Predicates of Gratification in English and Polish

Introduction

The structure of world stability and order hath been reared upon, and will continue to be sustained by, the twin pillars of reward and punishment…

Baha’u’llah

The above epigraph constituted the source of inspiration which initiated the investigation of a phenomenon, on which according to the quotation, the structure of world stability and order is reared – the pillar of reward. Little did I know that the initial curiosity into the psychological phenomenon of reward would evolve into research on the formality and philosophy of language, a code which is unique among the communication systems of the natural world in exhibiting rich combinatorial and compositional structure including lexical nomination. The research primarily concerns the comprehension of the semantic category of gratification in its syntactic perspective, i.e., formal-grammatical structure of sentences founded on the predicates of gratification treated more or less as discrete representations of the propositional (predicate-argument) structure. The starting point is the meaning of a sentence and the question of how much of a verb’s presence (combinatoricity) arises from the interaction of its content, meaning and general principles of grammar remains valid and crucial. Following S. Karolak (2002, 5–7), the assumption is that the conceptual structure governs the formal one. Its role is to direct attention to the “irreversible dependency” which exists between the combinatorial (syntactic) rules of formal elements and more abstract combinatorial (semantic) rules of conceptual elements. The basic vantage point of the analysis is the symmetric-asymmetric relation between the semantic and the formal plane of the sentence. The research attempts to take into account the immanent properties of analysed verbs adopting such a model that would enable explicit interpretation of both semantic and syntactic phenomena. Therefore, I will adopt here the principal theoretical framework and the apparatus of the so-called Polish school of semantic syntax founded by Karolak (1984, 2002) and its extended version of explicative syntax (Kiklewicz and Korytkowska 2010; Kiklewicz, Korytkowska, Mazurkiewicz-Sułkowska et al. 2019).

The research contrasts data compiled for Polish and English and comprises material based on excerpted isolated constructions with the Polish predicate NAGRODZIĆ/NAGRADZAĆ (S’) (‘reward’) and WYNAGRODZIĆ/WYNAGRADZAĆ (S’’¹) (‘compensate’), the English predicate ←11 | 12→REWARD² and to a lesser extent AWARD that are the primary source of data for much of the predicate-argument structure debate in this study. The presentation of material lies primarily on illustrative attestations of over one thousand and six hundred sentences excerpted from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) – around 600 examples and 800 hundred examples from the National Corpus of Polish (NKJP – Narodowy Korpus Języka Polskiego). A smaller number of samples was taken from the British National Corpus (BNC) as well as selected dictionaries (cf. Section 2.1.1). Almost all instantiations with AWARD (300) were collected from the website www.nobelprize.org as the objective was to investigate causality and examine the syntactic motivation of awarding Nobel laureates. The awareness of the systemic usage of the language component seems equally important in language studies, and an attempt to describe the standard usage of contemporary Polish and English – an actual, valid and well-founded objective.

If the assumption that the formal realisation (syntactic behaviour) of verbs is conceptually driven (semantically determined) is to be taken seriously, then the objectives must be formulated to determine to what extent the meaning of the verb governs its syntactic behaviour and what elements of the verb’s semantic definition matter in the relevant formal generalisations. Moreover, as mentioned by D. Szumska (2017, 273), the digitalisation of textual resources of natural languages, enabling work on even larger data sets, creates not only the possibility to verify and “attest to the instrumentation in the predicate-argument syntax,”³ but also functions as a reservoir for new paths of exploration. Consequently, the research questions posed in this monograph necessitate the examination of semantic (propositional) properties of emergent sentence structures and their syntactic structuralised forms. This research is guided by the hypothesis that the combinatoricity of verbs and its complements, particularly with respect to expression and realisation of its arguments, is, to a large extent coded in its meaning, in the predicate-argument structure of a proposition. If one wishes to establish the inventory of explicative patterns considering two different languages, it is obvious that a more general level of semantic roles will be required to account for generalisations across particular arguments, which must be accounted for ←12 | 13→in a principled and systematic way. Consequently, formal realisation of the predicate-argument structure, which serves as a tertium comparationis, can be used respectively to probe for linguistically relevant aspects of the conceptual as well as formal organisation of linguistic expression and the system of language in general.

