Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton June 21, 2016

Verb class, case, and order: A crosslinguistic experiment on non-nominative experiencers

  • Anne Temme EMAIL logo and Elisabeth Verhoeven
From the journal Linguistics

Abstract

In several languages, non-nominative experiencers tend to appear early on in utterances, which frequently triggers deviations from the preferred word order. These observations are based on linearization preferences, which in most cases involve gradient levels that cannot be determined precisely through singular intuitions. This article presents a crosslinguistic experimental study on languages with different word order properties (German, Greek, Hungarian, and Korean), offering precise estimates for the effects of experiencer objects on linearization. The findings reveal a strong effect of case in the sense that dative experiencers appear more frequently early in an utterance than accusative experiencers. Based on the specific properties of the investigated languages, we are revising previous hypotheses about the source of the dative/accusative asymmetry and conclude that the asymmetry relates to phrase-structural differences. Accusative experiencers are fronted more frequently than patients of canonical transitive verbs. We argue that this phenomenon relates to a preference for selecting experiencers as aboutness topics, which explains the fact that experiencer-first structures appear in syntactic constructions that may be triggered by aboutness. The results show that the experiencer-first principle interacts with properties of the syntactic structure. The differences between languages can thus be traced back to the basic properties of syntactic typology.

Abbreviations

ACC

accusative

ADV

adverbial

AOR

aorist

DAT

dative

DECL

declarative

GEN

genitive

GER

gerund

LOC

locative

M

masculine

NOM

nominative

PASS

passive

PERF

perfect

PL

plural

PST

past

PTCL

particle

PTCP

participle

SG

singular

TOP

topic

References

Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2000. Greek syntax: A principle and parameters approach. Journal of Greek Linguistics 1. 171–222.10.1075/jgl.1.09aleSearch in Google Scholar

Alexiadou, Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou. 2001. The subject in situ generalization, and the role of case in driving computations. Linguistic Inquiry 32. 193–231.10.1162/00243890152001753Search in Google Scholar

Alexopoulou, Theodora & Dimitra Kolliakou. 2002. On linkhood, topicalization and clitic left dislocation, Journal of Linguistics 38(2). 193–245.10.1017/S0022226702001445Search in Google Scholar

Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1997. Clitic left dislocation and contrastive left dislocation. In Elena Anagnostopoulou, Henk van Riemsdijk & Frans Zwarts (eds.), Materials on left Dislocation, 151–192. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.14.11anaSearch in Google Scholar

Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1999. On experiencers. In Artemis Alexiadou, Geoffrey C. Horrocks & Melita Stavrou (eds.), Studies in Greek syntax, 67–93. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-9177-5_4Search in Google Scholar

Arad, Maya. 1998. Psych-notes. In John Harris & Corinne Iten (eds.), UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 203–223. London: University College London.Search in Google Scholar

Bader, Markus & Jana Häussler. 2010. Word order in German: A corpus study. Lingua 120. 717–762.10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.007Search in Google Scholar

Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers & Harry J. Tily. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68. 255–278.10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001Search in Google Scholar

Bayer, Josef. 2004. Non-nominative subjects in comparison. In Peri Bhaskararao & Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (eds.), Non-nominative subjects, 49–76. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.60.05baySearch in Google Scholar

Behrens, Leila. 1982. Zur funktionalen Motivation der Wortstellung: Untersuchungen anhand des Ungarischen. Munich: Veröffentlichungen des Finnisch-Ungarischen Seminars an der Universität München.Search in Google Scholar

Belletti, Adriana. & Luigi Rizzi. 1988. Psych-verbs and Θ-theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6. 293–352.10.1007/BF00133902Search in Google Scholar

den Besten, Hans. 1989. Studies in West Germanic syntax. Amsterdam: Atlanta.Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar. 2004. The syntax of experiencers in the Himalayas. In Peri Bhaskararao & Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (eds.), Non-nominative subjects, 77–112. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.60.06bicSearch in Google Scholar

