Periodic Reporting for period 4 - LexsemLexcat (The lexical semantics of lexical categories)
Reporting period: 2023-03-01 to 2024-08-31
The distinction between the major lexical categories of noun, verb and adjective figures into myriad linguistic generalizations and has been a center of gravity in the study of language since antiquity. Notwithstanding their importance, lexical categories are poorly understood (see e.g. Baker & Croft 2017). Outstanding is whether there are generalizations about the meanings words in the major categories have. Many have claimed there are, and proposed theories linking meaning and category, in a one to one fashion. Such theories have been criticized, however, in light of clear counterexamples, and consequently the search for a universal link between meaning and category is perceived by many to have been unsuccessful (see von Fintel & Matthewson 2008). This project recasts the search for a link, in the spirit of recent work (Francez & Koontz-Garboden 2017: Chapter 5), not as one for a one-to-one mapping, but for constraints on meaning induced by category. The project targets a domain where the set of relevant meanings is small, but where there is variation in category: property concept sentences—sentences like (1) He is very clever, whose main predicate is an adjective or, (2) akwai shi da waayoo `He is very clever (lit: He exists with cleverness; Hausa; Newman 2000:179)', whose main predicate is not an adjective, but is translated by a sentence whose main predicate is an adjective in languages with a large class of them. Although (1) and (2) have the same meaning, their component parts do not.
We have found that while an abstract mass-type meaning is restricted to nominal property concept words, a predicative type of meaning can be found across noun, verb and adjective. Furthermore, we have shown that the contrast between this meaning type is deep, and can be found at the level of the root, as exemplified by our work on Washo, which has shown that the same language shows both meaning types in different root classes. We have additionally found that there are categorizers crosslinguistically that can turn abstract mass-type roots into predicates of individuals of all major categories---noun, adjective, and verb---a consequence of the possibility of the semantics of possession being packaged with functional heads which categorize roots as noun, verb and adjective. Property concept words across all these categories can be found behaving as if they have a semantics of “degree”, though evidence suggests that the degree-related meaning comes not from the open class noun/adjectives/verbs, but rather from functional vocabulary. Internal to the category of verb, a crosslinguistic survey of state/change of state derivation shows that verbal states are more likely to be polysemous with derivationally related change of state predicates than nominal or adjectival ones, a fact which is attributed to verb being the only category that can describe changes of state.
We have found that while an abstract mass-type meaning is restricted to nominal property concept words, a predicative type of meaning can be found across noun, verb and adjective. Furthermore, we have shown that the contrast between this meaning type is deep, and can be found at the level of the root, as exemplified by our work on Washo, which has shown that the same language shows both meaning types in different root classes. We have additionally found that there are categorizers crosslinguistically that can turn abstract mass-type roots into predicates of individuals of all major categories---noun, adjective, and verb---a consequence of the possibility of the semantics of possession being packaged with functional heads which categorize roots as noun, verb and adjective. Property concept words across all these categories can be found behaving as if they have a semantics of “degree”, though evidence suggests that the degree-related meaning comes not from the open class noun/adjectives/verbs, but rather from functional vocabulary. Internal to the category of verb, a crosslinguistic survey of state/change of state derivation shows that verbal states are more likely to be polysemous with derivationally related change of state predicates than nominal or adjectival ones, a fact which is attributed to verb being the only category that can describe changes of state.
In WP1 we did grammar mining, which coupled with later work on Warlpiri (WP4) and Washo (WP3) led to the finding that degreeless type meanings are found among nouns, adjectives, and verbs. This finding led us to investigate degreelessness generally. A major result (Bochnak et al under review) is recasting it as tied to variation in particular elements which support degreeful meanings.
In support of this, we undertook in WP3 and WP4 work to understand how gradability in degreeless languages with verbs (Washo) and nouns (Warlpiri). In the case of Washo, we found that the language invokes possession in the predication of property concept lexemes (Hanink and Koontz-Garboden in press). This work shows that degreelessness and property concept possession crosscut one another. Warlpiri is unlike Washo and like English in allowing conjoined comparatives to be used in crisp judgement contexts. Bowler (under revision) has argued that this can be understood with reference to the nature of nominal property concept words and noun phrases in Warlpiri generally. Another major strand of work in WP3 collected data to expand on the database `Verbal Roots Across Languages’ to show that a property concept word is more likely to have the same form as a change into that property concept just in case the property concept word is a verb, providing confirmatory evidence for a key project hypothesis about the nature of verb meaning: that only verbs can describe changes of state.
