Abstract
It is common for languages crosslinguistically to employ the same verb form in several diathetic constructions distinguished by a different degree of agent suppression. In South Slavic languages the so called ‘quasi-passive reflexive se-constructions’ (QRCs) encode a number of non-factual situations, expressing an array of semantically close meanings unified by modal semantics. The paper argues that QRCs in South Slavic languages represent a gradient category comprising potential, normative and generalizing situation types. The difference between these subclasses depends on the degree of implication of the agent in the construction: the agent is indirectly evoked in the potential, its presence can be felt in the normative, and a non-referring agent is present in the generalizing constructions. The intended interpretation of QRCs is obtained through the predicate-participant relation and pragmatic factors. In shaping the setting the latter may trigger overlapping between the subclasses. The goal of the paper is to prove that QRCs supply the cognitive link between anticausative reflexive (coding autonomous events) and passive reflexive constructions (coding agent defocusing situations): the potential type is closer to anticausatives, while the generalizing type shows affinity with passives. Such scalar analysis of QRCs may contribute to a better understanding of the typology of reflexive constructions.
References
Ackema, Peter & Maaike Schoorlemmer. 1994. The middle construction and the syntax-semantics interface. Lingua 93. 59–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(94)90353-0.Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis & Edit Doron. 2012. The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics 48. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226711000338.Search in Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2014. Active, middle, and passive: The morpho-syntax of voice. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 13. 19–40. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.153.Search in Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo. 1989. The middle: Where semantics and morphology meet. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 11. 18–30.Search in Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1994. Voice: Beyond control and affectedness. In Barbara A. Fox & Paul Hopper (eds.), Voice: Form and function, 89–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.27.06croSearch in Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Liesbet Heyvaert. 2007. On the middle voice: An analysis of the English middle. Linguistics 45(1). 37–83. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2007.002.Search in Google Scholar
de Schepper, Kees. 2010. The space between one and two: Transitives, intransitives and the middle voice. In Patrick Brandt & Marco García García (eds.), Transitivity: Form, meaning, acquisition, and processing, 191–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.166.08schSearch in Google Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav & Tore Nesset. 1998. The value of cognitive grammar in typological studies: The case of Norwegian and Russian passive, middle and reflexive. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 22. 27–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/03325869950137045.Search in Google Scholar
Everaert, Martin, Marijana Marelj & Tal, Siloni (eds.). 2012. The Theta system: The Theta system argument structure at the interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602513.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio & Putnam, Michael. 2014. The emergence of middle voice readings with and without agents. The Linguistic Review 31. 193–240. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2014-0002.Search in Google Scholar
Fagan, Sara. 1988. The English middle. Linguistic Inquiry 19. 181–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/chin.198829269.Search in Google Scholar
Fagan, Sara. 1992. The syntax of middle constructions: A study with special reference to German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Fellbaum, Christine. 1985. Agents in agentless actives and passives. Papers from the Parasession on Causatives and Agentivity, CLS 21, Part 2. 21–31.Search in Google Scholar
Fellbaum, Christine & Anne Zribi-Herz. 1989. The middle constructions in French and English: A comparative study in syntax and semantics. Bloomington, IN: IULP.Search in Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam. 2006. Demoting the agent: Passive, middle and other voice phenomena. In Benjamin Lyngfelt & Torgrim Solstad (eds.), Agent-backgrounding as a functional domain: Reflexivization and passivization in Czech and Russian, 83−110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.96.06friSearch in Google Scholar
Fried, Mirjam. 2007. Constructing grammatical meaning: Isomorphism and polysemy in Czech reflexivization. Studies in Language 31(4). 721−764. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.31.4.02fri.Search in Google Scholar
Geniušienė, Emma. 1987. The typology of reflexives. Berlin/NY: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110859119Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth & Samuel J. Keyser. 1986. Some transitivity alternations in English. Lexicon Project Working Papers, vol. 7, 605−638. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Search in Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth & Samuel J. Keyser. 1987. A view from the middle. Lexicon Project Working Papers 10. 1–36.Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1990. The grammaticalization of passive morphology. Studies in Language 14(1). 25–72. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.14.1.03has.Search in Google Scholar
