Joint research with Joanna Blaszczak
In Slavic aspectual literature, it is debatable which aspectual prefixes are lexical and which are superlexical and whether the division into these two classes can be maintained. Opinions are divided as to whether all the classes of superlexical prefixes are vP/VP external and whether some of them may function as both vP/VP internal and vP/VP-external. It is equally controversial what the status of secondary imperfectivizing morphology is in the Slavic aspectual architecture. Assuming the view proposed by Marantz (1997) (and followed by Ramchand 2008a) that vP is a domain of idiosyncratic meanings, we use VP idioms as a testing ground for investigating which aspectual morphemes are “vP/VP"- internal and which are “vp/VP"- external. VP idioms in Polish constitute a perfect testing ground for this set of questions because they are aspectually heterogenous. Some are by default perfective rozprostować kości 'to stretch one's bones' (lit. to stretch one's bones) and some are by default imperfective: klepać biedę 'to be poor' (lit. pat poverty). Our investigation reveals that only lexical prefixes which can result in idiosyncratic meanings are part of basic perfective VP idioms. Building on the idea that little v is a demarcation line for idiomatic meanings, it is concluded that lexical prefixes are vP internal. It is also shown that basic imperfective VP idioms are compatible with some superlexical prefixes and basic perfective VP idioms are compatible with secondary imperfective morphology, which suggests that such morphology is vP external. Further semantic analysis of the interaction of basic imperfective VP idioms with different classes of superlexical prefixes shows that the compatible ones measure over some scale associated with vP-external material or the temporal trace of an (idiomatic) event. In contrast, the incompatible ones measure over a scale encoded by a verbal predicate or impose semantic restrictions on its argument and hence they intervene in the semantics of a VP idiom. Based on these observations combined with relevant stacking facts and the interaction of different classes of superlexical prefixes with secondary imperfective morphology, two classes of superlexical prefixes are distinguished: high (projected above secondary imperfective) and low (projected below it).
