1 1 (lexical conceptual structure, LCS) 2 LCS 3 4 LCS 5 6 2 LCS (1999) LCS 2 (1) [x ACT(-ON y)] CAUSE [BECOME [z BE-AT w]] 1 (1993) ( ) V1 V2 2 (1) y z y z (5.3 )
( ) ( ) (action chain) (Langacker 1991) ( 1993: 46) (x y ) x y LCS (2) [x ACT-ON y] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE BROKEN]] (1999: 215) (1) (1) (3) a. * b. * (4) a. * b. * ( 1999: 215) ( ) (1) (1) (1993: 116) LCS (5) x CAUSE [y FALL] by x CUTTING y (1996), (1997) V1 V2 5 LCS
LCS1 LCS2 V1 V2 LCS (6) a. ( ) LCS1 AND LCS2 b. ( ) LCS2 WHILE LCS1 c. ( ) LCS2 BY LCS1 d. ( ) LCS2 FROM LCS1 e. ( ) [LCS2... [LCS1]...] LCS WHILE BY (1) (2005) (6) LCS LCS (7) (8) (7) [[x i ] CONTROL [[y i ] CRY]] AND [[x i ] CONTROL [[y i ] SHOUT]] [[x i ] CONTROL [[y i ] CRY AND SHOUT]] ( 2005: 113) (8) [x i ] CONTROL [[x i ] CAUSE [BECOME [[y j ] BE [AT [UP]]]]] BY [[x i ] CONTROL [[x i ] ACT ON [y j ]]] [[x i ] CONTROL [[[x i ] CONTROL [[x i ] ACT ON [y j ]]] CAUSE [BECOME [[y j ] BE [AT [UP]]]]]] ( 2005: 124) LCS (1) LCS LCS LCS LCS
3 LCS LCS 3.1 LCS (1) LCS (1996: 92) (2002: 25) 1 ACT-ON (x) BE-AT (z) ACT-ON (y) BE-AT (w) 1 ( ) LCS 3.2 (1) LCS 3 3 (1) (atelic) ( (2002) [BECOME [y BE-AT z]] )
(9) ( etc.) [x BEAT y] (10) ( etc.) [x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE BROKEN]] LCS LCS ( (2001) [ acc] ) (11) ( etc.) ([x ACT] CAUSE) [BECOME [y BE BROKEN]] (12) ( etc.) [x LAUGH] LCS LCS (13) ( ) [x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [x BE-AT y]] 4 LCS LCS 4.1 V1 V2 V1 V2 LCS LCS
4 (1) LCS LCS V1 ACT LCS (14) LCS LCS (1) V1 V2 V1 V2 and V1 V2 LCS (15) a. [x WEEP] b. [y CRY] x y (16) a. [x i WEEP] b. [y i CRY] LCS ACT WEEP CRY and ACT x y ( 4
) (17) LCS (17) [x WEEP and CRY] V1 V2 (18) a. [x i BEAT y j ] b. [z i ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [w j BE BROKEN]] LCS LCS LCS (19) [x BEAT y] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE BROKEN]] * * LCS ( ) ( ) LCS BE-AT (20) a. [x i ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE OPEN]] b. [z i ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [z i BE-IN w]] 2 4.2 V1 V2 V2 (21) a. b. c. { / * } LCS
(22) a. [x i WASH y] b. [z i ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [w BE OFF]] (18) y w LCS (23) [x WASH y] CAUSE [BECOME [w BE OFF]] 1 BE y ( ) w ( ) V2 (1993: 104) V2 ( 2004: 309) LCS (24) a. { / * } 1sg ASP b. I washed { dirt / *clothes } off. 4.3 V1 V2 ( 2001: 462) V1 (25) a.?* b. { * / } c.?*
LCS LCS 5 (26) a. [x i DRINK y] b. ([z i ACT] CAUSE) [BECOME [w i BE DRUNKEN]] (27) [x DRINK y] CAUSE [BECOME [x BE DRUNKEN]] x y ( ) * (25) (28a) ( 2004: 310) 6 - (1998: 36) (28b) (28c) (24b) (28) a. ( ) 3sg ASP b. * 3sg ACC ASP c. He drank { himself / *alcohol } sick. 5 DRUNKEN DRUNKEN - 6
4.4 V1 V2 (29) [x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [SMILE BE-BACK-TO y]] (30) LCS (31) a. x i CAUSE [BECOME [y BE-WITH x i ]] b. z i CAUSE [BECOME [z i BE-BACK-TO w]] (30) V1 V2 V1 * * 7 LCS (32) [x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE-BACK-TO z]] 7 ( ) ( 1993: 136)