Bornkessel, Ina, Brian McElree, Matthias Schlesewsky & Angela D. Friederici. 2004. Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking. Journal of Memory and Language 51. 495–522.10.1016/j.jml.2004.06.011Search in Google Scholar

Bornkessel, Ina, Matthias Schlesewsky, & Angela Friederici. 2003. Eliciting thematic reanalysis effects: The role of structure-independent information during parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes 18. 268–298.10.1080/01690960244000018Search in Google Scholar

Bouchard, Denis. 1995. The semantics of syntax: a minimalist approach to gram- mar. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Büring, Daniel. 1999. Topic. In Peter Bosch & Rob van der Sandt (eds.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives, 142–165. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Choi, Hye-Won. 1996. Optimizing structure in context: scrambling and information structure. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Dalmi, Gréte. 2005. The role of agreement in non-finite predication. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.90Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational vs. information focus. Language 74(2). 245–273.10.1353/lan.1998.0211Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 2003. Argument scrambling, operator movement, and topic movement in Hungarian. In Simin Karimi (ed.), Word order and scrambling, 22–43. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470758403.ch2Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 2005. Event types and discourse linking in Hungarian. Linguistics 43(1). 131–154.10.1515/ling.2005.43.1.131Search in Google Scholar

É. Kiss, Katalin. 2008. Free word order, (non-)configurationality, and phases. Linguistic Inquiry 39(3). 441–475.10.1162/ling.2008.39.3.441Search in Google Scholar

Fanselow, Gisbert. 2000. Optimal exceptions. In Barbara Stiebels & Dieter Wunderlich (eds.), Lexicon in focus, 173–209. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Fanselow Gisbert. 2003. Zur Generierung der Abfolge der Satzglieder im Deutschen. In Shin Tanaka (ed.), Akten des 30. Linguistenseminars, Kyoto & Tokyo.Search in Google Scholar

Ferreira, Fernanda. 1994. Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language 33. 715–736.10.1006/jmla.1994.1034Search in Google Scholar

Frank, Robert, Young-Suk Lee & Owen Rambow. 1996. Scrambling, reconstruction, and subject binding. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 21. 67–106.Search in Google Scholar

Frey, Werner. 2004. A medial topic position for German. Linguistische Berichte 198. 153–190.Search in Google Scholar

Frey, Werner. 2005. Zur Syntax der linken Peripherie im Deutschen. In Franz J. d’Avis (ed.), Deutsche Syntax: Empirie und Theorie (Göteborger Germanistische Forschungen 46), 147–171. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Search in Google Scholar

Frey, Werner. 2006. Contrast and movement to the German prefield. In Valéria Molnár & Susanne Winkler (eds.), The architecture of focus, 235–264. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110922011.235Search in Google Scholar

Ganenkov, Dmitry, Timur Maisak & Solmaz Merdanova. 2008. Non-canonical agent marking in Agul. In Helen de Hoop & Peter de Swart (eds.), Differential subject marking, 173–198. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6497-5_8Search in Google Scholar

Gerdts, Donna B. & Cheong Youn. 2001. Korean dative experiencers: The evidence for their status as surface subjects. In Susumu Kuno, Ik-Hwan Lee, John Whitman, Joan Maling, Young-Se Kang, & Young-joo Kim (eds.), Harvard studies in Korean linguistics IX, 317–327. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar

Grewendorf, Günther. 1989. Ergativity in German. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110859256Search in Google Scholar

Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2003. Prolific peripheries: A radical view from the left. College Park, MD: University of Maryland dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Haider, Hubert & Inger Rosengren. 2003. Scrambling: Nontriggered chain formation in OV languages. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 15(3). 203–267.10.1017/S1470542703000291Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. External possession in a European areal perspective. In Doris L. Payne & Immanuel Barshi (eds.), External possession, 109–139. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.39.09hasSearch in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2001. Non-canonical marking of core arguments in European languages. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, Robert M. W. Dixon & Masayuki Onishi (eds.), Non-canonical marking of subjects and objects, 53–83. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.46.04hasSearch in Google Scholar

Haupt, Friederike S., Matthias Schlesewsky, Dietmar Roehm, Angela D. Friederici & Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky. 2008. The status of subject-object reanalyses in language comprehension architecture. Journal of Memory and Language 59. 54–96.10.1016/j.jml.2008.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Hoberg, Ursula. 1981. Die Wortstellung in der geschriebenen deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Munich: Hueber.Search in Google Scholar

Ichihashi-Nakayama, Kumiko. 1994. On dative ‘subject’ constructions in Nepali. In Carol Genetti (ed.), Aspects of Nepali grammar (Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics, vol. 6), 41–76. Santa Barbara, CA: University of California, Santa Barbara.Search in Google Scholar

Kempen, Gerard & Karin Harbusch. 2003. A corpus study into word order variation in German subordinate clauses: Animacy affects linearization independently of grammatical function assignment. In Thomas Pechmann & Chistopher Habel (eds.), Multidisciplinary approaches to language production, 173–181. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110894028.173Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Youngjoo. 1990. The syntax and semantics of Korean case: The interaction between lexical and syntactic levels of representation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Klein, Katharina & Silvia Kutscher. 2002. Psych-verbs and lexical economy (Theorie des Lexikons 122: Arbeiten des Sonderforschungsbereichs 282), 1–41. Düsseldorf: Universität Düsseldorf.Search in Google Scholar

Kordoni, Valia. 1999. Lexical semantics and linking in HPSG: The case of psych verb constructions. In Vaila Kordoni (ed.), Tübingen Studies in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar 132(2) (SFB 340 Bericht), 494–527. Tübingen: Universität Tübingen, Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft.Search in Google Scholar

Lambert, Silke. 2010. Beyond recipients: Towards a typology of dative uses. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Lamers, Monique & Helen de Hoop. 2014. Animate object fronting in Dutch. In Brian MacWhinney, Andrej L Malchukov & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Competing motivations in grammar and usage, 42–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198709848.003.0003Search in Google Scholar

Lamers, Monique & Kees de Schepper. 2010. Argument linearization in Dutch and German: A multifactorial analysis. Paper presented at the Conference on Competing Motivations, Leipzig, 24 November.Search in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2010. The locative syntax of experiencers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/8387.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Lascaratou, Chryssoula. 1989. A functional approach to constituent order with particular reference to Modern Greek: Implications for language learning and language teaching. Athens: Parousia.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Eunsuk. 2007. Types of scrambling in Korean syntax. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Hanjung. 2001. Optimization in argument expression and interpretation: A unified approach. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Lenerz, Jürgen. 1977. Zum Einfluß von “Agens” auf die Wortstellung des Deutschen. In Hans Werner Viethen, Wolf-Dietrich Bald & Konrad Sprengel (eds.), Grammatik und interdisziplinäre Bereiche der Linguistik. Akten des 11. Linguistischen Kolloquiums Aachen 1976, 133–142. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783111353289.133Search in Google Scholar

Müller, Gereon. 1999. Optimality, markedness, and word order in German. Linguistics 37(5). 777–818.10.1515/ling.37.5.777Search in Google Scholar

Müller, Gereon. 2004. Verb-second as vP-first. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7(3). 179–234.10.1023/B:JCOM.0000016453.71478.3aSearch in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, David. 1987. Binding problems with experiencer verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 18. 126–140.Search in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, David. 1995. Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Philippaki-Warburton, Irene. 1982. I simasia tis siras rima ipokimeno antikimeno sta Nea Ellinika [The importance of the VSO order in Modern Greek]. Studies in Greek Linguistics 3. 135–158.Search in Google Scholar

Postal, Paul M. 1971. Cross over phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Search in Google Scholar

