Mandarin Physical Contact Verbs: a Frame-based Constructional - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Meichun Liu, Tianqi He, Hongfeng He and Yifan Cao

Department of Linguistics and Translation, CityU & Department of Chinese Language and Literature, HUST

Mandarin Physical Contact Verbs:

a Frame-based Constructional Approach

CLSW-2020

Contact

• Previous studies considered CONTACT as an essential

semantic component that are lexically encoded and distinguished in verb meanings, which has been testified with cross-linguistic evidences: ü English: an ubiquitous semantic characteristic. (Webster & Marcus 1989; Cohen & Oates 1998). ü Other languages: an essential lexical feature. (Choi & Bowerman 1991; Kawachi 2007; Schultze-Berndt 2000)

English Physical Contact (EPC) Verbs

• Previous literature pointed to two major sub-classes of

Contact verbs that are most extensively studied: ü Verbs of Contact by Impact: may participate in conative alternation that implies directed motion. (Levin 1993; Kemmerer 2003; Viberg 2004) ü Verbs of Surface Contact: describe surface contact without encoding a directed motion through impact. (Fillmore 1967; Hovav and Levin 2002)

Rub, Scratch, Sweep, Wipe Hit, Strike, Beat, Break

Mandarin Physical Contact (MPC) Verbs

• Studies on MPC verbs mainly focused on two aspests:

ü Cross-Linguisitic Comparison: both MPC and EPC verbs are naturally combined with Motion frame; Path is more closely related to MPC verbs due to the usage of co-verb bă. (Gao 2001; Gao & Cheng 2003). ü Classifying Criteria:

• - Diathesis alternation. (Wang 2008)
• - Lexicalized semantic characteristics. (Zhao 2008)

我把小桶滑/滾/彈進了廚房

What is less known:

• Less attention has been paid to the conceptual schema of

MPC verbs and the semantic components lexicalized in their verb roots.

• Little is known about the frame elements and corresponding

defining patterns of MPC verbs and its potential sub-types.

Thus, there still lacks a consensus on the scope and criteria in defining MPC verbs.

The Purpose

• To offer a consistent, principled and comprehensive

analysis and classification of MPC verbs with a frame- based constructional approach.

• To probe into the conceptual schema and tease out the

lexical semantic distinctions encoded in MPC verbs, based

• n corpus distributions of semantic-to-syntactic features.
• To provide characterization of the language-specific

lexicalization patterns unique to the Chinese verbal lexicon.

Corpus and Approach

• Corpus:

ü The distributional data are mainly based on Sinica

corpus and Gigaword.

• Approach:

ü A frame-based constructional approach (Liu & Chiang 2008;

Liu 2016; 2018; 2019) is adopted on the basis of theoretical

premises in Frame Semantics (Fillmore 1982, 1985) and Construction Grammar (Goldberg 1995, 2003, 2006).

Motion

• Talmy (1985: 57-58) proposed four basic semantic components

(Figure/Motion/Path/Ground) and two additional components (Cause/Manner) conflated in Motion verbs:

Two subtypes of Motion verbs are listed as conflating distinctive Manner: ‘Move+Manner’ (moving e.g. roll); ‘BeL+Manner’ (being located e.g. lie).

Contact and Motion

• Physical Contact verbs are closely related to Motion verbs

by lexicalizing the semantic features of Motion in their verb meanings (Gao 2001; Gao & Cheng 2003).

Motion Event: The keg rolled into the storeroom. Physical Contact Event: I rolled the keg into the storeroom.

Motion verbs

• Motion verbs encode motional Path with Goal (marked by

dào 到 ‘to’ ):

Motion verb gǔn 滚 ‘roll’ is more likely to take a motional path-PP.

MPC verbs

• MPC verbs may lexically profile contact with an affected

figure as an end result, rather than profiling a motional path:

MPC verbs tend to collocate with the locative marker zài 在 ‘at/on’ and take a Locative PP.

MPC Verbs vs. Motion Verbs:

• - Manner adverbials of

force (e.g., yònglì 用力 ‘violently’) is frequently found with impact verbs but not with motion verbs.

• - Resultatives due to strong

impact (eg. pò/suì 破/碎 ‘broken’) are frequently used with contact verbs but not motion verbs.

