Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T02:19:20.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ablative–locative transfers and their relevance for the theory of case-grammar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

J. Lachlan Mackenzie
J. Lachlan Mackenzie
Affiliation:
Department of English Language and Literature, Free University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has been suggested by various proponents of case-grammar that locational and directional expressions are not distinct in underlying structure and that the interpretation of such expressions and, where relevant, the selection of the preposition that is to occur in such expressions are determined by properties of the verb on which each expression is dependent. Fillmore (1968: 25) writes:

There is a certain amount of evidence… that locational and directional expressions do not contrast but are superficial differences determined either by the constituent structure or by the character of the associated verb.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , September 1978 , pp. 129 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. M. (1971). The grammar of case: towards a localistic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1976). Three chapters on case grammar: or, why there is no alternative. Linguistic Agency, University of Trier.Google Scholar
Braune, W. (1961). Gotische Grammatik, 16th ed.Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Bugarski, R. (1973). A system of English prepositions and their Serbo-Croatian equivalents. The Yugoslav Serbo–Croatian—Engligh Contrastive Project Reports 8. 3–20.Google Scholar
Burrow, T. (1973). The Sanskrit Language. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Capell, A. (1969). Grammar and vocabulary of the language of Sonsorol– Tobi. Sydney: University of Sydney Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. A. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In Bach, E. & Harms, R. E. (eds), Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 1–88.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971). Some problems for case grammar. In Report of the twenty-second annual round table meeting on linguistics and language studies. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. 35–56.Google Scholar
Jessen, M. (1975). A semantic study of spatial and temporal expressions in English. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Lejeune, M. (1939). Les adverbes grecs en -θev. Bordeaux: Delmas.Google Scholar
Lockwood, W. B. (1950). Notes on the Faroese language today. TPhS 1950. 88–111.Google Scholar
Lockwood, W. B. (1955). An introduction to modern Faroese. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Lockwood, W. B. (1968). Historical German syntax. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. & Vaillant, A. (1924). Grammaire de Ia langue serbo-croate. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Mimer, G. B. (1956). Fijian grammar. Suva, Fiji: Government Press.Google Scholar
Sävborg, T. (1941). Étude sur le rôle de la préposition DE dans les expressions de lieu relatives. Uppsala: Lundequistka Bokhandeln.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, E. H. (1932). The ablative in Indo-European and Hittite. Lg 8. 1–10.Google Scholar