5 3 4 16 5.1 Li (1993: 499) (33) Temporal Iconicity Condition LCS CAUSE ( ) ( ) V2 V1 (34) V1 V2 V1 3.2 ( ) V2 V1 (35) a. - * b. - * c. - * d. - *
5.2 (1998) V1 V2 8 V1 V2 (36) a. ( < ) ( < ) ( < ) ( < ) b. ( < ) ( < ) ( < ) ( < ) (37) - - (38a) (38b) (38) a. [x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE STATE1]] b. ([z ACT] CAUSE) [BECOME [w BE STATE2]] x w x w y w x y (38a) (x y (38a) 8 ( 2005: 136)
9 ) (39) a. - * b. - * 5.3 ( 1996: 261, 1999: 212) (40) LCS y z [x ACT(-ON y i )] CAUSE [BECOME [z i BE-AT w]] 4.2 ( ) 4.3 ( ) y z (41) a. - b. - c. - d. - 9 x y
e. - f. - (42) a. [x ACT-ON y] b. ([z ACT]) CAUSE [BECOME [w BE STATE]] (42a) x (42b) w x w y w x y (42a) 5.4 (1993) V1 V2 10 V1 V2 3 [±acc] 6 3 (43) a. [+acc] - [ acc] b. [+acc] - [ acc] c. [+acc] - [ acc] d. [ acc] - [+acc] e. [ acc] - [+acc] f. [ acc] - [+acc] 10 ([±acc] ) [+acc] [ acc]
6 LCS LCS LCS 2 11 11 V1 V2
1sg...................... 1 3sg...................... 3 ACC........................... ASP................. (1998).., 245, 32 41. (2002).,, 16.. (1993)... (1996).,, 5.. (1999).... (2002)..,, pp. 119 145.. (1997).,, 18.. Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Li, Y. (1993). Structural head and aspectuality. Language, 69, 480 504. (1998).., 114, 37 83. (2004).. 129, pp. 315 320. (1996).., pp. 105 118.. (2001).., 453 473. (2005)...
Japanese compound verbs as superimpositions of meaning Yoshihiko ASAO abstract This paper deals with the formation of Japanese compound verbs and claims that possible combination of verbs, as well as their argument structures, can be predicted by assuming the mechanism of superimposition of meaning. It has been pointed out that lexical verbs in natural languages, whether simplex or complex, are subject to inherent semantic constraints, which can be captured by the following schema in the framework of Lexical Conceptual Structure (LCS): (i) [x ACT(-ON y)] CAUSE [BECOME [y BE-AT z]] In previous studies, however, it has been often assumed that the LCSs of compound verbs have more complex structures, in which the LCSs of their constituent verbs are combined with additional predicates such as BY and WHILE. This paper takes another approach. It is assumed that every compound verb strictly follows the structure shown in (i), and its content is obtained by superimposing the LCSs of the two constituent verbs. It is shown that this assumption accords well with basic properties of Japanese compound verbs, and some of their peculiar behaviors can also be seen as direct consequences of the assumption. This paper further argues that possible combinations of verbs can be properly constrained by taking into account three additional constraints: the temporal iconicity condition, the subject identity, and the theme identity. The transitivity identity condition, another constraint proposed in the literature, automatically follows from the conditions proposed in this paper.