a t empor a or manner adver b) .
Because of t h s unr est r ct edness of t he component s I sha
neg ect st r uct ur es of Type ( A) n t he f ur t her ana yses.
Type ( B) . The component s of t he sent ence ar e semant ca y
dependent upon each ot her . Cf . ( 7) ;
( 7) Pt er t udomsr a hozt a Mar nak, hogy meg r t a a eve et .
' Pet er nf or med Mar y of h s hav ng wr t t en t he et t er . '
The comp ement of t he pr ed cat e phr ase ' t udomsr a hoz'
( ' nf ormsy of sg' ) s semant ca y const r a ned. Cf . ( 8) ,
whi ch i s unaccept abl e :
( 8) *Pt er t udomsr a hozt a Mr i anak a cer uzj t .
2
' Pet er i nf or med Mar y of hi s penci l .
The set of pr edi cat es whi ch may gover n t he component a.
l evel megi r sa ' wr i t i ng t he l et t er ' i s equal l y const r ai ned.
Cf . t he ungr ammat i cal i t y of ( 9) :
( 9) *Leeset t a f l dr e Pt er nek az a t et t e, hogy megi r t a a
l evel et .
' The act i on of Pet er t o have wr i t t en ( of havi ng wr i t t en)
t he l et t er f el l t o t he gr ound. '
I n ( 9) , l eeset t a f l dr e ' ( i t ) f el l t o t he gr ound' descr i bes
a physi cal event .
The st r uct ur al t ype ( B) seems t o be char act er i st i c of sen-
t ences wi t h ' hogy' i n whi ch t he subor di nat e cl ause has a
( synt act i cal l y) pr edi cat i ve f unct i on or const i t ut es an
ar gument of t he pr edi cat e i n t he mai n cl ause.
Wi t hi n Type ( ) , t wo t ypes of semant i c r el at i ons can be
r at her cl ear l y di st i ngui shed ( al t hough t he di f f er ences may
be of t en bl ur r ed) .
2
Such a sent ence can be accept abl e i n Hungar i an pr ovi ded
t hat ( a) cer uza ' ( t he) penci l
1
does not r ef er t o a physi cal
obj ect but t o some acci dent al f act i n connect i on wi t h i t ;
e. g. , i f cer uza i s meant t o i mpl y az, hogy a cer uza el veszet t
' ( t he f act t hat ) t he penci l has been l ost ' ; az, hogy cer uzr a
van szksg ' ( t he f act t hat ) a penci l i s needed
1
, or t he
l i ke.
At f i r st si ght , t he const r ai nt st at ed appear s t o excl ude
t he use of wor ds wi t h concr et e r ef er ence i n cer t ai n posi -
t i ons i n t he sent ences wi t h ' hogy' . I t i s easy t o see t hat
t hi s i s not so. For a det ai l ed account of t he r el at i onshi p
bet ween wor ds wi t h abst r act r ef er ence and sent ences wi t h
' hogy
1
, see my paper ci t ed i n f n. 1.
Rel ati on ( (1)) : SentN - CompCl
hogy Pter l evel et i rt . . .
t he r e at on bet ween t he subor d nat e c ause and t he sen-
t ent a noun r ef er r ng t o t ( t he at t er may be pr esent or
nser t ed post hoc f act o) . Th s s t he r e at on a r eady
ment oned, cf . a so examp es ( 10) :
( 10) ( ) . . . az az esemny,
( ) . . . az a cse ekvs,
( ) . . . az a benyomas,
( v) . . . az a kz emny,
' . . . t he event of Pet er ' s hav ng wr t t en a et t er . . . '
' . . . t he act on of Pet er ' s hav ng wr t t en a et t er . . . '
' . . . t he mpr ess on t hat Pet er has wr t t en a et t er . . . '
' . . . t he message ( say ng) t hat Pet er has wr t t en a
et t er . . . '
Most s mp y, what we see her e s t he dent f y ng- r ef er r ng
f unct on r e at on of a Pr o sent ent a f or m. The sent ent a
noun pr ov des a gener a f r ame t o wh ch t he subor d nat e c ause
be ongs. The subor d nat e c ause r epr esent s a t oken of t he
gener a f r ame. That s, n bot h cases a most t he same ent -
t es ar e r ef er r ed t o, once n a gener a and once n a con-
cr et e way. Th s r e at on w be ca ed ' nt er na connect on' .
I t shou d be not ed t hat n cer t a n st r uct ur es w t h n-
t er na ob| ect s t he f unct on of a sent ent a noun may be ex-
pr essed by ver bs ( ver b phr ases) as we . W t h r espect t o t he
r e at ons under d scuss on, sent ence pa r s such as ( 11) or ( 12)
ar e equ va ent :
( 11) ( ) Az az r zsem, hogy. . .
' I have t he f ee ng ( t hat ) . . . '
( ) Ugy ( azt az r zst ) erzern, hogy. . .
' I f ee ke (I f ee t he f ee ng of . . . ) . . . '
( 12) ( ) Az a mondat , hogy. . .
' The sent ence s ( t hat ) . . . '
( ) Azt (a mondat ot ) mond| a, hogy. . .
' The sent ence s sa d (by h m/ her ) t hat . . . '
The st r uct ur e cont a n ng t he nt er na connect on s an ob -
gat or y component of sent ences w t h ' hogy' . Occas ona y, t
may occur n sent ences such as ( 13) - ( 15) .
( 13) Pet er azt t et t e, hogy r t egy eve et .
' Pet er per f or med t he wr t ng of a et t er . '
( 14) Az az r zsem, hogy Pet er f r adt .
' I have t he mpr ess on t hat Pet er s t r ed. '
( 15) Pet er azt mondt a, hogy r ma| d egy eve et .
' Pet er sa d t hat he wou d wr t e a et t er . '
Re at on ( B( 2) ) : | sent N - CompC1 | - r ed
t he r el at i on bet ween t he st r uct ur al compl ex i ncl udi ng t he
i nt er nal connect i on, and a pr edi cat e r angi ng over i t ( usual -
l y a pr edi cat e of eval uat i on, qual i f i cat i on, or at t i t ude) ;
see st r uct ur es i n ( 16) - ( 19) :
( 16) Hel yes vol t (a cse ekvs) , hogy Pet er eve et r t .
' I t was cor r ect ( t he act on was cor r ect ) t hat Pet er
has wr t t en a et t er . '
( 17) Mar a e h t t e Pet er nek azt a k | e ent st , hogy
eve et f og r n .
' Mar y gave cr ed t t o Pet er ' s st at ement t hat he wou d
wr t e a et t er . '
( 18) A ma est e | a ka om esz ar r a (a cse ekvsr e) ,
hogy Pt er meg r | a a eve et .
' Th s even ng w be a f avour ab e occas on f or Pet er ' s
wr t ng t he et t er ( f or t he act on of Pet er t o wr t e
t he et t er ) . '
( 19) Nembesz I t em ar r az r zsemr l , hogy Pet er f r adt .
' I di d not ment i on my i mpr essi on t hat Pet er was ( i s)
t i r ed. '
As t he above pr edi cat es of eval uat i on or qual i f i cat i on ar e
r angi ng over ent i t i es whi ch exi st i ndependent l y of t hese
pr edi cat es, t he r el at i on bet ween t hem and t he compl ex
descr i bed under ( B( 1) ) wi l l be t er med ' ext er nal connect i on' .
EXI STENTI AL RELATI ONS I N ' HOGY' - SENTENCES 39 5
The d st nct ness of t he t wo t ypes of r e at ons d scussed
above can be assessed by var ous met hods. I n t a y, t he
t est of og ca con| unct on appear ed t o be t he on y mor e or
ess r e ab e cr t er a pr ocedur e. St r uct ur es w t h nt er na
connect on cannot be expr essed by con| o ned sent ences. Cf .
( 20) - ( 21) , wher e ( ) and ( ) ar e not equ va ent .
( 20) ( ) Pet er azt t et t e, hogy eve et r t .
' Pet er per f or med t he act of wr t ng a et t er . '
( ) Pt er eve et r t , es ezt t et t e.
' Pet er wr ot e a et t er and he d d t hat . '
( 21) ( ) Mr anak az a benyomsa, hogy Pet er eve et f og
r n .
' Mar y has t he mpr ess on t hat Pet er w wr t e
a et t er . '
( ) Pet er eve et f og r n , es Mr anak az a benyomsa.
' Pet er w wr t e a et t er and Mar y has t hat m-
pr ess on . '
On t he ot her hand, sent ences w t h ext er na connect ons can
eas y be expr essed by con| o ned sent ences. Not ce t hat ( )
and ( ) n ( 22) - ( 25) ar e equ va ent .
( 22) ( ) He yes vo t , hogy Pt er eve et r t .
' I t was cor r ect t hat Pet er wr ot e a et t er . '
( ) Pet er eve et r t , es ez he yes vo t .
' Pet er wr ot e a et t er and t hat was cor r ect . '
( 23) ( ) Mr a e h t t e Pet er nek azt a k | e ent st , hogy
eve et f og r n .
' Mar y gave cr ed t t o t he st at ement of Pet er ( wh ch
sa d) t hat he wou d wr t e a et t er . '
( ) Pt er k | e ent et t e, hogy eve et f og r n , es ezt
Mar a e h t t e.
' Pet er st at ed t hat he wou d wr t e a et t er and t h s
( st at ement ) was g ven cr ed t by Mar y. '
( 24) ( ) A ma est e | a ka om esz ar r a, hogy Pt er meg r | a
a eve et .
396
' Th s even ng w be a f avour ab e occas on f or
Pet er t o wr t e t he et t er . '
( ) Pt er nek szksges meg r n a eve et , es er r e a
ma est e | o a ka om esz.
' Pet er needs t o wr t e t he et t er and f or t hat
( act on) t h s even ng w be a f avour ab e occas on. '
( 25) ( ) Nembesz t em ar r az r zsemr l , hogy Pet er f r adt .
' I di d not ment i on my i mpr essi on t hat Pet er was/ i s/
t i r ed. '
( i i ) Az vol t az r zsem, hogy Pet er f r adt , de er r ol az
r zsemr ol nembeszl t em.
' I had t he i mpr essi on t hat Pet er was t i r ed but I
di d not ment i on t hat i mpr essi on. '
2. 4. Accor di ng t o what has been sai d t hus f ar , a semant i c
st r uct ur e of sent ences of Type ( B) can be schemat i cal l y r e-
pr esent ed as f ol l ows:
[ Ext er nal pr edi cat e ( i nt er nal connect i on) J
The st r uct ur e can be vi ewed as t he out come of a ( per haps al so
psychol ogi cal l y r eal ) mechani sm of sent ence const r uct i on whi ch
f i r st pr oduces t he compl ex of i nt er nal connect i on and t hen
bui l ds up t he ent i r e st r uct ur e by addi ng ext er nal pr edi cat es
i n a second st ep. ( I t mi ght be obj ect ed t hat act ual l anguage
use does not al ways const r ue sent ences wi t h ' hogy' vi a t he
same successi on of oper at i ons. The di scussi on of t hi s pr obl em
i s not par t of my t ask. I do not deny, however , t hat ot her
mechani sms i n act ual per f or mance may be r el evant t o t he un-
vei l i ng of semant i c i nt er r el at i ons. )
2. 5. The pi ct ur e pr esent ed above may be compl et ed by t aki ng
i nt o consi der at i on t hat bot h t he set of sent ent i al nouns and
t hat of ext er nal pr edi cat es (as coul d be r eadi l y pr edi ct -
ed f r omear l i er f i ndi ngs) ar e l exi cal l y mor e or l ess de-
l i mi t abl e. I have al r eady ment i oned sever al sent ent i al nouns.
Some of t he most cur r ent ext er nal pr edi cat es ar e gi ven bel ow.
4
vai ami f el adat somet hi ng i s t o be done
szoks i s a habi t
kezdet e val ami nek i s a st ar t f or sg
vge val ami nek i s t he end of sg
el okszl et val ami r e i s a pr epar at i on f or sg
al kal om val ami r e i s an occasi on f or sg
bor zaszt o i s t er r i bl e
csodl at os i s wonder f ul
f ur csa i s st r ange
megl at szi k shows i t sel f
di vat ba j n becomes f ashi onabl e
val aki bi i szke val ami r e someone i s pr oud of sg
hi bs val ami ben i s t o bl ame f or sg
haj l amos val ami r e i s r eady f or sg
ki f r ad val ami ben becomes t i r ed of sg
val aki egyet r t val ami ben someone consent s t o sg
hozzszoki k val ami hez get s used t o sg
kszl val ami r e pr epar es f or sg
vi t at kozi k val ami r l di scusses sg
mosol yog val ami n smi l es at sg
r l val ami nek i s happy about sg
saj nl val ami t i s sor r y f or sg
val aki megt anul val ami t someone l ear ns sg (to mast er )
t ud val ami t knows sg
el l enez val ami t opposes sg
megcf ol val ami t deni es sg
t amogat val ami t suppor t s sg
hasznosi t val ami t ut i l i zes sg
meger demel val ami t deser ves sg
el r val ami t achi eves sg
4
The pr onouns vai ami ' somet hi ng' , val ami nek ' of somet hi ng' , et c. ,
ar e at t ached as a vague r ef er ence t o t he synt act i cal posi -
t i on of a possi bl e Hungar i an subor di nat e cl ause.
megf e| t va am t so ves sg ( r evea s sg)
t gondo va am t t h nks sg over
e r va am t wr t es sg down
er a| zo va am t dr aws sg
and so on.
2. 6. Bef or e pr oceed ng, t seems usef u t o not e t hat accept ab e
Hungar an sent ences w t h ' hogy' can occur n a gr eat number of
st r uct ur es f or wh ch t he above schemes of f er no mmed at e
ana ys s. But even such cases have pr ov ded an nd r ect | ust -
f cat on of our schemes; t he except ona , t r ans t ona or
dev ant char act er of such sent ences can be mor e eas y under -
st ood on t he bas s of t he g ven schemes.
3. I n what f o ows I sha pr ov de f ur t her cr t er a f or d s-
cr m nat ng bet ween r e at ons of Type B/ 1 and r e at ons of
Type B/ 2. I t w become r ap d y ev dent t hat t hese cr t er a
ar e on y p a n y st at eab e af t er some d gr ess on. Th s s,
no doubt , due t o t he semant c comp ex t y of ' hogy' - sen-
t ences. However , t s hoped t hat t he ver y necess t y f or such
d gr ess on suggest s t he f ar - r each ng nt er - r e at edness of
t he phenomena under exam nat on.
3. 1. The pr ob em I sha t ur n t o n t h s sect on s t he n-
t er r e at on bet ween nt er na and ext er na st r uct ur es and
f act v t y. Fr omwhat has been sa d so f ar one m ght gat her
t hat f act v t y s r e at ed t o some aspect s of t he syst em
out ned. Fact v t y and nonf act v t y, nt er na and ext er na
st r uct ur e y e d, however , d st nct par t t on ngs of t he set
of pr ed cat es. Of t en t he t wo syst ems ar e over app ng. I n-
t er na r e at on cover s a number of nonf act ve pr ed cat es
wh e ext er na r e at on cover s a ser es of f act ve and
mp cat ve pr ed cat es. I must adm t t hat by ana ys ng
ext er na pr ed cat es I have unceas ng y been haunt ed by
f act ve ver bs, and t has a ways been an nt r gu ng quest on
t o me t o f nd out t he exact nat ur e of t he connect on bet ween
t hese t wo cat egor es.
As i s wel l known, f act i ve pr esupposi t i ons can be checked
by t he negat i on t est . When t he sent ence i s negat ed t he t r ut h
val ue of t he compl ement wi l l r emai n unchanged. However , i t
can be demonst r at ed t hat i dent i cal or si mi l ar behavi our i s
char act er i st i c of not onl y f act i ve pr edi cat es but of vi r t ual -
l y al l ext er nal pr edi cat es, f act i ves and nonf act i ves al i ke.
Consi der exampl es ( 26) - ( 27) :
( 26)
Mar i a ( azt az l l i t st ) , hogy
Pet er meg r t a a l evel et .
' Mar y cr edi t t o t he st at ement t hat
Pet er had wr i t t en t he l et t er . '
( 27)
Mar i a ar r a az eshet sgr e ( =l ehet seges
eset r e) , hogy sok vendg r kezi k.
' Mar y pr epar ed f or t he possi bi l i t y
(= possi bl e event ) t hat a gr eat number of guest s woul d
come. '
Sent ences ( 26) and ( 27) cont ai n nonf act i ve pr edi cat es. St i l l ,
somet hi ng r emai ns unchanged under negat i on: t he i nf or mat i on
t hat a st at ement or a possi bi l i t y exi st ed ( or exi st s) i s not
subj ect ed t o any change. Not i ce t hat el hi sz val ami t ' gi ves
cr edi t t o sg' and f el kszl ( t ) val ami r e ' i s pr epar ed f or sg'
or ' pr epar es hi msel f / her sel f f or sg' ar e ext er nal pr edi cat es.
As a pr oof , cf . ( 28) and ( 29) :
( 28) Val aki t asa az vo t , hogy Pt er meg r t a a eve et ,
es ezt (az t st ) Mar a e h t t e.
' I t was someone' s st at ement t hat Pet er had wr t t en t he
et t er and t hat ( st at ement ) was g ven cr ed t by
Mar y. '
( 29) Fenn t az az eshet osg, hogy sok vendg r kez k,
es er r e ( az eshet sgr e) Mar a f e ksz t .
' Ther e was a poss b t y t hat a gr eat number of
guest s wou d come and f or t hat ( poss b t y) Mar y
was pr epar ed. '
The pr ob em at hand can be appr oached f r omot her ang es as
we . Anot her cr t er on f or dec d ng whet her a ver b s
f act ve or not s t he nser t on nt o t he ma n c ause of t he
noun ' f act ' . Our ar gument s not af f ect ed by t he f act t hat
ot her sent ences m ght be supp ement ed by ot her nouns n t he
pos t on of ' f act ' . What s mpor t ant s t hat t he ass gnment
of t he subor d nat e c ause t o one of t he gener a cat egor es
( see Sect on 2. 1) r ema ns nvar ab e under negat on. Cf .
( 30) - ( 32) :
( 30)
Mar a azt az gr et t , hogy
meg at ogat .
' Mar y her pr om se t hat
she wou d come t o see me. '
( 31)
Mar a azt a kr st ( vagy: mondat at ) ,
hogy ment sk f e a v zsga a .
' Mar y her r equest ( app cat on, sen-
t ence, ut t er ance) t hat she be exempt ed f r om t he exam na-
t on . '
( 32)
be sol ved.
Anot her obser vat i on t o be account ed f or i s t hat sent ences
wi t h f act i ve ver bs can be suppl ement ed by nouns ot her t han
' f act ' .
( 33) Mar i nak t et szet t Pet er nek az az t l et e , hogy vegyenek
egy csnakot .
' Mar y was p eased by Pet er ' s dea of buy ng a boat . '
( 34) Mr r a nagy hat ssa vo t az a h r , hogy a t udosok
r t e mes nyek | e zse t sz e t k a v gur ben.
' Mar y was gr eat y moved by t he news t hat sc ent st s
had det ect ed s gna s emanat ng f r om nt e gent
cr eat ur es n out er space. '
We m ght a so f o ow an a t er nat ve t r a n of t hought . That
subor d nat e c auses embedded under nonf act ve pr ed cat es
can be ass gned t o gener a cat egor es ke aspont ' st and-
po nt ' , v emny ' op n on' , r zs ' f ee ng' , gondo t ' dea' ,
pr ob ema ' pr ob em' , dnt s ' dec s on' , t t e ' t hes s' , mondat
' sent ence' , zenet ' message' , va ornas ' conf ess on' , h ede em
' be ef ' , and t he ke, needs no demonst r at on. One m ght be
t empt ed t o be eve t hat t he above nouns, t oget her w t h comp e-
ment c auses at t ached t o t hem, r et a n t he r nonf act ve
char act er n a env r onment s. Dat a do not show t h s t o be
t he case, however . When comp exes w t h t he above nouns appear
as ar gument s of cer t a n pr ed cat es n sent ences w t h hogy,
t f o ows t hat t he psych ca phenomenon, commun cat on,
ut t er ance, et c. descr bed by t he sent ence ex st s r r espect ve
of whet her t he sent ence s af f r med or negat ed. Let me adduce
some f ur t her examp es :
( 35)
Mar a Pt er nek azon a va om-
sn, hogy szer et egyed enn .
' Mar y on Pet er ' s conf ess on t hat
he ked t o be a one. '
( 36)
az az spont , hogy e ke t r I n a
v zsgt .
' The op n on t hat t he exam nat on shou d be abo shed
dom nant . '
Such sent ent a pat t er ns ar e qu t e of t en der vab e f r oma
mor e ana yt ca , h er ar ch ca y or gan sed, st r uct ur e. Th s
st r uct ur e wou d nc ude t he above ar gument s and t he e ement
equ va ent t o ' f act ' . Cf . ( 37) as der ved f r om( 38) :
( 37) Em kszem ar r a az zenet r e, hogy. . .
' I r emember t he message t hat . . . '
( 38) Em kszem ar r a a t nyr e, hogy azt zent ek, hogy. . .
' I r emember t he f act t hat a message had been sent
( say ng) t hat . . . '
A der vat on of t h s t ype, however , pr oves unsat sf act or y
n ot her cases. ( 39) cannot be der ved f r om ( 40) , nor can
( 41) f r om ( 42) .
( 39) Gyzt t az az l l spont , hogy. . .
' The opi ni on t hat . . . became domi nant . '
( 40) Gyozt t az a t ny, hogy l t ezet t az az spont ,
hogy. . .
' The f act t hat t her e ex st ed an op n on ( say ng)
t hat . . . became dom nant . '
( 41) Mr a e gondo kodot t Pt er nek azon a va omsn,
hogy. . .
' Mar y med t at ed on Pet er ' s conf ess on t hat . . . '
( 42) Mar a e gondo kodot t azon a t nyen, hogy Pet er
beva ot t a, hogy. . .
' Mar y med t at ed on t he f act t hat Pet er conf essed
t hat . . . '
As was po nt ed out ear er , one can f nd sent ences n wh ch
ent t es n t he subor d nat e c ause ar e not nt er pr et ab e as
f act ua y ex st ng but ar e, nst ead, nc p ent or mer e y
poss b e. The at t er pr oper t es w aga n be ndependent
of t he af f r mat ve or negat ve f or mof an ext er na pr ed cat e.
Cf . ( 43) :
( 43)
( egy) o yan spont , hogy e
ke t r n a v zsgt .
' An op n on be ng gr adua y deve oped t hat
t he exam nat on shou d be done away w t h. '
3. 2. The f act s and cons der at ons pr esent ed above may ead
t o t he assumpt on t hat sent ences w t h ' hogy' can be char act er -
zed, apar t f r om t r ut h, by anot her semant c r e at onsh p as
we . The at t er can be based on a d f f er ent syst em of ' va ues'
wh ch w undoubt ed y cor r espond t o what we ca ed ' ext er na '
and ' nt er na ' connect ons ( see 2. 3 above) . I t may be wor t h
ment on ng t hat a so f act v t y can be account ed f or by t h s
syst em.
The r e at onsh p ment oned above w her e naf t er be
t er med ' ex st ent a r e at on' . By t h s t er mwe w r ef er t o t he
mode ( or f or m) of ex st ence wh ch s d sp ayed by t he semant c
component s n t he sent ence. I n ot her wor ds, such a r e at on
w char act er ze t he mode n wh ch ent t es denot ed by t he
semant c component s n t he sent ence ar e st at ed t o ex st . The
mode of ex st ence of t he ent t y denot ed by t he subor d nat e
c ause can be nd cat ed by t he ma n c ause wh ch may t e us
whet her t he descr pt on n t he subor d nat e c ause s about
an act ua s t uat on, about a per son' s assumpt ons, mpr es-
s ons, ut t er ances, et c. Sent ent a nouns be ong t her ef or e
t o t he ex st ent a f eat ur es of t he subor d nat e c auses.
The concept of ex st ence s a semant c concept wh ch,
| ust ke a ot her concept s n my syst em, s adapt ed t o t he
ngu st c nf or mat on or b ocks of - such nf or mat on about
r ea t y r ef ect ed n anguage.
We ar e now n t he pos t on t o f or mu at e a hypot hes s
concer n ng t he nt er act on of negat on and ex st ent a
r e at ons : Negat on changes t he ex st ent a r e at on of t he
subor d nat e c ause n nt er na , but not n ext er na , connec-
t ons . ( Not e t hat t r ut h va ues do not come nt o p ay d r ect y
at t h s eve of d scuss on; n ot her wor ds, t s a pr oper t y
of cer t a n subt ypes of ex st ent a r e at ons on y t hat t he r
st ab t y can be checked aga nst t he t r ut h va ue t est . )
Let us adduce an examp e f or bot h nt er na and ext er na
st r uct ur es. ( 44) cont a ns an nt er na st r uct ur e:
( 44)
, hogy f r adt .
t hat he was t r ed. '
The negat ve sent ence t e s us t hat t he r epor t ed sent ence
has not been ut t er ed by Pet er , . e. t does not ( d d not )
ex st . Negat on t hus a t er s her e t he ex st ent a r e at on
of t he af f r mat ve sent ence. ( 45) r epr esent s an ext er na
st r uct ur e :
( 45)
P t er nek azt a kz st ,
hogy f r adt .
t he message of Pet er
( say ng) t hat he was t r ed. '
I n ( 45) , n bot h cases t he subor d nat e c ause r epor t s on a
message act ua y ut t er ed by Pet er . The ex st ent a r e at on
of t he subor d nat e c ause has t hus not been af f ect ed by
negat on her e.
The examp es ( 44) and ( 45) ust r at e cases wher e
ne t her t he ( subor d nat e) c ause of t he nt er na nor t hat
of t he ext er na st r uct ur e need be t r ue. Our hypot heses can,
however , a so be mot vat ed by t ak ng subor d nat e c auses
whose t r ut h s guar ant eed.
The pr esent obser vat ons squar e we w t h Fr ege' s
t hes s accor d ng t o wh ch t r ut h va ues of subor d nat e c auses
embedded under cer t a n pr ed cat es, e. g. , ' say' , ' t ake somet h ng
f or gr ant ed' , ' be eve' , et c. ar e neut r a f r om t he po nt of
v ew of t he t r ut h va ue of t he who e sent ence. Th s can be
exp a ned, as Fr ege put s t , by c a m ng t hat n such cases
t he subor d nat e c ause const t ut es on y par t of t he dea
expr essed by t he ent r e sent ence.
I n t he pr esent f r ame I des gnat e as ' const r uct ons w t h
nt er na connect on' such comp ex sent ences wh ch adm t an
adequat e ass gnment of t r ut h va ues t o t he who e sent ence
comp ex but not t o t he subor d nat e c ause a one. The t r ut h
va ue of t he subor d nat e c ause seems t o covar y w t h t hat
of t he ma n c ause.
Th s obser vat on s suppor t ed by t he f act t hat a negat ed
nt er na comp ex cannot be an ar gument of a f ur t her pr ed ca-
t on. Th s s so because t he scope of negat on n t he case
of an nt er na comp ex embr aces not on y t he sent ent a noun
but a so t he subor d nat e c ause. Cf . t he f o ow ng examp e:
*Pet er nemmondt a azt , hogy f r adt , es en ezt a b | e ent st | o
meg| egyezt em.
' Pet er d d not say t hat he was t r ed, and I kept t h s ut t er -
ance f r m y n m nd. '
No doubt , t h s pr ob emwou d deser ve a mor e e abor at e d s-
cuss on. Space m t at ons pr event me f r omgo ng nt o f ur t her
det a s n t h s paper , however .
406
Fr omFr ege' s examp es t seems t hat by a ' non- ndependent
dea' he meant a descr pt ons wh ch des gnat e, nst ead
of a t r ue or f a se st at e of af f a r s, ent t es ke someone' s
( ex st ng) deas, t heses, messages, ut t er ances, et c. Fr ege
qua f ed t he pr ed cat e ' doubt somet h ng' exc us ve y on
t he gr ounds as t o whet her t he c ause gover ned by t was
t r ue or f a se. Accor d ng y, he cons der ed t t o be a par
w t h pr ed cat es of t he t ype ' say' or ' be eve' . I t shou d
be r ecogn zed, however , t hat t her e ar e t h ngs t hat can be
sa d t o ex st r r espect ve of t he r t r ut h or f a s t y, e. g.
t heses, st at ement s, t heor es and t he ke. I n ngu st c
and cogn t ve oper at ons such t h ngs ar e t r eat ed | ust ke
( act ua y) ex st ng s t uat ons; n Fr ege an par ance, t he r
descr pt ons ar e at t r but ed an ndependent sense. A sc ent -
f c t hes s r et a ns t s mode of ex st ence ( r ema ns a t hes s)
r r espect ve of t he at t t ude one ent er t a ns t owar ds t . I t
r ema ns a t hes s even f d spr oved. S t uat ons r ea zab e
n t he f ut ur e ( e. g. , p ans) , event s w t h mm nent out comes,
and ot her emer gent c r cumst ances ar e s m ar y char act er zab e.
I t s t her ef or e necessar y t o cons der t he mode of ex st ence
of t he subor d nat e c ause, n add t on t o t s t r ut h va ue.
I n what f o ows I sha pr ov de a br ef sur vey of my
r esu t s obt a ned t hus f ar . These r esu t s compr se:
( ) a syst em of f eat ur es f or t he descr pt on of ex st ent a
r e at ons n subor d nat e c auses w t h ' hogy' , wh ch syst em
s needed n or der t o per m t t he d scr m nat on of var ance/
nvar ance n ex st ent a r e at ons;
( ) emp r ca y or deduct ve y comp ed st s m r r or ng t he
d st r but on of ex st ent a r e at ons; t he same st s w
nc ude dat a show ng t he nf uence of var ous pr ed cat e t ypes
( among ext er na pr ed cat es) on ( t he change' or st ab t y of )
ex st ent a r e at ons under negat on.
Unf or t unat e y, t wou d t ake f ar t oo much space t o mot vat e
t he cat egor es and t heses n f u det a . Nor can I pr esent y
so ve a t he r e at ed ssues of t he pr ob em. I hope, however ,
t hat t he f ol l owi ng sket ch wi l l gi ve adequat e i l l ust r at i on
of my assumpt i ons and concl usi ons.
4. Exi st ent i al r el at i ons of subor di nat e cl auses wi t h ' hogy'
wi l l be def i ned by der i vi ng a syst em of f eat ur es f r oma
hypot het i cal , i nvar i ant semant i c const r uct symbol i zed as
' QS' (= a quasi - si t uat i on) .
4. 1. Focussi ng on t he aspect of subor di nat e cl auses wi t h
' hogy' poi nt ed out above, QS wi l l be speci f i ed by means of
f eat ur es based on t hr ee gr oups of f eat ur es ( I , I I and I I I ) .
Gr oups I and I I pr ovi de f eat ur es f or i nt er nal st r uct ur es
( t hese f eat ur es ar e assi gned t o quasi - si t uat i ons i n ar bi t r ar y
combi nat i ons) ; mor e exact l y, t hese f eat ur es descr i be t he
exi st ent i al r el at i ons of t he i nt er nal compl ex. Fr om t hi s t he
st r uct ur e ' [ ' ext er nal ' pr edi cat e ( ' i nt er nal ' compl ex) ] ' wi l l
be const r uct ed ut i l i zi ng f eat ur es out of Gr oup I I I .
The const r uct of quasi - si t uat i ons i s based on an anal ysi s
of st at ement s about f act s- i n- r eal i t y ut t er ed i n act ual con-
ver sat i on. Not i ce t hat t hi s i s based on t he obser vat i on t hat
a subor di nat e cl ause wi t h ' hogy' usual l y conf or ms t o a r egul ar
subj ect - pr edi cat e pat t er n wi t h t he except i on of quot at i ons
whi ch may di spl ay var i ous i r r egul ar i t i es. ( Cf . t he concept
of ' sent ence r oot ' ; e. g. , Al t r i cht er ( 1975) , pp. 86- 88. ) Quasi -
si t uat i ons ar e l ef t undef i ned her e wi t h r espect t o act ual
sent ences. They ar e t aken t o be based on act ual st at ement s of
f act s. Thi s means t hat al l pr er equi si t es f or t he st at ement of
f act s ar e necessar i l y pr esent i n st at ement s- of - f act s, i n-
cl udi ng t he r el at i ons i dent i f i ed t hus f ar and t hose not di s-
cussed i n t hi s paper . At t he pr esent st age of r esear ch i t
woul d be i mpossi bl e t o enumer at e al l si gni f i cant r el at i ons
i nher ent i n act ual st at ement s of f act s si nce many of t hem
ar e as yet unknown. The concept of quasi - si t uat i ons i s
t her ef or e const r ued i n a f r agment ar y way; al l t hat can be
ascer t ai ned at pr esent i s t hat i t i s a semant i c compl ex at
a pr e- sent ent i al st age.
The f eat ur e syst em s bu t up as f o ows.
Let "| ancs | t sz k ( | t kszer ekke ) " ' | ohnny s p ay ng
( w t h t oys) ' be a comp ex descr b ng a quas - s t uat on t o
be sub| ect ed t o exper ment a var at ons.
Gr oup of f eat ur es I
The spher e of ex st ence. Th s ex st ent a f eat ur e s ex-
pr essed by t he sent ent a noun. The subor d nat e c ause
can expr ess t he f o ow ng t ypes of ex st ence:
( ) Rea t y. Th s s t he ' t er a ' mean ng spher e of OS;
t h s r e at on w expr ess whet her a OS can or cannot be a
descr pt on of a f act , or be ( meant and) under st ood ( n a
sent ence w t h ' hogy' ) as a f act . The OS | ancs | t sz k
' | ohnny s p ay ng' can be compr ehended/ t aken as a f act when
nc uded n a sent ence w t h ' hogy' f t s qua f ed as
an ob| ect ve act v t y or an ob| ect ve cond t on. The OS
| ancs bo dog ' | ohnny s happy' , a psych ca st at e, can
kew se amount t o a f act f t s r ender ed as an ( act ua )
st at e or cond t on (as cont r ast ed t o be ng r ender ed as
someone' s mpr ess on or someone' s asser t on, | udgement , et c. )
OSs ke | ancs szer et ne | t szan ' | ohnny wou d ke t o p ay'
or | ancs egyen bo dog ' Let | ohnny be happy' can a so be
subsumed under t he spher e of Rea t y f t hey ar e meant ( and
under st ood) as sent ences about act ua p ay ng or happ ness
but r epr esent ed as a poss b e act v t y or des r ed st at e.
Consequent y, t he f eat ur e Rea t y does not expr ess whet her
t he OS at hand s act ua y t ak ng p ace ( be ng va d) or not .
Thus, by our examp es t s not mp ed t hat | ohnny s ac-
t ua y p ay ng. Nor s t mp ed t hat he wou d act ua y
ke t o p ay. What s mer e y mp ed s t hat a f ur t her
r e at ons ( see Gr oups I I and I I I ) w be based on t h s
spher e wh ch may be ca ed t he ' spher e of r ea t y n ever yday
anguage' . Ref er ence t o t h s spher e s made by ever yday
phr ases such as ' t h s s not a dr eam, mer e chat t er ng or
empt y wor ds but r ea t y' or ' t h s s t o be t ur ned f r omday-
7
dr eams i nt o r eal i t y' .
The above di scussi on of t he Real i t y concept was al so
necessar y i n or der t o be abl e t o t r eat any compl ex der i ved
st r uct ur e as QSs. Thus, f or exampl e, Pt er nek az l esz a
benyomasa, hogy Mar i a f r adt ' Pet er wi l l have t he i mpr essi on
t hat Mar y i s t i r ed' wi l l possi bl y be cl assed as a quasi - si t ua-
t i on under t he spher e of Real i t y pr ovi ded i t i s qual i f i ed by
t he sent ent i al noun kr l mny ' condi t i on' , ' ci r cumst ance' .
Cf . (...) az a kr l mny, hogy Pt er nek az l esz a benyomsa. . .
' ( . . . ) t he condi t i on t hat Pet er wi l l have t he i mpr essi on t hat
Mar y. . . ' .
Sent ent i al nouns whi ch expr ess Real i t y ar e: l l apot
' st at e' , szi t uci o ' si t uat i on' , kr l mny ' condi t i on' , esemny
' event ' , csel ekvs ' act i on' , t evkenysg ' act i vi t y' , et c.
7
That ever yday l anguage use i s r ef er r ed t o at t hi s pl ace i s
no acci dent . As al r eady ment i oned, I i nt end t o adapt t he
pr oposed syst em of f eat ur es t o l i ngui st i c cat egor i es and con-
cept s. I t shoul d be made cl ear , however , t hat t hi s quest i on
can al so be vi ewed f r om a much mor e gener al aspect , t hat of
pr axeol ogy (a t heor y of pr act i ce) . The pr obl em concer ni ng
t he condi t i ons under whi ch an ent i t y not i mmedi at el y exposed
t o obser vat i on can be consi der ed as r eal can al so be f or -
mul at ed as a pr axeol ogi cal quest i on. We mi ght t hus i nqui r e
what i s r ef l ect ed i n ever yday ut t er ances of t he f ol l owi ng
t ype: Ez nem i gazi egyt t r zs! ' Thi s i s not genui ne sympat hy' ;
Ez l hazaf i sgl ' That i s ( a) f al se pat r i ot i sm' ; Ez csak l at -
szat - er edmeny1 ' Thi s i s but a sham r esul t ' . I n my eyes
pr axeol ogy needs a basi c concept of r eal i t y on whi ch f ur t her
oper at i ons of exi st ence (' i s' , ' i s not ' , ' can be' , ' shoul d be' ,
et c. ) can be per f or med.
( ) Psych ca Cat egor es. OS appear s as t he expr ess on of
a per son' s ment a st at e. Sent ent a nouns per t a n ng t o t he
Psych ca spher e ar e: gondo at ' dea' , v emny ' op n on' ,
benyoms ' mpr ess on' , r zs ' f ee ng' , et c. I f we ass gn
such a cat egor y t o a OS t he r e at on we get w be one r epr esen-
t ab e n a f or m ke (...) az a gondo at , hogy | ancs | t sz k. . .
' (...) t he dea t hat | ohnny s p ay ng. . . ' .
Expr ess ons of soc a zed psych ca pr oduct s w a so
be mar ked w t h t he above f eat ur e. Cf . ( v t at ot t ) pr ob ema ' a
( debat ed) ssue' ; ( b zot t sg ) dnt s ' ( comm t t ee) dec s on'
et c.
( ) Commun cat on. By t h s f eat ur e OSs ar e qua f ed as
soc a zed f or ms of message. The per t nent sent ent a nouns
ar e: mondat ' sent ence' , kz emny ' message' , kr ds ' quest on' ,
v asz ' answer ' , ( u| sag) h r ' news( n t he pr ess) ' et c. When
t h s f eat ur e s ass gned t o a OS we get somet h ng ke . . . az
a v asz, hogy | ancs | t sz k . . . ' . . . t he answer t hat | ohnny
s p ay ng . . . '
Gr oup of f eat ur es I I
( Per sons, t mes, and moda t es. )
I t s by f eat ur e( s) of t h s gr oup t hat we can bu d up sen-
t ences w t h ' hogy' f r omOSs a r eady qua f ed by a ' Gr oup
I ' - t ype f eat ur e. The component s n t he r esu t ant st r uct ur e
w be nked by t he ' nt er na ' - t ype r e at on.
A syst emof f eat ur es w be sat sf act or y on y f t
embr aces a r e evant cat egor es of per son, t me and moda t y.
For our pr esent pur pose, however , t he cat egor es of per son
w not be of pr om nent mpor t ance. The cat egor y of t me
w not p ay a s gn f cant r o e e t her . Fr om a met hodo o-
g ca po nt of v ew t s mpor t ant t hat t he sent ences
shou d be as neut r a as poss b e w t h r espect t o commun cat ve
var ab es. Ther ef or e, var at ons n per son w be gnor ed n
t he pr esent t r eat ment a t oget her , and t me w not be t aken
nt o cons der at on at ever y po nt e t her . I n add t on, f or
t he s mp c t y of expos t on we sha r est r ct our se ves t o
t he k nds of a et h c moda t es most f r equent y nt er pr et ed
ngu st ca y.
Accor d ng y, we sha have t he f o ow ng f eat ur es:
( ) T me ( a) Pr esent
( b) Past
( c) Fut ur e
E. g. ,
. . . az a he yzet ( kr mny, st b. ) hogy
| ancs | t sz k. . .
| t szot t . . .
| t szan f og. . .
1
. . . t he s t uat on ( c r cumst ance, et c. ) t hat | ohnny
s p ay ng. . .
was p ay ng. . .
w p ay. . . '
_
( ) Moda t y. ( a) As s er t or ca ,
( b) Pr ob emat c,
( c) Apode ct ca .
E. g. , Fenn az a kr mny, hogy | ancs | t sz k. ( a)
' I t s t he case t hat | ohnny s p ay ng. '
| ancs | t sz k. ( a)
' | ohnny s p ay ng. '
Lehet s ges , hogy | ancs | t sz k. ( b)
' I t s poss b e t hat | ohnny s p ay ng. '
Szks ges , hogy | ancs | t sszon. ( c)
' I t s necessar y t hat | ohnny be p ay ng. '
| ancs | t sszon! ( _)
' Let | ohnny p ay' ; ' | ohnny s t o p ay. '
The f eat ur es under I and I I per m t us t o const r uct sent ences
w t h ' hogy' w t h any t ype of nt er na r e at on. Cf . ( 46)
cf . Lukas ew cz , Ar st ot e' s sy og st c f r om t he st andpo nt
of moder n f or ma og c, Oxf or d, 1957.
wher e t he f eat ur es Psych ca act v t y, Past , and Pr ob emat c
ar e comb ned:
( 46) Mr nak ehet et t az a benyomsa, hogy | ancs | t sz k.
' Mar y may have had t he mpr ess on t hat | ohnny was
p ay ng. '
Not e t hat t he f eat ur e spec f cat ons on T me and Moda t y can
be app ed t o a spec f cat on of t he Spher e of ex st ence f eat ur e
r at her t han d r ect y t o t he OS ( cf . ( 46) as opposed t o ( 47) ( ) ) :
( 47) ( ) Mr nak az a benyomasa, hogy | ancs eset eg ( va osz -
n eg) | t szot t .
' Mar y has t he mpr ess on t hat | ohnny may have been
p ay ng. '
I f Per son s d sr egar ded t he post u at ed f eat ur es y e d 27
f eat ur e comb nat ons or , t o put t d f f er ent y, a OS can have
27 modes of ex st ence n t he ava ab e syst em. Ex st ent a
r e at ons can qu t e nat ur a y be sub| ect ed t o negat on. I n
t h s cont ext , however , negat on can on y mean a negat on of
t he who e comp ex of f eat ur es ( nc ud ng Per son spec f cat on) .
Not ce a so t hat t he concept of ' f act ' appear s nat ur a -
y n our syst em. I t ar ses as a comp ex of t he f o ow ng
f eat ur es: Rea t y; Pr esent or Past ; Asser t or ca . Fact v t y
w t her ef or e be expr essed n t he syst em as a t r p e con-
s st ng of t he above f eat ur e spec f cat ons.
Gr oup of f eat ur es I I I
Oper at ons.
I use t he cover t er m ' oper at on' f or a oper at ons, qua f ca-
t ons, eva uat ons, at t t udes, at t r but ons, and t he ke,
wh ch ar e f t t o be app ed t o OSs a r eady de m t ed as t o
t he r mode of ex st ence. ' Oper at ona ' pr ed cat es w n-
c ude, among ot her s, ke emes ' ( s) p easant ' , f ont os
' ( s) mpor t ant ' , ost obasg ' ( s) nonsense' hos essg ' ( s) a
her o c deed' , f gye embe vesz ' t akes sg nt o cons der at on
1
,
e oseg t ' f ac t at es sg' , akad yoz ' h nder s sg' , r dek od k
' nqu r es about sg' or , ' ( s) nt er est ed n sg' , har agsz k
' ( s) angr y about sg' , f e r eer t ' m sunder st ands sg' .
As an ust r at on et us app y a pr ed cat e mean ng ' pr e-
vent on' t o t he sent ence ( 47) ( ) . Th s y e ds t he sent ence
( 47) ( ) :
( 47) ( ) Va am m at t nemkvet kezet t be Mar nak az a
( ehet sges) benyomsa, hogy | ancs | t sz k.
' Somet h ng pr event ed Mar y f r omhav ng t he ( pos-
s b e) mpr ess on t hat | ohnny was p ay ng. '
4. 2. A t hor ough nqu r y nt o t he synt act c mechan sms wh ch
ar e used t o const r uct mor e comp ex st r uct ur es wou d
go beyond t he pr esent ent er pr se. I t shou d, however , be
po nt ed out t hat t he same semant c st r uct ur e ( t he same mode
of ex st ence) can man f est t se f n a mor e mp c t f ash on
t han suggest ed by t he f or mer examp es. I n such cases, much
w depend on t he mean ng of t he ' ext er na ' pr ed cat e as
we . ( Name y, pr ed cat es occur r ng n t he ex con of a
g ven anguage may dr ast ca y de m t t he var et es of ex-
st ent a expr ess ons) . Mor eover , t he syst empr oposed s not
nt ended t o so ve t he pr ob em of whet her t he ex st ent a
r e at on n t he ' nt er na ' comp ex s mp ed by t he ' ex-
t er na ' pr ed cat e or conver se y, t he ' ext er na ' pr ed cat e
s chosen on t he bas s of a g ven ' nt er na ' ex st ence.
Compar e e. g. ( 48) w t h ( 47) ( ) :
( 48) | ancs nak t egnap vo t de| e ar r a, hogy | t sszon.
' Yest er day | ohnny had t me t o p ay. '
I n t he case of ( 47) ( ) t he f eat ur e spec f cat on Pr ob emat c
s expr essed mor e or ess ana yt ca y (as a ' poss b e m-
pr ess on' ) . I n ( 48) , an dent ca pa r of f eat ur es ( Past ;
Pr ob emat c) cooccur , nst ead of Psych ca act v t y, w t h a
Rea t y f eat ur e. However , Poss b t y has been expr essed n
(4 8) n a mor e mp c t way. ( The sent ence mp es t hat t he
p ay ng of | ohnny was among h s poss b e act v t es n t he
g ven per od. )
5. Af t er t hi s di scussi on of t he modes of exi st ence i n sub-
or di nat e cl auses we ar e r eady t o make our f i nal move. We
shal l exami ne whet her t he mode of exi st ence of subor di nat e
cl auses i s af f ect ed by t he negat i on of t he sent ence.
5. . Fi r st of al l , some basi c pr i nci pl es must be made cl ear ,
wi t hout whi ch one can get hopel essl y l ost i n t he maze of i n-
f i ni t e r el at i ons ext ant i n any act ual sent ence. Onl y a
smal l par t of t he possi bl e emer gi ng quest i ons wi l l be t r eat ed,
however .
( i ) The exi st ent i al r el at i on of t he subor di nat e cl ause has
t o be eval uat ed f r omt he vi ewpoi nt of t he speaker . We shal l
however concei ve of sent ence meani ng as i f i t wer e unmodi f i ed
by speaker s' at t i t udes i n t he pr esent paper .
The speaker ' s vi ewpoi nt becomes especi al l y i mpor t ant i f
t he speaker i s not i dent i cal wi t h t he Agent or t he Exper i encer
expr essed i n t he sent ence. I n t hi s case t he Agent or Ex-
per i encer may of cour se have a vi ew of t he mode of exi st ence
of t he subor di nat e cl ause whi ch i s di f f er ent f r om t hat of
t he speaker . To be sur e, i n t he st r i ct sense of t he wor d t he
Agent or Exper i encer cannot have vi ews si nce t he sent ence
i s not ut t er ed by hi m. Pr obl ems of t hi s ki nd ar i se wi t h so-
cal l ed emot i ve f act i ve ver bs [ f i r st i nvest i gat ed t hor oughl y on
Hungar i an mat er i al by Fer ene Ki ef er ( Ki ef er ( 1978) ) ] . An
adequat e expl anat i on of t he behavi our of emot i ve f act i ves
( as wel l as of some cl asses of non- emot i ve ver bs) can be
of f er ed i n t he pr esent f r amewor k by means of pr agmat i c or
psychi cal f act or s. Of cour se, t he i nf l uence exer t ed by
pr agmat i c and psychol ogi cal f act or s i s di scer ni bl e i n t he
synt act i c and semant i c st r uct ur e of sent ences. One of t he
basi c f act or s among t hem i s t he empat hi e at t i t ude of t he
speaker t owar ds t he per son denot ed by t he subj ect of t he sen-
t ence i . e. when t he speaker r epor t s on t he cogni t i ve st at e
or at t i t ude of t hat per son. ( As t o t he ' wi der ' concept of
quot i ng, cf . Tr k ( 1972) or Mo nr ( 1974) . For empat hy as a
psych ca phenomenon, see, e. g. , Wa on ( 1934) ) .
As an examp e, cons der ( 49) ( K ef er ' s sent ence) :
( 49) Pt er har agsz k, hogy Anna e ment , ped g Anna nem
ment e .
' Pet er s angr y about Anna' s hav ng gone, a t hough
Anna has not gone. '
Fr om a og ca or psycho og ca po nt of v ew, t he subor d nat e
c ause nt r oduced by ' hogy' can be r egar ded as t he speaker ' s
r eco ect on of Pet er ' s (= t he per son denot ed by t he sub| ect
of t he sent ence) f ee ng. I t ends t se f , | ust ke t he
r e at ed st r uct ur es ( see ( 50) - ( 52) ) , t o an ana ys s r esemb ng
t hat of quot at ons n a nar r ower sense.
( 50) Pt er d cseksz k, hogy sokat ker es.
' Pet er s boast ng t hat he ear ns a ot of money. '
( 51) Pet er gondo kodot t , hogy m t s t egyen.
' Pet er was t h nk ng about what t o do. '
( 52) Pet er b zt at t a | ancs t , hogy | t sszon.
' Pet er encour aged | ohnny t o p ay. '
We may t hus say t hat t he ex st ent a spher e of ( 49) s
Psych ca s nce what s man f est ed her e s t he speaker ' s
at t t ude wh ch cons st s n quot ng a f ee ng of t he per son
9
denot ed by t he sub| ect of t he sent ence.
( ) L ngu st c negat on, as nd cat ed by a number of f nd ngs,
shou d be d st ngu shed f r om og ca negat on ( whose r ea za-
t on n nat ur a anguage may of t en be r at her c umsy) . Nega-
t on n anguage s nt er woven w t h sever a ot her ngu st c
mechan sms. Nor s t f r ee of t he ef f ect s of pr agmat c
f act or s ( cf . Gr eene ( 1972) ) . Cons der now ( 53) :
Ther e ar e f ur t her pr ob ems t o be nvest gat ed her e. A number
of expr ess ons wh ch supposed y or g nat ed n empat h e r e-
at ons have become f xed nor ms n Hungar an. Thus, ver y of t en
t he speaker s no mor e awar e of h s/ her ' empat h c at t t ude' .
An nqu r y nt o t h s quest on wou d r equ r e a t hor oughgo ng ana-
ys s of ' ngu st c t h nk ng' .
( 53) Az nnep y nem azza f e| ezodt t be, hogy k oszt ot t k
a d | akat .
t . ' The ce ebr at on d d not come t o an end by pr ze-
g v ng. '
The Hungar an sent ence s mu t p y amb guous. I t may mean
t hat t her e was no pr ze- g v ng at a and t he ce ebr at on
was f n shed by some ot her agenda, or t hat t he pr ze- g v ng
was f o owed by anot her act . What s, however , r ea y m-
por t ant f r om a og ca po nt of v ew ( w t h r espect t o nega-
t on) s t hat f pr ze- g v ng s a f act t cannot be qua -
f ed by t he pr ed cat e ' t he end of t he ce ebr at on' .
Anot her examp e s g ven n ( 54) :
( 54) N ncs akad ya, hogy Pet er kum szt gyon.
' Not h ng pr event s Pet er f r omdr nk ng koum s. '
When us ng a t oken of ( 54) n ever yday anguage one wou d
r ar e y f ever t h nk of t he poss b t y t hat Pet er can set
out f or a | our ney t o Mongo a and dr nk koum ss when he
ar r ves t her e. At t he same t me, however , t he r ea poss b t y
of koum ss dr nk ng s c ear y f e t n ( 54) . I n ever yday an-
guage t he spher e of ex st ence of t he subor d nat e c ause t ends
t o be mor e ( r ea ) when embedded under n ncs akad ya ' t her e
s no obst ac e pr esent ' , ' s h nder ed by not h ng' t han when
t s embedded under van akad ya ' t her e ar e obst ac es pr esent ' .
Th s d f f er ence may be due t o pr agmat ca f act or s,
t ) I n assess ng ex st ent a r e at ons of subor d nat e c auses
we sha not cons der mp cat ons br ought about by spec f c
pr ed cat es. Cf . ( 55) :
( 55) Pet er e r t e azt , hogy f e vegyk az egyet emr e.
' Pet er managed t o be adm t t ed t o t he un ver s t y. '
Th s sent ence mp es t hat Pet er as a f act was adm t t ed t o
t he un ver s t y. Yet , n t he pr esent f r amewor k, t he subor d nat e
c ause w be qua f ed by t he f eat ur e Pr ob emat c. The
r eason f or t h s s t o be sought n t he use of t he ver b e r
' manage' by t he speaker . We cannot gnor e t he f act t hat t he
same st at e- of - af f a r s can be r ender ed ngu st ca y by
means of var ous semant c t oo s.
( v) The ver b mode used n t he subor d nat e c ause pr ov des
no pr em sses f or assess ng ex st ent a r e at ons. For n-
st ance, a ver b n t he mper at ve does not exc ude t he pos-
s b t y t hat t he mode of ex st ence of t he subor d nat e c ause
cou d be char act er zab e by t he f eat ur e Pr ob emat c.
5. 2. Th s sect on w be devot ed t o a br ef pr esent at on
of cases of nvar ance and cases of change n t he ex st en-
t a r e at ons.
( ) Changes n ex st ent a r e at ons
Type 1 ( see examp e ( 56) ) :
( 56)
t .
The s t uat on
, hogy va ame y k f t m nd g r ossz.
t hat one of t he
e evat or s s a ways out of or der . '
An ex st ent a spec f cat on F ct t ous appear ng her e f or
t he f r st t me has been nt r oduced w t h t he f o ow ng r a-
t ona e. I t has a r eady been ment oned t hat (as examp e
( 56) shows) negat on af f ect s t he sent ent a noun t oget her
w t h t he subor d nat e c ause. I n ot her wor ds, negat on n-
va dat es an af f r mat ve sent ence as a who e. Speaker s,
however , ar e not mpeded n speak ng about nonex st ent
10
Each t ype w be exemp f ed by on y one examp e. The
examp es ar e ar b t r ar y chosen f r om among t he poss b e
comb nat ons of f eat ur es. However , my c a ms about t he
behav or of t he t ot a t y of f eat ur e comb nat ons w on y
be hypot het ca s nce I have not exam ned t he ngu st c
pr oper t es of each comb nat on. The ar r ow nd cat es t he way
n wh ch negat on af f ect s t he t ype of ex st ence r evea ed
by t he ' hogy' - c ause.
418
si t uat i ons and can r eadi l y descr i be t hei r det ai l s. Such an
abi l i t y may go back t o sever al r easons. The speaker may
know t hat a si mi l ar si t uat i on obt ai ned at an ear l i er dat e
or he may have hear d a st at ement whi ch he woul d r ej ect .
Exi st ent i al r el at i ons of subor di nat e cl auses br ought about
i n t he above ways wi l l be subsumed under t he f eat ur e Fi ct i -
t i ous. ( For t hi s concept , see al so Tr k ( op. ci t . ) , pp.
423- 427; t he r ol e of negat i on i s di scussed, e. g. , i n Gr eene
( 1972) ) .
Pr edi cat es used i n such st r uct ur es i ncl ude l l apot ' st at e' ,
j el ensg ' phenomeon' , kr l mny ' condi t i on' , eset ' event ' ,
csel ekvs ' act i on' , t r t ni k ' happens' , t esz ' does' et c.
Type 2 ( see exampl e ( 57) ) :
( 57)
Pet er hogy t zkor kezdodi k az el adas.
' Pet er t hat t he l ect ur e begi ns at
t en o' cl ock. '
Per t i nent pr edi cat es i ncl ude spont ' st andpo nt ' , e v
' pr nc p e' , r zs ' f ee ng' , r ez ' f ee s' , kpze ' mag nes' ,
dont ' dec des' , gondo ' t h nks' , et c.
Type 3 ( see examp e ( 58) ) :
( 58)
Pt er nek kr dse, hogy mekkor a az
uszomedence.
' Pet er ' s quest on how b g t he sw mm ng
poo was. '
Char act er st c pr ed cat es nc ude: h r ' new' , kr ds ' ques-
t on' , v as ' answer ' , mond ' says' , _ ab ' shout s' , zen
' sends a wor d t o someone' , et c.
( ) I nvar ance of ex st ent a r e at ons
Th s case has pr oved t o be mor e var ed t han t he one under
( ) . I t seems usef u t o sor t out cer t a n f eat ur e comb nat ons
as sub- t ypes under spec f c abe s wh ch ar e meant t o r ef ect
t he ex ca f act s and semant c r e at ons n concr et e sent ences
mor e adequat e y. To be sur e, t h s may r esu t n a oss of
t he nt er na coher ence of t he f eat ur e syst em. On t he ot her
hand, we sha ga n t he advant age of mov ng c oser t o n-
gu st c f act s. I t shou d a so be made c ear t hat t he syst em
pr esent ed her e s ne t her f na nor comp et e; f ur t her r esear ch
may change t n sever a r espect s. I n what f o ows I sha
nt r oduce some nove modes of ex st ence wh ch w be exemp -
f ed at t he r equ s t e p aces.
Type 1 ( cf . examp e ( 59) ) :
To t h s t ype be ong bot h f act ve pr ed cat es n t he nar r ower
sence ( pr ed cat es wh ch a ow t he noun ' f act ' or t s equ va -
ent t o be nser t ed n t he sent ence) and t hose pr ed cat es
t hat app y t o act ua s t uat ons, event s or act ons.
Type 2 ( cf . examp e ( 60) ) :
( 59)
hogy | ancs | at sz k.
t hat | ohnny was p ay ng. '
( 60)
A r ossz d , hogy gyor san megszar ad| on
a f est ek.
' Bad weat her t he dr y ng- up
of t he pa nt . '
I t s a char act er st ca y human f acu t y t o be ab e pr ed ct
( under nor ma c r cumst ances) t he occur r ence of cer t a n event s.
Th s pr ov des gr ounds f or t he descr pt on of t he ex st ent a
r e at ons of sent ences such as ( 61) - ( 64) as pr ed ct ab e f ut ur e
event or ( n s ght y d f f er ent cases) a we - f ounded or we -
p anned f ut ur e event . ( These concept s do not co nc de w t h
t he concept of necess t y n a ph osoph ca sense. )
( 61) Hamar osan best t ed k.
' I t w gr ow dar k soon. '
( 62) A f est k f or a m va szr az esz.
' The pa nt w dr y up n ha f an hour . '
( 63) A | vo hnapt o eme k Pet er f zet st .
' Pet er ' s sa ar y s go ng t o be r a sed next mont h. '
The concept s nt r oduced f or t he pr esent pur pose har mon ze
w t h an ever yday v ew ( based on per sona exper ences) of
"t he f ut ur e event wh ch s expect ed t o occur f not h ng n-
t er venes" . Ther e ar e qu t e a f ew pr ed cat es expr essab e by
t h s f eat ur e comp ex; t hese nc ude be enyugsz k va am be
' r es gns onese f t o sg' , e ker va am t ' avo ds sg' , e enez
va am t ' opposes sg' , el kszl val ami r e ' pr epar es t o sg' ,
sszef og vai ami el l en ' col l abor at es agai nst sg' , et c. Pr e-
di cat es of t he above t ype ar e r el at ed t o f act i ve ver bs i n
t he sense t hat t he subor di nat e cl ause can descr i be, under
nor mal ci r cumst ances, a f ut ur e event consi der ed as a f act .
Type 3 ( cf . exampl e ( 64) ) :
( 64)
Ez a kanna ar r a, hogy o a| at t r o -
| anak benne.
' Th s can su t ab e f or st or ng o n. '
I t s char act er st c f or t h s f eat ur e comp ex t hat t he per -
t nent subor d nat e c auses dep ct - n t he ma| or t y of cases -
soc a y acknow edged s t uat ons or act v t es wh ch ar e
t her ef or e n gener a , poss b e. I n some spec a cases, how-
ever , t hey may f a t o obt a n or may r equ r e some sor t of
spec a qua f cat on. Per t nent pr ed cat es nc ude: va ak
ha| and va am r e ' someone s r eady t o do sg' , va ak nek
f e adat a va am ' someone has t he dut y of do ng sg' , va ak
er demes va am r e ' someone mer t s sg' , va ak nek van de| e
( kedve, pnze) ar r a, hogy (...) ' someone has ( enough) t me
( mot vat on, money) t o do sg' , et c.
Type 4 ( cf . examp e ( 65) ) :
(65) . . . . .
Pet er azt a d emm| t , hogy Mar t
ker esse f e vagy | nost .
' Pet er so ved h s d emma whet her he shou d
go t o see Mar y or | ohn. '
The quest on n wh ch ways d ver se var ant s of Psych ca
ex st ence can be r ea zed n concr et e sent ences s r at her
comp cat ed. Det a s w not be g ven n t he pr esent d s-
cuss on. Per t nent pr ed cat es nc ude f e haszna ' makes use
of sg' , ved ' pr ot ect s' , egyet r t va am ben ' consent s t o sg' ,
e gondo kod k va am n ' med t at e on sg' , e t er | ed va am
1
( an dea) s spr ead' , et c.
W t h n t he doma n of t he modes of ex st ence char act er zed
as Psych ca act v t y, t seems wor t hw e t o d st ngu sh a
subgr oup on t he bas s of t he ext er na char act er of t he
r espect ve pr ed cat es. Th s subgr oup cont a ns sent ent a
nouns such as t t e ' t hes s' , gazsg ' t r ut h' , e m et
' t heor y' , h pot z s ' hypot hes s' . As was ment oned ear er ,
such modes of ex st ence can be descr bed as soc a zed nt e -
ect ua pr oduct s expr essed by anguage ( see examp e ( 66) ) .
( 66)
Az adat ok azt a t t e t , hogy a
v t at ot t sz t r k er edet .
' Dat a t he c a m t hat t he wor d
under d scuss on was of Tur k sh or g n. '
Ot her f eat ur es of t he spher e of ex st ence wh ch ca f or a
spec a t r eat ment ar e t ma ' t op c' , kr ds ' quest on' , pr ob-
ema ' pr ob em' .
Cf . ( 67) and ( 68) :
( 67)
Pt er t az a t ma, hogy m r ny t | a a
d vat ot .
' Pet er nt er est ed n t he quest on of what t he
f act or s cont r o ng f ash on ar e. '
( 68)
A apok sokat ar r , hogy k a
egnpszer bb sz nszno.
' Paper s chat t er ng much about who t he most
popu ar act r ess s. '
Type 5 ( cf . examp e ( 69) ) :
( 69) Mar i a azt a h r t , hogy megt al l t k
az el veszet t gyer meket .
' Mar y on t he news t hat t he l ost chi l d
had been f ound. '
Space l i mi t at i ons pr event us f r omengagi ng i n a mor e det ai l ed
i nqui r y i nt o t he var i ant s of exi st ence.
Some of t he per t i nent pr edi cat es ar e: el hi sz ' gi ves
cr edi t t o sg' , megi smet el ' r epeat s' , el f ogad ' accept s' , mo-
sol yog val ami n ' smi l es at sg' .
I woul d now l i ke t o of f er some summar i zi ng and concl udi ng
r emar ks :
( i ) A subor di nat e cl ause wi t h t he f eat ur e speci f i cat i on
Asser t or i cal can have, at l east i f i t i s embedded wi t hi n
cer t ai n pr edi cat es, a l i mi t ed i nt er r ogat i ve f or m:
( 70)
, hogy mi t mond anyj a.
' what hi s mot her i s
sayi ng. '
The i nt er r ogat i ve f or m can somet i mes be a devi ce f or expr ess-
i ng act ual ambi gui t y ( possi bl e di sj unct i ve choi ce) ; cf . ( 71) :
( 71)
A munka bef ej ezse , hogy j l esz- e
az i doj r as.
' The compl et i on of t he wor k on whet her
t he weat her wi l l be good. '
( i i ) Obser vat i ons wi t h r espect t o t he pr agmat i cs of l anguage
may al so be r el evant i n t he pr esent cont ext ( see Ki ef er ( op.
ci t . ) ; El ekf i ( 1976) ; Haber mann ( 1978) ) . To adduce but one
exampl e, El ekf i cor r ect l y poi nt s out t hat subor di nat e cl auses
embedded w t h n pr ed cat es of commun cat on ar e gener a y
nt er pr et ed, ( at east ) n spec f c cont ext s, as f act s. Cf .
( 72) and ( 73) :
( 72) Edesanym r t a, hogy f e eme t k a nyugd | t .
' Mot her wr ot e t hat her pens on had been r a sed. '
( 73) O vast am a h r t , hogy Pt er megnos t .
' I r ead t he news t hat Pet er had got mar r ed. '
( ) The r esu t s obt a ned n t he pr esent st udy can be gen-
er a zed as f o ows. A st r uct ur e of t he ' nt er na ' t ype
r epr esent s a s ng e mode of ex st ence a t hough t s made
up of t wo component s ( t he sent ent a noun and t he subor d nat e
c ause) . Ther ef or e, a oper at ons per f or med d r ect y on t he
t ype of ex st ence expr essed by t he sent ent a noun w af f ect
t he t ype of ex st ence of t he who e st r uct ur e: That s when
sub| ect ed t o var ous oper at ons, t he who e st r uct ur e w
change. I t appear s t o be a r egu ar t y t hat t he ' nt er na '
t ype of st r uct ur e char act er st ca y changes t s mode of
ex st ence. On t he ot her hand, t he ' ext er na ' t ype of st r uc-
t ur e nc udes at east t wo ndependent ex st ent a r e at ons
( t he r e at on bet ween ext er na pr ed cat e and nt er na comp ex
and t he r e at on nher ent n t he nt er na comp ex) . Accor d ng-
y, oper at ons per f or med on t he ext er na pr ed cat e w not
af f ect t he ex st ent a r e at on n t he nt er na comp ex. That
s, ext er na st r uct ur es can be ca ed ex st ence pr eser v ng.
The t wo ndependent ex st ent a r e at ons can be | o nt y
a t er ed on y by sub| ect ng t hemt o separ at e oper at ons.
So f ar on y one oper at on, t hat of negat on, has been
cons der ed. Let us br ef y t r y anot her oper at on. We w
success ve y ass gn t he f eat ur e spec f cat on Pr ob emat c
t o an ' nt er na ' and t hen t o an ' ext er na ' pr ed cat e:
(74) Val szi nti l eg az trtni k maj d, hogy J ancsi j tszani
f og.
' What w pr obab y happen s t hat | ohnny w p ay. '
( 75) Ar r a va sz n eg esz de| e | ancs nak, hogy | t sszon.
' | ohnny w pr obab y have ( enough) t me t o p ay. '
I n t he case of ( 74) , pr obab t y s ascr bed t o t he who e
st r uct ur e ( t he poss b e f ut ur e event s | ohnny' s p ay ng) .
I n ( 75) , on t he ot her hand, t he adver b a ' pr obab y' does
not t e us anyt h ng about t he pr obab t y of p ay ng, t s
scope embr aces ' hav ng t me' on y.
( v) Ther e ar e sever a c asses of pr ed cat es wh ch have not
been bu t nt o t he syst em pr oposed. The r eason f or t h s s
connect ed w t h t he nt r cat e pr ob ems r a sed by such pr ed -
cat es. They nc ude pr ed cat es of want ng, asp r ng, w sh ng
and pr ed cat es of nt er per sona ( psych ca ) nf uences ( en-
cour ag ng, adv s ng, pr oh b t ng, or der ng) as we as ot her
c asses. Par t cu ar at t ent on shou d be pa d t o t he sent ences
t hat cont a n a sent ent a noun t hat r ef er s t o a "pr ef abr -
cat ed" ver ba pr oduct . Cf . ' . . . t he vo ce ( wor d, adage, song,
poem, t a e, et c. ) t hat . . . ' . I t s hoped t hat f ur t her nqu r y
nt o t hese w cor r obor at e t he assumpt on t hat r e at ons of
t he ' nt er na ' t ype ar e char act er zed by change of ex st ence
wh e t hose of t he ' ext er na ' t ype by ex st ence- pr eser vat on.
I t s a met hodo og ca pr ob emwhet her one shou d
r egar d t he nt er r e at onsh p bet ween negat on and ex st ence
( or t hat bet ween ot her og ca oper at ons and ex st ence) as
a poss b e cr t er on f or d st ngu sh ng bet ween nt er na
and ext er na st r uct ur es or r at her as a ngu st c phenomenon,
as a pr oper t y - somet mes man f est , somet mes on y at ent - of
sent ences w t h ' hogy' wh ch may he p us t o shed ght on yet
uncover ed semant c r e at ons. The t wo appr oaches ar e not neces-
sar y ncompat b e. I t s, however , equa y poss b e t hat t he
t wo appr oaches suggest d f f er ent exp anat ons of ngu st c
dat a. I n t hat case, t he second appr oach may t ur n out t o be mor e
pr oduct ve.
426
Ref er ences
Al t r i cht er , F. ( 1975) Hozzaszl s Ki ef er Fer ene el adshoz.
[ A comment on t he paper by Fer enc Ki ef er ] Nyel vt udom-
nyi Kzl emnyek 77. 395- 401.
El ekf i , L. ( 1976) Tagmondat ok i gazsgr t ke. [ The t r ut h
val ue of cl auses] Budapest , Manuscr i pt .
Fr ege, G. ( 1892) ber Si nn und Bedeut ung. Zei t schr i f t f r
Phi l osophi e und phi l osophi sche Kr i t i k, Neue Fol ge 100.
25- 50.
Gr eene, J . ( 1972) Psychol i ngui st i cs. Chomsky and psychol ogy.
Har mondswor t h: Pengui n Educat i on.
Haber mann, G. M. ( 1978) Tr ut h val ue assi gnment i n compr ehen-
si on and st or age of Hungar i an pr edi cat e compl ement con-
st r uct i ons. Act a Li ngui st i ca, t o appear
Ki ef er , F. ( 1978) Fact i vi t y i n Hungar i an. St udi es i n Lan-
guage 2. ( 2) . 165- 197.
Le Ny, J . - F. ( 1975) Smant i que et psychol ogi e. Languages,
40. 3- 29.
Mol nr , I . ( 1974) A Di csekszi k, hogy. . . mondat t pusr l .
[ On t he sent ence t ype ' Di csekszi k, hogy. . . ] Magyar
Nyel vr 98. 398- 405.
Tr k, G. (19 72) J zsef At t i l a- komment r ok XI V. [ Commen-
t ar i es t o At t i l a J zsef . Par t XI V. ] Magyar Nyel vr 96.
423- 439.
Vasi l ' ev, S. A. (19 74) Fi l osof ski j anal i z gi pot ezy l i ngvi s-
t i eskoj ot nosi t el nost i . [ A phi l osophi cal anal ysi s of
l i ngui st i c r el at i vi t y] Ki ev.
Wal l on, H. ( 1934) Les or i gi nes du car act r e chez 1' enf ant .
Les pr udes du sent ment de per sonna t . Ear s: Bo v n.
( Repr nt ed n 1954 by Pr esses Un ver s t a r es de Fr ance. )
FOREI GN LANGUAGE ENVI RONMENT AND LI NGUI STI C CHANGE: TWO EXAMPLES
Fer ene Papp
_. The ancest or of t he cont empor ar y Hungar an anguage became
separ at ed f r omt he Ob- Ugr an anguages, t s c osest r e at ves,
2500- 3000 year s ago, and came t o ve at f r st ma n y n t he
v c n t y of Tur k c and I r an an anguages, and has ved among
t he same S avon c, Ger man c and Neo- Lat n anguages f or t he
past 1000- 1100 year s. Th s at t er per od of t he anguage s
f a r y we document ed. I n t h s way, t may ser ve as a mode
f or any nqu r y concer n ng t he ef f ect on a anguage of mmer -
s on n such an ab d ng y a en env r onment . I f an ant s s n-
g ed out of t s k n and s p aced n anot her nest , t does not
t ake t he a en ant s sever a t housand year s t o k t . S m ar -
y, f a p ece of ve t ssue s t r ansp ant ed nt o anot her or -
gan sm, t s kew se soon t hr ust out . The s t uat on her e s
mor e ke t he one when a f g- t r ee s p ant ed t o t he nor t h of
t s nat ur a r ange of occur r ence, say, n Sout her n Hungar y:
t he p ant w somehow get used t o t he new ecosyst em n t he
new c mat e. (I n t he case of t he Hungar an anguage, even t he
cont r o necessar y f or sc ent f c exper ment s can be exam ned:
Ost yak and Vogu , t s c osest r e at ves, r ema ned c ose t o
each ot her , not f ar f r om t he or g na home, and, unt r at her
r ecent y, d d not have t he same k nd of nt ens ve cont act and
t s at t endant ar ea nf uence as Hungar an. However , I do not
w sh t o ent er nt o t h s quest on her e. )
I t s a we - known f act t hat n t he cour se of t he past
1000- 1100 year s sever a phonemes have d sappear ed f r omt he
f or mer syst em of Hungar an and, on t he ot her hand, a f ew new
ones have appear ed. The domest cat on of oanwor ds r evea s some
pecu ar t es n t he f e d of t he r phoneme st ock. Be ow, how-
ever , r at her t han dea ng w t h t h s, I sha t ack e a h t her t o
t t e st ud ed quest on, name y whet her t s poss b e t o po nt
out a change n t he mor pho og ca or phono og ca syst emof
Hungar an, n wh ch t he ar ge- sca e ex ca bor r ow ng of t he
past 1000- 1100 year s a so nt er act ed. Or , t o appr oach t he pr ob-
em f r om anot her ang e: t he quest on s whet her or not oan-
wor ds f r oment r e y a en syst ems sur r ound ng t he Hungar an an-
guage wer e ab e t o b end nt o t he mor pho og ca syst em of Hun-
gar an w t hout d f f cu t y, n v ew of t he f act t hat t he at t er
had or g na y been f or med t o t r eat exemes of F nno- Ugr c or -
g n ( . e. , of nat ve and Tur k c or g n - but t her e was no pr ob-
emconcer n ng t he st r uct ur e of t hese) . One may wonder whet her
t he mor pho og ca or phono og ca syst em, wh ch can be conce ved
of as an aut omat on pr ocess ng t he new dat a, d d not have t o
change a t t e, t oo, when ex ca t ems of a en st r uct ur e en-
t er ed t on a ar ge sca e, and a so whet her t h s ncur s on of
a en e ement s d st ur bed t s usua r out ne. The we ght of t he
pr ob em can be char act er zed by t he f o ow ng f gur es ( cf . Papp
1967, 520- 1) . Of t he 60, 000 wor d ent r es n t he Exp anat or y
D ct onar y of t he Hungar an Language ( =ED) , mer e y 6000 nd s-
put ab e st ems can be f ound. 43%of t hese ar e r epr esent ed by ob-
v ous r ecent bor r ow ngs and nt er nat ona oanwor ds. Of t he f ew
t housand st ems t hat ar e ef t , not mor e t han 614 ar e of F nno-
Ugr c or g n ( and, f or examp e, t he number of S avon c and Ger -
man oanwor ds s 569 and 330, r espect ve y) . I t s t r ue t hough
t hat t hese 614 nat ve wor ds ar e ver y act ve bot h ex co og ca -
y and n t ext s ( t hese gave d spr opor t onat e y many der vat ves
and ar e ver y f r equent y par t s of compounds; on t he who e t he r
FOREI GN LANGUAGE ENVI RONMENT
429
occur r ence n t ext s s r at her h gh) , never t he ess t s obv ous
t hat , at ever y t ur n, t he Hungar an ' mor pho og ca aut omat on'
has t o oper at e on nput s gn st r ngs whose st r uct ur e s gener -
a y a en t o t . Dur ng t he past m en um t he Hungar an ' mor -
pho og ca aut omat on' has under gone adapt ve changes wh ch have
been pr nc pa y pr omot ed by ( a) t he necess t y t o at t end t o t he
ncr eas ng y bet t er syst emat zat on of anguage- nt er na r e-
qu r ement s, ( b) t he necess t y t o do somet h ng w t h t he f ood
of dat a show ng a en f eat ur es.
1
Th s adapt ve change w be exam ned n t wo r espect s:
n connect on w t h vowe har mony ( =VH) and t he r ecogn zab t y
of st ems ( =RS) .
1. Vowe har mony
1. 1. Pr act ca y, VH means t hat ever y st em can cont a n on y
phonemes dent ca n some r espect s; t he ' mor pho og ca aut o-
mat on' must assur e t hat a nf ect ed wor d f or ms must have t he
same vowe st r uct ur e. For nst ance, et ' s say, vowe s must be
dent ca n t er ms of t he par amet er f r ont / back. Th s happens
t o be t he case n Hungar an. Then ever y st emmust cont a n e t her
on y back vowe s or f r ont vowe s. Suf f xes cont a n ng vowe s
have t wo var ant s: t hat var ant wh ch s har mon c w t h t he r e-
evant vowe n t he st emmust be used. For examp e, ember ' man'
cont a ns on y f r ont vowe s and can t ake on y end ngs w t h such
vowe s: ember nek ' t o t he man' , ember t o ' f r omt he man' , et c.
On t he ot her hand, a ma ' app e' can on y have back vowe suf -
Cons der ng t he pr esent st at e of deve opment of t he mass med a
as we as t he poss b t es f or t he r f ut ur e deve opment , t he
same ssue may ar se as a mor e or ess p vot a one f or per haps
a t he anguages of t he wor d n our own er a. Thanks t o t e-
ev s on and t he r ad o, at t he t me t hese nes ar e be ng wr t -
t en, a host of I r an an, V at namese, Khmer and Ch nese names
and common wor ds ar e ent er ng t he anguage.
f xes as n a manak ' t o t he app e' , a mt ' f r omt he app e' ,
et c. But what happens f def ect ve exemes emer ge, . e.
exemes wh ch cont a n het er ogeneous vowe s d sr upt ve of VH?
The ' aut omat on' t hat oper at es n accor dance w t h t he f unct on-
a pr nc p e out ned | ust now w not be ab e t o gener at e
t he d f f er ent f or ms of def ect ve exemes: t w not be ab e
t o choose t he appr opr at e suf f x f r omt he t wo ava ab e a o-
mor phs. Fur t her mor e, n t he c ass ca , pur e, and s mp e f or m
descr bed her e, VH f u f s a cohes ve and de m t at ve f unc-
t on: t ho ds t oget her t he g ven wor d- f or m and separ at es t
f r omot her s. Now even t hese f unct ons seemt o be weakened.
Such def ect ve exemes do beg n t o appear n Hungar an
r at her ear y. I n 1. 2. - 1. 4. t he causes and consequences of
t h s f act w be out ned.
1. 2. Among ot her t h ngs, Szpe ( 1958, 128) enumer at es t he f o -
ow ng nner causes n connect on w t h t he appear ance of de-
f ect ve exemes ( t he causes w be g ven n my f or mu at on) :
( ) t he back vowe s on t he way t o becom ng a f r ont vowe
and phonet ca y co nc des w t h t he f r ont vowe I t s of
cour se s mu t aneous y r et a ned n t he syst em of exemes hav ng
back VH or g na y. St ems cont a n ng a f or mer back w con-
t nue t o t ake back vowe suf f xes even af t er f u phono og ca
change has d sgu sed t s or g na qua t y. Th s account s f or
t he emer gence of def ect ve st ems and wor d f or ms w t h def ect ve
suf f xes: f ' boy' w t h an t ur ned pa at a and a ve ar ( =back)
u ; r ok ' I wr t e' : a pa at a zed st emw t h a ve ar suf f x, et c.
( ) Compound wor ds a so pr esent t hemse ves. Not h ng can of
cour se ensur e t hat back- vowe st ems and f r ont - vowe st ems shou d
be comb ned t o g ve compounds on y accor d ng t o VH, t her ef or e
compound wor ds as ex ca ent r es ar e of t en def ect ve. As a
r esu t of compound ng, wor d f or mat on, et c. , wor d- f or ms become
onger , t hus t he f r st st r essed sy ab e w ose some of t s
pr om nence ( so f ar t has been poss b e t o oper at e w t h t he
pr nc p e: "t he qua t y of t he f r st st r essed sy ab e det er -
431
m nes t hat of t he r est " ) .
1. 3. F na y, Szpe cor r ect y not es ( op. c t . ) t hat t hr ough "t he
eg on of a en wor ds" exemes of t he above- descr bed st r uct ur e
ent er t he wor d- st ock. I ndeed, when one comes t o t h nk of t ,
f r omt he v ewpo nt of t he sour ce anguages, S avon c, Ger man,
et c. , or t hat of nt er nat ona oanwor ds, t was ut t er y nc -
dent a whet her t hey gave ' pur e' ve ar / pa at a st ems or m xed
ones n t he ex con of Hungar an. I n r espect of t he ma n con-
sequence t o be not ed n 1. 4. , Szpe does not cons der t he r o e
of t h s ar ge- sca e bor r ow ng as ver y s gn f cant .
1. 4. What ar e t he consequences of t he new s t uat on or , t o put
t n anot her way, how does t he Hungar an ' mor pho og ca aut o-
mat on' behave under t he nf uence of t he ncr eased nf ux of
def ect ve exemes der v ng f r om nner and out er sour ces? I t
wou d be t heor et ca y conce vab e t hat t he VH par t of t he ' mor -
pho og ca aut omat on' beg ns t o f unct on wor se and wor se, w t h
a ot of r andom so ut ons, t hen f a s apar t and ceases t o f unc-
t on a t oget her : VH as such ceases t o ex st . I t s ver y essen-
t a t o st at e t hat t h s does not happen, however . As can be
seen at t he end of t h s sect on, VH emer ges w t h t s f u r ange
of act on n t he anguage syst em of cont empor ar y Hungar an.
1. 4. 1. I n some cases of s mp e pr ogr am mod f cat on, t he VH
' aut omat on' wor ks accor d ng t o expect at on: f a def ect ve e-
xeme t ur ns up, t w opt ona y g ve out bot h k nds of nf ec-
t ed f or ms. Mer e y 16 8 r oot exemes wer e f ound n t he ED t o be-
have as f o ows: har ak r - har ak r | e or har ak r | a ' h s/ her
har ak r ' , hot e - hot e ok or hot e ek ' hot e s' ( p . ) , et c. These
par a e out put dat a nd cat e t he he p essness of t he ' aut oma-
t on' const r ued n t he o d way. I f such cases had been mor e f r e-
quent , t h s wou d have meant t he weaken ng, t hen t he comp et e
br eakdown of t he VH ' aut omat on' . I n t he pr ocess of commun cat on
t hese par a e f or ms nd cat e t hat some speaker s choose one a -
t er nat ve, wh e ot her s t he oppos t e. Mor eover , t he same speak-
er may a so gener at e t hese f or ms a t er nat ve y, most y w t hout
any f unct ona - st y st c d f f er ences what ever . ( Cf . Papp 1975,
165 f f and Ohe ms. f or mor e det a s. )
1. 4. 2. An at t empt t o so ve t he pr esent pr ob em pr esent s t se f
f a r y ear y n Hungar an mor pho ogy: a new ' aut omat on' was
cr eat ed wh ch t r ansf or med def ect ve exemes nt o exemes hav-
ng t he necessar y Hungar an f or m. Thus, t he S avon c oanwor d
er esbn| a ' cher r y' makes t s f r st appear ance n Hungar an n
1256 n t h s f or m: cher esna, . e. w t h a f na - a. , but , a most
at t he same t me ( 1257) , t a so t ur ns up as cher esne: t he
at t er conf or m ng t o VH. The cont r vance changed t he S avon c
wor d ce ' ad n bot h pot ent a d r ect ons, t hus n pr esent - day
Hungar an cse d ' ser vant ' and csa d ' f am y' have f r ont vowe s
and back vowe s, r espect ve y. I n cont r ast t o 1. 4. 1. above,
wh ch n f act nd cat ed t he he p essness of t he syst em, t h s
s a f eas b e at t empt at so ut on. Th s wou d per haps have
been suf f c ent f or t he so ut on of t he pr ob em f def ect ve
exemes had on y made t he r way nt o t he ex con f r om ext er na
sour ces and n sma number s. I t s we - known, however , t hat
ne t her of t hese opt ma cond t ons obt a ned.
1. 4. 3. That s why t he mor e comp ex so ut on, name y t he par -
t a r eor gan zat on of t he VH ' aut omat on' , was necess t at ed.
Th s r eor gan zat on r uns as f o ows: VH pr ev ous y cond t oned
by t he st r essed f r st sy ab e of t he st em s r ep aced by VH r e-
gu at ed by t he ast sy ab e of t he st em. As a consequence of
t h s, t he st em can be of any engt h and may cont a n any k nd
of vowe s. The cor r ect a omor ph of suf f xes s aut omat ca y
pr ed ct ab e on t he bas s of t he qua t y of t he vowe n t he
st em f na sy ab es. At t he same t me, t h s new r u e a so en-
sur es t he cohes on bet ween st ems and suf f xes. The wor d de-
m t at on f unct on of VH, however , s subst ant a y weakened.
That s, wor ds can no onger be aut omat ca y separ at ed on
t he gr ounds t hat Hungar an t ext s have t he st r uct ur e t at at at e-
t et et at at at et et e, et c. ( Not ce, nc dent a y, t hat t h s f unc-
t on cou d not have been t oo st r ong ear er e t her , f or d s-
FOREI GN LANGUAGE ENVI RONMENT 433
t nct wor d f or ms hav ng t he same vowe har mony cou d of t en
f o ow one anot her . )
The behav or of compounds as a c ass f t s we nt o t he
d sr upt ve pat t er n ev denced by oanwor ds. As po nt ed out n
1. 2. , compounds, n f act , ar e one of t he nt er na sour ces f or
t he appear ance of def ect ve exemes. Cf . , f or examp e, ht r a-
dl ' si t back
1
, hat - kr ' per f ect ass' , por - hvel y ' human body' ,
os- haza ' or i gi nal home' , et c. I t i s i mpor t ant t o not e t hat com-
poundi ng i s an ext r emel y pr oduct i ve pr ocess i n cont empor ar y
Hungar i an. I n addi t i on t o 6000 st ems, t he ED cont ai ns wel l over
20, 000 compounds. Or i gi nal l y, i nf l ect i on and der i vat i on wer e
al so i nst ances of compoundi ng: suf f i xes came i nt o bei ng f r om
separ at e wor ds t hat became t he post er i or const i t uent s of com-
pounds. The maj or i t y of t hese suf f i xes wer e f or med dur i ng t he
f i r st cent ur i es of t he past 1000- 1100 year s. These suf f i xes
wer e cr eat ed al most excl usi vel y f r omwor ds havi ng f r ont vowel s.
Har moni zi ng wi t h t he f i r st vowel of t he st em, t hey f or med a
vel ar al l omor ph i n accor dance wi t h t he ol d r ul e concer ni ng VH,
when t hey wer e at t ached t o vel ar st ems. Thus, i n t he f i r st com-
pr ehensi ve wr i t t en r ecor d of t he Hungar i an l anguage f r omt he
end of t he 12t h cent ur y, t he f ol l owi ng wor d f or m i s f ound:
mi l ost ben, whi ch cor r esponds t o pr esent - day mal aszt ban ' i n di -
vi ne gr ace' . For t he cont empor ar y f or m t o emer ge, (i ) i t was
necessar y f or t he cont r i vance descr i bed i n 1. 4. 2. t o come i nt o
bei ng: mi l ost > mal aszt ( t he st em i t sel f i s of Sl avoni c or i gi n,
t hat i s why i t i s def ect i ve) , ( i i ) t he i ndependence of - ben
had t o cease, i t was changed t o - ban. I n moder n compounds, how-
ever , t he post er i or const i t uent does not change, and t he suf -
f i xes on compounds appear i n conf or mi t y wi t h t he r equi r ement s
of t he new VH ' aut omat on' , i . e. , t hey depend on t he vowel qua-
l i t y of t he l ast syl l abl e of t he post er i or const i t uent . Not i ce,
f ur t her mor e, t hat , when i n t he cont empor ar y l anguage t he above-
ment i oned 168 f l uct uat i ng st ems, al l owi ng f or par al l el f or ms,
f i gur e as post er i or const i t uent s i n compounds, t he new com-
pound l exemes wi l l not f l uct uat e i n most cases: t hey wi l l r e-
cei ve t he appr opr i at e i nf l ect i onal al l omor ph cor r espondi ng t o
t he l ast vowel of t he post er i or const i t uent s ( cf . Papp 1975,
169) . E. g. , bab- konzer v- ben, r at her t han bab- konzer v- ban ' i n
canned beans' , bor - f ot el - ben, r at her t han br - f ot el - ban ' i n
( a) ski n ar mchai r ' , kr t ya- par t ner - r el , r at her t han kr t ya-
par t ner - r al ' wi t h ( a) par t ner i n a car d- game' . The new VH
' aut omat on' i s i n f ul l swi ng.
I t must al so be not ed t hat , i n vi ew of t he r easons par t l y
out l i ned above, t he exi st ence of vowel s neut r al wi t h r espect
t o VH, namel y [ i ] , [ i : ] and [ e: ] , must al so be assumed
t o exi st i n t he nev/ VH syst em. For t hi s r eason, VH seems t o
oper at e cycl i cal l y: i f t he l ast vowel i s one of t hese neut r al
ones, t he ' aut omat on' t akes t he pr ecedi ng one, et c. , unt i l i t
r eaches t he f i r st condi t i oni ng vowel . I f i t r uns shor t of vow-
el s, i . e. , t he wor d cont ai ns onl y neut r al vowel s, t he vowel
har mony of t he wor d i s, or di nar i l y, pal at al , e. g. , vi gec- ek
' dr ummer s' , gebi cs- ek ' shr i kes' , r i ngl i spi l - ek ' t ur nabout s' ,
pi pi t er - ek ' camomi l es' , et c.
1. 5. At t hi s poi nt i t i s wor t h comment i ng on al l t hi s f r om
t he di achr oni c and t he synchr oni c poi nt s of vi ew.
1. 5. 1. I n t he cour se of t he past mi l l eni um, bot h t he Hungar i an
wor d- st ock and t he Hungar i an t ext s have become mor e and mor e
vel ar ( t hey t end t o cont ai n an i ncr easi ng number of back vow-
el s) . Thi s can be el uci dat ed and i l l ust r at ed by t he f ol l owi ng
quant i t at i ve dat a: ( i ) i f i ndi vi dual et ymol ogi cal l ayer s of
t he wor d- st ock of cont empor ar y Hungar i an ar e consi der ed, and
t he r at i o of f r ont and back vowel s i n t hese l ayer s i s est ab-
l i shed ( excl udi ng t he vowel s i and ) , t he per cent age of vel ar
vowel s pr esent s t he f ol l owi ng pi ct ur e ( 100 = al l t he vowel s of
a gi ven et ymol ogi cal l ayer , wi t hout i and ) : Fi nno- Ugr i c 55,
Tur ki c 59, of uncer t ai n or unknown or i gi n 61, t he r esul t of
i nt er nal devel opment i n Hungar i an 65, Ger man 72, Sl avoni c 76,
Neo- Lat i n 81, Lat i n and Gr eek 81. ( Cf . Papp 1975, 259) I t can
be seen t hat t he ' eg on' of oanwor ds a so meant an ncr ease
n t he number of back vowe s, ( ) I n some Hungar an t ext s
t he per cent age of ve ar vowe s can be g ven as f o ows ( 100=
a vowe s of a g ven t ext , cf . Papp 1977, 72, supp ement ed
by h t her t o unpub shed r esu t s of my nvest gat ons) : 12t h
cent ur y ( Ha ot t Beszd ' Funer a Ser mon' ) 40, 16t h cent ur y 42,
19t h cent ur y Pet of 47, Ar any 47, 20t h cent ur y 47. I t shou d
be not ed her e t hat , g ven t he r e at ve equa t y of t he ve ar /
pa at a oppos t on n t he wor d st ock, t he mar ked y pa at a cha-
r act er of ear y t ext s can on y be account ed f or by t he ver y
f r equent occur r ence of cer t a n f r ont - vowe wor ds n t h s ear y
per od ( and n pr eced ng cent ur es) . Th s s a so cor r obor at ed
by t he f act ment oned ear er t hat t hose f r equent y used exe-
mes t hat became suf f xes wer e pa at a . The pr edom nance of pa-
at a vowe s was on y at er d m n shed as a r esu t of t he n-
cr eas ng number of ve ar oanwor ds.
1. 5. 2. I n our per od - wh ch per od des gnat es t he pr esent t o
t he t me of Pet f and Ar any , . e. , t he m dd e of t he 19t h cen-
t ur y, as can be seen f r om t he above f gur es - a r e at ve y equa
ba ance has been r eached n t ext s : t ext s cont a n near y as many
( on y somewhat f ewer ) ve ar vowe s as pa at a ones. Fr om
t he st andpo nt of VH, t h s st at e s pr obab y dea , s nce t s
power s gr eat est when f r ont and back vowe s show equa d s-
t r but on .
2. Recogn zab t y of st ems ( RS)
2. 1. Wher eas VH s a f a r y we - known phenomenon, t he concept
of RS s r at her new. I n 19 75 I at t empt ed t o f or mu at e RS on t he
bas s of cer t a n dat a pr ov ded by t he Hungar an anguage ( op.
c t . 109 f f ) . Accor d ng t o my t r eat ment , one must assume t hat
nd v dua wor d- f or ms ar e aut omat ca y ana yzab e dur ng t he
cour se of commun cat on; t must be poss b e t o d f f er ent at e
bet ween st ems and nf ect ons w t hout r ecour se t o a d ct onar y
(or consul t i ng i t onl y when absol ut el y necessar y) . Thi s pr e-
sent s no pr obl em and t hat i s why i t i s not even r ai sed as a
quest i on i n l anguages t hat use so f ew i nf l ect i ons as, e. g. , En-
gl i sh. The wor d f i nal segment s must ser ve as an i mmedi at e i n-
di cat i on t hat aut obus i s not t he pl ur al of *aut obu. Si mi l ar l y,
st ems endi ng i n - i ng, e. g. , br i ng, i n cont r ast t o f or ms l i ke
goi ng, must al so be cat egor i al l y di scr i mi nabl e. Ther e ar e f ew
suf f i xes i n Engl i sh, t her ef or e t her e ar e f ew possi bi l i t i es f or
mi st aken anal ysi s, and t hi s makes RS quasi - super f l uous her e.
Ther e ar e r el at i vel y mor e suf f i xes - i n Russi an, but i t shoul d be
r at her easy t o est abl i sh t hat sal ' ami i s not t he pl ur al i n-
st r ument al of a noun *sal , and t hat i n t he wor d pal ' t o ' <Fr .
pal et ot ' ' coat ' t he l ast el ement o. i s not an endi ng but an
or gani c par t of t he st em ( i nci dent al l y, t hat i s why bot h nouns
ar e i ndecl i nabl e i n Russi an) , et c. Ther ef or e, RS does not have
a ver y br oad spher e of appl i cat i on i n Russi an ei t her .
I n a l anguage l i ke Hungar i an, however , t he si t uat i on i s
r adi cal l y di f f er ent f or at l east t he f ol l owi ng r easons: ( i )
t he number of cases i s ver y gr eat ( about t went y) ; ( i i ) case suf -
f i xes ar e r el at i vel y young and ar e not so cl osel y amal gamat ed
wi t h t he st em as t hey ar e i n Russi an, Lat i n, et c. ( Recal l what
was sai d under 1. : one of t he ear l i er ext ant f unct i ons of VH
was t o at t ach suf f i xes t o st ems. ) ; ( i i i ) case suf f i xes ar e ca-
pabl e of l i vi ng a separ at e l i f e even i n t he cont empor ar y sys-
t em: - ben i s a case suf f i x meani ng ' i n' , yet t he f ol l owi ng
ar e sel f - cont ai ned wor ds: bennem ' i n me' ( l i t . ' i n- I ' or ' i n-
my' ) , benned ' i n you ( sg. ) ' , et c. ; - t ! i s a case suf f i x denot -
i ng ' f r om' , never t hel ess t he f ol l owi ng ar e i ndependent wor ds:
t l em ' f r omme' , t l ed ' f r omyou ( sg. ) ' , et c. ; ( i v) and f i nal -
2
Let us assume t hat t he human bei ng as an ' aut omat on' i s bui l t
up l i ke al l ot her machi nes of t hi s t ype. I n hi s memor y he has
a di ct i onar y, st or ed dur i ng t he pr ocess of successi ve l anguage
acqui si t i on, as wel l as t he r ul es t o oper at e on t he el ement s
of t hi s di ct i onar y.
l y, a r eason whi ch I r egar d as maj or : i n keepi ng wi t h t he cha-
r act er i st i cs of an aggl ut i nat i ve syst em, one has t o deal wi t h
mor e t han one st em ( each of whi ch can t ake a mor ph desi gnat i ng
3
a case) . E. g. hot el ' hot el ' - hot el - em ' my hot el ' - hot el ed
' your hot el ( sg. ) ' - hot el j a ' hi s/ her hot el ' . . . - hot el ek ' ho-
t el s' , et c. J ust l i ke some r oot st ems, some der i ved st ems ar e
r el at i vel y r ar e. These st ems can be r ecogni zed as r eadi l y as
t he Russi an exampl es ment i oned above. However , at l east t hr ee
r oot st ems must be aut omat i cal l y r ecogni zabl e on account of
t hei r hi gh f r equency of occur r ence: ( i ) t he st em of t he bar e
si ngul ar : hot el ; ( i i ) t hat of t he bar e pl ur al : hot el ek; and
( i i i ) t hat of t he 3r d per son si ngul ar possessi ve const r uct i on:
hot el ; ] a.
Opposi t i ons f ound wi t h ( i i ) ar e not of gr eat i mpor t ance,
owi ng par t l y t o t he r el at i vel y l ow f r equency of occur r ence of
( i i ) ( cf . t he f i gur es i n f n. 4) , and par t l y because t he wor d
f i nal segment , whi ch coul d event ual l y be mi st aken f or t he
pl ur al suf f i x k, i s not ver y f r equent i n wor d- f i nal posi t i on

