Attribute in modern english

2.2. Two classes of change of state attributes
ABSTRACT
Contrary to the common belief that all attributes denoting a change of state
belong to one and the same uniform class, we strongly defend in the present
paper the existence of two distinct syntactico-semantic kinds of change of state
attributes in the English language: on the one hand, those that complement the
aspectual variants of the semantically vacuous copula be; and, on the other
hand, those that combine with lexically autonomous verbs and are, therefore,
optional for the grammaticality of the construction. Due to the markedly
different behaviour they exhibit, we are going to distinguish both classes of
attributes from a terminological point of view: we will cali the members of the
former group 'change of state attributes', strictly speaking, and those of the
latter type, resultative attributes. To prove our hypothesis, we are going to base
our study mainly on the nature of the verbal constituent that surfaces in the
attibutive structure and, as a consequence, on the syntactic and semantic relation
it maintains with the attribute under discussion.
1. The attributive phenomenon in the linguistic tradition. A brief survey of its
evolution and development The linguistic phenomenon of attribution originates within the theoretical framework of Traditional Grammar as the diametrically opposed phenomenon to the one commonly known as predication. Whereas the former includes predícate nominal sentences that denote qualities or states', (1 -2), the latter embraces verbal predícate clauses that, on the contrary, describe processes, (3-4): 142 Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
(1) Her hair felt rough and unpleasant to the touch.2 (MT: 125)
(2) My voice was getting Mgh and thin. (WSS: 93)
(3) He spoke into his ears. (PPS: 397)
(4) He retumed to the bed. (PPS: 400)
Being conftned to the small and restricted group of copulative verbs, attribution is
considered to be in this particular theoretical framework a grammatical phenomenon with very clear and easily differentiated boundaries.
Due to the dogmatic character acquired by the dichotomous pairs qualitiesstates/processes and nominal/verbal predicates, this first concept of attribution remains as an unanswerable issue until linguists of Hernández Alonso's stature (1971) categorically demónstrate that such a sharp distinction between attribution and predication can no longer be maintaioed on either syntactic or semantic grounds. Among the many reasons put forward by this author, the existence of many clauses that, like (5)-(6), combine in their predicate sintactico-semantic features of the two grammatical phenomenaunder discussion
seems to be the most convincing one:3
(5) He walked barefoot into the kitchen. (i?L:239)
(6) The workshop window flung open. (MSW: 95)
Instead of viewing attribution as an anomalous linguistic phenomenon, exclusive only to a reduced class of verbs, Hernández Alonso's paper presents such a grammatical henomenon as highly productive and fully integrated in the language. He explains this fect with the following words:
[...] apreciamos que el grupo de las oraciones atributivas no debe ser interpretado ni
tratado independientemente como un extraño predicado de dos verbos "fantasmas"
opuestos a todos los demás. Son unas construcciones desgajadas de otras predicativas intransitivas con una notable gramaticalización y gran extensión de uso por su amplitude semántica4 (Hernández Alonso, 1971: 339).
The above-mentioned study constitutes, therefore, a turning point in the research of
such a linguistic field. From this moment on, the attributive phenomenon begins to receive the deserved linguistic treatment which it has been deprived of for quite a long time, becoming, thus, the central subjectmatter of a considerable number of functional works in the last two decades (cf. Martínez Vázquez, 1991; Gonzálvez García, 1996; 1998 in the Engüsh linguistic tradition and Gutiérrez Ordóñez, 1986; Porroche Ballesteros, 1990 and Penadés Martínez, 1994, among others, in the Spanish one).5 These new and recent studies on attribution take Hernández Alonso's proposal as a starting point and, consequently, defend, in sharp contrast with what was believed in Traditional Grammar, that it is a linguistic phenomenon whose extensión is quite difficult to delimit with precisión and accuracy, owing mainly to the great variety of syntactic, lexico-semantic and pragmatic factors that such a phenomenon involves (cf. Gutiérrez Ordóñez, 1986: 20; Martínez Two Types of Change-of-State Attributes in English 143
Vázquez, 1991: 20). In Martínez Vázquez's words (1991:20), for instance, this same idea is expressed as follows:
[...] no podemos delimitar las estructuras atributivas mediante la clasificación de uno de sus elementos apriori, sino que hay que considerar la atribución como un fenómeno que implica tres elementos en una relación de interdependencia.
