Valency Grammar

14 Pages·2005·0.25 MB·English

ValencyGrammar 301
Keefe R & Smith P (eds.) (1997). Vagueness: a reader. the King’s College London Department of Philosophy.
Cambridge,MA:MITPress. 251–264.
MachinaKF(1976).‘Truth,belief,andvagueness.’Journal Tye M (1994). ‘Sorites paradoxes and the semantics
of Philosophical Logic 5, 47–78.In KeefeR & SmithP ofvagueness.’Orig.inTomberlinJ E(ed.).Philosophical
(eds.).174–203. perspectives, 8: logic and language. Atascadero, CA:
RussellB(1923).‘Vagueness.’AustralasianJournalofPhi- Ridgeview.InKeefeR&SmithP(eds.)(withomissions),
losophyandPsychology1,84–92.InKeefeR&SmithP 281–293.
(eds.).61–68. UngerP(1979).‘Therearenoordinarythings.’Synthese41,
Sainsbury R M (1990). ‘Concepts without boundaries.’ In 117–154.
KeefeR&SmithP(eds.).Inaugurallecturepublishedby WilliamsonT(1994).Vagueness.London:Routledge.
Valency Grammar
DJ Allerton,University of Basel, Basel,Switzerland their requirements for accompanying noun phrases
and/or prepositional phrases (with functions such as
(cid:1)2006ElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved.
subject, object, prepositional object, etc.) that they
requireand/orpermit.
TheEnglishverbsstumble,jolt,andthrusttypically
The Basic Idea of Valency
occurindistinctiveenvironments,asinsentenceslike
Valency (also known as valence, especially in the Alfred stumbled, Alfred jolted the door, and Alfred
United States) is the name given in various syntactic thrustthekeyintothelock.Puttingoneoftheseverbs
theories(suchasvalencygrammar,dependencygram- into the distinctive syntactic context of one of the
mar, word grammar, and some kinds of functional othersgivesanungrammaticalsequencelike*Alfred
grammar)toaparticularkindofdependencyproper- stumbled the door or *Alfred jolted the key into the
ty exhibited by many lexical items. This kind of lock. Such restrictions mean that verbs need to be
lexicosyntacticpropertyinvolvestherelationshipbe- subclassified according to their syntactic potential,
tween, on the one hand, the different subclasses of a a fact recognized by traditional grammar in the (in-
word-class(suchasverb)and,ontheother,thediffer- adequate) division into transitive and intransitive
ent structural environments required by those sub- verbs, and in modern linguistics by concepts like
classes, these environments varying both in the ‘subcategorization properties,’ ‘syntactic frame,’ or
number and in the types of element. Valency is thus ‘argument structure.’ The special contribution of
tobeseenasthecapacityaverb(ornoun,etc.)hasfor valency grammarians to the study of this type of
combiningwithparticularpatterns ofother sentence subselection has been a thorough investigation of
constituents, in a similar way to that in which the just how much is determined by the individual verb
valencyofachemicalelementisitscapacityforcom- (ornoun,etc.),andofhowdifferentpotentialsofthe
bining with a fixed number of atoms of another ele- same verb (e.g., Alfred pushed/ – pushed the key/ –
ment (for example, one in the case of monovalent pushedthekeyintothelock)arerelated.
hydrogenorsodium,twointhecaseofbivalentoxy-
gen or calcium, etc.). Such information is vital for
Different Conceptionsof Valency
languagelearnersbutwasneveradequatelypresented
intraditionalgrammarsanddictionaries. The invention of the notion of ‘valency’ (French
The concept of valency is most easily illustrated valence, German Valenz, Dutch valentie) is often
with reference to verbs. Most languageshave a cate- credited to Lucien Tesnie`re, whose Esquisse d’une
gory that roughly corresponds to or embraces the syntaxe structurale appeared in 1953, but whose
English category of verbs. Examples from English main work, E´lements de syntaxe structurale was
will be given here, although, where appropriate, only published posthumously in 1959. The notion
examples from French, German and other languages had, however, been clearly expounded by A. W. de
willbeconsidered. GrootinhisDutchwork,Structurelesvntaxis(1949),
All English verbs share syntactic and inflectional andisevenhintedatbyKarlBu¨hlerinanoft-quoted
features of a very basic kind (such as their range of remark from his Sprachtheorie (1934), to the effect
tensed and untensed forms, and their modification that ‘‘...words of a particular word-class open up
with time adverbials), but they differ radically in around them one or several ‘empty places’, which
302 ValencyGrammar
have to be filled by words of certain other word- In a typical sentence, like that of (B) in Figure 1,
classes’’(1934:173). Tesnie`re saw the main verb as the ‘central node’
It is nevertheless preeminently Tesnie`re’s notion of (noeud des noeuds). The verb achieves this central
valencythathasbeenstudiedanddevelopedinconti- role through its high position in the hierarchy of
nental Europe, especially Germany, since the 1960s. connexions but also through its ability to determine
On the one hand, valency has been integrated with the number and variety of its dependents. But the
‘dependency theory’ by such scholars as J. Ballweg, question of how many dependents a verb has is no
U. Engel, B. Engelen, H-J. Heringer, J. Kunze, simple matter. In fact, Tesnie`re distinguished two
H. Schumacher, and H. Vater; on the other, it has types of dependent for verbs, to which he gives the
been applied to the detailed description of, most labels ‘actants’ and ‘circonstants.’ From a semantic
notably,GermanbyG.HelbigandtheLeipzigschool, pointofview,the‘actants’representtheparticipants,
but also of English (D. J. Allerton, R. Emons, and whilethe‘circonstants’representthesettingandinci-
T. Herbst), and French (W. Busse and J.-P. Duhost). dentaldetailsoftheprocessorstateexpressedbythe
(For a historical survey up to the mid-1970s, see verb, the wholesentenceportraying aminidrama. In
Korhonen, 1977.) The following review of the prob- the example of (B) in Figure 1, where offered repre-
lems of valency theory will take Tesnie`re’s proposals sentstheprocess,Alfred,(that)Bible,andtoCharles
asastartingpoint. would be ‘actants,’ while repeatedly, in Strasbourg,
andonTuesdaywouldbe‘circonstants.’
Tesnie`re’s Approach
An Essential Distinction: ‘Actants’ versus
Valency can be incorporated into a functional type
‘Circonstants’
of constituency grammar (involving relationships
betweenthesubcategorizationofneighboringconsti- Everything so far noted about Tesnie`re’s views has
tuents), but for Tesnie`re, it was one aspect of depen- been a matter of general dependency theory, but the
dency grammar. His semantically based syntax was distinctionbetween‘actants’and‘circonstants’isdis-
concerned with establishing the hierarchy of word tinctively the preserve of valency theory. ‘Actants’
‘connexions’ within a sentence, which make up the belongtothevalencyofindividualverbtypes,where-
what he termed the ‘structural order’ of words (as as‘circonstants’areinprinciplepotentialdependents
opposed to their linear order). The structural order inanysentence,regardlessoftheverb.Thusthecon-
ofeachsentenceisgivenintermsofa‘stemma,’atwo- stellationof‘actants’representedin(B)inFigure1is
dimensional display, in which the top-to-bottom characteristic of one subclass of English verbs that
dimensionrepresentsaseriesofrelationshipsbetween includes not only offer but also give, lend, refuse,
‘governors’ (or‘heads,’French re´gissants)above and sell,send,andacoupleofdozenothers.
‘dependents’ (French subordonne´s) below. Typically In(B),Alfred,thatBible,andtoCharleswouldbe
in a ‘governor-dependent relationship,’ the governor termed by Tesnie`re first, second, and third ‘actant’
mayoccurwithoutthedependentbutnotviceversa, respectively, and these terms correspond to what in
and the governor provides the central semantic Englishgrammararenormallycalledsubject,(direct)
element, whereas the dependent only represents a object,andindirectobjectrespectively.Thesearethe
modificationofthiselement. onlyelementsthatTesnie`rerecognizedas‘actants’in
Aconsiderationofthepartialstructuralstemmaof active sentences. This choice is unfortunate, because
(A) in Figure 1 enables us to appreciate a number many prepositional phrases are equally essential to
of points about Tesnie`re’s approach: a first point is theverb,suchastheprepositionalobjectonBarbara
thatthegovernor-dependentrelationshipcanoperate inAlicereliedonBarbara,andevenpurelyadverbial
atdifferentlevels(witholdactingasdependentofthe phrasesarerequiredbycertainverbs,suchaslive(at
grammarian,butasgovernorofvery);asecondpoint home, etc.), last (for two hours, etc.), or thrust,
is that one governor (like the grammarian) can have which, as noted earlier, needs both an object and a
more than one dependent (old and French in this specificationofplace.
case), but not vice versa; finally, a ‘semantically Thesubclassofverbsthatincludesoffer,give,etc.is
empty’ word like the can combine with a ‘full’ word described as ‘trivalent,’ because its members require
like grammarian to form a single ‘nucleus’ (marked three‘actants’;thesamecouldbesaidofthesubclass
witha‘circle’), thatis,asinglepointonthestemma. of thrust, put, etc., although Tesnie`re did not recog-
Each governor is said to act as a ‘node’ (French nize this. Ordinary transitive verbs like jolt or like,
noeud) for all of its direct and indirect dependents, kill,etc., whichmerelyrequireasubjectandadirect
sothatthegrammarianactsasanodeforthewholeof object, are termed ‘bivalent’ (or ‘divalent’); and
thestemmaof(A)inFigure1. the same applies to copular verbs like be, seem, or
ValencyGrammar 303
Figure1 Stemmasandkindsofdependent.