Therefore, the study will try to 1) identify and characterise obligatory arguments (frame elements, participants) implicated by the predicate REWARD in Polish and English that are essential for a full understanding of the associated situation of gratification (“the frame elements are the participants, and situation features that need to be identified or are taken for granted in sentences for which the conceptual structure frame is relevant” – Baker et.al. 2003, 282); 2) examine the saliency of each participant, especially pertaining to the phenomena of agency and causality, but also those of the beneficiary and response action implicated by the predicate REWARD; 3) select from the extracted sentences a sufficient number of randomly chosen samples that cover the range of combinatorial possibilities and annotate them as layered segmentation of the sentences, where the segments (semantic arguments) are labelled according to the predicate logic categories (x, y, p, q); 4) investigate semantic and grammatical properties of various types of complements with an emphasis on those illustrating propositional arguments; 5) provide a systematic description of the inventory of explicative patterns (‘reservoir of algorithms’) that exhibit the discovered combinatorial affordances in Polish and English; 6) determine the degree of regularity of discrete, half-discrete and indiscrete-representations of propositional arguments; 7) compare and contrast the regularity of the syntactic condensation processes in Polish and English by examining various linguistic processes e.g., nominalisation, conflation etc; 8) describe the most predominant tendencies pertaining to basic and derivative diathesis, in particular, the dynamic processes of positioning object and propositional arguments; investigate the coexistence between non-clause predication and polipropositional clause predication, chiefly, to establish the relationship between a nuclear proposition and an adjunct derivative proposition and investigate other forms of argument realisation than those accepted in the literature, e.g. adjectival or adverbial phrases.

The research in sentence structures in contemporary Slavic languages employing the methodology of semantic and explicative syntax is quite extensive (Kiklewicz et al. 2000). However, the syntactic structure based on the predicate REWARD has never been explored in much detail. As a result, the approach taken to the content plane of the sentence provides a linguistic model of the ←13 | 14→conceptualised form of reality coded in the form of a sentence. Moreover, it is assumed that in keeping a particular semantic entity constant one is able to observe surface elements that express it. The current contrastive study based on a tertium comparationis of a predicate-argument structure, taking into account conceptual, functional and structural properties inherent to the English predicate REWARD has never been investigated before. Therefore, this theoretical and empirical research deficit will be reduced by providing a novel study based on new data and insight into theoretical linguistics as well as the functional implication of the examined category for present and prospective research projects. The analysis may be described as having ambivalent character, i.e., takes into account the distribution (syntagmatic) and the representational (semantic) aspect. Moreover, it is a part of well ground traditions of contrastive and corpus linguistics constituting a contribution to lexicographic studies. As a result, the research results offered in this monograph may prove valuable in the applied aspect of language investigations, e.g., in the creation of syntactic bilingual or multilingual dictionaries. Moreover, linguistic material which contrasts connectivity and combinatorial properties of lexical units may have implications in translation studies.

The monograph is organised as follows. There are two parts – theoretical (Chapter 1), and empirical (Chapters 2 and 3). Chapter 1 presents the main theoretical assumptions and the methodological framework upon which the analysis is based. It discusses the concept of proposition, predicate calculus and predicate from the vantage point of logic and presents an outline of various traditions that have taken a sentence⁴ as the centre of their analysis (Section 1.1). It is followed by a further exploration of the status of the predicate in linguistics, based on the discussion of predicate valency and classification of predicates. Different typologies of argument classification, and a long-debated topic of the dichotomy of arguments and adjuncts are included. The final part of Section 1.2 is devoted to the concept of diathesis and the place of arguments within a syntactic and semantic structure. Issues undertaken in Section 1.3 relate to research initiated by Ch. Fillmore on Case Grammar and the notion of a semantic role of particular referents participating in a situation described by the predicate. Section ←14 | 15→1.4 presents the basic tenants of the so-called Polish School of Semantic Syntax, the fundamental assumption about the two levels of a linguistic structure – the conceptual and the formal as well as the asymmetries between the two planes. It covers syntactic patterns of sentences as well as terminological issues. Section 1.5 deals with its adherent model, namely explicative syntax with an emphasis on propositional arguments. A thesis on gradual manifestation of propositional arguments is presented, underlying the diversity of syntactic realisations. including the notational system typology of explicative patterns as well. The final part of Chapter 1 engages in a discussion on the current problems in explicative syntax, considering the issues connected to corpus data and contrastive studies, includes areas for prospective research.

Chapter 3 provides detailed evidence on the combinatorial potential coded in the predicates of rewarding. Section 3.1 attempts to examine verb combinatoricity with respect to a wide range of syntactic diathetic alternations that reflect the verb’s meaning. Section 3.2 investigates complementation processes and covers the realisation of different types of syntactic exponents in which the predicate REWARD can express its prepositional arguments of Response Action (p) and Cause (q) in canonical (unmodified) as well as modified positions. This Section also explores condensation processes visible in the asymmetrical relation between the content and the expression plane. Section 3.3 presents a comprehensive list of explicative patterns, illustrative examples and comments on noteworthy properties. This extensive inventory of recorded data is first presented in Polish and includes finite, infinitive, the impersonal form ←15 | 16→nagrodzono as well as passive constructions. The examples with the P’’ sense WYNAGRODZIĆ/WYNAGRADZAĆ (‘compensate’), due to a relatively small number, are presented together irrespective of the form of the verb. The findings based on the English data include patterns based on finite, infinitival, and passive sentences with the verb REWARD as well as passive constructions with the verb AWARD. Contrastive analysis and discussion finalise Chapter 3. General conclusions and outlook generated by the research are offered at the end.

As in the famous quote, “There were the bits he understood. They were bad enough. But the bits he did not understand were worse”.⁵ I must humbly admit that when I embarked on the journey of a PhD monograph on the semantic and syntactic structure of sentences with gratification predicates, the bits I did understand were still overwhelming. I have reached a certain destiny with it; however, the reader must bear in mind this is not the final arrival point. Drawing a line is relatively arbitrary.

This monograph would be unbearably incomplete if it did not record my gratitude. It was originally written as PhD thesis under the supervision of Professor Aleksander Kiklewicz, to whom I am greatly indebted, first and foremost, for introducing me to the captivating school of thought of semantic syntax and as a natural consequence to the fascinating world of cognition, grammar and the undisputable connectivity and combinatorial properties of language and thought. Needless to say, finalisation of this project would not have taken place but for this Professor’s professional and valuable expertise, his guidance and continuous support. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the time and effort devoted by the reviewers Professor Małgorzata Korytkowska and Professor Genoveva Puskas to improving the quality of this work as well as their priceless words of encouragement and appreciation. I would also like to thank Dr Iwona Góralczyk for her co-supervision and insightful feedback. For whatever shortcomings that remain, I alone remain responsible.

I wish to extend my appreciation to the Humanities Department of the University of Warmia and Masuria for financial support which allowed me publish this monograph, but also to attend conferences, preliminary surveys of various national and international library holdings as well as numerous research stays without which my scholarly work would be impoverished and difficult. I am also greatly indebted to the Linguistics Department at Geneva University, whose intellectual grandeur and hospitality I benefitted from immensely during ←16 | 17→my research stays, lectures and doctoral schools that I had the privilege to attend. My appreciation is also due to Trevor Hill and Andrea Góra for their diligent editing work of the present book. Moreover, I wish to express my deepest gratitude to those who have helped, directly or indirectly, in bringing this research project into being, especially my dear friends Patrycja, Joanna, Hania, and many others. I would like to thank Peter Lang for editorial and publishing work. I am also indebted to Jarek Puczel for granting permission to use his artwork as the cover illustration. Finally, I remain grateful to the father of my children for his support and discipline almost through to the end of the long incubation period so that I could work more or less undisturbed.

Chapter 1: Valency properties of predicates – theoretical preliminaries

Before presenting some basic methodological principles and theoretical assumptions that form the foundations of semantic and syntactic analysis in the following monograph, I would like to begin with some general reflections on the nature of linguistic research. S. Karolak, the founder of the so-called Polish School of Semantic Syntax, would start many of his books by recalling a situation when Queen Isabella I of Castalia was presented with the first textbook of Spanish grammar. She questioned the usefulness of such a book – “since everyone fluently speaks Spanish” (Karolak 2002,7; 2007, 7). Even though awareness of language issues in the general public has improved since then and linguistics has been recognised as a field of science, there are linguists who “find [themselves] in a curious position of trying to persuade the world at large that we are engaged in a technically demanding enterprise” (Jackendoff 2002, 3).¹ This quote from Jackendoff (2002, 4) confirms this sociological problem and he comes up with the following similes: “the behaviour is reminiscent of creationists reacting to evolutionary theory, or oil corporations reacting to evidence of global warming”. The reason for writing this is to establish a baseline of what a theory of linguistic structure must be responsible for. Despite the fact that methodologies are not flawless, there is nothing like a well-grounded theory and clearly defined nomenclature to guard against dadaistic approaches to language. Therefore, I believe that linguistic theory finds its most profound and most characteristic concerns in the study of structure that will naturally be delved into with principal focus with an attitude of a “linguist-botanist” rather than a “linguist-gardener”, to refer to the words of W. Pisarek quoted by Szumska (2006, 11) – while, at the same time, being aware of the vastness and intricacy of a garden.

The present chapter delineates the principal perspective for theoretical reflections and detailed analyses in this monograph. Specific sections ought to be perceived as an entry or a watchword, which in no way exhaust the issues ←19 | 20→discussed. In the first part of this chapter, the notion of a propositional structure is discussed. It is followed by an overview of the phenomenon of valency, Case Grammar and semantic roles. It also presents the classification of predicates and arguments and the discussion of the dichotomy of arguments and modifiers. Finally, the methodological foundations of semantic syntax and its adherent model of explicative syntax are presented, including the discussion on its current problems. Chapter one is concluded by a presentation of contrastive and corpus foundations of this study.