Zúñiga, Fernando (2014). Benefaction proper and surrogation. Studies in Language, 38(3), pp. 543-565. John Benjamins 10.1075/sl.38.3.05zun
Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)The semantic role of beneficiary is usually conceptualized in very general terms, typically without an intensive definition of what can constitute a benefit in the particular construction under study. Among those accounts that have proposed to discuss benefaction as related to the notion(s) of surrogation, substituting, and/or deputing, Kittilä (2005) proposes a distinction between recipients, beneficiaries, and recipient-beneficiaries based on the binary features [reception] and [substitutive benefaction]; the recipient includes only reception (and the beneficiary only substitutive benefaction), whereas both features are relevant with recipient-beneficiaries.
This paper proposes an alternative account (i) by defining benefaction proper in terms of a prototype related to possession (and thereby to reception) and a periphery, and (ii) by defining surrogation as a separate notion that can, but need not, coalesce with benefaction proper. Thus, the beneficiaries’ condition improves because they are relieved from having to carry out a given action themselves.
Item Type: |
Journal Article (Original Article) |
|---|---|
Division/Institute: |
06 Faculty of Humanities > Department of Linguistics and Literary Studies > Institute of Linguistics |
UniBE Contributor: |
Zúñiga, Fernando |
Subjects: |
400 Language > 410 Linguistics 400 Language > 490 Other languages |
ISSN: |
0378-4177 |
Publisher: |
John Benjamins |
Submitter: |
Fernando Zúñiga |
Date Deposited: |
11 Nov 2014 07:28 |
Last Modified: |
05 Dec 2022 14:37 |
Publisher DOI: |
10.1075/sl.38.3.05zun |
Uncontrolled Keywords: |
benefactives, beneficiary, substitutive beneficiary, deputative beneficiary, surrogation |
URI: |
https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/59715 |
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit item |