Raz jeszcze o relacji między polskim aspektem niedokonanym i francuskim imperfectum w ramach gramatyki rozproszonej (franc. grammaire répartie)

Artykuł stanowi próbę pokazania, w jaki sposób teoria MIC (Meta-Informative Centering, teoria centrów uwagi) znajduje zastosowanie w porównawczym opisie użyć polskich form aspektu i francuskich form czasu. Analiza dotyczy wypadków trudnych, interpretowanych tradycyjnie jako nietypowe, tj. występowania polskich czasowników niedokonanych w kontekstach "zarezerwowanych" teoretycznie dla czasowników dokonanych, por. Nie czytałem tej książki, Jadłeś obiad? Proponowane przez nas ujęcie, uwzględniające czynniki semantyczne i pragmatyczne (opozycje typu Old/New, Known/Unknown i Anaphoric/Cataphoric) pozwala nie tylko wyjaśnić takie użycia polskiego imperfectum, lecz także skonfrontować je z użyciami francuskich form imparfait oraz innych czasów gramatycznych.The present paper is an attempt to apply the Distributed Grammar (DG) theory which includes both the semantic and the pragmatic (meta-informative) level, to a cross-linguistic, comparative analysis of the use of certain aspect forms in Polish and French. Although the opposition of simple and complex forms of the French verb is often interpreted as aspectual, the existence of aspect in French usually taken for granted, and the Imparfait tense (IMP) described as "imperfective", we propose to revisit the correspondence of IMP and the past forms of Polish Imperfective (IPF) verbs. We shall look particularly closely at cases where the IMP is not a translation equivalent of the Polish IPF, trying to explain these differences referring to both systemic and contextual factors. By reference to the theory of Meta-informative Grounding (MIG), we explain the corresponding uses of the IMP and the IPF by the ontological grounding of situations considered as generic, general, potential or habitual. The other uses of the IPF which do not correspond to the IMP in French can be explained by what we call cognitive and communicative grounding, in other words by the fact that the situation is pictured as known to both the speaker and the hearer or as already mentioned (anaphoric usage). Some other non-corresponding uses of the IPF result from its unmarked character in the Slavic Aspect opposition. Such uses of the IPF (which we call neutral) are motivated by the speaker's intention to (1) "avoid" a specific meaning carried out by the Perfective (PF), or (2) state nothing but the simple occurring of a situation,2 or (3) underline the fact that the speaker was certainly not involved in the situation described by the verb

Adjective attribution

"This book is the first typological study of adjective attribution marking. Its focus lies on Northern Eurasia, although it covers many more languages and presents an ontology of morphosyntactic categories relevant to noun phrase structure in general. Beside treating synchronic data, the study contributes to historical linguistics by reconstructing the origin of new types specifically in the language contact area between the Indo-European and Uralic families.

Subatomic quantification (Volume 6)

The goal of this book is to explore the relationship between the cognitive notion of parthood and various grammatical devices expressing this concept in natural language. The monograph aims to investigate syntactic constructions and lexical categories, e.g., partitives, whole-adjectives, and multipliers, encoding different kinds of part-whole structures both in Slavic and non-Slavic languages. It is envisioned to inspire radical rethinking of the ontology of models accounting for nominal semantics. Specifically, it provides novel evidence for a mereotopological approach to meaning, i.e., a theory of wholes that captures not only parthood but also topological relations holding between parts. This evidence comes from the phenomenon of subatomic quantification, i.e., quantification over parts of referents of concrete count nouns

Adjective attribution

This book is the first typological study of adjective attribution marking. Its focus lies on Northern Eurasia, although it covers many more languages and presents an ontology of morphosyntactic categories relevant to noun phrase structure in general. Beside treating synchronic data, the study contributes to historical linguistics by reconstructing the origin of new types specifically in the language contact area between the Indo-European and Uralic families

Adjective attribution

This book is the first typological study of adjective attribution marking. Its focus lies on Northern Eurasia, although it covers many more languages and presents an ontology of morphosyntactic categories relevant to noun phrase structure in general. Beside treating synchronic data, the study contributes to historical linguistics by reconstructing the origin of new types specifically in the language contact area between the Indo-European and Uralic families

Adjective attribution

This book is the first typological study of adjective attribution marking. Its focus lies on Northern Eurasia, although it covers many more languages and presents an ontology of morphosyntactic categories relevant to noun phrase structure in general. Beside treating synchronic data, the study contributes to historical linguistics by reconstructing the origin of new types specifically in the language contact area between the Indo-European and Uralic families

Adjective attribution

This book is the first typological study of adjective attribution marking. Its focus lies on Northern Eurasia, although it covers many more languages and presents an ontology of morphosyntactic categories relevant to noun phrase structure in general. Beside treating synchronic data, the study contributes to historical linguistics by reconstructing the origin of new types specifically in the language contact area between the Indo-European and Uralic families