The common par t of t he par adi gmat i c f or ms, t he par t "whi ch
can t ake t he mor ph f or case/ t he mor phs f or di f f er ent cases"
i s t he sense i n whi ch we use t he t er m ' st em' i n Lat i n, Russi an,
et c. I t i s i n t hi s sense t hat a Hungar i an noun has exact l y
42 di f f er ent ( der i ved) st ems ( see Ant al 1961, 50) . One and t he
same l exeme has 42 nomi nat i ves, accusat i ves, i nst r ument ai s, and
so on. At l east t he most i mpor t ant st ems ( bot h r oot st ems and
der i ved st ems) must be easi l y r ecogni zabl e, di st i ngui shabl e.
Thi s r equi r ement i s symbol i zed by ' RS' .
4
I n J anos Ar any' s her oi c epi c ent i t l ed Tol di t her e ar e about
2700 nomi nal f or ms. I n 63%of t hese t he st em i s i mmedi at el y
f ol l owed by some case endi ng, i n 33%by some possessi ve suf -
f i x ( most of t en, of cour se, t he one f or t he 3r d per son) and
i n al most 5%of t he cases by t he pl ur al suf f i x. Si mi l ar di s-
t r i but i ons can be f ound i n ot her t ext s as wel l .
of possess ve f or ms and s even ess t yp ca n f na pos t on
of bar e st ems. I n v/ hat f o ows, t her ef or e, ( w t h t he except on of
one examp e of m nor mpor t ance) t he oppos t on of ( ) : ( )
w be dea t w t h. That s t o say, t w be spec f ca y
exam ned how, when per ce v ng t he f or mhot e | a, t he addr essee
s ab e t o know aut omat ca y ( w t hout hav ng r ecour se t o t he
d ct onar y st or ed n h s memor y) t hat he has t o dea w t h t he
3r d per son st em of t he noun hot e , r at her t han w t h a bar e st em
ke hot e | a, and t hat a t he t went y nf ect ed wor d f or ms
he may encount er : hot e | at , hot e | nak, hot e | at o , et c. must
be segment ed n t he f o ow ng way: hot e - | - t , hot e - | - nak,
hot e - | - t o , et c. The cr uc a r o e of t he segment |_a must be
r ecogn zed on a h gher eve , t hat of synt act c ana ys s, s nce
t s t h s mor ph t hat s nd cat ve of a possess ve r e at on-
sh p. A mor ph- t o- mor ph t r ans at on of az aparn hot e | ban ' n
t he hot e of my f at her ' wou d g ve us ' t he f at her - my- hot e - h s-
n' , t her ef or e t he oss of t he segment | wou d be equ va ent
t o t he oss of t he possess ve f unct on expr essed by of n En-
g sh. The code must somehow pr ot ect t h s e ement wh ch s
a so so essent a f or synt act c ana ys s. ( I t shou d be not ed,
however , t hat n Eng sh, t oo, t her e s occas ona y some d f -
f cu t y w t h t h s cr uc a e ement , cf . our f at her ' s hot e -
our f at her s' hot e , et c. )
2. 2. By t he dawn of t he per od n quest on, . e. , about 1000-
1100 year s ago, t he f o ow ng s t uat on had emer ged: ( ) t he
f u dec ens on of possess ve suf f xes came nt o ex st ence,
( ) t he 3r d per son s ngu ar possess ve suf f x ( ' h s/ her ' , ' t he
. . . of ' ) was r ea zed as and n t he case of ve ar and pa-
at a VH, r espect ve y. Lat er t hese suf f xes became shor t er
and t he ve ar ones mor e ab a , wh ch, however , s of t t e
r e evance t o t he po nt at ssue, ( ) Wor d- f or ms mod f ed by
t hese suf f xes wer e not or g na y m st akeab e f or suf f x ess
bar e st ems. However , at t he beg nn ng of t he per od under n-
vest gat on, m sconst r ua became a f act or t o be account ed f or .
Cons der , f or examp e, f. ' t r ee' , a bar e st em, and ha - ' t he
f sh . . . of ' , wh ch bot h had an a n f na pos t on; ( v) As
a r esu t of h st or ca acc dent s, ve ar st ems ( bar e or r oot st ems
of t he f - t ype ar e r e at ve y mor e numer ous t han st ems w t h
a f na , t he at t er hav ng an ext r eme y ow occur r ence. Ther e-
f or e, t he danger of m sconst r ua not ed under ( ) s pr eva ent
among back- vowe wor ds; ( v) af t er st ems end ng n vowe s, t he
e ement | appear s bef or e t he suf f x a t o f n a h at us: f
> f | ( n t he sense of ( ) , t h s g ves us t he pr esent - day
f or m f a| a ' t he t r ee of . . . ' , ' h s/ her t r ee' ) . Th s e ement | ,
wh ch or g na y t hus had a ver y modest f unct on, had vast ,
t hough unpr ed ct ab e, poss b t es ahead of t . I n summar y,
when t he or g na Hungar an speak ng t r bes ar r ved n t he Car -
pat h an bas n, t he syst emhad t he s ng e nnocuous weak po nt ,
not ed under ( ) , wh ch was due t o nt er na causes conf ned
t o back vowe wor ds.
2. 3. Fr om t he beg nn ng of t he Hungar an occupat on of t he Car -
pat h an bas n and t he adopt on of Chr st an t y n Hungar y, a
dr amat c st at st ca t endency made t se f f e t , name y t hat t he
eg on of S avon c and, at er , Lat n oanwor ds most y ended n
- a. I t s not d f f cu t t o see why: f em n ne and neut er S avo-
n c oanwor ds had t he nom nat ve case suf f x - a. , ot her s wer e
bor r owed n t he r gen t ve f or mend ng n t he same back vowe .
A t hese bor r ow ngs ncr eased t he number of nouns end ng n
-a. . ( 35%of t he 6000 st ems pr oper n t he ED end n - a; f r om
anot her aspect , 38%of wor ds bor r owed f r om S avon c anguages
end n - a. a so, and t her e s a host of Lat n oanwor ds end ng
n - a n nd sput ab e r oot st ems. ) Wor ds end ng n -e_ , wh ch
wer e ext r eme y spar se n t he anguage ear er , a so became
mor e numer ous, t hough t hey d d not appr oach t he ncr ease n
wor ds end ng n - a. Fur t her mor e, a cons der ab e number of con-
sonant - f na bor r ow ngs ( espec a y f r om t he S avon c anguages,
at er f r omGer man as we ) wer e def ect ve n t hat t hey ended
n consonant c ust er s t hat had not been poss b e n f na po-
s t on at an ear er st age of Hungar an. I f nouns end ng n
such consonant c ust er s r equ r ed t he possess ve suf f x - a
or - e, t h s suf f x was ab e t o d sappear , . e. , t o ended
nt o t he st emby be ng added t o t he unwe come consonant c ust er
and t hus appear ed st em- f na . ( See be ow n 2. 4. 2. t he c ust er s
- m, - mb, - ck, et c. )
2. 4. What happens at t h s st age? Such phenomena can on y be
account ed f or by assum ng t he ex st ence of a t endency t o RS.
I t s essent a t o not e t hat f t he or g na unpr ob emat c
st at e had been r et a ned, t wou d not even have come t o ght
t hat RS was needed.
2. 4. 1. A r oot st em s def ect ve f t ends n - k (as t h s can
a so f unct on as t he p ur a suf f x) , and, above a , f t
ends n - a or - , s nce t hese can a so f unct on as possess ve
suf f xes. The s mp est way of count er act on s t o sever t he
amb guous f na e ement . Ther e ar e ndeed examp es of such a
pr ocess, but so f ar no account has adequat e y hand ed t hem. I n
S avon c car dak > Hung, csr da, t he f na _ d sappear ed. Chan-
ges of t he f o ow ng t ype ar e mor e numer ous: S avon c beseda
>Hung. beszd ( not ce, nc dent a y, t hat t h s change s mu -
t aneous y r est or ed vowe har mony) ; I t a an vo t a >Sout her n
S avon c bo t a >Hung, bo t ; S avon c ko basa >Hung, __ bsz ;
S avon c ad | a, ad | ka, et c. >Hung. ad _ ; S avon c opat a
>Hung. apat ; I t a an p azza >Hung. p ac; S avon c po ca >
Hung, po e; S avon c szobot a ( w t h a nasa _ n t he f r st sy -
ab e) >Hung. szombat , et c.
2. 4. 2. The k nd of t r uncat on oper at ve above, however , does
not of f er a sat sf act or y exp anat on f or a our pr ob emat c
cases. I n wor d f or ms w t h a possess ve suf f x t he e ement | ,
whose or g na f unct on was t o f n a h at us, s ncr eas ng-
y used whenever t can appear phonet ca y at a , af t er con-
sonant s n cases when t has t o be c ear y nd cat ed t hat t
s not a quest on of a r oot st em end ng n - a/ - e but a st emen-
d ng n a possess ve suf f x. I n such cases, t her ef or e, t he e e-
441
ment | g ves a s gna , as t wer e, f or aut omat c ana ys s:
"st ar t t he ana ys s f r omher e, t he subsequent - a/ - e segment
s par t of t he agg ut nat ve ( possess ve) c ust er of suf f xes,
and does not be ong t o t he st em! " Her e s an examp e t o us-
t r at e t h s ana ys s: f t he e ement | d d not f gur e af t er a
consonant n t h s new f unct on, t he f or m n quest on of t he
wor d gomb ' but t on' wou d r un as f o ows : *gomba ' h s/ her but t on'
and s m ar y Ace. *gombt , Dat . *gombnak, et c. I n t h s way,
t he r oot st em gomba ' mushr oom' and t s par ad gmat c der vat ves,
Acc gombt / Dat . gombnak, et c. , wou d be homonymous w t h t he
f or ms g ven above. I t shou d be not ed t hat f r omt he v ewpo nt
of RS t s not a ways necessar y t o assume such a t ot a homo-
nymy, t s enough t o cons der t hat t he wor d- f or m- end - mba s
amb guous as t o t s mor pho og ca st r uct ur e: e t her - mb + POSS
or t he r oot - st emend - mba. Th s amb gu t y makes unamb guous
mor pho og ca ana ys s mposs b e r ght f r om t he out set . No-
t ce t hat n t he case of pa r s such as gomb - gomba t s not
of much he p f t he d ct onar y s consu t ed: t her e bot h f or ms
can be f ound as r oot st ems, t her ef or e a semant c ana ys s of
t he message must st ar t bef or e t he beg nn ng of t he mor pho o-
g ca pr ocess ng. I n t he case of nat ve sender s and addr essees,
one m ght be ab e t o assume t hat ' t hey know whet her t s a
quest on of a but t on or a mushr oom' , t hat s, t hey st ar t t he
mor pho og ca ana ys s by way of a semant c one - t h s s r e-
f er r ed t o by t he assumpt on ' t hey know' . That t he s t ua-
t on s not t hat s mp e s c ear y shown by RS.
I n what f o ows we sha not cons der r oot st ems end ng
n vowe s s nce t hey nat ur a y cont nue t o be mod f ed by t he
e ement | wh ch f u f s t s anc ent f unct on: t f s n a
h at us ( cf . a ma ' app e' - a m| a ' h s/ her app e' ) . St ems end-
ng n s b ant consonant s w a so be om t t ed as t hey can-
not be f o owed by | f or phonet c r easons. Thr ough t he adop-
t on or non- adopt on of | , t he r est of t he consonant a st ems
( t her e ar e mor e t han t en t housand such st ems n t he ED a one)
show neat y wher e t was necessar y t o nd cat e t he st emsepa-
r at e y f or RS, wher e t her e was gr eat er need t han e sewher e,
et c. Her e ar e some f act s t o ust r at e t h s po nt : ( ) 40%
of a ve ar st ems under nvest gat on ar e mod f ed by | , wh e
on y 15%of a pa at a st ems t ake | ( t he r eason f or t h s
shou d be c ear f r omt he above ana ys s) , ( ) 27%of t he e e-
ment s t hat can on y be used as nouns r equ r e t he e ement | .
E ement s t hat , n add t on t o f unct on ng as nouns, can a so
f unct on as ad| ect ves r equ r e | _ n 74%of t he cases ( t must
be emphat ca y po nt ed out t hat t s r ea y a quest on of
nouns her e) . ( ) E ement s mod f ed by f r equent y occur r ng
or pr oduct ve suf f xes, of wh ch hundr eds or t housands can be
f ound n t he KD, r equ r e | on y n 0- 10% of t he cases. E ement s
w t h ess pr oduct ve suf f xes t ake | n 25- 50% of t he cases,
wher eas t hose w t h unpr oduct ve suf f xes a most a ways demand
| . Obser v ng t he d f f er ent k nds of suf f xed f or ms t oget her ,
one f nds t hat mer e y 2. 5% of t hem r equ r e t he e ement | , n
cont r ast w t h t he 66%of suf f x ess r oot - nouns: t s c ear
t hat a suf f x can | ust as unamb guous y nd cat e t he wor d end
as t he e ement | . Fr equent wor d- ends of f or e gn or g n ( most y
Lat n: - or , - um, et c. ) occupy a char act er st c m dd e pos t on
n t h s r espect : 28%r equ r e | , cons der ab y mor e t han suf f xed
f or ms of nat ve or g n do, but cons der ab y ess t han r oot
st ems w t h a comp et e y ' nd v dua ' wor d- end do. ( v) Wher eas,
as has been seen, 66%of r oot - nouns r equ r e t he e ement | , t h s
per cent age s on y 33. 5%among compounds cons st ng of t wo or
mor e st ems. One wou d expect t o f nd t he same per cent age w t h
compounds as w t h r oot - nouns, s nce, af t er a , t he same r oot -
nouns ent er nt o compounds. But , as can be seen, t h s s not
t he case: f r equent post er or const t uent s n compounds nd ca-
t e t he wor d- end near y as unamb guous y as a suf f x wou d. ( Mor e
pr ec se y, as f r equent wor d- ends of f or e gn or g n, cf . t he
above numer ca dat a. ) ( v) I f , f or h st or ca r easons, a st em
443
suf f er s some change bef or e t he possess ve suf f x, | never
appear s. For examp e, f m ' f m' - f m| e ' h s/ her f m' ,
wher e | shows up ( not ce, nc dent a y, t hat - 1m s a r at h-
er unusua consonant c ust er n f na pos t on n Hungar an) ,
but t r e em ' pat ence' - t r e me ' h s/ her pat ence' , w t hout
a | , f or t he a t er nat on of t he st ems t r e em - tre em unamb -
guous y nd cat es t he wor d- end.
The ast examp e shows t hat RS can pr ov de a r at ona ex-
p anat on f or cer t a n phenomena t hat ot her w se appear t o be
unaccount ab e f or ( why f m| e but t r e me n t he case of t he
same f na c ust er - 1m) . S m ar y, pa r s ke b ' f oot , eg'
- b a ' h s/ her f oot ' , w t hout | , but comb ' t h gh' - comb | a ' h s/
her t h gh' , wher e | _ appear s or ab ak ' w ndow' - ab aka ' h s/ her
w ndow' , but bar ack ' apr cot ' - bar ack| a ' h s/ her apr cot ' ,
et c. , appear ed t o be ncompr ehens b e. The r u e s t h s: when
a exeme ends n one s ng e consonant , e. g. b, k, et c. , | _ does
not show up. I n cases when t he consonant c ust er at t he end of
t he st em s a r eady d f f cu t t o pr onounce, t he e ement | s
added t o t he st em. Th s r esu t s n monst r uous consonant c us-
t er s, e. g. , - mb| - , - ck| - . Th s f act s a t he mor e not ewor t hy
because n Hungar an, n cont r ast t o t he ne ghbor ng S avon c
anguages and Ger man, consonant c ust er s ar e nf r equent ow ng
t o phonet c const r a nt s. A so, consonant s ar e of t en om t t ed or
vowe s added t o such consonant c ust er s n oanwor ds. Obv ous-
y, mor pho ogy nt er f er es her e n a f or cef u way and cr eat es
c ust er s wh ch wou d ot her w se be phonet ca y nconce vab e.
F na y, one must not e t hat a r e at ve y ar ge number of
exemes ex st n wh ch t her e s an a t er nat on bet ween t he pr e-
sence or absence of | . ( See be ow, 2. 4. 3. ) I n t hese cases, t
s not c ear whet her t hese exemes shou d be cons der ed def ec-
t ve or not . Depend ng on our dec s on, e t her | may nd cat e
t he unusua st emend ng or | s super f uous.
2. 4. 3. Two f ur t her comment s can be made on t he ef f ect of RS
f r omt he synchr on c po nt of v ew.
444
As cou d be seen under 1. , cont empor ar y t ext s cont a n
pa at a and ve ar e ement s n a r e at ve y ba anced pr opor t on,
and t he same s t r ue of nouns occur r ng n t hese t ext s. One get s
a d spr opor t onat e p ct ur e, however , f t he appear ance of |
af t er consonant s s cons der ed: n t ext s of cons der ab e engt h
(as n t he who e of t he her o c ep c ent t ed To d ment oned
ear er ) , | does not even occur af t er consonant s n t he case of
pa at a st ems.
Fr om a ex co og ca po nt of v ew t he f o ow ng r emar k
can be made. The KD cont a ns appr ox mat e y 35, 000 nouns and e -
ement s t hat , n add t on t o f unct on ng as some ot her par t of
speech, can a so f unct on as nouns. About 1500 wor ds of t h s
gr oup can have a t er nat ve end ngs ( pa at a or ve ar , possess ve
suf f x w t h a | or w t hout one, and ot her a t er nat ons) n some
of t s f or ms. Th s 4%must be r egar ded as an unso ved pr ob em:
t he mor pho og ca ' aut omat on' must , of cour se, oper at e unamb -
guous y by g v ng on y one par t cu ar f or m. I f t hese 1500 e e-
ment s ar e t aken as equa t o 100, t becomes ev dent t hat 12%
of t hem f uct uat e as t o VH and 6 8%accor d ng t o t he pr esence
or absence of | .. F uct uat ons of any ot her t ype need not be
ment oned n t he pr esent cont ext . I n sum, t hen, t he ma n sour ce
of unso ved mor pho og ca pr ob ems n cont empor ar y Hungar an
must be sought n t he spher e of RS, r at her t han n t hat of VH.
The a en env r onment , wh ch has ex st ed f or mor e t han a m -
en um, has mer e y changed t he ma n cond t on of VH and t he
anguage syst emhas been ab e t o so ve t he concom t ant pr ob-
ems r e at ve y unamb guous y t hr ough t he r eor gan zat on of
t he VH ' aut omat on' . RS, on t he ot her hand, causes a ma| or pr ob-
embecause a new r u e had t o be cr eat ed.
Ref er ences
Ant al , Lszl ( 1961) A magyar eset r endszer ( The Hungar i an Case
Syst em) , Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad.
Ohe, M. von der ( 1978) Vokal st r ukt ur und ' Vokal har moni e' der
ungar i schen St ammwr t er , Di sser t at i on, Lei pzi g: Uni ver si t y
of Lei pzi g.
Papp, Fer enc ( 1967) "A magyar szoki ncs gpi f el dol gozsnak egyes
er edmnyei s t ovbbi pr obl mi "( Some r esul t s of , and f ur -
t her pr obl ems i n, t he comput er anal ysi s of t he Hungar i an
wor d- st ock) , A magyar nyel v t r t net e s r endszer e ( The Hi s-
t or y and Syst em of t he Hungar i an Language) , S. I mr e and I .
Szat hmr i , eds. , Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad, 518- 22.
Papp, Fer enc ( 1975) A magyar f nv par adi gmat i kus r endszer e
( The Par adi gmat i c Syst em of t he Hungar i an Subst ant i ve) ,
Budapest : Akadmi ai Ki ad.
Papp, Fer ene ( 1977) "Nekot or ye kol i est vennye pokazat el i ven-
ger ski x i r usski x t ekst ov na ur ovne f onem", Sl avi ca XI V,
( Debr ecen) 67- 73.
Szpe, Gyr gy ( 1958) "Vegyes magnhangzj u szavai nk i l l eszke-
dsnek kr dshez" (On cho ce of suf f xes n t he case of
exemes w t h m xed vowe s) , I n: Magyar hangt an do gozat ok
( Paper s on Hungar an Phonet cs) , L. Benko, ed. , Budapest :
Akadm a K ad, 105- 29.
SUB| ECT OR TOPI C I N HUNGARI AN: SOME PSYCHOLI NGUI STI C EVI DENCE
TO I NCREASE THE CONFUSI ON
Csaba P h
1. I nt r oduct or y r emar ks
1. 1 The t r ad t ona pr ob em of d f f er ent at ng bet ween " og -
ca " , "gr ammat ca " and "psycho og ca " sub| ect has once mor e
become a f avor t e t op c of ngu st c d scuss ons dur ng t he
ast decade. The t er m no ogy s as conf used as t ever had
been; some aut hor s pr ef er t o t a k about ' t op c' and ' comment ' ,
ot her s about ' t heme' and ' r heme' , wh e st ot her s about
' g ven' and ' new nf or mat on' . I t wou d be t oo amb t ous t o
g ve even a t er m no og ca over v ew of t hese var ous concept s
pr oposed t o char act er ze "t hemat c st r uct ur e" n anguage.
( For a good r ev ew and ana ys s of t hese d f f er ent appr oaches,
see Chaf e ( 1976) and . K ss ( 1979) ) .
The pur pose of t he pr esent paper s t o g ve an account
of a psycho ngu st c exper ment on t he r e at ve mpor t ance
of sub| ect and t op c n t he nt er pr et at on of anaphor a n Hun-
gar an. I t s hoped t hat t he exper ment a ev dence about n-
t er pr et at on per f or mance wou d g ve some f ur t her ar gument s
about t he r e at ve r o e of t hese t wo gr ammat ca concept s n
t he st r uct ur e of Hungar an.
I n t h s cont ext t s wor t h t o ment on t hat t he d f -
f er ent concept ons about t hemat c st r uct ur e ar e based ma n y
on t he nt u t ons of soph st cat ed ngu st s, and t her e s a
gr eat dea of psycho og ca specu at on connect ed w t h t hese
pr ob ems. A par ad gmat c examp e s t he char act er zat on of
g ven nf or mat on as t he t h ng t he speaker pr esupposes t o be
n t he "consc ousness" of t he st ener at t he moment of t he
ut t er ance ( Chaf e ( 1976) ) .
1. 2. Th s conf us on ca s f or psycho ngu st c nvest gat ons
of t he r e at ed phenomena, espec a y f we t ake nt o account
t he ar gument s r a sed aga nst t he unr e ab t y of t he n-
gu st ' s nt u t on when dea ng w t h such soph st cat ed n-
gu st c d st nct ons ( see Bever ( 1971) , Labov ( 1971) ) . However ,
f act or s w t h n t he deve opment of exper ment a psycho ngu s-
t cs have a so p ayed a par t n t he ncr ease of emp r ca wor k
n t h s ar ea. The deve opment of mode s of sent ence ver f ca-
t ons, and t hose of nf or mat on nt egr at on n under st and ng
connect ed d cour se, has made t appar ent t hat some k nd of
"t hemat c or gan zat on" has t o be cons der ed t o exp a n t he
exper ment a r esu t s. To ment on | ust one examp e: Hor nby
1974 has c ear y shown, t hat t he t hemat c st ur ct ur e of a sen-
t ence nf uences t he at t ent on of sub| ect s when t hey compar e
sent ences aga nst p ct ur es pr esent ed f or a shor t t me ( . e.
aga nst t he st at e of af f a r s r epr esent ed by t he p ct ur es) .
I n c ef t sent ences f or examp e ( I t s t he boy who s pet t ng
t he cat ) , t her e s a t endency t o check on y t he t r ut h va ue
of t he new nf or mat on (I s t a boy?) , t ak ng t he g ven n-
f or mat on f or t r ue. That s t o say, pr esuppos t ons ar e n
f act t r eat ed as pr esuppos t ons by t he sub| ect s.
Her ber t C ar k and h s cowor ker s ( C ar k and C ar k ( 1977) ,
C ar k and Hav and ( 1977) ) have e abor at ed an amb t ous gener a
t heor y on t he bas s of s m ar exper ment s. The essence of
t he t heor y ( t he "g ven - new cont r act ") s a cogn t ve con-
ver sat ona post u at e: t he speaker has t o const r uct h s sen-
t ences n such a way as t o enab e t he st ener t o r ecover
one un que ant ecendent n h s memor y f or t he g ven nf or mat on
SUB| ECT OR TOPI C I N HUNGARI AN
449
of a sent ence, and t h s ant ecendent shou d be t he nt ended
one. On t he ot her end, t he st ener a ways d v des t he sen-
t ence nt o a g ven and a new par t , sear ches f or an ant e-
cedent n h s memor y f or t he g ven par t , and at t aches t he
new nf or mat on t o t h s "node" n h s memor y.
Ou t e a f ew phenomena of compr ehens on ar e account ed
f or by t h s mode . Spec f ca y, t he mode nc udes some
pr ed ct ons - par t y suppor t ed by exper ment a dat a - about
t he r e at onsh p bet ween t he g ven- new st ener st r at egy and
t he nt er pr et at on of anaphor c pr onouns. We sha r et ur n t o
some of t hese at er . At t he moment , t suf f ces t o po nt out
t hat wh e t h s mode exp c t y r e at es t hemat c or gan zat on
t o t he nt er pr et at on of anaphor a n a psycho ngu st c f r ame-
wor k by emphas z ng gener a nf or mat on pr ocess ng pr nc p es,
t neg ect s t he poss b e r e evance of nt er - ngua d f f er ences
n t he pr ocess.
Some f act s and t heor es about anaphor a n Hungar an
2. 1. Among t he ngu st c appr oaches t o t he ana ys s of t hema-
t c st r uct ur e, one of t he most nt er est ng ones s t he t ypo-
ogy pr oposed by L and Thompson ( 1976) . I n t he r t heor y, one
consequence of t op c pr om nence as opposed t o sub| ect pr om nence
n cer t a n anguages s r e at ed t o cor ef er ence.
They suggest t hat n t op c- pr om nent anguages t s
t he t op c r at her t han t he sub| ect t hat t r gger s of f de e-
t ons n t he case of cor ef er ence.
I n Hungar an, t her e ar e sever a phenomena r e evant t o
t h s ssue. The bas c phenomena concer n de et ons and pr onom -
na zat ons of r epeat ed sub| ect s. Noun phr ases r epeat ed n
sub| ect pos t ons ar e de et ed acr oss sent ence boundar es as
we as w t h n one sent ence, as seen n ( 1) . ( Pr ov s ona y,
we sha mean by "sub| ect " t he noun phr ase n t he nom nat ve
case. )
( 1) A f meg smer t e a f er f t . Odament hozz.
t . ' The boy r ecogn zed t he man. Went - over t o- h m'
On t he ot her hand, f a pr ev ous nonsub| ect NP appear s
as sub| ect n t he f o ow ng sent ence, t s pr onom na zed t o
a demonst r at ve pr onoun: az ( ' t hat ' ) , as seen n examp e 2
be ow.
( 2) A ny sr get t e a f t . Az megr t et t e mi r l van sz.
l i t . ' The gi r l hur r i ed t he boy. That r eal i zed what i t was
about '
2. 2. Ther e ar e sever al possi bi l i t i es t o account f or t he basi c
r egul ar i t i es i n t hi s cont r ast i ve use of anaphor i c el ement s.
( The zer o i s cl ear l y an anaphor i c el ement her e; i t st ands f or
t he nomi nat i ve t hi r d per son per sonal pr onoun whi ch i s mani f est
i n cont r ast i ve and emphat i c posi t i ons onl y. ) I n a pr evi ous
paper ( Pl h and Radi cs ( 1976) ) , an i nt er pr et at i on based on t he
not i on of subj ect was suggest ed wi t hi n t he f r amewor k of t he
gener at i ve St andar d Theor y.
The t hr ee basi c r ul es of t hi s model can be summar i zed
i nf or mal l y as f ol l ows:
I . I f a deep st r uct ur e subj ect i s r ef er ent i al l y i dent i cal
wi t h t he subj ect of t he pr evi ous sent ence, i t has t o be
del et ed i n t he second sent ence. ( See ' t he boy' i n 1. )
I I . I f t he subj ect i n a sent ence i s r ef er ent i al l y i dent i cal
wi t h a nonsubj ect NP i n t he pr evi ous s ent ence, i t appear s
as t he demonst r at i ve pr onoun a_z ( ' t hat ' ) i n t he second sen-
t ence. ( See ' t he boy' i n 2. )
3. Al l ot her r epeat ed r ef er ent i al l y i dent i cal NPs ar e pr o-
nomi nal i zed as per sonal pr onouns. ( See ' t he man' - ' t o- hi m'
i n ( 1) . )
Thi s account has sever al i nher ent weak poi nt s , one of
whi ch shoul d be ment i oned her e. Thi s i s t he case of sequences
wher e t he f i r st sent ence cont ai ns an exper i encer and an obj ect ,
r eal i zed i n Hungar i an wi t h cer t ai n ver bs as dat i ve and nomi na-
451
t ve, r espect ve y. ( About t he exper encer n Hungar an, see
Fr ed ( 1976) ) . I n t hese s ent ences , t he neut r a wor d or der s
t he one w t h t he dat ve exper encer at t he beg nn ng of t he
sent ence, ke n ( 3) and ( 4) .
( 3) A t anr nak kt f a van.
t . ' The t eacher +dat t wo boys + poss s ' .
( 4) A sz nsznek t et szet t a r endezo.
t . ' The act or +dat ked t he pr oducer '
The nt er est ng po nt f or us s' t he f act , t hat f sent ences
ke ( 3) - ( 4) ar e f o owed by anaphor c f or ms , t he zer o sub-
| ect s cor ef er ent w t h t he exper encer n t he pr ev ous sen-
t ence, and t he demonst r at ve pr onoun ( DP) w t h t he nom nat ve.
Thus , f ( 4) s f o owed by ( 5) ( a) , ' t he act or ' s t he agent
n sent ence ( 5) , wh e f ( 5) ( b) f o ows ( 4) , t hen ' t he pr o-
ducer ' g ves deas f or t he act or .
( 5) ( a) M nden nap | t et eket adot t nek .
t . ' 0 Ever y day new deas gave h m. '
( 5) ( b) Az m nden nap | t et eket adot t nek .
t . ' That ever y day new deas gave h m' .
Const r uct on ( 5) ( a) shows t hat t he gr ammat ca f act or gov-
er n ng de et on can n no way be t he sur f ace sub| ect , t hat s
t o say, t he sur f ace st r uct ur e nom nat ve . One can f nd an a -
t er nat ve exp anat on f or t he behav or of t hese sent ences n
some semant c not ons ( we sha r et ur n t o t h s at er on) , or
t he exper encer can be t r eat ed as ' deep sub| ect ' n t he
St andar d Theor y. A t h r d a t er nat ve wou d be t o make use of
t he concept of t op c : one cou d ar gue t hat t s t he r epeat ed
t op c t hat s de et ed r at her t han t he r epeat ed sub| ect .
2. 3. I t s | ust t h s t ype of nt er pr et at on t hat was put
f or war d n t he d sser t at on of Kat a n E. K ss ( 1979) . I n ac-
cor dance w t h her gener a gr ammat ca concept on, wh ch
emphas zes t he r o e of t op c n t he or gan zat on of Hungar an
Top c s used her e as a pur e y synt act c t er m; t denot es
t he unst r essed n t a ( sequence of ) comp ement ( s) n a sent ence.
sent ences, she pr oposes t he f o ow ng r u es t o account f or
sent ence pa r s ke ( 1) and ( 2) .
I . De et e t he t op c f t s cor ef er ent w t h t he t op c or
w t h t he sub| ect of t he pr ev ous sent ence. I n cases of con-
f ct bet ween t hese t wo poss b e nt er pr et at ons - when t he
sub| ect s not t op c n t he f r st sent ence - she suggest s
t hat t he t op c gover ns t he nt er pr et at on.
I I . I f an NP "has sever a synt act ca y poss b e ant ecendent s
and s cor ef er ent w t h t he nonsub| ect of t he pr ev ous c ause"
( . K ss ( 1979, p. 163) ) t s r ea zed as a demonst r at ve
pr onoun. DP s a so used when a pr ev ous non- t op c appear s
as t op c.
The t op c- cent er ed mode suggest s about t he same ef f ect s
concer n ng t he per sona pr onouns as t he ot her , sub| ect - cen-
t er ed one. I n t h s paper one ma n d f f er ence shou d be em-
phas zed bet ween t he t wo concept ons: wh e t he f r st r e es
on t he not on of sub| ect , t he second one s based on t he no-
t on of t op c n exp a n ng t he se ect ve use of anaphor c
dev ces n Hungar an. However , bot h nt er pr et at ons ncor -
por at e t he poss b e r e evance of t he ot her f act or . The mode
based on t he sub| ect g ves some a owance f or t he t op c, a -
t hough not n t he bas c gr ammat ca mode . The mode was
supp ement ed by some deas about t he r ecover y pr ocedur e t he
st ener uses when he nt er pr et s sent ences w t h anaphor c
e ement s. I n t h s per cept ua mode t he t op c pos t on of t he
deep st r uct ur e sub| ect was suggest ed t o be an mpor t ant sur -
f ace c ue f or t he nt er pr et at on pr ocess. And, as t has
a r eady been ment oned, t he dat ve- exper encer const r uct ons
can a so be t r eat ed by us ng t he concept of t op c.
I n t he t op c- cent er ed mode , t he r e evance of t he
sub| ect s ncor por at ed n t he bas c r u es t hemse ves, as
a r eady nd cat ed.
SUB| ECT OR TOPI C I N HUNGARI AN 453
3. A s mp e exper ment on t he f act or s det er m n ng t he nt er -
pr et at on of anaphor a n Hungar an
3. 1. Some ev dence about t he r e at ve we ght of sub| ect and
t op c n anaphor c r ef er ence can be obt a ned by act ua nt er -
pr et at on per f or mance of compar at ve y na ve sub| ect s. Th s
s a wor t hw e ent er pr se even w t h a s mp e met hodo ogy,
because a ma| or par t of t he ev dence suppor t ng t he gr ammat -
ca mode s a r eady comes f r om nt er pr et at on dat a - f r omt he
ngu st s. Fur t her mor e, s nce anaphor c r ef er ence s n-
f uenced by pr agmat c f act or s, t he danger of us ng pr agmat ca -
y " nf at ed" examp es as ev dence f or one t heor y or t he ot her
can be avo ded on y f we use syst emat ca y des gned ser es
of examp es.
The r e evant r esu t s of a p ot exper ment w be
summar zed be ow, w t hout go ng nt o t he t echn ca det a s
of pr esent at on and dat a pr ocess ng( f or a det a ed exper -
ment a account , see P h ( 1979) ) . I t has t o be ment oned at
t he out set t hat t he exper ment or g na y was not p anned
w t h t he a mt o cont r ast t op c and sub| ect .
I t s or g na pur pose was t o t est t he r e evance of t he
sub| ect - cent er ed mode , w t h an add t ona emphas s on wor d
or der ef f ect s. Ther ef or e, t he d f f er ent sent ence pa r s used
n t he exper ment do not exhaust a t he wor d or der s and
ot her var ab es wh ch wou d be r e evant t o t he sub| ect - t op c
pr ob em.
3. 2. Summar y of t he pr ocedur e and t he des gn of t he st mu us
mat er a
The nvest gat on st ar t ed w t h t he const r uct on of a
st of sent ence pa r s cons st ng of 25 t okens. The st
cons st ed of f ve t okens of each f or f ve d f f er ent r e a-
t onsh ps bet ween t he t wo sent ences of a pa r . The d f f er ent
r e at onsh ps w be d scussed t oget her w t h examp es be ow;
n each pa r , t he f r st sent ence cont a ned sever a ( t wo or
454
t hr ee) def i ni t e NPs wi t h a head noun, whi l e i n t he second
sent ence, one or t wo i nst ances of anaphor i c cor ef er ence
wi t h t he f i r st sent ence wer e used. The subj ect of t he second
sent ence was al ways ei t her del et ed or pr onomi nal i zed t o DP,
and i n some pai r s, t her e was a t hi r d per son per sonal pr onoun
i n t he second sent ence as wel l .
Out of t hese 2 5 pai r s, 4 exper i ment al l i st s wer e con-
st r uct ed. The di f f er ent ver si ons enabl ed us t o var y t he wor d
or der i n t he f i r st sent ences of t he pai r s, and t o cont r ol t he
possi bl e pr agmat i c ef f ect s. For exampl e, i n one l i st t he same
sent ence pai r was pr esent ed wi t h a zer o subj ect i n t he second
sent ence, whi l e i n anot her wi t h a DP subj ect . Al l nouns i n
al l sent ences wer e [+ ani mat e] , and wi t h a f ew except i ons
[ +human] , i n or der t o r educe pr agmat i c ef f ect s.
Four gr oups of t went y subj ect s ( al l of t hem uni ver si t y
st udent s) wor ked wi t h each l i st . Thei r t ask was t o r ead each
sent ence pai r , and answer t he quest i on f ol l owi ng each pai r .
Wh - quest i ons wer e used, whi ch ei t her asked f or t he agent of
t he second sent ence or f or t he obj ect or anot her ar gument of
t he ver b.
I s t opi c or subj ect cor ef er ent wi t h t he zer o el ement ?
The f i r st t ype of sent ence pai r s r el evant t o answer i ng
t hi s quest i on was l i ke ( 6) . The f i r st sent ence cont ai ns a
t r ansi t i ve ver b; ver si on ( a) shows t he neut r al SVO wor d
or der , wher e t he t opi c i s at t he same t i me t he gr ammat i cal
subj ect and agent ; i n ver si on ( b) , ( OVS) , t he obj ect i n t he ac-
cusat i ve case i s t he t opi c of t he sent ence, ( i ) and ( i i ) ar e t he
second sent ences wi t h zer o and DP subj ect , r espect i vel y. I n t he
f our l i st s bot h ( a) - ( b) wer e combi ned wi t h bot h ( i ) - ( i i ) .
( 6) ( a) A sof r ki h vt a a t i t kr nt ( i ) Fe vet t e a kabt -
| t
t . ' The dr ver ca ed out t he secr et ar y. 0 Put on coat -
poss '
SUBJ ECT OR TOPI C I N HUNGARI AN 455
( 6) ( b) A t i t kr not ki h vt a a sof or . ( i i ) . Az f el vet t e a
kabt j t .
same as (a) but r ever se or der , same as (i ) but DP subj ect
The r esul t s of t he i nt er pr et at i on can be expr essed as av-
er age per cent ages of answer i ng t o t he quest i on wi t h t he gr ammat i -
cal subj ect or t he gr ammat i cal obj ect of t he f i r st sent ence.
( The quest i on i n ( 6) was: Who has put on t he coat ? Her e, ' t he
dr i ver ' as an answer woul d be subj ect , ' t he secr et ar y' obj ect . )
As shown i n t he t abl e, t he zer o el ement i s i n f act i n-
t er pr et ed t o cor r espond t o t he pr evi ous subj ect NP ( t he over al l
di f f er ence i s hi ghl y si gni f i cant ) . DP as a subj ect , on t he
ot her hand, i s mai nl y i nt er pr et ed as cor r espondi ng t o t he pr e-
vi ous nonsubj ect . ( See Tabl e 1)
Wor d or der , however , has an ef f ect her e: i f t he subj ect
i s [- t opi c] i n t he f i r st sent ence ( OVS wor d or der ) , t he mai n
ef f ect of subj ect vs. nonsubj ect i s l ess st r ong. Thi s i s si g-
ni f i cant i n t he case of DP sent ences: t he demonst r at i ve i s
somet i mes i nt er pr et ed t o be cor ef er ent wi t h t he pr evi ous
- t opi c ] subj ect .
Thi s ef f ect i s even st r onger i n sent ence pai r s wher e
t he f i r st sent ence cont ai ns an exper i encer - dat i ve such as
( 7) . ( The meani ng of t he l et t er s and number s i s t he same as
i n (6)).
( 7) ( a) A sebsznek i mponl t a pnzt ar osn. ( i ) . M nden nap
t . ' The sur geon + dat mpr essed t he e ment me et t e.
cash er . Ever y day passed
by her ' .
( 7) ( b) A pnzt r osn i mponl t a sebsznek. ( i i ) . Az mi nden nap
el ment mel l et t e.
The quest i on f or t hi s pai r was: Who went by? Tabl e 2 shows
t he aver age per cent age of answer i ng wi t h t he f i r st sent ence
exper i encer (' the sur geon' i n t hi s case) or sur f ace subj ect
( ' secr et ar y' ) t o t he quest i on. The t heor y oper at i ng wi t h t he
concept of deep subj ect pr edi ct s i n t hese cases t he zer o
456
subj ect i n t he second sent ence t o appear cor ef er ent wi t h t he
1
st
sent ence exper i encer , whi l e t he DP wi t h 1
st
sent ence
sur f ace subj ect , i ndependent l y of wor d or der . The t opi c-
cent er ed t heor y, on t he ot her hand, pr edi ct s t hat t he zer o
el ement i s cor ef er ent wi t h t he pr evi ous t opi c. Thus, depend-
i ng on wor d or der , i t woul d be cor ef er ent once wi t h t he ex-
per i encer and once wi t h t he sur f ace subj ect of t he f i r st sen-
t ence .
The val ues i n Tabl e 2 i ndi cat e t hat t he zer o subj ect i s
cor ef er ent wi t h t he pr evi ous exper i encer , i ndependent l y of
t he + t opi c] posi t i on of t he l at t er . Thi s cont r adi ct s an
expl anat i on of t he par al l el behavi or of agent - subj ect and
exper i encer - dat i ve const r uct i ons on t he basi s of t opi cal i t y.
One possi bl e expl anat i on of t he exper i encer ' s pecul i ar i t y
mi ght be sought al ong al ong semant i c/ pr agmat i c l i nes. One coul d
pr opose t hat t he exper i encer i n t hese sent ences i s mor e
"act i ve" t han t he sur f ace subj ect ( or , usi ng Gi vn' s t er mi no-
l ogy ( Gi vn ( 1976) , i t i s mor e " i nvol ved" ) . Pr oceedi ng wi t h t hi s
ar gument , one coul d suggest t hat t he agent i s mor e act i ve (or
' i nvol ved' ) t han t he exper i encer , t he exper i encer mor e act i ve
t han t he obj ect and t hi s act i vi t y hi er ar chy mi ght be r esponsi bl e,
at l east i n par t , f or t he cor ef er ence i nt er pr et at i on i n case
of zer o subj ect s.
Wor d or der i s an i mpor t ant f act or i n t he i nt er pr et a-
t i on of sent ences wi t h a demonst r at i ve pr onoun: i t woul d seem
t hat i n t hese sent ences DP was i nt er pr et ed as a si gn of change
of t opi c. I f t he exper i encer i s [ - t opi c] i n t he f i r st sent ence,
i t i s f r equent l y associ at ed wi t h DP.
Thus, whi l e zer o i s cor ef er ent wi t h t he most act i ve
el ement ( agent or exper i encer ) i n t he f i r st sent ence, t he DP
i s a si gn of change. I n t he case of agent i ve const r uct i ons
i t i s mai nl y a si gn of t he change of subj ect but i n cases
wher e t her e i s no agent i n t he ant ecedent , i t i s mor e l i kel y
t o be t aken as a si gn of t opi c change. Thi s r esul t s i n a spe-
ci al t ype of ambi gui t y: t he same [ - topi c ] exper i encer i s
i nt er pr et ed once as cor r espondi ng t o t he zer o el ement , once
457
as cor r espond ng t o t he DP.
3. 4. Some dat a on t hr ee NP sent ences
S nce bot h t he sub| ect and t he t op c- cent er ed mode s dea
on y w t h t he d f f er ent a ef f ect s of sub| ect - nonsub| ect or
t op c- nont op c on anaphor c phenomena, ne t her of t hemd f -
f er ent at es bet ween sever a poss b e nonsub| ect and/ or non-
t op c ant ecedent s. Ne t her t he sub| ect , nor t he t op c cen-
t er ed or g na mode has any c ear pr ed ct ons n cases wher e
af t er a sent ence w t h t hr ee NPs we f nd a sent ence cont a n ng
a DP sub| ect _+t op c | . (Of cour se, t hey bot h get bet t er pr e-
d ct ons f t he second sent ence has a zer o sub| ect , ) I n t he
exper ment , t he nt er pr et at on of t hr ee NP sent ence pa r s was
st ud ed w t h pa r s such as ( 9) .
( 9) ( a) A f est megl t t a a kmvest a mszer sszel .
l i t . ' The pai nt er not i ced t he mason wi t h t he mechani c' ,
( b) A f est megl t t a a mszer sszel a kmvest .
Az kr t t l e egy huszast .
l i t . ' That asked of i t a t went y f or i nt bi l l ' .
The f i r st sent ences consi st ed of an agent - subj ect i n
t opi c posi t i on, an obj ect and an addi t i onal - mai nl y adver bi al
NP. The wor d or der var i at i on moved t he obj ect and t he t hi r d
NP r el at i ve t o each ot her ( but never t o a t opi c or f ocus
posi t i on) .
Wi t h t hese sent ence pai r s, one hal f of t he subj ect s
had t o answer a quest i on about t he agent ( Who asked f or t he
money?) , t he ot her hal f had a quest i on about t he ot her
par t i ci pant i n t he second sent ence ( r epr esent ed by t he per sonal
pr onoun - Whom di d he ask t he money f r om?)
The subj ect and t opi c cent er ed t heor i es can onl y ex-
cl ude t he f i r st sent ence [ + t opi c] subj ect ("the pai nt er ")
f r omt he possi bl e candi dat es f or cor ef er ence wi t h DP ( si nce
t her e was a change of subj ect and/ or t opi c) . However , t he
exper i ment has demonst r at ed some non- r andom ef f ect s her e.
Fi r st , as i t i s seen i n Tabl e 3, t he exper i ment al subj ect s
458
t end t o answer much mor e f r equent y w t h t he pr ev ous sen-
t ence ob| ect t o t he quest on "Who" t han t o t e quest on " whom,
t o whom et c. " ( The number s n t he t ab e nd cat e aver age
per cent ages of answer ng w t h t he pr ev ous ob| ect t o t he
quest on n ( 9) - ' t he mason' . )
Th s s gn f cant ef f ect s a so nf uenced by wor d
or der . The t endency s much st r onger when t he ob| ect s n
t he ast pos t on n t he f r st sent ence. S nce t he ob| ect s
n _ | - t op c| | - f ocus| pos t on n bot h cases, t he r eason
f or t he wor d or der ef f ect s pr obab y a pur e y near one:
at east n such wr t t en t asks, t her e m ght be a t endency t o
assoc at e t he "change s gn" anaphor c DP w t h t he r ght most
e ement . Spr ngst on ( c t ed n C ar k and Hav and ( 1977) ) , n h s
gener a t heor y about pr onom na nt er pr et at on, suggest s an
exp anat on f or t h s ef f ect : t he sear ch f or ant ecedent s s
go ng near y backwar ds, and t he f r st poss b e cor ef er ent
wou d have an advant age n amb guous cases.
Anot her nt er est ng ef f ect f ound w t h t he 3 NP sent ence
pa r s s t hat t he per sona pr onoun n t he second sent ence s
nt er pr et ed as cor ef er ent w t h t he f r st sent ence sub| ect
+ t op c| above chance eve . I n t hr ee out of t he f ve sen-
t ence pa r s t h s ef f ect s ver y s gn f cant . I n t he t wo dev ant
cases t he de ct c ver bs n t he f r st sent ence may nf uence
t he nt er pr et at on. For examp e, f t he sequence s some-
t h ng ke t h s: The wa t er sent t he guest t o t he door man.
( t . ) That ( DP) asked t he t me f r omh m, t he de ct c compo-
nent n sent r a ses t he pr obab t y t hat t he per son sent was
t a k ng t o t he one t o whomhe was sent and not t o t he one who
sent h m.
W t hout cons der ng wor d or der ef f ect , t he r esu t s w t h
t h s m t ed samp e of amb guous 3 NP sent ences suggest t hat
n t he case of sever a ant ecedent s t her e s a t endency t o
assoc at e t he pr onouns w t h t he mor e bas c e ement s ( ob| ect
and sub| ect ver sus ot her noun phr ases) of t he pr ev ous sent ence,
w t h n t he r est r ct ons char act er z ng t he use of t hese ana-
phor c e ement s.
459
4. Specu at ve conc us ons
4. 1. Concer n ng t he r e at ve mpor t ance of sub| ect and t op c
n t he nt er pr et at on of anaphor c e ement s, t he r esu t s
suggest a s ght y asymmet r c nt er pr et at on pr ocedur e. I t
wou d seem t hat zer o sub| ect ( and zer o t op c) and t he DP pr o-
nom na sub| ect ar e t r eat ed d f f er ent y by nat ve Hungar an
speaker s. The r ecover y of t he ant ecedent f or a zer o sub| ect
s not nf uenced by t he t hemat c or gan zat on of t he pr ev ous
sent ence: t he zer o sub| ect t ends t o be nt er pr et ed as cor -
r espond ng t o t he pr ev ous most act ve or most nvo ved
par t c pant . I n t he case of sent ences w t h an exper encer ,
t h s does not cor r espond t o t he sur f ace st r uct ur e nom nat ve.
Somehow t he nt er pr et at on pr ocedur e uses nf or mat on about
t he bas c semant c char act er st cs.
However , t he nt er pr et at on of sent ences w t h a demon-
st r at ve sub| ect ( and at t he same t me t op c) s nf uenced
by t hemat c st r uct ur e. The DP n sub| ect pos t on s nt er -
pr et ed as a s gn of change; a change e t her - and ma n y -
of t he sub| ect or t hat of t op c.
Thus, on t he bas s of per f or mance cr t er a one can
conc ude t hat w t h r espect t o anaphor a dent f cat on- nt er -
pr et at on Hungar an s sub| ect pr om nent n some cases and
t op c pr om nent n ot her s, but t he r o e of sub| ect s mor e
expr essed. For mor e det a ed st at ement s f ur t her r esear ch
w t h mor e var ed mat er a s needed. Spec f ca y, t he
t hemat c pos t on of t he anaphor c e ement s has t o be var ed,
t oo, s nce n t h s exper ment sub| ect and t op c a ways co n-
c ded n t he second sent ence.
2. Fur t her st ud es have t o c ar f y t he r e at ve we ght of t wo
poss b e nf uenc ng f act or s n such nt er pr et at on t asks,
t oo. Spec f c nt er act ons may be nvo ved bet ween act ua
nf uences and nf uences based on t he gener a ngu st c
exper ence of t he speaker / hear er . Th s can best be shown n
connection w t h t op c. The exper ment r epor t ed her e has
demonst r at ed t he nf uence of t he act ua t hemat c or gan za-
t on of t he ant ecedent sent ence. However , anot her mpor t ant
det er m ner m ght be t he gener a "know edge" of t he speaker
about t he r e at ve f r equency of cer t a n "cases" n t op c
pos t ons. For examp e, f t he exper encer s mor e f r equent y
t op c t han ob| ect , t h s f act or can ver y we nf uence t he
dec s on of t he nt er pr et er when he f nds a sent ence w t h an
anaphor c sub| ect | +t op c | n t . I f not h ng speaks aga nst
t , he may t end t o g ve mor e chance f or t he pr ev ous expe-
r encer t o be t he t op c and t he sub| ect n t he second sent ence.
3. To r et ur n t o t he st ar t ng po nt of t h s paper , on t he bas s
of t he pr e m nar y r esu t s summar zed her e, t seems pr om -
s ng t o under t ake emp r ca st ud es concer n ng t he r e at on-
sh ps bet ween t hemat c st r uct ur e and anaphor a nt er pr et at on
n anguages wher e t hemat c st r uct ur e has a mor e pr onounced
r o e. Wh e n t he st ud es done on Eng sh mat er a t he
t hemat c or gan zat on, wor d or der and s m ar phenomena have
ma n y been pr oved t o nf uence speed of pr ocess ng and d r ec-
t on of at t ent on, t he Hungar an dat a suggest t hat n mor e
t op c- cent er ed anguages t he same char act er st cs have a
c ear er nf uence on t he "cont ent " of anaphor a nt er pr et at on.
Fur t her r esear ch, us ng mor e nat ur a st c nt er pr et at on t asks,
w t h t he cont r o of r ead ng and answer ng t me, may br ng t o
t he f or e nt er est ng nt er - ngua pr ocess ng cont r ast s.
Ref er ences
Bever , T. G. ( 1970) The cogn t ve bas s f or ngu st c st r uc-
t ur es. I n: Hayes, | . R. ( ed. ) : Cogn t on and t he deve opment
of anguage. New Yor k: W ey, 279- 352,
Chaf e, W. L. ( 1976) G venness, cont r ast veness, def n t eness,
sub| ect s, t op cs, and po nt of v ew. I n: L , C. N. ( ed. ) :
Sub| ect and t op c. New Yor k: Academ c Pr ess, 26- 55.
C ar k, H. and C ar k, E. ( 1977) Language and psycho ogy.
New Yor k: Har cour t Br ace.
C ar k, H. H. and Hav and, S. E. ( 1977) Compr ehens on and t he
g ven- new cont r ast . I n: Fr eed e, R. O. (ed. ) : D scour se pr oduc-
t on and compr ehens on. Nor wood, N. | . : Ab ex Pub sh ng
Co, 1- 40.
E. K ss, K. ( 1979) A magyar sz nt ax s egy gener at v t r anszf or -
mc s megkze t se. ' A gener at ve t r ansf or mat ona
appr oach t o Hungar an synt ax' . Unpub shed D sser t at on,
Budapest (I n Hungar an) ,
Fr ed , M. ( 1976) Ada kok a magyar akt vum s passz vum
e r shoz eset gr ammat ka ker et ben. ' Cont r but ons t o t he
descr pt on of Hungar an act ve and pass ve const r uct ons
n a case- gr ammat ca f r amewor k' . A t a nos Nye vszet
Tanu mnyok, XI , 93- 113. (I n Hungar an) ,
G v6n, T. ( 1976) Top c, pr onoun and gr ammat ca agr eement .
I n: L , C. N. ( ed. ) : Sub| ect and t op c. New Yor k: Academ c
Press, 151- 188.
Hor nby, P. A. ( 1974) Sur f ace st r uct ur e and pr esuppos t ons.
| our na of Ver ba Lear n ng and Ver ba Behav or , 13, 530-
538.
Labov, W. ( 1971) The st udy of anguage n t s soc a cont ext .
I n: F shman, | . A. ( ed. ) : Advances n soc o ngu st cs.
Vo . I . The Hague: Mout on, 152- 216.
L , C. N. and Thompson, S. A. , 1976. Sub| ect and t op c: A new
t ypo ogy of anguage. I n: L , C. N. ( ed. ) : Sub| ect and t op c.
New Yor k: Academ c Pr ess, 457- 489.
P h, Cs. ( 1979) Anaphor c dev ces and per cept ua st r at eg es
n psycho ngu st cs: Some r e evant dat a f r omt he Hungar an
anguage. I n: Kar dos, L. and P h, Cs. ( eds. ) : Pr ob ems
of t he r egu at on of act v t y. Budapest : Akadm a K ad,
P h, Cs. and Rad cs, K. ( 1976) "H nyos mondat " , pr onom -
na zc s szveg. | "Tr uncat ed sent ence" , pr onom na -
zat on and t ext | A t a nos Nye vszet Tanu mnyok, XI ,
261- 277. (I n Hungar an)
Tab e 1 .
st
Per cent age of choos ng t he sub| ect or t he ob| ect of t he 1
sent ence as cor ef er ent w t h t he anaphor c e ement n t he
second sent ence n agent - sub| ect sent ence pa r s
Wor d or der n cor ef e- Sub ect n second sent ence Wor d or der n
st
sent .
cor ef e-
r ent
Sub| ect n second sent ence Wor d or der n
st
sent .
cor ef e-
r ent

