On English Locative Subjects

The paper analyses English sentences with thematic locative subjects. These subjects were detected as translation counterparts of Czech sentenceinitial locative adverbials realized by prepositional phrases with the prepositions do (into), na (on), v/ve (in), z/ze (from) complemented by a noun. In the corresponding English structure, the initial scene-setting adverbial is reflected in the thematic subject, which results in the locative semantics of the subject. The sentences are analysed from syntactic, semantic and FSP aspects. From the syntactic point of view, we found five syntactic patterns of the English sentences with a locative subject (SV, SVA, SVO, SVpassA and SVCs) that correspond to Czech sentences with initial locative adverbials. On the FSP level the paper studies the potential of the sentences to implement the Presentation or Quality Scale. Since it is the “semantic content of the verb that actuates the presentation semantics of the sentence” (Duškova, 2015a: 260), major attention is paid to the syntactic-semantic structure of the verb. The analysis of the semantics of the English sentences results in the identification of two semantic classes of verbs which co-occur with the English locative subject.

1. Adam, M. (2011) "A bee buzzed across their path": Semantic affinity as a formative force in presentation scale sentences. Ostrava Journal of Philology 3/1, 19–32.

2. Adam, M. (2013) Presentation Sentences (Syntax, Semantics and FSP). Brno: Masaryk University, Faculty of Education.

3. Anderson, S. R. (1971) On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language 7/3, 387–396. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25000539.

4. Boye, K. (2012) Epistemic Meaning. A Crosslinguistic and Functional-cognitive Study. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossRef

5. Brůhová, G. (2015) Passivization of ditransitive verbs from the FSP point of view. Linguistica Pragensia 25/1, 27–36.

6. Chamonikolasová, J. (2010) Communicative perspectives in the theory of FSP. Linguistica Pragensia 20/2, 86–93. CrossRef

7. Dowty, D. (2000a) "The garden swarms with bees" and the fallacy of "argument alternation". In: Ravin, Y. and C. Leacock (eds.), Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches, 111–128. Oxford University Press.

8. Dowty, D. (2000b) The semantic asymmetry of 'argument alternations' (and why it matters). Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik. Available at: http://www.ling.ohiostate.edu/~dowty.

9. Dušková, L. (1998) Syntactic forms of the presentation scale and their differentiation. Linguistica Pragensia 8/1, 36–43.

10. Dušková, L. (1999a) On some functional and stylistic aspects of the passive voice in present-day English. In: Studies in the English Language. Part 1, 113–148. Prague: Karolinum.

11. Dušková, L. (1999b) On some semantic and FSP aspects of the subject in Czech and in English. In: Studies in the English Language. Part 2, 247–272. Prague: Karolinum.

12. Dušková, L. (2015a) The relations between semantics and FSP as seen by Anglicist members of the Prague Linguistic Circle. In: From Syntax to Text: the Janus Face of Functional Sentence Perspective, 256–268. Prague: Karolinum Press.

13. Dušková, L. (2015b) Syntactic constancy of adverbials between English and Czech. In: From Syntax to Text: the Janus Face of Functional Sentence Perspective, 30–45. Prague: Karolinum Press.

14. Firbas, J. (1992) Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef

15. Fried, M. (2005) A frame-based approach to case alternations: the swarm-class verbs in Czech. Cognitive Linguistics 16/3, 475–512. CrossRef

16. Gast, V. (2015) On the use of translation corpora in contrastive linguistics. A case study of impersonalization in English and German. Languages in Contrast 15/1, 4–33.

17. Haspelmath, M. (2010) Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86/3, 663–687. CrossRef

18. Kettnerová, V. (2015) Lexikálně-sémantické konverze ve valenčním slovníku. Prague: Karolinum.

19. Klégr A., M. Malá and P. Šaldová (2011) Anglicke nepředložkove ekvivalenty českych předložek. In: Čermák, F. Korpusová lingvistika Praha 2011 – 1 InterCorp, 10–28. Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny.

20. Levin, B. (1993) English Verb Classes and Alternations: a Preliminary Investigation. Chicago/IL: The University of Chicago Press.

21. Malá, M. (2013) Translation counterparts as markers of meaning. Languages in Contrast 13/2, 170–192.

22. Martínková, M. (2014) K metodologii využití paralelních korpusů v kontrastivní lingvistice. Naše řeč 97/3–4, 270–285.

23. Mathesius, V. (1936) On some problems of the systematic analysis of grammar. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague VI, 95–107.

24. Panevová, J. et al. (2014) Mluvnice současné češtiny 2: Syntax češtiny na základě anotovaného korpusu. Prague: Karolinum.

25. Quirk, R. et al. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

26. Rohrauer, L. (2013) Syntactic realizations of the presentation scale in academic prose and in fiction. AUC Philologica 3. Prague Studies in English XXVI. Prague: Karolinum, 145–157.

27. Rohrauer, L. (2015) Presentation Sentences in Fiction and Academic Prose: a Syntactico-semantic, FSP and textual view. Ph.D. thesis. Prague: Charles University.

28. Český národní korpus – InterCorp. Ústav Českého národního korpusu FF UK, Praha. Available at: http://www.korpus.cz [2016-07-22].