Abstract The paper deals with verb-particle constructions in Italian, i.e.

complex
predicates formed by a verbal base and a modifying post-verbal particle. In recent
years a lot of interest has been devoted to these constructions in the Germanic
languages, and investigation has been focusing mostly on their structure. Recently,
some studies have shown that similar constructions also exist in the Italian language.
Our contribution adopts a constructionist approach and aims at improving our
knowledge of the properties of verb-particle constructions in Italian with particular
reference to semantics and Aktionsart. The paper shows that Italian post-verbal
particles contribute to the Aktionsart of verb-particle constructions. Even though
Italian does not present a coherent system of actional particles, there are nonetheless
some traces of regularity. One case in point is the emergence of a specic verb-
particle construction with via away that developed an actional function. The paper
also discusses the diachronic and synchronic relationship between verbal prexes and
post-verbal particles, trying to determine whether these two strategies cooperate or
compete in the expression of locative and aspectual meanings.
Keywords Verb-particle constructions Italian Aktionsart
Construction grammar
The article is the result of the close collaboration of both authors; however, for academic purposes,
Claudio Iacobini is responsible for Sects. 2, 2.1, 2.4, 2.5, 3, 3.1, 3.2 and 5, and Francesca Masini for
Sects. 1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.3, 3.4 and 4.
C. Iacobini (&)
Dipartimento di Studi Linguistici e Letterari, Universita` di Salerno (Italy),
Facolta` di Lingue e Letterature Straniere,
Via Ponte don Melillo, 84084 Fisciano (Salerno), Italy
e-mail: ciacobini@unisa.it
F. Masini
Dipartimento di Linguistica, Universita` Roma Tre (Italy),
Facolta` di Lettere e Filosoa, Via Ostiense 236, 00146 Roma, Italy
e-mail: fmasini@uniroma3.it
1 3
Morphology (2006) 16:155188
DOI 10.1007/s11525-006-9101-7
ORI GI NAL PAPER
The emergence of verb-particle constructions in Italian:
locative and actional meanings
Claudio Iacobini Francesca Masini
Received: 9 January 2006 / Accepted: 29 July 2006 / Published online: 23 January 2007
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007
1 Introduction
The paper deals with verbparticle constructions (hereinafter VPC), i.e. complex
predicates formed by a verbal base and a modifying post-verbal particle. In recent
decades, a lot of interest has been devoted to these constructions and investigation
has been focused mostly on Germanic languages, where the pattern is very
productive and widespread in use
1
.
In this paper, we will show that VPCs also exist in Italian (see some examples in 1)
and provide an overview of the phenomenon (Sects. 2.1 and 2.2).
(1) venire gi u lit. come down to come down
portare via lit. take away to take away
mettere sotto lit. put under to run over
The presence of VPCs in Italian challenges the well-known generalization about
frame-based languages and satellite-based languages expoundedin Talmy (1985)
(cf. Sect. 2.3), which raises the question of the controversial diachronic development of
these constructions (Sect. 2.4) and of their relationship with the system of verbal
prexes regarding the expression of locative and aspectual meanings (Sect. 2.5).
Inthis paper, weprovideoriginal dataabout theAktionsart properties of ItalianVPCs,
which have not been investigated so far. Section 3 rst illustrates the results of the
analysis and then expands on a specic case, the particle via away, which will be seen to
have developed an Aktionsart value. Finally, we discuss the theoretical implications of
our results and give an account of Italian VPCs in terms of Construction Grammar
(Fillmore, Kay, &OConnor, 1988; Goldberg, 1995, 2003, 2006). In particular, we adopt
the constructionist account of Dutch separable complex verbs put forward in Booij
(2002a, b) expanding it to cover Italian VPCs. Furthermore, we give a constructionist
account of the emergence of the via verb-particle pattern with Aktionsart function.
The paper therefore has two goals. On the one hand, it aims at contributing to the
study of VPCs in general by extending the research to a new language, i.e. Italian,
which also offers new scope for typological and diachronic research. On the other
hand, besides being further evidence for the locative-to-actional semantic shift of
particles and VPCs proposed in Brinton (1988), it shows the ongoing formation of a
new construction, exemplied by the subclass of VPCs with via, which functions as
an overt technique of Aktionsart marking. As we will see, the emergence of Italian
VPCs in general, and of the via class in particular, can be accounted for by a
Construction Grammar approach in a very straightforward way.
2 An overview of Italian VPCs
Traditionally, Italian VPCs are quite a neglected topic. In recent years, however,
they have succeeded in catching the attention of scholars. After seminal articles by
Schwarze (1985) and Simone (1997), a number of studies emerged on the matter (cf.
Venier, 1996; Antelmi, 2002; Jezek, 2002; Iacobini, 2003; Jansen, 2004; Masini, 2005,
to appear).
1
Cf. Haiden (2002) for a comparison between the various types of VPCs within the Germanic linguistic
family, Dehe et al. Eds., (2002) for an up-to-date discussion of the main theoretical issues concerning
VPCs inGermanic languages, andBooij &vanMarle(Eds.), (2003) for anoverviewof preverbs inother
languages, such as Estonian, Old French, Udi, Georgian and Northern Australian languages.
156 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Although this attention on Italian VPCs is relatively recent, the phenomenon is
not a contemporary innovation since it was already attested in Ancient Italian texts
(cf. Meyer-Lu bke, 1899, Sect. 370; Jansen, 2004; Masini, to appear). One can nd
some traces of VPCs also in Latin, in particular in those cases where the particle
strengthens the locative value of a prex that is semantically weakened, e.g. retro
regredi (Cic. Bell. Afr. 50,2), retroreverti (Lucr. 1,785); forasexire (Lucr. 3,772)
(cf. Hofmann & Szantyr, 1965, pp. 797799). However, we cannot speak of a pro-
ductive system of VPCs for the Latin language. Rather, VPCs here represent a
marginal and stylistically marked phenomenon with respect to prexation.
Furthermore, VPCs are widespread in some Italian dialects, especially northern
dialects (cf. De Mauro, 1963, pp. 381382; Rohlfs, 1983, p. 46; Telmon, 1993, pp.
120121 and references therein). In some of these varieties they represent a privi-
leged way to express locative meanings (cf. e.g. Vicario, 1997, who gives an account
of VPCs in Friulian from the earliest documents in the 14th century to their
increasing use in the present day). However, VPCs are also present in central (cf.
Rohlfs, 1969, Sect. 918 for Tuscan) and southern dialects (cf. Cini, 2002, pp. 147
148), although they are less frequent.
The remarkable feature of present-day Standard Italian is that VPCs are by now a
widespread lexical resource and their diffusion depends very loosely on diatopic or
diamesic factors. Some VPCs alternate with synthetic synonyms, e.g. entrare/andare
dentro to enter, to go in(to), and sometimes represent the less formal variant.
Others represent original lexicalizations of certain concepts, e.g. restare fuori to stay
outside/to be excluded, which could not be expressed by any synthetic form. Fur-
ther, VPCs are the new emerging means of expressing spatiality within the Italian
verbal system (see Sects. 2.32.5).
In the following sections, we shall give a preliminary description of Italian VPCs in
terms of structure (Sect. 2.1) and semantics (Sect. 2.2). Then we briey discuss the
position of Italian VPCs with respect to Talmys typological classication (Sect. 2.3).
Finally, we pass on to the diachronic development of Italian VPCs (Sect. 2.4) and
their relationship with verbal prexation (Sect. 2.5).
2.1 Syntactic properties
One might classify quite different constructions as VPCs depending on the criteria
used, since particles may form more or less cohesive units with the verbal bases (cf.
Brinton, 1988, pp. 16364). In particular, VPCs are quite similar to combinations of
verb plus a prepositional or adverbial phrase. Besides this, within the VPC itself one
can recognize a series of different - though closely related - congurations. In what
follows, we provide a description of the constructional range in which Italian VPCs
are to be found and indicate the congurations we have taken into account.
Our corpus (cf. Sect. 3.2) consists of VPCs that correspond to the minimal VPC
conguration exemplied in (2)
2
. This structure consists of a simple (non-pronominal,
non-reexive) verbal base (V), which can be both intransitive (2a) and transitive (2b,c)
2
In our analysis, we selected VPCs that correspond to the minimal conguration in (2) mainly for
two reasons. First, the conguration in (2) is by far the most common and less controversial in
classication in both diachronic and implicational terms. Second, we wanted to carry out the analysis
on a coherent corpus in terms of type of verbal bases (mostly motion verbs) and particles. In
particular, it was important to include only locative particles, in order to check the occurrence of the
metonymic locative-to-actional reinterpretation identied in Brinton (1988) (cf. Sect. 3.1).
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 157
1 3
and a post-verbal modifying particle (P), which corresponds to a locative adverb. The
VPC itself may be both intransitive (2a) and transitive (2b,c). In the latter case, the
direct object normally occurs to the right of the particle.
(2) [ [ ]
V
[ ]
P
]
VPC
P = LOCATIVE ADVERB
a. [[andare]
V
[su]
P
]
VPC
lit. go up to go up, to ascend
b. [[mettere]
V
[giu` ]
P
]
VPC
lit. put down to put down
c. [[mandare]
V
[avanti]
P
]
VPC
lit. send forward to run (e.g. a business)
It is interesting to note that, whereas the addition of the particle does not normally
affect the [] transitive feature, the argument structure of VPCs may be different
from that of their verbal bases. A quite regular minor change is illustrated in (3).
Here the particle su in (3b) absorbs the indirect (locative) argument (sul fuoco) of
the verbal base (metti) (whereas the direct argument il caffe` is not affected). This is
testied by the agrammaticality of (3c)
3
.
(3) a. Metti il caffe` sul fuoco
put.IMPER the coffee on.the re
Put the coffee on the stove
b. Metti su il caffe`
put.IMPER on the coffee
Put on the coffee
c. *Metti su il caffe` sul fuoco
put.IMPER on the coffee on.the re
A major argument structure change is the passage from a transitive and/or
unergative verbal base to an unaccusative VPC. The passage is marked by the choice
of the auxiliary verb:
(4) a. Il piccione ha volato da Roma a Pisa
the pigeon have.3SG y.PART.PAST from Rome to Pisa
The pigeon ew from Rome to Pisa
b. Il piccione e volato via
the pigeon be.3SG y.PART.PAST away
The pigeon took wing
Besides the minimal conguration in (2), Italian VPCs display a number of other
possibilities. For instance, apart from reexive forms (5a), one may nd different
kinds of pronominal verbs in V position (5b).
(5) a. far-se-la sotto
do-reexive.PRT-pronominal.PRT under
to quake in ones boots
b. ber-ci sopra
drink-locative.PRT up
to drink to forget something
3
In the examples that follow we make use of the following abbreviations (in alphabetical order): 1 =
rst person; 2 = second person; 3 = third person; ACC = accusative; FUT = future; IMPER =
imperative; INF = innite; PART.PAST = past participle; PRT = particle; SG = singular. When tense
is not marked, it is to be interpreted as present tense.
158 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Some VPCs obligatorily occur with a complement usually preceded by the
preposition a to, as in (6).