In the present paper we follow this broad and fairly recent concept of attribution. As a consequence, apart from the canonical attributive pattern of Traditional Grammar illustrated in (7-8) and composed of a 'theme' (T),6 a copulative verb (V) and an attribute (A^.), we also regard as 'attributive' those constructions, like (9-10), which join into a single syntactic structure two different relations of predication: a primary verbal predication of quite varied syntactico-semantic nature and a secondary or adjacent attributive one:
(7) The cheese tastes sour. (RL: 182) T V Atr
(8) And then you turned scarlet. (MSW: 663) T V Atr
(9a) Polly watched him open-mouthed. (MSW: 222) T Atr
(10a) My throat was swelling shut. (MSW: 213) T Atr
As the previous examples show, the attributive clauses with two different relations of predication formally differ from the traditional ones in not having the copulative verb overtly indicated at the surface level of expression. This does not mean, however, that the copulative verbal constituent is entirely missing from this type of attributive clause. As the following paraphrases illustrate, it does exist, though implicitly, at the semantic level of interpretation:
(9b) When Polly watched him, Polly was open-mouthed
(10b) My throat was becoming shut, because it was swelling.
2. Semantic classification of attributive parteras. The change of state parameter
The semantic concept of 'change of state' is extremely important when investigating the inguistic phenomenon of attribution. In point of fact, all the semantic classifications established within the attributive realm base themselves on this specific parameter. The most immediate result of such classifications leads to the división of attributive patterns into two wide semantic groups: on the one hand, those describing a change of state that modifies either the external or internal nature of the logical subject of the attribute, like (11-12); and on the other hand, those attributive structures that denote something completely different:
144 Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
whereas (13) expresses, for instance, the permanence of the nominal entity /in the state of 'silence' referred to by the attríbute, the sentence in (14) indicates that the theme of the attribution, the voice, has two particular properties, being queer and metallk, that are physically perceived by the sense organ of hearing:
(11) Aunt Margaret grew even thinner and more spectral. (MT: 134)
(12) The butter had gone rancid. (MSW: 579)
(13) I remained silent at his side. (FP: 103)
(14) My voice sounded queer, metallic. (MSW: 608)
If we observe these four examples caremlly, we reaüse that the semantic classification previously observed depends directly on the lexical meaning of their copulative verbs, which, though in some way grammaticalised, still retain in their attributive use some part of their original meaning as either transitive or intransitive verbs. It is, therefore, a semantic classification that follows the spirit of the earliest ones carried out by Poustma (1926-29) and Curme (1931) within the theoretical framework of Traditional Grammar. Below we present how these two linguists grouped together the different copulative verbs:
a) Verbs that, like to be, express a state and verbs of sensory perception such asfeel,
taste and smell.
b) Verbs that indícate the permanence of a nominal entity X in an state Y: remain,
continué.
c) Verbs, like become, that imply the entrance in a new state.
Apart from tracing its origin back to Traditional Grammar, the semantic classification under discussion is considered to be one of the most significant goals achieved by this, above all semantic, linguistic theory. In point of fact, it has extended beyond its frontiers, entering the domains of some recent approaches to the study of language. Downing and Locke (1992: 99) and Givón (1993: 101; 103), for instance, are good examples in this regard, since they both keep the distinction between copulative verbs of being and copulative verbs of becoming intact in their highly influential functional studies on Engüsh grammar.
But what is really significant for our purposes in this study is that, in spite of lacking an overt copulative verb at the surfece level of expression, the attributive structures with two different relations of predication can be subjected to a semantic classification similar to the one previously illustrated. As canbeseenin(15-18), itis once more the semantic parameter of 'change of state' that is crucially involved in determining the lexico-semantic properties of the following clauses. Therefore, whereas the verbs in (15-16) do not imply any type of mutationin the states of their grammatical subjects /and she, thosein (17-18) dotransform the original nature of the entities they are predicated of: in (17) the door becomes tied as a result of the verbal action denoted by tie and in (18) the hair is said to acquire a new and different colour:
Two Types of Change-of-State Attributes in English 145
(15) I arrived exceedingly wet and much incommoded by the surge. (C: 20)
(16) She wore a black waistunbuttoned. (MSW: 51)
(17) I tied the door shut. (MSW: 187)
(18) She dyed her hair a warm chesnut. (RL: 270)
Due to this obvious semantic oppositíon, liaguists such as Jespersen (1909-49: 355)
distinguish very early in the twentieth century two distinct classes of attributes, which he calis 'predicatives of being' and 'predicatives of becoming'. Later on, Halliday (1967: 63) ñames them depictive and resultative, respectively; and more recently, Greenbaum and Quirk (1990:210) refer to them as current and resulting attributes. It has to be remarked at this point, however, that Halliday's terminology is wider in scope than the ones provided by Jespersen and Greenbaum and Quirk. Apart from the attributes that complement the traditional and limited class of copulative verbs, the Hallidayan attributive dichotomy 'depictive/resultative' also applies to those attributes that constitute the secondary lexical predicates of a sentence. That is, the pairs of attributes happy-full mdfriend-dry in the following examples are considered to belong, according to Halliday, to the same semantic class: the former are classified in his study as depictive attributes and the latter, in turn, as resultatives:
(19) She was happy. (Halliday, 1967: 63)
(20) He dropped the tray full.
