The interface of metaphor and morphosyntax: honorific address in Russian
and Czech
In this paper I present an analysis of predicate agreement with honorific
vy that will account for the differences in morphology that appear when a single
person is addressed with a plural pronoun . The nature of the agreement relationship
can be captured by expressing cognitive motivations within a formal theory of
grammar (Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, or HPSG). First, though, we must
ask: what is vy? Why is it logical that we address one person in the plural?
Indeed, it is logical at all?
Let us consider the notion of metaphor and language use. Metaphor, as defined
by Lakoff and Johnson (1980: 3), is not simply a literary device. Metaphor,
i.e. defining one thing in terms of something else, "is pervasive in everyday
life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual
system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical
in nature." Metaphors, then, "structure how we perceive, how we think,
and what we do" (Lakoff & Johnson 1980: 4).
The use of plural pronouns in the addressing function can be viewed in terms
of metaphor. In Russian and Czech, orientation metaphors motivate pronominal
usage. For instance, one metaphor used to structure pronoun choice in the addressing
function is MORE IS UP. MORE IS UP relates specifically to plurality (since
PLURAL IS MORE) and to plural pronouns used to address a single person. STATUS,
especially HIGH STATUS (which is UP) has traditionally been considered an important
factor in determining address between two speakers. If MORE IS UP and HIGH STATUS
IS UP, we can conclude that HIGH STATUS IS MORE, or at least that MORE and HIGH
STATUS are coherent aspects of the notion of UP. The concept UP reveals conceptual
structures essential to understanding how the use of the plural pronoun vy is
motivated. That is, to address someone who is UP (higher status) relative to
us, we make him MORE, i.e., plural. Essentially, then, singular, honorific vy
is the metaphorical counterpart to plural (literal) vy.
What does this mean, though, for agreement and HPSG? Why might HPSG be an
ideal theory to account for the (sometimes messy) agreement issues involved
with address with polite pronouns? In my presentation I will explain much more
fully (and technically) how and why this can be represented in HPSG and why
traditional grammars (such as Government and Binding) are not adequate. Przepiórkowski
(2000: 8) notes that "HPSG does not attempt to reduce agreement within
natural languages to pure syntax or pure semantics; instead
syntactic,
semantic, and, indeed, pragmatic factors play a role in various agreement phenomena."
In fact, there are even ways to represent cognitive factors, such as the use
of metaphor, in this formalism as well. Indeed, I believe it is precisely because
HPSG can accommodate cognitive motivations that the nature of the agreement
relationship may be more accurately described within this theory.
Again, the use of a plural pronoun to express honor is metaphorically motivated,
I contend, by speakers' concepts of spatial orientation (UP-DOWN, for instance);
metaphorical vy has the same syntactic features that literal vy has, but the
semantics of the metaphorical pronoun are overwritten in the case that honor
is owed to an individual. That is, following Riehemann's (1997) use of an overwrite
operator, I suggest that, as she proposes for idioms, the semantics of plural
(literal) vy can be overwritten when vy is used metaphorically, i.e., to address
an individual. The metaphorical (honorific) vy has the same syntactic properties
as plural vy; what is overwritten is the semantics of the pronoun. The operator
states that metaphorical vy is just like the literal vy, except for the properties
of the semantics that have been changed.
In Russian and Czech, this 'overwrite' of semantics can be manifested in
two ways: first, elements of the predicate can have their own semantics overwritten
and simply agree "syntactically" with the pronoun, in which case there
are no feature mismatches . Alternatively, the predicate, or part of the predicate,
can have an agreement relationship with the pronoun's index, in which case the
real-world gender and number of the addressee is encoded in the morphology .
The constituents of the predicate that exhibit morphosyntactic agreement with
the pronoun have, like honorific vy, their semantics overwritten to indicate
their form is being used metaphorically. Kathol's (1997) analysis of the morphology-
syntax interface and the agreement relationship, on which much of this paper
is based, is particularly well suited to languages such as Russian and Czech
which have a great deal of morphology. More broadly, HPSG is a formalism that
can accommodate even cognitive motivations for the syntactic problems caused
by vy-address.
_________
Barlow, Michael. 1992. A Situated Theory of Agreement. New York: Garland
Publishing, Inc.
Barlow, Michael. 1983. Unification and Agreement. Stanford: Center for the
Study of Language and Information.
Corbett, Greville. 1983. Hierarchies, Targets, and Controllers: Agreement
Patterns in Slavic. London: Croom Helm.
Corbett, Greville. 1979. Predicate Agreement in Russian. Birmingham: University
of Birmingham.
Kathol, Andreas. 1997. "Agreement and the Syntax-morphology Interface
in HPSG." University of California at Berkeley.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and
London: The University of Chicago Press.
Pollard, Carl and Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford:
Center for the Study of Language and Information; Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Przepiórkowski, Adam. 2000. "Formal Grammar (HPSG)." Paper
presented at SLING2K Workshop, 2000. Bloomington, Indiana.
Riehemann, Susanne. 1997 (Draft of September). "Idiomatic Constructions
in HPSG." Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Head-Driven
Phrase Structure Grammar, 1997. Ithaca.
Sag, Ivan and Thomas Wasow. 1999. Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction.
Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.