Y a-t-il une relation entre la valence (pleine) et la synonymie?

Wiesław Banyś

doi:10.31261/NEO.2019.31.01

Published: 2019-12-31

Vol. 31 (2019)

Is There a Relationship Between (Full) Valency and Synonymy?

Wiesław Banyś

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.31261/NEO.2019.31.01

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of the possible relationships between (full) valency and synonymy. We first present a very short overview of positions on valency, then we proceed to present the position of researchers who see a relationship between valency (full, i.e., not distinguishing arguments from adjuncts and treating them all together as arguments) and synonymy. The article shows that since a more frequent word would appear in more contexts than a less frequent word, the more frequent word would tend to have more meanings, and therefore it will have more synonyms, and being more polysemous it would result in a greater number of full valency frames of that word. It has been shown that the hypothesis has not been sufficiently precise, because it is the word, as a form, that can be considered polysemous, but it cannot itself have synonyms: it is only a particular meaning of this polysemous word that can have them. Therefore, the analyses could not be sufficiently subtle to identify any relationship, if any, between the two phenomena. On the other hand, the results of the analyses from this not sufficiently precise starting point did not demonstrate that there is a significant correlation, let alone dependency, between the two phenomena. Kendall coefficient, which measures the ordinal association, was estimated at 0.18 in the case of the material analysed (for the range –1/+1). It was pointed out at the end that it is not possible to draw from the fact that the differentiation between arguments and adjuncts is often subtle and sometimes difficult to make, the conclusion that there is no difference between them, that the problem in fact does not exist, and to refrain from searching for satisfactory elements and criteria for differentiation of the two categories or to apply in a consequent way those at our disposal, namely, semantic implication.

Keywords:

Valency (full) , arguments , adjuncts , predicate-arguments structure , synonymy , polysemy , introspection , langue , parole , frequency , Kendall coefficient , semantic implication

Download files

PDF (Français (France))

Citation rules

Banyś, W. (2019). Is There a Relationship Between (Full) Valency and Synonymy?. Neophilologica, 31, 9–31. https://doi.org/10.31261/NEO.2019.31.01

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The Copyright Owners of the submitted texts grant the Reader the right to use the pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY SA). The user can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose.

1. License

The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.

2. Author’s Warranties

The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.

If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".

ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).

3. User Rights

Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.

4. Co-Authorship

If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.

As the author of the proposed text, I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.

References

Ackema P., 2015: “Arguments and adjuncts”. In: T. Kiss, A. Alexiadou, eds.: Syntax—Theory and Analysis. International Handbook. Vol. 1. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 246—274.
Google Scholar

Ágel V., Eichinger L.M., Eroms H.-W., Hellwig P., Heringer H.-J., Lobin H., eds., 2003: Dependenz und Valenz. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung / Dependency and Valency. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Berlin—New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Ágel V., Fischer K., 2015: “Dependency Grammar and Valency Theory”. In: B. Heine, H. Narrog: The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Altmann G., 2005: “Diversification processes”. In: R. Köhler, G. Altmann, R.G. Piotrowski, eds.: Quantitative Linguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch / Quantitative Linguistics. An International Handbook. Berlin—New York: de Gruyter, 646—659.
Google Scholar

Andrews A.D., 2007: “The Major Functions of the Noun Phrase”. In: T. Shopen, ed.: Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Clause Structure. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 132—223 [1st edition, 1985].
Google Scholar

Armstrong D.M., 1997: “What is Consciousness?”. In: N. Block, O. Flanagan, G. Güzeldere, eds.: The Nature of Consciousness. Philosophical Debates. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 721—728.
Google Scholar

Aronow P.M., Miller B.T., 2019: Foundations of Agnostic Statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Babby L.H., 2009: The Syntax of Argument Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Banyś W., 1989: Théorie sémantique et SI…ALORS. Aspects sémantico-logiques de la proposition conditionnelle. Katowice: Uniwersytet Śląski.
Google Scholar

Bejček E., Hajičová E., Hajič J., Jínová P., Kettnerová V., Kolářová V., Mikulová M., Mírovský J., Nedoluzhko A., Panevová J., Poláková L., Ševčíková M., Štěpánek J., Zikánová Š., 2013: Prague Dependency Treebank 3.0, https://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt3.0. (accès: 28.05.2019).
Google Scholar

Blanche-Benveniste C., 2002: «La complémentation verbale: petite introduction aux valences verbales». Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique, 37, 47—73.
Google Scholar

Blumenthal P., Koch P., dir., 2002: Valence: perspectives allemandes. Syntaxe et Sémantique 4. Caen: PUC.
Google Scholar

Bogacki K., Karolak S., 1991: «Fondements de la grammaire à base sémantique». Lingua e stile, 26, 309—345.
Google Scholar

Bogacki K., Karolak S., 1992: „Założenia gramatyki o podstawach semantycznych”. Język a Kultura, 8, 157—187.
Google Scholar

Bogacki K., Lewicka H., 1983: Dictionnaire sémantique et syntaxique des verbes français. Warszawa: PWN.
Google Scholar

Bogusławski A., 1974: „Preliminaries for semantic-syntactic description of basic predicative expressions with special reference to Polish verbs”. In: A. Orzechowska, R. Laskowski, red.: O predykacji. Wrocław: Ossolineum, 39—57.
Google Scholar

Bogusławski A., 1981: “More than three or three at most? The problem of valency places and arguments of relations”. Studia gramatyczne, 4, 7—14.
Google Scholar

Bogusławski A., 1988: „Preliminaria gramatyki operacyjnej”. Polonica, 13, 163—223.
Google Scholar

Bogusławski A., 2017: „W sprawie językowo-autorefleksyjnego testowania wymagań składniowych”. Prace Filologiczne, 70, 33—45.
Google Scholar

Brezina V., 2018: Statistics in Corpus Linguistics: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Butler J., 2013: Rethinking Introspection. A Pluralist Approach to the First-Person Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar

Bybee J., Hopper P., 2001: “Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic Structure”. In: J. Bybee, P. Hopper, eds.: Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1—24.
Google Scholar