• MPC and Motion verbs show skewing preference in selecting

adverbials and resultatives:

Conceptual Schema of MPC verbs

• An Agent engaged in a motional Act involving a specific Body Part or by

use of an Instrument, in a specific Manner or Direction that brings the Agent in Contact with a patient-like Figure which may be affected in some way as a Result’ .

Transitive Pattern of MPC Verbs:

• MPC verbs are highly transitive, they can easily enter the prototypical

transitive pattern: ‘Agent + CONTACT V + Figure’ (Hopper & Thompson

1980; Gropen 1989; Dixon, 2000; Ackerman & Moore 2001; Kemmerer 2008):

Primary Frames of MPC verbs

• Three major groups (primary frames) can be distinguished
• n the basis of distinctive semantic-syntacitc features:

ü Verbs of Contact by Impact (CI verbs) ü Verbs of Contact by Surface Motion (CS verbs) ü Verbs of Contact by Holding (CH verbs)

Dǎ/pāi/qiāo/jī 打/拍/敲/擊 ‘hit/pat/knock/strike’ Cā/sǎo/tú/mò 擦/掃/塗/抹 ‘wipe/sweep/paint/rub’ Wò/zhuā/zuàn/niē 握/抓/攥/捏 ‘hold/grab/seizesqueeze’

CI vs. CS vs. CH verbs with Adverbs:

• - CI and CH verbs frequently
• ccur with manner adjuncts

while CS verbs tend to choose instrumental adjuncts.

• - In terms of manner adjuncts,

CI and CH verbs show a clear preference in collocating with force-related adjuncts.

CI vs. CS vs. CH verbs in VR Compounds:

• - CI verbs frequently take

resulatives indicating change

• f state by impact.
• - CH verbs tend to collocate

with resultatives denoting tightly gripping.

• - CS verbs frequently

collocate with appearance- pertaining resultatives.

CI vs. CS vs. CH verbs with Durative markers:

• - Only CH verbs frequently

co-occur with the durative state marker zhe 著, coding prolonged contact (He et. al.

2019).

In sum, MPC verbs display quite various patterns in corpus and therefore, an extensive study on the semantic components conflated in the verb roots and the corresponding syntactic behaviors of MPC verbs is significant in further distinguish their potential subcategories.

Contact by Impact (CI) Verbs:

The Affected Figure can be expressed with three syntactic forms: 1) as a patient-like direct object; 2) as a direct contact point with specified body-part; 3) as a post-verbal locative.

• Crucial criteria: three-way alternation to highlight the Affected Figure.

Basic Frames of CI verbs

• Three basic frames can be further differentiated:

ü Body Part Incorporated CI verbs (BOD_INCOR_CI) ü Instrument Incorporated CI verbs (INS_INCOR_CI) ü Collision Incorporated CI verbs (COL_INCOR_CI)

dǎ 打 ‘hit’ chōu 抽 ‘slap’ zá 砸 ‘smash’ chuí 捶 ‘pound’ pāi 拍 ‘pat’ dǐng 頂 ‘head’ guō 摑 ‘slap’ shān 扇 ‘slap’ tī 踢 ‘kick’ chuài 踹 ‘kick’ mō 摸 ‘touch’ duò 跺 ‘stamp’ kǎn 砍 ‘cut’ tǒng 捅 ‘poke’ cì 刺 ‘stab’ chuí 錘 ‘hammer’ pèng 碰 ‘hit’ zá 砸 ‘smash’ qiāo 敲 ‘knock’ zhuàng 撞 ‘bump’ jī 擊 ‘hit’ cèng 蹭 ‘rub’

Body Part Incorporated CI verbs:

• - Body Part is graphically encoded

as the radical in written characters: ‘foot 足’ in tī 踢 (足+易) ‘kick’

• - Body Part is overly expressed as

Instrument.

• Definition: an Agent_Impactor uses certain Body Part in a force-related

Manner into Contact with the Figure_Impactee, which is affected in some way as a Result.

• Frame Elements: Agent_Impactor, Figure_Impactee, Body-Part as

Instrument, (Manner, Result).

Instrument Incorporated CI verbs:

• - Instrument is incorporated in

character forms: ‘knife 刀’ in cì 刺 (朿+刂) ‘stab’

• - Instrument is prominent enough

to enter the Subject slot.

• Definition: an Agent_Impactor utilizes a specified Instrument in a force-

related Manner into Contact with the Figure_Impactee, which is affected in some way as a Result.’

• Frame Elements: Agent_Impactor, Figure_Impactee, Instrument, (Result,

Ground).

Collision Incorporated CI verbs:

• - Body Part and Instrument are not

specified and hence show a higher flexibility in adverbial collocations:

• ‘yòng 用 by use of + Instrument’
• ‘yòng 用 by use of + Body Part’
• Definition: an Agent_Impactor moves with force into colliding Contact with

the Figure_Impactee which is affected in some way as a Result.

• Frame Elements: Agent_Impactor, Figure_Impactee, (Result, Instrument,

Body Part).

Lexicalization of COL_INCOR_CI Verbs:

• Mono-syllabic COL_INCOR_CI verbs can be combined into disyllabic VV

compounds and render a bilateral or bi-directional act of colliding contact, which may be used intransitively with plural subjects:

Less Prototypical CI Verbs:

• Less prototypical CI verbs such as mō 摸 ‘touch’ and cèng 蹭 ‘rub’ may not

involve strong impact but tend to take low-impact manner adverbs. They may show some similarities with surface motion verbs in coding manner and motional path:

Contact by Surface Motion (CS) Verbs:

• - Locus/Locatum as Object:

highlight the Ground/ Figure

• - Denoting motional path:

‘V-lái-V-qù’ construction

• Crucial criteria: two-way alternation to highlight the Figure or Ground (Liu

2001).

Basic Frames of CS verbs

• Three basic frames can be further differentiated based on

the directional result of the surface contact: ü CS for Taking Away (TAway_CS) ü CS for Putting on (POnto_CI) ü CS for Dual Purposes (DualP_CS)

fū 敷 ‘put on’ qī 漆 ‘paint’ hú 糊 ‘stick’ pēn 噴 ‘spray’ sǎo 掃 ‘sweep’ xuē 削 ‘peel’ tì 剃 ‘shave’ guā 刮 ‘scrape’ cā 擦 ‘wipe’ tú 塗 ‘paint’ mò 抹 ‘rub’ shuā 刷 ‘brush’

CS for Taking Away verbs:

• - Allow the Surface_Ground to be coded

as a possessor of the Substance_Figure；

• - Take an incremental theme as its direct
• bject；
• - May occur with change of state

resultatives.

• Definition: an Agent get into Contact with some Substance_Figure as well

as Surface_Ground, possibly by use of an Instrument or Body Part, for the purpose of removing the Substance_Figure from the Surface_Ground.

• Frame Elements: Agent_Impactor, Figure_Impactee, Instrument, (Result,

Ground).

CS for Putting on verbs:

• - Locative inversion construction;
• - Collocate with locative marker

to indicate the spatial configuration

• f Substance_Figure ‘being located’

at the Surface_Ground.

• Definition: an Agent comes into Contact with Substance_Figure and

Surface_Ground by putting the Substance_Figure onto the Surface_Ground.

• Frame Elements: Agent, Substance_Figure, Surface_Ground, (Result of

appearing).

CS for Dual Purposes verbs:

Incorporating the features of both TAway_CS and POnto_CS verbs.

• Definition: an Agent comes into Contact with Substance_Figure and

Surface_Ground by way of either putting the Subtance onto or removing it from the Ground.

• Frame Elements: Agent, Substance_Figure, Surface_Ground, (Result).

Contact by Holding (CH) Verbs:

• - Hand as Subject
• - Hand as Ground
• - Hand as Object
• - Hand as Instrument
• Crucial criteria: four-way alternation to highlight the Body Part (Hand).

Lexicalization of CH Verbs:

• Giving the saliency of ‘hand’ as the inherent and defining feature of CH

verbs, it may undergo morphological processes to form N-V compounds, such as shǒu-wò 手握 ‘hold by hand’ , and shǒu-zhuā 手抓 ‘grasp by hand’:

The hierarchical toxonomy

• The hierarchical taxonomy of MPC verbs can be

represented as follows:

Conclusion

• CI verbs feature in impactive contact and display a three-way alternation to

highlight the Affected Figure. It can be further divided into three basic frames: Body Part/Instrument/Collision-incorporated.