DP
SVO
sub| ect
ob| ect
95
5
16
84
OVS
sub| ect
ob| ect
79
21
38
32
bot h or der s
sub| ect
ob| ect
87
13
27
73
Tab e 2.
Per cent age of choos ng t he exper encer or t he sur f ace sub| ect
of t he f r st sent ence as cor ef er ent w t h t he anaphor c e ement
n t he second sent ence n sent ence pa r s w t h an exper encer -
dat ve const r uct on n t he f r st sent ence
Wor d or der n
1
st
sent .
cor ef e-
r ent
Sub| ect n second sent ence Wor d or der n
1
st
sent .
cor ef e-
r ent

DP
Exp. V S
Exp
Sub|
80
20
23
77
S V Exp.
Exp
Sub|
73
27
60
40
bot h or der s
Exp
Sub|
76
24
41
59
Tab e 3.
Per cent ages of us ng t he f r st sent ence ob| ect as cor ef er ent
w t h t he DP sub| ect and w t h t he ot her pr onom na ar gument
of t he ver b n t he second sent ence n 3 NP sent ence pa r s
Wor d or der n f r st
sent ence
st
1 sent ence cor ef er ent w t h
DP sub| ect Per sona pr onoun nonsub| ect
S- V- O- ot her NP
S- V- ot her NP - 0
57
81
28
17
bot h or der s 69 21
AFFI XED PERSON- MARKI NG PARADI GMS
A HI STORY AND TYPOLOGY*
Kat a n Rad cs
_. The a ms of t he nvest gat on
0. 1. I n a paper pub shed n 1964, W. S. A en put f or t h amp e
emp r ca ev dence demonst r at ng t hat , n gener a , t her e ex-
t s a gr eat number of par a e sms bet ween t r ans t ve and
possess ve const r uct ons; n par t cu ar , he ar gued t hat t he
sub| ect of ( pr mar y per f ect ve) t r ans t ve sent ences s bot h
f or ma y and semant ca y cor r e at ed t o t he possessor n pos-
sess on- sent ences or possess ve cont r uct ons.
Dr aw ng on A en' s mor e gener a c a m, I w at -
t empt t o show t hat t her e ar e f ur t her f unct ona , mor pho og -
ca , and synt act ca par a e sms bet ween t r ans t ve and pos-
sess ve const r uct ons. Name y, I w out ne a t ype of an-
guage n wh ch t he most s gn f cant ( t hough not t he on y) cor -
r e at on can be f ound, not bet ween t he sub| ect of t he t r ans -
t ve ver b and t he possessor , but bet ween t he af f xed per son-
mar k ng ( PM) par ad gms of t he t r ans t ve ver b, on t he one hand,
and t hose of t he possessed noun of possess ve const r uct ons,
on t he ot her . Af f xes of number w not be cons der ed n t he
*The wor k r epor t ed her e was n par t suppor t ed by a gr ant f r om
t he Resear ch Cent er f or t he Language Sc ences, B oom ngt on,
I nd ana.
paper . ( Ver ba or possess ve per son- mar k ng can be nt er -
pr et ed as agr eement f t her e s anot her const t uent n t he
synt act c st r uct ur e - - sub| ect , ob| ect , or possessor - - w t h
t he ver y same r ef er ence. A t hough t he quest on whet her t he
af f xes under cons der at on can be r egar ded as mor phemes of
agr eement or | ust as per son- mar ker s s pr obab y not unr e at ed
t o t he pr ob ems at ssue, t h s quest on w on y be dea t
w t h at one po nt n t he pr esent paper , and t her ef or e I w
a ways use t he mor e neut r a t er m ' per son- mar k ng' . )
The anguages t o be st ud ed have been se ect ed on t he
bas s of whet her t he per son of t he possessor s mar ked n an
af f xed f or m ( concer n ng t he anguages nvest gat ed, see
Append x 1) . I n t h s way, I r u ed out anguages n wh ch PMs
ar e exc us ve y, or pr edom nant y f r ee mor phemes ( t hat s,
possess ve pr onouns) .
0. 2. Fo ow ng t he usua pr act ce of t ypo ogy, I w f r st
sur vey t he cor r espondences bet ween t he ser a pr oper t es and
per son- mar k ng pat t er ns of t hese anguages. On t he bas s of
t hese cor r e at ons I w dr aw conc us ons f or t he h st or ca
pr ocesses of t he f or mat on and change of af f xed per son- mar k-
ng, as compar ed t o ot her t ypes of change.
The cor r e at ons I f ound bet ween ser a pr oper t es and
per son- mar k ng pat t er ns suggest t hat t he h st or y of t hese
par ad gms s t o be p aced w t h n t he VSX- SOV- TVX per od ( Sec-
t ons 1 and 2) . As t o mor e concr et e t ypes of change, I w
c a m t hat t hese par ad gms ar e f or med n a per od when t he
p acement of PM af f xes s pos t ona y dent ca w t h t hat of
ex ca NP comp ement s. Ther ef or e, suf f xed mar ker s w be de-
r ved f r omt he VSX per od and pr ef xed ones f r om t he SOV pe-
r od ( Sect on 3) .
I w ar gue t hat t s not necessar y t o nvo ve t op -
ca zat on pr ocesses n t he exp anat on of PM par ad gms f
we can sat sf act or y account f or t he or g n of t h r d per son
( zer o and non- zer o) af f xes ( Sect on 4) . On t he bas s of I an-
AFFI XED PERSON- MARKI NG PARADI GMS 469
guages t hat ar e n a st at e cr uc a f or t he h st or y of t he
af f xes, I w f or mu at e cond t ons f or t he f or mat on of
t ypes of per son- mar k ng par ad gms . I w ust r at e t he
f or mat on of t hr ee k nds of par ad gm t ypes - - pr onom na ,
adapt at ona , and pr epos t ona - - n var ous anguages ( Sec-
t on 5) . I w conc ude t hat t he f or mat on as we as t he
p acement of t he t h r d- per son mar ker may be r ad ca y d f f er -
ent f r omt hat of t he f r st and second per son af f xes ( Sec-
t on 6 ) .
Out n ng and nt er pr et ng t he phono og ca s m ar -
t es bet ween ver ba and possess ve par ad gms, I w ar gue
t hat t he d st r but on of ver ba par ad gms cor r esponds t o t he
er gat ve and nom nat ve pat t er ns of nom na case- syst ems
( Sect on 7) .
F na y ( Sect on 8) I w t r y t o mot vat e why t he pr es-
ent k nd of af f xed PM s mor e conser vat ve t han ser a change
n anguage, on bot h ngu st c and ant hr opo og ca gr ounds.
1. Cor r e at ons n t he pr oper t es of per son- mar k ng( PM) par a-
d gms
1. 1. Append x 2 cont a ns dat a f r om 19 anguages. Four of t he
ndexes ser ve t o det er m ne t he ser a t ype of t he anguage
( ( ) t he or der of pr mar y const t uent s, ( ) t he or der of t he
possess ve const r uct on, ( ) t he t ype of t he r e at ve c ause,
( v) t he p ace of case- mar k ng) and t hr ee of t hem f or t he de-
t er m nat on of t he r e evant pr oper t es of PM af f xes ( ( v) t he
p ace of t he PM af f x on t he possessor , ( v ) t s p ace on t he
ver b, ( v ) t he per son of wh ch comp ement s mar ked on t he
ver b) . I w now summar ze t he r e evant cor r e at ons sug-
A necessar y and suf f c ent cond t ons m ght be f or mu at ed
by compar ng t he pr oper t es and h st or ca changes of af f xed
per son- mar k ng anguages w t h t hose of anguages f r omwh ch
such par ad gms ar e absent .
gest ed by t hese par ad gms. The f r st cor r e at on cons st s
n t he f act t hat n each of t hese anguages, a PM n t he
possess ve const r uct on cooccur s w t h a ver ba PM.
1. 1. 1 I f t he possess ve per son- mar k ng par ad gm s af f xed
n a anguage, t hen t he ver ba per son- mar k ng par ad gm s
a so af f xed. The r ever sa of t h s t hes s does not ho d:
af f xed ver ba per son- mar k ng does not mp y af f xed posses-
s ve per son- mar k ng ( e. g. , Est on an, Fr ench, Ger man) .
The second emp r ca gener a zat on s a so nt u t ve y
obv ous :
1. 1. 2 I n anguages w t h af f xed possess ve per son- mar k ng
t he ver ba per son- mar k ng af f x s pos t ona y par a e ( . e.
pr ef x, nf x, or suf f x) t o t he possess ve one.
Th s second un ver sa does not r equ r e t hat , w t h n a
anguage, a PM af f xes shou d f o ow a s ng e pos t ona
pat t er n. I n f act n some anguages pr ef xes, suf f xes, and
nf xes can a be f ound. Never t he ess, t h s un ver sa ho ds
f or such m wed cases as we : n t hese anguages ( Ass n bo ne,
| aca t ec, B ackf oot ) t he mor phemes of t he same gr ammat ca
cat egor es ( number , per son, gender ) occupy t he same pos t ons
n t he possess ve and ver ba par ad gms ( or at east n a ma-
| or t y of ver ba par ad gms) .
1. 1. 3 The next obser vat on s not nt u t ve y pr ed ct ab e,
however . I n 17 cases out of 19, t he ver b agr ees not on y w t h
t s sub| ect but a so w t h t s ob| ect .
I t s h gh y pr obab e t hat n anguages w t h af f xed
possess ve per son- mar k ng t he ver ba pr ad gm mar ks t he per son
of mor e t han one comp ement ; n par t cu ar , not on y t he per son
of t he sub| ect but a so t hat of t he ob| ect .
Anot her not ewor t hy obser vat on s t hat n many cases
t her e s mat er a dent t y, or at east s gn f cant s m -
ar t y, bet ween t he phono og ca shape of t he possess ve
par ad gm and one or mor e ver ba par ad gms.
1. 1. 4 I t s h gh y pr obab e t hat n anguages w t h af f xed
possess ve per son- mar k ng t he phono og ca shape of t he pos-
sess ve par ad gm s dent ca , or s m ar , t o some or mor e
of t he ver ba par ad gms.
1. 2 The above obser vat ons can be g ven a br ef h st or ca
nt er pr et at on at t h s po nt . Un ver sa 1. 1. 1 obv ous y sug-
gest s t hat - - n case PM par ad gms ar e f or med and ost - - pos-
sess ve par ad gms e t her ar se and d sappear at t he same t me
as ver ba ones, or ver ba par ad gms come f r st and possess ve
par ad gms d sappear f r st . As t o f or mat on at east , Un ver -
sa s 1. 1. 2 and 1. 1. 4 suggest t hat t he t wo par ad gms ar se at
t he same t me and der ve f r om t he same sour ce. Lat er n t he
paper I w ar gue t hat we can a so set up a mor e exact chr o-
no ogy and e abor at on t han t h s and sket ch t he deve opment
of t hese par ad gms.
2. The pos t on of per son- mar k ng ( PM) af f xes and t he ser a
t ype of t he anguage
2. 1 As s we - known, af f xed PM s not one of t hose n-
gu st c pr oper t es t hat f ac t at e t he det er m nat on of t ype
f or any g ven anguage. That s, t her e s no r egu ar cor r es-
pondence bet ween t he ex st ence of PM af f xes and t he near
or der of ot her gr ammat ca mor phemes ( e. g. par t c es of ques-
t on, negat on, moda t y, and case mar ker ) and t he or der of S,
0 and V.
I nver se y t her e does seemt o be a cor r espondence bet ween
t he ser a t ype and t he pr esence of t he PM af f xes n quest on:
I have not f ound a s ng e pur e SVO anguage n wh ch t he per son
of t he possessor s af f xa y mar ked on t he possessed. Th s
mor pho- synt act c phenomenon s, t her ef or e, pr obab y ncons st -
ent w t h t he | o nt occur r ence of t he f o ow ng pr oper t es :
SVO, NG, NAd| , Post nom na RC,
Pr epos t ons f or case- mar k ng,
Aux ar y f or O, Neg, Mod.
2. 2 The d st r but on of t he ser a t ypes n anguages w t h
t he nvest gat ed af f xat on pat t er n s as f o ows :
SOV 10
TVX 5
VSX 4
I cl assed l anguages as TVX i f t he wor d or der was qui t e f r ee
but i f wi t h r espect t o t hei r ot her pr oper t i es, t hey l ooked
much l i ke SOV l anguages. Wi t h some l i cence Hungar i an has
been cl assed among t hese l anguages, t hough st r i ct l y, i t s
wor d or der may di f f er f r omTVX; t hi s di f f er ence i s evi dent
when a f ocussed const i t uent i mmedi at el y pr ecedes t he pr edi -
cat e ( see . Ki ss 1978) :
TVX: A kenyer - et meg- et t e Pet er .
t he br ead- Pr ef i x- at e Pet er
' As f or t he br ead, Pet er at e i t . '
TFVX: A kenyer - et a konyh- ban et t e meg Pet er
t he br ead- t he ki t chen- i n at e Pr ef i x Pet er
' As f or t he br ead, i t i s i n t he ki t chen t hat
Pet er at e i t . '
Thus af f i xed possessi ve PM appear s t o be most char act er -
i st i c of SOV l anguages, whi ch i s i n accor dance wi t h t hei r bas-
i cal l y aggl uni nat i ve char act er ( Vennemann 1974) . Never t hel ess,
t he hi st or y of t hese par adi gms r uns t hr ough t hr ee t ypol ogi cal
per i ods: VSX, SOV, and TVX.
2. 3 I n a det ai l ed and, t o some ext ent , empi r i cal l y suppor t ed
hypot hesi s Vennemann (19 74, 19 75) pr oposed t he f ol l owi ng
di r ect i ons of change bet ween l anguage t ypes :
Accept i ng hi s cl ai m , t he hi st or y of our par adi gms must be
2
Vennemann wor ked out hi s pr oposal pr i mar i l y f or t he SOV
TVX > SVO change; t he mot i vat i on he of f er s f or t he ot her
di r ect i ons i s r at her sket chy. I amsur e t hat , i n i t s pr esent
p aced and exp a ned w t h n t he VSX- TVX per od. I n or der t o
ear n mor e about t he h st or y of t hese par ad gms, however , t
s wor t hw e t o t ake a c oser ook at t he pos t on of af f xes
r e at ve t o t he st em.
2. 4 PM af f xes ar e a most a ways pr onom na n t he r or g n
(as shown by t he h st or ca nvest gat ons of many anguages)
and t he r f unct ons a so ev dence, at east , par t ca den-
t t y w t h t hose of pr onouns. I n most anguages t he pos t on
of pr onom na comp ement s s usua y dent ca t o t he pos t on
of ex ca NP comp ement s. For nst ance, t s pr obab e t hat
t he sub| ect w be f ound on t he same s de of t he ver b, r e-
gar d ess of whet her t s expr essed by a pr onoun or a ex ca
NP. To a sma er ext ent , t h s t r end seems t o ho d f or t he
ob| ect as we ( one of t he count er examp es s pr ov ded by
Fr ench) . Consequent y, one m ght expect t hat t he af f xes r e-
f er r ng t o t he sub| ect and t he ob| ect shou d nor ma y be f ound
on t he same s de of t he ver b as t he r espect ve ex ca NPs
( sub| ect and ob| ect ) . I n ana ogy w t h t h s, PM af f xes n pos-
sess ve const r uct ons ought t o be p aced on t he same s de as
t he ex ca NP possessor , t hat s, pr ef xed n SOV and suf -
f xed n VSX anguages. Never t he ess, some of t he dat a con-
t r ad ct t h s expect at on ( G vn 1971, I ngr am 1975) . As t o
ser a t ype and p ace of af f xat on, t he anguages n t he
samp e g ve t he f o ow ng d st r but on:
( f oot not e 2 cont nued) f or m, t a so eaves gaps: f or n-
st ance, t s qu t e conce vab e t hat we can post u at e d r ec-
t ons ot her t han t hose n h s f gur e; t hat we can r ef ne t he
causa r e at ons gover n ng changes: t hat t he oper at on of
"nat ur a " change w be necessar y t o be kept apar t f r omt he
changes r esu t ng f r om anguage cont act s. I n sp t e of a t h s,
however , Vennemann' s appear s t o be t he on y mode of change at
hand by wh ch ana ogous- ook ng h st or ca pr ocesses of genet -
ca y unr e at ed anguages can be gr asped.
The p ace of per son- mar k ng af f xes
Pr ef x Suf f x
SOV or TVX 4 10
VSX 2 2
I n t he SOV t ype we wou d obv ous y expect pr ef xes. TVX an-
guages ar e n many r espect s SOV- ke and t hus we m ght r egar d
s m ar pr ef x ng n t hose as we . I nst ead, we f nd t hat
out of 14 SOV and TVX anguages, 10 p ace t he af f x on | ust
t he oppos t e s de of t he ver b, wh e ha f of t he VSX an-
guages use pr ef xes and ha f of t hem suf f xes. ( Ass n bo ne
s r egar ded as a pr ef x ng SOV anguage s nce, a t hough t s
number mar ker s suf f xed, t he cat egor y of per son s expr essed
by pr ef xes. I n t he anguage m ss ng f r om t he t ab e, B ackf oot ,
we f nd per son- mar ker s n m xed pos t ons. )
2. 5 The cont r ad ct on r evea ed by t h s d shar mony obv ous y
needs t o be r eso ved somehow. One way t o r eso ve t s t o g ve
up t he c a m t hat per son- mar k ng af f xes ar e of pr onom na
or g n; a c a m t hat has been amp y suppor t ed by h st or ca
ev dence. Or , we may c a m t hat n anguages wher e t he p ace-
ment of af f xed mor phemes s d shar mon C w t h t he or der of
t he sent ent a const t uent s, t hese par ad gms wer e f or med n a
ser a t ypo og ca per od d f f er ent f r om t he one t he anguage
pr esent y shows; t hat s, t hey wer e f or med n a per od n
wh ch t he or der of t he const t uent s was compat b e w t h t he
p acement of t he af f xes we obser ve now ( G von 1971) . I n bot h
cases we ar e ke y t o encount er ser ous ob| ect ons. The at t er
a t er nat ve seems aspec a y vu ner ab e because, n t he v ew
These dat a ar e n accor dance w t h Lehmann' s ( 1973) c a m t hat
PM af f xes do not f o ow t he "p acement pr nc p e" , accor d ng
t o wh ch nom na and ver ba mod f er s - case- mar ker s, par t c es
of quest on, negat on, and moda t y - ar e p aced on t he oppo-
s t e s de of t he noun and t he ver b t han t he ex ca NP comp e-
ment s.
I have advanced, t he u t mat e cause of ser a t ype change s
t o be f ound n t he r educt on of wor d end ngs - and per son-
mar ker s ar e p aced pr edom nant y at t he ends of wor ds s nce
t hey ar e most y suf f xed. I t wou d seemqu t e unr easonab e
t o deny on t he ot her hand t he pr onom na or g n and nat ur e of
per son- mar k ng.
Nonet he ess, n t he f o ow ng sect ons I w t r y t o
ar gue n f avor of bot h of t hese a t er nat ves. I w at t empt
t o pr ove t hat n some anguages one member of t he par ad gm
( t he t h r d per son) s not d r ect y pr onom na n t s or g n,
and, f ur t her , t hat t he phenomenon of af f xed per son- mar k ng at
ssue changes mor e s ow y t han t he common y enumer at ed t ypo o-
g ca nd ces whose sum const t ut es g ven t ypes.
3. D r ect ons of t ypo og ca changes n t he anguages nvest -
gat ed
3. 1 I have a r eady ment oned t hat t he h st or y of af f xed PM
par ad gms s t o be p aced w t h n t he VSX- TVX per od. I n ac-
cor dance w t h t he d r ect ons po nt ed out by Vennemann we may
est ab sh a t r end n wh ch t he f or mat on of suf f xed per son-
mar ker s s dat ed f or t he VSX per od s nce n t hat ser a t ype
t he p ace of t he suf f xes s har mon c w t h t hat of ex ca or
pr onom na NPs. We c a mt hat t hese suf f xes sur v ve t he
change t o SOV ( f or some r eason t o be e abor at ed at er ) and,
f ur t her , t hat PM r ema ns suf f xed even f t he SOV anguage
deve ops TVX f eat ur es. The f o ow ng anguages w t h suf f xed
par ad gms r epr esent t hese t hr ee h st or ca per ods:
vsx
Agt a
Be a Coo a
SOV
Amhar c
Bur at
Esk mo ( Gr . )
Ouechua
Nenet s
Tat ar
_V_
Hungar an
S er r a M wok
S us aw
Take ma
476
3. 2 The d r ect ons of change n anguages w t h pr ef xed
par ad gms do not conf or m t o Vennemann' s mode , however , s nce
pr ef x ng s har mon c w t h t he SOV pat t er n, t s f or mat on
shou d be dat ed f r omt hat per od. Vennemann pr oposes a s ng e
d r ect on of change f r om SOV, t hat s, SVO t hr ough TVX. Af f xed
possess ve PM not be ng char act er st c f or pur e SVO, however ,
our par ad gms m ght not sur v ve t he SVO per od. Hav ng f ound
pr ef xed par ad gms n VSX anguages we ar e t hus f or ced t o pos-
t u at e an SOV VSX change t oo. The f o ow ng anguages wou d
be ong her e:
SOV > VSX
Ass n bo ne Azt ec
D egueno | aca t ec
Navaho
Ubykh
4. The or g n of per son- mar k ng ( PM) af f xes
4. 1 H st or ca and compar at ve nvest gat ons n numer ous
anguages have pr oved t hat t he r PM af f xes ar e of pr onom na
or g n. These pr onouns wer e f r st c t c zed and t hen agg u-
t nat ed t o t he st em. Suppor t f or t h s hypot hes s comes f r om
mor pho og ca phenomena n sever a anguages: unst r essed
pr onouns ndeed f or m a s ng e st r ess gr oup w t h t he ver b and
t he possessed wh e n add t on var ous k nds of phono og ca
nt er act ons ar e poss b e at t he boundar y of t wo mor phemes:
Fr ench | e demande. . .
| e cr o s. . .
| e t ' en pr e
The case of | aca t ec s much mor e comp cat ed t han t h s
c ass f cat on wou d suggest . The pr esence of pos t ona y
m xed af f xes makes t d f f cu t t o dec de whet her t h s an-
guage be ongs t o t h s gr oup of VSX anguages or t o t he f or mer
gr oup of VSX anguages.
AFFI XED PERSON-MARKING PARADIGMS
477
| ' ava s. . .
mon onc e
Eng sh I t o d you. . .
I ' ve got . . .
You know. . .
your p ct ur e. . .
Ther e s t t e doubt of a gener a t endency f or c t c za-
t on and subsequent agg ut nat on of unst r essed possess ve
and per sona pr onouns f or 1 and 2 per sons, but as soon
as we t ur n t o t he t h r d per son, t s qu t e d f f cu t t o see
why an over t pr onoun shou d get nt o t he possess ve or ver ba
const r uct on, even n cases when t he comp ement s of t he ver b,
or t he possessor , ar e a r eady expr essed w t h a ex ca NP .
I n ot her wor ds, t he phono og ca behav or of t hese unst r essed
pr onouns pr ov des a nat ur a exp anat on f or t hose cases n
wh ch per son- mar k ng s equ va ent t o pr onom na zat on; t
does not exp a n agr eement , however . Pr esumab y t h s s why
G vn ( 1975) t r aced back agr eement ( and mp c t y, a so
per son- mar k ng) t o t op ca zat on pr ocesses. H s "t op c- sh f t
r eana ys s as neut r a const r uct on" pr ocess wou d n f act
suf f ce t o mot vat e t he pr esence of over t PM af f xes n sen-
t ences w t h ex ca NPs.
4. 2 I pr opose t hat n t he anguages w t h t hese par ad gms
t her e s no need t o nvo ve t op ca zat on pr ocesses n t he
exp anat on of t he f or mat on of per son- mar k ng par ad gms;
t he r appear ance can be suf f c ent y mot vat ed on t he bas s
of t he above descr bed behav or of unst r essed pr onouns.
4. 2. 1 I t seems | ust f ab e t o gnor e t op ca zat on pr ocesses
because n t he over whe m ng ma| or t y of t hese anguages, at
east one ( sub| ect va or ob| ect va or bot h) t h r d per son
ver ba af f x s zer o. What may have happened n t hese par a-
d gms s t h s: t he f r st and second per son pr onouns wer e
agg ut nat ed t o t he ver b st emv a c t c zat on - but not h ng
ke t hat happened n t he t h r d per son. One r eason s t o be
f ound n t he f act t hat n many sent ences t he t h r d per son
comp ement s expr essed w t h a ex ca NP; anot her r eason s
t hat n some of t hese anguages t he t h r d per son pr onoun s
zer o. As a r esu t of agg ut nat on n 1 and 2 per son an
ncomp et e ver ba par ad gm s est ab shed: ncomp et e her e
cons st s n t he gap ef t by t he absence of s m ar agg ut na-
t on f or t he 3
r d
per son. I t s t h s gap wh ch pr esent - day n-
gu st s nt er pr et as a zer o mor pheme. Never t he ess, t he h s-
t or ca ant ecedent of t h s t heor et ca y post u at ed zer o s
not h ng. Thus G vn s r ght n c a m ng t hat " anguages wh ch
use zer o anaphor c pr onouns n t op c- sh f t const r uct ons, w
not deve op sub| ect - ver b or ob| ect - ver b agr eement " ( G vn 1975,
151) , s nce we have no r eason t o assume t hat , say, n a Hun-
gar an sent ence ke ' A vadsz l ' "t he hunt er shoot s" hi s-
t or i cal l y t her e i s a zer o agr eement mor pheme at t ached t o t he
ver b. I t i s l i kel y, however , t hat af f i xed per son- mar ki ng
par adi gms can devel op even i n l anguages i n whi ch t he cl i t i ci za-
t i on- aggl ut i nat i on pr ocess t akes pl ace sol el y i n t he f i r st and
second per sons. Never t hel ess, t her e ar i ses t he t heor et i cal
quest i on of when and why i t i s j ust i f i ed t o post ul at e a zer o
t hi r d per son mar ker i n such cases, wi t h r espect t o synchr oni c,
di achr oni c, and panchr oni c i nvest i gat i ons. I n t he f ol l owi ng
sect i ons I wi l l cont i nue t o use t he t er m "zer o" however , i n
acknowl edged di sr egar d of a possi bl e answer t o t hi s quest i on.
4. 2. 2 How can we now account f or t he cases ( whi ch ar e numer -
ous) wher e t he t hi r d per son member of t he ver bal par adi gm i s
not zer o? I cl ai m t hat pr eci sel y i n t hi s case t he i mmedi at e
hi st or i cal ant ecedent of t he over t af f i x i s not a pr onoun
( see 5. 2. and 5. 3. ) , but t he r esul t ( 1) of an adapt at i on of
a suf f i x whi ch bear s speci al f unct i ons, or ( 2) a case- mar ker
t hat has been somehow r et ai ned i n t he synt act i c st r uct ur e.
4. 2. 3 Not i ce t hat f or some t i me we have been negl ect i ng
possessi ve par adi gms. I n t hese par adi gms we onl y f i nd a zer o
AFFI XED ERSON- MARKI NG PARADI GMS 479
t hi r d per son af f i x i f t he noun i s i nher ent l y possessed
( Assi ni boi ne) . Thi s i s i n f act qui t e easy t o under st and si nce
conver sel y, nouns whi ch woul d ot her wi se not be i nt er pr et ed
as bei ng possessed, must evi dence an over t mar ker t o si gnal
such pr ovi sor y i nher ence. Never t hel ess, t he occur r ence of
over t t hi r d per son mar ker s i n addi t i on t o l exi cal possessor s
needs t o be expl ai ned her e, t oo. The t opi cal i zat i on hypot hesi s
wi l l not wor k si nce t opi cal i zed possessi ve const r uct i ons ar e
ver y r ar e, or ar e even ungr ammat i cal i n some l anguages. Thus
t her e i s no r eason t hat "t opi c- shi f t > neut r al r eanal ysi s"
i n possessi ve const r uct i ons shoul d gi ve r i se t o possessi ve
par adi gms i n so many l anguages. For such a pr ocess, we ought
t o assume t he f r equent occur r ence of t he f ol l owi ng const r uc-
t i ons as under l yi ng possessi ve par adi gms :
Hungar i an ?? Pt er , az knyve
Engl i sh ? Pet er , hi s book
Never t hel ess, one cannot excl ude t he possi bi l i t y t hat such a
5
pr ocess may al so pr oduce possessi ve par adi gms. The Assi ni boi ne
and Agt a const r uct i ons t o be pr esent ed i ndi cat e, however , t hat
t he t opi cal i zat i onal expl anat i on may be i gnor ed even i n t he
case of possessi ve par adi gms, and possessi ve PM af f i xes can
be der i ved si mpl y f r omunst r essed possessi ve pr onouns. Assi ni -
boi ne exempl i f i es t he si t uat i on of a l anguage i n whi ch t her e
exi st s a st age dur i ng whi ch onl y pr onomi nal , but not l exi cal ,
possessor NPs ar e accompani ed by t hi r d per son af f i xes. I t i s
al so pr obabl e, t hat af f i xed mar ki ng can be anal ogi cal l y ex-
t ended t o const r uct i ons wi t h l exi cal possessor s, t oo ( see
Edi t h Mor avcsi k ( per sonal communi cat i on) has dr awn my at t en-
t i on t o a Si er r e Leone cr eol e l anguage, Kr i o, i n whi ch t he
possessi ve const r uct i on i s qui t e cl ear l y t opi cal i zed i n her
opi ni on: di t i ca i pus [ t he t eacher hi s cat 1 ' t he t eacher ' s
cat ' . Never t hel ess, i t r emai ns t o be seen whet her t hi s st r uc-
t ur e i s not a mer e pr oduct of cr eol i zat i on, i . e. , whet her i t
i s a pr oduct of "nat ur al " change or an ef f ect of t he cont act
of t wo l anguages.
at er ) . On t he ot her hand, dat a f r omAgt a suggest t hat t he
t h r d per son mar ker s not necessar y of pr onom na or g n.
5. Types of af f xed per son- mar k ng ( PM) par ad gms
5. 0 I n what f o ows I w ust r at e t he cond t ons f or t he
f or mat on of t hr ee t ypes of par ad gms, and w pr mar y
r ef er t o anguages wh ch r epr esent t he n t a st age of t h s
deve opment . I n each case I assume t hat t he ex st ence of t he
par ad gms s a r esu t of t he c t c zat on- agg ut nat on of
unst r essed per sona and possess ve pr onouns and whenever t h s
pr ocess n t se f does not of f er sat sf act or y mot vat on f or
t he t h r d per son f or ms I w ook f or f ur t her f act or s.
5. 1 The_pr onom na pat t er n. Suppose t hat t he c t c zat on
and agg ut onat on of per sona and possess ve pr onouns s
s mp y t he r esu t of a nat ur a pr ocess. F r st and second
per sons ar e necessar y expr essed by pr onouns and t her ef or e
n t hese cases af f xat on w be deve oped n sub| ect , and
possess ve pos t ons as we . Th r d per son comp ement s ar e,
however , ver y f r equent y expr essed w t h ex ca NPs ( so t her e
s no pr onoun n t he sent ence) and, n add t on, n some an-
guages t he unst r essed pr onouns ar e a so zer o. Mor eover , t he
ver b t se f may a so qu t e nd cat e ( semant ca y or mor pho-
og ca y) what k nd of comp ement s may be n t he const r uct on.
I t s t her ef or e qu t e conce vab e f or ver ba par ad gms t hat
wh e t he f r st and t he second per sons ar e mar ked w t h af f xes
of pr onom na or g n, t he t h r d per son w be mar ked w t h
zer o n t he case of a ex ca comp ement or anaphor c pr ono-
m na zat on. Pr ov d ng t hat t he semant c or mor pho og ca
st r uct ur e of t he ver b makes t he number and nat ur e of t s
comp ement s r e at ve y unamb guous, t s a so poss b e t hat
t he per son- mar ker s of bot h sub| ect and ob| ect be zer o.
I t s a so nat ur a f or t he f r st and second per sons of
AFFI XED PERSON-MARKING PARADIGMS 481
t he possess ve par ad gm t o der ve f r omunst r essed possess ve
pr onouns. When t he ex ca possessor - NP s pr esent , t her e s
no pr onoun n t he const r uct on and t her ef or e t her e w be no
t h r d per son af f x e t her . W t h a pr onom na possessor , how-
ever , t he af f x cannot be zer o s nce n t hat case t he mer e
NP wou d not be nt er pr et ed as be ng possessed ( un ess n-
her ent possess ons const t ut e a separ at e cat egor y n t he an-
guage) .
Thus t shou d be poss b e t o schemat ze t he par ad g-
mat c pat t er n of pur e y pr onom na or g n as f o ows:
5. 1. 1 But s t her e such a anguage at a ?
Her e and n t he f o ow ng passages I sha concent r at e on t he
per son- mar ker s a one ( 1Per s, 2Per s, 3Per s) s nce number - mar ker s
ar e r at her ndependent of t hese. The abbr ev at ons n t he t ab e
ar e bor r owed f r omF nno- Ugr st cs: Vx st ands f or "ver ba af f x"
and Px f or "possess ve af f x". The Vx of an nt r ans t ve ver b
mar ks t he per son of t he sub| ect , and t hose of a t r ans t ve ver b
mar k t he per sons of t he sub| ect and ob| ect . I w gnor e t he
occur r ence of f us ona mor phemes n t h s at t er case, and f or
t he moment phono og ca s m ar t es bet ween Vx' s and Px' s w
a so be ef t out of cons der at on ( cf . , however , Sect on 7. )
Ver ba const r uct ons
1Per s
2Per s
3Per s
I nt r ans t ve
Vx
1
A
B

Tr ans t ve
Vx
2
Vx
3
_ E
D F

Possess ve const r uct ons
1Per s
2Per s
3Per s
Pr onom na
possessor
Px
G
H
I
Lex ca
possessor
unmar ked
482
Yes, t her e s. I n Ass n bo ne (a S ouan anguage, Lev n 1967)
pr ef xes cor r espond t o t he cat egor y of per son and suf f xes t o
t he cat egor y of number . ( Th s anguage has a so some nf xes. )
I n t he t h r d per son s ngu ar t he mar ker s of bot h t he sub| ect
and t he ob| ect ar e zer o, wher eas t he ot her per sons ar e mar ked
over t y when occur t ng n sub| ect and ob| ect pos t on:
w cst a ne pza waz - - ap ( Lev n 31)
man Par t cat he- t - h t
' t he man h t a cat '
uk- a- n - pe- p ( Lev n 34)
we- you- wa t - P ur
' we ar e wa t ng f or you'
Possessed nouns denot ng par t s of t he body or r e at ons
get zer o n t he t h r d per son, wher eas non- nher ent y possessed
Ns ar e mar ked w t h a non- zer o f or meven n t he t h r d per son.
Const r uct ons w t h ex ca possessor s ar e of t he GN or der and
unmar ked :
t a- w cu ( Lev n 24)
h s- w f e
' h s w f e'
V o a h knku Tom c c ( Lev n 60)
V o a husband Tom son
' V o a' s husband' ' Tom' s son'
I t s t o be not ed t hat Ass n bo ne be ongs t o t he SOV
ser a t ype and has pr ef xed per son- mar ker s, wh ch, n our
hypot hes s, means t hat t s n t he st age when t he pr ocess
of af f xat on has | ust begun and when t he p ace of t he af f xes
s har mon c w t h t he or der of ex ca const t uent s.
Ass n bo ne s t he on y pur e y pr onom na t ype anguage
n my samp e. Never t he ess, cer t a n f eat ur es of t h s pr onom na
t ype a so occur n t he ot her t wo t ypes of par ad gm.
Not e t hat t he pr nc p es of t h s pr onom na pat t er n wou d
a so a ow f or t he poss b t y t hat t her e be anguages n wh ch
t h r d per son pr onom na comp ement s ar e mar ked by non- zer o
af f xes of pr onom na or g n n t he ver ba par ad gm wher eas
t he cor r espond ng mar ker of ex ca NP comp ement s s zer o
( s m ar y t o t he Ass n bo ne possess ve) . Never t he ess, t her e
was no such an af f xat on t ype n my samp e.
5. 2 The adapt at ona pat t er n. I f ound t wo anguages n wh ch
many det a s of at east some of t he par ad gms can be exp a ned
a ong t he nes of t he above pr onom na zat on pat t er n. They
dev at e f r omt h s pat t er n at t wo mpor t ant po nt s, however ,
and t hese dev at ons nd cat e t hat t hese anguages r epr esent
n f act anot her t ype. The dev at ons ar e a so mot vat ed by
t he f act t hat t hese ar e TVX anguages and cont a n suf f xed
per son- mar ker s - . e. t he pr nc p e of af f xat on may be ver y
o d n t hem and may have a r eady under gone s gn f cant changes.
5. 2. 1 I n t he so at ed Penut a anguage, Take ma, 11 ver ba
par ad gms have been r ecor ded ( Sap r 1922) . I n 7 out of 11, t he
t h r d per son of t he sub| ect va and ob| ect va par ad gms s
zer o, t hat s, t hese par ad gms r esemb e t he Ass n bo ne ones.
The st r uct ur e of t he possess ve par ad gm s un ke Ass n bo ne,
however , as not on y pr onom na but a so ex ca possessor s
ar e accompan ed by per son- mar ker s ( n t h s case, suf f xes) :
hap' - da sg ' s hap' - da ( Sap r 1922, 292)
son- h s Coyot e son- h s
' h s son
1
' Coyot e' s son'
Ther e ar e t wo conce vab e exp anat ons f or t h s. The f r st ( and
mor e pr obab e) one s t hat t he possess ve par ad gmwas not
f or med n t he same way and at t he same t me as ver ba par ad gms
w t h zer o n t he t h r d per son but r at her w t h t hose ver ba
par ad gms n wh ch t her e ar e over t t h r d per son mar ker s; t he
second exp anat on m ght be t hat t he t h r d per son possess ve
suf f x at t ached t o ex ca possessor s s r esu t of ana og ca
ext ens on. The f r st a t er nat ve s suppor t ed by t he f act t hat
n h s gr ammar Sap r r e at es t he possess ve par ad gm t o one
of t hose w t h over t t h r d per son mor phemes ( see Sap r 19 22,
231) . But t he second a t er nat ve s not unr easonab e e t her :
t s qu t e easy t o mag ne t hat n a anguage n wh ch unmar ked
possess ve const r uct ons coex st w t h over t y mar ked ones,
t he mar ked pat t er n shou d be ext ended t o t he unmar ked one t oo.
Ther e ar e p ent y of sent ence t ypes f ac t at ng such an ex-
t ens on; most pr om nent among t hem s t hat case when t he
possessor s named but does not st and n a gen t ve r e at on
t o t he possessor n t he sent ence, e. g. :
Mar y t ook her bag.
The o d man wr ot e a et t er t o h s son.
Pet er r ea zed t hat h s p pe had been ef t at home.
Ext ens on s even mor e ke y s nce n a anguage of t he SOV
ser a t ype t he under ned const t uent s a ways st and next t o
each ot her n t he sur f ace st r uct ur e ( even n sent ences ke
our t h r d examp e, t hat s, when t he possessor and t he pos-
sessed be ong t o t wo d f f er ent c auses) .
Wh chever a t er nat ve we t ake, we must assume t hat over t
per son- mar k ng can be pr esent n const r uct ons w t h ex ca
possessor - NPs t oo.
The ot her po nt wher e Take ma d f f er s f r om Ass n bo ne
r epr esent s, however , a PM pat t er n wh ch s ver y s gn f cant y
d f f er ent f r om t he par ad gm t ype of pr onom na or g n.
As not ed above, t he PM suf f x of t he t h r d per son sub| ect
and ob| ect of Take ma ver bs s zer o n t he ma| or t y of t he
par ad gms. S nce, however , sub| ect and ob| ect ar e not d s-
t ngu shed by case- mar ker s and t he or der of t he NP comp ement s
s not f xed e t her , nt er pr et at on becomes d f f cu t n t wo
r at her f r equent sent ence t ypes; t hat s, n a sent ence com-
posed of a t r ans t ve ver b p us one ex ca NP you cannot
t e whet her t hat NP s t he sub| ect or t he ob| ect , and s m -
ar y, when t her e ar e t wo NPs but , semant ca y speak ng, bot h
m ght p ay t he r o e of e t her t he sub| ect or t he ob| ect . Th s
amb gu t y s r eso ved by an nt er pr et at on pr nc p e and a
( pr obab y new y adapt ed) af f x. I n v ew of t he nt er pr et at on
pr nc p e t he | + human| comp ement s r egar ded as sub| ect and
t he | - human| comp ement as ob| ect . An adapt ve ext ens on of
t h s nt er pr et at on pr nc p e s t he appear ance of t he af f x-
- kwa( - gwa) whi ch suspends t he val i di t y of t hi s pr i nci pl e by
i ndi cat i ng t hat t he obj ect of t he sent ence i s + human] ( Sapi r
1922, 158, 168- 9) :
t ! i bi si t ! ayak- -
ant s f ound- he- t / t hem
' He f ound t he ant s'
t ! b s t ! aya- - kwa
ant s f ound- t / t hey- h m
' t he ant s f ound h m'
t ! anah - -
he d- he- t
' he he d t '
t ! anaha- - gwa
he d- he- h m
' he he d h m'
mena yap! a t ! omo- - kwa
bear man k ed- t - h m
' t he bear k ed t he man'
Now, t he or g n of t h s d samb guat ng mor pheme - kwa
(- gwa) s qu t e r emar kab e: as de f r omt he case ment oned above,
t r ans t ve ver bs t ake on t h s suf f x f t he ob| ect s dent ca
t o t he sub| ect ( . e. t mar ks r ef ex v t y) , or , f t he ob| ect
wh ch s ncor por at ed n t he ver b s possessed by t he sub| ect
( e. g. t s a par t of t he body) . I t may be nt er est ng t o con-
s der t he Take ma examp es t oget her w t h Fr ench const r uct ons
wh ch, a t hough mak ng use of d f f er ent gr ammat ca dev ces,
d sp ay f eat ur es ver y s m ar t o Take ma ( Sap r 148) :
gaxaga' x- gwa- n
scr at ch- Ref - I
' I scr at ch myse f '
s n- t ' g ' s- gwa-
nose- scr at ch- Ref - he
' he scr at ched h s own nose'
486
The same k nd of mor phemes ar e af f xed t o t he Take ma ver b
and t he Fr ench ver b, n a m r r or - mage f ash on:
I n summar y, t he ver ba par ad gm adapt ed t h s r ef ex ve - kwa
(- gwa) mor pheme, wh ch s act ua y r e at ed t o ob| ect va and
possess ve r e at ons, f or t he pur poses of d samb guat ng NPs
n t r ans t ve const r uct ons.
Take ma ust r at es t he r se of a new t ype of par ad gm.
The n t a st age was ke Ass n bo ne: n t he t h r d per son,
t he sub| ect va and ob| ect va par ad gm cont a ned a zer o,
wher eas t he possess ve par ad gm cont a ned an over t mor pheme
( her e even bes des ex ca possessor s) . Never t he ess, a st age
seems t o be f or m ng n wh ch t he zer o t h r d per son af f x of
t he t r ans t ve ver ba par ad gm a t er nat es w t h an over t t h r d
per son mor pheme. Th s new over t mor pheme s a r esu t of adapt a-
t on; adapt at on, on t he ot her hand, was necess t at ed by
amb gu t y. I f nd t h s t ype of per son- mar k ng and t s f or mat on
espec a y mpor t ant because t seems t o suggest t hat t s
unnecessar y t o post u at e under y ng t op ca zat on pr ocesses,
even n cases when t he t h r d per son of a par ad gm s mar ked
overt y' . Not e t hat n t h s t ype t he over t t h r d per son mor pheme
ar ose at er (by adapt at on) t han t he f r st and second per son
mar ker s.
5. 2. 2 I n S er r a M wok ( Penut a Phy um, M wok Fam y) we f nd
a s t uat on s m ar t o t hat n Take ma. S er r a M wok has a
ver y comp cat ed syst em of PM, whose f or ms nt er act w t h t ense
and mood; name y, we f nd t hr ee k nds of sub| ect va and ob-
| ect va par ad gms. The f r st syst em cont a ns spec a mu t -
f unct ona mor phemes wh ch ser ve f or a poss b e comb nat ons
of per sons f or sub| ect s and ob| ect s. These mu t - f unct ona
mor phemes d st ngu sh bot h per sons and synt act c f unct ons.
I n t he second syst emwe f nd t hat t he sub| ect can be mar ked
w t h possess ve af f xes and t he ob| ect w t h af f xes d f f er ent
f r om t hese. S nce t he t wo set s of af f xes ar e d st nct and
t her e s, n add t on, a case- syst em n t he anguage, t he
dent f cat on of t he synt act c f unct on of a comp ement poses
no d f f cu t y. I n t he t h r d syst em, however , t he per sons of
bot h sub| ect and ob| ect ar e mar ked by means of t he ver y same
par ad gm - t hat s, t wo member s of t h s par ad gm cooccur n
a t r ans t ve ver b. Th s syst em mmed at e y per m t s t he appear -
ence of pr ob ems concer n ng t he cor r ect nt er pr et at on of
cer t a n const r uct ons. The aut hor of t he gr ammar ment ons on y
one such pr ob em, so I w accor d ng y r est r ct myse f t o t .
I f ne t her t he ob| ect nor t he sub| ect s named w t h a ex ca
NP and f one of t hem s n t he t h r d per son ( t he per son- mar ker
of wh ch s zer o) wh e t he ot her s not , t s mposs b e t o
t e whet her t he on y over t per son- mar ker mar ks a sub| ect or
an ob| ect .
D f f er ent d a ect s of t he anguage r eso ve t h s amb gu t y
n d f f er ent ways. The so ut on of one par t cu ar d a ect s
of spec a r e evance her e: f t he ( unnamed) t h r d per son com-
p ement happens t o be t he sub| ect , a t h r d per son possess ve
af f x s added t o t he over t mor pheme on t he ver b. Th s S er r a
M wok d a ect r esemb es Take ma by v r t ue of t he f act t hat t
s t he nt er p ay of an nt er pr et at on pr nc p e and a spec a
adapt ed af f x t hat r eso ves amb gu t y. The nt er pr et at on
pr nc p e s as f o ows: t s "nat ur a " f or t hat comp ement
t o be t he sub| ect whose per son s c oser t o t he per son of
t he speaker ; f t h s does not obt a n, . e. f t he t h r d per son
comp ement happens t o be t he sub| ect , an adapt ed possess ve
per son- mar ker s gna s t h s "anoma y". E. g. ( Fr ee and 55) :
? v ? - 0- t ? v ?- t e?- s
eat - t - I eat - me- h s
' I sha eat ( t ) ' ' he w eat me
? v ? - 0- t okn ? v ?- t okn ?- s
eat - t - you eat - you- h s
' you w eat ( t ) ' ' he w eat you
488
? v ? - - m ? v ? - me?- s
eat - t - we eat - us- h s
' we sha eat ( t ) ' ' he w eat us'
S er r a M wok s nt er est ng not on y n t s r esemb ance
t o Take ma but a so because t s adapt ed af f x happens t o be
t he t h r d per son possess ve per son- mar ker . Remember t he quas -
un ver sa emp r ca c a mwe made at t he out set of t h s paper ,
name y, t hat t he phono og ca f or mof t he possess ve par ad gm
s ver y ke y t o be dent ca , or at east s m ar , t o one
of t he ver ba par ad gms. Th s t hes s w be e abor at ed at er
but we can a r eady not e t hat , at east f or t he t h r d per son,
t he phono og ca coa escence may have been suppor t ed by t he
f act t hat , s m ar y t o S er r a M wok, t he t h r d per son f or mof
t he possess ve par ad gmwas adapt ed t o r eso ve amb gu t y n
ver ba const r uct ons.
5. 2. 3 Take ma and S er r a M wok exemp f ed t he pr ocess of
adapt at on; now we t ur n t o a anguage n wh ch such an adap-
t at on has t aken p ace ver y ong ago and, f ur t her , n t he
t h r d per son ( or , as somet mes t er med n I nd an ngu st cs,
n t he t h r d and f our t h per sons) we f nd sever a over t mor -
phemes f or r eso v ng poss b e amb gu t es.
I n Navaho ( At apascan Phy um, Apachean Fam y) , possess ve
PM pr ef xes ar e phono og ca y dent ca t o some of t he ob| ec-
t va PM pr ef xes n t he ver ba par ad gm ( Sap r - Ho | er 1967,
86- 87) :
1Per s - | aad ' my eg' n- - n t eeh ' you put me down'
2Per s n - | aad ' your eg' n- n - t eeh ' he put s you down'
3Per s d s- 0- t eeh ' I beg n t o car r y h m'
b| - | aad ' h s eg' b - d t eeh ' he beg ns t o car r y
h m'
y - d t eeh ' he beg ns t o car r y
h m'
ha- | aad ' h s eg' n - ho- nst eeh ' I put h mdown'
- | aad ' someone' s ?- d t eeh ' he beg ns t o car r y
eg' someone'
489
So f ar t her e s not h ng sur pr s ng about t h s, n v ew of
t he gener a c a m concer n ng phono og ca s m ar t es. What
s mor e nt er est ng s t he quest on concer n ng wh ch t h r d
per son mor pheme s t o be used under wh ch c r cumst ances. The
p ct ur e of t he possess ve par ad gm s r e at ve y s mp e: f
t he r ef er ence s def n t e, t he f r st f or m ( b - ) may be app ed
f or bot h an mat e and nan mat e possessor s, wher eas t he second
f or m ( ha- ) app es t o an mat e possessor s on y. I f t he possessor
s an mat e, t he cho ce s based on whet her t he possessor s a
f or egr ounded, mpor t ant , and sympat het c per son (b / -) , or
whet her t he possessor s mer e y a mar g na f gur e n t he
st or y, h s r e at on t o t he speaker coo and f or ma ( ha- ) .
The t h r d pr ef x ( ?a) app es t o possessor s w t h ndef n t e
r ef er ence ( Sap r - Ho | er 69) .
The same r u es ar e va d f or t he ver ba b - , ho- , and
?a- pr ef xes, never t he ess, we have t wo mor e pr ef xes her e.
Ther e s an opt ona zer o pr ef x f t he sub| ect s n t he
f r st or second per son, and y - c ear y ser ves t o d st ngu sh
sub| ect and ob| ect . Reca ng t he s t uat on n Take ma and
S er r a M wok t s easy t o see t hat t he use of t he zer o a o-
mor ph s gover ned by a s m ar nt er pr et at on pr nc p e: n
t he nat ur a case, t he per son c oser t o t he speaker s t he
sub| ect of t he sent ence. y . - p ays t he r o e of t he ( pr obab y
adapt ed) d samb guat ng af f x n t he f o ow ng manner . Ther e
be ng no case- mar k ng or f xed wor d or der n t he anguage, f
bot h t he sub| ect and t he ob| ect ar e n t he t h r d per son, t
s mposs b e t o t e wh ch NP p ays wh ch of t hese r o es.
The sub| ect va pr ef x does not he p s nce, a t hough t s
pos t on s f xed, t s t h r d per son f or m s zer o. ( That s,
we can det ect t he pr onom na pat t er n her e, s nce t he sub| ect va
t h r d per son s a ways zer o and t he ob| ect va t h r d per son
has a zer o a omor ph. ) Anot her nt er pr et at on pr ob em ar ses
when on y one t h r d per son NP pr ecedes t he ver b ( . e. , t s
amb guous bet ween be ng sub| ect or ob| ect ) . I nt er pr et at on
pr ob ems ar e r eso ved by PM pr ef xes: y - s used f t he
comp ement mmed at e y pr eced ng t he ver b s t he ob| ect ,
and b - s t o be used ot her w se ( Sap r - Ho | er 86) :
?ask y - d t eeh
boy h m- car r y
' he beg ns t o car r y t he boy'
?ask b - d t eeh
boy h m- car r y
' t he boy beg ns t o car r y h m'
d n ?ask y - d t eeh
man boy h m- car r y
' t he man beg ns t o car r y t he boy'
d n ?ask b - d t eeh
man boy h m- car r y
' t he boy beg ns t o car r y t he man'
Th r d per son af f xes a so p ay an ef f ect ve y s m ar d s-
amb guat ng r o e n embedded sent ences ( f or a det a ed
ana ys s, see __m_| an- Ander son 1970) .
I n Navaho t h s ar ge number of t h r d per son mor phemes
and t he st r k ng comp ex t y of t he r r u es of app cat on
seems t o pr ov de gr ounds f or a f ur t her gener a zat on:
Th r d per son mor phemes may not on y t ake over t he r o e of
d st ngu sh ng t he sub| ect and t he ob| ect (by adapt ng over t
mor phemes t o t he PM par ad gm) , but may a so d st ngu sh
def n t e and ndef n t e ob| ect s, and, as exemp f ed by t he
pr ef xes b - and ho- / ha- , may a so s gna cer t a n pr agmat c
d st nct ons.
5. 2. 4 F na y, we may not e t hat some dat a of Hungar an may
per haps a so be nt er pr et ed a ong t he nes of adapt at on
( a t hough somewhat ess conv nc ng y t han dat a of Navaho) .
Hungar an has an e abor at e case syst em; f t he comp ement s
ar e not expr essed wi t h NPs, PM mor phemes t ake over t he r ol es
of unst r essed subj ect i val and obj ect i vai pr onouns. I n mat r i x
sent ences we f i nd no t r ace of t hese PM suf f i xes bei ng di s-
ambi guat i ng mor phemes; i n embedded sent ences, however , t her e
i s a case whi ch can be i nt er pr et ed i n t hi s way.
I n pr esent - day Hungar i an t her e ar e t wo di f f er ent r el at i ve-
cl ause f or mi ng st r at egi es. The one ( whi ch i s pr obabl y ol der )
i s pr enomi nai ; i n t hi s case t he r el at i ve cl ause i s t r ansf or med
i nt o a par t i ci pl e const r uct i on. The ot her one ( whi ch i s pr e-
sumabl y a mani f est at i on of t he SOV ( F) VX change) i s post -
nomi nal ; i n t hi s case we have a cl ause begi nni ng wi t h a r el a-
t i ve pr onoun:
Pr enomi nai : a beszl - ember
t he t al k- i ng man
Post nomi nal : az ember , aki beszl
t he man who i s- t al ki ng
I f we have a pr esent or f ut ur e par t i ci pl e or a past par t i ci pl e
of an i nt r ansi t i ve ver b i n t he pr enomi nai cl ause, t her e ar e no
i nt er pr et at i on pr obl ems. I f , however , t he past par t i ci pl e
der i ves f r om a t r ansi t i ve ver b, t he head noun may ei t her be
i t s obj ect or i t s subj ect . I n addi t i on, i n cer t ai n somewhat
ar chai c const r uct i ons t he r el at i ve cl ause cont ai ns an unmar ked
obj ect , and t her ef or e nei t her t he embedded nor t he head noun
si gnal s whi ch of t hem i s t o be t he obj ect and whi ch t he subj ect .
I n such cases t he par t i ci pl e t akes on a t hi r d per son possessi ve
PM suf f i x i f t he head noun i s i t s subj ect :
vi l g t - ot t - ember
wor d see- past par t . - Vx3per s man
' man who has seen t he wor d'
sz ne hagy- ot t - kabt
co our ose- past par t . - Vx3per s coat
' coat wh ch has ost t s co our '
madr t - t - a kenyr
b r d see- past par t . - Px3Per s br ead
' br ead wh ch has been seen by b r ds'
pek st - t t - e c po
baker bake- past par t . - Px3Per s oaf
' oaf wh ch has been baked by a baker '
Assum ng t he va d t y of t he t hes s t hat embedded sent ences
ar e mor e conser vat ve ( wh ch has n f act: been pr oved f or many
anguages) we can say t hat t h r d per son suf f xes n t h s con-
st r uct on d st ngu sh t he sub| ect and t he ob| ect n an anc ent
f ash on. Never t he ess, t he examp es can a so be nt er pr et ed
w t hout c ause boundar es, and t he h st or ca r u e can t hus be
hypot het ca y ext ended over mat r x sent ences t oo: f t he
ob| ect mmed at e y pr ecedes t he ver b ( . e. , f t he sent ence
f o ows t he o d SOV pat t er n) , t he per sona suf f x on t he ver b
s zer o; f however t he sub| ect s p aced n f r ont of t he
ver b ( OSV) , t he adapt ed over t af f x may have nd cat ed t hat
t h s or der s anoma ous.
5. 2. 5 The adapt ed pat t er n may be schemat zed as f o ows:
I nt r ans t ve
Tr ans t ve. Tr ans t ve
VX
1
Vx
2
Vx
3
Vx
2
Vx
3
1Per s A C E _ E
2Per s _ D F D F
3Per s

Z
1Per s
2Per s
3Per s
Pr onom na
possessor
Px
G
H
I
Lex ca
possessor
I
wher e A t hr ough I ar e der vat ves of t he cor r espond ng per sona
and possess ve pr onouns; t he appear ence of I on t he possessed
NP n a possess ve comp ex wh ch nc udes a ex ca NP ( f or
cont r ast see 5. 1. ) s a r esu t of ana ogy; i s t he appear ence
of an ol der ( or i gi nal ) af f i x whi ch was l at er adapt ed i nt o t he
ver bal par adi gm i n or der t o di sambi guat e subj ect s f r omobj ect s.
I t may al so be t he case t hat = I .
5. 3 The pr eposi t i onal pat t er n. The per son- mar ki ng par adi gms
of Agt a (a Mal ayo- Pol ynesi an l anguage, Heal ey 1960) i ndi cat e
t hat t he f i r st and second per son af f i xes can be der i ved f r om
t he same ki nd of unst r essed pr onouns as t he r espect i ve per sons
i n t he pr onomi nal or adapt ed pat t er n. I t i s agai n i n t he t hi r d
per son t hat we encount er si gni f i cant devi at i ons.
5. 3. 1 Agt a i s a f ai r l y consi st ent r epr esent at i ve of t he VSX
ser i al t ype. I t has suf f i xed par adi gms f or mar ki ng t he per son
of t he subj ect on t r ansi t i ve ver bs and f or mar ki ng t he per son
of t he possessor on possessed NPs. The unst r essed pr onouns
of i nt r ansi t i ve subj ect s ar e not af f i xed ( t hei r t hi r d per son
f or mi s zer o) , and a pr onomi nal t r ansi t i ve obj ect i s af f i xed
onl y i f i t i s i n t he f i r st per son si ngul ar and, i f si mul t ane-
ousl y t he subj ect of t he sent ence i s mar ked wi t h a PM af f i x
( Heal ey 23, 35- 37) . These f act s seemt o i ndi cat e t hat t he
pr i nci pl e of af f i xed PM must be ver y r ecent i n Agt a, whi ch i s
al so suppor t ed by t he absence of af f i xed par adi gms f r omr e-
l at ed Mal ayo- Pol ynesi an l anguages. The per son- mar ker s of t r an-
si t i ve subj ect s ar e phonol ogi cal l y i dent i cal t o t hose of
possessor s and di f f er ent f r omt hose t hat modi f y t r ansi t i ve
obj ect s and i nt r ansi t i ve subj ect s. These l at t er ar e mar ked
most l y wi t h f r ee mor phemes. Consequent l y, Agt a f ol l ows an er -
gat i ve PM pat t er n.
Synt act i c f unct i ons l i ke subj ect and obj ect ar e mar ked
wi t h pr eposi t i ons. The case- mar ki ng pat t er n of pr eposi t i ons
i s al so er gat i ve: t her e i s one pr eposi t i on f or t r ansi t i ve
subj ect s and anot her f or t r ansi t i ve obj ect s and i nt r ansi t i ve
subj ect s.
The or der i n possessi ve const r uct i ons i s NG, and i f t he
possessor i s expr essed by a l exi cal NP i t i s mar ked wi t h a
pr eposi t i on; a pr eposi t i on whi ch i s i dent i cal t o t hat whi ch
pr ecedes t he t r ansi t i ve subj ect . ( Thi s squar es wel l wi t h
Al l en' s obser vat i on concer ni ng t he par al l el i sms bet ween t r an-
s t ve and possess ve const r uct ons. )
What s r emar kab e about a t h s s t hat t he af f x of
t he t h r d per son t r ans t ve sub| ect and possessor s dent ca
t o t he pr epos t on of t he t r ans t ve sub| ect and t he ex ca
possessor . Mor eover , f t he t r ans t ve sub| ect or t he possessor
s expr essed by a ex ca NP, t her e s no per son- mar ker - t hat
s, we f nd no agr eement n such cases. A f ew examp es:
p na gat na abb ngen ya kabayuq- en ( Hea ey 34)
h t Er g ch d- t he Abs hor se- t he
' t he ch d h t t he hor se
1
qar ay- na ya t obko ( Hea ey 36)
ar r ange- bet ween- bamboos- he Abs t obacco
' he' s ar r ang ng t obacco bet ween bamboos'
f un na h a ( Hea ey 27)
base Gen t ongue
' r oot of t he t ongue'
bar - na gadwa- na ( Hea ey 30)
body- her ha f - t s
' her body' ' ha f of t '
Now, I w assume t hat t he t h r d per son ver ba and
possess ve PM af f x n Agt a der ves f r om a case mar ker pr e-
pos t on . I t s p aced on t he ver b or on t he possessed NP f
t he ver ba comp ement . e. t he t r ans t ve sub| ect ) or t he
possessor s not expr essed w t h a ex ca NP. I t s necessar y
t o r et a n t he pr epos t on because ot her w se t he ver ba con-
st r uct on m ght be m s nt er pr et ed as nt r ans t ve or even
pass ve, and t he unmar ked possessed- NP wou d no onger be a
member of possess ve const r uct on.
The pr epos t on may be af f xed t o t he ver b, because ( )
t s unst r essed and, nor ma y, f or ms a s ng e st r ess gr oup
w t h t he noun f o ow ng t , but , n t he absence of t s own
gover n ng noun ( ) t cannot be at t ached t o anyt h ng e se but
t he pr eced ng ver b, s nce t he mor pheme f o ow ng t s an un-
st r essed pr epos t on t se f .
Agt a s n a st at e when on y t he pr onom na t r ans t ve
sub| ect , some ob| ect s, and possessor s appear n an agg ut nat ed
f or m. We may we assume t hat agg ut nat on w be ext ended
over a t he pr onouns. I t s pr obab e t hat as a gener a pat t er n,
t h s pr epos t on, when occur ng w t h ex ca NP' s, w beg n
t o gr adua y at t ach t se f t o t he st r ess gr oup of t he ver b or
t he possessed- NP. We may t her ef or e pr ed ct t hat t he above Agt a
sent ence and possess ve const r uct on w ook ke t h s:
p na gat - na abb ngen ya kabayuq- en
f un- na h a
That s t o say, t he VSX SOV change s not on y t r gger ed
by t op ca zat on but a so by t he f act t hat agg ut nat on
ar ses n ver ba and possess ve const r uct ons - wh ch s n-
cons st ent w t h t he VSX ser a t ype - , and t her ef or e t he
mpu se f or t ypo og ca cons st ency w be r ea zed by wor d
or der change.
5. 3. 3 When sket ch ng t he scheme of t he pr epos t ona pat t er n
I w assume t hat unst r essed f r st and second per son pr onouns
ar e a ways agg ut nat ed t o t he ver b or t he possessed- NP:
I nt r ans t ve Tr ans t ve,
( ex ca NPs)
Tr ans t ve
2
( pr onom na NPs)
1Per s
2Per s
3Per s
Vx
1
A
B

Vx
2
C
D

VX
3
E
F

Vx
2
C
D
Pr ep
VX
3
E
F

1Per s
2Per s
3Per s
Pr onom na
possessor
G
H
Pr ep
Lex ca
possessor
Pr eP
wher e A t hr ough H ar e der vat ves of t he cor r espond ng per -
sona and possess ve pr onouns; t he Pr ep member of Vx and Px
s phono og ca y as we as h st or ca y dent ca t o t he
pr epos t on wh ch d st ngu shes ver ba comp ement s and gen -
t ve r e at ons.
5. 3. 4 Agt a pr ov des va uab e nf or mat on concer n ng t he r se
of af f xed PM n anguages be ong ng t o t he VSX SOV > TVX
t r end. Ther e ar e nd cat ons, however , t hat t he t h r d per son
mar ker may der ve f r om a case mar ker even n anguages of t he
SOV VSX t r end. ( I n t h s nst ance, case mar ker s ar e post -
pos t ons or suf f xes. )
The wor d or der and ser a t ype of Ubykh (a Nor t hwest er n
Caucas an anguage) s cons st ent y SOV; bot h ver ba and pos-
sess ve per son- mar ker s ar e pr ef xed. The pr nc p e of af f xed
PM n t h s anguage s pr obab y ver y o d s nce a t he ot her
Caucas an anguages cont a n af f xed par ad gms. I t a so seems
ke y t hat var ous f r ee mor phemes got at t ached t o bot h t he
ver b and t he possessed e ement n sever a ear er per ods.
The f o ow ng phono og ca coa escences nd cat e t hat
3Per s mor phemes der ve f r om case mar ker s : t he er gat ve suf f x
s - n( a) ; t he gen t ve and dat ve suf f xes ar e f or ma y den-
t ca t o t he er gat ve suf f x. I n t ur n, t he ver ba par ad gm
shows an rva omor ph when t mar ks t he 3Per s t r ans t ve
sub| ect :
t hebr ot her - Er g h s- s st er - Dat a- book- Abs t - he- gave
' t he br ot her gave a book t o h s s st er '
The case suf f x of t he nt r ans t ve sub| ect and t he t r ans t ve
ob| ect s zer o and, par a e y, one of t he ver ba 3Per s mar ker s
of t he r espect ve const t uent s s a so zer o. Never t he ess, t h s
zer o per son- mar ker may on y be used f t he nt r ans t ve sub| ect
or t he ob| ect mmed at e y pr ecedes t he ver b:
a- t t ' - k' ka ( Dumz 55)
t heman he- came
' t he man came'
I t seems, however , t hat t h s c ear y er gat ve pat t er n
has comb ned w t h anot her set of PM af f xes. Cont r ar y t o
expect at ons, t he 3Per s possess ve af f x s not n- but a- ( and
t s a omor phs) wh ch seems r e at ed t o t he - / - a omor phs
n t he ver ba par ad gm.
5. 4 Let me br ef y summar ze my c a ms about t he or g ns of
af f xed per son- mar k ng par ad gms. I assumed t hat n t he an-
guages st ud ed PM af f xes most y der ve f r om unst r essed pr o-
nouns. The dat a suggest ed f or each case t hat t he n t a
st age s one n wh ch t her e ar e no over t 3Per s pr onouns e t her
because ex ca comp ement s ar e r at her f r equent or because
t he 3Per s f or mof t he per sona pr onoun t se f s zer o.
Af f xes of t he pr onom na pat t er n a der ve f r omun-
st r essed pr onouns. Whenever no pr onoun can be assumed n t he
or g na const r uct on, per son- mar k ng s dent f ed by a zer o
( or , t he cat egor y unmar ked) .
The adapt at ona pat t er n r epr esent s a poss b e at er
st age n t he deve opment of t he pr onom na pat t er n. I t s
char act er zed by t he f act t hat n some of t he t r ans t ve con-
st r uct ons an over t mor pheme has been adapt ed t o a 3r d per son
f unct on, n or der t o r eso ve amb gu t y. Fur t her mor e, t he
anguages n t he samp e show t hat t he over t 3Per s possess ve
af f x t ur ns up n possess ve const r uct ons w t h ex ca pos-
sessor s as we .
The pr epos t ona ( or , post pos t ona ) pat t er n : 1Per s and
2Per s af f xes der ve f r omunst r essed pr onouns, wher eas 3Per s
af f xes n t he ver ba as we as t he possess ve par ad gmde-
r ve f r om case mar ker s.
6. 1Per s and 2Per s ver sus 3Per s
We der ved per son- mar k ng af f xes f r omt hr ee k nds of
sour ces :
1Per s and 2Per s: unst r essed pr onoun ( ver ba and possess ve
par ad gms)
3Per s: unst r essed pr onoun ( possess ve par ad gms)
adapt ed af f x ( ver ba par ad gms)
case mar ker ( ver ba and possess ve par ad gms) .
6. 1. I n t he anguages ment oned so f ar t he p acement of
af f xes of var ous or g ns has been un f or m: af f xes of a
t hr ee per sons wer e f ound on t he same s de of t he ver b, t hat
s, e t her pr ef xed or suf f xed. Th s un f or m behav or s
by no means necessar y, s nce t he or g ns of t he PMs n any
g ven anguage sp t a ong 1st and 2nd vs. 3r d ax s has
a ways been d ss m ar . Ther e ar e anguages n wh ch t he
p acement of t he af f xes f o ows a d f f er ent but st r e-
gu ar pat t er n: 1Per s and 2Per s mar ker s ar e on t he one s de
of t he st em and t he 3Per s mar ker s on t he oppos t e s de.
On t he one hand, t hese at t er examp es ser ve as nd r ect
ev dence f or t he c a m t hat 1Per s and 2Per s mar ker s der ve
f r om sour ces d f f er ent f r omt hose of 3Per s mar ker s. On t he
ot her hand, t hey soppor t t he t hes s ( wh ch s mp ed by
our hypot hes s) t hat mor phemes der v ng f r om d f f er ent
sour ces need not behave un f or m y nor need t hey necessar y
come f r omone and t he same age e t her .
6. 2 Upper Cheha s ( Sa sh Fam y) exemp f es t he case
when 1Per s and 2Per s possess ve mar ker s n t he s ngu ar ar e
pr ef xed wher eas t he 3Per s mar ker s suf f xed ( I ngr am168) .
We f nd an even mor e conv nc ng exemp e n A gonqu an
( B oomf e d 1964, 94- 95, Fr ant z 1966, 52- 54, Voor h s 1974,
53- 73) - a schema t hat s n gener a st r ange but f t s we
nt o our hypot hes s. One gr oup of par ad gms s pur e y pr ef xed,
anot her gr oup pur e y suf f xed, wher eas a t h r d s m xed. I n
t he m xed par ad gms t he 1Per s and 2Per s mar ker s ar e on one
s de and t he 3Per s mar ker ( p us t he p ur a ) s on t he ot her .
Or , mor e exact y: 1Per s and 2Per s ar e pr ef xed wh e 3Per s
s pr ef xed and suf f xed, or mer e y suf f xed.
7. S m ar t es bet ween ver ba and possess ve per son- mar ker s
7. 1. So f ar we have f ound on y f r agment ar y mot vat on f or t he
c a mwe made n 1. 1. 4, name y, t hat t he phono og ca shape
of t he possess ve par ad gm s ver y ke y t o be dent ca ,
or s m ar , t o one or mor e of t he ver ba par ad gms. For one,
we not ed n connect on w t h t he over t 3Per s ver ba af f x n
S er r a M wok t he f act t hat some anguages bor r ow t he r 3Per s
ver ba af f x f r omt he possess ve par ad gm and t hat t h s may
have cont r but ed t o t he r s m ar appear ence. On t he ot her
hand, n Agt a and Ubykh t he t wo pr epos t ons ( er gat ve and
gen t ve) f r omwh ch we der ved 3Per s af f xes wer e dent ca .
Never t he ess, we have not yet f ound any exp anat on f or t he
f act t hat t he t wo par ad gms ar e of t en dent ca n a t he
t hr ee per sons. I t seems t hat t he scope of t h s emp r ca y
suppor t ed c a m s not r est r ct ed t o t he r ange of PM af f xes.
At t he out set of t he paper I r ef er r ed t o A en' s ar t c e,
n wh ch t he aut hor based h s c a m concer n ng t he par a e sms
bet ween t r ans t ve and possess ve const r uct ons pr mar y on
case mar ker s. As f or t he mot vat on, we can on y say t hat
t her e cer t a n y ar e t heor et ca y | ust f ab e s m ar t es
wh ch man f est t hemse ves n sever a par a e f eat ur es of t he
t wo const r uct ons. Even t hough A en wor ked t hese out f or case
mar ker s, t shou d cer t a n y a so ho d f or pr onom na syst ems
n sub| ect and ob| ect pos t ons t hat a set of t hose pr onouns
over aps w t h t he set of possess ve pr onouns; t hat s why a
subset of agg ut nat ed ver ba pr onouns, when f or m ng an af f xed
par ad gm, shou d be dent ca w t h t he agg ut nat ed possess ve
par ad gm. A ong t he nes of such cor r espondences I w po nt
out t hat t he d st r but on of af f xed ver ba PM par ad gms
m r r or s t he f or ma d st r but on of case mar k ng syst ems.
7. 2. As a po nt of depar t ur e et us assume t hat n s mp e
sent ences ( w t h a sub| ect and per haps an ob| ect ) anguages
must d st ngu sh t hr ee comp ement s - r egar d ess of whet her
t hey ar e ex ca NPs or s mp y pr onouns. These comp ement s
ar e t he t r ans t ve sub| ect , ob| ect and nt r ans t ve sub| ect ,
abbr ev at ed as S , 0 and S. r espect ve y. Pr ov ded t hat t he
500
per son of t hese s mar ked on t he ver b, w t h t wo par ad gms
at hand we have t hr ee d f f er ent t heor et ca y poss b e
d st r but ons of sub| ect and ob| ect mar k ng:
1 par ad gm
2
nd
par ad gm
S
t r
VS o, s

