{"?xml":{"@version":"1.0"},"edm:RDF":{"@xmlns:dc":"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/","@xmlns:edm":"http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/","@xmlns:wgs84_pos":"http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos","@xmlns:foaf":"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/","@xmlns:rdaGr2":"http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2","@xmlns:oai":"http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/","@xmlns:owl":"http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#","@xmlns:rdf":"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#","@xmlns:ore":"http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/","@xmlns:skos":"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#","@xmlns:dcterms":"http://purl.org/dc/terms/","edm:WebResource":[{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH/abbeeb91-882f-4ba3-9b77-57532adcd90e/PDF","dcterms:extent":"340 KB"},{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH/1a82cd84-5275-46fa-9e78-12c8b2ef8f77/TEXT","dcterms:extent":"67 KB"}],"edm:TimeSpan":{"@rdf:about":"1955-2025","edm:begin":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"1955"},"edm:end":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2025"}},"edm:ProvidedCHO":{"@rdf:about":"URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH","dcterms:isPartOf":[{"@rdf:resource":"https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-SG0YS4U8"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Linguistica (Ljubljana)"}],"dcterms:issued":"2011","dc:creator":"Bagasheva, Aleksandra","dc:format":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"številka:letn. 51"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"str. 39-63"}],"dc:identifier":["ISSN:0024-3922","COBISSID:47713378","URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-UBR0BDPH"],"dc:language":"en","dc:publisher":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete"},"dc:subject":[{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"anglais"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"angleščina"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"besedotvorje"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"English"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"formation des mots"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"glagolske zloženke"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"mots composés"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"verbe"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"word formation"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"zloženke"}],"dcterms:temporal":{"@rdf:resource":"1955-2025"},"dc:title":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Beyond dichotomies| on the nature and classification of compound verbs in English|"},"dc:description":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"The study of compound verbs in English poses numerous problems, among which even their recognition as compounds on grounds of their derivation. Resulting from at least three different word-formation patterns, compound verbs constitute a heterogeneous class of complex lexemes. Their status as actual compound lexemes invites the differentiation between compounding as a word-formation process and compounds as a special class of lexemes. Even within the latter, compound verbs display marked properties at least in relation to the inability of standard classifications of compounds to capture and compromise their lexical uniformity and their heterogeneous origin. The adoption of a position in which it is argued that compound verbs in English constitute a constructional idiom and the application of scalar analytical notions which combine word-formationist and lexical-semantic accounts cast in the general framework of the cognitive linguistic enterprise yield informative generalizations concerning the linguistic and conceptual properties of compound verbs in English. In view of Radden and Dirven's (2007: 41-46) claim that we do not need \"more than two basic types of conceptual units things and relations\" in order to establish linguistically relevant conceptual distinctions, compound verbs pose a problem for neat dichotomous treatment as they very often both conceptually and in terms of form include a \"thing\" (e.g. to flat-hunt, to house-sit, to fellow-feel, to case-harden, etc.) and thus come closer to a \"situation\" than to a \"relation\". Exactly because of the fact that compound verbs profile/perspectivize \"situations\" as \"relations\", they function as special construal mechanisms and as such do not fit the subordinate/coordinate distinction, because they name situations. In view of the above the paper treats compound verbs as a constructional idiom whose analysis necessitates the recognition of the role of conceptual conversion mechanisms, scalar classificatory and interpretative criteria and uniform lexico-semantic treatment"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Pri proučevanju glagolskih zloženk v angleščini trčimo na številne probleme, med drugim tudi, kako določiti status zloženke zgolj na podlagi besedotvornega vzorca. Glagolske zloženke, ki lahko nastanejo vsaj iz treh različnih besedotvornih vzorcev, tvorijo heterogeno skupino večleksemskih enot. Prav specifičnost teh enot, da so dejansko zloženi leksemi, nas sili, da razlikujemo med zlaganjem kot besedotvornim postopkom in zloženkami kot specifično vrsto leksemov. Za glagolske zloženke kot posebno vrsto leksemov lahko ugotovimo, da imajo specifične lastnosti, tako da standardne tipologije zloženk ne morejo zajeti in zaobjeti njihove leksikalne enovitosti in raznolikosti načinov nastanka. Če sprejmemo stališče, da predstavljajo glagolske zloženke v angleščini konstrukcijske idiomatske enote, in če se odločimo za uporabo skalarnih analitičnih pojmov, ki združujejo besedotvorni in leksikalni pristop, in če vse našteto vključimo v splošni okvir kognitivnega jezikoslovja, potem pridemo do zanimivih splošneje veljavnih ugotovitev, ki zadevajo jezikovne in konceptualne posebnosti glagolskih zloženk v angleščini. Upoštevajoč trditev, ki jo lahko preberemo v Radden in Dirven (2007: 41-46), da za določanje jezikovno relevantnih konceptualnih razlik zadostujeta že dva osnovna \"tipa konceptualnih enot, to so stvari in razmerja\", potem moramo ugotoviti, da predstavljajo glagolske zloženke poseben problem v prizadevanju po jasnem dihotomičnem razlikovanju, saj pogosto tako na konceptualni ravni kot formalno vključujejo \"stvar\" (npr. to flat-hunt, to house-sit, to fellow-feel, to case-harden ipd.) in so torej bližje \"stanju\" kot \"razmerju\". Prav zato ker glagolske zloženke \"stanje\" profilirajo/zarisujejo kot \"razmerje\", delujejo kot posebni konceptualni mehanizmi, ki jih kot takih ne moremo opisati z običajnim razlikovanjem med podredno in priredno strukturo, saj stanja poimenujejo. Izhajajoč iz povedanega, pričujoči članek glagolske zloženke obravnava kot konstrukcijske idiomatske enote, ki za to, da jih lahko ustrezno analiziramo, terjajo, da priznamo pomen konceptualnih konverzijskih mehanizmov, skalarnih tipoloških in interpretaticijskih kriterijev in enovitega leksikalno-semantičnega pristopa"}],"edm:type":"TEXT","dc:type":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"znanstveno časopisje"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"journals"},{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785"}]},"ore:Aggregation":{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH","edm:aggregatedCHO":{"@rdf:resource":"URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH"},"edm:isShownBy":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH/abbeeb91-882f-4ba3-9b77-57532adcd90e/PDF"},"edm:rights":{"@rdf:resource":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"},"edm:provider":"Slovenian National E-content Aggregator","edm:intermediateProvider":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"National and University Library of Slovenia"},"edm:dataProvider":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta"},"edm:object":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH/maxi/edm"},"edm:isShownAt":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-UBR0BDPH"}}}}