Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper analyzes the Cutting and Breaking (C&B) events affecting the tangible aspects of the personal domain, that is to say the body and its parts. The study of the embodied Self, as the affected theme of C&B events, provides a unique opportunity to contribute to the understanding of the conceptualization of the personal domain, as well as providing an additional distinction between cut-verbs and break-verbs. First, I propose to re-analyze three arguments of the C&B literature under the light of Talmy’s different levels of synthesis (2000). I propose that cut-verbs can be distinguished from break-verbs based on the level of synthesis of the affected theme they encode. I support this argument with a corpus-based analysis of a series of syntactic-semantic tests. Second, while English does not have morphosyntactic strategies to make a distinction between alienable and inalienable possessions, I argue that the participation of C&B events affecting the corporeal Self to specific argument structure alternations (causatives – reflexives – possessor raising) shows that the distinction is syntactically encoded in the English language. Third, I analyze a testimony of a FGC/FGM1 victim and demonstrate the sociocultural relevance of the distinction proposed in this paper.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simon Devylder (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: