SINTAGMATIC RELATIONS Van Valin 2001, the relation that a morphosyntactic element has to the elements it co-occurs with is termed syntagmatic relations . The syntax and morphology of a language affect the meaning of the words. Example: John killed Peter is different from Peter killed John. One consequence of syntagmatic relations is that there exists a kind of dependency among the elements that co-occur in a syntactic arrangement. A verb like fry requires that its object is something cooked in oil. These requirements that a verb imposes in its arguments are called selection restrictions
an argument designates some entity or group of entities
in most languages entities are codified as nouns. In mathematical terms nouns are arguments and the verbs are functions
Arguments in the arguments structure can take different semantic roles and very frequently the order of constituents marks a semantic role. In certain languages the order of constituents very frequently marks a semantic role as well. The semantic role of a constituent forces a certain syntactic patterning. There are some obligatory arguments to make sense and other that are optional.
In the sentence:
John closed the door with a key. C (J, d, K) where key is optional.
The key closed the door. C (k, d)
The door closed. C (d)
a predicate attributes some property or relation to the entities denoted by the arguments if there is more than one
SHE PUT THE BOOK ON THE TABLE
The workmen spoiled the carpet with their boots s (w, c, b)
SAEED 2003. Certain lexical categories (verbs) inherently describe different situation types and how these types are described by taking into account different parameters, such as whether a situation is static or not and whether a situation has or has not an inherent terminal point. He first differentiates stative and dynamic verbs , to further subdivide the latter into events and processes
STATIVE VERBS : have no internal phases or changes, and do not focus on the beginning or end of the state. MARY LOVED TO DRIVE SPORTS CARS
In English it is not possible to use the progressive forms with stative verbs. Some verbs can be stative or dynamic.
Types of SoA or types of events EVENTS: THE MINE BLEW UP INCHOACTIVE PROCESS: SHE STARTED WALKING RESULTATIVE PROCESS: SHE WALKED TO THE SHOP DURATIVE PROCESSES: SHE TALKED ALL NIGHT PUNCTUAL/SMELFACTIVE: SHE SNEEZED TELIC OR RESULTATIVE: SHE WAS RUNNING THE LONDON MARATHON ATELIC: SHE WAS RUNNING
ACHIEVEMENTS: (POINT EVENTS) SPOR SOMEONE, REACH THE TOP, WIN THE RACE, STOP
SENTENCE AND SITUATIONS: AUTHORS AND THEORIES RELATION BETWEEN SOA AND PARTICIPANT ROLES: Situation type is a label for the typology of situations encoded in the semantics of a language. The way different authors approach the relationship between state of affairs and participant roles is not exactly the same, but they all share the idea that language representation has to account for different levels of abstraction
His major contribution is the simplification of participant role into two main categories actor and undergoer . He includes the number of participants in the definition, we use the term SOA to refer to the phenomena in the world and following that tradition we propose that there are four basic types of affairs: SITUATIONS, EVENTS, PROCESSES AND ACTIONS. The parameters that define SOA are the number of participants whether there is a terminal point and whether the SOA happens spontaneously or is induced.
SITUATIONS: static non dynamic SOA, may involve the location/state/condition or an internal experience of participant
EVENTS: happens instantly
PROCESSES: SOA which involve change and take place over time.
ACTIONS: dynamic SOA in which a participant does something
There is an indirect relation with predicate. Different SOA give birth or 2 basic verb class distinctions.
His major contribution His predication and predicate frames (basic structures, linking properties or relations with entities of various kinds). He uses SOA in the wide sense of conception of something which can be case. It is a conceptual entity. The structural unit which describes is the predication number. The number of participants depends on the type of predication. His 5 parameters to analyse SOA are:
+ O – DYNAMIC
+ O – TELIC
+ O – MOMENTANEOUS
+ O – CONTROL
+ O – EXPERIENCE
his types of SOA are:
He thinks there is a direct relation between predicate and SOA. And predication is the starting point.