Delexical verbs and degrees of desemanticization

Abstract

The semantics of the word “delexical” in the term “delexical verbs” suggests that the verb is functioning as little more than a lexically empty auxiliary, with most or all of the semantic content being carried by the deverbal noun. But to what extent is this the case? Following Gabriele Stein's vehement rejection of the idea that the delexical verbs give, have, take are “mere connectives” or “light” verbs, I am responding to her challenge (1991:15) to specify the extent to which the core meaning is “weakened” or “eroded”. Basing my findings on an exhaustive analysis of the delexical verbs give, have, make and take as they occur in a one million word corpus of academic writing, I isolate distinct meanings for each verb, and attempt to determine the degree to which these verbs are truly desemanticized. The following tendencies emerge: in support of Stein's assertion that each delexical verb brings its own unique meaning to the construction in which it occurs, I find that make and to a lesser extent give and have typically retain most of their full, intuitive meaning, whereas take is largely, and at times fully devoid of its intuitive meaning.