1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2665-9336
  • E-ISSN: 2665-9344
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper explores the syntactic composition of Property Concept (PC)-expressions in Telangana Telugu. The study reveals two distinct ways in which PC-roots are composed into PC-adjectives and PC-nouns in syntax. These are: (1) PC-roots directly merge with an a-cat to form PC-adjectives and (2) PC-roots base-merge with an n-cat to form PC nouns, which necessitate more complex compositional structures such as relativization and case marking for their appearance in modification structures. 57 PC-expressions are selected from TT and four syntactic tests are employed to ascertain the syntactic category of each expression. It was found that 12 PC-roots exhibit adjectival properties and are categorized as PC-adjectives, being merged directly in the attributive modification position as adjectives. The remaining 45 PC-roots exhibit nominal properties, leading to their categorization as PC-nouns. The syntactic composition of these PC-nouns involves additional mechanisms like relativization. Some PCs use the CoS copula ‘become’ while others use a ∅ equative copula, resulting in variations in sub-eventual semantics.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24018.thi
2026-01-29
2026-02-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amritavalli, R., & Jayaseelan, K. A.
    (2004) The Genesis of Syntactic Categories and Parametric Variation. InJ. H. S. Yoon (Ed.), Generative Grammar in a Broader Perspective: Proceedings of the 4th Asian GLOW (pp.19–41). Hankook Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, M. C.
    (2003) Lexical Categories: Verbs, Nouns, and Adjectives. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Balusu, R.
    (2015) Comparison, predication, and lexical semantics of PC nouns in Telugu. Indian Linguistics, 76(1–2), 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Dixon, R. M. W.
    (1982) Where Have All the Adjectives Gone? And Other Essays in Semantics and Syntax. Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. (2004) Adjective Classes in Typological Perspective. InR. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Adjective Classes: A Cross-Linguistic Typology (pp.1–49). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Embick, D., & Marantz, A.
    (2008) Architecture and blocking. Linguistic inquiry, 39(1), 1–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Embick, D.
    (2015) The morpheme: A theoretical introduction (Vol. 31). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Frawley, William
    (1992) Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Halle, M., & Marantz, A.
    (1993) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Harley, H., & Noyer, R.
    (1999) Distributed morphology. Glot International, 4(4), 3–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Herur, S.
    (2016) Expression of adjectival meaning in Kannada. InFormal Approaches to South Asian Languages (pp. 1–16).
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Menon, M.
    (2012) The Apparent Lack of Adjectival Category in Malayalam and Other Related Languages. Proceedings of GLOW-in-AsiaIX1, 157–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Ramchand, G.
    (2008) Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First-Phase Syntax (Vol. 116). Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Reinhart, T.
    (1995) Interface strategies. OTS working papers in linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Subbārāo, K. V.
    (2012) South Asian Languages: A Syntactic Typology. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sweetser, E.
    (1997) Role and individual interpretations of change predicates. Language and conceptualization, 116–136.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24018.thi
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/alal.24018.thi
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error