Holvoet, Axel, Marta Grzybowska and Agnieszka Rembiałkowska. 2015. Middle voice reflexives and argument structure in Baltic. In Axel Holvoet & Nicole Nau (eds.). Voice and argument structure in Baltic. 181–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/vargreb.2.04holSearch in Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2007. English mediopassive constructions: A cognitive, corpus-based study of their origin, spread, and current status. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.10.1163/9789401203784Search in Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The middle voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.23Search in Google Scholar
Keyser, Samuel Jay & Thomas Roeper. 1984. On the middle and ergative constructions in English. Linguistic Inquiry 15(3). 381–417. https://doi.org/10.2307/4178392.Search in Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud & Kevin Lemoine. 2005. Definite null objects in (spoken) French: A construction-grammar account. In Mirjam Fried & Hans C. Boas (eds.), Grammatical constructions: Back to the roots, 13–54, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.4.03lamSearch in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive application, vol. II. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1999. Losing control: Grammaticalization, subjectification, and transparency. In Andreas Blank & Peter Koch (eds.), Historical semantics and cognition, 147–175. Berlin/NY: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110804195.147Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lekakou, Marika. 2002. Middle semantics and its realization in English and Greek. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14. 399–416.Search in Google Scholar
Lekakou, Marika. 2005. In the middle, somewhat elevated. London: University of London PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Lekakou, Marika and Marcel Pitteroff. 2018. This is personal: Impersonal middles as dispositional ascriptions. Glossa 3(1): 59. 1–37. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.487.Search in Google Scholar
Mitkovska, Liljana. 1998. The SE passive in Macedonian compared to the neighbouring Slavic languages. Studia Linguistica Polono-Meridianoslavica 9. 47–60.Search in Google Scholar
Mitkovska, Liljana. 2011. Makedonskite se-konstrukcii i nivnite ekvivalenti vo angliskiot jazik. [The Macedonian se-constructions and their English equivalents]. Skopje: Makedonska reč.Search in Google Scholar
Mozyński, Leszek. 1984. Wstęp do Filologii Sławiańskiej [Introduction to Slavic Philology]. Warszawa: PWN.Search in Google Scholar
Park, Kabyong. 2009. Explaining English middle sentences. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 13(2). 125–140.Search in Google Scholar
Schäfer, Fabian. 2008. Middles as voiced anticausatives. In Emily Efner & Martin, Walkow (eds.), Proceedings of NELS (North East Linguistic Society) 37, 183–196. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Search in Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 1988. The passive in Slavic. In Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), Passive and voice, 243–289. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.10.1075/tsl.16.09sieSearch in Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, 112–171. Canberra: Australian National University.10.1515/9783110871661-008Search in Google Scholar
Steinbach, Markus. 2002. Middle voice: A comparative study in the syntax-semantics interface of German. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.50Search in Google Scholar
Topolinjska, Zuzana. 2008. Polsko-makedonski: Gramatička konfrontacija: Razvitok na gramatički kategorii [Polish-Macedonian: Grammatical confrontation: Development of the grammatical categories]. Skopje: MANU.Search in Google Scholar
Turley, Jeffrey S. 1999. The creation of a grammaticalization chain: The story of Spanish decausative, passive, and indeterminate reflexive constructions. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 18. 101–138.Search in Google Scholar
van Oosten, Jeanne. 1986. The nature of subjects, topics and agents: A cognitive explanation. Bloomington: IULP.Search in Google Scholar
Wiemer, Björn. 2017. Slavic resultatives and their extensions: Integration into the aspect system and the role of telicity. Slavia 86 (2/3). 124–168.Search in Google Scholar
Yoshimura, Kimihiro & John R. Taylor. 2004. What makes a good middle? The role of qualia in the interpretation and acceptability of middle expressions in English. English Language and Linguistics 8(2). 293–321. https://doi.org/10.1017/s136067430400139x.Search in Google Scholar
Sources of examples
BK– Koneski, Blaže 1975. Od istorijata na jazikot na slovenskata pismenost vo Makedonija. [From the language history of Slavic literacy in Macedonia]. Skopje: Makedonska kniga.Search in Google Scholar
GS– Stefanovski, Goran. 1987. Odbrani drami. [Selected plays]. Skopje: Misla.Search in Google Scholar
MJ– Jovanovski, Meto. 1985. Zemja i tegobi. [Land and hardship]. In Meto Jovanovski. (ed), Izbor [Selected works]. Skopje: Makedonska kniga.Search in Google Scholar
MR– Boškovski, Petar. (ed). 1972. Makedonski raskazi. Antologija. [Macedonian short stories. Anthology]. Skopje: Kultura.Search in Google Scholar
PM– Cvetanovski, Savo (ed.). 1990. Antologija na makedonskiot postmodernistički raskaz. [Anthology of the Macedonian postmodern stories]. Skopje: Naša kniga.Search in Google Scholar
VIB– Iljoski, Vasil. 1986. Begalka.[Elopee]. Skopje: Naša kniga.Search in Google Scholar
VIČ– Iljoski, Vasil. 1976. Čorbadži Teodos. [Master Teodos]. In Aleksi Aleksiev (eds.), Makedonski drami medju dvete svetski vojni. [Macedonian plays between the two world wars]. Skopje: Makedonska kniga.Search in Google Scholar
VIM– Iljoski, Vasil. 1989. Mladi sinovi. [Young sons]. Skopje: Misla.Search in Google Scholar
VM– Maleski, Vlado. 1974. Razboj. [The loom]. Skopje: Kultura.Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
