The metonymy of logical metonymy
analyzing real language data
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
What is ‘logical metonymy’?
• Mary began the book
Mary began reading (/writing)
• Mary finished the book
Mary finished reading (/writing)
• John enjoyed the sandwich
John enjoyed eating [the sandwich]
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Defining logical metonymy (I)
• Pustejovsky 1991: 425 (≈ Pustejovsky 1989: xxii)
“Roughly, logical metonymy occurs when a logical
argument (i.e. subpart) of a semantic type that is
selected by some function denotes the semantic type
itself.”
• Godard & Jayéz 1993: 168
“a phrase of type o (object) is coerced to a phrase of
type e (event) under the influence of the predicate”
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Defining logical metonymy (II)
• Pustejovsky 1991:425, 1995:54
“Although superficial similar to cases of general metonymy
(cf. Lakoff and Johnson 1982, Nunberg 1978), there is
an interesting systematicity to such shifts that we will try
to characterize below as logical metonymy.”
• Nunberg 1996: 116 (=1995)
“The availability of transfer for common nouns,
adjectives, and the rest is what underlies the pattern
of lexical alternation that go by the names of ‘regular
polysemy’, ‘systematic polysemy’, ‘logical
metonymy’, and the like.”
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
What is logical metonymy? (III)
Verspoor 1997: 166-167
“This phenomenon involves the use of a noun phrase to
suggest an event associated with that noun phrase – it is
metonymy (e.g. Nunberg 1978) in the sense that one
phrase is used for another (the noun phrase in place of
the full eventive verb phrase) and, under the analysis I
will adopt, logical in that it is triggered by type
requirements which a verb places onto its arguments (in
the examples above, the verb requires an eventive
complement).”
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
VP-NP or object-event shifts?
2003:1 “logical metonymy, that is, constructions in which
the argument of a word in syntax appears to be
different from that argument in logical form”
(cf. also Egg 2003:163)
Lapata/Lascarides 2003:
• enjoy a lecture
¾ enjoy attending it
¾ enjoy giving it
• enjoy a marriage
¾ enjoy going to it
¾ enjoy participating in it
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
VP-NP??
• metonymy primarily relates to meaning
(form differences are by-effects)
• if l.m. is a VP-NP shift it cannot be a
‘missing event’ that induces the shift
• beyond English:
In other languages (Dutch and
German) a gerund VP is an NP!!!
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Logical metonymy:
(maybe also event-event?)
• object instead of event
• event required by matrix verb
• object and event metonymically related
¾metonymical pattern (Ruiz de Mendoza/Pérez 2001):
OBJECT FOR ACTION WHERE THE OBJECT IS INVOLVED IN
- Mary began the book
- Mary finished the book
- Mary enjoyed the book
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Pustejovsky 1991 & 1995
• Metonymical interpretation on the basis of a semantic
representation of the noun: qualia structure
book(x)
CONST = {text, paper,...}
FORMAL = physobj(x)
TELIC = read(P,y,x)
AGENTIVE = write(T,W,x)
sandwich(x)
CONST = {bread,...}
FORMAL = physobj(x)
TELIC = eat(P,y,x)
AGENTIVE = artefact(x)
• The noun coerces into an event
• The coercion is constrained (underlying event structure)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Advantages of such a
‘generative lexicon’
• explains where interpretation / metonymical link
comes from
• incorporates ‘encyclopedic’ knowledge into the
lexicon
• is thus also compatible with more cognitive
linguistic accounts
• it can be used to explain other phenomena
• the meaning of the matrix verb remains stable
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Linguistic evidence against coercion
(Godard & Jayez 1993)
– relativization:
Jan begon aan een boek dat erg dik was
*Jan begon aan een boek dat twee uur duurde
– anaphora:
John began his book at ten and put it away at eleven
*/?John began his book at ten and didn’t stop it till 11
– coordination: Il a commencé et finalement mangé le saumon
Er aß und genoss den Lachs
Hij heeft het beeld voltooid en vond het prachtig
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Qualia structure vs. Context & Convention
• The role of context (Lascarides/Copestake 1998)
– Mary begins the book (Mary = a goat)
– I enjoyed the book you gave me (of marzipan)
• The role of convention (Verspoor 1997)
– differences between finish, begin (on) & enjoy
– more agentive than telic roles for finish & begin
– only +/- 20 nouns which are used metonymic
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Problems, problems, problems
• is ‘logical metonymy’ actually an instance
of metonymy?