Primus, Beatrice. 2004. Protorollen und Verbtyp: Kasusvariaton bei psychischen Verben. In Rolf Kailuweit & Martin Hummel (eds.), Semantische Rollen, 377–401. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/ (accessed 8 June 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Rákosi, György. 2006. Dative experiencer predicates in Hungarian (LOT 146). Utrecht: University of Utrecht dissertation. www.lotpublications.nl/Documents/146_fulltext.pdf (accessed 8 June 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Rákosi, György. 2014. On dative causers in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 61(1). 91–111.10.1556/ALing.61.2014.1.4Search in Google Scholar

Reinhart, Tanya. 2002. The theta system: An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28(3). 229–290.10.1515/thli.28.3.229Search in Google Scholar

Rivero, Maria. L. 2004. Datives and the non-active voice: Reflexive clitics in Balkan languages. In Olga M. Tomíc (ed.), Balkan syntax and semantics, 237–267. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.67.13rivSearch in Google Scholar

Rudnitskaya, Elena. 2005. The experiencer of non-agentive psych predicates in Korean as a bearer of the prominent discourse role “the subject of a psychological state.” In Sang Jik Rhee (ed.), Proceedings of the 1st European Conference of Korean Linguistics (ECKL 1), 137–150. Seoul: Hankookmunhwasa.Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Florian. 2007. On the nature of anticausative morphology: External arguments in change-of-state contexts. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart dissertation.10.1075/la.126Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Florian. 2009. The oblique causer construction across languages. In Anisa Schardl, Martin Walkow & Muhammad Abdurrahman (eds.) Proceedings of NELS 38, 297–308. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000601 (accessed 13 January 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Scheepers, Christoph. 1997. Menschliche Satzverarbeitung: Syntaktische und thematische Aspekte der Wortstellung im Deutschen. Freiburg: Freiburg University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Scheepers, Christoph, Barbara Hemforth & Lars Konieczny. 2000. Linking syntactic functions with thematic roles: Psych verbs and the resolution of subject-object ambiguity. In Barbara Hemforth & Lars Konieczny (eds.), German sentence processing, 95–135. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-9618-3_4Search in Google Scholar

Shin, Yong-Min & Elisabeth Verhoeven. 2009. Animacy and argument hierarchy in conflict: Constraints on object topicalization in Korean. In Johannes Helmbrecht, Yoko Nishina, Yong-Min Shin, Stavros Skopeteas & Elisabeth Verhoeven (eds.), Form and function in language research (Trends in Linguistics 210), 107–122. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110216134Search in Google Scholar

Skopeteas, Stavros & Gisbert Fanselow. 2009. Effects of givenness and constraints on free word order. In Malte Zimmerman & Caroline Féry (eds.), Information structure: Theoretical, typological, and experimental perspectives, 307–331. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570959.003.0013Search in Google Scholar

Spyropoulos, Vasilios & Anthi Revithiadou. 2007. Subject chains in Greek and PF processing. In Claire Halpert, Jeremy Hartman & David Hill (eds.), Proceedings of the 2007 workshop in Greek syntax and semantics at MIT, 293–309. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Sternefeld, Wolfgang. 1985. On case and binding theory. Konstanz: University of Konstanz dissertation.10.1515/9783110882711-010Search in Google Scholar

Thiersch, Craig. 1978. Topics in German syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Tsimpli, Ianthi-Maria. 1995. Focussing in Modern Greek. In Katalin É. Kiss (ed.), Discourse configurational languages, 176–206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Verhoeven, Elisabeth. 2008. (Non-)canonical marking of experiencer objects: A typological comparison of Chinese, Korean, Turkish, and Modern Greek. Language Typology and Universals 61(1). 81–92.10.1524/stuf.2008.0008Search in Google Scholar

Verhoeven, Elisabeth. 2009. Experiencer objects and object clitics in Modern Greek: Evidence from a corpus study. In Georgios K. Giannakis, Mary Baltazani, Georgios I Xydopoulos & Tassos Tsangalidis (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Greek Linguistics, 574–588. University of Ioannina.Search in Google Scholar

Verhoeven, Elisabeth. 2010. Agentivity and stativity in experiencer verbs: Implications for a typology of verb classes. Linguistic Typology 14. 213–251.10.1515/lity.2010.009Search in Google Scholar

Verhoeven, Elisabeth. 2014. Thematic prominence and animacy asymmetries. Evidence from a cross-linguistic production study. Lingua 143. 129–161.10.1016/j.lingua.2014.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Wegener, Heide. 1998. Der Kasus des EXP. In Marcel Vuillaume (ed.), Die Kasus im Deutschen: Form und Inhalt, 71–84. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Weskott, Thomas, Robin Hörnig, Gisbert Fanselow & Reinhold Kliegl. 2011. Contextual licensing of marked OVS word order in German. Linguistische Berichte 225. 3–18.Search in Google Scholar

Zeanen, Annie, Joan Maling & Höskuldur Thráinsson. 1985. Case and grammatical functions: The Icelandic passive. Syntax and Semantics 24. 95–136.Search in Google Scholar

Appendix. Verb lists

accusativedative
experiencernon-experiencerexperiencernon-experiencer
A. German
1plagen ‘annoy’behindern ‘hinder’schwerfallen ‘be difficult’verloren gehen ‘become lost’
2erstaunen ‘astonish’schützen ‘protect’wehtun ‘hurt’auskippen ‘tip’
3entmutigen ‘discourage’verändern ‘change’leidtun ‘feel sorry’einlaufen ‘shrink’
4begeistern ‘enthuse’heilen ‘heal’schmecken ‘have a taste’anbrennen ‘scorch’
5verängstigen ‘frighten’wecken ‘wake up’nahegehen ‘affect’abbrechen ‘break’
6interessieren ‘interest’abholen ‘pick up’leichtfallen ‘be easy’volllaufen ‘swamp’
7erfreuen ‘delight’retten ‘rescue’entfallen ‘slip the mind’auslaufen ‘leak, run out’
8langweilen ‘bore’zerstören ‘destroy’zusagen ‘appeal’ausgehen ‘run out’
9anwidern ‘disgust’vergiften ‘poison’missfallen ‘dissatisfy’runterfallen ‘fall down’
10entzücken ‘rapture’verbessern ‘improve’vergehen ‘put off’kaputtgehen ‘get broken’
11frustrieren ‘frustrate’verletzen ‘injure’auffallen ‘attract attention’zerreißen ‘rupture’
12wundern ‘wonder’warnen ‘warn’einfallen ‘spring to mind’umkippen ‘tip over’
13beunruhigen ‘worry’blenden ‘bedazzle’gefallen ‘appeal to’verschimmeln ‘get moldy’
14erschrecken ‘scare’infizieren ‘infect’einleuchten ‘make sense’überlaufen ‘flood’
15aufregen ‘upset’aufhalten ‘hold back’entgehen ‘fail to notice’zerbrechen ‘break’
16enttäuschen ‘disappoint’blamieren ‘disgrace’fehlen ‘miss’abbrennen ‘burn away’
B. Greek
1εκνευρίζωπροειδοποιώχεφεύγωυπερχειλίζω
eknevrízoproidopioksefévɣoiperχilízo
‘upset’‘warn’‘slip the mind’‘overflow’
2ενδιαφέρωβοηθάωβρομάωπέφτω
enđiaférovoiθáovromáopéfto
‘interest’‘helfen’‘have an unpleasant smell’‘fall down’
3χαροποιώκαταστρέφωμου φαίνεται εύκολοκόβω
χaropiókatastréfomu fénete évkolokóvo
‘delight’‘destroy’‘be easy’‘clod’
4καταρρακώνωδηλητηριάζωδιαφεύγωχύνομαι
katarakónodilitiriázodiafévɣoχínome
‘discourage’‘poison’‘fail to notice’‘tip over’
5στενοχωρώξυπνάωμου πέφτει βαρύςπλημμυρίζω
stenoχoróksipnáomu péfti varísplimirízo
‘sadden’‘wake up’‘be difficult’‘swamp’
6προβληματίζωεμποδίζωμου φαίνεταιμπλοκάρω
provlimtízoembodízoικανοποιητικόblokáro
‘worry’‘hinder’mu fénete ikanopiitikó‘block’
‘satisfy’
7ενθουσιάζωκαθυστερώκολλάωχαλάω
enθusiázokaθisterókoláoχaláo
‘inspire’‘delay’‘stuck in mind’‘break’
8ενοχλώτυφλώνωμου φαίνεται άνοστοκαταστρέφω
enoχlótiflónomu fénete ánostokatastréfo
‘annoy, bother’‘bedazzle’‘have a bland taste’‘get broken’
9ταράζωπροστατεύωλείπωμουχλιάζω
tarázoprostatevolípomuχliázo
‘stir up, upset’‘protect’‘miss’‘get moldy’
10κουράζωβελτιώνωμου φαίνεται αηδιαστικότελειώνω
kurázoveltiónomu fénete aiđiastikótelióno
‘bore’‘improve’‘disgust’‘run out’
11σοκάρωτρυπάωστοιχίζωκαίγομαι
sokárotripáostiχízokégome
‘shock’‘pierce’‘cost emotionally’‘burn’
12απογοητεύωπαραλαμβάνωμου κακοφαίνεταισκίζομαι
apogoitevoparalamvánomu kakoféneteskízome
‘disappoint’‘pick up’‘dissatisfy’‘tear’
13αηδιάζωαποκοιμίζωμου φαίνεται βαρύςλιώνω
aiđiázoapokimízomu fénete baríslióno
‘disgust’‘drowse’‘be too heavy’‘melt’
14τρομάζωσώζωμου αρέσειστραβώνω
tromázosózomu arésistravóno
‘frighten’‘rescue’‘appeal’‘bend’
15ενθουσιάζωεξαντλώκόβομαικολλάω
enθusiázoeksantlókóvomekoláo
‘enthuse’‘exhaust’‘be put off’‘get stuck (key)’
16ενθουσιάζωκαταστρέφωμου φαίνεταισπάω
enθusiázokatastréfoσυγκινητικόςspáo
‘ravish’‘ruin’mu fénete siginitikós‘break’
‘affect’
C. Hungarian
