1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Languages in Contrast
  4. Volume 25, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 25, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6759
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9897
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Evaluative constructions involving -predicates (e.g., ) present atypical structure-to-meaning mappings and vary across languages: in some languages (e.g., English/French), speakers typically use so-called -constructions (TCs) in which the syntactic subject of the matrix sentence is logically the missing object of the infinitive; in others (e.g., Russian), speakers opt for a variety of functional analogues (e.g., passive, impersonal constructions). The aim of this paper is to explore English TCs involving difficult and easy adjectives, compare them to French and Russian analogues based on a parallel-corpus, and investigate how specific semantic properties (animacy, transitivity, adjective scope) relate to specific (more or less compact) configurations. The results show that French and Russian have similar functional analogues and only partially share the structural properties of English TCs. The findings support a multidimensional account based on the inherent semantic properties of evaluative constructions and their degree of compactness.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
2024-08-13
2025-04-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akmajian, A.
    1972 Getting Tough. Linguistic Inquiry, 31: 373–377.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alexiadou, A. and Anagnostopoulou, E.
    2020 A comparative study of English and Greek tough-movement constructions. Langages, 218(2): 17–38. 10.3917/lang.218.0017
     https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.218.0017 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailyn, J.
    2003 Does Russian scrambling exist?Paper presented at theInternational Conference on Word order and Scrambling, Tucson AZ, April 2000. 10.1002/9780470758403.ch7
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470758403.ch7 [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker, M.
    2014 The acquisition of syntactic structure: Animacy and thematic alignment (Vol.1411). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139022033
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022033 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2015 Animacy and the acquisition of tough adjectives. Language Acquisition, 22(1): 68–103. 10.1080/10489223.2014.928298
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.928298 [Google Scholar]
  6. Becker, M., Estigarribia, B. and Gylfadottir, D.
    2012 Tough-adjectives are easy to learn. Supplemental Proceedings of BUCLD, 361: 1–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. and Quirk, R.
    1999 Longman grammar of spoken and written English (Vol.21). London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bošković, Ž. and Takahashi, D.
    1998 Scrambling and last resort. Linguistic inquiry, 29(3): 347–366. 10.1162/002438998553789
     https://doi.org/10.1162/002438998553789 [Google Scholar]
  9. Boutault, J.
    2011 A Tough Nut to Crack: A Semantico-Syntactic Analysis of Tough-Constructions in Contemporary English. Syntaxe et sémantique, 1(1): 95–119. 10.3917/ss.012.095
     https://doi.org/10.3917/ss.012.095 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2012 A Hard Nut to Crack, Mouvements syntaxiques et motivation sémantique en anglais contemporain : les constructions « tough » et moyennes. PhD Thesis, University of Poitiers.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 2020 Vers une définition des constructions « tough » en anglais: les adjectifs et leur complément infinitif. Anglophonia. Available atjournals.openedition.org/anglophonia/3773 [last accessed29 September 2022]. 10.4000/anglophonia.3773
     https://doi.org/10.4000/anglophonia.3773 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chomsky, C.
    1969 The acquisition of syntax in children from 5 to 10. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Chomsky, N.
    1977 On wh-movement. InFormal Syntax, P. Culicover, T. Wasow and A. Akmajian (eds), 71–132. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Chung, Y. S.
    2001 Tough construction in English: a construction grammar approach. PhD Thesis, University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Cinque, G.
    1990 Ergative Adjectives and the Lexicalist Hypothesis. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory8(1): 1–39. 10.1007/BF00205530
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00205530 [Google Scholar]
  17. Comrie, B.
    1997 Tough-movement and its analogues in Germanic languages. InLanguage and its ecology: Essays in memory of Einar Haugen, W. Winter (ed.), 303–322. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110805369.303
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110805369.303 [Google Scholar]
  18. Comrie, B. and Matthews, S.
    1990 Prolegomena to a typology of tough movement. Studies in typology and diachrony: papers presented to Joseph H. Greenberg on his 75th birthday, 43–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.20.05com
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.20.05com [Google Scholar]
  19. Croft, W.
    2009 The role of domains in the interpretation of metaphors and metonymies. InMetaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. (Cognitive Linguistics Research 20), R. Dirven and R. Pörings (eds), 161–205. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Danckaert, L. and Tayalati, F.
    2023 The syntax and semantics of indirect predication in French. InFormal Perspectives on Secondary Predication, M. den Dikken and H. Kishimoto (eds), 17–49. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gahl, S.
    2002 Lexical biases in aphasic sentence comprehension: An experimental and corpus linguistic study. Aphasiology, 16(12): 1173–1198. 10.1080/02687030244000428
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030244000428 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gahl, S., Jurafsky, D., and Roland, D.
    2004 Verb subcategorization frequencies: American English corpus data, methodological studies, and cross-corpus comparisons. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 36(3): 432–443. 10.3758/BF03195591
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195591 [Google Scholar]
  23. Giurgea, I. and Soare, E.
    2010 Predication and the nature of non-finite relatives in Romance. InEdges, Heads, and Projections. Interface Properties, A. DiSciullo and H. Virginia (eds), 191–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.156.12giu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.156.12giu [Google Scholar]
  24. Givόn, T.
    1983 Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross language study. Typological studies in Language, Vol. 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  25. Guérin, V.
    2006 On tough constructions in French. Manoa Working Papers in Linguistics37(1): 1–21.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hicks, G.
    2009 Tough-constructions and their derivation, Linguistic Inquiry40(4): 535–566. 10.1162/ling.2009.40.4.535
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.4.535 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2017 Tough-movement. InThe Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition, M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk (eds), 1–27. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom035
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom035 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jackendoff, R. S.
    1972 Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Khalifa, J. C.
    2004 Syntaxe de l’anglais : théories et pratique de l’énoncé complexe aux concours. Paris: Editions OPHRYS.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kim, K.
    2014 Unveiling linguistic competence by facilitating performance. PhD Thesis, University of Hawaii.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kim, K. and Schwartz, B. D.
    2022 Learnability in the acquisition of the English tough construction by L1-Korean adult and child L2 learners. Second Language Research, 38(2): 259–287. 10.1177/0267658320922594
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320922594 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kövecses, Z.
    2002 Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195145113.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195145113.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  33. Langacker, R.
    1991 Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol.21. Stanford: Stanford university press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lasnik, H. and Fiengo, R.
    1974 Complement Object Deletion. Linguistic Inquiry51: 535–572.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Letuchiy, A. B.
    2017 Predikativ. Materialy dlja proekta korpusnogo opisanija russkoj grammatiki. Na pravah rukopisi. Moskva. Available atrusgram.ru/Предикатив [last accessed7 September 2022]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lison, P., Tiedemann, J. and Kouylekov, M.
    2018 OpenSubtitles2018: Statistical rescoring of sentence alignments in large, noisy parallel corpora. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation LREC 2018, Miyazaki, Japan, May 7–12 2018
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Mair, C.
    1987 Tough-movement in present-day british English: a corpus-based study. Studia Linguistica411: 59–71. 10.1111/j.1467‑9582.1987.tb00773.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1987.tb00773.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Paykin, K. and Van Peteghem, M.
    2020 Des adjectifs tough dans des langues sans construction Tough ? Le cas du russe. Langages, 218(2): 75–88. 10.3917/lang.218.0075
     https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.218.0075 [Google Scholar]
  39. Pekelis, O. E.
    2018 Expletives, referential pronouns and pro-drop: The Russian extraposition pronoun èto in light of the English it and the German es. Lingua, 2031: 66–101. 10.1016/j.lingua.2017.10.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2017.10.007 [Google Scholar]
  40. Peirsman, Y. and Geeraerts, D.
    2006 Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3): 269–316. 10.1515/COG.2006.007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.007 [Google Scholar]
  41. Popelíková, J.
    2015 Tough-constructions and the issue of thematicity: A study of the word easy in 17th and 18th century English. Linguistica Pragensia, 251: 37–48.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Postal, P. M.