becomethattakeanadjectivalornominalpredicative grammar (cf. Baker, 1989: 266–267) and systemic
(complement) such as beautiful or a beauty. Finally, grammar (cf. Halliday on ‘participant roles and cir-
ordinaryintransitiveverbslikestumbleordeteriorate, cumstantialroles’),varioustechnicaltermshavebeen
sneeze, etc. are describedas‘monovalent’. (For ‘zero- used to refer to the distinction between these two
valent’(or,touseTesnie`re’sterm,‘avalent’)verbs,see kinds of dependent of a governor (or head). These
thesection‘LevelsofAnalysis’). are listed in (C) in Figure 1. For clarity’s sake, the
Bycontrastwith‘actants,’theadverbialsof(b)are terms‘verbelaborator’and‘freemodifier’willhence-
notrelevanttovalencyclassification.Thusrepeated- forth be used for the post-Tesnie`rian equivalents of
ly, an adverbial of frequency, in Strasbourg, a posi- ‘actant’ and ‘circonstant.’ (The term ‘complement’
tionaladverbialofplace,andonTuesday,apunctual has frequently been used in the sense of elaborator,
adverbialoftime,couldalljustaswellhaveoccurred butithasthedisadvantagethatfortraditionalgram-
with the different verb subclasses represented by mariansandmanymodernones,ithasaquitediffer-
stumble, jolt, and thrust, in fact, with any verb at ent meaning and may exclude the subject, which the
all. Tesnie`re (1966: 125) mistakenly insisted that terms elaborator and ‘actant’ never do. The more
suchadverbialsareunlimitedinnumber(bycontrast modernterm‘argument’isunfortunateforadifferent
with the fixed number of ‘actants’), but the essential reason:totheuninitiated,itsuggestsawholesentence
point is their universality, their freedom to occur in or clause rather than the sentence constituent that
anysentence. itis.)
Through the history of valency theory and Whatever the terminology, there is a consensus
grammatical theories such as transformational about the need for a distinction between elaborators
304 ValencyGrammar
and free modifiers, but there are certain problems watched from what is evident in the context, in (7)
associated with it. Clearly Tesnie`re oversimplified the objectless sentence leaves the thing read totally
matters by insisting that, in principle, elaborators open as a matter of no immediate interest (cf.
(i.e., ‘actants’) were essentially nominal in form Allerton, 1982: 68–70). Thus while the optional
and semantically necessary to the verb, while free object is clearly part of the valency of watch in all
modifiers(i.e.,‘circonstants’)wereadverbialinform its uses, the verb read appears to have two different
(comprising adverbs and prepositional phrases) and valencies,onlyoneoftheminvolvinganobject.In(8),
semantically not required by the verb. German finally, no object is possible with the unequivocally
valency theorists, such as Helbig, Heringer, and intransitive verb idle; an object can therefore be no
Herbst, have proposed tests for distinguishing the part of its valency. This truism suggests a useful
two kinds of dependent. Helbig, for instance, sug- general test: if an element, such as an object noun
gestedthatinsentenceslikethefollowing: phrase,canonlybeaddedtocertainverbsandnotto
others,thenitparticipatesinverbvalency,incontrast
(1) Aliceatethesandwichinthetrain.
to,say,atimeadverbiallikeyesterdayortoday,which
(2) Aliceputthesandwichinthefridge. canbefreely addedtoanysentence(givenanappro-
priate tense form). The test of insertion, rather than
the status of the adverbial phrases differs partly be-
that of omission, is therefore most useful for distin-
cause in the train is omissible while in the fridge is
guishingelaboratorsfromfreemodifiers.
not,butalsobecausethefirstphrase,thoughnotthe
second, has regularly corresponding sentences of
theform: The Diversity of Elaborators
(3) Alicewasinthetrainwhensheatethesandwich. Further tests are required for deciding what kinds of
(cid:1)ðtoÞ eat(cid:2) elaborator need to be distinguished. A substitution
(4) WhatAlicedidinthetrainwas the
she ate test, for instance, is useful in assessing combinations
sandwich.
ofverbandprepositionalphrase.Alltheprepositional
These correspondences to related sentences seem to phrases in the following sentences are omissible
indicate that in the train in (1) is a free modifier or elaborators, and yet they do not all have the same
‘adjunct,’ whereas in the fridge in (2), though an status:
adverbial, is a verb elaborator, just like the earlier
(9) Alicelistenedtothebigwaves.
examples of obligatory adverbials with the verbs
live,last,andthrust. (10) Aliceconcentratedonthebigwaves.
Allobligatoryelementsarethereforeverbelabora-
(11) Aliceswamtothebigwaves.
tors,butthisdoesnotmeanthatalloptionalelements
(12) Alicefloatedonthebigwaves.
are free modifiers. Even Tesnie`re only suggested that
elaborators (‘actants’) are ‘‘often indispensable to A consideration of the first two sentences, (9) and
complete the sense of the verb’’ (1966: 128). Helbig (10), shows not only that the preposition is selected
therefore proposed a three-way division into obliga- by the verb, but even that no other preposition is
tory elaborators, optional elaborators, and free possiblewithoutachangeinthenatureofthecombi-
modifiers (obligatorische Erga¨nzungen, fakultative nation; the prepositional phrase is therefore some
Erga¨nzungen, freie Angaben). The following exam- kind of prepositional object (a category not allowed
plessuggesttheneedforanevenmoresubtleanalysis: for by Tesnie`re but standard in German valency
grammar). The prepositional phrases in (11) and
(5) Alfredwaspraisingtheplay.
(12), however, are not prepositional objects, as vari-
(6) Alfredwaswatching[theplay]. oustestsshow:theprepositioncanbereplacedwitha
(7) Alfredwasreading(theplay). rangeofotherprepositionstogiveaseriesofregular
semantic contrasts (to ! into, towards, under, etc.;
(8) Alfredwasidling.
on!over,near,behind,etc.);unlikethepreposition-
Thefirstthreehavetheplayastheobjectoftheverb al phrases of (9) and (10), those of (11) and (12)
andthereforeasapotentialpartofitsvalency,butitis demonstrate their place-adverbial nature through
onlyinthefirstsentencethattheobjectisobligatory. their capacity for being preceded by particles like
In both the second and the third sentences, the play right or back; finally, whereas the phrases of (9) and
may be omitted, but under different conditions: (10) show their partly nominal nature through
whereas in (6) the objectless version of the sentence theirelicitationwithaWhatþprepositionquestion,
always requires the listener to identify the thing those of (11) and (12) are typically elicited with the
ValencyGrammar 305
Where(...to)questiontypicalofplaceadverbialsof the moving of an active object to subject position in
locationanddestinationrespectively. the corresponding passive clause (e.g., changing (15)
Theseandsimilar criteriahavebeenreferredtoby abovetoAnathletewasinsultedbyAlfred),canplay
valencygrammariansasestablishingthevariouspos- apartinevaluatingsuchfunctions.Itisworthnoting,
sible elaborators of verbs. It has become clear that however, that not all the noun phrases traditionally
these elaborators include not only noun phrases but classedasobjectspassthistest,andifthisistakento
also prepositional phrases and adverbs. They also be the hallmark of objecthood, some will need to be
include adjective phrases, as in the first two ((13a) thought of as pseudo-objects or ‘objoids.’ In a lan-
and(13b))ofthefollowingsentences: guage like German, on the other hand, it might be
sufficient to define elaborators with such labels as
(13a) Alfredseemedratherstupid.
accusativeobject,dativeobject,prepositionalobject,
(13b) Alfredremainedfit.
etc. and regard the predicative as a nominative kind
(14a) Alfredseemedafool. of object, since passivization is not limited to sen-
(14b) Alfredremainedanathlete. tenceswithanyonekindofobject(though,admitted-
(15) Alfredinsultedanathlete. ly,onlythe accusativeobjectcan becomethe passive
subject).
Thefirsttwopairsofthesesentences,i.e.,(13a)/(13b)
One final type of elaborator needs to considered.
and (14a)/(14b), illustrate the pattern of a verb with
As a variation of (11), we might cite (17), which
what is in traditional grammar called a complement
differs only in having its adverbial (elaborator) in
but in most modern works is referred to as a ‘predi-
theshapeofasinglewordadverbinsteadofaprepo-
cative’ (following Jespersen). Most typically, this
sitionalphrase.Itneedstobecontrastedwith(18),in
pattern contains an adjective phrase, as in (13), but
which the single word adverb has a rather different
whereitisanounphrase,asin(14),thenounphrase
function:
may generally be replaced with an adjective phrase
(hencethealternativelabel‘predicatenominal/adjec- (17) Aliceswamout.
tival’). One way in which predicatives differ from
(18) Aliceturnedout.
objects is in their nonacceptance of ‘clefting,’ with
the result that, comparing (14) with (15), we find Whereasthenormaladverbial elaborator outin(17)
that *It was an athlete that he remained is not a participates in normal semantic contrasts like swam
possible sentence, while It was an athlete that he out versus swam in versus swam across, and can be
insultedisperfectlynatural. compared with the fuller form swam out of the
Noun phrases and adjective phrases are the two lagoon, the out of (18) has a quite different status.
universally described kinds of predicative, but there Thecontrastbetweenturnout(‘appearonduty’)and
isathirdkind,intheformofaprepositionalphrase, turnin(‘gotobed’)isnotthenormalonebetweenin
asin(16): andout,andthecombinationturnacrossisvirtually
nonoccurrent.Combinationsliketurnout(orturnin)
(16a) Alfredseemedinafunnymood. are not normal sequences of verb and adverbial
(16b) Alfredremainedingoodhealth. elaborator but tight collocations of the type usually
referred to as ‘phrasal verbs,’ and in these colloca-
The prepositional phrases in a funny mood and in
tions, the adverb has a strong limiting effect on the
goodhealthinthesesentenceshaveasimilarfunction
meaningoftheverb,sothatturn,forinstance,hasto
totheadjectivalphrasesratherstupidandfitin(13a)/
be understood in a special new sense. Such adverbs
(13b); it seems only reasonable then to recognize
(anditisonlyaquestionofsingle-wordadverbs)can
themasprepositionalpredicatives,alongsidenominal
bedescribedaslimiteradverbs.
and adjectival ones. In such prepositional phrases,
One view of the total range of English verb ela-
the preposition has a weak semantic contribution to
borators other than the subject is given for bivalent
makeandisselected bythenoun (cf.underamisap-
verbs in Figure 2. After each elaborator, a suggested
prehension,ontopform).
abbreviatorysymbolisgiveninparenthesis.