O VS S
, S

S

VS S
t r
, O
The t ab e shows t hat t he possess ve par ad gmmay n pr nc p e
be r e at ed t o any of s x ver ba par ad gms, t hat s:
1. Px
2. Px
3. Px
4. Px
5. Px
6. Px
S
t r
O
s

o , s

s
t r
, s

S
t r
, O
Even t hough our samp e anguages wer e not t oo numer ous, each
of t he s x cor r e at ons was bor ne out by t he dat a:
1 . Px
2. Px
3. Px
4. Px
5. Px
6. Px
Agt a, | aca t ec, S er r a M wok
Navaho
Be a Coo a, Take ma
Ass n bo ne
Ouechua
Hungar an, Nenet s
The r ema n ng anguages f a nt o t wo gr oups: n Bur at and
Tat ar t he possess ve par ad gmwas not dent ca t o any of
t he ver ba par ad gms wher eas n B ackf oot and Esk mo each of
t he t hr ee comp ement s ( S
t r
, O, S. ) was mar ked w t h mor phemes
s m ar t o t he possess ve af f xes.
7. 2. 1. The above schemat zat on ser ved t o demonst r at e t he
cor r espond ng var at ons bet ween possess ve and ver ba PM
af f xes. Never t he ess, t obscur ed and, t o some ext ent , a so
d st or t ed t he d ver s t y of t he par ad gms. I w now at t empt
t o r est or e t he r comp ex c ar t y. At t he beg nn ng I post u at ed
t he ex st ence of t wo par ad gms wher eas n many anguages ( e. g. ,
AFFI XED ERSON-MARKING PARADIGMS 501
Bl ackf oot , Si er r a Mi wok, Amhar i c, Takel ma, et c. , ) we f i nd
mor e t han t wo par adi gms, dependi ng on f act or s l i ke: t he
gender of t he compl ement s; t he t ype of t he f i ni t e ver b or
pr edi cat i ve nomi nal ; t he t ense and mood of t he ver b et c.
I n vi ew of t hese f act s t he f i r st cor r el at i on ment i oned above,
f or i nst ance, may be r ef or mul at ed as f ol l ows:
1. "Ther e i s an S
t r
af f i xed ver bal PM par adi gm t hat i s
i dent i cal , or ver y si mi l ar , t o t he possessi ve per son
mar ki ng par adi gm" and so on.
Thi s seems t o suf f i ce f or t he pr esent t ypol ogi cal pur poses;
when desci bi ng some of t hese l anguages such r ough and r eady
st at ement s can be made mor e pr eci se.
The scheme al so obscur ed t he f act t hat i n sever al cases
we may t r ace smal l er scal e si mi l ar i t i es bet ween t he possessi ve
par adi gm and some det ai l s of a ver bal par adi gm di f f er ent f r om
t he one di st i ngui shed above. Such par t i al cor r el at i ons seem
wor t hwhi l e t o i nvest i gat e; st i l l , t he above cl assi f i cat i on
may be j ust i f i ed si nce i n each case i t was based on an ex-
pl i ci t st at ement of t he wr i t er of t he r espect i ve gr ammar .
Fi nal l y t her e ar e l anguages wi t h sever al possessi ve
par adi gms, dependi ng on whet her t he possessed denot es a par t
of t he body, a ki nshi p t er m, an i nher ent or acci dent al pos-
sessi on and so on. I dent i t y, or si mi l ar i t y, i n such cases
hol ds f or one of t hose par adi gms ( al t hough, t hese par adi gms
do not t end t o be ver y di f f er ent f r om one anot her ) .
7. 3. The cor r espondence var i at i ons of ver bal and possessi ve
PM par adi gms make i t ver y cl ear t hat t he di st r i but i on of ver bal
par adi gms r esembl es t he di st r i but i on of mor phol ogi cal case
mar ker s on t he NP compl ement s of t r ansi t i ve and i nt r ansi t i ve
sent ences. Whi ch i s of cour se not sur pr i si ng si nce i n our
hypot hesi s, a r at her l ar ge pr opor t i on of t he af f i xes der i ve
f r omsubj ect i val and obj ect i vai pr onouns and, on t he ot her
hand, over t mor phemes had ei t her been adapt ed i n or der t o
r esol ve subj ect - obj ect ambi gui t i es ( and ar e t hus r el at ed t o
case mar k ng) or ar e d r ect y of case mar ker or g n. Spe ng
t he above c a m out n det a , 1. / Px S
t r
/ and 4. / Px O,
S, / cor r espond t o t he er gat ve pat t er n wher eas 2. / Px 0/
and 5. / Px S
t r
, S. / cor r espond t o t he nom nat ve pat t er n.
7. 3. 1. Th s neat syst emof cor r e at ons, however , s t oo good
t o be t r ue. I t s susp c ous, t o say t he east , t hat we f nd
sever a Px S. cases, t oo. I t s susp c ous because, n our
pr esent know edge of t ypo ogy, t her e s no anguage n t he
nom na case syst emof wh ch S. wou d have a separ at e case
mar ker as opposed t o S
t r
and 0, pr ov ded t hat t her e ar e t wo
cases n t he anguage ( Ander son 1978) . I f we ook c ose y at
t he dat a our susp c ons ar e | ust f ed s nce bot h Be a Coo a
and Take ma cont a n par ad gms w t h f us ona mor phemes f or S
t r
s
and Os; f r om a h st or ca po nt of v ew, t hese f us ona
mor phemes, cer t a n y n Be a Coo a ( Newman 1969b, 299) and
most pr obab y n Take ma, cont a n t he or g na mor phemes of
S. ( when mar k ng S
t r
) . That s, t he Px = S. cor r e at on must
be ef t empt y and, cont r ar y t o super f c a appear ence, Be a
Coo a and Take ma must be r ec ass f ed w t h Ouechua, t hat s,
under t he r ubr c Px = S
t r
, S
.
For t he same r eason t he anguages under t he Px S
t r
,
0 r ubr c need t o be r ec ass f ed as we . Her e we encount er
t he comp ement ar y s t uat on: nom na case syst ems may not be
such t hat S
t r
and 0 ar e mar ked w t h t he same ( over t ) mor pheme
as opposed t o S
Remember t hat S
t r
and 0 ar e not mar ked by
t wo d st nct par ad gms, each of wh ch cor r esponds t o Px but
r at her by a s ng e par ad gmwh ch emp oys mu t - f unct ona
mor phemes ( t he same mor pheme mar ks S
t r
and O on one and t he
same ver ba st em) . Th s ana ys s may of cour se change f
t her e s r eason t o post u at e zer o mor phemes n t he syst em.
I n pr nc p e, we may obt a n t wo d f f er ent r esu t s f
we assume t hat t he st r uct ur es of nom na case syst ems ar e
a so va d her e and t hus t hat t he above d st r but on of
par ad gms s mer e y an us on. We may e t her r e nt er pr et
Px S
t r
' O as px s
t r
or px s
t r
' S
. I n ot her wor ds, we

must ar r ve e t her at t he er gat ve or t he nom nat ve pat t er n.
S nce t he anguages n quest on ar e Nenet s and Hungar an,
member s of t he Ur a c f am y whose st r uct ur e s common y n-
t er pr et ed as be ng nom nat ve, we pr ef er t he ass gnment of
t he nom nat ve pat t er n ( f or a det a ed ana ys s pr esent ng
dat a pr ov ded by h st or ca and compar at ve ana ys s, see
Rad es, f or t hcom ng) .
7. 4. The above mod f cat ons ead t o t he f o ow ng r ec as-
s f cat on of t he anguages :
Nom nat ve pat t er n
Px S
t r
' S
Be a Coo a, Hungar an, Nenet s, Ouechua,

Take ma
Px 0 Navaho
Er gat ve pat t er n
Px S
t r
Agt a, | aca t ec, S er r a M wok
Px S. , 0 Ass n bo ne
Consequent y, t he d st r but on of ver ba par ad gms
r esemb es t he d st r but on of mor pho og ca case mar ker s, or ,
t s t r aceab e back t o such syst ems.
8. Conser vat v t y of af f xed per son- mar k ng
8. 1. I n t he cour se of est ab sh ng t he t empor a deve opment
of t he par ad gms f or t he per ods VSX SOV TVX, and SOV
VSX, I c a med t hat t he f et me of PM af f xes s much onger
t han t hat of par t cu ar ser a t ypes. I n ot her wor ds, t he
pr nc p e of af f xed PM changes mor e s ow y t han t he ser a
t ype of a g ven anguage. Th s t hes s seems t o cont r ad ct
t he common v ew t hat wor d end ngs t end t o be r educed over
t me. Ther ef or e, one can r easonab y ask, why most y suf f xed
PMs r es st t h s t endency?
I be eve t her e ar e t hr ee f act or s wh ch f ac t at e t he
sur v va of ver ba and possess ve par ad gms, desp t e t he
usua t endency f or suf f xa r educt on.
8. 1. 1. The c osed st r uct ur e of per son- mar k ng par ad gms.
Ther e ar e ver y f ew t ypes of par ad gms n anguage d sp ay ng
a char act er so c osed and or der ed as t hat of per son- mar k ng.
I t s easy t o see why: t he t hr ee per sons and t he t wo number s
ar e un ver sa y d st ngu shed cat egor es ( a t hough t he at t er
on y w t h a ver y h gh st at st ca pr obab t y) . I t s of
v t a nt er est f or any anguage t o ma nt a n t he d st nct on
bet ween t he member s of t h s par ad gm at each st age of t s
deve opment s nce, save f or a r at her sma pr opor t on of sen-
t ences ( mper sona const r uct ons, e pses, nt er | ect ons) t
s a ways necessar y t o mar k gr ammat ca per son.
The d mens ons of t he nt er na st r uct ur e of t hese
par ad gms pr obab y der ve f r om t he ver y s mp e const e at on
of human speech s t uat on: |E amt a k ng t o you about somet h ng.
Poss b t es f or f ur t her cat egor y r ef nement s ar e pr esent
pr mar y n t he t h r d per son and n t he cat egor y of number .
On t he ot her hand, ot her gr ammat ca subsyst ems of cent r a
mpor t ance n anguage usua y cor r espond t o f ar mor e comp ex
const e at ons; see, f or nst ance, t he f asc nat ng d ver s t y
of d st nct ons case mar k ng syst ems may r evea ( cf . Kom sy,
n t h s vo ume) wh ch go f ar beyond t he r at her s mp f ed
p ct ur e of t he er gat ve- nom nat ve d st nct ons used n t h s
paper . Consequent y, t he d mens ons of or gan zat on of per son-
mar k ng and t he sma er number of t hose cat egor es w con-
st t ut e a mor e st r ct and un f or m st r uct ur e w t h n t he g ven
subsyst em t han d mens ons and cat egor es of ot her subsyst ems.
The bor der nes of t he syst ems of PM par ad gms can
usua y be dr awn f a r y unamb guous y. Never t he ess, t h s
f act cannot be exp a ned on t he bas s of t he sma number
and r at her un ver sa char act er of t he cat egor es nvo ved
a one. I t s pr esumab y a so mpor t ant t o not e t hat wh e t he
boundar es of ot her subsyst ems t end t o squ sh ( see, f or
nst ance, t he boundar es bet ween case- mar k ng and oca -
t empor a r e at ons) , t h s har d y ever happens n per son- mar k ng
syst ems. I t s n t h s sense t hat I t ake t he st r uct ur e of PM
par ad gms t o be c osed.
The sur v va of t he par ad gms s f ur t her f ac t at ed
by t he f act t hat af f xed per son- mar k ng s used n t wo syn-
t act c key- pos t ons : n possess ve and n ( t r ans t ve and
nt r ans t ve) ver ba const r uct ons. Mor eover , t s a so
suppor t ed by t he mat er a dent t y bet ween t he possess ve
par ad gm and at east par t of t he ver ba par ad gm.
8. 1. 2. The gr ammat ca nat ur e of pr onouns; r est r ct ed
par t c pat on n ser a zat on. Per son- mar k ng af f xes ar e
a most pur e y pr onom na , cons der ng t he r or g n as we
as t he r f unct on. Th s pr onom na char act er has par t cu ar
consequences f or t he r behav or .
As s we - known, t he mpu se f or t ypo og ca con-
s st ency was mot vat ed n Bar t sch and Vennemann ( 1972) by t he
t hes s of "nat ur a ser a zat on" on t he bas s of mode
t heor et c semant cs. I n t h s v ew, wor d or der cor r e at ons
t end t o be un f or mbecause on y t h s may ensur e t he cor r ect
cor r e at on of un d r ect ona mapp ngs bet ween oper at or s and
oper ands t hr oughout t he sent ence. Th s un d r ect ona t y may
be r egar ded as a spec a man f est at on of t he pr nc p e of
east ef f or t ( cf . Mar t net 1963) n anguage.
Never t he ess, t hese mapp ngs have no equa r e evance
f or a const t uent s. The cons st ent ser a p acement of
ex ca NPs r ece ve a t wof o d mot vat on f r om t hese: on t he
one hand, n most sent ences t hey ar e mod f ed by an ad| ect ve,
a possessor or a r e at ve c ause, on t he ot her hand, ex ca
NPs ar e a so ar gument s of t he ma n pr ed cat e. Thus f or nat ur a
ser a zat on t o be r ea zed t hr oughout t he sent ence, ex ca
NPs must be so p aced t hat t he semant c mapp ngs have t he
same d r ect ons n t he case of a gr ammat ca r e at ons nt o
wh ch ex ca NPs may ent er .
On t he ot her hand, pr onouns and PM af f xes ar e n-
f uenced by t he needs of f ar ess numer ous oper at ons s nce
t hey ar e pr act ca y never mod f ed by ad| ect ves, possessor s
or r e at ve c auses and t her ef or e t he r par t c pat on n
nat ur a ser a zat on s much mor e r est r ct ed. Consequent y,
t he changes n t he p acement of pr onouns and PM af f xes may
be mor e s ower and mor e conser vat ve t han t hose of "mor e n-
vo ved" ex ca NPs.
8. 1. 3. Accumu at on of f unct ons; Romer ' s Law n anguage.
As a r eady not ed by Sap r , B oomf e d, Whor f and ot her s,
Amer nd an anguages ar e r ch n af f xed PMs and t hese PMs
bear st r k ng y many f unct ons n t hem. I n add t on t o t he
or g na f unct on of per son- mar k ng, n many anguages t hese
mor phemes a so ser ve t o f u f ot her f undament a f unct ons
ke d st ngu sh ng sub| ect s f r omob| ect s, mar k ng t he def n -
t eness of t he ob| ect , mar k ng t he r ef er ent a dent t y or non-
dent t y of t wo const t uent s, mar k ng t he synt act c r e at ons
n subor d nat e c auses ( | aca t ec, Navaho) , mar k ng t he ver y
f act of subor d nat on ( Amhar c, Ubykh) and so on. That PM
af f xes may t ake over a t hese f unct ons s poss b e because,
on t he one hand, be ng of pr onom na char act er , t hey ar e
c ose y r e at ed t o t he semant c t ask of r ef er r ng and, on
t he ot her hand, t hey ar e a r eady r e at ed t o case- mar k ng
s nce one member of t he par ad gmmay have or g na y been a
case- mar ker and ot her member s cou d have come f r omsub| ect va ,
ob| ect va or possess ve pr onouns. Whenever some mpor t ant
d st nct on d sappear s n a anguage f or what ever r eason, t
s ver y ke y t hat t he f r st at t empt at t s r est or at on w
be one t hat pr eser ves t he or g na t ype of t he anguage.
I n ant hr opo ogy, t he phenomenon t hat v ng be ngs t end
t o adapt t hemse ves t o new c r cumst ances by nt r oduc ng n-
novat ons t hat make t he cont nuat on of t he t r ad t ona way
of f e poss b e s r ef er r ed t o as Romer ' s Law ( see Hocket t -
Ascher 1964) . S m ar y, f n an SOV anguage f or nst ance,
507
t he oss of wor d end ngs damages or even e m nat es t he
case syst em, t he t r ad t ona agg ut nat ve "way of f e"
and t he wor d or der t ype can be ma nt a ned t hr ough t he n-
novat on t hat af f xed per son- mar ker s beg n t o d st ngu sh
cases. Or , suppose t hat t he mar k ng of t he def n t eness of
t he ob| ect becomes necessar y. The SOV t ype may be pr eser ved
f PMs under t ake t h s t ask; so t her e w be no need f or an
SVO var ant n t he wor d or der or f or t he deve opment of
ar t c es; and so on. The ver y accumu at on of d f f er ent
f unct ons w t h n a s ng e e ement s ke y t o ncr ease t he
f or ma sur v va of t hat e ement t oo, such a mu t - f unct ona
e ement s ver y d f f cu t t o d spense w t h.
8. 2. The above t hr ee ar gument s ser ve t o suppor t t he c a m
t hat t he syst em of per son- mar k ng par ad gms, f once deve oped,
w change mor e s ow y t han expect ed, even t hough t hey usua -
y appear at t he ends of wor ds. I n connect on w t h t he r eso u-
t on of t h s pr ob em, however , we have t o emphas ze a f ur t her
r est r ct on. Name y, t s on y t he pr nc p e of af f xed per son-
mar k ng t hat s conser vat ve; t he phono og ca f or mof per son-
mar ker s s ver y ke y t o change even mor e r ap d y t han ot her
mor pho og ca e ement s ( ow ng t o t s wor d- f na pos t on) .
Th s s nd cat ed by t he f act t hat many anguages have
sever a PM par ad gms ( depend ng, on t ense, mood, aspect , vo ce,
et c. of t he ver b) ; and a so by t he f act t hat ( cf . Lehmann
1973) t he r e at ve or der of PM af f xes and ver b- mod f y ng
af f xes - and, et us add, t he r e at ve or der of possess ve
PM af f xes and case- mar ker s - s not ver y r egu ar even n
genet ca y r e at ed anguages. I n t h s at t er case, t hese
af f xes have pr obab y been cr eat ed, or r e- cr eat ed, n d f -
f er ent ages. Ther e ar e nnumer ab e nst ances show ng t he
subst t ut on of one phono og ca f or mof an af f xed PM by
anot her . Accor d ng t o our hypot hes s, t he exp anat on of such
subst t ut ons s t h s: as a r esu t of t he t endency f or oss
of end ngs, t he f unct on of per son- mar k ng had been weakened
at some po nt s and gr ammat ca per son had become mposs b e
t o d st ngu sh. Never t he ess, t h s d st nct on be ng a
pr me necess t y, t he anguage mmed at e y cr eat ed or adapt ed
a new mor pheme f or t hat p ace - a new mor pheme t hat mmed a-
t e y f t nt o t he a r eady ex st ng par ad gm of af f xes.
APPENDI X 1
Language Samp e
Language Af f at on Locat on Dat a Sour ce
Agt a
Amhar c
Ass n bo ne
Azt ec
Be a Coo a
B ackf oot
Bur at
D egueo
Esk mo ( gr . )
Hungar an
| aca t ec
Navaho
Nenet s
Ouechua
S er r a M wok
S us aw
Take ma
Tat ar
Ubykh
Ma ayo- Po nes an
Sem t c, Et h op an
Macr o- S ouan,
S ouan
Ut o- Azt ec
Sa sh
A gonqu an
A t a c, Mongo
Hokan, Yuman
Esk mo- A eut
Ur a c, Ugr c
Penut a, Mayan
Na- Dene, At hapascan
Ur a c, Samoyed
Andean- Equat or a ,
Andean
Penut a, M wok
Penut a, Yakonan
Penut a, so at ed
A t a c, Tur k sh
Nor t hwest Caucas a;
Ph pp nes
Et h op a
USA, Mont ana
Mex co
Canada,
Br t sh
Co umb a
USA, Mont ana
USSR, Bur at R.
USA, Ca f or n a
S- Gr een and
Hungar y
Guat ema a
USA, Ar zona
USSR, W- S ber a
Per u, Bo v a
USA, Ca f or n a
USA, Or egon
USA, Or egon
USSR, Tat ar R.
USSR, Caucasus
Ar ea
Heal ey 1960
Cohen 1936,
Ti t ov 1976
Levi n 1967
Whor f 1946
Newman 1969 a, b
Fr ant z 1966,
1971
Poppe 1960
Langdon 19 70
Swadesh 1946
Thal bi t zer
1911
Day 1973
Sapi r - Hoi j er
1967,
Akmaj i an-
Ander son 19 70
Haj du 1968
Last r a 1968
Par ker 1969
Fr eel and 1951
Fr acht enber g
1922
Sapi r 1922
Poppe 19 68
Dumz
1931
A
P
P
E
N
D
I
X

2

L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e

O
r
d
e
r

o
f

C
o
n
s
t
t
u
e
n
t
s

O
r
d
e
r

o
f

P
o
s
s
e
s
s
v
e

C
o
n
s
t
r
.

T
y
p
e

o
f

R
C

C
a
s
e

m
a
r
k
n
g

P
M

o
n

t
h
e

P
o
s
s
e
s
s
o
r

P
M

o
n

t
h
e

C
o
n
s
t
t
u
e
n
t

V
e
r
b

M
a
r
k
e
d

b
y

P
M

A
g
t
a

(
i
)

V
S
O

(
)
N
G

(
)

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
n
a
v
)

P
r
e
p
o
s
o
n
a

I

(
v

)

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

(
v
)

S
u
f
f
x
e
d
,

(
E
n
c
c
s
)

S
t
r

A
m
h
a
r
c

S
O
V

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
,

0

A
s
s
b
o
n
e

S
O
V

G
N

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
n
a

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

s
,

_

A
z
t
e
c

v
s
o
,

s
v

G
N

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

S
,

0

B
e
a

C
o
o
a

v
s
o

N
G

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
n
a

P
r
e
p
o
s
o
n
a

I

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
,

0

B
a
c
k
f
o
o
t

T

G
N

?

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

0

B
u
r
i
a
t

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

s

D
i
e
g
u
e
n
o

s
o
v

G
N

R
e
p
l
a
c
i
v
e

,

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

0

E
s
k
i
m
o

(
g
r
.
)

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

O
,

I
O

H
u
n
g
a
r
i
a
n

T
V
X

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
i
n
a
l

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

0
2
,
3
P
e
r
s

J
a
c
a
l
t
e
c

v
s
o

N
G

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
i
n
a
l

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

(
P
r
o
c
l
i
t
i
c
s
)

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

(
P
r
o
c
l
i
t
i
c
s
)

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

0

N
a
v
a
h
o

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

R
e
p
l
a
c
i
v
e

R
-
E
x
t
r
a
p
o
s
e
d
l

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
i
x
e
d

S
,

0

N
e
n
e
t
s

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
,
O

3
p
e
r
s

Q
u
e
c
h
u
a

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
i
n
a
i

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
i
n
a
l

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
i
x
e
d

S

_

'

1
,
2
P
e
r
s

S
e
r
r
a

M
w
o
k

T
V
X

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
n
a

R
-
E
x
t
r
a
p
o
s
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
,

0

S
u
s
a
w

T
V
X

G
N

?

