In:Iconicity: East meets West
Edited by Masako K. Hiraga, William J. Herlofsky, Kazuko Shinohara and Kimi Akita
[Iconicity in Language and Literature 14] 2015
► pp. 241–257
Iconicity in question
The case of 'optional' prepositions in Lithuanian
Published online: 12 February 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.14.13pen
https://doi.org/10.1075/ill.14.13pen
This article analyzes three cases of competition between a preposition and its corresponding case or the use of the case by itself. It shows that the difference between the two types of constructions is always the same: the case alone is used to express an unmarked relationship, whereas the prepositional phrase + the corresponding case is used to focus on one of its aspects. This could be analyzed in terms of ‘iconicity of motivation’, as the instance marked semantically (with focalization) is also marked syntactically insofar as two markers co-occur. However, the author shows that this analysis which directly links form and meaning without taking into account the linguistic operations implemented by the linguistic forms, is unsatisfactory. She proposes an alternative analysis based on the hypothesis that a case and a preposition are ‘relators’ and explains that the focalization observed in the constructions with two relators (case+preposition) is not so much due to the fact that more markers are used, but to the fact that two semantically close relationships involving the same terms are fully implemented.
References (18)
de Boer, C. 1926. Essai sur la syntaxe moderne de la préposition en français et en italien. Paris: Honoré champion, VIII.
Colombat, B. 1981. Préposition, cas et syntaxe latine dans “l’Encyclopédie” in Histoire Epistémologie langage, Tome 3 fascicule 2. De la grammaire à la linguistique, 3–20.
Culioli, A. 1999. Des façons de qualifier. In Pour une linguistique de l’énonciation, Tome 3, 81–89. Paris: Ophrys.
Feuillet, J. 1992. Réflexions sur la perte des cas en bulgare. Revue des Etudes Slaves 64(3): 539–546.
Hagège, C. 1997. Les relateurs comme catégorie accessoire et la grammaire comme composante nécessaire. Faits de Langues 9: 19–28.
Holvoet, A. & Semėnienė, L. 2004. Gramatinių kategorijų tyrimai. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.
Jablonskis, J. 1957. Rinktiniai raštai. Vilnius: Valstybinė politinės ir mokslinės literatūros leidykla.
Luraghi, S. 1989. The relationship between prepositions and cases within Latin prepositional phrases. In Subordination and Other Topics in Latin: Proceedings of the Third Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Bologne 1 April 1985 [Studies in Language Companion Series 17], G. Calboli (ed.), 253–271. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Paillard, D. 2004. A propos des verbes prefixés. Slovo – Etudes Linguistiques et Sémiotiques 30–31: 13–43.
de Penanros, H. 2000a. L’ambivalence catégorielle préfixe-préposition: Le cas de PRI en russe contemporain. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris Diderot.
. 2000b.
Pri pomošči ou s pomosč’ju? Deux constructions de la notion d’aide. La Revue Russe 17: 55–66.