(6) a. correre dietro a qualcuno lit. run behind to someone
to pursue, to court
b. passare sopra a qualcosa lit. pass on to something
to pass, to forgive, to let something pass
Sequences of particles like the ones exemplied in (6) are structurally ambiguous,
since they can be interpreted either as VPCs that govern a prepositional phrase, or as
VPCs with a complex preposition in P position (here dietro a and sopra a). In the
rst case, the nominal element is part of the prepositional phrase, in the latter it is to
be interpreted as a direct argument.
Cases like (7) are also problematic, for different reasons. Even if (7a) contains a
sequence that might be regarded as a complex preposition (fuori da), the possibility
to split the sequence by interposing the nominal element (gli occhiali) (cf. 7b)
seems to suggest that tirare fuori actually functions as a VPC and dalla borsa as an
indirect argument. However, it is also possible to interpose gli occhiali between V
and P (7c).
(7) a. Carlo tira fuori dalla borsa gli occhiali
Charles pull.3SG out from.the bag the glasses
b. Carlo tira fuori gli occhiali dalla borsa
Charles pull.3SG out the glasses from.the bag
c. Carlo tira gli occhiali fuori dalla borsa
Charles pull.3SG the glasses out from.the bag
Charles gets the glasses out of the bag
Amongst VPCs one may also nd constructions in which the P position is lled by
elements other than locative, mainly temporal (8a) or manner (8b) adverbs.
(8) a. fare presto lit. do early to hurry up
b. nire male lit. nish badly to come to a bad end
Incidentally, VPCs should be distinguished from verbs governing a particular
preposition (9). The latter cannot be used without a nominal complement (9b), and,
moreover, the particle does not contribute to the meaning of the whole construction
(cf. Simone, 1997).
(9) a. Conto su di te
rely.1SG on of you.ACC
I rely on you
b. *Conto su
rely.1SG on
VPCs are characterized by morphosyntactic cohesion and xity. These properties
provide evidence for considering VPCs as multi-word expressions that are to be
distinguished from other similar sequences such as verb plus prepositional or
adverbial phrase, which are less cohesive and more exible.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 159
1 3
First of all, Italian VPCs can be separated only by clitics (10a) and light
constituents (10b), but not by heavy lexical constituents, as (11) illustrates
4
.
(10) a. Hai rischiato di metter-lo sotto
have.2SG risk.PART.PAST of put.INF-him under
You risked bumping into him
b. Devi guardare sempre avanti
must.2SG look.INF always ahead
You must always look to the future
(11) a. Irene ha buttato via la bambola
Irene have.3SG throw.PART.PAST away the doll
Irene threw the doll away
b.
??
Irene ha buttato la bambola via
Irene have.3SG throw.PART.PAST the doll away
Furthermore, adverbs may have scope on the whole construction, but not on the
particle alone, even if they interpose between V and P (12).
(12) Mario tira sempre fuori argomenti interessanti
Mario pull.3SG always out topics interesting
Mario always comes up with interesting topics
The topicalization of the particle and its left-dislocation with the construction
e`... che it is... that are normally unacceptable (13)
5
.
(13) a. Luigi e` saltato fuori allimprovviso
Luigi be.3SG jump.PART.PAST out suddenly
Luigi suddenly popped up
b. *Fuori Luigi e` saltato allimprovviso
Out Luigi be.3SG jump.PART.PAST suddenly
c. *E
`
fuori che Luigi e` saltato
allimprovviso
be.3SG out that Luigi be.3SG jump.PART.PAST
suddenly
4
In the spoken language one may nd occasional examples of interposition between V and P of the
direct object expressed by a lexical element, like in the following case: Spero che non mandino le
pagine indietro I hope they wont send the pages back (similar in structure to the one reported in
11b). Such examples are comparable with object shift phenomena in English. As is known, object
shift was a later innovation in English with respect to the rise of post-verbal particles, which were
originally more bound to the verb (other Germanic languages with less strict word order than
English do not allow a similar freedom of placement for the constituents of a complex verb). The
particle position in current English is inuenced by a number of variables, and their dynamics have
been investigated in several contributions (among the most recent: Dehe 2002, pp. 103207, 2005;
Gries, 2003; Lohse, Hawkins, & Wasow, 2004; Farrel, 2005). In our view, the occasional examples of
object shift in the Italian spoken language (a subject not yet investigated) might be regarded not as
anomalous cases, but rather as traces of a potential development of VPCs, i.e. of their ability to
adjust to the communicative needs of speakers.
5
Such expressions are not attested in the LIP corpus, the major reference corpus for spoken Italian.
160 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Moreover, when used in coordinating structures, VPCs behave as constituents.
Example (14a) shows that the nominal arguments la scacchiera and i pezzi are in fact
the direct arguments of the VPC, which is not true of (14c), where scacchiera nuova
and scacchiera vecchia are part of prepositional phrases.
(14) a. Max portera` su la scacchiera e Yuri
___ i pezzi
Max bring.FUT.3SG up the chessboard and Yuri
___ the pieces
Max will bring the chessboard and Yuri the pieces
b. *Max portera` su la scacchiera e Yuri
su i pezzi
Max bring.FUT.3SG up the chessboard and Yuri
up the pieces
c. Max gioca sulla scacchiera nuova e Yuri
su quella vecchia
Max play.3SG on.the chessboard new and Yuri
on that old
Max plays on the new chessboard and Yuri on the old one
d. *Max gioca sulla scacchiera nuova e Yuri
___ quella vecchia
Max play.3SG on.the chessboard new and Yuri
___ that old
In conclusion, we can say that, generally speaking, Italian VPCs display a par-
ticular syntactic behaviour that sets them apart from other free syntactic structures.
The previous studies on Italian VPCs adopt different theoretical approaches, but all
of them agree that VPCs are part of the larger family of multi-word expressions. Of
course, the delimitation of the phenomenon is not always clear-cut, but this follows
from the fact that Italian presents a set of related constructions in post-verbal
position expressing locative meanings (cf. Sect. 2.4). Like other multi-word expres-
sions, VPCs are the result of a lexicalization process that integrates the semantics of
the constituting elements, which consequently lose their lexical autonomy. The fact
that VPCs display a partial xity of the elements (e.g. verb and particle can be
separated by light constituents or clitics) might also be due to the characteristics of
the verbal head. Voghera (1994) notes that, amongst all Italian multi-word phe-
nomena, verbs resist the loss of lexical autonomy most strongly. This is due to the
presence of a rich sufxal inection, which prevents the complete fusion between the
verb and the following element.
2.2 Semantic properties
The semantics of VPCs is often traced back to the following tripartite classication
(cf. Dehe et al. Eds., 2002, pp. 1317):
6
6
The semantic properties of VPCs are dealt with in several authoritative works such as Bolinger
(1971), Dixon (1982), Lindner (1983), Brinton (1988) and, more recently, Stiebels (1996), Lu deling
(2001), McIntyre (2001, 2002, 2005), Jackendoff (2002a), Mu ller (2002), Gries (2003), Blom (2005).
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 161
1 3
(a) locative meanings, due to the fact that VPCs originate from the combination of
motion verbs and locative elements;
(b) idiomatic meanings, due to semantic bleaching of compositional verbparticle
combinations;
(c) aspectual and/or actional meanings, with particular reference to telicity and
duration.
While previous studies on Italian VPCs deal with points (a) and (b), aspectual
meanings have not yet been investigated. In fact, this is the subject of our analysis in
Sect. 3. Let us now concentrate on the rst two points.
Italian VPCs mainly express locative meanings. The particle may function as a
direction marker, especially with Manner verbs (15a), but also with non-Manner
verbs that do not lexicalize the motion direction such as in (15b)
7
.
(15) a. saltare fuori lit. jump out to jump out, to pop up
b. andare dentro lit. go in to enter
When added to Path verbs, particles may strengthen the locative information already
present in the verbal base, as in (16).
(16) entrare dentro lit. enter in to enter
uscire fuori lit. exit out to exit
Besides transparent cases, Italian VPCs also display more idiomatic meanings:
(17) mettere dentro lit. put inside to imprison
fare fuori lit. do out to kill
Examples like those in (17) are to be regarded as individual non-systematic cases of
semantic bleaching, which do however testify the high degree of establishment
of these constructions in Italian (i.e. their lexical status). Therefore, the expression of
locative meanings should be regarded as the primary function of post-verbal parti-
cles. This is also testied by the fact that polysemous VPCs usually maintain their
locative meanings besides the new idiomatic ones, as illustrated in (18).
(18) buttare giu` (lit. throw down): to throw down, to knock down, to swallow, to
undergo, to write down, to get down, to blow upon, to weaken
2.3 Typological remarks
Italian VPCs are an interesting typological issue. Following Talmy (1985, 2000), it is
claimed that IndoEuropean languages display two basic lexicalization patterns for
verbal roots: Motion + Manner/Cause or Motion + Path. The two patterns are
typically exemplied by Germanic and Romance languages, respectively: the former,
dened as satellite-framed languages, lexicalize the Manner or Cause of the
motion event in the verbal root and express the Path information by means of
satellites; the latter, dened as verb-framed languages, typically lexicalize the Path
7
The locative meanings expressed by the particles of our corpus are sketchily shown in Table 5. As
for the denition of Path and Manner verbs and in general for our classication of verbal bases see
Sect. 3.3.
162 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
and (optionally) provide the Manner or Cause through adjuncts. This situation is
shown in Table 1.
Given this background, it is evident that Italian does not conform to Talmys
generalization, since it behaves more like English than Spanish. Of course, this does
not mean that Italian lacks verbal roots incorporating Path. Rather, it means that
this is not the privileged way of realizing Path in present-day Italian
8
. Indeed, Italian
displays a hybrid (and to a certain extent redundant) system of motion verbs.
Table 2 gives an example of this state of affairs: the English VPCs with the verb to go
can be translated into Italian with both a synthetic form and an analytic form with a
post-verbal satellite.
The picture becomes more complex if we take into account the diachronic per-
spective. As a matter of fact, many Italian synthetic motion verbs derive fromprexed
Latin verbs, which were productively formed in that language
9
. However, in
contemporary Italian, the vast majority of these verbs can no longer be analysed
morphologically and cannot be derived according to productive word formation rules.
Table 2 English VPCs with to go and their Italian counterparts
English
to go
Italian
andare
Verb root + satellite Verb root Verb root + satellite
to go after inseguire andare/correre dietro
to go ahead procedere/continuare andare avanti
to go away andarsene andare via
to go back (ri)tornare andare/tornare indietro
to go down scendere andare giu`
to go for avventarsi andare/lanciarsi contro
to go in entrare andare dentro
to go on continuare andare avanti
to go out uscire andare fuori
to go (a)round girare andare attorno
to go up salire andare su
Table 1 The lexicalization of motion events (adapted from Talmy, 1985)
Language Family Components of a motion event typically represented in the verb
Verb Root Satellite
Romance Motion + Path
(e.g. Spanish poner, meter, subir)

Germanic Motion + Manner/Cause

(e.g. English to roll, to blow, to throw)
Path (e.g. English to run out)
8
For typological considerations about the way Italian lexicalizes Path and Manner verbs, cf. Wienold
and Schwarze (2002).