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

I
n
f
e
x
o
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
,

0
,

I
0

T
a
k
e
m
a

T
V
X

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
n
a

P
o
s
t
n
o
m
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
,

0

T
a
t
a
r

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

S

U
b
y
k
h

s
o
v

G
N

P
r
e
n
o
m
n
a

S
u
f
f
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

P
r
e
f
x
e
d

S
,

0
,

I
0

511
Ref er ences
A en, W. S. ( 1964) : Tr ans t v t y and Possess on. Language,
40: 337- 343.
Akma| an, A. and Ander son, S. ( 1970) : On t he use of f our t h per son
n Nava| o, or Nava| o made har der . UAL 36: 1- 8.
Ander son, | . M. - | ones, C. ( 1974) ( eds. ) : H st or ca L ngu st cs
I - I I . Amst er dam, Nor t h Ho and
Ander son, S. ( 1978) : I nf ect ona Mor pho ogy. M emo, t o appear
n : Language Typo ogy and Synt act c F e d Wor k
Bar t sch, R. and Vennemann, T. ( 1972) : Semant c St r uct ur es: a St udy
n t he Re at on bet ween Semant cs and Synt ax. Fr ankf ur t am
Ma n, At henum
B oomf e d, L. ( 1946) : A gonqu an. I n: Osgood ( 1946) , 85- 130.
Boas, F. ( 1911) ( ed. ) : Handbook of Amer can I nd an Languages.
Par t 1, Wash ngt on
Boas, F. ( 1922) ( ed. ) : Handbook of Amer can I nd an Languages.
Par t 2, Wash ngt on
Cohen, M. ( 1936) : Tr a t de angue Amhar que. Par s
Day, C. ( 1973) : The | aca t ec Language. I nd ana Un ver s t y
Pub cat ons, B oom ngt on.
Dumz , G. ( 1931) : La angue des Oubykhs, Par s.
Fr acht enber g, L. | . ( 1922) : S us awan ( Lower Umpqua) . I n: Boas
( 1922) , 431- 631.
Fr ant z, D. G. ( 1966) : Per son ndex ng n B ackf oot . I | AL 32. 1:
50- 58.
Fr ant z, D. G. ( 1971) : Towar d a Gener at ve Gr ammar of B ackf oot .
Summer I nst t ut e of L ngu st cs, Nor man, Ok ahoma.
Fr ee and, L. S. ( 1951) : Language of t he S er r a M wok. I nd ana
Un ver s t y Pub cat ons n Ant hr opo ogy and L ngu st cs,
Memo r 6.
G von, T. ( 1971) : H st or ca synt ax and synchr on c mor pho-
ogy: an ar cheo og st ' s f e d t r p. I n: Paper s f r omt he
7t h Reg ona Meet ng, Ch cago L ngu st c Soc et y, 394- 415.
G vn, T. ( 1975) : Top c, Pr onoun and Gr ammat ca Agr eement . I n:
L ( 1975) , 149- 188.
Ha| du P. ( 1968) : Chr est omat h a Samo ed ca. Tanknyvk ado,
Budapest .
Hea ey, P. M. ( 1960) : An Agt a Gr ammar . Summer I nst t ut e of
L ngu st cs, Man a.
Hocket t , C. F. - Asher , R. ( 1964) : The human r evo ut on. Cur r ent
Ant hr opo ogy, S: 135- 147.
I ngr am, D. ( 1975) : A not e on wor d or der n Pr ot o- Sa sh.
I | AL 41 : 165- 168.
. K ss K. ( 1978) : A magyar mondat ok egy sz nt akt ka mode | e.
NyK. 80: 261- 286.
Langdon, M. ( 1970) : A Gr ammar of D egueo. Un ver s t y of
Ca f or n a Pub cat ons, L ngu st cs 66. Un ver s t y of
Ca f or n a Pr ess.
Last r a, Y. ( 1968) : Cochabamba Ouechua Synt ax. Mout on.
Lehmann, W. P. ( 1973) : A st r uct ur a pr nc p e of anguage
and t s mp cat ons. Language 49: 47- 66.
Lev n, N. B. ( 1964) : The Ass n bo ne Language. I nd ana Un -
ver s t y, B oom ngt on.
L , Ch. N. ( 1975) : Wor d Or der and Wor d Or der Change. Un ver -
s t y of Texas Pr ess, Aust n and London.
Mar t net , A. ( 1963) : E ment s de ngu st que gener a e.
L br a r e Ar mand Co n, Par s 3
e
d t on
Newman, S. ( 1969a) : Be a Coo a Gr ammat ca Pr ocesses and
For m C asses. UAL 35: 175- 180.
Newman, S. ( 1969b) : Be a Coo a Par ad gms. UAL 35: 299- 306.
Osgood, S. ( ed. ) ( 1946) : L ngu st c St r uct ur es of Nat ve
Amer ca. V k ng Fund Pub cat ons n Ant hr opo ogy, Number
S x.
Par ker , G. | . ( 1969) : Ayacucho Ouechua Gr ammar and D ct onar y.
Mout on.
Poppe, N. ( 1960) : Bur at Gr ammar . I nd ana Un ver s t y Pub -
cat ons, Ur a c and A t a c Ser es 2.
Poppe, N. ( 1968) : Tat ar Manua . I nd ana Un ver s t y Pub -
cat ons, Ur a c and A t a c Ser es, Vo . 25.
Rad cs K. ( f or t hcom ng) : Typo og ca not es t o t he r econst r uc-
t on of PM suf f xes n t he Ur a c anguages.
Sap r , E. ( 1922) : The Take ma anguage of Sout h- West er n
Or egon. I n: Boas ( 1922) , 1- 297.
Sap r , E. and Ho | er , H. ( 1967) : The Phono ogy and Mor pho ogy
of t he Navaho Language. Un ver s t y of Ca f or n a Pub ca-
t ons, L ngu st cs 50, Un ver s t y of Ca f or n a Pr ess,
Swadesh, M. ( 1946) : Sout h Gr een and c ( Esk mo) . I n: Osgood
( 1946) , 30- 55.
Tha b t zer , W. ( 1911) : Esk mo. I n: Boas ( 1911) 967- 1069.
T t ov, T. T. ( 1976) : The Moder n Amhar c Language. "Nauka"
Pub sh ng House, Moscow.
Vennemann, T. (19 74) : Top cs, sub| ect s and wor d or der : f r om
SXV t o SVX v a TVX. I n: Ander son- | ones ( 1974) , T. 339-
377.
Vennemann, T. ( 1975) : An exp anat on of dr f t . I n: L ( 1975) ,
269- 307.
Voor h s, P. H. ( 1974) : I nt r oduct on t o t he K ckapoo Language.
I nd ana Un ver s t y, B oom ngt on.
Whor f , B. L, ( 1946) : The M pa A t a D a ect of Azt ec. I n:
Osgood ( 1946) , 367- 398.
MODEL THEORETI C SEMANTI CS OF PERFORMATI VES
Anna Szabol csi
Ex st ng pr oposa s f or t he t r eat ment of per f or mat ves
n Mont ague' s f ramework
1
, shar e t he common f eat ur e of ass m -
at ng per f or mat ves t o pr opos t ons. I n t he ght of t he
f act t hat mode t heor et c semant cs t akes t he descr pt ve
f unct on of anguage as a po nt of depar t ur e, t h s pr ocedur e
may seemon y nat ur a ; never t he ess, t does not seem t o cap-
t ur e t he nt u t on I be eve t o under e Aust n' s t heor y.
Rat her t han at t r but ng t he pecu ar t es of per f or mat ves t o
not h ng but convent ons of use, n t h s paper I appr oach t he
pr ob em f r om t he ot her way r ound: f r omwhat we know about t he
use of per f or mat ves I t r y t o wor k out what t he r cor r espond-
ng mean ngs can be n t er ms of mode t heor y.
I gr eat y benef t ed f r om comment s on ear er ver s ons of t h s
paper , made by Fer enc A t r cht er , Har r y Bunt , and Zeno Vend er .
1
For nst ance, Dav d Lew s, Gener a Semant cs, n: Dav dson and
Har man ( eds. ) Semant cs of Nat ur a Language, Re de , 19 72. and
Ro and Hausser , Sur f ace Compos t ona t y and t he Semant cs of
Mood, n Gr oenend | k and St okhof ( eds. ) Amst er dam Paper s n
For ma Gr ammar , Vo . I I . , Cent r a e I nt er f acu t e t , Un ver s t e t
van Amst er dam, 1978.
Nat ur a y, one may not expect t hat mode t heor et c se-
mant cs shou d ncor por at e some par t cu ar t heor y of speech
act s, t can on y be expect ed t o gr asp some r e evant f acet
of t he phenomenon t hose t heor es ar e concer ned w t h. Exp c t
per f or mat ves p ay a d st ngu shed r o e n speech act t heo-
2
r es ( bot h h st or ca y and concept ua y) and t s t he "per -
f or mat ve phenomenon" t hat seems | ust f ab e t o be ong w t h n
t he scope of mode t heor y. As a f r st st ep, t he per f or mat ve
phenomenon can be char act er zed as f o ows: f or ma y dec ar -
at ve sent ences d v de nt o t wo gr oups w t h r espect t o what
happens when t hey ar e ut t er ed. I n say ng ' I congr at u at e you'
t s poss b e t o per f or m t he act of congr at u at ng, t hat s,
t he ver y act r ef er r ed t o n t he sent ence, wher eas n say ng
' I amwa k ng
1
t s mposs b e t o per f or m t he act of wa k ng.
I t wou d of cour se be an us on t o be eve t hat t heo-
r y can be comp et e y pee ed of f t h s phenomenon. The ver y
f act t hat one f nds t r emar kab e s a r eady a consequence of
some t heor et ca backgr ound. Ther ef or e, we f r st have t o show
t hat Aust n' s or g na obser vat on s not so a en t o mode
t heor y t hat t he at t er may not f nd r emar kab e what he f ound
See Zeno Vend er , Res Cog t ans, Cor ne Un ver s t y Pr ess,
19 72. p. 8: "We may r eca t hat Aust n' s nvest gat ons be-
g n w t h an at t empt t o dr aw a d st nct on bet ween "per f or ma-
t ve" and "const at ve" ut t er ances. As t h s t ask cannot be
accomp shed t o h s sat sf act on, he deve ops t he t heor y of
ocut onar y act s, t hat s, of ocut onar y f or ces accom-
pany ng a "happy" or "successf u " ut t er ances. I n t h s new
per spect ve t he per f or mat ve- const at ve d st nct on f ades a-
way and what he pr ev ous y ca ed "per f or mat ve" ut t er ances
r et a n no spec a st at us except f or a st r onger emphas s on
some ocut onar y f or ce or anot her . Never t he ess, and exact -
y because of t h s emphas s, t he nt u t ve not on of an o-
MODEL THEORETI C SEMANTI CS OF PERFORMATI VES 517
so, and second y, we have t o po nt out t o what ext ent Aust n' s
exp anat on s compat b e w t h mode t heor y. These w be t he
t asks of Sect on 1. I n ana ys ng Aust n' s t ext s I w not t r y
t o be f a t hf u t o t he h st or y of sc ence, I w on y nvest -
gat e h s c a ms as cha enges t o pr esent - day mode t heor et c
semant cs. My ma n po nt w be t o dr aw a shar p ne bet ween
t he semant c and pr agmat c aspect s of per f or mat ves and t her e-
by d scover a gap n Aust n' s t r eat ment . Th s w n my v ew
nat ur a y ead t o t he pr oposa n Sect on 2, t hat s, t o
t r eat ng per f or mat ves as denot ng changes n nt ens ona mod-
e s. The r est of Sect on 2 w be concer ned w t h t he st at us
of f e c t y cond t ons and a t ent at ve ext ens on of Mont ague' s
The Pr oper Tr eat ment of Ouant f cat on n Or d nar y Eng sh.
I n t h s paper I do not of f er an exhaust ve ana ys s of
per f or mat ves n Mont ague' s f r amewor k. I concent r at e on a f ew
pr ob ems I be eve t o be bot h per f or mat ve- spec f c and com-
mon t o a per f or mat ves. As r egar ds t o any par t cu ar sen-
t ence, I et t he ndependent r esu t s of t he t heor es of
speech act s and gr ammar have t he f na wor d of | udgement .
Sect on 1
1. 1. Aust n' s d st nct on r ev s t ed
I n "Per f or mat ve Ut t er ances" Aust n nt r oduces h s t op c as
f o ows: "I want t o d scuss a k nd of ut t er ances wh ch ooks
ke a st at ement and, gr ammat ca y, I suppose, wou d be
c assed as a st at ement , wh ch s not nonsens ca , and yet s
not t r ue or f a se (...) f a per son makes an ut t er ance of
t h s sor t we shou d say t hat he s do ng somet h ng r at her
( f oot not e 2 cont nued) - cut onar y act r ema ns dependent upon
t he pr ev ous y descr bed char act er st cs of per f or mat ve
ut t er ances. " ( Emphas s supp ed)
t han mer e y say ng somet h ng (...) n a t hese cases t
wou d be absur d t o r egar d t he t h ng I say as a r epor t of
t he per f or mance of t he act on wh ch s undoubt ed y done - -
t he act on of bet t ng, or chr st en ng, or apo og z ng. We
shou d r at her say t hat , n say ng what I do, I act ua y
per f or m t hat act on (...) Now t hese k nds of ut t er ances ar e
3
t he ones t hat we ca per f or mat ve ut t er ances. "
As opposed t o my nnocent char act er zat on of t he per -
f or mat ve phenomenon, as g ven above, t he f r st t heor et ca
sur p us n Aust n' s t ext s t he mmed at e oppos t on of per -
f or mat v t y and t r ut h- f a s t y. The not on of t r ut h p ay ng
an mpor t ant r o e n mode t heor y as we , Aust n' s obser va-
t on count s as an obv ous cha enge. The st at us of h s d s-
t nct ons needs t o be r ev sed, however , as t s by no means
unamb guous what he means by t he t er m " ut t er ance" , name y,
whet her he t h nks of what we ut t er or of t he act of ut t er ng
t . The f r st nt er pr et at on seems t o be suppor t ed by t he
f act t hat n Aust n' s v ew, "ut t er ances" ar e gr ammat ca y
( . e. synt act ca y) c ass f ab e, f ur t her , t hat some "ut t er -
ances" ar e st at ement s and can t hus be t r ue or f a se, and f -
na y, by h s expr ess on "t he t h ng I say". On t he ot her hand,
t he act - nt er pr et at on s suppor t ed by t he f act t hat t he per -
f or mat ve char act er of an ut t er ance can be demonst r at ed n a
speech s t uat on (" n say ng what I do, I act ua y per f or m
4
t hat act on") .
| . L. Aust n, "Per f or mat ve Ut t er ances, " n Ph osoph ca Pa-
per s, Oxf or d, 1976. p. 235.
4
See a so t he f o ow ng oc n How t o Do Th ngs w t h Wor ds,
ed. by | . O. Ur mson, Oxf or d, 1962. p. 6: "What ar e we t o ca
2
a sent ence or an ut t er ance of t h s t ype? I pr opose t o ca
t a per f or mat ve sent ence or a per f or mat ve ut t er ance, or ,
f or shor t , a ' per f or mat ve' (...) ( f oot not e 4 cont nued)
Th s amb gu t y - wh ch eads t o an amb gu t y bet ween
the eve s of semant cs and pr agmat cs - can be t r aced n
a h s wor ks, a t hough t he r over a sp r t s n t he d -
r ect on of pr agmat cs. Th s amb gu t y s appar ent y r at her
r r e evant f or Aust n h mse f , t s most r e evant t o us,
however . The scope of mode t heor et c semant cs on y nc udes
t he r e at on bet ween expr ess ons and t h ngs n t he mode s of
t he wor d, wher e t hose mode s on y cont a n const r uct s neces-
sar y f or nt er pr et ng t he t er a mean ngs of expr ess ons.
The quest on of what happens n par t cu ar s t uat ons n
wh ch t hose expr ess ons ar e ut t er ed be ongs t o t he scope of
t he t heor y of anguage use, or pr agmat cs . A t hough at
pr esent we know of no f u - b own pr agmat c t heor y based on
mode t heor et c semant cs and us ng s m ar y advanced mat h-
emat ca t oo s, we can f or m a concept on of t on t he bas s
of ess mat hemat ca - m nded exp or at ons. I mag ne t hat t h s
pr agmat cs has t o account f or t he char act er st cs of anguage
use t ak ng nt o account bot h t he commun cat ve f unct on and
t he soc a embedd ng of anguage but , most mpor t ant y, has
t o r e y upon t he abst r act ngu st c syst em. Semant cs n
( f oot not e 4 cont nued) ' Sent ences' f or m a c ass of ' ut t er -
ances' , wh ch c ass s t o be def ned, so f ar as I amcon-
cer ned, gr ammat ca y"
p. 11: "I n no case do we say t hat t he ut t er ance was f a se
1
but r at her t hat t he ut t er ance - or r at her t he act , e. g.
t he pr om se - was vo d (...)
1
We sha avo d d st ngu sh ng t hese pr ec se y because
t he d st nct on s not n po nt . "
The k nd of ndex ca pr agmat cs Mont ague dev sed w f a
w t h n semant cs n t h s sense. I n f act , no mat t er how many
t up es nd ces shou d be as ong as t he "mode of t he wor d"
does not nvo ve se f - cont a ned mode s of t he nt er na st r uc-
t ur e of t he speech s t uat on.
t ur n has t o p ay n t he hands of pr agmat cs : t has t o def ne
t he mean ngs of expr ess ons n a way wh ch exp a ns t he
poss b t es of t he r us es .
Th s r equ r ement s a r eady sat sf ed n t he case of
st at ement s. I t s a par exce ence semant c pr oper t y of t he
sent ence ' I am wa k ng' t hat t can be t r ue or f a se. Regar d-
ess of whet her t h s sent ence s ever ut t er ed, t s mean ng
can be def ned by spec f y ng wh ch st at es of af f a r s t s
t r ue of and wh ch of t hem t s f a se of . Th s k nd of t r eat -
ment s mot vat ed by t he under y ng conv ct on t hat t he r e a-
t on of t h s sent ence t o f act s of t he wor d s descr pt ve
( t r ut h and f a s t y ar e but aux ar y not ons f or expr ess ng
t h s ) . The pr mar y end t o wh ch one may use t h s sent ence
when ut t er ng t s t o per f or m an act of des cr b ng, or r e-
por t ng. Now, when Aust n c a ms t hat " per f or mat ve ut t er -
ances" d f f er f r om st at ement s n t hat t hey cannot be t r ue or
f a se one m ght expect t hat he s go ng t o po nt out some par
exce ence semant c d f f er ence s nce, obv ous y, t he one k nd
of semant c char act er zat on ( . e. t he pot ent a of be ng t r ue
or f a se) ought t o be opposed t o anot her one. Sur pr s ng y
enough, however , as de f r om g v ng a poss b e st of synt ac-
t c char act er st cs of " per f or mat ve ut t er ances" Aust n on y
char act er zes per f or mat ves pr agmat ca y ( as he on y concen-
t r at es on speech act s t hems e ves ) . As ong as t he d st nct on
of st at ement s and per f or mat ves s ma nt a ned, t r ut h or f a -
s t y s opposed t o f e c t y or nf e c t y, t hat s , a seman-
t c qua f cat on t o a pr agamt c one. I t needs t o be empha-
s zed, however , t hat t h s eve sw t ch ng s by no means ex-
p c t n Aust n as t h s sw t ch ng s on y poss b e t hanks t o
t he non- d st nct on of semant cs and pr agmat cs ( wh ch s f a-
c t at ed by t he amb guous use of t he t er m " ut t er ance" ) .
I n sp t e of t h s nev t ab e asymmet r y n t he d st nct on
of st at ement s and per f or mat ves , Aust n' s c a m st pr esent s
a cha enge f or mode t heor y. I f we pr o| ect t he f act s of use
back t o t he abst r act ngu st c syst em t o a per m ss b e ( and
necessar y) ext ent , we must be ab e t o exp a n why ' I con-
gr at u at e you' and ' I amwa k ng' can be ( or , ar e bound t o
be) used so d f f er ent y. I t seems r easonab e t o accept t hat
' I congr at u at e you' and t s br ot her s cannot be ca ed t r ue
or f a se. Never t he ess, t he quest on f or mode t heor y now
s how t o f t he above d scover ed gap n semant cs; n ot h-
er wor ds, how t o char act er ze ' I congr at u at e you' at t he
eve of pur e semant cs t hen.
1. 2. Aust n' s ob| ect on r ev s t ed
Rat her t han t o pr oceed t o t he act ua pr oposa d r ect y, an
excur sus seems t o be n or der her e. When set t ng out t o base
an ar gument on t he d st nct on of st at ement and per f or mat ve
one must not f or get about t he f act t hat , hav ng e abor at ed t ,
Aust n a so d d h s best t o r a se doubt s w t h r espect t o t h s
appea ng d st nct on. Ther ef or e t needs t o be shown t hat ,
at east f r om our par t cu ar po nt of v ew, Aust n' s conc u-
s on t hat t her e s no essent a d f f er ence bet ween "per f or m-
at ve ut t er ances" and t he r est s not nescapab e.
When d scar d ng t he or g na d st nct on Aust n obser ves
t hat a k nds of sent ences and non- sent ences can be "per f or m-
at ve ut t er ances" ; t hat "ut t er ances" car e ess y qua f ed as
per f or mat ves ar e not a ways per f or mat ve; t hat t he c ass f -
cat on of t he t ype ' I st at e t hat . . . ' s par adox ca ; t hat
t r ut h and f a s t y ar e but gr oss abe s and st at ement s can a -
so be nf e c t ous et c. I t wou d be f ar t oo engt hy t o con-
s der each of t hese po nt s n det a so I mer e y nd cat e t he
ma n scheme of my ar gument . I t appear s t hat , s m ar y t o t he
case w t h set t ng up t he d st nct on, n ar gu ng aga nst t
Aust n cont nues t o make use of t he non- d st nct on of seman-
t cs and pr agmat cs.
Th s t endency s most per sp cuous per haps n t he t r eat -
ment of non- exp c t per f or mat ves. The expr ess on ' Bu ' or
' The bu s t o char ge' can n cer t a n cases be ut t er ed w t h
t he same f or ce as t he expr ess on ' I war n you t hat t he bu s
t o char ge' , never t hel ess, t hi s sameness of f or ce can onl y be
a pr oper t y of ut t er ances i n t he act - sense wher eas we f i nd no
t r ace of such an equi val ence i n t he meani ngs of t he cor r e-
spondi ng expr essi ons. Test ed agai nst t he cr i t er i on of "i n
sayi ng what I do, I act ual l y per f or m t hat act i on" as wel l ,
onl y ' I war n you t hat . . . ' wi l l t ur n out t o be per f or mat i ve
( si nce when ut t er i ng ' Bul l ' I nei t her say what I do nor per -
f or mt he act i on ( ?) t hat bul l , and si mi l ar l y f or t he ot her
exampl e) . I n or der t o di sambi guat e t he t er m "ut t er ance" I
shal l f r omnow on use t he t er m "per f or mat i ve sent ence" f or
expr essi ons cal l ed "expl i ci t per f or mat i ves" by Aust i n. The
act of ut t er i ng t hose expr essi ons may st i l l be cal l ed a "per -
f or mat i ve ut t er ance" but i n t he case of ut t er i ng ot her ex-
pr essi ons t hi s t er m seems ei t her unj ust i f i ed or si mpl y t au-
t ol ogous.
I t may al so be usef ul t o dwel l on t he i nf el i ci t i es of
st at ement s f or a whi l e, i n or der t o demonst r at e t hat t hey do
not ' obscur e t he i nt ended di st i nct i on, ei t her . The vi ol at i on
of pr esupposi t i ons can be handl ed by any not pur el y t wo- val ued
l ogi c at t he ver y l evel of semant i cs. The quest i on whet her a
st at ement ( e. g. ' Fr ance i s hexagonal ' ) i s exact or r ough
pr esent s no unsol vabl e pr obl em ei t her . One possi bi l i t y i s t o
use f uzzy l ogi c, wher e t he t r ut h val ue of a st at ement speci -
f i es t he measur e of i t s t r ut h. I t needs t o be emphasi zed,
The r el at i on bet ween cer t ai n expl i ci t per f or mat i ves and cer -
t ai n non- decl ar at i ves i s a sl i ght l y di f f er ent mat t er si nce
t he sameness of f or ce i n t he case of ' I or der you t o l eave'
and ' Leave' i s not so much a f unct i on of t he par t i cul ar speech
si t uat i on but a syst emat i c phenomenon. St i l l , t hei r equi va-
l ence i s al so mer el y pr agmat i c. For a t r eat ment of i mper at i ves
and i nt er r ogat i ves see Hausser ( 1978) , whose anal yses I f ul l y
accept al t hough my pr oposal f or expl i ci t per f or mat i ves i s at
var i ance wi t h hi s.
MODEL THEORETI C SEMANTI CS OF PERFORMATI VES 5 23
however , t hat model t heor et i c semant i cs assi gns t r ut h val ues
t o sent ences not wi t h r espect t o act ual r eal i t y but wi t h r e-
spect t o i t s mat hemat i cal model s. I t i s one quest i on whet her
Fr ance i s r eal l y hexagonal and anot her i s whet her we can mod-
el i t so. I n case we choose t o, t hi s sent ence wi l l be t r ue
even i n usual t wo- val ued l ogi cs. Such a di st i nct i on bet ween
r eal i t y and i t s model s i s not mer el y pl ayi ng wi t h mat hemat -
i cs, however : i t cor r esponds t o what Roman J akobson expr esses
by sayi ng t hat l i ngui st i c si gns r ef er t o an i nt er nal i zed
wor l d of human exper i ences. Fi nal l y, i t seems t o be a mat t er
of pr agmat i cs whet her we act ual l y bel i eve what we say and
whet her we ar e ent i t l ed t o sayi ng so ( e. g. t o say t hat some-
one el se i s not wel l ) .
Aust i n' s pr ogr ammat i c concl usi on was: "st at i ng some-
t hi ng i s per f or mi ng an act j ust as much as i s gi vi ng an or -
der or gi vi ng a war ni ng (...) What we need besi des t he ol d
doct r i ne about meani ngs i s a new doct r i ne about al l t he pos-
7
si bl e f or ces of t he ut t er ances" . As i t wi l l have become
cl ear f r omwhat has been sai d above, I do agr ee t hat al l
cases of sayi ng somet hi ng shoul d be st udi ed as act s. Whi ch,
however , does not amount t o al so agr eei ng t o abandoni ng se-
mant i cs f or t he sake of pr agmat i cs and, f ur t her , I see no
r eason why we shoul d not di st i ngui sh bet ween per f or mat i ve
sent ences and ot her expr essi ons i n semant i cs. Assumi ng t hat
t he l ack or pr esence of each of t he f ol l owi ng pr oper t i es can
be deci ded on i ndependent gr ounds ( f or any l anguage and any
expr essi on) , I t ake t he cl ass of per f or mat i ve sent ences t o
i ncl ude f or mal l y decl ar at i ve sent ences whi ch ( i ) cont ai n a
so- cal l ed per f or mat i ve ver b, t hat i s, whi ch ar e expl i ci t , ( i i )
whose synt act i c f or m can be char act er i zed, l anguage- speci f i -
cal l y, wi t h t he t ense, aspect , mood, per son et c. of t he per -
f or mat i ve ver b and wi t h t he nat ur e of i t s possi bl e compl e-
7
Per f or mat i ve Ut t er ances, p. 251
ment s ( a so adm t t ng t hat t h s synt act c char act er zat on
need not be un que and t her ef or e per f or mat ve sent ences may
be homonymous w t h some st at ement s, wh ch causes no t r ou-
b es n nt er pr et at on as ong as we pr ov de d f f er ent der va-
t ons f or t he per f or mat ve and t he const at ve ver s ons) , and
( ) t o wh ch t he " n say ng what I do, I act ua y per f or m
t hat act on" t est app es.
F na y, t shou d be not ed t hat I cannot accept t he
second par t of Aust n' s pr ogr am, as c t ed above, on t s t -
er a f or m. Wh e condemn ng t he o d doct r ne about mean ngs
f or be ng f u y descr pt ve, Aust n does n f act r e y upon t
as t s c ear f r omh s not on of ocut onar y mean ng. Locu-
t onar y mean ng, however , cannot exhaust t he f u mean ng of
a per f or mat ve sent ence, on y r e at es cer t a n par t s of t . I t
seems t hat what we need bes de t hat o d doct r ne about mean-
ngs s not on y a new doct r ne about f or ces but a so a
sma er - sca e new doct r ne about t he mean ngs of per f or mat ve
sent ences.
Sect on 2
2. 1. Denot ng changes
Reca t hat Aust n opposed t he act ve char act er of per f or m-
at ves t o "mer e y say ng somet h ng" . I n what sense can t h s
oppos t on be r egar ded as va d, cons der ng t hat a speech
act s have an nf uence on t he speech s t uat on ( f act or s ke
t he hear er ' s know edge or st at e of m nd a so nc uded under
t h s gener a abe ) ? To descr be some st at e of af f a r s s
mer e y say ng somet h ng n t he sense t hat t eaves t he st at e
of af f a r s n quest on unt ouched. Wher eas a speech act s ar e
"act ve" or "per f or mat ve" f r om a pr agmat c po nt of v ew,
on y t he mak ng of an exp c t per f or mat ve ut t er ance has
t he add t ona pr oper t y t hat t he pr mar y nf uence t has
shou d be descr bed n t er ms of t s t er a cont ent . I n
ot her wor ds, exp c t per f or mat ves ar e act ve n r e at on
t o t he mat t er s t he r t er a mean ngs ar e concer ned w t h,
and const at ves ( or ot her expr ess ons) ar e by no means ac-
t ve n t h s sense. Th s n t ur n suggest s t hat t he un que
act ve nat ur e of exp c t per f or mat ves s a semant c pr op-
er t y .
We can say n gener a t hat an act s somet h ng t hat
br ngs about some change. Speech act s n gener a br ng about
changes n t he speech s t uat on and shou d t her ef or e be Char -
act er zed n t hose t er ms, wh ch I ca pr agmat c t er ms
8
. At
t he eve of semant cs, however , mode s of t he wor d on y
p ct ur e t h ngs our expr ess ons r ef er t o. S nce exp c t per -
f or mat ves ar e act ve n t h s ver y r e at on, I pr opose t hat
per f or mat ve sent ences shou d denot e changes n t he mode s.
I n nt u t ve t er ms we can say t hat t he t er a mean ng of a
per f or mat ve sent ence spec f es how t he wor d wou d change
f t he sent ence wer e ut t er ed ( under appr opr at e c r cumst ances) .
Mor e pr ec se y, I t ake a change t o be a t r ans t on f r om
one st at e of af f a r s nt o anot her . Cor r espond ng y, t he denot -
at on of t he sent ence ' I congr at u at e you' at an ndex a s
a t r ans t on f r oma t o anot her ndex b. The nat ur e of t h s
par t cu ar t r ans t on, or change, can be char act er zed by
t he f act t hat b s such t hat t her e t s t r ue t hat t he per son
denot ed by ' I ' has congr at u at ed t he per son denot ed by ' you' .
Not e t hat t he sent ence denot es t he change and not t he r esu t -
ng st at e of af f a r s b and s t her ef or e cr uc a y d f f er ent
f r om st at ement s. Yet , t he above char act er zat on of b pr e-
9
ser ves a t s "descr pt ve cont ent " .
See f or nst ance H. C. Bunt , D a ogue Ana ys s and Speech Act
Theor y, I nst t ut e f or Per cept on Resear ch, Manuscr pt no.
330/ I I . E ndhoven, 1978.
9
I assume t hat b f o ows a n t me and t hat t hey ar e dent ca ,
I n or der t o ncor por at e t h s pr oposa nt o Mont ague
semant cs we have t o make an mpor t ant a t er at on on cur -
r ent y used mode s of nt ens ona og c. Those mode s ar e
st at c - t her e ar e no changes n t hem. Th s may sound sur -
pr s ng: how s Mont ague t hen capab e of account ng f or such
ever yday sent ences as ' Pet er ent er s' - does t h s sent ence
not denot e some change? Her e t he d f f er ence bet ween r ea t y
and t s mode s needs t o be emphas zed aga n. I n r ea t y,
ent er ng s a change and st and ng st s not ; Mont ague,
however , neut r a zes t h s d f f er ence n t he cour se of mod-
e ng when he capt ur es t he mean ngs of bot h of t he ver bs
' ent er ' and ' st and st ' w t h ( nt ens ons of ) set s. Those
set s ar e qu t e a ke n a mat hemat ca sense; on y when we
conf r ont - mode and r ea t y does t t ur n out t hat t he set of
t hose ent er ng s a set of mov ng peop e wh e t he set of
t hose st and ng st s not . Th s pr ocedur e s | ust f ed
s nce anguage t se f seems t o neut r a ze t h s d f f er ence,
1 0
at east t o a cer t a n mpor t ant ext ent . Never t he ess, an-
guage does not seem t o neut r a ze t he d f f er ence bet ween
' I congr at u at e you' and ' I amwa k ng' ( or , ' I amcongr at -
u at ng you' ) n t he same sense. The t r eat ment of per f or m-
at ve sent ences may t hus be a good r eason f or mak ng nt en-
s ona mode s dynam c, t hat s, t o a ow f or changes t o hap-
pen, not on y n r ea t y (as t hey do n t he case of ent er ng)
but a so n t he mode s of r ea t y.
Changes n nt ens ona mode s can be r epr esent ed by
( f oot not e 9 cont nued) except f or t he r esu t of t he change n
quest on. Not e t hat n t he pr esent f or mu at on per f or mat ve
sent ences ar e not se f - ver f y ng.
10
That bot h t he qua f cat ons "cer t a n" and " mpor t ant " ar e
necessar y becomes c ear f we t h nk of accomp shment ver bs
( cf . D. R. Dowt y, Towar d a Semant c Ana ys s of Ver b Aspect . . . ,
L ngu st cs and Ph osophy 1977/ 1) .
f unct i ons whose domai ns and r anges bot h cont ai n ( i ndi ces of )
st at es of af f ai r s. Such f unct i ons map st at es of af f ai r s i nt o
ot her s and ar e t hus mat hemat i cal r epr esent at i ves of t he no-
t i on of change as sket ched above. The necessar y ext ensi on of
i nt ensi onal l ogi c (as a mer e mat hemat i cal possi bi l i t y) has
11
al r eady been i nt r oduced by Dani el Gal l i n . I n di st i nct i on t o
t he or i gi nal def i ni t i on by Mont ague, i n whi ch s was not a
t ype, Gal l i n' s def i ni t i on of t ypes i s as f ol l ows:
( i ) e, t , s T'
( i i ) , T' <, > T'
By i nt r oduci ng s as a t ype i t becomes possi bl e t o def i ne f unc-
t i ons of t ype <(s,s)> , whi ch ser ves as t he t ype of possi bl e de-
not at i ons of per f or mat i ve sent ences. ( Obvi ousl y, t he t er m
"sent ence" shoul d r at her be r eser ved f or t r ut h val ue denot i ng
expr essi ons but I assume t hat t he mai nt enance of t hi s j ar gon
wi l l not be conf usi ng her e. ) Cor r espondi ngl y, t he meani ng of
a per f or mat i ve sent ence i s r epr esent ed by t he i nt ensi on of al l
1 9
possi bl e changes i t denot es and i s of t ype <s , <s, s>> .
2. 2. The st at us of f el i ci t y condi t i ons
The f i r st pr obl em ar i si ng i n connect i on wi t h t hi s pr oposal
i s concer ned wi t h t he i ni t i al i ndex a.. I s i t necessar y t o
i mpose r est r i ct i ons on t he domai n of t he change f unct i on and
i f so, t hen what ki nds? The conf r ont at i on of speech act t heor y
1 1
D. Gal l i n, I nt ensi onal and Hi gher Or der Modal Logi c, 8
Two- sor t ed t ype t heor y, pp. 59- 63, El sevi er , 1975.
12
The i dea of accomodat i ng changes i n i nt ensi onal model s i s
by no means unpr ecedent ed i n l i t er at ur e. The semant i c ef f ect
of st at e- swi t cher s and pr edi cat e t r ansf or mer s used by van
Emde Boas and J anssen ( Mont acf ue Gr ammar and Pr ogr ammi ng Lan-
guages , i n Gr oenendi j k and St okhof ( eds. ) , 1978) i s si mi l ar
t o t hat of our change f unct i ons; never t hel ess, t hose bei ng
oper at or s, t he cor r espondi ng changes cannot be denot at i ons of
expr essi ons.
and mode t heor et c semant cs makes t he need f or such r est r c-
t ons at east quest onab e. Never t he ess, I w not t ake
s des her e, on y nd cat e my doubt s.
I t s necessar y t o mpose r est r ct ons on a on y f we
t h nk t hat t her e ar e st at es of af f a r s f r omwh ch t her e can
be no t r ans t on t o any ot her v a ' I congr at u at e you' or
' I pr om se t o come' et c. Fr om t h s c a m t her e f o ow t wo
conc us ons, name y, ( ) r est r ct ons on a may be concer ned
w t h f e c t y cond t ons, and ( ) t he t heor et ca st at us of
t hose r est r ct ons may be s m ar t o t hat of pr esuppos t ons.
Pr esuppos t ons ar e usua y hand ed by exc ud ng st at es of
af f a r s n wh ch t he pr esuppos t ons of t he st at ement ar e not
f u f ed f r om t he doma n of t he f unct on t hat ass gns t r ut h
va ues t o t he sent ence. The s t uat on may be s m ar n our
case: we m ght r est r ct t he doma n of t he change f unct on so
t hat t may not t ur n st at es of af f a r s ack ng cer t a n pr oper -
t es nt o ot her s.
When t r y ng t o hand e f e c t y cond t ons s m ar y t o
pr esuppos t ons t he f r st pr ob emwe ar e f aced w t h s t h s:
t he f u f ment of pr esuppos t ons s necessar y f or a st at e-
ment even t o be f a se - ar e t her e ( some) f e c t y cond t ons
t hat ar e necessar y f or t he speech act even t o be nf e c t ous?
13
St udy ng Sear e' s ana ys s of pr om s ng we f nd t hat
he makes no such a d st nct on. Never t he ess, a t hough he
mer e y qua f es pr epar at or y cond t ons as s ne qu bus non
f or f e c t ous pr om s ng, t h s c ass of f e c t y cond t ons
m ght per haps be t aken as necessar y cond t ons f or a pr om se
t o be nf e c t ous as we . Name y, t he t wo pr epar at or y
cond t ons of pr om s ng n Sear e' s v ew ar e ( r ough y) t hat
one may on y pr om se somet h ng t hat s good f or t he addr essee,
and t hat one may on y pr om se somet h ng t hat wou d not obv -
ous y happen anyway. Now we m ght say t hat t hese t wo cond -
1 3
| . R. Sear e, Speech Act s, Cambr dge, 1970. pp. 57- 62.
t i ons ar e al so necessar y f or maki ng an i nf el i ci t ous ( e. g. i n-
si ncer e) pr omi se. I n t hi s case we shoul d r egar d i nsi ncer e
pr omi ses as pr omi ses ( al t hough i nf el i ci t ous ones) wher eas
"pr omi ses" concer ni ng bad or obvi ousl y happeni ng t hi ngs wi l l
not be r egar ded as pr omi ses at al l . I f we subscr i be t o t hi s
vi ew t hen i n our f r amewor k, at t he l evel of pur e semant i cs we
can pr oceed as f ol l ows. Possi bl e pr epar at or y condi t i ons of
t he speech act wi l l be r epr esent ed by r est r i ct i ons on t he
domai n of t he change f unct i on ( i ndi cat i ng t hat t he change
i n quest i on i s i mpossi bl e t o concei ve of unl ess t he i ni t i al
1 4
si t uat i on conf or ms t o t hose r equi r ement s) . I n case t hose
r equi r ement s ar e sat i sf i ed, t he change f unct i on cor r espond-
i ng t o ' I pr omi se t hat . . . ' wi l l t ur n a i nt o anot her b
( i ndi cat i ng t hat , by ut t er i ng t hat sent ence, t he act of
pr omi si ng can be per f or med, whet her happi l y or unhappi l y) .
What Sear l e cal l s si ncer i t y and essent i al condi t i ons, how-
ever , need not be t r eat ed i n semant i cs si nce t hey ar e con-
di t i ons onl y f or f el i ci t ous speech act s and i nsof ar as t hey
ar e gi ven i n t he ver y not i on of ' pr omi se' .
Not e however t hat onl y an i ndependent anal ysi s of speech
act s may pr ove t hat pr epar at or y condi t i ons (or some ot her f el -
i ci t y condi t i ons) ar e r eal l y necessar y f or i nf el i ci t ous pr om-
i si ng as wel l . Gi ven t he possi bi l i t y t hat t he r esul t s of such
an anal ysi s may be negat i ve, we may have al r eady t aken t he
' wrong pat h i n t r yi ng t o t r eat some of t he f el i ci t y condi t i ons,
i n anal ogy t o pr esupposi t i ons, as r est r i ct i ons on a.
The consi der at i on of a f ur t her quest i on may cast anot her
ki nd of doubt on t he whol e pr ocedur e of i mposi ng r est r i ct i ons
1 4
These r est r i ct i ons woul d seempossi bl e t o handl e si mi l ar l y
t o st age- descr i pt i ons i n Hausser ( 1978) . Not e however t hat
quest i ons l i ke what can be good f or t he addr essee ar e ver y
di f f i cul t t o deci de wi t hout r ef er ence t o t he act ual speech
si t uat i on, whi ch may go beyond what t hose st age descr i pt i ons
ar e supposed t o t ake car e of .
on a. Namel y, sever al schol ar s have suggest ed t hat f el i ci t y
condi t i ons ar e al r eady i ncl uded i n t he l exi cal meani ng of
1 5
t he per f or mat i ve ver b . Si nce however t hose suggest i ons have
been associ at ed wi t h assi mi l at i ng per f or mat i ve sent ences t o
pr oposi t i ons, i t i s not uni nt er est i ng per haps t o poi nt out
t hat t hei r cl ai m seems t o hol d even i f expl i ci t per f or mat i ves
ar e assi gned a speci al semant i c st at us. I nt er est i ngl y enough,
r esear cher s who f i nd t he f el i ci t y condi t i ons of ' I pr omi se
t hat . . . ' or ' I congr at ul at e you' so compl ex and necessar y t o
st udy cl oser never devot e much at t ent i on t o t he "speci al
t r ut h condi t i ons" of ' Pet er i s congr at ul at i ng Mar y' or ' Yes-
t er day Pet er pr omi sed t hat . . . ' , al t hough i t i s i nevi t abl e
t hat i n deci di ng whet her Pet er i s i n t he set of t hose who
ar e congr at ul at i ng Mar y et c. one shoul d consi der t he ver y
same quest i ons. That i s, t he pr obl em of f el i ci t y condi t i ons
i s not speci f i c f or per f or mat i ve sent ences but ar i ses i n con-
nect i on wi t h al l occur r ences of t he ver b. Whi ch suggest s t hat
f el i ci t y condi t i ons ar e i ndeed i ncl uded i n t he l exi cal mean-
i ngs of per f or mat i ve ver bs, and t her ef or e i t i s onl y neces-
sar y t o make t hemexpl i ci t i n wor d- semant i cs and ( possi bl y)
i n pr agmat i cs, wher eas sent ence semant i cs ( whi ch i s t he ver y
obj ect of model t heor y) onl y has t o t ake an i mpl i ci t r ecog-
ni t i on of t hem.
2. 3. A gr ammar of per f or mat i ve sent ences
One of t he cr uci al ar gument s f or t r eat i ng per f or mat i ves on
a par wi t h st at ement s has been t hat t hey bel ong t o t he same
synt act i c par adi gm. I n t he l i ght of t hi s cl ai m any at t empt
t o assi gn some speci al semant i c st at us t o per f or mat i ves seems
t o be doomed t o f ai l ur e as soon as one wi shes t o i ncor por at e
i t i nt o a gr ammar . That i s, such an at t empt i s l i abl e t o at
15
E. g. , Hausser ( 1978) and J . Al l wood, A Cr i t i cal Look at
Speech Act Theor y, i n . Dahl ( ed. ) Logi c, Pr agmat i cs and
Gr ammar , Dept . of Li ngui st i cs, Uni ver si t y of Gt ebor g, 1977.
east one of t he f o ow ng gr ave er r or s: ( ) t he v o at on
of a s gn f cant synt act c gener a zat on, by der v ng per -
f or mat ve sent ences comp et e y d f f er ent y f r om st at ement s,
and ( ) t he v o at on of t he compos t ona t y pr nc p e,
by ass gn ng nt er pr et at ons t o per f or mat ve sent ences n
an ar b t r ar y f ash on, . e. , ndependent y of t he r der vat ons.
I t seems t o me, however , t hat f t her e s an ndependent mo-
t vat on f or d st ngu sh ng bet ween st at ement s and per f or m-
at ves n semant cs t hen t hese f aws must be poss b e t o be
avo ded somehow. Ther ef or e I pr esent a t ent at ve ( and sket chy)
ext ens on of PTO, enr ched w t h change denot ng per f or mat ve
sent ences. I t needs t o be emphas zed t hat I do not r egar d t h s
so ut on as t he so ut on t o t he pr ob em; t s pr esent at on
r at her ser ves t o nd cat e a ong wh ch nes I mag ne t he t ask
t o be poss b y so ved.
Hav ng sur f ace st r uct ur es n m nd we may say t hat per -
f or mat ve sent ences const t ut e a subset of dec ar at ve sen-
t ences. I n ot her wor ds, t her e ar e sent ence st r uct ur es t hat can
be st r uct ur es of bot h st at ement s and per f or mat ves ( e. g. t he
ones whose ma n ver b s n t he s mp e pr esent et c. ) wher eas
ot her st r uct ur es can by no means be st r uct ur es of per f or m-
at ves ( e. g. , t he ones whose ma n ver b s n t he pr esent pr o-
gr ess ve et c. ) . I t ake t hese f act s t o be t he ones t hat a pos-
s b e gr ammat ca f r amewor k has t o account f or . Th s suggest s
t hat we must d st ngu sh bet ween synt act c r u es ( or oper a-
t ons) t hat a ow f or t he r esu t ng sent ence t o be per f or m-
at ve and t hose t hat do not . Nat ur a y, t h s cou d on y be
done f we had bot h a comp et e Eng sh synt ax and an exhaus-
t ve t axonomy of per f or mat ve sent ences at hand; never t he ess,
even now we may po nt out t hat t he oper at ons n Mont ague' s
S17 ( r u es of t ense and s gn) ar e, f or nst ance, r easonab e
cand dat es f or be ng e ement s of t he set of t hose oper at ons
t hat ar e r espons b e f or t he f act t hat t he r esu t ng sent ence
cannot be per f or mat ve ( r egar d ess of whet her t has a so-
cal l ed per f or mat i ve ver b i n t he appr opr i at e pos i t i on) .
Al l t hi s al so suggest s t hat some der i vat i ons can, up
t o a cer t ai n s t age, be der i vat i ons of ei t her per f or mat i ve
sent ences or st at ement s and i t i s t he appl i cat i on of an nt h
synt act i c r ul e t hat cancel s t he possi bi l i t y t hat t he r esul t
be per f or mat i ve.
Let us now consi der t he f ol l owi ng ext ensi on of Engl i sh
synt ax. Cat , or t he set of synt act i c cat egor i es , i s t o be t he
smal l est set such t hat
( 1) e, t , s Cat
( 2) I f , Cat , t hen / , / / Cat
( 3) Cat
The i nt r oduct i on of s among t he el ement s of Cat i s al r eady
necessi t at ed by t he cl ai m t hat per f or mat i ve sent ences denot e
f unct i ons of t ype <s , s >. The new cat egor y ( whi ch I wi l l
abbr evi at e as t ) behaves exact l y l i ke si mpl e t and cer t ai n
synt act i c r ul es i n f act r educe i t t o t . Tr adi t i onal cat egor i es
l i ke i nt r ansi t i ve ver b phr ases and t er m phr ases ar e now al l
r edef i ned i n t er ms of e' s and t ' s ( t / e and t / ( t / e) , r espec-
t i vel y) , t - r educi ng r ul es wi l l be of t he f or m as S17' :
S17' . I f oc , / ./e) and , / e t hen F
14
(oc, ) p
t
wher e F
14
, ( , ) = ' , and ' i s t he r esul t of r e-
pl aci ng t he f i r st ver b i n by i t s ( appr opr i at e)
pr esent per f ect f or m, and al l ' s i n t he pr ecedi ng
der i vat i on ar e r epl aced by t ' s.
As opposed t o S17' , S4' wi l l r et ai n "t' s i n t he cat egor i es
si nce t hi s r ul e may par t i ci pat e i n t he f or mat i on of per f or m-
at i ve sent ences ( pr ovi ded t hat t he ar gument s of F
4
. ar e appr o-
pr i at el y mar ked expr es s i ons , e. g. t he I V- phr ase cont ai ns a
per f or mat i ve ver b, and al so pr ovi ded t hat t he val ue of F.
wi l l not get embedded by t he subsequent appl i cat i on of S7' ,
f or i ns t ance) .
Thi s ki nd of pr oposal seems t o gi ve an adequat e account
f or t he f act t hat ( i ) no speci al synt act i c r ul e i s needed
f or per f or mat i ve sent ences - i t i s i n f act i n t hi s sense
t hat t hey bel ong t o t he nor mal par adi gm, but ( i i ) not al l
synt act i c r ul es may par t i ci pat e i n t he f or mat i on of per f or m-
at i ve sent ences. The r et r ospect i ve t - r educt i on does not seem
t o cause t r oubl es si nces i t act ual l y does not change t he der i -
vat i on, onl y i ndi cat es t hat a possi bi l i t y t hat has pr evi ousl y
been pr esent i s cancel l ed. Not e al so t hat t hi s pr oposal r el i es
on a pr i nci pl e si mi l ar t o t he one Mont ague used i n PTQ, name-
l y, t hat i n case a cer t ai n phenomenon has bot h "si mpl e" and
"compl i cat ed" var i ant s ( as i s t he case wi t h ext ensi onal and
i nt ensi onal r eadi ngs, or wi t h pr oper nouns and quant i f i er s as
t er mphr ases) t hen t he si mpl er one shoul d be t r eat ed as a
speci al case of t he mor e compl i cat ed one. I n t he above anal -
ysi s st at ement st r uct ur es ar e t r eat ed as speci al cases of per -
f or mat i ve st r uct ur es.
I n sum, we have so f ar concl uded t hat ' I congr at ul at e
you' i s i n cat egor y _, wher eas ' I have congr at ul at ed you' i s
i n cat egor y t , ever yt hi ng el se ( save f or t ense) bei ng t he same
i n t hei r der i vat i on.
Let us now t ur n t o t he semant i c aspect s of t hi s pr opos-
al . The necessar y ext ensi ons of i nt ensi onal l ogi c ar e as f ol -
l ows :
Type, or t he set of t ypes, i s t he smal l est set such t hat
( 1) e, t , s Type
(2) lf . , Type, then < , > Type
(3) <s, s>\ <s, t>6 Type
Her e <s, s> i s t he t ype of f unct i ons f r om i ndi ces t o i ndi ces
(as i n Gal l i n ( 1975) ) , and <s, s>| <s, t > i s but a subt ype of
t hose f unct i ons, as t o be def i ned bel ow. Let w be a var i abl e
of t ype s. To t he def i ni t i on of meani ngf ul expr essi ons of I L
we add t he cl ause
If
M E
<s , t >
then w. w [ ]
M E
<s, s>\ <s, t>
and f or t he ext ensi on of such an expr essi on wi t h r espect t o
, i / j / g:
I f ME/ t hen w. w[ ] , i , J , g i s t hat f unc-
<s, t >
t i on h t hat assi gns t o <i , j > anot her <i , j ' > such t hat
j ' > j and <i , j > i s i dent i cal t o <i , j > wi t h t he ( possi -
bl e) di f f er ence t hat [
V
] - - - - - = l .
That i s , t he expr essi on w. w[ ] denot es a change f unc-
t i on whose ar gument and val ue ar e i dent i cal except t hat a
1 6
cer t ai n st at ement i s t r ue at i t s val ue.
For t r ansl at i ng Engl i sh cat egor i es i nt o t ypes of I L we
ext end f so t hat
( 1) f ( e) = e
( 2) f ( t ) = t
( 3) f ( s) = s
( 4) f ( / ) = f ( A/ / B) = s , f ( B) > , f ( A) > whenever
A, B Cat
( 5) f = <s, s> \ <s , t >
( Cl ause ( 5) i s r at her awkwar d as i t t r ansl at es bot h s/ s and t
t o t he opposi t e of what coul d be expect ed on t he basi s of ( 1) -
( 4) ; never t hel ess, at pr esent I see no bet t er way t o ensur e
bot h t hat per f or mat i ves t hemsel ves get ext ensi onal r eadi ngs
and t hat t he st at ement s speci f yi ng t he nat ur e of t he change
may not be i nt er changed on t he basi s of i dent i cal t r ut h val -
ues . )
Fi nal l y, l et us exempl i f y t he t r ansl at i on r ul es cor r e-
spondi ng t o synt act i c r ul es pr oduci ng per f or mat i ve sent ences
wi t h T4' :
T4' : I f . , , , and and , t r ansl at e
/ ( / e) / e
i nt o ' , ' r espect i vel y, t hen F
4
. F
4
( , ) t r ansl at es
as w. w[
A
q] , wher e q i s t he t r ansl at i on of
F
14
( , ) .
I n ot her wor ds , a sent ence l i ke ' I congr at ul at e you' i s t r ans-
1 f i
I avoi ded t he expl i ci t t r eat ment of i ndexi cal expr essi ons
l i ke ' I ' and ' you' , si nce i t i s not speci f i c f or per f or mat i ves.
at ed nt o an I L- expr ess on denot ng a change f unct on such
t hat t s ar gument and va ue ar e dent ca nd ces, w t h t he
poss b e d f f er ence t hat at t s va ue t s t r ue t hat ' I have
congr at u at ed you' . Th s w ndeed obt a n n case t he sen-
t ence ' I congr at u at e you' has been ( happ y) ut t er ed at a
pr ev ous moment | .
ON THE FORMATI ON OF THE CONCEPT OF ' LI NGUI STI C SI GN' AND
ON STOI C LANGUAGE DOCTRI NE*
Zs gmond Te egd
(I )
( 1) A per cept on t ur ns nt o a s gn f or us as soon
as we gat her somet h ng f r om t t hat s d f f er ent f r omwhat
t s as such, some cont ent t hat s d f f er ent f r om t hat
wh ch t has n t se f . Th s means t hat t he qua t y of
be ng a s gn s never at t r but ab e t o a per cept on as such:
t he at t er s a s gn on y t o t he ext ent t hat t act ua y
pr oduces some cer t a n ef f ect : t hat t f unct ons as a s gn.
The smoke t hat a h ker may see r s ng beh nd t he t r ees
of some f or est s, st r ct y speak ng, no mor e t han | ust
smoke, "a r cont a n ng gaseous agent s, car r y ng f ne y d -
v ded so d and qu d par t c es st emm ng f r om combust on
pr ocesses" ; but f t nd cat es t o h m a f r e t hat he cannot
see t t ur ns nt o a s gn f or h m, a s gn of a spec a k nd:
an nd cat on. So a per son' s pecu ar y st agger ng wa k s
a s gn of h s dr unkenness, a cer t a n gr oup of sympt oms s a
s gn of a cer t a n d sease, a scar s a s gn of an ear er
wound, t he f r esh t r a of an an ma s a s gn of t he an ma
Th s s an abbr ev at ed and r ewor ked ver s on of an ear er
paper wh ch appear ed n Act a L ngu st ca 26, 267- 305 ( 1976) .
not be ng ver y f ar away, a r ap d y f a ng bar omet er s
a s gn of a st or m appr oach ng, et c. ; n a t hese cases
we f ace nd cat ons.
I nd cat ons nc ude t he par a ngu st c par t cu ar -
t es of a d scour se wh ch, n t he m nd of t he hear er , com-
p ement s t he sense of t hat d scour se - a sense t hat es
n t s st r ct y ngu st c aspect s, . e. , n t he comp exes
of abst r act ngu st c s gns pr oduced - by add ng a gr eat
dea of var ed nf or mat on on t he speaker ' s emot ons, on
t he at t t ude he has adopt ed t o what he says and on h s
per sona t y n gener a .
( 2) As t he above- ment oned examp es show, an n-
d cat on s a st at e- of - af f a r s po nt ng t o anot her st at e-
of - af f a r s. Mor e pr ec se y, t s a st at e- of - af f a r s t hat
assur es t he per son who per ce ves t ( . e. "who has act ua
know edge of t s ex st ence") of t he ex st ence of some ot her
st at e- of - af f a r s ; n Husser ' s wor ds: a per son nt er pr et ng
a st at e- of - af f a r s as an nd cat on exper ences t he con-
v ct on of t he pr esence of t h s st at e- of - af f a r s as a
mot ve conv nc ng h mof , or mak ng h m sur m se, t he pr e-
sence of anot her st at e- of - af f a r s.
We have def ned ' nd cat on' as a st at e- of - af f a r s.
Th s def n t on m ght seem r at her nar r ow: smoke, wh ch s
a r sat ur at ed w t h par t c es st emm ng f r om combust on pr o-
cesses, s a subst ance; but we a so descr bed as nd cat ons
t he scar on a v ng body and t he t r a of an an ma , wh ch
cou d be much mor e apt y descr bed as ob| ect s. The way n
wh ch we expr essed our se ves n ne w t h common ngu st c
Husser , 1928, 25. La ande def nes ' nd cat on' as a
"per cept on act ue e, | ust f ant , d' une man r e p us ou
mo ns sr e, une asser t on r e at ve que que aut r e chose. "
( La ande, 1960, 991) .
ON THE FORMATI ON OF THE CONCEPT OF ' LI NGUI STI C SI GN' AND 5 39
ON STOI C LANGUAGE DOCTRI NE
usage s, af t er a , naccur at e.
What ser ve as nd cat ons f or us n our par t cu ar
cases ar e t he st at es- of - af f a r s t hat some cer t a n man, some
nd v dua , has a scar on h s body or t hat t he t r a ef t
by some an ma s v s b e at a cer t a n p ace n a f or est ,
et c.
I t s ndeed a ways poss b e t o g ve t he nt er pr et a-
t on of an nd cat on t he f or mof an nf er ence n wh ch
t he nd cat on, exact y ke t he st at es- of - af f a r s nd cat ed,
s r epr esent ed by a sent ence; e. g. , "I f t her e s smoke r s ng
beh nd t he t r ees, t her e must be a f r e t her e. " The St o cs
d d n f act go so f ar as t o def ne ' nd cat on' as t he
t r ut hf u ant ecedent of some hypot het ca comp ex sent ence
2
whose consequent s t r ut hf u as we .
I t wou d, however , be nappr opr at e t o equat e
nd cat on w t h a og ca cat egor y. Husser r em nds us
t hat wher ever we "e ns cht g" ( ' ns ght f u y' ) deduce t he
ex st ence of one st at e- of - af f a r s f r om anot her , we do not ca
t he at t er an nd cat on of t he f or mer ; he demands - and
I t h nk r ght y so - t hat we shou d d st ngu sh bet ween
h nt and pr oof , bet ween t he emp r ca nt er pr et at on of
t he nd cat on, on t he one hand, and pr oof , wh ch uncover s
an ob| ect ve y necessar y connect on bet ween st at es- of - af f a r s,
on t he ot her ; t hat s why he says t hat t he nd cat on s
exper enced as a "n ent e ns cht g" ( ' non- ev dent ' ) mot ve
g v ng r se t o t he conv ct on or sur m se of t he ex st ence
3
of some ot her st at e- of - af f a r s.
( 3) I n a t he cases we have h t her t o been cons der ng
t her e was an nher ent causat ve r e at onsh p bet ween t he
2
See f ur t her be ow.
Husser , oc. c t . , 25- 28.
nd cat on and t he st at e- of - af f a r s nd cat ed by t . Smoke
s a pr oduct of combust on pr ocesses; t he char act er st c
st agger ng wa k of a dr unken per son r esu t s f r omt he
st at e he s n; a scar st ems f r om a wound sust a ned ear er
on and hea ed by now; et c.
I n cases of t h s k nd, man comes acr oss a st at e- of -
af f a r s wh ch s what t s; and t s nt er pr et ng man who,
s nce t h s st at e- of - af f a r s s nked w t h anot her n a
causat ve r e at onsh p, ascr bes t o t t he nat ur e of an
nd cat on. Ther e s, however , a so anot her ver y d f f er ent
k nd of nd cat on: t h ngs and pr ocesses, or qua t es
of t hem, cr eat ed f or t he pur pose of mak ng t hem f unct on
as nd cat ons.
A cust om s obser ved n many par t s of t he wor d t hat
s ver y anc ent ndeed: t he cust omof put t ng br ands on
cat t e t o mar k t he an ma s as t he pr oper t y of a commun t y
or some nd v dua ; but monogr ams put on aundr y ar e own-
er sh p mar ks, t oo. Pot t er y made n Mesopot am a n t he f our t h
4
m en um B. C. was f ound t o bear wor kshop or f or eman mar ks,
wh ch, ver y much ke t he t r ademar ks of t oday, had been
meant t o make t he pr oduct s of a cer t a n f act or y d st ngu sh-
ab e f r om s m ar ones made by ot her f act or es. ;
But man- made nd cat ons ar e not on y used as d s-
t nct ve mar ks. A post age st amp on an enve ope nd cat es
t hat a f ee has been pa d f or t he de ver y of t he par t cu ar
et t er ; t he mpr nt of a sea on a document nd cat es t he
at t er ' s aut hent c t y; a deat h' s- head on a box or bot t e
nd cat es t hat t s cont ent s ar e danger ous; and r oad s gns
ar e a so nd cat ons, pr ov ded t hey g ve nf or mat on
r at her t han s gna ze nst r uct ons or pr oh b t ons.
Even ngu st c s gns can occas ona y f unct on as
nd cat ons. E. g. , a passwor d ser ves as an nd cat on t hat
a per son who pr oves t o know t s ent t ed t o ent er a
pr oh b t ed ar ea.
Deshayes, 1969, 389f .
ON THE FORMATI ON OF THE CONCEPT OF ' LI NGUI STI C SI GN' AND 541
Ther e ar e scho ar s who seek t o dr aw a st r ct ne
bet ween s gns of t h s k nd - man- made nd cat ons - and
nat ur a s gns and w sh t o c ass f y t he f or mer and
ngu st c s gns t oget her .
Char es Ba y, e. g. , d st ngu shes bet ween " nd ces" ,
by wh ch he exc us ve y means t he nat ur a nd cat ons, and
" s gnes" , wh ch f or a t he r d f f er ences have one t h ng
n common: t hey ar e human cr eat ons. He r ef er s n par t cu ar
t o t he f act t hat man' s r e at onsh p t o a nat ur a nd cat on
s r ecept ve: t s g ven t o h m, and he m t s h mse f t o
nt er pr et ng t he nat ur a nd cat on on t he bas s of a
causat ve r e at onsh p nk ng one st at e- of - af f a r s w t h
anot her ; and he a so r ef er s t o t he f act t hat , on t he con-
t r ar y, t he act of us ng a convent ona s gn - per haps a
5
ngu st c nd cat on - s under man' s cont r o .
Now t her e s cer t a n y a d f f er ence bet ween man n-
t er pr et ng st at es- of - af f a r s he may have come upon as
nd cat ons, on t he one hand, and h mse f ar b t r ar y
Ba y ( 1969) . The subd v s on of s gns nt o nat ur a and
man- made ones appear s t o go back t o August ne ( "s gna nat u-
r a a" , cont r ast ed w t h "s gna dat a" , see: De doct r . chr st .
I I 2) . He s ke y t o have been t he - d r ect or nd r ect -
sour ce of t he Log que de Por t - Roya w t h r egar d t o t he
subd v s on of s gns nt o "s gnes nat ur e s" and "s gnes
d' nst t ut on et d' t ab ssement ". La Log que ou 1' ar t de
penser ( 1r e Par t e Chap. I V. ) . - The essent a r e at onsh p
bet ween nat ur a and man- made nd cat ons has been us-
t r at ed by Husser n par t cu ar ( Husser , 1928, 24f . ) .
Benven st e a so g ves a def n t on of "s gna " compr s ng
bot h nat ur a and man- made nd cat ons: "Un s gna est un
f a t phys que r e un aut r e f a t phys que par un r appor t
nat ur e ou convent onne . . . " ( Benven st e, 1966, 27) .
cr eat ng nd cat ons f or us ng t hem as means of commun ca-
t on, on t he ot her . But t h s d f f er ence, however mpor t ant
t may ot her w se be, does not a t er t he f act t hat a man-
made nd cat on f unct ons as a s gn n exact y t he same
way as a nat ur a nd cat on does, and s t her ef or e no ess
an nd cat on t han t he at t er . The essence of nd cat ng
es n so pr esent ng a connect on bet ween t wo st at es- of
af f a r s t hat t he per cept on of t he one bear s w t ness t o
t he ex st ence of t he ot her and | ust f es t he assumpt on
t hat t he at t er ex st s as we . The f act t hat t h s connec-
t on s convent ona n t he case of t he man- made nd ca-
t on does not r emove t he essent a d f f er ence bet ween t he
nd cat ng s gn and t he r epr esent ng, ngu st c, s gn.
( 4) I n ngu st c sc ence - and a so f ar beyond t s
boundar es - speech s r egar ded as commun cat on by s gns.
Th s v ew s we - f ounded ndeed.
Let us cons der t he ut t er ance r ea z ng t he sent ence
Ther e s a f r e bur n ng beh nd t he t r ees. Th s ut t er ance
act s ( f unct ons) as a s gn so f ar as t conveys t o t he
hear er some cont ent s t hat ar e t hor ough y d ver gent and
ut t er y d st nct f r om t s own cont ent s, f r omwhat t ac-
t ua y s: an acoust c event . But t he capac t y of a n-
gu st c s gn s r ad ca y d f f er ent f r om t hat of an nd ca-
t on.
As we have seen, t he nt er pr et at on of an nd cat on
s r epr esent ab e n t he f or mof an nf er ence nk ng t wo
st at ement s; t , s, n ot her wor ds, t he f or mat on of a
hypot hes s. I nt er pr et ng a sent ence - ke t he one c t ed
above - , however , means appr ehend ng a t ype of st at e of
af f a r s w t hout nf er r ng t he ex st ence of a cor r espond ng
act ua st at e of af f a r s f r omt he f act of t he ver ba r ep-
r esent at on. A f ur t her d f f er ence s t he f o ow ng. An
nd cat on s a per ce ved st at e- of - af f a r s, one of whose
ex st ence t he obser ver has act ua know edge; t h s mp es
t hat t s a s ngu ar st at e- of - af f a r s, as s t he st at e- of -
af f a r s whose ex st ence t nd cat es. One can say n gen-
er a t hat a sea nd cat es t he aut hent c t y of document s.
But a sea f unct ons n t h s way and becomes an act ua s gn
on y f put on a par t cu ar document , and t hen nd cat es
t he aut hent c t y of t hat document . Language, however , not
on y pr ov des us w t h means t o r epr esent gener a zed st at es
of af f a r s, r u es, or sc ent f c aws; t can expr ess - t o
use Hege ' s wor ds - bas ca y not h ng e se but t he gener a .
Aga nst t h s st at ement t hat "t he nd v dua r es st s anguage"
we ar e f r equent y r ef er r ed t o pr oper names. But a pr oper
name, pr ov ded t says anyt h ng about t s bear er , cer t a n y
says not h ng nd v dua . I f I know t hat someone s ca ed
| ohn, a I can nf er f r omt h s s t hat he s of t he ma e
sex and per haps a f ew ot her such gener a t es.
The r epr esent at on capac t y of t he sent ence s based
on t he f act t hat t he sent ence s f or med accor d ng t o
soc a y f xed r u es f r om component s ( cha ns of phonemes)
t o wh ch mean ngs ar e at t r but ed, so t hat t he sent ence as
a who e expr esses a coher ent comb nat on of mean ngs: a
mean ng comp ex. Mean ng s a ngu st c concept . Speak ng
of t he mean ng of an nd cat on ( e. g. , The smoke we see r s ng
means t hat t her e s a f r e bur n ng over t her e) , we n f act
mean t he st at e- of - af f a r s nd cat ed.
( 5) The op n on s w despr ead t hat n speech t he ver y
sounds r ender ng a sent ence or t s s gn f cant component s
act n t hemse ves as s gns; hear ng of ngu st c s gns,
one t h nks of t hem n t he f r st p ace. But , on c oser n-
spect on, t h s op n on pr oves nadequat e. An ut t er ance act s
as a s gn - and a sound sequence r ef er s t o some ob| ect - on y
t o t he ext ent t hat t hey ar e nked w t h a mean ng; on y t h s
comb nat on f or ms a ngu st c s gn.
Th s s not h ng new. Even Dant e, n h s unf n shed
t r eat se De vu gar e oquent a, seeks t o show t hat t he n-
gu st c s gn s necessar y of a doub e nat ur e: t hat man,
because of h s ver y nat ur e, needs a s gn f or commun cat on
t hat s per cept b e and r at ona at t he same t me: per -
cept b e t o t he ext ent t hat t s sound, and r at ona t o
t he ext ent t hat t has by agr eement been ass gned a mean-
6
mg.
Saussur e f o ows up t h s t r ad t on by emphat ca y
def n ng t he ngu st c s gn as a comb nat on ("un t r e
doub e") . But s nce he dr aws a st r ct ne bet ween an-
guage (" a angue") and t he use made of t n speech, he
exc udes t he per cept b e f r om t he concept of ngu st c
s gn and says t hat t he t wo component s comb ned n t he con-
cept ar e psych ca ; he descr bes t he ngu st c s gn as an
8
"ent t psych que deux f aces" . I n or der t o ar r ve at
a t er m no og ca d f f er ent at on bet ween t he who e of t he
s gn and t he component s t hat t comb nes, he made sever a
9
at t empt s , nt r oduc ng n t he t h r d cour s t he expr ess ons
s gn f ant and s gn f ; t hese expr ess ons, he says, of f er
t he add t ona advant age of mar k ng t he oppos t on not on y
bet ween t he component s t hemse ves, but a so bet ween t hem
10
t oget her and t he who e whose par t s t hey ar e.
"Opor t u t er go genus humanum ad comun candas nt er se con-
cept ones suas a quod r at ona e s gnum et sensua e haber e; . . .
Hoc equ dem s gnum est psum sub ect umnob e de quo oqu mur :
nam sensua e qu d est n quant um sonus est ; r at ona e ver o,
n quant um a qu d s gn f car e v det ur ad p ac t um" ( Dant e,
1968, 6) .
7
Gode , 1957, 190.
8
Saussur e, 1972, 99.
9
Gode , 1957, 192f .
10
Saussur e, 1972, 99.
( 6) As i s wel l - known, t hese expr essi ons wer e not
t hought up by Saussur e. The sour ce f r omwhi ch he i mmedi -
at el y t ook t hemmay be uncer t ai n; but i t i s pr et t y cl ear
t hat t hey i n t he f i nal anal ysi s go back t o ant i qui t y and
wer e f i r st used i n St oi c phi l osophy.
I n t hi s connect i on we wi l l have t o t ake a cl oser
l ook at t he det ai l s of St oi c doct r i ne.
Al t hough t hey agr eed t hat l ogi c was one of t he t hr ee
const i t uent s of phi l osophy, t he St oi cs wer e di vi ded on t he
1 1
quest i on of what i t s par t s ar e. Some sai d t hat i t consi st ed
of t wo par t s, r het or i c and di al ect i cs, t he f or mer bei ng con-
cer ned wi t h speaki ng wel l i n cont i nuous di scour se and t he
l at t er deal i ng wi t h speaki ng cor r ect l y i n di scussi on based
1 2
on quest i ons and answer s. So l ogi c was mai nl y seen as t he
1 3
t heor y of l ogos as f ar as t hi s wor d means "speech". But
t her e was al so anot her vi ew: some assumed t hat , apar t f r om
r het or i c and di al ect i cs, t her e wer e t wo f ur t her par t s, i n
whi ch epi at emol ogy and t he t heor y of def i ni t i ons wer e gi ven
separ at e t r eat ment .
As t o t he subdi vi si on of di al ect i cs, we do not hear
of any di f f er ences of opi ni on. Pr oceedi ng f r om t hei r
11
Cf . Zel l er , 1909, 65f f . ; and Bar wi ck, 1957, 13f .
12
DL VI I 42; Seneca. Epi st . 89. 17. ( "Super est ut r at i onal em
par t emphi l osophi ae di vi dam. Omni s or at i o aut cont i nua est
aut i nt er r espondent em et i nt er r ogant em di sci ssa; hane
di al ekt i ken, i 11am r ht or i kn pl acui t vocar i . " ) . Pl at o
( Kr at yl os 39oc) says t hat a di al ect i ci an i s a per son who
knows how t o ask and how t o answer . I n t he St oi c vi ew, i t
i s not possi bl e wi t hout di al ect i cs t o ask and answer i n a
met hodi cal manner .
Cf . "Logi c i n St oi ci smmay per haps best be descr i bed
as t he sci ence of r at i onal di scour se" ( Long, 1974, 122) .
anal ysi s of speech i n gener al , t he St oi cs al l r egar ded i t
as consi st i ng of t wo mai n par t s: one was t o be concer ned
1 4
wi t h l i ngui st i c expr essi on, t he ot her wi t h meani ng. The
t er ms t hat t hey used i n t hi s connect i on - smai non, "t he
t hi ng t hat si gni f i es" , and smai nomenon, "t he t hi ng t hat i s
si gni f i ed" - denot e expr essi on and meani ng as t he t wo pol es
- t he act i ve pol e and t he passi ve pol e - of t he semant i c
r el at i onshi p. They ar e exact l y i n l i ne wi t h t he t wo
expr essi ons si gni f i ant and si gni f i , whi ch Saussur e i n-
t r oduced i nt o moder n l i ngui st i cs, expr essi ons t hat ar e i n-
deed t r ansl at i ons of t hose t wo Gr eek wor ds.
T. De Maur o wr i t es t hat t he St oi cs, usi ng t he ver bal
pai r of semai non and smai nomenon, had accept ed a "concept ual -
l y and t er mi nol ogi cal l y" Ar i st ot el i an di f f er ent i at i on ( 1968,
347f . ) To pr ove hi s poi nt , he ci t es t wo passages f r om
Ar i st ot l e' s wr i t i ngs, one f r om t he t hi r d book of Rhet or i c
( 1405b) , t he ot her f r omPoet i cs ( 1457a) .
I n t he f i r st passage t he phi l osopher says t hat t he
beaut y of a noun, "as Li kymni us says" , l i es ei t her i n i t s
sounds ( psophoi ) or i n i t s meani ng ( semai nomenon) and t hat
ugl i ness i s t o be f ound t her e, t oo; and i n t he second he
says t hat a compound i s made up of ei t her a meani ngf ul and
a meani ngl ess par t ( smai non: asmon) or of t wo meani ngf ul
par t s. So t he expr essi ons semai non and semai nomenon ar e i n-
deed used i n Ar i st ot l e' s wor ks; but i n nei t her passage do
t hey appear si de by si de, i n ant i t het i cal combi nat i on:
semai nomenon i s cont r ast ed wi t h psophoi , and smai non wi t h
asemon. Appar ent l y, a t er mi nol ogi cal l y st abl e combi nat i on
of t he ver bal pai r , whi ch i s f or med f r om t he same st em,
14
DL VI I 43, 62; SE. P. h. I I 214; Seneca. Epi st . 89. 17.
( "Di al ekt i ke i n duas par t es di vi di t ur , i n ver ba et si gni f i ca-
t i ones, i d est , i n r es quae di cunt ur et vocabul a qui bus di cun-
t ur " ) .
1 5
I t i s a queer r ever sal of t he posi t i on f or R. H. Robi ns t o
say t hat he f i nds t he St oi c t er ms ( f oot not e 15 cont i nued)
cannot be f ound bef or e t he St o cs; and whoever has used t
af t er t hem goes d r ect y or nd r ect y back t o t hem. And
t her e can be no quest on t hat t he St o cs wer e who y n-
dependent n t he v ew t hey t ook of t he sema nomena.
( 7) Saussur e was n a pos t on t o adopt t he St o c
t er ms s nce t hey adm t of , and seem t o embody, an nt er -
pr et at on t hat s n ne w t h h s v ew of t he ngu st c
s gn.
Language, he t eaches, s a f or mr at her t han a sub-
st ance. Sound and t hought as such ar e out s de anguage;
on y t he r comb nat on - t he way n wh ch a anguage r e-
at es t hemt o each ot her - s ngu st c: t he ngu st c
s gn s a r e at on, r at her t han a sequence of sy ab es; t
s a sequence of sy ab es so f ar as some cer t a n mean ng
1 7
s at t r but ed t o t . Saussur e accor d ng y det aches "phona-
t on" f r om anguage: t he mat er a zat on of an dea comp ex
1
of s gns s n h s v ew ext r ns c t o anguage. I f we now
cons der t he St o c t er ms - t he names smai nont a and sma-
i nomena f or t he t wo component s of an ut t er ance - , we ar e
st r uck by t he f act t hat t hese names ar e r el at i ve : t hat t hey
ar e conf i ned t o denot i ng t he el ement s of a r el at i on on t he
basi s of t hei r r el at i on t o each ot her , what ever t he qual i t i es
t hat t hese el ement s as such may have.
Yet i n t he mi nds of t he St oi cs, semai nont a and sema-
i nomena ar e not conf i ned t o t he r el at i on af t er whi ch t hey have
been named. I t i s si gni f i cant t hat t he addi t i onal t er m phone
( f oot not e 15 cont i nued) "st r i ct l y r emi ni scent of Saussur e' s
si gni f i ant and si gni f i . " ( 1967, 16) .
16
Saussur e, 1972, 155f f . ( 2me par t e, ch. I V) .
1 7
Gode , 1957, 190 ( f r omt he second cour s) .
18
Saussur e, 1972, 36; Gode , 1957, 30.
548
( ' voi ce' ) i s used as a name f or t he "t hi ngs t hat si gni f y";
"di al ect i cs, " we r ead, "f al l s i nt o a sect i on on smai nomena
19
and anot her on phn. " The book i n whi ch Di ogenes of
Babyl oni a, one of t he most i mpor t ant pupi l s of Chr ysi ppus,
head of t he school af t er Zeno of Tar sus, di scussed t he
t heor y of semai nont a, i s ci t ed as Per i phones ( t echne) .
The wor d phone or i gi nal l y denot es t he voi ce, t he voi ce
of bot h man and ani mal . But man, t he Per i pat us says, does
not expr ess hi msel f t hr ough hi s voi ce as such, but t hr ough
21
i t s modi f i cat i ons ( pat h) . Thi s r ef er s t o t he ar t i cul at i on
of t he voi ce, i t s di vi si on i nt o l i ngui st i c sounds. The name
"voi ce" i s t her ef or e al so used t o denot e a sound sequence
as such; used l i ke t hi s, phone i s a cl ass t hat does not onl y
i ncl ude i ndi vi dual l i ngui st i c sounds and syl l abl es ( t he
"combi nat i on" of such sounds) , but al so wor ds and sent ences
- but noun, ver b and l ogos have t he di st i nct i ve f eat ur e of
bei ng phnai smant i kai , i . e. meani ngf ul sounds, sounds
t hat convey meani ngs.
The St oi cs accept ed t he i dea t hat t he human voi ce i s
di f f er ent i at ed f r om t hat of ani mal s by ar t i cul at i on ( i . e.
t hat t he human voi ce i s, i n essence, l i ngui st i c expr essi on) ;
and t hey al so adopt ed t he appl i cat i on of t he wor d phone t o
a sound sequence i n gener al consi der ed as a separ at e ent i t y,
i n abst r act i on of t he meani ng t hat may be ascr i bed t o i t .
So i t i s easy t o see why t he St oi cs wer e i n a posi t i on t o
gi ve phone t he same meani ng as t hey gave semai nont a; f or i t
22
i s, af t er al l , t he phnai t hat mean ( al t hough not ever y
19
DL VI I 43.
20
I bi d. 55, 57.
Pr obl emat a 39. 895a ("esti de ho l ogos ou t o t phn.
sema ne n, a a to ' s pat hes n aut s . . . t a de gr ammat a pat he
est t s phns" ) .
22
Cf . "ha men smai nei , ha de smai net ai ; smai nousi men hai
phnai , smai net ai de t a l ekt a. . . " ( f oot not e 22 cont i nued)
phn i s a smamon) .
( 8) Saussur e i nt r oduced t he St oi c expr essi ons i nt o
moder n l i ngui st i c sci ence so as t o pr ovi de a t er mi nol ogi cal
di f f er ent i at i on bet ween t he component s of t he l i ngui st i c
si gn and t he l i ngui st i c si gn i t sel f . He t hus r emoved an
i r r i t at i ng i mper f ect i on: he di d away wi t h t he ambi gui t y of
t he t er m si gn, whi ch had been seen as r ef er r i ng t o t he com-
bi nat i on of expr essi on and meani ng on some occasi ons and as
r ef er r i ng onl y t o expr essi on - t he sound sequence - on ot her s.
But hi st or i cal st udy cannot hel p aski ng whet her Saussur e' s
use of t he ver bal pai r cor r esponds t o t he or i gi nal one, i . e. ,
whet her t he St oi cs al so r egar ded t he smai non and t he sma-
i nomenon as component s of some hi gher ent i t y whi ch t hey
def i ned as a ki nd of si gn.
One mi ght at f i r st be i ncl i ned t o answer i n t he af -
f i r mat i ve: t he i dea i s, af t er al l , i nher ent i n t he Gr eek
names t hat t he obj ect s denot ed by t hem ar e l i nked i n a
( f oot not e 22 cont i nued) (SE A. m. VI I I 264) , ' t her e ar e
t hi ngs t hat si gni f y and t hi ngs t hat ar e si gni f i ed; t hose
whi ch si gni f y ar e phnai and t hose whi ch ar e si gni f i ed ar e
l ekt a
23
The gr ammar i ans, t oo, ar e f ami l i ar wi t h t he t er ms sma-
i nomena and phnai when i t comes t o cont r ast i ng meani ng
wi t h expr essi on. E. g. , ou gar phna s memer st a t a t o ogou
mer e, smai nomenoi s de, ' t he cl assi f i cat i on of t he par t s of
speech i s not based on sound, but on meani ng' ( Apol l oni us i n:
Gr ammat i ci Gr aeci I I / I f ase. 1. 67) ; ou gar mal l on hai phonai
epi kr at ousi kat a t ous mer i smous hos t a ex aut on semai nomena
( i bi d. I I / I I . 150; t he edi t or quot es t he cor r espondi ng passage
f r omPr i sci anus' s wr i t i ngs: "i gi t ur non voces magi s val ent
i n par t i t i one di ct i onum quamear um si gni f i cat i ones" ) . But
whi l e smai nomenon, ' meani ng' , ( f oot not e 23 cont i nued)
speci al way: t hat t hey r ef er t o each ot her and pr esuppose
each ot her , t hus f or mi ng a uni t y; and what uni t y shoul d t hat
be, i f not t he l i ngui st i c si gn?
Thi s consi der at i on may have l ed R. J akobson t o bel i eve
t hat Saussur e adopt ed t he St oi c concept of t he l i ngui st i c
si gn by def i ni ng i t as a combi nat i on of t he t wo component s
si gni f i ant and si gni f i . We r ead i n a paper by J akobson t hat
"at t he ver y end of hi s academi c act i vi t i es Saussur e adopt ed
t he St oi c concept i on of t he t wof ol d ver bal si gn composed of
24
t he per cept i bl e si gnans and t he i nt el l i gi bl e si gnat um. "
But i nvest i gat i ng t he sour ce mat er i al t hat we gai n
our knowl edge of anci ent St oi c doct r i ne f r om, we do not f i nd
any conf i r mat i on of t hi s assumpt i on. The sour ces do not pr o-
vi de t he l east bi t of evi dence t o show t hat t he St oi cs r e-
gar ded t he smai non and t he smai nomenon as t wo aspect s of
t he l i ngui st i c si gn.
( 9) Admi t t edl y, t he wr i t i ngs by St oi c aut hor s t hat have
been pr eser ved wer e al l wr i t t en as l at e as t he per i od of t he
Roman emper or s ( l i ke Seneca' s wr i t i ngs; Epi ct et us' Di scour ses
and Handbook by Ar r i an, and Mar k Aur el i us' Sol i l oqui es) . As
r egar ds t he ear l i er , t r ul y cr eat i ve cent ur i es of t he St oi c
school , we ar e compel l ed t o r el y on f r agment s and on account s
of t he school ' s gener al doct r i ne or of i ndi vi dual doct r i nes
of i t s exponent s. Some of t he account s ar e not i mmedi at el y
based on wr i t i ngs by St oi c phi l osopher s, but on summar i es
of St oi c phi l osophy or one or ot her of i t s par t s. Di ogenes
Laer t i us, whose wr i t i ngs dat e back t o t he begi nni ng of t he
t hi r d cent ur y, pr oduced a sur vey of St oi c l ogi c ( VI I 48- 82) ,
t hat he sai d he had t aken wor d by wor d f r om a paper wr i t t en
( f oot not e 2 3 cont i nued) i s of t en f ound i n Apol l oni us' s
wr i t i ngs, smai non, ' expr essi on' , i s not , accor di ng t o
Schnei der ' s i ndex, par t of hi s vocabul ar y.
24
J akobson, 1970, 457.
by Di ocl es of Magnesi a, one of hi s pr edecessor s, ar ound t he
25
mi ddl e of t he f i r st cent ur y B. C. J . Mau conj ect ur es t hat
Sext us Empi r i cus, t he Scept i cal doct or , t o whomwe ar e i n-
debt ed f or a gr eat weal t h of val uabl e i nf or mat i on on St oi c
26
l ogi c, dr ew f r om t he same or a ver y si mi l ar t ext book.
Thi s st at e of af f ai r s of t en pl aces har dl y sur mount abl e
obst acl es i n t he way of a mor e pr of ound r esear ch i nt o St oi -
ci sm; i t makes i t ver y di f f i cul t , i n par t i cul ar , t o f ol l ow
t he hi st or i cal devel opment of t hat doct r i ne. But t he sour ce
mat er i al t hat we do have i s on t he whol e r i ch and aut hent i c
enough t o j ust i f y our sayi ng t hat i t can har dl y be acci dent al
t hat al l t hi s mat er i al does not seemt o cont ai n any evi dence
t o say. t hat t he St oi cs bel i eved t he smai non and t he sma-
i nomenon t o have ent er ed i nt o a uni t y t o f or m t he l i ngui st i c
si gn.
( 10) I f we i n t hi s way t ake gui dance f r omour sour ces,
we ar e bound t o r eal i ze t hat t he di st i nct i on bet ween semai non
and smai nomenon i n anci ent St oi c doct r i ne was not l i nked
wi t h t he si gn t heor y of l anguage; t her e i s not hi ng t hat mi ght
poi nt t o speech bei ng consi der ed i n i t as communi cat i on by
si gns.
25
Mau, 19 57, 149. - A sur vey of what has come down t o us i s
t obe f ound i n: Pohl enz, 1949, 9- 11; Long, 1974, 115- 18. The
sour ces t el l i ng us about St oi c l ogi c wer e gi ven det ai l ed
t r eat ment by Met t e, 1951, 31- 36. The f r agment s l ef t of t he
wr i t i ngs by t he ol der St oi cs ( f r om Zeno t o Ant i pat r us) wer e
compi l ed by Hans von Ar ni m i n t he t hr ee vol umes of St oi cor um
Vet er um Fr agment a ( Lei pzi g 1903, 1905) ; wor k on t hi s col l ec-
t i on was f i ni shed onl y i n 1924, when t he f our t h vol ume ap-
pear ed, cont ai ni ng i ndi ces ar r anged by M. Adl er . A new
i mpr essi on came out i n St ut t gar t i n 1964.
"Sext us i s our best si ngl e aut hor i t y f or St oi c l ogi c"
( Kneal e and Kneal e, 1962, 141.
We must , however , t ake a f ur t her st ep.
When St oi c phi l osophy emer ged - Zeno, i t s f ounder ,
pr obabl y began gi vi ng l ect ur es of hi s own bef or e t he end
of t he f our t h cent ur y B. C. and di ed i n 26 2 B. C. - t he vi ew
had al r eady appear ed t hat we communi cat e i n speech by means
of si gns. The "st r anger f r omEl ea" , who i n Pl at o' s Sophi st es
r uns t he conver sat i on i n Socr at es' s pl ace, r ef er s t o noun
and ver b - t he wor ds t hat need t o be l i nked i f a sent ence i s
t o be f r amed - as sound si gns ( sme a t s phnes or t a t s
phones sme a) ; n do ng so, he appear s t o pr esuppose
t hat t h s v ew of t he wor d s we - known t o h s par t ner n
t he conver sat on ( Theaet et us who, on y a boy at t he t me
of t he d a ogue, became one of t he most br ant mat hema-
t c ans of h s gener at on) and does not r equ r e exp anat on.
Ar st ot e beg ns h s t r eat se De nt er pr et at one by
say ng t hat t he ut t er ances n sound anguage ( t a en t phn)
ar e s gns ( symbo a) f or t he st at es of t he sou ( t a en t.
psych pat hmat a) , and t hat what i s wr i t t en, i n t ur n, con-
27
st i t ut es si gns f or t he f or mer . He says t hat not onl y ut -
t er ances but al so t he wor ds t hat t hey consi st of ar e si gns,
si gns t hat owe t hi s val ue t o a convent i on; he under l i nes
t hat no sound i s a wor d by nat ur e and t hat , t o become a
wor d, a sound must t ur n i nt o a symbol on, a convent i onal
28
si gn. Accor di ngl y, t her e i s an essent i al di f f er ence bet ween
sounds ( i . e. t he sound sequences t hat our speech i s made up
of ) and t he st at es of t he soul , f or whi ch t he f or mer ar e
si gns ( semei a) i n t he f i r st pl ace: t he sounds ar e not t he
same f or ever ybody, j ust as much as t he wr i t t en char act er s
ar e not : t he st at es of t he soul , however , ar e t he same f or
Soph. 262a, d. - Cf . "Ecce si c per agi t ur ser mo nost er per
si gna sonant i a" ( Aug. Conf . I V 10. 15) .
27
De i nt er pr . 1. 16a 3- 4.
28
I bi d. , 2. 16a 26- 28; cf . al so 4. 17a 1- 2.
ever ybody, j ust as much as t he t hi ngs ar e t hat t hey r epr e-
sent .
Zeno of Ci t i um on Cypr us and Chr ysi ppus, t he second
f ounder of St oi ci sm, who came f r omSol oi i n Ci l i ci a, t ur ned
phi l osopher s i n At hens and wor ked t her e. One of Zeno' s
t eacher s was t he Academi st Pol emon; Chr ysi ppus i s sai d t o
have f i r st hear d l ect ur es by Ar cesi l aus and Lacydes, phi l o-
sopher s of t he Mi ddl e Academy. Thei r i ndependence as t hi nker s
i s unquest i onabl e. But t he assumpt i on cannot be r ej ect ed
t hat t hey wer e f ami l i ar wi t h Ar i st ot l e' s maj or t eachi ngs
29
De i nt er pr . 1. 16a 5- 8. - Ar i st ot l e al t er nat i ngl y cal l s
l i ngui st i c si gns ( ut t er ances and wor ds) symbol a and semei a
( cf . al so De i nt er pr . 3. 16b 8. 10. 22; 13. 24b 2; De soph, el .
16 5a 8; De audi bi l i bus 4 37a 15; Met aph. Gamma 7. 1012a 24) .
I n t hi s connect i on i t has been r epeat edl y cl ai med t hat
semeTon, unl i ke symbol on, act ual l y means t he nat ur al i ndi ca-
t i on ( cf . Wai t z, 1844, 324f . ; Aubenque, 1962, 109; Kr et zmann,
1974) ; t he concl usi on t hen i s t hat Ar i st ot l e expr esses hi msel f
i mpr eci sel y, r ef er r i ng t o si gns t hat he consi der s convent i onal
as semei a, or t hat he ( accor di ng t o Kr et zmann) usi ng di f f er ent
expr essi ons, means di f f er ent t hi ngs. - The cl ai m t hat semei on
can r ef er t o a convent i onal si gn onl y i f i t i s used i n i t s
non- st r i ct sense was al r eady r i ght l y r ej ect ed by St ei nt hal
( count er i ng Wai t z) : St ei nt hal poi nt ed out t hat even f l ags
and seal s ar e cal l ed semema ( St ei nt hal , 1863, 182 . 1. ) .
The r eason f or t hat mi st ake i s t hat ever si nce Ar i st ot l e
( ef . Anal , pr . c 27; Rhet . I . c. 2; I I . . 22- 24) i t had
been t he cust om i n l ogi c and r het or i c t o deal wi t h t he
nat ur al i ndi cat i on under t he gener al name of semei on.
30
Cf . Long, 1974
f
9f
and r ecei ved a good deal of var i ed st i mul at i on f r omt he
Academy and t he Per i pat us gener al l y; t he vi ew has even
been expr essed t hat "t her e [ i s] har dl a concept , har dl y
a t heor em of St oi c l ogi c t hat was not st i mul at ed by
Ar i st ot l e' s Or ganon or di d not or i gi nat e f r omear l y
31
Academi c, ear l y Per i pat et i c di scussi on. "
I n t hese - ci r cumst ances we can har dl y assume t hat t hey
had no knowl edge of t he si gn t heor y of l anguage. The f act
t hat t hi s t heor y di d not become par t and par cel of t hei r
doct r i ne can onl y mean t hat t hey r ej ect ed i t del i ber at el y.
So t he quest i on ar i ses of what t he r easons mi ght
have been f or t hat r ej ect i on. To f i nd an answer , we have
t o r et ur n t o t he vi ew t hat t he St oi cs t ook of t he si gn
( sme on) . But t hi s f i r st of al l r equi r es t aki ng a l ook at
t hei r t heor y of meani ng ( smai nomenon) .
( I I )
( 1) The account s of St oi c l anguage doct r i ne handed
down t o us f r om ant i qui t y def i ne nei t her t he semai nomenon
nor i t s cor r el at e, t he sma non. The wor d gener al l y denot es
t he "cont ent s" t hat l i ngui st i c expr essi on - pr ovi ded we
under st and i t - conveys t o us, i . e. t he "cont ent s" cont ai ned
i n i t i n t hi s r espect ; and we ar e l ef t t o gat her f r omour
sour ce mat er i al what par t i cul ar vi ew t he St oi cs t ook of
t hese cont ent s.
For t hi s pur pose we wi l l be wel l - advi sed t o st ar t
f r om a passage i n Sext us Empi r i cus' s wr i t i ngs. "The St oi cs, "
i t says, "say t hat t hr ee t hi ngs combi ne [i n speech] :
meani ng ( semai nomenon) , expr essi on ( sma non) and obj ect
/ of r ef er ence. / ( t ynchanon ) . Of t hese, expr essi on r ef er s t o
sound ( phn ) , l i ke Di on; ' meani ng' i s t he t hi ng i t sel f
31
Met t e, 1951, 36 - Pohl enz ( 1939) poi nt s out connect i ons
bet ween Ar i st ot el i an and St oi c l anguage doct r i ne.
( pr agma) as r eveal ed by t he f or mer and whi ch we appr ehend
as subsi st i ng wi t h our t hought , but t he bar bar i ans don' t
under st and, even t hough t hey hear t he sound; and, f i nal l y,
t he ' obj ect ' i s t hat what exi st s out si de, l i ke Di on
hi msel f . "
32
I n t hi s passage t he f i r st t hi ng t o not e i s t hat t he
St oi cs di f f er ent i at ed r adi cal l y bet ween t he cont ent s of an
expr essi on and t he obj ect t o whi ch i t r el at es: i t s r ef er ence.
Thi s di f f er ent i at i on i s t he r esul t of sci ent i f i c r ef l ect i on;
but put i n t hese gener al t er ms, i t i s not t ypi cal l y St oi c
yet . Ar i st ot l e t aught al r eady (as we have seen) t hat ut -
t er ances i n sound l anguage ar e si gns of t he st at es of t he
soul and t hat t hese pr ovi de a l i nk bet ween t he t hi ngs t hey
r epr esent and t he convent i onal si gns of l anguage.
We r ecei ve f ur t her cl ues f r omt he cont ext i n whi ch
t he passage f i nds i t sel f . Sext us r epor t s t her e on an ar gument
r evol vi ng ar ound t he basi c phi l osophi cal quest i on of l ogi c,
t he quest i on of what i s act ual l y cal l ed t r ue or f al se: what
ki nd of t hi ngs r eal l y deser ve t he l abel of "t r ue" or "f al se".
Thi s quest i on, he says, has been answer ed i n di f f er ent ways
by di f f er ent phi l osophi cal t r ends. The f ol l ower s of Epi cur us
and St r at on (a Per i pat et i c) ascr i be t r ut h t o t he sound, i . e.
t o l i ngui st i c expr essi on; ot her s ascr i be i t t o t he "movement
32
The t er m t ynehanon t o denot e what exi st s out si de and can
become t he obj ect of our speech - i . e. , t he r ef er ence - i s
pecul i ar t o t he St oi cs; ot her wi se pr agma i s used i n t hi s
sense ( t hi s St oi c devi at i on f r omwhat i s cust omar y i s ex-
pr essl y r ef er r ed t o by comment at or s on Ar i st ot l e, cf . SVF
I I 236, and Mi ghnucci , 1965, 89 n. 58) . The i nt r oduct i on of
a new t er mt o denot e t hi ngs concr et e i s expl ai ned by t he
f act t hat pr agma was gi ven a di f f er ent meani ng by t he St oi cs,
who use i t t o r ef er t o t he t hi ng as i t i s cont ai ned i n t he
sent ence, as i t i s expr essed, " meant " , by t he sent ence, i . e. ,
t he semai nomenon.
of t hi nki ng" , i . e. t o t he psychi cal act of j udgement ; but
33
t he St oi cs ascr i be i t t o t he smai nomenon.
Thi s r eveal s t hat accor di ng t o St oi c doct r i ne t he
smai nomenon, whi ch const i t ut es t he speci f i c cont ent s of
l i ngui st i c expr essi on, i s not t o be sought i n t he act i vi t y
Of t hi nki ng, i n "st at es of t he soul " : t hat i t i s of a non-
34
psychi cal nat ur e . Thi s vi ew i s al so mani f est i n t he f act
t hat t he smai nomena ar e decl ar ed t o be i ncor por eal : t he
act i vi t y of t hi nki ng, t he St oi cs mai nt ai n, consi st s i n a
35
mat er i al change of t he soul as a body.
( 2) The St oi c vi ew i s not sel f - expl anat or y. Speech i s
ut t er ance
;
i . e. ext er i or i zat i on. To put i t mor e scr upul ousl y:
i t i s our i mmedi at e, endl essl y r epeat i ng exper i ence t hat we
ext er i or i ze somet hi ng i n speech t hat goes on i n our mi nds
and i s not accessi bl e t o ot her s: somet hi ng t o whi ch we l end
exi st ence out si de our sel ves. I t seems t o f ol l ow f r om t hi s
t hat t he cont ent s of our speech must j ust be what i s i nsi de
us: t he psychi cal .
Yet i t was r eal i zed ver y ear l y i ndeed t hat an assump-
t i on of t hi s ki nd - however nat ur al i t may appear t o be - i s
i nadequat e and t hat i t woul d i n par t i cul ar be i mpossi bl e t o
say t r ue or f al se t hi ngs wi t h an obj ect i ve cl ai m t o val i di t y,
i f speech wer e t he i mmedi at e expr essi on of psychi cal pr oces-
ses. One need onl y r ead on i n Sext us' s t ext t o f i nd out t hat
he, t oo, r eal i zed t hat . I n t he cour se of hi s di scussi on,
whose openi ng r emar ks we have quot ed, he seeks t o r ef ut e a
vi ew he hi msel f ment i oned ear l i er on: t he vi ew t hat t he
33
SE. A. m. VI I I 13.
34
Cf . "The f undament al poi nt i s t hei r r ecogni t i on ( ' t hei r'
r ef er s t o t he St oi cs, t he aut hor ) t hat t he meani ng of a sen-
t ence . . . cannot be r educed t o any physi cal or psychol ogi cal
st at e of af f ai r s t hough i t depends on bot h of t hese" ( Long,
1971, 137) .
35
SVF I I 801.
But i f meani ngs ar e essent i al l y di f f er ent f r oml i n-
gui st i c expr essi on ( t he semai nont a) , on t he one hand, and
f r ompsychi cal pr ocesses ( t he "movement s of t hi nki ng" ) ,
on t he ot her , t hen i t i s onl y nat ur al f or t hem t o become t he
subj ect of a di sci pl i ne of t hei r own: t he t heor y of sma-
i nomena.
( 3) Havi ng expl ai ned t he t hr ee f act or s of speech i n
accor dance wi t h t he St oi c vi ew, Sext us cont i nues hi s account ,
sayi ng: "Two of t hese [ f act or s] ar e bodi es - t he sound and
t he obj ect - ; one, however , i s i ncor por eal : t he t hi ng
si gni f i ed ( t o smai nomenon pr gma) ; and t hi s i s a l ekt on:
what i s t r ue or f al se. " (A. m. VI I I 12) .
The t er m l ekt on (' what i s sai d' ) , whi ch i s used her e,
t akes t he pl ace of smai nomenon i n t wo passages, whi ch ar e
par al l el t o t hose ci t ed; t he f i r st passage ( P. h. I I 84)
i s about t he t hr ee vi ews concer ni ng t he nat ur e of t hat whi ch
i s t r ue or f al se; and t he second (A. m. VI I I 75) i s about
t he t hr ee f act or s of speech. We have t o t ake a cl oser l ook
at t he concept denot ed by t hi s expr essi on; i t i s one of t he
most i mpor t ant i n St oi c l anguage doct r i ne, even i n St oi c
di al ect i cs i n gener al .
The wor d l ekt on was a t echni cal expr essi on; and i t
was t her ef or e gi ven a pr oper def i ni t i on. Thi s def i ni t i on
has come down t o us i n Sext us' s and Di ogenes Laer t i us' s
37
wr i t i ngs; and i t r eads: a l ekt on i s t hat whi ch subsi st s
hyphi st at ai i n conf or mi t y wi t h a r at i onal pr esent at i on.
Thi s f or mul a i s an at t empt at answer i ng t he quest i on of how
t he i ncor por eal , obj ect i ve l ekt on - l ekt a ar e smai nomena,
af t er al l - i s connect ed wi t h t he cor por eal , subj ect i ve
act i vi t y of t hi nki ng; t he f or mul a makes cl ear t hat t he l ekt on
does not enj oy an exi st ence i ndependent of t he l at t er . But i t
37
SE. A. m. VI I I 70; DL VI I 63.
But i f meani ngs ar e essent i al l y di f f er ent f r oml i n-
gui st i c expr essi on ( t he semai nont a) , on t he one hand, and
f r ompsychi cal pr ocesses ( t he "movement s of t hi nki ng" ) ,
on t he ot her , t hen i t i s onl y nat ur al f or t hem t o become t he
subj ect of a di sci pl i ne of t hei r own: t he t heor y of sma-
i nomena.
( 3) Havi ng expl ai ned t he t hr ee f act or s of speech i n
accor dance wi t h t he St oi c vi ew, Sext us cont i nues hi s account ,
sayi ng: "Two of t hese [ f act or s] ar e bodi es - t he sound and
t he obj ect - ; one, however , i s i ncor por eal : t he t hi ng
si gni f i ed ( t o smai nomenon pr gma) ; and t h s s a ekt on:
what s t r ue or f a se. " (A. m. VI I I 12) .
The t er m ekt on (' what s sa d' ) , wh ch s used her e,
t akes t he p ace of smai nomenon i n t wo passages, whi ch ar e
par al l el t o t hose ci t ed; t he f i r st passage ( P. h. I I 84)
i s about t he t hr ee vi ews concer ni ng t he nat ur e of t hat whi ch
i s t r ue or f al se; and t he second (A. m. VI I I 75) i s about
t he t hr ee f act or s of speech. We have t o t ake a cl oser l ook
at t he concept denot ed by t hi s expr essi on; i t i s one of t he
most i mpor t ant i n St oi c l anguage doct r i ne, even i n St oi c
di al ect i cs i n gener al .
The wor d l ekt on was a t echni cal expr essi on; and i t
was t her ef or e gi ven a pr oper def i ni t i on. Thi s def i ni t i on
has come down t o us i n Sext us' s and Di ogenes Laer t i us' s
37
wr i t i ngs; and i t r eads: a l ekt on i s t hat whi ch subsi st s
hyphi st at ai i n conf or mi t y wi t h a r at i onal pr esent at i on.
Thi s f or mul a i s an at t empt at answer i ng t he quest i on of how
t he i ncor por eal , obj ect i ve l ekt on - l ekt a ar e smai nomena,
af t er al l - i s connect ed wi t h t he cor por eal , subj ect i ve
act i vi t y of t hi nki ng; t he f or mul a makes cl ear t hat t he l ekt on
does not enj oy an exi st ence i ndependent of t he l at t er . But i t
37
SE. A. m. VI I I 70; DL VI I 63.
pr es uppos es a pr ac t i c al knowl edge of what t he wor d l ekt on
i s t o mean. I t wi l l t her ef or e har dl y be hel pf ul t o us at
t hi s poi nt .
The aut hor s of our s our c e mat er i al , however , t el l us
mor e about t he di f f er ent t ypes of l ekt a.
They di s t i ngui s h f i r s t of al l bet ween i nc ompl et e and
c ompl et e l ekt a ( l ekt a el l i pe and l ekt a aut ot el e) . The
c ompl et enes s of a l ekt on, t hey s ay, can be s een f r omt he
expr es s i on embodyi ng i t : f r om whet her t hi s expr es s i on i s
s el f - c ont ai ned or not . The ver b f or m gr aphei , ' i s wr i t i ng' ,
e. g. , expr es s es an i nc ompl et e l ekt on, " bec aus e we ar e bound
t o want t o know: who i s ?
U
; a s ent enc e l i ke gr aphei Skr at s ,
' Socr at es i s wr i t i ng' , however , i s t he expr es s i on of a c om-
3 8
pl et e l ekt on.
Compl et e l ekt a ar e, as t he exampl e s hows , s ent enc e
meani ngs ; t hei r t ypes - t her e ar e s ai d t o be t en of t hem
( among t hem t wo t ypes of ques t i ons , er ot ema, ' s ent ence ques -
t i on' , and pys ma, ' wor d ques t i on' ) - c or r es pond t o t he t ypes
of s ent enc e des c r i bed i n our gr ammar s . They i nc l ude t he axi oma,
whi c h i n St oi c par l anc e i s what i s t r ue or f al s e: t he pr opo-
39
s i t i on.
We know al r eady t hat t he St oi c s as c r i bed t r ut h or f al s e-
hood as t he c as e may be - t o meani ng. As we nows ee, t hei r
doc t r i ne s ays t hat what has a t r ut h val ue i s mor e c l os el y
38
DL VI I 63.
39
I n some ot her passage ( VI I 63) , Di ogenes ment i ons f our
t ypes of compl et e l ekt a: pr oposi t i ons ( axi mat a) , syl l ogi sms
( whi ch do not r eal l y bel ong her e si nce t hey l i nk pr oposi t i ons) ,
sent ence quest i ons and wor d quest i ons. G. Nuchel mans supposes
t hat we her e have t he t r ace of an ear l i er st age of devel op-
ment bef or e us. He r emi nds us t hat t he di al ect i cal i nvest i ga-
t i on of an i ssue moves bet ween quest i on and answer ; he
assumes t hat t he st ar t i ng poi nt of t he t heor y of compl et e
l ekt a, whi ch f or ms par t of St oi c ( f oot not e 39 cont i nued)
def i ned as t he meani ng of a sent ence of a cer t ai n t ype; as
such, i t bel ongs t o t he same cl ass - and consi st s of t he
same "subst ance" - as l i ngui st i cal l y expr essed quest i ons,
i nvi t at i ons, et c. But i f pr oposi t i ons ar e l ekt a, i . e. sma-
i nomena, t hey have t o be deal t wi t h by t he t heor y of sma-
i nomena, j ust as much as bot h t he combi nat i ons of pr oposi -
t i ons f or med f r om t hem and t he i nf er ences consi st i ng of
pr oposi t i ons have t o; so l ogi c, as we see i t , i s consi der ed
by t he St oi cs as a par t of t he t heor y of meani ng.
( 4) I n t he l i t er at ur e on St oi c l i ngui st i c doct r i ne we
occasi onal l y come acr oss t he vi ew t hat t he St oi cs, when
speaki ng of "i ncompl et e l ekt a" , meant wor d meani ngs i n gener al
( or , mor e pr eci sel y, t he meani ngs of nouns and ver bs) . Thi s
vi ew i s hel d, e. g. , by Rudol f Schmi dt , t he aut hor of t he
f i r st - and so f ar onl y - monogr aph on St oi c l anguage doct r i ne.
Accor di ng t o Zei l er , t he St oi cs di vi ded t he " i ncompl et e l ekt a"
i nt o t wo cl asses, t he cl ass of names and adj ect i ves and t he
cl ass of ver bs. Pohl enz, i n hi s paper on t he f oundat i on of
West er n l anguage t heor y by t he St oi c school , says t hat l ekt a
40
ar e t he "i ncor por eal cont ent s of wor ds" .
But when we exami ne our sour ces mor e cl osel y, we f i nd
t hat t hi s vi ew i s a mi sunder st andi ng.
I t has t o be not ed i n t he f i r st pl ace t hat our sour ces
expr essl y ascr i be t he qual i t y of bei ng an i ncompl et e l ekt on
onl y t o t he pr edi cat e, t o whi ch, i n t er ms of par t s of speech,
41
t he ver b cor r esponds.
( f oot not e 39 cont i nued) di al ect i cs, must have been t he st udy
of sent ence quest i ons and t he answer s gi ven t o t hem ( Nuchel -
mans, 19 73, 62f . )
40
R. Schmi dt , 1839, 57; Zei l er , 1909, 91; Pohl enz, 1939, 158.
- Cf . al so "Def i ci ent l ekt a seem t o have been di vi ded i nt o
pr edi cat es ( kat gor mat a) and subj ect s ( pt osei s) . " ( Kneal e
and Kneal e, 1962, 144; but t hi s cl ai m i s vi r t ual l y cor r ect ed
on . 14 9. )
Af t er r el at i ng t he subdi vi si on of l ekt a i nt o i ncompl et e
and compl et e ones and gi vi ng a ver b f or m ( gr aphei , ' i s wr i t -
i ng' ) t o i l l ust r at e t he f or mer , Di ogenes Laer t i us ends t he
par t i cul ar par agr aph by maki ng t hi s gener al poi nt : "I n-
compl et e l ekt a i ncl ude t he pr edi cat es ( kat egor emat a) ; compl et e
l ekt a i ncl ude t he pr oposi t i ons ( axi mat a) , t he syl l ogi sms,
42
t he sent ence quest i ons and t he wor d quest i ons. " I n t he
f ol l owi ng par agr aph ( VI I 64) he gi ves t hr ee def i ni t i ons of
t he pr edi cat e. The t hi r d r eads: The pr edi cat e i s an i ncompl et e
l ekt on l i nked wi t h a nomi nat i ve ( not anot her l ekt on! ) t o make
a pr oposi t i on.
I t shoul d be ment i oned i n t hi s connect i on t hat i n a
l i st of obj ect s di scussed by t he St oi cs i n t he sect i on on
smai nomena we f i nd aut ot e and kat egor emat a p aced s de
43
by s de; t hey ar e c ear y des gned t o denot e t he t wo t ypes
of ekt a; so kat egor emat a s used w t h t he same mean ng as
( ekt a) e pe s.
The def n t on of t he pr ed cat e, wh ch we quot ed | ust
now, po nt s t o t he r eason why t he St o cs cons der ed t he
pr ed cat e as an ncomp et e ekt on. The r eason becomes even
c ear er when we ook at t he way t he St o cs subd v ded t he
44
pr ed cat es.
I t s qu t e s gn f cant t hat t he po nt of depar t ur e s
t he quest on: what add t ons ar e r equ r ed f or a pr ed cat e,
an ncomp et e ekt on, t o t ur n nt o a comp et e one, . e.
nt o a pr opos t on? The out come s a subd v s on based on
t wo b nar y f eat ur es. Ther e ar e pr ed cat es t hat as such ar e
( f oot not e 41 cont nued) 69 n. 2; Long, 1971, 104f . ;
NucheI mans, 19 73, 57.
42
DL VI I 63.
43
DL VI I 43.
44
SVF I I 184.
comp et e, . e. pr ed cat es t hat f or m a pr opos t on as soon
as t hey ar e nked w t h a noun; and t her e ar e ot her s, n-
comp et e ones, wh ch t ur n nt o a comp et e pr ed cat e on y
45
when a noun n an ob que case s added. On t he ot her hand,
pr ed cat es f a nt o t wo c asses, depend ng on whet her one
of t he nouns t hat t hey nk up w t h t o f or m a sent ence s n
t he nom nat ve case or not . These f eat ur es - | + comp et e |
and | + nk ng up w t h a nom nat ve noun| - pr ov de t he
bas s f or d st ngu sh ng bet ween f our t ypes of pr ed cat e,
wh ch ar e each g ven a spec a name. Ever y one of t he t ypes
s ust r at ed by an examp e ( w t h t he name, t he t echn ca
t er m, g ven n br acket s) :
( 1) Sokr at es per pat e , ' Socr at es s wa k ng about ' ( kat gor ma
or symbama) ; ( 2) Skr at ei met amel ei , ' Socr at es r epent s'
45
Di ogenes of Babyl on def i ned t he ver b as a par t of speech
meani ng a si mpl e ( l i t er al l y: non- compound) pr edi cat e ( DL VI I
58) ; Pohl enz concl uded t hat t he St oi cs had di st i ngui shed be-
t ween si mpl e and compound pr edi cat es, and assumed t hat t hey con-
si der ed t hose pr edi cat es as compound whi ch ar e expr essed by a
combi nat i on of t he copul a and a noun ( Pohl enz, 1948, 47) .
I n SVF I I 184 we do, however , f i nd a St oi c subdi vi si on
of pr edi cat es. We ar e at once st r uck by t he f act t hat t he
pr edi cat i ve expr essi ons gi ven t her e ar e onl y ver bs. We al so
not i ce t hat a l i ne i s dr awn t her e bet ween one- wor d and mul t i -
wor d pr edi cat es, i . e. pr edi cat es expr essed ei t her by a mer e
ver b or by a combi nat i on of a ver b wi t h a noun ( l i ke Pi ona
ph e ) . I f nd t mor e nat ur a t o assume t hat t he St o cs
under st ood by "compound pr ed cat es" pr ed cat es of t he at t er
k nd.
See next page f n.
( par asymbama) ; ( 3) Pl at n Di na ph e , ' P at o oves D on'
( e at t on kat egor ema) ; ( 4) Skr at ei Al ki bi adou mel ei ,
' Socr at es i s at t ached t o Al ki bi ades' ( el at t on e par asymbama) .
(I n ( 1) and ( 3) t he pr edi cat e i s l i nked wi t h a noun i n t he
nomi nat i ve case, i n ( 2) and ( 4) i t i s l i nked wi t h a noun i n
an obl i que case. )
Thi s cl assi f i cat i on of t he pr edi cat es i mpl i es a vi ew of
sent ence st r uct ur e t hat i s ut t er l y di f f er ent f r omt he conven-
t i onal one, i . e. , t he one t hat we wer e t aught at school . Ac-
cor di ng t o t he l at t er , a sent ence i s made by so l i nki ng t wo
const i t uent s ( wor ds or gr oups of wor ds) t hat t hey become a
subj ect and a pr edi cat e f or mi ng a uni t y. Thi s vi ew i s, so
t o speak, gi ven t angi bl e expr essi on i n a t heor y t hat once
commanded a good deal of i nf l uence: t hat ever y sent ence con-
t ai ns an expr essed or vi r t ual copul a, a const i t uent whose
f unct i ons i ncl ude t hat of l i nki ng t he const i t uent s of a
46
sent ence as i f t hey woul d not st i ck t oget her ot her wi se.
I n t he St oi c vi ew, however , - t hi s i s cl ear f r omwhat
has gone bef or e - one of t he t wo const i t uent s, t he pr edi cat e,
i s not sel f - cont ai ned - i t i s "unsat ur at ed" - t o t he ext ent
Whi l e t he Gr eek or i gi nal uses an obl i que case, t he Engl i sh
t r ansl at i on has t o use what i s t ant amount t o a nomi nat i ve
case (= subj ect case) i nst ead. The t r ansl at or .
46
Cf . , e. g. , "Vocul a i st a, quae nexumpr adi cat i et subj ect i
si gni f i cat , di ci t ur Copul a . . . Copul a i n pr oposi t i one vel
expr esse poni t ur , vel i n t er mi no, qui ad pr aedi cat umper t i net ,
l at et " ( Chr . Wol f f i n: Del br ck, 1893, 25) ; "Tout e pr oposi -
t i on n' est aut r e chose que l ' expr essi on d' un j ugement de
not r e espr i t . . . La pr oposi t i on devant t r e e t ab eau de
ce | ugement de not r e espr t , . . . , e e do t ncessa r ement
expr mer un su| et , un at t r but , et ' ex st ence de ce su| et
avec sa r e at on ' at t r but " ( Sacy, 1831, 119f . ) .
t hat i t has t he pecul i ar f eat ur e of det er mi ni ng how many
nouns shoul d be added, and what t hei r cases ( synt act i c
f unct i on) shoul d be, t o cr eat e a compl et e l ekt on; so, a
sent ence emer ges ( st r uct ur al l y) as a r esul t of f ol l owi ng
t he pl an cont ai ned i n, and t hus pr edet er mi ned by, t he pr e-
47
di cat e. The pr edi cat e - and t he pr edi cat e al one - i s
t her ef or e a l ekt on el l i pes, i . e. , an i ncompl et e sent ence
( or , mor e pr eci sel y, an i ncompl et e sent ence meani ng) .
Onl y moder n l ogi c per mi t t ed a cor r ect assessment
of t hi s vi ew of t he St oi cs : t he St oi cs r eal i zed i n a way
t hat a ver b i s not a mer e wor d, but a pr oposi t i onal f unct i on,
i . e. , an expr essi on cont ai ni ng one or mor e undet er mi ned
const i t uent s such t hat , when val ues ar e assi gned t o t hese
const i t uent s, t he expr essi on becomes a pr oposi t i on.
So, i ncompl et e l ekt a ar e not wor d meani ngs i n gener al ;
t he meani ng of a wor d i s cover ed by t hi s concept onl y t o t he
ext ent t hat a par t i cul ar wor d i s i n r eal i t y a sent ence,
t hough admi t t edl y an i ncompl et e one, a sent ence r equi r i ng
addi t i on.
( 5) The gr ammar i ans of ant i qui t y, f r om Di onysi us Thr ax
t o Apol l oni us, sai d t hat t he di st i nct i ve f eat ur e of t he sen-
t ence i s t hat i t expr esses a compl et e t hought ( di anoi an
48
aut ot el ) . The i dea of basi ng t he def i ni t i on of t he sen-
47
Cf . "A kat egor ema was seen as a ki nd of schema f or axi omat a:
by f i l l i ng i n t he name posi t i ons ar ound t he gi ven pr edi cat e
one f or ms a f ul l - bl own asser t i on" ( Nuchel mans, 1973, 57) .
48
Di onysi us gi ves t he f ol l owi ng def i ni t i on of t he sent ence:
Logos est i peze l exeon synt hesi s di anoi an aut ot el e del ousa
( Di oni si o Tr ace. Techne gr ammat i ke. Test o cr i t i co e comment o
a cur a di G. B. Pecor el l a. Bol ogna 1962) . Wout er s ( 1975) poi nt s
out t hat t he ver si on peze l exeon synt hesi s - i n cont r ast t o
pezes l exeos synt hesi s f ound i n t he ol der edi t i on by Uhl i g -
i s conf i r med by a papyr us f r agment . ( Wout er s wi shes t o i n-
t er pr et t he phr ase peze l exeon synt hesi s as meani ng "t he
combi ni ng of wor ds i n gener al ". ) The ( f oot not e 48 cont i nued)
t ence on t hi s f eat ur e cl ear l y goes back t o St oi c l anguage
doct r i ne, whi ch def i ned t he cont ent s of a sent ence as a
49
l ekt on aut ot el es.
The gr ammar i ans, adopt i ng t he i dea, al so adopt ed t he
St oi c expr essi on f or compl et eness. Tr ue enough, t hi s t er m
i s not a cr eat i on of t he St oi cs; i t i s al r eady f ound i n
Ar i st ot l e' s wr i t i ngs. But i t i s not ewor t hy, af t er al l , t hat
aut hor s who, al t hough not St oi cs t hemsel ves, r el at e St oi c
vi ews or al l ude t o t hem, r epeat edl y r epl ace aut ot el es by
synonyms such as t el ei os ( SVF I I 182. 184) or pl er es ( i bi d.
99) .
But t he gr ammar i ans di d not i n t hi s case si mpl y adopt
St oi c dogmas: t hey devi at ed f r omt hemt o a consi der abl e ext ent .
The l ogos of t he gr ammar i ans, unl i ke t he St oi c l ekt on,
denot es t he expr essi on ( t he phn) , and what t hi s expr essi on
r eveal s i s not a smai nomenon as t he St oi cs saw i t ; but i t
i s a t hought ( di anoi a) , i . e. somet hi ng psychi cal . I t shoul d
f ur t her mor e be not ed t hat t he St oi cs cont r ast t he l ekt on
aut ot el es wi t h t he l ekt on el l i pes, whi ch bel ongs t o t he same
cl ass and i s al so a l ekt on, t hough an i ncompl et e one. The
gr ammar i ans, who di d not adopt t he i dea t hat t he ver b i s a
( f oot not e 48 cont i nued) sent ence def i ni t i on gi ven by
Apol l oni us r eads i n Pr i sci an' s Lat i n ver si on: Or at i o est
or di nat i o di ct i onum congr ua, sent ent i amper f ect am demon-
st r ans ( Di onysi i Thr aci s Ar s Gr ammat i ca. Edi di t G. Uhl i g.
Li psi ae 1883. 23. ) .
49
Cf . Pohl enz, 1939, 181; Kneal e and Kneal e, 1962, 143.
Apol l oni us even cal l s t he i nt r ansi t i ve ver b aut ot el es so
f ar as i t , as a pr edi cat e, i s compl et e, i . e. t hat i t does
not r equi r e t he addi t i on of a noun i n an obl i que case t o
f unct i on as a pr edi cat e ( Apol l oni i Dyscol i . De const r uct i one
l i br i quat t uor . Recensui t G. Uhl i g, Li psi ae 1910, 161. 4- 7;
402f . ) . As Ammoni us' s account of t he St oi c subdi vi si on of
pr edi cat es shows, t hi s i s or i gi nal l y St oi c doct r i ne.
sent ence f unct on, g ve t he comp et eness of t he sent ence
a d f f er ent mean ng: t he sent ence s comp et e v s- - v s
t he un t s, wor ds and wor d gr oups n gener a t hat ar e n-
cor por at ed n t s st r uct ur e, and a of t hese, t he ver b
nc uded, d f f er f r om t as t o c ass.
( 6) Yet t he c ose r e at onsh p bet ween pr ed cat e
( kat gor ma) and sent ence meani ng ( l ekt on aut ot el es) - t he
f act t hat t he t wo bel ong t o t he same cl ass - r est s not onl y
on l i ngui st i c f oundat i ons, but al so on ont ol ogi cal ones.
To use Seneca' s expl anat i on of an i mpor t ant t enet of
5 1
St oi ci sm: when I see Cat o wal ki ng about and pr oceed t o
make a cor r espondi ng st at ement , t hen t he subj ect of my pr o-
posi t i on i s Cat o, who i s wal ki ng about , a body; but my
st at ement , t he l ekt on expr essed by t he sent ence Cat o ambul at ,
' Cat o i s wal ki ng about ' , i s of a ver y di f f er ent nat ur e: i t
i s i ncor por ed ( asmat on) . The cont r ast bet ween body and
t he i ncor por eal , however , has a si gni f i cance of i t s own i n
St oi c ont ol ogy.
The St oi cs say t hat t he cr i t er i on f or t he r eal i t y of
a bei ng i s hi s abi l i t y t o pr oduce or suf f er an ef f ect . But
t hey at t r i but e t hi s abi l i t y t o bodi es onl y; and on t he
st r engt h of t hat ver y cr i t er i on t hey deny t hat t he asmat a
enj oy exi st ence i n t he st r i ct sense of t he wor d: t hey bel ong
52
t o t he me ont a. Thi s i s not meant t o say t hat t her e ar e no
asomat a at al l ; t o be i ncor por eal i s an i mpr oper way of
bei ng, whi ch i s ascr i bed t o f our t hi ngs: t i me, space, voi d
and t he l ekt a.
51
Seneca. Epi st . 117. 13. - The Seneca passage i s t r ansl at ed
and di scussed i n: Long, 1971, 77f .
52
SVF 329- 35; 357- 68. - Br ehi er devot ed an i mpor t ant mono-
gr aph t o t he i ssue of "t he i ncor por eal " i n St oi ci sm. I t
was f i r st publ i shed i n 1908, cf . Ref er ences.
A l ekt on i s not a t hought i n t he sense of a moment i n
t he cour se of t he act i vi t y of t hi nki ng goi ng on i n somebody' s
mi nd; t hi s i s i n t he St oi c vi ew somet hi ng physi cal , r eal ;
t he l ekt on does not exi st i n i sol at i on, but onl y i n connec-
t i on wi t h our t hi nki ng: i t coexi st s ( par yphi st at ai ) wi t h t he
l at t er , i . e. i t exi st s onl y t o t he ext ent t hat i t i s ( ut t er ed
and) t hought ; i t does not have an exi st ence i ndependent of
53
t hi nki ng.
Si nce onl y bodi es i n t he st r i ct sense of t he wor d
ar e accor di ng t o t he St oi cs r eal , t her e i s not hi ng i n r eal i t y
t hat cor r esponds i mmedi at el y t o a pr oposi t i on, t he r epr esent a-
t i on of a st at e of af f ai r s i n t hought . I n t hi s r espect , a
pr oposi t i on l i ke Cat o i s wal ki ng about i s a cr eat i on of
t hi nki ng man. But t her e i s a cor r espondence bet ween t hi s
axi oma and r eal i t y t o t he ext ent t hat t he t r ut h of t he f or mer
can be checked i n t he l at t er : t he f or mer i s t r ue i f Cat o i s
54
i ndeed wal ki ng about and i t i s wr ong i f he i s not .
The axi oma Cat o i s wal ki ng about i s i ncor por eal si nce
i t i s a pr oposi t i on about a body. But st r i ct l y speaki ng, t he
pr oposi t i on l i es i n t he pr edi cat e ( t he kat gor ma) ; t he ot her
par t of t he axi ma def i nes t he obj ect t o whi ch t he pr edi cat e
i s ascr i bed. So t he kat egor ema i s al so an asmat on; and i t
pr oves al so f r omt hi s angl e t o be a st r uct ur e di f f er ent
f r omt he l ekt on aut ot el es onl y i n t hat i t i s i ncompl et e
( "unsat ur at ed") .
53
SE. A. m. VI I I 12; Si mpl i ci us i n: Long, 1971, 80.
54
SE. A. m. VI I I 100; DL VI I 65. - Appar ent l y, t he St oi cs
di st i ngui shed al so t er mi nol ogi cal l y bet ween pr oper exi st ence
and i mpr oper exi st ence: t o expr ess t he sense of ' be' , t hey
used hypar chei n of t he r eal l y exi st i ng bodi es, and hyphi st ast hai
of asrnat a ( see SVF I I 509. 521; SE. P. h. I I 80) . Cf .
( Long, 1971 , 91 . ) .
( 7) What now r emai ns f or us t o do i s t o end our
consi der at i ons about l ekt a by addi ng a f ew f ur t her poi nt s.
The name of l ekt a i s t r anspar ent i n f or m; i t i s a
ver bal adj ect i ve f or mi ng par t of t he syst em of t he l exeme
l egei n, ' say
1
; so i t gener al l y means ' what i s sai d' , ' t he
t hi ng sai d' , when used as a noun.
To under st and t he t echni cal use of t he wor d, i n whi ch
i t denot es sent ence meani ng, you have t o t ake i nt o account
t hat l egei n, a t r ansi t i ve ver b, i s usual l y f ol l owed by a
compl ement r ef er r i ng t o t he cont ent s of what i s sai d.
St enzel says t hat i t al ways means ' t o mean somet hi ng' ("ti
l egei s?" i s i nvar i abl y: "what do you mean?" ) ; and Mar t ha
Kneal e t hi nks t hat t he best l i t er al Engl i sh t r ansl at i on of
l ekt on i s pr obabl y ' what i s meant ' .
The St oi cs f ur t her mor e emphasi ze t he di f f er ence bet ween
l egei n, ' say' , and pr opher est hai , ' br i ngi ng f or t h (a wor d or
a sent ence as a sound sequence) ' . "Sayi ng i s di f f er ent f r om
br i ngi ng f or t h; f or what i s br ought f or t h ar e sounds, but
what i s sai d ar e t hi ngs ( pr agmat a) , whi ch ar e t her ef or e al so
57
l ekt a ( t hi ngs sai d) , " wr i t es Di ogenes Laer t i us ( VI I 57) ,
who i n t he f i nal anal ysi s t akes hi s mat er i al f r omt he t ext -
book on sound ( i . e. on t he smai nont a) wr i t t en by Di ogenes
of Babyl on.
The di f f er ence i s enor mous i ndeed; i t concer ns t he
ont ol ogi cal st at us of sound and l ekt on: sound bel ongs t o t he
bodi es, t he l ekt on, however , i s i ncor por eal . But t hei r
combi nat i on does not onl y ser ve t he pur pose of communi ca-
t i on: i t has deeper r oot s.
