Advanced

Modal readings of light verbs with to-infinitivals

Gronemeyer, Claire LU (2001) In Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics 48.
Abstract
This paper examines one type of configurationally determined meaning. Specifically, I defend the hypothesis that modality is not only expressed lexically, that is, by modal verbs or adverbs, but can arise syntactically, as the result of certain function words in specific configurations. This paper examines light verbs that receive modal readings due to their syntactic configuration and explores the factors that contribute to this configurationally determined interpretation. To summarize the results at the beginning, I will argue that the modal interpretation of the light verbs get, be, and have followed by a to-infinitival is the result of the following factors: the underspecified lexical entries of the verbs, the morphological or lexical... (More)
This paper examines one type of configurationally determined meaning. Specifically, I defend the hypothesis that modality is not only expressed lexically, that is, by modal verbs or adverbs, but can arise syntactically, as the result of certain function words in specific configurations. This paper examines light verbs that receive modal readings due to their syntactic configuration and explores the factors that contribute to this configurationally determined interpretation. To summarize the results at the beginning, I will argue that the modal interpretation of the light verbs get, be, and have followed by a to-infinitival is the result of the following factors: the underspecified lexical entries of the verbs, the morphological or lexical stativity of the light verb, the meaning of the relator to, and the aspectual type of the embedded predicate. Section 2 presents the basic data on light verbs in modal constructions. Section 3 surveys the range of modal uses of get in English, making some comparisons with other Modal Light Verb (MLV) constructions. Section 4 takes a strictly compositional approach to the problem and shows how the separate meanings of the component parts combine to yield the observed interpretations. As a LV, the meaning of get is underspecified, and variation in its meaning is a function of the syntactic context. On the compositional approach to meaning assumed here, see Hoekstra 1994, Pustejovsky 1995, Barbiers 1995, a d Jackendoff 1997, among others. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Working Paper
publication status
published
subject
in
Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics
volume
48
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
f2b851e9-6820-4a7e-833a-400e34587385 (old id 528652)
alternative location
http://www.ling.lu.se/disseminations/pdf/48/Gronemeyer.pdf
date added to LUP
2007-09-27 13:18:56
date last changed
2016-04-16 12:03:08
@misc{f2b851e9-6820-4a7e-833a-400e34587385,
  abstract     = {This paper examines one type of configurationally determined meaning. Specifically, I defend the hypothesis that modality is not only expressed lexically, that is, by modal verbs or adverbs, but can arise syntactically, as the result of certain function words in specific configurations. This paper examines light verbs that receive modal readings due to their syntactic configuration and explores the factors that contribute to this configurationally determined interpretation. To summarize the results at the beginning, I will argue that the modal interpretation of the light verbs get, be, and have followed by a to-infinitival is the result of the following factors: the underspecified lexical entries of the verbs, the morphological or lexical stativity of the light verb, the meaning of the relator to, and the aspectual type of the embedded predicate. Section 2 presents the basic data on light verbs in modal constructions. Section 3 surveys the range of modal uses of get in English, making some comparisons with other Modal Light Verb (MLV) constructions. Section 4 takes a strictly compositional approach to the problem and shows how the separate meanings of the component parts combine to yield the observed interpretations. As a LV, the meaning of get is underspecified, and variation in its meaning is a function of the syntactic context. On the compositional approach to meaning assumed here, see Hoekstra 1994, Pustejovsky 1995, Barbiers 1995, a d Jackendoff 1997, among others.},
  author       = {Gronemeyer, Claire},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Working Paper},
  series       = {Working Papers, Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics},
  title        = {Modal readings of light verbs with to-infinitivals},
  volume       = {48},
  year         = {2001},
}