9
Latin can in fact be classied as a satellite-framed language with inseparable prexes as satellites.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 163
1 3
2.4 The origin of Italian VPCs
In our view, the proliferation of VPCs in Italian and their imposition as the main way
of expressing verbal locative meanings can be interpreted as the development of a
diagrammatic technique of overt locative marking, which is due to the morphose-
mantic bleaching of Latinate prexed motion verbs and to the loss of productivity of
verbal prexation in the domain of spatiality.
The passage from the Latin to the Italian situation is sketched in Table 3: the left
column contains examples of transparent Latin prexed verbs with locative mean-
ings, the central one shows the (no longer analysable) Italian forms inherited from
Latin and the right column illustrates the correspondent analytic forms (VPCs),
which can be considered the true Italian formations
10
.
The establishment of VPCs also refers to a general tendency of contemporary Italian
towards analyticity and is supported by the presence of a quite elaborate set of prepo-
sitions (that substitute some of the functions of Latin cases) that are used very efciently
for the expression of syntactic and locative relations. In addition, the passage from the
Latin SOV to the Italian SVO word order helped to reanalyse the locative relators in
post-verbal position (especially when the landmark is not expressed) as modiers of the
verbal head. Moreover, the entrenchment of the VPC scheme was also fostered by the
frequent use of a network of different constructions built around a locative element
(particle, prepositionor adverb) (cf. Jansen, 2004 for further details onthis, andVincent,
1999 for the diachronic development of Romance prepositional phrases).
This viewis generally opposed by supporters of the so-calledGermanic hypothesis,
who believe that Italian VPCs may depend on a syntactic calque from German (cf.
Meyer-Lu bke, 1899, Sect. 482; Rohlfs, 1969, Sects. 916, 918). The Germanic hypoth-
esis is baseduponthefollowingobservations: (a) VPCs arenot typical of classical Latin;
(b) they virtually do not occur inmajor modern Romance languages (except for Italian);
(c) they occur in central and northern Italian dialects, increasingly so as one nears the
Alps; (d) they are frequently employed in Rhaeto-Romance and in Ladin (where they
are almost the sole system of expression of verbal locative meanings). Hence the con-
clusion that VPCs entered the Italian language through Romance Alpine dialects,
which, in turn, imported such a structure by way of contact with the German language.
Due to the authority of Meyer-Lu bke and Rohlfs and the scanty attention paid to
Italian VPCs up to recent years, the Germanic hypothesis is still quite popular.
Table 3 Synthetic and analytic verbs of motion in Latin and Italian
Latin Italian Latinate forms Italian VPCs
ascendere
to ascend
descendere
to descend
salire scendere andare su andare giu`
inire
to enter
exire
to go away
entrare uscire andare dentro andare fuori
10
Apart from salire to ascend, which is of IndoEuropean origin and constitutes a good example of
lexicalization of the Path into the verbal root, scendere to descend and uscire to exit depend on the
bleaching of the prex, whereas entrare to enter derives from the Latin intrare to go inside, which
is formed from the preposition intra inside. This word formation pattern is no longer productive in
Italian. Therefore, even if entrare presents striking similarities with the preposition entro within, it
cannot derive synchronically from the latter.
164 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
The sharpest criticism of such a hypothesis has come from scholars of Rhaeto-
Romance and Ladin. A detailed account of such criticism cannot be provided here,
but some mention will be made by taking Kramer (1987) as a reference. In the rst
place, the following methodological remark can be made: even if it is based on
correct observations, the Germanic hypothesis can be criticized from a theoretical
point of view. The fact that Italian VPCs resemble German complex verbs with
separable preverbs, and that similar structures seldom occur in other Romance
languages, does not necessarily mean that Italian derived its VPCs from German.
Generally speaking, it is necessary to assess the degree of similarity of the structures,
so as to identify to what extent they are specic to a particular language or, on the
contrary, widespread among various (families of) languages. Moreover, in this
specic instance, it is worth mentioning that syntactic calques from German are a
rare occurrence in Romance languages and they mainly concern the literary register
rather than the colloquial one. It is also necessary to make a distinction between the
adoption of specic expressions (which are isolated instances whose meaning can be
worked out only by referring to the original language)
11
and the systematic use of a
given construction within a language. In Rhaeto-Romance and in Ladin there are
cases of VPCs whose meaning can only be explained as a calque from the corre-
sponding German phrases (e.g. Ladin mor ` fo` ra from German aussterben). However,
the pervasiveness of this phenomenon, which applies to the whole system of the
expression of verbal locative meanings, has caused various scholars (cf. Gsell, 1982;
Mair, 1984) to lean towards the hypothesis that we are in the presence of a syntactic
pattern which developed on its own, i.e. a colloquial construction that took its origin
from a pattern which was already productive in vulgar Latin (cf. Durante, 1981 on
the development of analytic forms in vulgar Latin alongside and in contrast to
prexed verbs, e.g. ire susu(m) to go from below upwards, ire via(m) to go away).
This pattern was then forsaken at the time of humanism in favour of prexed verbs
formed according to the classical Latin model, whereas more isolated languages,
such as Alpine ones, retained this construction which was later strengthened by its
contact with modern German. There are a number of factors favouring this
hypothesis. First, the fact that VPCs were widely used in Tuscan in the 13th and 14th
centuries (cf. Masini, to appear on the use of VPCs in Dante), and also in Old French
(cf. Dufresne, Dupuis, & Tremblay, 2003). Second, the presence - scanty though it
may be - of VPCs in Romance languages that were less exposed to the inuence of
German, such as Spanish and Rumanian (cf. Vicario, 1995).
The early appearance of this phenomenon and its spread, mainly, among Italys
central and especially northern dialects, may suggest that a Germanic inuence did
occur, but at the time of the barbarian invasions
12
. The settlement areas of German
populations in the High-Middle Ages match - to a large extent - those where VPCs
prevail in Italian dialects. However, the documentation to prove this hypothesis is
insufcient. And even if such an inuence were to be proven, this would simply
strengthen the theory of an autonomous development of VPCs in Italian, in that the
Germanic superstratum would have simply acted as a catalyzer of processes which
were already under way in Vulgar Latin, and not as a trigger of new ones.
11
Cf. Kramer (1981) on the calques from Dutch in the French spoken in Brussells (e.g. couper en bas
from afsnijden), and from German in the French spoken (till the end of 19th century) by the
descendants of Huguenot refugees in Hesse (e.g. donner dehors from herausgeben).
12
On the German inuence on Old French, cf. Foulet (19461947).
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 165
1 3
It is alsonecessarytoconsider thecontributionof dialects inrelationtotheparticular
history of the Italian language. Italian was mainly a written language for many cen-
turies, and it was not before the second half of the 20th century that it became the
language spoken by the majority of Italians. Many recently introduced traits of the
Italian language that are drawn from its spoken form or from the informal register are
examples of trends which are well integrated into the functioning of the language, but
have been long excluded from or marginalized by normative grammar. VPCs may be
seen as one such instance (cf. Jansen, 2004 for similar arguments).
Inconclusion, wethinkthat the development andthe establishment of VPCs inItalian
is better explained in terms of an internal change. This is mainly due to the restructur-
ationof thesatellite function, i.e. totherelationships andbalancing betweenprexes and
particles withrespect totheexpressionof locality(and, as wewill see, aspectuality) inthe
verbal system. In the following section we will focus on this relationship.
2.5 Particles and prexes: their synchronic and diachronic relationship
2.5.1 Locative meanings
Italian verbal prexes with locative meanings are rather limited in number compared
to Latin. Table 4 compares the rich system of verbal prexes with locative meanings
in Latin (exemplied by the derivatives of the verbal bases duco to pull and mitto
to send) and the Italian prexed derivatives of the verb portare to bring/take.
On the one hand, it is interesting to see that the number of empty cells in the portare
column is rather high. Moreover, all derivatives from portare are of Latin origin: their
rst recordings in Italian date back to several centuries ago and their meanings are
largely non-compositional. Furthermore, none of the prexes in combination with
portare areproductively usedinpreverbal positioninthe Italianlanguage (cf. Table 5).
Onthe other hand, it is worthnoting that the verbportare is involvedina series of VPCs
(cf. 19), that incidentally ll some of the empty spaces in Table 4.
(19) portare addosso to wear, portare appresso to take with one, portare
avanti to further/bring upfront, portare giu` to bring down(stairs),
portare indietro to bring back, portare sopra to take up(stairs),
portare sotto to take down, portare su to bring up(stairs), portare
via to take away
The quantity of verbal prexes and the quantity of meanings conveyed by prexes
notably decreased in the passage from Latin to Romance languages (and until the
present day; cf. Lu dtke, 1996). This factor has been partially overshadowed by the
high frequency of a number of prexed verbs of Latin origin that play an important
role in the present-day Italian lexicon. However, in a recent study on the produc-
tivity of verbal prexes in Italian (based on a dictionary corpus), Iacobini (2005)
shows that about 70% of existing prexed verbs that are attested for the rst time in
the 20th century are derived by means of only four prexes, i.e. ri-, de-, dis- and s-.
These convey the following meanings: iterative (ri-), opposite (dis-), privative and
reversative (de-, dis-, s-)
13
. What is more, Iacobini (2005) shows that only 8% of the
13
This tendency is conrmed by Gaeta and Ricca (2003), a quantitative study on the productivity of
Italian derivational afxes based on a daily press corpus (in the period 19961998) of about 75
millions tokens.
166 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
prexed verbs coined in the 20th century are formed by prexes that can express
locative meanings.
Table 5 shows the locative meanings conveyed by Italian prexed verbs. The table
also compares the range of locative meanings expressed by verbal prexes with those
Table 4 Latin and Italian verbs with locative prexes
Prexes Latin Italian
duco to pull mitto to send portare to
bring/take
(12th century)
ab- away abduco amitto asportare to
remove
(14th century)
ad- to, toward adduco admitto apportare to
produce
(13th century)
ante- ahead, forward antemitto
circum- around, on all sides circumduco circummitto
de- from, down deduco demitto deportare to
deport
(14th century)
dis- apart disduco
ex- out educo emitto esportare to
export
(15th century)
in- in, on, against induco immitto importare to
import to be
important
(14th century)
inter- between intermitto
intro- internally introduco intromitto
ob- toward, against obduco omitto
per- through, thoroughly perduco permitto
prae- before praemitto
praeter- beyond praeterduco praetermitto
pro- in front of, forth produco promitto
retro- backwards retroduco
se- aside seduco
sub- under subduco submitto sopportare
to tolerate
(13th century)
super- above superduco
trans- across traduco transmitto trasportare
to transport
(14th century)
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 167
1 3
14
Table 5 distinguishes between productive and unproductive prexes: the former are marked by an
underscore. Question marks (?) indicate doubtfully productive prexes. Grey cells highlight
meanings that cannot be productively expressed by prexation.
Table 5 Locative meanings expressed by verbal prexes and post-verbal particles
14
Prexes and prexed verbs Locative meanings Particles and VPCs
ante-, pre-, pro- ANTERIOR, BEFORE avanti
anteporre, premettere,
progredire
andare a.
retro-, re-/ri- (?) BACK indietro
retrocedere, riuire andare i.
