Prototype Theory and Light Verb Construction

【Abstract】The present paper aims to explain the English light verb construction from the perspective of prototype theory and tries to explain some of the ungrammaticality of light verb construction. Some of the ungrammaticality of the light verb construction is explained by virtue of the prototype theory which is proved to be efficient and meaning.

【Key words】light verb construction; prototype theory; grammatical approach

【作者簡介】俞双英，九江学院，东亚大学在读博士。

1. Introduction

When teaching， sometimes we will encounter such questions “why can we say have a drink but cannot say have an eat？” Others may ask why we can say “have a try” but not “have an attempt”. Sometimes why it is grammatical to say “take a bath” but ungrammatical to say “have a bath”？ The present paper focuses on finding the answers to these questions based on prototype theory.

Have a drink * have an eat

Have a try * have an attempt

Take a bath have a bath

In these examples， “take” and “have” are called light verb， which is different from the following heavy “have” and auxiliary verb “have”.

They have blue eyes. （full verb）

She has to go.               （auxiliary verb）

In order to answer these questions， the definition of light verb and LVC should be mentioned in section 2. In section 3 I try to use prototype theory to explain this construction which turns out to be efficient and cost-saving before the conclusion comes.

2. Light Verb and Light Verb Construction

Definition of Light Verb and Light Verb Construction

What is light verb and LVC？ Different scholars gave different definitions and up to now， no unitary definition has been given. In this subsection， I will compare several definitions put forward by different scholars and give my own definition used in the present paper.

2.1.1 Definition of Light Verb. Jespersen （1965） who is thought to be the first to  coin the term “light verb” but  he uses the term to refer to the verbs in such English verb + noun constructions as “have a rest”， “take a walk” and “give a sigh” stead of giving a clear definition.

Miyamoto （2000）， Butt and Geuder （2001）， Claudia Brugman （2001）  and Meyers et al （2004） all gave the definition to light which mainly focus on the semantic bleaches， argument sharing so on.  All of the definitions given by the previous scholars just show one or two features of the light verb. Based on the above-mentioned definitions， this paper defines light verb as a closed grammatical lexical category of a complicated predicate with high frequency and share arguments with the noun following.

2.1.2 Definition of Light Verb Construction. Various other names such as ‘expanded predicate （Algeo 1995）， ‘verbal-nominal construction （Claridge 2000）， ‘stretched verb constructions or ‘support verb constructions （Ronan 2012）， are used to substitute the light verb construction. Butt and Geuder（2001）， Claudia Brugman （2001） Sag et al. （2002） ， Fazly and Stevenson （2007） ， Patricia Ronan & Gerold Schneider（2015） gave their own definition to light verb construction.

Based on the above mentioned definition， LVCs can be defined as a special type of double heads construction consisting of a verbal（ intermediate verb between full verb and auxiliary verb） and a nominal component acting as the predicate， where the noun preserves its original meaning while the verb has lost it （to some degree）.

3. Prototype Theory and Light Verb Construction

3.1 Prototype Theory

In the prototype model， categorization involves a process of abstraction， where central tendencies of exemplars features are used in a summary representation or prototype of the category. The prototype view requires the formation of an abstract representation through an analysis of the features of exemplars.

There is graduation of the categorization and there are central and peripheral members. The prototypical member contains the most features and some of the members may just contain one or two features. According to prototype theory， everything is a matter of degree.

3.2 Elements of Light Verb Construction （Have + （modifier） + NP）

According to the nature of LVCs， I try to list some of the elements of the light verb construction and then put forward the prototypical element of LVCs.

The subject NP should be agent， most affected and human being while object NP should be abstract， denoting event， least affected or not affected at all， has aspectual meanings and usually colloquial. It also concerns with the degree of nouniness. The action should be time limited， short period but not momentary， aimless， repeatable， intentional and has pleasure.

All in all， the elements of the structure are abundant. However， the central feature of the element should be human， intentional， pleasure then two arguments， atelic and one argument and so on.

Here I argue that The LVC “have+ NP”， the least nouny the noun is， the most prototypical the LVC is while the most nouny the noun is， the least possible the LVC is.

3.3 Explanation of Ungrammaticality of LVC under Prototype Theory

In this section， I try to explain some of LVCs by using the prototypical element given in the above-mentioned section.

a. She has a house.

b. She has a walk.