1vonz ‘attract’akadályoz ‘hinder’jelent ‘mean sth.’besárgul ‘become yellow’
2bánt (lelkileg) ‘trouble’elvakít ‘bedazzle’szembeötlik ‘stand out’kinyílik ‘open’
3elcsüggeszt ‘discourage’meggyógyít ‘heal’ízlik ‘taste’begurul vhova ‘roll in easy (ball)’
4érdekel ‘interest’lejárat ‘disgrace’hiányzik ‘miss’beindul ‘start (car)’
5izgat ‘excite’tönkretesz ‘destroy’nehezére esik ‘be difficult’kifakul ‘bleach out’
6nyomaszt ‘distress’figyelmeztet ‘warn’derogál ‘derogate’kijön (számolásnál) ‘result (counting)’
7bosszant ‘annoy’felkelt ‘wake up’beválik ‘work well’meggyullad ‘ignite’
8meglep ‘surprise’megmérgez ‘poison’könnyen megy ‘be easy’felolvad ‘unfreeze’
9megvisel ‘make sb. feel low’megvéd ‘protect’túl sokáig tart ‘take too long’bezáródik ‘lock’
10elszomorít ‘sadden’megerősít ‘strengthen’jót tesz ‘do sth. good’bekapcsol ‘turn on’
11lelkesít ‘enthuse’megfertőz ‘infect’beugrik ‘come to mind’sikerül ‘succeed’
12untat ‘bore’elhoz ‘pick up’megfelel ‘be suitable’megjavul ‘get repaired’
13lehangol ‘depress’feltart ‘hold back’megtetszik ‘appeal to’összeáll ‘stand to reason’
14nyugtalanít ‘worry’megsebesít ‘injure’fájdalmat okoz ‘hurt’becsukódik ‘close’
15kínoz ‘pester, torture’megváltoztat ‘change’leesik ‘fall down’megfő ‘cook’
16megfélemlít ‘frighten’megment ‘save’feltűnik ‘appear, attract attention’megkel ‘let the dough prove’
D. Korean
1귀찮게 하다방해하다힘겹다날아오다
kwichanhkey hatapanghayhatahimkyeptanalaota
‘annoy’‘disrupt’‘be too much’‘come flying’
2기쁘게 하다구원하다부담스럽다들어오다
kippukey hatakwuwenhatapwutamsuleptatuleota
‘delight’‘rescue’‘distress’‘come in, get in’
3맥빠지게 하다부상시키다후회하다떨어지다
maykppacikey hatapwusangsikhitahwuhoyhatattelecita
‘discourage’‘injure’‘feel sorry’‘fall’
4만족스럽게 하다살려내다만족스럽다오다
mancoksulepkey hatasallyenaytamancoksuleptaota
‘satisfy’‘reanimate’‘be satisfactory’‘come’
5두렵게하다깨우다필요하다달려오다
twulyepkey hatakkaywutaphilyohatatallyeota
‘frighten’‘wake up’‘need’‘come up to’
6흥미있게 하다실어가다쉽다마주오다
hungmiisskey hatasilekataswiptamacwuota
‘interest’‘pick up’‘be easy’‘come up to’
7흐뭇하게 하다살려주다부럽다쏟아지다
humwushakey hatasallyecwutapwuleptassotacita
‘please’‘go easy on’‘envy’‘slop’
8지루하게 하다망쳐놓다두렵다스치다
cilwuhakey hatamangchyenohtatwulyeptasuchita
‘bore’‘ruin’‘be afraid’‘touch’
9메스껍게 하다중독시키다불쾌하다다가오다
meysukkepkey hatacwungtoksikhitapwulkhwayhatatakaota
‘disgust, sicken’‘poison’‘be obnoxious’‘draw near’
10싫증나게 하다성장시키다맛있다묻다
silcungnakey hatasengcangsikhitamasisstamwutta
‘disgust’‘let grow’‘taste’‘cover with dirt’
11화나게 하다다치게 하다발견되다부딛히다
hwanakey hatatachikey hatapalkyentoytapwutithita
‘anger’‘injure’‘be apparent, visible’‘push, hustle’
12소름끼치게 하다정신차리게 하다떠오르다튀다
solumkkichikey hatacengsinchalikey hatatteolutathwita
‘appall’‘warn’‘come to mind’‘bounce, splatter’
13당황하게 하다눈부시게 하다좋다지급되다
tanghoanghakey hatanwunpwusikey hatacohtacikuptoyta
‘embarrass’‘dazzle’‘be good’‘be paid’
14불안하게 하다감염시키다떠오르다휘감기다
pwulanhakey hatakamyemsikhitatteolutahwikamkita
‘unsettle’‘infect’‘come to mind’‘twist away’
15격분하게 하다지체시키다지루하다걸리다
kyekpwunhakey hatacicheysikhitacilwuhatakellita
‘outrage’‘retard’‘be boring’‘hang’
16부끄럽게 하다기죽이다그립다닥쳐오다
pwukkulepkey hatakicwukitakuliptatakchyeota
‘shame’‘daunt’‘miss’‘come around’
Published Online: 2016-6-21
Published in Print: 2016-7-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 28.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ling-2016-0018/html
Scroll to top button