BEHIND appresso, dietro
andare a./d.
contra-/contro-, ob- OPPOSITE SIDE, AGAINST addosso, contro
contrapporre, occludere andare a./c.
giusta- NEAR accanto, vicino
giustapporre andare a./v.
FAR
lontano
andare l.
fra-, infra-, inter-, intro-, tra- BETWEEN, INWARDS dentro
frammischiare, inframmettere, andare d.
interporre, introdurre,
trascegliere
ab-, de-(?), dis-, e-/es-,
estra-, estro-(?),
OUTSIDE, AWAY fuori, via
andare f./v.
s-, se-
abdurre, deportare,
disperdere,
emergere, espatriare,
estrapolare,
estromettere, sbarcare,
separare
sopra-/sovra-, sor- ON, ABOVE, UP, OVER sopra, su
sopraelevare, sovrapporre,
sorpassare
andare s./s.
sotto-(?) UNDER, BELOW sotto, giu`
sottoscrivere andare s./g.
per-, trans- ACROSS, BEYOND oltre
trasferire, perforare andare o.
circum-/circom- AROUND intorno, attorno
circumnavigare, circondare andare i./a.
168 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
conveyed by the 19 post-verbal particles of our corpus (cf. Sect. 3.2) when used in
combination with motion verbs.
The rst observation that can be drawn from Table 5 is that all the locative
meanings that can be expressed by verbal prexes can also be expressed by post-verbal
particles. On the contrary, post-verbal particles can convey some additional meanings
with respect to prexes, i.e. behind and far. Moreover, half of the meanings (those in
grey cells) are no longer productively expressed by verbal prexation, and only
approximately one-third of the prexes (marked by an underscore) can be considered
as productive in contemporary Italian. Furthermore, for some prexes the locative
meaning is not the only - and in some cases not even the main - value: e.g. sopra-/sovra-,
sotto- may also express evaluation, re-/ri- almost exclusively convey iteration, while
de-, dis-, s- are mainly employed with privative and reversative meanings
15
. This is also
due to the fact that, in contrast to what happened in other semantic domains, no new
Italian formation went to enrich the Latin set of locative verbal prexes. In addition to
this, we can identify at least three other factors that restrict the use of prexes and, at
the same time, supported the growth of post-verbal particles.
First, the set of Italian motion verbs already includes a large number of Latinate
prexed verbs (e.g. the mettere to put family, that counts verbs such as ammettere
to admit, immettere to put in, sottomettere to subdue, etc.). This represents a
strong restriction on available bases for prexes, since (in contrast to what happened
in Late Latin) Italian does not normally present two locative prexes on the same
verb. On the contrary, post-verbal particles are much freer to combine with prexed
verbs. Second, post-verbal particles are preferred to the few left productive prexes
because they represent a more overt and systematic way of expressing spatial indi-
cations. Third, there seems to be a diaphasic difference between prexed verbs and
VPCs, the latter being the preferred form in more informal contexts. This is due to
the fact that many prexed verbs developed a non-literal meaning (that became the
most common in use), while the original locative meaning came to be conned to
technical or bureaucratic registers. For instance, the verb introdurre is commonly
used in the meaning to bring something into use for the rst time. Of course, it
could also be employed with the original meaning to insert, but this would be
stylistically marked. Certainly, nobody would use introdurre to say to put the car
into the garage. Rather, the VPC mettere dentro to put inside would be the pre-
ferred form.
To sum up, nowadays particles ll most of the gaps left by verbal prexes with
respect to the expression of locative meanings. In the following section, we pass on
to the second domain often related to prexes: Aktionsart.
2.5.2 Actional meanings
So far we have discussed the synchronic and diachronic relationship between
verbal prexes and post-verbal particles with reference to locative meanings: here
particles have gradually taken over from verbal prexation. But what about the
expression of Aktionsart, which is often directly linked to locative prexes?
15
Some prexes that used to have a locative value in Latin are now productively used with other
meanings (e.g. super- is now an evaluative prex).
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 169
1 3
Diachronically, the rich and complex system of prexes used in Early and
Classical Latin to render verbs telic had already broken down in the Latin language,
in the very rst centuries of the Christian era
16
. Therefore, there is a temporal gap
that separates the emergence of VPCs from the collapse of Latin aspectual prexes.
This can be taken as a crucial difference to Germanic languages. Here there was a
long period of overlapping (and thus competition) between the fading system of
native prexes (that expressed both locative and aspectual meanings) and the new
particle system, which, starting from locative meanings in combination with motion
verbs, also came to express Aktionsart, even with non-motion verbs (cf. Hiltunen,
1983; Brinton, 1988 for the English language).
Nowadays, Italian verbal prexes do not normally convey actional meanings. In-
deed, the only means of actional marking in contemporary Italian seems to be
parasynthetic verb formation (Iacobini, 2004)
17
. What remains to be investigated is
the relationship between VPCs and Aktionsart, which is dealt with in the following
section.
3 Semantics and Aktionsart
While the last section provided a state-of-the-art overview of the phenomenon of
VPCs in Italian, this section is intended as the most innovative part of our contri-
bution. In Sect. 2.2, we showed that Italian VPCs display two of the types of
meanings conveyed by Germanic VPCs: locative and idiomatic. This part aims at
improving our knowledge of the actional and/or aspectual semantics of these con-
structions in present-day Italian through the analysis of 165 Italian VPCs.
First of all, we will outline the view of aspect and Aktionsart adopted in the
analysis and give a brief description of our corpus. Afterwards, we will pass on to the
illustration of the results. Finally, we will focus on one specic case that, in our view,
nicely illustrates the passage from a locative to an actional function: the particle via
away.
3.1 Basic assumptions on aspect and Aktionsart
The domain of aspectuality is at the centre of a heated theoretical debate (cf. Sasse,
2002 for a comprehensive review). Our study of the actional properties of Italian
VPCs does not intend to take part in this debate, since it is essentially empirical in
nature and aims at nding further evidence for a specic path of semantic devel-
opment. Indeed, we aim to show that, with respect to verbal bases, Italian VPCs
display not only different locative values, but also different actional properties.
16
Classical Latin did not employ aspectual particles: preverbs were joined to verbs as prexes (cf.
Vincent, 1999). The role of prexes in Aktionsart changes in the Latin verbal system and their
decline is studied in Haverling (2003). Cf. also Romagno (2003) for the interplay of actional prexes
and thematic structure in Latin.
17
Parasynthesis with ad- and in- expresses ingressive change of state (cf. Iacobini, 2004). It is
important to note that these two prexes cannot be productively preposed to verbs, and therefore
cannot be considered as verbal prexes. Egressive meaning may be expressed by de-, dis-, s- (which
are normally used with privative and reversative values) through a reinterpretation of their ablative
meaning. Most linguists include the iterative meaning (that in Italian is productively expressed by ri-)
among the aspectual ones.
170 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
However, this empirical perspective has not prevented us from taking for granted
some basic theoretical and terminological assumptions about aspect and Aktionsart.
These assumptions are largely based on Bertinetto (1986, 1997) and Brinton (1988),
and can be summed up as follows:
Aspect Aktionsart (bidimensional approach): while aspect is a matter of view-
point distinctions (of the perfective/imperfective type) of an event on behalf of the
speaker and is typically expressed morphologically by means of inection,
Aktionsart is essentially rooted in the lexical semantics of verbs and concerns the
intrinsic temporal nature of the event according to a limited number of relevant
binary features such as telic versus atelic, durative versus non-durative, static versus
dynamic events. Of course, even if aspect and Aktionsart express distinct semantic
properties, it is their intersection that contributes to determining the general
aspectual properties of a sentence;
Actional features (non-holistic representation of the event): the classication adopted
in the analysis is the renement of Vendlers (1967) classication put forward by
Bertinetto (1986) and is based on underlying binary semantic features such as [dura-
tive], [telic], [dynamic], thus distinguishing ve actional classes (see Table 6);
18
Diagnostic tests: in order to assign each verb to one actional class we used diag-
nostics tests based on both the compatibility with different kinds of adverbials (e.g.,
in X time or for X time), and on semantic compatibility, such as those worked out by
Klein (1969);
Terminology: in accordance with the bidimensional approach, we distinguish
between aspect and Aktionsart; aspectual and aspectuality are used to refer to the
aspectual domain in general, whereas actional refers to Aktionsart only; event is used
as a cover term for both dynamic and static delimitations in the aspectual domain;
A compositional view of Aktionsart: Aktionsart is not a pure lexical property, but
results from many interacting factors at both the lexical and the clausal level, i.e. it is
compositional;
19
a typical example of recategorization of the actional value of a verb
is the passage from Activity to Accomplishment by the addition of a nominal phrase
with certain characteristics (+determinate, +singular, cf. Bertinetto, 2001, p. 182) in
direct object position, for instance: to draw (Activity) to draw the circle
(Accomplishment).
Table 6 Actional classications by Vendler (1967) and Bertinetto (1986)
Vendler (1967) Bertinetto (1986) Durative Telic Dynamic
Accomplisment Risultativo + + +
Activity Continuativo + ) +
Achievement Trasformativo ) + +
Achievement Puntuale ) ) )
States Stativo + ) )
18
We decided to adopt Bertinettos classication for two reasons: rst, this classication was elab-
orated on Italian data and, second, it proposes to split the Achievement class on the basis of the
telicity (and dynamicity) feature, which is the most relevant in our analysis.
19
In some cases, not only the verbal phrase is involved, but the whole argument structure of the verb.
For example, in constructions with unaccusative verbs, also the subject may affect the Aktionsart.
Therefore, at least in these cases, Aktionsart is a property to be assigned at a clause-level rather than
at a phrasal level.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 171
1 3
Finally, we should mention telicity, which is the key feature in our analysis. Among
actional features, telicity is one of the most sensitive to the context of occurrence.
For example, the presence of an object may often contribute to telicize the predicate
by indicating the endpoint of the activity. The very same function can be provided by
prexes in Dutch (20) or by particles in English (21):
20
(20) schrijven to write [telic]
op-schrijven lit. up-write to write down [+telic]
over-schrijven lit. over-write to copy [+telic]
(21) to write [telic]
to write down [+telic]
to write up [+telic]
We dene a telic event as an event which has a necessary endpoint, which neces-
sarily includes a goal, aim, or conclusion (Brinton, 1988, p. 26). In this perspective,
any indication of endpoint may contribute to the telic reading of the predicate. Of
course, those locative particles indicating movement oriented towards a specic goal
may come to imply attainment of the goal (telic events), whereas particles that
express stasis or direction without a specic endpoint may contribute to indicate
atelic events (cf. Fig. 1).
Brinton (1988, pp. 191199) suggests that the actional values expressed by
particles should be explained in terms of metonymic extension from one domain
(spatial movement) to another domain which is conceptually related (event
structure) (cf. Sect. 4 for a theoretical account of this mechanism). Interestingly,
also Talmy (2000, p. 231) identies a conceptual correlation between motion
events and other kinds of events such as, for instance, the temporal one: This
conceptual analogy motivates a syntactic and lexical analogy: to a great extent in
a language, aspect is expressed in the same constituent type as Path (+Ground),
and often by homophonous forms. Thus, in accordance with the general typology,
the core schema of an event of temporal contouring appears in the main verb in
verb-framed languages, while it appears in the satellite in satellite-framed lan-
guages. In conclusion, we may speak of tendentially telic particles and tenden-
tially atelic particles, as a consequence of their bounded or unbounded spatial
meaning.
andare dentro lit. go in to enter andare attorno lit. go around to wander about
Fig. 1 From locative to aspectual meanings
20
Examples taken from Boogaart (2004, p. 1172), who rightly observes that none of the prexes or
particles mentioned marks telicity per se: Aktionsart is a property that refers to the whole con-
struction and therefore results from the interaction between the semantics of the verb and the
semantics of the satellite (prex/particle).
172 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
3.2 The corpus
Our corpus consists of 165 VPCs listed in two major Italian dictionaries, i.e.
GRADIT and DISC. The verbal bases in the corpus amount to 54. Some of them
occur with only one particle (e.g. entrare to enter), while others combine with ten or
even more particles (e.g. andare to go, mettere to put). Most verbal bases are verbs
of motion or location, though not all of them can be ascribed to this macro-class, as
we will see. The particles involved amount to 19. A complete list is provided in (22).
(22) accanto next to, addosso on, appresso nearby, behind, attorno
around, avanti forward, contro against, dentro in(side), dietro
behind, fuori out(side), giu` down, indietro back(wards), intorno
around, lontano far away, oltre beyond, sopra on, sotto under,
su up, via away, vicino near
The whole corpus was analysed according to the basic assumptions outlined
above. Section 3.3 lays out the results of our investigation.
3.3 The results
The main results of the analysis are reported in Table 7, which illustrates types and
percentages of telicity shifts that occur in the passage from verbal bases to VPCs.
The table also details the numbers of VPCs involved in each kind of shift according
to the semantic class of the verbal base.
Following the typology of motion events in Talmy (1985, 2000), we distinguish
between:
(a) verbs expressing Location (BE
L
) (e.g. stare to stay);
(b) verbs expressing Motion, which consist of three subgroups, all containing both
Non-Agentive (NA) and Agentive (A) verbs:
Path verbs (e.g. entrare to enter, uscire to exit): only a limited number of Italian
Path verbs are involved in VPCs and, as we will see, most of them combine with
only one particle (which denotes the same direction of the verbal base and thus
functions as an emphasiser).
Manner verbs (e.g. correre to run, saltare to jump): apart from NA motion verbs
like correre to run or volare to y, this includes two sub-groups of A verbs, i.e.
Table 7 Telicity changes
V VPC % Motion and location verbs Non-
Motion
Total
Path Manner Generic BE
L
+TEL +TEL 42.8% No changes 10 12 30 13 65
108 TEL TEL 28.3% 71.1% 1 2 1 26 13 43
TEL +TEL 11.2% Telicization 4 8 3 2 17
32 TEL +TEL 9.8% 21% 2 13 15
TEL TEL 6.6% Detelicization ) ) 5 ) 5 10
12 +TEL TEL 1.3% 7.9% ) ) ) ) 2 2
Total 100% 15 24 52 26 35 152
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 173
1 3
verbs of throwing (e.g. gettare to throw, buttare to throw) and verbs of removing
(e.g. tagliare to cut, grattare to scrape).
Generic verbs (e.g. andare to go, mettere to put):
21
this class presents only two
NA verbs (the deictic verbs andare to go and venire to come), which however
combine with quite a number of particles, and a series of A verbs including, among
the others, verbs of putting (e.g. mettere to put, porre to put) and verbs of
sending and carrying (e.g. mandare to send, portare to bring/take).
(c) verbs expressing meanings other than motion: the Non-Motion class includes
verbs of various kinds (e.g. avere to have, dare to give, fare to do) and is
therefore the most heterogeneous class.
Let us discuss the results shown in Table 7 in more detail. The rst column
illustrates the telicity changes in the passage from the verbal base to the VPC. We
assigned three values to both verbal bases and VPCs: +TEL, TEL, TEL
22
. In
order to make the results clearer, we excluded the cases in which the VPC was a
TEL item (which is why the total number of VPCs in Table 7 is 152 instead of 165).
The missing data, however, would not change the overall picture. Given this, we can
identify three main types of telicity changes:
absence of telicity change;
telicization;
detelicization.
As one may notice from the data in the percentage column, in the great majority of
cases telicity does not change (71.1%): over 40% of VPCs (out of the total) have telic
bases that remain telic, whereas almost 30% have atelic bases that remain atelic.
Within the +TEL +TEL group most verbal bases are Motion verbs. Here we can
distinguish two main functions of the post-verbal particles with respect to the
semantics of the verbal base, namely: directional marking and making the telos
explicit (cf. also below). This last strengthening operation might be due to the
opacity of the base (which is no longer morphologically analysable) or to some
communicative need of explicitness
23
.
As expected, in the TEL TEL group almost all verbal bases belong to the
BE
L
group, which typically contains stative verbs. Here the particles do not affect
telicity, rather their main function is to specify the location of the event, like in essere
21
Since Talmy (1985, 2000) focuses on the kinds of lexicalization patterns for verbal roots, he does not
explicitly speak of Generic verbs. However, this category is quite implicit in his work. Indeed, he
speaks of generic verbs with reference to the English verbs to put and to go (cf. Talmy 2000, p. 284)
and denes the English verbs to put and to take as suppletive forms of a single more general and non-
directional putting notion, where the specic form that is to appear at the surface is determined
completely by the particular Path particle and/or preposition present (Talmy, 1985, p. 71).
22
The presence of the value TEL is in line with the aspectual multivalence proposed by Brinton
(1988, p. 31), i.e. the ability of a single lexical verb to name different situation types depending upon
the structures with which it combines. Cf. also Bertinetto (2001, p. 182): [...] most predicates may
have more than one actional classication.
23
For similar considerations, see Traugott (1982, p. 252), who suggests that the particle serves to
make a covert endpoint overt, and Lindner (1983, p. 169 ff.), who says that the particle serves to
prole the goal. Antelmi (2002, p. 107, footnote 14) speaks of rideterminazione [redetermina-
tion].
174 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
via to be away, out of town. Furthermore, many of these verbs have metaphorical
meanings, e.g. essere giu` lit. be down to be depressed.
In the light of these rst data, we might be induced to say that, generally speaking,
the presence of particles does not affect the verbal bases in a systematic way, since
the vast majority of VPCs display no telicity changes. However, there are also quite
a number of verbs that do change their telicity.
As for the telicization cases (21%), the verbal bases mainly belong to Manner and
Generic motion verbs, where the particle usually behaves as a direction or path
marker
24
. This seems to suggest that there is a simultaneity of functions of the
particle: the function as a path marker and the function as a telos indicator. This is
well illustrated in the examples in (23):
(23) tirare to pull (Generic, Agentive) tirare fuori to take out
andare to go (Generic, Non-Agentive) andare via to go away
sbattere to dash/throw (Manner, Agentive) sbattere fuori to throw out
saltare to jump (Manner, Non-Agentive) saltare giu` to jump down
Almost all these cases contain tendentially telic particles (cf. Sect. 3.1), i.e. particles
that inherently refer to a specic spatial endpoint and thus contribute to the overall
telic meaning of the VPC
25
. This conrms the expectation that telicization does
actually occur in the presence of telic particles.
Finally, we may nd also few cases of detelicization (7.9%). Interestingly enough,
most of the verbs involved in this process are Non-Motion verbs (see also below).
However, there are also a few detelicization cases with Generic verbal bases.
Here, the particles used are actually of the tendentially atelic type (cf. Sect. 3.1), i.e.
particles that denote a direction without specifying any endpoint, e.g. addosso on,
appresso nearby, behind, attorno around, indietro back(wards). Even though the
examples of this kind are too few to make any serious generalizations regarding the
interaction between the detelicizing process and the type of particles involved, this
also seems to conrm the correctness of the metonymic process outlined in Sect. 3.1
26
.
In order to understand better the role of the semantics of verbal bases in these
processes, we will now turn to the relationship between telicity changes and semantic
classes. Table 8 shows the percentages of changes within each semantic class.
24
Quite convincing syntactic evidence of this telicization process is the fact that some verbs, after
turning into VPCs, become unaccusative (cf. the example below and example 4 in Sect. 2.1). In fact,
many scholars argue for a connection between unaccusativity and telicity.
(1) volare (intransitive, aux. avere have) volare via (intransitive, aux. essere be)
a. Luccello ha volato per due ore The bird ew for two hours (TEL)
b. Luccello e` volato via The bird ew away (+TEL)
Our corpus displays a number of cases like the one in (1).
25
The most represented tendentially telic particles in our corpus are (in decreasing order): via away,
dentro in(side), fuori out(side), su up and giu` down.
26
Here we will limit ourselves to noting that the supposed atelic character of some particles seems to
hold also with non-motion verbs. Consider for example the following set of VPCs formed with the
base guardare to look, see, watch: guardare avanti to look forward, guardare indietro to look
backwards, guardare lontano to foresee. Here, we have a verbal base (guardare) that can express
both an Activity (e.g. guardare la TV to watch TV) and an Accomplishment when accompanied by
a specic, bound object (e.g. guardare un lm to watch a movie). Since the particles avanti/indietro/
lontano only denote a direction, and not an endpoint, they cannot be interpreted as a specic, bound
object to look at and, consequently, cannot enhance the potential telicity of the verbal base.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 175
1 3
As the percentages clearly show, most Path verbs are telic and remain telic. In these
cases the particle has the function of making the telos explicit (e.g. fuggire via lit.
escape away to escape). Even though there is also a signicant percentage (26.7%)
of telicization cases, this percentage is unnaturally high, since it regards four VPCs
with the same verbal base, i.e. passare to pass (e.g. passare via to fade away).
Manner verbs are the most interesting category, since, in percentage terms, they
telicize more than others. Indeed, Manner verbs constitute an optimal base for the
creation of new VPCs, as they denote events that might require the specication of a
Path (e.g. buttare fuori to throw out) and/or endpoint (e.g. grattare via to scrape
away). In some cases particles may have a double function (direction markers and
telic markers together), e.g. in volare via to y away, correre via to run away,
saltare fuori to jump out.
In order to conrm the hypothesis that Manner verbs are especially prone to
combine with post-verbal particles, and since VPCs originating from Manner verbs
are highly underrepresented in our corpus, we carried out an informal Google search
to check the occurrence of particles with other Manner verbs. The results actually
conrm this tendency. Indeed, we found a number of Manner VPCs with locative
meaning, such as gocciolare giu` to drip down or scivolare via to slide off. Even
more interestingly, in many cases the addition of the particle makes the verbal base
telic, as illustrated in the following examples.
(24) a. rotolare giu` to roll down
Mentre procedeva in bicicletta sullargine del ume [],
perdeva il controllo e rotolava giu`
While he was cycling along the bank of the river, he lost
control and rolled down
b. strisciare via to crawl away
[] riusc ` a strisciare via di soppiatto e a salvarsi
He managed to crawl away without being seen and save himself
c. trascinare giu` to drag down
Letizia era svenuta e lho trascinata giu`
Letizia had fainted and I dragged her down
d. trascinare via to drag away
Lho trascinata via per i pantaloni
I dragged her away by her trousers
The class of Generic verbs of motion includes all verbs of motion that do not
lexicalize the Path, nor any co-event such as Manner or Cause. Particles seem to be
Table 8 Semantic classes and telicity changes
Telicity changes Motion and Location verbs Non-motion
V VPC
Path Manner Generic BE
L
No changes +TEL +TEL 66.6% 50.0% 57.7% 37.2%
TEL TEL 6.7% 8.4% 1.9% 100% 37.2%
Telicization TEL/TEL +TEL 26.7% 41.6% 30.8% 5.7%
Detelicization +TEL/TEL TEL 9.6% 19.9%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
176 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
especially prone to combine with this class too. Indeed, it contains some of the verbal
bases that combine with the highest number of particles, i.e. andare to go, venire to
come, mettere to put, portare to take/bring. As with Manner verbs, particles
function either as pure direction markers when the verbal base is telic (e.g. porre giu`
to put down), or as a direction and/or telicity marker when the base is TEL (e.g.
andare su to go up(wards), portare via to take away).
Finally, we turn to Location (BE
L
) and Non-Motion verbs, which display very
different results. The former appear to be rather insensitive to the presence of
particles, which is due to the fact that BE
L
verbs are mostly stative and cannot
delineate a process. Within this group, all outputs are atelic VPCs that often have
metaphorical or idiomatic meanings, such as essere giu` to be depressed, stare/essere
fuori to be mad, crescere dentro to grow as a person and dare giu` to beat. The
latter group, however, is rather heterogeneous. Indeed, it seems difcult to identify
any noticeable regularity within this group, apart from the fact that, as for other
classes, most examples do not display any telicity changes and that, as already
mentioned, many have non-literal meanings (e.g. mangiare fuori to have a meal
out, vedere lontano to foresee). However, the combination of particles with Non-
Motion verbs implies that the construction extends beyond the domain of spatiality,
and therefore testies to the productivity and pervasiveness of the construction in
present-day Italian.
In conclusion, we can notice that the Italian particle system seems to be particu-
larly productive with Manner and Generic verbs of motion (both Agentive and Non-
Agentive). Telicity changes are also mostly connected with these two classes. This
stresses the primary locative function of Italian particles, which is summarized in (25).
(25) a. P + telic base direction marker (Manner/Generic)
telos strengthener (Path)
b. P + atelic base direction marker (Manner/Generic)
telos marker (Manner/Generic)
In cases like (25b), the particle may point to the endpoint of the process, which can
be reinterpreted as telicity marking. Furthermore, the +TEL feature of the whole
VPC can strengthen this association between the particle and the telicity feature. In
the next section, we will see that, although Italian does not present a coherent system
of actional particles, there are some traces of regularity in this sense.
3.4 The via case
Our investigation has shown that most VPCs do not change telicity with respect to
their verbal bases. This may lead to the conclusion that Italian particles are not proper
actional markers, or rather not yet. However, if we exclude the unvaried group, we
nd quite a number of telicity changes, and most of them indicate a passage towards
telicity. This largely depends on the presence of tendentially telic particles such as
dentro in(side), fuori out, giu` down, su up and via away/off (see the upper part
of Table 9). To a much lesser extent, also tendentially atelic particles (e.g. addosso
on, appresso nearby, behind, attorno around, indietro backwards) seem to play a
role in detelicization cases (see the lower part of Table 9).
As a result, particles do indeed play a role in determining the Aktionsart of the
VPC: the expectations about the correspondence between type of particle and type
of telicity change are broadly matched.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 177
1 3
Moreover, on further examination, one may nd some areas of regularity or
subregularity. As we have already noted, tendentially telic particles are often in-
volved in telicization cases. In particular, the particle via away seems to telicize
Manner and Generic verbs regularly, meaning approximately removing, as in
grattare to scrape, lavare to wash and raschiare to scrape
27
. Most of these verbal
bases may denote both the activity and its result, but the successfulness of the
activity can never be taken for granted. Consider for instance the sentences in (26).
(26) a. Marco raschia la vernice
Marco scrape.3SG the paint
Marco scrapes the paint
b. Marco raschia via la vernice
Marco scrape.3SG away the paint
Marco scrapes the paint off/away
c. Marco raschia la vernice, ma questa non
Marco scrape.3SG the paint, but this not
si stacca
itself detach.3SG
Marco scrapes the paint, but it doesnt peel off
d. *Marco raschia via la vernice, ma questa non
Marco scrape.3SG away the paint, but this not
si stacca
itself detach.3SG
Marco scrapes the paint off, but it doesnt peel off
Table 9 Actional contribution of particles
Telicization Generic tirare to pull TEL tirare fuori
to pull out
+TEL
tirare to pull TEL tirare giu` to
pull down
+TEL
Manner saltare to
jump
TEL saltare dentro
to jump in
+TEL
volare to y TEL volare via to
y away
+TEL
Path passare to
pass
TEL passare via to
fade away
+TEL
passare to
pass
TEL passare su
to drop by
+TEL
Detelicization Generic portare to
bring
TEL portare appresso
to take with one
TEL
Generic andare to go TEL andare attorno
to wander about
TEL
Manner correre to run TEL correre indietro
to come back
by running
TEL
27
Even though tagliare to cut and togliere to remove are already telic, tagliare via to cut-off and
togliere via to take off emphasize the result and become non-durative.
178 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
In (26a), the scraping process is not necessarily successful (though it might be), as
demonstrated by a sentence like (26c). On the contrary, (26b) can only be inter-
preted as successful, as shown by the agrammaticality of (26d). Therefore, when
added to this class of verbs, the particle via stresses the successfulness of the process
and emphasizes the result. In actional terms, it changes an Activity (or an Activity/
Accomplishment) into an Accomplishment. The next step is to see whether this also
applies to other verbal bases.
In order to check this, we selected a list of verbs semantically similar to those
mentioned above and combined them with via. These verbal bases (e.g. grattugiare
to grate, fregare to rub), were not included in our original corpus. Most of them
have a TEL (e.g. sfregare to scratch) or TEL feature (e.g. asportare to remove),
while some others are telic, like cancellare to delete and cassare to dismiss.
Besides making use of our intuition as native speakers, we checked the occurrence
of these verbs by means of Google. The combination proved to be possible (and
actually attested) in the vast majority of cases (see examples below), which shows
that some of the examples to be found in our corpus are not a closed occasional
set, but are the result of a semi-productive process.
In examples (27)(36), the particle via does not add any locative information, since
the meaning AWAY is already somehow implicit in the verbal bases. The only
function of via here is to emphasize the resultativity of the processes (which are
already telic), i.e. the fact that the telos has been reached or has to be reached.
(27) asportare to take away asportare via to take away
Bisogna asportare via subito i rami secchi []
It is necessary to take away the deadwood immediately []
(28) cacciare to send away cacciare via to send away
Marco Pannella che protesta [] e viene cacciato via da Oscar
Luigi Scalfaro []
Marco Pannella, who protests, [] and is chased away by Oscar
Luigi Scalfaro []
(29) levare to take off levare via to pull off
[] hanno levato via il sangue sparso sul letto []
[] they removed the blood shed on the bed []
(30) rimuovere to remove rimuovere via to remove
bene, rimuovere via senza pieta`!!!
good, remove it without remorse!!!
(31) scansare to put aside scansare via to put aside/to
eliminate
[] ho cercato, nuovamente, di scansare via pregiudizi e mi sono
avvicinato al palco []
[] I tried again to put aside my prejudices and I approached
the stage []
(32) strappare to rip strappare via to rip off
Mastino gli aveva dato lordine di strappare via i manifesti []
Mastino ordered him to rip off the posters []
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 179
1 3
(33) spostare to move away spostare via to move away
[] come spostare via il bicchiere mentre tentano di riempirtelo []
[] (it is) like moving away a glass while someone tries to ll it up []
(34) cancellare to delete cancellare via to delete
[] il Papa si convinse a fare cancellare via quasi tutti gli affreschi []
[] the Pope persuaded himself to have almost all the frescos
destroyed []
(35) cassare to eliminate cassare via to eliminate
[] in settimana hanno cassato via alcune mie affermazioni
dal Forum []
[] this week they eliminated some of my statements on the
Forum []
(36) eliminare to eliminate eliminare via to get rid of
[] per eliminare via questo assurdo []
[] in order to get rid of this absurdity []
More interestingly, the particle via also occurs with a series of atelic Manner verbs:
(37) fregare to rub fregare via to rub up/off/away
Cerchi di fregare via lo schifo che hai addosso []
You try to rub off that lth on you []
(38) grafare to scratch grafare via to scratch off
Fate attenzione a non grafare via la vernice []
Be careful not to scratch off the paint []
(39) raspare to rasp raspare via to scrape off/away
[] resina (da raspare via una volta indurita) []
[] resin (to scrape off once it stiffens) []
(40) scartavetrare to sand scartavetrare via to sand off
[] ho scartavetrato via lattack
[] I sanded off the glue
(41) sfregare to rub sfregare via to rub off/away
Un personaggio che tenta di sfregare via la melassa []
One character that tries to rub off the melasses []
(42) stronare to rub stronare via to wipe off
[] voi dovrete stronare via le macchie
[] you will have to wipe off the stains
In examples from (37) to (42), there is no AWAY meaning implicit in the bases.
Given this, one might think that via here functions as a mere directional marker.
However, the semantics of the VPCs in (37)(42) seems to be more complicated and
can be approximately reworded as succeeding in removing something by V-ing. Let
us take the sentence in (43).
180 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
(43) Luigi ha raspato via la resina
Luigi scraped off the resin
Here via does not add a directional information to the rasping action itself. Instead,
the locative interpretation emerges more clearly if we insert a located object, as in
(44):
(44) Luigi ha raspato via la resina dalla maglietta
Luigi scraped the resin off the T-shirt
In this case the combination of via and da denes the landmark and helps bringing
the locative interpretation in the foreground. The supposed semantic difference
between (43) and (44) is further supported by a syntactic clue: while in (44) the
direct object (la resina) may be interposed between V and P (cf. 45a), in (43) this is
not possible, as (45b) shows.
(45) a. Luigi ha raspato la resina via dalla maglietta
b. *Luigi ha raspato la resina via
Therefore, the two constructions are certainly closely related but yet different: while
(44) is compatible with a locative reading, the meaning of (43) is not purely locative.
In fact, the addition of the particle via does not denote the direction of the
action, but the fact that the action has a telos. In other words, it makes the verbal
base telic.
In conclusion, if we look at the data in more detail and take into account classes of
verbs with common semantic features, it is possible to identify some regularities in
the way particles modify the Aktionsart of the verbal bases. The discussion above
showed that the particle via combines semi-productively with a subclass of Manner
verbs, thus producing an actional effect of resultativity and successfulness. In the
next section we will give a theoretical interpretation of these results.
4 Theoretical implications
The popularity of VPCs over the last decade, especially amongst generative gram-
marians, has been mainly due to their ambiguous structural status between words
and phrases (cf. the introduction in Dehe et al. Eds., 2002). The basic question for
the generative approach was: are VPCs morphological or syntactic in nature? This
demarcation problem is of course the by-product of the modular architecture of the
grammar in which components are autonomous and subsequent. Consequently, the
different proposals to unravel the puzzle were based on syntactic and semantic
criteria that aimed at demonstrating the word-like or phrase-like status of these
constructions. A number of technical solutions were put forward to account for the
properties of VPCs, from the Small-Clause analysis (cf., among others, den Dikken,
1995) to the non-projecting word proposal for particles (cf. Toivonen, 2003).
However, at present, generative grammarians have not reached a general agreement
on the kind of structure to assign to VPCs.
A new theoretical perspective has been recently put forward by Booij (2002a, b),
who claims that separable complex verbs in Dutch are a case of periphrastic word
formation, i.e. lexical items that behave functionally as complex words but display a
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 181
1 3
phrasal structure
28
. Technically speaking, these complex verbs are regarded as con-
structional idioms (cf. Goldberg, 1995; Jackendoff, 1997, 2002b), i.e. semi-specied
syntactic structures with a (partially) non-compositional meaning that are stored in
the lexicon and display a limited productivity. As Booij himself recognizes, his pro-
posal is in line with the basic tenets of Construction Grammar (cf. Fillmore, Kay &
OConnor 1988; Goldberg, 1995, 2003, 2006), which claims that language consists of a
network of constructions, i.e. form-meaning pairings (hence, signs in the Saussurean
sense) differing in size and complexity. Constructionist approaches therefore rely on
a view of the language faculty that is non-modular in nature and allow for a gradual,
non clear-cut division between syntax, morphology and the lexicon. This scalar vision
of grammar allows us to leave the demarcation problem (phrasal versus morpho-
logical) in the background, due to the non-strict separation between what we tradi-
tionally refer to as the modules of the grammar. In the following discussion, we refer
to both the analysis of VPCs proposed in Booij (2002a, b) (and further developed in
Blom, 2005) and to the Construction Morphology framework elaborated in Booij
(2005a, b). In Construction Morphology, [w]ord formation patterns can be seen as
abstract schemas that generalize over sets of existing complex words of a particular
morphological shape, and specify how new complex words can be created (Booij,
2005a, p. 1). Construction Morphology can be considered an implementation of
Construction Grammar that aims at accounting for morphological issues and for all
those phenomena which are traditionally considered on the boundary of morphology
and syntax, such as verb-particle constructions
29
: in fact, VPCs are neither morpho-
logical nor syntactic objects, they are simply constructions with a phrasal form and a
unitary semantics that makes them close to words.
This kind of approach allows us to account for both idiosyncratic, occasional VPCs
(which are to be analysed as listed phrasal lexical items), and verbparticle patterns
that display a certain degree of productivity. In the latter case, the construction is
semi-specied, i.e. there is a free slot for the verb and a specied slot for the particle.
The whole construction is of course associated with a meaning. Take for example the
Dutch example in (46) and the corresponding Italian example in (47), where the
particles op and su express their basic directional meanings:
(46) [[op]
P
V]
VPC
(example adapted from Blom 2005, p. 176)
to cause Y to become up by V-ing
de tafel optillen to cause the table to become up by V-ing
(47) [V [su]
P
]
VPC
The difference between the two constructions lies in the fact that in (47) V stands for
both transitive and intransitive verbs. In the former case, we will have the same
causative interpretation as in the Dutch example:
(48) tirare su le braccia lit. pull up the arms to raise the arms
whereas in the latter case, we will have a Non-Agentive semantics, like in (49):
(49) correre su lit. run up to run up(wards)
28
The idea that we need to include lexical items with phrasal structure in the lexicon is also stated,
among others, in Jackendoff (1997, 2002b).
29
VPCs are not the only topic addressed by Booij in his papers. Indeed, he deals with a number of
issues traditionally considered as boundary phenomena, such as periphrasis.
182 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Of course, the A/NA information has to be added to the construction in (47), which
therefore gives rise to two different, though related constructions:
(50) [V
A
[su]
P
]
VPC
to cause Y to become up by V-ing
(51) [V
NA
[su]
P
]
VPC
to V upwards
This type of pattern with locative meaning is the basic conguration of Italian VPCs
and doubtlessly the more productive. As already mentioned, we believe that the
emergence of such constructions in Italian is related to the loss of the system of
verbal prexes in the passage from Latin to Italian. In fact, this productive system
was already declining in Late Latin. The need to ll a gap in the system and the large
use of these formations in the spoken language led to the entrenchment (cf. Lan-
gacker, 1987) of the pattern itself for the expression of location in the verbal system.
The results of the semantic analysis in Sect. 3 showed that particles seem to have
some actional side-effect on the verbal bases, but cannot yet be considered as proper
Aktionsart markers. Notwithstanding this, a deeper analysis of a specic particle (via
away) revealed that its actional effect on a particular class of Manner verbs is
strikingly regular. Some of these verbs (such as asportare to take away or rimuovere
to remove) are telic and incorporate the meaning AWAY in the verbal root.
Others (such as fregare to rub or grafare to scratch) are either atelic or TEL and
do not incorporate the meaning AWAY. Whereas in the former case the particle via
has the effect of stressing the resultativity of the verbal root (2736), in the latter it
has a clear telicizing function (3742).
In constructionist terms, this can be interpreted as the rise of a new construction
with actional function such as (52):
(52) [V [via]
P
]
VPC
to successfully remove something by V-ing
where V = Manner verb of wiping/scratching (either TEL or TEL)
The rise of this new constructional meaning might be traced back to two factors.
First, the particle via occurs very often with telic verbs of removing (examples 27
36). In these contexts, via has the role of making the telos overt and emphasizing the
resultativity of the action. This frequent use with telic contexts might have had an
important role in the creation of the new constructional meaning in (52), since it
strengthens the feeling that via is linked to telic situations.
Second, via has inherent telicizing properties, i.e. is a tendentially telic particle (cf.
Sect. 3.1). As we already mentioned, its telicizing character derives from its original
locative meaning by means of metonymic extension. From the point of view of
Construction Grammar, this can be easily accounted for in terms of inheritance links
(cf. Goldberg, 1995). According to the constructionist framework developed in
Goldberg, the set of constructions that form the linguistic competence of the speaker
is not a mere list, bur rather an organized network. Constructions are related to each
other by a set of inheritance links, that establish specic semantic relationships be-
tween the different structures, such as the polysemy link or the metaphorical
extension link. Goldberg (1995, p. 77) also states that [s]ince links are objects in the
present system, a type of link that recurs often throughout the grammar can be said
to have a high type frequency [] and is therefore predicted to be productively
applied to new cases which share the relevant factors associated with the existing
cases. In other words, systematic semantic connections contribute to create new
constructions or new constructional meanings.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 183
1 3
This account perfectly applies to the Italian situation which has been depicted, but
also to other languages such as English. As mentioned in Sect. 3.1, according to
Brinton (1988) the actional value of particles is derived from their locative meaning
by means of metonymic extension, i.e. by means of a transposition from the spatial
domain to the event structure domain. Since this mechanism is shared by different
languages (cf. also Talmy, 2000), we could say that, in addition to the polysemy link
and the metaphorical extension link, there is also a metonymic link, which applies in
these cases and accounts for the creation of actional (or more in general aspectual)
meanings from locative ones. Of course, the systematic application of the metonymic
link in specic contexts can bring to the rise of a new constructional meaning, as in
the via case. In other words, once the new pattern has become entrenched enough, it
extends quoting Goldberg to new cases which share the relevant factors
associated with the existing cases, i.e. to other verbs with a compatible meaning.
5 Conclusions
The study presented here is intended to add a new element to the lively discussion
on VPCs, by enlarging the typological coverage of languages in which these verb
particle patterns are to be found.
The overview of Italian VPCs showed that these expressions present a strong
morphosyntactic and semantic cohesion. Their emergence is part of a coherent
internal development of the Italian language that implies a general tendency towards
analiticity and post-modication.
Semantically speaking, VPCs turned out to be the productive way to express spa-
tiality in the Italian verbal system. As for Aktionsart, the results of the actional
analysis revealed that there is an ongoing process towards the specication of par-
ticles as actional markers. However, we can already speak of actional marking in the
case of the subgroup of VPCs with via dealt with in Sect. 3.4, which can be con-
sidered as the product of an emerging actional construction. It is worth noting that
the development of an overt Aktionsart marker is an unprecedented innovation for
Italian.
A ne-grained analysis of the semantics of Italian VPCs also allowed us to
compare these phrasal lexical items with their direct morphological rivals: prexed
verbs. From the diachronic standpoint, we can trace an opposition between prexes
and particles in the realization of the satellite category. Today, VPCs cooperate with
verbal prexation by performing different functions in the language. This testies to
the interaction between morphological and phrasal constructions, which is in line
with and predicted by a constructionist view of language.
Finally, our investigation of Italian VPCs allows us to draw some general theo-
retical conclusion. As for the theory of language change (and in particular semantic
change), our study:
(a) conrms the locative-to-actional semantic shift of particles and VPCs identied
by Brinton (1988) for English;
(b) shows that semantic change is gradual and prior to syntactic change (cf. Traugott,
2003), since the emergence of the actional via is not syntactically marked and it is
gradually expanding.
184 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Furthermore, from the point of view of linguistic theory, it implies that:
(a) constructions are not static objects but can change or emerge gradually, which
creates an important link between Construction Grammar in general and studies
on grammaticalization and/or lexicalization;
(b) the emergence of new constructions or of new constructional meanings largely
depends on cognitive processes, such as metonymic extension, which conrms the
crucial role of the cognitive sphere in language.
This state of affairs can be effectively examined using the constructionist approach
put forward by Goldberg (1995). This was implemented by proposing a metonymic
inheritance link to account for the emergence of the actional verbparticle patterns
with via.
References
Antelmi, D. (2002). Il verbo senza signicato: possibilita` di slittamento del contenuto lessicale su
elementi di tipo nominale. Rivista italiana di linguistica e di dialettologia 4, 97117.
Bertinetto, P. M. (1986). Tempo, aspetto e azione nel verbo italiano. Il sistema dellindicativo.
Florence: Accademia della Crusca.
Bertinetto P. M. (1997). Il dominio tempo-aspettuale: demarcazioni, intersezioni, contrasti. Turin:
Rosenberg & Sellier.
Bertinetto, P. M. (2001). On a frequent misunderstanding in the temporal-aspectual domain: the
perfective-telic confusion. In C. Cecchetto, G. Chierchia, & M. T. Guasti (Eds.), Semantic
interfaces: reference, anaphora and aspect (pp. 177210). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Blom, C. (2005). Complex predicates in Dutch. Synchrony and diachrony. PhD dissertation, Vrije
Universiteit Amsterdam (LOT Publications Series 111).
Bolinger, D. (1971). The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Boogaart, R. (2004). Aspect and Aktionsart. In G. Booij, Ch. Lehmann, & J. Mugdan (Eds.),
Morphologie/morphology: Ein internationals Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung/An inter-
national Handbook on Inection and Word-Formation (Vol. 2, pp. 11651180). Berlin/New
York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Booij, G. (2002a). Constructional idioms, morphology and the Dutch lexicon. Journal of Germanic
Linguistics, 14(4), 301329.