Returningtonounphrasepredicatives,weseethat
theycanbeformallyidenticaltonounphraseobjects.
The Special Status of Subjects
Clearly predicatives and objects are noun phrases
with rather different functions, and it can be argued The range of English verb elaborators displayed in
that function is a vital ingredient in the specification Figure2expresslyexcludesthesubject.But,asnoted
ofelaborators,particularlyinanoncaselanguagelike above, valencygrammarians differ fromother gram-
English. In addition to the ‘clefting’ test just men- marians in seeing the subject not as standing apart
tioned, ‘passivization’ of a sentence, in particular, from the predicate or verb phrase but rather as
306 ValencyGrammar
Figure2 NonclauseelaboratorsofEnglishbivalentverbs,excludingthesubject(S).
standing alongside the object as an elaborator. As Russian).Asfortheverb’sowninflections,thesecom-
Tesnie`reputit(1966:109),‘‘...dupointdevuestruc- monlyagreewiththenumber,person,etc.ofthesub-
tural...lesujetestuncomple´mentcommelesautres’’; ject but not the object, whereas the reverse never
butthisstatementissomethingofanoversimplification. obtains. Languages with an ergative/absolutive case
Thesubjecthasaspecialplaceasregardsinflection- system,likeBasque,areslightlydifferentinthesetwo
al morphology. In languages that have grammatical respects.
case,thereisfrequentlyacasesuchasthenominative In terms of syntactic form, subjects have greater
that is selected for active subjects regardless of the positional prominence in the sense that, in the
lexical verb used, whereas verbs may govern objects absence of a specially marked theme, the subject
in at least two different cases (as in German or occurs typically as the first noun phrase in the
ValencyGrammar 307
sentence – a feature shared by SOV, SVO, and VSO matter of the semantic valency requirements of
languages,thatis,wellover90percentoftheworld’s individual verbs, asexemplified bythe similar corre-
languages. As regards syntactic dependence for oc- spondencesobservableinthefollowingsentences:
currence, the subject normally has a higher priority
(21) AlicelikedBarbara.
than the object, in the sense that with all verbs, or
(depending on the language) the vast majority of (22) BarbarawaslikedbyAlice.
them, a subject is obligatory, while an object is only
(23) AlicepleasedBarbara.
required by a proportion of verbs (i.e., by transitive
(24) BarbarawaspleasedbyAlice.
ones). It is of course true that many languages –
so-calledpro-droplanguageslikeSpanish,Italian,or Thus,while inthe first two sentences, (21) and (22),
Japanese–allowthesubjecttobeomittedwhenitis with liked, the active object and the passive subject,
identifiable from the linguistic or situational context Barbara, agree in being the causer or stimulus of the
(e.g., Spanish vino ‘he/she/it came’). But these lan- emotion described by the verb, in the last two sen-
guages further allow the objects of many verbs to be tences, (23) and (24), with pleased, it is the active
omitted with no requirement of contextual subjectandpassive‘counter-subject’(termed‘perject’
recoverability(justlikeEnglishread,discussedabove, in Allerton, 1982), (by) Alice, that have this kind of
cf. Spanish leyo´ ‘he/she/it read (something)’); and of role. There is a similar exchange of syntactic func-
course purely intransitive verbs (like Spanish venir tions between the liked sentences and the pleased
‘come’)rejectobjectsaltogether. sentences for the other semantic role of ‘mental
Finally,thesubject(butnottheobject)hasatextual experiencer.’ So while precise semantic roles are
role in being the typical sentential theme, one often determined by the meaning of individual verbs
carried forward from previous sentences, and is (cf.alsodefeatandlose(to)),thereis,givensentences
often phonologically marked as such (in English, for containing any particular verb, a crucial correspon-
instance, often through a separate intonation unit). dence between the syntactic functions of the active
On the whole, then, subjects stand apart from other andthepassiveformatofrelatedsentences,andthere-
verb elaborators and need to be accorded a special fore a need to recognize a level of analysis indepen-
status vis-a`-vis the verb; but they are elaborators dentofandintermediatebetweensuperficialsubjects
nonetheless. andobjectsontheonehandandpurelysemanticroles
ontheother.Thisrecognitionisofthevalencylevelof
Levels of Analysis deeporunderlyingsubjectsandobjects.
A further reason for recognizing this underlying
The above discussion of subjects and objects partly valencylevelofdescriptionisthebehaviorofcertain
presupposesacleardefinitionofthesecategories.But meteorological verbs, as exemplified by English It
thisissueisacomplexone,inwhichmuchhingeson was raining, French Il pleuvait, and Spanish Llovı´a.
the relationship between transitive active sentences In Spanish (and other pro-drop languages), it is im-
andpassivesentencesaswellassentenceswithother possible to have a subject with such verbs in their
formats.Considerapairofsentenceslike: normal use, and the verb llover can be said to be
zero-valent (or ‘avalent,’ to use Tesnie`re’s term). In
(19) AliceattackedBarbara.
English and French, the words it and il respectively
(20) BarbarawasattackedbyAlice. fulfill the requirements discussed above to qualify as
Accordingtomostcriteria(position,agreement,obli- superficial subjects; but such a subject has no clear
gatoriness, for instance), Alice is the subject of (19), semanticroleandisnotreplaceable(bysuchaphrase
whereas Barbara is the subject of (20) despite astheweather),anditseemsthatitmaysimplybepart
the virtual synonymy of the two sentences. Tesnie`re of the required surface structure for English and
acceptedsuchananalysisbutnotedthatthesubjectof French sentences without corresponding to a true
the passive, Barbara, has the same semantic role valencysubject.ForthecorrespondingGermanform
(‘patient’ or ‘sufferer’ of the verbal action) as the Esregnet,thesituationappearstobeslightlydifferent,
object of the active sentence; whereas the subject of because sentences without a (nominative) subject do
theactivesentence,Alice,hasthesamesemanticrole occur,e.g.,Michfriert‘Meisfreezing¼Iamfreezing,’
(‘agent’) as the passive agentive phrase, by Alice, Mir ist kalt ‘To-me is cold¼I am cold,’ Mir wurde
which he termed ‘counter-subject’ (French contre- geholfen ‘To-me was helped¼I was helped’). (N.B.
sujet). What Tesnie`re failed to note is that these Theinitialpronouninthesesentencesisthethemebut
semanticrolesarenotvalidforallactiveandpassive not the subject.) It could therefore be argued that,
subjects, objects, and counter-subjects; rather, it is a since this empty German es is not required by any
308 ValencyGrammar
Figure3 CorrelationofEnglishvalencyandsurfacefunctions.
generalruleofsentencestructurebutisdemandedby with the subject again having the role of agent.
such meteorological verbs, it is a required (though But in both cases, the reflexive pronoun fulfills the
empty)elaborator. valency function of object, a (prepositionless) noun
A summary of the relationships between valency phraseimmediatelyfollowingthelexicalverb,sothat
functionsandsurfaceforminEnglishmeteorological bothverbscanberegardedasbivalent.
sentences, ordinary intransitive, and transitive This view of the valency of reflexive verbs differs
sentences.bothactiveandpassive,isgiveninFigure3. from that of Tesnie`re, who saw reflexive verbs
Trivalentverbsoftheindirectobjecttypediscussed as manifestations of a different kind of verbal voice,
(like offer and give), also appear in two virtually the so-called recessive (French re´cessif), which re-
synonymousformatsinEnglish,asexemplifiedby: duced the valency of a verb by one, so that bivalent
verbs like lever ‘raise,’ or ouvrir ‘open (transitive)’
(25) AlfredhandedthatBibletoCharles. become monovalent when reflexive (se lever ‘rise,
stand up,’ s’ouvrir ‘open (intransitive)’). Although
(26) AlfredhandedCharlesthatBible.
this view is an interesting one, it is something of an
Thesetwoformatscanberegardedasvariantrealiza- oversimplification.
tions of the same valency pattern, with the indirect In fact, reflexive verbs in French (and many other
object appearing either after the object and with a languages, including German), seem to have at least
preposition (as in (25)) or before it and without fourpossibledifferentkindsofstatus.Afirstgroupof
apreposition(asin(26)).Eachversiongivesrisetoa verbs,likeselaver‘washoneself’orsecritiquer‘criti-
differentpassivesentence(ThatBiblewashanded.../ cize oneself’ are ordinary transitive verbs that can
Charleswashanded...). have a reflexive object as an alternative to a normal
one, but the reflexive one has no special significance
for verb valency. A second group of verbs, like
Different Links betweenElaborators and s’absenter‘absentoneself’orsesouvenir(de)‘remem-
Semantic Roles ber,’ do not have a nonreflexive use, and thus the
reflexive pronoun is an empty elaborator, even
Ratherdifferentinitsvalencyimplicationsisthekind
though an essential one, rather similar to the es of
of obligatorily reflexive verb exemplified by absent
German Es regnet (discussed in the section Levels
oneselfin(27),comparedwiththeincidentallyreflex-
of Analysis). Thirdly, there are verbs like douter/
iveverbof(28):
se douter ‘doubt/imagine, suspect’ or re´soudre/se
(27) Aliceabsentedherselffromthemeeting. re´soudre (a`) ‘solve/decide,’ which have both a non-
reflexive and a reflexive use, but where the semantic
(28) Alicecriticizedherselfatthemeeting.
differenceistoogreatforthemtobesimply counted
Sinceanonreflexiveobjectisimpossiblewiththeverb asthesameverb;infact,reflexivizationisusedalmost
absent,theherselfof(27)isanemptyelaboratorthat likeadeviceofword-formationforproducinganew
cannot be said to express an independent semantic lexical item, one that has to count as a compulsorily
rolebeyondthatofthesubject,whichinthiscasecan reflexiveverb.Finally,thereareverbslikeouvrirand
be described as agent. In (28), on the other hand, vendre, for which the reflexive pattern is used to
herself has the role of patient (or affected entity), convey the idea that the subject is semantically the
ValencyGrammar 309
patient (and hence also object), and that there is no (34) Theglassbroke.
explicitagent,whichiswhythepatienthastofillthe
(35) Johnbroketheglass.
subjectpositiontoo,asinLaportes’ouvre‘Thedoor
opens (itself).’ This reflexive use truly is a way of Withsuchverbs,thesubjectoftheintransitivepattern
coping with a reduced number of semantic roles and andtheobjectofthetransitivepatternhavethesame
givesriseto‘polyvalency,’thatis,averbdisplayingan semanticroleof‘patientaffected,’whilethetransitive
equivalentmeaningintwoquitedifferentgrammatical subjecthastheroleof‘agent.’
uses. An alternative way of dealing with different con-
Tesnie`re also recognized syntactic devices for stellations of elaborators with semantic roles is by
increasingthevalencyofverbs,suchasFrenchcausa- marking the particular valency pattern by means of
tive constructions with faire. English causative con- derivational morphology, i.e., having a related verb
structions with have, make, cause, etc. preserve derived with an affix to create a verb of different
subject and object functions in the embedded infini- valency: the German prefix be-, for instance, often
tive clause of sentences like those of (29) and (30) hastheeffectofconvertinganintransitiveverbintoa
below,so that Alfred remains the subject and Balzac transitive one, as in the pairs arbeiten/bearbeiten
the object of the verb (to) read, just as they would ‘work/work on, process’ and enden/beenden ‘(come
have been in a full sentence with the same content toan)end/(bringtoan)end,complete’.Swahilihasa
(AlfredreadsBalzac,forinstance): rangeofsuffixesthatworkinasimilarway:
(29) JohnhadAlfredreadBalzac.
-w(a) dynamic e.g.,-vunjwa
(30) JohncausedAlfredtoreadBalzac. passive ‘be(come)
broken’
In French, on the other hand, faire seems to com-
-ı´k(a)/-ek(a) stative e.g.,-vunjika‘be/
binewithinfinitivestoformcomplexverbslikefaire passive remainbroken’
mourir‘have...die,’faireapprendre‘have...learn,’ -an(a) reciprocal e.g.,-pendana
andfairedonner‘have...give’togivesentenceslike ‘seeeachother’
thefollowing(adaptedfromTesnie`re),inwhichJean -i(a)/-e(a) applicative e.g.,-letea‘bring
isintroducedasthecauserorinstigatorandassubject to(someone)’
ofthewholefaireþverbcomplex,displacingAlfred -sh(a)/-z(a)/-ny(a) causative e.g.,-angusha
‘make
fromsubjectposition:
fall¼drop’
(31) JeanfaitmourirAlfred.
All of these Swahili suffixes give rise to sets of
(cf.Alfredmeurt.)
relatedverbswithdifferentconstellationsofelabora-
(32) Jeanfaitapprendrelebulgarea` Alfred. tors with semantic roles, but these constellations
(cf.Alfredapprendlebulgare.)
are of different kinds. The applicative and the
(33) JeanfaitdonnerlaBiblea` CharlesparAlfred. dynamic passive (like the English passive) reassign
(cf.AlfreddonnelaBiblea` Charles.) elaborators:theobjectintheapplicativecorresponds
to a normal preposition phrase; the subject in the
As Tesnie`re pointed out (1966: 260–262), French
dynamic passive corresponds to a normal object.
requiresthatthedisplacedsubjectshouldoccupythe
The stative passive involves reassignment of the
nextavailableplacedownthehierarchy,startingwith
object to subject position but loss of the original
theobject(¼secondactant)asin(31),goingontothe
subject. The reciprocal reduces bivalent subject-
indirect/ prepositional object (¼tierce actant) as in
object structure to a simple monovalent one. The
(32), and going on as far as the agent phrase
causative and the applicative increase the valency:
(¼quatrie`meactant)asin(33).
the causative includes a new ‘instigator’ subject,
Other languages have different ways of dealing
downgrading the normal subject to object, while the
with the valency of causative relationships. One
applicative introduces a new ‘indirect patient’ as
possibility is to allow polyvalency in such a way
object, downgrading the normal object to a kind of
that the same verb may be used intransitively and
secondaryobject.