• and if so, how does the involved
metonymy work?
• which verbs do allow such constructions?
• do all these verbs work in a similar way?
HOW ABOUT REAL LANGUAGE?????
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Need for more data
1. almost all research on English
(Godard/Jayez 1993, Pustejovsky/Boullion 1996, Horacek 1996)
2. real data hardly ever taken into account
only 3 corpus studies: – Briscoe et al 1990
– Verspoor 1997
– Lapata & Lascarides 2003
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
In sum, what needs to be done:
• more precise analysis of involved
metonymy
• analyzing similarities/differences
between verbs
• analyzing similarities/differences
(Dutch, German)
between languages
• taking real language data into
account (!)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
English verbs
• attempt
• expect
• resist
• begin
• fear
• regret
• choose
• finish
• savor
• complete
• master
• start
• continue
• miss
• survive
• endure
• postpone
• try
• enjoy
• prefer
• want
Copestake/Briscoe 1996, McElree et al 2001, McElree et al 2006,
Lapata/Lascarides 2003, Pustejovksy 1995, Ruiz de Mendoza/Perez 2001
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Dutch and German data:
•
•
•
•
•
•
2/7/2009
translation of the English verbs
more synonyms
related verbs → around 50 verbs for each language
non-eventive direct objects (Google)
analyzing corpus examples
dictionaries: metonymy on event/object
complements
research group XLXS
XL differences: English-Dutch-German
• Gerund = an eventive noun
– he enjoyed reading = er genoss das Lesen
• Direct Object vs. Prepositional complement
– ‘begin’: Dutch: beginnen + DO/aan/met –
German: anfangen + DO/mit, beginnen + DO/mit
– ‘enjoy’: Dutch: genieten van – German: genießen + DO
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
PPcomplements for ‘begin’
1. Mary began (on) the book
2. Marie begon (aan) het boek
3. Maria hat (mit dem/) das Buch angefangen
(cf. Horacek 1996:123)
1. Mary began with the book , and then
2. Marie begon met het boek, en daarna
[cf. e.g. third meaning of begin in
Cobuild online & Honselaar 1980:148]
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
The difference between DO/on-aan
• Verspoor 1997:191
“I propose that this structure [i.e. begin on-X] indicates only
that something is being done with the NP object, leaving
a more specific interpretation to be established using
contextual information.”
• Honselaar 1980:153
“In tegenstelling tot gebeuren-aanduidende woorden die tot
nu toe behandeld zijn [...] biedt een representatie d.m.v.
AAN X de mogelijkheid om allerlei substantiva en
pronomina te gebruiken;”
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
‘begin’: optional/obligatory PPc.?
1. Mary began (on) the book
2. Marie begon (aan) het boek
3. Maria hat (mit dem/) das Buch angefangen
(cf. Horacek 1996:123)
1. Mary began (on) the soup.
2. Marie begon aan de soep.
3. Maria hat mit der Suppe angefangen.
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Similar difference without PP
1. Mary finished the book.
2. Marie beëindigde het boek.
3. Maria hat das Buch beendet. (Cf. Horacek 1996:122)
1. Mary finished the beer.
2. *Marie beëindigde het biertje.
3. *Maria hat das Bier beendet. (cf. Horacek 1996:110)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Explanation: particle verbs?
– finish a beer
– finish a cigarette
→
→
→
→
bier opdrinken
Bier austrinken
sigaret oproken
Zigarette aufrauchen
BUT:
– finish a book→
→
boek beëindigen/uitlezen
Buch beenden/auslesen
¾hierarchy: books/food/drinks/cigarettes?
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Equivalents of to finish
Dutch:
• beëindigen
• eindigen met
• voltooien
• afmaken
German:
• beenden/beendigen
• vollenden
• fertig stellen
afmaken/fertig stellen:
‘to make ready’
can only be combined with
concrete objects!
How about voltooien/vollenden?
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Continuum reflected in corpus data
• all kinds of events combined with
beëindigen/beenden
(sometimes concrete objects instead)
• some events combined with
voltooien/vollenden
(e.g. building but not writing)
• only very specific events combined with
afmaken/fertig stellen
(by default concrete thing)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
English verb classes
I.
eventive verbs / phase verbs
begin, complete, continue, finish,
postpone, start
II.
evaluative verbs / emotive verbs
choose, endure, enjoy, expect, fear,
prefer, regret, savour, want
III. in-between / rest category (information on both)
attempt, master, miss, resist, survive, try
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Do all verbs work the same?
•
•
•
•
John began a/the beer ¾ drinking
John wants a/the beer ¾ to drink ? to have
John chose a/the beer ¾ to drink ? to have
John enjoyed a/the beer ¾ drinking
¾John enjoyed the taste of the beer
•
•
•
•
John began a/the book
John chose a/the book
John wants a/the book
John enjoyed a/the book
2/7/2009
¾ reading
¾ to read ? to have
¾ to read ? to have
¾ reading
research group XLXS
Interpretation based on qualia structure?
• same shift for all direct objects:
ik wil een biertje / een auto / een mooi huis (= having)
• and even similar for event shifts
ik wens een auto / een fijn leven
• unclear or several activities
die Sonne genießen; ihre Traumwohnung vollenden
• not by telic/agentive role qualia structure
Terroristen bekämpfen, van je kleinkinderen genieten
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Data conclusions
• non-homogeneous group of verbs
– the specificity of the inferred activity varies
– some verbs need one activity for all nouns
– ‘nonmetonymical construction’ can be impossible
• qualia structure cannot very well explain the
data
• the relevance of the ‘logical shift’ is arguable
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
An alternative cognitive linguistic proposal
• what is metonymy?
• how does the involved metonymy
in (each of the) examples of logical
metonymy work?
• having a close look at the verb
semantics
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Defining conceptual metonymy
“Metonymy is a cognitive process in which one
conceptual entity, the vehicle, provides mental access
to another conceptual entity, the target, within the
domain” (Kövecses/Radden 1998:39)
• mental access / conceptual mapping
• real world relationship = within one domain
• highlighting parts of a conceptual structure
(Croft 1993)
metonymy =
highlighting a part of a conceptual structure
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Metonymical polysemy
SCHOOL
institution
people
lessons
building
cf. Moerdijk 1989
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Metonymical polysemy
• The school has run out of money
SCHOOL
institution
• The whole school has a day off
people
• The school is on fire
lessons
• I will meet you after school
building
cf. Moerdijk 1989
Certain semantic traits of a concept are highlighted
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Metonymical polysemy
• The school has run out of money
SCHOOL
institution
• The whole school has a day off
people
• The school is on fire
lessons
• I will meet you after school
building
cf. Moerdijk 1989
Certain semantic traits of a concept are highlighted
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Metonymical polysemy
• The school has run out of money
SCHOOL
institution
• The whole school has a day off
people
• The school is on fire
lessons
• I will meet you after school
building
cf. Moerdijk 1989
Certain semantic traits of a concept are highlighted
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Metonymical polysemy
• The school has run out of money
SCHOOL
institution
• The whole school has a day off
people
• The school is on fire
lessons
• I will meet you after school
building
cf. Moerdijk 1989
Certain semantic traits of a concept are highlighted
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Examples of classical metonymies
I am reading Shakespeare
READ
AUTHOR
BOOK
-writes books -written by
author
The ham sandwich is waiting for its check
restaurant context
2/7/2009
ORDER
CLIENT
-for a client
-orders food
research group XLXS
The metonymy of logical metonymy
metonymy = highlighting parts of a conceptual structure
(one conceptual entity gives access to another)
• How does this ‘highlighting’ phenomenon
work in case of logical metonymy?
• How do we know how semantic/conceptual
structures look like?
¾Frame Semantics
(http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Mary began reading
(http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
A representation for logical metonymy:
MAIN STRUCTURE 1
lexical unit
Core Element (CE)1
(agent)
CE2
(activity)
STR. 2
lexical unit
possible outcome
CE1
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
CE2
A representation for logical metonymy:
highlighting parts of (embedded) struct.
