Cover not available

Article published In: The Linguistic Expression of Mirativity
Edited by Agnès Celle and Anastasios Tsangalidis
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:2] 2017
► pp. 343–384

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Degrees of mirativity

 | Université de Lille/UMR 8163 STL, France
 | Université de Lille/UMR 8163 STL, France
Published online: 8 December 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.15.2.03sah
Abstract
This paper studies degrees of mirativity as grammaticalised in the Indo-Aryan language Odia by four light verb constructions, asymmetric complex predicates combining a lexical verb with a (partially) bleached light verb. As such, these light verb constructions can be considered non-parasitic expressions of mirativity. The present paper adds a number of important new insights to the discussion of mirativity. Firstly, we show that mirativity is a complex category which, next to the prototypical notion of surprise, also comprises the notion of “unsupposedness”. Secondly, we demonstrate that the four constructions vary in the degree of mirativity they express. These differences can be related to features of transitivity, such as volitionality or control and affectedness (as contextually realised by the process size, impact, force, or scope). This hypothesis is confirmed by two corpus studies: a collostructional analysis (based on verb types) and a comparison of contexts for constructional minimal pairs.
Article outline
  • 1.Odia light verbs: Non-parasitic expressions of mirativity
  • 2.General properties of ‘V-go’, ‘V-fall’, ‘V-give’, and ‘V-drop’
    • 2.1The grammar of completion and MIRATIVITY
    • 2.2Lexical versus grammatical expression of completion
    • 2.3Degrees of MIRATIVITY
  • 3.Corpus and analysis
  • 4.Corpus-based analysis of ‘V-go’, ‘V-fall’, ‘V-give’ and ‘V-drop’
    • 4.1Comparison of verb types
      • 4.1.1Intransitive ‘-go’ and ‘-fall’
        • Main verb distribution
        • Collostructional analysis
      • 4.1.2Transitive ‘-drop’ and ‘-give’
        • Main verb distribution
        • Collostructional analysis
    • 4.2Comparison of context types
      • 4.2.1Intransitive ‘-go’ and ‘-fall’
      • 4.2.2Transitive ‘-drop’ and ‘-give’
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (32)
References
Abbi, A., & Gopalakrishnan, D. (1991). Semantics of explicator compound verbs in South-Asian languages. Language Sciences, 13(2),161–180. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aksu-Koç, A., & Slobin, D. I. (1986). A psychological account of the development and use of evidentials in Turkish. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology (pp. 159–167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, A. M., Baker, P., & Hardie, A. (2003). The EMILLE corpus. [URL].
Bashir, E. (2010). Traces of mirativity in Shina. Himalayan Linguistics, 9(2), 1–55.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butt, M. (1995). The structure of complex predicates in Urdu. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butt, M., & Geuder, W. (2001). On the (semi) lexical status of light verbs. In N. Corver & H. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), Semilexical categories: On the content of function words and the function of content words (pp. 323–370). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Butt, M., & Lahiri, A. (2002). Historical stability vs. historical change. Ms (available at [URL]).
DeLancey, S. (1997). Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 1(1), 33–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 529–564.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dickinson, C. (2000). Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language, 24(2), 379–421. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Stefanowitsch, A. (2004). Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 9(1), 97–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hay, J., & Plag, I. (2004). What constrains possible suffix combinations?: On the interaction of grammatical and processing restrictions in derivational morphology. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 22(3), 565–596. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hill, N. W. (2012). “Mirativity” does not exist: hdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 389–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2014). Construction Grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hook, P. E. (1993). Aspectogenesis and the compound verb in Indo-Aryan. In M. K. Verma (Ed.), Complex predicates in South Asian languages (pp. 97–113). New Delhi: Manohar Publication.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56(2), 251–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Montaut, A. (2006). Mirative meanings as extensions of aorist in Hindi/Urdu. In R. Singh (Ed.), The yearbook of South-Asian languages and linguistics (pp. 71–86). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemmens, M. (2015). Cognitive semantics. In N. Riemer (Ed.), Routledge handbook of semantics (pp. 90–105). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). A cognitive, usage-based view on lexical pragmatics. In I. Depraetere & R. Salkie (Eds.), Semantics and pragmatics: Drawing a line (pp. 101–114). Amsterdam: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemmens, M., & Sahoo, K. (2016). Something’s gotta go, something’s gotta give: Completion, mirativity, and transitivity in Odia light verb constructions. Studia Linguistica. (online pre-publication 2016 ).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(accepted.). Rise and be surprised: Aspectual profiling and mirativity in Odia light verb constructions.
Napiorkowska, L. (2016). Mirativity and the near deixis copula dule in Neo-Aramaic. Journal of Pragmatics, 98(1), 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peterson, J. (2000). Evidentials, inferentials and mirativity in Nepali. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 23(2), 13–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peterson, T. (2013). Rethinking mirativity: The implication and expression of surprise. [URL].
(2015). Mirativity as surprise: Evidentiality, information, and deixis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(6), 1327–1357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(this volume). Problematizing mirativity.
Sahoo, K. (2001). Oriya verb morphology and complex verb constructions. Doctoral dissertation, Norwegian University of Science & Technology, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. T. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(2), 209–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). Covarying collexemes. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 1(1), 1–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiklund, A. (2009). The syntax of surprise: Unexpected event readings in complex predication. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax, 841, 181–224.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Lemmens, Maarten & Kalyanamalini Sahoo
2019. Rise and be surprised: Aspectual profiling and mirativity in Odia light verb constructions. Cognitive Linguistics 30:1 ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Ayoun, Dalila, Agnès Celle & Laure Lansari
2018. Introduction. In Tense, Aspect, Modality and Evidentiality [Studies in Language Companion Series, 197], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue