Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Abstract/Artist Statement
Humans are able to naturally produce grammatical sentences they’ve never heard before in their native languages and have others understand what they mean, an amazing feat for a process which we go through daily without much effort. Languages are rule-governed and systematic in ways that are sometimes not so transparent. These rules are what create the structure within a language, making it learnable and usable. By studying these rules and systems we can better understand how the human brain processes and produces language (Pinker, 2007). One way in which we classify verbs in order to better understand them is to organize them into temporal and aspectual classes. This study looks at semelfactives, a class of aspectual verbs. A series of tests put forth by Van Valin (2006) explain the largely systematic way in which different classes of verbs function. However, he proposes that semelfactives are inconsistent in their compatibility with dynamic adverbs, or adverbs that indicate some sort of action, citing the semelfactive glimpsed which cannot occur with words like vigorously or actively as in the problematic sentence: He glimpsed the intruder strongly. Meanwhile, others can, as in She sneezed once violently. (Van Valin, 2006). The data I have collected in order to examine these claims provides evidence that semelfactives are in fact consistent and systematic, showing that the test used to determine their classification to be useful and effective. In addition, this helps us understand more about the system governing how classes of temporal verbs function.
Semelfactives are events that happen suddenly, with the end result being the same as the beginning, such as in He glimpsed at the side-view mirror. where the event has taken place, but he and the mirror are not changed in any way by the action. I propose that this is not in fact an inconsistency, but a matter of additional features of the verb which Van Valin may not have taken into account affecting the test’s accuracy. The issue instead is the fact that semelfactives are problematic and often ungrammatical with animate object. That is to say, you can glimpse at the side-view mirror, but if you glimpse at the intruder it sounds odd. I suggest based on my findings that rather than some semelfactives being compatible with dynamic adverbs and others being incompatible it is actually the case that all semelfactives are compatible with dynamic adverbs.
My findings indicate that Van Valin’s tests are more consistent than he might have thought. Semelfactives are consistently dynamic as far as my data and other studies have shown, and the issue of some being incompatable with non-dynamic adverbs has more to do with the odd combination of the word glimpse and an animate object than it has to do with an exception to the rules. This, in turn gives more evidence that when something appears to be an exception to a rule in a language, it may simply be a case of another rule operating, making things appear less systematic on the surface.
Mentor Name
Leora Bar-el
Uncovering the Rules of Language: What the Case of the Word 'Glimpse' Can Teach Us
UC South Ballroom
Humans are able to naturally produce grammatical sentences they’ve never heard before in their native languages and have others understand what they mean, an amazing feat for a process which we go through daily without much effort. Languages are rule-governed and systematic in ways that are sometimes not so transparent. These rules are what create the structure within a language, making it learnable and usable. By studying these rules and systems we can better understand how the human brain processes and produces language (Pinker, 2007). One way in which we classify verbs in order to better understand them is to organize them into temporal and aspectual classes. This study looks at semelfactives, a class of aspectual verbs. A series of tests put forth by Van Valin (2006) explain the largely systematic way in which different classes of verbs function. However, he proposes that semelfactives are inconsistent in their compatibility with dynamic adverbs, or adverbs that indicate some sort of action, citing the semelfactive glimpsed which cannot occur with words like vigorously or actively as in the problematic sentence: He glimpsed the intruder strongly. Meanwhile, others can, as in She sneezed once violently. (Van Valin, 2006). The data I have collected in order to examine these claims provides evidence that semelfactives are in fact consistent and systematic, showing that the test used to determine their classification to be useful and effective. In addition, this helps us understand more about the system governing how classes of temporal verbs function.
Semelfactives are events that happen suddenly, with the end result being the same as the beginning, such as in He glimpsed at the side-view mirror. where the event has taken place, but he and the mirror are not changed in any way by the action. I propose that this is not in fact an inconsistency, but a matter of additional features of the verb which Van Valin may not have taken into account affecting the test’s accuracy. The issue instead is the fact that semelfactives are problematic and often ungrammatical with animate object. That is to say, you can glimpse at the side-view mirror, but if you glimpse at the intruder it sounds odd. I suggest based on my findings that rather than some semelfactives being compatible with dynamic adverbs and others being incompatible it is actually the case that all semelfactives are compatible with dynamic adverbs.
My findings indicate that Van Valin’s tests are more consistent than he might have thought. Semelfactives are consistently dynamic as far as my data and other studies have shown, and the issue of some being incompatable with non-dynamic adverbs has more to do with the odd combination of the word glimpse and an animate object than it has to do with an exception to the rules. This, in turn gives more evidence that when something appears to be an exception to a rule in a language, it may simply be a case of another rule operating, making things appear less systematic on the surface.