Verbal Prefixation and Metaphor: How Does Metaphor Interact with Constructions?
This is the accepted manuscript version. Published version available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2013.0001 (PDF)
This article argues that metaphorical and non-metaphorical content find different expression on the constructional level. The hypothesis is supported by two empirical case studies of the Russian Locative Alternation verbs, based on the data from the Russian National Corpus: the unprefixed verb sypat’ ‘strew’ (which does not have an aspectual partner) and the unprefixed verb gruzit’ ‘load’ and its three perfective partners with the prefixes na-, za-, and po-. It is argued that metaphorical extensions of these Locative Alternation verbs have a strong relationship with elaborations (interactions between different constructions), on the one hand, and reduction (Locative Alternation constructions with a reduced or omitted participant), on the other. The results indicate differences in metaphorical behavior of different prefixes (even when they are used to form perfective partner verbs) and different constructions (some constructions are more often instantiated as metaphorical extensions than the other).
PublisherSlavica Publishers Inc.
CitationJournal of Slavic Linguistics 21(2013) nr. 1 s. 171-204
MetadataShow full item record
The following license file are associated with this item: