Abstract
Russian verbal prefixes are traditionally analysed as polysemous and their contribution often appears to be unpredictable. Exploring in detail two of them, po- and na-, I show how most of the variation in their interpretations can be predicted by combining the Frame Semantic analysis offered in Zinova (2017) with pragmatic computation within Rational Speech Act theory. The set of possible competing expressions is determined on the basis of morphological information and context-dependent syntactic restrictions on the verb. Such a system where morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics work together allows to explain (most of) the apparent polysemy and non-transparency of verbal prefixes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Semantic representations are paired with syntactic analysis within Tree Adjoining Grammars (Joshi 1985, 1987; Joshi and Schabes 1997) as formalized in Kallmeyer and Osswald (2013). The syntactic part of the modelling is implemented for the prefixes discussed here, but is not shown in this paper. For more details in this respect, see Zinova (2017).
- 2.
It is worth noting that researchers that adopt the idea of distinguishing two classes of prefix usages in Russian, lexical and superlexical, never classify the two latter usages of po- in the list above as superlexical (Ramchand 2004; Svenonius 2004a; Romanova 2006; Tatevosov 2007). According to Svenonius (2004b, p. 229), superlexical prefixes are distinguished in that they: (i) do not allow the formation of secondary imperfectives; (ii) can occasionally stack outside lexical prefixes, never inside; (iii) select for imperfective stems; (iv) attach to the non-directed form of a motion verb; (v) have systematic, temporal or quantizing meanings, rather than spatial or resultative ones.
Although predominant in the literature, this distinction is problematic, as discussed rather briefly in Kagan (2015) and extensively in Zinova (2017). One of the main reasons for the criticism is that there is no pair of criteria that would apply to the same set of prefixes, which leads to different classification in every individual paper on the topic. This strongly indicates that if there is a distinction, it is not categorical.
- 3.
Other usages, such as distributive or inceptive, emerge from underspecified representations as soon as the relevant scale type is selected, so no further refinement is needed in these cases as long as the proposed computation is performed. In Zinova (2017) this is done within the Frame Semantics, so we will be using the same framework here in order to move towards an integrated system.
- 4.
I will use the term delimitative to refer to the discussed usage in order to differentiate it from the distributive (second in the list) and inchoative (fourth in the list) usages, but I will not imply attenuativity.
- 5.
Such an analysis naturally leads to the unification of the resultative (last in the list by Švedova 1982) usage of the prefix with the delimitative usage.
- 6.
A full analysis of this case requires providing a formal representation of the postfix -sja but for this paper I will limit myself to the claim that the contribution of the prefix remains the same and the role of the postfix is to select one of the subject-related scales as a measure dimension of the event. For more information and formal analyses of the reflexive usage of the prefix na-, see Kagan and Pereltsvaig (2011a), Kagan and Pereltsvaig (2011b), Součková (2004), Filip (2000), and Filip (2005).
- 7.
This should be possible as well, but the detail are not worked out.
- 8.
The most tricky usage in this respect is inceptive. It is derived from an underspecified representation by using a constraint that the movement can only start at the point that is the minimum of the path scale (in case path is the measure dimension of the event). It is a formulation of an idea that movement can only start from the location where the undergoer of the movement is located at the start of the translocation event, expressing the asymmetry between the start and end points of the path description. More details are provided in Zinova (2017).
- 9.
This instantiates the idea that there are two possible sources of relevant scales (verb and context, often in form of the direct object) and various prefixes have different preferences. At the same time, if a verb lexicalizes a scale, as in the case of gret’ ‘to warm up’ (temperature scale), it cannot be overwritten and the contextual scale must be of the same type. For more details, see Zinova (2017).
- 10.
Note that the measure dimension only stores a relevant segment of the scale, not the whole segment. For instance, in case of the temperature scale the minimum of the measure dimension is the temperature of the object before the event start.
- 11.
- 12.
RSA code is provided in Appendix A.
- 13.
More research has to be done to find out the best world model to represent the relevant states. Alternative solutions include distinguishing between ‘not all of the theme is consumed’ and ‘the quantity of the theme consumed is not relevant’ case as well as adding ‘excess’ state of the world. I stay with the proposed version as a first option that has to be further adjusted and tested.
- 14.
The question of competition between verbs that have different stems but are semantically close is left for future work.
- 15.
In this case, however, one would also have to include obest’sja ‘to eat too much’ that is true only if the actor is overfull, so I have omitted this option for simplicity and illustration purposes with respect to the behaviour of the prefix po-.
- 16.
This is an arbitrary selected value. By varying this parameter one can model different behaviour: more or less dependent on the rational considerations. If alpha equals zero, pragmatic listener’s behaviour will not differ from that of a literal listener.
- 17.
RSA code (the part of it that differs from the code for poest’ ‘to eat’) is provided in Appendix A.
- 18.
Note that in case of the verb est’ ‘to eat’ considered above the presence of two different scales does not lead to na- acquiring the cumulative interpretation. This is not reflected by the code provided in the appendix, but is due to the competition with the verb ob”est’sja ‘to eat until becoming overfull’ that selects the same scale.
References
Barsalou, L.W.: Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In: Lehrer, A., Kittay, E.F. (eds.) Frames, Fields, and Contrasts, New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, Chap. 1, pp. 21–74. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1992)
Braginsky, P.: The semantics of the Prefix ZA - in Russian. Ph.D. thesis, Bar-Ilan University, Department of English (2008)
Efremova, T.F.: Novyj slovar russkogo jazyka. Tolkovo-slovoobrazovatel’nyj [New dictionary of Russian. Explanatory and interpretational]. Russkij jazyk, Moscow (2000)
Filip, H.: The quantization puzzle. In: Pustejovsky, J., Tenny, C. (eds.) Events as Grammatical Objects, pp. 3–60. CSLI Press, Stanford (2000)
Filip, H.: Measures and indefinites. In: Carlson, G.N., Pelletier, F.J. (eds.) References and Quantification: The Partee Effect, pp. 229–288. CSLI Publications, Stanford (2005)
Fillmore, C.J.: Frame semantics. In: Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.) Linguistics in the Morning Calm, pp. 111–137. Hanshin Publishing Co., Seoul (1982)
Frank, M.C., Goodman, N.D.: Predicting pragmatic reasoning in language games. Science 336(6084), 998 (2012)
Goodman, N.D., Frank, M.C.: Pragmatic language interpretation as probabilistic inference. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20, 818–829 (2016)
Goodman, N.D., Tenenbaum, J.B.: Probabilistic Models of Cognition (2016). http://probmods.org/v2. Accessed 2 Mar 2018
Grice, H.P.: Logic and conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. Academic Press, New York (1975)
Joshi, A.K.: Tree adjoining grammars: how much contextsensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? In: Dowty, D., Karttunen, L., Zwicky, A. (eds.) Natural Language Parsing, pp. 206–250. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1985)
Joshi, A.K.: An introduction to Tree Adjoining Grammars. In: Manaster-Ramer, A. (ed.) Mathematics of Language, pp. 87–114. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1987)
Joshi, A.K., Schabes, Y.: Tree-adjoining grammars. In: Rozenberg, G., Salomaa, A. (eds.) Handbook of Formal Languages, pp. 69–123. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59126-6_2
Kagan, O.: Scalarity in the Verbal Domain: The Case of Verbal Prefixation in Russian. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2015)
Kagan, O., Pereltsvaig, A.: Bare NPs and semantic incorporation: objects of intensive reflexives at the syntax-semantics interface. In: Browne, W., Cooper, A., Fisher, A., Kesici, E., Predolac, N., Zec, D. (eds.) Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 18: The Cornell Meeting, pp. 226–240. Michigan Slavic Publications, Ann Arbor (2011a)
Kagan, O., Pereltsvaig, A.: Syntax and semantics of bare nps: Objects of intensive reflexive verbs in russian. In O. Bonami and P. C. Hofherr, editors, Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 8, 221–238 (2011b)
Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R.: A frame-based semantics of the dative alternation in lexicalized tree adjoining grammars. Submitted to Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, vol. 9 (2012)
Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R.: Syntax-driven semantic frame composition in lexicalized tree adjoining grammars. J. Lang. Model. 1(2), 267–330 (2013)
Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R., Pogodalla, S.: Progression and iteration in event semantics - an LTAG analysis using hybrid logic and frame semantics. In: Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris (CSSP 2015) (2015)
Kennedy, C., Levin, B.: Telicity corresponds to degree of change. Unpublished MS, Northwestern University and Stanford University (2002)
Löbner, S.: Evidence for frames from human language. In: Gamerschlag, T., Gerland, D., Osswald, R., Petersen, W. (eds.) Frames and Concept Types, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, pp. 23–67. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01541-5_2
Petersen, W.: Representation of concepts as frames. Balt. Int. Yearb. Cogn. Log. Commun. 2, 151–170 (2007)
Petersen, W., Osswald, T.: A formal interpretation of frame composition. In: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Concept Types and Frames, Düsseldorf (2009, to appear)
Ramchand, G.: Time and the event: the semantics of Russian prefixes. Nordlyd 32(2) (2004)
Romanova, E.: Constructing Perfectivity in Russian. Ph.D. thesis, University of Tromsø (2006)
Scontras, G., Tessler, M.H.: Probabilistic language understanding: an introduction to the Rational Speech Act framework (2017). https://michael-franke.github.io/probLang/. Accessed 12 Oct 2018
Součková, K.: Measure prefixes in Czech: Cumulative na- and delimitative po-. Master’s thesis, University of Tromsø (2004)
Svenonius, P.: Slavic prefixes and morphology. An introduction to the Nordlyd volume. Nordlyd 32(2), 177–204 (2004a)
Svenonius, P.: Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP. Nordlyd 32(2), 205–253 (2004b)
Tatevosov, S.: Intermediate prefixes in Russian. In: Proceedings of the Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 16 (2007)
Ušakov, D.N. (ed.): Tolkovyj slovar’ russkogo jazyka. [Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language]. Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moscow (1935–1940)
van Deemter, K.: Utility and language generation: the case of vagueness. J. Philos. Log. 38(6), 607 (2009)
Švedova, N.J.: Russkaja Grammatika, vol. 1. Nauka, Moscow (1982)
Zinova, Y.: Russian verbal prefixation. Ph.D. thesis, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf (2017)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
A RSA Code: poest’ ‘to eat’
B RSA Code: nagret’ ‘to warm up’
C RSA Code: nazharit’ ‘to fry a lot of’
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Zinova, Y. (2019). Explaining Meaning: The Interplay of Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics. In: Silva, A., Staton, S., Sutton, P., Umbach, C. (eds) Language, Logic, and Computation. TbiLLC 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11456. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59565-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59565-7_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-59564-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-59565-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)