    1971 Cross-over Phenomena, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Quyen, N. T.
    2018 Various Factors in the Acquisition of English Tough-Construction by Vietnamese EFL Learners. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(4): 227–254. 10.17154/kjal.2018.12.34.4.227
     https://doi.org/10.17154/kjal.2018.12.34.4.227 [Google Scholar]
  44. Rezac, M.
    2006 On Tough-Movement. InMinimalist Essays, C. Boeckx (ed.), 288–325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.91.19rez
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.91.19rez [Google Scholar]
  45. Rosenbaum, P. S.
    1967 The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Ross, J. R.
    1967 Constraints on variables in syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Russo, K. D., Peach, R. K. and Shapiro, L. P.
    1998 Verb preference effects in the sentence comprehension of fluent aphasic individuals. Aphasiology, 12(7–8): 537–545. 10.1080/02687039808249556
     https://doi.org/10.1080/02687039808249556 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ŝerba, L. V.
    2004 Jazykovaja i rečevaja dejatelʹnostʹ. Moscow: URSS Editorial.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Serdobolʹskaja, N. V. and Toldova, S. J.
    2014 Konstrukcii s ocenočnymi predikativami v russkom jazyke: učastniki situacii ocenki i semantika ocenočnogo predikata. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Trudy instituta lingvističeskih issledovanij, 10(2): 443–477.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Tayalati, F. and Mostrov, V.
    2020 La construction Tough en arabe standard et en bulgare : une sémantique commune. Langages, 218(2): 125–148. 10.3917/lang.218.0125
     https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.218.0125 [Google Scholar]
  51. Tayalati, F., Mostrov, V. and Van de Velde, D.
    2020 Les constructions Tough : syntaxe, sémantique et interfaces. Langages, 218(2): 7–16. 10.3917/lang.218.0007
     https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.218.0007 [Google Scholar]
  52. Theakston, A., Maslen, R., Lieven, E. and Tomasello, M.
    2012 The acquisition of the active transitive construction in English: A detailed case study. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(1): 91–128. 10.1515/cog‑2012‑0004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2012-0004 [Google Scholar]
  53. Tiedemann, J. and Thottingal, S.
    2020 OPUS-MT–Building open translation services for the World. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, 479–480, Lisboa, Portugal, 3–5 November 2020
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Tsikulina, A. and Soroli, E.
    2023 English tough constructions and their analogues in Russian. InBotinis, A. (ed.) 14th International Conference of Experimental Linguistics (Exling-23), 113–114. Athens: ExLing Society Electronic edition, Greece, 20 October 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Van de Velde, D.
    2020 Les adjectifs tough du français comme prédicats dispositionnels. Langages, 218(2): 107–124. 10.3917/lang.218.0107
     https://doi.org/10.3917/lang.218.0107 [Google Scholar]
  56. Wang, H.
    2015 The Problems of Transitivity Studies and Its Solution. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 31: 170–176. 10.4236/jss.2015.310023
     https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2015.310023 [Google Scholar]
  57. Wehrli, E.
    1979 Constructions infinitives : complements VP et leurs implications théoriques. PhD. Thesis, McGill University.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Williams, E.
    1983 Syntactic vs. Semantic Categories. Linguistics and Philosophy, 61: 423–446. 10.1007/BF00627484
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00627484 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
Loading
English tough-constructions and their analogues in French and Russian
Languages in Contrast 25, 83 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00041.tsi
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): crosslinguistic variation; functional analogues; parallel corpus English/French/Russian; semantics-syntax interface; tough-constructions

Most Cited

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