dc.rights.license | CC-BY-NC-ND | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Winter, Y. | |
dc.contributor.author | Kruitwagen, I. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-11-02T18:01:18Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-11-02T18:01:18Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://studenttheses.uu.nl/handle/20.500.12932/27989 | |
dc.description.abstract | Most works on reciprocity so far relied on the assumption that the intransitive variant of reciprocal verbs - e.g. Mark and Violet hugged – logically entails its two transitive counterparts: Violet hugged Mark and Mark hugged Violet. According to this view, symmetry is a logical consequence from reciprocity. In contrast with most previous analyses, I hypothesized that the relation between reciprocity and symmetry is not logical, but preferential. Results from two truth-value judgement tasks testing the acceptability of reciprocal verbs describing non-symmetric events confirmed my hypothesis. Results suggested that two factors positively influence the acceptability of reciprocal verbs: one factor is identical participation – the degree to which a group acts in an identical manner with respect to the action that a verb specifies; a second factor is collective intentionality – the degree to which a group has a shared intention and/or shared belief. | |
dc.description.sponsorship | Utrecht University | |
dc.format.extent | 1301194 | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | Does it take two to tango? On Reciprocal Verbs as Collective Predicate Concepts. | |
dc.type.content | Master Thesis | |
dc.rights.accessrights | Open Access | |
dc.subject.keywords | reciprocity, semantics, collective intentionality, symmetry, logic | |
dc.subject.courseuu | Linguistics | |