Further to this, Smith, Hopperdietzel and Koontz-Garboden (under review) and Hopperdietzel (2024, in press) in WP3, drew on data from Japanese, Tongan, Mandarin and Daakaka, showing that there are more types of relationship between verbal state and associated change of state than previously appreciated, with some types of change of state simply targeting the onset of the state, while others are type shifts.
WP2 investigated adjectives in Fijian and Basaa. We have shown (Hanink 2019) that while the property concept lexemes are indeed adjectival in Fijian, the facts do not support a degreeless analysis, contrary to previous belief. Investigation of Basaa (Hanink et al 2019) offered rare evidence for the claim that the meanings of adjectives (e.g. strong) are the same as the meanings for have + mass property concept noun constructions (e.g. have strength).
This result fed into WP5. Drawing on crosslinguistic results of WP1 and fieldwork, Hanink and Koontz-Garboden (in press) showed that there are affixes that create property concept words that are nouns, adjectives, or verbs that are at the same time possessive. Building on this and results of WP2 and WP3, Hanink and Koontz-Garboden (under review) conducted a study of Washo property concept roots to investigate the universality of property concept root meaning, showing that it has two semantic classes of root: those with a quality-based semantics while those which denote predicates of individuals. Work on Logoori (Bowler and Gluckman 2021) showed that a single semantic generalization underlies the use of a range of word classes with the verb kudoka ‘arrive/be enough/reach/must’, offering evidence for a particular meaning component in property concept words.
In support of this, we undertook in WP3 and WP4 work to understand how gradability in degreeless languages with verbs (Washo) and nouns (Warlpiri). In the case of Washo, we found that the language invokes possession in the predication of property concept lexemes (Hanink and Koontz-Garboden in press). This work shows that degreelessness and property concept possession crosscut one another. Warlpiri is unlike Washo and like English in allowing conjoined comparatives to be used in crisp judgement contexts. Bowler (under revision) has argued that this can be understood with reference to the nature of nominal property concept words and noun phrases in Warlpiri generally. Another major strand of work in WP3 collected data to expand on the database `Verbal Roots Across Languages’ to show that a property concept word is more likely to have the same form as a change into that property concept just in case the property concept word is a verb, providing confirmatory evidence for a key project hypothesis about the nature of verb meaning: that only verbs can describe changes of state.
Further to this, Smith, Hopperdietzel and Koontz-Garboden (under review) and Hopperdietzel (2024, in press) in WP3, drew on data from Japanese, Tongan, Mandarin and Daakaka, showing that there are more types of relationship between verbal state and associated change of state than previously appreciated, with some types of change of state simply targeting the onset of the state, while others are type shifts.
WP2 investigated adjectives in Fijian and Basaa. We have shown (Hanink 2019) that while the property concept lexemes are indeed adjectival in Fijian, the facts do not support a degreeless analysis, contrary to previous belief. Investigation of Basaa (Hanink et al 2019) offered rare evidence for the claim that the meanings of adjectives (e.g. strong) are the same as the meanings for have + mass property concept noun constructions (e.g. have strength).
This result fed into WP5. Drawing on crosslinguistic results of WP1 and fieldwork, Hanink and Koontz-Garboden (in press) showed that there are affixes that create property concept words that are nouns, adjectives, or verbs that are at the same time possessive. Building on this and results of WP2 and WP3, Hanink and Koontz-Garboden (under review) conducted a study of Washo property concept roots to investigate the universality of property concept root meaning, showing that it has two semantic classes of root: those with a quality-based semantics while those which denote predicates of individuals. Work on Logoori (Bowler and Gluckman 2021) showed that a single semantic generalization underlies the use of a range of word classes with the verb kudoka ‘arrive/be enough/reach/must’, offering evidence for a particular meaning component in property concept words.
Our work on individual languages has drawn on traditional methods of fieldwork. Much of it also, however, uses typology as a tool of formal analysis. The way in which we have deployed it is not unique to our project, but is at the cutting edge, in that it is not frequently used as a tool for the development and testing of hypotheses in formal semantics. The way in which we have brought it to bear on the issue of lexical categoryhood is unconventional in that it draws on larger scale typological survey to bear on detailed semantic questions of a kind which have traditionally been considered only from the perspective of single or a few languages. Our approach maintains this focus on individual languages, but uses crosslinguistic surveys too. The fruits of this approach are seen in our work on (i) degreelessness (Bochnak et al 2020), (ii) categorization (Hanink and Koontz-Garboden 2021, in press), (iii) root meanings (Beavers et al in press, Hanink and Koontz-Garboden under review), and (iv) verbal polysemy and verbhood (Koontz-Garboden et al 2019, Smith et al under review).