When comparing the two sentences， it is found that “house” is nounier than “walk”. If we want to distinguish the two constructions， we can see 1）a is heavier than 1） b.

a. She has a drink.

b. *She has an eat.

Here we can say why 2）a is grammatical while 2）b is ungrammatical. The first explanation can be like this： “drink” is zero derived from the verb “drink” which means that “drink” has no other derived noun form while the derived noun form of “eat” is not “eat” but it is “ meal” so we have the conventionalized phrase “have a meal”. The second explanation can be the aspectual meaning and effect of the action. The action “drink” has less effect on the object than “eat” on the object. So the same explanation can be applied to “have a speech” and * “have a speak”.

a. have a read

b. *have a write

From the structure， we can see these two structures can be called LVCs. The grammaticality should be explained by the effect feature mentioned. A person who reads sth does get sth from what （s）he reads but has no on effect on what is read. However， if a person writes sth， the person gets less effect than the person who gets the thing written. In this way “have a read” is grammatical while “have a write” is ungrammatical.

a. we have an argue about the topic.

b. we have an argument about the topic.

Sometimes we can have these two kinds of sentences. So if you talk your dissertation topic with your advisor， which sentence 4）a or 4）b should you choose？ 4）a should you choose because just as we mentioned above， the LVC has a flavor of pleasure. 4）a is lighter than 4）b if you compared these two sentences. So 4）a has the meaning of pleasure of LVC while 4）b has no such meaning.

5） a. Lets have a chat together. Lets have a think.

b. *Lets have a converse together.  *Lets have a contemplate

As I mentioned， the colloquial verbal noun is preferred in LVC than the more formal ones. “Chat” is more colloquial than “converse” and “think” is more than “contemplate”.

Have a look  * have a find

LVC usually is aimless. “Look” usually implies an aimless， unintentional action while “find” usually implies aimless and intentional action. For example

Look at your book.

Find your book.

All in all， LVC is a difficult and confusing structure for many linguists. Not all of the LVCs show the same meaning pattern and it is unpredictable. However， the core elements and peripheral elements mentioned above to explain most of the HAVE LVCs.

4. Conclusion

The present paper has an overall study on the light verb and LVC in English taking have as an example from the perspective of prototype theory. To begin with， the definition of light verb and LVC are given. The typical pattern of the LVC is put forward in the end and it is found out that the prototype theory can explain the LVC very well. It proves to be efficient.

References：

[1]Claire Nicole Bonial.. Take a Look at This！ Form， Function and Productivity of English LVCs[D]. University of Colorado，2014.

[2]Brugman， C.. Light verbs and polysemy[J]. Language Sciences， 2001，23：551-578.

[3]www.elsevier.com/locate/langsci[OL].

[4]Dongjin， WANG.. Language Transfer and the Acquisition of English Light Verb + Noun Collocations by Chinese Learners[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics （Quarterly），2011，Vol.34 No.2.

[5]Kearns， Kate. Light Verbs in English[J]. ms. MIT，1988.

[6]Lareo， I.. Make-Collocations in Nineteenth-Century Scientific English[J]. Studia Neophilologica，2009，81：1-16.

[7]Ryan， N.. Computational Measures of the Acceptability of LVCs[J]. University of Toronto，2005.

[8]Patricia Ronan & Gerold Schneider. Determining LVCs in contemporary British and Irish English[J]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics，2015.

[9]Ryan North.Computational Measures of the Acceptability of LVCs[J]. MA. University of Toronto，2005.

[10]Trudgill， P.， & Wischer， I.. Dynamic have in North American and British Isles English[J]. English Language and Linguistics， April，2002，2002.

[11]Todira?cu， A & Christopher， G.. Extracting collocations in context： the case of verb-noun constructions in English and Romanian. Recherches anglaises et Nord-américaines，2008，41：107-122.

[12]Wei-Te Chen.， Bonial， C.， Palmer， M. English Light Verb Construction Identi?cation Using Lexical Knowledge. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence[J].

[13]Wittenberg， E.， Khan， M. & Snedeker， J.. Investigating Thematic Roles through Implicit Learning： Evidence from LVCs[J]. Frontiers in Psychology，30 June，2017.