Manner of Obtainment as a relative in a family of resultative constructions

The present paper examines the syntactic and semantic properties of a group of constructions which carry an idiomatic interpretation of obtainment. In Polish and German, the constructions under consideration consist of a verb with a directional particle followed by an object NP, as exemplified in (1a)-(1b). (1a) Adam wynurkował starego buta. (Polish) Adam wy- snorkeled old shoe. ‘Adam found an old shoe while snorkeling.’ (1b) Michael erboxte sich den Titel. (German) Michael er- boxed REFL the title. ‘Michael boxed his way to the (championship) title.’ Sentences containing these constructions will be assumed to have the same basic interpretation “Subject obtains/produces Object by V-ing”. A constructional analysis of the constructions will be proposed, as they pose licensing problems and their interpretation cannot be accounted for in terms of the individual conceptual structures of the lexical items composing the sentence. Unlike most accounts of verb particle constructions based on implicit or explicit assumptions of straightforward semantic composition, the present study proposes an analysis under which the semantic structure of verb particle combinations is not a compositional function of the verb and the particle/prefix alone. It is argued that the construction comes with its own subcategorization frame (separate from that carried by the verb) which is motivated by the meaning of the construction and its corresponding constructional subevent. Additionally, a crosslinguistic correlation will be shown to hold between a language’s ability to express event conflation (Talmy 1985, 2000) and the occurrence of some form of the construction in that language. This will be taken as an indication of the resultative nature of those types of directional phrases which involve the semantic interpretation of boundary crossing.

Imperatives in concessive clauses: compatibility between constructions

In his pioneering paper on “Performative Subordinate Clauses,” Lakoff (1984) claimed that subordinate clauses expressing a reason or concession allow imperatives conveying statements (i.e. assertive illocutionary force). While this analysis has gone unchallenged to this day, the present paper shows that Lakoff’s analysis is inadequate, in that reason and concessive clauses show a sharp contrast in the kinds of imperative utterances they permit. Contra Lakoff, concessive clauses with although, though and except (that) do allow imperative constructions conveying directive illocutionary forces to occur, whereas by contrast those with even though tend to disallow both types of imperatives. These findings can be explained in terms of compatibility between “component” constructions constituting a complex sentence. It is argued that the compatibility between imperatives (both directive and assertive types) and concessive adverbials (excluding even though) can be attributed to the latter’s loose integration into a matrix clause required by the former. Furthermore, it is argued that the incompatibility of even though with imperatives arises primarily from the incompatibility between the tight integration of even though and the loose integration required by imperatives, together with the associated incompatibility between the non-rectifying function of even though and the rectifying conjunction favored by imperatives.

Le juif errant d'aujourd'hui : et́ude sur l'eḿigration des Israélites de l'Europe orientale aux Etats-Unis de l'Amérique du Nord ; avec 40 tabl. statistiques et 9 diagr.

par L. Hersch

La situation des juifs en Russie : Rapaport adressé au gouvernement des Etats-Unis

par J. B. Weber & W. Kempster

Nominalization and nominalization-based constructions in Galo

This paper describes nominalization and nominalization-based constructions in Galo, a Tibeto-Burman language of the Tani branch spoken in North East India. Nominalizers in Galo are divided into primary and secondary sets, while nominalization-based constructions are divided into two types: nominalized clauses and clausal nominalizations. Both primary and secondary nominalizers help form nominalized clauses, which are uninflected, exhibit a genitive subject, and enter into nominal complement and relative clause constructions. Clausal nominalizations are formed by primary nominalizers only, may be inflected, exhibit a nominative subject, and in general take on a more main clause-like structure and set of functions. Following this basic description, the diachronic origins of Galo nominalizers are discussed, and the Galo forms and patterns are situated in terms of a broader typology of nominalization in Tibeto-Burman.

Les moeurs des Israélites : ou l’on voit le modèle d’une politique simple et sincère pour le gouvernements des états et de la reformation des moeurs

par [Claude] Fleury

Les Tribus Dans l´histoire et face aux états. En: Avá, nº 17

Este brevísimo libro de Maurice Godelier, cuyo texto procede de la conferencia inaugural del coloquio internacional The Political Role of Tribes in the Middle East (Ammán, Jordania, Octubre de 2009), ofrece en apenas unas 80 páginas un panorama general de cuestiones de antropología política, con una vertiente de comparación histórica en diversos períodos y lugares, sobre la naturaleza de las sociedades tribales y su relación con las organizaciones estatales.