Derivational Relations between Verb Classes

When a class of verbs of certain subcategorization can also take another pattern of subcategorization, often there is a derivational relation between the two classes. In LFG, the derivational relatedness between two verb classes, e.g., active forms of verbs and passive forms, is accounted for by morpholexical rules in Lexical Mapping Theory. Actually, the "lexical" part of the name of LFG is to indicate this commitment to characterize processes that alter the "valency," or subcategorization, of predicates in the lexicon, while in a transformational framework such processes are often accounted for by transformations, such as Move-α in GB. Although it is beyond the scope of this book to account for derivational relations among verb subcategories, we will point out the likely existence of such relationship in our discussion, and here we will give one specific example to illustrate how such relationship may be accounted for in LFG. Following the model presented in Bresnan and Kanerva (1989), we will account for the derivational relation between verbs in 1 and the so-called "locative inversion" verbs in 2.

1. a. Zhang1san1 zuo4 zai4 qi4che1- li3.

Zhangsan sit at car inside

‘Zhangsan sits in the car.’

b. Hen3duo1 du1cha2 lai2 dao4 xue2xiao4.

many inspector come to school

‘Many inspectors came to the school.’

c. Ta1 de hua4 gua4 zai4 qiang2-shang4.

he DE painting hang at wall top

‘His painting is hanging on the wall.’

2. a. Qi4che1-li3 zuo4 zhe Zhang1san1.

car inside sit ZHE Zhangsan

‘In the car there sits Zhangsan.’

b. Xue2xiao4 lai2 le hen3duo1 du1cha2.

school come LE many inspector

‘The school had many inspectors arrived.’

c. Qiang2-shang4 gua4 zhe ta1 de hua4.

wall top hang ZHE he DE painting

‘One the wall, there hangs his painting.’

Presumably, the verbs in both sets require a theme role and a location role.

However, while verbs in 1a-c subcategorize SUBJ and OBL_LOCT (see our discussion in III.2. of this chapter), in 2a-c they subcategorize SUBJ and OBJ (see III.4.C). We will see how Lexical Mapping Theory may account for this derivational process of "locative inversion."

Four components comprise Lexical Mapping Theory: (a) a thematic hierarchy of semantic roles, (b) a classification of grammatical functions along two binary features, (c) principles of lexical mapping from semantic roles to the feature specification of grammatical functions, and (d) well-formedness conditions.

The following universal thematic hierarchy is assumed: agent > ben >

goal/exp > inst > theme/pat > loc. Grammatical functions are classified by binary features: + r (restricted, thematically) and + o (object-like), as shown in the following chart.

VERBSUBCATEGORIZATIONINMANDARINCHINESE 91

-r +r +o OBJ OBJ2

-o SUBJ OBL

Figure 3.1 Classification of Grammatical Functions

The lexical mapping principles are of three types: (a) intrinsic assignments, (b) morpholexical operations, and (c) default assignment. First of all, the following three intrinsic classifications are assumed:

3. th/pat → [-r]

ag → [-o]

loc → [-o]

Morpholexical rules are language-specific operations that affect feature assignment by adding features or suppressing thematic roles. To account for locative inversion in Chinese, we pose a morpholexical rule that allows the locative role to be optionally assigned [-r] when in the predicate argument structure of the lexical item the other role is theme.

4. Locative Inversion (optional): <th loc>

↓ [-r]

The default classification assigns the feature [-r] to the highest role in the hierarchy and [+r] to all others. Note that any feature assignment has to be feature-preserving. Thus, later assignment may not conflict with existing specifications. Finally there are the following well-formedness conditions on lexical forms.

5. a. Subject Condition:

every lexical form must have a SUBJ function.

b. Function-Argument Biuniqueness:

every argument must have a unique grammatical function and vice versa.

Now, let's use the verb zuo4 'sit' as an example and see how the morpholexical rule of "lexical inversion" relate its two 'valencies': <SUBJ , OBL_LOCT> and <SUBJ , OBJ>. We will step through the process of mapping thematic roles to grammatical functions through feature assignment by intrinsic classification, morpholexical rules, and default classification.

6. zuo4 'sit' < theme loc >

Intrinsic [-r] [-o]

Default [+r]

Class. of functions S/O OBL ---

Subject Cond. SUBJ OBL `in 1a

7. zuo4 'sit' < theme loc >

Intrinsic [-r] [-o]

Locative Inversion [-r]

Class. of functions S/O SUBJ ---

Biuniqueness Cond. OBJ SUBJ `in 2a

In 6, the optional locative inversion rule did not apply and what we get is the subcategorization of <SUBJ , OBL> of 1a. After the morpholexical rule applies in 7, the default classification can no longer apply without violating the feature-preserving principle. The morpholexical rule of locative inversion thus reveals the derivational relationship between verbs of 1a-c and 2a-c.

For more examples, refer to Bresnan and Kanerva (1989) or Huang (1989).

Our study of verb subcategorization of grammatical functions presented in the following sections and Huang's preliminary application of Lexical Mapping Theory to Chinese provide a good starting point for the investigation and formal description of the intricate network of derivational processes among verb subcategories. For readers interested in such an undertaking, we urge that Starosta's criticism regarding the lack of linguistic relevance in the situation-based identification procedure of thematic relations in the Chomskyan tradition based on Gruber (1965) or case roles in the Fillmorean tradition (Fillmore 1968) be taken seriously and that his proposal of the

VERBSUBCATEGORIZATIONINMANDARINCHINESE 93

perception-based concept of thematic relations be taken into consideration (Starosta 1988).