transitively in a causative sense without change of
form, as with the many so-called ergative verbs of
English, which typically refer to a change of state or
Patterns Involving a Transcategorial
position. Verbs such as break, cook, open, boil,
Quasitransformational Relationship
and sink have a monovalent use as in (34) below,
beside a bivalent one with a causative meaning as in Apartfromtheregular,transformationalrelationships
(35): thatwefindbetweenactiveandpassivestructuresor
310 ValencyGrammar
in other cases of polyvalency, there are some more that semantically such correspondences obtain. But
distantandlessregularcasesofvalencypatternrela- grammatically, even at the deeper valency level, de-
tionships that need to considered. These are cases in rive is a verb and enjoyment is a noun. Such quasi-
which not simply the elaborators of the verb are transformational relationships between ‘kindred’
reconfigured in some way, but ones in which the constructions are therefore semantic in nature but
verb itself is involved in the restructuring. Unlike need to be recognized as involving a grammatical
active-passive and similar regular transformational correspondencethatistranscategorial.Theexistence
relationships, these partly irregular relationships of stretched verb constructions gives the speaker a
are like word-formation patterns in their partial un- wide choice between different verbal construction
predictability,sothatitwouldbereasonabletorefer types to express broadly the same meaning, as the
tothem as ‘quasitransformational’ patterns of corre- furtherexamplesof(40)show.
spondence. Eachoftheoptionsgivenin(40a)–(40f)represents
Considerthefollowingexamples: a different grammatical structure, with a different
relationship to the underlying sentence (40), which
(36) Alfredgreatlyenjoyedthemusic.
has the action expressed by a verb. Compared with
(37) AlicereallylovedMozart. the simplex structure of (40), the eventuality type
named by the verb has been ‘moved’ into a verb
(38) Alfredderivedgreatenjoymentfromthemusic.
elaborator position (predicative or prepositional
(39) AlicereallywasinlovewithMozart.
objoid or object) and there have been reallocations
The sentences of (36) and (37) are simple bivalent oftheverbelaboratorsthemselves.Inthestructureof
structureswithsubjectandobjectasverbelaborators, (40b), a ‘former’ object has been downgraded to
whereas their quasi-synonymous kindred sentences, the position of a prepositional phrase qualifier (PQ)
(38)and(39)respectively,involveadifferentpattern. of a verb elaborator, which in this case is a nominal
In this more complex structure, a semantically predicative(ND):
lightweight verb is used, pushing the verb’s meaning
(40) Thechildhelpedtheteacher.
into an elaborator position, object position in the
SþVþO
case of (38) and noun phrase within a prepositional
(40a) Thechildwashelpfultotheteacher.
predicative in (39). Although the valency of the sim-
S/sþV/øþAD/vþPO¨/o
plex verbs enjoy and love is identical (i.e., they are
bothbivalent,witha‘mentalprocessor’subjectanda (40b) Thechildwasahelperoftheteacher.
‘mental focus’ object), the corresponding nouns S/sþV/øþND/v<PQ/o>
(enjoyment and love) participate in quite different (wheretheNDisagent-oriented)
patterns and are anything but interchangeable. In (40c) Thechildwasahelptotheteacher.
Allerton (2002), sentences like those of (38) and S/sþV/øþND/vþPO¨/o
(39)aresaidtoinvolve‘stretchedverbconstructions,’ (wheretheNDisprocess-oriented)
and the relationship of their structure to that of
(40d) Thechildwasofhelptotheteacher.
theirkindredsimpler‘unstretched’structureisrepre- S/sþV/øþPD/vþPO¨/o
sented by marking the functions of their elaborators
(40e) Thechildcametothehelpoftheteacher.
with the capital letters used already (S, O, etc.) and
S/sþV/øþPO¨/vþPO¨/o
byattachingtoeverydescriptivecategoryanoblique
stroke(or‘slash’)followedbyalowercaseletterindi- (40f) Thechildgavehelptotheteacher.
cating the corresponding element in the equivalent S/sþV/øþO/vþIO/o
‘unstretched’structure. Elements that have no corre-
What all stretched verb constructions share is the
late in the simple verb structure are labeled as .../ø.
waytheprocessofhelpingissignaledbyanadjective
Sentences (38) and (39) could be represented at a
or noun rather than the verb. The verb in such con-
valencylevelas(38x)and(39x)respectively:
structions has been variously described as a light or
thin verb, or as a support verb, because its semantic
(38x) Alfredderivedgreatenjoymentfromthe
contribution is so weak. In English stretched verb
music.
S/sþV/øþO/vþPO¨/o constructions with a copular verb, the standard verb
isofcoursebe,butotherwise,theverbseemstohave
(39x) AlicereallywasinlovewithMozart.
been selected from a limited list of possibilities: in-
S/sþV/øþPD/vþPO¨/o
transitive patterns like (40e) have come, go, put,
The collocation derive enjoyment from has a mean- meet, and provide or some such similar verb, while
ing that is not essentially different from enjoy, so intransitiveoneslike(40f)themostcommonverbis