Booij, G. (2002b). Separable complex verbs in dutch: a case of periphrastic word formation. In
N. Dehe et alii (Eds.), 2141.
Booij, G. (2005a). Construction Morphology. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Booij, G. (2005b). Construction-dependent morphology. Lingue e linguaggio, 4(2), 163178.
Booij, G. & J. van Marle (Eds.) (2003). Yearbook of morphology 2003. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Brinton, L. J. (1988). The development of English aspectual systems. Aspectualizers and post-verbal
particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cini, M. (2002). I verbi sintagmatici negli etnotesti dellALEPO. In G. Marcato (Ed.) La dialetto-
logia oltre il 2001 (Quaderni di dialettologia 6). (pp. 143150). Padua: Unipress.
Dehe , N. (2002). Particle verbs in English. syntax, information structure and intonation. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dehe , N. (2005). The optimal placement of up and ab - a comparison. Journal of Comparative
Germanic Linguistics, 8, 185224.
Dehe , N. et al. (Eds.) (2002). Verb-particle explorations. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
De Mauro, T. (1963). Storia linguistica dellItalia unita. Bari: Laterza.
Dikken, M. den (1995). Particles: on the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DISC = Dizionario italiano Sabatini Coletti. (1997). Florence: Giunti Multimedia.
Dixon, R. (1982). The grammar of English phrasal verbs. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 2(1),
142.
Dufresne, M., Dupuis F., & Tremblay, M. (2003). Preverbs and particles in old French. Yearbook of
Morphology, 2003, 3360.
Durante, M. (1981). Dal latino allitaliano moderno. Saggio di storia linguistica e culturale. Bologna:
Zanichelli.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 185
1 3
Farrel, P. (2005). English verb-preposition constructions: constituency and order. Language, 81(1),
96137.
Fillmore, Ch. J., Kay, P., & OConnor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical
constructions: the case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501538.
Foulet, L. (19461947). Leffacement des adverbes de lieu. Romania, 69, 179.
Gaeta, L., & Ricca, D. (2003). Italian prexes and productivity: a quantitative approach. Acta
Linguistica Hungarica, 50(12), 93112.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. (2003). Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive
Studies, 7(5), 219224.
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions at work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
GRADIT = Grande dizionario italiano delluso. (1999). Tullio De Mauro editor in chief, Turin:
UTET.
Gries, S. T. (2003). Multifactioral analysis in corpus linguistics: a study of particle placement. London:
Continuum.
Gsell, O. (1982). La rosas dattan ora - les ro ses da` fora` - le rose danno fuori: Verbalperiphrasen mit
Ortsadverb im Ra toromanischen und im Italienischen. In S. Heinz, & U. Wandruszka (Eds.),
Fakten und Theorien. Festschrift fu r Helmut Stimm (pp. 7185). Tu bingen.
Haiden, M. (2002). Verb particle constructions. Aston University, Ms. (available at http://www.univ-
lille3.fr/silex/equipe/haiden/particle/case_117_vepa.htm).
Haverling, G. (2003). On prexes and actionality in classical and late Latin. Acta Linguistica Hun-
garica, 50(12), 113135.
Hiltunen, R. (1983). The decline of the prexes and the beginnings of the English phrasal verb. The
evidence from some old and early middle English texts. Turku:Turun Yliopisto.
Hofmann, J. B., & Szantyr, A. (1965). Lateinische syntax und stylistik = Lateinische Grammatik.
Zweiter Band, by Leumann, Hofmann & Szantyr (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft II.2.2),
Munich.
Iacobini, C. (2003). Lindicazione di valori locativi a partire da basi verbali. Seminar held at the
University of Roma Tre (Department of Linguistics), 13 November 2003.
Iacobini, C. (2004). Parasintesi. In M. Grossmann, & F. Rainer (Eds.), La formazione delle parole in
italiano (pp. 165188). Tu bingen: Niemeyer.
Iacobini, C. (2005). I verbi italiani come base di derivazione pressale. In M. Grossmann, & A. M.
Thornton (Eds.), La formazione delle parole. Atti del XXXVII Congresso Internazionale della
SLI (pp. 289307). Rome: Bulzoni.
Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Jackendoff, R. (2002a). English particle constructions, the lexicon, and the autonomy of syntax. In
N. Dehe et al (Eds.), 6794.
Jackendoff, R. (2002b). Foundations of language. Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Jansen, H. (2004). La particella spaziale e il suo combinarsi con verbi di movimento nellitaliano
contemporaneo. In P. DAchille (Ed.), Generi, architetture e forme testuali (pp. 129144). Atti
del VII Convegno SILFI. Florence: Franco Cesati editore.
Jezek, E. (2002). Lo sfondamento di un conne tipologico. Il caso dei verbi complessi nellitaliano. In
P. Cordin, R. Franceschini, & G. Held (Eds.), Parallela 8. Atti dellottavo incontro italo-austriaco
dei linguisti. Lingue di conne, conni di fenomeni linguistici.(pp. 289308). Rome: Bulzoni.
Klein, H. G. (1969). Das Verhalten der telischen Verben in den romanischen Sprachen ero rtert an der
Interferens von Aspekt und Aktionsart. Dissertation, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universita t,
Frankfurt am Main.
Kramer, J. (1981). Die U

bernahme der deutschen und der niederla ndischen Konstruktion Verb +

Verbzusatz durch die Nachbarsprachen. In W. Meid, & K. Heller (Eds.), Sprachkontakt als
Ursache von Veranderungen der Sprach- und Bewusstsseinsstruktur (pp. 129140). Innsbruck:
Innsbrucker Beitra ge zur Sprachwissenschaft.
Kramer, J. (1987). Tedeschismi e pseudo-tedeschismi nel ladino e altrove. Quaderni Patavini di
Linguistica, 6, 930.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University
Press.
LIP = De Mauro, T., Mancini, F., Vedovelli M., & Voghera, M. (Eds.) (1993). Lessico di frequenza
dellitaliano parlato. Milan: Etas Libri.
Lindner, S. J. (1983). A lexico-semantic analysis of English verb particle constructions. Bloomington:
Indiana University Linguistics Club.
186 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3
Lohse, B., Hawkins, J. A., & Wasow, T. (2004). Domain minimization in English verb-particle
constructions. Language, 80(2), 238261
Lu deling, A. (2001). On particle verbs and similar constructions in German. Stanford: CSLI Publi-
cations.
Lu dtke, J. (1996). Gemeinromanische Tendenzen IV. Wortbildungslehre. In G. Holtus et al. (Eds.),
Lexicon der Romanistischen Linguistik (vol. 2(1), pp. 235272). Tu bingen: Niemeyer.
Mair, W. N. (1984). Transferenz oder autonome Bildung? Zeitschrift fu r Romanische Philologie, 100,
408432.
Masini, F. (2005). Multi-word expressions between syntax and the lexicon: the case of Italian
verb-particle constructions. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 18, 145173.
Masini, F. (to appear). Diacronia dei verbi sintagmatici in italiano. To appear in Archivio Glotto-
logico Italiano.
McIntyre, A. (2001). German double particles as preverbs: morphology and conceptual semantics.
Tu bingen: Stauffenburg.
McIntyre, A. (2002). Idiosyncrasy in Particle Verbs. In N. Dehe et al (Eds.), 95118.
McIntyre, A. (2005). The semantic and syntactic decomposition of get. An interaction between verb
meaning and particle placement. Journal of Semantics, 22(4), 401438.
Meyer-Lu bke, W. (1899). Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen, IV Syntax. Leipzig.
Mu ller, S. (2002). Complex predicates: verbal complexes, resultative constructions, and particle verbs
in German. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Rohlfs, G. (1969). Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Turin: Einaudi; revised
version of Historische Grammatik der italienischen Sprache und ihre Mundarten. Bern: Francke
Verlag 19491954.
Rohlfs, G. (1983). Romanische Lehnu bersetzungen aus germanischer Grundlage: materia romana,
spirito germanico. Mu nchen: Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Romagno, D. (2003). Azionalita` e transitivita` : il caso dei preverbi latini. Archivio Glottologico
Italiano, 88(2), 156170.
Sasse, H.-J. (2002). Recent Activity in the Theory of Aspect: Accomplishments, Achievements, or
just Non-Progressive State? Linguistic Typology, 6, 199271.
Schwarze, Ch. (1985). Uscire e andare fuori: struttura sintattica e semantica lessicale. In A.
Franchi de Bellis, & L. M. Savoia (Eds.), Sintassi e morfologia della lingua italiana duso. Teorie
e applicazioni descrittive (pp. 355371). Atti del XXIV Congresso Internazionale della SLI.
Rome: Bulzoni.
Simone, R. (1997). Esistono verbi sintagmatici in italiano? In T. De Mauro, & V. Lo Cascio (Eds.),
Lessico e grammatica. Teorie linguistiche e applicazioni lessicograche. (pp. 155170). Rome:
Bulzoni.
Stiebels, B. (1996). Lexikalische argumente und Adjunkte: zum semantischen Beitrag verbaler Praxe
und Partikeln. Studia Grammatica 39. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Stiebels, B., & Wunderlich, D. (1994). Morphology feeds syntax. Linguistics, 32, 919968.
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Ed.),
Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Volume III. Grammatical Categories and the
Lexicon (pp. 57149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics: typology and process in concept structuring, Vol. 2.
Cambridge: MIT Press.
Telmon, T. (1993). Varieta` regionali. In A. A. Sobrero (Ed.), Introduzione allitaliano contempo-
raneo. (pp. 93149). Rome-Bari: Laterza.
Toivonen, I. (2003). Non-projecting words. A case study of Swedish particles. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Traugott, E. C. (1982). From Propositional to Textual and Expressive Meanings: Some Semantic-
Pragmatic Aspects of Grammaticalization. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Perspectives
on Historical Linguistics (pp. 245271). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Traugott, E. C. (2003). Constructions in grammaticalization. In B. D. Joseph & R. D. Janda (Eds.),
The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. (pp. 624647). Oxford: Blackwell.
Vendler, Z. (1967). Verbs and times. In Id (pp. 97121). Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca N.Y.:
Cornell University Press.
Venier, F. (1996). I verbi sintagmatici. In P. Blumenthal, G. Rovere, & Ch. Schwarze (Eds.),
Lexikalische Analyse Romanischer Sprachen (pp. 149156). Tu bingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Vicario, F. (1995). Sul tipo a da afara , a veni napoi: verbi con avverbio in rumeno. Revue de
Linguistique Roumaine, 40(4), 149164.
Vicario, F. (1997). I verbi analitici in friulano. Milan: Franco Angeli.
Morphology (2006) 16:155188 187
1 3
Vincent, N. (1999). The Evolution of C-Structure: Prepositions and PPs from Indo-European to
Romance. Linguistics, 37(6), 11111153.
Voghera, M. (1994). Lessemi complessi: percorsi di lessicalizzazioni a confronto. Lingua e Stile, 29,
185214.
Wienold, G., & Schwarze, Ch. (2002). The lexicalization of movement concepts in French, Italian,
Japanese and Korean: Towards a realistic typology. Arbeitspapier 112, Fachbereich Sprach-
wissenschaft Universita t Konstanz.
188 Morphology (2006) 16:155188
1 3