St enzel , 1957, 81. - As t o t he semant i cs of l egei n, cf .
al so Von Fr i t z, 1971. 405f . , 556.
56
Kneal e and Kneal e, 1962, 140.
57
Pr opher ont ai men gar hai phonai , l eget ai de t a pr agmat a,
ha de kai l ekt a t ynchanei . - Cf . al so SE. A. m. VI I I 80.
The l ekt on i s br ought f or t h by t hi nki ng. Speech i n
gener al - and t he l ekt on i s what i s sai d - i s accor di ng t o
5 8
St oi c doct r i ne a f unct i on of human t hi nki ng: t he voi ce
of an ani mal i s a per cussi on of ai r br ought about by nat ur al
i mpul se, t he voi ce of man i s ar t i cul at e and sent f or t h by
59
r eason. Pecul i ar t o man ar e r at i onal pr esent at i ons
( phant asi ai l ogi kai ) ; and a r at i onal pr esent at i on i s one
i n whi ch what i s pr esent ed ( t o phant ast hen) can be shown
f or t h i n speech. The l ekt on, on t he ot her hand, i s def i ned
as t hat whi ch subsi st s ( hyphi st at ai ) i n conf or mi t y wi t h a
r at i onal pr esent at i on; and j ust as much as i t or i gi nat es
i n t hi nki ng, i t i s, l i ke ot her asmat a, appr ehended by t hi nk-
63
mg.
Li ngui st i c f or mi s not , however , a ki nd of dr ess put
on a t hought whi ch as such i s i ndependent of i t ; t he l ekt on
64
i s r eal i zed i n t hi s f or m and i s i nsepar abl e f r om i t . H.
St ephanus descr i bes t hi s r el at i onshi p ver y apt l y when he,
Cf . pr oege t ai . . . he phant asi a, ei t h' he di anoi a ekl al et i ke
hypar chousa, ho paschei hypo t es phant asi as, t out o ekpher ei
l ogcj ), ' t he pr esent at i on comes f i r st ; t hen t hi nki ng, whi ch, as
i t possesses t he capaci t y f or expr essi on, mani f est s i n speech
what i t exper i ences f r om ( "suf f er s t hr ough") t he pr esent at i on
1
( DL VI I 49. ) .
59
DL VI I 55.
60
I bi d. , 51.
61
SE. A. m. VI I I 70.
62
D. L. VI I 63; SE. l oc. ci t .
63
DL VI I 51.
64
Cf . Mi gnucci , 1965, 89 A. 56; Nuchel mans, 1973, 117.
i n hi s t r ansl at i on of Sext us' s Pyr r hnei n hypot ypsei s,
par aphr ases Gr eek l ekt on wi t h phr ases l i ke i n di ct o seu
di ct i one consi st ens or quod i n ver bo consi st i t . Sext us
seeks t o pr ove i n A. m. VI I I 69f f . t hat t her e ar e no l ekt a
and, as a r esul t , no pr oposi t i ons ( axi mat a) . That i s why
he r ef er s among ot her t hi ngs t o t he f act t hat accor di ng t o
t he St oi cs ever y l ekt on must be sai d, but t hat i t i s i n
r eal i t y i mpossi bl e t o pr oduce t he sound st r uct ur e t hat i s
t o expr ess a l ekt on: a whol e whose par t s do not exi st si mul -
t aneousl y wi t h i t does not i t sel f exi st ; yet si nce speech
i s l i near i n nat ur e, a sent ence can be ar t i cul at ed onl y i n
t he cour se of t i me, one bi t of i t af t er anot her .
( 8) Def i ni ng an axi ma as a l ekt on, we say no mor e t han
t hat i t i s a "t hi ng sai d", t he cont ent s of some ( pr oduced)
sent ence. But how can we gi ve a cl oser def i ni t i on of t hi s
"t hi ng sai d"? What i s i t i n act ual f act ? The St oi cs answer :
a pr agma, a "t hi ng".
Thi s was al r eady sai d i n t he st at ement on t he di f f er ence
bet ween pr opher est hai and l egei n t hat we quot ed above :
". . . what i s br ought f or t h ar e sounds, but what i s sai d ar e
t hi ngs ( pr agmat a) . . . " We al so saw t hat Sext us decl ar es t he
smai nomenon t o be t he t hi ng i t sel f , whi ch i s r eveal ed by
sound. I n some ot her passage ( A. m. VI I I 80) he r el at es t hat
accor di ng t o St oi c def i ni t i on l egei n i s "br i ngi ng f or t h t he
sound meani ng t he t hi ng t hought . "
Pr gma i s t her ef or e used as a synonym of l ekt on.
Di ogenes Laer t i us of f er s t hr ee def i ni t i ons of t he pr edi cat e
( VI I 64) ; t he f i r st def i ni t i on does not ment i on t he cl ass,
t he second cal l s i t pr gma, and t he t hi r d cal l s i t l ekt on.
Accor di ng t o DL VI I 63, t he axi ma bel ongs t o t he compl et e
l ekt a, but i n c, 65 i t i s def i ned as a compl et e pr agma;
Gel l i us ci t es t he same def i ni t i on, but makes l ekt on t he name
65
Fabr i ci us, 1841, 1. 142. - Cf . al so R. Schmi dt , 1839, 55.
f oot not e.
of t he c ass ( Noct es At t cae XVI , 8, 4) . The var ous t ypes
of sent ence ( quest on, mper at ve, et c. ) ar e accor d ng t o
Sext us ( A. m. VI I I 70) t ypes of t he comp et e ekt on; t he
def n t ons g ven n D ogenes Laer t us' s paper ( VI I 66- 68)
ca t he genus pr ox mumpr gma.
We w have t o dea w t h t h s synonymy n gr eat er
det a . Let us f r st cons der t he examp es aga n t hat
D ogenes Laer t us c t es t o ust r at e t he ncomp et e and
t he comp et e ekt on: gr aphe , ' s wr t ng' , and gr aphe
Skr at s, ' Socr at es i s wr i t i ng' . I n ei t her case an act i on
i s ment i oned t hat i s pr edi cat ed of a subj ect ; i n t he f i r st
case t he subj ect i s not i dent i f i ed and i n t he second i t i s:
i t i s cal l ed by name. I n ot her wor ds, t he "t hi ng sai d" ,
t he pr gma, s an act on n e t her case.
These examp es ar e t yp ca : t he sent ences t hat St o cs
c t e t o ust r at e t he r t heor es ar e as a r u e ver ba sen-
t ences; even n t he r c ass f cat on of t he pr ed cat es, wh ch
we d scussed ear er on, t hey cons der on y t hose wh ch
cons st of a ver b or a ver b gr oup.
The pr nc p es of St o c sm r evea a r at her pecu ar
v ew of what an act on or - t o put t n a mor e gener a
67
way - an event , a pr ocess s. On y bod es can par t ake,
act ve y or pass ve y, n a pr ocess: t he pr ocesses t hemse ves
ar e ncor por ea ef f ect s of causes, wh ch ar e necessar y
bod es; on t he ot her hand, a body can never be t he cause of
anot her body, but on y of a pr ocess go ng on at anot her body.
To t ake an examp e: f r e - a body - occas ona y becomes t he
66
Cf . St e nt ha , 1863, 612f . ; Nuche mans, 1973, 51.
67
Cf . Br h er ( 1909) .
68
Cf . St i koi men pn a t on sma phas smat i asmat ou t i nos
ai t i on gi nest hai , ' accor di ng t o t he St oi cs, ever y cause i s a
body t hat becomes t he cause of somet hi ng i ncor por eal t o a
body' ( SE, A. m. I X 211) .
cause t o t he bur ni ng occur r i ng at anot her body: wood; t he
pr ocess, unl i ke t he t wo bodi es, i s an asmat on: i t i s i n-
cor por eal .
Exi st ence i n t he st r i ct sense of t he wor d i s, however ,
( accor di ng t o St oi c doct r i ne) at t r i but abl e t o bodi es onl y.
Pr ocesses, si nce t hey ar e i ncor por eal , ar e al so unr eal ( and,
si nce t hey ar e onl y ef f ect and can never be cause, ar e
i nef f ect i ve) ; t hey ar e mer el y t hought and "sai d". I n our
par t i cul ar i nst ance t he sent ence Socr at es i s wr i t i ng as a
whol e cor r ect l y r epr esent s a st at e of af f ai r s exi st i ng i n
r eal i t y and i s, i n so f ar as i t does so, t r ue; but t he pr agma,
t he i ncor por eal act i on, whi ch i s denot ed by t he wor ds i s
wr i t i ng, does not enj oy any exi st ence of i t s own - any
exi st ence i ndependent of t hi nki ng - and can t her ef or e be
sai d: i t can be a l ekt on.
I n consequence, t he wor ds pr agmat a and l ekt a ar e
synonyms because pr agmat a ar e sai d and ar e i n essence "t hi ngs
sai d" .
69
What has gone bef or e expl ai ns - and t hi s mi ght at
f i r st seem sur pr i si ng - t hat t he St oi cs used t he expr essi ons
kat gor ma and l ekt on al so t o denot e ( pr edi cat ed) act i ons
and st at es of af f ai r s as t hese ar e i ncor por eal ef f ect s of
bodi es t hat const i t ut e causes. Zeno t aught t hat t he cause
i s a body, t he ef f ect , however , a pr edi cat e ( SVF I 89) .
Cl ement of Al exandr i a r el at es t hat , as t he St oi cs saw i t ,
ef f ect s ar e i ncor por eal - t hey ar e pr edi cat es accor di ng t o
one vi ew, and ( compl et e) l ekt a accor di ng t o anot her - ;
and he adds t hat t her e i s a t hi r d vi ew, accor di ng t o whi ch
69
G. Nuchel mans assumes t hat t he St oi cs pr i mar i l y under st ood
by pr gma some act on or suf f er ng pr ed cat ed of a body as
a cause of t he pr gma, and t hat t hey accor d ng y used ekt on
or g na y n t he sense of ' pr ed cat e' ( cf . SVF I I I p. 263)
and on y secondar y app ed t he wor d t o t he pr opos t on
( ax oma) ( Nuche mans, 1973, 45f f . )
some ef f ect s ( l i ke t emnet ai , ' i s bei ng cut ' ) ar e pr edi cat es
and ot her s ( l i ke naus gi net ai , ' a shi p i s bei ng bui l t ' ) ar e
pr oposi t i ons ( SVF I I I p. 262 sq. ) .
The pr ecedi ng expl anat i ons show t hat t he concept of
l ekt on i s f i r ml y i nt egr at ed i n St oi c doct r i ne: t hat i t i s
ver y cl osel y i nt er woven wi t h i t . So i t i s not sur pr i si ng
t hat t he concept has har dl y spr ead beyond t he St oi c school
and was not adopt ed by t he gr ammar i ans, i n par t i cul ar .
( 11) Thi s sur vey of St oi c semant i cs coul d har dl y have
been done wi t hout : t he St oi cs i ndeed r egar ded t he si gn
( sme on) as a smai nomenon.
St r angel y enough, Sext us i s our one and onl y sour ce con-
70
cer ni ng t hei r si gn t heor y. We know f r omhi m i n par t i cul ar
t hat t hey def i ned t he si gn as a st at ement ( axi oma) , as t he
t r ue ant ecedent of a condi t i onal st at ement ( i mpl i cat i on) ,
71
whose consequent ( t he smei t on) i s equal l y t r ue. "The
72
si gn must be t r ue and i ndi cat e a t r ut h. "
But t hi s i s not yet an adequat e descr i pt i on of t he si gn:
used as an ant ecedent , i t must al so "r eveal " t he consequent ,
i . e. , i t must st at e somet hi ng f r omt he exi st ence of whi ch we
can i nf er what i s sai d i n t he consequent ; e. g. , "i f t hi s
woman has mi l k i n her br east s, she has concei ved. " Thi s l at t er
def i ni t i on i s t o excl ude compound st at ement s l i ke "i f day
has come, i t i s br i ght " ; what i s her e st at ed i n t he consequent
73
i s not r eveal ed by t he ant ecedent , but per cei ved separ at el y.
70
P. h. I I 104- 06; A. m. VI I I 244- 56. Sext us al so ascr i bes t o
t he St oi cs t he di f f er ent i at i on bet ween t wo t ypes of si gns:
"hypomnest i c" and "endei ct i c" ones ( P. h. I I 97- 101; A. m.
VI I I 143. 151- 55) ; but cf . Hei nt z, 1932, 47f f . ; Pohl enz,
1949, 127.
71
P. h. I I 101; A. m. VI I I 245, 250.
72
A. m. VI I I 249.
73
P. h. I I 106; A. m. VI I I 250- 53.
574
Fi nal l y, anot her def i ni t i on says t hat t he si gn, as
i t i s pr esent , i s t o be t he si gn of somet hi ng pr esent , i . e.
t hat t he t wo component s of t he compound st at ement ar e t o
st at e somet hi ng t hat exi st s at pr esent . Thi s def i ni t i on
seems t o be cont r adi ct ed by sent ences such as "i f t hi s man
has a scar , he must have been wounded" or "i f t hi s man' s hear t
has been st abbed, he wi l l di e. " But t hi s obj ect i on i s di s-
mi ssed by t he St oi cs as a mi sunder st andi ng. The woundi ng,
t hey say, i s i ndeed an event t hat bel ongs t o t he past ; but
t he smei t on, i . e. t he i nf er ence t hat t hi s man has been
wounded, i s a pr oposi t i on t hat , al t hough i t i s about a past
event , i t sel f exi st s and i s t r ue at pr esent . Thi ngs ar e
si mi l ar i n t he ot her exampl e: t he pr oposi t i on exi st s at
pr esent , even t hough t he event t hat i t r ef er s t o wi l l come t o
74
pass onl y i n t he f ut ur e.
What has gone bef or e shows t hat t he St oi cs, i n t hei r
l ogi cal consi der at i ons, meant t he ( nat ur al ) i ndi cat i on when
t hey spoke of t he smei on. Thi s was one of t he t r adi t i onal
uses of t he wor d; t he par t i cul ar i t y of t hei r vi ew was t hat
t hey, as we have seen, r egar ded t he i ndi cat i on as a pr oposi -
t i on and, i n consequence, as a l ekt on, as a t hi ng t hat
cannot be per cei ved wi t h t he senses, but i s t hought : as
75
somet hi ng i nt el l i gi bl e ( noet on) .
Such a concept i on of t he si gn ( i n Gr eek t he i ndi cat i on
i s si mpl y cal l ed sme on) , however , makes t mposs b e
t o ext end t he not on ' s gn' t o ngu st c ut t er ances, n
wh ch t he St o cs, t oo, d st ngu sh bet ween per cept b e
expr ess on ( phone) and r at ona mean ng. I t s t hus no
74
A. m. VI I I 254- 56.
75
A. m. VI I I 244. - Sext us says ( oc. c t . , 177) t hat
Ep cur us and h s f o ower s, n cont r ast t o t he St o cs,
dec ar ed t he s gn t o be per ce vab e by t he senses ( a st het on) .
As t o t he cont r over sy on t he s gn bet ween t he St o cs and t he
Ep cur eans, cf . Ph. and E. A. De Lacy. Ph odemus: On Met hods
of I nf er ence. Pennsy van a 1941; ( f oot not e 75 cont nued)
acci dent t hat our sour ces nowher e at t r i but e t o t hem t he
vi ew t hat sma non and smai nomenon ( expr essi on and meani ng)
ar e t he component s of one l i ngui st i c si gn.
( 12) Sext us seeks t o pr ove t hat t he St oi cs cont r adi ct
t hemsel ves, def i ni ng t he si gn as a pr oposi t i on.
On t he one hand, he r ef er s t o t he f act t hat t he f unc-
t i on t hat t ur ns somet hi ng i nt o a si gn, t he act of i ndi cat i ng
( endei knyst hai ) , i s an act i vi t y and poi nt s out t hat St oi c
doct r i ne mai nt ai ns t hat onl y bodi es can be act i ve and t hat
i ncor por eal l ekt a cannot . On t he ot her hand, he t aci t l y
equat es i ndi cat i ng wi t h meani ng ( smai nei n) ; and i t f ol l ows
f r omt hi s t hat t he si gns bel ong t o t he smai nont a, whi ch ar e
bodi es, and cannot be pr oposi t i ons si nce t hese, i n t hei r
77
capaci t y of l ekt a, ar e, af t er al l , i ncor por eal smai ncmena.
B. Mat es, aut hor of a pi oneer i ng monogr aph on St oi c
l ogi c , al so says t hat t he St oi cs equat ed sma non w t h
sme on, and t her ef or e be eves t hat Sext us d scover ed a
79
"r ad ca d f f cu t y" n t he St o c t heor y . He has t o adm t ,
however , t hat wher e t he "s gn" s def ned as t he ant ecedent
of cer t a n cond t ona st at ement s, on y seme on s used,
( f oot not e 75 cont nued) Br eh er , 1955, 185- 92. As t o t he
d f f er ence bet ween t he Ar st ot e an and t he St o c v ew of
t he s gn, cf . M gnucc , 1969, 720- 22.
7 f
But he uses sema ne n on y by way of except on n or der t o
denot e t he f unct on of t he seme on; see He nt z, 1932, 54,
f oot not e 1 ( on p. 55) .
77
A. m. VI I I 262- 64.
7 8
St o c Log c. Ber ke ey- Los Ange es 1961 ( Pub shed f or t he
f r st t me n 1953) .
79
Loc. c t . , 13.
and t hat i n passages t hat dr aw a l i ne bet ween "si gn", and
l ekt on, onl y sma non s used; he t her ef or e con| ect ur es t hat
n St o c t er m no ogy (" n t echn ca St o c anguage") sma-
non and sma on "may" not have been synonymous.
The pr ob em d sappear s as soon as one r ea zes t hat
by sma non t he St o cs under st ood ngu st c expr ess on
(an ar t cu at ed sound sequence) , and by seme on t he ( nat ur a )
nd cat on, and t hat t hese ar e ut t er y d f f er ent t h ngs n-
deed. I amnot go ng t o answer t he quest on of whet her t he
Knea es do not go t oo f ar when t hey n t h s connect on accuse
t he Scept c of a comp et e ack of nt e ect ua consc ence;
t hey ar e no doubt r ght when t hey say: "The r e at on bet ween
smai non and smai nomenon i s t hat bet ween l anguage and what
i t expr esses, whi l e t he r el at i on bet ween sme on and smai t on
i s what i s known f i r st and what i s known t hr ough i t . "
8 _
Loc. c t . f oot not e 16. - The descr pt on of t he St o c
t heor y of " s gn, sense and denot at on" n t he second chapt er
of t he book s m s ead ng t o t he ext ent t hat t s aut hor
pr esupposes t hat t s est ab shed t hat t he St o cs equat ed
sma non and sme on. ( The chapt er opens w t h t he announ-
cement : "The chapt er s d v ded nt o t wo sect ons. The
f r st cont a ns an account of t he St o c d st nct on bet ween
t he s gn, t he s gn f cat e . . . and t he phys ca ob| ect t o wh ch
t he s gn r ef er s" ) .
81
Knea e- Knea e, 1962, 142. Cf . a so Long, 1971, 84f f . -
R. A. Mar kus a so assumes t hat n t he op n on of t he St o cs,
t he expr ess ons sma non and sme on had t he same mean ng,
and he t her ef or e g ves a t hor ough y m st aken descr pt on
of St o c v ews ( Mar kus, 1957, 61f . )
( I I I )
( 1) I hi nt ed on an ear l i er occasi on t hat t he St oi cs,
by r ef usi ng t o r egar d t he means of l i ngui st i c expr essi on as
sme a, v r t ua y r ef used t o ext end t he spher e of app ca-
t on of t h s wor d ( or of t he concept of s gn) beyond t s
t r ad t ona m t s. Th s v ew w now be subst ant at ed
n some det a .
Go ng t hr ough t he ent r y on sme on n t he we - known
82
d ct onar y by L dde and Scot t , we f nd a gr eat abundance
of uses f or t he wor d. On c oser nspect on, however , ever y-
t h ng f a s nt o p ace, however chaot c t may have seemed
at f r st . I t becomes c ear t hat t hese uses, f or a t he r
var et y, nvar ab y r epr esent one of t wo t ypes of s gn: n
pr act ca y a cases r eg st er ed n t he d ct onar y t he wor d
denot es a per ce ved st at e of af f a r s f unct on ng e t her as a
( convent ona or nat ur a ) nd cat on nd cat ng t he ex st ence
of some ot her st at e of f act ( t he s gn on a sh e d; a cut
st one t hat s set n a r ng and whose mpr nt can ser ve t o
cer t f y a document ; a t ombst one; a boundar y mar k; a passwor d;
an omen sent by a god; t he t r a of an an ma ; a pat ho og ca
sympt om; et c. ) ; or as a s gna nduc ng a cer t a n act v t y
and cont r o ng t he act v t y of t hose f or whom t s a s gna
( e. g. a f ag s gna convey ng t he command of a gener a ) .
Th s nk ng of nd cat on and s gna by means of a
common name goes f ar back nt o h st or y.
I n anc ent Gr eek seme on s a compar at ve y young
wor d; t s f ound ne t her n Homer ' s nor n Hes od' s wor ks.
Der ved f r om sema, t has adopt ed t he mean ngs of t h s wor d
and t hen f or ced t back t o a cons der ab e ext ent , espec a y
n pr ose. The o der wor d s so at ed n Gr eek, not der vab e
8 2
A Gr eek- Eng sh Lex con. Comp ed by H. G. L dde and R.
Scot t . New ( n nt h) ed t on comp et ed 1940. Oxf or d.
f r om any ot her wor d; i t appear s t o be i nher i t ed, but a
convi nci ng et ymol ogy has yet t o be det ect ed.
We can easi l y see t hat even sema does not di st i ngui sh
bet ween t he t wo t ypes of si gn ment i oned above, but t hat i t
can be used t o r ef er t o t he one as wel l as t o t he ot her . I n
Book XXI I I of Homer ' s Odyssey t he wor d r ef er s t o t he i n-
di cat i on al l owi ng Penel ope t o r ecogni ze her husband wi t h
cer t ai nt y; but i t i s al so t he name of t he si gnal ( Od. 21.
231) t hat i s t o make Odysseus' s f ai t hf ul ser vant s Eumai us
and Phi l oet i us t o f ul f i l t hei r commi ssi on of hel pi ng hi m
t o set t l e account s wi t h t he sui t or s; and i n t he Homer i c
poems t he ver b smai nei n ( pr oper l y: ' gi ve a si gn' ) , a der i v-
at i ve f r omsma, s most f r equent y used n t he sense of
' g ve a command' .
But on t he ot her hand, t he t wo wor ds ( sma and sme on)
shar e a s gn f cant r est r ct on: t hey ar e never used of t he
ngu st c s gn; and t h s means: t he t h nk ng t hat had
mou ded t he semant cs of t hese wor ds separ at ed speech c ear y
f r om commun cat on by nd cat ons and s gna s. Th s r est r c-
t on s sur pr s ng f or us s nce we ar e used t o r egar d ng
t he doct r ne of t he s gn nat ur e of anguage as a f undament a
t enet of ngu st c sc ence; on c oser nspect on we must ,
however , adm t t hat t he r est r ct on s nat ur a . Ther e s
ndeed a r ad ca d f f er ence bet ween t he s gns n t he nar r ower
sense of t he wor d ( nd cat on and s gna ) and ngu st c
expr ess on.
A st at e of af f a r s per ce ved t ur ns nt o an nd cat on
or s gna by our nt er pr et ng t n a cer t a n manner : but
f t h s nt er pr et at on s t o be g ven a commun cab e f or m,
. e. , f t s t o be made exp c t - per haps n answer t o
t he quest on about t he sense of a r oad s gn - , we have t o
depend on anguage and have t o c ot he our nt er pr et at on n
wor ds. The r e at onsh p s not r ever s b e. Even a wor d or
a sent ence may be unc ear t o t he hear er and r equ r e nt er -
pr et at on; but a so n a case ke t h s we use anguage, and
we use t as t s own met a- anguage: t he nt er pr et at on s
made i n t he f or mof some ( mor e or l ess pr oper ) def i ni t i on
or par aphr ase. What i s mor e, t he nat ur al i ndi cat i ons ( much
as t hose sent by gods) ar e ambi guous i n t hemsel ves: t hei r
sense i n a par t i cul ar case i s est abl i shed onl y t hr ough l i n-
gui st i c i nt er pr et at i on; and, on t he ot her hand, t he est abl i sh-
ment of man- made i ndi cat i ons or si gnal s r equi r es some expr ess
convent i on, an expl anat i on by means of l anguage.
( 2) What has been sai d hel ps us t owar ds a bet t er un-
der st andi ng of t he evol ut i on of t he meani ng of t he ver b
smai nei n.
Anal yzi ng t he St oi c vi ew of meani ng and t r ut h, Mar t ha
Kneal e makes a r emar k on t he di f f er ence bet ween t he Gr eek
ver b and Engl i sh me an ; t he l at t er , she says, can be used
of a per son as wel l as of a sent ence; t he St oi cs, on t he
ot her hand, had t wo di f f er ent ver bs wher e Engl i sh has onl y
one, "f or Gr eek uses l egei n of per sons and semai nei n of sen-
t ences. "
83
Thi s r emar k - i n so f ar as i t i s cor r ect - r ef er s t o
l at er l i ngui st i c usage; ear l i er on, t her e was some ot her
di f f er ence bet ween l egei n and smai nei n.
Smai nei n i s onl y i ndi r ect l y r el at ed t o sme on; t he
r el at i on i s cr eat ed by t he f act t hat t he t wo ar e der i ved f r om
t he same pr i mar y wor d, sema; but t he ver b - t hi s i s even
shown by t he st em f or m sman- , whi ch was used f or der i vat i on -
i s sever al cent ur i es ol der . I t at f i r st meant ( 1) ' mar k' i n
t he sense of ' at t ach a si gn t o somet hi ng t o al l ow i t t o be
di st i ngui shed f r omot her t hi ngs or t o be r ecogni zed' and ( 2)
84
' gi ve a si gn' , i . e. ' i ndi cat e' or ' command' , i n l i ne wi t h
t he t wo meani ngs of sma ( ' i ndi cat i on' and ' si gnal ' ) .
83
Kneal e and Kneal e, 1962, 157.
84
Cf . Nee ul l a causa est nobi s si gni f i candi , i d est si gni
dandi . . . ( August i n. De doct r . chr i st . I I 3; so: si gni f i car e =
si gnum dar e) .
Or i gi nal l y, smai nei n t her ef or e appear s t o have been
sai d of bei ngs capabl e of per f or mi ng t he act i vi t i es ment i oned
above - t he act i vi t i es of cr eat i ng si gns or expr essi ng
t hemsel ves t hr ough si gns - , i . e. of peopl e ( t he Homer i c
85 86
poems use t he ver b i n t hi s way onl y) , gods or ani mal s
On t hi s l evel , i t s pecul i ar semant i c cont ent s, whi ch di st i n-
gui sh i t f r om l egei n, ar e based on t he f act t hat t he pr i mar y
wor d ( sma) means ' nd cat on' or ' s gna ' on y and s not
used of ngu st c expr ess on.
A t a e n Her odot us' wor k ( I V 113) has a Scyt h an and
an Amazon f ace each ot her . They cannot commun cat e t hr ough
t a k ng: t hey speak d f f er ent anguages. She cannot t e
h mwhat she means; a she can do s smai nei n, i . e. , hi nt
t o hi mt hr ough si gns ( made by hand) .
Remar kabl e i s t he di f f er ence bet ween l egei n and sma-
87
i nei n i n a sayi ng by Her acl i t us: ho anax, ho t o mant e on
est t o en De pho s, out e ege , out e kr ypt e , a a smai nei
"t he Lor d who owns t he or acl e at Del phi nei t her speaks nor
hi des hi s meani ng, but i ndi cat es i t by a si gn" . So, semai nei n
85
"Smai nei n i st Ter mi nus der Or akel spr ache" ( W. Kr anz i n:
Di el s - Kr anz 1, 1956, 494) .
Cf . he men on phn t o hedeos ka yper ou est seme on,
d o ka t o s a o s hypar che zoo s ( mechr gar t out ou he
phys s aut on e e yt he, t ou eche n a st hes n yper ou ka
hedeos ka t aut a sema ne n a e o s, ' t he vo ce s a s gn
of t h ngs p easant and unp easant , and t hat s why t s
a so at t r but ab e t o t he r est of t he v ng be ngs; f or t h s
s how f ar t he r nat ur e goes of per ce v ng t h ngs p easant
and unp easant ( p easur e and pa n) and h nt ng at t t o one
anot her ' ( Ar st ot e, Po t ca 2. 1253a 13) .
87
D e s - Kr anz 1, 1956, 172.
i s somet hi ng i n bet ween sayi ng and not sayi ng: al t hough
mor t al man, when he t ur ns t o t he or acl e, r ecei ves an
answer cl ot hed i n wor ds, t he sense of t he wor ds i s onl y an
i ndi cat i on, a si gn hi nt i ng at t he act ual message f r omt he
god.
88
A si mi l ar r el at i onshi p bet ween l egei n and smai nei n
i s r eveal ed t o us by anot her passage i n Her odot ' s wr i t i ngs
( I I 54- 57) . The hi st or i an r el at es t her e t hat accor di ng t o
t he pr i est esses of Dodona t he f amous or acl e was f ounded on
a command by Zeus pr ocl ai med t o t he i nhabi t ant s by a bl ack
dove. He consi der s t hi s t al e a l egend. I n hi s opi ni on, t he
est abl i shment of t he or acl e goes back t o a pr i est ess f r om
Thebes i n Egypt , who, af t er her abduct i on by t he Phoeni ci ans,
came t o t he Thespr ot i ans; and he f i nds an al l usi on t o t hat
i n t he l egend i t sel f : ". . . and when t hey [ t he i nhabi t ant s]
say t hat t he dove was of bl ack col our , t hey ar e hi nt i ng
t hat t he woman was f r omEgypt ( mel ai nan de l egont es e na
t en pe e ada sema nous hot A gypt e he gyne en) . "
89
So,
sema ne n a so her e means h nt ng at t he act ua message
( t he h st or ca t r ut h) by means of what s sa d ( t he f ab e) ,
as f by s gn.
( 3) I f , however , sema ne n or g na y r equ r ed an
an mat e sub| ect and r ef er r ed t o a commun cat on by s gns
- n cont r ast t o ngu st c commun cat on - , how has t come
t o be used of ngu st c expr ess on ( t he wor d and t he sen-
t ence) f or t he pur pose of denot ng t s f unct on of mean ng,
t s f unct on of convey ng nt e g b e cont ent s? What has
been handed down t o us does not a ow us t o f o ow t he
88
Cf . ho d' au e egon t as neas sema ne n t on t heon, ' yet
ot her s sa d t hat t he god h nt s at t he sh ps | w t h t he wooden
wa s|
1
( Hdt . VI I . 142) .
89
Hdt . I I 57.
det ai l s of t he pr ocess t hat l ed t o t hi s r esul t ; but i n post -
Homer i c l i t er at ur e, wel l bef or e i t adopt ed t he sense of
' mean' , we see smai nei n push back t he f i r st bar r i er s t hat
wer e pl aced ar ound i t by i t s or i gi n. I t di d so i n t wo
di r ect i ons.
Fi f t h- cent ur y wr i t er s l i ke Her odot us or t he At t i c
t r agedy wr i t er s wer e f ami l i ar wi t h t he use of semai nei n i n
t he sense of ' i ndi cat i ng ( or al l y) ' and ' r epor t i ng' . I n
Aeschyl us' s wor ks Oceanus comes hur r yi ng t o of f er hel p t o
Pr omet heus, who has been put i n shackl es, and says t o hi m:
Smai n' ho t i chr soi sympr assei n, ' Tel l me what assi st ance
90
t o gi ve you. ' Her odot us says (I 43) t hat af t er At ys' s
t r agi c end somebody hur r i ed t o Cr oesus, hi s f at her , t o br i ng
hi mt he news and, af t er he had ar r i ved i n Sar des, t ol d
( esemene) hi m about hi s son' s deat h.
On t he ot her hand, semai nei n has - cer t ai nl y f r omver y
anci ent t i mes - been met aphor i cal l y appl i ed t o i nani mat e
t hi ngs. As we have seen , t he ver b or i gi nal l y meant ' gi ve
a si gn i n or der t o hi nt at somet hi ng' ; f ur t her mor e, t he hi nt
i s at t r i but ed t o t he si gn i t sel f . So i t i s occasi onal l y
sai d of a dr eam or an amazi ng, ext r aor di nar y i nci dent ( t er as)
t hat t hey smai nousi ( i . e. , hi nt at ) t he comi ng of a cer t ai n
9 1
event ; Ar i st ot l e uses t he ver b of t he comet s, whose f ai r l y
f r equent i nci dence i s sai d t o i ndi cat e wi nds and dr y spel l s
92
( smai nousi pneumat a kai auchmous) . Even f ur t her r emoved
f r omt he or i gi nal meani ng i s t he meani ng i n t he phr ase used
by Pl at o on sever al occasi ons: hs l ogos semai nei , ' as
9 3
r eason i ndi cat es' ; yet one can al so say - as Eur i pi des
9 4
wr i t es - t o er gon aut o smane , ' t he act on t se f w
90
Prom. 295.
9 1
Hdt. I . 34; 78.
Met eor o og ca I 7. 344b 19.
93
E. g. , Gor g as 511b; 527c, e ; Thea t . 160c.
9 4
Eur p des. Andr om. 265.
r eveal i t ' , i . e. i t wi l l r eveal an i nt ent i on kept secr et
f or t he t i me bei ng ( t he l ogous t hat have not been voi ced
yet ) .
Anot her met aphor i cal use of t he ver b i s sayi ng sema-
i nei n of t he i nst r ument ser vi ng t o br i ng f or t h t he si gn. I n
a speci al use t he ver b means ' convey a command t o t he ar my
by means of a t r umpet si gnal ' . Thi s i s act ual l y an act i on
per f or med by a t r umpet er , but t he si gnal i zi ng can al so be
at t r i but ed t o t he i nst r ument , whi ch i s t hen consi der ed
per soni f i ed; cf . epei dan h sal pi nx smn, t. st r at opedo. ,
' when t he t r umpet si gnal i zes t o t he ar my' .
95
However , i f we ask what t he or i gi n of t he use of t he
ver b semai nei n i s i n so f ar as i t i s l i nked i n t he sense of
' mean' wi t h a l i ngui st i c expr essi on as t he subj ect , i t i s
not enough j ust consi der i ng t he ear l i er uses of t he wor d.
I n t hi s use t he ver b i s a t echni cal t er m, whose f or mat i on
i s connect ed wi t h a cr uci al st ep ahead i n t he consi der at i ons
r egar di ng t he nat ur e of l anguage.
I n nai ve pr e- sci ent i f i c di scour se, sound and sense
f or ma si mpl e uni t y i n speech. Phn i s not onl y ' voi ce' or
' sound' , but al so ' l anguage' ; phne n i s not onl y ' br i ng
97
f or t h a not e' , but al so ' speak a l anguage' ; conveyi ng a
sense f i gur es as a capaci t y ( dynami s) of ( ar t i cul at ed) sound.
The devel opment , however , t hat has l ed t o t he use of
smai nei n i n t he sense of ' mean' goes hand i n hand wi t h t he
knowl edge t hat speech i s of a doubl e nat ur e - t hat i t uni t es
95
Ar i st ot . De mundo. 6. 399b 2.
96
Hdt . I V 111; V 5 8. Xenophon. Anabasi s I V 8. 4. Ar r i anus.
Al exandr ou anabasi s I 12.
Phonesai men ouk ei che ou gar syni esan al l el on, she coul d
not speak [ i . e. she was unabl e t o expr ess her sel f i n l an-
guage] , f or t hey di d not under st and each ot her ' - t hi s i s
what i s sai d of t he Amazon i n t he passage f r omHer odot us'
wr i t i ngs ci t ed on an ear l i er occasi on.
het er ogeneous component s, i . e. : wi t h a cl ear di st i nct i on
bet ween sound, whi ch i s sound onl y, and what i t "r epor t s"
( smai nei ) . Thi s di st i nct i on al l ows smai nei n t o change f r om
a met aphor - f or t hi s i s what i t at f i r st i s, i f sai d of
l i ngui st i c expr essi on - i nt o a t echni cal t er mof l anguage
doct r i ne.
On t he ot her hand, t he st r i ct separ at i on of sound and
sense i ndi cat es a vi ew accor di ng t o whi ch l i ngui st i c uni t s
may be consi der ed as si gns of a cer t ai n ki nd: i f sense i s
ext r i nsi c t o sound, speech al so shows somet hi ng per cept i bl e
sayi ng somet hi ng di f f er ent f r omwhat i t as such i s. We come
upon t hi s vi ew f or t he f i r st t i me when Pl at o descr i bes wor ds
as "sound si gns" ; but behi nd t hat t her e i s cer t ai nl y t he
gr eat spi r i t ual movement of t he f i f t h cent ur y, i n par t i cul ar
t he di scussi on on "t he cor r ect ness of names" , i . e. , on t hei r
r el at i onshi p t o r eal i t y, about whi ch we t al k wi t h t hei r hel p.
Ref er ences
Ar n m, Hans von ( 1909) "D e eur op sche Ph osoph e des
A t er t ums, " A geme ne Gesch cht e der Ph osoph e von
W he mWundt u. a. , Ber n und Le pz g.
Aubenque, P er r e ( 1962) Le pr ob me de ' t r e chez Ar st ot e.
Par s.
Ba y, Char es ( 1969) "Ou' est - ce qu' un s gne?" I n: A Geneva
Schoo Reader n L ngu st cs. Ed. by R. Gode . B oom ngt on
and London.
Bar w ck, Kar ( 1957) Pr ob eme der st o schen Spr ach ehr e
und Rhet or k. Ber n.
Benven st e, Em e ( 1959) Le vocabu a r e des nst t ut ons
ndo- eur opennes. I - I I . Par s.
Benven st e, Em e ( 1966) Pr ob mes de ngu st que gner a e.
Par s.
Br eh er , Em e ( 1908) La t hor e des ncor por e s dans
' anc en st o c sme. Par s. ( Th r d ed t on 1962)
Br h er , Em e ( 1955) Et udes de ph osoph e ant que. Par s.
Dant e A gh er ( 1957) De vu gar e oquent a. R dot t o a
m g or ez one, comment at o e t r adot t o da A. Mar go. Ter za
ed. a cur a d G. R cc . F r enze.
Dant e A gh er ( 1968) De vu gar e oquent a a cur a d P. V.
Menga do. Padova.
De Maur o, Tu o ( 1968) F. de Saussur e. Cor so d n-
gu st ca gener a e. I nt r oduz one, t r aduz one e comment o du
Tu o De Maur o, Bar .
Deshayes, | ean ( 1969) Les c v sat ons de ' Or ent anc en.
Par s.
D e s, Her mann ( 1954) D e Fr agment e der Vor sokr at ker .
Gr ech sch und deut sch von Her mann D e s.
Fabr c us, I o. A ber t us ( 1841) Sext Emp r c Oper a gr aece
et at ne. Gr aeca ex MSS. cod c bus cast gav t . . . et
t ot oper not as add d t - . Ed t o emendat or . I - I I .
L ps ae, 1841.
Feh ng, D. ( 1958) "Bespr echung von Bar w ck ( 1957) " , GGA
212 ( 1958) 161- 173.
Fr ege, Got t ob ( 1967) K e ne Schr f t en. Hg. von I .
Ange e . H deshe m.
Fr ege, Got t ob ( 1971) Schr f t en zur Log k und Spr ach-
ph osoph e. Aus demNach a. M t E n e t ung . . . und
Reg st er hg. von G. Gabr e . Hambur g.
Fr t z, Kur t von ( 1971) Gr undpr pb eme der Gesch cht e der
ant ken W ssenschaf t . Ber n und New Yor k.
Gode , Rober t (19 5 7) Les sour ces manuscr t es du Cour s de
ngu st que gener a e de F. de Saussur e. Genve et Par s.
Gut hr e, W. K. C. ( 1962) A H st or y of Gr eek Ph osophy. I .
The Ear er Pr esocr at cs and t he Pyt hagor eans. Cambr dge.
Ha er , Rudo f ( 1962) "Unt er suchungen zum Bedeut ungspr ob em
n der ant ken und m t t e a t er chen Ph osoph e" . Ar ch v
f r Begr f f sgesch cht e 7, 57- 119.
He nt z, W. ( 1932) St ud en zu Sext us Emp r cus. Vor ge egt
von R. Har der . Ha e/ S. ( Unver nder t er r epr ogr aph.
Nachdr uck. Tb ngen 1972. )
Husser , Edmund ( 1928) Log sche Unt er suchungen. 2. Bd. I .
T. V er t e Auf . Ha e/ S.
| akobson, Roman ( 1970) "L ngu st cs, " Ma n Tr ends of
Resear ch n t he Soc a and Human Sc ences. Par s - The
Hague, 419- 63.
| akobson, Roman (197- 1) Se ect ed Wr t ngs. Vo . 2. The
Hague.
Knea e, W am C. and Mar t ha Knea e ( 1962) The Deve opment
of Log c. Oxf or d. '
Kr et zmann, Nor man (19 74) "Ar st ot e on Spoken Sound
S gn f cant by Convent on, " I n: Anc ent Log c and t s Moder n
I nt er pr et at ons. , Ed. by | . Cor cor an. Dor dr echt - Bost on.
3- 21.
La ande, Andr ( 1960) Vocabu a r e t echn que et cr t que de
a ph osoph e. 8. d. , r evue et augment e. Par s.
Long, A. A. ( 1971) "Language and Thought n St o c sm, "
I n: Pr ob ems n St o c sm. Ed. by A. A. Long, London.
Long, A. A. ( 1974) He en st c Ph osophy. St o cs, Ep cur eans,
Scept cs. London.
Mar kus, R. A. ( 1957) " St . August ne on S gns, " Phr ones s 2,
60- 83.
Mar r ou, Henr - I r ne ( 1958) Sa nt August n et a f n de a
cu t ur e ant que. 4. d. , Par s.
Mat es, Benson. ( 1961) St o c Log c. Ber ke ey- Los Ange es.
( Or g na y pub shed n 1953) .
Mau, | r gen. ( 1957) "St o sche Log k. I hr e St e ung gegenber
der Ar st ot e schen Sy og st k und demmoder nen Aussagenka -
k , " Her mes 85, 147- 58.
Met t e, Hans | oach m. ( 1951) "Bespr echung von Poh enz ( 1948,
1949) , " Gnomon 23, 27- 39.
M gnucc , Mar o. ( 1965) I s gn f cat o de a og ca st o ca.
Bo ogna.
M gnucc , Mar o ( 1969) Ar st ot e e. G Ana t c Pr m .
Tr ans at ed, nt r oduced and comment ed by Mar o M gnucc . Nap es.
Nuche mans, Gabr e . ( 1973) Theor es of t he Pr opos t on.
Anc ent and Med eva Concept ons of t he Bear er s of Tr ut h
and Fa s t y, New Yor k.
Pat z g, Gnt her . ( 1970) Spr ache und Log k. Gt t ngen.
Poh enz, Max. ( 1948, 1949) D e St oa. Gesch cht e e ner
ge st gen Bewegung. 2 Bde. , Gt t ngen ( 4. Auf age 1972) .
Poh enz, Max ( 1965) K e ne Schr f t en. 2 Bde. H deshe m.
Pr ant , Car ( 1855) Gesch cht e der Log k mAbend ande.
I . Bd. , Mnchen.
Rob ns, R. H. ( 1970) D ver s ons of B oomsbur y. Se ect ed
Wr t ngs on L ngu st cs. Amst er dam.
Ross, W. D. ( 1945) Ar st ot e. 4t h ed. , r ev sed. London.
Saussur e, Fer d nand de (19 72) Cour s de ngu st que gnr a e.
d t on cr t que pr par e par T. De Maur o. Par s.
Schm dt , Rudo phus ( 18 39) St o cor um gr ammat ca. Ha s.
S mone, R. ( 1969) "Sem o og a agost n ana, " La Cu t ur a
7, 88- 117.
St e nt ha , H. ( 1863) Gesch cht e der Spr achw ssenschaf t be
den Gr echen und Rmer n m t besonder er Rcks cht auf d e
Log k. Ber n.
St enze , | u us. ( 1957) K e ne Schr f t en zur gr ech schen
Ph osoph e. Dar mst adt .
Wa t z, Th. ( 1844) Ar st ot s Or ganon Gr aece. Ed d t Th. Wa t z.
Par s Pr or . L ps ae.
Wout er s, . ( 1975) "Di onysi os Thr ax' Def i ni t i on of t he l ogos
( sent ence) and P. Yal e I . 25, " Or bi s 24, 217- 23.
Zel l er , Eduar d ( 1909) Di e Phi l osophi e der Gr i echen i n
i hr er geschi cht l i chen Ent wi ckl ung dar gest el l t . 3. T. 1.
Abt g. 4. Auf l age hg. von E. Wel l mann, Lei pzi g.
Books Ref er r ed t o by I ni t i al s
DL = Di ogenes Laer t i us. Phi l osophn bi on kai
dogmat n synagg.
SE. A. m. = Adver sus mat hemat i cos.
SE. P. h. = Pyr r honi ae hypot yposes.
SVF = St oi cor umVet er umFr agment s.
ABSTRACT / w/ I N HUNGARI AN
Rober t M. Vago
1 . I nt r oduct on
The abst r act ness of phono ogy has been one of t he most
w de y d scussed and hot y debat ed ssues n t he t er at ur e
of t he at e 19 60s and ear y 19 70s. Hungar an phono ogy has
s gn f cant cont r but ons t o make r egar d ng t h s debat e. See
f or examp e t he d scuss on on t he abst r act ness of Hungar an
vowe har mony n Vago ( 1973) , Vago ( 1976) , Vago ( 1978) , | en-
sen ( 1978) , Phe ps ( 1978) , R ngen ( 1978) , and t he r ef er ences
c t ed n t hese wor ks.
The pr esent ar t c e d scusses st anot her p ece of
ev dence f r omHungar an f or t he abst r act ness of phono ogy.
The f act s ar e dr awn f r om a set of ver ba r oot a t er nat ons.
A number of poss b e ana yses ar e cont emp at ed, and t s
conc uded t hat t he one wh ch assumes t he abst r act under -
y ng segment / w/ s t he most p aus b e account of t he
f act s.
1
1
The eva uat ve cr t er a used n compar ng a t er nat ve
ana yses ar e, of cour se, open t o debat e. For some r e evant
d scuss on, see t he wor ks c t ed above.
590
2. The Fact s
Ther e i s a gener al i zat i on t o be made about Hungar i an
2
ver bal r oot s: t hey ar e consonant f i nal . However , a handf ul
of hi st or i cal l y ol d r oot s seem t o cont r adi ct t hi s gener al -
i zat i on. These r oot s have a vowel f i nal al t er nant i n some
envi r onment s. Let us l ook at t he pr esent , past , and condi -
t i onal i nf l ect i ons of t he ver b L ' shoot ' , i n bot h t he def i -
3
ni t e and i ndef i ni t e conj ugat i ons:
( 1) a. Def i ni t e Conj ugat i on
Pr esent Past Condi t i onal
1sg l v- m
2sg l v- d
3sg l v- i
1pl l - j k
2pl l v- i t ek
3pl l v- i k
l - t t - em
l - t t - ed
l - t t - e
l - t t - k
l - t t - et ek
l - f f - Pk
l - ne- m
l - n- d
l - ne
l - n- nk
l - n- t ek
1 nk
b. I ndef i ni t e Conj ugat i on
Pr esent
1sg l v- k
2sg l o- sz
3sg l o
1pl l v- i i nk
2pl l - t k
3pl l - nek
Past
l - t t - em
l - t t - l
1- t t
l - t t - i i nk
l - t t - et ek
l - t t - ek
Condi t i onal
l - n- k
l - n- 1
l - ne
l - n- nk
l - n- t ek
l - n- nek
2
Thi s gener al i zat i on i s t r ue of st ems as wel l , wher e st em
i s def i ned as r oot pl us a ser i es of opt i onal der i vat i onal
af f i xes. The t er m r oot wi l l be used t hr oughout , si nce der i -
vat i onal af f i xes wi l l not ent er i nt o t he di scussi ons.
Ot her ver bs t hat pat t er n l i ke l ar e: f ' cook ( i nt r ansi -
t i ve) ' n ' gr ow' , r ' scr i bbl e' , and sz ' weave' . Two ot her
ver bal r oot s ar e ment i oned i n f oot not e 7.
ABSTRACT / w/ I N HUNGARI AN 591
I n ( 1) , - t t and - ne/ n ar e t he past and condi t i onal
mar ker s; t her e i s no over t mar ker f or t he pr esent . The r e-
mai ni ng suf f i xes ar e per son mar ker s. The r oot i s l v- be-
f or e a vowel i ni t i al suf f i x and l - wor d f i nal l y and bef or e
a consonant i ni t i al suf f i x. Whi ch of t hese al t er nant s, i f
ei t her , shoul d be assumed t o be basi c? Thi s quest i on i s ex-
pl or ed i n t he f ol l owi ng sect i ons.
3. The Vowel Fi nal Anal ysi s
We can i mmedi at el y di spense wi t h assumi ng t hat t he
vowel f i nal al t er nant i s under l yi ng and t hat t he consonant
f i nal al t er nant i s der i ved by a r ul e whi ch i nser t s v bef or e
a vowel i ni t i al suf f i x. For one t hi ng, t hi s anal ysi s woul d
dest r oy t he ot her wi se val i d gener al i zat i on t hat ( basi c) ver -
bal r oot s ar e consonant f i nal . But even mor e si gni f i cant l y,
v i nser t i on woul d not wor k i n case t he suf f i x i ni t i al vowel
i s epent het i c. Ther e ar e sound r easons t o suppose ( Vago t o
appear ) t hat i n t he pr esent t ense par adi gms t he f i r st per son
si ngul ar per sonal suf f i xes ar e / m/ i n t he def i ni t e conj uga-
t i on, and / k/ i n t he i ndef i ni t e conj ugat i on. The vowel o, al -
t er nat i ng wi t h and e accor di ng t o t he gener al pat t er ns of
vowel har mony, i s i nser t ed by a r ul e whi ch br eaks up a conso-
nant cl ust er whi ch ar i ses as a r esul t of appendi ng a wor d f i -
nal suf f i x consi st i ng of one or t wo consonant s t o a consonant
4
f i nal mor pheme:
( 2) / + ( ) #
Rul e ( 2) i s oper at i ve i n der i vi ng knyk- m ' my el bow' f r om
/ knyk+m/ , but not i n haj o- m ' my shi p' . Not e al so t - m ' I
4
I n t he noun syst em, r ul e ( 2) appl i es i n a sl i ght l y modi f i ed
ver si on. See r ul e ( 4. 42) i n Vago ( t o appear ) .
hi t i t
1
, f r om/ i i t +m/ , and t - k ' I hi t ' f r om/ t +k/ .
The pr obl emwi t h t he vowel f i nal anal ysi s i s t hat r ul e
( 2) cannot appl y t o a r epr esent at i on l i ke / l +k/ , wher e t her e
i s no consonant cl ust er t o be br oken up. Consequent l y, f or ms
l i ke l v- k cannot be der i ved. We t her ef or e must r ej ect de-
r i vi ng t he consonant f i nal r oot al t er nant i n ( 1) f r omt he vow-
el f i nal al t er nant .
4. The v- Fi nal Anal ysi s
The al t er nat i ve anal ysi s t o be consi der ed at t hi s poi nt
i s whet her t he r ever se anal ysi s can be mai nt ai ned, namel y de-
r i vi ng t he vowel f i nal al t er nant f r omt he consonant f i nal al -
t er nant by a r ul e t hat del et es t he r oot f i nal consonant wor d
f i nal l y and bef or e a consonant i ni t i al suf f i x.
Al l i ndi cat i ons ar e t hat a consonant f i nal r oot anal y-
si s wor ks. For exampl e, l v- m can be der i ved f r om somet hi ng
l i ke / l v+m/ by t he vowel epent hesi s r ul e ( 2) . Fur t her mor e,
assumi ng an under l yi ng f i nal consonant f or r oot s l i ke l / l v-
al l ows one t o make t he gener al st at ement t hat al l Hungar i an
ver bal r oot s ar e consonant f i nal under l yi ngl y.
The most l i kel y candi dat e f or t he consonant i n r oot f i -
nal posi t i on appear s t o be v, si nce t hi s consonant shows up
i n t he obser ved r oot al t er nat i ons. However , t wo ar gument s can
be made agai nst assumi ng / v/ . Fi r st , t her e exi st some ver bs
( h v ' cal l ' , v( i k) ' spawn' , ov ' caut i on' , sz v ' i nhal e' ,
v v ' f ence' ) and a host of nouns whi ch end i n v but whi ch do
not f ol l ow t he al t er nat i on pat t er n of l / l v- . These r oot s
do not l ose t hei r f i nal v. Compar e f or exampl e r o ' scr i be' ,
r o- nak ' t hey scr i be' ( r ov- ok ' I scr i be' ) wi t h v, * ' cau-
5
Ther e i s no epent hesi s bef or e t he pr esent i ndef i ni t e second
per son suf f i x - _: cf . l o s , * l vsz .
t i on' , v- nak, *- nak ' t hey caut i on' ( v- ok ' I caut i on' ) . I f
r oot s l i ke l / l v- and r / r ov- end i n v under l yi ngl y, t hen
al l ot her v- f i nal r oot s i n t he l anguage woul d have t o be ex-
empt ed f r omunder goi ng t he put at i ve r ul e of v- del et i on whi ch
del et es r oot - f i nal v wor d f i nal l y and bef or e a consonant . Ob-
vi ousl y, t hi s i s not a sat i sf act or y anal ysi s, as t he l ar ge
number of except i on f eat ur es woul d add consi der abl e compl ex-
i t y t o t he gr ammar . Nor woul d t hi s anal ysi s capt ur e t he gener -
al i zat i on t hat v- f i nal r oot s ar e per f ect l y r egul ar and expec-
t ed i n t he l anguage.
Anot her ar gument agai nst post ul at i ng / v/ f or r oot s l i ke
l o/ l v- i s t hat t he i ndef i ni t e past t hi r d per son si ngul ar
f or ms cannot be der i ved by i ndependent l y j ust i f i ed r ul es. The
i ndef i ni t e past t hi r d per son si ngul ar i nf l ect i ons ar e f or med
by at t achi ng t he past t ense suf f i x - t t / t , under l yi ng / t t / , t o
t he r oot ; t he t hi r d per son si ngul ar suf f i x i s - 0. Some r oot s
t ake an epent het i c mi d vowel , ot her s do not . Vowel epent hesi s
i s condi t i oned by t he r oot f i nal consonant . Consi der t he f ol -
l owi ng f or ms :
( 3) a. nz ' l ook' nezet t ' he l ooked'
hoz ' br i ng' hoz- ot t ' he br ought '
l k ' push' l k- t t ' he pushed'
nyom ' pr ess' nyom- ot t ' he pr essed'
kap ' r ecei ve' kapot t ' he r ecei ved'
hagy ' l et ' hagy- ot t ' he l et '
s ' di g' as- ot t ' he dug'
b. kr ' ask f or ' ker - t ' he asked f or '
k vn ' wi sh' ki van- t ' he wi shed'
beszel ' speak' beszel - t ' he spoke'
buj ' hi de' buj - t ' he hi d'
hny ' t hr ow' hany- t ' he t hr ew'
The r oot s i n ( 3a) end i n ei t her an obst r uent or i n an
ant er i or and non- cor onal sonor ant ( m) . The shor t mi d vowel
i s i nser t ed bet ween t hese consonant s and t he past t ense suf f i x
/ t t / . The epent het i c vowel l at er under goes vowel har mony; we
can obser ve t he expect ed al t er nat i on o/ / e i n ( 3a) .
The r oot s i n ( 3b) end i n a sonor ant consonant whi ch i s
ei t her cor onal and ant er i or ( n, 1, r ) or non- cor onal and non-
ant er i or ( ny, j ) . Ther e i s no epent hesi s f ol l owi ng t hese con-
sonant s. Rat her , t he past - t ense suf f i x under goes t he i ndepen-
dent l y mot i vat ed pr ocess of degemi nat i on and shows up as - t. .
The t wo set s of r oot - f i nal consonant s ar e descr i bed by
t he f ol l owi ng di st i nct i ve f eat ur e combi nat i ons :
I t i s appar ent t hat ( 4b) descr i bes a nat ur al cl ass of
consonant s, whi l e ( 4a) does not . I t i s t her ef or e pr ef er abl e
t o i nser t gener al l y and del et e i t subsequent l y i n case
t he r oot f i nal consonant bel ongs t o t he cl ass descr i bed by
( 4b) . I n f act , can be i nser t ed by r ul e ( 2) , whi ch i s needed
i n t he gr ammar anyway.
Now l et us consi der t he under l yi ng r epr esent at i on / l v+
t t / ' he shot ' . Rul e ( 2) appl i es, and af t er har moni zi ng t he
epent het i c vowel , / l v+t t / i s der i ved . The pr obl emwi t h as-
sumi ng r oot f i nal i s t hat t he epent het i c vowel cannot be
del et ed si nce i s not a sonor ant consonant havi ng t he same
val ue f or t he f eat ur es [ ant er i or ] and [ cor onal ] . I ndeed, t he
epent het i c vowel st ays f ol l owi ng uncont r over si al v- f i nal
r oot s: cf . h v- ot t ' he cal l ed' , v- ot t ' he caut i oned' . I n
br i ef , *l vt t and not cor r ect l t t i s obt ai ned i f we assume
t he under l yi ng r oot - shape / l v/ .
/
I t i s i mpor t ant t o not e t hat t he put at i ve v- del et i on r ul e
i s or der ed af t er r ul e ( 2) . Thi s i s cl ear l y seen i n der i va-
t i ons l i ke / l v+m/ = l ym, wher e r ul e ( 2) bl eeds v- del et i on.
5. The Mi nor Rul e Feat ur e Anal ysi s
I f one wi shes t o mai nt ai n an under l yi ng / v/ f or r oot s
l i ke l / l v- , t hen t her e i s st i l l anot her way t o account f or
t he f act t hat t hese ver bs del et e t hei r f i nal v, whi l e ot her s,
l i ke hi v, do not . A mi nor r ul e del et i ng r oot f i nal v bef or e #
or _ can be post u at ed: t he c ass r epr esent ed by o/ v- s
ex ca y mar ked f or under go ng t h s r u e, wh e t he c ass
r epr esent ed by h v s not .
The m nor v- de et on r u e must be or der ed af t er r u e
( 2) : / v+k/ becomes vk, not *l k. Of cour se, t he pr obl em
st i l l r emai ns t hat v i s not del et ed bef or e wor d f i nal - t t :
/ l v+t t / becomes l vt t , not *l t t .
Anot her l exi cal f eat ur e coul d exempt r oot s l i ke / l v/
f r omunder goi ng r ul e ( 2) pr eci sel y bef or e t he past t ense
suf f i x. I n t hat case, v i s f ol l owed by a consonant , and v-
del et i on can appl y cor r ect l y. Whi l e t hi s anal ysi s gr i nds out
t he f act s, i t i s hi ghl y compl ex and has no expl anat or y f or ce
what soever . Consequent l y, we r ej ect t he mi nor r ul e anal ysi s
as a val uabl e descr i pt i on of t he f act s.
6. The Al l omor phy Anal ysi s
A st i l l di f f er ent descr i pt i ve devi ce i s t o assume t wo
al l omor phs f or r oot s l i ke l / Vl v- : / l */ i f a consoant i ni t i al
suf f i x or no suf f i x f ol l ows, and / l v/ i f a vowel - i ni t i al suf -
f i x f ol l ows.
However , t hi s anal ysi s f ai l s i n case t he r oot i s f ol -
l owed by a der i ved vowel . Thus, f or exampl e, i f t he i ndef i ni t e
pr esent f i r st per son si ngul ar suf f i x / k/ i s appended t o t he
r oot , t he var i ant / l o/ i s chosen f or t he r oot . However , r ul e
( 2) i s i nappl i cabl e t o t he r epr esent at i on / l o+k/ . Consequent l y,
*l k i s der i ved i nst ead of l vk.
7. The Abst r act Anal ysi s
I n t he pr ecedi ng sect i ons we have consi der ed a number
of al t er nat i ve descr i pt i ons of t he conj ugat i onal par adi gms
of t he ver b l / l v- . We have concl uded t hat t he r oot shoul d
have a f i nal consonant under l yi ngl y but t hat i f v i s chosen,
each of t he af or ement i oned anal yses i s i nadequat e on empi r i cal
and/ or t heor et i cal gr ounds. To add mor e subst ance t o t he cr i t -
i cal eval uat i on of t hese anal yses, an empi r i cal l y val i d and
expl anat or i l y at t r act i ve anal ysi s must be f ound. I t i s such
a descr i pt i on t o whi ch we now t ur n.
I f we r ej ect v as t he f i nal under l yi ng consonant of
r oot s l i ke l / l v- , t hen whi ch ot her consonant shoul d we pos-
t ul at e? Cl ear l y, we shoul d be gui ded by at l east t hr ee cr i -
t er i a: a, t he r oot - f i nal consonant shoul d be as cl ose t o v
phonol ogi cal l y, i . e. i n di st i nct i ve f eat ur e composi t i on, as
possi bl e; b, i t shoul d be del et ed i n t he appr opr i at e con-
t ext s by a gener al r ul e; and c, i t shoul d condi t i on t he de-
l et i on of t he epent het i c vowel i n t he i ndef i ni t e past t hi r d
per son si ngul ar i nf l ect i on.
I t wi l l be r ecal l ed t hat t wo cl asses of consonant s
t r i gger epent het i c vowel del et i on: ant er i or and cor onal sono-
r ant s, and non- ant er i or and non- cor onal sonor ant s. Of t he
exi st i ng sonor ant s, l , r , n, ny, and j bel ong t o ei t her of
t hese cat egor i es. But we cannot post ul at e any of t hese as
t he f i nal consonant of r oot s l i ke l o/ l v- , si nce t hese con-
sonant s cannot be del et ed by any wel l mot i vat ed r ul e: cf .
t he ver bs i n ( 3b) .
The onl y ot her al t er nat i ve i s t o assume a consonant
whi ch does not appear i n sur f ace r epr esent at i ons. Our t hr ee
cr i t er i a l ead t o a uni que choi ce: / w/ . w and v ar e phonol ogi -
cal l y si mi l ar ( i ndeed, t hey of t en al t er nat e and ar e hi st or i -
cal l y r el at ed i n numer ous l anguages) ; w can be del et ed be-
f or e # and _ by a gener a r u e f or ma zed be ow; and f na y,
7
Vowel l engt heni ng may be ext r act ed f r omr ul e ( 5) . I n al l
of t he w- f i nal ver bs w i s pr eceded by ei t her or o_ These
vowel s may be l engt hened by a separ at e r ul e whi ch account s
f or t he f act t hat Hungar i an has no mor pheme f i nal shor t
or o.
The ver bs r i ' cr y' and nyu ' wear down' ar e w- f i nal
r oot s al so, but t hey have a l ong vowel even when w i s
del et ed. We wi l l assume under l yi ng l ong vowel s; t he vowel
l engt heni ng par t of r ul e ( 5) appl i es vacuousl y.
w can condi t i on epent het i c vowel del et i on, si nce i t i s
[ +sonor ant ] , [ - ant er i or ] , and [ - cor onal ] .
As can be obser ved f r omt he par adi gms i n ( 1) , t he de-
l et i on of / w/ i s accompani ed by a concomi t ant l engt heni ng
of t he pr ecedi ng vowel . These t wo changes can be descr i bed
by a t r ansf or mat i onal r ul e :
7
/ w/ i s an abst r act segment i n t hat i t never appear s i n pho-
net i c r epr esent at i ons. I f w i s not del et ed, i t i s neut r al i -
zed wi t h / v/ uncondi t i onal l y:
( 6) w v
Rul es ( 5) and ( 6) , appl yi ng i n t hat or der , j oi nt l y account
f or t he r oot al t er nat i ons obser ved i n ( 1) .
8. Concl usi on
I n t hi s ar t i cl e, we have consi der ed t he descr i pt i on of
a set of ver bal r oot al t er nat i ons i n Hungar i an. We have f ound
t hat t he best mot i vat ed anal ysi s was t he one whi ch assumed
t he abst r act segment / w/ i n basi c r epr esent at i ons. The choi ce
of / w/ as t he under l yi ng abst r act segment was not ar bi t r ar y;
r at her , i t was based i n par t on evi dence ext r act ed f r omt he
phonol ogi cal pat t er ni ng of cer t ai n ver bal i nf l ect i ons. The
gener a conc us on t o be dr awn s t hat phono og ca t heor y
shou d make abst r act under y ng segment s and cont ext f r ee
( abso ut e) neut r a zat on r u es ava ab e f or t he de-
scr pt on of phono og ca st r uct ur e.
Wh e t h s ar t c e adduced suppor t f or abst r act / w/ on-
y f r om a m t ed set of ver ba r oot a t er nat ons, t he ev -
dence act ua y s much st r onger . Add t ona ar gument s f or
set t ng up / w/ n t he nom na r oot a t er nat ons and case n-
f ect ons ar e made n Vago ( t o appear ) .
I t s unr easonab e t o expect t hat t he ana ys s of f er ed
her e w f nd un ver sa accept ance, g ven t hat t he abst r act -
ness of phono ogy s a cont r over s a ssue. I t was not t he
pur pose of t h s ar t c e t o at t empt t o r eso ve t h s mpor t ant
pr ob em. Rat her , t he nt ent on has been t o po nt out one mor e
case wher e an abst r act ana ys s seems t o be t he most ef f ca-
c ous descr pt on of t he f act s.
References
Jensen, | ohn T. ( 1978) "Rep y t o ' Theor et ca I mp cat ons
of Hungar an Vowe Har mony' , "L ngu st c I nqu r y 9. 89- 97.
Phe ps, E a ne ( 1978) "Except ons and Vowe Har mony n
Hungar an, " L ngu st c I nqu r y 9. 9 8- 104.
R ngen, Cat her ne 0. ( 1978) "Anot her V ew of t he Theor et ca
I mp cat ons of Hungar an Vowe Har mony, " L ngu st c I n-
qu r y 9; 105- 115.
Vago. , Rober t M. ( 1973) "Abst r act Vowe Har mony Syst ems n
Ur a c and A t a c Languages, " Language 49. 579- 605.
Vago, Rober t M. ( 1976) "Theor et ca I mp cat ons of Hungar an
Vowe Har mony, " L ngu st c I nqu r y 7. 2 43- 26 3.
Vago, Rober t M. ( 1978) "Some Cont r over s a Ouest ons Concer -
n ng t he Descr pt on of Vowe Har mony, " L ngu st c I nqu r y
9. 116- 125.
Vago, Rober t M. ( t o appear ) The Sound Pat t er n of Hungar an,
Wash ngt on, D. C. : Geor get own Un ver s t y Pr ess.

(Ferenc Kiefer) Hungarian Linguistics

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

(Ferenc Kiefer) Hungarian Linguistics

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

HUNGARIAN LINGUISTICS

LINGUISTIC & LITERARY STUDIES IN EASTERN EUROPE (LLSEE)

gr oup wi l l not consi st of one as-

. I n ot her wor ds, we

Be a Coo a, Hungar an, Nenet s, Ouechua,

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen