- * We thank Dana Cohen, Bridget Copley, Gianina Iordăchioaia and Artemis Alexiadou for helpful comment (...)
1The articles collected in this volume on “Nominalizations” were selected from papers presented at the JENOM 3 workshop (Troisièmes Journées d’Étude sur les Nominalisations) that we organized at the University of Paris 8 - Saint-Denis, June 17-18, 2010. Articles in this volume address a variety of languages: French, German, Greek, English and Serbo-Croatian.
2Isabelle Roy and Elena Soare present an introduction to the volume, in which they offer not strictly a state-of-the-art in the study of Nominalizations, but rather a presentation of new insights, recent developments and theoretical implications in this domain. Particular topics are: the notion of events inside nominals; the relationship of nominalization to aspect; aspect and the expression of plurality; nominalizations derived from stative verbs; deadjectival nominals.
3Artemis Alexiadou’s paper investigates the morpho-syntax of stative verbs in Greek and their related nominalizations. It, first, distinguishes two different classes of stative verbs: verbs that are ambiguous between a stative and an eventive reading, and verbs that are unambiguously stative. It then shows, on the basis of modification criteria that emerge from the nominalizations of these two classes of stative, that a non-quantity structure is present in stative nominalizations that preserve the argument structure of their corresponding verbs. The paper offers an articulated structure of stative verbs and stative nominalizations.
4Boban Arsenijević’s contribution is concerned with deadjectival nominalizations in Serbo-Croatian and the question of the ontology of nominalizations more generally. Three types of deadjectival nominalizations are presented, each with different semantic properties, corresponding to what has been referred to in the literature as properties, tropes and qualities. The need for introducing ontological types like tropes and qualities, is then questioned, and the author shows that viable analyses can be formulated where the meanings referred to as tropes and qualities are derived from properties in combination with theoretical handles that are introduced for independent reasons.
5Bernard Fradin’s contribution deals with cases of (‘complex-event’/argument structure) nominalizations in French, which are morphologically formed from non-stative verbs e.g. emprisonner ‘to jail’, but which are regularly associated with a stative reading when occurring in a duration context. The author shows that the nominalizations in question are all constructed on verbs whose semantics involves a spatial relation; other relevant dimensions are scalarity and agentivity. While nominalizations with stative readings like traduction ‘translation’ cannot normally be built on verbs that are associated with a closed scale with maximal standard, the nominalizations in question seem to provide a counterexample that the paper addresses.
6Richard Huyghe’s article addresses the putative correspondence between the mass-count distinction in the nominal domain and the aspectual classification in the verbal domain. The author investigates the issue of aspectual inheritance in nominalizations, and the classical correlation between the mass-count nominal feature and (a)telicity, focusing on French nouns derived from activity verbs. He argues that the mass-count distinction does not correlate with (a)telicity, and that nominal and verbal Aktionsarten are not isomorphous.
7Marie Laurence Knittel’s paper deals with the pluralization of ‘complex-event’ nominals in French. It distinguishes between aspectually unambiguous nominalizations, which are characterized by an inner Aspect projection, and ambiguous nominalizations, displaying only a Number Projection. Nominals derived from unaccusative verbs are argued to involve both projections. The author suggests, as a conclusion, that number variation is linked to perfective aspect.
8In his contribution, Florian Schäfer discusses er-nominalizations in German, a language which has, aside from standard ‘agent’ denoting -er nominalizations, a further type of er-nominalizations, which does not denote entities but events. These event-denoting er-nominalizations turn out to be restricted semelfactives, which have been characterized in the literature as expressing ‘naturally atomic’ events. The paper explores the semantic and syntactic consequences of the hypothesis that the two types of er-nominalizations involve the same nominalizer in different syntactic contexts.
* We thank Dana Cohen, Bridget Copley, Gianina Iordăchioaia and Artemis Alexiadou for helpful comments on the volume, and the authors for their contribution. We also thank the participants at the JENOM 3 workshop (Troisièmes Journées d’Étude sur les Nominalisations)for lively discussions.Haut de page
Pour citer cet article
Isabelle Roy et Elena Soare, « Presentation », Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes [En ligne], 40 | 2011, mis en ligne le 01 novembre 2011, consulté le 30 mars 2017. URL : http://rlv.revues.org/2008Haut de page
© Presses universitaires de VincennesHaut de page