POLARITY IN THE VERBAL DOMAIN. PRELIMINARY RESULTS AND CONSIDERATIONS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphilo.2025.4.12Keywords:
polarity, verbal meaning, distribution across the lexicon, socio-cultural entrenchmentAbstract
Polarity in the Verbal Domain. Preliminary Results and Considerations. The paper presents preliminary results of an extensive investigation of polarity in the verbal domain of Hungarian. Polarity has manifold and wide-ranging connections to different aspects and subdomains of the language system. The present study is concerned with the distribution of polarity in the lexicon and its possible motivations.
In language studies, it has long been hypothesized that negative polarity is richer in its representation than positive polarity on a lexical, constructional and idiomatic level as well. The preliminary results of the investigation show that, in the verbal domain, this is indeed the case. This is not surprising, but the nature of the phenomenon and its ramifications deserve further linguistic exploration.
Other important considerations presented in the study regard the definition of polarity. From a quantitative approach, it seems obvious that affective and evaluative meaning cannot be separated from socio-cultural knowledge and subjective expectations. This last category does not differentiate itself distinctly from other, more robust cases of polarity. The connection is also strengthened by structural properties of verbs and by the negativity bias. Because of this, I believe that, besides affective content and evaluative meaning, although strongly connected to these, negative polarity verbs also encode non-preferred alterations to events, while positive polarity verbs encode preferred alterations or outstanding forms of events. For an event to be outstanding in some respect, is relevant in fewer contexts, than excelling in non-preferred ways. This explains the higher elaboration of the negative domain, but makes polarity as a verbal phenomenon even harder to grasp and define.
REZUMAT. Polaritatea în domeniul verbal. Rezultate și considerații preliminare. Lucrarea prezintă o cercetare preliminară în cadrul unei investigații extinse asupra polarității în domeniul verbal al limbii maghiare. Polaritatea are conexiuni multiple și de amploare cu diverse aspecte și subdomenii ale sistemului lingvistic. Studiul de față se concentrează asupra distribuției polarității și a posibilelor sale motivații.
În studiile lingvistice, există de multă vreme ipoteza că polaritatea negativă are o reprezentare mai bogată decât polaritatea pozitivă, atât la nivel lexical, cât și la nivel construcțional și idiomatic. Rezultatele preliminare ale cercetării arată că, în domeniul verbal, această ipoteză se confirmă. Acest lucru nu este surprinzător, însă natura fenomenului și implicațiile sale merită o explorare lingvistică mai profundă.
Alte considerații importante prezentate în lucrare privesc definirea conceptului de polaritate. Dintr-o perspectivă cantitativă pare evident că sensurile afective și evaluative nu pot fi separate de factorii și așteptările socio-culturale. Această ultimă categorie nu se diferențiază clar de alte cazuri mai robuste de polaritate. Legătura este consolidată și de proprietățile structurale ale verbelor și de către tendința spre negativitate. Din acest motiv, consider că, pe lângă conținutul afectiv și semnificația evaluativă – deși strâns legate de acestea – verbele cu polaritate negativă codifică și modificări ale evenimentelor considerate ca fiind nedorite sau nepreferate, în timp ce verbele cu polaritate pozitivă codifică forme remarcabile ale evenimentelor. Un eveniment remarcabil într-un anumit sens este relevant în mai puține cazuri, decât manifestarea modurilor nedorite sau nepreferate. Acest lucru explică reprezentarea lexicală mai bogată al domeniului negativ, dar face ca polaritatea, ca fenomen verbal, să fie și mai dificil de înțeles și de definit.
Cuvinte-cheie: polaritate, sens verbal, distribuție în lexicon, factori socio-culturale
Article history: Received 7 May 2025; Revised 20 October 2025; Accepted 20 November 2025;
Available online 12 December 2025; Available print 30 December 2025
References
Bárczi Géza, and Országh László (eds.). 1959–1962. A magyar nyelv értelmező szótára [Hungarian Explicatory Dictionary]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Boucher, Jerry, and Charles E. Osgood. 1969. “The Pollyanna Hypothesis.” Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior 8: 1–8.
Bybee, Joan L., and Clay Beckner. 2009. “Usage-based theory.” In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited by Narrog, Heiko, and Bernd Heine, 827–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
https://www.unm.edu/~jbybee/downloads/BybeeBeckner2010UsageBasedTheory.pdf
Cambria, Erik, and Amir Hussain. 2015. Sentic Computing: A Common-Sense-Based Framework for Concept-Level Sentiment Analysis. Heidelberg–New York–Dordrecht–London: Springer. https://sentic.net/sentic-computing.pdf
Diessel, Holger. 2017. „Usage-based linguistics.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, edited by Aronoff, Mark, 1–26. New York: Oxford University Press.
Faber, Pamela B., and Ricardo Mairal Usón. 1997a. “The paradigmatic and syntagmatic structure of the semantic field of existence in the elaboration of a semantic macronet.” Studies in language 21, no. 1: 129‒67.
Faber, Pamela B., and Ricardo Mairal Usón. 1997b. “Towards a typology of predicate schemata in a Functional-Lexematic Model.” In Towards a Functional Lexicology, edited by Wotjak, Gerd, 11‒37. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Faber, Pamela B., and Ricardo Mairal Usón. 1999. Constructing a Lexicon of English Verbs. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Garcia, David, Antonios Garas, and Frank Schweitzer. 2012. “Positive words carry less information than negative words.” EPJ Data Science 1, no. 3: 1–12. https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds3
Hua, Yan Cathy, Paul Denny, Jörg Wicker, and Katerina Taskova. 2024. “A systematic review of aspect based sentiment analysis: Domains, methods, and trends.” Artificial Intelligence Review 57: 296. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10462-024-10906-z
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2011. “Negative and positive polarity items: Variation, licensing, and compositionality.” In Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, edited by Maienborn, Claudia, Klaus von Heusinger, and Paul Portner, 1660–712. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jing-Schmidt, Zhuo 2007. “Negativity bias in language: A cognitive-affective model of emotive intensifiers.” Cognitive Linguistics 18, no. 3: 417-443.
Mingorance, Martín L. 1990. “Functional grammar and lexematics.” In Meaning and Lexicography, edited by Tomaszczyk, Jerzy, and Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 227‒86. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Martin, Jennifer R. and Peter Rupert Robert White. 2005. The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kugler Nóra 2014. “A nyelvi polaritás kifejezésének egy mintázata, avagy milyen a félelmetesen jó?” Magyar Nyelvőr 138, no. 2: 129-139.
Ladányi Mária. 2017. “Alaktan.” In Nyelvtan [Grammar], edited by Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor, 503-660, Budapest: Osiris.
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar. A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Oravecz Csaba, Váradi Tamás, and Sass Bálint. 2014. The Hungarian Gigaword Corpus. In: Proceedings of LREC 2014.
Osgood, Charles E. 1964. “Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures.” American Anthropology 66: 171–200.
Princeton University. 2010. About WordNet. WordNet. Princeton University. https://wordnet.princeton.edu/
Pusztai Ferenc. 2006. Magyar értelmező kéziszótár [Hungarian explicatory dictionary]. 2nd, extended edn. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Szabó Martina, Vincze Veronika, and Bibok Károly 2023. “Thank you for the terrific party!” – An analysis of Hungarian negative emotive words. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 19, no. 3: 451-485.
Szilágyi N., Sándor, and Dimény Hajnalka. 2021. Magyar igék szemantikai adatbázisa [Semantic database of Hungarian Verbs]. Cluj-Napoca: Babeș-Bolyai University.
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics I. Concept structuring systems. London: MIT Press.
Tolcsvai Nagy Gábor. 2016. “Van: változatok a létezés nyelvi konstruálására [Van ‘there is’: Variations of the linguistic construal of existence].” Magyar Nyelvőr 140, no. 1: 7‒22.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1999. Emotions across languages and cultures. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Windisch Brown, Susan, Claire Bonial, Leo Obrst, and Martha Palmer. 2017. “The Rich Event Ontology.” In Proceedings of the Events and Stories in the News Workshop, edited by Caselli, Tommaso, Ben Miller, Marieke van Erp, Piek Vossen, Martha Palmer, Eduard Hovy, Teruko Mitamura, and David Caswell, 87–97. Vancouver: Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-2712/
Zipf, George Kingsley. 1936. The Psychobiology of Language. London: Routledge.
Zipf, George Kingsley. 1949. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. New York: Addison-Wesley Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