• CS verbs profile surface contact with motion and take both Figure and

Ground as the direct object (Locus-Locatum alternation). It can be divided into three basic frames based on different directions and purposes: CS for taking away/putting onto/dual purposes.

• CH verbs often occur with durative zhe to express prolonged contact and

the lexically designated body part ‘hand’ is expressed with a four-way alternation: Hand as subject/object/instrument/Ground.

• In sum, this study is significant in presenting a comprehensive scheme in

distinguishing the lexical semantic categories of MPC verbs from a frame- based constructional approach.

Reference

§ Ackerman, F., & Moore, J. (2001). Proto-properties and grammatical encoding: A correspondence theory of argument selection. Stanford: CSLI Publications. § Choi, S., & Bowerman, M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization

• patterns. Cognition, 41(1-3), 83-121.

§ Cohen, P. R., & Oates, T. (1998). A dynamical basis for the semantic content of verbs. In Working Notes of the AAAI-98 Workshop on The Grounding of Word Meaning: Data and Models (pp. 5-8). § Dixon, R. M. W. (2000). A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. In: R. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. § Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In the Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm, pp. 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co. § Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di semantica, 6(2), 222-254. § Gao, H. (2001). Notions of motion and contact for physical contact verbs. In Proceedings of the 18th Scandinavian conference of linguistics (Vol. 2, pp. 193-209). Lund University. § Gao, H., & Cheng, C. C. (2003). Verbs of contact by impact in English and their equivalents in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Linguistics, 4(3), 485-508. § Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. § Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(5), 219-224. § Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press on Demand. § Gropen, J. H. (1989). Learning locative verbs: how universal linking rules constrain productivity (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute

• f Technology).

§ He, T., Liu, M., & He, H. (2020). Lexical Semantics of Mandarin Carry and Hold Verbs: A Frame-Based Constructional Analysis of ná 拿 and wò 握. In From Minimal Contrast to Meaning Construct (pp. 39-50). Springer, Singapore. § Hopper, P., & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. c56, 251–299.

Reference

§ Hovav, M. R., & Levin, B. (2002, August). Change of state verbs: Implications for theories of argument projection. In Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 269-280). § Kawachi, K. (2007). Korean putting verbs do not categorize space contrastively in terms of “tightness of fit”. Lingua, 117(10), 1801-1820. § Kemmerer, D. (2003). Why can you hit someone on the arm but not break someone on the arm?—a neuropsychological investigation of the English body-part possessor ascension construction. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 16(1), 13-36. § Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. University of Chicago press. § Liu, M. C., & Chiang, T. Y. (2008). The construction of Mandarin VerbNet: A frame-based study of statement verbs. Language and Linguistics, 9(2), 239-270.(SSCI and AHCI index) § Liu, M. (2016). Emotion in lexicon and grammar: lexical-constructional interface of Mandarin emotional predicates. Lingua Sinica, 2(1), 4. § Liu, M. (2018). A frame-based morpho-constructional approach to verbal semantics (框架为本，构式为用-基于语料库实证的汉语动词语 义分析与分类). In Frontiers of Empirical and Corpus Linguistics《实证和语料库语言学前沿》, eds. by Chunyu Kit and Meichun Liu. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press. § Liu, M and M. Wan. 2019. 中文动词及分类研究：中文动词词汇语义网的构建及应用. Lexicographical Studies (辞书研究) 2: 42-60. § Schultze-Berndt, E. F. (2000). Simple and complex verbs in Jaminjung: A study of event categorisation in an Australian language. [Sl: sn]. § Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. Language typology and syntactic description, 3(99), 36-149. § Viberg, Å. (2004). Physical contact verbs in English and Swedish from the perspective of crosslinguistic lexicology. In Advances in corpus linguistics (pp. 327-352). Brill Rodopi. § Wang, B. (2008). A Lexical Semantics Approach: Contact Verbs of Chinese and the Argument Realization (汉语接触动词的语义与论元表 达——从词汇语义学的角度探讨. Studies in Language and Linguistics, 2008(03):66-73. § Webster, M., & Marcus, M. (1989, June). Automatic acquisition of the lexical semantics of verbs from sentence frames. In Proceedings of the 27th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 177-184). Association for Computational Linguistics. § Zhao, M. (2008). The Valence Study of Mandarin Contact Verbs (现代汉语接触动词的配价研究). Journal of Hefei Normal University, 26(4), 107-110.

THANKS