(21) They became friends.
(22) The cakes burn dry.
A somewhat similar classification is carried out by Martínez Vázquez (1991: 130)
within the group of attributive clauses describing a change of state. It has to be pointed out, nevertheless, that the linguist, though including as Halliday does all the attributes in (23-26) in the class of 'resultatives', is fully aware of the fect that they complement verbal constituents with a totally distinct syntactico-semantic status. Henee, Martínez Vázquez classifies the examples in (23-24) as resultative attributive structures with a copulative verb and those in (25-26) as resultative attributive clauses with a non-copulative verb:
(23) He grew palé. (Martínez Vázquez, 1991: 130)
(24) I proved it wrong.
(25) He blushed crimson.
(26) They scared him silly.
Leaving aside the terminological and scope distinctions commented above, all the
aforementioned linguists agree in explaining in temporal terms the main difference that exists between the two semantic types of attributes that they identify. That is, whereas resultative attributes are said to be the direct consequence of the action denoted by the verb with which they combine, current or depictive attributes exist totally independent of the
146 Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
verbal process. As a result, the former are temporally posterior to the verbal action and the latter, in turn, maintain either a simultaneous or anterior temporal relationship with the verbal head of their clause.
Two classes of change of state attributes
Contrary to the common belief that all attributes denoting a change of state pertain to only one and the same uniform class, we strongly defend in the presentpaper the existence of two distinct syntactico-semantic kinds of change of state attributes. To prove our hypothesis, we are going to focus mainly on the different behaviour exhibited by the members integrating both classes of attributes and on the syntactico-semantic nature of the verbal constituent that surfaces in the attibutive constructions at issue. As regards the widespread assumption in the literature that all change of state attributes maintain a posterior temporal relation to the action denoted by the verbal constituent of their lauses, we deem it necessary to make some refinements. To start with, we firmly beheve that this previous assertion is solely valid in the environment of attribution as secondary predication. That is, only those attributes that are the secondary lexical heads of an attributive construction pass the temporal subordination test. According to this syntactic test, the attribute in question appears in the main clause as the complement of the copulative verb become, and the verbal action causing such a change of state is, in turn, subordinated to it by means of a conjunction expressing, like afier in the examples that follow, a posterior temporal relationship:
(27) I tore the letter open. (MSW: 135) — The letter became open after being torn.
(28) The cow licked her face clean. (MSW: 4) _ The cow's face became clean after being Hcked (by the cow).
Nevertheless, if the attribute complements any of the aspectual variants of the semantically vague copula be that denote a change of state, the aforementioned test leads to ungrammatical results. We can conclude, therefore, that these change of state attributes do not maintain at all such a temporal relationship with the verbal constituent of their patterns:
(29) I became, necessarily, 'a great butler'. (RD: 70) ->
*I became a great butler after becoming.
(30) In spring the land turns emerald. (MSW: 107) ->
*In spring the land becomes emerald after turning.
The contrast we notice between both classes of attributes is merely one of the many
consequences deriving from the very distinct syntactico-semantic nature of the verb with which they combine. Whereas the verbal constituent of those attributive structures with two Two Types of Change-of-State Attributes in English 147
relations of predication is a lexical verb with syntactic autonomy, the aspectual copulative variants describing a change of state are syntactically, as well as semantícally, dependent on the attributive element. Henee, the syntactic optionality of the attribute in the first type of constructions, (31b-32b), and its obligatoriness in the second one