ACTIVITY_START
MAIN
STRUCTURE 1
lexical
unit
begin
Core Element (CE)1
(agent)
CE2
(activity)
lexical
unit
read
begin reading/to
read (2)
possible
outcome
begin reading the book (2+2.2)
begin the book (2.1)
2/7/2009
ACTIVITY
STR. 2
CE1
(reader = agent1)
research group XLXS
CE2
(text)
book
English verb class I
I.
eventive verbs / phase verbs
begin, complete, continue, finish,
postpone, start
FRAMES:
Activity_Start(begin, start)
Activity_Ongoing structure (continue)
Activity_Stop / Activity_finish (finish, complete)
Change_Event_time structure (postpone)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
English verb class III
III. in-between / rest category (information on both)
attempt, master, miss, resist, survive, try
FRAMES
Surviving (survive)
Core Elements: ‘survivor’ & ‘dangerous situation’
Attempt (attempt, try)
Core Elements: ‘agent’ & ‘goal’
(= “what the Agent attempts to achieve”)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
I have survived the airplane
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
A representation for surviving the plane
MAIN STRUCTURE 1
lexical unit
Core Element (CE)1
(agent)
SURVIVING
survive
CE2
(dangerous situation)
RIDE_VEHICLE
STR.
2
lexical unit [flying]
CE1
CE2
airplane
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
English verb class II
II.
evaluative verbs / emotive verbs
choose, endure, enjoy, expect, fear, prefer, regret,
savour, want
FRAMES
Desiring (desire)
Preference (prefer)
Choosing (choose)
Expectation (expect)
Experiencer_Subj (enjoy, fear, regret, savour)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
John enjoyed eating / the sandwich
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
A representation for: to enjoy a sandwich
MAIN STR. 1EXPERIENCER_SUBJ
lexical unit
Element 1
(experiencer)
enjoy
Element 2
(experience)
STR. 2
EXPERIENCE
eat
possible
outcome
enjoy eating
/ to eat
enjoy eating the sandw.
enjoy the sandwich
2/7/2009
Element 1
Element2
(ingestor/exp.) (ingestibles)
research group XLXS
sandwich
Logical metonymy
An analysis of highlighted element of embedded frame:
• explains the involved metonymy
• has no problems with event-event shifts (events can
also be highlighted elements)
• restricts the metonymy
– only Core Elements can be highlighted
– there must be highlighting involved (afmaken, fertigstellen)
• can deal with the continuum of cases
specificity CE2: not ‘just’ any event is needed
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
‘Other’ Logical metonymies
Van Dale Groot Woordenboek 14:
„objectsverwisseling: 1·(taalkunde) bepaalde
vorm van metonymie: verwisseling van het
oorspronkelijke object bij een werkwoord door
een ander object (dat, naar de betekenis, lokaal,
causaal of temporeel met het oorspronkelijke is
verbonden), bv. ‘een gesprek onderbreken’ >
‘iemand onderbreken’ “
= highlighting of the 1st Core Element!
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Solution for: AGENT-ACTIVITY
He interrupted her/her talk
MAIN STR.
INTERRUPT_EVENT
lexical unit
Core Element 1
(agent)
possible
interruptoutcome
a/the talk
interrupt
Core E. 2
(event)
EVENT
lexical unit
interrupt his/her talk
interrupt him/her
2/7/2009
EMBEDDED STR.
Element 1
(agent)
research group XLXS
talk
he/she
Solution for difficult, vague cases
MAIN STR.
EXPERIENCER_SUBJ
lexical unit
Element 1
(experiencer)
enjoy
Element 2
(experienced content)
STRUCT. 2
EXPERIENCE
enjoy the sun
possible
outcome
Element 1
Element2
(agent/exp.) (exposed content)
sun
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Solution for specific contexts
Mary (my goat) began the book
ACTIVITY_START
MAIN
STRUCTURE 1
lexical
unit
begin
Core Element (CE)1
(agent)
Mary (the goat)
CE2
(activity)
ACTIVITY
EMB.
STR. 2
lexical
unit
read
nibbling
CE1
(reader
= agent1)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
CE2
(text)
book
PPcomplement is important
™Some of these verbs are intransitive (always PP)
• doorgaan met, treuren om, hopen op, ophouden met,
genieten van
ƒ weitermachen mit, trauern um/über, hoffen auf, aufhören mit,
bangen um
™Some verbs use PPcomplements in some cases
• beginnen (aan), starten (met), verlangen (naar)
ƒ anfangen (mit), starten (mit), verlangen (nach)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS
Conclusions
• Logical metonymy = metonymically used
constituents interpreted as some event
• highlighting Core Elements within
(combined/embedded) Frame, explains:
– non-homogeneous group of verbs
– AGENT-ACTIVITY shifts
– blocking defaults because of context
– tool to describe XLdifferences
• PPcomplements often mark logical
metonymies (not only DOs)
2/7/2009
research group XLXS